Posted on 05/01/2005 8:59:25 AM PDT by sinkspur
Back in the 1970s, when possession and exorcism were the cinematic and fictional flavor of the era -- one that historian Martin Marty appropriately called “the silly season” -- it fell to my lot to conduct a pre-publication review of Malachi Martin’s sensational book Hostage to the Devil. I was allied in this with an internationally celebrated clinical psychologist. Working independently, our conclusion was the same: Martin’s five “cases” were fabrications of an inventive but disturbed mind, lacking all psychological, historical, theological and pastoral credibility.
Some time later, I interviewed Malachi Martin on television. A former priest, Martin had left the Jesuit order under cloudy conditions, to say the least. (The sordid details were described in Robert Blair Kaiser’s agonized 2002 memoir, Clerical Error: A True Story.) In person, I found Martin to be a clever, charming, engaging Irish rogue who evaded every effort to document the instances of possession he so graphically described. In the end, my earlier suspicion that Martin was a deeply disturbed individual was strongly reinforced.
A decade later, when M. Scott Peck’s second book, People of the Lie, was published, I was appalled to find that he, a newly committed Christian of a vaguely evangelical stripe, had accepted and endorsed Martin’s fictional ravings as accurate and instructive case studies. Now, 20 years later, Dr. Peck has returned to the topic of possession, still idolizing the late ex-Jesuit, who died in 1999, and to whom the popular psychiatrist not only dedicates Glimpses of the Devil but draws on exclusively for reference.
Insouciant in his ignorance of the real history of and the extensive literature on possession phenomena, Dr. Peck hails Martin as “the greatest expert on the subject of possession and exorcism in the English-speaking world” and “brilliant,” despite his own misgivings and warnings from colleagues that Martin was a sociopath. The psychiatrist’s resolute adulation of Martin is thus both disturbing and misleading. Despite Dr. Peck’s claim that he was the most famous exorcist in the world, Malachi Martin had no discernible training, expertise or even adequate knowledge of the history or ministry of exorcism in -- or out of -- the Catholic faith he once professed but which he bitterly turned against at the end of his unhappy life. Moreover, by Dr. Peck’s own frequent admission, Martin was a liar and manipulator.
Not surprisingly, Martin went on to write several novels as well as pseudo-histories such as The Jesuits and The Final Conclave. And it must be admitted that Martin had a gift for writing as he did for gab. But as a theologian and pastoral minister, Martin was a fraud. Dr. Peck’s choice of a mentor in regard to possession and exorcism is therefore a multiple disaster.
Dr. Peck’s book describes in copious detail his attempt to exorcise two women who were his patients. Following Martin, Dr. Peck attributes possession to indulgence in forms of belief or behavior that he disapproves of, in the case of “Jersey Babcock,” both spiritualism (or “neo-spiritualism”) and interest in the teachings of Edgar Cayce. In that of “Beccah Armitage,” he considers a number of precipitating factors that led her to evidently schizophrenic experiences and self-destructive behavior.
Even in Jersey’s case, Dr. Peck seems torn between two explanations for her condition -- her involvement with New Age spiritualist cults versus her passive consent to having been sexually molested by her father when she was 12. Dr. Peck never decides between them, nor does he suggest that some sort of synergy between these events occasioned her “possession.” He seems, rather, to opt for either explanation at different moments in his narrative. In Jersey’s case, the exorcism Dr. Peck imposes might be called moderately successful, although she is not freed from delusional thinking. In that of Beccah, her last state is ultimately not only worse than the first, but she dies at her own hand.
It is hardly novel for ideologues to press alleged demonic phenomena into service, beginning in the late Middle Ages and reaching a climax in the witchcraft trials of the 17th century that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocents. The trials and executions at Salem, Mass., in 1692 still provide an instructive case in point. Dr. Peck seems oblivious, on the other hand, to the persuasive role played by suggestion and especially hypnosis in inducing dissociative states. In his enthusiasm to enter the lists as an exorcist, he too easily dismisses dissociative identity disorder (formerly known as multiple personality disorder) as a simpler explanation and more easily treated condition. Far from being discredited, moreover, it is still listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (IV) of the American Psychiatric Association.
Dr. Peck’s dismissal rests on his claim that he had never seen a case of multiple personality. But he similarly admits that he had never encountered a case of possession before leaping to the conclusion that one of his patients was possessed. Despite his endorsement of differential diagnosis, he arguably failed quite dramatically to utilize it in either of the instances he discusses, at least one of which ended in failure and tragedy. By attempting to persuade, even “trick” his patients into accepting Christianity and even to study Christian theology, Dr. Peck also seems to have transgressed the boundaries of professional ethics. But this is a matter for his peers to evaluate.
“Beware the man of one book!” said Thomas Aquinas (perhaps). Here, clearly, it would have been wiser by far for Dr. Peck to consult more widely than Hostage to the Devil. And if one is tempted to read something by M. Scott Peck, choose The Road Less Traveled.
Fr. Richard Woods, OP, is professor of theology at Dominican University, Chicago.
This is an excellent article. Thanks for posting it.
Regards,
TS
The fact that Dr Peck Idolizes Martin says it all.
Sound to me that Dr Peck may have been possessed also.
Good article.
Satan is very tricky!
ANOTHER KIND OF LOVE: Homosexuality & Spirituality, by Fr. Richard Woods OP. Chicago: Thos. More Press, 1977. 163 pp $8.95; Doubleday Image paperback, rev. 1978, 155 pp $1.95. A Dominican priest's observations on and recommendations for a loving ministry with gay men.
There are currently three legitimate books on exorcism;
Gabriel Amorth's An Exorcist Tells his Story
Gabriel Amorth's An Exorcist: More Stories
Malachi Martin's Hostage to the Devil.
All three of the above books are in perfect concordance with Catholic teaching and each other in the definition of possession, and the theology of possession and exorcism
Both of Peck's books, on the other hand, are bizarre anomolies which are at odds with scripture and the faith of the church fathers. Even though he pays lip service to Fr. Martin, Peck seems to believe we can battle preternatural beings through an application of human willpower.
Strange that the National Uncatholic Reporter, in it's craven hatred of Fr. Martin, trashes Peck's book- Peck actually serves their horizontal church agenda quite well.
the witchcraft trials of the 17th century that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocents.
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS???!!! This sounds like the ravings of an anti-Christian liar.
Good find!
Martin's view of the Jesuits is very much on the mark.
Scott Peck is Bill Moyers lite. Another raving liberal with zero dedication to facts.
I believe Fr. Malachai Martin was still allowed to say Mass privately. He petitioned the Vatican to allow him to leave the Jesuit order. Fr. Malachi was a deeply traditional Catholic priest. He had been an exorcist for many years, and at the Vatican for many years also. He was critical of some of the things going on in the Catholic Church hierarchy, but not of the current Pope John Paul II. Fr. Malachai often said that there was black smoke in the Vatican, meaning that some of the clerics there were actually not on the side of Jesus and the church.
It's curious that Cardinal Ratzinger petitioned JPII three times for retirement, and everytime JPII requested that Ratzinger stay as he needed him. I think JPII knew he could trust Cardinal Ratzinger and not some of the others. In fact, It almost seems as though JPII orchestrated the election of his successor by keeping Benedict XVI in Rome so all the Cardinals knew him very well. That is what gave him such a strong base of support going into the conclave.
Thanks for that. There's no such thing as disinterested analysis anymore, is there? Between John Allen and this man, The National Catholic Reporer should go public.
Fr. Malachi Martin was asked if he feared for his life since writing "Windswept House". Fr. Martin said that he was but was too old to change his ways. Father Martin soon met his death under very suspicious circumstances. He was found unconscious and bleeding in his home with hard wood fragments imbedded in his skull. In a coma, he regained consciousness just briefly enough to declare that it was a murder attempt but that he did not get a chance to see who did it. Fr. Malachi Martin fell back into coma and died on July 27, 1999
You continue to slur John Allen with your juvenile and snide implication that he is gay.
He is not gay; he is very much a married man.
Malachi Martin was a mental case and a master manipulator. His "historical" novels are embellished with fiction and are made to sound believeable.
If one is not a conspiracy theorist, I don't understand the fascination with him.
ROTFL!
exactly.. or Marrianne Williamson menthol...
Robert Blair Kaiser is Fr. Martin's chief calumnator and another certified liberal whack job. Didn't they nab him with a big butterfly net and throw him in a psych ward for a few years for persistent delusions and paranoia?
Oh my error that is Fr Wood, not Fr Woody. ;-}
Yes he is. Have you seen post #4?
:-D
Have you read them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.