Editing Malleus Maleficarum (section)

====Resolution====
<!-- This is a summary of content AS IS. Please place objections elsewhere -->
There are two signings, sometimes also referenced as two approbations. The difference is that four signatories of the first part testify that they have examined the treatises and endorse its text while in the second signing signatories do not assert that they have read the treatises but nonetheless express approval by explicitly restating some general propositions of the treatises and endorsing them instead.{{sfnp|Mackay|2009|pp=74–80}}

In the first part, the opinion of a "temporary Dean of the Faculty of Holy Theology at Cologne" namely [[Lambertus de Monte]] of [['s-Heerenberg]]{{efn|{{harvnb|Broedel|2003|p=93}}: He was one of the advocates of Aristotelian thought and opponents of ''via moderna'', he was "one of Sprenger's most distinguished colleagues at Cologne, and the man whose name appears first on the faculty endorsement of the ''Malleus'', [he] even went so far as to lead an abortive drive to obtain beatification for Aristotle."}} is expressed and then professors [[Jacobus Straelen]] of Noetlinck, [[Andreas Schermer]] of [[Ochsenfurt]] and Master Thoma de Scotia<ref>Thomas Liel de Scotia. In a book of supplementary sources (Quellen [https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=QXXX48OyGjcC&pg=GBS.PA504 p.504]) Joseph Hansen lists two other trials involving this professor of theology.</ref> testify that they agree with his opinion.{{sfnp|Mackay|2009|p=77}} The following is an excerpt from the opinion: <blockquote>[I proclaim] that this three part treatise, which has been examined by me and carefully compared against [[Bible|Scripture]] with regard to its first two parts, contains nothing, in my humble judgment at least, that is contrary to the pronouncements of the non-erroneous philosophers, or against the Truth of the Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith, or against the determinations of the Doctors approved or admitted by the Holy Church, and that the third part should certainly be upheld and approved in regard to the punishments of those heretics whom it treats, in that it does not contradict Holy Canons, and also because of the personal experiences described in this treatise, which are believed to be true because of the reputation of such great men, particularly since they are inquisitors. It should be ensured that this treatise will become known to learned and zealous men, who will then, on the basis of it, provide various healthy and appropriate advice for the extermination of sorceresses [...]{{sfnp|Mackay|2009|p=76}}</blockquote>

The second part is signed by those from the first signing and in addition by professors [[Ulrich Kridweiss]] of [[Esslingen am Neckar|Esslingen]], [[Konrad Vorn]] of [[Kampen, Overijssel|Kampen]], [[Cornelius Pays]] of [[Breda]] and Dietrich of Balveren (Bummel).{{sfnp|Mackay|2009|p=78}} Signatories attest that: <blockquote>1) The Masters of Holy Theology written below commend the Inquisitors into Heretical Depravity appointed by the authority of the Apostolic See in conformity with the Canons, and urge that they think it right to carry out their office zealously.<br>2) The proposition that acts of sorcery can happen with God's permission through sorcerers or sorceresses when the Devil works with them is not contrary to the Catholic Faith, but consonant with the statements of Holy Scripture. Indeed, according to the pronouncements of the Holy Doctors it is necessary to admit that such acts can sometimes happen.<br>3) It is therefore erroneous to preach that acts of sorcery cannot happen, because in this way preachers impede, to the extent that they can, the pious work of the inquisitors, to the prejudice of the salvation of souls. Nonetheless, secrets that are heard at any time by inquisitors should not be revealed to everyone.<br>4) All princes and Catholics should be urged to think it right to assist such pious vows on the part of the Inquisitors in defense of the Holy Catholic Faith.{{sfnp|Mackay|2009|pp=77–78}}</blockquote>