The displaying of supposed witchcraft

by John Webster

2. In the temptation of Eve, there was something more extraordinary than can be assigned in any other temptation whatsoever, except that of Christ. And therefore was there a more peculiar and extraordinary dispensation from God in that case than can be shewed in any others but that of Christ. For now it pleaseth God in his merciful providence, so to order and overrule the malice of his hellish will, and to restrain and bridle his envious nature, that though his will be never so wicked, yet is he kept in his chains of darkness, and God will not suffer his people to be tempted, above what they are able, but will with the temptation also make way to escape that they may be able to bear it. Now Adam and Eve were in an extraordinary condition in respect of the Saints of God in this life, or of any other persons, and there was a more high and greater end in the providence of God in ordering and permitting of that temptation than there is or can be in any others, but that of Christ: And therefore from what the Lord permitted, and ordered to do in that temptation, or the liberty that he might grant him to exert his own power then, will no argument rationally follow that he can commonly and at his pleasure perform as much, and so maketh no firm conclusion.

Vid. Pererii Comment. in locum.

And as concerning that place of Scripture in the third of Genesis the great and learned Jesuit Pererius doth undertake with tooth and nail to prove that it is to be literally interpreted, and that Satan did really enter into the Body of the natural Serpent, and spoke in him, or through his Organs; and laboureth (though in vain) to enervate and overthrow the strong arguments of his Brother in Religion, the most learned Cardinal Cajetan, Where he rejecteth the opinion of those that hold that the Devil did assume a Body in the shape of a Serpent; because (he saith) that Satan presently after the temptation ended must have deposited and put off the assumed body, but that the Serpent was after in Paradise, and therefore that he did not act it in an assumed Body. Therefore we shall also pass by that opinion of assuming of Bodies, as being a meer groundless figment invented by the dreaming Schoolmen, as we shall demonstrate hereafter. But to proceed in order, We shall first shew that the place must of necessity admit of an Allegory or Metaphor. And secondly, we shall lay down positive Arguments to shew the absurdity and impossibility of the Devils speaking in the Serpent, or by his Organs. And thirdly, we shall answer all objections that are material, and that in these particulars.

1. The thing that in that History is to be taken literally, is that Eve was tempted and seduced; but the instrument by which it was done, the manner and circumstances, must of necessity have an Allegorical or Metaphorical interpretation, otherwise no sense rationally can be made of the place at all.

Vid. Dialog. Discourses of Spirits and Devils. Dialog. 4. p. 110.

2. “There can no blame of the action be imputed to Satan himself, if neither absolutely, nor properly, nor Historically, nor Allegorically, nor Metaphorically, nor no ways else he be named in that very History of Evahs tentation, wherein the action it self with the several circumstances is fully and plainly expressed. For the action especially being so weighty a matter, was necessary to be known in every point: And therefore it is not to be doubted, but that the History concerning the same is so exactly set forth, with every circumstance, as that any Man may be able to judge of the principal Actors therein at the least. So then, although the Devil in that History, be neither absolutely, nor Historically, nor properly expressed by name; yet must we acknowledge him to be therein Allegorically and Metaphorically set forth at the least, or otherways impose no blame upon him at all concerning the action.” And therefore must Pererius needs confess a Metaphor in the place, or else the Devil cannot be made an actor in the business.

3. It was no natural Serpent but the Devil himself Metaphorically set forth by the name of a Serpent, who gave the onset upon Evah in that tentation. For by Allegories and Metaphors there is evermore some other thing meant than that which is literally expressed. And that this is so, is thus proved. If in that action the Devil himself be not Historically and properly, but Allegorically and Metaphorically, called a Serpent, because he is most crafty and subtile; then undoubtedly the objection of a natural Serpent to be used in that action is very inconvenient: But the antecedent is true, and therefore also the consequent.

Apoc. 12. 3, 4, 5.

Id. 20. 2.

4. The antecedent to that Hypothetical Argument foregoing is easily thus proved: It is an accustomed thing in the Sacred Scriptures to use the names of other creatures in setting forth to our sense the Intellectual Creatures themselves. Hereupon it is that in the Apocalypse the Devil (by a perpetual Allegory) is called a Dragon or Serpent: And therefore in this History of Evahs tentation, by the like perpetual Allegory he is also called a Serpent. For no Man can be so absurd and foolish to think that the Devil literally and properly (in that of the Revelation) can be called a Dragon or Serpent; but only in a Metaphorical and Mystical sense, and therefore must in right reason be taken so in that place of Genesis; for one part of Scripture is alwaies best interpreted by another.