DEMONOLOGY
713
DEMONOLOGY
srlf in the midst of a simple, credulous, and supersti-
tious population, would shrink from adopting harsh
and drastic measures to get rid of these cherished
superstitions and popular errors. And though on this
point we must speak with some reserve, it is possible
that in such a case the teacher, in endeavouring to
make himself understood by his hearers, will use their
own language and convey his own message of truth
throiigh the medium of words and phrases which, taken
litiTally, may seem to give some countenance to these
popular errors. But whetherthisbe permissible or no,
It may be safely asserted that a wise and good teacher
" ill not carry his accommodation to the point of con-
lit ming his hearers in their delusions. And these
iiitics themselves can hardly question the fact that
till' whole treatment of demonic possession in the
inis|>els has had this effect, and has confirmed and
)" rpetuated the belief in real demonic possession.
And at least in these latter days there must be many \\\\n would have abandoned all belief in the reality or p\ fn the bare possiljility of any such possession, but that thry felt constrained to beheve it on the author- ity of Christ and the testimony of the Gospels. Cer- tainly, if it were possible to accept this interpretation of the early Rationalists, and regard the attitude of Clirist as an accommodation to popular beliefs and siiprrstitions, it must be confessed that the alleged criinomy has had very unfortunate consequences. Liter Rationalists, who see the difficulty, or rather til.' impossibility, of reconciling this view with the lenience of the Gospels, have turned to other ways if i^cape, and, like the other supernatural and mirac- ulms elements in the Gospel narrative, the instances ■ il demonic possession and the casting out of devils 111 vc been explained as parts of a mythical legend that lias grown up around the figure of Christ; or again till V have furni.shed grounds for disputing the fullness I if Ili.s knowledge, or the authenticity and veracity of 1 li narrative. This is not the place to deal with these pnililems of apologetics; but it may be well to say a "iinl on the true ground for the rejection of belief in I' al demonic possession. The tendency has been to ill iiv the possibility of miracles or demonic possession. Ami it is sometimes curious that critics who are so 1h>M in setting limits to the knowledge of Christ are I if* I'll strangely oblivious of their own natural knowl- iiIl.'!-. On metaphysical principles we can have no V ilid ground for deciding that such a thing as demonic iil'-ission is impossible, and it is a more reasonable, as will as a more modest, course to keep to means of kiiDwledge within our reach and examine the evidence aildiicible for the actual occurrence of obsession. If any one has examined this evidence and found it in- siiilicient, his denial of demonic agency, whether we ai 11 pt it or not, is at any rate entitled to respect. Hut few of those w-ho have been most decided in their n !• rtion of obsession or other preternatural or mirac- iil' ills manifestations have taken any pains to examine tlir adducible evidence. On the contran,', they have generally dismissed it with contempt, as unworthy of serious consideration. And Baader is surely well warranted when he complains of what he calls " Ra- tionalistic obscurantism and dogmatism" in this matter (Werke, IV, 109). Of late years the mag- netism to which this acute thinker was calling the at- tention of philosophers in the work we have cited, and more recently the phenomena of hypnotism and spirit- ism, have helped to bring the critics to a more rational attitude. And with the weakening of this credulous prejudice many of the difficulties raised against the demonic possession in the New Testament will natur- ally disappear.
The instances of obsession mentioned in the New Testament may be roughly divided into two classes. In the first group we are given some facts which, even apart from the use of rienionizerl or some equivalent tenn might suffice to show that it is a case of demonic
possession properly so called. Such are the cases of
the "man with an unclean spirit" in the synagogue at
Capharnaum (Mark, i) and the Gerasene demoniac
(Luke, xi). In both of these instances we have evi-
dence of the presence of an evil spirit who betrays
knowledge beyond the ken of the demonized person or
(in the latter case) manifests his power elsewhere after
he has been cast out. In the second group may be
placed those cases in which we are not given such dis-
tinct and unmistakable signs of true demonic posses-
sion, e. g. the woman who had a spirit of infirmity
(Luke, xiii, 11). Here, apart from the words, spirit,
and whom Satan hath bnumi, there is apparently noth-
ing to distinguish the case from an ordinary healing of
infirmity. A careful consideration of the medical
aspect of demonic possession has often been associated
with a denial of the demonic tigency. But this is by
no means necessary; and, rightly understood, the
medical evidence may even help to establish the truth
of the record. This has been done within the last few
years by Dr. Wm. Menzies Alexander in liis " Deraonic
Possession in the New Testament: Its Kclaticms, His-
torical, Medical, and Theological" (Edinburgh, 1902).
In his view, the Gospel records of the chief cases of
demonic possession exhibit all the symptoms of such
mental diseases as epilepsy, acute mania, and so on,
with such accuracy of detail that the narrative can
only owe its origin to a faithful report of the actual
facts. At the same time Dr. Alexander is equally
impressed by the cogency of the evidence for real
demonic possession at least in these cases. Even
those readers who are imable to accept his conclusions
— and in regard to later instances of obsession we are
unable to follow him — will find the book helpful and
suggestive and it may be commended to the attention
of Catholic theologians.
For authorities see modern titles cited at end of De\il. W. H. Kent.
Demonology. — As the name sufficiently indicates, demonology is the science or doctrine concerning de- mons. Both in its form and in its meaning it has an obvious analogy with theology, which is the science or doctrine about God. And with reference to the many false and dangerous fonns of this demonic science we may fitly adapt the well-known words of Albertus Magnus on the subject of theology and say of demon- ology, "A daemonibus docetur, de da}monibus docet, et ad diBmones ducit". — It is taught by the demons, it teaches about the demons, and it leads to the de- mons. — P^or very much of the literature that comes under this head of demonology is tainted with errors that may well owe their origin to the father of false- hood, and much of it again, especially those portions which have a practical purpose (what may be called the ascetical and mystical demonology) is designed to lead men to give themselves to the service of Satan. There is, of course, a true doctrine aliout demons or evil spirits, to wit that portion of Catholic theology which treats of the creation and fall of the rebel angels, and of the various ways in which these fallen spirits are permitted to tempt and afflict the children of men. But for the most part these questions will be dealt with elsewhere in this work. Here, on the con- trary, our chief concern is with the various ethnic, Jewish, and heretical systems of demonology. These systems are so many that it will be out of the question to deal with them all or to set forth their doctrines with completeness. And indeed a fidl treatment of these strange doctrines of demons might well seem somewhat out of place in these pages. It will be enough to give some intheation of the main features of a few of the more important systems in divers lands and in distant ages. This may enable the reader to appreciate the important part played by these ideas in the course of htmian history and their influence on the religion and morals and social life of the people.
