CHAPTER VI

DIABOLIC POSSESSION AND MODERN SPIRITISM The phenomenon of diabolic possession, the mere possibility of which materialists and modernists in recent years have for the most part stoutly denied, has, nevertheless, been believed by all peoples and at all periods of the earth’s history. In truth he who accepts the spiritual world is bound to realize all about him the age-long struggle for empery of discarnate evil ceaselessly contending with a thousand cunning sleights and a myriad vizardings against the eternal unconquerable powers of good. Nature herself bears witness to the contest; disease and death, cruelty and pain, ugliness and sin, are all evidences of the mighty warfare, and it would be surprising indeed if some were not wounded in the fray—for we cannot stand apart, each man, S. Ignatius says, must fight under one of the two standards—if some even did not fall. The ancient Egyptians, whose religion of boundless antiquity is pre-eminent in the old world for its passionate earnestness, its purity, and lofty idealism certainly held that some diseases were due to the action of evil spirits or demons, who in exceptional circumstances had the power of entering human bodies and of vexing them in proportion to the opportunities consciously or unconsciously given to their malign natures and influences. Moreover, the Egyptians were regarded as being supremely gifted in the art of curing the diseases caused by demoniacal possession, and one noteworthy instance of this was inscribed upon a stele and set up in the temple of the god Khonsu at Thebes so that all men might learn his might and his glory.[1] When King Rameses II was in Mesopotamia the various princes made him many offerings of gold and gems, and amongst other came the Prince of Bekhten, who brought his daughter, the fairest maiden of that land. When the king saw he loved her and bestowed upon her the title of “Royal spouse, chief lady, Rā-neferu” (the beauties of Ra, the Sun-god), and taking her back to Egypt he married her with great pomp and hallowed solemnity. In the fifteenth year of the king’s reign there arrived at his court an ambassador from the Prince of Bekhten, bearing rich presents and beseeching him “on behalf of the lady Bent-ent-resht, the younger sister of the royal spouse Rā-neferu, for, behold, an evil disease hath laid hold upon her body,” “wherefore,” said the envoy, “I beseech thy Majesty to send a physician[2] to see her.” Rameses ordered the books of the “double house of life” to be brought and the wise men to choose from their number one who might be sent to Bekhten. They selected the sage Tehuti-em-heb, who in company with the ambassador forthwith departed on their journey, and when they had arrived the Egyptian priest soon found the lady Bent-ent-resht was possessed of a demon or spirit over which he was powerless. Wellnigh in despair the Prince of Bekhten sent again to the king begging him to dispatch even a god to his help. When the ambassador arrived a second time Rameses was worshipping in the temple of Khonsu Nefer-hetep at Thebes, and he at once besought that deity to allow his counterpart Khonsu to go to Bekhten and to deliver the daughter of the prince of that country from the demon who possessed her. Khonsu Nefer-hetep granted the request, and a fourfold measure of magical power was imparted to the statue of the god which was to go to Bekhten. The god, seated in his boat, and five other boats with figures of gods in them, accompanied by a noble attendance of horses and chariots upon the right and the left, set out for Bekhten, where in due course they were received with great honour. The god Khonsu was brought to the place where the princess was, magical ceremonies were performed, and the demon incontinently departed. Khonsu remained in Bekhten three years, four months, and five days, being worshipped with the utmost veneration. One night, however, the Prince had a dream in which he saw a hawk of gold issue from the sacred shrine and wing its way towards Egypt. In the morning the Egyptian priests interpreted his dream as meaning that the god now wished to return, and accordingly he was escorted back in superb state, and with him were sent grateful gifts and thank offerings innumerable to be laid in the temple of Khonsu Nefer-hetep at Thebes. The Greeks of the earlier civilization were inclined generally to attribute all sickness to the gods, who again often by this particular means took almost immediate revenge upon those who had insulted their images, profaned their sanctuaries, or derided their worship. Thus Pentheus who resists the introduction of the mysteries of Dionysus into Thebes is driven mad by the affronted deity.[3] The madness of Ajax, and that of the daughters of Proetus,[4] who imagined themselves changed into cows, shows us that this belief went back to heroic times. In later days Demaratus and his brother Alopecos were driven lunatic (παραφρονήσαν) after having found the statue of Artemis Orthosia, and this was considered to be the power of the goddess.[5] The frenzy which attacked Quintus Fulvius was regarded as a punishment, a possession by evil spirits on account of his sacrilege in having stolen the marble roof of the temple of Juno Lacinia at Locri.[6] Pythagoras taught that the ailments both of men and of animals are due to demons who throng the regions of the air, and this doctrine does no more than state clearly what had been more or less vaguely believed from the dawn of human history. Wherefore Homer in the _Odyssey_, speaking of a man who is racked by a sore disease, says that a hateful demon is tormenting him: στυγερὸς δέ οἱ ἔχραε δαίμων, V, 396. (But a hateful demon griped him fast.) The word κακοδαιμονία, possession by an evil spirit, in Aristophanes signifies “raving madness,” and the verb κακοδαιμονάω, to be tormented by an evil spirit, is used by Xenophon, Demosthenes, Dinarchus, and Plutarch[7] amongst other authors. Many philosophers believed that each man has a protecting daimon, who in some sense personifies his individuality. It followed that lunatics and the delirious were afflicted with madness by these spirits who guided them, and accordingly the Greek names for those distraught are highly significant: ἐνεργούμενοι (in later Greek, persons possessed of an evil spirit), δαιμονιόληπτοι (influenced by devils), θεόληπτοι, θεόβλαβες (stricken of God), θεόμανες (maddened by the gods); and so Euripides has λύσσα θεομανής, and again θεομανης πότμος.[8] The very name μανία given by the Greeks to madness was derived from the root-word _man, men_,[9] which occurs in the Latin _Manes_, and indeed the Romans thought that a madman was tormented by the goddess Mania, the mother of the Lares, the hallucinations of lunatics being taken to be spectres who pursued them.[10] And so a madman was _laruarum plenus_, _laruatus_,[11] one whom phantoms disturbed; as in Plautus, where the doctor says: “What kind of a disease is this? Explain. Unfold, old sire, I say. Art thou crazed (_laruatus_) or lunatic? Tell me now.”[12] The frantic exaltation which thrilled the Galli, and the Corybantes when they celebrated the Dionysia, seems to have been epidemic, and was universally attributed to divine possession. There are many allusions to the connexion between the rites of Cybele and Dionysus. Apollodorus[13] says Dionysus was purified from madness by Rhea at the Phrygian Cybela, and was then initiated into her rites and took her dress; thence he passed into Thrace with a train of Bacchanals and Satyrs. Strabo,[14] on the other hand, thinks the rites were brought from Thrace by colonists from that country into Phrygia; he even quotes a fragment from the _Edoni_ of Æschylus[15] as proving the identity of the cultus of Dionysus and Cybele. So also we have in Euripides, _Bacchæ_, 58, Up, and wake the sweet old sound, The clang that I and mystic Rhea found, The Timbrel of the Mountains.[16] It is interesting to remark that Nicander of Claros,[17] who was a physician, in his _Alexipharmaca_ (Ἀλεξιφάρμακα), speaking of a particular form of lunacy, compares the shrieks uttered by patients with those of a priestess of Rhea, when on the ninth day she makes all whom she encounters in the streets tremble at the hideous howl of the Idæan Mother; κερνοφόρος ζάκορος βωμίστρια Ῥείης is the exact phrase.[18] In the _Hippolytus_ (141 _sqq._) the Chorus speaking to Phædra says: Is this some spirit, O child of man? Doth Hecat hold thee perchance, or Pan? Doth She of the Mountains work her ban, Or the Dread Corybantes bind thee?[19] And in the _Medea_ (1171-2) we have: “She seemed, I wot, to be one frenzied, inspired with madness by Pan or some other of the gods.”[20] Here τινὸς θεῶν, says Paley, alludes to Dionysus or Cybele. Madness was sometimes thought to be sent by Pan for any neglect of his worship, so in the _Rhesus_ Hector cries (36-7): “Can it be that you are scared by the fear-causing stroke of Pan of old Kronos’s line?”[21] Aretæus, the medical writer, who is especially celebrated for his accuracy of diagnosis, in his _De signis chronicorum morborum_, VI, describes Corybantic frenzy as a mental malady and says that patients may be soothed and even cured by the strains of soft music.[22] We have here then the same remedy as was applied in the case of Saul, whom, we are told, “an evil spirit from the Lord troubled,”[23] and to whose court David, the sweet harper, was summoned. This seems to be the only instance of demoniac possession in the Old Testament and although the Hebrew word _rûah_ need not absolutely imply a personal influence, if we may judge from Josephus[24] the Jews certainly gave the word that meaning in this very passage. It may be well here clearly to explain the difference between possession and obsession, two technical terms sometimes confounded. By obsession is meant that the demon attacks a man’s body from without;[25] by possession is meant that he assumes control of it from within. Thus S. Jerome describes the obsessions which beset S. Hilarion: “Many were his temptations; day and night did the demons change and renew their snares.... As he lay down how often did not nude women encircle him? When he was an hungered how often a plenteous board was spread before him?”[26] S. Antony the Great, also was similarly attacked: “The devil did not let to attack him, at night assuming the form of some maiden and imitating a woman’s gestures to deceive Antony.”[27] These painful phenomena are not uncommon in the lives of the Saints. Very many examples might be cited, but one will suffice, that of S. Margaret of Cortona,[28] the Franciscan penitent,[29] who was long and terribly tormented: “Following her to and fro up and down her humble cell as she wept and prayed [the devil] sang the most filthy songs, and lewdly incited Christ’s dear handmaid, who with tears was commending herself to the Lord, to join him in trolling forth bawdy catches ... but her prayers and tears finally routed the foul spirit and drove him far away.”[30] The theologians, however, warn us to be very cautious in dealing with so difficult a matter, and the supreme authority of S. Alphonsus Liguori advises us that by far the greater part of these obsessions are distressing hallucinations, neurasthenia, imagination, hysteria, in a word, pathological: “It is advisable always to be very suspicious of such diabolic attacks, for it cannot be gainsaid that for the most part they are fancy, or the effect of imagination, or weakness, especially when women are concerned.”[31] Dom Dominic Schram presses home the same point with equal emphasis: “Very often what are supposed to be demoniacal obsessions are nothing else than natural ailments, or morbid imaginings, or even distractions or actual lunacy. Wherefore it is necessary to deal with these cases most carefully, until the peculiar symptoms clearly show that it is actual obsession.”[32] Demoniac possession is frequently presented to us in the New Testament, and we have the authority of Christ Himself as to its reality. The infidel argument is to deny the possibility of possession in any circumstances, either on the hypothesis that there are no evil spirits in existence, or that they are powerless to influence the human body in the manner described. But whatever view Rationalists may adopt—and they are continually shifting their ground—no reader of the Scriptural narrative can deny that Christ by word and deed showed His entire belief in possession by evil spirits. And if Christ were divine how came He to foster and encourage a delusion? Why did He not correct it? Only two answers can be supposed. Either He was ignorant of a religious truth, or He deliberately gave instructions that He knew to be false, frequently acting in a way which was something more than misleading. To a Christian either of these explanations is, of course, unthinkable. The theory of accommodation formulated by Winer[33] may be accepted by Modernists, but will be instantly condemned by all others. Accommodation is understood as the toleration of harmless illusions of the day having little or no connexion with religion. Even if this fine piece of profanity were allowed, which, of course, must not be the case, the argument could not be applied here, indeed it seems wholly repugnant even in regard to a Saint, but entirely impossible in consideration of the divinity of Christ. The victims of possession were sometimes deprived of speech and sight: “Then was offered to him one possessed of a devil, blind and dumb: and he healed him, so that he spoke and saw” (S. Matthew xii. 22). Sometimes they had lost speech alone: “Behold, they brought him a dumb man, possessed with a devil, and after the devil was cast out the dumb man spoke” (S. Matthew ix. 32, 33); also “And he was casting out a devil, and the same was dumb: and when he had cast out the devil the dumb spoke” (S. Luke xi. 14). In many cases the mere fact of possession is mentioned without further details: “they presented to him such as were possessed by devils, and lunatics ... and he cured them” (S. Matthew iv. 24); “and when evening was come, they brought to him many that were possessed with devils, and he cast out the spirits with his word” (S. Matthew viii. 16); “And, behold a woman of Canaan, who came out of those coasts, crying out, said to him: Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David: my daughter is grievously troubled by a devil ... Then Jesus answering, said to her: O woman, great is thy faith: be it done to thee as thou wilt: and her daughter was cured from that hour” (S. Matthew xv. 22-28); “And when it was evening after sunset they brought to him all that were ill and that were possessed with devils”; “And he cast out many devils, and he suffered them not to speak, because they knew him”; “And he was preaching in their synagogues, and in all Galilee, and casting out devils” (S. Mark i. 32, 34, 39); “And the unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him: and they cried, saying: Thou art the Son of God” (S. Mark iii. 11, 12); “And devils went out from many, crying out and saying: Thou art the Son of God” (S. Luke iv. 41); “And they that were troubled with unclean spirits were cured” (S. Luke vi. 18); “And in that same hour, he cured many of their diseases, and hurts, and evil spirits” (S. Luke vii. 21). The exorcism of the man “who had a devil now a very long time,” and who dwelt among the tombs in the country of the Gerasens (Gadarenes) is related by S. Luke (viii. 27-39). The possessed is tormented by so many unclean spirits that they proclaim their name as Legion: he is endowed with supernatural strength so that he breaks asunder bonds and fetters: the devils recognize Christ as God, and Our Lord converses with them, asking how they are called. Immediately the devils have been cast out the man is clothed, peaceable, reasonable, and quiet, “in his right mind.” At the foot of Mount Tabor a young man is brought by his father to be healed. The youth is possessed of a dumb spirit, “who, wheresoever he taketh him dasheth him, and he foameth, and gnasheth with the teeth, and pineth away.” When Jesus approached, “immediately the spirit troubled him; and being thrown down upon the ground, he rolled about foaming.” The patient had been thus afflicted “from his infancy, and oftentimes hath he cast him into the fire and into waters to destroy him.” Our Lord threatened the spirit, and forthwith expelled it. (S. Mark ix. 14-28.) It should be noticed that it is the demons who are addressed on these occasions, not their victims. In the face of this catena of Biblical evidence and the various circumstances attending these exorcisms it is impossible to maintain that the possessed suffered merely from epilepsy, paralysis, acute mania, or any other such disease. In fact the Evangelists carefully separate natural maladies from diabolic possession: “He cast out the spirits with his word: and all that were sick he healed” (S. Matthew viii. 16); “They brought to him all that were ill and that were possessed with devils ... and he healed many that were troubled with divers diseases and he cast out many devils” (S. Mark i. 32, 34). In the original Greek the distinction is still more clearly and unmistakably shown: πάντας τοὺς κακῶς ἔχοντας καὶ τοὺς δαιμονιζομένους. Saint Matthew, again, differentiates: “they presented to him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases [ποικίλαις νόσοις] and torments [βασάνοις] and such as were possessed by devils [δαιμονιζομένους] and lunatics [σεληνιαζομένους] and those who had the palsy [παραλυτικούς] and he cured them,” iv. 24. Moreover, Our Lord expressly distinguishes between possession and natural disease; “Behold I cast out devils and do cures,” are the Divine Words; ἰδοὺ ἐκβάλλω δαιμόνια καὶ ἰάσεις ἀποτελῶ (S. Luke xiii. 32). That the demoniacs were often afflicted with other diseases as well is highly probable. The demons may have attacked those who were already sick, whilst the very fact of obsession or possession would of itself produce disease as a natural consequence. According to S. Matthew x. 1, Our Lord gave special powers to the Apostles to exorcize demons: “And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities.” And S. Peter, when describing the mission and miracles of Christ, stresses this very point: “Jesus of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Ghost, and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were possessed by the devil,” τοὺς καταδυναστευομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου (Acts x. 38). Our Lord Himself directly appeals to His power over evil spirits as a proof of His Messiahship: “If I by the finger of God cast out devils; doubtless the kingdom of God is come upon you”; εἰ δὲ ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ ἐκβάλλω τά δαιμόνια, ἄρα ἔφθασεν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ (S. Luke xi. 20). Whilst yet on earth Christ empowered the Apostles to cast out demons in His Name, and in His last solemn charge He promised that the same delegated power should be perpetuated: “These signs shall follow them that believe: in my name they shall cast out devils”; σημεῖα δὲ τοῖς πιστεύσασι ταῦτα παρακολουθήσει· ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου δαιμόνια ἐκβαλοῦσι (S. Mark xvi. 17.) But the efficacy of exorcism was conditional, not absolute as in the case of Our Lord Himself, for He explained, upon an occasion when the Apostles seemed to fail, that certain spirits could only be expelled by prayer and fasting. Moreover, a perfect belief and complete command are necessary for the exorcizer. τότε προσέλθοντες οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ Ἱησοῦ κατ ἰδίαν εἶπον, Διατί ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἠδυνήθημεν ἐκβαλεῖν αὐτό; ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὐτοῖς, Διὰ τὲν ὀλιγοπιστίαν ὑμῶν· ... τοῦτο δὲ τὸ γένος οὐκ ἑκπορεύεται εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ νηστείᾳ ... (S. Matthew xvii. 19-21). S. Paul, and no doubt the other Apostles and Disciples, regularly made use of this exorcizing power. Thus, at Philippi, where the girl “having a pythonical spirit ... who brought to her masters much gain by divining” (παιδίσκην τινὰ ἔχουσαν πεῦνμα πύθωνα ... ἥτις ἐργασίαν πολλὴν παρεῖχε τοῖς κυρίοις αὐτῆς μαντευπμένη)[34] met S. Paul and S. Luke and proclaimed them as servants of the most high God, S. Paul “being grieved, turned, and said to the spirit: I command thee, in the name of Jesus Christ, to go out from her. And he went out the same hour” (Acts xvi. 16-18). And at Ephesus, a hot-bed of magic and necromancy, “God wrought by the hand of Paul more than common miracles. So that even there were brought from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the wicked spirits went out of them” (Acts xix. 11, 12). Those who do not imagine that the powers Our Lord perpetually bestowed upon the Apostles and their followers abruptly ceased with the thirty-first verse of the twenty-eighth chapter of The Acts of the Apostles, realize that the charisma of exorcism has continued through the ages, and in truth the Church has uninterruptedly practised it until the present day. The Exorcist is ordained by the Bishop for this office, ordination to which is the second of the four minor orders of the Western Church. Pope Cornelius (251-252) mentions in his letter to Fabius that there were then in the Roman Church forty-two acolytes, and fifty-two exorcists, readers, and door-keepers, and the institution of these orders together with the organization of their functions, seems to have been the work of the predecessor of Cornelius, Pope Saint Fabian the Martyr (236-251). The rite of the Ordination of Exorcists, “De Ordinatione Exorcistarum,” is as follows: First, the Book of Exorcisms, or in its place the Pontifical or Missal must be ready at hand; _Pro Exorcistis ordinandis paretur liber exorcismorum, cuius loco dari potest Pontificale uel Missale_ (A Book of Exorcisms must be prepared for those who are to be ordained Exorcists. Howbeit in place thereof the Pontifical or the Missal may be handed to them) runs the rubric. When the Lectors have been ordained, the Bishop resuming his mitre takes his place upon his seat or faldstool at the Epistle side of the altar, and the Missal with the bugia being brought by his acolytes he proceeds to read the Gradual, or (if it be within the Octave of Pentecost) the _Alleluia_. Meantime the Gradual is sung by the choir. When it is finished, he rises, takes off his mitre, and turning to the altar intones the third collect. He next sits again, resumes his mitre, and the third Lection is read. Two chaplains assist him with bugia and book whence he reads the Lection. The Archdeacon now summons the ordinandi, who approach, holding lighted tapers in their hands, and kneel before the Bishop, who solemnly admonishes them with the prayer: “Dearest children who are about to be ordained to the office of Exorcists, ye must duly know what ye are about to undertake. For an Exorcist must cast out devils; and announce to the people that those that may not be present at the sacrifice should retire; and at the altar minister water to the priest. Ye receive also the power of placing your hand upon energumens, and by the imposition of your hands and the grace of the Holy Spirit and the words of exorcism unclean spirits are driven out from the bodies of those who are obsessed. Be careful therefore that as ye drive out devils from the bodies of others, so ye banish all uncleanness and evil from your own bodies lest ye fall beneath the power of those spirits who by your ministry are conquered in others. Learn through your office to govern all imperfections lest the enemy may claim a share in you and some dominion over you. For truly will ye rightly control those devils who attack others, when first ye have overcome their many crafts against yourselves. And this may the Lord vouchsafe to grant you through His Holy Spirit.”[35] After which the Bishop hands to each severally the Book of Exorcisms (or Pontifical or Missal), saying: “Receive this and commit it to thy memory and have power to place thy hands upon energumens, whether they be baptized, or whether they be catechumens.”[36] All kneel, and the Bishop, wearing his mitre, stands and prays: “Dearest brethren, let us humbly pray God the Father Almighty that He may vouchsafe to bless these his servants to the office of Exorcists that they may have the power to command spirits, to cast forth from the bodies of those who are obsessed demons with every kind of their wickedness and deceit. Through His only begotten Son Jesus Christ Our Lord who with Him liveth and reigneth in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. _R._ Amen.”[37] Then, his mitre having been removed, he turns to the altar with “Oremus” to which is given the reply “Flectamus genua” with “Leuate,” and the last prayer is said over the kneeling exorcists: “Holy Lord, Almighty Father, Eternal God vouchsafe to bless these thy servants to the office of Exorcists; that by the imposition of our hands and the words of our mouth they may have power and authority to govern and restrain all unclean spirits: that they may be skilful physicians for Thy Church, that they may heal many and be themselves strengthened with all Heavenly Grace. Through Our Lord Jesus Christ Thy Son who with Thee liveth and reigneth in the unity of the Holy Spirit one God world without end. _R._ Amen.” And then, at a sign from the Archdeacon, they return to their places.[38] It should be remarked that the Exorcist is specifically ordained “to cast out demons,” and he receives “power to place his (your) hands upon the possessed, so that by the imposition of his (your) hands,[39] the grace of the Holy Ghost, and the words of exorcism, evil spirits are driven out from the bodies of the possessed.” The very striking term _spiritualis imperator_ is strictly applied to him, and God the Father is earnestly entreated to grant him the grace “to cast out demons from the bodies of the possessed with all their many sleights of wickedness.” Nothing could be plainer, nothing could be more solemn, nothing could be more pregnant with meaning and intention. The Order and delegated power of Exorcists cannot be minimized; at least, so to do is clean contrary to the mind of the Church as emphatically expressed in her most authoritative rites. In actual practice the office of Exorcist has almost wholly been taken over by clerics in major orders, but this, of course, in no way affects the status and authority of the second of the four minor orders. Every priest, more especially perhaps if he be a parish priest, is liable to be called upon to perform his duty as Exorcist. In doing so he must carefully bear in mind and adhere to the prescriptions of the _Rituale Romanum_, and he will do well to have due regard to the laws of provincial or diocesan synods, which for the most part require that the Bishop should be consulted and his authorization obtained before exorcism be essayed. The chief points of importance in the detailed instructions under twenty-one heads prefixed to the rite in the _Rituale_ may thus be briefly summarized: (1) The priest or exorcist should be of mature age, humble, of blameless life, courageous, of experience, and well-attested prudence. It is fitting he should prepare himself for his task by special acts of devotion and mortification, by fervent prayer and by fasting (S. Matthew xvii. 20). (2) He must be a man of scholarship and learning, a systematic student and well versed in the latest trends and developments of psychological science. (3) Possession is not lightly to be taken for granted. Each case is to be carefully examined and great caution to be used in distinguishing genuine possession from certain forms of disease. (4) He should admonish the possessed in so far as the latter is capable, to dispose himself for the exorcism by prayer, fasting, by confession, and Holy Communion, and while the rite is in progress he must excite in his heart a most lively faith in the goodness of God, and perfect resignation to the divine will. (5) The exorcism should take place in the Church, or some other sacred place, if convenient, but no crowd of gazers must be suffered to assemble out of mere curiosity. There should, however, be a number of witnesses, grave and devout persons of standing, eminent respectability, and acknowledged probity, not prone to idle gossip, but discreet and silent. If on account of sickness or for some legitimate reason the exorcism takes place in a private house it is well that members of the family should be present; especially is this enjoined, as a measure of precaution, if the subject be a woman. (6) If the patient seems to fall asleep, or endeavours to hinder the exorcist in any way during the rite he is to continue, if possible with greater insistence, for such actions are probably a ruse to trick him. (7) The exorcist, although humble and having no reliance upon himself alone, is to speak with command and authority, and should the patient be convulsed or tremble, let him be more fervent and more insistent; the prayers and adjurations are to be recited with great faith, a full and assured consciousness of power. (8) Let the exorcist remember that he uses the words of Holy Scripture and Holy Church, not his own words and phrases. (9) All idle and impertinent questioning of the demon is to be avoided, nor should the evil spirit be allowed to speak at length unchecked and unrebuked. (10) The Blessed Sacrament is not to be brought near the body of the obsessed during exorcism for fear of possible irreverence; Relics of the Saints may be employed, but in this case every care must be most scrupulously observed that all due veneration be paid to them; the Crucifix and Holy Water are to be used. (11) If expulsion of the evil spirit, who will often prove obstinate, is not secured at once, the rite should be repeated as often as need be. It will be seen that the Church has safeguarded exorcism with extraordinary precautions, and that everything which is humanly possible to prevent superstition, indecorum, or abuse is provided for and recommended. Again and again the warning is repeated that so solemn, and indeed terrible, an office must not lightly be undertaken. The actual form in present use is as follows:[40] THE FORM OF EXORCISING THE POSSESSED [TRANSLATED FROM THE “ROMAN RITUAL.”] _The Priest, having confessed, or at least hating sin in his heart, and having said Mass, if it possibly and conveniently can be done, and humbly implored the Divine help, vested in surplice and violet stole, the end of which he shall place round the neck of the one possessed, and having the possessed person before him, and bound if there be danger of violence, shall sign himself, the person, and those standing by, with the sign of the Cross, and sprinkle them with holy water, and kneeling down, the others making the responses, shall say the Litany as far as the prayers._ _At the end the Antiphon._ Remember not, Lord, our offences, nor the offences of our forefathers, neither take Thou vengeance of our sins. Our Father. _Secretly._ ℣ And lead us not into temptation. ℟ But deliver us from evil. _Psalm_ liii. _Deus, in Nomine._ _The whole shall be said with_ Glory be to the Father. ℣. Save Thy servant, ℟. O my God, that putteth his trust in Thee. ℣. Be unto him, O Lord, a strong tower, ℟. From the face of his enemy. ℣. Let the enemy have no advantage of him, ℟. Nor the son of wickedness approach to hurt him. ℣. Send him help, O Lord, from the sanctuary, ℟. And strengthen him out of Sion. ℣. Lord, hear my prayer, ℟. And let my cry come unto Thee. ℣. The Lord be with you, ℟. And with thy spirit. Let us pray. O God, Whose property is ever to have mercy and to forgive: receive our supplications and prayers, that of Thy mercy and loving-kindness Thou wilt set free this Thy servant (or handmaid) who is fast bound by the chain of his sins. O holy Lord, Father Almighty, Eternal God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who hast assigned that tyrant and apostate to the fires of hell; and hast sent Thine Only Begotten Son into the world, that He might bruise him as he roars after his prey: make haste, tarry not, to deliver this man, created in Thine Own image and likeness, from ruin, and from the noon-day devil. Send Thy fear, O Lord, upon the wild beast, which devoureth Thy vine. Grant Thy servants boldness to fight bravely against that wicked dragon, lest he despise them that put their trust in Thee, and say, as once he spake in Pharaoh: I know not the Lord, neither will I let Israel go. Let Thy right hand in power compel him to depart from Thy servant N. (or Thy handmaid N.) ✠, that he dare no longer to hold him captive, whom Thou hast vouchsafed to make in Thine image, and hast redeemed in Thy Son; Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the Unity of the Holy Spirit, ever One God, world without end. Amen. _Then he shall command the spirit in this manner._ I command thee, whosoever thou art, thou unclean spirit, and all thy companions possessing this servant of God, that by the Mysteries of the Incarnation, Passion, Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ, by the sending of the Holy Ghost, and by the Coming of the same our Lord to judgment, thou tell me thy name, the day, and the hour of thy going out, by some sign: and, that to me, a minister of God, although unworthy, thou be wholly obedient in all things: nor hurt this creature of God, or those that stand by, or their goods in any way. _Then shall these Gospels, or one or the other, be read over the possessed._ The Lesson of the Holy Gospel according to S. John i. 1. _As he says these words he shall sign himself and the possessed on the forehead, mouth, and breast._ In the beginning was the Word ... full of grace and truth. The Lesson of the Holy Gospel according to S. Mark xvi. 15. At that time: Jesus spake unto His disciples: Go ye into all the world ... shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. The Lesson of the Holy Gospel according to S. Luke x. 17. At that time: The seventy returned again with joy ... because your names are written in heaven. The Lesson of the Holy Gospel according to S. Luke xi. 14. At that time: Jesus was casting out a devil, and it was dumb ... wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. ℣. Lord, hear my prayer, ℟. And let my cry come unto Thee. ℣. The Lord be with you, ℟. And with thy Spirit. Let us pray. Almighty Lord, Word of God the Father, Jesus Christ, God and Lord of every creature: Who didst give to Thy Holy Apostles power to tread upon serpents and scorpions: Who amongst other of Thy wonderful commands didst vouchsafe to say—Put the devils to flight: by Whose power Satan fell from heaven like lightning: with supplication I beseech Thy Holy Name in fear and trembling, that to me Thy most unworthy servant, granting me pardon of all my faults, Thou wilt vouchsafe to give constancy of faith and power, that shielded by the might of Thy holy arm, in trust and safety I may approach to attack this cruel devil, through Thee, O Jesus Christ, the Lord our God, Who shalt come to judge the quick and the dead, and the world by fire. Amen. _Then defending himself and the possessed with the sign of the Cross, putting part of his stole round the neck, and his right hand upon the head of the possessed, firmly and with great faith he shall say what follows._ ℣. Behold the Cross of the Lord, flee ye of the contrary part, ℟. The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed. ℣. Lord, hear my prayer, ℟. And let my cry come unto Thee. ℣. The Lord be with you, ℟. And with thy spirit. Let us pray. O God, and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, I call upon Thy Holy Name, and humbly implore Thy mercy, that Thou wouldest vouchsafe to grant me help against this, and every unclean spirit, that vexes this Thy creature. Through the same Lord Jesus Christ. THE EXORCISM. I exorcise thee, most foul spirit, every coming in of the enemy, every apparition, every legion; in the Name of our Lord Jesus ✠ Christ be rooted out, and be put to flight from this creature of God ✠. He commands thee, Who has bid thee be cast down from the highest heaven into the lower parts of the earth. He commands thee, Who has commanded the sea, the winds, and the storms. Hear therefore, and fear, Satan, thou injurer of the faith, thou enemy of the human race, thou procurer of death, thou destroyer of life, kindler of vices, seducer of men, betrayer of the nations, inciter of envy, origin of avarice, cause of discord, stirrer-up of troubles: why standest thou, and resistest, when thou knowest that Christ the Lord destroyest thy ways? Fear Him, Who was sacrificed in Isaac, Who was sold in Joseph, was slain in the Lamb, was crucified in man, thence was the triumpher over hell. _The following signs of the Cross shall be made upon the forehead of the possessed._ Depart therefore in the Name of the Father ✠, and of the Son ✠, and of the Holy ✠ Ghost: give place to the Holy Ghost, by this sign of the holy ✠ Cross of Jesus Christ our Lord: Who with the Father, and the same Holy Ghost, liveth and reigneth ever one God, world without end. Amen. ℣. Lord, hear my prayer. ℟. And let my cry come unto Thee. ℣. The Lord be with you. ℟. And with thy spirit. Let us pray. O God, the Creator and Protector of the human race, Who hast formed man in Thine own Image: look upon this Thy servant N. (_or_ this Thy handmaid N.), who is grievously vexed with the wiles of an unclean spirit, whom the old adversary, the ancient enemy of the earth, encompasses with a horrible dread, and blinds the senses of his human understanding with stupor, confounds him with terror, and harasses him with trembling and fear. Drive away, O Lord, the power of the devil, take away his deceitful snares: let the impious tempter fly far hence: let Thy servant be defended by the sign ✠ (_on his forehead_) of Thy Name, and be safe both in body, and soul. (_The three following crosses shall be made on the breast of the demoniac._) Do Thou guard his inmost ✠ soul, Thou rule his inward ✠ parts, Thou strengthen his ✠ heart. Let the attempts of the opposing power in his soul vanish away. Grant, O Lord, grace to this invocation of Thy most Holy Name, that he who up to this present was causing terror, may flee away affrighted, and depart conquered; and that this Thy servant, strengthened in heart, and sincere in mind, may render Thee his due service. Through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. THE EXORCISM. I adjure thee, thou old serpent, by the Judge of the quick and the dead, by thy Maker, and the Maker of the world: by Him, Who hath power to put thee into hell, that thou depart in haste from this servant of God N., who returns to the bosom of the Church, with thy fear and with the torment of thy terror. I adjure Thee again ✠ (_on his forehead_), not in my infirmity, but by the power of the Holy Ghost, that thou go out of this servant of God N., whom the Almighty God hath made in His Own Image. Yield, therefore, not to me, but to the minister of Christ. For His power presses upon thee Who subdued thee beneath His Cross. Tremble at His arm, which, after the groanings of hell were subdued, led forth the souls into light. Let the body ✠ (_on his breast_) of man be a terror to thee, let the image of God ✠ (_on his forehead_) be an alarm to thee. Resist not, nor delay to depart from this person, for it has pleased Christ to dwell in man. And think not that I am to be despised, since thou knowest that I too am so great a sinner. God ✠ commands thee. The majesty of Christ ✠ commands thee. God the Father ✠ commands thee. God the Son ✠ commands thee. God the Holy ✠ Ghost commands thee. The Sacrament of the Cross ✠ commands thee. The faith of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and of all the other Saints ✠, commands thee. The blood of the Martyrs ✠ commands thee. The stedfastness (_continentia_) of the Confessors ✠ commands thee. The devout intercession of all the Saints ✠ commands thee. The virtue of the Mysteries of the Christian Faith ✠ commands thee. Go out, therefore, thou transgressor. Go out, thou seducer, full of all deceit and wile, thou enemy of virtue, thou persecutor of innocence. Give place, thou most dire one: give place, thou most impious one: give place to Christ in Whom thou hast found nothing of thy works: Who hath overcome thee, Who hath destroyed thy kingdom, Who hath led thee captive and bound thee, and hath spoiled thy goods: Who hath cast thee into outer darkness, where for thee and thy servants everlasting destruction is prepared. But why, O fierce one, dost thou withstand? why, rashly bold, dost thou refuse? thou art the accused of Almighty God, whose laws thou hast broken. Thou art the accused of Jesus Christ our Lord, whom thou hast dared to tempt, and presumed to crucify. Thou art the accused of the human race, to whom by thy persuasion thou hast given to drink thy poison. Therefore, I adjure thee, most wicked dragon, in the Name of the immaculate ✠ Lamb, Who treads upon the lion and adder, Who tramples under foot the young lion and the dragon, that thou depart from this man ✠ (_let the sign be made upon his forehead_), that thou depart from the Church of God ✠ (_let the sign be made over those who are standing by_): tremble, and flee away at the calling upon the Name of that Lord, of Whom hell is afraid; to Whom the Virtues, the Powers, and the Dominions of the heavens are subject; Whom Cherubim and Seraphim with unwearied voices praise, saying: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Sabaoth. The Word ✠ made Flesh commands thee. He Who was born ✠ of the Virgin commands thee. Jesus ✠ of Nazareth commands thee; Who, although thou didst despise His disciples, bade thee go bruised and overthrown out of the man: and in his presence, having separated thee from him, thou didst not presume to enter into the herd of swine. Therefore, thus now adjured in His Name ✠, depart from the man, whom He has formed. It is hard for thee to wish to resist ✠. It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks ✠. Because the more slowly goest thou out, does the greater punishment increase against thee, for thou despisest not men, but Him, Who is Lord both of the quick and the dead, Who shall come to judge the quick and the dead, and the World by fire. ℟. Amen. ℣. Lord, hear my prayer. ℟. And let my cry come unto thee. ℣. The Lord be with you. ℟. And with thy spirit. Let us pray. O God of heaven, God of earth, God of the Angels, God of the Archangels, God of the Prophets, God of the Apostles, God of the Martyrs, God of the Virgins, God, Who hast the power to give life after death, rest after labour; because there is none other God beside Thee, nor could be true, but Thou, the Creator of heaven and earth, Who art the true King, and of Whose kingdom there shall be no end: humbly I beseech Thy glorious majesty, that Thou wouldest vouchsafe to deliver this Thy servant from unclean spirits, through Christ our Lord. Amen. THE EXORCISM. I therefore adjure thee, thou most foul spirit, every appearance, every inroad of Satan, in the Name of Jesus Christ ✠ of Nazareth, Who, after His baptism in Jordan, was led into the wilderness, and overcame thee in thine own stronghold: that thou cease to assault him whom He hath formed from the dust of the earth for His own honour and glory: and that thou in miserable man tremble not at human weakness, but at the image of Almighty God. Yield, therefore, to God ✠ Who by His servant Moses drowned thee and thy malice in Pharaoh and his army in the depths of the sea. Yield to God ✠ Who put thee to flight when driven out of King Saul with spiritual song, by his most faithful servant David. Yield thyself to God ✠ Who condemned thee in the traitor Judas Iscariot. For He touches thee with Divine ✠ stripes, when in His sight, trembling and crying out with thy legions, thou saidst: What have I to do with Thee, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Art Thou come hither to torment us before the time? He presses upon thee with perpetual flames, Who shall say to the wicked at the end of time—Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. For thee, O impious one, and for thy angels, is the worm that dieth not; for thee and thy angels is the fire unquenchable prepared: for thou art the chief of accursed murder, thou the author of incest, thou the head of sacrileges, thou the master of the worst actions, thou the teacher of heretics, thou the instigator of all uncleanness. Therefore go out ✠ thou wicked one, go out ✠, thou infamous one, go out with all thy deceits; for God hath willed that man shall be His temple. But why dost thou delay longer here? Give honour to God the Father ✠ Almighty, before Whom every knee is bent. Give place to Jesus Christ ✠ the Lord, Who shed for man His most precious Blood. Give place to the Holy ✠ Ghost, Who by His blessed Apostle Peter struck thee to the ground in Simon Magus; Who condemned thy deceit in Ananias and Sapphira; Who smote thee in Herod, because he gave not God the glory; Who by his Apostle Paul smote thee in Elymas the sorcerer with a mist and darkness, and by the same Apostle by his word of command bade thee come out of the damsel possessed with the spirit of divination. Now therefore depart ✠, depart, thou seducer. The wilderness is thy abode. The serpent is the place of thy habitation: be humbled, and be overthrown. There is no time now for delay. For behold the Lord the Ruler approaches closely upon thee, and His fire shall glow before Him, and shall go before Him; and shall burn up His enemies on every side. If thou hast deceived man, at God thou canst not scoff: One expels thee, from Whose Sight nothing is hidden. He casts thee out, to Whose power all things are subject. He shuts thee out, Who hast prepared for thee and for thine angels everlasting hell; out of Whose mouth the sharp sword shall go out, when He shall come to judge the quick and the dead, and the World by fire. Amen. _All the aforesaid things being said and done, so far as there shall be need, they shall be repeated, until the possessed person be entirely set free._ _The following which are noted down will be of great assistance, said devoutly over the possessed, and also frequently to repeat the_ Our Father, Hail Mary, _and_ Creed. _The Canticle._ Magnificat. _The Canticle._ Benedictus. _The Creed of S. Athanasius._ _Quicunque uult._ Psalm xc. _Qui habitat._ Psalm lxvii. _Exurgat Deus._ Psalm lxix. _Deus in adiutorium._ Psalm liii. _Deus, In Nomine Tuo._ Psalm cxvii. _Confitemini Domino._ Psalm xxxiv. _Iudica, Domine._ Psalm xxx. _In Te, Domine, speraui._ Psalm xxi. _Deus, Deus meus._ Psalm iii. _Domine, quid multiplicasti?_ Psalm x. _In Domino confido._ Psalm xii. _Usquequo, Domine?_ _Each Psalm shall be said with_ Glory be to the Father, &c. _Prayer after being set free._ We pray Thee, O Almighty God, that the spirit of wickedness may have no more power over this Thy servant N. (_or_ Thy handmaid N.), but that he may flee away, and never come back again: at Thy bidding, O Lord, let there come into him (_or_ her) the goodness and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom we have been redeemed, and let us fear no evil, for the Lord is with us, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee, in the Unity of the Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end. ℟. Amen. A shorter form of exorcism, which, being general, differs in aim and use, was published by order of Pope Leo XIII and may be found in the later editions of the _Rituale Romanum_, “Exorcismus in Satanam et Angelos apostalicos.”[41] After the customary invocation _In nomine_ ... the rite begins with a prayer to S. Michael, the solemn adjuration of some length follows with versicles and responses, a second prayer is next recited, and the whole concludes by three aspirations from the Litany: “From the deceits and crafts of the Devil; O Lord, deliver us. That it may please Thee to rule Thy Church so it shall alway serve Thee in lasting peace and true liberty; We beseech Thee, hear us. That Thou wouldst vouchsafe to beat down and subdue all the enemies of Thy Holy Church; We beseech Thee, hear us.” _And the place is sprinkled with Holy Water_,[42] is the final rubric. The Baptismal Exorcism and exorcisms such as those of water, salt,[43] and oil, it were perhaps impertinent to treat of here. It may, however, be noticed that in the ceremony of the Blessing of the Waters[44] (approved by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, 6 December, 1890), performed on the Vigil of the Epiphany, there occurs a solemn “Exorcismus contra Satanam et Angelos apostalicos,” followed by “Exorcismus salis” and “Exorcismus aquæ.” There are recorded throughout history innumerable examples of obsession and demoniacal possession, as also of potent and successful exorcism. It is, of course, quite possible, and indeed probable, that many of these cases were due to natural causes, epilepsy, acute hysteria, incipient lunacy, and the like. But, none the less, when every allowance has been made for incorrect diagnosis, for ill-informed ascriptions of rare and obscure forms of both physical and mental maladies, for credulity, honest mistakes, and exaggerations of every kind, there will yet remain a very considerable quota which it seems impossible to account for and explain save on the score of possession by some evil and hostile intelligence. But nobody is asked to accept all the instances of diabolic possession recorded in the history of the Church, nor even to form any definite opinion upon the historical evidence in favour of any particular case. That is primarily a matter for historical and medical science. And, perhaps, even at the present day and among civilized races this phenomenon is not so rare as is popularly supposed. The annals of Bedlam, of many a private madhouse, and many an asylum could tell strange and hideous histories. And if we may judge from the accounts furnished by the pioneers of the Faith in missionary countries the evidences of diabolical agency there are as clearly defined and unmistakable as they were in Galilee in the time of Christ.[45] Demoniacal possession is frequently described and alluded to by the early fathers and apologists in matter-of-fact terms which leave no shadow of doubt as to their belief in this regard. Indeed the success of Christian exorcism is often brought forward as an argument for the acceptance of the Divinity of the founder of Christianity. It would be an easy, but a very lengthy process, to make a catena of such passages from Greek and Latin authors alike.[46] S. Justin Martyr (_ob._ _circa_ A.D. 165) speaks of demons flying from “the touch and breathing of Christians” (_Apologia_, II, 6), “as from a flame that burns them,” adds S. Cyril of Jerusalem (_ob._ 385-6: _Catechesis_, XX, 3). Origen (_ob._ 253-4) mentions the laying on of hands to cast out devils, whilst S. Ambrose[47] (_ob._ 397), S. Ephrem Syrus[48] (_ob._ 373), and others used this ceremony when exorcizing. The holy sign of the Cross also is extolled by many Fathers for its efficacy against all kinds of diabolic molestation; thus Lactantius writes: “Nunc satis est, huius signi [Crucis] potentiam, quantum ualeat exponere. Quanto terrori sit dæmonibus hoc signum, sciet, qui uiderit, quatenus adiurati per Christum, de corporibus, quæ obsederint, fugiant,”[49] _Diuinarum Institutionum_, IV, xxvii.[50] S. Athanasius (_ob._ 373), _De Incarnatione Uerbi_, XLVII; S. Basil (_ob._ 379), _In Esaiam_, XI, 249; S. Cyril of Jerusalem, _Catechesis_, XIII; S. Gregory of Nazianzus (_ob._ _circa_ 389), _Carmen aduersus Iram_, 415 _sqq._, all have passages of no little weight to the same effect. S. Cyril, _Procatechesis_, IX; and S. Athanasius, _Ad Marcellum_, XXIII, recommend that the prayers of exorcism and the adjuration should as far as possible repeat the exact words of Holy Scripture. In the annals of hagiography we find from the earliest days until our own time very many instances of possession, very many cases where a poor afflicted wretch has been released and relieved by the power and prayer of some Saint or holy servant of God.[51] Thus in the life of S. Benedict, that noble, calm, dignified, prudent, great-souled, and high-minded hero, there are recorded several occasions upon which he was confronted by extraordinary manifestations of evil spirits who resisted the building of his monastery upon the crest of Monte Cassino, where Satanism had been previously practised. It is not said that there were any visible appearances, save to S. Benedict alone,[52] but a succession of untoward accidents, of abnormal occurrences and constant alarms, plainly showed that the Saint was contending against superhuman difficulties. More than once he found it necessary to exorcize certain of his monks,[53] and so marked was his triumph over these malignant and destructive influences that he has always been venerated in the Church as a most potent “effugator dæmonum,” and is confidently invoked in the hour of spiritual peril and deadly attack. Great faith also is placed in the Medal of Saint Benedict. This medal, originally a cross, is dedicated to the devotion in honour of the Patriarch. One side bears the figure of the Saint holding a cross in his right hand, and the Holy Rule in his left. Upon the other is a cross together with the following letters arranged on and around it: C.S.P.B., Crux Sancti Patris Benedicti (The Cross of the holy Father Benedict). C.S.S.M.L., Crux Sacra Sit Mihi Lux (May the holy Cross be my Light). N.D.S.M.D., Non Draco Sit Mihi Dux (Let not the Devil be my guide). U.R.S.: N.S.M.U.: S.M.Q.L.: I.U.B.: Uade Retro Satana: Nunquam Suade Mihi Uana: Sunt Mala Quæ Libas: Ipse Uenena Bibas. (Begone, Satan, never suggest things to me, what thou offerest is evil, drink thou thyself thy poison).[54] The “Centenary” form of the medal (struck at Monte Cassino in 1880 to commemorate the 13th centenary of the birth of S. Benedict in 480) has under the figure the words: _Ex S.M. Cassino MDCCCLXXX_. Upon the same side round the edge runs the inscription: Eius in obitu n̅r̅o præsentia muniamur (May we be protected by his presence at the hour of our death), and the word PAX appears above the cross. It is doubtful when the Medal of S. Benedict originated, but during a trial for Witchcraft at Natternberg, near the abbey of Metten, in Bavaria, during the year 1647, the accused women testified that they had no power over Metten which was under the particular protection of the cross. Upon investigation a number of painted crosses surrounded by the letters which are now engraved upon Benedictine medals were found on the walls of the abbey, but their signification had been wholly forgotten. At length, in an old manuscript, written in 1415, was discovered a picture representing S. Benedict holding in one hand a staff which ended in a cross, and in the other a scroll. On the staff and scroll were written in full the formulas of which the mysterious letters were the initials. Medals with the figure of S. Benedict, a cross, and these letters began now to be struck and rapidly spread over Europe. The medals were first authoritatively approved by Benedict XIV in his briefs of 23 December, 1741, and 12 March, 1742. In the case of the possessed boys of Illfurt (Alsace) they exhibited the utmost horror and dread of a Medal of S. Benedict. These medals are hallowed with a proper rite[55] in which the adjuration commences: “Exorcizo uos, numismata, per Deum Patrem ✠ omnipotentem....” “I exorcize ye, medals, through God the Father ✠ Almighty.... May the power of the adversary, all the host of the Devil, all evil attack, every spirit and glamour of Satan, be utterly put to flight and driven far away by the virtue of these medals....”[56] The prayer runs: “O Lord Jesus Christ ... by Thy most Holy Passion I humbly pray and beseech Thee, that Thou wouldest grant that whosoever devoutly invoketh Thy Holy Name in this prayer and petition which Thou Thyself hast taught us, may be delivered from every deceit of the Devil and from all his wiles, and that Thou wouldest vouchsafe to bring Thy servant to the harbour of salvation. Who livest and reignest....”[57] S. Maurus also, the beloved disciple of S. Benedict, was famous for the cures he wrought in cases of possession.[58] Visiting France in 543 he became founder and superior of the abbey of Glanfeuil, Anjou, later known by his name, St. Maur-sur-Loise.[59] The relics of S. Maurus after various translations were finally enshrined at St. Germain-des-Prez. In the eleventh century an arm of the Saint had been with great devotion transferred to Monte Cassino, where by its touch a demoniac was delivered. This is related by Desiderius,[60] who was abbot at that time, and afterwards became Pope, Blessed Victor III (_ob._ 16 September, 1087). Throughout the Middle Ages the tomb of S. Maur at St. Germain was a celebrated place of pilgrimage, and the possessed were brought here in large numbers to be healed.[61] The Holy Winding Sheet of Besançon, again, was greatly resorted to for the relief and cure of possession. This venerable relic, being one of the linen cloths used at the burial of Christ, was brought to Besançon in 1206 by Otto de la Roche, and the feast of its arrival (_Susceptio_) was ordered to be kept on 11 July. At present it is a double of the first class in the cathedral, St. Jean, and of the second class throughout the diocese. Novenas made in the church at Bonnet, near Nantes, were popularly supposed to be of especial efficacy in healing possession. It is, of course, impossible even briefly to catalogue the most important and striking of the numberless cases of possession recorded throughout the centuries in every country and at every era. Of these a great number are, no doubt, to be attributed to disease; very many to a commixture of hysteria and semi-conscious, or more frequently unconscious, fraud; some few to mere chousing; and, if human evidence is worth anything at all, many actually to diabolic influence. There were some curious episodes in England during Queen Elizabeth’s reign, when a third-rate Puritan minister, John Darrel, made a considerable stir owing to his attempts at exorcism. This idea seems to have been suggested to him by the exorcisms of the famous Jesuit missionary priest, William Weston, who after having been educated at Oxford, Paris, and Douai, entered the Society on 5 November, 1575, at Rome. He then worked and taught in Spain, until he was called to his native mission, actually arriving in England, 20 September, 1584. In the course of his labours, which at that dangerous time were carried on in circumstances of extremest peril, he was required to perform the rite of exorcism upon several distressed persons, who were for the most part brought to him at the houses of two zealous Catholics, Sir George Peckham of Denham, near Uxbridge, and Lord Vaux of Hackney, both of which gentlemen had suffered in many ways for their faith. With regard to the patients we can only say that we lack evidence to enable us to decide whether the cases were genuine, or whether they were merely sick and ailing folk; but we can confidently affirm that there is no suspicion of any fraud or cozenage. Father Weston is acknowledged to have been a man of the most candid sincerity, intensely spiritual, and of no ordinary powers. Although the rites, in which several priests joined, were performed with the utmost secrecy and every precaution was taken to prevent any report being spread abroad, somebody gossiped, and in about a year various exaggerated accounts were being circulated, until the matter came before the Privy Council. A violent recrudescence of persecution at once followed, many of the exorcists were seized and butchered for their priesthood, the rest, including Weston, were flung into jail, August, 1586. A long period of imprisonment ensued, and in 1599 Weston was committed to the Tower, where he suffered such hardships that he wellnigh lost his sight. Eventually in 1603 he was banished, and spent the rest of his days at Seville and Valladolid. He was rector of the latter college at the time of his death, 9 June, 1615.[62] It was in 1586, just when the exorcisms of the Jesuit fathers had unfortunately attracted so widespread attention and foolish comment, that John Darrel, although a Protestant and lacking both appropriate ordination and training, rashly resolved to emulate their achievements. He was young, not much more than twenty, he was foolhardy and he was ignorant, three qualities which even in our own time often win cheap notoriety. It seems that he was first called in to cure a young girl of seventeen, Katherine Wright, who lived at Mansfield, Nottingham. Darrel forthwith pronounced that she was afflicted by an evil spirit, and he prayed over her from four o’clock in the morning till noon, but entirely without result. He then declared that the wench had been bewitched and that the demon, moreover, was sent by one Margaret Roper, with whom the patient had recently quarrelled. The girl backed his story, and the accused woman was at once taken into custody by the constable. When, however, she appeared before Mr. Fouliamb, a justice of the peace, not only was she incontinently discharged, but Darrel received a smart rebuff and found himself in no small danger of arrest. This mischance sufficiently scared the would-be exorcist, and for some ten years he disappeared from view, only to come before the public again at Burton-upon-Trent, where he was prominent in the sensation and the scandal that centred round Thomas Darling, a young Derbyshire boy. This imaginative juvenal was subject to fits—real or feigned—during which he had visions of green angels and a green cat. Betimes his conversation became larded with true Puritan cant, and he loved to discourse with godly ministers. A credulous physician suggested that the lad was bewitched, and very soon afterwards it was noticed that the reading aloud of the Bible, especially certain verses in the first chapter of S. John’s Gospel, threw him into frantic convulsions. He also began a long prattling tale about “a little old woman” who wore “a broad thrimmed hat,” which proved amply sufficient to cause two women, Elizabeth Wright, and her daughter, Alse Gooderidge, long vehemently suspected of sorcery, to be examined before two magistrates, who committed Alse to jail. Next those concerned summoned a cunning man, who used various rough methods to induce the prisoner to confess. After having been harried and even tortured the wretched creature made some rambling and incoherent acknowledgements of guilt, which were twisted into a connected story. By now Darling had been ill for three months, and so far from improving, was getting worse. At this juncture, exactly the dramatic moment, John Darrel, full of bluff and bounce, appeared upon the scene, and forthwith took charge of affairs. According to his own account his efforts were singularly blessed; that is to say the boy got better and the sly Puritan claimed all the credit. Alse Gooderidge was tried at the assizes, convicted by the jury, and sentenced to death by Lord Chief Justice Anderson; “She should have been executed but that her spirit killed her in prison,” says John Denison the pamphleteer! The whole affair greatly increased Darrel’s reputation. Not long after a much-bruited case of alleged possession in Lancashire gave him further opportunity to pose in the limelight. Ann Starchie, aged nine, and John, her brother, aged ten, were seized with a mysterious disorder; “a certaine fearefull starting and pulling together of her body” affected the girl, whilst the boy was “compelled to shout” on his way to school. Both grew steadily worse until their father, Nicholas Starchie, consulted Edmund Hartley, a notorious conjurer of no very fair repute. Hartley seems to have quieted the children by means of various charms, and the father paid him something like a retaining fee of forty shillings a year. This, however, he insisted should be increased, and when any addition was denied, there were quarrels, and presently the boy and girl again fell ill. The famous Dr. Dee was summoned, but he was obviously nonplussed, and whilst he “sharply reproved and straitly examined” Hartley, in his quandary could do or say little more save advise the help of “godlie preachers.” The situation in that accursed house now began to grow more serious. Besides the children three young wards of Mr. Starchie, a servant, and a visitor, were all seized with the strange disease. “All or most of them joined together in a strange and supernatural loud whupping that the house and grounde did sounde therwith again.” Hartley fell under suspicion, and was haled before a justice of the peace, who promptly committed him to the assizes. Evidence was given that he was continually kissing the Starchie children, in fact, he kept embracing all the possessed, and it was argued that he had thus communicated an evil spirit to them. He was accused of having drawn magic circles upon the ground, and although he stoutly denied the charge, he was convicted of felony and hanged at Lancaster. John Darrel and his assistant, George More, minister of a church in Derbyshire, undertook to exorcize the afflicted, and in a day or two, after long prayers and great endeavours, they managed to expel the devils. Here we have folly, imposture, and hysteria all blended together to make a horrible tale. At this time Darrel was officiating as a minister at Nottingham, where there happened to be living a young apprenticed musician, a clever and likely lad, William Somers, who some years before had met Darrel at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, where both had been resident. It appears that the boy had once met a strange woman, whom he offended in some way, and suddenly he “did use such strang and idle kinde of gestures in laughing, dancing, and such like lighte behaviour, that he was suspected to be madd.” The famous exorcist was sent for on the 5th of November, 1597, and forthwith recognized the signs of possession. The lad was suffering for the sins of Nottingham. Accordingly sermons were delivered and prayers were read in true ranting fashion, and when Darrel named one after the other fourteen signs of possession the patient, who had been most carefully coached, illustrated each in turn. It is possible that Darrel had to some extent mesmeric control over Somers, whose performance was of a very remarkable nature at least, for “he tore; he foamed; he wallowed; his face was drawn awry; his eyes would stare and his tongue hang out”; together with a thousand other such apish antics which greatly impressed the bystanders. Finally the boy lay as if dead for a quarter of an hour, and then rose up declaring he was well and whole. However, obsession followed possession. The demon still assailed him, and it was not long before Master Somers accused thirteen women of having contrived his maladies by their sorcery. Darrel, the witch-finder, had by this time attained a position of no small importance in the town, being chosen preacher at S. Mary’s, and he was prepared to back his pupil to the uttermost. Yet even his influence for some reason did not serve, and all but two of the women concerned were released from prison. Next certain unbelieving citizens had the bad taste to interfere, and to carry off the chief actor to the house of correction, where he pretty soon confessed his impostures, in which, as he acknowledged, he had been carefully instructed by Darrel. The matter now became a public scandal, and upon the report of the Archdeacon of Derby the Archbishop of York appointed a commission to inquire into the facts. Brought before these ministers, not one of whom could possibly have had any means of forming a correct judgement, Somers retracted his words, asserted that he had been induced to slander Darrel, and thereat fell into such fits, foamings, and contortions that the ignoramuses were convinced of the reality of his demoniac possession. At the Nottingham assizes, however, things went differently. Summoned to court and encouraged by the Lord Chief Justice, Sir Edmund Anderson,[63] to tell the truth the wretched young man made a clean breast of all his tricks. The case against Alice Freeman, the accused, was dismissed, and Sir Edmund, shocked at the frauds, wrote a weighty letter to Whitgift, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Darrel and More were cited to the Court of High Commission, where Bancroft, Bishop of London, two of the Lord Chief Justices, the Master of Requests, and other high officials heard the case. It is obvious that Bancroft really controlled the examination from first to last, and that he combined the rôles of prosecutor and judge. Somers now told the Court how he had been in constant communication with Darrel, how they had met secretly when Darrel taught him “to doe all those trickes which Katherine Wright did” and later sent him to see and learn of the boy of Burton. In fact Darrel made him go through a whole series of antics again and again in his presence, and it was after all these preliminaries and practice that the lad posed as a possessed person at Nottingham and was prayed over and exhibited. The vulpine Puritan was fairly caught. No doubt the Bishop of London may have been a trifle arbitrary, but after all he was dealing with a rank impostor. Darrel and More were deposed from the ministry, and committed to close prison. The whole of this case is reported by Samuel Harsnett, chaplain to Bancroft, in a book of three hundred and twenty-four pages, _A Discovery of the Fraudulent Practises of John Darrel, Bacheler of Artes_.... London, 1599, and a perfect rain of pamphlets followed. Both Darrel and More answered Harsnett, drawing meantime a number of other persons into the paper fray. We have such works as _An Apologie, or defence of the possession of William Sommers, a young man of the towne of Nottingham.... By John Darrell, Minister of Christ Jesus_ ... a black letter brochure which is undated but may be safely assigned to 1599; _The Triall of Maist. Dorrel, or A Collection of Defences against Allegations_ ... 1599;[64] and Darrel’s abusive _A Detection of that sinnful, shamful, lying, and ridiculous discours of Samuel Harshnet_, 1600. There are several allusions in contemporary dramatists to the scandal, and Jonson in _The Divell is an Asse_, acted in 1616, V, 3, has: It is the easiest thing, Sir, to be done. As plaine as fizzling: roule but wi’ your eyes, And foame at th’ mouth. A little castle-soape Will do’t, to rub your lips: And then a nutshell, With toe and touchwood in it to spit fire, Did you ner’e read, Sir, little _Darrel’s_ tricks, With the boy o’ _Burton_, and the 7 in _Lancashire_, Sommers at _Nottingham_? All these do teach it. And wee’l give out, Sir, that your wife ha’s bewitch’d you. It is probable that in his books Harsnett is to a large extent the mouthpiece of the ideas of Bancroft,[65] whose opinions must have carried no small weight seeing that in 1604 he became Archbishop of Canterbury. But Harsnett himself was also a man who could well stand alone, a divine marked out for the highest preferments. As Master of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, Vice-chancellor of that University, Bishop of Chichester, Bishop of Norwich, and finally in 1628 Archbishop of York,[66] he was certainly one of the most prominent men of the day. His views, therefore, are not only of interest, but may be regarded as an expression of recognized Anglican authority. Bancroft, who was a bitter persecutor of Catholics, seems to have turned over a quantity of material he had collected to Harsnett, who in 1603 published a verjuiced attack upon the priesthood in particular and upon the supernatural in general under the title of _A Declaration of Egregious Popish Impostures_.[67] This violent and foolish polemic with its heavy periods of coarse ill-humour and scornful profanity jars upon the reader like the harsh screeching of some cankered scold. True, it has a certain force due to the very vehemence and elaborate gusto of the wrathful ecclesiastic, the force of Billingsgate and deafening vituperation bawled by leathern lungs and raucous tongue. As a sober argument, a reasoned contribution to controversy and debate, the thing is negligible and has been wholly forgotten. Nevertheless, historically Harsnett and Bancroft are important, for it was the latter who drew up, or at least inspired, carried through Convocation, and at once enforced the Canons generally known as those of 1604, of which number 72 lays down: “No minister or ministers shall ... without the license or direction (_mandatum_) of the Bishop ... attempt upon any pretence whatsoever either of possession or obsession, by fasting or prayer, to cast out any devil or devils, under pain of the imputation of imposture or cozenage, and deposition from the ministry.” This article seems definitely intended to fix the position of the Church of England.[68] The whole question of exorcism had, in common with every other point of Christian doctrine, caused the most acrid disagreement. The Lutherans retained exorcism in the baptismal rite and were both instant and persevering in their exorcisms of the possessed. Martin Luther himself had a most vivid realization of and the firmest belief in the material antagonism of evil. The black stain in the castle of Wartburg still marks the room where he flung his ink-horn at the Devil. The silly body, the blind, the dumb, the idiot, were, as often as not, afflicted by demons; the raving maniac was assuredly possessed. Physicians might explain these evils as natural infirmity, but such physicians were ignorant men; they did not know the craft and power of Satan. Many a poor wretch who was generally supposed to have committed suicide had in truth been seized by the Fiend and strangled by him. The Devil could beget children; had not Luther himself come in contact with one of them?[69] At the close of the sixteenth century, however, an interminable and desperate struggle took place between the believers in exorcism and the Swiss and Silesian sectaries who entirely discarded exorcism,[70] either declaring it to have belonged only to the earliest years of Christianity or else trying to explain away the Biblical instances on purely rationalistic grounds. In England baptismal exorcism was retained in the First Prayer Book of 1549, but by 1552, owing to the authority of Martin Bucer, we find it entirely eliminated. Under Elizabeth the ever-increasing influence of Zurich and Geneva, to which completest deference was paid, thoroughly discredited exorcisms of any kind, and this misbelieving attitude is repeatedly and amply made clear in the sundry “Apologies” and “Defences” of Jewel and his followers. A letter of Archbishop Parker in 1574[71] with reference to the proven frauds of two idle wenches, Agnes Bridges and Rachel Pinder,[72] shows that he was thoroughly sceptical as to the possibility of possession, and his successor, the stout old Calvinist Whitgift, was certainly of the same mind. In 1603 five clergymen attempted exorcism in the case of Mary Glover, the daughter of a merchant in Thames Street, who was said to be possessed owing to the sorceries of a certain Elizabeth Jackson. John Swan, “a famous Minister of the Gospel,” took the lead in this business, which made considerable noise at the time. The Puritans were not unnaturally anxious to vindicate their powers over the Devil and they seem avidly to have grasped at any such opportunity that offered. Swan did not fail to advertise his supposed triumph in _A True and Breife Report of Mary Glover’s Vexation and of her deliverance by the meanes of fastinge and prayer_, 1603; moreover, after her deliverance he took her home to be his servant “least Satan should assault her again.” Old Mother Jackson was indicted, committed by Sir John Crook, the Recorder of London, and actually sentenced by Sir Edmund Anderson, the Lord Chief Justice, to be pilloried four times and be kept a year in prison. Unfortunately for the would-be exorcists and their pretensions King James, whose shrewd suspicions were aroused, sent to examine the girl, a physician, Dr. Edward Jorden, who detected her imposture, in which, I doubt not, she had been well coached by the Puritans. Dr. Jorden recounted the circumstance in his pamphlet _A briefe discourse of a disease called the Suffocation of the Mother, Written uppon occasion which hath beene of late taken thereby to suspect possession of an evill spirit_ (London, 1603). The ministers were extremely chagrined, and one Stephen Bradwell even took up the cudgels in a tart rejoinder to Jorden, which was singularly futile as his lucubrations remain unpublished.[73] It is not improbable that this performance had its share of influence on Bancroft when he drew up article 72 of the 1604 Canons. Francis Hutchinson in his _Historical Essay on Witchcraft_ (1718)[74] doubts whether any Bishop of the Church of England ever granted a licence for exorcism to any one of his clergy, and indeed the case which is given by Dr. F. G. Lee,[75] who relates how Bishop Seth Ward of Exeter assigned a form under his own signature and seal in January, 1665, to the Rev. John Ruddle, vicar of Altarnon, is probably unique. And even so, this was not strictly speaking an instance of exorcism, at least there was no deliverance of a person possessed. Mr. Ruddle records in his MS. Diary that in a lonely field belonging to the parish of Little Petherick[76] an apparition was seen by a lad aged about sixteen, the son of a certain Mr. Bligh. The ghost, which was that of one Dorothy Durant, who had died eight years before, appeared so frequently to the boy at this same spot which he was obliged to pass daily as he went to and from school, that he fell ill and at last confessed his fears to his family, who treated the matter with ridicule and scolded him roundly when they saw that jest and mockery were of no avail. Eventually Mr. Ruddle was sent for to argue him out of his foolishness. The vicar, however, was not slow to perceive that young Bligh was speaking the truth, and he forthwith accompanied his pupil to the field, where they both unmistakably saw the phantom just as had been described. After a little while Mr. Ruddle visited Exeter to interview his diocesan and obtain the necessary licence for the exorcism. The Bishop, however, asked: “On what authority do you allege that I am entrusted with faculty so to do? Our Church, as is well known, hath abjured certain branches of her ancient power, on grounds of perversion and abuse.” Mr. Ruddle quoted the Canons of 1604, and this appears to have satisfied the prelate, who called in his secretary and assigned a form “insomuch that the matter was incontinently done.” But the worthy vicar was not permitted to depart without a thoroughly characteristic caution: “Let it be secret, Mr. Ruddle,—weak brethren! weak brethren!” The MS. Diary gives some details of the manner in which the ghost was laid, and it is significant to read that the operator described a circle and a pentacle upon the ground further making use of a rowan “crutch” or wand. He mentions “a parchment scroll,” he spoke in Syriac and proceeded to demand as the books advise; he “went through the proper forms of dismissal and fulfilled all, as it was set down and written in my memoranda,” and then “with certain fixed rites I did dismiss that troubled ghost.” It would be interesting to know what form and ceremonies the Bishop prescribed. It does not sound like the details of a Catholic exorcism, but rather some superstitious and magical ritual. From what is related the form can hardly have been arranged for the nonce. Although exorcism was not recognized by Protestants there are instances upon record where an appeal has been made by English country-folk for the ministrations of a Catholic priest. In April, 1815, Father Edward Peach of the Midland District, was implored to visit a young married woman named White, of King’s Norton, Worcestershire. She had for two months been afflicted with an extraordinary kind of illness which doctors could neither name nor cure. Her sister declared that a young man of bad repute, whose hand had been rejected, had sworn revenge and had employed the assistance of a reputed wizard at Dudley to work some mischief. However that might be, the unhappy girl seemed to lie at death’s door; she raved of being beset day and night by spirits who mocked and moped at her, threatening to carry her away body and soul, and suggesting self-destruction as the only means to escape them. The clergyman of the parish visited and prayed with her, but no good resulted from all his endeavours. It so happened that a nurse who was called in was a Catholic, and horrified at the hideous ravings of the patient she procured a bottle of holy water, with which she sprinkled the room and bed. A few drops fell upon the sufferer, who uttered the most piercing cries, and screamed out, “You have scalded me! You have scalded me!” The paroxysm, however, passed, and she fell for the first time during many weeks into a sound slumber. After some slight improvement for eight and forty hours she was attacked by violent convulsions, and her relatives, in great alarm, on Tuesday in Rogation Week, 2 May, 1815, sent a special messenger to beg Father Peach to come over immediately. When the priest appeared the girl was being held down in bed by two women who were forced to put forth all their strength, and as soon as she saw him—he was a complete stranger to her nor could his sacred profession be recognized by his attire—so terrible were her struggles that her husband was bound to lend his aid also to master her writhing limbs. Presently she fell into a state of complete exhaustion, and Father Peach, dismissing the rest of the company, was able to talk to her long and seriously. He seems to have been quite satisfied that it was a genuine case of diabolic possession, and his evidence, carefully expressed and marshalled with great moderation, leave no reasonable doubt that this strange sickness owned no natural origin. In the course of conversation it appeared that she had never been baptized. A simple instruction was given and finding her in excellent dispositions Father Peach at once baptized her. During the administration of this sacrament she trembled like a leaf, and as the water fell upon her she winced pitifully, a spasm of agony distorting her countenance. She afterwards averred that it gave her as much pain as if boiling water had been poured upon her bare flesh. Immediately afterwards there followed a truly remarkable change in her health and spirits; her husband and sister were overjoyed and thought it no less than a miracle. The next day Father Peach visited her again and noticed a rapid improvement. Save for a slight weakness she seemed perfectly restored, and, says the good father, writing a twelvemonth later than the event from notes he had taken at the time, there was no return, nor the least lingering symptom of her terrible and distressing malady. In its issue of 11 October, 1925, _The Sunday Express_, under the heading “Evil Spirit Haunts A Girl,” devoted a prominent column to the record of some extraordinary happenings. The account commences: “Haunted for twelve months and more by a mischievous spirit—called a Poltergeist—driven almost to a state of distraction, threatened with a lunatic asylum, and then cured by the help of a band of spirit Indians, is the extraordinary experience of the nineteen-year-old Gwynneth Morley, who lives with her widowed mother at Keighley, and who was employed in the spinning mills of Messrs. Hay and Wright.” These phenomena were communicated to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who informed Mr. Hewet McKenzie, with the result that the girl was brought to London for psychic treatment, Mr. McKenzie being “honorary principal of the British College of Psychic Science,” an institution which is advertised as the “Best equipped Centre for the study of Psychic Science in Britain,” and announces “Lectures on Practical Healing,” “Public Clairvoyance,” “A Small Exhibition of notable water colours ... representing Soul development, or experience of the Soul in ethereal conditions.” “The College” is, I am given to understand, a well-known centre for spiritistic séances. Gwynneth Morley worked in Mr. McKenzie’s family for three months “as a housemaid, under close observation, and receiving psychic treatment. “Day by day the amazing manifestations of her tormenting spirit were noted down. In between the new and full moon the disturbances were worse. Everything in the room in which Gwynneth happened to be would be thrown about and smashed. Tables were lifted and overturned, chairs smashed to pieces, bookcases upset, and heavy settees thrown over. “In the kitchen of Holland Park the preparation of meals, when Gwynneth was about, was a disconcerting affair. Bowls of water would be spilt and pats of butter thrown on the floor. “On another occasion when Gwynneth was in the kitchen the housekeeper, who was preparing some grape fruit for breakfast, found that one half had disappeared and could be found neither in the kitchen nor in the scullery. She got two bananas to take its place, and laid them on the table beside her; immediately the missing grape fruit whizzed past her ear and fell before her and the bananas vanished. Some ten minutes later they were found on the scullery table. “All this time Gwynneth was being treated by psychic experts. Every week the girl sat with Mr. and Mrs. McKenzie and others. It was found that she was easily hypnotised, and that tables moved towards her in the circle. “At other times during the cure the Poltergeist seemed to accept challenges. One night after a particularly exciting day, Mrs. Barkel magnetised her head and quietened her, and Mrs. McKenzie suggested that she should go to bed, saying ‘Nothing happens when you get into bed.’ Going up the stairs a small table and a metal vase crashed over, and a little later a great noise of banging and tearing was heard in Gwynneth’s room. When Mrs. McKenzie went into the room it looked as if a tornado had swept over it. “After an active spell from June 21 to June 25 the spirit behaved itself until July 1, when the girl had a kind of fit. Suddenly she fell off her chair with her hands clenched. They laid her on a bed, and she fell into another fit. She gripped her own throat powerfully. “Since that evening she has had no further attacks, nor have there been any disturbances.” The main cause of this apparent cure is said to be the mediumship of Mrs. Barkel. “On many occasions Mrs. Barkel gave Gwynneth excellent clairvoyance, describing deceased relatives, friends, and incidents in her past life which the girl acknowledged and corroborated. “One near relative, says Mr. McKenzie, whose life had been misspent, and who had been a heavy drinker, was clearly seen. The girl feared and hated this personality, in life and beyond death, and had herself often seen him clairvoyantly before the disturbances began at all. Through Mrs. Barkel’s spirit guide, Mr. McKenzie got into touch with him, and he promised to carry out any instructions that might be given for the benefit of the girl. “The request was made that he should withdraw altogether from any contact with her and not return except by request. ‘Professor J.,’ a worker on the other side, became interested. Mr. McKenzie asked that a band of Indians, who sometimes profess to be able to help, should take Gwynneth in hand and protect her from the assaults of disturbing influences. “The following day Mrs. Barkel described an Indian who had come to help, and improvements were noted from about this date. The ‘professor’ encouraged the treatment by suggestion, and told Mr. McKenzie that in a few weeks, with the help of the Indian workers, he would place the medium in an entirely new psychic condition. Mr. McKenzie says that the promise was kept.” I have quoted this case at some length owing to the prominence afforded it in a popular and widely read newspaper. That the facts are substantially true I see no reason at all to doubt. It is an ordinary instance of obsession, and will be easily recognized as such by those priests whose duty has required them to study these distressing phenomena. That the interpretation put upon some of the occurrences is utterly false I am very certain. The clairvoyance is merely playing with fire—I might say, with hell-fire—by those who cannot understand what they are about, what forces they are thus blindly evoking. “Professor J.” and “the band of Indians,” indeed all these “workers on the other side” are nothing else than evil, or at the least gravely suspect intelligences, masquerading as spirits of light and goodness. If, indeed, the girl is relieved from obsession one cannot but suppose some ulterior motive lurks in the background; it is but part of a scheme organized for purposes of their own by dark and secret powers ever alert to trick and trap credulous man. The girl, Gwynneth Morley, should have been exorcized by a trained and accredited exorcist. These amateurs neither know nor even faintly realize the harm they may do, the dangers they encounter. A bold mind, such as that of Guazzo, might specify their attempts—well-meaning as they are, no doubt—in terms I do not care to use. At Illfurt, five miles south of Mulhausen in Alsace, is a monument consisting of a stone column thirty feet high surmounted with a statue of the Immaculate Conception, and upon the plinth of the pillar may be read the following remarkable inscription: _In memoriam perpetuam liberationis duorum possessorum Theobaldi et Josephi Burner, obtentæ per intercessionem Beatæ Mariæ Uirginis Immaculatæ, Anno Domini 1869_. Joseph Burner[77] and Anna Maria, his wife, were poor but intelligent persons, who were not merely respected but even looked up to for their probity and industry by their fellow-villagers of Illfurt. The family consisted of five children, the eldest son, Thiébaut, being born on 21 August, 1855, and the second, Joseph, on 29 April, 1857. They were quiet lads of average ability, who, when eight years old, were sent in the usual course to the local elementary school. In the autumn of 1864 both were seized with a mysterious illness which would not yield to the ordinary remedies. Dr. Levy, of Altkirch, who was called in to examine the case acknowledged himself completely baffled, and a number of other doctors who were afterwards consulted declared themselves unable to diagnose such extraordinary symptoms. From 25 September, 1865, the two boys displayed most abnormal phenomena. Whilst lying on their backs they spun suddenly round like whirling tops with the utmost rapidity. Convulsions seized them, twisting and distorting every limb with unparalleled mobility, or again their bodies would for hours together become absolutely rigid and motionless so that no joint could be bent, whilst they lay motionless as stocks or stones. Fearful fits of vomiting often concluded these attacks. Sometimes they were dumb for days and could only gibber and mow with blazing eyes and slabbering lips, sometimes they were deaf so that even a pistol fired close to their ears had not the slightest effect.[78] Often they became fantastically excited, gesticulating wildly and shouting incessantly. Their voices were, however, not their normal tones nor even those of children at all, but the strong, harsh, hoarse articulation of rough and savage men. For hours together they would blaspheme in the foulest terms, cursing and swearing, and bawling out such hideous obscenities that the neighbours took to flight in sheer terror at the horrible scenes, whilst the distracted parents knew not whence to turn for help or comfort. Not only did the sufferers use the filthy vocabulary of the lowest slums, but they likewise spoke with perfect correctness and answered fluently in different languages, in French, Latin, English, and even in most varied dialects of Spanish and Italian, which could by no possible means have been known to them in their normal state. Nor could they at any time have heard conversation in these languages and subconsciously assimilated it. A famous case is on record where a servant girl of mean education fell ill and during a delirium began to mutter and babble in a language which was recognized as Syriac. This was considered to be accounted for when it was discovered that formerly she had been in service in a house where there was lodging a theological student, who upon the eve of his examinations used to walk up and down stairs and pace his room saying aloud to himself Syriac roots and vocables, which she thus often overheard and which in this way registered themselves in her brain. But there could not be any such explanation in the case of Thiébaut and Joseph Burner, since they did not merely reel out disconnected words and phrases in any one or two tongues, but conversed easily and sensibly in a large variety of languages and even in dialects. This has always been considered one of the genuine signs of diabolic possession, as is stated in the third article of _De Exorcizandis Obsessis a Dæmonio_: “3. In primis, ne facile credat, aliquem a dæmonio obsessum esse, sed nota habeat ea signa, quibus obsessus dignoscitur ab iis, qui uel atra bile, uel morbo aliquo laborant. Signa autem obsidentis dæmonis sunt: ignota lingua loqui pluribus uerbis, uel loquentem intelligere; distantia et occulta patefacere; uires super ætatis seu conditionis naturam ostendere; et id genus alia, quæ cum plurima concurrunt, maiora sunt indicia.” Moreover, both Thiébaut and Joseph Burner repeatedly and in exactest detail described events which were happening at a distance, and upon investigation their accounts were afterwards found to be precisely true in every particular. Their strength was also abnormal, and often in their paroxysms and convulsions it needed the utmost exertions of three powerful men severally to hold these lads who were but nine and seven years old. It was noticed at the very beginning of these maladies that the patients were thrown into the most violent fits and every symptom of disease and disorder exacerbated by the presence of any sacramental such as holy water, or medals, rosaries, and other objects which had been blessed according to the ritual. They seemed particularly enraged by the blessed Medal of S. Benedict and pictures of Our Lady of Perpetual Succour. On one occasion Monsieur Ignace Spies, the _Maire_ of Selestat, a man of exceptional devotion and piety, held before their eyes a Relic of S. Gerard Majella,[79] the Redemptorist thaumaturge, when their shrieks and yells were truly terrific, finally dying away in inhuman whines and groans of despair. It so happened that a Corpus Christi procession passed the house, opposite which an Altar of Repose had been erected. The children, who were in bed, knew nothing of this and seemed to lie in a deep stupor. However, as the Blessed Sacrament approached their behaviour is said to have been indescribable. They poured forth torrents of filth and profanity, distorting their limbs into a thousand unnatural postures, their eyes almost starting from their heads, a crisis which was succeeded by a sudden horrible composure, whilst they crept away into the furthest corners of the room moaning, panting, and retching as if in mortal agony. Above all, pictures and Medals of Our Lady and the invocation of Her Most Holy Name filled the possessed with terror and rage. At any mention of “the Great Lady,” as they termed Her, they would curse and howl in so monstrous a way that all who had heard them shook and sweated with fear. The abbé Charles Brey, parish priest of Illfurt, quickly made up his mind as to the diabolic nature of the phenomena. It was an undoubted case of possession, since in no other way could what was taking place be explained. Accordingly he sent to his diocesan, Monsignor Andreas Räss (1842-87) a full account of such extraordinary and fearful events. The Bishop, however, was far from satisfied that these things could not be accounted for naturally. In fact it was only after three or four years’ delay that at the instance of the Dean of Altkirch he decided to order a special ecclesiastical investigation. He finally appointed for this task three acute theologians, Monsignor Stumpf,[80] Superior of his Grand Seminary at Strasburg; Monsignor Freyburger, Vicar-General of the diocese; and Monsieur Sester, rector of Mulhausen. These priests, then, presented themselves unexpectedly at the Burner’s house on Tuesday morning, 13 April, 1869, at 10 o’clock. It was found that Joseph Burner had already concealed himself, and it was only after a prolonged search he could with difficulty be dragged from under his bed where he had taken refuge. Thiébaut feigned to be unconscious of the presence of strangers. The inquiry lasted for more than two hours, and it was not until past noon that the investigators left the house. Meanwhile they had witnessed the most hideous scenes, and their minds were quite made up as to the reality of the possession. They shortly presented their report to the Bishop, who then, and not until then, allowed himself to be convinced of the facts. Even so, the prudent prelate ordered fresh precautions to be taken. At the beginning of September, 1869, Thiébaut was conveyed in the company of his unhappy mother, to the orphanage of S. Charles at Schiltigheim, where he was to be lodged whilst the case was investigated _de nouo_ by Monsignor Rapp, Monsignor Stumpf, and Father Eicher, S.J., Superior of the Jesuit house at Strasburg. At the same time Father Hausser, the chaplain of S. Charles, and Father Schrantzer, a well-known scholar and psychologist, were to keep the boy systematically but secretly under the closest observation. It was decided to proceed to exorcism, and a priest of great reverence and experience, Father Souquat, was commissioned by the Bishop to perform the solemn rite. At two o’clock on Sunday, 3 October, Thiébaut was forcibly brought into the chapel of S. Charles, which hitherto he had always sedulously avoided, and when compelled to enter he uttered without intermission such hoarse yells that it was necessary to remove him for fear of scandal and alarming the other inmates. The lad, however, was now held fast by the abbés Schrantzer and Hausser, assisted by Charles André, the gardener of the establishment, a stalwart and muscular Hercules. The sufferer stood upon a carpet spread just before the communion rails, his face turned towards the tabernacle. He struggled and writhed in the grasp of those who were restraining him; his face was scarlet; his eyes closed; whilst from his swollen and champing lips there flowed down a stream of thick yellowish froth which fell in great viscous gouts to the floor. The Litanies began, and at the words “Sancta Maria, ora pro nobis” a hideous yell burst from his throat. The exorcizer unmoved continued the prayers and gospels of the Ritual. Meanwhile the possessed blasphemed and defied their utmost efforts. It was resolved to recommence upon the following day. Thiébaut, accordingly, was confined in a strait jacket and strapped down in a red arm-chair, around which stood the three guards as before. The evil spirit roared and howled in a deep bass voice, raising a terrific din; the boy’s limbs strained and contorted but the bonds held tight; his face was livid; his mouth flecked with the foam of slobbering saliva. In a firm voice the priest adjured the demon; he held the crucifix before his eyes, and finally a statue of Our Lady with the words: “Unclean spirit, disappear before the face of the Immaculate Conception! She commands! Thou must obey! Thou must depart!” The assistants upon their knees fervently recited the _Memorare_, when the air was rent by a yell of hideous agony, the boy’s limbs were convulsed in one sharp convulsion, and suddenly he lay still wrapped in a deep slumber. At the end of about an hour he awoke gently and gazed about him with wondering eyes. “Where am I?” he asked. “Do you not know me?” questioned the abbé Schrantzer. “No, father, I do not,” was the reply. In a few days Thiébaut was able to return home, worn and weak but bright and happy. Of all that happened during those fateful years he had not the smallest recollection. He returned to school, and was in every respect a normal healthy boy. Joseph, who had grown steadily worse, was meantime secluded from his brother, pending the preparations for his exorcism. On 27 October he was taken very early in the morning to the cemetery chapel near Illfurt. Only the parents, Mons. Ignace Spies, Professor Lachemann, and some half a dozen more witnesses were present, as the affair was conducted in the utmost privacy. At six o’clock the abbé Charles Brey said Mass, after which he exorcized the unhappy victim. During three successive hours they renewed prayers and adjurations, until at last some present began to feel discouraged. But the glowing faith of the priest sustained them, and at length with a loud groan that sounded like a deep roar the boy, who had been struggling and screeching in paroxysms of frantic fury all the while, fell back into a deep swoon and lay motionless. After no long pause he sat up, opened his eyes as awaking from sleep, and was overcome with amazement to find himself in a church with strange people around him. Neither Thiébaut nor Joseph ever experienced any recurrence of this strange malady. The former died when he was only sixteen years old on 3 April, 1871. The latter, who obtained a situation at Zillisheim, died there in 1882 at the age of twenty-five. An even more recent case of possession, which has been authoritatively studied in minutest detail and at first hand, presents many of the same features.[81] Hélène-Joséphine Poirier, the daughter of an artisan family—her father was a mason—was born on 5 November, 1834, at Coullons, a small village some ten miles from Gien in the district of the Loire. Whilst still young she was apprenticed to Mlle Justine Beston, a working dressmaker, and soon became skilful with her needle and a remarkable embroideress. Already she had attracted attention by her sincere and modest piety, and was thought highly of by the parish priest, M. Preslier, a man of unusual discernment and the soundest common sense. On the night of 25 March, 1850, she was suddenly awakened by a series of sharp raps, which soon became violent blows, as if struck upon the walls of the small attic where she slept. In terror she rushed into her parents’ room next door, and they returned with her to search. Nothing at all could be discovered, and she was persuaded to go back to bed. Although they could actually see no cause for alarm her parents had heard the extraordinary noises. “From this date,” says M. Preslier, “the life of Hélène in the midst of such terrible physical and moral suffering that she might well have given utterance to the complaints of holy Job.”[82] These manifestations to Hélène Poirier may not unfittingly be compared with the famous “Rochester knockings,” the phenomenon of the rappings at Hydesville in 1848 at the house of the Fox family, which by many writers is considered to be the beginning of that world-wide movement known as Spiritism or Spiritualism in its modern manifestations and recrudescence.[83] Some months after this event Hélène suddenly fell rigid to the ground as if she had been thrown down by some strong hands. She was able to get up immediately but only to fall again. It was thought she was epileptic or at any rate seized with some unusual attack, some fit or convulsion. But after a careful observation of her case Dr. Azéma, the local practitioner, shrewdly remarked: “Nobody here but the Priest can cure you.” From this time disorders of spirit and physical maladies increased with unprecedented rapidity and violence. “Her physical and mental sufferings, which began on 25 March, 1850, continued until her death on 8 January, 1914, that is to say during a period of sixty-four years. But those of diabolic origin ceased towards the end of 1897. So the diabolic attacks actually lasted for some seven-and-forty years, and for six years of this time she was possessed.”[84] It was in January, 1863, it first became undeniably evident that her sufferings, her spasms, and painful trances had a supernatural origin. The abbé Bougaud, Archdeacon of Orleans, having interviewed her, advised that she should be brought to the Bishop, Monsignor Dupanloup, and made arrangements for her to stay at a Visitation convent in the suburbs, promising that a commission of theologians and doctors should examine her case. On Thursday, 28 October, 1865, Hélène accordingly commenced a retreat at the convent, where she was kindly received. M. Bougaud saw her for about two minutes, and she was handed an official order which would allow her access to the Bishop without waiting for a summons from his lordship or any other undue delay. But there was some misunderstanding, for on the Friday a doctor of high repute called at the convent, as he had been requested, interrogated and examined her for some three-quarters of an hour and then roundly informed the Mother Superior that she was mad, stark mad, and had better be sent home at once. He seems to have impressed the Bishop with his report, for Monsignor Dupanloup sent a messenger to direct the nuns to dismiss her forthwith, and accordingly she was perforce taken back to Coullons after a fruitless journey of bitter disappointments and discouragement. Many persons now began to regard her with suspicion, but in the following year, 1866, the Bishop, whilst visiting Coullons for an April confirmation, granted her an interview which caused him very considerably to modify his first opinion, and M. Bougaud, who saw her in September, declared himself convinced of the supernatural origin of the symptoms she displayed. The most terrible obsessions now attacked her, and more than once she was driven to the verge of suicide and despair. “From 25 March, 1850, until March, 1868, Hélène was _only obsessed_. This obsession _lasted 18 years_. At the end of this time she was _both obsessed and possessed_ for 13 months. From this double agony of obsession and possession she was completely delivered by the exorcisms, which the Bishop had sanctioned, at Orleans, on 19 April, 1869. Four months’ peace followed, until with heroic generosity she voluntarily submitted to new inflictions. “At the end of August, 1869, she accepted from the hands of Our Lord the agony of a new obsession and possession in order to obtain the conversion of the famous general Ducrot. When he was converted, she was delivered from her torments at Lourdes on 3 September, 1875, the cure being effected by the prayers of 15,000 pilgrims who had assembled there. _The obsession and possession in their new form_ had lasted five years. During the forty years which passed before her death, she was never again subject to possession, but she was continually obsessed, the attacks now being of short duration, now long and severe. The sufferings of every kind which she endured as well she offered with the intention of the triumph and good estate of God’s priests. Why she was originally thus persecuted by the Devil for nineteen years, and with what intention she offered those torments from which she was delivered by the exorcisms directed by the Bishop, must always remain a secret.”[85] On Tuesday, 13 August, 1867, a supernormal impulse came over her to write a paper full of the most hideous blasphemies against Our Lord and His Blessed Mother, and, what is indeed significant, to draw blood from her arm and to sign therewith a deed giving herself over body and soul to Satan. This she happily resisted after a terrible struggle. Upon the following 28 August reliable witnesses saw her levitated from the ground on two distinct occasions. With this phenomenon we may compare the levitation of mediums at spiritistic séances. Sir William Crookes in _The Quarterly Journal of Science_, January, 1874, states that “There are at least a hundred recorded instances of Mr. Home’s rising from the ground.” Of the same medium he writes: “On three separate occasions have seen him raised completely from the floor of the room.” In March, 1868, it became evident that the poor sufferer was actually possessed. Fierce convulsive fits seized her; she suddenly fell with a maniacal fury and a deep hoarse voice uttered the most astounding blasphemies; if the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary were spoken in her presence she gnashed her teeth and literally foamed at the mouth; she was unable to hear the words _Et caro Uerbum factum est_ without an access of insane rage which spent itself in wild gestures and an incoherent howling. She was interrogated in Latin, and answered the questions volubly and easily in the same tongue. The case attracted considerable attention, and was reported by the Comte de Maumigny to Padre Picivillo, the editor of the _Civiltá Cattolica_, who gave an account thereof to the Holy Father. The saintly Pius IX[86] showed himself full of sympathy, and even sent through the Comte de Maumigny a message of most salutary advice recommending great caution and the avoidance of all kinds of curiosity or advertisement. In February, 1869, when interrogated by several priests Hélène gave most extraordinary details concerning bands of Satanists. “In order to gain admission it is necessary to bring one or more consecrated Hosts, and to deliver these to the Devil, who in a materialized form visibly presides over the assembly. The neophyte is obliged to profane the Sacred Species in a most horrible manner, to worship the Devil with humblest adoration, and to perform with him and the other persons present the most bestial acts of unbridled obscenity, the foulest copulations. Three towns, Paris, Rome, and Tours, are the headquarters of the Satanic bands.”[87] She also spoke of a gang of devil-worshippers at Toulouse. It is obvious that a mere peasant woman could have no natural knowledge of these abominations, the details concerning which were unhappily only too true. In the following April Hélène was taken to Orleans to be examined and solemnly exorcized. The interrogatories were conducted by Monsieur Desbrosses, a consultor in theology for the diocese, Monsieur Bougaud, and Monsieur Mallet, Superior of the Grand Seminary. They witnessed the most terrible crisis; the sufferer was tortured by fierce cramps and spasms; she howled like a wild beast; but they persisted patiently. Mons. Mallet questioned her on difficult and obscure points in theology and philosophy using now Latin, now Greek. She replied fluently in both tongues, answering his queries concisely, clearly, and to the point, incontestable proof that she was influenced by some supernormal power. Two or three days later the Bishop was present at a similar examination, and forthwith commissioned his own director, Monsieur Roy, a professor at the Seminary, to undertake the exorcisms. With him were associated Monsieur Mallet, the parish priest of Coullons, and Monsieur Gaduel, Vicar-General of the diocese. Two nuns and Mlle Preslier held the patient. It was found necessary to repeat the rite five times upon successive days. On the last occasion the cries of the unhappy Hélène were fearful to hear. She writhed and foamed in paroxysms of rage; she blasphemed and cursed God, calling loudly upon the fiends of hell; she broke free from all restraint, hurling chairs and furniture in every direction with the strength of five men; it was with the utmost difficulty she could be seized and restrained before some serious mischief was done; at last with an unearthly yell, twice repeated, her limbs relaxed, and after a short period of insensibility she seemed to awake, calm and composed, as if from a restful slumber. The possession had lasted thirteen months from March, 1868, to April, 1869. Into the details of her second possession from 23 August, 1869, until 3 September, 1874, it is hardly necessary to enter at any length. Monsieur Preslier noted: “The second crisis of possession was infinitely more terrible than the first; 1st, owing to the length; the first lasted thirteen months, the second five years. 2nd, the first was relieved with a number of heavenly consolations, but very little solace was obtained during the second. 3rd, there was much bodily suffering in the first, in the second there were far keener mental sufferings and more exquisite pain.”[88] She was finally and completely delivered at Lourdes on Thursday, 3 September, 1874. It is not to be supposed that she passed the remaining forty years of her life without occasional manifestations of extraordinary phenomena. After much sickness, cheerfully and smilingly borne, she made a good end in her eightieth year, on 8 January, 1914, and is buried in the little village cemetery of her native place. We have here the case of a woman who was mediumistic and clairvoyant to an almost unexampled degree, and it is very certain that if these would-be fortune-tellers and mages who so freely advertise their powers in many spiritistic journals to-day truly realized to what terrible dangers and very real psychic perils the use and even the mere possession of such faculties expose them, they would, so far from trafficking in the presumption of abnormal gifts, regard them with caution and indeed shrink from any occult practice at all, lest haply they become the prey of controls and influences so cunning, so potent for evil, as to merge them body and soul in untold miseries and shadows darker even than the bitterness of death. The modern Spiritistic movement, so strongly supported by recent scientific utterances, is increasingly affecting all classes and conditions of society, and is beginning in every direction to undermine and actually to usurp the religious belief and convictions of thousands of earnest and seriously inclined but not very accurately informed or well-instructed persons. The basis of the movement is the claim that the spirits of the dead are continually seeking to communicate and, indeed, communicating with us through the agency of sensitives, so that it is possible to get into touch and to converse with our dear ones who have passed from this life. It is hardly necessary to emphasize the almost infinite consolation and comfort such a doctrine holds for the bereaved, how eagerly and with what yearning mourners will embrace such teaching, and how perseveringly and with what tender agonies of an hungered love they will devote themselves to the practices they imagine will place them in closest connexion and communion with those whom they have lost awhile, but whose voices they ever long to hear, whose faces they long to see once again. It is a matter of common knowledge that during and since the Great War Spiritism has increased tenfold; many who were wont to laugh at it, who refused to listen to its claims and scorned it as futile nonsense, are now among its most enthusiastic devotees. In truth there must be few of us who cannot appreciate the irresistible influence such beliefs will have upon the mind. Spiritism is seemingly full of joy, and hope, and promise, and happiness. It will wipe all tears of sorrow from poor human eyes; it is balm to the wounded heart; divine solace and sympathy; the barriers of death are broken down; mortality is robbed of its terrors. Were it true, could we summon to our side the spirits of those whom we have so fondly cherished and converse with them of things holy and eternal, could we learn wisdom from their fuller knowledge, could we be assured in their own sweet accents of their fadeless love, could we now and again be comforted with a sight of their well-known faces, the touch of their hands upon ours, were it God’s will that this should be so, then assuredly Spiritism is a most blessed and sacred thing, consolation to the afflicted, succour to the distressed, a shining light upon earth’s dark ways, a very ready help to us all. But if on the other hand there is reason and grave reason to suppose that the spirits, with whom it is possible under certain exceptional conditions and by certain remarkable devices to establish a contact, although often claiming to be departed friends or relatives and supporting their contention (we acknowledge) with no little plausibility, are again and again found to be masquerading intelligences, in some cases undoubtedly actors of excellence who play their part for a time with consummate skill, but who have never at any séance whatsoever anywhere been able conclusively to demonstrate their identity, if in fact these manifesting intelligences are deceivers, imposing for purposes of their own a fraudulent impersonation upon those who with breaking hearts are so eagerly longing to communicate with son or husband fallen in battle, it may be, or on some lone shore, if they are proven liars, if their messages are trivial, ambiguous, cryptic, incapable of verification, shifty, ignorant, nay worse, blasphemous and hideously obscene, then are we justified—and we are in point of fact fully and completely justified—in concluding that the spirits are not those of the departed, but evil intelligences who never have been and never will be incarnate, unclean spirits, demons, and then assuredly Spiritism is most foul, most loathly, most dangerous, and most damnable. The mediums, who of their own will freely open the door to these spirits, who invite them to enter, stand in the most deadly peril. A Spiritist of many years’ experience who saw not too late the hazard and abandoned that creed, writes as follows: “Spirit communion soon absorbs all the time, faculties, hopes, fears, and desires of its devotees, and herein lies one of the greatest dangers of spiritualism. Infatuated by communication with the unseen inhabitants of the hidden world, the medium loses his or her interest in the things pertaining to everyday life and interest. A soft and pleasing atmosphere appears to surround them. The realities of flesh and blood are lost in ideal dreaming and there is no incentive to break away from a state of existence so agreeable, no matter how monstrous are the delusions practised by the spirits. Their consciences are so callous as if seared with a hot iron, sin has to them lost its wickedness, and they are willing dupes to unseen beings who delight to control their every faculty. Very seldom has a full-fledged spiritualist been able to comprehend the necessity and blessedness of the religion of Jesus Christ, and to withdraw from the morbid conditions into which he has fallen.... “For about three months I was in the power of spirits, having a dual existence, and greatly tormented by their contradictory and unsatisfactory operations.... They tormented me to a very severe extent, and I desired to be freed from them. I lost much of my confidence in them, and their blasphemy and uncleanness shocked me. But they were my constant companions. I could not get rid of them. They tempted me to suicide and murder, and to other sins. I was fearfully beset and bewildered and deluded. There was no human help for me. They led me into some extravagances of action, and to believe, in a measure, a few of their delusions, often combining religion and devilry in a most surprising manner.”[89] [Illustration: PLATE VII S. JAMES VISITS THE WARLOCK’S DEN. Breughel [_face p. 250_] In my own experience, I myself, not once, but over and over again, have seen all these symptoms unmistakably marked in those whose sole interest and aim in life seemed to be a constant attendance at séances. I have watched, in spite of every effort unable to check and dissuade, the fearfully rapid development of such characteristics in persons who have begun to dabble with Spiritism, at first no doubt in moods of levity and wanton curiosity, but soon with hectic anxiety and the most morbid absorption. Some fifteen years ago in a well-known English provincial town a circle was formed by a number of friends to experiment with table-turning, psychometry, the planchette, ouija-boards, crystal-gazing, and the like. They were, perhaps, a little tired of the usual round of social engagements, dances, concerts, bridge, the theatre, dinner parties, and all those mildly pleasurable businesses which go to make up life, or at least a great portion of life, for so many. They wanted some new excitement, something a little out of the ordinary. A lady, just returned home from a prolonged visit to London, had (it seems) been taken to some Spiritistic meeting, and she was full of the wonders both witnessed and heard there. The sense of the eerie, the unknown, lent a spice of adventure too. The earlier meetings were informal, first at one house, now at another. They began by being infrequent, almost casual, at fairly long intervals. Next a certain evening each week was fixed for these gatherings, which soon were fully attended by all concerned. No member would willingly miss a single reunion. Before long they met twice, three times, every evening in the week. Professional mediums were engaged who travelled down from London and other great cities, some at no small distance, to give strange exhibitions of their powers. I myself met two of these experts, a man and a woman, both of whose names I have since seen advertised in Spiritistic journals of a very recent date, and I am bound to say that I was most unfavourably impressed in each instance. Not that I for a moment think they were fraudulent, nor do I suspect any vulgar trickery or pose; they were undoubtedly honest, thoroughly convinced and sincere, which makes the matter ten times worse. And so from being mere idle triflers at a new game, incredulous and a little mocking, the whole company became besotted by their practices, fanatics whose thoughts were always and ever centred and concentrated upon their communion with spirits, who talked of nothing else, who seemed only to live for those evenings when they might meet and enter—as it were—another world. Argument, pleading, reproof, authority, official admonishment, all proved useless; one could only stand by and see the terrible thing doing its deadly work. The symptoms were exactly as above described. In two cases, men, the moral fibre was for a while apparently destroyed altogether; in another case, a woman, there was obsession, and persons who either knew nothing of, or had no sort of belief in, Spiritism, whispered of eccentricities, of outbursts of uncontrolled passion and ravings, which pointed to a disordered mind, to an asylum. All sank into a state of apathy; former interests vanished; the amenities of social intercourse were neglected and forgotten; old friendships allowed to drop for no reason whatsoever; a complete change of character for the worse, a terrible deterioration took place; the physical health suffered; their faces became white and drawn, the eyes dull and glazed, save when Spiritism was discussed, and then they lit with hot unholy fires; one heard covert gossip that hinted of crude debauch, of blasphemous speeches, of licence and degradation. Fortunately by a series of providential events the circle was broken up; outside circumstances compelled the principals to fall away, and what was doubtless a more potent factor than any, one or two were suddenly brought to realize the deadly peril and the folly of their proceedings. It proved a hard struggle indeed to rid themselves of the controls to which they had so blindly and so utterly submitted; their wills were weakened, their health impaired; more than once they slid back again into the old danger zone, more than once they were on the verge of giving up the contest in despair. But under direction and availing themselves of those means of grace the Church so bounteously proffers they persevered, and were at length made clean. There must be many who have had similar experiences, who know intimately, even if they have not actually had to rescue and to guide, those who have been meshed and trapped by Spiritism and are endeavouring to escape. They will appreciate how difficult is the task, they will realize how pernicious, how potent, how evil, such toils may be. Nobody who has had to deal with sensitives, with poor dupes who are eager to abandon their practices, can think lightly of Spiritism. That Spiritism opens the door to demoniac possession, so often classed as lunacy, is generally acknowledged by all save the prejudiced and superstitious. As far back as 1877 Dr. L. S. Forbes Winslow wrote in _Spiritualistic Madness_: “Ten thousand unfortunate people are at the present time confined in lunatic asylums on account of having tampered with the supernatural.” And quoting an American journal he goes on to say: “Not a week passes in which we do not hear that some of these unfortunates destroy themselves by suicide, or are removed to a lunatic asylum. The mediums often manifest signs of an abnormal condition of their mental faculties, and among certain of them are found unequivocal indications of a true demoniacal possession. The evil spreads rapidly, and it will produce in a few years frightful results.... Two French authors of spiritualistic works, who wrote _Le Monde Spirituel_ and _Sauvons le genre humain_, died insane in an asylum; these two men were distinguished in their respective professions; one as a highly scientific man, the other as an advocate well learned in the Law. These individuals placed themselves in communication with spirits by means of tables. I could quote many such instances where men of the highest ability have, so to speak, neglected all and followed the doctrines of Spiritualism only to end their days in the lunatic asylum.” Some half a dozen years ago an inquiry was undertaken and there was circulated an interrogatory or _enquête_ which invited opinions upon (1) “the situation as regards the renewed interest in psychic phenomena”; (2) whether this “psychic renewal” denoted a “passing from a logical and scientific (deductive) to a spiritual and mystic (inductive) conception of life,” or “a reconciliation between the two, that is between science and faith”;[90] (3) “the most powerful argument for, or against, human survival”; (4) “the best means of organizing this (psychic) movement in the highest interest, philosophical, religious and scientific, of the nation, especially as a factor of durable peace.” Five-and-fifty of the answers were collected and published under the title _Spiritualism: Its Present-Day Meaning_,[91] a book which certainly makes most interesting and illuminating if extremely varied reading. Being a symposium, all schools of thought are represented, and I would venture to add that among the contributions are some outpourings which evince no thought at all, a fact which is of itself not without considerable significance. We have the unflinching logic and sound common-sense of Father Bernard Vaughan, whose verdict is reiterated by the Rev. James Adderley and the Rev. J. A. V. Magee; the concise, outspoken, pertinent and telling comments of General Booth; the vague hopelessly inadequate flotsam of Dr. Percy Dearmer,[92] vapid stuff which makes a theologian writhe; the sweet sugary sentimentalism of Miss Evelyn Underhill, so anæmic, so obviously popular, and so ingenuously miscalled mysticism; the dull worthless dross of Mr. McCabe’s superstitious materialism; the feverish panicky special pleading of the convinced Spiritists. Here, too, we have much that directly bears out our present contention, the medical evidence of such names as Sir Bryan Donkin; Dr. W. H. Stoddart, who treats of “The Danger to Mental Sanity”; with Dr. Bernard Hollander on “The Peril of Spirits”; and Dr. A. T. Schofield on “The Spiritist Epidemic.” Thus Dr. Stoddart writes: “In some cases the spiritualistic hallucinations so dominate the whole mental life that the condition amounts to insanity; and I can confirm Sir Bryan Donkin’s statement that spiritualistic inquiries tend to induce insanity.”[93] Dr. Hollander is even more emphatic: “The practice is a dangerous one. Persons become intoxicated with spirits of that nature as others do with spirits of another kind. And similarly, as not all persons who take alcohol get drunk, so not all spiritualists show the effects of their indulgences.... But that is no proof against the harmful nature of these practices, and, as a mental specialist, I confess I have seen victims of both, and that the one addicted to material spirits is the easier to treat.”[94] Spiritism, Dr. Schofield points out, “has been known to Christians for 2000 years. Any benefit derived therefrom is more than neutralized by the very doubtful surroundings and character of the supposed revelation (I say ‘supposed’ because it has been known so long). If, however, it must be coupled with the dangers, horrors, and frauds that so often in modern Spiritism accompany the knowledge of the unseen, we are almost as well without it, at any rate from such a source.... There can be no doubt the epidemic will eventually subside, but before it does, the vast mischief of a spiritual tidal wave of very doubtful origin will be most disastrously done, and thousands of unstable souls will be wrecked in spirit, if not in mind and body as well.... To class it as a religion is an insult to the faith of Christ.”[95] Sir William Barrett utters a word of grave import: “All excitable and unbalanced minds need to be warned away from a subject that may cause, and in many cases has caused, serious mental derangement.”[96] “Spiritualism,” says Father Bernard Vaughan, “only too often means loss of health, loss of morals and loss of faith. Consult not Sir Oliver Lodge or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle or Mr. Vale Owen, but your family medical adviser, and he will tell you to keep away from the séance-room as you would from an opium den. In fact, the drug habit is not more fatal than the practice of Spiritualism in very many cases. Read the warning note sounded by Dr. Charles Mercier, or by Dr. G. H. Robertson or by Colonel R. H. Elliot, and be satisfied that yielding to Spiritualism is qualifying for an asylum. You may not get there but you deserve to be an inmate.”[97] The following letter written by Miss Mary G. Cardwell, M.B., Ch.B., from the Oldham Union Infirmary, speaks for itself: “One day recently I admitted a woman of thirty-five years to the hospital of which I have the honour to be resident medical officer. She was sent in as incapable of looking after herself or her family. She told me that she was a medium, having been introduced into Spiritualism by a man, also a medium, who said he could thereby help her over some family worries. As a direct result of this, she has neglected her children, so that the public authorities have removed them from her care, her home is ruined, and she herself is a mental and moral wreck. She had paid the other medium for his services by the sacrifice of her virtue.”[98] And this is no isolated, no exceptional, instance. I have myself known precisely similar cases. Occasionally some particularly shocking incident will find its way into the public Press and we have records such as the following, which was headed “Family of Eleven Mad. Burning Mania after Séance. Child to be Sacrificed. “The story of an entire family of eleven persons, in the village of Krucktenhofen, Bavaria, going out of their minds after a spiritualistic séance is sent by the Exchange Paris correspondent, quoting the _Berliner Tageblatt_. “Renouncing the goods of this world, the father, mother, three sons, two elder daughters, and subsequently the remaining four younger members of the family, joined in burning their furniture and bedding. “Finally, the three-months-old child of one of the daughters was about to be burnt when neighbours interfered. The whole family is now in an asylum.” (_Daily Mirror_, 19 May, 1921.) “Camouflage it as you will, Spiritualism with its kindred superstitions, such as necromancy and occultism, is a recrudescence of the old, old practices cultivated in the days of long ago.”[99] In other words this “New Religion” is but the Old Witchcraft. There is, I venture to assert, not a single phenomenon of modern Spiritism which cannot be paralleled in the records of the witch trials and examinations; not a single doctrine which was not believed and propagated by the damnable Gnostic heresies of long ago. Some of the definitions of Spiritism given by spiritists themselves are sufficiently startling. They frankly tell us that “Spiritualism is the science or art of communion with spirits.... It does not follow that because a communication comes from ‘the unseen,’ it is therefore from God, as a revelation. It may be from the latest dead lounger, as an amusement,”[100] or, I would add, from a demon as a snare. There is something inexpressibly ugly and revolting about this cold-blooded necromancy defined in set categorical terms. Modern Spiritism is usually considered to have had its origin in America. In the year 1848 there lived at Hydesville, Wayne, New York State, a family of the Methodist persuasion named Fox; a father, mother, and two daughters, Margaretta and Katie, aged fifteen and twelve respectively. During the month of March all the household began to declare that they were kept awake at night by the most extraordinary noises, loud knockings on the wall, and footsteps. The children amused themselves by trying to imitate the noises; they tapped on the wainscot, and to their great surprise answering taps came back, so that they found they could get into communication with the unknown agency. They would ask a question and invite it to respond with one sharp rap for “no” and three for “yes,” and thus it continually replied. They further held actual conversations in this way by repeating the alphabet and establishing a regular code. Mrs. Fox then began to make inquiries concerning the former occupants of the house, and soon discovered that a pedlar named Charles Rayn was said to have been murdered in the very bedroom where her two girls were sleeping, and that his body had been buried in the cellar. Public curiosity was aroused, and it was now generally believed that it was the spirit of the unfortunate victim who haunted the farm-house, endeavouring to convey some message to those whom he had left. Actually no body was found in the cellar, and the alleged murderer whose name was given, appeared at Hydesville and “threw very hot water on the story.” Later when the family moved to Rochester—it is said they were practically driven out of Hydesville by the Methodist minister there—the rappings followed them, and the whole town was speedily on the tiptoe of excitement. It was then given out that the noises were communications from the spirits of those recently dead, and that the Fox girls, who apparently attracted them, were gifted with some special faculty which rendered intercourse of this kind possible. People soon began to flock round them asking their assistance in getting messages from their departed relatives and friends; the two girls held regular séances, and netted a fair sum of money. It was not long before other persons discovered that they also possessed this extraordinary faculty of attracting spirit manifestations, and of getting into communication with the other world at will. But the Fox sisters were first in the field, and to them came a continuous stream of persons with well-filled pockets from all parts of America. There was also opposition, which sometimes took a very violent form. As early as November, 1850, an attack was made upon Margaretta Fox, who was staying at West Troy in the house of a Mr. Bouton. A rough mob surrounded the premises, stones were thrown at the windows, and shots fired, whilst both men and women uttered threats and imprecations against the “unholy witch-woman within.” At one of the séances Dr. Kane, a famous Arctic explorer was present, and he was so fascinated by the beauty of Margaretta Fox that he never rested until he had taken her away from her sordid and harmful surroundings, had her educated at Philadelphia, and finally, much to the annoyance of his relations, who loathed any connexion with the Fox family, made her his wife. Dr. Kane died soon after his marriage, but in the book published by his widow there are several references to his abhorrence of Spiritism. “Do avoid spirits,” he urges, “I cannot bear to think of you as engaged in a course of wickedness and deception.” For ten years Mrs. Kane did indeed abandon it; in fact in August, 1858, she was baptized as a Catholic at New York; but then,[101] owing perhaps to the pinch of poverty, she again took up work as a medium, and was received back with acclamations by the whole Spiritistic community. From that moment dates her steady deterioration, both physical and moral. Kate Fox, Mrs. Jencken as she had become, the wife of a London barrister, was the mother of a baby whom popular talk credited with mediumistic powers of the most extraordinary kind. The whole Spiritistic following prophesied a brilliant future for the poor child, of whom, however, there is nothing recorded save that he was sadly neglected by his miserable mother, who died of chronic alcoholism in June, 1892. Mrs. Kane survived her sister for nine months, a pitiable and hopeless wreck, craving only for drink. The last few weeks of her life were spent in a derelict tenement house. “This wreck of womanhood has been a guest in palaces and courts. The powers of mind now imbecile were the wonder and the study of scientific men in America, Europe, and Australia.... The lips that utter little else now than profanity, once promulgated the doctrine of a new religion.”[102] It would, indeed, be difficult to conceive anything more sordid and more miserable than this sad and shocking story of utter degradation. The collapse and moral corruption of the first apostles of modern Spiritism should surely prove a timely warning and a danger signal not to be mistaken.[103] In the earliest days of Spiritism the subject was investigated by men like Horace Greeley, William Lloyd Garrison, Robert Hare, professor of chemistry in the University of Pennsylvania, and John Worth Edmonds, a judge of the Supreme Court of New York State. Conspicuous among the spiritists we find Andrew Jackson Davis, whose work _The Principles of Nature_ (1847), dictated by him in trance, contained theories of the universe closely resembling those of the Swedenborgians. From America the movement filtered through to Europe, and when in 1852 two mediums, Mrs. Haydon and Mrs. Roberts, came to London, not merely popular interest but the careful attention of the leading scientists of the day was attracted. Robert Owen, the Socialist, frankly accepted the Spiritistic explanation of the various phenomena, while Professor De Morgan, the mathematician, in his account of a sitting with Mrs. Haydon declared himself convinced that “somebody or some spirit was reading his thoughts.” In the spring of 1855 Daniel Dunglas Home (Hume)—Home was the son of the eleventh Lord Home and a chambermaid at the Queen’s Hotel, Southampton, but was brought up in America—who was then a young man of twenty-two, crossed to England from America. In 1856 Home was received into the Church at Rome by Father John Etheridge, S.J., and he then gave a promise to refrain from all exercise of his mediumistic powers, but in less than a year he had broken his pledge and was living as before. This famous medium is almost the only one who, as even Podmore admits, was never clearly convicted of fraud. Sir David Brewster, the scientist, and Dr. J. J. Garth Wilkinson, a scholar of unblemished integrity and one of the leading homœopathic physicians, both avowed that they were incapable of explaining the phenomena they had witnessed by any natural means. It was in 1855 that the first English periodical dealing exclusively with the subject, _The Yorkshire Spiritual Telegraph_, was published at Keighley, in Yorkshire. In 1864 the Davenport brothers visited England, and in 1876 Henry Slade. Amongst English mediums the Rev. William Stainton Moses became prominent in 1872,[104] and about the same year Miss Florence Cook, so well known for the materializations of “Katie King,” which were scrupulously investigated by the late Sir William Crookes. In 1873 and in 1874, however, the trickery of two mediums, Mrs. Bassett and Miss Showers, was definitely exposed.[105] In 1876 and 1877 the sensitive “Dr.” Monck was at the height of his reputation, and both Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace, F.R.S., and the late Archdeacon Colley state that in various séances with him they witnessed on several occasions phenomena, including materialization, under rigid test conditions which admitted of no dispute as to their genuineness. It is true that in 1876 Monck had been in trouble and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment under the Vagrant Act. About the same time William Eglinton, who figures in Florence Marryat’s work _There is No Death_, appeared on the scenes and for a while loomed largely in the public eye. He became famous for his slate-writing performances as well as his materializations. He was, however, exposed by Archdeacon Colley, who during the discussion which had centred round a medium named Williams, detected in fraudulent practices during séances in Holland, wrote to _The Medium and Daybreak_ to say: “It unfortunately fell to me to take muslin and false beard from Eglinton’s portmanteau.... Some few days before this I had on two several occasions cut pieces from the drapery worn by, and clipped hair from the beard of, the other figure representing Abdullah. I have the pieces so cut off beard and muslin still. But note that when I took these things into my possession I and a medical gentleman (25 years a Spiritualist and well known to the old members of the Movement) found the pieces of muslin cut fit exactly into certain corresponding portions of the drapery thus taken.”[106] The medium Slade, who was famous for slate-writing, was upon one occasion suddenly seized as he was about to put the slate under the table. His hands were held fast, and when the slate was snatched from him it was seen to be already covered with characters. Anna Rothe, who died in 1901, a medium well known for her apports of flowers, suffered a term of imprisonment in Germany on a charge of fraud. When Baily, the Australian sensitive, visited Italy he refused to sit under the strict conditions which were arranged in answer to a challenge of his powers. Charles Eldred of Clowne, an adept at materialization, employed a chair skilfully made with a double seat, and in this recess were discovered the whole paraphernalia he employed in his performances. Mrs. Williams, an American medium, who for a long while was a centre of spiritistic attention at Paris, used to materialize a venerable doctor with a flowing beard who was sometimes accompanied by a young girl dressed in white. At one circle Mons. Paul Leymaric gave a prearranged signal. He and a friend each laid hold of one of the apparitions; a third spectator seized Mrs. Williams’ assistant; and a fourth turned on the lights. Mons. Leymaric was seen to be struggling with the medium, who had donned a grey wig and a long property beard; the young girl was a mask from which were draped folds of fine white muslin and which she manipulated with her left hand. Miller, a Californian medium, was more than suspected of producing spirits from gauze and nun’s veiling.[107] From one of the mediums of Mons. de Rochas, Valentine, there emanated mysterious lights, which moved quickly hither and thither during the séances. Colonel de Rochas, when this manifestation was once at its height, suddenly switched on a powerful electric torch and Valentine was seen to have slipped off his socks and to be waving in the air his feet, which were covered with some preparation of phosphorus.[108] As early as June, 1875, a photographer named Buguet was convicted of selling faked photographs of spirits by which he netted a very pretty sum.[109] It is notorious that in Spiritistic séances and circles charlatanry and swindling of every kind are rife; that again and again mediums have been convicted of fraud; that not infrequently all kinds of properties, stuffed gloves, gauzes, yards of diaphanous muslin, invisible wires, hooks, beards, wigs, have been discovered; that the use of luminous paint is very effective and far from uncommon; that a sliding trap or panel may on occasion prove of inestimable service; that we must allow for self-deception, delusions, suggestion, hypnotism even; but when all has been said, when we candidly acknowledge the imposture, the adroit legerdemain, the conjurer’s clever tricks, the significant _mise en scène_, the verbal wit and quibbling, the deliberate and subtle cozenage contrived by shrewd minds and the full play of dramatic instinct and energy, nevertheless there yet remain numbers of instances when it has been repeatedly proven that acute and trained observers have witnessed phenomena which could not by any possibility whatsoever have been fraudulently produced; that clear-headed, cold-hearted, suspicious, hard men of science with every sense keenly alert at that very moment have conversed with, inspected, nay, actually handled, materialized forms and figures no personation could have devised and manifested. The proceedings against Monck plainly showed that he had at any rate a firm belief in his own psychic powers, and although Eglinton was detected in a trick upon more than one occasion there is irrefutable evidence to prove that in other instances when he assisted at séances any normal mode of production of the phenomena seen there was quite impossible. A large number of Miller’s manifestations also were genuine.[110] The same may be said of very many mediums. This means, in fine, that although the manifestations of almost any medium may in some cases have been artificially contrived, such phenomena are not on any account to be adjudged _always_ fraudulent, and even if the charge of imposture could be brought home far more conclusively than has so far been possible as regards the majority of sensitives, yet it were a false inference indeed to deduce therefrom that all phenomena are equally fraudulent and devised. It is only the recklessly illogical mind and the loose thinker who will in the face of absolutely conclusive proof of genuine manifestations continue to maintain that a certain quota of quackery can invalidate the whole. Writers of the temper of Messrs. Edward Clodd, Joseph McCabe, J. M. Robertson must, of course, be expected to condemn Spiritism without knowing the facts or weighing the evidence as an obvious absurdity which calls for no serious refutation. But this, I think, matters little. The superstitious dogmatism of the materialist is gravely discredited nowadays. True, the sort of book he produces is widely circulated and very successful within certain limits. We should expect tenth-rate ideas which could only emanate from a lack of understanding, a total want of imagination, and no training in metaphysics or philosophy, to have a direct appeal to the immature intelligences, the uneducated vulgar and the blatant yet presumptuous ignorance, which alone are eager for this kind of outmoded fare. In France Spiritism was first proclaimed by a pamphlet of Guillard _Table qui danse et Table qui répond_. The way had been long paved owing to the interest which was generally taken in the doctrines of Emanuel Swedenborg. Balzac had published in 1835 his esoteric hybrid _Séraphita_ (_Séraphitus_), a fanciful yet interesting work, in which there are many pages of theosophic philosophy. Perhaps he meant these seriously, but it is impossible to take them as other than flights of romance. In 1848 Cohognet more immediately heralded Guillard by publishing at Paris the first volume of his _Arcanes de la vie future devoilées_, which actually contains what purport to be communications from the dead. In 1853 séances were being held at Bourges, Strasburg, and Paris, and a regular furore ensued. Nothing was talked of but the wonders of Spiritism, which, however, soon met an opponent, Count Agénor de Gasparin, a Swiss Protestant, who carefully investigated table-turning with a circle of his friends and came to the conclusion that the phenomena originated in some physical force of the human body. It must be admitted that his _Des Tables Tournantes_ (Paris, 1854) is unconvincing and to some extent superficial, but more perhaps could hardly be expected from a pioneer in so tortuous an investigation. The Baron de Guldenstubbe, on the contrary, declared his firm belief in the reality of these phenomena and spirit intervention in general. His work _La Réalité des Esprits_ (Paris, 1857) eloquently argued for his convictions, whilst _Le Livre des Esprits_ (Paris, 1853) by M. Rivail or Rival, better known under his pseudonym Allan Kardec, became a world-wide textbook to the whole subject. In these early days the most distinguished men were wont to meet in the rue des Martyrs at Paris for séances. Tiedmen Marthèse, governor of Java; the academician Saint-René-Taillandier; Sardou, with his son; Flammarion; all were constant visitors. The notorious Home was, it is said, expelled from France after a séance at the Tuileries, during which he had touched the arm of the Empress with his naked foot, pretending that it was a caress from the tiny hands of a little child who was about fully to materialize. No one, I think, could be surprised to know that the famous Joris Karl Huysmans, an epicure in the byways of the occult, made many experiments in Spiritism, and séances were frequently held at No. 11 rue de Sèvres where he lived. Extraordinary manifestations took place, and upon one occasion at least the circle effected a materialization of General Boulanger, or an apparition of the General appeared to them. At the present time Spiritism is as widely spread in France as in England, if indeed not far more widely. Thus _La Science de l’Ame_ is a new bi-monthly journal issued under the auspices of _La Revue Spirite_. It has articles on Magnetism and Radio-activity, the analysis of the soul, and vital radiations. In the number of _La Revue Spirite_, which commences the year 1925, Mons. Camille Flammarion prints a signed letter from Heliopolis, which describes a first experience of a séance, where the death of the writer’s father was predicted in six months and took place ten days after the allotted time. Elsewhere in the issue are particulars of the International Congress of Spiritism which was to be held at Paris in September, 1925, and would be open to all Federations, Societies, and Groups everywhere. An immense concourse was expected. The President is Mr. George F. Berry, a well-known name in English Spiritistic circles, and the compliment of honorary membership is paid to Léon Denis,[111] Gabriel Delanne, Sir William Barrett, and Ernest Bozzano. A glance at the pages of any Spiritistic journal in England will show almost endless activities in every direction. In one issue of the weekly _Light_ (Saturday, 21 February, 1925) we have amongst other announcements nine “Sunday’s Society Meetings” in various districts of London, with addresses on Wednesdays and Thursdays. The following seems sufficiently startling and a close enough imitation: “_St. Luke’s Church of the Spiritual Evangel of Jesus the Christ, Queen’s-road, Forest Hill, S.E._—Minister: Rev. J. W. Potter. February 22nd, 6.30, Service, Holy Communion and Address. Healing Service, Wed., Feb. 25th, 7 p.m.” In the next column are details of “Rev. G. Vale Owen’s Lecture Tour.” The “London Spiritualist Alliance, Ltd.” has a list of meetings. There are discussion classes and demonstrations of clairvoyance, psychometry, and Mystic Pictures. Among “Books that will Help you” we find _Talks with the Dead_, _Report on Spiritualism_, _The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ_—(is this used at St. Luke’s Church of the Spiritual Evangel?)—_Spirit Identity, Spiritualism_, and many more of similar import. There is a “British College of Psychic Science” where Mr. Horace Leaf, a medium of some repute, lectures on “The Psychology and Practice of Mediumship,” Mrs. Barker demonstrates Trance Mediumship, and Mrs. Travers Smith the Ouija-Board and Automatic Writing. There is a “London Spiritual Mission” and a “Wimbledon Spiritualist Mission.” At Brighton “St. John’s Brotherhood Church” provides “The Spiritual Evangel of Jesus the Christ,” “Minister, Brother John.” And all this is scarcely a tithe of the various announcements and advertisements. However grotesque, and indeed often puerile in its bombast and grandiloquence, such a mass of heterogeneous notices may seem we must remember that these people are in deadly earnest, and I doubt not but their meetings and assemblies are well attended by enthusiastic devotees. In a report of an address by the Rev. G. Vale Owen at the “Spiritualist Community Services in the County Hall” on Sunday evening, 15 February, 1925, I read “all seats were filled long before the advertised hour for starting. The doors were closed and many for a time were denied admission. A little later they were allowed to enter and take up positions along the edges of the dais and other odd places about the hall.”[112] This, of course, was possibly some exceptional occasion, but there is no indication that such was the case. Mr. Vale Owen may be a very eloquent speaker and able to hold his audience spell-bound with the magic of his words. It must assuredly be his manner and not his matter, for his so-called revelations of the life beyond the grave, written under control and presumed to be directly derived from spirit agency, which appeared in _The Weekly Dispatch_ are vapid, inept, idle, and insipid to the last degree. Such banal ramblings would provoke a smile, were it not for the pity that any person can be so self-deluded, and can apparently induce others to give credit to his silliness. There have been large numbers of mediums in recent years who owing to one cause or another attracted considerable attention from time to time, and there are many well-known contemporary sensitives widely practising to-day. Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland, who were believed to have obtained spirit messages from the late F. W. H. Myers, occupied the serious attention of the Society of Psychical Research[113] for a considerable period; Mrs. Piper is an automatic writer of no little repute; Mr. Vout Peters specializes in psychometry and clairvoyance; Mr. Vearncombe and Mrs. Deane have recently enjoyed their full share of notoriety;[114] the Rev. Josie K. Stewart (Mrs. Y.), a lady hailing from the United States, has a gift for the production of “writing and drawings on cards held in her hand”; Mrs. Elizabeth A. Tomson, in spite of being detected of fraud at a Spiritistic “Church” in Brooklyn, still has devoted followers; Franek Kluski, Stella C., and Ada Besinnet, are in the forefront of American mediums; whilst the famous Goligher circle at Belfast was carefully and patiently investigated for no less than three months by Dr. Fournier d’Albe, who has published the result of his experiences.[115] The very cream of these occult manifestations is materialization, the most complex problem of all, which has been described as “the exercise of the power of using of the matter of the medium’s and the sitters’ bodies in the formation of physical structures on a principle totally unknown to ordinary life, although probably present there.”[116] Recently (1922) Erto, the Italian medium, appears to have been the subject of careful experiments at the French Metaphysical Institute during a period of several months, those who assisted being pledged to silence until a decision had been reached. The particular phenomena produced by or in his presence were chiefly characterized by the radiation of an extraordinary light about his person. At the end of 1922 two papers appeared in _La Revue Métapsychique_ on the part of Dr. Sanguinetti and Dr. William Mackenzie of Genoa indicating their assurance (1) that every scientific precaution had been taken, and (2) that the phenomena were genuine. However, the experiments seem to have continued and later there appeared in _Le Matin_ an enthusiastic contribution by Dr. Stephen Chauvet, which caused Dr. Gustave Geley, Director of the Metaphysical Institute, to come forward in confirmation of the testimony. It is only fair to add that immediately afterwards Dr. Geley to a certain extent retracted his statement, as he suggested that the psychic lights could be produced with _ferro-cerium_, and it was thought that traces of this substance could be found on Erto’s clothes. The medium protested his innocence of any deception, and offers himself for further experiments. A writer in _Psychica_ is inclined to believe that the phenomena were genuine, but that later some fraud may have been practised owing to waning power. This is possibly the case, for that the radiations were at first supernormal cannot, I think, be gainsaid in view of the high testimony adduced. For this phenomenon Mr. Cecil Hush and Mr. Craddock have sat repeatedly; of the extraordinary manifestations of the late Eusapia Palladino there can be no reasonable doubt at all; the materializations of Mlle “Eva Carrère,”[117] although on several occasions not altogether successful, are at other times supported by the strongest evidence; Nino Pecoraro, who is described as “a remarkably muscular young Neapolitan,” is famous for “ectoplasmic effects”; and Stanislava P., Willy S., the Countess Castelvicz, and very many more psychics possess these supernormal powers, although, as we might expect, they have to be used with the utmost caution and often prove very exhausting to the subject. After all, it must be remembered that probably under certain conditions materialization cannot take place, whilst under favourable conditions it can be completely effected. For an exhaustive and authoritative discussion of the whole matter the Baron Von Schrenck-Notzing’s _Phenomena of Materialization_ (Kegan Paul, 1923), should be consulted. The 225 photographic reproductions are of the utmost importance, whilst the investigations were carried on under conditions of such pitiless severity to eliminate any hypothesis of fraud that the mediums cannot but have been subjected to the intensest physical and moral strain. Among recent psychic phenomena very general attention has been attracted by what is known as “The Oscar Wilde Script,” which was widely discussed in 1923-24. Briefly, this purports to be a number of communications which were delivered by the spirit of the late Oscar Wilde at the rate of 1020 words in an hour by means of automatic writing through the mediumship of Mrs. Travers Smith (Mrs. Hester M. Dowden)[118] and a certain Mr. V. True, there were published in _The Sunday Express_ pages which had a superficial resemblance to the more flashy characteristics of Wilde’s flamboyant style, but it seemed as if the wit and point had vanished, leaving only a somewhat heavy and imitative prose; one had a sense of damp fireworks, and personally I do not for a moment accept this script as being inspired or dictated by Wilde. I hasten to add that I do not suggest there was any conscious fraud or trickery on the part of those concerned; it is quite probable that these psychic messages were conveyed by some intelligence of no very high standing, and the result in fine is not of any value. It is said that a three act play is being or has been communicated through the ouija-board from what purports to be Wilde. This I have not read, and therefore I am not in a position to pronounce upon it. Spiritism is upheld by many distinguished names. Sir Oliver Lodge, F.R.S., has battled on its behalf, as also have Sir William Barrett, F.R.S., and Sir William Crookes, F.R.S., Professors Charles Richet, Janet, Bernheim, Lombroso, and Flammarion lend it the weight of their authority, whilst Sir Conan Doyle has poured forth his benedictions upon occultism of every kind.[119] He has even presided over the opening of a most attractive bookshop in Victoria Street, Westminster, where Spiritistic publications are sold. How then are we to regard this mighty movement at which it were folly to sneer, which it is impossible to ignore? The Catholic Church does neither. But none the less she condemns it utterly and entirely. Not because she disbelieves in it, but because she believes in it so thoroughly, because she knows what is the real nature of the moving forces, however skilfully they may disguise themselves, however quick and subtle their shifts and turns, the intelligences which inform and direct the whole. It is a painful subject since (I reiterate) many good people, no doubt many thoughtful seekers after truth, have been fascinated and swept along by Spiritism. They are as yet conscious of neither physical nor moral harm, and, it may be, they have been playing with the fire for years. Nay more, Spiritism has been a sweet solace to many in most poignant hours of bitter sorrow and loss; wherefore it is hallowed in their eyes by tenderest memories. They are woefully deceived. Hard as it may seem, we must get down to the bed-rock of fact. Spiritism has been specifically condemned on no less than four occasions by the Holy Office,[120] whose decree, 30 March, 1898, utterly forbids all Spiritistic practices although intercourse with demons be strictly excluded, and communication sought with good spirits only. Modern Spiritism is merely Witchcraft revived. The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore (1866), whilst making ample allowance for prestidigitation and trickery of every kind, warns the faithful against lending any support whatsoever to Spiritism and forbids them to attend séances even out of idle curiosity, for some, at least, of the manifestations must necessarily be ascribed to Satanic intervention since in no other manner can they be understood or explained. NOTES TO CHAPTER VI [1] E. de Rougé, _Étude sur une stèle Égyptienne_, Paris, 1858: E. A. W. Budge, _Egyptian Magic_, VII. [2] _Rekh Khet_, “knower of things.” [3] Euripides, _Bacchæ_: passim; Ovid, _Metamorphoses_, III. 513, _sqq._; Apollodorus, III. v. 2.; Hyginus, _Fabulæ_, 184; Nonnus, _Dionysiaca (Bassarica)_, XIV, 46. [4] Sophocles, _Ajax_; Pindar, _Nemea_, VII, 25; Ovid, _Metamorphoses_, XIII, 1-398. [5] Pausanias, III, xvi, 6. [6] Valerius Maximus, I, 11, 5. Lacinium was a promontory on the east coast of Bruttium, a few miles south of Croton, and forming the western boundary of the Tarentine gulf. The remains of the temple of Juno Lacinia are still extant, and have given the modern name to the promontory, _Capo delle Colonne_ or _Capo di Nao_ (ναός). [7] Xenophon, _Memorabilia_, II. i. 5; Demosthenes, XCIII, 24; Dinarchus, CI, 41; Plutarch, _Lucullus_, IV. [8] Euripides, _Orestes_, l. 854, and l. 79. [9] Cf. μάντις. [10] Cf. Vergil _Æneid_, IV. 471-3: Agamemnonius scænis agitatus Orestes armatam facibus matrem et serpentibus atris cum fugit, ultricesque sedent in limine Diræ. (Or as the Atridan matricide Runs frenzied o’er the scene, What time with snakes and torches plied He flees the murdered queen, While at the threshold of the gate The sister-fiends expectant wait.) [11] Plautus, _Amphitruo_, II. 2. 145. Nam hæc quidem edepol lauarum plenast. [12] Quid esset illi morbi, dixeras? Narra, senex. Num laruatus, aut cerritus? fac sciam. _Menæchmei._ V. I, 2. Apuleuis has _laruans_ = a madman: “hunc [pulcherrimam Mercurii imaginem] denique qui laruam putat, ipse est laruans.” (_Laruatus_ is a poorer reading in this passage.) _Cerritus_, a rare word, is contracted from _cerebritus_ (_cerebrum_), and not connected with Ceres, as was formerly suggested. Cf. Horace, _Sermonum_, II, iii. 278. [13] _Bibl._ III, v, 1. [14] 471, _sqq._ [15] 56, Nauck. [16] τἀπιχώρἰ ἐν πόλει φρυγῶν τύμπανα, Ῥέας τε μητρὸς ἐμά θ’ εὑρήματα. [17] _Circa_ 185-135 B.C. [18] Professor Leuba, _The Psychology of Religious Mysticism_ Kegan Paul, London, 1925, p. 11 _sqq._ has some very important references to the worship of Dionysus. [19] σὺ γὰρ ἔνθεος, ὦ κούρα, εἴτ’ ἐκ Πανὸς εἴθ’ Ἑκάτας ἢ σεμνῶν Κορυβάντων φοιτᾷς, ἢ ματρὸς ὀρείας. [20] δόξασά που ἢ Πανὸς ὀργὰς ἢ τινὸς θεῶν μολεῖν. [21] ἀλλ’ ἦ Κρονίου Πανὸς τρομερᾷ μάστιγι φοβεῖ; [22] Pythagoras prescribes music for mental disorders, Eunapius _Uita philosophurum_, 67; and Cælius Aurelianus by his references shows that this was a common remedy in such cases, _De Morbis Chronicis (Tardarum Passionum)_ VI. Origen, _Aduersus Celsum_, III, x, and Martianus Capella _De Nuptiis Philologiæ et Mercurii_ IX, 925, have similar allusions. [23] 1 Kings xvi. 14 (A.V. 1 Samuel xvi. 14): “Exagitabat eum [Saul] spiritus nequam a Domino.” [24] _Antiquitates Iud._, VI, viii, 2; ii, 2. [25] _La Mystique Divine_, Ribet, II, ix, 4, it is true, speaks of “l’obsession intérieure,” but he makes the above distinction, and further says: “L’obsession purement intérieure ne diffère des tentations ordinaires que par la véhémence et la durée.” [26] Multæ sunt tentationes eius, et die noctuque uariæ dæmonum insidiæ.... Quoties illi nudæ mulieres cubanti, quoties esurienti largissimæ apparuere dapes? _Uita S. Hilarionis._ VII. Migne. vol. XXIII. col. 32. [27] Sustinebat miser diabolus uel mulieris formam noctu induere, feminæque gestus imitari, Antonium ut deciperet. S. Athanasius, _Uita S. Antonii_, V. Migne. vol. XXVI. col. 847. [28] Feast (duplex maius apud Minores), 22 February. [29] It may perhaps not be amiss to point out that S. Margaret before her conversion was by no means the woman of scandalous life so many biographers have painted her. [30] Sectando per cellam orantis et flentis, cantauit [diabolus] turpissimas cantationes, et Christi famulam lacrymantem et se Domino commendantem procaciter inuocabat ad cantum ...; tentantem precibus et lacrymis repulit ac eiecit. Bollandists, 22 February. Vol. VI. [31] Ceterum consilium est semper de talibus inuasionibus suspicionem habere, non enim negandum maiorem earum partem esse aut fictiones, aut imaginationes, aut infirmitates, præsertim in mulieribus. _Praxis confessariorum_, n. 120. [32] Sæpissime, quæ putantur dæmonis obsessiones, non sunt nisi morbi naturales, aut Naturales imaginationes, uel etiam inchoata aut perfecta amentia. Quare caute omnino procedendum, usquedum per specialissima signa de obsessione constet. _Theologia mystica_, I. n. 228. [33] _Biblisches Realworterbuch_, Leipsig, 1833. [34] This word is found nowhere else in the New Testament, and wherever it is used in the LXX, it is invariably of the sayings of lying prophets, or those who practised arts forbidden by the Jewish Law. Thus of the witch of Endor (1 Kings (1 Samuel) xxviii. 8) μάντευσαι δή μοι ἐν τῷ ἐγγαστριομύθῳ, and (Ezechiel xiii. 6) βλέπουτες ψευδῆ, μαντευόμενοι μάταια. [35] Ordinandi, filii charissimi, in officium Exorcistarum, debitis noscere quid suscipitis. Exorcistam etenim oportet abiicere dæmones; et dicere populo, ut, qui non communicat, det locum; et aquam in ministerio fundere. Accipitis itaque potestatem imponendi manum super energumenos, et per impositionem manuum uestrarum, gratia spiritus sancti, et uerbis exorcismi pelluntur spiritus immundi a corporibus obsessis. Studete igitur, ut, sicut a corporibus aliorum dæmones expellitis, ita a mentibus, et corporibus uestris omnem immunditiam, et nequitiam eiiciatis; ne illis succumbatis, quos ab aliis, uestro ministerio, effugatis. Discite per officium uestrum uitiis imperare; ne in moribus uestris aliquid sui iuris inimicus ualeat uindicare. Tunc etenim recte in aliis dæmonibus imperabitis, cum prius in uobis eorum multimodam nequitiam superatis. Quod nobis Dominus agere concédât per Spiritum suum sanctum. [36] Accipite, et commendate memoriæ, et habete potestatem imponendi manus super energumenos, siue baptizatos, siue catechumenos. [37] Deum Patrem omnipotentem, fratres charissimi, supplices deprecamur, ut hos famulos suos bene ✠ dicere dignetur in officium Exorcistarum; ut sint spirituales imperatores, ad abiiciendos dæmones de corporibus obsessis, cum omni nequitia eorum multiformi. Per unigenitum Filium suum Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, qui cum eo uiuit et regnat in unitate Spiritus sancti Deus, per omnia sæcula sæculorum. _R._ Amen. [38] Domine sancte, Pater omnipotens, æterne Deus, bene ✠ dicere dignare hos famulos tuos in officium Exorcistarum; ut per impositionem manuum, et oris officium, potestatem, et imperium habeant spiritus immundos coercendi: ut probabiles sint medici Ecclesiæ tuæ, gratia curationum uirtuteque cœlesti confirmati. Per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum Filium tuum, qui tecum uiuit, et regnat in unitate Spiritus sancti Deus, per omnia sæcula sæculorum. _R._ Amen. _Post hæc, suggerente Archidiacono, redeunt ad loca sua._ [39] Sulpitius Severus (d. 420-5) in his _Dialogues_, III (II), 6; (Migne, _Patres Latini_, XX, 215) tells us that S. Martin of Tours was wont to cast out demons by prayer alone without the imposition of hands or the use of the formulæ recommended to the clergy. Similar instances occur in the lives of the Saints. [40] Translated from the _Rituale Romanum_. There are several forms extant, some authorized, but more, perhaps, unauthorized. There is an authorized form in the Greek _Euchologion_. It commences with the Trisagion, and Psalms, _Domine exaudi_ (cxlii.), _Dominus regit me_ (xxii.), _Dominus illuminatio mea_ (xxvi.), _Esurgat Deus_ (lxvii.), _Miserere_ (lvi.), _Domine ne in furore_ (vi.), _Domine exaudi orationem_ (ci.). Then follows the Consolatory Canon, with a long Hymn addressed to Our Lord, Our Lady, and All Saints. Next the priest anoints the patient, saying a prayer over him, and so the office closes. [41] It is also given in the _Horæ Diurnæ O.P._, Rome, 1903, where an indulgence of 300 days is attached, plenary once a month. [42] Ab insidiis diaboli, libera nos Domine; Ut Ecclesiam tuam secura tibi facias libertate seruire, te rogamus, audi nos; Ut inimicos sanctæ Ecclesiæ humiliare digneris, te rogamus, audi nos. _Et aspergatur locus aqua benedicta._ [43] Holy water, the commonest of the sacramentals, is a mixture of exorcised salt and exorcised water. [44] Of Eastern origin. It should be remembered that the Baptism of Christ in Jordan is commemorated on the Epiphany. In the present Breviary office in Nocturn I the first response for the day, the Octave, and the Sunday within the Octave deal with the Baptism, as does the second response. The antiphon to the Benedictus and the Magnificat antiphon at Second Vespers also make mention of the same mystery. In Rome the Latin rite of the Blessing of the Waters is pontificated by a Cardinal at S. Andrea della Valle on 5 January, about 3.30 p.m., at the church of the Stimmate of S. Francesco at 9.30 a.m. on the Feast itself. On the Vigil the Oriental rite is performed at the Greek church of S. Atanasio, beginning about 3.30 a.m. [45] See Wilson, _Western Africa_; and the article “Possession diabolique” by Waffelaert in the _Dictionnaire apologétique de la foi catholique_, Paris, 1889. The opinion of the Cistercian Dom Robert de la Trappe (Dr. Pierre-Jean-Corneille Debreyne), who, whilst acknowledging that the demoniac possessions as detailed in the New Testament are _de fide_, supposes that all other cases are to be attributed to fraud or disease, must be severely censured as regrettably rash and even culpable. _Essai sur la théologie morale_, IV. p. 356. [46] S. Justin. Martyr, _Apologia_, VI; _Dialogues_, XXX, LXXXV: Minutius Felix, _Octavius_, XXVII; Origen, _Contra Celsum_, I, 25; VII, 4, 67: Tertullian, _Apologia_, XXII, XXIII. [47] Paulinus, _Uita Ambrosii_, 28, 43. [48] S. Gregory of Nyssa, _De Uita Ephraem_. [49] Upon this passage Servatius Galle (1627-1709), a Dutch minister at Haarlem, in his edition of Lactantius, 1660, writes the most absurd note I have ever met with in any commentator. [50] Published between 304-313. De Labriolle, _Histoire de la Littérature Latine Chrétienne_, p. 272. [51] A very full and scholarly monograph upon this subject may be recommended: _La Réalité des Apparitions Démoniaques_, by Dom Bernard-Marie Maréchaux, Olivetan, O.S.B., Paris, Téqui, 1899. [52] It is true that on one occasion S. Maurus, who was with S. Benedict, beheld an apparition, and S. Benedict once enabled a monk to see a similar vision. [53] One of Sodoma’s exquisite frescoes at Monte Oliveto (Siena) depicts an exorcism by S. Benedict. [54] The letters have been thus translated by Dom Benedict McLaughlin of Ampleforth: Holy Cross be thou my light, Put the evil one to flight. Behind me Satan speedily, Whisper not vain things to me. You can give but evil, then Keep it for yourself. Amen. [55] All English Benedictine priests hold the special faculty to use this (bestowed 23 February, 1915), and it has also been granted to many others, religious and seculars. [56] Omnis virtus aduersarii, omnis exercitus diaboli, et omnis incursus, omnis phantasma Satanæ, eradicate et effugare ab his numismatibus.... [57] Domine Iesu Christe ... per hanc tuam sanctissimam passionem humiliter exoro; ut omnes diabolicas insidias et fraudes expellas ab eo, qui nomen sanctum tuum, his litteris ac characteribus a te designatis, deuote inuocauerit, et eum ad salutis portum perducere digneris. Qui uiuis et régnas.... [58] The _Rituale Romanum_ has “Benedictio Infirmorum cum Ligno SS. Crucis, D.N.J.C. _seu_ Signum S. Mauri Abbatis.” This is a blessing of the sick with a Relic of the Holy Cross and the invocation of S. Benedict and S. Maurus. [59] The _Uita S. Mauri_ (Mabillon, _Acta S.S. O. S.B._, I, 274) is ascribed to a companion, the monk Faustus of Monte Cassino. Père Delehaye, in his unfortunate and temerarious work _Légendes Hagiographiques_ (translation. London, 1907), indecorously attacks this and treats S. Maurus with scant respect. A worthy defence was made by Adlhoch, _Stud. u. Mittheil._, 1903, 3; 1906, 185. According to Peter the Deacon he also wrote a _Cantus ad B. Maurum_. [60] Blessed Victor III. _Dialogues_, I, 2. [61] Abbé Lebeuf. _Histoire du diocèse de Paris_, V. 129 _sqq._ [62] Portraits of him are preserved at Rome and Valladolid. [63] A hearty believer in witchcraft. He had sent at least one witch to the gallows, and another to prison. [64] Apparently the work of Darrel himself, but in the Huth catalogue (V, 1643) ascribed to James Bamford. [65] Darrel in his _Detection of that sinnful, shamful, lying, and ridiculous discours of Samuel Harshnet_, 1600, writes: “There is no doubt but that S.H. stand for Samuell Harsnet, chapline to the Bishop of London, but whither he alone, or his lord and hee, have discovered this counterfeyting and cosonage there is the question. Some think the booke to be the Bishop’s owne doing: and many thinke it to be the joynt work of them both.” [66] On 10 November, 1629, he was sworn of the Privy Council. [67] Whence Shakespeare derived the names of various evil spirits whom Edgar mentions in _King Lear_. [68] I do not conceive that at the present time many, if any, Bishops of the Church of England would license exorcism. Certainly the more scientifically minded and modernistic Lords Spiritual of the Anglican bench have rid themselves of such an idle superstition. How they would explain Our Blessed Lord’s words and actions I do not pretend to know, but I suppose that according to their wider knowledge Christ—_sit uenia uerbis_—was mistaken in this as in other particulars. [69] _Colloquia Mensalia_, passim. [70] It is difficult to see how the teachings of such a Protestant leader as Gaspar von Schwenckfeld (1489-90—1561) are anything save tantamount to mere personal morality and a vague individual pietism. A critical edition of his numerous works is in course of publication under the editorship of Hartranft, Schlutter, and Johnson: _Corpus Schwenckfeldianorum_, I, Leipzig, 1907. [71] Parker’s _Correspondence_, Parker Society, Cambridge, 1856, pp. 465-6. [72] By vomiting pins and straws they had made many believe that they were bewitched, but the tricks were soon found out and they were compelled to public penance at S. Paul’s. There is a black letter pamphlet _The discloysing of a late counterfeyted possession by the devyl in two maydens within the Citie of London_ [1574], which describes this case. See also Holinshed, _Chronicles_ (ed. London, 1808), IV, 325, and Stow _Annales_, London, 1631, p. 678. But the fact that there are malingerers does not mean there are none sick. [73] _Marie Glover’s late woefull case.... A defence of the truthe against D. J. his scandalous Impugnations_, British Museum, Sloane MSS., 831. Sinclar, _Satan’s Invisible World Discovered_, Edinburgh, 1685, Relation XII quotes an account of Mary Glover from Lewis Hughes’ _Certaine Grievances_ (1641-2); and hence Burton, _The Kingdom of Darkness_, and Hutchinson, _Historical Essay concerning Witchcraft_, both assign a wrong date (1642) to the occurrence. [74] Enlarged edition, 1720. [75] _The Other World_, London, 1875, I, pp. 59-69. The incident is narrated by Fortescue Hitchins, _The History of Cornwall_, Helston, 1824, II, pp. 548-51; and also in fuller detail by the Rev. R. S. Hawker, _Footprints of Former Men in Far Cornwall_, London, 1870, who quotes from Ruddle’s MS. Diary. [76] Six miles north of S. Columb and three miles due south from Padstow. [77] A full and documented account of these strange happenings may be found in _Lucifer, or the True Story of the Famous Diabolic Possession in Alsace_, London, 1922, with the Imprimatur of the Bishop of Brentwood. Compiled from original documents by the abbé Paul Sutter and translated by the Rev. Theophilus Borer. [78] Jesus ... comminatus est spiritui immundo, dicens illi: Surde et mute spiritus, Ego præcipio tibi, exi ab eo: et amplius ne introcas in eum. _Euan. sec. Marcum._ IX. 25. [79] 1726-1755. This great Saint was then Venerable; he was beatified by Leo XIII, 29 January, 1893, and canonized by Pius X, 11 December, 1903. His feast is kept on 16 October. [80] Peter Paul Stumpf succeeded Andreas Räss as Bishop of Strasburg, 1887-1890. [81] _Une Possédée Contemporaine_ (1834-1914). _Hélène Poirier de Coullons_ (_Loiret_). Paris, Téqui, 1924. An ample study, profusely documented, of 517 pages, edited by M. le Chanoine Champault of the diocese of Orleans. [82] A partir de cette époque, la vie d’Hélène s’écoulera au milieu de souffrances physiques et morales si grandes, que dans sa bouche les plaintes de Job ne seraient point déplacées. [83] Mr. G. R. S. Mead, however, in this connexion not impertinently recalls the “controlling” of members of the Shaker communities by what purported to be spirits of North American Indians. This was prior to 1848. [84] Ses souffrances physiques et morales, commencées le 25 mars, 1850, se poursuivirent jusqu’à sa mort, 8 janvier, 1914, soit pendant soixante-quatre ans. Toutefois les vexations diaboliques cessèrent vers la fin de 1897. Ces vexations durèrent donc près de quarante-sept années, dont six de possession. [85] Du 25 mars, 1850, au courant de mars, 1868, Hélène _fut seulement obsédée. Cette obsession dura donc 18 années_. Au bout de ce temps et pendant 13 _mois_ elle fut _obsédée et possédée tout ensemble_. De I’obsession et de la possession elle fut complètement délivrée par les exorcismes officiels, à Orléans, le 19 avril, 1869. Suivirent quatre mois de tranquillité, jusqu’au recommencement volontaire et généreux de ses peines. A la fin d’août, 1869, elle accepta de la main de Notre Seigneur les tourments d’une nouvelle obsession et possession afin d’obtenir la conversion du célèbre général Ducrot. La conversion obtenue, elle fut délivrée à Lourdes le 3 septembre, 1875, par les prières des 15,000 pèlerins qui s’y trouvaient réunis. _Obsession et possession renouvelées_ avaient duré cinq ans. Plus jamais, pendant les quarante ans qu’elle avait encore à vivre, elle ne fut possédée; mais elle continua à être obsédée tantôt plus, tantôt moins. Les souffrances de toutes sortes, qu’elle endura alors, eurent pour but d’obtenir le salut et le triomphe du clergé. Quant aux raisons et au but des premières persécutions diaboliques qu’elle subit pendant dix-neuf ans et dont elle fut délivrée par les exorcismes officiels, ils sont restés inconnus. _Une Possédée Contemporaine_ (1834-1914), pp. 171-2. [86] A fragment of the soutane of this most holy Pontiff was taken to Hélène and during one of her fits placed upon her forehead. At the contact she cried out: “Le Pape est un saint, oui un grand saint.” (The Pope is a Saint, truly a great Saint!) [87] Pour y être admis, il faut apporter une ou plusiers hosties consacrées, les remettre au démon qui, sous forme corporelle ou visible, préside l’assemblée. Il faut les profaner d’une manière horrible, adorer le démon lui-même et commettre avec lui et les autres sociétaires les actes d’impudicité les plus révoltants. Trois villes: Paris, Rome, et Tours sont les sièges de cette société infernale. [88] La seconde possession fut plus terrible que la première. 1ᵉ: Par la durée; la première fut de treize mois, la seconde de cinq ans. 2ᵉ: La première fut adoucie par de nombreuses consolations surnaturelles; la seconde très peu. 3ᵉ: Les dévices abondèrent dans la première; dans la seconde les avanies morales l’emportèrent de beaucoup sur les avanies physiques. _Une Possédée Contemporaine_ (1834-1914), p. 405. [89] _Spirit Possession_, Henry M. Hugunin, published in Sycamore, Ill., U.S.A. [90] One should note the implication that science and faith are opposed. Dr. Wilfred T. Grenfell pointedly comments: “This question seems inept. To me the terms are not in antithesis, i.e. logical _v._ spiritual.” [91] Edited by Huntly Carter. Fisher Unwin, 1920. [92] Whose contribution, _From Non-Religion to Religion_, opens with the following ineptitude: “I think that the renewal of Spiritualism is mainly due to a real increase in our knowledge of psychical facts.” This phrase could only have been written by one wholly ignorant of mystical theology, and, it would seem, of historical Christianity. [93] _Spiritualism, Its Present-Day Meaning_, p. 258. [94] _Idem_, p. 269. [95] _Idem_, pp. 270-1. [96] _Idem_, p. 245. [97] _Idem_, p. 206. [98] _Idem_, pp. 206-7. [99] _Idem_, p. 205. The words are those of Father Bernard Vaughan. [100] “Seventeen Elementary Facts concerning Spiritualism.” _Light_, 21 February, 1925. Here we also have the frank avowal: “Modern Spiritualism is only a revival of phenomena and experiences that were well known in ancient times.” It should be remarked that similar phenomena, believed to be a genuine case of haunting, occurred at the house of Mr. Samuel Wesley, at Epworth, Lincolnshire, in 1716, and attracted universal attention. It is said that the knockings at the house of Parsons, Cock Lane, West Smithfield, in 1760, were proved to be fraud, but I do not know that the case has ever been candidly studied. [101] She took part in a séance on 25 October, 1860, but this seems to have been exceptional. [102] _Washington Daily Star_, 7 March, 1893, quoted in _The Medium and the Daybreak_, 7 April, 1893. [103] In the “educational” primers prepared by certain spiritists for use by children the story of the Fox Sisters is told in glowing colours to a point, but the history of their downfall is suppressed. [104] He died at Bedford, 5 September, 1892. His control was the spirit Imperator, who claimed to be the prophet Malachias. For a very full biography see Arthur Lillie’s _Modern Mystics and Modern Magic_. London. 1894. [105] For Mrs. Bassett see _The Medium_, 11 April and 18 April, 1873, pp. 174 and 182; for Miss Showers, _The Medium_, 8 May and 22 May, pp. 294 and 326. [106] _Medium and Daybreak_, 15 November, 1878, p. 730. [107] _L’Eclair_, 6 April, 1909. [108] Dr. Grasset, _L’Occultisme_, pp. 56, _sqq._; p. 424. [109] _Procès des Spirites_, 8vo. Paris. 1875. [110] _La Revue Spirite_ and _L’Echo du Mentalisme_, Nov., 1908. [111] Who apparently believes that Spiritism is authorized by the Scriptures, and that many of the prophets, nay, even Our Divine Lord Himself, were but mediums. [112] _Light._ Saturday, 21 February, 1925, p. 89. [113] Organized in 1882 for the scientific examination of “debatable phenomena.” [114] See the Report presented 11 May, 1922, and published by The Magic Circle, Anderton’s Hotel, Fleet Street. [115] _The Goligher Circle, May to August, 1921._ Experiences of E. E. Fournier d’Albe, D.SC. London, Watkins, 1922. [116] _The Classification of Psychic Phenomena_, by W. Loftus Hare. _The Occult Review_, July, 1924, p. 38. [117] Her real name appears to be Marthe Béraud. Professor Richet is satisfied that in his experiments with this medium at the Villa Carmen (Algiers) in 1905 genuine materialization was effected. [118] Who, as noted above, specializes in the Ouija-Board and Automatic Writing. [119] He has written such works as _The New Revelation_, and compiled _The Spiritualists’ Reader_, “A Collection of Spirit Messages from many sources, specially prepared for Short Readings.” [120] In all of whose documents the distinction is clearly drawn between legitimate scientific investigation and superstitious abuses.