EXORCISM
710
EXORCISM
and bound him in the desert of upper Egypt"; and
tlie instruction previously given to young Tobias (VI,
IS, and 19), to roast the fish's heart in the bridal cham-
ber, would seem to have been merely part of the
angel's plan for concealing his own identity. But in
extra-canonical Jewish literature there are incanta-
tions for exorcising demons, examples of which may
be seen in the Talmud (Schabbath, xiv, 3; Aboda Zara,
xii, 2; Sanhedrin, x, 1). These were sometimes in-
scribed on the interior surface of earthen bowls, a col-
lection of which (estimated to be from the seventh
century a. d.) is preserved in the Royal Museum in
Berlin; antl inscriptions from the collection have been
published, and translated, by Wohlstein in the " Zeit-
schrift fiir Assyriologie " (Dec, 1893; April, 1894).
The chief characteristic of these Jewish exorcisms is their naming of names believed to be efficacious, i. e. names of good angels, which are used either alone or in combination with El (=God) ; indeed reliance on mere names had long before become a superstition with the Jews, and it was considered most important that the appropriate names, which varied for different times and occasions, should be used. It was this supersti- tious belief, no doubt, that prompted the sons of Sceva, who had witnessed St. Paul's successful exor- cisms in the name of Jesus, to try on their own account the formula, "I conjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth", with results disastrous to their credit (Acts, xix, 13). It was a popular Jewish belief, ac- cepted even by a learned cosmopolitan like Josephus, that Solomon had received the power of expelling demons, and that he had composed and transmitted certain formulae that were efficacious for that purpose. The Jewish historian records how a certain Eleazar, in the presence of the Emperor Vespasian and his officers, succeeded, by means of a magical ring applied to the nose of a possessed person, in drawing out the demon tlu-ough the nostrils — the virtue of the ring being due to the fact that it enclosed a certain rare root indicated in the formuliB of Solomon, and which it was exceedingly difficult to obtain (Ant. Jud. VIII, ii, 5; of. Bell. Jud. VII, vi, 3).
But superstition and magic apart, it is implied in Christ's answers to the Pharisees, who accused Him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub, that some Jews in His time successfully exorcised demons in God's name: "and if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? " (Matt., xii, 27). It does not seem reasonable to under- stand this reply as mere irony, or as a mere argu- mcnlum ad Iwminem implying no admission of the fact; all the more so, as elsewhere (Mark, ix, 37-38) we have an account of a person who was not a disciple casting out demons in Christ's name, and whose ac- tion Christ refused to reprehend or forbid.
E.xoRcis.M IN THE New TESTAMENT: Assuming the reality of demoniac possession, for which the authority of Christ is pledged (see Obsession, Possession), it is to be observed that Jesus appealed to His power over demons as one of the recognised signs of Messiahship (Matt., xii, 23, 28; Luke, xi, 20). He cast out demons. He declared, by the finger or spirit of God, not, as His adversaries alleged, by collusion with the prince of demons (Matt., xii, 24, 27; Mark, iii, 22; Luke, xi, 15, 19) ; and that He exerci.sctl no mere delegated power, but a personal authority that was properly His own, is clear from the direct and imperative way in which He commands the demon to depart (Mark, ix, 24; cf. i, 25 etc.): " He cast out the .spirits with his word, and he healed all that were sick" (Matt., viii, 16). Some- times, as with the daughter of the Canaanean woman, the exorcism took place from a diKl;iiiec (Matt., xv, 22.sqq.; Mark, vii,25). Sometimes again the spiritsex- pelled were allowed to express their recognition of Jesus as " the Holy One of God" (Mark, i, 24) and to complain that He had come to torment tliem " before the time", i. e. the time of their final punishment
(Matt., viii, 29 sqq. ; Luke, viii, 28 sqq.). If demoniac
possession was generally accompanied by some dis-
ease, yet the two were not confounded by Christ or
the Evangelists. In Luke, xiii, 32, for example, the
Master Himself expressly distinguishes between the
expulsion of evil spirits and the curing of diseases.
Christ also empowered the Apostles and Disciples to cast out demons in His name while He Himself was still on earth (Matt.. X, 1 and 8; Mark, vi, 7; Luke, ix, 1; X, 17), and to believers generally He promised the same power (Mark, xvi, 17). But the efficacy of this delegated power was conditional, as we see from the fact that the Apostles themselves were not always suc- cessful in their exorcisms: certain kinds of spirits, as Christ explained, could only be cast out by prayer and fasting (Matt., xvii, 15, 20; Mark, Lx, 27, 28; Luke, ix, 40). In other words the success of exorcism by Christians, in Christ's name, is subject to the same general conditions on which both the efficacy of prayer and the use of charismatic power depend. Yet conspicuous success was promised (Mark, xvi, 17). St. Paul (Acts, xvi, 18; xix, 12), and, no doubt, the other Apostles and Disciples, made use regularly, as occasion arose, of their exorcising power, and the Church has continued to do so uninterruptedly to the present day.
Ecclesiastical Exorcisms: Besides exorcism in the strictest sense, i. e. for driving out demons from the possessed, Catholic ritual, following early traditions, has retained various other exorcisms, and these also call for notice here. (1) Exorcism of the possessed. We have it on the authority of all early writers who refer to the subject at all that in the first centuries not only the clergy, but lay Christians also were able by the power of Christ to deliver demoniacs or energu- mens, and their success was appealed to by the early Apologists as a strong argument for the Divinity of the Christian religion (Justin Martyr, Apol., 6; P.G.,VI, 453; Dial., 30, 85; ibid., 537, 676 sq; Minutius Felix, Octav.,27,P.L.,III;Origen,ContraCel.sum.,I,25;VII, 4,67; P.G.,XI, 705, 1425, 1510; Tertullian, Apol., 22, 23; P. L., I, 404 sq; etc.). As is clear from the testi-' monies referred to, no magical or superstitious means were employed, but in those early centuries, as in later times, a simple and authoritative adjuration ad- dressed to the demon in the name of God, and more especially in the name of Christ crucified, was the usual form of exorcism.
But sometimes in addition to words some symbolic action was employed, such as breathing {insufjiatio) , or laying of hands on the subject, or making the sign of the cross. St. Justin speaks of demons flying from " the touch and breathing of Christians" (II Apol., 6) as from a flame that burns them, adds St. Cvril of Jerusalem (Cat.,xx,3, P. G., XXXIII, 1080). Origen mentions the laying on of hands, and St. Ambrose (Paulinus,Vit. Ambr.,n.28,43, P.L.,XIV, 36, 42), St. Ephraem Syrus (Greg. Nyss., De Vit. Ephr., P. G., XLVI, 848) and others used this ceremony in exor- cising. The sign of the cross, that briefest and sim- plest way of expressing one's faith in the Crucified and invoking His Divine power, is extolled by many Fathers for its efficacy against all kinds of demoniac molestation (Lactantius, Inst., IV, 27, P. L., VI, 531 sq.; Athanasius, De Incarn. Verbi.,n. 47, P. G., XXV, ISO; Basil, In Isai., XI, 249, P. G., XXX, 557; Cyril of Je- rusalem, Cat., XIII, 3 col. 773; Gregory Nazianzen, Carm. adv. iram, v, 415 sq.; P. G., XXXVII, 842). The Fathers further recommend that the adjuration and accompanying prayers should be couched in the words of Holy Writ (Cyril of Jerus., Procat., n. 9, col. 350; Athanasius, Ad Marcell., n. 33, P. G., XXVII, 45). The present rite of exorcism as given in the Roman Ritual fully agrees with patristic teaching and is a proof of the continuity of Catholic tradition in this matter.
(2) Baptismal exorcism. At an early age the prao
