Quantcast

Inner Awareness

An exorcist priest must be clairvoyant, too

By |

A front page news item in the June 12, 2013, issue of the Inquirer about a Roman Catholic priest exorcist caught my attention and interest.

According to the news item written by Jocelyn R. Uy, Rome-based theologian and exorcist Fr. Joseph Iannuzzi advised his Filipino Catholic audience during his series of lectures to “wear scapulars and the Benedictine cross, use holy water, oil or salt” to protect themselves against evil. These are called sacramentals, which refer “to sacred objects, actions or blessings that give grace to believers through the prayers of the Church.”

Medieval slant

What caught my attention was the obvious medieval slant of his thinking, in which he blamed the devil for almost everything bad that man experiences on earth.

“Any sense of fear or anxiety is an evil spirit,” he was quoted as saying. “Even nightmares might be the doing of the devil.”

As I have often said, I really pity the poor devil in this country, because he is always blamed by the clergy for something he may not be responsible for, or credited for something he may not have done.

Can you imagine blaming the devil for such common psychological conditions as anxieties and nightmares? I am quite sure even Fr. Iannuzzi must have experienced anxiety or nightmares at least once in his life. If he has gone through Manila traffic, he cannot escape being anxious or having nightmares! Are these the works of diabolical forces?

During the medieval era, anything strange that couldn’t be explained rationally was attributed to the devil, such as seeing the future, hearing voices or receiving messages from the dead. If the office of the Holy Inquisition still existed today, people experiencing such things would surely have been burned at the stake.

Special dispensation

Another thing that may be worth pointing out is that not every Catholic priest is an exorcist, or knows how to cast out evil from houses or from possessed persons. To be an exorcist priest requires training and special dispensation from the bishop.

A priest’s mere blessing of a haunted place with holy water is not always enough to drive out evil spirits. We have gone to a haunted house that has been blessed three times by a Catholic priest, and yet the evil spirits still remained there. Not only that, when we visited the place, there were more evil spirits manifesting themselves than before.

To be a successful exorcist, one must be a clairvoyant, too—that is, one whose Third Eye is open and who can see and communicate with the spirits. Otherwise, it is a useless exercise.

This is the reason I don’t do exorcism by myself, I am not that clairvoyant. I always go with a proven clairvoyant who knows how to deal with negative entities and can actually see them.

However, positive or benign entities should not be exorcised or forced out of a place because they do no harm, although they may initially scare people who don’t understand them. Often, they can be gently persuaded to leave the person or place and move on.

It is not clear from the news item if Fr. Iannuzzi is a clairvoyant or not. If he is not, then he is as blind as the victims of the evil spirits he is trying to exorcise.

Note:

Attend my next Basic ESP and Intuition Development Seminar on June 29-30 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and my next Practical Mind Dynamics Seminar on July 13-14 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at Rm. 308 Prince Plaza I, Legazpi St., Greenbelt, Makati City. For details, call tel. nos. 8107245/ 8159890 or 0908-3537885. E-mail jaimetlicauco@yahoo.com. Visit www.jimmylicauco.com


Follow Us




Recent Stories:

Complete stories on our Digital Edition newsstand for tablets, netbooks and mobile phones; 14-issue free trial. About to step out? Get breaking alerts on your mobile.phone. Text ON INQ BREAKING to 4467, for Globe, Smart and Sun subscribers in the Philippines.

  • emomarcelo

    Why does a respectable newspaper publish a “mangkukulam’s” column. Stupidity and ignorance should be eradicated not encouraged.

    • realitystrikes

      Because it sells to people with nothing better to do, and who have an urgent need to escape reality.

      • Mon Sparks

        Poor you.

      • realitystrikes

        How so?

    • OneUp

      Perhaps Inquirer is respectable because it’s open-minded and shows articles for a broad range of readers.

      It’s simple, if you don’t want it then don’t read it. I don’t go to the Showbiz section and trolls the columns because of their nonsense gossips. Don’t make your life harder. Go only to the articles you want to read.

      • realitystrikes

        The issue here is not whether we want to read it or not. This is a national publication publishing fairy tales as if they were true, written by an author with a financial interest (“Attend my Seminar…”) in their propagation.

      • OneUp

        Just like I said. Inquirer publishes articles for a broad range of readers. If it’s a “fairy tale” or not is up to the people. That’s your opinion and others don’t have that. If other people like reading it then let them. You don’t see Licauco’s avid readers forcing you to read his articles.

      • realitystrikes

        Actually, whether clairvoyance is factual or not, is not “up to the people.” And it’s not my opinion (nor yours) either.

      • OneUp

        Yes, I could agree with you there. Just like what Licauco is always saying “There are always three sides to any controversy: ‘Your side, my side, and the correct side!’”

      • realitystrikes

        Once again, that’s not the point. Whether e.g. clairvoyance is true or not, is not a matter of opinion. And objectively (according to science) it’s untrue. But here it is being propagated as if it were true, by an author who stands to profit from such a claim. Such claims would’nt be surprising in a tabloid, but one should expect more from the Inquirer, I hope.

      • OneUp

        Okay, that’s your opinion. I understand that. But please understand that not everyone has the SAME opinion as you do. For those who have a differing opinion is what the Inquirer is presenting this article for. In other words, it’s up to the readers’ discretion if they believe it or not.

        Also, I don’t believe it’s propagated here as true. Where did you get that idea? Again, it’s your opinion that it’s being propagated here as true. You think people are suckers that what they read everything online is true? Many people know that issues like these should be taken with a grain of salt. Please don’t underestimate people.

        Lastly, how could the author profit from such a claim wherein he said he doesn’t do exorcism? If he really wants to profit from this article he could just put an announcement that if the readers experience evil spirits we should contact him.

      • realitystrikes

        Just to clarify, are you asserting that my statement that “whether clairvoyance is true or not, is not a matter of opinion.” Is my opinion?

    • BCon

      Maybe you should also ask Yahoo and other dailies to cancel their Horoscope section.

      • realitystrikes

        Better yet, have this column moved to the right next to the Showbiz or Horoscope sections, or wherever people get their entertainment, as opposed to facts.

    • Mon Sparks

      But why read it? Even the New York Times and the venerable New Yorker feature articles like this?

      • stromboli67

        OK, cite me a single article in these publications on this similar subject where the author ( or a ferenced authority) did not present an opposite opinion debunking or contradicting the posited opinion. That’s the big difference – Licauco’s articles are not about exploration of knowledge on a specific subject where all sides of the issue are presented for the reader’s edification, but rather appear to be written to promote a certain point of view favorable to his financal interest, as alluded to in earlier comments.

  • panhase

    “I always go with a proven clairvoyant.”
    Must be a lonely life.

    • Mon Sparks

      The conclusion is not supported by the premise.

      • realitystrikes

        Premise 1: There is no proven clairvoyant.
        Premise 2: “I always go with a proven clairvoyant.”

        Conclusion: I don’t go with any clairvoyant.



Copyright © 2014, .
To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.
Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:
c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94
Advertisement
Marketplace