Refutation of the intervention of the demon.

— In response to the opinion that attributes to a ruse of the demon the moral transformations effected by the teaching of the Spirits, we have said many times that the devil would be very unskillful if, in order to succeed in damning man, he began by drawing him out of the mire of incredulity and led him back to God; that this would be the conduct of a fool and of a simpleton. To this it is objected that it is precisely there that lies the masterpiece of the malice of this enemy of God and of men. We confess we do not understand the malice.

— One of our correspondents addresses to us, in support of our reasoning, the following words of monsignor Frayssinous, bishop of Hermopolis, taken from his Conferences on religion, n volume II, page 341; Paris – 1825.

“If Jesus Christ had worked his miracles by the virtue of the demon, the demon would have labored to destroy his own empire and would have employed his power against himself. Certainly, a demon who sought to destroy the reign of vice in order to establish that of virtue, would be a singular demon. This is why Jesus, to repel the absurd accusation of the Jews, said to them: “If I work prodigies in the name of the demon, then the demon is divided against himself; he seeks, then, to destroy himself,” a reply that admits of no rejoinder.”

— Grateful to our correspondent for the kindness of pointing out to us this important passage, of which our readers will know how to take advantage in due time. Grateful, too, to all those who transmit to us what they find, in their readings, of interest to the doctrine. Nothing is lost.

As one sees, not all ecclesiastics profess, on the demonic doctrine, opinions as absolute as those of certain members of the clergy. In these matters, the monsignor of Hermopolis is an authority whose value none could refuse. His arguments are precisely the same as those that the Spiritists oppose to those who attribute to the demon the good counsels they receive from the Spirits. Indeed, what do the Spirits do, but destroy the reign of vice in order to establish that of virtue? lead back to God those who misunderstand and deny him? If such were the work of the demon, he would act like a professional thief, who restored what he had stolen and induced the other thieves to become honest. Then he ought to be congratulated on his transformation. To maintain the voluntary cooperation of the Spirit of evil to produce good, is not only a contradiction, but is to deny the highest Christian authority: that of the Christ. That the Pharisees of the time of Jesus should have believed this in good faith, could be conceived, for then one was no more enlightened about the nature of Satan than about that of God, and it entered into the theogony of the Jews to make of them two great rivals. But today such a doctrine is as inadmissible as that which attributed to Satan certain industrial inventions, such as printing, for example. The very ones who defend it are perhaps the last to believe in it; it already falls into ridicule and frightens no one; in a short time no one will dare any longer to invoke it seriously.

The Spiritist Doctrine does not admit any power rival to that of God, and still less could it admit that a fallen being, cast down by God into the abyss, could have recovered power enough to counterbalance his designs, which would take from God his omnipotence. According to this doctrine, Satan is the allegorical personification of evil, as among the pagans Saturn was the personification of time, Mars that of war, Venus that of beauty.

The Spirits who manifest themselves are the souls of men and among them there are, as among men, good and wicked, advanced and backward; the good say good things, give good counsels; the wicked give bad ones, inspire bad thoughts and do evil as they did on Earth. Seeing the wickedness, the knavery, the ingratitude, the perversity of certain men, one recognizes that they are worth no more than the worst Spirits; but, incarnate or disincarnate, these evil Spirits will one day come to improve themselves, when they shall have been touched by repentance.

Compare the one and the other doctrine, and you will see which is the more rational, the more respectful toward the divinity.

[1] [Défense du christianisme, ou, Conférences sur la religion, vol.

By Denis-Luc Frayssinous - Google Books.]