Nice Anne Rice?

Carl Olson lets fly here about novelist Anne Rice's latest anti Catholic tirade.  I have to admit that I really liked Anne Rice's books about Jesus. I was asked to interview her, and she very kindly sent me detailed answers to lots of questions I emailed her. She was polite and respectful to me as a priest and seemed like a really nice person.

However, I sensed a problem. When she was discussing women's ordination or homosexuality she was clearly tiptoeing through a personal minefield. Her answers were honest, but cagey..."I fully accept the church's teachings, but I personally wish they were different..." I felt she was being real careful in order to get good reviews from the Christians she hoped would buy her book. OK. You can be a faithful Catholic and feel such things. You can be a faithful Catholic and still try to be shrewd in how you handle interviews. That wasn't the real problem.

I think the real problem is her personality type. From her writing and her letters to me I could tell she was very much the intuitive, emotional, heart to heart kind of person. A sympathetic, loving and kind person, and a mama as well--she's simply allowed heart to triumph over head. To put it bluntly, she's a sentimentalist, and locked into a society where sentimentalism rules, she simply couldn't swim stronger than the sentimentalist undertow.  The mama bear instinct ruled and she couldn't bear to see her baby mistreated. Having spent years in the bleeding heart liberal world, a Rooster Cogburn Catholic Church was too much to take.

I think I understand and I'm genuinely sorry. After she publicly announced her renunciation of the Christian religion I wrote her another email saying how sorry I was to hear of her decision and reminding her that not all Christians or Catholics were idiotic, fundamentalist, homophobic bigots. I encouraged her to re-consider and admitted that sticking with the church required huge amounts of humility, stamina and good humor. Anne fell into the trap of mistaking Catholics for Catholicism, and then ruled against Catholicism because of the Catholics. Good heavens, if we all judged Catholicism on the Catholics we'd all come unstuck!

The problem is that, for whatever reason, we feel that we can be the judge of the church and not the other way around. We want the church to live up to our expectations, when in fact, we should be asking how we can ever live up to the church's expectations.

Beneath this problem is good old fashioned spiritual pride. Anne spotted the hateful hypocrites, the lying loonies, the uncaring apologists and pompous prelates and thought she was better than them. What she (and all of us) need to do is see these folks and mutter in shame, "Geesh, they're awful, but they're my brothers and we're all in the same lifeboat, so we'd better pull together." Anne couldn't do that, and like so many of her sort, thought she rose above it all, only now to end up saying stuff that's just as judgmental and shallow and uncaring as the people she was blaming.

Anyhow, one of the good things Anne contributed was a smart criticism of the modern Biblical critics. Her essay on the subject in her first Christ the Lord book was great. She wrote from the perspective of a historical novelist doing research, and a bit like C.S.Lewis, who criticized the Biblical critics as a literary critic, she revealed the naked emperors in the halls of theological academe for what they are.

The biggest problem for Anne now is that she has fallen into the same trap she accused of which she accused the New Testament scholars. She rightly said that they were creating a Jesus in their own image, or as someone has written, "They were writing autobiography as New Testament studies." Poor Anne has now done the same thing. Cut adrift from the authority of the Catholic Church she can only do what all the Protestants have done for the last 500 years: create a Jesus in her own image.

So Anne now 'follows Christ', but what Christ? It will be the loving, sympathetic teacher, gentle Jesus who is, well, somewhat effeminate really. Anne was a flower child in college, so her Jesus will be the kind of hippie Jesus we're all familiar with from that generation--a long haired, groovy kind of beach bum who meditates on mountaintops, mixes with down and outs and delivers a real cool anti establishment, John Lennon kind of sermon. Then when Anne or her son is 'persecuted' by the hard hearted, hypocritical religious leaders she'll understand how Jesus was persecuted too.

That's a real nice Jesus, and that kind of Jesus isn't unknown to the gospels, but remembering that heretics don't preach lies, they preach half truths, we have to say that the hippie, flower child 'give peace a chance' Jesus is only part of the story. Anne Rice needs to meet the Jesus who is also the Lord of Lords, the King of Kings--Christus Rex and Christus Pantacrator.

The Problems with Possession

She was sixteen years old. She knocked on my door early on a Saturday morning, disheveled and frightened. “There is something around me. It’s like a shadow or something and it talks to me. It’s weird and I’m scared!” I asked a few questions and found she had been hanging around with the members of a witch’s coven in the town. I picked up the phone to call a more experienced priest and she started screaming, “It’s inside me. It’s inside me!” At that point her appearance changed. The pretty teenaged girl looked like a malevolent and sick old woman. She started growling in a foreign language neither of us could understand. The other symptoms of demonic infestation soon manifested themselves, and fortunately the older, experienced priest arrived within minutes and conducted an exorcism then and there. He went through the ritual and when the holy water hit her she shrieked and returned to normal.

I witnessed this exorcism and never wish to even come close to such a thing again. Ever.

It led me to read more on the subject of the deliverance ministry, and what I learned about the realm of the diabolical is that it is impossible to specify much of anything about the realm of the diabolical. What I mean is that it is impossible to accurately classify and explain and analyze what is going on when dealing with demonic possession. There is so much that is unknown--so much that is complex and ambiguous.

This is true for several reasons: First of all, it is difficult to truly pin down anything in the spiritual realm because we are dealing with a realm of reality that is totally alien to our physical, materialistic assumptions. Analysis and categorization are poor tools when dealing with the spiritual realm because the spiritual realm operates according to different criteria and expectations. From our materialist perspective everything is ambiguous. We see through a glass darkly. The spiritual realm operates with a different set of causal factors. Behaviors are unpredictable and defy our attempts to classify and explain.


Secondly, we perceive the spiritual realm through the aspect of our personality which might be called Imagination. This is the part of our mind with which we dream and intuit and pray and contemplate. Consequently, this part of our mind uses a different language. Symbols and signs and mythopoeic images are used to communicate. Raw emotion and primal experiences are the language of this realm. Rationality, language and grammar break down. We are in a realm that cannot be experienced but not explained.


Thirdly, this realm of the Imagination is not only sub-linguistic, but it is extremely complex. We are in a vast unknown realm. "On the edge of a grimpen where there is no foothold" This realm within our perception is inter-knotted with emotions, rational thought, ancestral memories, personal memories, relationships present and past. It is influenced and interwoven with our physiology--our medical history, mind altering drink and drugs, addictions, tragedies and triumphs--in other words our whole self.


To complicate matters further, is there is a demonic element involved, then by definition, we are dealing with a deceiver. The devil transforms his appearance. He lies. He hides. He is a shapeshifter, he transposes and transmogrifies. One moment a beast from beyond the darkness and the next moment whispering sweet nothings as an angel of light. We are out of our depth, and he knows it.


This is why the exorcist must be expertly trained not only in the rite of exorcism, but in psychology. This is why he must consult with sympathetic mental health experts, counselors and others who are expert in discernment of spirits. Those who have written on this subject have attempted to classify the levels of demonic influence. The lists are tentative and the borders are porous. The classification is more that of a continuum of influence rather than any strict method of diagnosis.


The first level of demonic influence is temptation. This is what we all experience which is one step up from the simple temptations of everyday life. We may be hungry and tempted to steal a loaf of bread. This is simple temptation, and only part of human nature. Demonic influence comes in when the temptation is to do something truly vile, or to spend time planning and pre meditating on a sin and beginning to wallow in it.


The second level of demonic influence is obsession. This is when the soul, after indulging in the sin becomes obsessed with it. The person thinks about the sin, if not constantly, then frequently enough that their life begins to revolve around the sin. This is where many addictive behaviors can overlap with demonic influences. At this point the personality of the obsessed person may begin to change. The change may be dramatic and sudden, but more likely it is gradual. Even when gradual the change may manifest itself from time to time in a sudden and dramatic way. The personality may alter, but the demonic influence is outside the person.


Experts disagree about the third and fourth stages. Some say that what we normally think of as 'possession' with the dramatic and horrifying manifestations should better be called infestation. At this point the demon has entered the personality and all the symptoms are evident and the exorcist is summoned.


What is most disturbing is that some go on to explain that true possession is when the horrible symptoms disappear and the person seems to go back to 'normal' but what has happened is that the demon has taken true possession and is now lodged permanently and deeply within the personality and is hiding there. Such a deeply possessed person will not exhibit any dramatic and monstrous symptoms, but the person will 'live for the devil'. In other words, they will seem 'normal' but will pursue a sinful life without the slightest sense of guilt or shame. They will ridicule and (if pressured) exhibit a scorn and hatred of Christ and his disciples.


This is a debatable point because, of course, there are no obvious symptoms for these 'truly possessed' individuals. It is a frightening point as well because, if this is true, then there may well be very many individuals living among us who are truly and deeply possessed by the evil one. Because of the ambiguous nature of these diagnoses it is impossible to categorize neatly and certainly it is unwise to attempt a diagnosis of the spiritual condition of other individuals. Nevertheless, I have come across one or two people who seemed to me to be in this condition--one a totally charming and worldly man who seemed kindly to all, but who, beneath the surface, was quite evil. When the subject of religion ever came up he would go silent and it was like a shadow came over his face. If he ever spoke about religion it was with open scorn and ridicule.


What to do about it? This is why I rarely write on the subject--because the best thing to do about the devil is to laugh at him or ignore him. He's proud and hates that. Not to ignore him in disbelief of course. Be watchful at all times. He is prowling around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.


Keep him in the corner of your eye, but focus on Christ and his beautiful face. Live the Christian life with simplicity, vigor and peace. Pray without ceasing. Go to confession with joy and tears. Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness. Receive Christ in the sacraments and serve the Lord with gladness.


The devil will be enraged and run far from such a soul.

Is the New Translation More Reverent?

Will the new English translation of the liturgy make our worship more reverent? I doubt it. This doesn't mean that I am opposed to the new translation. From what I've seen so far it has its good points and its bad points. No translation is perfect, and I reckon we're swapping one set of problems for another. Don't get me wrong. I'm in favor of the new translation and have high hopes for its successful implementation.

However, we must imagine that a more dignified and more accurate translation of the Mass is going to automatically make Catholic worship reverent. Catholic worship isn't reverent or irreverent just because of the words you use. This should be obvious to anyone who has attended a reverently and carefully celebrated Novus Ordo Mass.

What is more important than the words is how the Mass is celebrated by both the priest and the people. I am quite sure that when the new Mass is introduced that Fr. Folkmass will still celebrate Mass in his usual game show host style while other priests will celebrate the Mass casually and carelessly. Many Americans will still shuffle into Mass late wearing shorts and flip flops. Comfort hymns and crooners with hand held microphones will still lead the music and politically correct former nuns will still bully everyone into singing protest anthems instead of hymns.

Mass isn't reverent simply because you start using lofty language that 'sounds religious'. True reverence is the fruit of a condition of heart. Reverence in worship is a by product of a certain type of Catholic mindset. It is not the automatic product of a particular form of words.

This is why I am not that optimistic about the new translation making Catholic worship more reverent. To understand the irreverence in much Catholic worship we have to probe much deeper than the form of words we use for worship. Catholic worship is too often irreverent because Catholics (priests and people) have stopped really believing the Catholic faith.

I'm sorry to call a spade a spade, but far too many Catholics don't actually believe in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. They believe in the fellowship meal. They don't believe in transubstantiation. They believe in 'the real presence' (a vague and flexible term which can mean practically anything) That's why Mass is irreverent--because they've changed it from a participation in the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, which takes them into the very presence of the throne room of the King of Kings to a cross between a protest march and a pot luck supper at which we sing campfire songs.

The new translation of the Mass will provide  more reverent language to those who are already reverent at Mass, but real change for the irreverent masses will come not with a change of words, but with a change of heart.

Aliens and Angels

Here is my latest for InsideCatholic--in which I discuss the existence of aliens and angels.

What I Keep Coming Back To

Mahler's Ruckert Lieder, the Cowper Madonna, Brideshead Revisited, Elgar's Dream of Gerontius, my sixteen year old daughter playing Chopin, T.S.Eliot's Four Quartets, red wine at nine, fresh bread in the morning, Therese of Lisieux, a brown lab and a black lab who greet me all a-wagging, my wife tired but happy, my Volvo motorcar, Dame Janet Baker in song, my fourteen year old son serving at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Mendlessohn's Elijah, Dante, George Herbert, my twelve year old son beating me at chess, roses, Beethoven's string quartets, the Rule of St Benedict, Compline sung by the monks of Quarr, my eighteen year old son running cross country with the wind in his face, my Honda motorcycle, swimming at six in summer, Brahms, memories of England better more than worse, Oxford and Rome.

Will You Help...

...advertise Gargoyle Code?

Do you have a blog? Would you help advertise my Lent book Gargoyle Code?

If you put an ad on your blog you may buy the book from me for half price. ($7.50 incl. p+p) Just email me for the code for the banner ad, then get back to me once the ad is up. I'll then advise you how to obtain the book.

SPECIAL OFFER: If you are a pastor why not buy multiple copies of Gargoyle Code for your parish? Email me and I will provide a very good price for bulk orders so that you can use sales of the book as a bit of a fund raiser.  Likewise if you have a special cause for which you are raising funds, be in touch. I can also supply artwork and copy for posters and advertising.

Bethel and Bethlehem

I am re-reading Patrick Harpur's book Daimonic Realities--a fascinating study of the other world from a thoughtful author who is not a Catholic. What intrigues me is how vague and ethereal all other religions are when it comes to the supernatural. They deal in myth and mystical and mysterious experiences of the supernatural, but everything remains foggy and fuzzy. Here a prophecy, there a prognostication. Here an apparition there a visit from the dead. Here a paranormal event, there a demonic infestation. Here a ghostly appearance, there a spooky visitation, a co incidence, a curious connection or an out of body experience.

Catholicism, on the other hand, is concrete, solid and substantial, but supernatural and spiritual at the same time. "Here," as Bl. John Henry Newman said, "is real religion." Here is a religion that holds in one person like, let us say, Bl. Teresa of Calcutta, the heights of mystical prayer and the depths of washing the sores of lepers in the gutter. Here is the universal transcendence of communion with angels and saints on the one hand, and the ordinary rough and tumble of getting on with your family, your friends and the 'not yet saints' who you have to deal with every day. Here is the Divine Son of God, the second person of the Holy and most glorious Trinity who is also the Son of Mary, the burning Babe of Bethlehem. Here is the logos, the energy and power by who all things were made and by whom all things consist who is also present in the most humble form in this bread and this wine on this altar in this church right here and right now at the hands of this priest who is most unworthy.

What sort of paradoxical and paradisaical religion is this? Who would every have dreamed it up? What a mass of seeming contradictions which, when put altogether validate each other and confirm the truth of each and every element which on their own could not stand, but together with the others stand as a monolithic and unpredictable truth down the ages. Next to this concrete and solid religion all else seems like fairyland. It seems like a tiptoe through make believe. Next to this concrete and solid, yet universal and transcendent religion the Protestant sects pale into shallow, emotionalism and inconsequential ephemera. Next to this concrete and substantial, yet universal and transcendent religion the New Age Gnostic sects and the airy fairy religions of the East seem abstract, vague and insubstantial.

There is something solid here. Through the sacraments we have connecting points with the vast ocean of the spiritual  realm. Through the ordinary rites of the church we have bridges into the unknown, and little portals to the other world.. Here the ladder of Jacob stretches from earth to heaven. Here angels ascend and descend. Here is Bethel--the doorstep--the threshold of heaven at Bethlehem--which means House of Bread.

Candlemass

Simeon by Rembrandt

A Song for Simeon
T.S. Eliot

Lord, the Roman hyacinths are blooming in bowls and
The winter sun creeps by the snow hills;
The stubborn season has made stand.
My life is light, waiting for the death wind,
Like a feather on the back of my hand.
Dust in sunlight and memory in corners
Wait for the wind that chills towards the dead land.

Grant us thy peace.
I have walked many years in this city,
Kept faith and fast, provided for the poor,
Have taken and given honour and ease.
There went never any rejected from my door.

Who shall remember my house, where shall live my children’s children
When the time of sorrow is come ?
They will take to the goat’s path, and the fox’s home,
Fleeing from the foreign faces and the foreign swords.

Before the time of cords and scourges and lamentation
Grant us thy peace.
Before the stations of the mountain of desolation,
Before the certain hour of maternal sorrow,
Now at this birth season of decease,
Let the Infant, the still unspeaking and unspoken Word,
Grant Israel’s consolation
To one who has eighty years and no to-morrow.

According to thy word,
They shall praise Thee and suffer in every generation
With glory and derision,
Light upon light, mounting the saints’ stair.
Not for me the martyrdom, the ecstasy of thought and prayer,
Not for me the ultimate vision.
Grant me thy peace.

(And a sword shall pierce thy heart,
Thine also).

I am tired with my own life and the lives of those after me,
I am dying in my own death and the deaths of those after me.
Let thy servant depart,
Having seen thy salvation.

Bultmann's New Clothes

Students of New Testament 101 will have come across the German Biblical scholar Rudolph Bultmann. One in a long line of modernist, Protestant theologians, Bultmann is famous for his attempt to 'de-mythologize' the New Testament. What this means is that he wanted to get rid of the troublesome and 'incredible' supernatural elements of the gospels.

It is from his way of thinking that we get the now famous interpretation of the feeding of the 5,000 that "the real miracle was that everyone shared their lunch with one another." Anyone with a little bit of imagination can get involved in the 'de-mytholization' game. The Virgin Birth? A beautiful and innocent girl became pregnant and gave birth to a great teacher. He was so great that pagan myths of the god/man being born of a virgin were later ascribed to her. We now know this could not have happened, and we learn that innocence and beauty are always to be valued." The Ascension? "It's a construction of the early church. As the disciples worked through their grief and came to accept the tragic death of their leader they came to realize a wonderful truth: that the noble and beautiful teachings of Jesus Christ have a new, and transcendent quality..." Blah blah blah and so forth.

The modernist re-interpreters of the gospel were seemingly well intended. They wanted to rid the New Testament of it's primitive, first century supernaturalism--believing that this would make the gospel accessible for modern people. What the goof balls didn't understand is that modern people--just like people in the first century--actually want their religion to be supernatural. That's what religion is all about. Taking the supernatural out of religion is like playing tennis without the net. 'Modern' has nothing to do with it. With supreme arrogance they seemed to think that ancient people found miracles far easier to believe than modern people. This is dumb. Ancient people were smart too. They knew miracles were difficult just like modern people. The people of the first century understood that virgins don't get pregnant, and walking on water doesns't usually happen, and that feeding 5,000 people with one lunch is not an everyday occurrence. Err. That's why they recorded the miracles in the first place--because they were extraordinary. In other words, because they were miracles.

Why were so many seemingly smart people taken in by this naked emporer? Just because the guy was German and had a name that had two 'n's at the end and smoked a pipe and looked smart? Maybe. Of course it has all to do with the philosophical trends that had been going on in the West since the 'enlightenment', but that's another topic.

Back to Bultmannnn. Why didn't anyone see the most glaring error of all? Bultmann and his gang of intellecutal bullies were all for 'de-mythologizing' the New Testament. But the whole obvious point is that the New Testament, and the documents of the early church do not present the gospel stories as 'myth' at all. They present them as history. To be sure, the stories work on us as myth, but as J.R.R.Tolkien said to C.S.Lewis, "They work on us like all the other myths, except they really happened."

What Bultmann wanted to do was to steer around the historical accounts of the miraculous--to leave them in place as 'marvelous stories' but assuming that the supernatural simply couldn't have happened like that, they wanted to draw people to the 'real meaning' of the stories. The implication, of course, is that the events didn't really happen at all, or if they happened they were ordinary events that the 'aw gawrsh!' stupid early church members interpreted as miraculous (like everybody sharing their lunch becoming a miraculous multiplication of food) What Bultmann the de-mythologizer actually did therefore, was to turn what was reported as real events and historical accounts into--hey presto!--myths. A myth being a beautiful (but fictional) story with transcendent meaning to guide us through life.

Bultmann's 'great accomplishment' therefore was to turn historical events into myth while claiming to "de-mythologize" them.

If this subterfuge, double talk, intellectual obfuscation and deception isn't direct from the pit I don't know what is.

Just as I Am

Just as I am, without one plea,
But that Thy blood was shed for me,
And that Thou bidst me come to Thee,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, and waiting not
To rid my soul of one dark blot,
To Thee whose blood can cleanse each spot,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, though tossed about
With many a conflict, many a doubt,
Fightings and fears within, without,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, poor, wretched, blind;
Sight, riches, healing of the mind,
Yea, all I need in Thee to find,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, Thou wilt receive,
Wilt welcome, pardon, cleanse, relieve;
Because Thy promise I believe,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, Thy love unknown
Hath broken every barrier down;
Now, to be Thine, yea, Thine alone,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, of that free love
The breadth, length, depth, and height to prove,
Here for a season, then above,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come!

Some feedback please. Do you know this precious hymn? If so, what memories of it do you have? Are they good memories or bad memories? If they are good memories, which are your favorite verses? If you don't like the hymn why not? The story of the hymn and it's author along with the rather mawkish tune (Woodworth) used in American Evangelical worship is here. On this page you can also find a much nicer tune--usually used in Anglican worship called 'Saffron Walden'. For earlier posts on church music and hymns check out the label 'church music' in the left sidebar.

Innocence and Imagination

St Therese as Joan of Arc

I think there is a line in George Bernard Shaw's play St Joan in which the inquisitors say with exasperation about Joan's visions, "Joan, Joan! These visions are all in your imagination!" To which she replies, "But of course! How else would God communicate with me?"

One of the major problems in our society and in our church is that we are suspicious of imagination. There are two forms of imagination. The primary is that part of us--our Soul--which connects us with all that is mysterious and mystical and intuitive and universal. This we might call Imagination with an "I". The second is derived from the first and is the lower form of imagination--that faculty whereby we envision a solution, dream up a new future, devise the plot to a story, see in our mind's eye what someone is describing or create something beautiful and amazing in our heads.

Our society and our church is suspicious and uncomfortable with both. Instead we prefer the utilitarian solution. We want facts. We want statistics. We trust engineers and mathematicians and scientists. We want proof. In religion we want certainty. We want dogma. We want rules. We want regulations. Do not misunderstand me. We need all this concrete, solid and "sure" stuff, but without Imagination--without contact with the Spiritual realm and all that is greater than us, transcendent and awesom and wonder-full we are left with dull facts.

In religion we are suspicious of Imagination as well. We pull back from the mystical visions of the night. We draw away from the fiery chariot, the earthquake, wind and fire or the still, small voice of Love. We run from the immensity of Imagination--the power of the transcendent and the vast, swirling depths of the ocean of the impossible.

In place of the prophetic vision, the mystical transformation and the trembling ranks of angels we have substituted emotionalism. We mistake the sweet, sentimental comfort song for a real experience of the overwhelming Love of God. We accept the feel good self help sermon as a substitute for the transformation by the tongues of fire--fire that promises to transform only by burning away all the wood, hay and stubble in our lives. We opt for the false comfort of universalism--in which everyone gets to go to Heaven because God (who we have made into a sort of celestial Colonel Sanders) is too nice to send anyone to Hell.

What is required along with a renewal of the Spiritual Imagination is the renewal of Innocence. By this I do not mean naivete, or immaturity, but the sort of child like innocence demanded by the gospel. Along with out distrust of Imagination is a cynicism and skepticism which destroys the soul. The Innocence of which I am speaking is the sort of cheerful innocence which regards miracles as not only possible, but to be expected. This child like innocence sees wonderful connections between things the rationalist would never connect.
Therese (who once played the part of Joan of Arc) as a child once saw the stars in the shape of the letter 'T' and exclaimed with delight that her name was written in heaven.

C.S.Lewis once wrote, "The saints, the poets and the children were right." They had this Innocence and Imagination, and so their hearts were open to Eternity.

The Rite

Exorcism movies are now becoming so abundant that they have almost become a sub genre within the horror genre of movies. We're all becoming familiar with the twitching fingers, the rolling eyes, the growls, the supernatural gymnastics, blasphemies, spitting nails and so forth. This is not to minimize the reality and horror of demon possession, but I think movies like this have a double effect. On the one hand, they remind us of the fact of demonic infestation and the reality of the supernatural. On the other hand, we can become calloused. "Oh yes," we yawn, "yet another movies about young girls with devils inside them. Ho hum."

Anthony Hopkins has specialized in roles of men on the edge. On the edge of madness, on the edge of evil, on the edge of the supernatural, on the edge of remarkable goodness. He comes through again with a riveting performance--this time of Fr Lucas Trevan, a down to earth, yet otherworldly exorcist based in Rome. Young American seminarian Michael Kovak (Colin O'Donoghue) goes to Rome to take a course in exorcism and gets involved with the exorcist and his clients. The movies is uneven at places with a plot line that wanders, but on the whole it is a good account of the realities of exorcism. It's a dramatic movie, so it goes for the high drama and what we don't see is the more mundane exorcisms, we do glimpse the dreary hard work of repeated ministries and exorcisms that can take days, weeks or months as the exorcist works time and again with a young girl possessed by an especially nasty demon.

So as a movie, it's pretty good. I like the Roman setting, the cool old architecture and atmosphere of Rome, the fine acting by both Hopkins and Donoghue. The directing is suitably atmospheric and the drama/horror managed in a way that is larger than life, but not too much so. There were little problems with verisimilitude church wise, but on the whole 8 out of 10.

What intrigues me most about exorcism movies though, is how they undermine the rationalistic, materialistic mindset of our modern world. Whenever an exorcism movie comes out what sets it apart from your usual horror film is that it is invariably prefaced with those somber words, "What you will see is based on true events." Demonic possession is one of those anomalies in the modern world which just "isn't supposed to happen". According to modern materialists there simply is no such thing as demons. But after all is said and done, once all the psychiatric tests are run, once all the medical diagnoses are complete, once the person is totally assessed mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally, a condition exists which cannot be explained any other way. The personality really is taken over by an obscene, monstrous and repulsive entity totally alien to the infested person's mind and heart.

If this is so, then it is a reminder that our watertight, materialistic little world is a little bit leaky. There are things out there that we cannot account for. Reality is rubbery. What we thought was solid and 'real' and dependable turns out to be ephemeral, unreliable and unpredictable. The universe is open ended. There are possibilities we cannot predict and connections that we can never explain. There are patterns and systems that are far greater and more mysterious than our silly, narrow scientific minds can deal with.

If this is so, then religion is the realm of interaction with these things. In religion we grasp the poor tools we have to deal with the unseen world. It is through religion that we make a transaction with the Almighty. It is there that we deal with demons, encounter angels and joust for the salvation of souls. It is there that we face the Realities beyond our small realities. It is there, in the everyday routine of a priest's work, and in the everyday prayers and sacrifices of the faithful that we battle unseen forces and wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers and the forces of evil in the unseen world.

All the worse then, when religion is turned into some sort of self help therapy session to make obscenely rich middle class Americans feel even better about themselves. All the worse then, when religion is turned into some sort of ideology to make the world a better place and to dish out greeting card sentiments to people already satiated with self love and sentimentality.

No, I'm for what I call 'crunchy Catholicism'--and more on that later...