Showing posts with label exorcism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label exorcism. Show all posts

Monday, April 16, 2012

Vatican-Approved Exorcist Featured In New Documentary

Documentarystarsvaticanapprovedexorcist
Many people are familiar with the iconic 1973 film "The Exorcist," in which actors Max von Sydow and Jason Miller team up to turn the tables on a truly terrifying case of demonic possession. But a new documentary casts light on the real-life ritual through the eyes of a Vatican-approved exorcist.

The Exorcist in the 21st Century takes the viewer into the unknown and sinister world of exorcism in the Catholic Church. We meet one of the few exorcists in Europe, the Vatican approved José Antonio Fortea. He travels around the world on a mission to enlighten the masses about demonic possession. Constanza, a Colombian woman, is desperately looking for Fr. Forteas help. She claims to have been possessed by demons for nearly 15 years and she goes through a ritual of exorcism before she sees the Spanish exorcist as a last hope for spiritual liberation. The film follows both their journeys and gives a unique insight into one of the world most secret and mystical rites – the catholic ritual of exorcism. For more info, go to theexorcistdoc.com/


The Exorcist in the 21st Century from Creatur Media on Vimeo.

"The Exorcist in the 21st Century" follows José Antonio Fortea -- a Roman Catholic priest in Spain who is one of the few exorcists sanctioned by the Vatican -- as he travels the world enlightening the faithful about demonic possession. 

In the film, Fortea, a prolific writer who has penned several books on demonology, speaks floridly about the elaborate ritual. 

"Exorcism is a fight between all the forces of light against all the forces of demons," he says, "[...] a battle with the weapons of prayer." 

According to filmmaker Fredrik Horn Akselsen, who was reached by The Huffington Post via e-mail, the trailer for the film shows a Peruvian priest (not Fortea) performing an exorcism on a Colombian woman who claims to have been possessed by demons since 1997. 

While it is not apparent from the trailer, Akselsen told HuffPost the film takes "considerable time to express a skeptical view." This includes interviews with a skeptic within the Catholic church, as well as a psychiatrist who treated the allegedly possessed woman. 

Akselsen said the documentary focuses on Fortea's fame as an exorcist, and documents peoples' reactions to his celebration of "liberation massess," among other things. 

The film's intent does not appear to be either to validate or discredit exorcism, but rather to capture the powerful impact that faith has on people. In this sense, Akselsen's film has more in common with a documentary like "Jesus Camp" than it does with various exorcism mockumentaries that have been released in recent years, such as "The Last Exorcism" (2010) and "The Devil Inside" (2012). 


In 2010 the Vatican received over half a million reports of demonic possession (The Times)

This is an article for the Faith section of The Times, based on Anthony Hopkins’ latest film, The Rite.  

The Making of a Modern Exorcist

A look at the new film The Rite which explores the nature of exorcism and a novice priest’s journey to discover his faith
There are many traditional beliefs held by the orthodox Roman Catholic Church that are hotly debated by religious and non-religious people today, but what about the idea that humans can be possessed by the devil? An age old myth or fantasy created by Hollywood movies you may think, but not according to Anthony Hopkins latest film, The Rite.

Exorcism – still a widely used Christian practice of removing evil spirits from a person – may seem like an unfeasible and predictable topic for a horror film, but director, Mikael Hafstrom, intelligently employs it here as an accessible topic through which to explore how we deal with the unexplained. Is there such a thing as the Devil? Or are the ‘possessed’ just mentally ill?

The film has been billed as another disturbing tale centred around Anthony Hopkins in the role of sinister villain. But, although his performance doesn’t disappoint, there is a danger that his presence could detract from the important messages of faith at the film’s heart.

Such questions are explored through Michael Kovak (Colin O’Donoghue), an American student priest who has doubts about his own faith as well as the concept of possession. His character acts as a mouth-piece for the audience, as he insistently challenges his superiors’ unwavering faith, with arguments based on psychology and science.

He is sent for exorcism training at the Vatican – an authentic exorcism school that is still running today – to ultimately test his faith. His time there is based around the real-life experiences of Father Gary Thomas, an American priest who underwent the same training. This was chronicled by journalist, Matt Baglio, in his book, ‘The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist’, which inspired the film.

Hafstrom stresses that the events and ideas in the film are based on real beliefs. It references the fact that last year the Vatican received over half a million reports of demonic possession and begins with the words of Pope John Paul II: “The battle against the Devil…is still being fought today, because the Devil is still alive and active in the world.”

Kovak’s armour begins to fall when he starts apprenticing with the unorthodox priest and exorcist, Father Lucas (Anthony Hopkins), who was once a sceptic himself, and treats the possessed using a combination of religious practices and medical expertise. When Kovak witnesses exorcisms first-hand and is confronted with things he can longer explain using science, he is forced to look within to reconcile what he believes.

By the end of the film, Kovak returns to being a priest, fully convinced of his commitment to God. He even rejects the advances of Angeline (Alice Braga), a pretty young journalist who is investigating exorcism for an article.

Such clichés of boy meets girl, as well as the theatrical demonic voice of those possessed – which sounds like it has been lifted straight from ‘The Exorcist’ or ‘The Exorcism of Emily Rose’ – somewhat weakens the strong religious messages that underpin the film.

There were also various wasted threads and ineffectual creative devices used – such as Lucas’ evil looking cats that served no purpose to the plot and the Devil supposedly embodied through orange eyed frogs. This took away from the otherwise suspenseful and genuinely disturbing film.

On the whole though, the film depicted the Roman Catholic Church authentically and probably benefited from having genuine exorcist, Father Gary Thomas on board as a consultant.

However, whether or not you are convinced by the idea of possession as Kovak is, The Rite is an intriguing look into a much-forgotten practice that is still believed in by many people.

Indeed, most of us will not have the opportunity to witness exorcisms to convince us that God and the Devil exist, but Kovak and Lucas’ multidimensional characters show that asking questions about religion is a positive thing.


Vatican's Chief Exorcists has handled more than 70,000 Cases of Demonic Possession

Father Gabriele Amorth.
The Pope's chief exorcist is telling the world that the devil himself is hard at work these days inside the Vatican.

Father Gabriele Amorth, 85, has held the position of chief exorcist for the Vatican for 25 years. That adds up to more than 70,000 cases of demonic possession at the end of 2009 alone.

This information comes as Fr. Amorth has given recent interviews, and has just published a new book - Memoirs of an Exorcist, a series of interviews with Vatican journalist Marco Tosatti.

Where is the devil within the Catholic Church? Fr. Amorth suggests there are cardinals who do not believe in Jesus - and bishops who are "linked to the Demon."

My first introduction to an exorcism was the 1973 film, "The Exorcist." In one interview, Fr. Amorth says he approved of the film, while exaggerated, it offered a "substantially exact" image of a real case of possession.
In fact, in the very real cases, Fr. Amorth says that the possessed may spit out nails or glass. He has stated that in some of these cases, it has taken "six or seven of his assistants to hold down a possessed person."

Apparently any priest can carry out an exorcism, but it is generally done only by those who have been trained.

Fr. Amorth is the founder and honorary president of the International Association of Exorcists with more than 200 members. A priest must have permission from his bishop to join this organization. They meet twice a year in Rome.

Thanks goes out to Roger Marsh with the Examiner for publishing this story.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Types of Demonic Activity

Catholic exorcists differentiate between "ordinary" Satanic activity or influence (which includes mundane everyday temptations) and "extraordinary" Satanic activity, which can take six different forms:[7]
  1. External physical pain caused by Satan;
  2. Demonic Possession, in which Satan takes full possession of a person's body without their knowledge or consent: the victim is therefore morally blameless;
  3. Diabolical Oppression, in which there is no loss of consciousness or involuntary action, such as in the biblical Book of Job in which Job was tormented by a series of misfortunes in business, family, and health;
  4. Diabolic Obsession, which includes sudden attacks of irrationally obsessive thoughts, usually culminating in suicidal ideation and intrusive dreams;
  5. Diabolic infestation, which affects houses, things, or animals; and
  6. Diabolic subjugation, in which a person voluntarily submits to Satan.
In Hostage to the Devil, Malachi Martin also mentions a type of demonic attack called "familiarization". He writes,

" The possessing spirit in 'familiarization' is seeking to 'come and live with' the subject. If accepted, the spirit becomes the constant and continuously present companion of the possessed. The two "persons", the familiar and the possessed, remain separate and distinct. The possessed is aware of his familiar". [8]

True diabolical or satanic possession has been characterized since the Middles Ages, in the Rituale Romanum, by the following four typical characteristics:[9][10][11]

1. manifestation of superhuman strength;
2. speaking in tongues or languages that the person cannot know;
3. the revelation of knowledge, distant or hidden, that the victim cannot know; and
4. blasphemic rage and an aversion to holy symbols or relics

The Bible indicates that people can be possessed by demons but that the demons respond to Jesus's authority:
In the synagogue there was a man possessed by a demon, an evil spirit. He cried out at the top of his voice, 34 “Ha! What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God!” 35 “Be quiet!” Jesus said sternly. “Come out of him!” Then the demon threw the man down before them all and came out without injuring him. 36 All the people were amazed and said to each other, “What is this teaching? With authority and power he gives orders to evil spirits and they come out!” 37 And the news about him spread throughout the surrounding area. (Luke 4:33-35 NIV)
It also indicates that demons can possess animals.
When Jesus stepped ashore, he was met by a demon-possessed man from the town. For a long time this man had not worn clothes or lived in a house, but had lived in the tombs. 28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell at his feet, shouting at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, don’t torture me!” 29 For Jesus had commanded the impure spirit to come out of the man. Many times it had seized him, and though he was chained hand and foot and kept under guard, he had broken his chains and had been driven by the demon into solitary places. “Legion,” he replied, because many demons had gone into him. 31 And they begged Jesus repeatedly not to order them to go into the Abyss. 32 A large herd of pigs was feeding there on the hillside. The demons begged Jesus to let them go into the pigs, and he gave them permission. 33 When the demons came out of the man, they went into the pigs, and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and was drowned. (Luke 8:27-32 NIV)
The literal view of demonization is still held by a number of Christian denominations. Official Catholic doctrine affirms that demonic oppression can occur as distinguished from mental illness, but stresses that cases of mental illness should not be misdiagnosed as demonic influence. Catholic exorcisms can occur only under the authority of a bishop and in accordance with strict rules; a simple exorcism also occurs during Baptism (CCC 1673). 

In charismaticdeliverance ministries are activities carried out by individuals or groups aimed at solving problems related to demons and spirits, especially possession of the body and soul, but not the spirit as ministries like Ellel Ministries International, Don Dickerman Ministries and Neil T. Anderson explicitly teach that a Christian can not have demons in their spirit because the Holy Spirit lives there, though they can have demons in their body or soul due to inner emotional wounds, sexual abuse, satanic ritual abuse. [12] This is usually known as partial possession or demonic infestation, as opposed to outside demonic oppression which does not reside in any of the 3 parts of a person: body, soul, spirit. Christianity,

A great deal of controversy surrounds the book War on the Saints originally published in 1912 as a resource to the Christian faced with combating demon influences.

In the New Testament Jesus is reported to have encountered people who were demonized and to have driven the "evil spirits" out of these demoniacs. In the 4th century, St. Hillary asserted that demons entered the bodies of humans to use them as if they were theirs, and also proposed that the same could happen with animals.
The New Testament's description of people who had evil spirits includes a capacity for hidden knowledge (e.g., future events, innermost thoughts of the people around them) (Acts 16:16) and great strength (Act 19:16), among others, and shows those with evil spirits can speak of Christ (Acts 19:16, Mark 3:11). According to Catholic theologians[citation needed], demonic assault can be involuntary[13] and allowed by God to test a person (for more details about God's tests on persons see Job). Involuntary demonic assault, according to these theologians, cannot be denied because this would imply the negation of the cases mentioned in the New Testament (12, some of them repeated in more than one Gospel). However, in the overwhelming majority of cases of alleged demonic possession in modern times, the victim can suffer due to any of a number of personal initiatives: occult practices, mortal sin, loss of faith, or psychological trauma, among others. Furthermore, Malachi Martin goes as far as to say "...no person can be Possessed without some degree of cooperation on his or her part," and "The effective cause of Possession is the voluntary collaboration of an individual, through his faculties of mind and will, with one or more of those bodiless, genderless creatures called demons."[14]

In previous centuries, the Christian church offered suggestions on safeguarding one’s home. Suggestions ranged from dousing a household with Holy water, placing wax and herbs on thresholds to “ward off witches occult,” and avoiding certain areas of townships known to be frequented by witches and Devil worshippers after dark.[15]

Medicine and psychology:

Demonic possession is not recognized as a psychiatric or medical diagnosis by either the DSM-IV or the ICD-10. There are many psychological ailments commonly misunderstood as demonic possession, particularly dissociative identity disorder. In cases of dissociative identity disorder in which the alter personality is questioned as to its identity, 29% are reported to identify themselves as demons,[16] but doctors see this as a mental disease called demonomania or demonopathy, a monomania in which the patient believes that he or she is possessed by one or more demons.[17]

Biblical Accounts:

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia:[5]
"In the Old Testament we have only one instance, and even that is not very certain. We are told that "an evil spirit from the Lord troubled" Saul (1 Samuel 16:14). The Hebrew rûahJosephus (Ant. Jud., VI, viii, 2; ii, 2), the Jews were inclined to give the word that meaning in this very case. In New-Testament times, however, the phenomenon had become very common." need not imply a personal influence, though, if we may judge from
The New Testament mentions several episodes in which Jesus drove out demons from persons, believing these to be the entities responsible for those mental and physical illnesses.
Acts of the Apostles contains also a number of references to people coming under the influence of the Holy Spirit (1:8, 2:4, 2:17-18, 2:38, 4:8, 4:31, 6:3-5, 7:55, 8:15-19, 8:39, 9:17, 10:19, 11:12-16, 11:28, 13:9, 16:6-7, 19:2-6, 20:23, 21:11, 23:8-9) which is believed to be a good thing in contrast to demonic influence, see also Spirit possession#Christianity.

The 1902 work Demonic possession in the New Testament by Rev. William Menzies Alexandersynoptic Gospels, outlining their historical, medical and theological aspects.[6] attempted to explain accounts of possession in the synoptic Gospels, outlining their historical, medical and theological aspects.[6]

Possession according to the degree

Possession of the first degree:
Mysteriously, the demon can sometimes invade the psyche of a human being, taking the control of his or or her body and his or her intentions. The phenomenon lasts until he or she is not annulled by the exorcism, or for established periods previously. In this degree of possession the demon is latent; he or she limits him to alter the attitudes of the possessed one. By his or her reactions to the sacred, it instills in them feelings of desperation and depression.

Possession of the second degree:
At this degree changes of voice manifest in the possessed, also preternatural phenomenon such as glossolalia, levitation and pirocinesi ( power to set on fire distance objects ) may occur. Holy water also can produce sores on the body of the possessed.

Possession of the third degree:
To this degree the malignant spirit (or spirits) have taken such dominion over the person as to even alter horribly his or her somatic lines ( relating to bodily changes ) his or her odor, and temperature. This is the most arduous case, and it usually requires numerous exorcisms for the definitive liberation. In effect, the difference among the last three gradations is only a fine line; the range between one degree to the other is without imperceptible change.    Phantasm Psychic Research

The New Rite of Exorcism Commissioned by the Vatican Theologians

The "New" Rite of Exorcism 

Certain reformations have been made over the last few hundred years to the ritual itself, the last being made in 1952. But not until the 1990's was a commission of Vatican theologians and liturgists put together to come up with a new manual of exorcism. A new 90-page set of instructions, De Exorcismus et Supplicantionibus Quibustam. It was presented in October of 1998. In the eyes of the Vatican this replaces the old procedures established in 1614 by Pope Paul V.

(De Exorcismus et supplicationibus quibusdam)
 ( Below are a few articles that were released during the 1999 issuing of the new rite.)

Catholic World News – January 1999 

VATICAN RELEASES NEW RITE FOR EXORCISM 

VATICAN (CWNews.com) -- The Devil exists. That unpopular reality is brought into sharp focus by the promulgation of a new rite of exorcism for the Catholic Church.
De Exorcismus et supplicationibus quibusdam, approved by Pope John Paul II on October 1, 1998, was formally released by the Vatican on January 26. The document sets out a new and precise liturgical form for the rite of exorcism. The 84-page form, introduced by the Congregation Divine Worship, was published entirely in Latin; the episcopal conferences of different nations may now prepare their own versions in the vernacular languages. 

This new Vatican document clearly recognizes both the existence of the Devil and the reality of diabolical possession. In a short introduction, the document calls attention to the existence of both "angelic creatures" and others "called demons, who are opposed to God." Since the influence of the demonic can become apparent in people, places, or things, the document continues, the Church "has prayed, and continues to pray, that men will be freed from the snares of the Devil." 

The new rite confirms "the victory of Christ and the power of the Church over the demons." It points to the rites in the Christian tradition: the "minor exorcism" of catechumens prior to their baptism and the major exorcisms conducted according to this ritual. The latter are designed to "drive out demons, or bring freedom from demonic influence, through the spiritual authority which Jesus confided in his Church." 

The liturgical ritual itself is centered on supplicatory prayers, asking for God's help, and "imperative" prayers addressed directly to the Devil, commanding him to depart. The prayers are to be said as the exorcist lays his hand on the individual, and are part of an overall ritual which includes specific blessings and sprinklings with holy water. The ritual also includes the litany of the saints, the reading of the Psalms and the Gospel, and a proclamation of faith which may be either the familiar Creed or a simple question-and-answer ("Do you renounce Satan? I do."). The ritual concludes with the kissing of the Cross, and the final prayer, proclaiming the triumph of Christ and his Church. 

The new ritual for exorcism replaces one which was promulgated as part of the Roman Ritual of 1614. The Second Vatican Council called for the revision of that Ritual, which has been accomplished in stages during the past 30 years; the rite of exorcism was the last of the new rituals to be introduced. 

In introducing the new document to reporters in Rome, Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estevez, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, said that the rite has not been greatly changed from the earlier ritual. He added that while there are "very few cases" in which the rite is used, the rite of exorcism-- which can only be used under the guidance of the local bishop, and with the consent of the person suffering diabolical possession-- remains necessary because the Devil is a reality. He cautioned that while many Catholics today no longer profess belief in the Devil, that belief "is not a matter of opinion which one can accept or reject; it is an element of faith and Catholic doctrine."

NCCB – Newsletter, Committee on the Liturgy
(Volume XXXV, Jan. - Feb. 1999)
New Rite of Exorcism 

On January 26, 1999, Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estevez, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, announced that on November 22, 1998, the Solemnity of Christ the King, he had signed a decree by which a revised editio typica latina of De Exorcismis (Rite of Exorcism) was to be published. In response to article 79 of Sacrosanctum Concilium, this rite was revised to replace Chapter XII of the former Latin Roman Ritual, and will eventually be published in vernacular editions for use by the Church throughout the world. This rite may be used by priests who have been given a specific faculty to do so by the diocesan bishop.

The Wanderer – 4 February 1999
Cardinal Medina Says New Rite
Of Exorcism Similar To Old

VATICAN CITY (VIS) Jorge Arturo Cardinal Medina Estevez, prefect of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, on Jan. 26th presented at the Holy See Press Office the new rite of exorcism of the Roman Book of Rites. 

Cardinal Medina began by stating that the person's capacity to welcome God is "blurred by sin, and at times evil occupies the place where God wishes to dwell. For this reason, Jesus Christ came to liberate the person from the dominion of evil and sin.... Jesus Christ drove out demons and liberated people who were possessed with evil spirits to make space for Him in that person.
"Exorcism is an old and particular form of prayer which the Church uses against the power of the Devil," he continued. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (n. 1673) explains that exorcism is directed at "the expulsion of demons or to the liberation from demonic possession through the spiritual authority which Jesus entrusted to His Church." 

According to the rite of exorcism, continued the cardinal prefect, there are various criteria to know if we are dealing with demonic possession: "Speaking with a great number of words from unknown languages, or understanding them, making known things either distant or hidden, showing strength beyond one's situation, together with vehement aversion toward God, our Lady, the cross, and holy pictures." 

"To perform an exorcism," he stressed, "authorization from the diocesan bishop is required, which can be given for a specific case, or rather in a general and permanent way to the priest who has the ministry of exorcist in the diocese." 

Cardinal Medina said that the Roman Book of Rites contained in the last chapter the indications and liturgical text of the exorcisms, but "it had not been revised since Vatican Council II." After ten years of work, the current text was approved by the Pontiff. Once the translations of the ritual are completed in different languages, they will be submitted "for the recognition of the [Sacred] Congregation for Divine Worship." 

In the current book of rites there is "the rite of exorcism itself, and "the prayers which must be publicly recited . . . when it is prudently deemed that there is an influence of Satan over places, objects, or people, without having arrived at the phase of possession itself. In addition, there is a series of prayers which the faithful must pray privately when they believe that they are subject to demonic influences." 

"Exorcism has its departure point in the faith of the Church, according to which Satan and other evil spirits exist. . . . Catholic doctrine teaches us that demons are fallen angels as a result of their sin, and that they are spiritual beings with great intelligence and power."
The prefect of the congregation, recalling with The Catechism of the Catholic Church that "the power of Satan is not infinite," said however that God's allowing us to be tempted "is a great mystery." 

In conclusion, he emphasized that "the harmful influence of the Devil and his evil spirits is normally exercised through deception, falsehoods, lies, and confusion. As Jesus is the Truth, the Devil is the liar par excellence. Lies have always been, right from the beginning, his preferred strategy." 

In answer to a question, Cardinal Medina explained that "there is great continuity between the old and the new rites, there are no radical changes. The language is more somber and fewer adjectives are used; however, the expression of faith in the power of God to expel the Devil is the same in both cases. 

A Closer Look
The New Rite of Exorcism
The Influence of the Evil One
by Father X – Summer 2002 

In his famous discourse of June 30, 1972, Pope Paul VI said that he
sensed "that from somewhere or other, the smoke of Satan has entered the
temple of God." Nowhere has this been more evident than in the disastrous
revision of the blessings of the Church in De Benedictionibus, the so-called
"Book of Blessings,"1 approved in 1984.

In the original Latin this defective book scandalously refuses to bless
objects, but only persons. The example of Christ our Lord in blessing things
(e.g., Matt. 14:19; 26:26; Mk. 6:41; 8:7; 14:22; Lk. 9:16; 24:30) obviously
carried no weight with the liturgists who wrote that book. The official
General Introduction to the Book of Blessings informs us: "At times the
Church also blesses objects and places connected with human activity or
liturgical life, or connected with piety and devotion - but always, however,
with a view to the people who use those objects and are engaged in those
places" (Praenotanda Generalia, 12). This explanation is dishonest, in that
it gives only half a reason for blessing things, and because it conceals the
fact that the book of blessings, with a few exceptions, systematically
refuses to bless things. It is a book of non-blessings. To take but one
example, the "blessing" of holy water outside of Mass contains no actual
blessing of the water. The closest thing to it is a prayer to God asking for
certain effects by the use of this water. The so-called "Prayer of blessing"
(in Latin and English) refrains from using the word "bless" even once, and
there is no Sign of the Cross made over the water. The Devil must have
laughed when that "Book of Blessings" was issued. The traditional exorcism
of water and salt, and all the other Roman Ritual's traditional prayers
against the devil and his influence were almost completely abolished. On
three occasions only is a thing blessed. These three exceptions in Latin are
for meals, church bells and cemeteries. In the American edition, the same
things appear; also chalice and paten (found in Latin in the Pontifical);
also two other places in which the alternative rite (not in the Latin) does
bless an object.2 (The blessing of holy water within Mass does contain an
actual blessing of the water.)

The treatment of blessings in the Catechism (#1671-2) speaks of blessings of
persons, places and things. But this is belied, as I have said, by the Latin
text of De Benedictionibus, the "Book of Blessings," so called. When the
definitive Latin text of the Catechism was issued in 1997, with the
paragraph saying that the Church blesses things, a priest friend wrote to
Cardinal Ratzinger pointing out that the lex orandi and the lex credendi
were at odds, and asked a question: "Can we expect a revision of the Book of
Blessings in the light of the definitive text of the Catechism?" Of course,
this is a reversal of the traditional practice and view of things: one is
meant to pass from the Church's practice to a formulation of the Church's
faith. But, if it will do good, the reversal has become a necessity.
What lies behind this change to the rites of blessings? Clearly, a loss of
sense of the power of the priesthood - a desire, even, to overthrow
sacerdotal mediation, to reduce the priest from an instrument of Christ,
clothed with the authority of Jesus Christ, to a mere prayer, on the same
level as that of any lay person. The retention of the title "Blessings"
means nothing: as we know, All Souls' Day is No Souls' Day, even in the
original Latin, where the word for soul (anima) has been suppressed in the
prayers of November 2.3

The New Rite of Exorcism
The same mentality has been at work in the revised Rite of Exorcism,
promulgated in January 1999, De Exorcismis et Supplicationibus Quibusdam.4
This was intimated by the defective definition of exorcism in the 1992
Catechism at #1673, unchanged in the Latin text that came out five years
later: "When the Church asks publicly and authoritatively in the name of
Jesus Christ that a person or object be protected against the power of the
Evil One and withdrawn from his dominion, it is called exorcism."
Let us read that definition again, with emphases added: "When the Church
asks publicly and authoritatively in the name of Jesus Christ that a person
or object be protected against the power of the Evil One and withdrawn from
his dominion, it is called exorcism." Notice the use of the word asks, and
the use of the passive voice. The text says that the Church asks for this
person or object to be protected. Asks whom? For protection by whom?
Obviously, God. So, according to this, an exorcism is: asking God to free
someone from the devil. But, despite what this text implies, an exorcism is
not a prayer to God; exorcism is a command issued to the Devil in the name
of God. The very word exorcism tells you that - exorcizo, I adjure. To
adjure, as the Oxford Dictionary defines it, is to charge or entreat someone
solemnly, as if under oath, or under the penalty of a curse. No one can
adjure God, but a minister of God can adjure a demon. The Ritual for
Exorcism of 1614 (which until January 1999 was the only officially published
text for Latin rite exorcists) does contain prefatory prayers to God to ask
that a person be delivered - but then under the subheading of "Exorcism"
itself, the exorcist orders the demon to depart. "Exorcizo te, immundissime
spiritus.in nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi" - "I exorcize you, unclean
spirit.in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." He uses other imperatives
addressed to the demon, such as recede, da locum, exi, discede (withdraw,
give way, exit, depart).

The new ritual scandalously gives the priest a choice of two forms of
exorcism, which it calls "deprecatory" and "imperative." "Deprecatory" means
a prayer to God, in this case to ask Him to deliver the demoniac.
"Imperative" means a command issued to the demon in the name of God to
depart. The imperative formula is a real exorcism, but the deprecatory form
is not an exorcism at all. A prayer is a request to God; an exorcism is a
command to a demon. The so-called "deprecatory exorcism" is simply a
petitionary prayer to God. It is not an exorcism. (If it is an exorcism,
then the final petition of the Lord's Prayer, "deliver us from evil," would
also be an exorcism!)

As with the so-called "exorcism" in the modern Rite of Baptism, simply
placing the sub-heading Exorcism does not make what follows an exorcism.
What is extremely worrying is that, according to the new rubrics, the
deprecatory form must always be used, but the second form, the imperative,
is an optional extra. What lies behind this change? The same denigration of
the priesthood described above. It is a true Protestantization: the
reduction of the ordained priest to the level of the common priesthood. It
is the fruit of embarrassment about the visible priesthood. It is the
mentality that is at work when a priest says at the end of Mass: "May
Almighty God bless us.." When a priest does that, he is losing his identity,
and is uncomfortable about the fact that he is different, and that he can
confer blessings.

Here is an extract from one of the new deprecatory formulas:
O God, creator and defender of the human race, look upon this Your servant,
whom You did make in Your own image and call to share in Your glory.. Hear,
holy Father, the cry of the Church suppliant: let not Your child be
possessed by the father of lies; let not Your servant, whom Christ has
redeemed by His blood, to be held in the captivity of the devil; let not a
temple of Your Spirit be inhabited by the unclean spirit. Hear, O merciful
God, the prayers of the blessed Virgin Mary, whose Son, dying upon the
Cross, crushed the head of the serpent of old and entrusted all men to His
mother as sons: let the light of truth shine upon this Your servant, let the
joy of peace enter into him, let the Spirit of holiness possess him, and by
inhabiting him render him serene and pure. Hear, O Lord, the supplication of
blessed Michael the Archangel and of all the Angels ministering unto You:
God of hosts, drive back the force of the devil; God of truth and favor,
remove his deceitful wiles; God of freedom and grace, break the bonds of
iniquity. Hear, O God, lover of man's salvation.free this servant from every
alien power.

As we can see, this is merely a petitionary prayer.
Here is an extract from one of the new imperative formulas:
I adjure you, Satan, enemy of man's salvation, acknowledge the justice and
goodness of God the Father, who by just judgment has damned your pride and
envy: depart from this servant of God, whom the Lord has made in His own
image, adorned with His gifts, and has mercifully adopted as His child. I
adjure you, Satan, prince of this world, acknowledge the power and strength
of Jesus Christ, who conquered you in the desert, overcame you in the
garden, despoiled you on the Cross, and rising from the tomb, transferred
your victims to the kingdom of light.. I adjure you, Satan, deceiver of the
human race, acknowledge the Spirit of truth and grace, who repels your
snares and confounds your lies: depart from this creature of God, whom He
has signed by the heavenly seal; withdraw from this man whom God has made a
holy temple by a spiritual unction. Leave, therefore, Satan, in the name of
the Father + and of the Son + and of the Holy + Spirit; leave through the
faith and the prayer of the Church; leave through the sign of the holy Cross
of our Lord Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.


As one can see, this optional formula is an exorcism proper. In the former
rite, there were prayers to God asking for deliverance, but they were always
followed by exorcisms proper.

Changes to the Old Directives to the Exorcist
Other things are of great concern in this new ritual. The Ritual of 1614
contains 21 directives for the exorcist, a magnificent distillation of the
accumulated wisdom and experience of the Church. The new preface never gets
to the point about the manner of proceeding. The former directives 4-6, 8-9,
13-17, 19-20 have no equivalent in the new ritual's preface. This means that
most (12) of the 21 are deleted. The following former directives have no
parallel in the new introduction:

4. In order to better test these signs [of possession], the priest should
question the demoniac after one or other exorcism as to what he feels in his
mind or body, so that in this way he can also learn which words more greatly
disturb the demons, so as then to bear down on them and repeat them all the
more.

5. The priest should stay alert for tricks and deceptions that demons use to
mislead the exorcist. For they will give false answers as much as possible,
and show themselves only with difficulty, in order that the exorcist at
length become worn out and give up the exorcism; or the ill person might
appear not to be harassed by the devil.

6. Occasionally, after they appear, the demons hide and leave the body
almost free of all disturbance, so that the ill person might think he is
completely freed. But the exorcist should not stop until he sees the signs
of liberation.

8. Some demons point out an act of witchcraft which has been done [to cause
possession], by whom it was done, and the way to undo it; but the demoniac
should be careful not to have recourse to sorcerers, fortune-tellers, or
other such persons, on this account, but should go to the ministers of the
Church rather than use any superstitious or otherwise illicit means.

9. Sometimes the devil grants the sick person relief and permits him to
receive the Holy Eucharist so that he might seem to have departed. In short,
there are countless devices and tricks of the devil to deceive man, which
the exorcist should beware, lest he be deceived.

13. .Also relics of Saints, where available, safely and properly fastened
and covered, may be reverently applied to the chest or head of the
possessed. Care must be taken that the sacred objects are not improperly
handled or harmed in any way by the demon. Because of danger of irreverence,
the Holy Eucharist should not be placed upon the head of the possessed
person or elsewhere on his body.

14. The exorcist should not engage in a great deal of talking or ask
unnecessary or curious questions, especially concerning future or secret
matters not pertaining to his task. But he should command the unclean spirit
to be silent, except to answer his questions. Nor should he believe the
demon if he pretends to be the soul of some Saint or deceased person or a
good Angel.

15. However, there are necessary questions, for example, concerning the
number and names of the possessing spirits, the time and reason they
entered, and other things of this sort. The exorcist should restrain or
spurn the rest of the devil's nonsense, laughter and foolishness, and advise
those present, who should be few, that they must not pay attention to these
things nor question the possessed person, but rather humbly and earnestly
pray to God for him.

16. The exorcist should read and carry out the exorcism with strength,
authority, great faith, humility and fervor, and when he sees that the
spirit is especially tormented, then he should persist and bear down all the
more. And whenever he sees that the possessed person is being disturbed in
some part of his body, or stung, or that a swelling appears somewhere, he
should make the sign of the cross on that area and sprinkle it with holy
water which should be on hand.

17. He is also to observe at which words the demons tremble more, and then
he should repeat these words more often. When he reaches the threatening
words, he should say them repeatedly, always increasing the punishment. If
he sees that he is making progress, he should continue for two, three, or
four hours, or even longer if he can, until he obtains the victory.

19. If he is exorcising a woman, he should always have persons of integrity
with him to hold the possessed person while she is agitated by the demon.
These people should be close relatives of the suffering woman if possible.
Mindful of decency, the exorcist should be careful not to say or do anything
which could be an occasion of an evil thought to himself or the others.

20. While he is exorcising, he should use the words of Sacred Scripture
rather than his own or someone else's. He should command the demon to tell
him if he is held in that body because of some magic, or sorcerer's signs or
devices. If the possessed person has consumed things of this sort orally, he
should vomit them up. If they are elsewhere outside his body, he should
reveal where they are, and once found, they are to be burned. The possessed
person should also be advised to make known all his temptations to the
exorcist.

These crucial directives, followed by exorcists for 385 years, have no
parallel in the new introduction.

The preface explicitly says that lay people may not say any of the prayers
of exorcism, and repeats the old directive that exorcism is not to be
conducted in public. It adds the rule (a welcome addition) that exorcism is
not to be open to any communications media; and the exorcist and any
assistants are not to speak publicly before or after the exorcism about what
took place.

Other Changes
This article is not meant to be an exhaustive analysis of the new rite of
exorcism. Many of the prayers and rites are perfectly acceptable in
themselves: the new rite contains a prefatory prayer, blessing of holy
water, Litany of the Saints, a Psalm, a Gospel reading (the Prologue of St.
John, or a text in which Christ rejects the devil or expels demons),
imposition of hands over the demoniac, Profession of Faith or renewal of
Baptismal promises with renunciation of Satan; the Our Father, the Sign of
the Cross on the possessed person; and, after deliverance, the Magnificat
followed by other prayers and a blessing.

Laughable, however, are the references, in the prefatory decree, to
Sacrosanctum Concilium of Vatican II - as if the Council had called for a
revised, updated exorcism to allow full conscious participation by the
laity! The only conceivable allusion to exorcism in the Vatican II decree on
the liturgy is where it says the sacramentals will be revised - but the
clear proof that the bishops never had exorcism in mind is seen from the
reason given for revision. The one and only relevant sentence here says:
"The sacramentals are to be revised, account being taken of the primary
principle of the intelligent, actual and easy participation of the faithful"
(art. 79). Since exorcism, new and old, must be conducted away from the
faithful, the principle of intelligent, actual and easy participation is
irrelevant. Once again, the liturgical decree is cited as the basis for
something never intended.

Dishonest is the use of the word instauratum (restored) in the subheading of
the title page: the new exorcism ritual is in no way a restoration. It is a
fabrication. The Latin should have read fabricatum or innovatum or maybe
concoctum!

The preface provides for translation of the rite into myriad languages - but
what on earth for? If an exorcist does not know enough Latin to perform the
prayers in Latin, he should not be appointed to the office. The preface at
no. 13 quotes canon 1172 saying that an exorcist should be, inter alia,
"outstanding in knowledge" - but how could that be said of a priest who
cannot say or follow very simple texts and prayers in Latin? As well, given
charismatics' predilection for exorcisms and "deliverance," it is highly
imprudent to make the Church's official exorcism prayers available to all
and sundry in every language, when only a tiny proportion of priests need to
use them.

With the promulgation of the new exorcism ritual, the Athanasian Creed has
now officially disappeared from any Catholic ritual. In the 1960s, its
frequency was reduced in the Breviary and finally it was abolished from it.
The rite of exorcism was the last surviving ceremony in the Church where the
Athanasian Creed was recited. Now it is gone. This is a serious loss, and
there was no good reason why it was replaced by a choice between the
Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed.

Another innovation, but a welcome one, in the new Ritual for Exorcism, is an
exorcism to be used for a place or thing, something not specifically present
in the former Ritual. (Herbert Thurston S.J.'s book Ghosts and Poltergeists5
has an appendix containing his English translation of an "Exorcism of a
house troubled by an evil spirit," which he found in the Appendix of an
edition of the Roman Ritual printed in Madrid in 1631, published with the
authorization of the Inquisition. Father Thurston evidently thought this was
a worthwhile ceremony to have.) This new rite for a place or thing also
requires permission from the bishop before being used. Again, however, in
this ceremony, the imperative formula, the true exorcism, is to be added,
only if the priest wishes.

Conclusion
Well-informed people may wonder how it is that such innovative and defective
things can be promulgated by someone like Cardinal Medina Estevez. They
wonder, too, how Cardinal Ratzinger can let certain things go on, and not
reverse them by a new document, and so on. It is important to remember that
the Sacred Congregations are composed of voting members, all of whom are
Bishops. They have plenty of advisers and experts, but only Bishops are
actual members. When the time comes for handing down a public decision,
promulgating a document, and the like, these things are put to a vote of the
members. Cardinal Ratzinger does not have single-handed and complete control
over the Holy Office, which has 21 bishop members (cf. Annuario Pontificio).
The same applies to the other Cardinal Prefects. Suppose Cardinal Medina
Estevez wanted to abolish some banal Swiss eucharistic prayers, for example.
He does not have the authority to draw up a decree abolishing them
single-handedly. The 34 bishop members of the Congregation for Divine
Worship would have to vote on it. Possibly, certain decisions require a
two-thirds majority - who knows?

According to the president of the International Association of Exorcists,
Father Gabriele Amorth (30 Days, no. 6, 2001), when the new rite was ready,
Cardinals Ratzinger and Medina sought to add a provision in its introduction
authorizing the use of the previous rite. This move of theirs was rejected,
so Cardinal Medina issued a separate notification that an exorcist can use
the old rite if his bishop asks the Congregation for Divine Worship, who
will "gladly provide the requested permission" (Notitiae, vol. 35, 1999).
The new rite will one day itself be subject to a true restoration, which
will restore to the obligatory texts of the exorcist the true nature of his
office.

Thank you Phantasm Psychic Research!