Tractatus I: PRIMUS DE VIRTUTIBUS THEOLOGICIS

Quaestio I: SUPERSTITION, what it is, and of how many kinds

What SUPERSTITION is, and of how many kinds.

SUPERSTITION is defined by D. Bonaventure in 4. d. 13. dub. 4. and D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest. 92. art. 1. A false religion, or a vicious cult, and a superfluous institution of the cult of a true or false deity, and thus also Lessius lib. 2. de Iustitia, cap. 43. d. 1. Sanchez Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 37. Fagundez on the first precept of the Decal. lib. 1. cap. 34. Tanner d. 5. de Religione, quaest. 7. d. 1.

OF THIS there are three species: Idolatry, divinatory Superstition, and Superstition of vain observances.

OF Idolatry I have treated sufficiently on faith, disput. 2. quaest. 1. et seqq.

AS TO divination, it is a superstitious foretelling of things to come, or an investigation, or manifestation of hidden things through means adverse to Religion. Thus define it D. Bonaventure p. p. Centil. sect. 29. et in 2. d. 7. part. 2. quaest. 3. in resolutione, D. Thomas hic art. 1. Sanchez in Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. Lessius Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 53. dub. 5. num. 23. who defines it in other words with D. Bonaventure in 2. loc. cit.: it is a foretelling which someone makes, by the help or the discipline of the Demon, concerning some hidden thing which he cannot know in a human way.

It is moreover a grave sin, gravely reprehended Isa. 8. et 47. et Levit. 28.: those who consult these magi are condemned to the punishment of death, as the holy Doctor warns in 2. d. 7. part. 2. art. 2. quaest. 3.

It is committed in TWO WAYS, by an express or a tacit invocation of the Demon.

One sins gravely indeed who has an express pact with the Demon, as D. Bonaventure teaches above in Centil., because he renders to the enemy, against the prohibition, the homage owed to God, asking of him what is proper to God, namely to announce future contingents. Similarly one who has an implicit pact, for the same reason. These St. Augustine pursues lib. 2. de Doctrina Christiana, cap. 22. et 23. and D. Thomas hic art. 2. et 3. Sanchez Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. num. 3. Fagundez in primum praeceptum Decal. lib. 1. cap. 35. where he remarks with D. Bonaventure in 2. loc. cit. ex D. Augustino de divinat. daemonum, cap. 5. et 6. et lib. 2. de Genes. ad litt. cap. 17. et si the Demons cannot certainly foreknow those things that depend most upon causes contingent through free will, yet they can conjecture. For first they know natural causes excellently: then, since they mingle themselves with them, exciting tempests, etc. They also know the temperaments, inclinations, and affections of men. They also see causes moved from afar, e. g. ships loosed from India. Besides, they can receive some things from the Angels of God, God willing, etc. Thus also Less. Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 5. num. 23. These things the Demons, when invoked, predict and disclose.

The Demon is invoked expressly, however, either by actions, in which the Demon is known to intervene, or by words. Tacitly, on the other hand, one invokes him when someone procures an effect reserved to God alone through means in themselves powerless and improper. Thus commonly the Doctors.

Less. Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 5. num. 28. Tolet. lib. 4. summa, cap. 16. Sanchez Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. num. 26. Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 8. a num. 22. Fagundez cap. 35. citato remark, with D. Bonaventure in Centil. loc. cit., that every invocation of the Demon is a malediction, because there either the cult due to God is rendered to the devil, or that which is God's is demanded, and it is often joined with heresy and apostasy from the faith, as the holy Doctor again warns in 4. d. 13. dub. 4. Therefore confessors are admonished by the holy Doctor sermone 2. in Decal. et in confessionali, cap. 2. particula 9. et cap. 5. particula 37. et 38. and by the cited Doctors to attend to what pact he made and under what formula; whether adoration from the heart intervened, or only extrinsic: whether he used sacred things, or the Sacrament; likewise the harm they inflict upon persons, beasts, fields, etc.

SIMILARLY in the implicit pact, by which that knowledge is pretended which is proper to God alone, and hence it is always mortal. Thus Valentia d. 6. quaest. 12. puncto 4. Delrius lib. 4. disq. mag. cap. 2. quaest. 4. Sanchez tom. 1. decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. num. 18. Ignorance, however, can excuse. Thus Caietanus quaest. 5. art. 2. Valentia, and Delrius loc. cit. Sanchez num. 10; et alii apud hos.

The SIGNS of an implicit pact with the Demon will be, if some vain condition is added in words to deeds, as that the Gospel be written on a lamina. Second, when falsehoods are mingled with the words, or unknown characters are employed, when the effects are vain or transcendent, as Tannerus notes dubio 2. et alii.

If, however, these things are done in jest, e.g. with the astrolabe, etc., not in order to know the future, there will be no superstition; if indeed they are done seriously to investigate hidden things, as theft; grave penance is imposed by Alexander III. extra. de furtis. and the Priest is deprived of his ministry by right, and the Bishop shall proceed against him 26. quaest. 5. cap. Non oportet, si quis Episcopus, as the holy Doctor transmits in confessionali, cap. 3. particula 38. Bassaeus adds V. Magia, that no parvity of matter is granted in this genus of sin.

THERE are indeed certain prayers that circulate as rendering one safe from death inflicted by sword, iron, etc.; they may be carried, if they contain nothing superstitious; nor let the secure promise be held. Thus Sanchez Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 40. num. 20. et alii apud Fagundez num. 16.

He notes also num. 17. with Ciruelo, that those prayers are vain in whose titles a number of days is decreed during which they are to be recited to obtain grace; for no term can be set to God.

Superstition indeed arises from an inordinate desire of obtaining some good, or of avoiding some evil; and this is more connatural to women. Thus the holy Doctor LL. CC. et cum eo Fagund. num. 4.

Now Divination, in which there is an express invocation of the Demon, has five species, according to D. Bonaventure in Centil. loc. cit.: Mantia, Sortilegium, Augury, Maleficium, and Prestige.

AS TO practice, however, they hold only three species to be distinctly expounded in confession, Valentia d. 6. quaest. 12. puncto 2. in calce, Tannerus d. 5. quaest. 7. dub. 1. Azorius lib. 9. cap. 13. quaestio 3. The first is that which has an express pact with the Demon. The second is that by which knowledge is sought from the disposition that bodies have, which can be called by a bodily name Augury. The third is that by which knowledge is sought from certain things deliberately done, and in both there is an implicit invocation of the Demon.

MANTIA is named from Mantis, a distinguished Diviner among the Athenians, and this has other species: The first is Necromancy, divining through appearing images of the dead, from Necron, which is dead, and Mantia, which signifies divination. Second, Geomancy through signs appearing in earthly bodies, from Gea, which is earth, as in a circle. Third is Hydromancy through signs appearing in water, from Hydros, water. Fourth is Aeromancy, through signs in the air. Fifth, Pyromancy from Pyros, fire, through signs in fire.

Other less principal species of divination are enumerated by the holy Doctor loc. cit. Centil. et aliis locis. The first is Divination, which predicts from fates and constellations; and it is called Mathesis, and Astronomantia. The second, through inspection of the air, keeping days and hours in one's actions, and it is called Auruspicium. The third, which inspects the entrails or intestines of beasts, and is called Extipex. The fourth, which receives responses from Demons on the altars of Idols; it is called Ariolus, a diviner on altars. The fifth, which observes dreams, and is called Onyrocritica; but the observer of dreams is called Coniector. The sixth, from the words or accidental deeds of men, and is called Omen; the seventh is Phytonia, speaking through a malignant spirit, and this one is called Phyto, or Phytius, from Phytius, that is, so named from Apollo, or a ventriloquist. The eighth is Genethliacs, observing the moments of births, and this superstition is called Constellatio. So also Horoscopy, which observes the Hours of birth, agrees with the preceding. The ninth is Saltatio, whence Saliator, who, whatever part of the members shall leap, divines what is prosperous or fatal. The tenth Physiognomy, which augurs from the signs of the human body. The eleventh Spatulamantia, which conjectures from the signs in the shoulder-blade of some animal. The twelfth Motescopia, which from the forehead. The thirteenth is from the signs of the hands, and is called Chiromantia.

The species of maleficium which is called Magia is subordinate, and is subdivided into others; for divination is made either from the entrails and fat of infants, or from the blood of abortives, or by the killing of some man or woman, by means of laminas, etc.

Sortilegium by lots cast, whether in water, or on papers, or in books, is manifold.

Augurium from the chattering of birds and the various voices of animals is various; to which is also reduced Auspicium, taken from the flight of birds and the movement of other animals.

Similarly Prestige is wrought through the various apparitions of the devil himself, whether true or phantastic, and it happens in many ways, as may be seen in Valentia quaest. 12. puncto 2. For first the Demon is wont to present true bodies, translated from elsewhere, or quickly made by himself through the application of actives to passives. In which way are said to be true serpents those which the magi of Pharaoh Exodi 7. fashioned, as St. Augustine holds lib. 3. de Trinitate, cap. 7. et 8. et lib. 83. qq. quaestione 79. D. Thomas quaest. 7. de potentia, art. 5. ad 8. and D. Bonaventure in 2. d. 7. part. 2. art. 2. quaest. 2. Second, the Demon is wont to present apparent bodies. In this way Augustine says 18. de ciuit. cap. 18. is to be understood what is narrated of the companions of Ulysses changed into beasts; And what is told of the Arcadians, that when they crossed a pool they were turned into Wolves. Thus the same St. Augustine lib. 2. ad simpl. quaest. 3. says it is better understood what is said 1. Reg. 28. of Samuel, who is said to have appeared to Saul.

Third the Demon mocks by altering the senses, confusing the species, disturbing the organ, so that, like phrenetics, they seem to see marvels.

Fourth, in mockery, the internal senses being disturbed and the phantasy confounded, so that some seem to have visions. See Valentia with D. Bonaventure locis adductis, Tract. de Angelis, disp. 11. ubi de potentia Angelorum.

Quaestio II: On Divination by the Stars

I assume here that Astrology, which argues from the motion of the stars and their various influxes that effects of the same kind follow from purely natural causes, is a true and lawful science; for it is natural to deduce effects from causes. Therefore most holy Sixtus V, in the Bull by which he condemns judicial astrology, speaking of those who conjecture free effects from the motions of the stars, says: Excepting only future events arising from necessary natural causes, or occurring frequently, which do not pertain to divination.

That astrology, however, which predicts free effects from natural causes is not a science but a superstitious fable, as the Doctors note. Since the stars cannot produce effects of a higher order, namely of free will, as I showed in my Treatise on the heavens, disputation 2, question 17, no one can divine those from them. For these lie hidden in the secrets of God. Hence the Saintly Doctor admonishes, ad 8. Eccl., that while we have time we should do good, because man cannot know future things by any announcement, as is said there; and Fagundez also subjoins this, lib. 1. on the first precept of the Decalogue, cap. 38.

I assert, therefore, that natural astrology is lawful, while judicial astrology alone is illicit. So D. Bonaventure and D. Thomas, here; Less. Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 6. circulo de superstit. 2. part. cap. 3. and 4. Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 11. Sanchez Tomo primo Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. a num. 17. Fagundez lib. 1. cap. 38.

The former part is proved by the Saintly Doctors, because like cause, like effect; but the stars were created as causes of sublunary natural things, as is said in Genesis 1. Deuteronomy 4. Therefore from them conjectures can be drawn.

Moderately, however, must these things be predicted, because since they depend on many causes, which can be impeded, they often fail. But things that are casual fail more, as that a passing lightning bolt should strike someone, etc.

I assert secondly, that to divine voluntary events from the stars is superstitious.

It is proved first by the Saintly Doctor. That which is subjected to another does not predominate; but the stars and other natural causes were made in the service of man, as is said in Deuteronomy 4. Therefore they do not predominate over their free wills.

It is proved secondly. Whoever uses the light of the intellect for free works does not depend on the extrinsic determination of natural things, but determines himself; such is man, above all the Wise man. Therefore Ptolemy says:

The wise man will rule the stars:

It is proved thirdly, because what is rightly ordered always tends toward good: Therefore either all will always do good; or they will not move their free will.

It is proved fourthly. If the variety of morals were caused by the motions and influxes of the stars, it would follow that we act all moral things of necessity, and liberty would be wholly taken away: the consequence is Manichaean: Therefore. The consequence is proved; every cause produces according to what it is in act, and not beyond its order; but the stars are natural causes, determined to effects: Therefore all effects of the will would be produced of necessity: Therefore liberty would be taken away, counsels would be removed, merits destroyed, there would be no work worthy of praise or blame, which are absurd.

It is proved fifthly in the body by the Saintly Doctor, because many good works are commanded to us, many urged by counsel, many forbidden: of these eternal punishments are intimated: to those the rewards of glory are promised, as is clear from the Holy Scriptures: But all these are taken away if the stars cause these works in us determinately: for since they would then be necessary, they have neither law nor counsel; nor can they merit either reward or punishment. Thus even grace assisting our operations would be taken away, and glory too. Thus the Justice of God perishes, while our good and evil works are poured back into the stars; and honor and veneration are hurled at the stars, and thus men are snatched away to Idolatry.

It is proved sixthly by experience. For Esau and Jacob were born of the same birth under the same Horoscope, etc., and yet they were so different in morals in life and death. Under the same constellation also there are born the rustic and the king's son; there are born a man and an ass.

It is confirmed against certain observations of the astrologers, for instance, that those born under Aquarius should be fishermen, and those under the sign of Libra, money-changers; and yet in Getulia under the sign of Aquarius they are not fishermen, and in the kingdoms under Libra no money-changers are found.

It is proved seventhly. That which is lower does not predominate over what is above; but the body is lower than the spirit: Therefore the spirit is not subject to the stars.

PROVED eighthly from the inconvenience which they bring in, that the stars are therefore to be venerated. For either the stars induce their effects on man inevitably of necessity, or not. If not, why are they to be venerated or feared? If of necessity; what due service, or what supplications?

PROVED ninthly. Constellations are to be observed from birth, or not. If from birth, as the Genethliaci hold: Therefore also in the following times. Why then do they observe the Horoscope at the nativity? why the royal house? why the Anaphoras and Cataphoras of the houses? If in the first constellation they are not to be observed. Therefore neither in the following ones. Indeed they seem to be observed rather at conception, where the formation of the fetus takes place: for birth is often hastened, delayed, etc. But who knows the moment of conception, in the animation?

The Saintly Doctor draws these arguments from D. Augustine in the places cited, from D. Gregory, homil. 10. on the Gospel, from Damascene lib. 2. de fide, cap. 7. And so it is concluded that hence heresies are brought in.

Finally the Saintly Doctor urges it from the faith, Isaiah 47. it is said: Stand now, and let the diviners of the heavens save thee, who gaze upon the stars, that from them they might announce to thee things to come. For it is a kind of imprecation. Where in the place of Augurs, the LXX have Astrologers. And D. Jerome says of them, who are called Mathematici, and believe that human affairs are governed by the course and fall of the stars.

JEREM. 10. Learn not according to the ways of the nations: and be not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the nations fear: For the laws of the peoples are vain.

These things are prohibited also in the Council of Toledo, first, in the assertion of the faith, and in the chapter Non liceat, 26. quaest. 5., and finally by Sixtus V, motu proprio 21, which begins: Moderator caeli, et terrae. See Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 11. Delrium lib. 4. disquis. mag. cap. 3. quaest. 1. Fagundez cap. 38.

ADD Suates num. 31. Sanchez Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 1. cap. 38. num. 33. Less. lib. 2. de Iust. cap. 43. dub. 6. num. 42. Fagundez num. 8., that even if the astrologer believes inwardly that the judgment from the stars is not certain but only probable, he is still superstitious. The reason of D. Bonaventure which they use is, because from the stars no such cause can be had as would make a probable indication, but only one that is most remote, and yields doubtful and uncertain judgments.

I ASSERT thirdly, that it is not forbidden to conjecture from the constellations one's temperament and in some degree one's inclination. The reason of D. Bonaventure is, because natural causes communicate an inclining temperament. Hence the choleric are irascible; the sanguine benign, the melancholic spiteful, the phlegmatic sluggish; yet this is not of necessity; for the soul dominates the affections, especially when aided by grace. For we have seen many choleric men gentle, etc. And so, although from natural causes the organization and mixture of the body be such as to incline, yet not so much that you could even probably divine from it; Therefore St. Augustine, lib. 5. de Civit. cap. 2., cited by D. Bonaventure, relating a certain case of two brothers who fell ill together and were cured together, praises rather the answer of the physician, who said this happened from a symmetry of complexions; than that of the astrologer, who said it happened from the same constellation.

Nor is such conjecturing forbidden by Sixtus V in the motu cited, as Fagund. notes, num. 10. Yet this conjecture, since it comes from afar, cannot assert anything with probability, as Fagund. says with D. Bonaventure, in the body.

YOU OBJECT first from Boethius, lib. 4. de consol., prose 6: Fate is an inherent disposition in movable things, by which the Divine Providence weaves each thing into its own orders: But fate, according to D. Augustine, 5. de Civit. cap. 1., is the force of the position of the stars, which, when it exists at the time one is conceived or born, makes known what he will be. If therefore fate is truly real, and consists in the influxes of the stars, and in this consists the whole governance of life: Therefore the diversity of morals depends on these.

The Saintly Doctor answers that Boethius takes fate as it truly is a disposition of divine providence, binding all genera of causes to act according to their proper orders; but D. Augustine takes fate in the sense of the philosophers' estimation, and shows it to be nothing. Whence he adds: If anyone calls fate the order of causes which God has instituted, in so doing he holds the true opinion, and corrects the word. And so it is not permitted to infer from fate as truly real, which consists in the sweet yet firm providence of God, that it consists in the force of the stars, and that the governance of life hangs on these.

YOU OBJECT secondly, from the various constellations various effects are produced in men, even free ones. Thus Aristotle relates, lib. de propriet. elem. and 5. Polit. cap. 7.: Kingdoms have been made empty, and lands depopulated, at the conjunction of two great stars, namely of Jupiter and Saturn. To this tends what the astronomers say, that the transit of Saturn from one sign to another always causes something extraordinary, especially in the conjunction which they call the Great, with Jupiter; and when that took place on the twenty-first of October 1663, Piscator Clarevallensis and others predicted a comet for the following year, which appeared in that same month of December, at which time Saturn was passing from the fiery sign of Sagittarius to the earthy sign of Capricorn; and about that comet indeed many have written many things: but especially in those kingdoms over which it was vertical, it produced, they say, its various influxes, namely under Virgo, Leo, Gemini, Cancer, and Aries. And to prove this they bring forward many examples of events in those regions in which comets, or certain violent stars, were made vertical.

In Europe they note very many cases. Thus they note that a star of the second magnitude in the right arm of Auriga, made vertical as the sygnet of Mercury and Mars, brought that horrible contagion upon Milan and the neighboring cities, but especially Brescia, where of 45,000 only fourteen thousand survived, besides innumerable others laid low in the vast surrounding territory; and at Bergamo there was nearly the same calamity. Thus they say that a star in the head of Medusa, the sygnet of Saturn and Jupiter, of the third magnitude, made vertical over Polyflipponus, in the year 1640, stirred up that great revolution in which, casting off the scepter of King Philip IV, they acclaimed John Duke of Braganza as King. The boreal star in Ursa Major, like Mars, of the third magnitude, in the zenith of the royal city of the Venetians, in the year 1643, is said to have brought innumerable evils upon our most serene republic (may God grant it eternal life) from the Turkish tyrant; thus an ill-formed star in Helice, not unlike Mars, of the second magnitude, in the zenith of the royal city of Parthenope, which is Naples, is said to have stirred up dark seditions under the leader Thomas Aniello (who is also called Masaniello): but the bright star in the head of the Dragon, connected with Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars as its sygnet, while it brooded over the vertex of the royal city of London in England, in the year 1648, is said to have wickedly inflamed that people, like a Fury roused by the Dire Ones, into rebellion against its most clement King Charles Stuart, into horrible parricide, so that, by an example unheard of for centuries, the King himself was most unjustly condemned to death by judges sitting on the tribunal of the filthy rabble, Fairfax acting, and in the broad square of the city, from the lofty scaffold, with his head struck off at the feet of the executioner, his body was laid down. And that monarchy was rolled into the turbulent tyranny of a Democracy and Aristocracy, with the sons of the kingdom, the heirs, sought out for extermination. Likewise the star on the right side of Perseus, friendly to Saturn and Jupiter, in the zenith of that region of the world, the city of Paris, set high, in the year 1650, was believed to have loosed those savage tempests upon the young King Louis the Great XIV, unconquered Firstborn of Louis XIII the Just, now happily reigning, bursting forth in bloody vortices even to the stars to be belched forth.

NUMBERLESS other things they report that happened under stars or comets made vertical, or treading the horizon.

To these, and other such things, the Saintly Doctor answers that the Philosopher attributes to the constellations, etc., only certain dispositions arising from temperament, which indeed can be repelled by the soul; yet because the majority follow them, therefore the astrologers often predict truly, especially concerning men living in the manner of animals; but concerning men who use reason they can say very few things truly.

YOU OBJECT thirdly from Scripture. The Magi, from the star that rose, knew the Lord to be adored, Matth. 1. and Christ, Ioan. 8.: My hour is not yet come: Therefore if Christ hung upon Horoscopes and the stars, much more the rest.

The Saintly Doctor answers that that star was created as a sign of the newborn Messiah, whom they recognized as from the sign of his nativity, with divine revelation irradiating them, and that Christ did not depend on the stars, but awaited the predestined time to fulfill the figures and to redeem the world.

YOU OBJECT fourthly: Stars and comets often appear at the death of Kings, and the astronomers divine many true things from them, and these notable signs of wars, revolutions, etc., as I said in my Treatise on the heavens, disputation 9. question 9., where I described many comets in various centuries together with the gravest calamities, even the downfall of Princes; and most recently, in the year 1664, in the month of December, there appeared a remarkable comet, which was struck by the rays of the sun from behind, out of the East, and these, refracted (not otherwise than when, refracted in a crystal sphere, they are shot forth toward the opposite farthest part) showed a bearded shape toward the west, and that radiant coma persevered as long as the comet, between the penultimate flexure of Hydra, below the Vase, all the way to the tree of the Argonauts, and thence above the prow toward the Dog, not far from the belt of Orion, preceding the sun, was struck by the vibrating sun from the East; but the rays were rolled toward the summer Tropic, since the sun, near the opposite winter Tropic, was making his way toward the Antarctic. But when it grew toward the belt of Orion, where it was seen stationary for several days, before it passed across the equinoctial, it was seen to be comated and shorn. For when it stood directly opposite the sun, it shot its rays upward; but when, withdrawing from the belt of Orion, fleeing beneath the eye of the Bull, and rising above the high head of the Whale toward the joining of the Fishes, it made its way between the equinoctial and the Ecliptic, where it also placed its station; drinking in the rays of the sun from the west it poured them out toward the East, and little by little it perished as it came to the Zodiac, where comets cannot long remain, since they approach the sun too nearly.

And so it was seen by me even after the Easter feasts. But I always observed that it scarcely appeared greater with the spyglass than without it, although the moon through the same glass appeared far greater. From which I deduced, according to the rules of Perspective, that the comet existed far above the moon, much higher than it, emitting a sharper pyramid, appearing far thinner in proportion than the moon. Now at this time the opinion of Tycho Brahe is most flourishing, that comets wander not in the air, but in the Spheres of the heavens. Nor indeed could this one have been concocted from terrestrial exhalations, since it extended over 22 degrees of longitude in its orb, which are 1980 miles, which, translated into the supreme region of the air, would constitute a corresponding globe far larger than the whole terrestrial globe. This one seems to have been concocted from the great preceding conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn; more proximately indeed from a universal conjunction of almost all the Planets, which at this time, when the comet first appeared, were moving under the sign of Capricorn; and Saturn himself, after the greatest copulation with Jupiter, was joined first to Mars, then to Venus, to the Sun, and finally to Mercury; according to P. Cabeo, in meteoris. And so it was rolled about within the ambit of the Moon and of Mercury, and it would have received from both those Planets, and from its parent Saturn, a cognate organization; malignant births from it were augured; in color too, similar to Saturn, leaden mixed with some varied and sub-white, with other Planets indicated by the Gemini, the birth was seen to be most similar. Wherefore they ominously predicted malignant diseases, sudden deaths, exiles, and straits. And because it ran against the order of the signs, according to the doctrine of Cardano, they argued a change of Laws and of Kingdoms, a Tyranny; and according to the sayings of Origani, the death of those Princes whose states are subject to the signs which the comet traverses: And in our case under Virgo, Leo, Cancer, Gemini, Taurus, Aries, but especially under Leo, Gemini, and Aries, where it placed its station; but the long horse-like tail indicates lasting seditions, according to text 54. in the second Book of the quadripartitum of Ptolemy. — not indeed to all, but to those over which it was vertical, or whose horizon it grazed; otherwise, since that comet traversed a greater area of the signs of the Zodiac, whether by reason of the signs, or by reason of the responding Trigon, almost the whole world would be shaken.

THENCE, step by step, they deduced that this comet, which on the 16th of December, across the Tropic of Capricorn by seven degrees, and 18 above our Horizon, was finally raised 58 degrees above our Horizon, had already been made vertical over many kingdoms, as below the Tropic of Capricorn in Tibiquiri of the Island of St. Lawrence, and many others of the AEthiopian sea, and between the Tropic of Capricorn and the Equator in the kingdoms of Peru, Brazil, Cephalae, Madagascar, Mozambique, Quiloa, Manicogni, Caphatae, Quarz, Damus, Cemae, Melinda, Vanguae, Janz the greater and lesser, and New Guinea. Above the Equator by 12 degrees, the kingdoms of Tangar, Madagazo Mechae Diasar, etc., Bexin, Melgetae, Giuper Mapan with all Guinea, Zocorote, Calicut, Cochin, Onori, Marsingae, Goa, Zelandae, Malaccae, Samonae, Siam, Baloan, Borneo, Molucci, Mindanao; it was also Horizontal over the kingdoms of Sweden, Norway, Finmark, Lapland, Scriphinia, Bodiae, Finland, Novgorod, Volgdae, Bernia, Corelia, Braimia, Sarmatia, Condorae, Iceland, Greenland, up to the Zenith of the arctic pole, to which the Equinoctial is the Horizon. So has the book published at Milan, in the year 1664.

This scaffold of narrations unveils the vanity of the astrologers with regard to free operations. And so the Saintly Doctor answers that comets are produced by God, and moved by Angels, to deter men from vices, but not to strike only those over whom they were vertical or horizontal. But this the here-and-now experiment teaches; for in this year, in that region, nothing new came of it; but on the contrary, in the regions of Europe the Princes of Austria died, the Emperor fell sick unto death, indeed even the Supreme Pontiff Alexander VII died, as did also the Duke of Mantua, Charles II. There rested in peace also the heroic Queen, most worthy mother of Louis XIV King of France: the King of Spain passed away. Also at the same time died P. Matc. Antonius Galitius, General Minister of our Religion, the Oracle of Rome, and constantly at the side of the Supreme Pontiff in counsel. And so the comet sent into the world threatened these losses to Christian lands, but not to the kingdoms of Madagascar and Finland, nor was it going to aim any operations at free will.

You object lastly: The most excellent Governance of God directs lower things through higher, and earthly things through the heavenly, as St. Dionysius says in de cael. Hier.; and what is governed ought to be subject to its perfect governor.

It is answered, that God governs the lower bodies through the higher; but not spirits through bodies; for although spirits inhabit the earth, they are far higher than bodies. Therefore the heavenly bodies serve these in ministry, not in dominion.

Quaestio III: On Divination by the Elements, and other mixed things

On Divination through the Elements; and the other Mixtures.

The Demon has devised a thousand ways of doing harm, so that men might abuse the creatures, founded for their use. And not only did he arm the stars, as it were the Militia of Heaven, so that, fighting against God, they might prostitute to senseless lights the honor owed to the creative Majesty, but he packed the elements for our ruin. Thus he instructed the magi, so that they might hold the luminaries of heaven sacred. But first Sazoba Zoroaster the King began to worship the Sun, as Porphyry relates in de Nympharum antro. His subjects the Persians imitated him, and among the Assyrians Nemrod was adored under the name of the Sun, as Salianus relates, in the year of the world 1931. The Egyptians also, the Phoenicians, and the Greeks began to invoke the militia of heaven, as many relate, cited by Serlogus, analog. 5. sectione 5.

At almost the same time among the Persians and Assyrians fire was invoked. Hence they relate that Abraham was cast into the fire, which he had refused to worship, as D. Jerome narrates in de traditionibus Hebraeis, where he mocks that fable. The cult shown to the other creatures is treated in the law in Serlogo.

Therefore the Demon taught men Geomancy, so that, imprinting certain signs, points, and figures on the earth, in dust, on stones, on papers, or on other earthly bodies, they might thence attain the power of divining the future. Thus also he taught Hydromancy, so that they might impart some motion to water in a basin, and gaze into it for taking omens: in the air he created insane variations in the sounds of the winds and of the fanings, whether sharp or booming, unto musical Steromantic tones. He placed Pyromancy in observations of fire; namely, whether it was smoky or clear, etc., that they might thence predict things to come — as if indeed the green woods did not by nature exhale an obscure, turbid, and blood-colored fire, while the dry exhale a clear one, in the form of a pyramid, into the open field.

He taught men to consider many natural things for divining: in the hands the signs, lines, the vital, etc., the Mounts of Venus, of Jupiter, etc., chimerically contrived, that they might thence argue whether they were going to enjoy a happy life, a faithful wife, treacherous friends, dangers of iron, fire, and similar ravings. Indeed in the lineaments the parts beget sons like themselves, and in events altogether unlike. These lineaments accordingly are disfigured by fatness, leanness, wrinkles, etc.

Grave also is the fact that in these times it is permitted to extend the hand of the Gypsy, that they may augur our fortune for us, as Navarrus teaches, summa, cap. 11. num. 31. Alcozer summa, cap. 14. fol. 46. Ludouicus Lopez p. p. Instruct. cap. 41. Sanchez Tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. num. 47. Fagundez lib. 1. cap. 39. num. 4. in primum praeceptum Decal. — provided, however, that this be done in jest and for sport, it will not be lethally illicit, unless from the dignity of the person a scandal breaks out.

That physiognomy, however, which is a part of natural Philosophy, which from the disposition of the body, the habit and proportion of the members, conjectures with probability the affections of the mind, and a good or evil disposition of character, a keen intelligence, the temperament of the body, a firm or infirm state of health, is lawful, because from these things these can be known with probability; otherwise if these are predicted with certainty; for they cannot exhibit anything with certainty, as Delrius proves at length, lib. 4. disq. cap. 3. quaest. 4. Azorius Tom. 1. lib. 9. cap. 16. Less. lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 7. num. 45. Sanchez tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. num. 44. after D. Bonaventure, in compend. Theol. veritatis, lib. 2. cap. 58., where, in favor of the nearly probable conjecture from these signs, he alleges Aristotle, Avicenna, Constantius, Philemon, Loxeus, Palaemotius, and he distinguishes excellently: and his book was published by order of Sixtus V, who issued his own Motu against vain divination, and this book was dedicated to Clement VIII. You should see that most excellent one distinguishing, from which you will receive no small pleasure. See also the last disputation of tome 3, where I discussed physiognomy at length according to the mind of the Saintly Doctor.

But the physiognomy which, from the aspects of the parts of the human body, predicts prosperous and adverse events of a man, is superstitious and condemned by Sixtus V, as the cited Doctors relate, and it is detested by S. Bonaventure, loc. cit. et alibi passim.

From the motions of the human body no, or a very weak, conjecture can be taken for divining things to come; for they often depend on the free will. Whence it is a superstition. So Sanchez num. 44. Valentia d. 6. quaest. 12. puncto 5. Fagundez num. 6.

Similarly, to divine from fortuitous accidents is superstitious, for instance from the double encounter of the same person on the same journey; from the breaking of a strap, the spilling of salt, etc. So Sanchez num. 42. Azorius Tom. 1. lib. 5. cap. 22. quaestio unica, Fagundez num. 7.

Thus to divine contingencies from the voices of men is vain and superstitious, as Valentia notes, puncto 3. Azorius Tom. 1. lib. 9. cap. 12. — unless indeed God reveal something from them, as Gedeon, Iudic. 7., on the dream being narrated to him, predicted victory.

From the motion, flight, and song of birds, free events are divined superstitiously; for these natural things are determined to one thing. They have, indeed, a phantasy directed by the stars to their proper acts, their food, sleep, and prey; whence their animal spirits are excited by a change in the air, their brain is affected, so that they flee, cry out, etc., as D. Bonaventure teaches above, D. Thom. quaest. 95. art. 7. Caietanus there, Azorius tom. 1. lib. 9. cap. 15. in fine, Less. lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 7. num. 45.

These indeed indicate certain intemperies in the air and in the other Elements, insofar as they are accustomed to excite dispositions in the blood and the choler; whence one conjectures quarrels, wars, and seditions, but most remotely and uncertainly, as the Saintly Doctor says, and with him Fagundez num. 9. Sanchez num. 30. Valentia puncto 3. col. 2.

Quaestio IV: On Divination from Dreams

On Divination from Dreams.

CONCERNING dreams it should be noted, from D. Bonaventure, 3. part. Centil. sect. 23., and the little work, Declaratio terminorum Theologiae, and in 2. d. 7. part. 2. quaest. 3. ad argumenta, and d. 23. art. 2. quaest. 2. ad argumenta, that they come about from many causes. First, from the singular Providence of God, such were the dreams of Joseph. Second, from the constellation of the sky and the impression of the air. Third, from the affection and disposition of the human body. Fourth, from prior anxieties. Fifth, from the act of demons.

From God indeed come dreams for unfolding the Divine will: Such was the dream of Joseph about the Virgin not to be abandoned, about the flight into Egypt, about the return; more even about the way to be turned aside, Matth. 1. and 2.; and these are good, since they come from God.

About these you have Numbers 12, Job 33, Genesis 40 and 41, Daniel 2, 4 and 7, Judges 7, 3 Kings 3, Esther 10, and also 2 Machab. 15, and elsewhere monitions and examples. Yet if there is not probability that those dreams are from God, it will not be permitted to give faith to them, for knowledge of future contingents cannot be had from elsewhere. Therefore they are prohibited in Deuteronomy 13, where he decrees that they are to be punished with death; and Ecclesiasticus 34, where it is said: Dreams lift up fools: Unless the visitation be from the Most High, give not thy heart upon them: For dreams have led many into error, and they have fallen who hoped in them. So it is proved by the Saintly Doctor in 2. d. 7. loc. cit. Yet it can be a venial fault if they are believed out of levity, or not firmly.

It is MORTAL also to place any vain things under the bed of the sick, e.g. horns, letters, that they may catch sleep: For these have effects from an implicit at least pact with the devil.

It is discerned, moreover, whether dreams are from God or from the devil by those signs by which also revelations are, as Delrius notes, lib. 4. disq. mag. cap. 3. quaest. 6. Pererius lib. 1. in Danielem, quaest. 3., and lib. 2. de magia quaest. 3. Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 13. Fagundez lib. 1. in primum praeceptum, cap. 39.

But two signs are chief. The first is from the effect toward which they move: for if they excite to a good work, they are good. Second, from the affections which they cause, namely if they cause alacrity, or the devotion of fasting, it is a sign that they are good. Yet in these one must walk cautiously and humbly, with the judgment also of a prudent confessor.

IF dreams are from some impression and influx of secondary causes, for instance heat, or a very humid, turbid air, they avail nothing; for they are accustomed to stir the humors violently, whence dreams mostly arise indicating the humors predominant in us. For thus the bilious seem to gaze upon conflagrations, the sanguine upon wounds, the melancholic upon dark things, for instance smoking globes, or dense fog, funerals, and the dead. But the phlegmatic see white things, for instance snows: if one thinks himself flying through the air, it is a sign of a tempered symmetry; if he thinks he finds treasures, it is a sign of possessing a deficit. Finally the Saintly Doctor concludes that these are signs of infirmity from some humor predominating. But it belongs to physicians to observe these, as Ciruelo teaches, de superstit. 2. p. cap. 6. Perer. supra de magia, quaest. 7. Azor. tom. 1. lib. 9. cap. 17. Less. lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 8. Suarez tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 13. Fagundez num. 20. Tanner. d. 5. quaest. 7. d. 1.

TO these dreams from the abundance of the dominating humor belongs that dream in which one sees and feels at night a specter rushing upon him and oppressing him, which physicians call the Incubus, and it is called Ephialtes, as the Saintly Doctor says, loc. cit. Centil. For it arises from a thick and foul humor rushing into the brain and intercepting the passages of the animal spirits, as the Saintly Doctor teaches with Galen, lib. 3. de locis male affectis, cap. 4.; and this is a sign of thick and melancholic blood, and there is danger of epilepsy if one suffers it frequently; and this is also called phantasma, from Cicero Visum: Marobius treats of these at length, lib. 1. in somnium Scipionis.

Dreams are also accustomed to break in from cares and anxieties, which indicate only past causes, and propose nothing of the future to be divined.

Quaestio V: On Sortileges

On Sortileges.

SORTILEGE is divination by lots, which the ancients used, and indeed some Saints, as the Apostles, Acts 1, when they gave the lot for the election of the successor of Judas in the Apostolate, before they received the fullness of the Holy Spirit, as the Saintly Doctor observes, p. p. Centiloquii, sect. 29. And because some lots are just, others condemned as superstitious, therefore the diversity of these must be explained, that we may unmask superstitious sortileges, which the Saintly Doctor reviews in the speculum animae, cap. 1.

There are THREE genera of lots: Divisoria, Consultoria, and Divinatoria. Lots are divisory when by a cast of lots what is to be divided among each party is expected, for instance of two brothers, to whom this estate may fall, etc. They are consultorial, when by a cast of lots in doubtful matters the divine counsel is inquired into, what is to be done. They are divinatory, when from lots things to come are inquired into; and indeed these can be expected either from God, or from the Demon, or from chance.

DIVISORY lots are in some cases lawful, and are conceded in l. si duob. C. si communia de legatis, when equal power of choosing is given to two heirs or legatees, and they contend among themselves; the faculty is given of deciding the whole matter by lots.

They are LAWFUL indeed in secular matters which cannot otherwise conveniently be divided, for instance in the division of an inheritance between two brothers, or other co-heirs, for settling disputes. So teaches the Abbas in c. Ecclesiae extra de sortilegiis. Fagund. lib. 1. t. 40, Less. tom. 1. de Iustitia, lib. 2. c. 43. d. 9. Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. c. 12. Tanner. d. 5. quaest. 7. dub. 1. They are lawful also in honors or dangers, as if between two nations there is a dispute which town should first be attacked. So D. August. Ep. 180, and Lessius. They are also employed in another danger, when there are many Clerics in time of pestilence, and it is disputed who ought to remain to minister the Sacraments. So Fagund. Sanchez tom. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 38. n. 59. Suarez n. 17., with D. Thom. 2. 2. quaest. 95 art. 8. Yet guard against injustices, losses, and profanations. See Bass. V. Divinatio.

Divisory lots are PERMITTED also in punishments, as if many are condemned to death for the same crime, and the Prince, to show clemency, wants to grant some pardon, but, to keep discipline, to punish some; by the lot of dice those to be saved and those to be condemned are chosen. So, with the authorities alleged, Delrius lib. 4. disq. cap. 4. quaest. 1. Finally, when in a storm some are to be cast into the sea, as Less. loc. cit., Fagundez num. 4., Delrius num. 60., Sanchez num. 62. note.

There is a QUESTION, however: whether lots are lawful for settling ecclesiastical disputes. First indeed, as regards election to ecclesiastical benefices, they are prohibited in cap. Ecclesia, extra, de sortilegiis. As to the rest: The first opinion asserts that it is lawful; another denies. A third concedes that it is lawful, provided it be done by public ecclesiastical authority. So Suarez, cap. 12. num. 12. Sanchez num. 79. Fagundez num. 7. The reason is, because it is nowhere prohibited in the law; which however is not proved privately, because there is a danger of invading a benefice under an unjust title. It is confirmed by the general rule in the matter of benefices, where it is decreed that a private pact over a benefice that is being litigated is not lawful, and that such a pact is Simony. That it can be done by the authority of a judge, the Gloss holds, in cap. licet causam, de probat. Hostiensis there num. 20. Abbas num. 37.

CONCERNING election indeed to benefices, all agree that it is not lawful, as is shown in cap. Ecclesia, and it is extended to the universal ecclesiastical election, in which jurisdiction, or the right of electing or renouncing, or an ecclesiastical dignity, benefice, or administration is given. So Suarez num. 5. Fagundez n. 10. And such an election will also be invalid, because it is against the form of elections given in cap. Quia propter, de elect., as Panormitanus notes, in cap. Ecclesia; see Bassaeus num. 3.

You will say: Matthias was elected to the episcopate by lot, Acts 1.

Fagundez answers that there lots are called suffragia. So in the Greek text we have: they gave them suffragia. But afterwards, thus he was elected to remove the scandal of the people, because Joseph seemed rather to be the one to be elected, since noble, and celebrated for justice and holiness, they asked of God a confirmation, which took place with a light sent down from God, which they call the lot. So also Lorinus on that passage, alleging Chrysostom. And D. Dionysius, de Ecclesiast. Hierar. part. 3. cap. 5., says that this lot was a Gift showing to that most noble assembly that Matthias had been elected. The same the Saintly Doctor teaches in the sermons on that Saint.

¶ Yet for civil offices election by lot is not evil; it can, however, be against distributive justice, if the less worthy is set in the lot with the more worthy. So Suarez cap. 12. num. 15. Less. cap. 43. d. 9. num. 58. Sanchez cap. 38. num. 58. D. Thom. quaest. 95. art. 8. Azor. tom. 1. lib. 9. cap. 21. quaesito un. Tolet. lib. 4. sum. cap. 15. Sylvest. superstitio, quaestio 9. Sayrus lib. 4. cap. 5. num. 20. Deltius lib. 40. cap. 4. quaest. 1., and all commonly, cited by Fagundez num. 15. See also Sigisin. dub. 26., with Basszo ut supra.

But the Canon law does not regulate except in the properly ecclesiastical matter.

C O N S U L T O R I AE lots are regularly illicit; they can, however, be lawful under these conditions. The first is necessity: Second, if they are done with God inspiring: Third, due reverence: Fourth, that they be not done about an undue matter, of which I treated just above. So Sanchez num. 83. Less. num. 60. Suarez num. 18. Fagundez n. 16. Bass. num. 3. Portel. de dub. reg. V. Venef. num. 21.

But without necessity, etc., to want God to show His will is to tempt Him who has not promised this, and the way is opened to the Demon, to insinuate himself by frauds.

That they can nevertheless be done prudently, the usage of the Holy Fathers shows, Iosue 7. Primo Reg. 10. Act. 1. So Prov. 16.: Lots are cast into the lap, but they are tempered by the Lord. So also S. P. Francis consulted God by thrice opening the Book of the Gospels, and again by turning over a companion, and also in other ways, as S. Bonaventure relates in his life.

I assert therefore, that divinatory lots are illicit and prohibited, cap. 1. de sortil. et 26. quaest. 1. cap. sortes. cap. Pervenit. cap. Si quis clericus. cap. Contra. cap. Episc. eadem 26. quaest. 1., and the Saintly Doctor relates it in the confessionali, cap. 3. particula 37. et 38. They are prohibited also by Sixtus V in his motu proprio.

It is proved, because knowledge of things to come is to be expected from God alone; but he himself never promised to announce the future by lots. So Fagundez n. 19. Suarez num. 27. Sanchez num. 88. Less. num. 61., and others.

Quaestio VI: On superstitious observances for works

On superstitious observances in deeds.

S U P E R S T I T I O N of vain observance differs from divinations, because divination is ordered to obtaining an undue knowledge of hidden things; but superstitious observance to obtaining certain advantages, or to harming others. It is done by an explicit or implicit invocation of the Demon.

And indeed, if the pretended effect surpasses natural power, it is superstition, because honor due to God alone is shown to the devil; but if it does not surpass it, it seems a sin against charity toward oneself, as Valencia says quaest. 13. tertio puncto.

Moreover the means are known to be superstitious because they are inept, such as Astronomical images, Amulets, characters on tablets, inept words mixed with sacred things, which little women frequently mutter ought to be drunk down. Such are the cures of Ensalmators by certain words. So Fagundez in primum praeceptum Decal. lib. 1. cap. 36. et in secundo Ecclesiae, lib. 8. cap. 4. num. 16. for although by a gift freely given some may have the power of healing from some infirmity, nevertheless the force does not reside in the words, but in the persons. So the Kings of France by divinely favored contact of the right hand cure swollen swellings in the Throat, as Less. notes lib. 2. cap. 43. d. 10. Tanner. d. 5. quaest. 7. d. 2. n. 40.

Ensalmators indeed would be tolerable if they added permitted prayers to natural remedies, for prayers add nothing evil. So Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 15. Sanchez. lib. 1. Decal. lib. 2. cap. 50. num. 39. Fagundez in primum Decal. lib. 1. cap 36. and others cited by them.

Tannerus adds d. 5. quaest. 7. dub. 2. num. 37. that these Salvators, or Ensalmators, seem to some to have a grace freely given; this however is uncertain, since otherwise these men are reprobate.

But concerning the Psylli of Africa, and the Marsi of Italy, who drew out poisons by drinking them, Delrius ascribes it to diabolical magic lib. 1. disquis. mag. cap. 3. quaest. 4.

Tannerus however warns that not all ceremonies are to be condemned outright, for instance leading beasts of burden around near the temple of some Saint, e.g. St. Pancras; or applying to the sick bread or fat pressed to the Crucifix on Good Friday, on which Greiferus de cruce, lib. 2. cap. 62. See other things in Tannerus and Fagundez.

Indications are commonly brought forward here when things are superstitious; but I have reported these above.

One thing however is wont to be noted as especially important, that one not easily believe apparitions: for the Demon is wont to transform himself into an Angel of light, and to feign himself to be the soul of someone believed saved, so that he may defame it; or another soul, thought to be damned, that he may expose it to veneration, as D. Thom. notes p. p. quaest. 113. art. 4. and others:

Note also that Demons cannot at will bring it about that souls come forth either from Purgatory or from Hell: for they are in the prison of God. Whence that Rich Man in Luke 16. could not come forth from the nether world, as D. Bonavent. notes there, and with him Fagundez n. 9. But that they sometimes go forth from their receptacles with God willing, I shall show in the Third part, Tom. 1. d. 39. with D. Bonavent. in 4. d. 45.

One must nevertheless beware of fallacies. There will be two principal signs for knowing them. First, if they fear the sign of the Cross, or the name of Jesus, of the Virgin Mary, and of the Saints, or flee, or shrink from the relics of Saints, or blessed wax, or holy water. Second, if importunately they seek once and again, mixing in inept things. So Thyraeus lib. de spirituum apparitionibus, cap. 16. Delrius lib. 2. disquis. quaest. 26. sect. 3. Fagundez num. 12.

Against this, that souls appear by the aid of the Demon, they object that Samuel appeared to Saul at the command of the Witch 1. Reg. 28. as I shall say with D. August. 3. part. loc. cit. and many Fathers teach: Iustinus in Dialogo cum Tryph. ad calcem, Lyra, and Caietanus ad primum Reg. 28. Tostatus quaest. 18. D. Thom. 2. 2. quaest. 174. art. 5. et p. p. quaest. 89. art. 6. and many expositors cited by Fagundez num. 18. Suarez Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 16. Pererius in cap. 7. Exodi, 18. Cornelius a lapide in Eccles. p. 3. cap. 46. who favor this opinion. Nor was it done at the command of the Pythoness, but before her incantations, at the command of God.

Fagundez cap. 37. further warns that there are other superstitions in sacred things, as in the Masses of St. Amator; and the Masses of the Counts, where superstitious things are mixed in. From money first offered to the Crucifix on Good Friday they make a ring for health, which however is not entirely condemned: They gather herbs on the day of St. John the Baptist; which is no hindrance, if they attend to a natural cause. Images of some saint are tied and submerged in a river, until it rains. See him.

Quaestio VII: On the malefices of Witches

The name of magic, belonging to natural science, has been transferred to the wicked art of Witches, whose inventor was Zoroaster, King of the Persians, as they commonly report with D. Bonaventure.

But a far greater number of women than men, from innate levity, follow it, and they are called Lamiae from their cruelty: for the Lamia is a monstrous animal with a human face, carrying the cruelty of a wild beast in its trunk, especially in slaughtering children, that it may pour out and suck their blood, as D. Bonavent. teaches in 3. Threnorum, and with him Fagundez in primum praeceptum, lib. 1. cap. 41. to whom alludes that text of the Threni, sed et Lamiae nudaverunt mammas.

They are called Sagae from sagacity: Maleficae from maleficia: Veneficae from veneficia.

They are called Striges from certain night birds that emit a screech in flight.

It is customary here to dispute: Whether striges are truly brought to the places of dances: but I have treated these in my Tract. de Angelis, d. 11. where I also reported the unspeakable copulations with the demon.

These however are apostates from the faith, for they deny Baptism, the most holy Cross, the Trinity, as some of this refuse have expressed to me. Whence they rightly say, with Prosper Farinac. Tract. de haeresi, parte 8. operum crim. quaest. 181. §. 1. num. 46. Delrius lib. 5. disq. sect. 5. that Lamiae are heretics. There is added the cult of demons; for they adore the devil, either under the figure of a He-goat, or seated on a throne; they adore however with the shoulder bent sideways, as they have told me,

Blasphemies are belched forth against God, against Christ, and against the B. Virgin, as I reported d. 11. de Angelis.

There are added sacrileges of every kind in the abuse of the Sacraments, the Relics of Saints, and of the Most Holy Eucharist itself.

There follow the unspeakable copulations with the Demon, both according to nature and against it.

There are added the gravest damages in the goods of orchard, of floods, and of fires, and even to life itself. And so a witch, whom I accompanied to execution, confessed that she had killed ten men. These things they report: Binsfeld, commentar. ad l. Nemo, C. de maleficiis and Delrius disq. lib. 5. sect. 16. Serlogus Anselis. in cant.

Add that this crime is contagious, so that it creeps like a cancer. For these men and women have from the Demon a precept of drawing others to the same apostasy, which is first celebrated by the trampling of the Cross, and the denial of the faith, and the adoration of the goat, and the serpent, as is established for me all too truly by the experiment of those whom I examined; for so pestilential a virus did some Youths spread, that they would hand over to me some of their parents to be converted, otherwise, they protested, they wished to kill them, because they were also corrupting other brothers, even little boys. And I saw some of these even as infants, who would perform these diabolical ceremonies, and with turbulent mouth and horrible face they terrified.

These things they learn in solitudes, while they guard flocks and herds, or in the night time, where they are not recognized. They have confessed also that they bring masters to the sacrilegious places, and except for these, others are not recognized, because all appear masked. But what they do there is so detestable that even inks and pages would blush to describe it: Moreover they bring innumerable calamities, they cast Demons into bodies, as I have learned from the possessed, they stir up tempests so savage that once in the Valley of Rhaetia I saw all the crops cut down by hailstones, the fields laid waste by waters flooding from the ridges, buildings buried, and within one hour damage of forty thousand gold pieces inflicted by two young striges.

Truly for the restitution of these things the striges are held, and those who cooperate with them; but especially those who induce them, as Suarez Tom. 1. lib. 1. de superstit. cap. 14. Toletus lib. 4. summae, cap. 16. Less. Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 8. d. 2. Navar. cap. 15. num. 19. Fagundez loc. cit. cap. 41. n. 19. note.

Wherefore, as the Doctors commonly teach, this obligation of restitution is not extinguished by their killing; for through those punishments they satisfy legal justice, not the injured party. Therefore the heirs are held to restitution according to cap. in litteris, de raptoribus, and cap. ult. de sepult. But if the goods have come to the fisc, it is held first to restore the damages inflicted according to leg. Non possunt, and leg. In summa, ff. de iure fisci, where the best account of this matter is given, because things liable to a debt owed are not computed among the goods of the deceased. Which is common to all other debts. So teach Suarez num. 12. Navar. num. 25. Binsfeld. tract. de confess. malefic. praelud. 13. Fagundez num. 20. and others.

I confess that those whom I knew were for the most part destitute, and each of them had a single daughter educated, to whom they might leave the inheritance of so great iniquity; but the other offspring the cruelest Lamiae killed. About the aforesaid the confessor ought to question them, as Bass. num. 7. notes.

I know that sometimes fantasy alone carries some to the execrable places, as I said disp. 11. de Angelis cit. In which category there occurred a charming spectacle; for one of the striges under inquisition, who, since she was very old, had not been fastened to the rack, but with fire applied to her feet was called forth to confession and questioning, and had always denied; when she had been condemned to exile and was to go into the lands of Brescia, I approached her, and besought her to inflict no more evils: But she blasphemed that she was innocent as an Angel, and as the most holy Virgin; (for this is their ordinary justification) The young daughter was also present; But having exhorted both with gentle words, I recognized from their own confession that both were striges. Therefore I commended to God my Brescian fatherland, to which one of them was to come. After some days, departing from her sickbed (with her feet burnt — for indeed the fire had been extinguished by the force of a great sum of money) she lay dying for many hours. Her husband, weary of the disgrace, called the Priests, and had her buried as dead; she was let down into a deep dug grave, and covered with much earth; but on the following night a pack of huge Cats of black color led dances around her sepulcher. Thus perished the wretch.

Moreover their philters and love potions are not naturally efficacious for kindling lascivious loves toward a particular individual, although they can excite the humors, as Azor. cap. 26. quaestio 1. Medina lib. de recta in Deum fide, cap. 7. teach.

It is also wont to be asked: Whether men can compel Demons with regard to rings, mirrors, etc. It is answered with Azorius quaestio 2. Fagundez num. 23. negatively; since they are of lower nature and power, but they are compelled by a superior Demon, whom the magus consults.

You will object. The liver of the fish drove away Demons, Tobiae 6. et 8. The holy Doctor answers, de sex alis Seraphim, cap. 8. et part. 3. de Eccl. Hier. cap. 2. et part. 2. cap. 2. that this was done by the power of the Angel Raphael, who took the liver of the roasted fish to signify salvation by the power of the passion of Christ. So also Fagundez num. 25. and Azorius in the place cited.

Quaestio VIII: Whether it is lawful to consult Witches, that at least the malefices be removed

Whether it be lawful to consult Witches, that they at least remove maleficia.

I suppose here with D. Bonavent. in the places cited in the preceding questions, that it is not permitted to approach Witches to place a maleficium. So all the Doctors, and it is proved by the holy Doctor from Levit. 19. and 20. Deuter. 13. and 18. This however proves that it is not permitted to approach even patarini and Arioli.

A greater question is: Whether it be lawful to approach a prepared strix, that she remove a maleficium by maleficium. The common, and true, opinion is that it is not permitted. So Sanchez lib. 7. matr. d. 95. Albertt. in 4. d. 34. art. 9. Sotus quaest. unica, art. 3. Palat. ibi, d. 1. Caietanus in summa, verb. maleficium, et in opusc. tract. 12. de maleficiis, quaest. un. Abul. cap. 19. Matth. quaest. 90. ad 3. Castro lib. de iusta haeret. punit. cap. 15. Ledesma 2. part. 4. quaest. 60. art. 2. Ciruelo de superstit. part. 3. cap. 15. Margarita confess. in primum praeceptum, fol. 60. Viguet. l. Inst. cap. 16. §. 7. ver. 9. imp. 11. Angles in flor. p. p. ubi de matrim. quaest. 8. art. 2. d. 2. Tolet. lib. 4. summae, cap. 16. Bannes 2. 2. quaest. 68. art. 4. d. 2. ad 4. Peretius, Ledesma de matrim. quaest. 58. art. 2. d. 2. Henriquez lib. 5. de poenit. cap. 6. et lib. 12. de matrim. cap. 8. Philiarc. tom. 1. part. 2. lib. 3. cap. 11. Delrius lib. 6. disg. cap. 2. sect. 1. quaest. 2. Barthol. a Ledesma de matrim. quaest. 49. Navarr. summa, cap. 11. num. 29. Couarr. in cap. Quamvis pactum, p. p. §. 1. Ludov. Lopez 2. part. Instruct. ubi de matrim. cap. 52. Rodriguez tom. 1. summa, cap. 7. concl. 11. Flamma 3. part. method. cap. 8. §. 11. Graff. p. p. decis. lib. 2. cap. 6. num. 10. Vega tom. 1. summae, cap. 34. casu 110. Rosella verb. imped. 15. num. 19. ibi. Tabien. imped. 11. quaest. 9. Sylvest. verb. malef. quaest. 8. ibi Armilia num. 2. Binsfeld. lib. 1. cap. de mathem. quaest. 5. Suarez tom. 1. de relig. lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 18. num. 4. Fagundez lib. 1. in primum praecept. Decal. cap. 42. Tannerus Tom. 1. d. 5. quaest. 6. dub. 7. et Tom. 4. de impedimentis matrimonii. Bassaeus V. Malefic. §.

This is the express opinion of D. Bonavent. in confessionali, cap. 1. particula 38. where he proves it from cap. 2. de sortil. where Alexander III condemned a Presbyter who for a good end had tried a superstitious damnation. It is also clear from cap. Qui sine salvatore 26. quaest. 2. drawn from D. Augustine. Thus it is proved also by others.

The reason is, because to make a maleficium in order to remove a maleficium includes a new invocation of the Demon, plainly wicked, but evils are not to be done that goods may come, as is said in Rom. 3.

Hence you have that it is false which is decided in leg. eorum, 46. de malef. and leg. Regia, 3. tit. 23. part. 7. and Azorius relates summa, tit. de malef. that malefics exercising maleficia for a good end, lest the fruits of the earth perish, are excused. For these are false, since these cannot be removed without an invocation of the Demon, which is not permitted even for a good end, as the holy Doctor notes loc. cit. and with him Fagundez num. 26. Bartol. in d. leg. eorum. Salicetus, and others.

You have also that it is unlawful to compel Witches by threats or punishments to remove a maleficium by maleficium, as Sanchez notes lib. 7. de matrim. d. 95. Suarez Tom. 1. de Religione, lib. 2. de superstit. cap. 18. Delrius lib. 6. disg. cap. 2. sect. 1. quaest. 2. The reason is, because this is intrinsically evil.

To me however it seems permitted, at least if the maleficium can be removed by a means unculpable, or licit, because I ask what can rightly be done, compelled by necessity; just as therefore on that account I can ask money from a usurer, because he can damn without usury, so in the present case. So Sanchez dub. cit. Suarez loc. cit. and others cited by Fagundez cap. 42. But that in necessity it be permitted to ask money from a usurer, I showed in the Tract. de charitate, d. 18. quae de scandalo, and Disput. de Usura, quaest. ult.

I add however, with Fagundez num. 12. that the strix is to be exhorted to employ only a licit means, which if she refuse to do, the fault is imputed to her.

Observe also that the remedies for removing maleficia are the Relics of Saints, Blessings, etc. which however, if they have something inept joined to the ceremony as necessary, would be superstitious, as Navar. warns summa Lat. cap. 11. num. 25. and others. It is also permitted to take away and burn the signs of maleficia, for instance knotted hairs, little statues, etc. as the Doctors commonly say; for they are works of the devil, which it is licit to destroy. Wherefore Scotus 4. d. 34. quaest. un. says it is ridiculous to doubt about this. It is permitted also to place other sacred things, that the bond may be destroyed. So Suar. cap. 17. num. 9. Less. lib. 2. cap. 44. d. 6. Fagundez num. 6. cap. 43.

Quaestio IX: On the penalties of Witches, etc.

On the punishments of Witches, etc.

Venefici, Sagae, Malefici, Sortilegi, Divini, and Magi, a plague of the world, a virus of the Church, and a contagion of Kingdoms, the laws scourge with the same punishments. Formerly by the old law they were condemned to death Exodi 22. Levit. 20. Deuter. 13. et 18. as we have often seen with the holy Doctor. The same now stands in tota causa 26. and throughout the Codex in the title de maleficis.

In Canonical law venefici and malefici, and those consulting them, are excommunicated cap. si quis ariolos, 26. q. 5. yet the excommunication does not seem ipso facto, but to be inflicted, as the Doctors note. But if they are heretics, they incur ipso facto the excommunication in the Cena Domini.

IN canonical law they are punished with other penalties; for, if they are laymen, a penance of forty days is imposed on them, as is clear cap. 1. de sortil. and the holy Doctor relates in confessionali, cap. 3. particula 37. which is understood in the forum of Confession; just as also in the Council of Ancyra they are punished with a five-year penance 26. quaest. 5. for according to the laws they are burned, and their goods are proscribed, as D. Bonavent. notes in confessionali, cap. 3. particula 48.

IN cap. Episcopi 26. quaest. 5. it is prescribed that such men, after being scourged, be cast out.

But DE consulentibus it is said in cap. Quisquis 2. quaest. 8. that they are infamous, and 26. quaest. 5. from the Fourth Council of Toledo cap 30. if he is a Bishop or presbyter, he is deposed from office, and assigned to a monastery in perpetuity, as the holy Doctor relates in confessionali, cap. 3. part. 49.

One must however stand by the custom of that place in each diocese.

But IURE civil they are punished with death cap. de maleficiis, et Mathem.

IF the offense has mixed in heresy, or suspicion of it, the cognition of these belongs to the Inquisitors of the faith cap. causam, §. de haeret. in 6. and Suarez notes cap. 18. but if suspicion of heresy is not present, its cognition does not belong to the Inquisitors, according to cap. causam, but it is judged of mixed forum, unless by reason of the person it belongs to the Ecclesiastical.

KNOW first, that the Bull of Sixtus V against Iudiciarii extends the power of the Inquisitors against venefici, etc., and not only against sortilegi, as Sanchez thinks Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 38. So Diana warns part. 4. tract. 8. de offic. et potestate Inquisit. resol. 107. But by force of this Bull they can take cognizance of all superstitions, at least those wise [ones] that savor of heresy, even if not manifest, as Diana notes.

IN doubt also: whether sortilegia savor of heresy, the Inquisitors can manifestly take cognizance by the new law of Sixtus V: I add also by the old law cap. accusatus, as Simanca teaches, de Cathol. Instit. tit. 30. and others in him, and most recently Acugna tract. de confessar. sollicitantibus, quaest. 5. num. 15. and Diana in the place cit. resol. 112. and Tract. 7. resol. 10.

FINALLY, although by the old law the DD. Inquisitors could not take cognizance except of sortilegia, divinations, etc. that savored of heresy; nevertheless now, by force of the Bull of Sixtus V, they take cognizance of all, as Scortia notes in Bull. Pontif. epist. 58. Theor. 158. and others, whom Diana follows part. 4. Tract. 7. de poenis delictorum, resol. 10.

But DE modo, the order, and rigor of proceeding against these nefarious men, Tannerus treats 2. 2. disp. 4. quaest. 5. and Martinus Delrius lib. 5. disq. mag.

Tannerus however warns that one proceed most cautiously, and piously, lest the innocent be involved in these infamies; but if many are guilty, and an innocent one must be mixed with these, let them rather abstain.

I add ONE little doubt: Whether Striges, who have killed infants, are to be handed over by the DD. Inquisitors to the secular Judge for homicides, even if they are truly converted. Simanc denies it de Cathol. Instit. tit. 37. num. 17. Albertinus de agnosc. proposit. caib. quaest. 25. num. 66. cited by Fagundez lib. 1. cap. 44. num. 21. The same is taught by Sousa Inquisitorum Aphorismis, lib. 10. cap. 58. Farinac. quaest. 20. num. 105. cited in Dianam, resol. 10.

BUT Diana notes that most recently Gregory XV declared the opposite, and therefore that such a one is to be handed over to the secular Court; but if by infirmity, or incapacity for matrimony, or if she has gravely harmed someone by [spoiling] fruits, etc., she is to be shut within a wall, or be made to serve in building prisons in the S. off. Inquisit. where it existed.

Tractatus I: PRIMUS DE VIRTUTIBUS THEOLOGICIS

Proemium I: Prooemium

Disputatio I: ON FAITH

Quaestio I: What FAITH signifies, and what it is

Quaestio II: What the object of FAITH is

Quaestio III: Whether the object of FAITH is something complex

Quaestio IV: Whether the object of FAITH can be false

Quaestio V: Whether the object of FAITH can be evident scientifically

Quaestio VI: Whether FAITH is concerned with those things which are seen by vision on the way

Quaestio VII: Whether the articles of FAITH are evidently credible

Quaestio VIII: Whether the things to be believed are rightly arranged according to the articles

Quaestio IX: Whether the articles of FAITH have grown over the course of time

Quaestio X: Whether FAITH has grown as regards light

Quaestio XI: Whether Faith has grown in certitude

Quaestio XII: Whether the articles of Faith are to be expounded by some authority which is an infallible teacher, and what it is

Quaestio XIII: What are the marks of the true Church, in which the authority of expounding FAITH resides

Quaestio XIV: What must be believed by the necessity of means

Quaestio XV: What things are to be believed by the necessity of precept

Quaestio XVI: Whether we are bound to confess FAITH, and when

Quaestio XVII: Whether it is lawful to dispute about FAITH, and when

Quaestio XVIII: Whether Faith resides in the Intellect

Quaestio XIX: Whether Faith is perfected by Charity, as by its form

Quaestio XX: Whether it is certain that FAITH remains without CHARITY

Quaestio XXI: Whether, and how, FAITH is a VIRTUE

Quaestio XXII: Whether FAITH is ONE VIRTUE

Quaestio XXIII: Whether FAITH is the first of the Virtues

Quaestio XXIV: Whether FAITH is more certain than any science, or than any intellectual habit

Quaestio XXV: Whether one can know with certainty that he has FAITH

Quaestio XXVI: In whom FAITH is found

Quaestio XXVII: Whether FAITH is a substantial Gift of GOD

Quaestio XXVIII: Whether the difference between FAITH and other acts, natural as opposed to supernatural moral acts, always arises from the object

Quaestio XXIX: On the effects of FAITH

Quaestio XXX: On the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING

Dubitatio I: Whether UNDERSTANDING is a gift of the Holy Ghost

Dubitatio II: Whether the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING can coexist with FAITH

Dubitatio III: Whether the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING consists in the contemplation of the Creator and of Creation

Dubitatio IV: Whether the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING is found in all who have grace, and whether in these alone

Dubitatio V: What is the necessity and utility of the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING

Dubitatio VI: Whether* **the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING** *corresponds to the sixth beatitude, namely, Blessed are the clean of heart, etc.

Dubitatio VII: Whether* **to the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING** *there corresponds, among the fruits of the Holy Ghost, Faith

Quaestio XXXI: On the Gift of Knowledge

Dubitatio I: Whether* **KNOWLEDGE** *is a gift of the Holy Ghost

Dubitatio II: Whether knowledge is concerned with Divine things

Dubitatio III: Whether the gift of knowledge is speculative

Dubitatio IV: Whether the third Beatitude corresponds to the Gift of Knowledge: Blessed are they that mourn, etc.

Disputatio II: On Unbelief

Quaestio I: What UNBELIEF is, and what kind of sin it is

Quaestio II: Whether all the works of unbelievers are sins

Quaestio III: Whether unbelievers can be compelled to hear FAITH

Quaestio IV: Whether unbelievers can be compelled to embrace our FAITH, when it has been sufficiently set forth

Quaestio V: Whether unbaptized unbelievers can be compelled to abandon errors or rites contrary to natural reason

Quaestio VI: Whether the rites of unbelievers are to be permitted

Quaestio VII: Whether it is lawful to make agreements with unbelievers about the toleration of their rites

Quaestio VIII: Whether unbaptized unbelievers can retain power over the Faithful, and whether they can be deprived of it

Disputatio III: On Heresy

Quaestio I: What HERESY is

Quaestio II: Whether one who doubts about the articles of FAITH is a heretic

Quaestio III: Whether one who gives merely opinionative assent to an article of FAITH is a heretic

Quaestio IV: Whether, and what, Ignorance excuses from Heresy

Quaestio V: What pertinacity is required for HERESY

Quaestio VI: Whether, for one to be deemed a Heretic, it is necessary that he have been baptized and a believer

Quaestio VII: Whether the Church can compel heretics to receive the Catholic FAITH

Quaestio VIII: On the other means the Church uses against heretics, by forbidding their Books

Quaestio IX: Whether we are bound to avoid the conversation of heretics

Quaestio X: What excommunication is inflicted upon heretics

Quaestio XI: On the other spiritual punishments of heretics

Quaestio XII: On the temporal punishments of Heretics

Disputatio IV: On Hope

Quaestio I: What HOPE is

Quaestio II: What the material object of HOPE is

Question III

Quaestio IV: Whether a certain object is set forth for HOPE, and is hoped for

Quaestio V: Whether Hope is a Virtue

Quaestio VI: Whether HOPE is a Theological Virtue

Quaestio VII: Whether HOPE is at times formless

Quaestio VIII: Whether HOPE arises from merits

Quaestio IX: Whether Hope precedes Charity

Quaestio X: What the proximate subject of HOPE is

Quaestio XI: Whether HOPE remains in the Blessed

Quaestio XII: Whether there is a precept of hoping in GOD

Dubitatio VI: Whether* the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING *corresponds to the sixth beatitude, namely, Blessed are the clean of heart, etc.

Dubitatio VII: Whether* to the GIFT OF UNDERSTANDING *there corresponds, among the fruits of the Holy Ghost, Faith

Dubitatio I: Whether* KNOWLEDGE *is a gift of the Holy Ghost