Providence College

DigitalCommons@Providence Spring 2013, Science and Religion

Liberal Arts Honors Program

4-1-2013

Exorcism and the Demons of Dissociative Disorders Maggie Szot Providence College

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.providence.edu/science_religion_2013 Part of the Psychiatric and Mental Health Commons Szot, Maggie, "Exorcism and the Demons of Dissociative Disorders" (2013). Spring 2013, Science and Religion. Paper 6. http://digitalcommons.providence.edu/science_religion_2013/6

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Liberal Arts Honors Program at DigitalCommons@Providence. It has been accepted for inclusion in Spring 2013, Science and Religion by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Providence. For more information, please contact [email protected].

  1   Maggie  Szot     Fr.  Nicanor     Hon  480-­‐003   8  May  2013   Exorcism  and  the  Demons  of  Dissociative  Disorders        

  For  the  average  American  susceptible  to  the  influences  of  popular  culture,  mention  

of  “the  devil”  and  “demonic  possession”  likely  conjures  sensationalized  images  of  a  person   (typically   a   young   female)   in   a   physically   impossible   contortion,   making   loud   inhuman   sounds.  Or,  if  one  has  not  viewed  movies  such  as  The  Exorcist  or  The  Exorcism  of  Emily  Rose,   an   image   of   a   red   cartoonish   beast-­‐man   with   a   long   tail,   red-­‐horns,   and   a   pitchfork   may   come  to  mind.  In  both  cases,  it  is  hard  to  take  these  associations  seriously  as  anything  but   somewhat  immature  forms  of  entertainment.  Even  within  the  Christian  world,  Satan  is  met   with   skepticism.   According   to   a   Barna   Group   2009   survey   of   American   Christians,   approximately   sixty   percent   either   somewhat   agreed   or   strongly   agreed   with   the   statement,  “Satan  ‘is  not  a  living  being  but  is  a  symbol  of  evil’”  (“Most”  6).     According   to   Catholic   theology,   this   statement   is   profoundly   incorrect.   As   Fr.   Gabriele  Amorth,  chief  exorcist  of  Rome,  writes  in  his  account  An  Exorcist  Tells  His  Story,  “It   is  impossible  to  understand  the  salvific  action  of  Christ  if  we  ignore  the  destructive  action   of   Satan…Those   modern   theologians   who   identify   Satan   with   the   abstract   idea   of   evil   are   completely  mistaken.  Theirs  is  true  heresy”  (25-­‐27).  Despite  this  teaching,  most  people  in   western,  “developed”  societies  are  either  agnostic  or  do  not  believe  in  the  devil’s  existence.   As  a  result,  abnormal  behavior  that  could  be  interpreted  as  the  manifestation  of  demonic  

  2   possession   is   usually   explained   as   a   symptom   of   mental   illness.   Dissociative   Identity   Disorder1,  or  “DID,”  is  a  psychiatric  diagnosis  that  is  often  applied  to  such  cases.     Although  DID  is  a  valid  mental  disorder,  it  is  disturbing  to  consider  the  possibility   that   cases   of   potential   demonic   activity   are   automatically   classified   as   resulting   from   mental   illness,   because   this   would   prevent   people   from   receiving   the   spiritual   treatment   necessary  to  end  their  suffering.  As  Amorth  points  out,  “‘when  we  jeer  at  the  Devil  and  tell   ourselves  that  he  does  not  exist,  that  is  when  he  is  happiest’”  (Brandreth  43).  After  all,  the   more   that   people   ascribe   demonic   work   to   physical   causes,   the   less   opposition   the   devil   faces   through   spiritual   interventions   such   as   exorcisms,   whereby   Jesus   Christ   works   through   a   priest   to   expel   a   demon   from   the   subject   it   has   possessed.   This   paper   will   attempt  to  contribute  to  the  important  task  of  exploring  the  limits  of  the  explanatory  power   of   psychiatry   in   order   to   determine   under   what   circumstances   an   exorcism   may   be   appropriate.   DID   will   be   used   as   a   representative   mental   illness   with   which   demonic   possession  could  be  confused.  It  will  be  proposed  that  spiritual  and  medical  healers  must   collaborate  in  order  to  successfully  treat  individuals  suffering  from  the  symptoms  of  DID.     DID  is  a  complicated  and  relatively  rare  mental  disorder.  According  to  the  DSM-­‐IV,  a   person  with  DID  displays  at  least  two  unique  and  enduring  identities  or  “personality  states”   that   repeatedly   take   over   the   individual’s   conscious   thought   and   behavior   at   respective   times   (Pais   74).   The   condition   must   occur   independently   of   any   substance   abuse   and   is   accompanied  by  “‘inability  to  recall  important  personal  information  that  is  too  extensive  to   be   explained   by   ordinary   forgetfulness’”   (Pais   74).   DID   is   far   more   extreme   than   the   average  individual’s  adjustment  of  behavior  according  to  the  current  social  role  that  he  or                                                                                                                   1  Dissociative  Identity  Disorder  is  the  same  thing  as  multiple  personality  disorder  (MPD).  DID  is  the  more  recent  and   accurate  name  used  to  describe  this  disorder  (Pais,  83).    

  3   she  is  playing.2  Rather,  the  multiple  identities  (sometimes  called  “alters”)  of  a  person  with   DID   are   entirely   different–   they   can   vary   with   respect   to   name,   gender,   age,   perceived   physical   appearance,   desires,   and   dispositional   tendencies   (Ross   148).   Sometimes   the   personalities   know   of   the   others   and   sometimes   they   do   not   (Ross   148).   Either   way,   patients  with  this  disorder  suffer  from  a  radical  disjunction  of  their  self  into  multiple  parts.   There   is   usually   one   main   personality,   which   is   called   the   “host   personality”   (Ross   148).   The   goal   of   DID   treatment,   which   typically   involves   long-­‐term   psychotherapy,   is   to   integrate  the  system  of  alters  into  one  unified  self  (Brand  492).     Demonic  possession  “occurs  when  Satan  takes  full  possession  of  the  body  (not  the   soul);  he  speaks  and  acts  without  the  knowledge  or  consent  of  the  victim”  (Amorth  33).  It  is   easy   to   see   how   demonic   possession   may   be   mistaken   for   DID   and   vice   versa   due   to   similarities   in   the   behaviors   through   which   these   conditions   become   apparent.   For   instance,  suppose  a  friend  begins  to  regularly  talk  and  act  with  the  conviction  that  he  or  she   is  an  entirely  different  person,  exhibiting  destructive,  dark,  and  angry  behavioral  patterns   that  he  or  she  had  not  previously  displayed.  This  person  may  even  claim  to  be  a  demon.  Is   this   evidence   of   a   psychological   break   in  the   friend’s   identity,   resulting   in   the   development   of  a  new  alter  personality?  Or  is  he  or  she  the  victim  of  demonic  activity,  resulting  in  the   possession   of   the   physical   selfhood?   Or   are   a   combination   of   both   conditions   acting   together  to  bring  about  the  concerning  behavior?      

In  most  western  societies,  the  majority  of  highly  educated  persons,  including  mental  

health  experts,  would  not  take  the  latter  two  questions  seriously.  The  secular  and  scientific   worldview   that   dominates   these   societies   holds   that   abnormal   behavior   can   always   be                                                                                                                   2  For  example,  the  difference  in  the  behavior  of  a  college  student  in  class  as  opposed  to  at  a  party  is  an  example  of  typical  

social  role  adjustment  that  is  not  nearly  as  extreme  as  the  type  of  personality  divergence  observed  in  someone  with  DID.    

  4   attributed   to   material   causes;   specifically,   deviations   from   the   typical   physiological   activity   of   the   brain.   According   to   this   scientific   worldview,   a   combination   of   genetic   factors   and   environmental  influences  (i.e.,  the  person’s  encounters  with  other  matter  and  other  human   beings)   can   bring   about   an   electro-­‐chemical   malfunction   in   the   brain.   This   perspective   leaves  no  space  for  postulating  that  metaphysical  causes,  such  as  demonic  activity,  may  be   responsible  for  aspects  of  one’s  behavior.      

Therefore,   it   is   no   surprise   that   mainstream   psychologists   and   psychiatrists   of   the  

western  world  reject  exorcism  as  a  legitimate  form  of  treatment  for  the  symptoms  of  DID.   Many   of   these   professionals   ascribe   to   the   conflict   model   of   the   relationship   between   religion  and  science,  and  consequently  do  not  consider  integrating  spiritual  practices  and   bio-­‐psychological   treatment   approaches.   For   example,   when   asked   about   the   role   of   exorcism  in  the  treatment  of  DID,  Dr.  Elizabeth  S.  Bowman,  an  American  psychiatrist  with   extensive  experience  and  knowledge  pertaining  to  DID,  replied  “Addressing  exorcism  in  the   treatment   of   DID   is   difficult   because   exorcism   and   possession   in   DID   straddle   two   clashing   worldviews  –  the  scientific  and  the  spiritual”  (Rosik  114).  Bowman  and  other  experts  argue   that  exorcists  are  not  typically  educated  in  psychological  disorders  such  as  DID,  and  their   ignorance  may  lead  them  to  perform  rituals  in  a  manner  that  inflicts  further  psychological   trauma  to  patients  (Bull  132).     Psychotherapists   point   to   a   number   of   different   factors   to   account   for   the   purportedly   negative   effects   of   exorcisms   in   DID   patients,   claiming   that   exorcisms   evoke   feelings  of  guilt  and  worthlessness,  lead  to  a  loss  of  religious  faith,  may  generate  new  alters   in   the   patient,   and/or   bring   about   negative   changes   in   the   current   relationship   between   dissociated   parts   (Fraser   239).   For   example,   Bowman   studied   the   effects   of   past   exorcisms  

  5   in   fourteen   people   diagnosed   with   DID   (“Clinical”   222-­‐238).   Her   findings   are   as   follows:   “The   exorcisms   functioned   as   traumas   and   resulted   in   severely   dysphoric   feelings,   symptoms   of   post-­‐traumatic   stress   disorder,   and   dissociative   symptoms.   Subjects   created   new   alters   and   experienced   considerable   dissociative   rearrangements   that   led   to   the   hospitalization   of   nine   subjects”   (Bowman,   “Clinical”   222).   Bowman   also   argues   that   “exorcism   may   serve   the   exorcist’s   narcissistic   needs”   (Bowman,   “Primum”   262)   at   the   expense   of   the   patient’s   well-­‐being,   and   may   compromise   the   role   of   the   therapist   by   jeopardizing   the   “neutrality   necessary   for   resolving   the   intense   transferences   of   MPD   patients”   (Bowman,   “Primum”   262).   Clearly   there   exist   strong   objections   to   the   use   of   exorcisms  to  treat  patients  diagnosed  with  DID,  which  demand  serious  consideration.      

However,   it   must   be   acknowledged   that,   albeit   rarely,   human   beings   exhibit  

disturbing   behaviors   that   defy   logical   explanation,   even   in   light   of   the   most   advanced   understanding   that   psychiatry   can   offer.   As   Amorth   explains,   there   are   three   main   examples  of  such  exceptional  behavior:  “speaking  in  tongues,  extraordinary  strength,  and   revealing   the   unknown”   (Amorth   33).   Scientific   explanations   for   such   phenomenon   are   inadequate   –   the   only   recourse   for   a   materialist   is   to   assert   that   such   events   did   not   happen,  which  is  a  weak  argument  when  they  occurred  on  numerous  occasions  and  in  the   presence   of   several   witnesses.   For   instance,   Father   Candido,   a   late   famous   exorcist,   encountered   a   slender   girl   lacking   physical   strength   “who   had   to   be   subdued   by   force   by   four  strong  men  during  exorcisms.  She  broke  every  bond,  even  some  heavy  leather  straps   with  which  they  tried  to  tie  her  down.  Once,  when  she  was  tied  with  strong  ropes  to  an  iron   bed,  she  broke  some  of  the  iron  rods  and  folded  others  at  a  right  angle”  (70).  Such  a  feat  

  6   would   be   physically   impossible   for   a   weak   female,   and   therefore   explanations   citing   material  causes  do  not  make  sense.     The   failure   of   all   medical   interventions   and   alternative   treatments,   except   for   exorcisms,   to   alleviate   the   sufferings   of   particular   patients   also   provides   strong   evidence   for   genuine   demonic   possession.   For   example,   Father   Gabriele   tells   of   his   success   in   the   exorcism  of  Mark,  a  young  adult  for  whom  psychiatric  treatments  provided  no  relief:     He   had   been   confined   for   a   long   time   and   had   been   tormented   by   psychiatric   remedies,   especially   electroshock,   without   the   slightest   reaction.   When   the   doctor   prescribed   sleep   therapy,   for   an   entire   week   they   gave   him   enough   sleeping   pills   to   sedate   an   elephant;   he   never   fell   asleep,   either   during   the   day  or  during  the  night.  He  wandered  around  the  hospital  in  a  stupor,  with   wide-­‐open   eyes.   Finally   he   landed   at   my   doorstep,   with   immediate   positive   results.  (Amorth  70)   Mark’s   case   and   that   of   the   young   girl   with   extraordinary   physical   strength   illustrate   situations   in   which   the   explanatory   power   of   a   naturalist   philosophy   is   found   wanting,   whereas  a  Christian  theological  lens  provides  greater  clarity.    Thus  far,  it  has  been  argued  that  there  are  cases  in  which  Satan  directly  takes  over   the   bodies   of   human   beings,   and   that   some   general   criteria   –   namely,   the   presence   of   superhuman   behavior   –   may   be   used   to   distinguish   between   demonic   possession   and   purely   psychiatric   malfunctioning.   One   may   be   tempted   to   conclude   that   given   these   guidelines,  there  should  not  be  ambiguity  in  determining  which  cases  should  be  handled  by   the  psychiatrist  and  which  should  be  referred  to  the  exorcist.  One  may  suppose  it  would  be   sufficient   to   administer   a   basic   test   wherein   the   patient   would   be   asked   to   speak   in   an  

  7   entirely  foreign  language,  dead  lift  ten  times  their  body  weight,  and  reveal  closely  guarded   personal  information  about  the  therapist.  Perhaps  a  little  levitation  could  be  requested,  as   well.   If   the   patient   were   to   perform   at   least   one   of   the   aforementioned   feats,   then   an   exorcist   would   be   summoned.   Otherwise,   the   client   would   be   sent   to   the   psychiatrist’s   office.   The   designated   professional   (exorcist   or   psychiatrist)   would   then   conduct   his   or   her   distinct  method  of  therapy.     Unfortunately,  most  cases  are  not  nearly  this  simple  because  a  unique  amalgam  of   complex   and   interacting   factors,   both   medical   and   spiritual,   determines   an   individual’s   behavior   and   the   particular   flavor   of   his   or   her   suffering.   Therefore,   the   insights   into   the   restoration   of   human   health   provided   by   the   fields   of   psychiatry   and   theology   cannot   function   in   isolation.   After   all,   the   mental   and   spiritual   influences   on   a   person’s   behavior   and   health   are   not   found   in   neatly   divided   compartments,   but   rather   are   interspersed   to   the   extent   that   it   is   hard   to   tease   out   where   one   ends   and   the   other   begins.   In   treating   a   person   suffering   from   DID-­‐like   symptoms,   persons   skilled   in   spiritual   healing,   such   as   exorcists   and   pastoral   clergy,   and   psychological   healers,   such   as   psychiatrists   and   psychotherapists,  must  mirror  the  convergence  of  physical  and  spiritual  dimensions  that  is   found   in   the   patient.   Doctors   of   biological   health   and   doctors   of   spiritual   health   must   engage  in  fruitful  dialogue  and  integrate  their  efforts  to  develop  a  plan  of  care  that  fits  the   particular  needs  of  each  patient  and  optimizes  his  or  her  quality  of  life.      

In   order   to   establish   this   type   of   partnership,   practitioners   from   both   camps   must  

relinquish  an  “either/or”  mentality  with  regards  to  demonic  activity  and  mental  illness,  and   recognize   that   in   many   cases   they   will   encounter   a   “both/and”   situation.   For   example,   James  Friesen,  Ph.D.,  a  minister  and  psychologist,  embraces  the  latter  perspective.  Friesen  

  8   points   out   that   the   experience   of   severe   abuse,   especially   in   a   religious   or   spiritual   context,   will   make   it   difficult   for   a   person   to   have   a   trusting   relationship   with   God   (Rosik   116).   Patients   with   DID   have   frequently   suffered   extremely   traumatic   abuse   –   in   fact,   “DID   is   increasingly   understood   as   a   complex   and   chronic   posttraumatic   psychopathology”   (Pais   73).  Therefore,  the  same  risk  factors  that  predispose  one  to  develop  DID  also  make  one  an   easier  target  for  the  devil’s  activity  (Rosik  116).  Friesen  writes,  “The  devil  prowls,  looking   for   weakness   in   each   of   us.   Those   who   have   suffered   religious   and   spiritual   abuse   are   particularly   vulnerable   to   the   devil’s   attacks”   (Rosik   116).   Therefore,   spiritual   and   psychiatric  illness  will  often  occur  together,  requiring  the  wisdom  of  multiple  disciplines  to   understand  and  mitigate  the  troublesome  behavior  that  results.      

For   instance,   Father   Gabriele   Amorth   and   other   exorcists   regularly   encounter   the  

coexistence  of  psychiatric  ailments  and  evil  influence  in  their  work.  He  writes,  “we  cannot   always   arrive   at   a   precise   diagnosis.   Often   we   are   faced   with   situations   that   leave   us   perplexed.  This  is  because,  often,  in  the  most  difficult  cases,  we  are  faced  with  individuals   who   are   afflicted   by   both   evil   influences   and   psychological   disturbances”   (Amorth   47).   Amorth  states  that  in  such  cases,  a  psychiatrist  is  of  assistance,  citing  the  interdisciplinary   work   between   his   predecessor,   exorcist   Father   Candido,   and  the   head   of   a   mental   hospital,   Professor  Mariani,  in  curing  such  patients  (Amorth  47).       Moreover,  literature  on  DID  commonly  mentions  that  some  patients  perceive  one  or   more   alters   to   be   externally   imposed   (Bull   134).   These   alters   have   been   referred   to   by   a   number   of   terms,   including   “ego-­‐alien   entities”   (Bull   134)   and   “internalized   imaginary   companions  (IICs)”  (Allison  116).  The  host  personality  does  not  interpret  this  identity  to  be   a  dissociated  piece  of  the  self,  but  rather  “they  feel  this  part  is  not  human  or  at  least  not  a  

  9   part  of  them.  Sometimes  the  internal  appearance  of  the  entity  gives  a  clue.  It  may  look  like  a   monster  or  a  scaly  serpent.  It  may  say  it  is  thousands  of  years  old”  (Bull  134).  The  presence   of   such   a   being   in   a   person   diagnosed   with   DID   may   point   to   demonic   influence   and   indicate  the  need  for  an  exorcism.  Therefore,  the  presence  of  ego-­‐alien  identities  provides   further   proof   that   DID   and   demonic   possession   may   present   simultaneously   in   the   same   patient.     In   addition,   psychiatrists   and   exorcists   must   become   educated   about   the   others’   discipline,   because   each   may   provide   a   radically   different   interpretation   of   the   same   behavior   in   a   patient,   resulting   in   opposing   implications   for   the   next   step   in   treatment.   Perhaps   the   best   example   of   this   phenomenon   has   to   do   with   the   behavior   of   a   person   during   an   exorcism.   During   exorcisms,   the   recipient   of   the   blessing   may   exhibit   anger,   violence,  aggression,  or  other  behaviors  that  point  to  possession,  including  claims  to  be  a   demon.   A   psychiatrist   convinced   that   the   patient   suffered   from   DID   would   view   this   behavior   as   the   patient’s   response   to   the   psychological   disturbance   that   the   exorcism   evoked.  For  instance,  in  her  case  study  of  the  effects  of  exorcisms  on  DID  patients,  Bowman   states   that   during   the   exorcisms,   “Changes   in   alters   included   growing   bigger   to   provide   protection,  regressing  in  size  and  age,  becoming  angry  and  vindictive…Those  who  formed   new   alters   reported   creating   aggressive   alters   to   protect   them   or   stop   the   ritual,   or   religious   alters   who   satisfied   the   exorcists’   expectations”   (“Clinical”   227).   Thus,   psychiatrists   such   as   Bowman   would   consider   demonic-­‐like   activity   surfacing   during   an   exorcism   as   a   sign   that   the   exorcism   should   be   stopped   in   order   to   prevent   further   psychological  upset  that  would  delay  the  patient’s  recovery.    

  10   In   contrast,   an   exorcist   may   view   the   same   exact   behavior   as   evidence   that   the   exorcism  is  working.  Demons  are  known  to  be  sneaky  creatures  that  will  attempt  to  remain   hidden:  “Demons  go  to  any  length  to  avoid  detection…They  try  to  hide  during  an  exorcism   as   well”   (Amorth   120).   Therefore,   the   exorcist   must   “goad”   the   demon   into   making   its   presence   known,   and   so   dramatic   signs   of   a   demon’s   presence   “are   usually   present   only   during,   after,   or   as   a   result   of   many   exorcisms”   (Amorth   46).   Consequently,   the   exorcist   would  view  the  surfacing  of  previously  unseen  demonic  behavior  as  proof  that  a  person  is   possessed,   not   that   the   exorcism   was   a   traumatic   experience   that   had   caused   increased   chaos  in  the  mind  of  an  already  mentally  unstable  person.   Both   of   these   perspectives   cannot   be   right   with   respect   to   the   same   patient.   The   disturbed  behavior  is  either  the  result  of  demonic  possession  or  increased  fragmentation  of   the   self.   In   each   case,   a   different   course   of   action   is   called   for   –   either   continuing   the   exorcism   or   stopping   it   immediately.   If   the   patient   shows   superhuman   abilities   as   previously   detailed,   then   it   will   be   easy   to   differentiate   the   case   as   one   of   demonic   possession.   But   not   all   situations   are   so   clear,   and   therefore   require   the   psychiatrist   and   exorcist  to  combine  their  tools  of  discernment  to  arrive  at  the  truth.     However,  it  is  important  to  note  that  the  integration  of  these  perspectives  must  not   be   taken   to   such   an   extreme   as   to   sacrifice   the   differences   that   make   each   perspective   valuable.   For   example,   a   perversion   of   the   interdisciplinary   approach   is   evident   in   the   practice  of  Dr.  Ralph  B.  Allison,  who  performed  experimental  “exorcisms”  on  DID  patients   in  a  hypnotic  state,  during  which  they  claimed  to  be  possessed  by  vengeful  spirits.  Allison   claimed   that   when   he   performed   such   exorcisms,   he   believed   in   their   efficacy,   but   then   afterwards   he   was   uncertain   as   to   his   opinion.   He   writes:   “To   be   successful,   my   belief  

  11   system  had  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  patient  –  spirit  possession  existed  and  exorcism   corrects   the   problem.   But   afterwards,   when   I   looked   back   and   thought   about   what   I   had   done,   I   didn’t   know   what   to   believe”   (113).   Allison   also   coined   the   term   “Internalized   Imaginary   Companions,”   which   he   characterizes   as   an   entity   “made   by   the   ‘emotional   imagination’  of  the  patient”  (116).  However,  in  a  later  section  of  his  work,  Allison  describes   his   experience   expelling   an   IIC   from   an   MPD   patient   in   contradictory   terms,   stating:   “We   both  shared  the  same  belief  system  that  these  invading  spirits  existed  and  could  move  from   body   to   body”   (117).   Allison’s   waffling   between   worldviews   and   improvisation   of   his   personal  spiritual-­‐scientific  method  of  treatment  makes  a  mockery  of  both  psychiatric  and   religious  viewpoints.     Unfortunately,  similar  distortions  of  collaboration  are  prevalent  in  the  work  of  other   therapists  working  with  DID  patients,  such  as  Colin  Ross,  M.D.  Ross  suggests  that  whether   or   not   a   person   with   DID   who   presents   with   a   demonic   alter   personality   is   actually   possessed   has   no   bearing   on   treatment.   In   regards   to   “the   question   of   whether   a   demon   really  is  present”  he  writes  “Within  the  therapy,  there  is  no  way  to  tell,  and  in  any  case,  it   does  not  make  any  difference”  (Ross  156).  Of  course  it  matters  whether  a  patient  exhibiting   a  demonic  identity  is  actually  possessed.  If  a  patient  comes  into  the  ER  after  a  bad  fall  and   in  much  pain,  convinced  that  his  or  her  leg  is  broken,  an  X-­‐ray  is  taken  to  determine  if  the   leg   actually   is   broken   or   there   is   another   cause   of   the   pain.   Knowledge   of   the   underlying   cause   is   relevant   to   the   patient’s   treatment   in   mental   health   as   well.   As   previously   discussed,   a   patient   with   solely   DID   could   be   psychologically   damaged   by   an   exorcism   whereas  it  may  be  the  only  hope  of  relief  for  someone  suffering  from  possession.    

  12   In   addition   to   the   risk   of   sacrificing   the   search   for   truth   on   the   altar   of   “open-­‐ mindedness,”  another  obstacle  to  the  successful  collaboration  between  the  theological  and   religious   fields   in   treating   DID   is   the   secular   materialistic   conception   of   reality   that   dominates   western   societies.   The   concept   of   “demonic   possession”   will   rarely   be   taken   seriously  in  an  increasingly  secular  society  that  dismisses  the  notion  of  spiritual  realities  as   laughable,   primitive,   and   superstitious.   As   Father   Gabriel   writes,   “The   psychiatrist,   in   the   majority   of   cases,   does   not   believe   in   demonic   possession;   therefore   he   does   not   even   consider  it  in  his  diagnostic  process”  (61).  The  fervor  attached  to  the  scientific  worldview   in   contemporary   society   does   not   support   the   humility   necessary   for   viewing   the   world   through   a   metaphysical   lens.   Educated   people   who   work   in   psychiatry   and   also   have   a   strong  religious  faith  can  bridge  this  gap  and  serve  as  mediators  between  the  scientific  and   religious  communities.     The   lack   of   empirical   research   in   effective   treatments   of   DID   and   the   effects   of   exorcisms   in   treating   such   patients   also   poses   an   obstacle   to   cooperative   work.   It   is   widely   acknowledged   that   “little   empirical   evidence   exists   about   the   treatment   of   dissociative   identity   disorder,”   (Brand   1)   leading   to   a   heavy   reliance   on   clinical   case   studies   and   commonly   held   expert   recommendations   in   the   treatment   of   this   disorder.   Anecdotal   evidence   can   be   produced   from   both   camps   to   support   conflicting   approaches   in   a   particular  situation,  and  there  is  a  lack  of  data  to  clarify  the  superior  course  of  treatment.   Therefore,  there  need  to  be  more  extensive  and  reliable  studies  conducted  in  these  areas.   Taking   on   these   challenges   may   seem   an   overwhelming   and   even   insurmountable   task.   However,   it   is   necessary   in   order   to   care   for   those   who   struggle   intensely   and   tragically  with  DID  and/or  demonic  possession.  As  Ross  writes:    

  13   The  battle  between  good  and  evil  on  this  planet  is  played  out  in  the  souls  of  people   with   dissociative   identity   disorder…the   therapeutic   conversation   has   more   depth,   complexity,   urgency,   and   spiritual   import   than   most   conversations   in   the   world.   Done  well,  it  provides  a  microcosm  of  healing  and  recovery  from  which  our  planet   could  learn  at  the  macrocosmic  level.  (159-­‐160)     In   an   analogous   manner,   the   combined   efforts   of   exorcists   and   psychiatrists   in   the   art   of   healing   could   provide   a   model   for   an   alliance   between   science   and   religion   in   a   broader   social  context.                                  

  14   Works  Cited   Allison,  Ralph  B.  “If  in  Doubt,  Cast  it  Out?:  The  Evolution  of  a  Belief  System  Regarding   Possession  and  Exorcism.”  Journal  of  Psychology  and  Christianity  19.2  (2000):  109-­‐ 121.     Amorth,  Gabriele.  An  Exorcist  Tells  His  Story.  San  Francisco:  Ignatius  Press,  1999.  Print.     Bowman,   Elizabeth   S.   “Clinical   and   Spiritual   Effects   of   Exorcism   in   Fifteen   Patients   with   Multiple  Personality  Disorder.”  Dissociation  6.4  (1993):  222-­‐238.     Bowman,  Elizabeth  S.  “Primum  Non-­‐Nocere  –  A  Reason  for  Restraint:  Dr.  Bowman’s  Reply   to  Drs.  Crabtree,  Rosin,  and  Noll.”  Dissociation  6.4  (1993):  262-­‐263.     Brand,  Bethany  L.  et.  al.  “A  Survey  of  Practices  and  Recommended  Treatment  Interventions   Among  Expert  Therapists  Treating  Patients  with  Dissociative  Identity  Disorder  and   Dissociative   Disorder   Not   Otherwise   Specified.”   Psychological   Trauma:   Theory,   Research,  Practice,  and  Policy  4.5  (2012):  490-­‐500.  Print.     Brandreth,   Gyles.   “An   Interview   with   Father   Gabriele   Amorth:   The   Church’s   Leading   Exorcist.”  Boston  Catholic  Journal  (2004-­‐2013):  n.  pag.  Web.  23  April  2013.     Bull,   Dennis   L.   “A   Phenomenological   Model   of   Therapeutic   Exorcism   for   Dissociative   Identity  Disorder.”  Journal  of  Psychology  and  Theology  29.2  (2001):  131-­‐139.     Ebon,   Martin.   The   Devil’s   Bride:   Exorcism:   Past   and   Present.   New   York:   Harper   &   Row   Publishers,  1974.  86-­‐104.  Print.     Fraser,   George   A.   “Exorcism   Rituals:   Effects   on   Multiple   Personality   Disorder   Patients.”   Dissociation  6.4  (1993):  239-­‐244.     “Most  American  Christians  Do  Not  Believe  that  Satan  or  the  Holy  Spirit  Exist.”  Barn  Group   10  April  2009.  Web.  6  May  2013.  <  http://www.barna.org/barna-­‐

  15   update/article/12-­‐faithspirituality/260-­‐most-­‐american-­‐christians-­‐do-­‐not-­‐believe-­‐ that-­‐satan-­‐or-­‐the-­‐holy-­‐spirit-­‐exis>.     Pais,   Sheba.   “A   Systemic   Approach   to   the   Treatment   of   Dissociative   Identity   Disorder.”   Journal  of  Family  Psychotherapy  20  (2009):  72-­‐88.     Rosin,   Christopher   H.   “Critical   Issues   in   the   Dissociative   Disorders   Field:   Six   Perspectives   From   Religiously   Sensitive   Practitioners.”   Journal   of   Psychology   and   Theology   31.2   (2003):  113-­‐128.     Ross,   Colin   A.   “Dissociative   Identity   Disorder   and   Psychospiritual   Perspectives.”   The   Psychospiritual   Clinician’s   Handbook:   Alternative   Methods   for   Understanding   and   Treating   Mental   Disorders.   Ed.   Mijares,   Sharon   G.   and   Singh   Khalsa,   Gurucharan.     Binghamton:  The  Haworth  Reference  Press,  2005.  147-­‐161.  Print.     Ward,   Colleen   A.   Altered   States   of   Consciousness   and   Mental   Health:   A   Cross-­‐Cultural   Perspective.  Newbury  Park:  Sage  Publications,  1989.  125-­‐145.  Print.