{"collection":"Paganism & Neopaganism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/pag/mm/mm01_12a.htm","path":"pag/mm/mm01_12a.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/pag/mm/mm01_12a.htm","text":"Sacred-Texts\u00a0\n Neo-Paganism\u00a0\n Index\u00a0\n Previous\u00a0\n Next\u00a0\n \n \n Malleus Maleficarum Part 1\n Question XII\n Whether the Permission of Almighty God is an Accompaniment of Witchcraft.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Now we must consider the Divine permission itself, touching which four \n things are asked. First, whether it is necessary that this permission should \n accompany a work of witchcraft. Secondly, that God in His justice permits a \n creature naturally sinful to perpetrate witchcraft and other horrid crimes, \n the other two necessary concomitants being presupposed. Thirdly, that the \n crime of witchcraft exceeds all other evils which God permits to be done. \n Fourthly, in what way this matter should be preached to the people.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Concerning the third postulate of this First Part, namely, the Divine \n permission, it is asked: Whether it is as Catholic to affirm the Divine \n permission in these works of witches, as it is quite heretical to contradict \n such an affirmation? And it is argued that it is not heretical to maintain \n that God does not permit so great power to the devil in this sort of \n witchcraft. For it is Catholic, and not heretical, to refute such things as \n appear to be to the disparagement of the Creator. And it is submitted that \n it is Catholic to maintain that the devil is not allowed such power of \n injuring men, since to hold the opposite opinion seems to be a disparagement \n of the Creator. For it would then follow that not everything is subject to \n the Divine providence, since the all-wise Provider keeps away, as far as \n possible, all defect and evil from those for whom He cares. And if the works \n of witchcraft are permitted by God, they are not kept away by Him: and if \n He does not keep them away, the God Himself is not a wise Provider, and all \n things are not subject to His providence. But since this is false, therefore \n it is false that God permits witchcraft.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n And again, to permit a thing to happen presupposes in him who permits it \n that either he can prevent it from happening if he wishes, or he cannot \n prevent it even if he wishes; and neither of these suppositions can apply \n to God. For in the first case, such a man would be thought spiteful, and in \n the second case impotent. Then it is incidentally asked: As to that \n bewitchment that happened to Peter, if God could have prevented it, and did \n not do so, then God is either despiteful or He does not care for all; but if \n He could not have prevented it even if He wished, the He is not omnipotent. \n But since it is not possible to maintain the opinion that God does not care \n for all, and the rest, therefore it cannot be said that witchcraft is done \n with the permission of God.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Besides, he who is responsible to himself and is the master of his own \n actions is not subject to the permission or providence of any governor. But \n men were made responsible to themselves by God, according to Ecclesiasticus \n xv: God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his counsel. \n In particular, the sins which men do are left in their own counsel, according \n to their hearts' desire. Therefore not all evils are subject to Divine \n permission.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Yet again, S. Augustine says in the Enchiridion, as does also \n Aristotle in the ninth book of Metaphysics: It is better not to know \n certain vile things than to know them, but all that is good is to be \n ascribed to God. Therefore God does not prevent the very vile works of \n witchcraft, whether He permits or not. See also S. Paul in I. Corinthians \n ix: Doth God take care of oxen? And the same holds good of the other \n irrational beasts. Wherefore God takes no care whether they are bewitched or \n not, since they are not subject to His permission, which proceeds from His \n providence.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Again, that which happens of necessity has no need of provident permission \n or prudence. This is clearly shown in Aristotle's Ethics, Book II: \n Prudence is a right reasoning concerning things which happen and are subject \n to counsel and choice. But several effects of witchcraft happen of necessity; \n as when for some reason, or owing to the influence of stars, diseases come, \n or any other things which we judge to be witchcraft. Therefore they are not \n always subject to Divine permission.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n And again, if men are bewitched by Divine permission, then it is asked: Why \n does this happen to one more than to another? If it be said that it is \n because of sin, which abounds more in one than in another, this does not \n seem valid; for then the greater sinners would be the more bewitched, but \n this is manifestly not so, since they are less punished in this world. As it \n is said: Well is it for the liars. But, if this argument were good, they \n also would be bewitched. Finally, it is clear from the fact that innocent \n children and other just men suffer most from witchcraft.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n But against these arguments: it is submitted that God permits evil to be \n done, though He does not wish it; and this is for the perfecting of the \n universe. See Dionysius, de Diuin. Nom. III: Evil will be for all \n time, even to the perfecting of the universe. And S. Augustine in the \n Enchiridion: In all things good and evil consists the admirable \n beauty of the universe. So that what is said to be evil is well ordained, \n and kept in its due place commends more highly that which is good; for good \n things are more pleasing and laudable when compared with bad. S. Thomas also \n refutes the opinion of those who say that, although God has no wish for evil \n (since no creature seeks for evil, either in its natural, or its animal, or \n in its intellectual appetite, which is the will, whose object is good), yet \n He is willing that evil should exist and be done. This he says to be false; \n since God neither wishes evil to be done, nor wishes it not to be done, but \n is willing to allow evil to be done; and this is good for the perfecting of \n the universe.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n And why it is erroneous to say that God wishes evil to be and to be done, \n for the good of the universe, he says is for the following reason. Nothing \n is to be judged good except what is good in itself and not by accident. As \n the virtuous man is judge good in his intellectual nature, not in his animal \n nature. But evil is not of itself ordained for good, but by accident. For \n against the intention of those who do evil, good results. In this way, \n against the intention of witches, or against the intention of tyrants, was \n it that through their persecutions the patience of the martyrs shone out \n clearly.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Answer. This question is as difficult to understand as it is \n profitable to elucidate. For there is among the arguments, not so much of \n Laymen as of certain Wise men, this in common; that they do not believe that \n such horrible witchcraft as had been spoken of is permitted by God; being \n ignorant of the causes of this Divine permission. And by reason of this \n ignorance, since witches are not put down with the vengeance that is due to \n them, they seem now to be depopulating the whole of Christianity. Therefore \n that both learned and unlearned may be satisfied in each way, according to \n the opinion of the Theologians, we make our answer by the discussion of two \n difficulties. And first, that he world is so subject to the Divine providence \n that He Himself provides for all. Secondly, that in His justice He permits \n the prevalence of sin, which consists of guilt, punishment, and loss, by \n reason of His two first permissions, namely, the fall of the Angels and that \n of our first parents. From which also it will be clear that obstinately to \n disbelieve this smacks of heresy, since such a man implicates himself in the \n errors of the infidels.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n And as for the first, it is to be noted that, presupposing that which pertains \n to the providence of God (see Wisdom xiv: Thy providence, O Father, \n governeth all things), we ought also to maintain that all things are subject \n to His providence, and that also He immediately provides for all things. And \n to make this clear, let us first refute a certain contrary error. For taking \n the text in Job xxii: Thick clouds are a covering to him that He \n seeth not us; and He walketh in the circuit of heaven: some have thought that \n the doctrine pf S. Thomas, I, 22, means that only incorruptible things are \n subject to Divine providence, such as the separate Essences, and the stars, \n with also the species of lower things, which are also incorruptible; but \n they said that the individuals of the species, being corruptible, were not \n so subject. Wherefore they said that all lower things which are in the world \n are subject to Divine providence in the universal, but not in the particular \n or individual sense. But to others this opinion did not seem tenable, since \n God cares for the other animals just as He does for men. Therefore the Rabbi \n Moses, wishing to hold a middle course, agreed with their opinion in saying \n that all corruptible things are not individually entirely subject to Divine \n governance, but only in a universal sense, as has been said before; but he \n excepted men from the generality of corruptible things, because of the \n splendid nature of their intellect, which is comparable with the of the \n separate Essences. And so, according to his opinion, whatever witchcraft \n happens to men comes from the Divine permission; but not such as happens to \n the animals or to the other fruits of the earth.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n Now though this opinion is nearer to the truth than that which altogether \n denies the providence of God in worldly matters, maintaining that the world \n was made by chance, as did Democritus and the Epicureans, yet it is not \n without great fallacy. For it must be said that everything is subject to \n Divine providence, not only in the general, but also in the particular sense; \n and that the bewitching not only of men, but also of animals and the fruits \n of the earth, comes from Divine and provident permission. And this is \n plainly true; the providence and ordinance of things to some end extend just \n so far as the causality of them itself extends. To take an example from \n things that are subject to some master; they are so far subject to his \n providence as they are themselves under his control. But the causality which \n is of God is the original agent, and extends itself to all beings, not only \n in a general but also in an individual sense, and not only to things \n incorruptible. Therefore, since all things must be of God, so all things are \n cared for by Him, that is, are ordained to some end.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n This point is touched by S. Paul in Romans xiii: All things which are \n from God were ordained by Him. Which is to say that, just as all things come \n from God, so also are all things ordained by Him, and are consequently \n subject to His providence. For the providence of God is to be understood as \n nothing else than the reason, that is, the cause of the ordering of things \n to a purpose. Therefore, in so far as all things are a part of one purpose, \n so also are they subject to the providence of God. And God knows all things, \n not only in the mass generally, but also in the individual particularly. Now \n the knowledge which God has of things created is to be compared with a \n craftsman's knowledge of his work: therefore, just as all his work is subject \n to the order and providence of a craftsman, so are all things subject to the \n order and providence of God.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n But this does not provide a satisfactory explanation of the fact that God in \n justice permits evil and witchcraft to be in the world, although He is \n Himself the provider and governor of all things; for it would seem that, if \n this is conceded, He ought to keep away all evil from those for whom He \n cares. For we see among men that a wise provider does all that he can to \n keep away all defect and harm from those who are his care; therefore why \n does not God, in the same way, keep away all evil? It must be noted that a \n particular and an universal controller or provider are two very different \n matters. For the particular controller must of necessity keep away all the \n harm he can, since he is not able to extract good out of evil. But God is \n the universal controller of the whole world, and can extract much good from \n particular evils; as through the persecution of the tyrants came the patience \n of the martyrs, and through the works of witches come the purgation or \n proving of the faith of the just, as will be shown. Therefore it is not God's \n purpose to prevent all evil, lest the universe should lack the cause of \n much good. Wherefore S. Augustine says in the Enchiridion: So \n merciful is Almighty God, that He would not allow any evil to be in His \n works unless He were so omnipotent and good that He can bring good even out \n of evil.\n \n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \n And we have an example of this in the actions of natural things. For \n although the corruptions and defects which occur in natural things are \n contrary to the purpose of that particular thing (as when a thief is hanged, \n or when animals are killed for human food), they are yet in accordance with \n the universal purpose of nature (as that man's life and property should be \n kept intact); and thus the universal good is preserved. For it is necessary \n for the conservation of the species that the death of one should be the \n preservation of another. For lions are kept alive by the slaughter of other \n animals.\n \n \n \n Next: Question XIII\nHerein is set forth the Question, concerning the Two Divine Permissions which God justly allows, namely, that the Devil, the Author or all Evil, should Sin, and that our First Parents should Fall, from which Origins the Works of Witches are justly suffered to take place.","title":"Malleus Maleficarum Part 1 Question XII","type":"page"}