New Film - Clearing Some Things Up (Jesus, priests, gospel)

[johnnys4life]

Just saw the trailer for what seems to be an interesting new movie called The Exorcism of Emily Rose, (which has a very awesome website with clips, trailers and information on possession, here click on "enter the site" and make sure to read the section under "possession" - a little scary!) I like a good horror movie now and then, I know many of you may be opposed to such things, so if that offends you please do not visit the site!

Although it was written by a practicing Catholic, and "based on" a true story, there are some misconceptions that I feel need to be cleared up concerning this film.

First off, yes it is very loosely based on the tragic case of a young woman named Anneliese Michel who was officially recognized as being possessed by the catholic church in 1976. This was later retracted by a bishop's conference after her untimely death.

Because she was involved in exorcism immediately prior to her death, a priest was charged for negligence in the matter. Many things I've read seem to indicate the priest had something to do with her death.

That is a lie.

This exorcism did not injure her or cause her death(!) Yes, the priest and/or her parents should've sent the girl to a mental institution, but there she would not have been helped, she had been there before and not been helped, just restrained and kept alive. The exorcism was to help her from the torment she was experiencing, however, it did not work. There is a great deal of secrecy surrounding what actually happens during exorcism, but the basic practice is making the sign of the cross, sprinkling a bit of holy water, and commanding the demon(s) to leave the afflicted person in the name of Christ.

Anneliese had died of starvation. The official cause of her death was self-inflicted starvation, and had nothing at all to do with the exorcism, besides the fact that during it, she threw herself into genuflection. At the time of her death, she weighed a mere 68 lbs.

Contrary to some accounts, she did not die at age 19 (the age she was when she became ill), but 23, after several years of failed attempts at seeing medical doctors, who's treatments did nothing at all for her, and priests who refused to perform exorcism. She was diagnosed with grand mal epilepsy, however, even the doctor who diagnosed her admitted he had never seen anything similar or even comparable to her case. [Which in my opinion probably meant he was struggling to put a label on what he was seeing, and settled on epilepsy].

From what I've read, the scientific community insists that her main problem was epilepsy. I'm not so sure...my dad has epilepsy. If you read what actually happened to Anneliese in the years between 19 and 23, it sounds like a lot more than that.

The thing was that she spoke in different voices, like someone possessed. She spoke in men's voices, a good deal of this is caught on over 40 tapes. There are even very strange things in them, like 2 demons arguing out of her mouth, over which one had to leave her. She would lash out and bite and beat people for no reason. She urinated all over the place, and even drank her own urine. She would lie on the floor eating spiders, coal, and flies. She smashed mirrors and wounded herself. She showed a strong aversion to religious objects such as crosses, but holy water seemed to help her symptoms temporarily.

During the exorcism, Anneliese herself, NOT THE PRIESTS, forced herself to genuflect (on her knees) about 600 times in a row. Her knees were very injured and practically worn through, yet she claimed the demons were making her do it. Her parents also believed her incredible strength (as that is quite a feat for someone weighing 68 lbs.!) was demonic.

Neither the priests, nor her parents, ever starved the girl. She claimed the demons would not allow her to have food. Her parents and the priest were charged with negligence because they never forcibly took her to a mental institution AT THAT TIME, (which would have been against her will, and this was when she was 23) and had her tied up and force-fed, which they definitely should have done! They were convicted, but the judge must have felt been persuaded in some manner, because they were sentence very mildly.

The church at the time did consider it an official exorcism. Later, probably because of pressure from the media, and also because of a ricochet effect it had, where many mental patients were suddenly claiming to also be possessed because of the story, did they confer and decide that it was not.

Personally, I still think she was!!! However, because of this case, the Roman Catholic church has issued several documents reminding priests to be extremely cautious of confusing mental illness with demonic possession. The media would like us to believe that exorcism happens all the time, but is just kept secret. In fact, there haven't been more than a handful of officially recognized exorcisms in the U.S. in recent years, and anywhere you go, getting an exorcism is extremely difficult and permission is rarely granted. In order to be recognized as a possession, there are several requirements that must be met to insure that it is not a hoax.

In the past, many mental illnesses were presumed to be of a demonic nature when in fact they were medical. Now, it seems the opposite is true.

Many times it seems people are all too willing to attack the Roman Catholic church for it's practices, and in this case, to assume that exorcism would normally cause injury and/or death. There is only one case I know of in which a priest was charged with violence during exorcism. This was, however, an exorcism which was not authorized by the church. Had they been notified in time, it might've been stopped before anyone got hurt.


There is a book written on the case of Anneliese, called The Exorcism of Anneliese Michel By Felicitas D. Goodman, which I presume has more information.

[johnnys4life]

VATICAN CITY (AP) - The Vatican issued new guidelines Tuesday [this is from the 1990's] for driving out devils, urging exorcists not to mistake psychiatric illness for diabolic possession - but also stressing the power of evil.

The new exorcism rite, in Latin and contained in a red, leather-bound, 84-page book, also reflects Pope John Paul II's efforts to convince the skeptical that the devil is very much in the world.

“The existence of the devil isn't an opinion, something to take or leave as you wish,” said Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, a Vatican official who presented the revisions. “Anyone who says he doesn't exist wouldn't have the fullness of the Catholic faith.”

John Paul has denounced the devil in a series of recent homilies as a “cosmic liar and murderer.”

In today's world, the cardinal said, the devil's force comes through widespread acceptance of “lies and deceit ... the idolatry of money ... the idolatry of sex.”

The new guidelines are the first revision to the exorcism rite since 1614. They did not

drastically change the words or the gestures used by exorcists, but they do provide optional texts for priests to use.

The novelty appears largely in the cautions offered to exorcists to take psychiatric medicine into account.[Novelty?? Excuse me, they've been saying that for decades!]

Exorcists must “not think possessed by a demon someone who is suffering from some illness, above all psychic,” or who is “the victim of one's own imagination,” the guidelines advise.

Among the widely accepted signs [*ahem* more generally, requirements] of possession by the devil are speaking in unknown tongues and demonstrating physical force beyond one's natural capacity.[There have also been validated cases which involved actual levitation of persons!]

The rite itself remains essentially the same. It involves making the sign of the cross, laying on hands, sprinkling holy water and ordering the devil to leave the possessed person.[Wow, how harmful that would be to non-possesed persons! ]

John Paul himself once performed an exorcism during his papacy, according to the memoirs of

Cardinal Jacques Martin, the former prefect of the pontifical household.

Quoting the late cardinal's book, “My Six Popes,” the Italian news agency ANSA said John Paul carried out the rite in 1982, driving out the devil from a woman who was brought to him writhing on the ground.

The new guidelines will eventually be translated into modern languages.

[Victor]

Johnnys4life, good read and thanks keeping us informed. I've always wondered about this. I've only seen one thing in which I could not explain. Church never got involved because my aunt didn't want to bother. It happen to my cousin. He is fine now. Long story.

~Victor

[Sabio]

Thanks for the interesting story Johnny. It amazes me that many Christians do not acknowledge the existence of demons (or the devil) and their operations as oppressors and in some case as possessors. I know this is a Catholic thread, and there is "tradition" which guides Catholic exorcism, but there are also many exorcisms done by other Christians in obedience to Jesus.

Sabio

Mark 16
17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[b] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Sabio

Thanks for the interesting story Johnny. It amazes me that many Christians do not acknowledge the existence of demons (or the devil) and their operations as oppressors and in some case as possessors. I know this is a Catholic thread, and there is "tradition" which guides Catholic exorcism, but there are also many exorcisms done by other Christians in obedience to Jesus.

Sabio

Mark 16
17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[b] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

Ya, I've heard of these, just never heard or seen how they are performed.

[michel]

Thank you Johnnys4life.

[Shadow Wolf]

I know the first Exorcist is very losly based on a true story. It's so losly based, it wasn't even a little girl that was possesed, it was a boy maybe about 12 or 13. If Hollywood is going to base a movie on something, they should get it all right.