Part II, chapters 7–8: That the true Samuell did not appeare to the vvytche in Endor; and following chapters

CHAP. VII. That the true Samuell did not appeare to the vvytche in Endor.

NOwe touching the examples by them commonly alleaged, whiche do thinke that the soules of the dead do return again vnto the liuing vpon the earth: I wil first intreat of Samuels apparition, of which matter now adayes there is greate contention and reasoning. And (as I trust) I shal proue by strong argumentes, that very Samuell himselfe did not appeare in soule and body, neither that his body was raised vp by the sorcerers, which perchaunce then was rotten & consumed vnto dust in the earth, neither yt his soule was called vp, but rather some diuelish spirite. First the author of the two bookes of Samuel sayeth, that Saule did aske counsell of the Lord, & that he would not answer him, neither by visions, nor by Urim, nor by his Prophets. Wherfore if God disdayned by his Prophetes yet liuing, and other ordinarie wayes to giue answer vnto him, whom he had alredy reiected, we may easily coniecture, that he would much lesse haue raysed a dead prophet to make him answer. And the rather, for that as we haue a little before sayde, the law of God hathe seuerely by a greate threatening, forbidden to learne oughte of the deade, and woulde not haue vs to searche for the truth of them, nor that any manne should vse dyuination by spyrites, and suche other diuelyshe Artes. Secondly, yf very Samuell in deede appeared, that muste of necessitie haue come to passe, eyther by the will of God, or by the worke of arte Magike. But Gods will was not that Samuel should retourne. For he hath condemned Necromancie, and would not haue vs to aske counsell at the dead: & that the spirit of God did that which was contrary herevnto, or did permitte the saints to do it, or was present with them that did ought contrary thereto, it may not be graunted. And that those things were done by the force and operation of Arte Magike, wée can not affirme. For the wicked spirit hath no rule or power ouer the soules of the faithfull to bring them out of their places when he lust, sith they be in the hand of God, and the bosome of Abraham, nay (which is lesse) he hath no power ouer filthy and vncleane swine, for he was driuen (as we reade in the viij. chapter of Matthew) to beg leaue, before he could enter into the heard of swine: and how thē should he haue any power ouer the soule of mā? yet can it not be denied, that God somtimes for certein causes doth giue the Diuell and his seruants, Magitians & Necromancers, power to do many things, as to hurte and lame man & beast, and to worke other straunge things. But that God dothe giue the Diuell leaue to raise dead bodies, or to call, bring forth, or driue away soules especially out of Heauen, it hathe no grounde at all in Scripture, neither can there be any reasonable cause alledged, wherefore God would or should giue the Diuell licence to do these things contrary to the vsuall and common order, yea and against his owne expresse commaundement. For vayne and childishe is the cause hereof that is giuen of some men, that Samuell shoulde appeare to certifie and astonishe Saule: as if God coulde not haue feared hym by other wayes and meanes. Was he not before vtterly abashed & dismayed? Thirdly, if Samuel were brought backe, the same was done either by his will and consent, or without the same, but that he did fréely and of his owne accorde obey the sorcerers, no man I thinke is so blinde to imagin. For that were vtterly repugnaunt to the Lawe of God, that he should confirme Witchcraft and Sorcerie by hys example. If the Witch had called for Samuell, whilest he liued, doutles he would not haue approched vnto hir. And how then can we beléeue that he came to hir after his death? We may not so say, that the Witch compelled him to resort to hir agaynst his wil: for the Deuil hath no power ouer the Soules of the godly, and Magike of it self is of no force. Heathnish superstition no doute it is, that wordes vttered by Magitians, after their peculiar manner, or figures drawne, should haue such a secret and hidden operation. For the Hethens beléeued that they could with a certen set stile & number of words, bring and draw down Iupiter out of Heauen. Wherfore they termed him Iupiter Elycius. There are also certain superstitious persons in these our dayes, which go about to cure diseases by certaine rites of blessings, and by coniurings. Some hang aboute their neckes certayne scrolles of Paper, in which ther are written diuers straunge words, but whether wordes of themselues haue any force at al, reade Plinie in his 28. booke, and 2. chapter, and Caelius Rhodiginus in his 16. booke and 16. chapter of Antiquities.

Fourthely, if very Samuel himselfe had appeared, hée would not haue ben worshipped of Saule. For we reade in the 19. and 22. chapter of the Reuelation, that Iohn woulde haue worshipped the Angell, whiche had opened vnto him great mysteries, but the Angell of God forbad him so to do. Some héere aunswere, that Saule ment not to giue vnto the Prophet, the honor that was due vnto God, but onely a certaine outward and ciuil worship, such as we are wonte to yéeld vnto honest men, and suche as haue well deserued of the Churche and common weale. For they say, that the Hebrue word Schachah there vsed, doth signifie to bend the knée, and to fall down at a mans féete: which kynd of worship we reade, that Abigael and Nathan the the Prophet gaue vnto King Dauid. And Paule also in the 12. chapter of his Epistle to the Rom. teacheth, that we should honour one another. Thomas of Aquine entreating of those two places that I euen nowe recited out of the Reuelation, sayth, that Iohn meant not to worship the Angell, with the worship properly called Latria, but with an other kynd of worship termed Dulia, that is to say, that Iohns wil was not to withdraw from God, the honor due vnto him, but to worship the Angell that was sent from God, only with a ciuil & outward homage: and yet the Angell would not so far condiscend vnto him. In the new Testament the 10. chap of the Acts of the Apostles, we read that Cornelius met with Peter, fel down at his féet & worshipped him, yet, so as he had ben an Embassadour from God & not God himselfe, & yet Peter lifted him vp & said, arise for I my self am a man also. He said not to Cornelius thou dost wel herein: nor as his worthie Uicare (with a mischiefe) is wont to do, proffered hys foote vnto him to kysse. We may read also that Elias disciples worshipped Elizeus that succeded into his office, in which place the worde to bowe the knée, or fal downe, is vsed. But whether the Prophet did accepte and alowe this kinde of reuerence or no, there is no expresse mention. Bréefly, it is not lykely that the Prophet would haue suffered the King to fall downe at his féete.

Fiftly, if he had ben the true Samuel, he would no dout haue exhorted Saule to repentance, & willed him to wayt for ayde from God, to put his whole confidence in him, or at least way, to haue giuen him some comforte, or counselled him to fight againste his enimies with more courage. For though the Prophetes do often beat & threaten men, yet do they agayne reuiue & solace them. Nowe bycause this Samuel doth beat no other thing into his heade, but that God was displeased with him, & had alredy forsaken him, we may not beleue that he was the true, but a méere counterfet Samuel. Sixtly, the auncient Fathers write, that the true Samuel was not seene.

Tertullian in his booke De anima sayth, that the Deuill dyd there represent Samuels soule, God forbid (sayth hée) that we should beléeue that the deuil can drawe the soule of any Saint, muche lesse a Prophete, out of his proper place, syth we are taught that Sathan doth transfourme himselfe into an Angel of lyght, & much soner into a man of lyght: who also will auouch himselfe to be God, and do notable signes and wonders to seduce, if it were possible, the very elect. S. Augustine is not alwayes of one iudgement touching this apparition: in his second boke to Simplician Byshop of Millane, and the third question therof, he graunteth that by the dispensation of Gods will, it might so come to passe, that the spirit of some holie Prophete, shoulde consent to present it selfe in the sight of the King, to come out of his owne place, & to speake with him, but not to do this by constrainte, or by the vertue of Arte Magike, which might haue any power ouer it: but therby to shew it self obedient to the secret dispensation of God: & yet he doth not dissemble, that a better answere may bée giuen, to wit, that the spirit of Samuel was not truely, & in déed raysed vp from his rest, but rather some vayne vision & counterfet illusion, that should be brought to passe by the deuils practise, which the Scripture therefore doth terme by the name of Samuel, bycause the same is woont to call the Images & similitudes of things, by the names of the things themselues. For who is he (saith Augustine) that wil be afraid to cal a man painted, a man, considering that without staggering, we are acustomed to giue eache thing his proper name, as soon as we behold the picture of the same: as when we take the viewe of a painted table, or wall, we say straight waye, this is Tullie, this is Salust, hée Achilles, that other Hector, thys is the floude called Symois, that place tearmed Rome, whereof these things be ended no other than painted Images, of those things whose names they beare. Sith thys is so, he sayth, it is not to be maruelled that Scripture sayth Samuell was séene, when perchaunce Samuels Image séemed to appeare, thorow the crafty pollicie of hym, that transformed himselfe into an Angell of lyght, and fashioneth hys Ministers like vnto the Ministers of righteousnesse.

In his booke De octo Dulcitij questionibu[…], the 6. question therof, he vttereth al this in as many words, & in his booke De cura pro mortuis gerenda, he writeth that some are sent, from the deade to the lyuing: as on the other side, Paule was rapt vp from the lyuing vnto Paradise: he addeth ther the example of Samuel being dead, which dyd foreshewe to Saule, things, that afterwardes should come to passe. He sayth further, that this place may otherwise be vnderstanded, and that certaine faythful men haue ben of this Iudgement, that it was not Samuel, but that some spirit fit for such wicked practises, had taken vpon him his shape and similitude. And in other places, as we wil shew héereafter, he affirmeth that there is a fygure contayned in those wordes, bycause the name of the thing is giuen vnto the Image that dothe but represent the same: and that it was not Samuel that appeared, but some deuilysh spirit.

Other Fathers of the Church haue written nothing particularly of this storie, so far as I know, but in certen places of their workes, they teache generally that good spirites are not pulled backe into the earth by Magicall Art. Of Iustine and Gregorie I wil speake anone. In the very Papall decrées 26. question 5. chapter Nec mirum, it is written that it was not Samuell, but rather some wicked spirit that appeared to Saule: And that it were a great offence that a man should beléeue the playne words of the storie without some farther meaning, for how saith he could it come to passe, that a man from his byrth holie and iust in conuersation of life, should by Art Magicke be pulled out of his place? And if he were not so drawen against his will, then he must needes agree thereto: bothe whiche are alike absurde, to be imagined of a iust man. This is the Diuells legerd[…]mayne, to make shewe, as though he had power ouer good men, thereby the rather to deceyue many. He there farther addeth, that the Hystoriographers do sette foorth both Saules mynde, and Samuels state, and also those things whiche were sayde and séene, omytting this, whether they were true or false. And other wordes followe, whiche who so lyst to sée more of that matter, may there reade.

But héer Nicolas Lyras iudgement (which in his commentaries on the books of the Kings, mainteineth the contrarie opinion) shoulde be little weighed and regarded of vs. Where he noteth, that the place by vs euen now alleged, is not written according to the censure of the Church though it be found in the Popes lawe, for otherwise saith he, they whiche ensued in latter tymes, woulde not haue written contrary to the same, for many of those thyngs concerning which men haue written otherwise in latter tymes, were neuerthelesse set foorth to the worlde, to be beléeued, as the very expresse and sound iudgement of the whole Christian Churche, bycause they were put in the Popes booke of Decretals.

CHAP. VIII. A Confutation of their argumentes, vvhich vvould haue Samuell himselfe to appeare.

WE wil now come to the Confutation of their Arguments, which mainteine, that very Samuel himselfe appeared to the Sorcersse, for he that rightly ouerthroweth his aduersaries arguments, is supposed by the same meanes to confirme his own cause. The chéefest arguments which our aduersaries vse, is taken out of the 46. chapter of Ecclesiasticus, where these words are foūd. Samuel before his death made protestation before God, & before his anoynted, that he tooke from no man his substance, no not so much as the value of a shoe, and no man could then reproue him. And after his deth he Prophesied and tolde the King of his ende. From the earth he lifte vp his voyce, and shewed that the wickednesse of the people should perish.

This place somewhat troubled S. Augustine, and other Godly Fathers. For if the Deuill onely appeared, and not Samuell, howe is it there sayde that he slept, that is, dyed, for the Deuill neyther sléepeth nor dieth. Héerevnto I maye shape thys aunswere, that this booke is not to be numbred among the Canonical bokes of the olde Testament, and that Doctrine in controuersies, cannot bée proued by the authoritie thereof, the whych Saincte Augustine, also confesseth in hys booke De cura pro mortuis agenda.

But howesoeuer that be credited as true or false, I answere them playnly, that Iesus the Sonne of Syraches intente was, to alleage the Storie literally, as the woordes lye, and not by reason to debate the matter, whether Samuell truely appeared or no. Hée speaketh there according too the opynion of Saule and the Witche, whiche thought that Samuell hymselfe was raysed. Further they say, that hée whiche appeared vnto Saule, is sometymes expresly and in playne woordes called Samuell. And an vnséemely matter it were, making muche for the reproche of so greate a Prophete, if hys name hadde béene applyed vnto the Deuill. If say they, it hadde not béene Samuell, but some wicked Spirite, the Scripture woulde in some one woorde, or other haue noted the same.

To this Argument fyrst I aunswere, that euen in our common speache, it is an vsuall phrase by the figure Metonymia, to terme the Image by the name of the thyng, that it presenteth. So wée terme the Armes and Ensigne of a Noble man, by the name of that Lorde hymselfe, that giueth those Armes. We saye, this is Iulius Cesar, Nero, Saint Peter, Saint Paule, or here thou mayest sée the Cities of Tigurine, and Argentorat, also the Duke of Saringe, whereas in deed they are onely theyr Counterfeicts, or Armes, and Signes of Honor.

In a Commedie or Tragedie, wée call thys manne Saule, that Samuel, an other Dauid, whereas they do but betoken and represent their Personages. So saythe Vergill, in his fyrst booke of Aeneidos: They wonder at Aeneas gyftes, and haue Iulius in admiration. And yet was it not Iulius or Ascanius, but Cupide feining himselfe to bée Iulius, whereby hée myght the eas[…]yer pearce the heart of the ignorant Quéene, with hys Darte of Loue.

Saynte Augustine in his seconde booke and nynth chap. De mirab[…]libus Scripturae, sayth, that holie Scripture dothe sometymes applye the verie names of things to the Images and similitudes of the same. Hée alleageth there this example, that the foule spirit is called Samuel bycause hée dyd falsely beare Saule in hande, that hée was Samuell: whyche fraude of the Deuill, coulde no ways turne too Samuels reproch. For who would say, that it should bée a reproche for an honest manne, if some knaue would terme hymselfe by his name, as if hée were hée himselfe.

The false Prophetes sayde, they were true Prophets, and Goddes Seruauntes, yea (which is more) they fained themselues too bée the verie Messias, the Sonne of God. And that Scripture doth not so muche as in one woorde make mention, that this was verie Samuell in déede, but rather some spirite, we must think that it so came to passe, for this cause, that all men by the Lawe of God might vnderstand, that Magike and enquirie of things at the dead, dyd much displease God. Saule himselfe before by the counsell and motion of Samuell, slewe all the Magitians that he could any where finde. And God is not accustomed in this wise to interprete Figuratiue speaches: for many of them are soone descried by suche as giue diligent héed to them. A vaine & superfluous speach it were, if a man wold say this is Peter, this is, that is the Image of Peter, whiche by a figure, is called by the name of Peter.

Furthermore, holie Scripture dothe vse to speake of things, rather according to the opinion and iudgement of men, than accordyng to the substance and true béeing which they haue in déede. So Iesus is called the Sonne of Ioseph, and Iosephe named his father, whereas notwithstanding, our Sauiour Chryst Iesus, was borne of a chast and vnspotted Uirgin, without any helpe of man. And yet neuerthelesse many of the Iewes, imagined, that he was the Sonne of Ioseph. In the 1. Cor. 1. the Gospel it selfe is named foolishnesse, bicause that men did account the great wisdom of God but as méere foolishnesse. So in the first epistle to the Corinthians .x. chap. the Scripture termeth them gods, which be nothing lesse thā so in dede. And that for this cause onely, for that the Heathen tooke them for Gods, and so dyd worshippe them. Euen so the Scripture doth terme the Deuil Samuel, bycause Saule thought him to […]e Samuel in very déede.

An other reason they vse, that Samuel forshewed vnto […] such things as afterwardes should come to passe: as that the Philistians should in ba[…]tayle ouerthrow hys […], and he and his sonnes together be slaine. And all these thyngs com[…] to passe according to his Prophesie. And say they the Deuil knoweth not, neither can he foretell of things to come, sith it is onely in Gods power so to do: But as Christ in the eyght of Iohn saith, he is a lyer, & the father of lyes. Here vnto a man may easily answere: The Diuell knewe howe things stode with the Iewes, and the Philistines, he vnderstode euen the very secrete consultations, priuy practises, and warlike preparation on both sides. He sawe that the Israelits were slenderly addressed vnto battaile, and vtterly daunted of courage. Besides this, Samuel had a little before thretned Saul with gods heauie wrath and vengeaunce, and that Dauid shold be aduaunced to the kingly throne wherby he might easely gather what would ensue, and that Saule must nedes giue place to Dauid. And if the euent had bin otherwise, yet he knewe that Saule with this prophesie woulde be quite dismayde, and driuen to dispaire: which thing muste néedes well content and please Sathan, who layeth hys baits day and night to intrappe men.

The Diuell doth not presently vnderstande things to come, and therefore he giueth doubtfull aunswers to such as séeke oracles of him: As when he saide, Croesus perdet Halin transgres[…]us plurima regna.

That is, Cresus passing ouer the riuer Halis shal ouerturne many kingdomes. And yet oftentimes he gathereth one thing no otherwise than by an other. Hereof writeth Augustine in the 26.27. and 28. chapters of his booke De Anima. The Diuell is one which hath bin long beaten in experience, the which thing in all affaires and matters is of very great force. For olde and practised souldiours […] by and by foresée to what issue things will come, but yong men, and suche as want experience do not forthwith espye out the euent of eche enterprise. Moreouer, the Diuels are very actiue, and can soone dispatch their matters. The marriners knowe when winds and stormes will arise. Husbandmen also are not destitute of their prognostications. The skilful astronomer can many yeares before exactly foretell when there will happen an Eclipse of the Sunne and Moone. The Phisitian by the critical dayes, pulse, and vrine, can lightly iudge whether his patient shal liue or no: builders sée before hand when an house wil fal, and a practised souldioure can straight wayes iudge who shall winne the victory. And what maruaile then may it be, if the Diuell an olde trained souldiour, can sometimes foreshew some certain thing? Shall we be of this minde, that so many yeares experience hathe broughte them no knowledge at all? Otherwhiles he telleth things which be true in déede, and yet to no other ende, but that he may therby purchase a certaine credite vnto his lying, to seduce the ignoraunt.

For euen that counterfeit Samuell, made wise, as if he had taken it in very ill parte, that Saule did so molest and disquiet him, and that he shold be forced to talke with him: he vseth farther the words as it were of Samuel him selfe. And hereof it commeth, that many gather, he was the true Samuell in déede. But what doth not Sathan deuise to deceyue men, and to force them vnto desperacion? Here I could alleage examples of suche as haue bin perswaded, that they sawe and heard this and that man, and moreouer knewe them perfectly by their spéeche: whereas they haue afterwards had euident intelligence, that they were at that time many miles distaunt from them. So craftie is the Diuell, and knoweth howe to worke these and many other feates.

There are farther, diuers places alleaged out of the auncient fathers that séeme too make for them, whyche affirme that true Samuell appeared vnto Saule. But these places wée haue béefore for the moste parte aunsweared. For albeit Augustine in some places moue a doubte, whether it were the true Samuell or no, yet in certeine other places he lyketh and beste alloweth their opinion, who denye Samuell to haue appeared at all, takyng rather that kinde of speache, for tropicall and figuratiue.

Iustine the Martir, who is one of the most aunciente fathers, reasoning against Trypho a Iewe, writeth in his colloquio, that the couetouse sorceresse at Saules commaundement raysed vp Samuels soule. And no man shoulde maruaile hereat, sith that the selfe same author dothe by and by adde, that he is of this iudgemente, that all the soules of Prophetes and iust menne are subiecte vnto suche power as a man may in very déede beléeue, to haue bin on thys gréedy and subtile Witche. But this none of the fathers will graunt him. Other Gréeke writers also, whyche in their tender yeares applyed theyr mindes to Philosophie, and not to the studie of holy Scriptures, and afterwardes were conuerted to Christianitie, do sette foorthe in their writings certaine opinions whyche are not agreable to the word of God. Wherefore it néede not séeme a straunge thing to any manne, that Iustine the Martire in some pointes hadde hys erroures.

The same author in Responsionibus ad Orthodoxos, quest. 52. mainteineth the contrary assertion. For, sayth he, what soeuer things were done by that hungry witche, were in déede the workes of the Diuell, who dyd so dasell the eyes of suche as beheld him, that it séemed vnto them, they sawe Samuell him selfe, when in very déede he was not there. But the truth of his words procéeded from God, who gaue the Diuell power to appeare vnto the sorceresse, and to declare vnto hir, that which shoulde afterwards come to passe. &c.

If any manne obiect that thys woorke is not ryghtly ascribed vnto Iustine, (for so muche as he dothe make mention of Origen, and Ireneus the Martire, whereas notwithstanding he hym selfe was martired before them: And further, speaketh of the Manichees, who were in their ruffe long after this tyme. Herevnto wee answere, that yf this booke were not written by Iustine, yet (as maye appeare) some other learned clerke wrote that woorke, whose authoritie might carie away as great credite as Iustines, […]ith that the same doth fully agrée with holy Scripture. Furthermore we may set agaynste Iustine, other holy fathers, as Tertullian and Chrysostom, of whom wée haue before spoken, who haue by holy scripture instructed vs, that it was not Samuel in deede which appeared vnto Saule. We will héereafter say somewhat of Gregorie, who no doubte was a learned and godly father, but yet too simple and light of beléefe.

And the fathers themselues denye, that a man shoulde subscribe vnto their opinion in oughte that they doo mayntaine and aduouche without the warrant of Gods worde. The Popes out of Augustine haue written in their Decrées, Quest. 9. ca Noli, that a man should credite none of the fathers except he proued his saying out of holy scriptures. But in these days many cull nothing out of their bookes but erroures, and whatsoeuer they maynteyn by good testimonie of the holy scriptures, that they reiecte and disanull: in whiche poynt they doo fitly resemble those chyldren, who onely in things wicked and euill, imitate their good parentes: for good men also haue their faultes.