Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/04/02/vatican-more-trained-exorcist.html
…
On the one hand, any endorsement of delusional etiology is harmful. On the other hand…
…not wrong. Magical thinking is sadly not going away in the foreseeable future.
On the gripping hand, the established clergy, while far less predatory than the MLM chicaners people often to turn to for boutique woo, aren’t saints.
I call “Bullshit” on the whole damn practice, but then I like the 21st century over the Dark Ages, so…
I’m fairly certain is possessed by something sinister, what could it hurt if the church focused on this very dangerous instance?
Remember the good ol days, like 20 years ago when the vatican wouldn’t even admit there were such things as exorcists because it made them look backward and ignorant because many of those well educated priests were trained in modern psychology?
It’s a dry heat…
Define shark.
A of all, that map really has nothing to do with the legitimacy (or lack thereof) of the practice of demonic exorcism.
Second of B, a fair amount of the divine intervention described in the texts of the Abrahamic religions occurs in Babylon, Badr, Mecca, and Medina, and God worked some miracles through Paul in Ephesus and Troas, and none of those locations fall into the little circle. If you’re going to insist on pointless and tangential snark based on geography, at least try to get the geography right.
Its predictable jeebus-in-the-sky washout would only cause Trump’s braindead holy-rolled minions to ejaculate even further into believing that there was nothing evil about him to begin with. So I say… nope.
In the “good ol days” many more altar boys were being abused by priests, so I say that this may be the time to take the very good with the not so bad.
I have no idea where one goes to find these sorts of data(anyone?); but I’d be curious to know to what extent this represents a reactionary faction in Catholicism gaining ground over their opponents and how much it represents a defensive reaction to the successes(sometimes pretty dramatic) that various flavors of protestantism, typically the more freaky charismatic types that speak in tongues and do hardcore exorcisms; not Episcopalians and UUs have had in making inroads into historically Catholic areas of the developing world.
Here are some incomplete but interesting numbers: I suspect that “Your market share in Brazil fell from 92% to 65% between 1970 and 2010; assorted Pentecostals now account for 22% of the market” is the sort of thing that gives even Catholics rather embarrassed by the idea a case of “if we don’t someone else will”.
No one has posted this yet?
I thought it would be obligatory…
So can the Vatican exorcise all MAGA-ots (pronounced as you might expect) from the USA?
Worth a try.
You know, as an occasionally practicing Catholic I have no brook for exorcism as a treatment of anything. It is anti-scientific in a Church that, for so many things, comes down hard on the side of science and scientific inquiry. At the same time, I cannot look down on the old tradition of it.
When my daughter – who has a number of serious anxiety issues – went into her rages, I knew there was a scientific/medical diagnosis to be had. But in the days before real understanding of psychopharmacology? You know – previous to say the 1970s – what on Earth would an honestly believing, faithful Catholic possibly have thought was going on with a kid that that was that angry and that different than who she ordinarily was…
And back into the 1800s? Or earlier? I’d have done anything the Church could have suggested to make my little girl better. If it was the only source of truth available – and it was to most folks – exorcism to rid her of demons seems like the most normal thing in the world. I’d be banging on the door night and day.
Yea, that’s not actually true either. But it’s nice we’ve proved the existence of atheists on he internet. Who knew?
My concern is the shortage of immigration court judges, which John Oliver pointed out below. And qualified exorcists.