What's The Straight Dope On Exorcism?

[ralph124c]

I saw a (dramatised) reenactment of an exorcism last night, on TDC. It looked like pretty standard Hollywood stuff-kid contorted in rage, priest chanting service. Enraged (devil-posessed kid breaks straps, attacks priest). No greeen pea soup vomit, though. So, I have a few questions: knowing that the rite (RC exorcism) is exceedingly rare, have any of these cases been investigated?
-what happens to people who undergo exorcism-do they get posessed agin?
-do most of them have that "superhuman" strength?
-do they attack the priest?
Anybody know how many exorcisms are performed per year, in the USA?
What is the official procedure for determining if somebody is really posessed(as opposed to simple mental illness)?

[glee]

I don't have any cites for you, but I know of no evidence that anyone has ever been possessed, nor that evil spirits exist.
It's all a religious belief, like God.
A priest turns up, announces there is an evil spirit, which is undetectable by any scientific test, performs a ritual and announces a success, which is undetectable by any scientific test.
All parties then go to Church and give money in grateful thanks.

The Catholic Church regularly announces that people have become saints, which involves having performed miracles. These are never scientifically investigated either.

[Bricker]

I don't have any cites for you, but I know of no evidence that anyone has ever been possessed, nor that evil spirits exist.
It's all a religious belief, like God.
A priest turns up, announces there is an evil spirit, which is undetectable by any scientific test, performs a ritual and announces a success, which is undetectable by any scientific test.
All parties then go to Church and give money in grateful thanks.


Why do you suppose the Church is so exceedingly reluctant to perform excorcisms, then, and finds in the vast majority of "possessions" that the issue is mental illness? Why aren't they simply raking in the dough?

[scottkris]

<snip> on TDC.


What is "TDC?" Did the Discovery Channel change their logo again (I really don't know, as I have not had cable TV in over 3 years)?

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Why do you suppose the Church is so exceedingly reluctant to perform excorcisms, then, and finds in the vast majority of "possessions" that the issue is mental illness? Why aren't they simply raking in the dough?
They are (quite sensibly) concerned about their credibility as an institution.

The fact remains that there is no scientific evidence for "demonic possession,' or for the existenmce of demons, evil spirits, what have you.

Exorcisms are still common in a number of other traditions. A religion professor of mine once showed us home video he had taken of a shaman performing impromptu exorcisms at a temple in Taiwan. It was very entertaining. The crowd in the temple was really into it. I guess it's pretty commonplace there. People imagine they're possessed (or maybe they're schizophrenic), and they act like they think they should act. Then a shaman performs a ritual (for a fee) and they feel better. I think the shaman actually believes it himself, but it's all psychosomatic.

[Surok]

ralph124c, you will find answers to a lot of your questions in American Exorcism (http://www.amazon.com/American-Exorcism-Expelling-Demons-Plenty/dp/0767910095/sr=8-1/qid=1169797629/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-4096782-7751158?ie=UTF8&s=books) which takes a relatively balanced (although not very in-depth) look at the subject.

[glee]

Why do you suppose the Church is so exceedingly reluctant to perform excorcisms, then, and finds in the vast majority of "possessions" that the issue is mental illness? Why aren't they simply raking in the dough?

Over the centuries, Churches have performed varying numbers of exorcisms.
(They have also sentenced people to death as witches, again based only on religious belief.)
My point is that there is no evidence at all that spirits exist, nor that exorcism does anything.
I threw in the money angle merely to show why this practice continues. (I could draw a comparison with psychics, who take money from bereaved people under similar circumstances.)

I have no idea why any Church would perform even a single exorcism, nor why they would pay people to perform them.

[Operation Ripper]

There is no such thing as magic, ralph124c. :)

[Bricker]

The fact remains that there is no scientific evidence for "demonic possession,' or for the existenmce of demons, evil spirits, what have you.


Actually, there is "scientific evidence" for demonic possession.

What also exists is much, much stronger scientific evidence in favor of other causes, such as mental illness, so that on balance, the appropriate scientific conclusion is that there is no such thing. This is a nitpicky point, I grant, but since you once argued yourself blue in the face over the meaning of "evidence" in the West Memphis Three case, I thought you might appreciate the point in another context.

Almost anything is "evidence." The quesiton is not whether there is any evidence, but rather, what does an examination of ALL the evidence, weighed appropriatedly, tell us?

In these cases, of course, it tells us that fraud, mental illness, and poor and selective observation are the most likely explanations for "demonic possession."

[Bricker]

I threw in the money angle merely to show why this practice continues. (I could draw a comparison with psychics, who take money from bereaved people under similar circumstances.)

I have no idea why any Church would perform even a single exorcism, nor why they would pay people to perform them.

Except that your point DOESN'T show that. If the money angle explains why the practice continues, what's the explanation for the fact that vanishingly few excorcisms are actually performed in this day and age?

MY point is that while it's fair to attack the notion that evil spirits exist (except for tequila, of course; no one can deny that) and it's fair to attack the notion that they may possess a body, it's not supportable to claim some sort of financial motive for the Catholic Church in encouraging the belief, since they approach exorcism requests with great reluctance and a presumption that the issue is mental illness.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

In defense of Bricker, while the RCC does not believe demonic possession is impossible, it doesn't like to encourage beliefs that it happens very commonly (if at all) anymore, it does not encourage the practice of exorcisms by priests and tends to be extremely skeptical of specific claims about it. I read somewhere that appeals to the Church for help with purported incidents of possession are automatically assumed to be cases of mental illness, epilepsy, hoaxes or some other natural cause, and that it's extraordinarily difficult to convince them otherwise.

In addition to that, whatever money might be made from performing an exorcism (which, again, the Church doesn't like its clergy to do) is so negligible as to be a non-factor. If you talk to the average Catholic priest about possession, I think you'll find they're, if anything, more skeptical about it than the average Joe.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Actually, there is "scientific evidence" for demonic possession.

What also exists is much, much stronger scientific evidence in favor of other causes, such as mental illness, so that on balance, the appropriate scientific conclusion is that there is no such thing. This is a nitpicky point, I grant, but since you once argued yourself blue in the face over the meaning of "evidence" in the West Memphis Three case, I thought you might appreciate the point in another context.

Almost anything is "evidence." The quesiton is not whether there is any evidence, but rather, what does an examination of ALL the evidence, weighed appropriatedly, tell us?

In these cases, of course, it tells us that fraud, mental illness, and poor and selective observation are the most likely explanations for "demonic possession."
Scientific evidence is not the same as legal evidence. I confused the two definitions in the WM3 discussion. You're doing it in this one. Scientific evidence actually has to prove something or it isn't called evidence.

[alterego]

Here's an interesting study: Belief in demons and exorcism in psychiatric patients in Switzerland. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7803317&dopt=Citation)

Belief in demons as the cause of mental health problems is a well-known phenomenon in many cultures of the world. However, there is little literature on this phenomenon in Protestant subcultures of the West. The author conducted a systematic investigation of the prevalence of this attribution in 343 mainly Protestant out-patients of a psychiatric clinic in Switzerland, who described themselves as religious. Of these, 129 (37.6 per cent) believed in the possible causation of their problems through the influence of evil spirits, labelling this as 'occult bondage' or 'possession'. One hundred and four patients (30.3 per cent) sought help through ritual 'prayers for deliverance' and exorcism. [...]

Here's another one: Exorcism-resistant ghost possession treated with clopenthixol (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/abstract/165/3/386)

An Indian man now in Britain explained his criminal behaviour as episodic ghost possession. Traditional exorcisms failed to help. METHOD. A 'Western' diagnosis of dissociative state or paranoid schizophrenia was made. Treatment commenced using trifluoperazine and clopenthixol. RESULTS. The patient underwent remission during neuroleptic treatment, despite previous evidence of genuine possession. CONCLUSIONS. Many cultures give rise to apparently genuine cases of ghost possession. Neuroleptics may relieve symptoms of exorcism- resistant possession.

Lots more on Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=exorcism&num=100&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=).

[Ethilrist]

A friend of mine got exorcised back when we were in college. She was pregnant and her husband decided that she was bearing the Antichrist. They discussed this with their minister and he suggested an exorcism. They had it done, but her husband decided it didn't take and, since he didn't want to be around the son of Satan, he divorced her.

The minister was talking to her afterwards and, trying to lighten things up, asked, "So, have you thought of any names for the baby?"

"Sure. Damien."

[ralph124c]

I guess my question really is; can somebody get into such a mental state, that they actually BELIEVE they are being controlled by an evil spirit? Are these states similar to those experienced by teenage girls who go crazy over a rock star? I don't put much credence in demonic posession-the gospels themselves forbid it: once Jesus told satan to fuck off ("get the behind me, satan")I figure the world was free of satan and his demons.

[Voyager]

Scientific evidence is not the same as legal evidence. I confused the two definitions in the WM3 discussion. You're doing it in this one. Scientific evidence actually has to prove something or it isn't called evidence.
Perhaps that should be support a hypothesis? Scientific evidence will never prove anything.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Perhaps that should be support a hypothesis? Scientific evidence will never prove anything.
Yes, of course, I should have articulated myself better. scientific evidence has to demonstrate something by either confirming or falsifying a prediction made by a hypothesis. Demonic possession is a hypothetical explanation for certain kinds of claims and observed phenomena. There has never been any demonstrated finding which would support that hypothesis (as nebulous and resistant to falsification as it may be).

[Diogenes the Cynic]

once Jesus told satan to fuck off ("get the behind me, satan")I figure the world was free of satan and his demons.
He was talking to Peter.

[Fear Itself]

I don't put much credence in demonic posession-the gospels themselves forbid it: once Jesus told satan to fuck off ("get the behind me, satan")I figure the world was free of satan and his demons.Um, that was St. Peter he was talking to (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=16&verse=22&end_verse=24&version=31&context=context):Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"

Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." There was this encounter with Old Scratch: (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%208:28-33;&version=31;)Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."

Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."

Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.
But only a short time later it seems, They'rrree ba-aaacckkk (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%208:28-33;&version=31;)!When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,[a] two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way.

"What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. "Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?"
30

Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. The demons begged Jesus, "If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs."

He said to them, "Go!" So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water.

Those tending the pigs ran off, went into the town and reported all this, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men.My point is, if we are to believe the Bible, a good cursing by Jesus won't rid us of demons once and for all; they are like spyware, and will come back whenever they see an opportunity.

[Eutychus]

what happens to people who undergo exorcism-do they get posessed agin?

No, but if they don't keep up the payments to their exorcist, they can get repossessed.

[Polycarp]

Actually, exorcism must be among the most effective of ritual acts: there is absolutely zero scientific proof of anyone still being possessed by an evil spirit following an exorcism. (Think about it! ;))

:::: goes to put out some additional tiger repellent :::