This morning, over my third cup of coffee, I
came across this report,
in the Catholic Herald, about the alleged exorcism performed by Pope Benedict
XVI in St Peter’s Square. According to Fr. Gabriele Amorth, “when the Pope blessed the men, they ‘flew
three metres backwards’ and ‘howled no longer’.”[1]
In response to the allegation by Fr. Amorth, “Vatican spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi,
denied that the Pope had performed an exorcism. ‘Even if the facts are true,
it’s not correct to talk about an exorcism by the Pope, who was not warned or
aware of their presence,’ he said.”
I really am not sure what to make of this. I do
believe that, just as the women was healed when she reached out an touched our
Lord’s cloak from amongst the crowd, that it is also possible that someone
could be healed, by God, when they come into the presence of a holy person like
the pope.
My gut feel however is that this claim, by Fr.
Amorth, may be more about sensationalism and marketing, than about the truth.
Why? Well it seems to me that all this claim has done is focus attention on Fr.
Amorth and his new book. My common sense leads me to believe that the true test must
always be to ask if the event points to and leads people to God? If not, it is
probably of man and not of God.
I could be wrong. What do you think?
[1] Catholic Herald, Benedict XVI performed exorcism in St Peter’s Square, claims priest, Feb 3, 2012
Well, yes, I agree. Do all the formal exorcism 'whistles and bells' have to be present for an exorcism to take place? I very much doubt it. Why would the Pope have to be warned for it to be classified as an exorcism? That seems rather absurd to me. If the men were exorcised simply because he blessed them, then they were exorcised. End of story. What's the problem? Why does it have to be pointed out that it wasn't a planned event? Very strange.
ReplyDelete