{"collection":"Paganism & Neopaganism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/pag/mm/mm01_09a.htm","path":"pag/mm/mm01_09a.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/pag/mm/mm01_09a.htm","text":"Whether Witches may work some Prestidigatory Illusion so that the Male Organ appears to be entirely removed and separate from the Body.\nHere is declared the truth about diabolic operations with regard to the male\norgan. And to make plain the facts in this matter, it is asked whether\nwitches can with the help of devils really and actually remove the member,\nor whether they only do so apparently by some glamour or illusion. And that\nthey can actually do so is argued a fortiori; for since devils can\ndo greater things than this, as killing them or carrying them from place\nto place - as was shown above in the cases of Job and Tobias - therefore\nthey can also truly and actually remove men's members.\nAgain, an argument is taken from the gloss on the visitations of bad Angels,\nin the Psalms: God punishes by means of bad Angels, as He often punished\nthe People of Israel with various diseases, truly and actually visited upon\ntheir bodies. Therefore the member is equally subject to such visitations.\nIt may be said that this is done with the Divine permission. And in that\ncase, it has already been said that God allows more power of witchcraft over\nthe genital functions, on account of the first corruption of sin which came\nto us from the act of generation, so also He allows greater power over the\nactual genital organ, even to its removal.\nAnd again, it was a greater thing to turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt\nthan it is to take away the male organ; and that (Genesis xix) was a\nreal and actual, not an apparent, metamorphosis (for it is said that that\npillar is still to be seen), And this was done by a bad Angel; just as the\ngood Angels struck the men of Sodom with blindness, so that they could not\nfind the door of the house. And so it was with the other punishments of the\nmen of Gomorrah. The gloss, indeed, affirms that Lot's wife was herself\ntainted with that vice, and therefore she was punished.\nAnd again, whoever can create a natural shape can also take it away. But\ndevils have created many natural shapes, as is clear from Pharao's magicians,\nwho with the help of devils made frogs and serpents. Also S. Augustine, in\nBook LXXXIII, says that those things which are visibly done by the lower\npowers of the air cannot be considered to be mere illusions; but even men\nare able, by some skilful incision, to remove the male organ; therefore\ndevils can do invisibly what others do visibly.\nBut on the contrary side, S. Augustine (de Ciuitate Dei, XVIII) says:\nIt is not to be believed that, through the art or power of devils, man's\nbody can be changed into the likeness of a beast; therefore it is equally\nimpossible that that should be removed which is essential to the truth of\nthe human body, Also he says (de Trinitate, III): It must not be\nthought that this substance of visible matter is subject to the will of\nthose fallen angels; for it is subject only to God. Answer. There is no doubt that certain witches can do marvellous\nthings with regard to male organs, for this agrees with what has been seen\nand heard by many, and with the general account of what has been known\nconcerning that member through the senses of sight and touch. And as to how\nthis thing is possible, it is to be said that it can be done in two ways,\neither actually and in fact, as the first arguments have said, or through\nsome prestige or glamour. But when it is performed by witches, it is only a\nmatter of glamour; although it is no illusion in the opinion of the sufferer.\nFor his imagination can really and actually believe that something is not\npresent, since by none of his exterior sense, such as sight or touch, can\nhe perceive that it is present.\nFrom this it may be said that there is a true abstraction of the member in\nimagination, although not in fact; and several things are to be noted as to\nhow this happens. And first as to two methods by which it can be done. It is\nno wonder that the devil can deceive the outer human senses, since, as has\nbeen treated of above, he can illude the inner senses, by bringing to actual\nperception ideas that are stored in the imagination. Moreover, he deceives\nmen in their natural functions, causing that which is visible to be\ninvisible to them, and that which is tangible to be intangible, and the\naudible inaudible, and so with the other senses. But such things are not\ntrue in actual fact, since they are caused through some defect introduced\nin the sense, such as the eyes or the ears, or the touch, by reason of which\ndefect a man's judgement is deceived.\nAnd we can illustrate this from certain natural phenomena. For sweet wine\nappears bitter on the tongue of the fevered, his taste being deceived not by\nthe actual fact, but through his disease. So also in the case under\nconsideration, the deception is not due to fact, since the member is still\nactually in its place; but it is an illusion of the sense with regard to it.\nAgain, as has been said above concerning the generative powers, the devil\ncan obstruct that action by imposing some other body of the same colour\nand appearance, in such a way that some smoothly fashioned body in the colour\nof flesh is interposed between the sight and touch, and between the true\nbody of the sufferer, so that it seems to him that he can see and feel\nnothing but a smooth body with its surface interrupted by no genital organ.\nSee the sayings of S. Thomas (2 dist. 8. artic. 5) concerning glamours and\nillusions, and also in the second of the second, 91, and in his questions\nconcerning Sin; where he frequently quotes that of S. Augustine in Book\nLXXXIII: This evil of the devil creeps in through all the sensual approaches;\nhe gives himself to figures, he adapts himself to colours, he abides in\nsounds, he lurks in smells, he infuses himself into flavours.\nBesides, it is to be considered that such an illusion of the sight and touch\ncan be caused not only by the interposition of some smooth unmembered body,\nbut also by the summoning to the fancy or imagination of certain forms and\nideas latent in the mind, in such a way that a thing is imagined as being\nperceived then for the first time. For, as was shown in the preceding\nquestion, devils can by their own power change bodies locally; and just as\nthe disposition or humour can be affected in this way, so can the natural\nfunctions. I speak of things which appear natural to the imagination or\nsenses. For Aristotle in the de Somno et Uigila says, assigning the\ncause of apparitions in dreams, that when an animal sleeps much blood flows\nto the inner consciousness, and thence come ideas or impressions derived\nfrom actual previous experiences stored in the mind. It has already been\ndefined how thus certain appearance convey the impressions of new\nexperiences. And since this can happen naturally, much more can the devil\ncall to the imagination the appearance of a smooth body unprovided with the\nvirile member, in such a way that the sense believe it to be an actual fact.\nSecondly, some other methods are to be noted which are easier to understand\nand to explain. For, according to S. Isidore (Etym. VIII, 9), a\nglamour is nothing but a certain delusion of the senses, and especially of\nthe eyes. And for this reason it is also called a prestige, from prestringo,\nsince the sight of the eyes is so fettered that things seem to be other\nthan they are. And Alexander of Hales, Part 2,\nsays that a prestige, properly understood, is an illusion of the devil,\nwhich is not caused by any change in matter, but only exists in the mind of\nhim who is deluded, either as to his inner or outer perceptions.\nWherefore, in a manner of speaking, we may say even of human prestidigitatory\nart, that it can be effected in three ways. For the first, it can be done\nwithout devils, since it is artificially done by the agility of men who show\nthings and conceal them, as in the case of the tricks of conjurers and\nventriloquists. The second method is also without the help of devils; as\nwhen men can use some natural virtue in natural bodies or minerals so as to\nimpart to such objects some other appearance quite different from their true\nappearance. Wherefore, according to S. Thomas (I, 114, 4), and several\nothers, men, by the smoke of certain smouldering or lighted herbs, can make\nrods appear to be serpents.\nThe third method of delusion is effected with the help of devils, the\npermission of God being granted. For it is clear that devils have, of their\nnature, some power over certain earthly matters, which they exercise upon\nthem, when God permits, so that things appear to be other than they are.\nAnd as to this third method, it is to be noted that the devil has fives\nways in which he can delude anyone so that he thinks a thing to be other\nthan it is. First, by an artificial tricks, as has been said; for that which\na man can do by art, the devil can do even better. Second, by a natural\nmethod, by the application, as has been said, and interposition of some\nsubstance so as to hide the true body, or by confusing it in man's fancy.\nThe third way is when in an assumed body he presents himself as being\nsomething which he is not; as witness the story which S. Gregory tells in\nhis First Dialogue of a Nun, who ate a lettuce, which, however, as\nthe devil confessed, was not a lettuce, but the devil in the form of a\nlettuce, or in the lettuce itself. Or as when he appeared to S. Antony in a\nlump of gold which he found in the desert. Or as when he touches a real man,\nand makes him appear like a brute animal, as will shortly be explained. The\nfourth method is when he confuses the organ of sight, so that a clear thing\nseems hazy, or the converse, or when an old woman appears to be a young girl.\nFor even after weeping the light appears different from what it was before.\nHis fifth method is by working in the imaginative power, and, by a\ndisturbance of the humours, effecting a transmutation in the forms perceived\nby the senses, as has been treated of before, so that the senses then\nperceive as it were fresh and new images. And accordingly, by the last three\nof these methods, and even by the second, the devil can cast a glamour over\nthe senses of a man. Wherefore there is no difficulty in his concealing the\nvirile member by some prestige or glamour. And a manifest proof or example\nof this, which was revealed to us in our Inquisitorial capacity, will be\nset forth later, where more is recounted of these and other matters in the\nSecond Part of this Treatise.\nHow a Bewitchment can be Distinguished from a Natural Defect.\nAn incidental question, with certain other difficulties, follows. Peter's\nmember has been taken off, and he does not know whether it is by witchcraft\nor in some other way by the devil's power, with the permission of God. Are\nthere any ways of determining or distinguishing between these? It can be\nanswered as follows. First, that those to whom such things most commonly\nhappen are adulterers or fornicators. For when they fail to respond to the\ndemand of their mistress, or if they wish to desert them and attach\nthemselves to other women, then their mistress, out of vengeance, through\nsome other power causes their members to be taken off. Secondly, it can be\ndistinguished by the fact that it is not permanent. For if it is not due to\nwitchcraft, then the loss is not permanent, but it will be restored some\ntime.\nBut here there arises another doubt, whether it is due to the nature of the\nwitchcraft that it is not permanent. It is answered that it can be permanent,\nand last until death, just as the Canonists and Theologians judge concerning\nthe impediment of witchcraft in matrimony, that the temporary can become\npermanent. For Godfrey says in his Summa: A bewitchment cannot always\nbe removed by him who caused it, either because he is dead, or because he\ndoes not know how to remove it, or because the charm has been lost.\nWherefore we may say in the same way that the charm which has been worked\non Peter will be permanent if the witch who did it cannot heal him.\nFor there are three degrees of witches. For some both heal and harm; some\nharm, but cannot heal; and some seem able only to heal, that is, to take\naway injuries, as will be shown later. For thus it happened to us: Two\nwitches were quarreling, and while they were taunting each other one said:\nI am not so wicked as you, for I know how to heal those whom I injure. The\ncharm will also be permanent if, before it has been healed, the witch\ndeparts, either by changing her dwelling or by dying. For S. Thomas also\nsays: Any charm may be permanent when it is such as can have no human\nremedy; or if it has a remedy, it is not known to men, or unlawful; although\nGod can find a remedy through a holy Angel who can coerce the devil, if not\nthe witch.\nHowever, the chief remedy against witchcraft is the sacrament of Penitence.\nFor bodily infirmity often proceeds from sin. And how the charms or witches\ncan be removed will be shown in the Second Part of this Treatise, and in the\nSecond QUestion, chapter VI, where other different matters are treated of\nand explained.\nSolutions of the Arguments.\nFor the first, it is clear that there is no doubt but that, just as, with\nGod's permission, they can kill men, so also can devils taken off that\nmember, as well as others, truly and actually. But then the devils do not\nwork through the medium of witches, concerning which mention has already\nbeen made. And from this the answer to the second argument is also made\nclear. But this is to be said: that God allows more power of witchcraft over\nthe genital forces because, etc.; and therefore even allows that that member\nshould be truly and actually taken off. But it is not valid to say that this\nalways happens. For it would not be after the manner of witchcraft for it to\nhappen so; and even the witches, when they do such works, do not pretend\nthat they have not the power to restore the member when they wish to and\nknow how to do so. From which it is clear that it is not actually taken off,\nbut only by a glamour. As for the third, concerning the metamorphosis of\nLot's wife, we say that this was actual, and not a glamour. And as to the\nfourth, that devils can create certain substantial shapes, and therefore can\nalso remove them: it is to be said with regard to Pharaoh's magicians that\nthey made true serpents; and that devils can, with the help of another agent,\nproduce certain effects on imperfect creatures which they cannot on men, who\nare God's chief care. For it is said: Does God care for oxen? They can,\nnevertheless, with the permission of God, do to men true and actual harm,\nas also they can create a glamour of harm, and by this the answer to the\nlast argument is made clear.\nNext: Question X Whether Witches can by some Glamour Change Men into Beasts.","title":"Malleus Maleficarum Part 1 Question IX","type":"page"}