POSSESSION
315
POSSESSION
Dcr PoMivismxis torn Toiie A. Comic's bis auf unsere Tage (Frei-
burg 1891) • Stimmen aus Maria-Luach, supplements xlv and
lii: Ravaisson, La philos. en France, au XIX< Siecle (Paris, 1894) ;
Mercieh, Psychologie (6th ed.. Louvain, 1894); Idem,
Criteriologie generate (4th ed.. Louvain. 1900); Peiluiube, La
Iheorie des concepts (Paris. 1S95): PlAT, Uidee (Paris, 1901);
MvHER Psj/cAoioffj/ (5th ed., London. 1903) ; B\i.Foua, Defense
of Philosophic Doubt (London, 1895); Turner, Hist, of Philos.
(Boston, 1903); Deherme, A. Comte et son auvre (Paris. 1909).
George M. Sauvage.
Possession, Deiioxiacal. — Man is in various ways subject to the influence of e\-il spirits. By original sin he brought himself into "captivity under the power of him who t hence [from the t ime of Adam's t ransgression] had the empire of death, that is to say, the Devil" (Council of Trent, Sess. V, de pecc. orig., 1), and was through the fearof death all his lifetimesubject to servi- tude (Heb.,ii, 15). Even thoughredeemed by Christ, he is subject to violent temptation: "for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulersof the world of this dark- ness, against thespiritsof wickedness in the high places " (Kph., vi, 12). But the influence of the demon, as we know from Scripture and the historj' of the Church, goes further still. He may attack man's body from without {obsession), or assume control of it from within (possession). As we gather from the Fathers and the theologians, the soul itself can never be "possessed" nor deprived of libert}', though its ordinary control over the members of the bodj- may be hindered by the obsessing spirit (cf. St. Aug., "De sp. etan.", 27; St. Thomas, "In II Sent.", d. VIII, Q. i; Ribet, "La mystique divine", Paris, 1883, pp. 190 sqq.).
Cases of Possessiox. — Among the ancient pagan nations diabolical possession was frequent (Ma,spero, "Hist. anc. des peuples de I'Orient", 41; Lenor- mant, "La magie chez les Chaldeens"), as it is still among their successors (Ward, "Historj' of the Hindoos", v., I, 2; Roberts, "Oriental Illustrations of the Scriptures"; Doohttle, "Social Life of the Chinese"). In the Old Testament we have only one instance, and even that is not very certain. We are told that "an evil spirit from the Lord troubled" Saul (I Kings, x\i, 14). The Hebrew word nVih need not imply a personal influence, though, if we may judge from Josephus (Ant. Jud., VI, viii, 2; ii, 2), the Jews were inclined to give the word that meaning in this verj' case. In New-Testament times, however, the phenomenon had become verj- common. The victims were sometimes deprived of sight and speech (Matt., xii, 22), sometimes of speech alone (^Iatt., ix, 32; Luke, xi, 14), sometimes afflicted in ways not clearly specified (Luke, viii, 2), while, in the greater number of cases, there is no mention of any bodily affliction beyond the possession itself (Matt., iv, 24; viii, 16; x\', 22; Mark, i, 32, 34, 39; iii, 11; \-ii, 2.5; Luke, iv, 41; vi, 18; ^^i, 21; \-iii, 2). The effects are described in various passages. A young man is possessed of a spirit "who, wheresoever he taketh him, dasheth him, and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away, . . . and oftentimes hath he [the spirit] cast him into the fire and into waters to destroy him" (Mark, ix, 17, 21). The possessed are sometimes gifted with superhuman powers: "a man with an unclean spirit, who had his dwelling in the tombs, and no man now could bind him, not even with chains. For having been often bound with fetters and chains, he had burst the chains, and broken the fet- ters in pieces, and no one could tame him" (Mark, v, 2-4). Some of the unfortunate \-ictims were con- trolled by several demons (Matt., xii, 43, 45; Mark, x^'i, 9; Luke, xi, 24-26) ; in one case by so many that their name was Legion (Mark, v, 9; Luke, viii, 30). Yet, evil as the possessing spirits were, they could not lielp testifving to Christ's Divine mission (Matt., viii, 29; Mark, i, 24, 34; iii, 12; v, 7; Luke, iv, 34, 41 ; viii, 28). And they continued to do so after His Ascension (Acts, xvi, 16-18).
The history of the early Church is filled with in-
stances of similar diabolical agency. A quotation
from TertuUian will suffice to bring before us the
prevalent conviction. Treating of true and false
divinity, he addresses the pagans of his time: "Let a
person be brought before your tribunals who is
plainly under demoniacal possession. The wicked
spirit, bidden speak by the followers of Christ, will as
readily make the truthful confession that he is a
demon as elsewhere he has falselj' asserted that he is
a god" (Apolog., tr. Edinburgh, p. 23). The factsasso-
ciated with possession prove, he says, beyond question
the diabolical source of the influence — "What clearer
proof t han a work like t hat ? What more t rust wort hy
than such a proof? The simplicity of truth is thus
set forth: its own worth sustains it ; no ground remains
for the least suspicion. Do you say that it is done
by magic or by some trick of the sort? You will not
say anj-thing of the sort if you have been allowed the
use of your ears and ej'es. For what argument can
you bring against a thing that is exhibited to the eye
in its naked reality?" And the Christians expel by
a word: "All the authority and power we have over
them is from our naming of the name of Christ and
recalling to their memories the woes with which God
threatens them at the hands of Christ as Judge and
which they expect one day to overtake them. Fear-
ing Christ in God and God in Christ, they become sub-
ject to the servants of God and Christ. So at our
touch and breathing, oven\-helmed by the thought
and realization of those judgment fires, they leave at
our command the bodies they have entered."
Statements of this kind embody the views of the
Church as a whole, as is evident from the facts, that
various councils legislated on the proper treatment
of the possessed, that parallel with the public penance
for catechumens and fallen Christians there was a
course of discipline for the energumens also, and,
finally, that the Church established a special order of
exorcists (cf. Martignv, "Diet, des antiq. chret.",
Paris, 1877, p. 312).
All through the ]\Iiddle Ages coimcils continued to discuss the matter: laws were passed, and penalties decreed, against all who invited the influence of the Devil or utilized it to inflict injurv on their fellowmen (cf. the Bulls of Innocent VIII, 1484; Julius II, 1504; and Adrian VI, 1523); and powers of exorcism were conferred on even,' priest of the Church. The phe- nomenon was accepted as real by all Christians. The records of criminal investigations alone in which charges of witchcraft or diabohcal possession formed a prominent part would fill volumes. The curious may consult such works as Des Mousseaux, "Pra- tiques des demons" (Paris, 1854), or Thiers, "Super- stitions", I, or, from the RationaUstic point of view, Lecky, "Rise and Influence of Rationalism in Eu- rope", I, 1-138, and, for later instances, Constans, "Relation sur une epidemie d'hystero-demonopathie" (Paris, 1863). And though at the present day among civilized races the cases of diabolical possession are few, the phenomena of Spiritism, which offer many striking points of resemblance, have come to take their place (cf. Pauvert, "La vie de N. S. Jesus- ChrLst", I, p. 226; Raupert, "The Dangersof Spiritual- ism", London, 1906; Lepicier, "The Unseen World", London, 1906; Miller, "Sermons on Modern Spiritual- ism", London, 1908). And if we may judge from the accounts furnished by the pioneers of the Faith in missionar>' countries, the e\'idences of diabolical agency there are almost as clear and defined as they were in Galilee in the time of Christ (cf. Wilson, "Western Africa", 217; Waffelaert in the "Diet. apol. de la foi cath.", Pari.^, 1889, s. v. Possession diabol.).
II. Reality of the Phenomenon. — The infidel policy on the question is to deny the possibility of po.ssession in any circumstances, either on the sup- position, that there are no evil spirits in existence,
