The Theological Battle

Antiphon 10.
1 (2006): 32-69
The Theological Battle over the

Rite of Exorcism, Cinderella of
the New Rituale Romanum
Manfred Hauke
I. Introduction
The New Rite: Cinderella or Media Star?
The six-year tenure of Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estvez as Prefect
of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the
Sacraments [CDW] brought to completion the revision of the official
liturgical books of the Roman Rite which the Second Vatican Council
had mandated. If we were to classify the liturgical books that appeared
in the Medina years according to the reactions which they elicited
in the secular media, the most noted work undoubtedly would be the
new rite of exorcism. For the liberal mainstream in western countries,
it was often presented as a deplorable concession to a medieval practice
This article is an expansion of an address delivered at the international
conference Sacrificium laudis: The Medina Years (1996-2002), hosted by
the Research Institute for Catholic Liturgy at the Colombiere Center in
Clarkston, MI, 28-30 October 2005.
Second Vatican Council, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum
concilium [henceforth SC] 21, in Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. 2, TrentVatican II, ed. and trans. Norman P. Tanner (Washington DC: Georgetown
University Press, 1990) 825: In order that the Christian people can more
surely obtain the abundance of graces in the liturgy, the church wishes to
make strenuous efforts at a general reform of the liturgy itself. Moreover,
in the course of this renewal, the texts and rites must be organised so as to
express more clearly the holy things which they represent, and so that thus the
Christian people, insofar as this is possible, will be able to understand these
things easily, and to enter into them through a celebration that is expressive of
their full meaning, is effective, involving, and the communitys own.
De exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam, editio typica (Vatican City:
Vatican Press, 1999) [henceforth Ex 1999] and ibid., editio typica emendata
(Vatican City: Vatican Press, 2004) [henceforth Ex 2004]. Citations from De
exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam follow the emended version of 2004
rather than the typical edition of 1999, unless otherwise stated, since minor
changes have been introduced to the text.
33
that is senseless in the modern world. When Cardinal Jorge Arturo

Medina Estvez presented this new liturgical book in the Vatican
Press Hall on 26 January 1999, the event took even some prominent
liturgical specialists by surprise. Manfred Probst, for instance, called
the news surprising and noted: As far as I know, at least in the last
ten years there has been no discussion in the liturgical commission of
the German Bishops Conference about this topic.
In any case, there had been a long preparation. In the decree
promulgating the new rite on 22 November 1998, Cardinal Medina
recalls the Second Vatican Councils Constitution on the Sacred
Liturgy Sacrosanctum concilium of 1963. The council had projected a
revision of the sacramentals along two guidelines: active participation
of the faithful and attention to the needs of our time. The immediate preparation of the new ritual De exorcismis began ten years before
its publication. In 1990, the CDW sent a liturgical text ad interim to
the national episcopal conferences and also consulted some specialists under the seal of strict confidentiality.10 According to Cardinal
See, for example, Manfred Probst and Klemens Richter, Exorzismus
oder Liturgie zur Befreiung vom Bsen (Mnster: Aschendorff, 2002) 9.
Jorge Arturo Medina Estvez, Il rito degli esorcismi, <www.vatican.
va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents>. See also the English
summary of the presentation and the discussion in the Vatican Press Hall
in Zenit (26 Feb 1999), titled Prefect for Divine Worship on the New Rite
of Exorcism.
Manfred Probst, Der groe Exorzismus ein schwieriger Teil des
Rituale Romanum, Liturgisches Jahrbuch 49 (1999) 247-62, here 247.
Ex 1999, p. 3.
SC 79: Sacramentalia recognoscantur, ratione habita normae
primariae de conscia, actuosa et facili participatione fidelium, et attentis
nostrorum temporum necessitatibus.
See Medina Estvez, Il rito degli esorcismi. According to Nicola
Giampietro, Il rinnovamento del rito degli esorcismi, Notitiae 35 (1999)
164-76, here 170 [first appeared in: Rivista di Pastorale Liturgica 213 (1999)
77-84], the preparation took 15 years: Il lavoro costato quindici anni....
By this calculation, therefore, it would have begun in 1984.
10 See Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 131. The draft, with
the title De exorcismis: ritus ad interim, was dated 4 June 1990 according
to Gabriele Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective Against the
Evil One, 30 Days (June 2000) <www.kensmen.com/catholic/amorth.
html>. On this draft of the rite of exorcism and the discussion concerning
it, see Ren Laurentin, Il demonio mito o realt? (Milan: Massimo, 1995) 20722; the original French edition is Le dmon: mythe ou ralit? (Paris: Fayard,
1995). According to Franz Kohlschein, Der Exorzismus ein zwiespltiges,
doch aktuelles Erbe der Kirche? Klerusblatt 81.8 (2001) 179-182, here 180,
another draft titled De exorcismis maioribus et cura pastorali obsessorum was
produced in 1997.
34
Manfred Hauke
Medina, the new rite needed many studies, revisions, adaptations

and modifications with various consultations of the episcopal conferences, after an analysis by the Ordinary Assembly of the Congregation
for Divine Worship.11 Of the various parts of the Rituale Romanum,
first promulgated in 1614, the revision of the section on exorcism
was the last to be undertaken, with the result that a Roman exorcist
amusingly dubbed it the Cinderella of the Rituale.12 But has this
Cinderella, like her namesake of fairy tale fame, been adorned with
new splendor?
One year after the appearance of the new rite, Anthony Ward,
editor of Ephemerides liturgicae, noted: It is rather surprising that so
far there have appeared in the specialized journals relatively few commentaries on this Rite and almost none that go beyond an initial presentation.13 While some books have appeared, it is still true that the
publications, seen as a whole, have been rather sparse thus far.14
11 Medina Estvez, Il rito degli esorcismi, my translation.
12 Gabriele Amorth, Un esorcista racconta (Rome: Dehoniane, 1990)
183.
13 Editors, De exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam, Ephemerides
liturgicae [henceforth EL] 114 (2000) 212.
14 See, in chronological order, Giuseppe Ferrara, Il nuovo Rituale
degli esorcismi: strumento della signoria di Cristo, Notitiae 35 (1999) 177222; Giampietro, Il rinnovamento del rito; Manfred Probst, Der groe
Exorzismus; Ulrich Niemann, Exorzismus und/oder Therapie? Stimmen
der Zeit 124 (1999) 781-84; Anthony Ward, The Psalm Collects of the New
Rite of Exorcism, EL 114 (2000) 270-301; Achille M. Triacca, Spirito Santo
ed esorcismo: in margine al recente Rituale, EL 114 (2000) 241-69; idem,
Esorcismo, in Liturgia, ed. Domenico Sartore et al. (Cinisello Balsamo:
Edizioni San Paolo, 2001) 711-35; Gabriele Amorth, Exorzisten und Psychiater,
trans. Reinhold Ortner (Stein am Rhein: Christiana, 2002), Italian edition:
Esorcisti e psichiatri (Bologna: Dehoniane, 2004); idem, Letter of 9 August
2000, reported in Andrea Gemma, Io, vescovo esorcista (Milan: Mondadori,
2002) 164-71; Kohlschein, Der Exorzismus ein zwiespltiges; Probst
and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie; Manlio Sodi, ed., Tra maleficio, patologie e
possessione diabolica: teologia e pastorale dellesorcismo (Padua: Messaggero, 2003),
the contributions of which appeared first in Rivista liturgica 87 (2000);
Patrick Dondelinger, review of Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie,
in Theologische Revue 99 (2003) 398-401; Ute Leimgruber, Kein Abschied
vom Teufel: eine Untersuchung zur gegenwrtigen Rede vom Teufel im Volk Gottes
(Mnster: LIT, 2004) 69-76; Gabriele Nanni, Il dito di Dio e il potere di Satana:
lesorcismo (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2004, reprint 2005);
Klemens Richter, Liturgie zur Befreiung vom Bsen statt Exorzismus, in
Exorzismus oder Therapie? Anstze zur Befreiung vom Bsen, ed. Ulrich Niemann
and Marion Wagner (Regensburg: Pustet, 2005) 94-110; Ulrich Niemann et
al., Stellungnahme zum Thema Das Bse und die Befreiung vom Bsen,
137-41; Istituto Sacerdos, ed., Esorcismo e preghiera di liberazione (Rome:
The Theological Battle over Exorcism
35
On the other hand, the faithful and the secular public generally
have expressed considerable interest in this phenomenon. Publications about angels and demons abound, even though many of these
are to be regarded correctly as belonging rather to the realm of the
esoteric and the New Age.15 Numerous problems derive from spiritism, satanism and magic practices. According to recent inquiries, in
Italy alone more than 22,000 magicians were consulted in the last
five years by roughly ten million persons, that is, by nearly twenty
percent of the population.16 Stimulated by television shows, every
kind of occultism is on the rise in the western world. In the 1980s,
there were about twenty exorcists in Italy and fifteen in France; their
number has increased to more than 300 in Italy and about 100 in
France.17 Until now, nevertheless, it seems that the challenge from
the occultist constituency within neopaganism has been underestimated by ecclesiastical personnel. Contrary to the expectations of its
publishers, the Latin ritual De exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam
quickly sold out.18
Exorcism or Prayer for Liberation from Evil?

Neglect of the Lords command to practice exorcism is often the result of embarrassment on the part of many theologians over demonic
possession and exorcism. Certain currents have even dismissed the
very existence of Satan and evil spirits. Possession is often explained
away in psychological or parapsychological terms. The unease of
these theologians is evident in a book by two German liturgists,
Manfred Probst and Klemens Richter, who contrast the Ritual of
1614 with the new proposed rite of exorcism. In the rite of 1999,
they note a continuity, a strong revision of the preceding text and
several new aspects.19 As to continuity, they affirm: The language
has become in some texts more sober, but it can be supported only
Shalom, 2005), containing material from the course for exorcists offered at
the Pontificium Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum.
15 See Manfred Hauke, La riscoperta degli angeli: note sul ricupero
di un trattato dimenticato, Rivista teologica di Lugano 10 (2005) 55-71, here
55-62.
16 See Gilles Jeanguenin, Il diavolo esiste! Testimonianze di un esorcista
(Cinisello Balsamo: Edizioni San Paolo, 2005) 64; the original French
edition is Le Diable existe! Un exorciste tmoigne et rpond aux interrogations
(Paris: Salvator, 2004).
17 See Jeanguenin, Il diavolo esiste, 65.
18 Manlio Sodi, Ma liberaci dal maligno, in Tra maleficio, patologie e
possessione, 5-14, here 7: Un libro che, con sorpresa delleditore, andato
letteralmente a ruba!
19 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 138.
36
Manfred Hauke
with difficulties, especially regarding the third imperative exorcism in

which insulting the Devil in a good medieval manner has been more
or less conserved.20 Probst and Richter themselves in turn ridicule
the Middle Ages, but they also question Sacred Scripture when they
ask: what reasons motivated the Roman redactors of this new fascicle
of the Ritual again to accept the biblical and medieval ideas about
possession by the Devil and his demons?21
This reaction from the German-speaking world is somewhat typical. In 1979, the German Bishops Conference established a commission to study fundamental questions about possession and exorcism.22
In 1983, this commission produced a draft for a so-called liturgy
for liberation from evil, explained and, with some modification,
proposed recently yet again by Probst and Richter.23 The title is itself
significant: it mentions evil, but is not clear about the existence of
the Evil One. The rite could be used without difficulty by a priest
who does not believe in the existence of a personal Devil and other
evil spirits. The choice of Gospel reading in the rite seems significant:
the pericope of the temptation of Jesus in the desert is proposed in
the first instance, although it has nothing to do with demonic possession.24 A second proposal, based, according to the two liturgists,25
on the new rite of 1999, explains in its Introduction the object of
the intervention in this way: The most difficult fight that man has
to support is the struggle with evil: with the evil in ones own heart
and the evil that comes to us from outside. We call it traditionally
the Devil or demons.26 The so-called prayer of exorcism does not
say a word about diabolic possession, but speaks instead of evil ideas
which torment the spirit of the human person.27
The introduction to the draft of 1983, accepted by the German
20 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 138; see also Richter,
Liturgie zur Befreiung, 106. The third imperative exorcism is the nearest
to the previous text of the old ritual: see the analysis of the six exorcistic
formulae of Ex 1999 in Ferrara, Il nuovo Rituale degli esorcismi, 214-21.
21 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 139; see Richter,
Liturgie zur Befreiung, 107.
22 Emil Lengeling, Der Exorzismus der katholischen Kirche: zu einer
verwunderlichen Ausgabe, Liturgisches Jahrbuch 32 (1982) 249-57, here
256-57.
23 See Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 148-67; Richter,
Liturgie zur Befreiung, 99-103. Richter lists the members of this
commission on p. 100.
25 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 167-80.
37
Bishops Conference in autumn 1984, has recently been published.28

The commission summarized its work in four points:29
1) The doctrine of the Church about the existence of demonic
powers is de fide, but it must be reconstructed and formulated in
a new way.
2) The possibility of possession is not excluded, but there are
no criteria to recognize it clearly.30 There are objections against
the manner in which the Rituale Romanum of 1614 describes the
recognition of possession and the exorcism. These objections also stem
from the imperative form (that is, the order given to the demons)
because it is correlated to anthropomorphic ideas about demons.
3) The commission does not simply eliminate the rite of major
exorcism, but substitutes it with a liturgy for the liberation from
evil.
4) The draft for this liturgy and the praenotanda should be sent
to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of
the Sacraments. If the rite should be incorporated into the new
Benedictionale, it ought to be accompanied by a pastoral aid which
still has to be elaborated.
The principal theological problem with this proposal is its ambiguity

concerning the existence of evil spirits. The commission purports to
guard the Churchs belief in the existence of demonic powers, but these
powers seem to be interpreted here in an impersonal way. The main
test for this new interpretation lies in the elimination of exorcism
28 The Introduction is cited completely by Probst and Richter, Exorzismus
oder Liturgie, 64-74. See also the summary in Reiner Kaczynski, Der
Exorzismus, in Sakramentliche Feiern II, ed. Bruno Kleinheyer, Emmanuel
von Severus, and Reiner Kaczynski, Gottesdienst der Kirche 8 (Regensburg:
Pustet, 1984) 275-91, here 290-91; Franz Reckinger, In meinem Namen
werden sie Dmonen austreiben: zur Reform des Exorzismus, Forum
Katholische Theologie 5 (1989) 137-45, here 138. The integral text of the
exorcism itself has not been published, but enters into the proposal of Probst
and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 148-67.
29 See Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 60-63.
30 See Introduction 4, by Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie:
Da es keine eindeutigen theologischen Kriterien fr die Besessenheit
gibt.... (As there are no unequivocal criteria for possession....). The
text closely resembles the exposition of Walter Kasper, Das theologische
Problem des Bsen, in Teufel Dmonen Besessenheit: zur Wirklichkeit des
Bsen, ed. Walter Kasper and Karl Lehmann (Mainz: Grnewald, 1978) 4169, esp. 66-69.
38
Manfred Hauke
understood as a command addressed to demons to leave the possessed

person. Even the word exorcism is substituted by the formulation
liturgy for liberation from evil.
Another problem, evident in the points already cited above, is
the abandonment of any significant criteria for discerning a case of
possession from psychiatric or parapsychological phenomena. The
praenotanda hold that the power of evil does not manifest itself beyond the concomitant causality of natural causes and that it is not
possible to individuate specific signs of sickness or other phenomena
that prove by themselves a state of being overwhelmed by the power
of evil.31 For this reason, formulated by Karl Rahner,32 Probst and
Richter propose to integrate the rite of exorcism into the ritual for
administering the sacraments of the sick.33
Reiner Kaczynski, a German liturgist who had worked for some years
in the CDW, published in 1984 a chapter about exorcism in a well-known
liturgical handbook. He wrote that the proposal of the German commission had been sent to the corresponding Roman Congregation:
At Rome, this work has been noted with satisfaction. There is
already a first draft for the praenotanda of the Prayer for liberation
of someone overwhelmed by the power of evil. Corresponding to
the title, certainly there will be no more imperative exorcisms. Even
the word exorcism does not appear.34
Kaczynski calls the formula used in the draft a prayer for liberation.35
31 Praenotanda 5, in Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 66.
32 Karl Rahner, Besessenheit und Exorzismus, Stimmen der Zeit 194
(1976) 721-22, here 722: Wie wir heute auch als orthodoxe Glubige ohne
Hexen auskommen, so knnte man in der Praxis auch ohne Besessenheit
auskommen. Selbst wenn man einen Einflu solcher bsen Mchte und
Gewalten als denkbar annimmt, wre dieser uns empirisch gegeben in dem,
was wir schlicht Krankheit nennen und unter diesen Voraussetzungen
durchaus mit irdischen Mitteln bekmpfen knnen.
33 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 147; Klemens Richter,
review of Kaczynski, Der Exorzismus, in Theologische Revue 84 (1988)
224-27, esp. 226-27. See also Gianni Cavagnoli, I Praenotanda del De
exorcismis, in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione, 177-201, here 199-201.
34 Kaczynski, Der Exorzismus, 290: In Rom ist diese Arbeit mit
Befriedigung zur Kenntnis genommen worden. Ein erster Entwurf fr
die Vorbemerkungen zum Gebet um Befreiung eines von der Macht des
Bsen berwltigten liegt bereits vor. Entsprechend dem Titel wird es
mit Sicherheit keine imprekatorischen Exorzismen mehr geben. Das Wort
Exorzismus fllt berhaupt nicht mehr.
35 Kaczynski, Der Exorzismus, 290. A similar development took place
39
The Main Points of Theological Debate

The new rite published in 1999, however, uses the word exorcism
in the title, contains imperative exorcisms and re-proposes the traditional criteria for the discernment of demonic possession. For this
reason, we shall briefly study, first, the theological question about the
existence of evil spirits and, second, the possibility and discernment
of possession. We shall take into consideration also the ample discussion about the tragic case of Klingenberg, where in 1976 an exorcized
girl died from malnutrition. This case, and its slanted treatment not
only by the mass media but also by the ecclesiastical establishment,
influenced the proposals of the previously mentioned commission to
disastrous effect.
We have to clarify, then, the term exorcism. In 1985, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith admonished groups engaged
in the liberation of possessed persons to distinguish clearly between
the orders given to the demons, which are reserved to the priests
called by the bishop to undertake the exorcists task, and prayers
for liberation.36 Here the imperative form is the determinative sign
for liturgical exorcism. The new exorcism rite of 1999, strangely, does
not compel the exorcist to use any imperative exorcism. It is possible
to use only a so-called supplicating exorcism (exorcismus deprecativus)
in which God is supplicated to liberate the possessed person.37 Several important questions therefore arise: Is this invocative text a real
exorcism? Or is it only a prayer for liberation that could be used
in a similar way by any Christian? Is the possibility of avoiding any
form of imperative exorcism a compromise with the liberal current
of theology?
Another problem is the discernment between possession and
other forms of demonic influence. The most frequent cases in which
in France where, unlike Germany, there is a certain number of exorcists,
but many of these priests do not believe in the reality of diabolic possession
and do not practice exorcism. This fact is clear in Isidore Froc, ed., Exorcistes
(Paris: Plon/Mame, 1996) esp. 27, 56-58, 60-69, 128, and 133, translated as
Esorcisti e mistero del male (Cinisello Balsamo: Edizioni San Paolo, 2000). See
also Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective, 5; idem, Exorzisten
und Psychiater, trans. Reinhold Ortner (Stein am Rhein: Christiana, 2002)
39-44.
36 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Epistula ordinariis
locorum missa: in mentem normae vigentes de exorcismi revocantur,
Acta Apostolicae Sedis 77 (1985) 1169-70. The distinction was prepared
by Cardinal Lon-Joseph Suenens, Erneuerung und die Mchte der Finsternis
(Salzburg: Otto Mller, 1983) 62, p. 109; the original French edition is
Renouveau et puissances des tnbres (Malines, 1982).
37 See Ex 2004 28.
40
Manfred Hauke
exorcists are engaged are not possessions but various forms of extraordinary diabolic action, for instance in the case of bewitchment
and the consequences of spiritualist or satanic practice.38 We find an
allusion to these infestations in the first appendix of the new rite.
The texts are taken, for the most part, from the exorcism introduced
by Leo XIII (pope from 1878 to 1903) and later incorporated into
the 1925 edition of the Rituale Romanum.39 They can be adopted (a)
when the demonic influence manifests itself in some way in things
and places, but also (b) in aggression against or persecution of the
Church.40 This point is not explained in the praenotanda where we
find, in the first edition of 1999, some expressions that could be read
in support of the thesis that all these things are only superstition. For
example, the exorcist should distinguish in a right way the case of a
diabolic intervention from that credulity (ab illa credulitate) by which
some people, even believers, think that they are the object of an evil
spell, of bad luck or of a malediction (obiectum maleficii, malae sortis vel
maledictionis). Here the exorcist must not employ an exorcism.41 In
the edition of 2004, the words ab illa credulitate have been changed
to a falsa opinione.42 This change seems to envisage the erroneous attribution of demonic influence without excluding the possibility of
bewitchment and malediction, realities abundantly present in the
experience of many exorcists.
A Rite Created by Exorcistic Illiterates?

The detail just mentioned, which could easily be more completely
elaborated in many points, would suggest that insufficient account
was taken of the experience of exorcists when the new ritual was being
developed. The new rite of exorcism consequently has drawn many
criticisms, most notably from the Roman exorcist Gabriele Amorth.
In an interview with 30 Days in the year 2000, Amorth comments on
the membership of the commissions responsible for the revised rite:
38 See Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective.
39 See Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 136; Nanni, Il dito di
Dio, 134-36. For the origin of the exorcismus Leonis, see Amorth, Un esorcista
racconta, 35-38.
40 Appendix I, Supplicatio et exorcismus qui adhiberi possunt in
peculiaribus adiunctis ecclesiae, in Ex 2004, p. 71: Diaboli et aliorum
daemoniorum praesentia apparet atque exstat non solum in personis
tentandis vel vexandis, sed etiam in rebus et locis quodammodo propria
actione penetrandis atque in variis formis oppositionis et persecutionis
Ecclesiae.
41 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 15.
42 See Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 245.
41
During these last ten years, two commissions worked on the Ritual;
one which was made up of cardinals and which was responsible for
the Praenotanda and the other which was responsible for the
prayers. I can affirm with certainty that none of the members of
these commissions had ever performed an exorcism, had ever been
present at an exorcism and ever possessed the slightest idea of what
an exorcism is. Here lies the error, the original sin of this Ritual. Not
one of those who collaborated on it was an exorcism specialist.43
Amorth even holds that the new rite is a blunt weapon. Efficacious
prayers, prayers that had been in existence for twelve centuries, were
suppressed and replaced by new ineffective prayers.44
Amorth, here, does not criticize the work of Cardinal Medina. The
revision of the ritual of exorcism began in 1989.45 Already in 1990 a
draft was sent to episcopal conferences throughout the Church, that
is, six years before the Medina years. In 1990, the prefect of the
CDW was Cardinal Eduardo Martinez Somalo.46 Amorth mentions
that only Medina had some experience with exorcism, whereas the
other commission members were complete illiterates concerning exorcisms; they never practiced them nor had they even seen them.47 The
Roman exorcist also mentions that Cardinals Medina and Ratzinger
resorted to a maneuver in extremis, introducing into the liturgical
book an article authorizing exorcists to use the previous Rituale Romanum. This attempt failed, but on the day after the presentation
of the new ritual, Medina published a notification to the effect that
every bishop could ask the CDW for permission to use the old ritual,
adding that this permission would be given willingly (libenter).48
The permission to use the old rite, in any case, is indicative at
least of some practical problems. Let us draw an analogy between
exorcism and swimming: imagine that some people allege that water
does not exist and that for this reason it is impossible to swim. For
them, evidently, it does not make sense to write a book about swimming. This case corresponds to the theologians who want to revise
43 Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective.
44 Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective.
45 Medina Estvez, Il rito degli esorcismi: Il lavoro costato dieci
anni. See also note 9 above.
46 Somalos role is mentioned by Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism
is Ineffective.
47 Amorth, Letter cited in Gemma, Io, vescovo esorcista, 168.
48 Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective; Achille M.
Triacca, Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 712. See Medina Estvez, Notificatio de
ritu Exorcismi, Prot. n. 1280/98/L (27 Jan 1999), Notitiae 35.3-4 (1999)
156.
42
Manfred Hauke
the faith of the Church about diabolic possession. Another example

presents itself: imagine somebody writing a manual about swimming,
but without ever having swum and without consulting experienced
swimmers. The cure of exorcism is similar: the greater problem is
that of the rejection of faith which also includes the existence of
Satan and demons; the other problem is a glaring lack of practical
experience which could prove disastrous. I myself must confess to
having no practical familiarity with major exorcism, but at least I try
to learn from the rich experience of exorcists an experience far too
overlooked in the last few decades.
II. The Existence
of
Satan
and
Other Evil Spirits
The praenotanda of the new ritual are preceded by a prooemium that

places the existence of the Devil and of demons within the context
of the whole of the Christian faith.49
In the whole history of salvation there are angelic creatures. A part
of them serves the divine plan, always giving hidden and potent aid
to the Church. Another part is fallen and is called diabolic; they
oppose the salvific will of God and the redemptive work of Christ,
and also try to associate man with their rebellion against God.50
Some of the actual phrases are drawn from The Catechism of the Catholic
Church,51 which cites, among the documents of the Magisterium, the
decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), where the existence
of angelic creatures and the fall of the angels constitute part of the
profession of faith.52 The council rejected the neo-Manichaeism of
Catharism, which taught a metaphysical dualism according to which
an evil principle exists from eternity. The profession of faith accentuates the fact that the evil spirits were created as good angels, but
fell through their own fault. Nevertheless, the existence of the Devil
and of the other fallen angels is an intrinsic part of the conciliar affirmations, sustained by the ordinary Magisterium the Church for
2000 years. For this reason, Cardinal Medina could respond with the
necessary clarity to a journalist in the Vatican Press Hall: We know
there are Catholics who have not received good formation and doubt
the existence of the Devil, but this is an article of faith and part of
the doctrine of the Catholic Church. Whoever says the Devil does
49 Ex 2004, pp. 5-6. Cf. Triacca, Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 712.
50 Ex 2004, p. 5.
51 Catechismus catholicae ecclesiae, 2nd ed. (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice
Vaticana, 1997) [henceforth CCE] 332, 391, 414, 2851.
52 CCE 391.
43
not exist is no longer a believer.53

The Catechism, explicitly quoted in the prooemium, mentions also
the Lords Prayer, which is certainly the best summary of the teaching of Jesus Christ. The supplication but deliver us from evil does
not express evil as an abstraction, but as a person: Satan, the Evil
One, the angel who opposes God.54 A biblical investigation confirms
that evil implies a diabolic influence.55
The following section of the prooemium gives more references about
the role of the Devil and of the demons, as opposed to the salvific
mission of Jesus Christ. It is not the task of a liturgical foreword to
give a scientific presentation, but the passages from the New Testament are certainly sufficient evidence that the messianic work of the
Savior implies victory over evil spirits. This fact is accentuated, for
instance, by a programmatic article by Joseph Ratzinger against the
work of a Swiss exegete who dismissed the existence of Satan as a
mythological concept now lain to rest by scientific progress:
The spiritual battle against the enslaving forces, the exorcism over
a world blinded by demons, is an inseparable part of the spiritual
way of Jesus and of his disciples. The figure of Jesus, his spiritual
physiognomy, does not change if the sun revolves round the earth or
if the earth moves around the sun, if the world evolved or not, but
it is changed decisively if the struggle with the experienced force of
the demonic reign is cut off.56
From a systematic point of view, it is important to stress the

53 Medina Estvez, Prefect on the New Rite. For an historical and
systematic presentation of the doctrine of the Church, see Corrado Balducci,
Il diavolo (Casale Monferrato: Piemme, 1988); Giorgio Gozzelino, Il mistero
delluomo in Cristo: saggio di protologia (Turin: Leumann, 1991); idem, Angeli e
demoni: Linvisibile creato e la vicenda umana (Milan: San Paolo, 2000); Benito
Marconcini, ed., Angeli e demoni: Il dramma della storia tra il bene e il male
(Bologna: Dehoniane, 1992); Renzo Lavatori, Satana un caso serio (Bologna:
Dehoniane, 1996); idem, Il diavolo tra fede e ragione (Bologna: Dehoniane,
2000); Leo Scheffczyk, Schpfung als Heilserffnung: Schpfungslehre,
Katholische Dogmatik 3 (Aachen: MM Verlag, 1997) 349-71.
54 CCE 2851: In hac petitione, Malum abstractio quaedam non est,
sed personam designat, Satan, Malignum, angelum qui Deo opponitur.
55 See, for instance, Heinz Schrmann, Das Gebet des Herrn, 4th ed.
(Freiburg/Breisgau: Herder, 1981) 121-23.
56 Joseph Ratzinger, Abschied vom Teufel? in Dogma und Verkndigung,
3rd ed. (Munich: Wewel, 1977) 221-30, here 227. Ratzinger is writing against
Herbert Haag, Abschied vom Teufel (Einsiedeln: Benziger, 1969), 8th ed. (Zrich:
Benziger, 1990). On Haags publications, see Bernd J. Claret, Geheimnis des
Bsen: Zur Diskussion um den Teufel (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1997) 84-207.
44
Manfred Hauke
specificity of Jesus in his historical context.57 With the Pharisees and

the majority of the Jewish people, our Lord shares a conviction concerning the existence of Satan and of demons, whereas the Sadducees
do not even believe in the existence of angels. The negation of the
angelic world is not a trait only of the modern world. When rabbinic
literature speaks about demons, only rarely does it link them with
Satan; rather, they are seen as autonomous spirits that can cause
harm.58 In the presentation given by Jesus, the demons are clearly evil
spirits under the leadership of Satan, opposed to the reign of God
(Mk 3:20-27; Mt 12:22-30; Lk 11:14-23).
The third and last section of the prooemium, citing the Pastoral
Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et spes,
refers to the victory of Christ over the Devil and demons, but also to
the struggle that continues over the whole course of history.59 As to
diabolic influence, we should note the specification of the prooemium
that the harmful action of the Devil and of demons afflicts persons,
things, places and appears in different ways. The Church has
prayed and prays that people be liberated from the persecutions of
the Devil.60 The different ways imply temptation, often called the
ordinary way of demonic influence, but also the extraordinary
manner of possession and other harms which also concern things and
places relative to man.61
III. Possibility and Discernment of Possession

The Phenomenon of Possession in the New Testament
The praenotanda of the new rite of exorcism consist of six parts: (I)
the victory of Christ and the power of the Church against demons;
(II) exorcism within the sanctifying mission of the Church; (III) minister and conditions for using the major exorcism; (IV) the ritual to
be used; (V) complements and adaptations; (VI) adaptations for the
competence of the episcopal conferences.62 In the first three parts,
57 See Willem Cornelis Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene: Die Dmonen
in Geschichte und Gegenwart und ihre Austreibung (Aschaffenburg: Pattloch,
1970) 30-71; Marconcini, I demoni: la testimonianza della Sacra Scrittura,
in Angeli e demoni: Il dramma, 203-91; Lavatori, Satana, 65-82; Scheffczyk,
Schpfung als Heilserffnung, 359-62.
58 See Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 23.
59 Ex 2004, pp. 5-6; cf. Gaudium et spes 22, 37, in Decrees of the Ecumenical
Councils, ed. and trans. Tanner, vol. 2, pp. 1082-83, 1091.
60 Ex 2004, p. 6.
61 See, for instance, Moreno Fiori, Riflessione su Satana e sulla sua
azione, in Angeli e demoni: Il dramma, 329-99, here 361; Jeanguenin, Il
diavolo esiste, 35.
62 Ex 2004 1-38.
45
especially, we find the systematic presuppositions for our theological

investigation.
The reality of demonic possession is clear from human experience
throughout the centuries, from the exorcisms practiced by Jesus Christ
himself, and from the command of the Lord to his disciples. The praenotanda develop the doctrine, already shortly presented in the prooemium,
of the angelic fall ( 1). As a consequence of original sin, mankind fell
under the dominion of the Devil ( 2). The redemptive work of Christ
implies victory over Satan ( 3-5). Here the praenotanda hint at the
exorcisms of the Lord ( 4). To continue his ministry, Christ gave his
apostles and the other disciples the power to expel impure spirits (cf.
Mt 10:1-8; Mk 3:14-15; 6:7.13; Lk 9:1; 10:17-20). Among the signs
which follow believers in the Gospel is mentioned the expulsion of
demons (cf. Mk 16:17) ( 6). According to these biblical references,
exorcisms belong to the specific tasks which the Lord entrusted to his
disciples. The first part of the praenotanda concludes by adverting to
the practice of the Church, entrusted by Jesus since apostolic times
with the task of exorcizing demons ( 7).
The praenotanda subsequently repeat the traditional criteria to
discern cases of possession ( 16), but do not describe the phenomenology of such cases. It is useful to look at the biblical description,
analyzed in a brilliant way by Willem Cornelis Van Dam, a Protestant
theologian from the Netherlands.63 The most detailed description of
an exorcism occurs in the pericopes concerning the possessed man
in the region of the Gerasenes (alternately given as Gergesenes or
Gadarenes; Mk 5:1-20, cf. Mt 8:28-34 and Lk 8:26-39). Here we find
together in a single account all the traits present in the Gospels. Van
Dam provides a list of nine points:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
strong resistance against all divine influences,

extraordinary physical strength,
disturbances in the organic functions,
another person speaking out of the possessed person,
self-inflicted wounds and attempts at suicide,
aggressive and unquiet behavior, a furious excitation,
elevated perception with knowledge beyond natural power,
extraordinary phenomena when the demon is expelled (cramps,
cries, falling to the ground),
(9) exhaustion, but perfect healing after the expulsion64
63 Van Dam discusses the New Testament evidence in Dmonen und

Besessene, 30-71, and the criteria for possession in 112-64.
64 Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 112, with biblical references.
46
Manfred Hauke
Van Dam divides these nine phenomena into four groups: religious
(trait 1, aversion to the sacred); corporal (traits 2-4); psychological
(traits 5-6); and parapsychological (trait 7).65 From this description
we can begin to discuss the difference between diabolic possession
and merely psychic disturbances or parapsychological traits.
The Klingenberg Case

The necessity of correct discernment can be more clearly shown by
reference to the tragic event that happened at Klingenberg, in the
diocese of Wrzburg (Bavaria).66 On 1 July 1976, a twenty-three-yearold female student was found dead in her bed. She had refused to eat
and weighed only 31 kilograms. Previously, a number of exorcisms had
been performed on her. For this reason, the district attorney brought
charges against the parents and the two exorcists. The case occupied
the mass media for two years, until the tribunal passed sentence in
1978. The accused were condemned to six months in prison with a
suspended sentence of three years. In his summation, the judge said:
Anneliese Michel was not possessed. Since the first of May 1976 she
was psychologically disturbed.67 The guilt of the accused consisted,
according to the judge, in not having called a doctor for forced feeding. With very few exceptions, the German Church accepted this
sentence as though it were an infallible intervention of the supreme
Magisterium. A year after the judgment of the tribunal, the German
episcopal conference instituted the commission whose results have
already been summarized.
The first scientific study that tried to incorporate all the accessible
material about the case of Klingenberg was written by a Protestant
American anthropologist, Felicitas D. Goodman, whose mother is of
German-speaking origin.68 Goodman conducted interviews with the
65 Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 113.
66 The film The Exorcism of Emily Rose, written by Paul Harris Boardman
and Scott Derrickson, directed by Scott Derrickson (Sony Pictures, 2005),
is loosely based upon the case of Klingenberg.
67 Jean-Marie Faerber, Klingenberg, in Von Wemding nach Klingenberg:
vier weltberhmte Flle von Teufelsaustreibungen, ed. Georg Siegmund (Stein am
Rhein: Christiana, 1985) 93-161, here 93.
68 Felicitas D. Goodman, ed., Anneliese Michel und ihre Dmonen: der
Fall Klingenberg in wissenschaftlicher Sicht (Stein am Rhein: Christiana, 1980,
4th revised and enlarged edition, 2004); the English version is The Exorcism
of Anneliese Michel (New York: Doubleday, 1981); idem, How about Demons?
Possession and Exorcism in the Modern World (Bloomington and Indianapolis:
Indiana University Press, 1988) 114-22. See also Adolf Rodewyk,
Possessed by Satan, The New York Times (8 August 1976) 11-20, cited in
Leimgruber, Kein Abschied vom Teufel, 52; Manfred Adler et al., Tod und Teufel
47
persons involved, read the protocols of the tribunal, and studied the
tapes of the exorcism sessions. According to her reconstruction of
the case, the demonic troubles began in 1968, when Anneliese was
sixteen years old and committed to a sanatorium. She complained
that she continuously saw the faces of demons. For this reason, she
consulted a number of psychiatrists. Her situation deteriorated in
1973. A doctor diagnosed something like epilepsy and prescribed
accordingly. The young woman, alas, did not manifest the symptoms
typical of epilepsy: she could drive a car or use the swimming pool
without any difficulty. She was put on a medication called Tegretal,
prescribed for her without any subsequent checks, over the course
of three years, from 1973 to 1976. The exorcisms began only in the
summer of 1975. One of the collateral effects of Tegretal is the loss
of appetite. Normally, the blood should have been checked regularly,
but this was not done. Neither ought such dangerous drugs be administered to a young woman. According to Goodman, the death of the
girl came from an irreversible poisoning by Tegretal. This conclusion
is shared by various doctors. One of them, the Swiss scholar Theo
Weber-Arm, noted that, in 1973, it was already acknowledged that
Tegretal was responsible for several other deaths. Normally, the doctors who had prescribed the drug, not the exorcists, should have been
prosecuted.69 Goodman, though, is convinced that Anneliese Michel
really was possessed by evil spirits. The same conclusion was reached
by, among others, the Swiss psychiatrist Hans Naegeli-Osjord. Like
Goodman, he is not a Catholic, but a Protestant with some syncrein Klingenberg: eine Dokumentation (Aschaffenburg: Pattloch, 1977); Georg
Siegmund, Nachtrag und Ergnzung, in Dmonologie, 2 vols, ed. Egon von
Petersdorff, 2nd ed. (Stein am Rhein: Christiana, 1982) vol. 1, 380-425, here
405-408; Johannes Mischo and Ulrich Niemann, Die Besessenheit der
Anneliese Michel in interdisziplinrer Sicht, Zeitschrift fr Parapsychologie
und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie 25 (1983) 129-94; against this, see Elisabeth
Becker, Exorzismus, in Goodman, Anneliese Michel, 318-43; Faerber,
Klingenberg; Ernst Alt, Aussagen der Dmonen im Fall Klingenberg,
in Treibt Dmonen aus! ed. Lisl Gutwenger (Stein am Rhein: Christiana,
1992) 235-45 [Ernst Alt was one of the exorcists]; Johannes Mischo, 20
Jahre nach Klingenberg, in Dmonen unter uns: Exorzismus heute, ed. Joachim
Mller (Fribourg, Switzerland: Paulusverlag, 1997) 79-122 [the author is a
parapsychologist who interprets possession as the personification of psychic
forces]; Uwe Wolff, Das Bricht dem Bischof das Kreuz: die letzte Teufelsaustreibung
in Deutschland 1975/76 (Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1999); against this work, see
Arnold Guillet, Es nicht sein kann, was nicht sein darf: Besessenheit, Die
Tagespost (7 Sept 1999) 6; Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 5355; Leimgruber, Kein Abschied vom Teufel, 52-64 [this author excludes the
possibility of demonic interventions].
69 Faerber, Klingenberg, 113.
48
Manfred Hauke
tistic leanings.70 It might even be the case that the investigation of

Goodman, together with other studies, has influenced in some way
the diagnostic manual of the American Psychiatric Association, which
accepts the possibility of possession.71
The critical observations about the sentence of the German court,
in large part from non-Catholic experts in the human sciences, came
too late to influence the opinion makers of the mass media in Germany. For the theologians, the most typical reaction was the opinion of
Karl Rahner, who suggested suppressing the ritual of exorcism because
demonic possession allegedly does not exist.72 It comes as no surprise
that the German Bishops Conference, guided by Karl Lehmann, a
pupil of Rahner, wrote a letter to Cardinal Ratzinger declaring that
there was no need to create a new Ritual because exorcisms should
no longer be performed.73
The Discernment of Diabolic Possession According to the Rituale

Romanum (1614; 1999)74
The term possession is applicable when a body is occupied by an
evil spirit with the result that the demon disposes of the human body
as if it were its own.75 Possession manifests itself during a crisis, a
kind of trance, when the spirits intervene. During the crisis, the conscious action of the possessed person typically is cut off. The Rituale
70 Hans Naegeli-Osjord, Besessenheit und Exorzismus (Remagen: Otto
Reichl, 1983) 155-68.
71 American Psychiatric Association, ed., Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (Washington: APA, 1994) [henceforth
DSM-IV] 490, 727-29, and 849. Other voices in this sense are cited by
Peter Zimmerling, Die charismatischen Bewegungen (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Rupprecht, 2001) 281; Amorth, Exorzisten und Psychiater, 199-213;
Morgan Scott Peck, Glimpses at the Devil: A Psychiatrists Personal Accounts of
Possession, Exorcism, and Redemption (New York: Free Press, 2005).
72 Karl Rahner, Besessenheit und Exorzismus, in Tod und Teufel in
Klingenberg: eine Dokumentation (Aschaffenburg: Pattloch, 1977) 44-46, here
45, also found in Rahner Besessenheit und Exorzismus, 721. Although
Rahner did not formally deny the existence of diabolic possession, he
seriously questioned it. If it exists, he maintained, it would be present within
sickness and must be combated by modern remedies.
73 Amorth, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective. For Karl
Lehmanns position, see Der Teufel ein personales Wesen? in Teufel
Dmonen Besessenheit, 71-98, esp. 72-73.
74 See Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 214-90.
75 See Adolf Rodewyk, Dmonische Besessenheit heute, 2nd ed.
(Aschaffenburg: Pattloch, 1970) 10, translated into Italian as Possessione
diabolica oggi (Udine: Segno, 1997); Corrado Balducci, La possessione diabolica
(Rome: Edizioni Mediterranee, 1988) 99.
49
Romanum of 1614 first warns against concluding too readily that a

direct intervention of the Devil has taken place. Possession must not
be confused with melancholy, a somber mood, or some sickness.76
Then the document enumerates three criteria to discern a case of
diabolic possession: (1) speaking or understanding a language which
is not known by the possessed person; it may happen likewise that
the person may utter multiple words simultaneously; (2) manifesting
distant or secret realities; (3) showing powers that go beyond the age
or natural condition of the person possessed. These three points do
not constitute a complete criteriology, because the text adds that there
are other signs of this kind; the signs assume a greater importance,
however, when they appear together.77 Individual signs, taken by themselves, are only indicators (indicia). This fact, already acknowledged in
the text of 1614, was underscored once more in the edition of 1952.
Whereas the original version says that the three criteria are signs of
possession, the 1952 edition states that they can be such signs.78 Is
it true, then, that there are no certain criteria for possession, as the
German commission concluded in 1984?
In the immediate context of the Rituale Romanum, it is evident
that a fourth criterion must be added: reaction to exorcism and to
sacred realities, for instance the sprinkling of holy water.79 According
to the experience of exorcists, the diagnostic exorcism, that is, the
exorcism used as a test, leads to moral certainty about a given case
76 Norm 3, in Rituale Romanum editio princeps (1614), ed. Manlio Sodi
et al., Monumenta Liturgica Concilii Tridentini 5 (Vatican City: Libreria
Editrice Vaticana, 2004) [henceforth RR 1614] 863, p. 206 (original p.
198) [the norms were assigned numbers only in 1752, during the pontificate
of Benedict XIV, but those numbers are used here for convenience]: In
primis, ne facile credat, aliquem a daemone obsessum esse; sed nota habeat
ea signa, quibus obsessus dignoscitur ab iis, qui vel atra bile, vel morbo aliquo
laborant. See Patrick Dondelinger-Mandy, Le rituel des exorcismes dans
le Rituale Romanum de 1614, La Maison-Dieu 183/184 (1990) 99-121, esp.
99, note 1. For the last typical edition of the old Ritual, see Anthony Ward
and Cuthbert Johnson (eds), Rituale Romanum: editio prima post typicam anno
1953 promulgata, Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia, Instrumenta
Liturgica Quarreriensia Supplementa 6 (Rome: C.L.V.-Edizione Liturgiche,
2001). An English translation of this text can be found on <www.trosch.
org/chu/exorcism.htm>.
77 Norm 3, in RR 1614 863: Signa autem obsidentis daemonis sunt.
Ignota lingua loqui pluribus verbis, vel loquentem intelligere: distantia, &
occulta patefacere: vires supra aetatis, seu conditionis naturam ostendere; &
id genus alia, quae cum plurima concurrunt, maiora sunt indicia.
78 See Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 270.
79 Norms 4, 13, 16, 17, in RR 1614 863, 872, 875, 876.
50
Manfred Hauke
of possession.80 This kind of exorcism is not a liturgical act and can

be expressed mentally, without mentioning this fact to the person
suspected of being possessed.81 The paranormal phenomena, like
speaking unknown languages or knowing secret things, normally start
only during the crisis provoked by exorcism. The use of diagnostic
exorcism is indispensable in determining whether a person is possessed or not. According to Adolf Rodewyk, a renowned authority on
exorcisms, evil spirits must manifest themselves in words or actions
when the exorcist, in the name of Christ, commands them to leave the
troubled person: Here we find the decisive accent to discern possession and not in the great theater of extraordinary parapsychological
phenomena, even if these are for the moment very impressive.82
Nevertheless, the Rituale Romanum of 1614 and its sources reckon also
with the possibility that demons, for some time, can hide themselves
from the interventions of the exorcist.83
The new rite of exorcism essentially restates the same four criteria
established by the Rituale of 1614, and even uses in large part the
same words.84 The praenotanda, however, do not reflect the importance
of diagnostic exorcism, when moral certainty is required about the
state of possession before celebrating the exorcism.85 This norm had
80 See Rodewyk, Dmonische Besessenheit heute, 13, 123-26; Amorth,
Un esorcista racconta, p. 44; idem, The New Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective;
Jos Antonio Fortea, Summa daemoniaca: tratado de Demonologa y Manual de
Exorcistas (Benasque [Huesca, Spain]: Editorial Dos Latidos, 2004) 129;
Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 255, 289.
81 See Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 289. It could be prayed by any believer, at
least as an invocation directed to God. On this, see Reckinger In meinem
Namen, 139-45.
82 Rodewyk, Dmonische Besessenheit heute, 13. Another accent is given
by Franois Dermine, Il discernimento degli spiriti, in Esorcismo e preghiera
di liberazione, 81-108, here 90: according to Dermine, the imperative
exorcism is necessary for discernment in some cases, but normally a prayer
for liberation would be sufficient.
83 See norm 5, in RR 1614 865; see Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 257.
84 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 16: Secundum probatam praxim, ut
signa obsidentis daemonis habentur: ignoto sermone pluribus verbis loqui
vel loquentem intellegere; distantia et occulta patefacere; vires supra aetatis
seu condicionis naturam ostendere. Quae signa indicium quoddam praebere
possunt. Cum autem signa huiusmodi non necessario reputanda sint ex parte
diaboli provenientia, attendere etiam oportet ad alia, praesertim ordinis
moralis et spiritalis, quae alio modo interventum diabolicum manifestant,
ut, v. g., aversionem vehementem a Deo, Sanctissimo Nomine Iesu, Beata
Virgine Maria et Sanctis, et imaginibus sacris.
85 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 16: Exorcista ad exorcismum
celebrandum ne procedat, nisi compererit, morali certitudine fretus,
51
been introduced by Benedict XIV in 174586 and was reiterated in the

1917 Code of Canon Law.87 According to this context, the celebration of exorcism means the liturgical form present in the ritual, but
it does not seem to exclude the discreet use of a diagnostic exorcism.88
Otherwise it would be much more difficult to verify demonic possession. In any case, this point should be clarified by the CDW, in
a future revision of the praenotanda or at least in a separate pastoral
directory for exorcists.
The Difference between Possession and Mental Illness89

It is important not to confuse possession with some kind of mental
illness. It is significant that although the introduction to the 1614
rite had stressed this discernment, the praenotanda of the revised rite
were written at a time marked by a much greater scientific awareness
of the various kinds of psychological pathologies. Before proceeding
to the exorcism, the exorcist should consult if necessary, experts in
the medical and psychiatric sciences who have a sense of spiritual
exorcizandum esse revera a daemone obsessum . Giampietro, Il
rinnovamento del rito, 171, even sustains: sono escluse alcune prassi
inconvenienti, quale luso dellesorcismo per verificarne la necessit.
86 Epistula Sollicitudini (1 Oct 1745) 43, as cited in Codex iuris canonici
1917 (Vatican City: Polyglot Press, 1974) [henceforth CIC 1917] n. 1, pp.
385-86. See Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 251.
87 CIC 1917, can. 1152 2: ad exorcismos ne procedat, nisi
postquam diligenti prudentique investigatione compererit exorcizandum
esse revera a daemone obsessum. The footnote to the CIC 1917 refers here
not only to the document of Benedict XIV, but also to the Rituale Romanum,
tit. X, c. 1, 1 and 3.
88 Another interpretation of the juridical question is given by Nanni
in Il dito di Dio, 256 and 298. Nanni posits that according to the new rite
even the diagnostic exorcism is prohibited, a precept that for him raises
some questions: Se ne conclude che per lattuale Rito, contrariamente alle
fonti, lesorcismo come strumento diagnostico proibito. Rimane aperto
linterrogativo, quale sia la ragione di tale proibizione.
89 See Corrado Balducci, Gli indemoniati (Rome: Coletti, 1959) 113230; idem, Possessione diabolica; Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 179213; Thomas Glantz, Besessenheitsphnomene und psychisch-physische
Erkrankungen, in Dmonen unter uns, 42-55; Amorth, Exorzisten und
Psychiater, 100-31; Vincenzo Mastronardi et al., Possessione demoniaca
e psicopatologie, in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione, 17-54; Costantino
Gilardi, Quando esorcizzare? in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione, 31325; Marco Tosatti, Inchiesta sul demonio (Casale Monferrato: Piemme, 2003)
125-45; Fortea, Summa daemoniaca, 120-25; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 282-88;
Tonino Cantelmi, Aspetti psicologici, in Esorcismo e preghiera di liberazione,
169-95.
52
Manfred Hauke
realities.90 The condition of having a sense of spiritual realities is

important, because the mainstream of contemporary psychiatry is
not disposed to accept the possibility of demonic possession, even if
recently there is a greater openness to such, as is clear from the DSMIV, the psychiatric handbook already mentioned.91 It is not necessary
that the medical or psychiatric experts be faithful Christians, but they
should be open to an explanation that goes beyond psychic causes.
In antiquity, epilepsy was often interpreted as possession because
in this condition crises occur, when the sick person manifests an extraordinary strength and may even foam at the mouth. The biblical
figure sometimes called the epileptic demoniac (Mk 9:14-29), in
any case, was not an epileptic. In the event of an epileptic attack, the
patient stays where he falls, but is not driven into the fire or into
the water (Mk 9:22). An epileptic attack is short, but the crises of a
demoniac can last several hours. Medication can help in the case of
epilepsy, but it is futile against possession.92
It is not true, as some theologians have maintained, that the New
Testament identifies demonic possession with sickness,93 presupposing
that every sickness is caused by a demon.94 Satan too can cause diseases (see Lk 13:11-13), but the evangelical accounts of the activity of
Jesus differentiate between ill persons and demoniacs.95 For instance,
in Mark 1:34, Jesus healed great numbers of the sick that evening
and ordered many demons to come out of their victims. Whereas the
demons in possessed persons manifested a strong resistance against
Jesus and were cast off, none of these demonic traits were evident
in those who were ill.96 In the second century, the apologist Tatian
90 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 17: De necessitate adhibendi ritum
exorcismi, exorzista prudenter iudicabit post diligentem inquisitionem,
consultis expertis quatenus opus sit, in scientia medicinae et
psychiatriae, qui sensum habeant rerum spiritualium.
91 See note 71 above.
92 See Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 181-85.
93 For example, Alexandre Ganoczy, Schpfungslehre, in
Glaubenszugnge I, ed. Wolfgang Beinert, (Paderborn: Schningh, 1995)
365-495, here 418.
94 Specialists of the New Testament sometimes also assume, without
the necessary proof, that every sickness, according to ancient thinking, was
caused by demons. See, for example, Joachim Gnilka, Jesus von Nazaret
(Freiburg/Bresgau: Herder, 1990) 125.
95 For instance, sick people were brought to him, and the touch of
his hands healed every one. Some were possessed by demons; and the
demons came out at his command (Lk 4:40-41); see Van Dam, Dmonen
und Besessene, 33.
96 Gozzelino, Il mistero delluomo, 254; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 21, 101-8.
53
maintained an explicit differentiation between diseases provoked by

demons or coming from a natural origin.97
It is not possible to review here the principal kinds of psychiatric
illness. For discernment, in any case, it is important to bring together
the sensitive aversion to the sacred with the paranormal faculties
which are not specific, for instance, for hysteric or schizophrenic
diseases. Psychiatric illness and possession cannot be identified as
interchangeable terms, but it is possible, and it sometimes happens,
that the two phenomena actually coincide. In these cases, collaboration with a psychiatric specialist is especially important.
Possession and Parapsychology

The opinion of the German commission that there are no certain criteria for diabolic possession was strongly influenced by an optimistic
evaluation of parapsychology. Normally, the parapsychologists tend
to explain all paranormal phenomena from secret forces within the
human mind. In this way, demons, whose existence the parapsychologists cannot explain, are substituted by human forces, which, by the
way, also remain quite hypothetical. There seem to be some forces in
the human soul which go beyond normal capacities, for instance in
the case of water-diviners or some forms of telepathy.98 But parapsychology normally is not acknowledged as a science; in Germany, the
Supreme Court has refused it that status.99 The principle reason for
this refusal was the fact that the more important parapsychological
phenomena cannot be repeated according to the free will of the person
who has claimed parapsychic faculties.100 In many cases, we should
presuppose, besides the frequent phenomenon of a trick or a fraud,
the intervention of spirits whose knowledge goes beyond that of the
Even an exegete who does not believe in the reality of demonic possession
admits that the synoptic Gospels distinguish between sickness and
possession: Franz Annen, Der Exorzismus aus neutestamentlicher Sicht,
in Dmonen unter uns, 11-21, here 14.
97 Tatian, Oratio ad Graecos 16-18. See Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene,
84. It is incorrect, then, to attribute the difference between sickness and
possession only to modern times, as does Patrick Dondelinger, Die Praxis
des Exorzismus in der Kirche, Concilium 34 (1998) 525-34, here 531. The
first to make this distinction is William of Auvergne (d. 1249), according
to Katharina Elliger, Besessenheit, in Teufelsglaube, ed. Herbert Haag
(Tbingen: Katzmann, 1974) 391-439, here 395. Even this seems too late.
98 See Petersdorff, Dmonologie, vol. 2, pp. 152 and 167.
99 See Franz Reckinger, Wenn Tote wieder leben. Wunder: Zeichen Gottes
oder PSI? (Aschaffenburg: Ursula Zller, 1995) 57-72.
100 See Reckinger In meinem Namen, 139-41; Mastronardi et al.,
Possessione demoniaca, 20-23; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 282.
54
Manfred Hauke
human person. An example may help to illustrate what I mean. One of

my theological students referred to a special case of automatic writing
in a spiritualist session conducted by his younger brothers and sisters.
The small table used by the children wrote strange messages, which
the local clergy, following the parapsychological interpretation, read
as psychic automatisms coming from the subconscious. These messages, however, were written in the old German script unknown to the
children; they had to ask their grandmother to decipher them. Does
it make sense to derive such writing from the subconscious of the
children? The sinister context of these phenomena points in another
direction which should not be unknown to Catholic priests.
During the crises provoked by exorcism, we observe not only
one or another parapsychic phenomenon, but a rather large realm of
these. One of the most striking signs is understanding and speaking
in tongues that the possessed person does not know. During an exorcism conducted by a Protestant pastor in the Philippines, for instance,
fifty different demons spoke out of the possessed student; some voices
expressed themselves in diverse languages. The twenty-hour struggle
was recorded on tape.101
Another astounding phenomenon is occasional levitation. Sulpicius Severus (active 395-404), in the biography of Saint Martin, refers
to the example of demoniacs exorcised in a church. They levitated
and remained attached to the roof, heads down and feet up, without
any movement of the clothes downwards.102 During an exorcism
some years ago in the city of Rome, it is reported that a young man
climbed up, as if there were a ladder, to the roof of the church. But
there was no ladder. At the end of the exorcism, he descended and
found himself seated as before in his place. After the crisis, he did
not recall anything.103
It is also striking to observe the reaction of the possessed to holy
things related to Christ. Even the Protestant theologian Willem Van
Dam notes that demons, which detest holy water, can detect its presence and are able to distinguish it from unblessed water.104 Before proceeding to the exorcism, the exorcist should make a good confession,
because otherwise the demons can reveal his unconfessed sins; this
101 See Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 142.
102 Sulpicius Severus, Dialogus III.6 (CSEL 1:204). See Van Dam,
Dmonen und Besessene, 89.
103 Amorth, Exorzisten und Psychiater, 121.
104 Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 139, 278-80. The reaction is not
the same when the possessed person is confronted with pagan interventions
(p. 115).
55
trait also cannot be explained in terms of parapsychic faculties.105

If we evaluate the great scale of paranormal phenomena, provoked
by exorcism and linked to an aversion to Christ, which transcends
human knowledge, it seems strange to affirm that there are no sure
criteria to discern exorcisms. If the criteria mentioned by the old and
the new rites of exorcism are verified, moral certainty about cases of
possession should be possible.
IV. Possession
and
Other Forms
of
Demonic Influence
Although diabolic possession is the most manifest form of demonic

influence, in the experience of exorcists such cases are relatively few. In
only a small percentage of suspected cases the persons really are possessed.106 Much more numerous are cases linked to the occult, magic,
and Satanism, which lead to demonic disturbances unexplained by
science. The Catechism of the Catholic Church quite realistically mentions
the dangers coming from recourse to demons in witchcraft.107 Even in
the most industrialized regions of the world, phenomena characterized
by the Latin word maleficium are not lacking: somebody is trying to
operate an evil effect on another with the help of demons.108 Great discretion is certainly necessary in order to avoid confusing real diabolic
influence with superstitious opinions not based on reality. It would
be dangerous to move from one extreme to the other, from illuminist
rationalism to a new witch hunt. In any case, there are some clear
signs that reveal a previous bewitchment, such as, for instance, the
presence of a magic object, a kind of sacramental of the Devil, in
pillows or in mattresses where it could not have been left in a natural
way.109 The old ritual long since acknowledged these things, confirmed
today by the experience of many exorcists, when it mentioned such
magic objects; the exorcist should interrogate demons about these
105 Van Dam, Dmonen und Besessene, 139; Rodewyk, Dmonische
Besessenheit heute, 137.
106 Suenens, Erneuerung und die Mchte 46, p. 83; Balducci, Il diavolo,
257; Amorth, Un esorcista racconta, 32; Jeanguenin, Il diavolo esiste, 76-79.
107 CCE 2117.
108 On this phenomenon, see Amorth, Un esorcista racconta, 141-57;
Jrg Mller, Verwnscht, verhext, verrckt oder was? (Stuttgart: Betulius, 1998);
Moreno Fiori, Il maleficio tra concetti e fenomenologie, in Tra maleficio,
patologie e possessione, 79-126; idem, Maleficio e demonologia: prospettive
per una rinnovata attenzione pastorale, in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione,
327-54; Jeanguenin, Il diavolo esiste, 52-65; idem, Il maleficio: indagine sulle
pratiche del male (Rome: Citt Nuova, 2005).
109 See Amorth, Exorzisten und Psychiater, 113; Fiori, Il maleficio tra
concetti e fenomenologie, 116, 330; idem, Il maleficio, 167-68, 197-200;
Jeanguenin, Il diavolo esiste, 58.
56
Manfred Hauke
objects, and when they are found, they must be burned.110 The 1999
version of the new rite does not mention anything about this, but
alludes only to the possibility of superstition. This was corrected in
the emended edition of 2004.111 The first appendix provides a liturgical formula that can be used also in the case of maleficium and of
other troubles deriving from a demonic source,112 but this possibility
is not sufficiently treated in the praenotanda. It is only hinted at in
the definition of exorcism, taken from the Catechism.113
This oversight likely reflects, at least partially, the opinion of an
Italian liturgist, Achille M. Triacca, who served as a member of the
commission that elaborated the new rite.114 In a work prior to the publication of the new rite, Triacca claimed that exorcism concerns only
possessed persons, but not, as in other times, things or places. This
opinion, which is not to be found in the authors latest publications,
is motivated by the Code of Canon Law, which mentions exorcism
only for persons.115 Triacca seems to forget, however, that the Code
of 1983 did not abrogate the liturgical books used by the Church,116
including the Rituale Romanum with its chapter on exorcism from 1952.
This part is still effective today, even beyond 1999, once the bishop
asks permission of the CDW to use it. Also the new rite, in the first
appendix, provides an imperative exorcism, taken from the formula
introduced by Leo XIII, which can be used against demonic influence
on things and places.117 It would be contrary to the theology of the
Incarnation to neglect material realities, refusing to bless them.118
110 See norm 20, in RR 1614 879.
111 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 15; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 211.
112 Appendix I: Supplicatio et exorcismus qui adhiberi possunt in
peculiaribus adiunctis ecclesiae, in Ex 2004, pp. 71-77.
113 CCE 1673; praenotanda, in Ex 2004 7: Cum Ecclesia petit, ut
quaedam persona vel res [!] contra Maligni influxum id dicitur exorcismus.
See Triacca, Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 712.
114 See Achille M. Triacca, Esorcismo: un sacramentale discusso,
Ecclesia orans 4 (1987) 285-300; Lesorcismo, in I sacramentali e le benedizioni,
ed. Ildebrando Scicolone et al., Anamnesis 7 (Genova: Marietti, 1989) 16791; idem, Spirito Santo ed esorcismo, and Esorcismo.
115 Triacca, Lesorcismo, in I sacramentali e le benedizioni, 170, with
reference to CIC 1983, can. 1172.
116 See CIC 1983, can. 2.
117 Appendix I: Supplicatio et exorcismus qui adhiberi possunt in
peculiaribus adiunctis ecclesiae, in Ex 2004, pp. 71-77.
118 In the new Book of Blessings of 1984, alas, many formularies
manifest a great restriction regarding the benediction of material things: De
benedictionibus (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1984, reprint 1993).
Even in the case of a house or of a rosary, the benediction is directed only
to the persons using the object. For a demonstration of this phenomenon,
57
Correspondingly, it is also wrong not to do anything against demonic

influence on things and places related to humanity. The necessity of
exorcistic protection was very well known in times when pagans converted in large numbers to Christ,119 but with the recent rise of neopaganism, ancient threats are reemerging. As the human body forms
part of a person, so also the material environment bears a strict relation
to mankind. This relation, however, is based on a specific being that
cannot be reduced to merely anthropological factors. Such specificity
should also be taken into account in liturgical theology.
V. The Definition
of
Exorcism Exorcism in the Early Church
The most potent weapon against possession and other forms of diabolic
influence is exorcism. But what is exorcism? The Greek word exorkisms
appears in the New Testament as a term that signifies an insistent request manifested before God (Mt 26:63) or directed against demons
(Acts 19:13).120 Jesus orders the demons to leave the possessed persons
(e.g., Mk 1:25, 27; 5:8; 9:25). A detailed description of an exorcism
performed by St Paul is given in the Acts of the Apostles. At Philippi,
Paul and his companions were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of
divination and brought her owners much gain by soothsaying (Acts
16:16). Paul reacts with an exorcism: I command you in the name of
Jesus Christ to come out of her. The demon instantly leaves the girl,
who loses her paranormal faculties, thereby infuriating her masters
(Acts 16:18-19). Here the Apostle follows the example of the Lord
who commanded demons. A prayer for liberation made only by a
supplicant formula would no longer correspond to the faculty and order
given by Jesus.121
see Daniel G. Van Slyke, The Order for Blessing Water: Past and Present,
Antiphon 8.2 (2003) 12-23. Certainly every blessing is imparted for the sake
of human beings, but the proper being of the material world should also be
taken seriously. See Karin Bommes, Die Sakramentalien der Kirche, in
Christusbegegnung in den Sakramenten, ed. Herbert Luthe, 3rd ed. (Kevelaer:
Butzon & Bercker, 1994) 631-706, here 680-86. The experience of exorcists
reveals this fact from a negative perspective, as for instance, in the case
of a haunted house, where demonic influence has some specific impact
on the place, even after changes occur in the ownership of the house: see
Jeanguenin, Il diavolo esiste, 38-41.
119 This is precisely when the first sacramentals were established,
and their texts entered later into the Rituale Romanum of 1614: Triacca,
Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 721.
120 Johannes Schneider, Exorkzo, in Theologisches Wrterbuch zum
Neuen Testament, vol. 5, ed. Otto Bauernfeind et al. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer,
1954) 465; Elmar Bartsch, Die Sachbeschwrungen in der rmischen Liturgie
(Mnster: Aschendorff, 1967) 5-7; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 136.
121 Reckinger In meinem Namen, 141.
58
Manfred Hauke
It is difficult to understand the opinion of Probst and Richter,

who maintain: Only supplicating exorcism is situated in the genuine
Jewish-Christian tradition of prayer, whereas the imperative exorcism
comes without doubt from the pagan realm.122 The examples of Jesus
Christ and the Apostle Paul refute this opinion. If we should define
exorcism, starting with the typical example reported in the Acts of
the Apostles, we could say: Exorcism, in the Christian realm, is a
command in the name of Jesus Christ to a demon to leave his victim.
Probst and Richter mention that, in the ancient Church, exorcizare
refers nearly exclusively to the expulsion of evil forces.123 Together
with Emil Lengeling, a member of the above-mentioned German commission, they claim: The term exorcism can be used in a correct
terminological sense only for an order given to the Devil.124 If this
thesis is true, then a supplicating exorcism (exorcismus deprecativus) is
no exorcism in the proper sense of the word, but only a prayer called
such because of some similarity. In this case, the title of the new ritual
De exorcismis could be cited with quotation marks, because the
exorcist is authorized to avoid every real exorcism, understood as
an imperative or a command given to demons.
122 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 145; Richter, Liturgie
zur Befreiung, 107, with reference to Klaus Thraede, Exorzismus, in
Reallexikon fr Antike und Christentum 7 (1969) 44-117, here 44-58. Thraede
does not establish this opposition; nevertheless, he deduces baptismal
exorcism from Gnostic practice (p. 84). This affirmation contradicts the
exorcistic character of baptism already present in the Apostolic Fathers,
including Barnabas, Ignatius of Antioch (probably), and Irenaeus: see
Manfred Hauke, Heilsverlust in Adam: Stationen griechischer Erbsndenlehre
(Paderborn: Bonifatius, 1993) 91, 93, 271. Distinct exorcisms are mentioned
first in Traditio apostolica 20, attributed to Hippolytus of Rome. For a critique
of Thraede, see Bruno Kleinheyer, Gottesdienst der Kirche: Handbuch der
Liturgiewissenschaft, Teil 7, pt 1, Sakramentliche Feiern I (Regensburg: Pustet,
1989) 43.
124 Emil J. Lengeling, Exorzismen und antidmonische Texte in der rmischen
Liturgie mit Ausnahme des Groen Exorzismus, Anlage 12 zu den Ergebnissen
der Gemischten Kommission der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz von 1984,
cited in Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 15: der Begriff Exorzismus
(kann) terminologisch korrekt nur auf die imperative Anrede an den Teufel
und auf an ihn gerichtete Aufforderungen und Befehle verwandt werden.
See also Bommes Die Sakramentalien der Kirche, 665; Kohlschein, Der
Exorzismus ein zwiespltiges, p. 181; Richter, Liturgie zur Befreiung,
95; Dondelinger, review of Probst and Richter, 399: an exorcism not directed
against the Devil is a contradiction in terms.
59
The Current Definitions of Exorcism

The first definitions of exorcism are found in the writings of Augustine and Isidore of Seville. For Augustine, to exorcize means to
expel an impure spirit with conjuration by divine things.125 Isidore of
Seville, the great encyclopedist at the end of the patristic period in the
Latin Church, defines Exorcism, a Greek word, in Latin conjuration,
as a command to the Devil to go away.126 In the Latin churches of
Rome, Gaul, and Spain since the end of late antiquity, we also find
exorcisms directed immediately toward material things, like water
and oil, with the aim of expelling any demonic influence.127 But the
exorcism against possession seems to imply generally an order to the
demon in the name of the Lord. Even the baptismal exorcisms, at least
until the liturgical reform of the 1960s, were formulated in an imperative way. For this reason, important specialists on exorcism, such as
Forget (1924), Rodewyk (1959), and Balducci (1988), include the
(imperative) order given to the Devil in the definition of exorcism:
Lexorcisme est donc, proprement parler, une adjuration au dmon
pour lobliger vacuer un lieu, abandonner une situation, rendre
la libert une personne quil dtient plus ou moins en son pouvoir.128
Exorzismus ... ein im Namen Gottes (Jesu) an den Teufel gerichteter
Befehl, Menschen oder Gegenstnde zu verlassen beziehungsweise
sie in Ruhe zu lassen.129
125 Augustine, De beata vita III.18 (CCSL 29:75): exorcizare hoc
est per divina eum (spiritum immundum) adiurando expellere.
126 Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae VI.19.55-56, in Isidori Hispalensis
episcopi Etymologiarum sive originum libri XX, ed. W. M. Lindsay (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1911) vol. 1, p. 252: Exorcismus Graece, Latine coniuratio,
sive sermo increpationis est adversus diabolum, ut discedat. Hoc est
exorcismus increpare et coniurare adversus diabolum; unde sciendum est
quod non creatura Dei in infantibus exorcizatur aut exsufflatur, sed ille sub
quo omnes qui cum peccato nascuntur. Est enim princeps peccatorum. On
the oldest definitions see Bartsch, Die Sachbeschwrungen, 7-10.
127 Bartsch, Die Sachbeschwrungen, 336-340.
128 Jacques Forget, Exorcisme, in Dictionnaire de theologie catholique, vol.
5, ed. A. Vacant, E. Mangenot et al. (Paris: Letouzey et An, 1924) 1762-80,
here 1763. Nevertheless the following phrase introduces a differentiation
that could have influenced the distinction between exorcismus imprecativus and
deprecativus: Labjuration se fait sous forme dordre intim directement au
dmon, mais au nom de Dieu ou de Jsus-Christ, soit sous forme dinvocation,
de supplication adresse Dieu et Notre-Seigneur, en vue dobtenir quils
donnent lordre dexpulsion ou quils en assurent lexcution.
129 Adolf Rodewyk, Exorzismus,in Lexikon fr Theologie und Kirche, vol. 3,
ed. Josef Hfer et al. (Freiburg/Bresgau: Herder, 1959) 1314-15, here 1314.
60
Manfred Hauke
Gli esorcismi sono perci degli scongiuri, dei comandi fatti in nome
di Dio al demonio, perch desista dallesplicare un influsso malefico
in luoghi, cose, o su di una determinata persona.130
According to St Thomas Aquinas, the command is the correct way

to deal with demons during an exorcism. In the Summa theologiae, he
addresses the question whether it is permitted to conjure demons:
There are two ways of conjuring (duplex est adiurandi modus), one by
supplication (per modum deprecationis) the other by expulsion (per
modum compulsionis): it is not permitted to conjure the demons in the
first way, because this mode seems to belong to some benevolence
or friendship which is not permitted in the relation to demons; but
such is permitted by way of expulsion.131
For St Thomas, conjuring by way of expulsion accords with the divine

power received by Christ.
We can make a further comparison between exorcism and the
other sacramentals. Egon von Petersdorff observes: Exorcisms have
their efficacy not only, like the other sacramentals, from the force
of the supplicating prayer of holy Church, but primarily from her
exorcistic power to command.132 Preferring the so-called exorcismus
deprecativus to the imperative form, as it is possible according to new
ritual, seems to dilute the exorcistic power given to the Church by
Jesus Christ.
Supplicating Exorcisms?
Developing the language of St Thomas, we could distinguish, nevertheless, between a supplicating exorcism, directed not to the demon
but to God, who is asked to expel the demon, and an imperative
exorcism, directed to the demon or demons in the name of God.
This distinction, it seems, is of modern origin.133 It could be adapted
130 Balducci, Il diavolo, 300.
131 Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae [henceforth ST] II-II q. 90 a. 2,
resp., in Summa theologiae, ed. Ottawa Institute of Medieval Studies, 2nd rev.
ed. (Ottawa: Collge Dominicain, 1943) vol. 3, col. 1901a.
132 Petersdorff, Dmonologie, vol. 1, p. 345. See also Vinzenz Thalhofer
and Ludwig Eisenhofer, Handbuch der katholischen Liturgik, 2nd ed. (Freiburg/
Bresgau: Herder, 1912) vol. 2, p. 506: Die wesentlichen Bestandteile des
Exorzismus gehen schon in das hchste christliche Altertum zurck. So vor
allem der whrend der Beschwrung an den Teufel gerichtete Befehl, aus dem
Energumenen auszufahren, wodurch sich der Exorzismus wesentlich vom
bloen Gebete unterscheidet.
133 It is used, for instance, by Kaczynski, Der Exorzismus, 278,
but not yet in the standard liturgical manual of Thalhofer and Eisenhofer,
61
from a criterion that contemplates the exorcistic prayers transmitted from Christian antiquity. We have numerous hints of imperative
exorcism being used in patristic times, but among the few written
exorcistic prayers in the earliest period there is the special case of
the Apostolic Constitutions (Syria, fourth century), which do not use
the imperative form.134 In the seven exorcistic prayers attributed to
Cyprian of Antioch, there is an alternation between invocations of
God and commands directed against demons.135 In the seventh and
eighth centuries, among the first more elaborate formulae for exorcism,
we find commands to the Devil, but also prayers directed to God.136
Evidently, every exorcism implies at least tacitly a prayer to God; it
is an action conducted in the name of Christ. But the formulae that
begin with adiuro or exorcizo, in the exorcism for possessed persons,
seem exclusively to use the imperative form. The prayers directly addressed to God can be interpreted as supplications which accompany
the exorcisms and which alternate with them. But it seems altogether
imprecise to call them exorcisms in a proper sense. They may figure
as exorcisms secundum quid.137 In the Rituale Romanum (1614) we find
Handbuch, vol. 2, pp. 506-7. It may derive from Forget, Exorcisme, in
Dictionnaire de thologie.
134 Constitutiones apostolicae VIII.7 (SC 336:156-58). According
to Thalhofer and Eisenhofer, Handbuch, vol. 2, p. 507, these prayers are
not exorcisms. They appear at the end of the first part of the eucharistic
celebration, together with the dismissal of catechumens and penitents.
135 Enzo Lodi, ed., Enchiridion euchologicum fontium liturgicorum,
Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 15 (Rome: C.L.V.-Edizioni
Liturgiche, 1979) 672-78; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 119-22. On the exmagician Cyprian, who might be legendary, see Victor Saxer, Cipriano
di Antiochia, in Dizionario patristico e di antichit cristiane, ed. Angelo di
Berardino (Casale Monferrato: Piemme, 1983) vol. 1, p. 677. For other
ancient sources, see Adolph Franz, Die kirchlichen Benediktionen im Mittelalter,
(Freiburg/Bresgau: Herder, 1909, reprint Bonn: Nova et Vetera, 2006) vol.
2, pp. 575-79; Thraede, Exorzismus, 109-14; Basilio Petr, Demoni ed
esorcismi nella tradizione ortodossa, in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione,
155-76; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 118-26.
136 The relation between the exorcisms of the old sacramentaries
and the Rituale Romanum of 1614 is briefly reported in Lengeling, Der
Exorzismus, 253-56; Pietro Sorci, Gesti e atteggiamenti nel rito degli
esorcismi, in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione, 243-76, here 256. The
medieval development is described by Franz, Die kirchlichen Benediktionen,
vol. 2, pp. 574-85.
137 The complete verification of this hypothesis requires a more
detailed study of the sources. For a sample of the exorcistic texts against
possession used in the Middle Ages, see Franz, Die kirchlichen Benediktionen,
vol. 2, pp. 586-615.
62
Manfred Hauke
an alternation between exorcismi and orationes. The orationes are prayers;

the exorcismi are commands with imperatives given to demons.138 The
orationes have a conclusive role, whereas in the new rite similar prayers
are called exorcismi deprecativi and located at the beginning.139
We could make a comparison between exorcism and the sacramental rites that proceed ex opere operato. Among the sacramentals, exorcism has a special role because it was not introduced by the Church,
but by Christ himself who has invested it with a special efficacy in
his name.140 For this reason some theologians attribute to Christian
exorcism a certain efficacy ex opere operato, even though mainstream
theology prefers to speak of an efficacy ex opere operantis Ecclesiae.141
Without technical terms, the efficacy of performing exorcisms in the
name of Christ is stressed also by the praenotanda of the new rite: in
the exorcism the Church does not operate in her own name, but only
in the name of God or of Christ the Lord whom every reality, even
the Devil and the demons, have to obey.142 For this reason we can
make a comparison, as to efficacy, with the sacraments not efficacy
understood ex opere operato as such is typical for the sacraments, but
the conferring ex opere operato of sanctifying grace. Sacramentals also
can have a certain effect ex opere operato, even if this effect does not
immediately cause the sanctifying grace.
For the absolution granted in the ritual of penance, the Byzantine
Church uses a supplicating prayer which invokes almighty God to
pardon the sins, whereas the Roman formula of absolution accentuates
the sacramental power given by God to his minister: Ego te absolvo a
peccatis tuis. The sacramental effect does not depend on the supplicating or the indicative form. Nevertheless, the reconciliatory faculty
given by Christ is clearer in the indicative expression: I absolve you
138 RR 1614 895-904; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 150.
139 Ex 2004 61-62, 81-84; Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 133.
140 According to CCE 1667, with reference to SC 60, the Church has
instituted the sacramentals. Regarding exorcism, this is true of the established
form of liturgical celebration. But the foundation of this regulation is the
precept of the Lord himself: see CCE 1673.
141 Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 152. Already Thomas Aquinas notes that the
imperative words in the exorcisms have some effect, even if only baptism
confers sanctifying grace: ST III q. 71 a. 3. A standard reference on this topic,
rarely discussed in the last decades, is Franz Schmid, Die Sakramentalien
der katholischen Kirche (Brixen, 1896). The miserable state of systematic
reflection on the sacramentals is deplored, for instance, by Carlo Rocchetta,
Sacramentaria fondamentale (Bologna: Dehoniane, 1989) 496.
142 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 12: Ecclesia in exorcismis agit,
non proprio nomine, sed unice quidem nomine Dei vel Christi Domini, cui
omnia, etiam diabolus et daemonia, oboedire debent et subsunt.
63
from your sins.143 We could make a similar observation concerning

the fittingness of the imperative exorcism. The decree of Cardinal
Medina, at the beginning of the new rite, likewise underscores the
command in the name of the Lord:
Among the sacramentals, the Church, in obedience to the Lords
Prayer, has mercifully provided since ancient times to ask God that
the Christian faithful be freed from every danger and especially
from persecutions by the Devil. In a peculiar way, however, in the
Church exorcists are instituted who imitate the charity of Christ and
liberate the possessed from the Evil One also by commanding (etiam
imperando) the demons to go away in the name of God so that they
[the demons] do no more harm in any way to human creatures.144
Finally, the definition of exorcism in the new rite cites a description

from The Catechism of the Catholic Church. In this definition there is no
indication as to the linguistic form: When the Church publicly and
with authority demands, in the name of Christ, that some person or
thing be protected from the influence of the Evil One and liberated
from his dominion, this is called exorcism.145
Exorcism: Invocative Benediction or Adjuration?

The neglect of imperative exorcism may have been influenced also
by Achille Triacca.146 In his contribution on exorcism in the liturgical
manual Anamnesis in 1989, Triacca maintains that exorcism is an invocative benediction for persons.147 Since Christ expelled the demon
by the finger of God, namely, the Holy Spirit (see Lk 11:20), the
Italian liturgist explains that exorcism is an epiclesis, an invocation of
the Spirit of God.148 According to Triacca, the pneumatological per143 See Franz Diekamp and Klaudius Jssen, Katholische Dogmatik nach
den Grundstzen des hl. Thomas, 13th ed. (Mnster: Aschendorff, 1962) vol.
3, 247-50.
144 Decretum, in Ex 2004, p. 3.
145 CCE 1673; praenotanda, in Ex 2004 7: Cum Ecclesia publice
et cum auctoritate, Iesu Christi nomine, petit, ut quaedam persona vel res
contra Maligni protegatur influxum et ab eius subtrahatur dominatu, id
dicitur exorcismus.
146 See the discussion of Triaccas opinion above in section IV of this
essay.
147 Triacca, Lesorcismo, in I sacramentali e le benedizioni, 175; cf. idem,
Esorcismo: un sacramentale discusso, 299, and Esorcismo, in Liturgia,
725-33.
148 Triacca, Lesorcismo, in I sacramentali e le benedizioni, 185. See also
Triacca, Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 714: Il motivo [for the prevailing of the
supplicant formula in Ex 2004] da ricercarsi sia nel fatto che lesorcismo
64
Manfred Hauke
spective is the dominant theological topic in the exorcistic formulae

of the new rite.149
There is no doubt that the Spirit of God is opposed to evil spirits
and that this reality should be reflected in the liturgical texts. It should
not be forgotten, however, that the fundamental point of exorcism is
not pneumatological, but christological. Jesus Christ, the incarnate
Son of God, expels demons with the force of the Holy Spirit, which
proceeds from him eternally. The exorcisms performed by the apostles
and described in the New Testament do not consist in invocations of
the Holy Spirit, but in commands in the name of Christ, an imperative
made possible by the intervention of the Spirit.150 The pneumatological aspect of exorcism should not be developed at the expense of
its christological basis. In a correct systematic perspective, exorcism
should not be included among benedictions, even if an exorcistic
prayer could constitute part of a benediction, but should form its
own category that of adjuration.151 Adjuration is a liturgical act; it
should always be accompanied by prayer, by invocative benediction.
In this sense, we can emphasize that traditional exorcistic formulae
primariamente non sta nel fatto di comandare al demonio di andarsene,
bens nella venuta dello Spirito Santo sia nel fatto che le imperative di per
s devono essere usate unicamente quando si ha certa cognizione della
presenza del diavolo. The motive formulated by Triacca, that the imperative
exorcism makes sense only when the Devil is present with certainty, seems
to be in tension with the norm of the praenotanda, in Ex 2004 16, where
the use of the supplicant exorcism also presupposes this certainty.
149 Triacca, Esorcismo: un sacramentale discusso, 221; cf. idem,
Spirito Santo ed esorcismo, and Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 719.
150 For a more detailed critique, see Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 142-52.
See also Alessandro Pistoia, Riti e preghiere di esorcismo: problemi di
traduzione, EL 114 (2000) 227-40, here 233. A similar one-sidedness
appears in Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 15, and Richter,
Liturgie zur Befreiung, 95, who defines liturgy as dialogue between God
and man, such that exorcism would be foreign to liturgy. For a criticism of
this view, see Dondelinger, review of Probst and Richter, 399, who notes
that acts in the name of God directed to other persons are also part of the
liturgy. See Bartsch, Die Sachbeschwrungen, 18: Conjuring is practically its
own kind of cultic speaking, beside praying, benediction and profession.
151 See, for example, Rocchetta, Sacramentaria fondamentale, 507-9;
Bommes Die Sakramentalien der Kirche, 660-70. In the section of CIC
1983 dedicated to sacramentals (can. 1166-72), benedictions (can. 116971) are distinguished from exorcism (can. 1172). See also CCE 1671-73.
In the old liturgical texts, it is evident that speaking directly to someone, in
this case the demons, is an essential part of every conjuration: Bartsch, Die
Sachbeschwrungen, 18. Conjurations contain epicleses, but are not identical
with them (ibid, p. 341).
65
revolve around the Latin verbs exorcizo, adiuro, convenio, alloquor, and
benedico.152
VI. A Short Comparison Between

Rites of Exorcism
the
Old
and the
New
It is not the task of this paper to give a detailed comparison between

the old and new rites of exorcism.153 Nevertheless, from our discussion
of central theological topics, some brief observations are in order. In
response to a journalists question, Cardinal Medina underscored the
substantial identity between the old and new rites:
The new text is an outgrowth of the old. There are no substantial
changes or breaks with the previous text. There are changes
in language: the new text has more sober language, with fewer
adjectives. Moreover, it gives the priest who practices the rite of
exorcism greater liberty greater flexibility in the choice of prayers
to use. In a word, there is a new style, in a language more adapted
to our time, but the content is the same.154
Substantial identity certainly exists with regard to the fundamental

presuppositions: the existence of the Devil and of demons, the reality of diabolic possession, and the criteria for its discernment. The
principal change here is the possibility of substituting the imperative
form of exorcism with its supplicant form, which, according to many
authors, is not exorcism in its proper sense. When we consider the
theological tradition and its profound meaning since New Testament
times, this concession to liturgical fashion is to be regretted.155 Nevertheless, the optional presence of imperative exorcisms represents a
certain progress, especially if we compare the dominant opinions in
the Congregation for Sacraments in 1984, when Kaczynski predicted
that there would never again be any commands to expel demons in
a liturgical rite.156
152 Bartsch, Die Sachbeschwrungen, 4-22 (exorcism formulae concerning
things, e.g. water and oil); Triacca, Esorcismo, in Liturgia, 720. Triacca
does not realize that the element of blessing is not typical in the exorcism
of possessed persons (the Devil, after all, is not blessed), but in conjurations
on material things: Bartsch, Die Sachbeschwrungen, 22.
153 Daniel G. Van Slyke takes up this task in the subsequent essay,
The Ancestry and Theology of the Rite of Major Exorcism (1999/2004),
Antiphon 10.1 (2006) 70-116.
154 Medina Estvez, Prefect on the New Rite, 1; see also Giampietro,
Il rinnovamento del rito, 175.
156 Kaczynski, Der Exorzismus, 290, quoted in note 34 above.
66
Manfred Hauke
From the perspective of Probst and Richter, the maintenance of

the imperative formula is contrary to the reform of the baptismal
rite from which exorcisms, in the proper sense, have been eliminated,
notwithstanding the existence of prayers under this title. According to
these German liturgists, in the new rite De exorcismis, an entirely different line prevailed.157 This affirmation seems exaggerated. We could
discuss whether it was wise to change the imperative exorcisms in the
baptismal rite,158 but Probst and Richter, at least in their critique of
the new rite, do not sufficiently differentiate between candidates for
baptism and persons possessed by demons. The ancient Church, in
any case, well knew the difference between catechumens and energumens.159 Diabolic possession is the most visible form of demonic
influence, so the use of imperative-formulae exorcism is still more
convenient in the major exorcism than in the baptismal rite.
The differences between the old and the new rites concern, at least
from a systematic point of view, minor aspects. There are some positive perspectives, such as the stronger presence of Marian elements,160
157 Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 138: Im Vergleich zu
der etwa dreiig Jahre frher vollzogenen Reform der Exorzismen des Kinderund Erwachsenentaufritus durch die damalige Gottesdienstkongregation
hat sich 1999 in der rmischen Kongregation fr den Gottesdienst und
die Sakramentenordung eine grundstzlich andere Linie durchgesetzt.
Offensichtlich meint man in dieser Kongregation, auf imprekative
Exorzismen auch heute noch nicht verzichten zu knnen.
158 Rodewyk, Dmonische Besessenheit heute, 134-36, refers to a case
where, according to the responses of the demons to questioning, the
omission of baptismal exorcism was fatal for a girl who was cursed by her
grandmother; the first demon entered very soon after baptism (!). The
spiritual sensitivity and experience of the early Church, still present today
in the Eastern churches, reflect an acute awareness of the dangers of magic
rites often practiced in ancient societies. In the postconciliar reforms of
the 1960s, such threats were optimistically forgotten. The importance of
exorcism in the baptismal rite for removing demonic obstacles is underlined,
for instance, in the exposition of Thomas Aquinas, ST III q. 71 a. 3. The
elimination of the exorcisms in the proper sense from the baptismal rite is
criticized, for example, by Bommes, Die Sakramentalien der Kirche, 668.
On the other hand, the change is justified by Balthasar Fischer, Baptismal
Exorcism in the Catholic Baptismal Rite after Vatican II, Studia liturgica
10 (1974) 48-55, and Probst and Richter, Exorzismus oder Liturgie, 139-44.
According to Laurentin, Il demonio mito o realt? 146, Pope Paul VI was not
pleased with this achievement of the Bugnini years.
159 See, for example, Constitutiones apostolicae VIII.6 (SC 336:150-56)
for the dismissal of the catechumens, and VIII.7 (SC 336:156-58) for the
dismissal of the energumens.
160 See Achille M. Triacca, La preghiera della Chiesa nellesorcismo
maggiore, in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione, 217-41, here 228. A stronger
67
the introduction of psalm collects,161 and the more elaborate accent

on the liturgical celebration.162 Some points, however, are lacking.
Take, for instance, the questions addressed to the demons.163 Among
the five possible means, mentioned with good reason in the old rite,
by which the demons might try to deceive the exorcist, only a single
reference remains.164 Alas, the role of diagnostic exorcism is not very
clear, and neither is the treatment of diabolic infestations that do not
constitute possession.165 Furthermore, secondary points can influence the practice of exorcism in a rather negative way.
The principal cause of the defects seems to be procedural: in the
ten years of the preparation of De exorcismis (1999), only the national
episcopal conferences and some scholars seem to have been directly
involved. In a normal situation concerning a well-known topic, this
might be the best way for making liturgical improvements. But exorcism is not a well-known theme, nor do the bishops conferences, at
the present moment, seem to have any special experience of it. It
would have been wise to have appealed directly for the practical help
of the best, most effective exorcists.
We should evaluate the new rite also on the basis of the requirements formulated by the conciliar Constitution on the Sacred
Liturgy. Do we find now, for example, evidence of greater participatio
actuosa? Does the new rite correspond better to the exigencies of the
contemporary situation?166 The most important indication for the
second point must certainly be the cooperation with specialists in
medicine and psychiatry, a requirement only hinted at in the old rite,
introduced some centuries ago. So there has been progress.167 Also,
the foreword and the first two chapters of the praenotanda contain
useful hints for an actual understanding of the rite. They may not
have been necessary in 1614, but they are now appropriate in a time
presence of Marian elements had been requested also by Amorth, The New
Rite of Exorcism is Ineffective.
161 See Ward, The Psalm Collects, 270-301.
162 See Kohlschein, Der Exorzismus ein zwiespltiges, 181; Sorci,
Gesti ed atteggiamenti, 272; Cavagnoli, I Praenotanda, 178.
163 On this, see Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 189-92, 211. See also Amorth,
Letter cited in Gemma, Io, vescovo esorcista, 170: in his experience, the
omission of certain parts of the introduction to the old ritual, particularly
norms 4-8, 11, 13-20, in RR 1614 864-67, 870, 872-79, is not justified.
164 Compare norms 5-9, in RR 1614 865-68 with praenotanda, in
Ex 2004 14. See Nanni, Il dito di Dio, 257-62.
165 See Fiori, Il maleficio tra concetti e fenomenologie, 339; Nanni,
Il dito di Dio, 293.
166 SC 79.
68
Manfred Hauke
marked by basic doubts concerning the existence of the Devil and of

demonic possession.168
Perhaps the first point mandated by the council, namely, an improved active participation by the faithful, must await translations
into vernacular languages. As to this necessity, nevertheless, practical experience also points to the advantage of the Latin language.169
Exorcistic prayers in the vernacular can suggest too easily diabolic
possession to gullible persons who are not in fact possessed, whereas
the Latin formulae concentrate on the aim of expelling the demons
who perfectly understand any language. In the liturgical translations
still to be published, it might be advisable, for this very reason, to
give the exorcistic formulae also in Latin.
VII. Perspectives
for the future
If we peruse the sparse bibliography concerning the new rite of

exorcism, we find little enthusiasm. Liberal theologians are content
with the withering of imperative exorcism, but are furious with its
continued presence. The episcopal conferences, with the exception of
the Italian,170 were not or are not in any hurry to translate the rite,
already published seven years ago. Many exorcists have expressed critical observations about a ritual designed at a desk without sufficient
contact with practical experience. For them, the best achievement
of the Medina years with regard to exorcism is the permission to
continue to use the old rite. The new rite seems to be a kind of transient compromise. Even Achille Triacca, who seems to have exercised
considerable influence on the new texts, notes that the actual ritual
is not at a standstill, but is to be seen as a pause which should lead
to further progress.171 Not every liturgical reform necessarily leads to
an improvement. The reform of exorcism has been the Cinderella
of the liturgical renewal, but it might also become the starting-point
for a reform of the reform. Perhaps we could apply to it in some
way the Lords words: Many that are first will be last, and the last
first (Mt 19:30).
A reformed edition of the 2004 rite ought to take into far greater
168 This point is conceded even in the tough critique of Amorth, Letter
cited in Gemma, Io, vescovo esorcista, 168.
169 See Fortea, Summa daemoniaca, 130; Giovanni Battista Proja,
Uomini diavoli esorcismi: la verit sul mondo delocculto (Roma: Citt Nuova,
2002) 118.
170 Rito degli esorcismi e preghiere per circostanze particolari (Vatican City:
Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2002). The introduction, dated May 2001, is
published separately in Tra maleficio, patologie e possessione, 357-62.
171 Triacca, La preghiera della Chiesa, 238-40.
69
account the practical experience of exorcism. In the meantime, it

should be strongly noted that the use of the old rite is still permissible;
such permission in fact also ought to be recorded in the praenotanda.
A start can be made with the introductions to the vernacular translations of the Ritual. This possibility could be reinforced by a general
faculty to every exorcist, without, as it has been regulated until now,
an individual request on the part of the bishop to the CDW. In the
diocese of Rome, for instance, every exorcist has received permission
to use the old rite.172 The previous rite, in the 1952 edition, could
be published once more for practical use, possibly between the same
covers as the new rite. Another requirement would be a kind of practical directory for exorcists, to be composed with the cooperation of
the best exorcists themselves.173 Every diocese should have at least
one official exorcist.174
In any case, our topic commands the attention of the Church
also in the future, because, until the Last Judgment, Christians must
struggle against the influence of the Devil. Certainly they must realize
the command of the Lord: in my name they will cast out demons
(Mk 16:17). In the challenging period of postconciliar liturgical reform, Cardinal Medina has played an important and praiseworthy
role in saving the substance of the Lords command and in laying the
groundwork for improvements in the rite of exorcism.
Fr Manfred Hauke, Th.D., is Professor of Dogmatics and Patrology at the Theological
Faculty of Lugano, Switzerland.
172 Francesco Bamonte, La mia esperienza da esorcista, in Esorcismo

e preghiera di liberazione, 221-40, here 227.
173 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 38, recommends the participation
of experienced exorcists for the directories that can be published by the
episcopal conferences.
174 Praenotanda, in Ex 2004 13, and CIC 1983, can. 1172, mentions
only the necessity of episcopal delegation for exorcisms in the case of
possession. It would be even better to have a team: see Nanni, Il dito di Dio,
298.

The Theological Battle

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Theological Battle

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Antiphon 10.

The Theological Battle over the

that is senseless in the modern world. When Cardinal Jorge Arturo

Medina, the new rite needed many studies, revisions, adaptations

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

Exorcism or Prayer for Liberation from Evil?

with difficulties, especially regarding the third imperative exorcism in

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

Bishops Conference in autumn 1984, has recently been published.28

The principal theological problem with this proposal is its ambiguity

understood as a command addressed to demons to leave the possessed

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

The Main Points of Theological Debate

A Rite Created by Exorcistic Illiterates?

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

the faith of the Church about diabolic possession. Another example

II. The Existence

Other Evil Spirits

The praenotanda of the new ritual are preceded by a prooemium that

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

not exist is no longer a believer.53

From a systematic point of view, it is important to stress the

specificity of Jesus in his historical context.57 With the Pharisees and

III. Possibility and Discernment of Possession

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

especially, we find the systematic presuppositions for our theological

strong resistance against all divine influences,

63 Van Dam discusses the New Testament evidence in Dmonen und

The Klingenberg Case

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

tistic leanings.70 It might even be the case that the investigation of

The Discernment of Diabolic Possession According to the Rituale

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

Romanum of 1614 first warns against concluding too readily that a

of possession.80 This kind of exorcism is not a liturgical act and can

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

been introduced by Benedict XIV in 174586 and was reiterated in the

The Difference between Possession and Mental Illness89

realities.90 The condition of having a sense of spiritual realities is

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

maintained an explicit differentiation between diseases provoked by

Possession and Parapsychology

human person. An example may help to illustrate what I mean. One of

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

trait also cannot be explained in terms of parapsychic faculties.105

Although diabolic possession is the most manifest form of demonic

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

Correspondingly, it is also wrong not to do anything against demonic

Exorcism Exorcism in the Early Church

It is difficult to understand the opinion of Probst and Richter,

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

The Current Definitions of Exorcism

According to St Thomas Aquinas, the command is the correct way

For St Thomas, conjuring by way of expulsion accords with the divine

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

an alternation between exorcismi and orationes. The orationes are prayers;

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

from your sins.143 We could make a similar observation concerning

Finally, the definition of exorcism in the new rite cites a description

Exorcism: Invocative Benediction or Adjuration?

spective is the dominant theological topic in the exorcistic formulae

The Theological Battle over Exorcism

VI. A Short Comparison Between

It is not the task of this paper to give a detailed comparison between