Part III (Secunda Secundae) Part 151 (2/2)
Reply Obj. 3: The trial by hot iron or boiling water is directed to the investigation of someone's hidden sin, by means of something done by a man, and in this it agrees with the drawing of lots. But in so far as a miraculous result is expected from G.o.d, it surpa.s.ses the common generality of sortilege. Hence this kind of trial is rendered unlawful, both because it is directed to the judgment of the occult, which is reserved to the divine judgment, and because such like trials are not sanctioned by divine authority. Hence we read in a decree of Pope Stephen V [*II, qu. v., can. Consuluist i]: ”The sacred canons do not approve of extorting a confession from anyone by means of the trial by hot iron or boiling water, and no one must presume, by a superst.i.tious innovation, to practice what is not sanctioned by the teaching of the holy fathers. For it is allowable that public crimes should be judged by our authority, after the culprit has made spontaneous confession, or when witnesses have been approved, with due regard to the fear of G.o.d; but hidden and unknown crimes must be left to Him Who alone knows the hearts of the children of men.” The same would seem to apply to the law concerning duels, save that it approaches nearer to the common kind of sortilege, since no miraculous effect is expected thereupon, unless the combatants be very unequal in strength or skill.
_______________________
QUESTION 96
OF SUPERSt.i.tION IN OBSERVANCES (In Four Articles)
We must now consider superst.i.tion in observances, under which head there are four points of inquiry:
(1) Of observances for acquiring knowledge, which are prescribed by the magic art;
(2) Of observances for causing alterations in certain bodies;
(3) Of observances practiced in fortune-telling;
(4) Of wearing sacred words at the neck.
_______________________
FIRST ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 96, Art. 1]
Whether It Be Unlawful to Practice the Observances of the Magic Art?
Objection 1: It would seem that it is not unlawful to practice the observances of the magic art. A thing is said to be unlawful in two ways. First, by reason of the genus of the deed, as murder and theft: secondly, through being directed to an evil end, as when a person gives an alms for the sake of vainglory. Now the observances of the magic art are not evil as to the genus of the deed, for they consist in certain fasts and prayers to G.o.d; moreover, they are directed to a good end, namely, the acquisition of science. Therefore it is not unlawful to practice these observances.
Obj. 2: Further, it is written (Dan. 1:17) that ”to the children” who abstained, ”G.o.d gave knowledge, and understanding in every book, and wisdom.” Now the observances of the magic art consist in certain fasts and abstinences. Therefore it seems that this art achieves its results through G.o.d: and consequently it is not unlawful to practice it.
Obj. 3: Further, seemingly, as stated above (A. 1), the reason why it is wrong to inquire of the demons concerning the future is because they have no knowledge of it, this knowledge being proper to G.o.d. Yet the demons know scientific truths: because sciences are about things necessary and invariable, and such things are subject to human knowledge, and much more to the knowledge of demons, who are of keener intellect, as Augustine says [*Gen. ad lit. ii, 17; De Divin.
Daemon. 3, 4]. Therefore it seems to be no sin to practice the magic art, even though it achieve its result through the demons.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Deut. 18:10, 11): ”Neither let there be found among you ... anyone ... that seeketh the truth from the dead”: which search relies on the demons' help. Now through the observances of the magic art, knowledge of the truth is sought ”by means of certain signs agreed upon by compact with the demons”
[*Augustine, De Doctr. Christ. ii, 20; see above Q. 92, A. 2].
Therefore it is unlawful to practice the notary art.
_I answer that,_ The magic art is both unlawful and futile. It is unlawful, because the means it employs for acquiring knowledge have not in themselves the power to cause science, consisting as they do in gazing certain shapes, and muttering certain strange words, and so forth. Wherefore this art does not make use of these things as causes, but as signs; not however as signs inst.i.tuted by G.o.d, as are the sacramental signs. It follows, therefore, that they are empty signs, and consequently a kind of ”agreement or covenant made with the demons for the purpose of consultation and of compact by tokens”
[*Ibid.]. Wherefore the magic art is to be absolutely repudiated and avoided by Christians, even as other arts of vain and noxious superst.i.tion, as Augustine declares (De Doctr. Christ. ii, 23). This art is also useless for the acquisition of science. For since it is not intended by means of this art to acquire science in a manner connatural to man, namely, by discovery and instruction, the consequence is that this effect is expected either from G.o.d or from the demons. Now it is certain that some have received wisdom and science infused into them by G.o.d, as related of Solomon (3 Kings 3 and 2 Paralip. 1). Moreover, our Lord said to His disciples (Luke 21:15): ”I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to resist and gainsay.” However, this gift is not granted to all, or in connection with any particular observance, but according to the will of the Holy Ghost, as stated in 1 Cor. 12:8, ”To one indeed by the Spirit is given the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit,” and afterwards it is said (1 Cor. 12:11): ”All these things one and the same Spirit worketh, dividing to everyone according as He will.” On the other hand it does not belong to the demons to enlighten the intellect, as stated in the First Part (Q. 109, A. 3).
Now the acquisition of knowledge and wisdom is effected by the enlightening of the intellect, wherefore never did anyone acquire knowledge by means of the demons. Hence Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x, 9): ”Porphyry confesses that the intellectual soul is in no way cleansed by theurgic inventions,” i.e. the operations ”of the demons, so as to be fitted to see its G.o.d, and discern what is true,” such as are all scientific conclusions. The demons may, however, be able by speaking to men to express in words certain teachings of the sciences, but this is not what is sought by means of magic.
Reply Obj. 1: It is a good thing to acquire knowledge, but it is not good to acquire it by undue means, and it is to this end that the magic art tends.
Reply Obj. 2: The abstinence of these children was not in accordance with a vain observance of the notary art, but according to the authority of the divine law, for they refused to be defiled by the meat of Gentiles. Hence as a reward for their obedience they received knowledge from G.o.d, according to Ps. 118:100, ”I have had understanding above the ancients, because I have sought Thy commandments.”
Reply Obj. 3: To seek knowledge of the future from the demons is a sin not only because they are ignorant of the future, but also on account of the fellows.h.i.+p entered into with them, which also applies to the case in point.
_______________________
SECOND ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 96, Art. 2]
Whether Observances Directed to the Alteration of Bodies, As for the Purpose of Acquiring Health or the Like, Are Unlawful?
Objection 1: It would seem that observances directed to the alteration of bodies, as for the purpose of acquiring health, or the like, are lawful. It is lawful to make use of the natural forces of bodies in order to produce their proper effects. Now in the physical order things have certain occult forces, the reason of which man is unable to a.s.sign; for instance that the magnet attracts iron, and many like instances, all of which Augustine enumerates (De Civ. Dei xxi, 5, 7). Therefore it would seem lawful to employ such like forces for the alteration of bodies.
<script>