p. 11 | Witchcraft and False Theocracies by C. M. S.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Feb 23, 1911

Witchcraft and False Theocracies

By C. M. S.

No story of the evil results of the union of religion and the state in colonial days could be considered in any sense complete that omitted mention of the witchcraft developments in the colonies. It is easily demonstrated that had there been no New England theocracy, there would have been no execution of witches in Connecticut and Massachusetts.

The earliest histories of the earliest nations are either sprinkled with the blood of witches or teem with the record of the incomprehensible or incredible marvels which the historiographers attributed to them. But wherever the blood of witches has been shed, we find this true—that church and state, religion and the government, have been under one ruler, whether as in the case of the true theocracy of Israel, or the false theocracies of heathendom and of Christendom.

Demonology is a science practically as old as the race; and demonolatry has been charged against men and women from times most ancient. That there has been foundation for the charges must be admitted in many cases; for demon-worship has been perpetuated in many lands for ages, and is still prevalent in some countries even in our day.

In the book of Leviticus we read:—

“They shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, after whom they have gone a whoring. This shall be a statute forever unto them throughout their generation.” Lev. 17:7.

Wherever Israel touched heathendom, there was danger of the people adopting heathen modes of worship. The worship of idols and of demons was an established custom among the ancient heathen nations of the East, and in many instances the Israelites were induced to forsake the worship of Jehovah, and sacrifice to the idols and the demons whom their neighbors worshiped. Therefore the prohibition of Jehovah. But notwithstanding that prohibition, the apostasy continued among the “chosen people.” The record says of them:—

“They moved him to jealousy with strange gods; with abominations provoked they him to anger. They sacrificed unto demons.” Deut. 32:16, 17.

To such an extent did this apostasy go in the time of Jeroboam, that the priests of the Lord were cast off by that king, and fled for protection and support to Rehoboam, while Jeroboam deliberately established a system of demonolatry, appointing “priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made.” 2 Chron. 11:15.

Because, therefore, of the ever-present danger that the chosen people of the Lord might be turned away from the worship of the true God to the service of demons, the code of that true theocracy contained a most stringent law in reference to witchcraft. No one could have a “familiar spirit,” on pain of death. Necromancy (seeking counsel of the dead, or soliciting aid of the devil) was a forbidden practise. “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live,” read the ancient law of Israel. Ex. 22:18. And because of the practise of witchcraft among the early nations of Canaan, Jehovah permitted them to be driven out. That is made plain in these words:—

“When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee.” Deut. 18:9-12.

Israel was a theocracy—a nation governed by God himself, through those appointed by himself to represent him and speak for him. This is shown by the message which the prophet Samuel received from the Lord when Israel demanded a king, that she might be like the nations around her. The Lord said to Samuel:—

“Harken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.” 1 Sam. 8:7.

This was a change of kings, but it did not end the theocracy. The law of Sinai, the code given to the people through Moses, the sanctuary containing the representation of God’s government, were still retained; and God spoke to the kings through his prophets, directing as to what they should do in every crisis. The kings were often intractable; nevertheless God did not abandon his sovereignty over that people until after they had slain “the Lord of glory.” Looking forward to the time when that chosen nation should smite the Redeemer, Jesus said: “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Luke 13:35. When the last act had been performed in that greatest of earth’s tragedies, the apartment of the Jewish sanctuary, wherein was set the symbol of God’s government, was thrown open by the angel hands that tore the temple veil in twain from top to bottom. Josephus tells us that on that occasion voices were heard in the temple saying, “Arise, let us go hence.”

Jehovah had finished with that nation. The time had come when the “owner of the vineyard” had been slain by the wicked servants. Theocracy was finished, never to appear again in its true form until the time foretold by the prophet Ezekiel:—

“And thou, O deadly wounded wicked one, the prince of Israel, whose day is come, in the time of the iniquity of the end, thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Remove the mitre and take off the crown; this shall be no more the same; exalt that which is low, and abase that which is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn it: this shall also be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.” Eze. 21:25-27.

The possession of the mitre and the crown by the one individual indicated the religious and civil rulership in that individual. But when that third overturning came, the verdict of Jehovah is that the theocratic system of government should never be re-established until “he come, whose right it is.” Then said he in whose power it is to set up and pull down kingdoms, “I will give it him.” Jesus Christ, who purchased with his own blood the right to the rulership of this world, has not yet come to take over that rulership. Consequently, any system of government setting itself forth as a theocracy between the time when Jesus of Nazareth was slain on Calvary and the time when Jesus the Christ comes again to earth, is a false theocracy. Between those two events there can be no true theocracy in this earth. There have been many false ones; and being false, they have wrought havoc in the fold of the Good Shepherd.

Now the purpose of this seeming digression is to make apparent where lay the blame for the terrible indignities and punishments suffered by innocent persons in New England (and incidentally in Europe) during the witchcraft trials.

The Massachusetts and New Haven colonies were both established upon the theocratic plan; and Connecticut, while not founded upon such a platform, did have very much of the theocratic principle in its modus operandi. On June 4, 1639, the New Haven Assembly held its first “general meeting to consult about settling their civil government according to God, . . . for the establishing of such civil ruler as might be most pleasing to God, and for the choosing the fittest men for the foundation work of a church to be gathered.”—“New Haven Colonial Records,” anno 1639. That assembly entered into an agreement that “the Word of God shall be the only rule attended unto in ordering the affairs of government.”—“New Haven Historical Papers,” Vol. I, page 17. The Mosaic code was the foundation of all law in New Haven, and any crime punishable by death under that

code was made a capital offense in the New Haven colony. Only church-members were admitted to the privileges of free men, and regular church attendance was made compulsory. The General Assembly declared that “the Scriptures do hold forth a perfect rule for the direction and government of all men in all duties, which they are to perform to God and men, as well in the government of families and commonwealths as in matters of the church.”—“New Haven Colonial Records,” anno 1639.

The general government of Connecticut regarded itself responsible for the state of religion in the commonwealth and for the purity of doctrine. It required that every person should “carefully apply himself on the Lord’s day to the duties of religion—to attend public worship in some congregation allowed by law, provided that he conscientiously and conveniently can attend.”—“New Haven Historical Papers,” Vol. III, page 399. Neglect of public worship, or forming companies separate from the churches recognized by law, was punishable by fine; and any person, not a regular minister, who dared to administer the sacraments was to be whipped and fined.

Concerning Massachusetts in this particular, the record is that Mr. John Cotton was appointed by the general court to draw up an abstract of laws for the guidance of magistrates, patterned after “the laws of judgment delivered from God to Moses.” He did so, and writing of it in after-years, Cotton declared the government of Massachusetts to be a theocracy. In 1641 the general court of Massachusetts formally adopted the principles of theocratic rule.

Upon this basis, so completely subversive of all liberty of individual conscience and freedom of worship, did these three colonies conduct their governments. There is no question that those responsible for these conditions and operations honestly believed they were working in the interests of the Redeemer’s kingdom. The fruit of their operations ought to have convinced them, as it must convince us, that their hypothesis was unfounded.

C. M. S.

(To be concluded)