Could my past come back to haunt me?

[Lapsed]

Andrew_11:

Led Zeppelin isnt metal.

It was in the '70’s. Along with Black Sabbath, Deep Purple and other pioneers of heavy music.

Now Def Leppard, Great White and all the other 80’s hair bands - that’s not metal.

I’ve listened a lot of metal over the years - including bands like Death and Cannibal Corpse. The last big concert I ever went to was Testament and Megadeth openning for Judas Priest (it was over a decade ago). The first band I was in sounded a lot like Slayer (thanks mainly to my truly terrible vocals).

The effects of such music really depend on the individual. If there are underlying psychological issues, it can be damaging. For someone who is weak spiritually, it can be damaging. For others, it’s just music (or noise depending on taste). For me the attraction has always been the truly amazing musicians like Alex Skolnik and Steve Harris to be found in metal bands.

Can it lead to demon possession? Just listening to it and banging your head, highly unlikely. As a stepping stone into Satanism, possibly. It depends on how the individual reacts to it. Talk to your priest about how you feel it is affecting you, he may be able to give you some direction.

 

[hurst]

rayne89:

I think each person has to make their own assessment to where there weaknesses are. I still listen to Def Leppard, Led Zeppelin, Metallica and even Megadeth if I’m feeling a little nostalgic of my highschool days.

I don’t think it is wise to be listening to such rebellion and vice no matter how strong you may be (unless you are going among them to preach etc.)

Holy Scripture can be a good guide on this issue:

Philippians 4:8 For the rest, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever modest, whatsoever just, whatsoever holy, whatsoever lovely, whatsoever of good fame, if there be any virtue, if any praise of discipline, think on these things.

2 Timothy 2:22 But flee thou youthful desires, and pursue justice, faith, charity, and peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

rayne89:

I have never felt or experienced any Satanic influence by the music I listen to. I have never been drawn to evil things despite my earlier taste in music.

I’m not saying that all music is harmless but we can not tell you what the influence has been since we do not know you. If the music has made you think of evil things or seem to influence you to do evil acts then yes I would say the influence was considerable.

There is also the possibility that much is latent, waiting to spring up at a later time… Our memories can work against us later if we do not purify them now.

rayne89:

… purchase a St. Benedict’s cross (preferably one you can wear), have it blessed by a priest and then wear it. And avoid such music in the future.

Excellent advice.

hurst

 

[beckyann2597]

EtienneGilson:

Half of my record (now CD) collection is Led Zepplin and Pink Floyd. I noticed Supertramp was not on your list…for shame.

What about Neil Young, The Guess Who, flamming liberals like Bob Dylan, and Simon and Garfunkel. The Righteous Brothers convinced me to sell my soul to the devil and worship Baal. Oh wait, that was the Waterboys. Gordon Lightfoot caused me to drink.

The Logical Song and Another Brick in the Wall killed the education system…along with Twisted Sister which killed everything it touched.

Gowan made me a criminal…with a criminal mind.

Franz Schubert intentionally left the word “catholic” out of the credo in his Mass in G minor. Schubert has been directly linked to people converting to satanism or worse, protestantism and I believe he was mentioned in Fatima.

And the worst thing of all, the Boss was on stage with the devil John Kerry at a Demoncrat presidential campaign stop…

Hurst, have you ever listened to any of those groups you dismiss or claim are dangerous?

As Chesterton said, idolary is not only creating false gods, but also creating false daemons.

Don’t worry about curses and other supersticious things. From a Thomistic perspective they are the meaningless fantasies of ignorant people.

Brilliant! If you ever write a book I want to buy it! You are absolutely correct and I seriously laughed out loud while reading your post.

 

[RobNY]

hurst:

I strongly disagree!

hurst

Perhaps, hurst, the better Scripture to apply here would be the Romans 14 principle:

1 Welcome anyone who is weak in faith, but not for disputes over opinions. 2 One person believes that one may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats must not despise the one who abstains, and the one who abstains must not pass judgment on the one who eats; for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on someone else’s servant? Before his own master he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. 5 (For) one person considers one day more important than another, while another person considers all days alike. Let everyone be fully persuaded in his own mind. 2 6 Whoever observes the day, observes it for the Lord. Also whoever eats, eats for the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while whoever abstains, abstains for the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 None of us lives for oneself, and no one dies for oneself. 8 For if we live, we live for the Lord, 3 and if we die, we die for the Lord; so then, whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.

If the thread maker feels this poses a threat to him, then by all means, let us not test our brother who is weak in his faith. I personally do enjoy classic rock of course.

What about Neil Young,

I would be especially wary around this specimen. For the sake of your ears, of course. But if you’ve become acclimated to his voice, then perhaps it isn’t so bad. You wouldn’t happen to be familiar with his album with Crazy Horse, Zuma?

 

[hurst]

EtienneGilson:

Don’t worry about curses and other supersticious things. From a Thomistic perspective they are the meaningless fantasies of ignorant people.

Curses are not superstitious. We need not worry if we face and deal with them in faith and grace. But that does not mean ignore that they can have an adverse effect.

As for the Thomistic view, cursing is real, and is either good or evil, depending on the intent

A curse may be pronounced in two ways: first, so that the intention of the one who curses is fixed on the evil which he invokes or pronounces, and cursing in this sense is altogether forbidden. Secondly, so that the evil which a man invokes in cursing is intended for the good of the one who is cursed, and thus cursing is sometimes lawful and salutary: thus a physician makes a sick man undergo pain, by cutting him, for instance, in order to deliver him from his sickness.

Summa Theologica
See: OF CURSING (FOUR ARTICLES)
catholicprimer.org/summa/SS/SS076.html#SSQ76OUTP1

hurst

 

[hurst]

Shameless:

I used to draw pentagrams and pray to the devil … I really messed myself up, now I’m having trouble getting things right. … I feel like I’m being held back, like something or someone is interfering with my spirituality. … I just feel like I’m only going through the motions of being Catholic, like I’m plugged in but there is no juice - if that makes any sense.

You need to show perseverance and do small acts of self-sacrifice. And let me recommend the Rosary, which you can do as a service to Our Lady.
rosary-center.org/

If you help her to thank God in each Hail Mary, you will not go without a reward from her. She is very grateful for all we do in love.

Matthew 10:41 He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive the reward of a prophet: and he that receiveth a just man in the name of a just man, shall receive the reward of a just man. 42 And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.

And also, there is a saint, Bl. Bartolo Longo, who has an interesting story you may want to read, since he fell into satanism quite deep, and benefitted by the Rosary.
marymediatrix.com/kb/kb6/14.shtml

Look into consecrating yourself to Jesus through Mary. Mary crushes the head of the serpent.

“Consecration to the Mother of God,” says Pope Pius XII, “is a total gift of self, for the whole of life and for all eternity; and a gift which is not a mere formality or sentimentality, but effectual, comprising the full intensity of the Christian life — Marian life.” This consecration, the Pope explained, “tends essentially to union with Jesus, under the guidance of Mary.”

By our consecration we promise to become dependent on Mary in all things: to offer all our prayers and oblations to God through Mary, and to seek every gift from God through Mary. And we do this with the greatest confidence. Since she is our mother, she knows our needs better than we; and since she is Queen of Heaven, she has immediate access to the infinite treasury of graces in the Kingdom of her Divine Son.

Mary is not only the Mother of Jesus, Son of the Eternal Father; she is also Mother of all the Father’s adopted children. As their Mother, she has been given the role of molding them into the likeness of Jesus.

CONSECRATION TO THE IMMACULATE HEART OF MARY
rosary-center.org/consecrt.htm

hurst

 

[hurst]

EtienneGilson:

I don’t know what Fr. Corapi has said on the issue but I have run into the infamous Fr. Gabriel Amorth before.

As for chants and incantations, I would rather side with the Vatican than some wacko-priest (or together with Fr. Malachi Martin) or loonie priests.

I would be more warry of men like Fr. Amorth than demonic possession

Fr. Amorth is well respected from all accounts in my circles. I ask that you consider the path you are on in what may be termed as detraction and railing.

Still if the most you can do is name-calling, then there must not be anything of substance to dismiss him on. The only thing you showed is that he feels hindered in his work due to the ritual changes.

hurst

 

[Ianjo99]

I still listen to a majority of music deemed demonic by some. I really think it’s a stretch to condemn certain bands and such as evil.

Subliminal messaging is hardly substantiated by medicine, and, even if it does exist, I think you would see a greater number of people affected.

As far as a curse goes, I don’t really think people have the power to commit curses on things. I don’t see objects as intrinsically evil. What you do with it may very well be evil, but as far as the music itself? If you do find yourself committing deeds because of that music, well then yeah, stay away from that.

I believe God is a little more powerful than words chanted by idiots desperate for a sale. As someone already said, curses are little more than superstition IMHO.

 

[Ghosty]

I used to be a big metal head, I listened to a lot of heavy metal music as a teen and early 20’s, I am afraid I may have let a lot of demonic influences into my life that would explain some of the sin I am caught into now. I used to listen to Metallica, AC/DC, Black Sabbath, Led Zepplin, Def Leppard, Obituary, Testament, Exodus, Anthrax, Megadeth, Helloween, Iron Maiden and a lot more.

The only thing that might come back to haunt you is your taste

Peace and God bless!

 

[EtienneGilson]

Shameless:

I mean you no disrespect but why are you talking badly of Fr. Gabriel Amorth? He IS a priest in good standing and is the leading exorcist of Rome, he was appointed by the Vicar of Rome, he is no wacko

All those things are not guarantees against being a wacko. I seem to remember a certain African Cardinal getting married in the Moonies cult, a Cardinal named by the Pope himself. On the other side of the spectrum Karl Rahner and Hans Kung are/were priests in good standing and periti (theological experts) at VII though I doubt you take their word as literal truth. The FACT is that this priest is on record for stating that the Vatican has made the liturgy a “farce” (direct quote). It is in the authority of the Holy See to alter any liturgiy as it sees fit. This priest has espoused a kind of hocus-pocus view of the liturgy of exorcism and sided with people who see boogey-men under the bed rather than the Vatican which has taken a moderate approach informed by modern psychology.

I take my theology from the Vatican, not from Hollywood movies like “The Exorcist”.

I have seen no evidence that Fr. Corapi believes these curses carry any weight. The most your example gives is that Hollywood has some serious issues and their priorities are askew. Let drug dealers put spells on heroin all they want…heroin is no more addictive and disruptive because some self-proclaimed “Priest of Satan” repeats some worn-out pig-latin phrases over the drug.

A quick aside about Led Zepplin. Many of their songs, including The Battle of Evermore, Misty Mountain Hops and Ramble On, are songs inspired by the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit: two stories written by the devoutly Catholic Oxford scholar J.R.R. Tolkien. If anyone can find anything objectionable in “When the Levee Breaks” then I’ll eat my CD.

All this reminds me of the Tipper Gore fiasco.

Oh Beckyann, it has been a lifelong dream of mine to write a book…but this subject never crossed my mind. Of course I should be hung, drawn and quartered for forgetting The Grateful Dead. Whiskey in the Jar (later covered by Metallica…a nice job I might add) caused me to rob Colonel Pepper, punch a police officer and foreswear women. For shame Gerry Garcia…for shame.

RobNY, Neil Young is great…with or without Crazy Horse. His later stuff like Silver and Gold have a different feel. Harvest Moon was likely his last great album. Cortez the Killer (though terrible history) was likely his best song, but who can forget Ohio…even Richard Nixon has got soul!

hurst:

Fr. Amorth is well respected from all accounts in my circles. I ask that you consider the path you are on in what may be termed as detraction and railing.

Hurst, firstly you have deliberately misrepresented Thomism. To paraphrase the late and great Judge Reihnquist, “I can forgive anything except misrepresenting Thomas Aquinas” (well, he forgave everything but not having a sense of humour, but you get the point). Nowhere in the Summa is your quote found. Not only that but the Summa doesn’t discuss the effect of cursing (spell-casting) but rather the implications for those who WISH evil on another person. It is drawn from the same passage as those who commit adultry in their heads. Aquinas doesn’t state that cursing is wrong because it binds evil spirits to souls, but rather because it is a manifestation of a desire to harm.

*To curse is the same as to speak ill. Now “speaking” has a threefold relation to the thing spoken. First, by way of assertion, as when a thing is expressed in the indicative mood: in this way “maledicere” signifies simply to tell someone of another’s evil, and this pertains to backbiting, wherefore tellers of evil [maledici] are sometimes called backbiters. Secondly, speaking is related to the thing spoken, by way of cause, and this belongs to God first and foremost, since He made all things by His word, according to Ps. 32:9, “He spoke and they were made”; while secondarily it belongs to man, who, by his word, commands others and thus moves them to do something: it is for this purpose that we employ verbs in the imperative mood. Thirdly, “speaking” is related to the thing spoken by expressing the sentiments of one who desires that which is expressed in words; and for this purpose we employ the verb in the optative mood. * newadvent.org/summa/307601.htm

I believe that the Vatican’s position has been clear on the issue of exorcism, seek psycheatric help first. Fr. Amorth might not like it, but the days of masturbation causing blindness and spirits causing epilepsy are over. Let’s not degrade God, man and the Church by looking for demons where none exist.

I believe that one of the leading interpretations of “The Sin Against the Spirit” (the only unforgivable thing) is: attributing to the devil that which is of God. Think about that next time you claim Led Zepplin or Elton John are “of the devil”.

 

[hurst]

Ianjo99:

As someone already said, curses are little more than superstition IMHO.

Let’s compare notes:

Josue 9:23 Therefore you shall be under a curse, and your race shall always be hewers of wood, and carriers of water unto the house of my God.

Judges 9:57 The Sichemites also were rewarded for what they had done, and the curse of Joatham the son of Jerobaal came upon them.

2 Esdras 13:2 Because they met not the children of Israel with bread and water: and they hired against them Balaam, to curse them, and our God turned the curse into blessing.

Matthew 15:4 Honour thy father and mother: And: He that shall curse father or mother, let him die the death.

Mark 11:21 And Peter remembering, said to him: Rabbi, behold the fig tree, which thou didst curse, is withered away.

There is legitimate cursing, and forbidden cursing. Cursing can be a punishment by God (Jesus cursed the fig tree), or it can be a wicked intent to do unjust evil (cursing parents).

But it is not superstitious. The fact is, since the devil has a certain dominion over our race due to Adam’s sin (dogma), and he is the agent of punishment by God, then it can be seen to make sense that the devil has, as it were, power to curse us with God’s punishments according to our sins.

Tobias 6:14 Then Tobias answered, and said: I hear that she hath been given to seven husbands, and they all died: moreover I have heard, that a devil killed them. 15 Now I am afraid, lest the same thing should happen to me also: … 16 Then the angel Raphael said to him: Hear me, and I will shew thee who they are, over whom the devil can prevail. 17 For they who in such manner receive matrimony, as to shut out God from themselves, and from their mind, and to give themselves to their lust, as the horse and mule, which have not understanding, over them the devil hath power.

That is yet another reason to remain in the state of grace.

hurst

 

[hurst]

EtienneGilson:

hurst:

As for the Thomistic view, cursing is real, and is either good or evil, depending on the intent

A curse may be pronounced in two ways: first, so that the intention of the one who curses is fixed on the evil which he invokes or pronounces, and cursing in this sense is altogether forbidden. Secondly, so that the evil which a man invokes in cursing is intended for the good of the one who is cursed, and thus cursing is sometimes lawful and salutary: thus a physician makes a sick man undergo pain, by cutting him, for instance, in order to deliver him from his sickness.

Summa Theologica
See: OF CURSING (FOUR ARTICLES)
[catholicprimer.org/summa/SS/SS076.html#SSQ76OUTP1](http://www.catholicprimer.org/summa/SS/SS076.html#SSQ76OUTP1)

Hurst, firstly you have deliberately misrepresented Thomism. … Nowhere in the Summa is your quote found.

Actually, I quoted a small excerpt from excommunication as a curse, but then referred the link to the page on cursing, because the page on excommunication was not my main focus. That is why I wrote “See:”.

But since you feel I “deliberately misrepresented Thomism”, here is the link where my quote is from:

Summa Theoligica
Whether the Church should excommunicate anyone?
Reply to Objection 1
catholicprimer.org/summa/XP/XP021.html

Sorry if you felt misled.

EtienneGilson:

Not only that but the Summa doesn’t discuss the effect of cursing (spell-casting) but rather the implications for those who WISH evil on another person. It is drawn from the same passage as those who commit adultry in their heads. Aquinas doesn’t state that cursing is wrong because it binds evil spirits to souls, but rather because it is a manifestation of a desire to harm.

It doesn’t matter that it doesn’t talk about spell-casting or binding spirits to souls. You said:

EtienneGilson:

Don’t worry about curses and other supersticious things. From a Thomistic perspective they are the meaningless fantasies of ignorant people.

I am not misrepresenting Aquinas when I refer to him to demonstrate that curses exist and are not superstition. Isn’t it rather you who is misrepresenting what a “curse” is by saying it is superstitious?

And I am not aware of any place in the Summa that he gives the perspective that they are “meaningless fantasies of ignorant people”. Quite the opposite!

Where is it defined that a curse is spell-casting or binding evil spirits to souls?

From Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Curse : \Curse\ (k?rs), v. t. [imp. & p. p. Cursed (k?rst) or Curst; p. pr. & vb. n. Cursing.] [AS. cursian, corsian, perh. of Scand. origin; cf. Dan. korse to make the sign of the cross, Sw. korsa, fr. Dan. & Sw. kors cross, Icel kross, all these Scand. words coming fr. OF. crois, croiz, fr. L. crux cross. Cf. Cross.]

1. To call upon divine or supernatural power to send injury upon; to imprecate evil upon; to execrate.
2. To bring great evil upon; to be the cause of serious harm or unhappiness to; to furnish with that which will be a cause of deep trouble; to afflict or injure grievously; to harass or torment.

Now, as to spell-casting and the like, that is something that people really try to do, with varying degrees of success. But if it works, it is because of other circumstances, such as collusion with the devil who actually does have ability to cause harm and oppress souls, due to sins. That is Church Dogma. (Ott p. 121-122)

All things are from God or allowed by Him, and one should not even curse the devil. Still, we should oppose him and his works. Our baptismal promises include renouncing the devil and all his pomps and works.

hurst

 

[Ghosty]

Fr. Amorth might not like it, but the days of masturbation causing blindness and spirits causing epilepsy are over.

So my poor eyesight isn’t a result of my past life of sin? Next thing you’ll tell me that my poor hearing isn’t from the music I listened to!

 

[jamesandjen]

Your past can always come back to haunt you in some way. When I got out of the military my dream was to become a cop. Well when you apply they ask you about things that you did and didn’t get caught for. Then they give you a lie detector test and ask you if you answered truthfully and included everything. Needless to say I was 27 years and and something I did when I was 16 came back to haunt me. Kids when you get your drivers license and your driving around and bump into a car and nobodies looking, just remember that one day that can come back to haunt you and it cost me my dream job. I was what the police were looking for, but I couldn’t pass the background. Now I have a job that I love, but I will always wonder about my dream job.

 

[Sean_O_L]

http://www.revolutionoflove.com/lessons/triumphant/bl_bartolo.htm

**Blessed Bartolo Longo **
(1841-1926)

Is it possible for an ex-satanist priest to be beatified by the Roman Catholic Church? The answer is yes! Blessed Bartolo Longo is proof of this.

Born in Latiano Italy, Bartolo was raised in a Godly home and was considered a pious child. This changed when Bartolo went off to the University of Naples where he, so to speak, hung out with the wrong crowd and got himself involved with the occult. Eventually he joined a group of satanists and became a satanic priest.

Following his entrance into the satanic priesthood Bartolo’s physical and mental health declined. After visiting his friend Vincenzo Pepe, who was a devout Catholic, Bartolo decided to quit satanism and returned to the Church. In 1871 Bartolo became a third order Dominican and took the name Brother Rosary.

Bartolo became a great Marian apostle. His prayer and spirituality was based on the most holy Rosary which is why John Paul II mentioned Bartolo several times in his Apostolic Letter on the Holy Rosary.

I believe there are two lessons we can learn from Bartolo. First, that no matter what you did in your past, no matter how far you have fallen, God is always there to invite you back into his loving embrace. Second, that if you want to overcome temptation, grow in holiness, and live your life for God, PRAY THE ROSARY!

God bless!

 

[EtienneGilson]

hurst:

Actually, I quoted a small excerpt from excommunication as a curse, but then referred the link to the page on cursing, because the page on excommunication was not my main focus. That is why I wrote “See:”.

But since you feel I “deliberately misrepresented Thomism”, here is the link where my quote is from:

Summa Theoligica
Whether the Church should excommunicate anyone?
Reply to Objection 1
catholicprimer.org/summa/XP/XP021.html

Sorry if you felt misled.

I’m sorry too, I never thought of looking at the section on Excommunication. Thank you for the link.

However, the quote is still taken out of context. I simple look at the objection (since it is a reply to an object) shows that Aquinas nowhere states these curses (spells or whatnot) have any demonic powers attached to them: Objection 1: It would seem that the Church ought not to excommunicate anyone, because excommunication is a kind of curse, and we are forbidden to curse (Rm. 12:14). Therefore the Church should not excommunicate.

catholicprimer.org/summa/XP/XP021.html

Allow me to answer your question for you by highlighting what you wrote:

Where is it defined that a curse is spell-casting or binding evil spirits to souls?

From Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Curse : \Curse\ (k?rs), v. t. [imp. & p. p. Cursed (k?rst) or Curst; p. pr. & vb. n. Cursing.] [AS. cursian, corsian, perh. of Scand. origin; cf. Dan. korse to make the sign of the cross, Sw. korsa, fr. Dan. & Sw. kors cross, Icel kross, all these Scand. words coming fr. OF. crois, croiz, fr. L. crux cross. Cf. Cross.]
1**. To call upon divine or supernatural power to send injury upon; to imprecate evil upon; to execrate**.
2. To bring great evil upon; to be the cause of serious harm or unhappiness to; to furnish with that which will be a cause of deep trouble; to afflict or injure grievously; to harass or torment.

When you originally wrote about cursing: * Also, satanic groups not involved in the band could have also put a curse on such music that lent itself so much to demonic suggestions. * you were obviously refering to some form of spell-casting.

Now, as to spell-casting and the like, that is something that people really try to do, with varying degrees of success.

It might be something they try to do, but never with verying degrees of success. Thomism might have discussed the effects of casting a spell or a curse on the state of the soul of the person who cast it, but I have yet to see any evidence that he believed that the curse had an exterior effect on the person to whom it was cast. From a Thomistic metaphysical position of form and matter, I am still want to see how he reconciled evil spirits with physical causality.

But if it works, it is because of other circumstances, such as collusion with the devil who actually does have ability to cause harm and oppress souls, due to sins. That is Church Dogma. (Ott p. 121-122)

I like to believe that the person mature in their faith has moved away from the notion of God as a Santa Claus looking grandfather figure, and the devil as some boogey-man.

I believe that it is necessary to point out that the cursing refered to in the passages from the Summa and the cursing (spell-casting) we are discussing are two seperate things. Thomas’ cursing is found in “petty injustices to the world” section right after whispering and derision. Wow, this kind of cursing IS serious

Here is what Walter Farrell notes on the passage:

Cursing directed against God is blasphemy; against the irrational world it is a waste of breath, for good and evil have no place where necessity if king; against the devil, it is an attempt to gild the lily. More often than not, cursing is no more than a safety-valve blowing off the steam of impatience and anger that have proved too much for a limited vocabulary. (Companion to the Summa, Vol. 3 p. 232)

I do not see any spiritual powers here. I am more worried about negative messages in music, such as the objectification of women and the encouragement of violence in rap, than spirit-curses on Metallica albums.

 

[Shameless]

EtienneGilson:

I believe that the Vatican’s position has been clear on the issue of exorcism, seek psycheatric help first. Fr. Amorth might not like it, but the days of masturbation causing blindness and spirits causing epilepsy are over. Let’s not degrade God, man and the Church by looking for demons where none exist.

So what you don’t believe in the devil? You quoted that you stand behind what the Vatican says of all this yet you don’t cite where you are getting your information, exactly what Vatican documents are you refering to? I think perhaps you should read the Bible and the Catechism. The Catechism is full of references to demonic possession. Fr. Amorth is a well respected priest I suggest you get your facts straight before you call a man of God a loony or a wacko. The Popes have been are well aware and approve of Fr. Amorth’s work, Pope John Paul II even did exorcisms while he was Pope.

 

[EtienneGilson]

Shameless:

So what you don’t believe in the devil? You quoted that you stand behind what the Vatican says of all this yet you don’t cite where you are getting your information, exactly what Vatican documents are you refering to? I think perhaps you should read the Bible and the Catechism. The Catechism is full of references to demonic possession. Fr. Amorth is a well respected priest I suggest you get your facts straight before you call a man of God a loony or a wacko. The Popes have been are well aware and approve of Fr. Amorth’s work, Pope John Paul II even did exorcisms while he was Pope.

Give it up, even the CatholicAnswers website has an article which falls JUST short of calling Fr. Amorth a wacko:

Surpassing Credulity

We need a good book on both extraordinary demonic activity—since there has been so much of it lately—and on exorcism, now that the new rite of exorcism has been released. Fr. Gabriel Fr. Amorth’s An Exorcist Tells His Story is probably not that book.

Fr. Amorth is the chief exorcist for the Diocese of Rome. He makes the astounding claim to have performed 30,000 exorcisms over nine years (129), a number that surpasses the credulity of even the most favorably disposed reader. And though this particular claim appears late in the book, a careful reader will encounter various other problems throughout.

Fr. Amorth’s book will not fare well under scholarly, or even under commonly thoughtful, analysis. For starters, there are no footnotes, no bibliography, and no index. Save for a small number of textual references, there is no way to check most of Fr. Amorth’s multitudinous assertions, even many that he claims are well-documented. And as for the personal, real-life life episodes described by Fr. Amorth, they are frequently unconvincing.

Consider one of three examples of a “curse” narrated by Fr. Amorth (130–131): A father cursed his son at birth and continued to curse him as long as the son lived at home. The son, says Fr. Amorth, “suffered from every conceivable misfortune”—poor health, unemployment, marriage difficulties, and health problems with his own children. But how does any of this prove the existence of a curse? These sad facts seem readily explainable as the common manifestations of an emotionally battered child. With dads like that, who needs devils?

Inconsistencies are common in Fr. Amorth’s book. For example, he correctly notes that canon law requires priests to obtain express permission to perform an exorcism and that such a solemn rite should be applied only after diligent examination (see canon 1172). Yet Fr. Amorth describes case after case of people who seem to appear on his doorstep, and he immediately sets about performing an exorcism (70, 77, 88, 158–159). Even accepting Fr. Amorth’s claim that only 94 of his 30,000 exorcisms represented full-blown possession (the only scenario for which exorcism is canonically authorized), that equates to nearly one case per month that had to be thoroughly examined and processed over nine years, a daunting feat to say the least.

The author is critical of physicians who treat patients for years with little or no results (62, 70), and yet he does not blush at recording his own weekly exorcisms of some people that run on for years (49, 73, 139, 169). He correctly outlines the eventual triumph of Christ over Satan that is manifested in exorcism cases (19–23, 56, 96), but then tells about a house that was so infested, “I was forced to recommend simply leaving the place” (125). What are we to make of this? That some places are off limits to God? Fr. Amorth also dismisses as a “false belief” the idea that the devil will expose the sins of the others during the expulsion ceremonies, then he immediately provides two examples of the devil doing precisely that (94–95).

Some of Fr. Amorth’s assertions are jarring. For example, he describes the bizarre objects that the unfortunate people he works with have ingested, and states that this practice might be a sign of demonic activity (118–119). Indeed, it might be. But it might also be a sign of pica, schizophrenia, or even Kleine-Levin syndrome, none of which Fr. Amorth alludes to.

catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0001revw.asp

As for believing in the Devil…I take the episode of the fallen angels just as seriously as the episode of Adam and Eve in the garden. I do not know what the Devil is but it is a little much to blame everything on him.

Does the devil exist? If the devil is pure evil, and existence is inherently good, then it is logically impossible for the devil to exist per se. The possible existence of a non-existent being is an interesting question but according to Thomism it is hard to reconcile with metaphysics.

 

[rayne89]

EtienneGilson:

Give it up, even the CatholicAnswers website has an article which falls JUST short of calling Fr. Amorth a wacko: catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0001revw.asp

As for believing in the Devil…I take the episode of the fallen angels just as seriously as the episode of Adam and Eve in the garden. I do not know what the Devil is but it is a little much to blame everything on him.

Does the devil exist? If the devil is pure evil, and existence is inherently good, then it is logically impossible for the devil to exist per se. The possible existence of a non-existent being is an interesting question but according to Thomism it is hard to reconcile with metaphysics.

Maybe it would wise to start a seperate thread on the subject of curses or Fr. Amorth since we seemed to have stayed from the original subject matter of this thread.

 

[Anguirus]

I’ve damaged myself as well, although in a different way and I still feel the urge to fall back into sin sometimes. Sometimes I do. I find the best thing is to do is try to repair the damage by developing a greater relationship with God and treating each failure as a greater incentive to succead. Whenever I fall back into sin, I always take a look at what I was doing and say “Okay, what could I and should I have done differently and what can I do in the future so that when this comes around again I don’t fail?” Also, whenever you fail make sure you go to confession, since that will help also. Try to keep people like St. Augustine, Mary Magdaline, and King David in mind as you strive to repair the damage, and pray often.

God bless, and may all the saints give you help.