Rebuking witchcraft

 


He thought < What An idiot

. . . . .


. . . . .


. . . . .


. . . . .


Some Fault

James I’s 1603 Act against Conjuration, Witchcraft, and dealing with evil and wicked Spirits clearly defined witchcraft, and its relationship to the devil, in order to determine what it actually is and a suitable punishment, a 'better restraining of said offences, and more severe punishing the same'.

The Act kept the Elizabethan distinction between minor and major offences, focussing on harmful and disruptive magic, but with a real focus on the demonic and evil nature of witchcraft as we can see here:

‘use, practise, or exercise any invocation or conjuration of any evil and wicked spirit: or shall consult, covenant with, entertaine, imploy, feed, or reward any evil and wicked spirit, to or for any intent or purpose; or take up any dead man, woman, or child, out of his, her, or their grave,… to be imployed, or used in any manner of Witchcraft, Sorcery, Charme, or Inchantment,’

This focus on demons, evil and defining what witchcraft really is makes much more sense when we understand James I’s level of personal interest in the subject. James I’s Daeomonologie was a culmination of this, printed in 1597, which included an in-depth look at magic and necromancy (part 1), witchcraft and sorcery (part 2) and spirits, ghosts and spectres (part 3).

. . . . .

Why We Oppose Witchcraft


Simple

Because its Evil

( See Above )

. . . . .
Dæmonologie, in forme of a dialogue, divided into three Bookes, 1597. Digitised book available via the British Library.

. . . . .


. . . . .

https://archives.blog.parliament.uk/2020/10/28/which-witchcraft-act-is-which/

. . . . .