The demonologist will see you now
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Excuse me – I can’t help it.
The Pope has instructed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly the Holy Office of the Inquisition, to draw up a new handbook to help bishops snuff out an explosion of bogus heavenly apparitions. Benedict XVI plans to update the Vatican’s current rules on investigating apparitions to help distinguish between true and false claims of visions of Jesus and the Virgin Mary, messages, stigmata (the appearances of the five wounds of Christ), weeping and bleeding statues and Eucharistic miracles.
Well yes, certainly, of course; one can quite see why he would. Only…is it really, actually, genuinely possible to distinguish between true and false claims of visions and stigmata and the like? Or are they much of a muchness? Oh no, surely they have a method; they can’t be just gesturing at the air.
[A]nyone who claims to have seen an apparition will only be believed as long as they remain silent and do not court publicity over their claims. If they refuse to obey, this will be taken as a sign that their claims are false. The visionaries will then be visited by a team of psychiatrists, either atheists or Catholics, to certify their mental health while theologians will assess the content of any heavenly messages to see if they contravene Church teachings.
Ah good! That’s a good method – that should definitely weed out the bogus claims, because Church teachings are the infallible checking mechanism for telling Up from Down, gold from dross, wheat from chaff, wine from vinegar, and heavenly from not so good.
If the visionary is considered credible they will ultimately be questioned by one or more demonologists and exorcists to exclude the possibility that Satan is hiding behind the apparitions in order to deceive the faithful.
Yes but…how does that work? What questions are there that demonologists and exorcists can ask that would reveal Satan hiding behind the apparitions? Isn’t Satan clever enough to answer their questions in such a way that they can’t spot Satan hiding? Oh well, I shouldn’t ask such questions, demonologists and exorcists are professionals and they have techniques and tools and skills that they learned and got degrees in, so I’ll just bow deferentially and go eat lunch.
Oooh! Where can I study to become a demonologist? That sounds awesome, but they didn’t even cover that on career day, dammit.
-CM
Jesus H. Christ on toast, literally. You can’t parody this.
“while theologians will assess the content of any heavenly messages to see if they contravene Church teachings”
So this means that holy revelations are only valid if they are agreed upon by people high enough up in the church. So basically god is only allowed to talk to you if you agree with the pope. So, really, god can only talk to the pope? Good job pope. Nice decree. That doesn’t look like yet another attempt to solidify your power at all.
Interestingly parts of this post are absolutely hilarious if you get safari to read it to you in the voice “deranged” or “whisper”.
“[A]nyone who claims to have seen an apparition will only be believed as long as they remain silent and do not court publicity over their claims.”
Does this rule out St Paul et al?
I think St Paul was grandfathered in.
Heeheeheehee.
Well bad news from my cabinet of miracles. I turned over the tortilla where the Virgin of Guadalupe appeared and damned if there wasn’t an image of that sneaky boots Satan on the back.
Please note that I am trying to keep this quiet, to I’ll have a better chance of being believed.
Also of interest, I am pretty sure I have some toothpaste called Vademecum. Again, not courting publicity or anything.
‘The visionaries will then be visited by a team of psychiatrists, either atheists or Catholics, to certify their mental health’
Given the latter group believe a virgin was impregnated by a ‘holy spirit’, that Jesus walked out of his tomb having been ‘resurrected’ from the dead, that ‘eating the flesh’ and ‘drinking the blood’ of a dead man will help them get to ‘heaven’, and that talking to dead people can lead to ‘miraculous healings’ perhaps they’re not the best to rule on that.
Isn’t this all standard RC practice? I recall a not-very-good film about a miracle-investigating priest [aha, The Third Miracle, 1999, thanks IMDB] in which these kinds of assertions were voiced. And he ended up having sex with Anne Heche. That’s probably not standard practice. Unless he was trying to convert her from lesbianism. In which case other methods are probably still the Church’s preferred option. Her being over 18 and all…
So much for transcendent numinous (a word I have quickly grown to loathe) truth irreducible to human reason and communicated only to the worthy through signs.
The supernatural as a product of bureaucracy used to be a secular mass media entertainment fantasy…
In the latter years of his reign the Holy Office of the Inquisition, now called the (Sacred, was dropped) Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith was headed by orthodoxy-czar Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.
It became responsible for dealing with the worldwide clergy abuse scandal.
It still ferrets out errant priests.
But until the recent round of crises, its chief interests seemed to be seeking out the theologically treacherous ones.
For those who threaten the faith have always been considered a graver menace than those who endanger the bodies of believers.
Maintaining the integrity of the faith is its purpose.
The same body in the past served as the final court of appeal in trials of heresy.
Vademecum, (the name sounds so demonic and scary.)
The Pope has instructed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to draw up a new handbook to help bishops snuff out an explosion of bogus heavenly apparitions.
I wonder will Our Lady of Zeitoun, (1968, Cairo) who was reportedly seen by millions of Egyptians and foreigners, including Copts, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews and people of no particular faith be in for the chop with the pope.
And will the sick and blind, who were said, at the time to have been cured and the many other people, who, as a result, converted to Christianity, be forced to rethink as a consequence of the snuffing process, their cures and conversions.
Talk about explosion – it is more like implosion.
“According to Petrus, an Italian online magazine which leans towards conservative elements in the Vatican, anyone who claims to have seen an apparition will only be believed as long as they remain silent and do not court publicity over their claims. If they refuse to obey, this will be taken as a sign that their claims are false.”
So if a green frog lands beside me, claims it has been sent by God, and starts telling me all sorts of secrets of the universe (like “Tell them not to bother at CERN looking for the God particle: there ain’t no such beast”) I’m supposed to keep quiet about it?
On second thoughts, maybe I should. Yep, they’re onto something sensible there.
But at the same time it has some problems, particularly if extended into the wider cognitive sphere: “Mr Galileo, you’ve been telling people that you have spotted two moons in orbit around Mars through your telescope. Well, just for that, we refuse to believe you.”
Then again, what’s so new in that?
Yeah, it is a wonderful trap, isn’t it. If you won’t be quiet when we tell you to be quiet, that shows that your claim is bogus. Yes that’s the way to find things out!
But of course finding things out is not what the Vatican does, or pretends to do, or wants to do, or hopes to do if it ever learns how.
‘”[A]nyone who claims to have seen an apparition will only be believed as long as they remain silent and do not court publicity over their claims.”
Does this rule out St Paul et al?’
Actually it rules out all of them. I mean, if someone gets to know about it, then they may be taken as courting publicity.
So the only ones that are valid are the ones that no-one knows about.
I’ll stop worrying about them then.
I take it they won’t be doing this retrospectively, because it would mean they would have to un-saint a number of individuals who were clearly certifiable.
The world has become arrogant, and likewise the church follows suit. Most individuals would not even be able to identify a positive or even a negative “supernatural” experience because they have their head shoved too far up their own ass (pardon the expression). I suppose that could be considered a supernatural experience as well, looking through a dark tunnel with only momentary glimpses of light from a hole that has 32 stalactites and stalagmites at its end. Maybe visions of a hellish place, but still one could describe it being supernatural.The idea to sway people into remaining silent from a personal experience is treacherous, the church only considers those that remain quiet as valid cases, to me only indicates the Roman influence behind their practices. Especially given consideration that those which genuinely have had spiritual experiences are from that moment on, life-alteredAll the biblical accounts of individuals which had supernatural encounters with the heavenly were very vocal about these experiences – or one could argue how else would the story be in place?Everyone wants to point to Satan as being a culprit in the mischief of the lives of those having extraordinary experiences – yet the clergy fails to recognize that Satan is simply an angel, can only be one place at one time, is not omnipresent, nor omnipotent and does not have time for helpless whelps that are fantastical and want people to believe them. Satan is interested in total control and is interested in influencing the minds of those which can carry this agenda out for him. Individual cases are not going to do anything for him – so the answer to the ignorance should be quite clear here. Demonology and demonologists are not bound by the church ; they were never part of or recognized by the church as part of it’s function. The background to a true demonologist is the study and understanding of the occult. While this knowledge may also be influenced and expanded to include the bible as their motivations and/or faith driven system of operation – a demonologist and exorcist are two completely different roles. Exorcism has been religiously modified at it’s center, exorcisms were originally barbaric and it’s practices were rooted to punish, purify, and obtain confessions of evil. While the writer of this blog drew my attention by it’s headline ; I can clearly see that they disagree with the church’s opinion. My only question would be – why would you suggest that a demonologist and/or even those that practice the rites of exorcisms would minutely be interested in your indecision towards the church? They are not parallel with your level of reasoning so why indicate them at all?To further expand on your err of facts – neither demonologists nor exorcists have any obtainable degrees, nor is their secret doctrines obscured from world view which grant them spiritual superiority over the masses. But in order for one to be an effective demonologist, one needs to know and understand the occult, both what’s written and the arcane side of it’s effect. And in order to become a true exorcist, one must be commissioned and sanctioned by the church to perform such an act. In neither instance, would one offer up such services for whimsical purposes – nor would one that does offer such services tele-evangelise themselves as experts in the field.