Los Angeles, Calif., Aug 20, 2017 / 03:48 pm (National Catholic Register).- What children read, what they see on the screen, can inspire them toward greater faithfulness. Conversely, Father Robert warns, it can lead them into the sordid world of the occult, even opening them to demonic possession.
Father Robert is not exaggerating. A priest for more than 10 years and an experienced exorcist, he knows firsthand the unintended consequences when children or adults open the door to demonic activity. “Oftentimes,” he says, “[demon possession] begins because kids get curious after reading Harry Potter.” He explains that kids want the unusual powers that they see depicted on the screen.
One former Satanist whom Father Robert knew personally, a man who has turned away from his past life and embraced the Catholic faith, had begun his descent into Satanism at the age of nine or 10, when he began playing a game called “Bloody Mary.” From that simple beginning, he gradually became involved with others who were Satanists.
Respecting Confidentiality
An important part of Father Robert’s ministry is training other priests at the Vatican’s official Exorcism Institute in America. From across the country and around the world, Catholic priests come to the Institute to learn the secrets of this ancient rite, so that they too can exorcize demons and evil spirits. The nature of the work that Father Robert and the Institute are involved in is so hazardous that he has requested that the National Catholic Register not publish his full name or reveal his location.
A Decidedly “Catholic” Horror Film
I had the opportunity to meet and talk with Father Robert at a recent media preview of New Line Cinema’s latest horror production, “Annabelle: Creation,” which opens nationwide on August 11. Directed by David F. Sandberg (director of the short film “Lights Out”), “Annabelle: Creation” is actually a prequel to the highly successful 2014 release of “Annabelle” – which is itself a prequel to the 2013 cult favorite “The Conjuring” and the more recent “Conjuring 2” (2016). Father Robert had seen them all, and he agreed that “Annabelle: Creation” was largely faithful to the Catholic Church’s teachings with regard to possession and exorcism.
By Invitation Only: Satan Only Goes Where He Is Invited
Father Robert explained that the devil will only go where he is invited. He talked of two cases he knew of personally in which two young women, not realizing the gravity of their request, had invited “any spiritual being” to help them. The consequence was that they exhibited symptoms of demon possession and required an exorcism.
The writers of the film, Father Robert noted, had done their homework – they understood that the demon could only enter the home of dollmaker Samuel Mullins and his wife Esther if it was invited. In “Annabelle: Creation,” Esther and Samuel Mullins are mourning the loss of their beloved daughter Bee. Miranda Otto, who portrays the mother Esther in the film, explained,
Like most parents, they are devastated. But unlike most, they decided that they would do anything to have her back…absolutely anything at all. Basically, they prayed, calling out to any kind of power that would allow them to see her or feel her presence in any way. But by doing so, they evoked certain spirits that are not the kind you would welcome into your home.
Twelve years after the tragic accident, the grieving parents seek comfort by opening their home to Sister Charlotte and several girls from an orphanage that has been closed. When one of the girls peers into the closet and sees the possessed doll, Annabelle, the doll sets her sights on the girls and unleashes a storm of terror.
A Few Inaccuracies
Father Robert and I agreed that “Annabelle: Creation” was, for the most part, faithful to the Catholic understanding of exorcism. There were, however, a few scenes which caused us both to raise an eyebrow:
A Sister heard confession? – Most particularly, there was a scene in which Sister Charlotte, played by the talented Stephanie Sigman, listens to the confession of one of her young charges. Granted, there were differences from a regular confession: The Sister and the young girl sat back-to-back, not in a confessional. But the concept of confession was renewed when Sister Charlotte said, “Well, for your penance….” Particularly during the time period of the film, Father Robert considered it highly unlikely that a Sister would ever put herself in the position of appearing to perform a sacramental function that requires a priest.
Sister Charlotte wore a contemporary religious habit. – Based upon the clothing styles, classic automobiles, and the Victorian farmhouse, it would seem that “Annabelle: Creation” is set in the early 20th century. However, Sister Charlotte wears what appears a contemporary religious habit – with a knee-length skirt and a simple headpiece which exposed her hair. When I asked director David Sandberg and actress Stephanie Sigman (Sister Charlotte) about that during our interview, both seemed surprised, explaining that they had looked at photos of nuns in different habits and had chosen a simple costume which would make it easier to act the role.
Disposal of the possessed object – In “Annabelle: Creation,” two priests come to the home to bless the doll Annabelle and to sprinkle it with holy water before it is sealed away in a Scripture-lined closet. Good as far as it goes, Father Robert thought, but he was adamant that an exorcist would never leave the possessed object there intact, to be found by someone in the future. “You would take the curse off the object,” he explained. “You could burn it or take it apart; but it would be decommissioned somehow.”
As an example of a possessed object, Father Robert described a crucifix that hangs in his office which was burned from the bottom during an exorcism, the fire consuming the corpus and leaving only the arms of the crucified Christ. “It had a plastic corpus on it,” he explained. “The cross itself was blessed. It was put in the room with a woman who practiced Brujería witchcraft in Mexico. In the middle of the night, the cross caught fire. I decommissioned it. I would never permit anyone else to get near it, because it could be used in the future for something wrong.”
The scarecrow scene, and the Tasmanian devil – A scene in which a scarecrow was possessed by the evil spirit and moved from its original position seemed unlikely, according to Father Robert. Similarly, he was unconvinced when the demon began to grow and assumed a physical likeness of what he called a “Tasmanian devil.”
Only by invitation! – In one scene, a child becomes possessed when she finds herself in the presence of a demon that manifests itself as a little girl. Father Robert rejected the idea that an evil spirit could inhabit the body of a child who happened to be in its presence – since, as he explained earlier, an evil spirit will only enter a person if he is invited.
Five Signs of Possession
Father Robert listed five signs which may indicate that a person is suffering spiritual attack:
1.Hidden knowledge. If a person has knowledge which he or she should not have, such as private information which is known by only a few people, that may signal demonic possession.
2.Languages. A possessed person may be able to speak in an unfamiliar language which he or she would not normally know.
3.Superhuman strength. Father Robert reported one case in which a young girl who was 5’4” tall and weighed perhaps 110 pounds was able to throw a number of big guys off of her, preventing them from holding her down during the exorcism ritual.
4.Extreme aversion to the sacred. A person who is possessed may be unable to look at a crucifix, or to touch a rosary which has been blessed. Father Robert knew of one woman who couldn’t be in the presence of a cross of St. Benedict, or to be in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament.
5.Levitation. Father Robert had personal knowledge of a case in Louisiana, in which a person was seated in a chair and, powered by the evil spirit, was able to levitate with the chair and proceed down the hall.
“Annabelle: Creation” opened in theaters across America on August 11. Despite the small inconsistencies which Father Robert noticed, the film is respectful of faith. The film does an effective job of building tension, and there are repeated “frights”; but it is not really gory and depends on spiritual and psychological effects rather than blood. It’s likely to enjoy wide distribution among fans of the horror genre. Rated “R”, it seems unsuitable for small children; but others can attend, confident that their faith will not be challenged.
This article was originally published at the National Catholic Register.
[…]
He didn’t have a problem with making a judgement for other people when he handed down the vaccine mandate. But I suppose he’ll have that debate at the pearly gates.
Abortion is a Justice issue because it violates the Natural Law, the ground of justice and civil law, and the right to life. Human life in the womb deserves full protection under the law, not a wrongly adjudicated proscription that allows for murder of the prenatal infant.
Biden, is both an heretical Catholic and a lawless politician. Roe is shown to have no basis in the practice of justice.
Why should he have to explain himself to some EWTN reporter when he clearly has the favor of both the Cardinal of Washington DC and the Pope? The ashes on his forehead effectively amount to the stamp of approval from Gregory and Bergoglio. Catholic politicians who flagrantly defy Church teaching are not the biggest problem we face – bishops and a pope who happily let them get away with it are. When we frankly admit that bitter enemies of the Faith occupy most of the highest positions of the hierarchy, including the top one, then we’ll have taken the first step in dealing with the crisis.
The top of my head just blew off.
Biden is “giving up” sweets for Lent? But, at the same time, enabling the systematic killing of millions upon millions of children around the world?
My God!
Doesn’t anyone see the hideous, monstrous, unthinkable incongruity there?
If Joe Biden is Catholic, then the word has no meaning.
This questioning perpetuates the wrong notion that Catholics are to politically engage or vote on the issue of abortion only, and neglect the issues of racism, economic inequity, broken immigration system, inaccessible health care, climate emergency, death penalty, euthanasia. Read Matthew 25, Acts 2, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Social Teachings of the Church, or the latest “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” of the USCCB. President Biden is correct not to directly answer the question which would have involved explaining theology and especially the matter of conscience. The reporter thought he got a scoop but actually only showed his cluelessness about theology and especially about the use of one’s conscience in determining complex matters. This again shows that EWTN is not fully Catholic by not presenting the full spectrum of Catholic teaching in reporting about social issues. This aligns with the regular pattern of EWTN in disrespectfully and disloyally bashing Pope Francis or in resisting or rejecting some of the reforms mandated by the Second Vatican Council. The fullness of catholicity of EWTN is questionable.
Oh, please. You’re committing the same embarrassing mistake as Joe Biden: pretending this is a “theological issue”, when it is no more specifically theological than is the issue of racial equality or economic justice for poor people. It’s not “complex”. It 101 science, commonsense, and human decency. And the questioning of Biden is completely legit: he (and his team and the media) continually promote his “Catholic faith”, and yet he is most passionate (in terms of policy and also, at times, personal comment) in pushing for “reproductive health”. Finally, one’s conscience as a Catholic is to be formed by Church teaching, and it is very clear on this matter:
That’s. Very. Clear. Very.
Thank you, Mr. Olson.
Your answer to Noel’s comment was far more cogent — and far less rude — than mine would have been.
The left’s effort to characterize abortion as a complex theological issue beyond the ken of us ordinary folk who ain’t got us the book larnin’ ya need ta unnerstand it good is, frankly, pathetic.
It’s also very clear this is a moral issue with wide consequences even for those who view themselves at the periphery of the discussion. The decriminalization of abortion in the US was a Republican initiative in the 60s. It was furthered by doctors, nearly all male, who had a motive to avoid imprisonment in exchange for a rather lucrative cash stream for what they viewed as a medical procedure. It was constitutionally enshrined by GOP appointees to the US Supreme Court. Mr Nixon’s justices went 3-1 in favor, and the structure was set that executives and legislatures were sidelined for the next fifty years. Both major US political parties knew they were insulated as long as judiciaries controlled the matter.
The truth is that unlike China, one of main pressures to procure abortions in the US is personal. It comes from parents and partners. Secondarily, it is economic: people need jobs, they are fearful of providing for a child or for themselves. These factors can all be wrongheaded, and likely are.
So yes, a lot of otherwise good and moral Christians contribute to the culture that supports abortion. Yes also, racism, anti-labor initiatives, and other political factors contribute to abortion. The lack of support for women with children is no less remote a cooperation as advocating for a useless law that won’t affect the big abortion ticker at all.
I know: the Right isn’t big into compassion. Or self-examination. They want to turn away when priests and conservative politicians pay for the abortions of mistresses, girlfriends, daughters, or wives. They complain about boycotting China–it’s too difficult; everything I buy comes from there!
What many pearl-clutchers don’t realize is that the culture of life starts with them: how they give good or bad example. That includes how they treat women, death-row convicts, immigrants, people of color, and even their white neighbors.
Mr Biden’s approach raises questions, but not as many as the politically-opposed-but-morally-in-favor crowd.
Todd, your assumptions here are offensive.
Have there been Republicans who favored abortion? Of course. In a country of hundreds of millions of people, there are always outliers who can be used to try to derail any argument.
But how often in the past 49 years, friend Todd, has abortion been a Republican Party platform plank?
(For the Democrats, the answer is, every one of those 49 years. The Republicans? Never.)
When has opposition to abortion been verboten for Republican candidates?
(The answer, again, *never.*)
You try to run away from the Democrats’ history as the all-in, flat-out, straight-up, passionate and rabid pro-abortion party. But it’s a fool’s errand.
In the past half century, Democrats have espoused no issue more consistently than abortion, prioritized no policy before abortion, promoted no policy more strenuously than abortion.
Whereas the raison d’etre for the Democratic Party pre-1964 was white supremacy, since 1973, it has been abortion.
The Democrats are the all-abortion all-the-time party.
Indeed, what party has even recently abolished the informal, Republican-initiated agreement to prohibit the use of federal dollars to fund abortions? The Democrats.
Most offensive of all is your illogical, almost comical, assertion that opposing abortion means unconcern for troubled women, or disdain for the poor, or a failure to floss adequately, or low scores on the SAT’s, or whatever else you were claiming.
Unless you can claim to have polled each of the dozens of millions of Republicans in America, your assertion is patently absurd.
Actually, no. Even more offensive is your assumption that we who denigrate the Democratic Party for its absolute and unwavering support for abortion are Republicans.
I, good Todd, am personally insulted at your implication.
I have long considered most Republican politicians to be spineless, soulless, unprincipled poltroons.
In fact the only good thing I can think of to say about them is that, in most cases anyway, they’re not Democrats.
Sir, if you choose to vote Democratic despite their unwavering promotion of killing every cute, sweet, funny, beautiful baby they can get their initiatives on, that is your business. And I will pray for you.
But your decision implies nothing about what I do or believe or support.
Noel, your argument doesn’t hold water…
It’s like arguing that the Titanic was in no danger because, after all, there’s more parts to the the Barque of Peter than a simple hole below the waterline.
Not that “complex” after all.
As for the USCCB, here’s what they had to say back in 1998, about faithful citizenship:
…Any politics of human dignity must seriously address issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment, education, housing and health care” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 23). We pray that Catholics will be advocates for the weak and the marginalized in all these areas. “But being ‘right’ in such matters can never excuse a wrong choice regarding direct attacks on innocent human life. Indeed, the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 23).
The theological poison of the late Bernardin is fully on display with a defender of Biden.
Biden, Pelosi, et. al. – ‘catholic’ with a small c.
And yet it stings deeply they are all Catholic, still large-C, still going to Mass, still receiving Communion, still going to confession and receiving absolution, and still walking around not getting hit by lightning. Political lay people don’t get to decide who’s in and who’s out. Last time I checked, the Last Judge is in charge. And he’s not y’all.
President Biden, Pelosi – their actions are beyond disgraceful. It’s one thing to make mistakes in ignorance; it’s another thing entirely to willfully and obstinately promote an evil that robs innocent human beings of their lives. They, as we all, will answer for their actions in this life. Given the Church’s constant teaching, it’s not difficult to imagine how difficult it will be for anyone who remains unrepentant. The stain of mortal sin – i.e., indifference to the murder of countless millions by enabling a culture of death – will be exposed and judged accordingly. “Almighty God, unto whom all hearts be open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets are hid… .” – from the Collect for Purity, Divine Worship: the Missal
Biden’s implication that those of us who don’t have a theology degree can’t grasp the enormity of abortion is patronizing and insulting.
P.S. More than one of those lettered theologians have helped bring about the moral confusion we currently live in.