dumb? or only to make men so? Would not the lat ter opinion be a sufficient reason for giving them these titles ? In the controversy concerning the gospel demoniacs, between Dr. Sykes and his opponents, it seemed to be taken for granted by both parties, that if demons were evil spirits, they must of necessity be fallen angels. But if we allow that demons were considered as evil spirits, it will by no means follow that they were regarded as beings originally of a higher order than mankind; aswe have elsewhere shown *. The Fathers of the church generally understood demon in an ill sense, and thought. it was to be so taken in the Scriptures ↑. SECTION IV. Prop. IV. Those persons who are spoken of as having demons, suffered real and very violent disorders, from whatever causes these disorders proceeded. WHETHER reputed demoniacs were possessed by demons or not, they are ranked in the New Testament amongst those who suffered the most grievous distempers. St. Matthew having said in general terms, "They brought to Jesus all sick people that were taken with DIVERS dis *Dissertation on Miracles, p. 204, 8vo, or p. 130, 12mo. + St. Austin De C v. Dei, lib. ix. c. 19. Tertullian as cited there, i. e. Dissertation on Miracles, p. 548, 8vo, or 351, 12mo. Origen Contra Cels. p. 234. Euseb. Præp. Evang. lib. iv. c. 5. † Ch. iv. 24. Παντας τες κακως έχοντας, ποικίλαις νόσοις και βασάνοις συνεχόμενες, και δαιμονιζομενες, και σεληνιαζόμενες, και παραλυτικές. eases eases and torments;" then specifies the following particu lar cases; "even those who were possessed with demons, and those who were lunatic, and those who had the palsy." Here possessed persons, lunatics, and paralytics, though contra-distinguished from each other, are all equally comprehended under the sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments. On another occasion, the same evangelist says, "They brought unto him many that were possessed with demons: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses." This prophecy concerning Christ's taking our infirmities and bearing our sicknesses, was accomplished in part by the cure of demoniacs; and therefore possessions are comprehended under infirmities and sicknessest, and consequently imply some disorder or distemper in the human frame, from whatever cause it might proceed. The miracle wrought upon the demoniacs is often described in the same terms as that wrought upon the diseased; terms that necessarily imply their having previously laboured under a real distemper. St. Matthew says equally concerning demoniacs, lunatics, and paralytics, "He HEALED them." The same historian describes the cure of the daughter of a woman of Ca* Matt. viii. 16, 17. Isa. liii. 4. + Τας ασθένειας, και τας νιους. Had not possessions been included under diseases, the mention of them would not have been omitted Matt. xi. 5. See below, sect. x.. + EligatiUser Aurys, Matt. iv. 24. naan, naan, who was grievously vexed with a demon, by saying that she was MADE WHOLE*. "A great multitude of people," says St. Luke, "came to be healed of their diseases; and they that were vexed with unclean spirits, and they were healed t." At another time he tells us that "Christ CURED many of their infirmities, and plagues, and evil spirits." In describing the miracle wrought upon demoniacs, the evangelists say indifferently, Christ expelled the demon, or, that he healed the demoniac §. From hence it appears, that a real disorder was cured, whenever Christ is represented as ejecting a demon. Amongst the Greeks and Romans, also, as well as amongst the Jews, those persons who were thought to be possessed suffered grievous distempers. This will appear with the fullest evidence in the two following sections, where we are particularly to explain the nature of those distempers which were imputed to possessions. All that we mean here to affirm, is, that demoniacs were afflicted with certain distempers, whether the possession of demons was the real, or only the reputed cause of them. It was indeed from the well-known ap + ElegaπSUNTO, Luke vi. 18. Ian, Matt. xv. 28. Η Εθεράπευσε πολλές από νόσων και μαστίγων και πνευματων πονηρών, Luke vii. 21. In ch. viii. 2. we read of " certain women which had been healed of evil spirits." See also Act. v. 16. § Concerning the epileptic youth, it is said, "Thy disciples could not (Digivσa) cure him," Matt. xvii. 16. "The demon departed out of him; and the child was cured (bigawtudn) from that very hour," v. 18. In Luke ix 42, it is said, "Jesus healed the child." See also Matt. viii. 16, 17. just now cited, where Christ's "bearing away our sicknesses" includes the cure of possessions, as well as of other dis eases. pearances pearances and symptoms of certain diseases, that the antients inferred that the patients were possessed. SECTION V. Prop. V. The particular disorders which the antients, whether heathens or Jews, ascribed to the possession of demons, were such only as disturbed the understanding. To prepare the way for the proof of this proposition, it is necessary to observe that we are carefully to distinguish, though the distinction hath not been attended to, between diseases supernaturally inflicted, and possessions. The antient heathens attributed diseases, not only those attended with extraordinary symptoms, (as Dr. Sykes apprehended,) but diseases in general, to the anger of the immortal gods +; and accordingly from them sought for relieft. Sick persons advised with their priests and prophets, as we now do with our physicians; and expected to be restored to health by lustrations and charms, without the use of natural remedies, except such as were suggested by the gods. They did not, however, represent all persons whom the gods or demons visited with diseases, as having those gods or demons within them, which was supposed to be the case with all demoniacs. When they became such, the de *Inquiry, p. 6. +"Morbos tum ad iram deorum immortalium relatos esse, et ab iisdem opem posci solitam." Celsus, lib. i. præfat. See Young on Idolatry, vol. ii. p. 85. mon mon was thought to enter them; and at his leaving them, or being expelled from them, they no longer came under this denomination*. While he remained in them, they spoke *In the evangelical history we read, that "the demons (20ovTes arnalov sis any aysλnv) came out of the men, and went into the herd. of swine." Matt. viii 32. Compare Mark i. 26. Indeed the expres sion of casting out demons, which so often occurs in the New Testament, shows, that the popular opinion was, that they had been in the demoniacs. Agreeably to this opinion, the Gadarene demoniacs, conceiving of themselves as the mere organs of indwelling demons, say to Christ, "If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine :” (ει εκβάλλεις ήμας, επιτρεψον ήμιν απελθείν εις την αγέλην των xorgv) Matt. viii. 31. On other occasions, the demons are represented as speaking in the possessed. The learned and ingenious. Semlerus asserts, " ex verbis illis, iğnadov, εξήρχετο δαιμονια, non conficitur, dæmenia esse in homine ύφισταμενα. And he assigns as the ground of his assertion, that a similar phrase occurs with respect to the leprosy, ǹ λeæga aænλbiv, Mark i. 42. Luke v 13. p. 36, 37, 38. In p. 45, note 30, he says, "Cypriani inveni primam illam truculentam phrasin, de obsessorum corporibus ejiciuntur; de obsessis corporibus exire coguntur.-Illud sxCaλ2uv, ejicere, induxit interpretes, non vero refertur ad corpus ipsum hominis." Indeed, through the whole of his tract, he seems more inclined to dispute the personal presence of demons in the human body, than their power of afflicting it with uncommon diseases. And in the passage here cited, he seems. willing to assign the notion of proper possessions, so late a date as the age of Cyprian. It appears however from the earliest writers, that demoniacs were supposed to have demons within them in person. Semlerus himself says, p. 8, note 6," In corpus intrat dæmon fatidicus;" and, in proof of this assertion, very properly appeals to Eurip. Bacch. v. 300. 'Orav, Y*e όθεος, ΕΙΣ ΤΟ ΣΩΜ' ΕΛΘΗ πολυς; and also to Virgil, An.vi. 77, &c "At Phœbi nondum patiens, immanis in antro Bacchatur vates, magnum si pectore possit Excussisse deum." Aristo.le |