50,000 served
Jimmy Akin has a good post on Exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth who is in the news once again for claiming that Hitler and Stalin were possessed.
The fact is that Fr. Amorth is an individual given to making sweeping statements that are not firmly grounded and that are subject to a credulous mindset that is too ready to see possession (full-blown or not).
How else can one explain his claim--in his book An Exorcist Tells His Story--to have performed thirty THOUSAND exorcisms in a nine year period? That's nine exorcisms PER DAY for nine years--Sundays included!
If this claim is remotely accurate then the man is a walking exorcism factory.
Especially since each exorcism requires canonical approval his bishop would also have to be one exorcism permitting factory also. Though now his claims are 50,000 served as if he is competing with McDonalds. Dr.Ed Peters had previously reviewed Fr. Amorth's book and noted:
I begin by noting that Fr. Benedict Groeschel wrote one of the most tepid forewords to a book I have ever seen. “At first I declined,” he noted, and then he continued, “…I have difficulties with Fr. Amorth’s approach. He writes of this intriguing subject in ways quite foreign to the ideas of the English-speaking world…he uses rhetoric foreign to most of us and even theological concepts alien to our way of thinking…” Groeschel’s concerns are justified, and the cultural oddities are many. See, for example, Amorth’s comments on gypsies, mentioned only because “they are everywhere in Europe”, and whom he lumps together with “card readers and scoundrels” (p. 161), or his brief but confused discussion of the stereotypically Italian “evil eye” (p. 132). But bothersome as such details are, the problems are deeper than this.
Now what do you do with an out of control exorcist? If his bishop removed his faculties as an exorcist would this be considered repossession? Or do you hope for a Megan to come along and a bad fall?
Known as 
I must agree that certain translation issues and culture contexts can make what he is stating in his books appear odd.
But I just posted this over at Mr. Akin’s blog because I must comment (I have read Fr. Amorth’s books a few times):
Jimmy Akin wrote:
"Huh? Really? All of the members of the Nazi Party? Without exception? They all had full-blown cases of possession with personality displacement?"
Did he say "full-blown" cases? Did he say with "personality displacement?"
If he did not then he can be correct since possession can be on many different levels (even minor levels) - meaning they don’t have to be slobbering around like a crazy person.
Jimmy Akin wrote:
"One more recent report indicates that the number of exorcisms he has performed had risen to 50,000 as of 2001.
It is therefore very difficult to place much weight in claims made by Fr. Amorth on such matters"
If he is counting his simple blessings with minor exorcisms attached in them (which I think he's not allowed to do) then I can see this statement being true.
I have read the book and enjoyed it. I guess I didn't actually do the math, but those numbers seem a bit ludicrous. One part of the book that made sense to me was that there are different levels of demonic activity. The most severe, full possesion, being quite rare. Oppression and affliction (can't remember the exact name he gave it) are much more common in our world. And I would have to agree with that statement.
On another note, for those Catholics who are still fighting to keep politicians accountable, take a look at my response to Deal Hudson's latest Windows Column
Jimmy is a good apologist but should stick to the subjects he is good at. Spiritual warfare may not be his specialty. Anyone can say a simple exorcism prayer. Just because someone uses the word exorcism does not mean they are speaking about solemn exorcisms which need approval from a bishop. simple exorcism or deliverence prayers should be said by everyone. I say at least two simple exorcism prayers a day. So I would expect Rome's exorcist would far exceed my number. If you read anything about him he states how RARE his solemn exorcisms have been.
It seems to be Catholic converts that have such a difficult time with exorcisms and the role of an exorcist. If one thinks dealing with the evil one every day is like a day with Linda Blair it is easy to see why there is such a fuss over Fr Amorth's statements.
I second Pam's clarification between solemn exorcisms and simple exorcisms. Simple exorcisms are very common and do not require approval from the ordinary. The current rite of baptism still contains a simple exorcism and other rites may as well (I would have to check on this). Akin's distinction between "full-blown" and "[not] full-blown" is unclear and not the language of the Church.
Yes, Fr. Amorth is ambiguous in many ways. But I don't see Fr. Groeschel's forward as quite as negative as some have made it out to be. After all, I have heard Fr. Groeschel himself speak critically of our Western divisions between psychological and spiritual "issues." For example, Fr. Groeschel has said that genuine and holy spiritual phenomena--apparitions, stigmata--are often paired with some level of psychological "disorder," and God works with us where we are. The Devil does, too.
Also, Fr. Groeschel has stated in _Crisis_ that perfectly sane people are hard to find, especially in religion.
Fr. Corapi's video on demonic possession is very telling, and a much better explanation of the subject for the ill-informed. He draws from Fr. Amorth, but cautions that you must read the book with a certain spirtual maturity and theological foundation.
OTOH, many of the Catholics I see criticizing Fr. Amorth are doing so by over-emphasizing the "rarity" of the experiences he accounts. I daresay most people have experienced "extra-ordinary" manifestations of spiritual beings at some point in their lives. I've seen angels on video tape--not some Fox presentation but an actual home video recorded by a priest at an ordination Mass the night before, brought over to our houes the next day so we could hear the music.
A priest in my hometown is well-known for both healing ministry and deilverance. Before I was born, my father was told he had a broken spine and would never walk again, after the accident that killed his first wife. this priest came to visit him in the hospital and prayed over him. dad felt a warmth, and later that day, after another test, the doctors said, "We made a mistake. your spine is fine."
Dad told me this story after my alcoholic brother went into that priest's halfway house program. During my brother's stay, Monsignor related some of his experiences as an exorcist, and brought my brother with him to a couple exorcisms. Just about every time I talked to my brother on the weekend, Msgr. was off to some part of the state doing an exorcism--and my brother and the others at the house would pray to support him, and see all sorts of "crazy" things.
Point is that "extraordinary" and "rare" can mean many things. Once in a lifetime, or one in every hundred people, can be "rare" or "extraordinary."
Many contemporary Catholics act like "rare" in the case of possession means that only a couple people in the world are possessed at any given time.
Most priests I've spoken with at any length, even quite liberal ones, have encountered "extraordinary" manifestations of the demonic.