Sacred Texts: Wicca and Neo-Paganism

Malleus Maleficarum Part 2 Question II

Summary only - full text stays on its own separately-gated source. Read the full text at the source »

This is an excerpt from Part 2, Question II of the *Malleus Maleficarum* (1486/87), the infamous Latin treatise on witchcraft written by Dominican inquisitors Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, functioning as both a theological manual and a legal guide for witch trials. The passage stages a formal scholastic debate—structured in the disputatio tradition—around a single question: whether it is lawful to remove a curse or bewitchment through counterspells or other forbidden means. The text surveys competing authorities on both sides, pitting canonists like Duns Scotus and Henry of Segusio (who held that using superstitious counter-remedies is permissible) against Thomist theologians like Aquinas, Bonaventura, and Peter a Palude (who argued one must suffer a bewitchment rather than invoke diabolical assistance to cure it). A distinctive claim runs through the text: witchcraft is so entangled with diabolic agency that no purely human remedy exists, making any cure either miraculous (and thus not reliably available) or spiritually illicit—a position that effectively traps victims in a bind of permanent affliction versus mortal sin. The authors then attempt to harmonize these positions by taxonomizing unlawful remedies into three categories of increasing severity, while leaving open the possibility of licit folk or ceremonial remedies as a last resort. Anyone interested in the theological apparatus behind early modern witch persecution, medieval demonology, or the intersection of canon law and popular healing practice will find the primary source directly relevant here.

Malleus Maleficarum Part 2 Question II

Related pages View as graph →