• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Guest Recommendation: A Real Exorcist

Forums New posts
C

CathGal

Paranormal Novice
You guys should interview Fr. Ashcraft. He's a traditional Byzantine Catholic priest who is an exorcist. He's mentioned here: http://orthodoxwiki.org/Exorcism

And this is his website: http://www.wix.com/fathera/sarum

I heard him speak once at a convention and he was incredibly fascinating. The stories of actual exorcisms he told were some frightening events. I know he's granted interviews for a few other paranormal programs. He has some really interesting theories about UFO's, aliens, and demons. Anyway, I'd love to hear him on your show and so very few exorcists ever speak out since Malachi Martin died (who was a sedevacantist like Fr. Ashcraft), that this is a real find for our community.

Cindy
 
The Father Martin and Art Bell interviews are classics. No matter your belief it is good talk radio. I don't know if Art was ever better. "maybe" when he had Dr. Kaku on he approached it. He seemed to rise to good guest. Don't know this guy but I'll check out the link. I found an old Art Bell and Malchai Martin interview concerning a "murder" many years ago. It had few if any "supernatural" elements but was just a facsinating interview.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
Exorcisms are basically an archaic practice of trying to cure psychological afflictions through religion.
Click to expand...

Is that just another pronouncement, Angelo? Maybe you could frame that as your question to the gentleman, if he appears on the show.

Below is an excerpt from the "The Roman Ritual — 1952 A.D." Please note the section in bold/italics.

PART XIII. EXORCISM

CHAPTER I

GENERAL RULES CONCERNING EXORCISM

1. A priest — one who is expressly and particularly authorized by the Ordinary — when he intends to perform an exorcism over persons tormented by the devil, must be properly distinguished for his piety, prudence, and integrity of life. He should fulfill this devout undertaking in all constancy and humility, being utterly immune to any striving for human aggrandizement, and relying, not on his own, but on the divine power. Moreover, he ought to be of mature years, and revered not alone for his office but for his moral qualities.
2. In order to exercise his ministry rightly, he should resort to a great deal more study of the matter (which has to be passed over here for the sake of brevity), by examining approved authors and cases from experience; on the other hand, let him carefully observe the few more important points enumerated here.
3. Especially, he should not believe too readily that a person is possessed by an evil spirit; but he ought to ascertain the signs by which a person possessed can be distinguished from one who is suffering from some illness, especially one of a psychological nature. (From the emended text of the 1952 edition.) Signs of possession may be the following: ability to speak with some facility in a strange tongue or to understand it when spoken by another; the faculty of divulging future and hidden events; display of powers which are beyond the subject's age and natural condition; and various other indications which, when taken together as a whole, build up the evidence.
 
The Pair of Cats said:
Is that just another pronouncement, Angelo? Maybe you could frame that as your question to the gentleman, if he appears on the show.

Below is an excerpt from the "The Roman Ritual — 1952 A.D." Please note the section in bold/italics.

PART XIII. EXORCISM

CHAPTER I

GENERAL RULES CONCERNING EXORCISM

1. A priest — one who is expressly and particularly authorized by the Ordinary — when he intends to perform an exorcism over persons tormented by the devil, must be properly distinguished for his piety, prudence, and integrity of life. He should fulfill this devout undertaking in all constancy and humility, being utterly immune to any striving for human aggrandizement, and relying, not on his own, but on the divine power. Moreover, he ought to be of mature years, and revered not alone for his office but for his moral qualities.
2. In order to exercise his ministry rightly, he should resort to a great deal more study of the matter (which has to be passed over here for the sake of brevity), by examining approved authors and cases from experience; on the other hand, let him carefully observe the few more important points enumerated here.
3. Especially, he should not believe too readily that a person is possessed by an evil spirit; but he ought to ascertain the signs by which a person possessed can be distinguished from one who is suffering from some illness, especially one of a psychological nature. (From the emended text of the 1952 edition.) Signs of possession may be the following: ability to speak with some facility in a strange tongue or to understand it when spoken by another; the faculty of divulging future and hidden events; display of powers which are beyond the subject's age and natural condition; and various other indications which, when taken together as a whole, build up the evidence.
Click to expand...

What I said is what I believe, and I figured it would illicit the usual reaction, which is great for discussion. However, there's no need for you to buy what I said, as we usually disagree anyway. There's been nothing shown that shows that any "exorcism" has ever been anything demonic, unless one believes such things. So I guess it's all a matter of perception and if the exorcism cures the person, well that's pretty good. Unfortunately, if medication is necessary, the "demon" will usually return.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
What I said is what I believe, and I figured it would illicit the usual reaction, which is great for discussion. However, there's no need for you to buy what I said, as we usually disagree anyway. There's been nothing shown that shows that any "exorcism" has ever been anything demonic, unless one believes such things. So I guess it's all a matter of perception and if the exorcism cures the person, well that's pretty good. Unfortunately, if medication is necessary, the "demon" will usually return.
Click to expand...

Well I agree with you..up to a point. There are probably very few real cases of true demonic possession with the need for the Roman Ritual or any other denominational method of such. But this does not mean that none exist or have existed. There is abundant chronicled evidence.
What i had taken exception with was your misleading and inaccurate statement in your initial post in this thread.
Exorcisms are basically an archaic practice of trying to cure psychological afflictions through religion.
Click to expand...
At the point an exorcism is called for, the prosaic and mundane (including the full psychological testing by trained church psychologists) have been thoroughly examined and exhausted.
 
Sorry Phil, I didn't mean for anyone to take exception to what I said. Growing up in a Catholic household I heard all about demonic possessions and it scared the crap out of me.
I don't think that demons actually exist, so I find the exorcism thing hard to swallow. However, as long as no one gets hurt, I think it's harmless - still scary though.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
Sorry Phil, I didn't mean for anyone to take exception to what I said. Growing up in a Catholic household I heard all about demonic possessions and it scared the crap out of me.
I don't think that demons actually exist, so I find the exorcism thing hard to swallow. However, as long as no one gets hurt, I think it's harmless - still scary though.
Click to expand...

No worries Angel. And you are right it is a very scary thought indeed.
 
Its interesting you mention psychology. One of the main points of his talk was pointing out the various mental problems that people would assume are demonic activity. He set very clear and specific criteria for what is real demonic stuff and what isnt. He also said that like 99 percent of the cases brought to him have other explanations. He is pretty low key and unassuming when you meet hi too. Not the movie stereotype I expected at all. LOL
 
CathGal said:
Its interesting you mention psychology. One of the main points of his talk was pointing out the various mental problems that people would assume are demonic activity. He set very clear and specific criteria for what is real demonic stuff and what isnt. He also said that like 99 percent of the cases brought to him have other explanations. He is pretty low key and unassuming when you meet hi too. Not the movie stereotype I expected at all. LOL
Click to expand...


I truly reccommend a book called "People of the lie" by M. Scott Peck. It has a very "chilling" encounter between the author who was a professional mental health expert and his first "recongniton" of abject evil. Also, Bed by the Window" by the same author.
 
tyder001 said:
I truly reccommend a book called "People of the lie" by M. Scott Peck. It has a very "chilling" encounter between the author who was a professional mental health expert and his first "recongniton" of abject evil. Also, Bed by the Window" by the same author.
Click to expand...

I read Peck's book. Freaky!
 
I think demons are so scary because they represent centuries of religions fine-tuning the dark fears of humans and turning them back on us. It's like they've distilled a collection of bed time ghost stories and promoted the best ones as 'demons' with superhero powers. This is supported by anthropology whereby Amazonian tribes have concepts of ghosts, but no hierarchy of demons.

Think of them as the stick with heaven as the carrot. Perhaps it isn't as cynical as all that? Back in the 5th Century with the onset of organised Christianity or the 7th with Islam, we had influential people who saw the world as good and evil. These people have helped to lead the world to where (and what) it is now. As they imagined evil lurking in the minds of men and orchestrating everything, they shared their magical thinking and fears with the rest of us. How many Inquisitions or religious wars does it take to instil these ideas into the human consciousness?

I've no doubt that most people involved in the subject have a complete belief in it all. It's worth pointing out that even as recently as the 19th Century, people were blaming 'the forces of evil' for what we now understand as abnormal psychology and mental illness. We know that 'succubi' can be defeated with regular sleep patterns. We know that shit humans and circumstances are responsible for the worst crimes and not demons. There's a large body of research showing the backgrounds of 'evil' people and their brain structure share similar features.

Whist clinical psychology has got its skeletons in the closet (electro-convulsive therapy?), in the long term, it's likely to be more successful than throwing water on people and chanting at them.

An exorcist could make an interesting interviewee. He or she'll have some tales that give us the shivers and Halloween is creeping up to make it timely.
 
I agree Kandinsky. I think it would be a great show at this time of year even more. Do the producers ever read here for suggestions though?
 
CathGal said:
I agree Kandinsky. I think it would be a great show at this time of year even more. Do the producers ever read here for suggestions though?
Click to expand...

Yeah a spooky Paracast for Halloween could be fun as long as it's not the guy with the talking trumpet from last year. The fella who focuses on the Gettysburg ghosts does a good interview and has audio too....I'd love a Paracast with him.

The producers do read the suggestions, but I guess it's not so easy as just getting anyone we want on. Earlier in the year, I was in touch with Jerry Cohen (The Research of Jerry Cohen) hoping he'd be interested in being a guest and Gene was open to the idea too. Jerry's known all the big names in ufology and had a flying saucer sighting in the 60s. When I asked, he politely declined because he's got more important things in his life...family and playing music.

I know that's only one example, but I realised how many factors come into play trying to book guests. It must be even harder for the show trying to fill the slot every week.
 
A trumpet? That sounds...well...dumb. lol Not as dumb as some of the stuff on C2C lately tho! ugh!

I sent the padre an email asking if he did radio shows and he said he does them when asked, but he doesnt get asked lots because he's not in the public eye much. So if one of the producers is reading this thread please, please, please contact him. It would be a great show. I used the email at his website that I posted at the start of thios thread to get ahold of him.
 
I still think that Freud and especially his scholar Jung got it right, at least as much as we comprehend it. 'Believe' in something indeed seems to give 'things' power, that is if one believes in a collective unconscious. I would go as far as saying that all western 'magick' systems build on that belief.
 
dyingsun said:
I still think that Freud and especially his scholar Jung got it right, at least as much as we comprehend it. 'Believe' in something indeed seems to give 'things' power, that is if one believes in a collective unconscious. I would go as far as saying that all western 'magick' systems build on that belief.
Click to expand...


I agree on much of that statement. :) Don't know if I would go quite as far as far as all western "magic" systems but it's certainly a valid idea to discuss and think about. I think we do give "power" to objects and statements and guru's. There is an experiment (I would venture to guess some others on here know more about it than I do.) where some people (I think it may have been college students) made up a biography for a person. They did the whole life from birth to death including marriage, children and work and education. Then they used a Quija Board and actually "made contact" with an enegy that "mimicked" the actual bio of the person they had made up. Wild! The human mind is much more than grey matter and consciouness is much more than the firings of a brain. I don't know if we live after death. Freud didn't think so but Jung did think so. However, neither had the traditional Christian worldview. I found a rare (yeah, I know everything says rare on youtube :) ) but this was really rare. Anyway, a rare interview with Jung. He expressed no actual belief as far as a black and white statement. But, he did express that he anticpated (as did his older patients) continuing the "eternal journey" (my phrase, not his) once the body dies. He was a brilliant man and a very diverse person. Anyway, back to the subject I seem to be rambling this morning. Gotta get my coffee. :)
 
The talk I heard Fr.Ashcraft give went into various mental illnesses and even potentially self generated altered states that can mask as demonic activity. So it doesnt look like you're far from the mark on some of this stuff tyder.
 
Back
Top