De Exorcismus et supplicationibus quibusdam

  • Thread starter Thread starter creedseebas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

creedseebas

Guest
this is the new roman rite for exorcisms. it is 84 pages long. it was approved by the pope. anyone know where i can get a copy of it or of the old version? i already tried ebay and had no luck…and by th eway i know that only priests should perform exorcisms, i’m not gonna try to but i want a copy for my personal studies.
 
See my reply to your duplicate post in the Miscellaneous Forum.
 
It’s available here:
paxbook.com/texec/mediainfo.jsp?product_id=29963

from the Vatican online bookstore. The document is only available in Latin, because the prayers for exorcisms are only used by priests anyway. It should be noted also that not only should laity not attempt to perform exorcisms, the rite of Exorcism should not even be ready aloud by lay persons as imprecatory prayers should be reserved to the ordained.
 
Talking about exorcisms my niece thinks her four year old may be possessed. She has been baptized. Is it possible?
As for the original question posted I have to agree with Dr. Colussus: lay people should not be reading exorcism prayers. It is like children playing with matches. Prayer and fasting are our weapons.
 
As a point of clarification, I didn’t say that we shouldn’t read them, just that we should *use *them (i.e. say them out loud).

Regarding your neice’s four-year-old, it is possible for a baptised person to become posessed, though I read somewhere (sorry I don’t have the source) that they must allow the demon to enter them. In the case of a four-year-old, she wouldn’t have reached the age of reason to be capable of this. Was she baptized in the Catholic Church? If not, her baptism may not have been valid.

What signs suggest to your neice that she may be posessed?
 
WHO HAS THE POWER TO EXORCISE DEMONS?

The following question occurs frequently: “Since Protestants have no real concept of a central infallible authority, would God have granted us the power [to exorcise a demon] simply because we were acting on what we believed to be the proper scriptural interpretation?”

In reply we may say: Your instincts concerning the Mystical Body of Christ are ecclesiologically correct! Ignorance of the need for proper authority is bliss, that is, successful, *if and only if *God empowers it. But this is very dangerous all together, for without the proper authority one is personally opened up to the attacks of the evil one. Note that Jesus didn’t send everyone to cast out demons. In fact, He put quite a severe limitation on this, an action which is absolutely legitimate for the Church to imitate. In the code of canon law, mirrored by the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1673) we read this:

#1172. No one may lawfully exorcise the possessed without the special and express permission of the local Ordinary. This permission is to be granted by the local Ordinary only to a priest who is endowed with piety, knowledge, prudence, and integrity of life.

In September of 1985 (AAS) Cardinal Ratzinger rescinded the permission for both laity and non-exorcist priests to proceed with any kind of exorcism, something which also applies to the recitation of the exorcism of Leo XIII.

As it is, no one but an exorcist may give a direct command to the devil, for such a direct command, given in the name of Jesus, is by definition an exorcism. The most one can do is make prayers of intercession for the deliverance of the besieged person or thing in conjunction with other sacramentals of the Church such as holy water. Note that this has a place in the prayer of intercession, the Lord’s Prayer, at the end of which we pray, “deliver us from evil.” “Evil”, in this case, is to be understood as a personal evil, that is, the Evil One.

If you come across what you perceive to be a case of someone being harassed by the devil, or have a problem with a dwelling or a particular object, contact my colleague Fr. LeBar. — Counselor.
Provided Courtesy of:
Eternal Word Television Network
5817 Old Leeds Road
Irondale, AL 35210
www.ewtn.com
Electronic Copyright © 2000 EWTN
All Rights Reserved
 
WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PERFORM AN EXORCISM?
Are all exorcisms forbidden? The old moral theologians distinguished exorcism of a possessed person, which they called “solemn”; this is certainly restricted to an episcopally authorized exorcist. Then there are “simple” exorcisms, not indeed of a possessed person, but of, for example, catechumens. Those who have permission to use the traditional Roman Rite of Baptism certainly command the devil to “beat it”. Or again, if one were experiencing an extraordinary temptation by the devil, he is not allowed to say, “go to hell” to the devil? I don’t think Cardinal Ratzinger explicitly forbade all exorcisms, but only those of possessed persons. Comments?

I recently saw an interview with the President of Franciscan University at Stubenville, Fr. Scanlon, who seemed to think that simple exorcisms in cases of oppression and obsession were permitted.

In fact he made an interesting point that I had never heard before about confessors traditionally being encouraged to perform exorcisms as part of the rite of penance in cases of obsession.
Now exorcism, by definition, puts the devil under the pain of a law he must carry through (for instance, to depart). Every direct command and only a direct command to the devil is properly called an exorcism.

There is imprecatory exorcism, which is a direct command to the devil, something which might be called a solemn exorcism no matter how short or improvised or discreet. Formal examples include the ritual of exorcism of 1614 still in force to this day, as well as that of Leo XIII, as well as the one in the pre-Vatican II ritual of baptism, etc. Anyone authorized to perform this latter ritual of baptism is authorized to perform the exorcism present in that ritual. Solemn, major, public, official exorcism of the Church is a sacramental which necessitates a duly authorized priest. This involves imprecation, that is, a direct command to the devil given in the name of Jesus and the Church to depart from a person, place, or object. Such a command, that is, any such command, be it improvised or from a ritual, no matter how short or long, is by its very nature exorcism. Remember that Jesus Himself was extremely restrictive in his choice of exorcists.

There is also deprecatory exorcism, which is an intercessory prayer directed to God, the Virgin Mary, St. Michael, et alii, that they themselves command the devil instead of us, something which might be called a simple exorcism no matter how long or traditional or public. Deprecatory exorcism, is, strictly speaking, not an exorcism at all since there is no direct command to the devil involved. Formal examples include “exorcisms” of the new ritual of baptism, of the RCIA, the last petition of the Lord’s Prayer, etc.

continued
 
All are encouraged to participate in deprecatory “exorcism”, ordained or not, authorized or not, when necessary, but always, always in the name of Jesus and the Church. (Cf. the Lord’s Prayer.) No commands are to be given. But without authorization, all, including priests, are forbidden to perform imprecatory exorcisms. Minor, private, simple “exorcism” is necessarily restricted to deprecation, that is, intercessory prayer. This is true no matter the antiquity, length, or author.

I suggest that this is the type of “exorcism” to which the St. Alphonsus Liguori was referring concerning the usage of exorcism within the confessional. But even if this were not the case, remember that although the changing prudential judgment of the Church on the correct implementation of the sacramental of exorcism changes through the years according to the signs of the times, this does not make either St. Alphonsus a heretic or the present Magisterium heretical. Analogously, the implementation of the Novus Ordo does not make Pio V a heretic nor the present Magisterium of the Church heretical.

I’m not sure what you mean by the "traditional freedom of the faithful."I hope it does not mean the liberal flaunting of Church authority to do what one thinks best. The law of the Church (CIC 1172) is written in a manner which is “invalidating” and “incapacitating.” Restrictions are to be interpreted strictly, which in this case means that imprecation is left to authorized priests. See the Church’s own official interpretation in Inde ab aliquot annis (Die 29 m. Septembris a. 1985).

This is the present law of the Church and the present official interpretation. The mind of the legislator is clear according to legislated norms of interpretation. Some feel the prudential judgment of the Church to be inadaquate, both those who are more traditional and those who are more charismatic. The present law is indeed extremely restrictive. So was Jesus in this matter. There are reasons for this. Anyone performing any imprecatory exorcism without authorization is in extreme danger. I can’t emphasize this more. If one plays with fire, one WILL GET BURNT!

Electronic Copyright © 2000 EWTN
All Rights Reserved
 
Baptisms conducted in recognized Protestant religions are considered valid Christian Baptisms. I was Baptized in a Baptist Church and when converting to Catholicism through RCIA, my Baptism was considered valid.
Dr. Colossus:
As a point of clarification, I didn’t say that we shouldn’t read them, just that we should *use *them (i.e. say them out loud).

Regarding your neice’s four-year-old, it is possible for a baptised person to become posessed, though I read somewhere (sorry I don’t have the source) that they must allow the demon to enter them. In the case of a four-year-old, she wouldn’t have reached the age of reason to be capable of this. Was she baptized in the Catholic Church? If not, her baptism may not have been valid.

What signs suggest to your neice that she may be posessed?
Click to expand...
 
Dr. Colossus:
As a point of clarification, I didn’t say that we shouldn’t read them, just that we should *use *them (i.e. say them out loud).

Regarding your neice’s four-year-old, it is possible for a baptised person to become posessed, though I read somewhere (sorry I don’t have the source) that they must allow the demon to enter them. In the case of a four-year-old, she wouldn’t have reached the age of reason to be capable of this. Was she baptized in the Catholic Church? If not, her baptism may not have been valid.

What signs suggest to your neice that she may be posessed?
Click to expand...
Code:
It is possible but probably improbable. Being four years old she cannot give assent to the spirit as it was but maybe through some hurt, trauma and whatever that may entail, the evil spirit can enter that way. And sometimes there is no reason…it just happens. Children are very susceptible to such encounters and are very sensitive of supoernatural happenings due to their innocence.

I would, first of all, bring her to a doctor to be assessed physically and mentally. There could be a natural reason for the strange behaviour. And only after that (and maybe getting a second opinion from a kids’ specialist), I would bring her to a priest. This is not to be taken lightly and ALL natural reasons must be researched first before considering anuything supernatural. This would be ordered as such by the priest and bishop anyway. The clerics will play the devil’s advocate here and this is wise.

Playing around with the supernatural can cause one to be burned real bad. It is best to leave it to authority who knows best…

Blessings,
Shoshana
 
40.png
Rosalinda:
Talking about exorcisms my niece thinks her four year old may be possessed. She has been baptized. Is it possible?
As for the original question posted I have to agree with Dr. Colussus: lay people should not be reading exorcism prayers. It is like children playing with matches. Prayer and fasting are our weapons.
Click to expand...
Believe me, there are days when I think ALL four-year-olds are possessed!!! But if she really is worried, tell her speak her concerns to her priest
 
Dr. Colossus:
Regarding your neice’s four-year-old, it is possible for a baptised person to become posessed, though I read somewhere (sorry I don’t have the source) that they must allow the demon to enter them. In the case of a four-year-old, she wouldn’t have reached the age of reason to be capable of this.
Click to expand...
That’s a common misconception. A casual study of exorcisms will reveal that anyone - even priests - can become possessed. The classic case of the nuns of Loudon and Fr Urbain Grandier dispute the belief that only the unbaptised may be possessed.

Some, like Malachi Martin, describe a condition called “perfect possession” in which the possessed is not truly possessed since they have assented to a demonic “in-dwelling.” Others refute such claims. Personally I think that the idea of “perfect” or voluntary possession is oxymoronic: possession, by its nature, is involuntary - hence its pain.
 
credoDOWNunder,

I sence that you have more to say. What you have said is parallel to al that I know. Thanks for your words.
JMJ
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top