Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live!

[angrysoba]

I am currently reading the Bible (I'll put up a post on that sometime soon, although I know there are plenty of posts by previous gluttons for punishment intrepid readers), and I'm still only working my way through Exodus after three days.

I'm reading through what I had understood to be the Ten Commandments although it seems there are in fact something like 4789 Commandments that appear while Moses is up Mount Sinai in which God is bursting forth with a Torrent of Commandments, most of which are to be observed on pain of death. But one of them (Exodus 22:18) is a bit eye-catching because of its abruptness and lack of context:

Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

(Exodus 22:19, on the other hand, is standard fare: "Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.")

Now, I don't expect there is anything written in the Bible that hasn't been endlessly picked over and examined and even used by someone for all manner of excuses, but was this particular passage used in the Church's persecution of witches?

And am I right in suggesting that Ten Commandments is a bit of a misnomer. I understand that Leviticus also has a Ten Commandments as well and that there are some variations.

Sorry, for asking a question which I am sure is well-known to seasoned Bible bashers. (Of both varieties! )

 

[madurobob]

actually, I think the traditional ten commandments are limited to Exodus 20. The Ten are also outlined in Deuteronomy. Leviticus is more like forty zillion commandments, but I think the general interpretation is that Leviticus is direction specifically for the religious leaders, not for lay people.

 

[geni]

I am currently reading the Bible

Which version?

(I'll put up a post on that sometime soon, although I know there are plenty of posts by previous gluttons for punishment intrepid readers), and I'm still only working my way through Exodus after three days.

I'm reading through what I had understood to be the Ten Commandments although it seems there are in fact something like 4789 Commandments that appear while Moses is up Mount Sinai in which God is bursting forth with a Torrent of Commandments, most of which are to be observed on pain of death.

The tend commandments were those written on the tablets. They don't however divide neatly into 10.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_commandments#Two_texts_with_numbering_schemes


There are of course other partsof jewish law.

But one of them (Exodus 22:18) is a bit eye-catching because of its abruptness and lack of context:



(Exodus 22:19, on the other hand, is standard fare: "Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.")

I think thats more a translation artificat than anything else.

Now, I don't expect there is anything written in the Bible that hasn't been endlessly picked over and examined and even used by someone for all manner of excuses, but was this particular passage used in the Church's persecution of witches?

Sometimes. At other times the church took the position that there was no such thing as witches.

And am I right in suggesting that Ten Commandments is a bit of a misnomer. I understand that Leviticus also has a Ten Commandments as well and that there are some variations.

The commandments that appeared on the tablets can be devided into ten.

 

[Bikewer]

I had heard that the original proscription was against "poisoners" rather than witches, and that this, like much else, was changed much later to reflect the Dark-Ages bias against "witches".

 

[HansMustermann]

Now, I don't expect there is anything written in the Bible that hasn't been endlessly picked over and examined and even used by someone for all manner of excuses, but was this particular passage used in the Church's persecution of witches?

Yes. That kind of verses were explicitly invoked in the witch hunt mania. Well spotted.

Even worse though was Leviticus 20:27: "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them." It was eventually construed to mean or support the idea that people who pledge themselves to Satan get a magical animal to help them with the doing evil part. They get a spirit from hell as a familiar. In, say, the shape of a cat. So basically even just having a cat worked against you if you were accused of being a witch. (And in many cases, they'd actually burn the cat together with the "witch".)

 

[RobDegraves]

If you don't mind I would like to offer a few nit picky corrections.

In the middle ages, there was little in the way of a persecution of witches by the church. You really don't get that until the renaissance and later. The main crux of the inquisition was heresy, which is basically being Christian... but in a way that is not approved by the Church. The middle ages sees many sorcerers employed at courts around Europe and many villages had types of worship that were essentially pagan. The Church didn't have much of a problem with those since they were not a threat to it's authority. Heresy however, did threaten the Church since it might catch on with the nobility and become the general religion of the people, as it did with the Cathars.

Charges of witchcraft, along with lurid tales of devil worship and general evil deeds were added a bit later to associate them with the practice of heresy in order to scare people away from it. Eventually, when the Church's authority was unchallenged, witchcraft became more of a threat... largely as a tool to explain any misfortune and provide a scapegoat.

An interesting segway is the development of sex as a form of witchcraft. Earlier tales of witchcraft include mass orgies, which were likely included as a way to sensationalize the stories. However, this backfired a bit since people kind of got the idea that this might actually be fun. Later tales of witchcraft either don't have orgies or the sex involved is much nastier, degrading and painful.

Lastly... there is a bit of a debate as to what the statement "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live" refers to but the witch hunters certainly did use it often to justify their deeds. However, they didn't really need that passage as they had many other rationalizations available.

One of my favorite's comes from the "Malleus Maleficarum", which translates as the "Hammer of the Witches" which was essentially the witch hunter's bible. Written by an inquisitor named Heinrich Kramer, it provides a fascinating explanation as to how you can tell if a woman is a witch. Essentially, it goes like this... lust is a sin... when you look at a woman and you feel lust, you are being tempted into sin. Who tempts man into sin? Satan of course. Ergo, when you feel lust for a woman, it's because Satan is acting through her to tempt you into sin.



Yes it's pretty nasty. One of my thesis was on the inquisition. If you think horror movies are scary... people in the middle ages wouldn't have blinked at even the scariest ones.

 

[HansMustermann]

Well, none of us actually said that the witch-hunt craze peaked in the middle ages, so I would say that's not really a correction. It's true and valuable historical information, mind you, just not much of a correction.

That said, the Malleus Maleficarum... now that's something a psychiatrist could have a field day with. BTW, for whoever is in a masochistic mood, it's even available online: http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/

On the topic of lust, for example, the opposite was witchcraft too. If a guy DOESN'T bone his wife, either by lack of desire, or he just loses the erection or anything, that's witchcraft too. So, you know, lust after a woman = witchcraft, no lust after a woman = witchcraft.

(Side note: the way the matter of those damned witches can make a guy lose his erection is a somewhat recurring theme, I have to wonder if the author has a personal axe to grind there)

Also if a guy is in love with another woman than his wife, then that's the work of a witch too. If he hates his wife, that's the work of a witch. If he goes and screws around, that's the work of a witch. (If a woman does the same, of course, she's just a slut.)

Fun stuff, really

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I understand that there is some evidence that the word "witch" was used to placate King James VIII.

I get some support on this via Google but I am not interested enough to do a thorough analysis.

 

[Leumas]

And am I right in suggesting that Ten Commandments is a bit of a misnomer. I understand that Leviticus also has a Ten Commandments as well and that there are some variations.

actually, I think the traditional ten commandments are limited to Exodus 20. The Ten are also outlined in Deuteronomy. Leviticus is more like forty zillion commandments, but I think the general interpretation is that Leviticus is direction specifically for the religious leaders, not for lay people.

THESE ARE NOT the 10 commandments the ten commandments that are actually CALLED the TEN COMMANDMENTS in the actual biblical text and that are labeled accordingly by Moses and that are on the two tablets that end up in the ark are a TOTALLY different set of commandments.
Here are the REAL ten commandments…..notice verse 28….. by the way….the words “ten commandments” is mentioned in the biblical text ONLY THREE times…. The one below and two times in Deuteronomy…. NONE of the times refers to the ten commandments that people think they are. (Exo 20.)

Exodus 34

1 The LORD said to Moses, “Chisel out two stone tablets like the first ones, and I will write on them the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke. 2 Be ready in the morning, and then come up on Mount Sinai. Present yourself to me there on top of the mountain. 3 No one is to come with you or be seen anywhere on the mountain; not even the flocks and herds may graze in front of the mountain.”
[…]
10 Then the LORD said: “I am making a covenant with you. Before all your people I will do wonders never before done in any nation in all the world. The people you live among will see how awesome is the work that I, the LORD, will do for you. 11 Obey what I command you today. I will drive out before you the Amorites, Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. 12 Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land where you are going, or they will be a snare among you. 13 Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherah poles.[a] 14 Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

1. 15 “Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land; for when they prostitute themselves to their gods and sacrifice to them, they will invite you and you will eat their sacrifices. 16 And when you choose some of their daughters as wives for your sons and those daughters prostitute themselves to their gods, they will lead your sons to do the same.
2. 17 “Do not make any idols.
3. 18 “Celebrate the Festival of Unleavened Bread. For seven days eat bread made without yeast, as I commanded you. Do this at the appointed time in the month of Aviv, for in that month you came out of Egypt.
4. 19 “The first offspring of every womb belongs to me, including all the firstborn males of your livestock, whether from herd or flock. 20 Redeem the firstborn donkey with a lamb, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck. Redeem all your firstborn sons.
5. “No one is to appear before me empty-handed.
6. 21 “Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest.
7. 22 “Celebrate the Festival of Weeks with the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, and the Festival of Ingathering at the turn of the year. 23 Three times a year all your men are to appear before the Sovereign LORD, the God of Israel. 24 I will drive out nations before you and enlarge your territory, and no one will covet your land when you go up three times each year to appear before the LORD your God.
   [*]25 “Do not offer the blood of a sacrifice to me along with anything containing yeast, and do not let any of the sacrifice from the Passover Festival remain until morning.
   [*]26 “Bring the best of the firstfruits of your soil to the house of the LORD your God.
   [*]“Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.”
   

27 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.” 28 Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.

Remember....some bibles have the habit of LABELING sections with a heading to make the section easy to find when one is browsing the bible.

So you will find the section in Exodus 20 labeled as the ten commandments.

HOWEVER...these labels are NOT part of the text of the Bible....they are MODERN LABELS inserted in some bibles for a quick scan reference.

The actual text of the Bible is what I am talking about....the WORDS OF GOD (supposedly).

The words "ten commandments" appear in the bible three times....Exodus 34:28, Deut 4:13, Deut 10:4.

Both Deut ones are talking about them only and do not list them.

Exodus 34:28 is where MOSES says "these are the ten commandments” and WRITES this on the two tablets. Read 34:28 CAREFULLY.

Even in the New Testament Jesus never says ten commandments. He does say “commandments” but he quotes some of them wrong (assuming Exo 20) and he does not list 10 anyway.

Notice Matthew 19…. First he says commandments (not ten) and the guy asks him WHICH. He then lists SIX and the last one is NOT in the Exo 20 list.

{19:16} And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? {19:17} And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is,] God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. {19:18} He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, {19:19} Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

Notice the same story in Mark 10….again the commandments are not ten but again 6 and one of them is not from Exo 20 which also actually contradicts Matthew 19:16 above

{10:17} And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? {10:18} And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is,] God. {10:19} Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.

Notice Luke 18….he now only lists 5.

{18:19}And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? None [is] good, save one, [that is,] God. {18:20} Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

You must also remember that Jesus NEVER says TEN commandments. Remember the words “TEN COMMANDMENTS” occurs in the bible only three times like I said above. One of them is EXPRESSLY used to LABEL the ten commandments as such and as the ones that went on the tablets.

It is understandable why people do not want to admit the REAL ten....read them and see how IMMORAL most of them are.


The first commandment Jesus mentions as the most important commandment and claims is the FIRST commandment given by god (Mat 22:34-40) is in Deuteronomy 6:5 and is not at all the FIRST of the commandments in Exo 20:2-17 as Jesus claims (nor the repeated ones in Deuteronomy 5:6-21). The second one is in fact in Leviticus 19:18 and not even in Exodus altogether.

So where did they get the idea that the 10 commandments are the ones in Exo 20:2-17 (or Deut 5:6-21) rather than the actual ones in Exo 34:14-28..... Augustine only knows.


If Jesus gave the impression that he prefers some commandments over others they were only 2 that are not listed in Exo 20 (nor Deut 5) and when he liked a few more they were only 5 out of the ones in Exo 20 and he NEVER named them the 10 commandments. Besides, Jesus said that ALLLL the laws are to be fulfilled to the last tittle (Mat 5:18). So why keep harping on about the 10.

 

[CynicalSkeptic]

THESE ARE NOT the 10 commandments the ten commandments that are actually CALLED the TEN COMMANDMENTS in the actual biblical text and that are labeled accordingly by Moses and that are on the two tablets that end up in the ark are a TOTALLY different set of commandments.

That's only because God has a horrible memory and couldn't correctly recall what he wrote on the tablets the first time before Moses broke them. So when he attempted to re-dictate the 10 commandments he screwed up.

 

[Leumas]

But one of them (Exodus 22:18) is a bit eye-catching because of its abruptness and lack of context:

Exodus
22:18 “Do not allow a sorceress to live.


Leviticus
20:27A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Deuteronomy
18:10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD; because of these same detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you.



1 Samuel
{15:23} For rebellion [is as] the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness [is as] iniquity and idolatry. Because thou
hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from [being] king.

{28:9} But the woman said to him, “Surely you know what Saul has done. He has cut off the mediums and spiritists from the land. Why have you set a trap for my life to bring about my death?”

2 Chronicles
{33:6} And he caused his children to pass through the fire in the valley of the son of Hinnom: also he observed times, and used enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.

Micah
{5:12} And I will cut off witchcrafts out of thine hand; and thou shalt have no [more] soothsayers: {5:13} Thy graven images also will I cut off, and thy standing images out of the midst of thee; and thou shalt no more worship the work of thine hands. {5:14} And I will pluck up thy groves out of the midst of thee: so will I destroy thy cities. {5:15} And I will execute vengeance in anger and fury upon the heathen, such as they have not heard.

Nahum
{3:4} Because of the multitude of the whoredoms of the wellfavoured harlot, the mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms, and families through her witchcrafts.

Acts
{8:9} But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:

{8:11} And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.


Galatians
{3:1} O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

{5:19} Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
{5:20} Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,


Revelation
{9:21} Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

{21:8} But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

{22:15}For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

 

[I Ratant]

...
(Side note: the way the matter of those damned witches can make a guy lose his erection is a somewhat recurring theme, I have to wonder if the author has a personal axe to grind there)
...

.
The authors were Dominican monks... Nuff said...

 

[Leumas]

That's only because God has a horrible memory and couldn't correctly recall what he wrote on the tablets the first time before Moses broke them. So when he attempted to re-dictate the 10 commandments he screwed up.

 

[Isentropic Frontkick]

Deuteronomy
18:10 Let no one be found among you... who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to ISENTROPIC FRONTKICK

Now here's one I can support.

 

[RobDegraves]

In reply to HansMustermann's post...

Also if a guy is in love with another woman than his wife, then that's the work of a witch too. If he hates his wife, that's the work of a witch. If he goes and screws around, that's the work of a witch

There was a saying oft quoted in the medieval ages, particularly in France and England, that you could not drop a pin from a rooftop without it hitting a demon bent on mischief. In a very superstitious age, demons were everywhere.

Christianity in the middle ages replaced pagan animism with a much scarier and darker version. Demons were responsible for everything that was wrong with the world. As witches were in league with them, anything that went wrong could be blamed on witches.

However, what I was pointing out in my previous post was that the witch craze does not really begin until the Renaissance. I was referring to the various posts that spoke of witch hunts in the dark ages or medieval ages. It's nit picky indeed.

OH.. and for I Rantant...

Dominicans had an interesting nickname in the middle ages. Dominicanes... which meant "Hounds of God"... Domini (Lord) Canes (dog). That was largely because the order was often seen heading the inquisition. It is oft said that some of those orders saw a large amount of mental aberrations based on their concept of sin. You could sin by deed... sin by thought or sin by omission. Since they considered sex to be a major sin, even thinking of sex was a sin. You can see where that could really be an issue when any of them saw a woman.

 

[TimCallahan]

The word translated as "witch" in Ex. 22:18 is kawshaf in Hebrew, based on a root that means "to whisper" as in a secretive whispered spell. The witch of Endor in 1 Samuel is in Hebrew a baalat ob, meaning the wife or mistress of a ghost, i.e. a spirit not content to remain in Sheol. In the New Testament, the young woman in Acts 16:16 who has a "spirit of divination" has, in the original Greek, a pneuma pythonos, or a "pythonic spirit." The python in question is the oracular serpent Apollo slew, but whose spirit was still residing in Delphi; hence the priestess who gave forth prophetic utterances there was called the Pythia.

Basically, the injunction against men or women who cast spells, have concourse with ghosts (often seen as serpentine), or who are diviners is a ban on any of the competition, as opposed to a ban on purveyors of falsehoods. Consider that the young woman with a pythonic spirit who plagues Paul and Silas in Acts, follows them about saying that they are servants of the true god. Or, consider Deuteronomy 13:1 - 3:

If a prophet arises among you, or a dreamer of dreams, and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder which he tells you comes to pass, and he says, "Let us go after other gods," which you have not known, "and let us serve them," you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or to that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

 

[theprestige]

Yes. That kind of verses were explicitly invoked in the witch hunt mania. Well spotted.

Even worse though was Leviticus 20:27: "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them." It was eventually construed to mean or support the idea that people who pledge themselves to Satan get a magical animal to help them with the doing evil part. They get a spirit from hell as a familiar. In, say, the shape of a cat. So basically even just having a cat worked against you if you were accused of being a witch. (And in many cases, they'd actually burn the cat together with the "witch".)

Presumably we know these things are true because we have documents from the witch hunters, invoking these passages to justify their witch hunts. Presumably we also have documents listing black cat ownership prominently among the signs of witchery.

Hans, do you have a preferred source for these claims, that you would be willing to cite here for our reference?

 

[HansMustermann]

Dominicans had an interesting nickname in the middle ages. Dominicanes... which meant "Hounds of God"... Domini (Lord) Canes (dog). That was largely because the order was often seen heading the inquisition. It is oft said that some of those orders saw a large amount of mental aberrations based on their concept of sin. You could sin by deed... sin by thought or sin by omission. Since they considered sex to be a major sin, even thinking of sex was a sin. You can see where that could really be an issue when any of them saw a woman.

Well, in all fairness, JC beat them to it. Matthew 5:28: "But I say to you, anyone who stares at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Can't really blame the Dominicans for inventing that aberration, when it's in the bible and said by Jesus.

But generally, IMHO those guys didn't seem to have invented all that much themselves, but rather took some BS to its logical conclusion. The Malleus Maleficarum is peppered with references to the bible, St Augustine, etc, as well as later scholars like Hostiensis who based their stuff in turn on it.

 

[HansMustermann]

Presumably we know these things are true because we have documents from the witch hunters, invoking these passages to justify their witch hunts. Presumably we also have documents listing black cat ownership prominently among the signs of witchery.

Hans, do you have a preferred source for these claims, that you would be willing to cite here for our reference?

The fact that witches have familiars who do stuff for them is even in the Malleus Maleficarum, which arguably jump-started the whole craze. E.g., it gets a mention in Part II, Question I, Chapter XIV.

(Side note, you can tell how good those guys are at anatomy when they think that milk is menstrual by nature, and thus can't stop except during pregancy. Except if witchcraft is involved. Mind boggles, really.)

It also advises inquisitors to never leave a witch alone, lest it summons her familiar to free or kill her.

Though the Witchhammer itself doesn't actually give instructions on how to check for a familiar, others have been known to take it even more extremely than even just cats (black or otherwise.) ANYTHING could be a familiar. Usual familiar animals included cat, frog, owl, serpent, pig, raven, stag, goat, wolf, dog, horse, bat, and mouse. So, literally, even having mice -- and who didn't? -- was enough to be a possible witch. But really, anything including tiny insects could be a familiar.

E.g., take the infamous "witch hunter general" Matthew Hopkins, who in a mere 14 months got around 230 "witches" executed, more than other witch-hunters in a lifetime. Taking the Malleus Maleficarum part about witches summoning their familiars when in custody seriously, this deranged dude would tie a woman naked in a room and wait to see if as much as a mosquito or gnat comes anywhere near. If it does, bingo, that's a familiar and she's a witch.

You can see this kind of evidence and others equally preposterous for example in Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions, part II by Charles Mackay. Chosen mostly because the text is freely available online.

 

[angrysoba]

Which version?

The good ole KJV! Or Authorised Version. Yes, I know it isn't the original but my Hebrew, Ancient Greek, Assyrian and Latin aren't up to it yet.

Yes. That kind of verses were explicitly invoked in the witch hunt mania. Well spotted.

Even worse though was Leviticus 20:27: "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them." It was eventually construed to mean or support the idea that people who pledge themselves to Satan get a magical animal to help them with the doing evil part. They get a spirit from hell as a familiar. In, say, the shape of a cat. So basically even just having a cat worked against you if you were accused of being a witch. (And in many cases, they'd actually burn the cat together with the "witch".)

Ah, yes! I've just read that verse today.

If you don't mind I would like to offer a few nit picky corrections.

Nit-pick away. The finer-grained, the better.

In the middle ages, there was little in the way of a persecution of witches by the church. You really don't get that until the renaissance and later. The main crux of the inquisition was heresy, which is basically being Christian... but in a way that is not approved by the Church. The middle ages sees many sorcerers employed at courts around Europe and many villages had types of worship that were essentially pagan. The Church didn't have much of a problem with those since they were not a threat to it's authority. Heresy however, did threaten the Church since it might catch on with the nobility and become the general religion of the people, as it did with the Cathars.

I've actually not long ago finished reading Diarmaid MacCulloch's book, A History of Christianity, which is one of the reasons I've gone back to the original source here. His explanations of heresy and how it was treated in Christendom is excellent, I think, although I am not an expert so I don't know whether there are better texts on this. In the book, MacCulloch says there were days in the early church in which certain forms of mysticism were common practice and some women were known as mystics. He mentions one Hildegard of Bingen. (p.420)

I probably should have dipped back into his book before posting my thread but, according to MacCulloch, there was a massive uptick in persecution of witches from 1560 (although the main period of persecution was from 1400-1800.

Charges of witchcraft, along with lurid tales of devil worship and general evil deeds were added a bit later to associate them with the practice of heresy in order to scare people away from it. Eventually, when the Church's authority was unchallenged, witchcraft became more of a threat... largely as a tool to explain any misfortune and provide a scapegoat.

MacCulloch also suggests that in England many of the women accused of witchcraft were "prosperous and significant figures in the community, though commonly not the most peaceable"

An interesting segway is the development of sex as a form of witchcraft. Earlier tales of witchcraft include mass orgies, which were likely included as a way to sensationalize the stories. However, this backfired a bit since people kind of got the idea that this might actually be fun. Later tales of witchcraft either don't have orgies or the sex involved is much nastier, degrading and painful.

Hmmm... this is interesting.

Lastly... there is a bit of a debate as to what the statement "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live" refers to but the witch hunters certainly did use it often to justify their deeds. However, they didn't really need that passage as they had many other rationalizations available.

I also remember there is quite a long chapter on this in Carl Sagan's Demon-Haunted World. I should probably re-read that too. Do you have any sources for the use of "Thou Shalt not suffer a witch to live!"?

One of my favorite's comes from the "Malleus Maleficarum", which translates as the "Hammer of the Witches" which was essentially the witch hunter's bible. Written by an inquisitor named Heinrich Kramer, it provides a fascinating explanation as to how you can tell if a woman is a witch. Essentially, it goes like this... lust is a sin... when you look at a woman and you feel lust, you are being tempted into sin. Who tempts man into sin? Satan of course. Ergo, when you feel lust for a woman, it's because Satan is acting through her to tempt you into sin.



Yes it's pretty nasty. One of my thesis was on the inquisition. If you think horror movies are scary... people in the middle ages wouldn't have blinked at even the scariest ones.

Ahhh, Malleus Maleficarum is also mentioned in MacCulloch's book. According to MacCulloch, the author Jacobus Sprenger was also one of the originators of the Marian cult. I seem to remember it was based on some vision a nun had. Interesting that two forms of blatant "mysticism" should be treated in bizarrely different ways. [That reminds me somehow of the interpretation Joseph had of the dreams of the chief butler and chief baker.]

I understand that there is some evidence that the word "witch" was used to placate King James VIII.

I think you mean, King James I! Or King James VI if you want to be all Scottish.

Well, in all fairness, JC beat them to it. Matthew 5:28: "But I say to you, anyone who stares at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Can't really blame the Dominicans for inventing that aberration, when it's in the bible and said by Jesus.

I think Rob meant that the "witches" were blamed for causing lust in the eyes of men.