All priests ordained prior to Vatican II had the orders to perform exorcisms. But after Vatican II it was only given when someone received their episcopal ordination.
I believe that is what I learned in a presentation given by an exorcist. These days a priest must receive permission to perform exorcisms.
Everything else has been covered I think.
I’m not sure about that. I think what he meant was that all priests before Vatican II were instituted as exorcists. Before Vatican II, there were minor orders and major orders. The minor orders were: porter, lector, exorcist and subdeacon. The major orders were the same as they are now: deacon, priest, bishop. Pope Paul VI suppressed the porter, exorcist and subdiaconate orders with a
motu proprio (I think) in the early 1970s.
Porters carried things, they “ported” stuff around. Lectors did the same as they do now, which is read. Exorcists (contrary to what it implies) only did Minor Exorcisms; that is, they performed the exorcisms during baptisms, many of which were suppressed in the new baptismal rite. Currently, in baptisms the Minor Exorcisms are performed by a priest or deacon. Subdeacons performed ministerial duties in High Masses; vestments were similar to the deacon’s, and in many cases, exactly the same.
So, the progression was: porter, lector, exorcist, subdeacon, deacon, priest, bishop.
Now, the order is: acolyte (I think this one is first), lector, priest, bishop. For most purposes, the acolyte is similar to the subdiaconate. In fact, I think acolytes can be legitimately called subdeacons now, as long as the bishop’s conference is so pleased to do so.
So, I think what the priest was talking about is the minor order of exorcist. Not the priestly position of exorcist.
Nowadays, several groups of priests (FSSP, ICRSS, etc.) still confer the minor orders legitimately. However, most priests do not receive these orders anymore.
