Incubi, Secubi, and Cambions

[Vigis]

In the Middle-Ages many people believed in these things called Incubi, Secubi, and Cambions. I was wondering if any of todays Church leaders believe that these things exist. Do you believe in these things? They are not explicitly talked about in the Bible. I know that there is one verse that talks about such demons. I know this is a strange topic, but it sparked my curiosity to see if any people today believe that these demons exist. If you do not know exactly what I am talking about here is a link.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incubus_(demon)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambion

Please share your opinion. God speed.

 

[PhilVaz]

<< Please share your opinion. God speed. >>

My opinion? Ewwwww that’s gross.

I remember an early 1980s movie called "Incubus" and a rock band by that name. I think the Passantinos or others did an article for the Christian Research Journal a while back on this, and they include it with other “medieval superstitions.” Here it is, part of their expose of Bob Larson (PDF file) who heavily believed in those kinds of demons.

Don’t remember anything in This Rock, but I could do a search.

Phil P

 

[Scottgun]

The Church teaches the existence of fallen angels, but I don’t think it officially teaches classes of demons.

Scott

 

[ssejllenrad]

I know of the incubus, secubus, and cambion… At least what they are… Don’t really know that much if they are in scriptures or not… Is it somehow related to the nephilipm?

 

[Maranatha]

The links you provided show how those who updated Wikipedia have a bias against Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.

The article starts by claiming the origins on the Incubus is from Western Medieval legend. They don’t ascribe any clear reference supporting that claim. As we all know Christianity and specifically Catholicism was the dominant religion during those times.

The words Incubus and Cambion do not appear in the Bible or the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The Old Catholic Encyclopedia doesn’t mention those beliefs directly but does have an article on Demonology in general. You’ll notice that the article shows:

When we turn from the Avesta to the Sacred Books of the Jews, that is to say to the canonical Scripture, we are struck by the absence of an elaborate demonology such as that of the Persians and Assyrians

Elaborate heirchies of demons are exterior to the history and traditions of the Judeo-Christian religion. In fact the Church has consistently fought again superstition from the beginning.

 

[BJRumph]

As already mentioned, there is a distinct lack of a developed demonology in the tradition, and therefore in the Church.

However, I can see such things as being semi-logical speculative developments. I have heard it said (though I cannot as yet determine the “validity” of such a teaching within the Church itself) that the demons/fallen angels try to imitate (for reason of perversion) the Orders instituted within the Celestial Heirarchy, and being “angels” themselves, it is not unreasonable to suggest that there are particular demons who “specialize” in particular sins, in the case of the Succubi/Incubi, Lust.

However, as these beings lack the physical faculties necessary, as the MM actually got right, the creation of Cambions is not really possible. I suppose the closest one could get would be in the intercourse with a possessed individual; otherwise it is pure occultic superstition, the resulting “fruit” of cambions being anything but physical humanoids.

Additionally, as angels (and therefore demons) lack a sexual basis, it would be inconsistent to divide the Succubus and the incubus into two distinct classes of demons, a single demon would itself be both, with the Succ-/Inc- prefix being malleable “descriptor” to fit the specific instance in relation to its victim.

The issue of the nephilim is a little complex from the Church’s perspective, as it denies that they were 1/2 breeds as commonly understood (well, “commonly” within that small group of people who know anything about them )

But, as a reminder; outside of the “fact” of their existence, everything else is essentially “Speculative” theory with regards to demonology. Even the Church’s angelology, far more developed and bound by Tradition, has many speculative components.

The Opus Angelorum has some good references for what the Church teaches definitively regarding Angelology and Demonology. My personal favorite is “Deliver Us from Evil” by Fr. Basil Nortz, ORC as it contains recent teachings (from JP II), the Catechism exerpts, Cannon Law exerpts, ect, as well as a variety of prayers for both honoring the angels, and appropriate ones against demons. Another good, if small, book is their “Little Catechism on the Angels” which provides the relevant De Fide positions regarding the subject, in addition to the catechism and other resources.

 

[Eilrahc]

I think St. Augustine claimed that some demons collect sperm.

 

[mchale]

The links you provided show how those who updated Wikipedia have a bias against Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.

The article starts by claiming the origins on the Incubus is from Western Medieval legend. They don’t ascribe any clear reference supporting that claim. As we all know Christianity and specifically Catholicism was the dominant religion during those times.

While I agree that the articles lack any citations and are therefore somewhat suspect, I think it is a bit of stretch to suggest that they show a bias against Christianity and Catholicism. They are in fact legends, unsupported by the Church, so I think the bias would be if they ascribed these beliefs to the Church. The reality is we don’t know precisely where the beliefs came from. They may well have been a fusion (and perversion) of Christian belief with pre-christian pagan and heathen beliefs.

In any case, the great thing about Wikipedia is that if you don’t agree with the presentation of an article, you can always edit the article yourself. Of course on the flip side, this means that wars can start over updates.

–
Bill