Demons

[R_C]

What’s the point of having a spiritual director if we don’t follow his directions I see, you renamed him “advisor” I’ve done that, and it did not bring me peace. Some inclinations of our soul may not be bad, they may be legitimate and, in fact, under a different set of circumstances they may even be good. But it is possible that it is not the case at this point!

I know that you are trying to understand. Understanding is important. But sometimes we simply need to trust in God and give up our curiosity for the time being.

Possessed in the days of the Lord: we don’t know how many! We seem to read of many accounts of a specific people in a specific place: namely the only people in the known world with whom God spoke directly, in a very special way, under a covenant. Versus, for instance, Romans having a questionable moral conduct, or barbarians having, well, a barbaric conduct…(I’m not being judgmental here, just saying )

Now, when “the doctor was in town”, clearly they would have contact with people under demonic possession. A few, compared to crowds of sick people of whom we don’t read too much about We can see in these encounters the work of divine providence as well.

But mind you, those few described as possessed in the Bible were not working evil, or not as much as those who were quite free, and yet plotted to kill the Lord and the apostles and disciples - all over the world. Their evil was not of demonic origin…it came from free will…even if, no doubt about it, demonic temptations mingled with the temptations of the world and of the flesh, for them as for all of us…

There aren’t more demons yesterday than today: the number of spiritual creatures is fixed. One may argue that perhaps there are less cases of possession today, given that we are in a world where evil and filth of all sorts are embraced and even promoted, in which the Christian message is either obliterated or rejected, and in which the Church of Christ is perennially mistreated. But how would we know? We don’t have access to records on that matter (assuming there is some sort of systematic record), and even if we did, we wouldn’t know whether some (or many) individuals never have access to a priest…or simply never seek help at all.

My point is this: we focus on demons because they are, in a sense, pure evil. Beings that are purely spiritual and thus capable of perfect will, and who chose to do evil and nothing else. But evil is evil, while demons are just creatures, and creatures created good. The devil himself is not “evil” itself, he is a creature, an angel. Evil itself is something different, and it is this what we must focus on. If the devil is cold water, we must beware of the cold, not of the water. We can empty the water out, but we can’t make cold disappear.

Aquinas, of all philosophers and theologians, gives a most profound overview of evil and the problem of evil in the world. He shows that evil is a non-essence, accidental to good inasmuch as it is an imperfect good. A partial paraphrase of a paragraph of Summa contra Gentiles:

A created thing tends toward the divine likeness through its operation. Now, through its operation, one thing becomes the cause of another. Therefore, in this way, also, do things tend toward the divine likeness, in that they are the causes of other things. …] it is as a result of the goodness of God that He confers being on all things …] So, things generally desire to become like God in this respect, by being the causes of other things. …] by the fact that it is the cause of another, a thing is ordered toward the good, for only the good is directly caused in itself; evil is merely caused accidentally …] Therefore, to be the cause of other things is good. Now, a thing tends toward the divine likeness according to each good to which it inclines, since any created thing is good through participation in divine goodness."

Evil is not an essence, but a privation, a negation in a substance, and occurs in things apart from the intention of the agents - that is, evil is different from the good which every agent intends. What this means is that the intention of the agents was to do something good - in fact, something in accordance to their good nature, as shown: to try to be like God. Evil was a result apart from intention.

The only way for this to be possible, then is that “a defect in an effect and in an action results from some defect in the principles of the action”. Even further: evil cannot exist by itself, since it has no essence, and thus every evil is based on some good. We say that every evil is in a good thing, because, evil being a privation, the privation which is evil is present in a good thing, and is called evil due to the fact that it causes injury to the good.

Since reason is able to apprehend many goods and a multiplicity of ends, and since for each thing there is a proper end, there will be, then, for the will an end and a first motivating object which is not merely any good, but some determinate good.

Hence, when the will inclines to act as moved by the apprehension of reason, presenting a proper good to it, the result is a fitting action.

But when the will breaks forth into action, at the apprehension of sense cognition, or of reason itself presenting some other good at variance with its proper good, the result in the action of the will is a moral fault.

Hence, a defect of ordering to reason and to a proper end precedes a fault of action in the will:

• in regard to reason, in the case of the will inclining, on the occasion of a sudden sense apprehension, toward a good that is on the level of sensory pleasure;

• and in regard to a proper end, in the case when reason encounters in its deliberation some good which is not, at this time or under these conditions, really good, and yet the will inclines toward it, as if it were a proper good.

 

[Aloysium]

There are many examples in Scripture of people having their demons casted out. These days we rarely hear of true posessions, though we do hear about lots of people suffering from mental illnesses.

1. Were these people in Biblical times really posessed by demons?
2. Is the Bible wrong by labeling their afflictions as demonic and were they, instead, suffering from mental illness?
3. If these people were suffering from mental illness instead of demons, can we trust the Bible as being true?
4. If the Bible is true and they did have mental illnesses, can someone please explaine?
5. If these people did suffer from demonic posession, why so many then compared to now? Did the posessed just gravitate toward Jesus and his Apostles or …what?

I am not sure what you have heard about mental illness or possession, and it sounds like you are trying to gain an understanding of these human realities, which are quite complex and very difficult to understand.

For some background, you should be aware that the field of Psychiatry is constantly changing:

• Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud who worked together had very different ideas on the nature of mind and you don’t hear much about either one of them these days.
• Although you are referring to mental illness, because of how funding is accessed, the nature of scientific research itself, access to publishing, and so forth, this area has become a “mindless” study of behaviour and neurophysiology.
• The evolution of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) demonstrates how the field is as influenced by sociopolitical forces as much as anything else.
  There may not be that bank of knowledge out there, that you think there is.

I would respond to your questions as follows:

1. Some were possessed by demons, some could have suffered from Schizophrenic Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, Dissociative Disorder, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, etc.
2. No the Bible would not be wrong. There was something very broken in those individuals that was given a particular label; they were healed through God’s grace.
3. I can trust the Bible; it sounds like you have doubts. This is good as long as you don’t give up, as it will lead you away from your preconceptions to a more solid understanding of human nature and a deeper relationship with God.
4. I don’t understand your quandary. To cover all the bases, the response would be too long. I would suggest you examine within yourself where the question comes from; having some basis in your life, an answer may be more forthcoming. If there is an issue with yourself: that someone has stated that you suffer from a mental illness, but feel yourself possessed, I would recommend following your doctor’s advice.
5. This is a different world now. There are different kinds of lepers whose flesh does not peel off but who carry communicable diseases without the outward appearance of illness. Similarly, possession now-a-days may come in the forms of fanatical secularism/consumerism, sexual and other addictions, modern warfare/genocide, etc. In a world with no spirituality, no demons, no God, the truth of these evils is not seen for what it is.

 

[Faith1960]

I would respond to your questions as follows:

1. Some were possessed by demons, some could have suffered from Schizophrenic Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, Dissociative Disorder, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, etc.
2. No the Bible would not be wrong. There was something very broken in those individuals that was given a particular label; they were healed through God’s grace.
3. I can trust the Bible; it sounds like you have doubts. This is good as long as you don’t give up, as it will lead you away from your preconceptions to a more solid understanding of human nature and a deeper relationship with God.
4. I don’t understand your quandary. To cover all the bases, the response would be too long. I would suggest you examine within yourself where the question comes from; having some basis in your life, an answer may be more forthcoming. If there is an issue with yourself: that someone has stated that you suffer from a mental illness, but feel yourself possessed, I would recommend following your doctor’s advice.
5. This is a different world now. There are different kinds of lepers whose flesh does not peel off but who carry communicable diseases without the outward appearance of illness. Similarly, possession now-a-days may come in the forms of fanatical secularism/consumerism, sexual and other addictions, modern warfare/genocide, etc. In a world with no spirituality, no demons, no God, the truth of these evils is not seen for what it is.

Your answer to # 1 is a common one, so,how do you reconcile the Truth of the Boble with the idea that many people of those days had a mental illness rather than demonic possession?

And no. I do not suspect, nor has people who know me, suspect I’m suffering from possession.

 

[Faith1960]

Huh. bethscib.com/1/post/2013/06/is-it-time-to-talk-about-mental-illness.html

 

[Faith1960]

Could this explain why there was more demonic activity in Jesus’ day compared to now?

banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?375

 

[R_C]

Could this explain why there was more demonic activity in Jesus’ day compared to now?

banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?375

This same source also says in a separate article:

I want to speak especially to our children and young people this morning, because there seems to be a spirit about as if the Roman Catholics are good Christians; they may be a little bit different, but it does not really matter. The church of Rome is an apostate church and the gospel that it preaches is under the anathema, the curse of Almighty God. …] we are speaking of a system, an evil system, a wrong system …] and the dreadful things that system teaches and the errors that that system teaches …]

I would presume that this website is not only a poor source of information, but heavily anti-Catholic, and thus prone to present content that will, if possible, contradict the teachings of the apostolic Church.

So no, I do not think this idea is reliable, and I also consider that treating demonic possession as some sort of contagious plague is sheer nonsense. I also think it is quite dangerous for us to start rejecting those sources that are in line with our Holy Mother Church and start looking elsewhere (though don’t get me wrong, I am almost certain you did not verify beforehand that website’s position regarding the Church, but rather that you were researching the answer to a specific question).

The danger in visiting such sources is that of assimilating heresy that seems quite rational and truthful (as it often is) and which can, if anything, bring anxiety and discomfort to someone who is either not strong in the faith or going through a hard time of trial (I know, I’ve been in both places). For understanding, it is better to rely on that which the Church teaches, for it is not biased: namely, our writings are not meant to be against some other group or to contradict or prove wrong some other group. I am afraid the same can’t always be said about others, at least not all the time.

Again, we have no evidence that there was more demonic activity back then than today. We simply don’t know that. And if it doesn’t affect us, perhaps we shouldn’t worry about it too much either, other than knowing that it happened back there and it still happens, and that just as the apostles were given authority to deal with this, so today those in the apostolic succession retain that same authority.

 

[fred_conty]

I did notice that there was a comment that we have no proof that this “devil possession” is nothing more than people having mental problems, even stories of those possessed in the bible.

Lk.32-33
“Now a herd of many swine was there, feeding on the mountainside. And they kept entreating him to give them leave to enter into them. And he gave them leave. And the devils came out from the man and entered into the swine; and the heard rushed down the cliff into the lake and were drowned.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=8916404#post8916404

The other incidents of Jesus driving out demons from a human, they did not ask to inhabit someone else or something else. In other cases, they just left and the only proof that the devil vacated was that the person returned to being normal again.

But in this case, they just didn’t leave but went into several thousand pigs. My personal view on this is that Jesus wanted to VISUALLY prove that there were that many demons in that man. This would remove any doubt that the behaviour of the man was not due to some mental defect, but that it really was coming from thousands of demonic beings. So this event would show that there were all those devils in that one man, maybe thinking of all those later in christianity who would doubt that the devil existed, and that it was only some sort of psychosis.

The erratic behaviour of the pigs was necessary to show that the demons had actually entered the pigs. How else would there be proof of demonic presence if the pigs only went about their normal buisness?

The demons asking permission to enter the pigs shows that they may not do anything without God’s allowing them. It shows that Jesus controls what goes on in this world and the other. But to me the question resolves itself by understanding that the demons are just evil seeking to destroy and hurt whereever they can. In this case, it fit the plan of Jesus to show the reality of demons possessing a human being.

Just a thought.

 

[Rete]

I think the Church is in trouble when you see so many people with such an unbelievable lack of understanding of their own faith. If you don’t believe the existence of demons, then you must not believe the scriptures. You must not believe what every person in the apostolic succession has told you. You must not believe the Pope in certain circumstances cannot speak error.

 

[John_of_Woking]

Here! Here! (Always wanted to say that! An English fellow being spot on provided me my opportunity!). - Or is it “Hear! Hear!” ?

I’ve heard this stuff before. Sometimes going farther. Every miracle of the Bible must have a scientific explanation or its “superstition” or Jesus and the Apostles getting something wrong that " … WE now know to be ______ – instead of what they thought!"

Especially favorite targets for these “new theologians” are: sin, the devil, hell, purgatory, confession, exorcism, and people who “still” believe in miracles.

Jesus was just a particularly cool philosopher, who if alive today would be saying JUST the same things the “new theologians*” do on these subjects.

• new theologians = as new as “right now!” in some cases. Old and orthodox = bad, stupid, superstitious. That old stuff. What’re you stuck in the Middle Ages?

Jesus and St. Paul tell us to put on some armor, take a sword and be ready for the spiritual battles.

When Jesus says turn the other cheek, and in another place, offer no resistance to the evil man, it is not to have us join the enemy in doing evil but rather “overcoming evil with good.”

READ the Catechism is such good advice. I wince in astonishment when I hear an otherwise faithful Catholic goof up the most basic doctrines out loud. uch:

Maybe just the sheer volume of the INDEX of the Catechism will help.

Again: to your gracious entreaties to avail oneself of the Catechism’s theological counsels
may I add: Quite right! Carry On!

Hear hear:

 

[John_of_Woking]

I think the Church is in trouble when you see so many people with such an unbelievable lack of understanding of their own faith. If you don’t believe the existence of demons, then you must not believe the scriptures. You must not believe what every person in the apostolic succession has told you. You must not believe the Pope in certain circumstances cannot speak error.

Exactly. This is our Faith

 

[Skye_Ariel]

I did notice that there was a comment that we have no proof that this “devil possession” is nothing more than people having mental problems, even stories of those possessed in the bible.

Lk.32-33
“Now a herd of many swine was there, feeding on the mountainside. And they kept entreating him to give them leave to enter into them. And he gave them leave. And the devils came out from the man and entered into the swine; and the heard rushed down the cliff into the lake and were drowned.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=8916404#post8916404

The other incidents of Jesus driving out demons from a human, they did not ask to inhabit someone else or something else. In other cases, they just left and the only proof that the devil vacated was that the person returned to being normal again.

But in this case, they just didn’t leave but went into several thousand pigs. My personal view on this is that Jesus wanted to VISUALLY prove that there were that many demons in that man. This would remove any doubt that the behaviour of the man was not due to some mental defect, but that it really was coming from thousands of demonic beings. So this event would show that there were all those devils in that one man, maybe thinking of all those later in christianity who would doubt that the devil existed, and that it was only some sort of psychosis.

The erratic behaviour of the pigs was necessary to show that the demons had actually entered the pigs. How else would there be proof of demonic presence if the pigs only went about their normal buisness?

The demons asking permission to enter the pigs shows that they may not do anything without God’s allowing them. It shows that Jesus controls what goes on in this world and the other. But to me the question resolves itself by understanding that the demons are just evil seeking to destroy and hurt whereever they can. In this case, it fit the plan of Jesus to show the reality of demons possessing a human being.

Just a thought.

Exactly, I agree and it also shows that animals can be possessed also. Also Jesus who is God would know the difference between possession and **just **mental illness. So I don’t understand why some think possessions didn’t really happen back then. My theory is that evil spirits need a weak mind or someone with mental problems in order to get in in the first place so the evil spirit looks for those already mentally ill to possess, and/or the physical affect of possessing someone creates the same chemical imbalances in the brain that mentally ill people have. I don’t think it’s black or white, possessed or mentally ill, it could be both. Just because someone is mentally ill doesn’t rule out that they are possessed. Being possessed would make anyone crazy.

I think the Church is in trouble when you see so many people with such an unbelievable lack of understanding of their own faith. If you don’t believe the existence of demons, then you must not believe the scriptures. You must not believe what every person in the apostolic succession has told you. You must not believe the Pope in certain circumstances cannot speak error.

Exactly! I can’t believe the number of people who have been brainwashed by the non believing world to think that possession in the Bible was just mental illness and nothing more as if Jesus who is God can’t tell the difference! We have more sophisticated ways of diagnosing people and treating people with drugs etc but even a possessed person would stop acting possessed if they were kept drugged up, it would be like driving a car with no gas. If the person is in a chemical coma a spirit can’t do anything with the body that can’t stay awake. Just because a person responds to drugs doesn’t mean they were never possessed and just mentally ill.

 

[Dorothy]

Possession can also occur when a person seeks after occult knowledge, which is forbidden.

Instead, they should be seeking the Lord, who has everything good for them!

 

[R_C]

they should be seeking the Lord, who has everything good for them!

:yup:

 

[Faith1960]

What’s the point of having a spiritual director if we don’t follow his directions I see, you renamed him “advisor” I’ve done that, and it did not bring me peace. Some inclinations of our soul may not be bad, they may be legitimate and, in fact, under a different set of circumstances they may even be good. But it is possible that it is not the case at this point!

I know that you are trying to understand. Understanding is important. But sometimes we simply need to trust in God and give up our curiosity for the time being.

Possessed in the days of the Lord: we don’t know how many! We seem to read of many accounts of a specific people in a specific place: namely the only people in the known world with whom God spoke directly, in a very special way, under a covenant. Versus, for instance, Romans having a questionable moral conduct, or barbarians having, well, a barbaric conduct…(I’m not being judgmental here, just saying )

Now, when “the doctor was in town”, clearly they would have contact with people under demonic possession. A few, compared to crowds of sick people of whom we don’t read too much about We can see in these encounters the work of divine providence as well.

But mind you, those few described as possessed in the Bible were not working evil, or not as much as those who were quite free, and yet plotted to kill the Lord and the apostles and disciples - all over the world. Their evil was not of demonic origin…it came from free will…even if, no doubt about it, demonic temptations mingled with the temptations of the world and of the flesh, for them as for all of us…

There aren’t more demons yesterday than today: the number of spiritual creatures is fixed. One may argue that perhaps there are less cases of possession today, given that we are in a world where evil and filth of all sorts are embraced and even promoted, in which the Christian message is either obliterated or rejected, and in which the Church of Christ is perennially mistreated. But how would we know? We don’t have access to records on that matter (assuming there is some sort of systematic record), and even if we did, we wouldn’t know whether some (or many) individuals never have access to a priest…or simply never seek help at all.

My point is this: we focus on demons because they are, in a sense, pure evil. Beings that are purely spiritual and thus capable of perfect will, and who chose to do evil and nothing else. But evil is evil, while demons are just creatures, and creatures created good. The devil himself is not “evil” itself, he is a creature, an angel. Evil itself is something different, and it is this what we must focus on. If the devil is cold water, we must beware of the cold, not of the water. We can empty the water out, but we can’t make cold disappear.

Aquinas, of all philosophers and theologians, gives a most profound overview of evil and the problem of evil in the world. He shows that evil is a non-essence, accidental to good inasmuch as it is an imperfect good. A partial paraphrase of a paragraph of Summa contra Gentiles:

I called her my spiritual advisor but apparently the words “advisor” and “director” are two different things. I didn’t know that.