Possession, Demoniacal And Other

by T K Oesterreich

  In spite of these disorders he was, at least from time to time, able to work. According to his wife it was only a few years since he had himself carried the stones to a great building which he had undertaken.

  He had grown very thin, and when he spoke of his state his head or body was suddenly bent and visibly drawn inwards. Without being able to prevent it he would suddenly be obliged to cry out like an animal.…

  In his natural state he looked a quiet and gentle person and spoke accordingly. But in the middle of the conversation the facial expression, bodily posture, and tone of voice often changed suddenly, he became irascible, walked gesticulating as if filled with anger, but nevertheless always retained the full use of his senses. He is a peaceable and God-fearing man, but not bigoted, and his wife is like him.…

  The magico-magnetic treatment had the result of obliging the demon who had hidden in him for thirty-six years to speak forthwith. A strange demoniac voice then made itself heard by his mouth, which had never happened before.1

  These singular “methods of treatment” are of great interest from the psychological point of view, for they show that by artificial means and in appropriate suggestive and autosuggestive conditions it is possible to induce division of the psychic life. Naturally this method might still be applied with success to many ignorant persons, and we should then be in an ideal position, theoretically speaking, to explore the psychology of possession in a truly experimental manner. But from the practical point of view the student could hardly bring himself to provoke these disturbances voluntarily, for, as the literature of the subject shows they are far easier to cause than to cure. It would be difficult to make them disappear by hypnotic suggestion, because persons affected by compulsive phenomena are only slightly, if at all, susceptible to hypnosis. For this reason we should, at least before trying to induce possession, impart in the state of hypnosis the suggestions which would later serve to make it disappear. In any case attempts of this nature would entail such a responsibility that they are to be deprecated.

  Finally yet another case may be cited in which timely psychiatric treatment intervened before the demoniac visions resulting from a priest’s suggestion of the idea of possession had produced derangements of the personality.

  The fits of sleep generally succeeded convulsive attacks; V. was not forewarned of their advent. Their duration varied from one to four days, and they ended in tears and depression. “Everything seemed odd to me, I did not recognize myself at all.” The greater the efforts to calm and console her, the more her tears redoubled. In addition she was prostrate with fatigue.

  At Lariboisière (a hospital) the almoner came to see her after her attacks; he told her that it was the devil who made her ill. Presently under the influence of this idea her malady redoubled in intensity and in the delirious period of the convulsive fits she saw the devil. “He was tall, with scales and legs ending in claws; he stretched out his arms as if to seize me; he had red eyes and his body ended in a great tail like a lion’s, with hair at the end; he grimaced, laughed, and seemed to say: “I shall have her!”

  The nun and the almoner had persuaded her that she was possessed by the devil because she did not pray enough, and that she would not recover. She had masses said for which she paid a franc or one franc fifty; she confessed and took communion; the almoner sprinkled her with holy water and made signs over her.

  Sometimes V. saw the devil between her fits. If she was in bed she hid her face under the bedclothes to escape from the apparition; but she saw it nevertheless. The more she was talked to about the devil the more she saw him and the more violent and frequent became her attacks.

  In the first months of her admission to the Saltpêtrière she still had diabolic visions. As she went to church less and no one talked to her any more about the devil, she gradually regained her tranquillity and finally got rid of the idea “that she belonged to the devil.”1

  The fact that possession springs from belief in the devil joined to auto- and hetero-suggestion accounts for the fact that it has always been most extensive in the least educated classes of society.

  Hardly any example is known of possession in a really cultured individual. This affliction generally befalls persons of inferior station, which explains the coarse and vulgar tone of the alleged demons.2

  Finally, as regards the artificial extinction of possession, it has always been suggestive in character and has even resulted from “exorcism,” that is to say, the emphatic ordering of the so-called demon to leave the possessed person. The stories of the Gospels are in this respect typical of the procedure of exorcism at all times. It has never varied, either in the time of Jesus or during the millenaries before and since. The exorcist always speaks to the demon and tries to induce him, by contingent threats and in the name of a deity (Jesus, etc.), to leave the possessed. The most frequent procedure has been one of threats and commands.

  Exorcism presents the exact counterpart of the genesis of possession. In the same way that the latter springs from a man’s belief that he is possessed, conversely it disappears, when the exorcism is successful, through his belief that it will no longer continue. The inner nature of this effect of conviction on psychic phenomena is not known and cannot be elucidated. The theory of suggestion can do no more than recognize it. Just as we can say little about the physiological effects of suggestion and autosuggestion, the production of vesications and bleeding stigmata, so do their deep-seated psychic effects escape our closer knowledge. We cannot avoid the difficulty by merely affirming the connection between faith and the changes which it brings to pass. What should, however, be possible is a more exact analysis of the psychic state during enhanced suggestibility.1

  Of specimens of exorcism there is no lack. We possess some dating from the first days of the Christian era, and also from earlier times. Recent finds of papyri have been particularly rich in them, but it should be noted that as sickness and possession have often been identified, the great abundance of exorcisms does not correspond to an equal number of true cases of possession, but to pathological states of every kind. Exorcisms of possession properly so called are in the minority.

  As example of these latter we shall give the grand formula taken from the magic papyrus of Paris and published by Wesseley. It certainly served against possession, since the demon was summoned to give an account of himself. According to Deissmann it is an exorcism of Jewish origin into which a pagan has introduced the name of Jesus.

  Against demoniacal possession. The tried formula of Pibechis (a celebrated magician). Take of the juice of green fruits, together with the plant Mastigia (?) and lotus-pith, and heat it with marjoram (the colourless kind); then pronounce the following words: “Joel, Ossarthiomi, Emori, Theochipsoith, Sithemeoch, Sothe, Joe, Mimipsothiooph, Phersothi. AEEĪOYŌ, Joe, Eochariphtha; get thee out of N.N.” (and other formulæ). But write the protecting charm on a tablet of tin: “Jæo, Abraothioch, Phtha, Mesentiniao, Pheoch, Jæo, Charsok,” and hang it upon the sick person. To every demon it is a thing of fear which he dreads. Place thyself in front of the patient and conjure him. The formula of exorcism is the following: “I conjure thee by the God of the Hebrews, Jesus (later interpolation from a non-Jewish source), Jaba, Jæ, Abraoth, Aia, Thoth, Ele, Elo, Æo, Eu, Jiibæch, Abarmas, Jabarau, Abelbel, Lona, Abra, Maroia, Arm, appearing in fire, thou, Tannetis, in the midst of plains, and snow, and mists; let thine inexorable angel descend and put into safe keeping the wandering demon of this creature whom God has created in his holy Paradise. For I pray to the Holy God, putting my reliance in Ammonipsentancho.” Say: “I conjure thee with a flood of bold words: Jakuth, Ablanathanalba, Akramm.” Say: “Aoth, Jathabathra, Chach-thabratha, Chamynchel, Abrooth. Thou art Abrasiloth, Allelu, Jelosai, Jæl: I conjure thee by him who manifested himself to Osræl by night in a pillar of fire and in a cloud by day and who has saved his people from the hard tasks of Pharaoh and brought down on Pharaoh the Ten Plagues because he would not harken. I conjure thee, demoniac spirit, to say who tho
u art. For I conjure thee by the seal Solomon placed upon the tongue of Jeremiah that he might speak. Say therefore who thou art, a celestial being or spirit of the airs.1

  A detailed history of Christian exorcism is to be found in the seventh book, second part, of A. J. Binterim’s work: Die vorzüglichsten Denkwürdigkeiten der christ-katholischen Kirche.2 In the third essay entitled “Of Energumens and their Treatment in the Primitive Church,” the information furnished by the early Christian writers about the possessed is collected and dealt with.

  Like so many other things in the Catholic Church, the growth of exorcism came to an end at the time of the Counter-Reformation. This was due to the publication in 1614, consequent on the repeated request of Paul V, of the Rituale Romanum. The rite of exorcism formulated therein has remained the accepted one up to the present time.

  Amongst other works the Manuale Exorcismorum1 gives a complete insight into the procedure of exorcism. It contains instructions as to how exorcisms should be carried out and gives a great number of ritual formulæ. These latter are in some instances voluminous, the most important occupying close on forty pages.

  Exorcism never draws its strength from the exorcist, but is always carried out in the name of God, of Jesus, etc. The Manual warns the exorcist that he is dealing with an ancient and astute adversary, strong and exceedingly evil: antiquo et asturo hoste, forti et nequissimo. The first arm and the most important is therefore a lively faith, an absolute confidence in God and Jesus. The exorcist must be convinced that nihil se posse absque ejus singulari assistentia et auxilio.

  By way of subjective preparation for exorcism he must compose himself inwardly. Revocabit mentem et spiritum a curis et negotiis sœcularibus eamque pacatam et tranquillam reddere studebit meditationibus piis et precibus. Preliminary fasting and prayer are also recommended: Nunquam ad exorcisandum accedet nisi prœvio ieiunio vel aliis pœnitentiœ et satisfactoriis operibus nisi prœsens necessitas aliud videatur exigere. Incessanter orabit etiam privatim aliosque ad prœdicta bona opera et pietatis exercitia invitabit eleemosynasque elargiri curabit.2

  The scene of the exorcism should in general be the church or some other place consecrated to God. Only in cases of urgency may it take place in a private house. Women and children should be excluded, as well as the vulgar curious. But the exorcist should not operate without witnesses. He should provide ut adsint viri graves et pii, prœsertim clerici, Sacerdotes vel Religiosi, si haberi possint, qui non solum erunt testes sacrarum actionum, sed etiam ipsum iuvabunt orationibus et piis desideriis.3 It is left to the discretionary power of the exorcist to decide whether the exorcism shall take place in public or not.

  At Loudun there must have been at times as many as 7,000 spectators.

  The exorcisms of Nicole de Vervins (1566) were also great spectacles. All the Catholics and Protestants came in crowds from the surrounding district to the cathedral of Laon, the civil authorities were also present, and the Huguenots claimed reserved seats;1 nothing was lacking except the collection of an entrance fee. It almost came to a serious fight between the armed Catholic priests with their following and the retainers of a Protestant landowner of the district.

  The principal exorcism of the Rituale Romanum published by order of Paul V is enclosed between long prayers at the beginning and end and in the middle is inserted another prayer, so that the whole is divided into five parts: prayer, exorcism, prayer, exorcism, prayer, again interrupted in many places by readings from the Scriptures. From the psychological point of view this construction is by no means inept. While the exorcism seeks to work upon the “demon” by threats and commands, the prayers are designed to help the possessed person, reinforcing his desire to be delivered from the demon, and increasing his confidence in the divine power which is invoked. Nevertheless cures by a single application of exorcism appear to have been rare; exorcisms last as a rule for days, weeks, months and even years. The impression made upon the possessed by the conjuration is further enhanced by signs of the cross () and the winding of the priest’s stole round his neck together with layings-on of hands; sacraments, holy water and other sacred objects are also used. The exorcist must speak as is formally prescribed, constanter et magna cum fide.

  Two passages from the exorcism may be given as example:

  Exorciso te, iinmundissime spiritus, omnis incursio adversarii, omne phantasma, omnis legio, in nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi; eradicare et effugare ab hoc plasmate Dei. Ipse tibi imperat, qui te de supernis cælorum in inferiora terrae demergi praecepit. Ipse tibi imperat, qui mari, ventis et tempestatibus imperavit. Audi ergo et time satana, inimice fidei, hostis generis humani, mortis adductor, vitæ raptor, iustitiæ declinator, malorum radix, fomes vitiorum, seductor hominum, proditor gentium, incitator invidiæ, origo avaritiæ, causa discordiæ, excitator dolorum. Quid stas et resistis cum scias Christum Dominum vires tuas perdere? Illum metue, qui in Isaac immolatus est, in Joseph venumdatus, in agno occisus, in homine crucifìxus, deinde inferni. Triumphator fuit (Sequentes, Cruces fiant in fronte obsessis). Recede ergo in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti, da locum Spiritui sancto, per hoc signum Crucis Jesu Christi Domini nostri. Qui cum Patre et eodem Spiritu sancto vivit et regnat Deus per omnia sæcula sæculorum.1

  Adiuro te serpens antique, per Judicem vivorum et mortuorum, per factorem tuum, per factorem mundi, per eum qui habet potestatem mittendi te in gehennam, ut ab hoc famulo Dei N., qui ad Ecclesiæ sinum recurrit, cum metu et exercitu furoris tui festinus discedas. Adiuro te iterum (in fronte) non mea infìrmitate, sed virtute Spiritus sancti, ut exeas ab hoc famulo Dei N. quem omnipotens Deus ad imaginem suam fecit. Cede igitur, cede non mihi, sed ministro Christi. Illius enim te urget potestas, qui te Cruci suæ subiugavit. Illius bracchium contremisce, qui devictis gemitibus inferni, animas ad lucem perduxit. Sit tibi terror corpus hominis (in pectore), sit tibi imago formido Dei (in fronte). Non resistas, nec moreris discedere ab homine isto, quoniam complacuit Christo in homine habitare. Et ne contemnendum putes, dum me peccatorem nimis esse cognoscis. Imperat tibi Deus Imperat tibi maiestas Christi . Imperat tibi Deus Pater imperat tibi Deus Filius, imperat tibi Deus Spiritus sanctus. Imperat tibi sacramentum Crucis . Imperat tibi fides Sanctorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli, et ceterorum Sanctorum . Imperat tibi Martyrum sanguis . Imperat tibi continentia Confessorum . Imperat tibi pia Sanctorum et Sanctarum omnium intercessio .Imperat tibi Christianæ fidei mysteriorum virtus . Exi ergo transgressor, exi seductor, plene omni dolo et fallacia, virtutis inimice, innocentium persecutor. Da locum dirissime; da locum impiissime: da locum Christo, inquo nihil invenisti de operibus tuis, qui te spoliavit, qui regnum tuum destruxit, qui te victum legavit.…

  Adiuro ergo te, draco nequissime, in nomine Agni immaculati, qui ambulavit super aspidem et basiliscum, qui conculcavit leonem et draconem, ut discedas ab hoc homine (fiat in fronte), discedas ab Ecclesia Dei (fiat signum super circumstantes), contremisce et effuge.…2

  In later times the curative action of Christian exorcism derived mainly from the solemn nature of the ritual. The Latin tongue ceased to be generally understood by the uncultured victims of possession.

  In place of command and menace, other methods of healing may also be used. In the C. St. case of Eschenmayer, for example, efforts were formally made to convert the demon.

  The feature common to all methods is that the exorcist always addresses himself to the possessing spirit, never to the possessed. In clear cases of somnambulism it would moreover be inherently impossible to speak to the possessed because he does not generally react when called by his ordinary name. It is different in cases where the normal personality is preserved, and where it would be perfectly conceivable for the exorcist, in our day the doctor, to try to convince the patient that the demon will leave him at a given time. But even to-day, in the only case of this kind known to me, the doctor, that is to say, the psychologist, addressed himself to the demon,1 for the undoubted reason that the patient is more accessible to strong suggestion in the somnambulistic than in the waking st
ate.

  It is worth emphasizing that as a rule success depends on the authority and power of suggestion of the exorcist. It is even important, particularly in a religious period, that he should himself be religious and convinced of the reality of possession if by that means his faith in the success of exorcism is increased. Secondary expedients of a suggestive nature are also brought to bear.

  In this connection Kerner formulates in his dogmatic way that:

  The cure is produced magically by prayer and conjurations, and chiefly by the name of Jesus pronounced with an assured faith.2

  But this magic influence (conjuration) must be given forth with the firmest will and faith, as if addressed to a real demon and not a malady, and the conversation with the articulate demon must be carried on in the same way.…

  If the prayer and conjuration are not carried out with the most complete faith that there is a real demon incarnate (and not poison from a scratch, etc.) no cure follows.3

  In the same way that a firm faith is required of him who conjures the demon, the patient should for his part and so far as in him lies take care not to weaken, and everything which might distract him must be kept from him. Persons able to perform conjuration with much faith are found rather amongst shepherds than amongst the educated.4

  Harnack similarly remarks:

  The message of Christian preaching does not alone suffice to cure the malady. Behind it there must be firm faith and a person sustained by that faith. It is not prayer which heals but he who prays; not the letter, but the spirit; not the exorcism, but the exorcist.5

  It might better be expressed: It is the faith of the possessed himself in the joyful message which comes to his aid; his shortcomings are, however, helped by an adequate personality in the messenger.

  There is no doubt that in present-day Christian missions there still survives something of that joyful assurance, that faith in the domination of the world, which animated primitive Christianity, and that their strong influence where they have penetrated rests essentially on the same factors which led early Christianity to success: the preaching of the Redeemer with an ardour free from all egotism, ready for sacrifice, even death, and combined with a standard of personal conduct corresponding to the faith.