OBSESSION AND POSSESSION OF THE DEVIL.
It is with reason that obsessions and possessions of the devil are
placed in the rank of apparitions of the evil spirit among men. We
call it _obsession_ when the demon acts externally against the person
whom he besets, and _possession_ when he acts internally, agitates
them, excites their ill humor, makes them utter blasphemy, speak
tongues they have never learnt, discovers to them unknown secrets, and
inspires them with the knowledge of the obscurest things in philosophy
or theology. Saul was agitated and possessed by the evil spirit,[242]
who at intervals excited his melancholy humor, and awakened his
animosity and jealousy against David, or who, on occasion of the
natural movement or impulsion of these dark moods, seized him,
agitated him, and disturbed from his usual tenor of mind. Those whom
the Gospel speaks of as being possessed,[243] and who cried aloud that
Jesus was the Christ, and that he was come to torment them before the
time, that he was the Son of God, are instances of possession. But the
demon Asmodeus, who beset Sara, the daughter of Raguel,[244] and who
killed her first seven husbands; those spoken of in the Gospel, who
were simply struck with maladies or incommodities which were thought
to be incurable; those whom the Scripture sometimes calls _lunatics_,
who foamed at the mouth, who were convulsed, who fled the presence of
mankind, who were violent and dangerous, so that they were obliged to
be chained to prevent them from striking and maltreating other people;
these kinds of persons were simply beset, or obseded by the devil.
Opinions are much divided on the matter of obsessions and possessions
of the devil. The hardened Jews, and the ancient enemies of the
Christian religion, convinced by the evidence of the miracles which
they saw worked by Jesus Christ, by his apostles, and by Christians,
dared neither dispute their truth nor their reality; but they
attributed them to magic, to the prince of the devils, or to the
virtue of certain herbs, or of certain natural secrets.
St. Justin,[245] Tertullian, Lactantius, St. Cyprian, Minutius, and
the other fathers of the first ages of the church, speak of the power
which the Christian exorcists exercised over the possessed, so
confidently and so freely, that we can doubt neither the certainty nor
the evidence of the thing. They call upon their adversaries to bear
witness, and pique themselves on making the experiment in their
presence, and of forcing to come out of the bodies of the possessed,
to declare their names, and acknowledge that those they adore in the
pagan temples are but devils.
Some opposed to the true miracles of the Saviour those of their false
gods, their magicians, and their heroes of paganism, such as those of
Esculapius, and the famous Apollonius of Tyana. The pretended
freethinkers dispute them in our days upon philosophical principles;
they attribute them to a diseased imagination, the prejudices of
education, and hidden springs of the constitution; they reduce the
expressions of Scripture to hyperbole; they maintain that Jesus Christ
condescended to the understanding of the people, and their
prepossessions or prejudices; that demons being purely spiritual
substances could not by themselves act immediately upon bodies; and
that it is not at all probable God should work miracles to allow of
their doing so.
If we examine closely those who have passed for being possessed, we
shall not perhaps find one amongst them, whose mind had not been
deranged by some accident, or whose body was not attacked by some
infirmity either known or hidden, which had caused some ferment in the
blood or the brain, and which, joined to prejudice, or fear, had given
rise to what was termed in their case obsession or possession.
The possession of King Saul is easily explained by supposing that he
was naturally an atrabilarian, and that in his fits of melancholy he
appeared mad, or furious; therefore they sought no other remedy for
his illness than music, and the sound of instruments proper to enliven
or calm him. Several of the obsessions and possessions noted in the
New Testament were simple maladies, or fantastic fancies, which made
it believed that such persons were possessed by the devil. The
ignorance of the people maintained this prejudice, and their being
totally unacquainted with physics and medicine served to strengthen
such ideas.
In one it was a sombre and melancholy temper, in another the blood was
too fevered and heated; here the bowels were burnt up with heat, there
a concentration of diseased humor, which suffocated the patient, as it
happens with those subject to epilepsy and hypochondria, who fancy
themselves gods, kings, cats, dogs, and oxen. There were others, who,
disturbed at the remembrance of their crimes, fell into a kind of
despair, and into fits of remorse, which irritated their mind and
constitution, and made them believe that the devil pursued and beset
them. Such, apparently, were those women who followed Jesus Christ,
and who had been delivered by him from the unclean spirits that
possessed them, and partly so Mary Magdalen, from whom he expelled
seven devils. The Scripture often speaks of the spirit of impurity, of
the spirit of falsehood, of the spirit of jealousy; it is not
necessary to have recourse to a particular demon to excite these
passions in us; St. James[246] tells us that we are enough tempted by
our own concupiscence, which leads us to evil, without seeking after
external causes.
The Jews attributed the greater part of their maladies to the demon:
they were persuaded that they were a punishment for some crime either
known or unrevealed. Jesus Christ and his apostles wisely supposed
these prejudices, without wishing to attack them openly and reform the
old opinions of the Jews; they cured the diseases, and chased away the
evil spirits who caused them, or who were said to cause them. The real
and essential effect was the cure of the patient; no other thing was
required to confirm the mission of Jesus Christ, his divinity, and the
truth of the doctrine which he preached. Whether he expelled the
demon, or not, is not essentially necessary to his first design; it is
certain that he cured the patient either by expelling the devil, if it
be true that this evil spirit caused the malady, or by replacing the
inward springs and humors in their regular and natural state, which is
always miraculous, and proves the Divinity of the Saviour.
Although the Jews were sufficiently credulous concerning the
operations of the evil spirit, they at the same time believed that in
general the demons who tormented certain persons were nothing else
than the souls of some wretches, who, fearing to repair to the place
destined for them, took possession of the body of some mortal whom
they tormented and endeavored to deprive of life.[247]
Josephus the historian[248] relates that Solomon composed some charms
against maladies, and some formulae of exorcism to expel evil spirits.
He says, besides, that a Jew named Eleazar cured in the presence of
Vespasian some possessed persons by applying under their nose a ring,
in which was enchased a root, pointed out by that prince. They
pronounced the name of Solomon with a certain prayer, and an exorcism;
directly, the person possessed fell on the ground, and the devil left
him. The generality of common people among the Jews had not the least
doubt that Beelzebub, prince of the devils, had the power to expel
other demons, for they said that Jesus Christ only expelled them in
the name of Beelzebub.[249] We read in history that sometimes the
pagans expelled demons; and the physicians boast of being able to cure
some possessed persons, as they cure hypochondriacs, and imaginary
disorders.
These are the most plausible things that are said against the reality
of the possessions and obsessions of the devil.
Footnotes:
[242] 1 Sam. xvi. 23.
[243] Matt. viii. 16; x. 11; xviii. 28.
[244] Tob. iii. 8.
[245] Justin. Dialog. cum supplem. Tertull. de Corona Militis, c. 11;
and Apolog. c. 23; Cyp. ad Demetriam, &c.; Minutius, in Octavio, &c.
[246] James i. 14.
[247] Joseph. Antiq. lib. vii. c. 25.
[248] Ibid. lib. viii. c. 2.
[249] Matt. xii. 24.