The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16 [1 ed.] 1527591913, 9781527591912

Citation preview

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16 By

Jesmond Micallef

Transcription with liturgical and theological comments

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16 By Jesmond Micallef This book first published 2023 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2023 by Jesmond Micallef All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-9191-3 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-9191-2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

General Introduction ................................................................................... 1 PART I..................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 1: Jesus the Exorcist ................................................................... 12 Chapter 2: Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium: A Brief Survey Throughout the History .............................................................. 112 PART II ................................................................................................. 231 Chapter 1: Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript .............................................................................................. 232 Chapter 2: Transcription of the Manuscript ........................................... 248 Chapter 3: Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v .......... 250 PART III ............................................................................................... 271 Chapter 1: Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer (Folios [ĭĭ] 133v-139v)........................ 272 Bibliography ........................................................................................... 348 Abbreviations ......................................................................................... 370

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The Devil is small, but his acts are large. Byzantine proverb

From the Gospel of Mark 5:2-19: «When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him. This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain. For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones. When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. He shouted at the top of his voice, ‘What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Have you come to torture us before the appointed time?’ Then Jesus asked him, ‘What is your name?’ ‘My name is Legion,’ he replied, ‘for we are many’. And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area. A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. The demons begged Jesus, ‘Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them’. He said to them ‘Go!’ and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned. Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demonpossessed begged to go with him. Jesus did not let him, but said, ‘Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you’».

The subject of demons and demon possession has always seemed somewhat remote and academic to the sophisticated modern man. Biblebelieving Christians have always accepted the existence of demons and their activity in the New Testament times. However most of us are inclined to relegate demonic activity in these days to pagan lands and missionary experiences. Like it or not, demons and demonic activity are likely to become much more of a concern to our society in the days to come. In his letter to the Ephesians 6:12, Saint Paul writes that our struggle is, at bottom, a spiritual one:

2

General Introduction «For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places».

The existence of the devil and his works of evil is a teaching of the Scriptures. The New Testament reveals that Jesus Christ himself banished demons from afflicted persons. The mission of Christ was not only to reveal the nature of the True God, but also to destroy the power of Satan. The film The Exorcist (1973) aroused curiosity but seemingly created an awareness and fear of «demonic influence». Even if the film is frightening, shocking, pornographic, hideous, causes people to become ill, and blasphemous in gruesome detail, it is so appealing to the public. The fact is that the main struggle the Christian has always faced is against the evil forces that surround him not only in today’s turbulent world, but from the time of the «fall» of man in Paradise. Today’s social climate cannot be fully understood unless it is remembered that there is an evil force working to tempt everyone and to win against those who are unbelieving and indifferent Evil is a reality. The evil spirit develops and progresses because of indifferent and compromising attitudes toward moral standards and goodness. The behaviour of man and the world at large cannot be understood unless one remains conscious of this fact. This «demonic» force works within the individual, because he consciously or unconsciously cooperates with the evil one. Everyone has to make a personal decision as to whether the «demonic force of evil» or the Spirit of God will occupy his heart and mind. In his very first homily on March 14th 2013, Pope Francis warned cardinals gathered in the Sistine Chapel the day after he was elected that «he who doesn’t pray to the Lord prays to the devil»1. He has since mentioned the devil on a handful of occasions. In May 4th 2013 during his morning Mass in the Vatican chapel, he spoke of the need for dialogue í except with Satan. «With the prince of this world you can’t have dialogue: Let this be clear! » he warned2.

Why studying the theme of Exorcism? The controversial theme of Exorcism today attracts renewed interest in the Western Church, especially after the Roman Catholic Church on the 28th January 1999 published the exorcistic rite entitled DESQ3 which triggered a multitude of publications and academic works. However the problem of evil has always been one of the most serious philosophical challenges to the Christian faith. The presence of evil and suffering in the world has even been argued by some philosophers from Epicurus (341-270 B.C.) to David

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

3

Hume (1711-76 A.C.) who casted doubt on the existence of God. Other modern writers such as Freud and Marx sought to show that religion’s explanations of the presence of evil and suffering were based on delusions. There is a widespread conviction that the oriental tradition regarding this theme is more reserved than the western one. As a result one notes how byzantine iconography is more discreet when it comes to the representation for example of the wicked angels who appear in only three scenes: the Anastasis or Resurrection of Christ, the Last Judgement and the icon of St. George (and sometimes, in Russian art, in the icon of St. Dimitri). It has to be stated that in the Orthodox world, exorcism is mainly connected with baptism. As a result in the Orthodox theology we find lacunae when studying the theme of Exorcism maybe because of the importance given to baptismal exorcisms4. Also the lack of proper studies in demonology in the Orthodox world plus the scarcity of information about exorcisms, helped the spreading of some popular beliefs and imaginations. It is only by turning to authoritative and contemporary Orthodox sources and recalling some fundamental lines of orthodox doctrines about demons that one can arrive to some considerations about exorcisms. It is evident that Eastern scholars do not give the amount of attention this theme deserves with the result that there is no tentative systematic evaluation of it.5 Academically, it has typically been coldly addressed and neglected by Orthodox moralists, a fact they themselves attest. Is it perhaps considered by many as a psychological issue and thus not convincingly adapted to be explored and written about? It would be also wrong to think that orthodox theology gives little consideration to the reflection of the real personification of the demon. Studies on oriental Christianity of the 4th century and the Byzantine millennium dwell clearly on the presence of the demonic theme in hagiographic texts, spiritual texts, in exorcisms, superstitious practices and popular exorcist prayers; they show the presence of a learned demonology which is, in some lines, a continuation of the pagan philosophy. This presence is not lacking in popular religious belief during the post-Byzantine period. Superstitious practices and popular exorcistic prayers with paganChristian characteristics that mix together the divine, saints and demons, are still widespread6. Spiritual literature based on the texts of the Fathers does not forget the demon. On the other hand, Russian literature and theology have tried in the last centuries to penetrate the personality of evil by examining the mysterious demons. It is enough to read N. Gogol and F. Dostoevsky to understand their contribution to this subject. The latter for example, gave a huge contribution in the understanding of evil through his famous novel Demons where he depicts the demons in the ideas of idealism, rationalism, empiricism, materialism, utilitarianism, positivism, socialism,

4

General Introduction

anarchism, nihilism and ultimately atheism. Getting man to relinquish these ideas is to have mankind embrace the asceticism of Russian Orthodoxy7. I. FROC says that «the other aspects of orthodoxy seem less categorical (absolute) when it comes to the personification of the demon»8. However what we have been seeing shows the close and essential relationship that in Orthodoxy unites redemption and victory over the evil one, salvation and expulsion of demons. Seen in this light, the exorcist dimension in the Orthodox vision of salvation is not some marginal or added dimension but rather a structural and fundamental component. From the Orthodox theological point of view we can conclude that: 1. Christ is the exorcist par excellence for it is He who won the victory over the power of the devil; 2. Priests follow Christ’s example in the performance of the holy sacraments and in preaching the word of God; 3. All Orthodox Christians are exorcists as they struggle against personal sin and social evil. In fact, «the whole Church, past, present and future, has the task of an exorcist to banish sin, evil, injustice, spiritual death, the devil from the life of humanity»9. The late Archbishop Iakovos, in a sermon at the Sage Chapel, Cornell University, spoke on exorcism in the following manner: «Both healing and exorcising are ministered through prayers, which spring from faith in God and from love for man...All the prayers of healing and exorcism, composed by the Fathers of the Church and in use since the third century, begin with the solemn declaration: In Thy Name, O Lord»10. In summary, the four prayers of exorcism by Saint John Chrysostom and the three of Saint Basil ask in the name of God to deliver the possessed from the captivity of the devil. Some can be healed by faith accompanied by fasting and purification. However, the use of exorcism must be made with discretion and great care. This diversity and multiplicity of liturgical rites and the abundance of forms found in the eastern and western catholic traditions, permit the use of a comparative study of liturgies. These factors enhance the study of Catholic worship, which has been enriched by scholars exploring the depths of different liturgical traditions, especially by those who have brought to light connections between the historical developments of the various liturgical families. However, in the field of comparative liturgical studies there is a dearth of published euchological sources. Frequently, this creates a serious obstacle for the development of the liturgical studies in general, and

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

5

comparative liturgical studies in particular11. The technique of comparative liturgical study would only enhance our understanding of such a text12. 3. Limitations. The edition presented in this work is limited to one particular manuscript (the Xiropotamou 98) and to its euchological importance. As for the contents of the manuscript, the texts already known were simply transcribed, while a critical edition was reserved for the unedited exorcistic prayer found in the manuscript and on which a commentary was devised. The aim of this work is to present an unedited source allowing the research to focus on the section concerning exorcism and eastern euchology. 4. Objectives. The research attempts to produce an edition of the Xiropotamou manuscript 98 preserved at the Library of the Xiropotamou monastery of Mount Athos in Greece. It is not known whether these prayers were recited only at the monastery of Xiropotamou or elsewhere in other monasteries of the peninsula. I have recorded a number of interviews with the monks of the Athos so as to answer this dilemma and other questions that may arise in trying to fill the gaps that exists in this field of exorcism studies. The manuscript was transcribed as it is, accepting typical customs of the scribes/diplomats. Variations of the manuscript were not made so that attention was not deterred from the singular emphasis of the research. Only the most common/simple errors and orthographic information provided by the indicated manuscript (its spellings, punctuation, capitalization, line divisions) which are produced on the printed page have been corrected. However this is not a purely liturgical study. It is a study which cushions the liturgical exorcistic prayer of the manuscript between a biblical study of this ancient activity of the Church and an overview of the Rite of Exorcism in Orthodox usage of Early, Middle, and Late Byzantium, a work which to my knowledge, has not been yet studied. It should be clear that my intent was only to study exorcism as practised in the Greek orthodox church since the Xiropotamou manuscript is a Greek manuscript. 5. Method. The choice of publishing a late 16th century manuscript is founded on the principle of recentiores non deteriores – that is «the most recent witness of the text is not the worst». The fact that a text is more recent, and therefore less ancient, does not mean that it is not valid for the reconstruction of the

6

General Introduction

original text. This Xiropotamou 98 Euchologion is especially interesting for it includes different kinds of rites and prayers concerning rural life in a village, blessing of water, a blessing for meat and food, for the Kollyba, prayers to the Virgin Mary, Megalinarias, prayers recited during Christmas period and others. However most interesting are the prayers against the evil spirits and the exorcisms of Saint Tryphon, Saint Nichodemus of the Mount Athos, Saint Basil the Great, Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Gregory, Saint Ypatios, Saint Charalambos, Saint Mamas of Caesarea, Saint Simeon Stylite the Elder and Saint John the Miracleworker. The editing and the contextualisation of a manuscript are overlapping exercises that belong to different fields ranging from Classical Philology and Patristics to codicology, palaeography and historical liturgical studies. The use of these disciplines obliges one to utilize the criteria of the ecumene academia and therefore, the utilisation of the gold standard in developing a research programme. My reference point for the description of the manuscript will be the method of A. PETRUCCI,13 for codicology the methods of M.L. AGATI,14 for Palaeography the school of P. CANART, and G. CAVALLO,15 and for liturgical studies, the method of comparative liturgy of J. MATEOS, R. TAFT and S. PARENTI16. 6. Division of work. This study covers three major parts: PART ONE: Chapter 1: Jesus the Exorcist. Chapter 2: An Overview of the development of the Exorcistic prayer in Orthodox usage of Early, Middle, and Late Byzantium. PART TWO: Chapter 1: Paleographical description of the Xiropotamou 98 manuscript. Chapter 2: Transcription of the manuscript. Chapter 3: Edition and critical apparatus of folios: 133v-139v.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

7

PART THREE: Chapter 1: Analysis and commentary of some single liturgical units of the exorcistic prayer (folios [ijij] 133v-139v) = ǽ’– Prayers against the demons: (ij.133r-138v) – Ǿ’– Prayer against the Vampires and how to destroy them: (ij.139r-[140r-149v=missing] 150r). 7. Sources. The scope of the research, amongst others, is the preparation of the edition of the Xiropotamou manuscript which determines the sources of this research. The main sources of this work have been the printed editions of these euchologies, namely: ARRANZ, M., L’Eucologio costantinopolitano agli inizi del secolo XI. Hagiasmatarion & Archieratikon (Rituale e Pontificale) con l’aggiunta del Leitourgikon (Messale), Roma 1996. GOAR, J., Euchologion Sive rituale Graecorum, Rituale Graecorum complectensritus et ordines Divinae Liturgiae, officiorum, sacramentorum, consecrationum, benedictionum, funerum, orationum,etc. Editio secunda expurgata, et accuratior, Venice 1730. DMITRIEVSKIJ, A., Opisanie liturgiceskich rukopisej chranjas c ichsja v biblioteka chpravoslavnao Vostaoka, t.II, Eûxológia, Kiev 1901. PARENTI, S – VELKOVSKA E., L’eucologio Barberini gr. 336, Roma 20002. ȆǹȆǹǻȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ, N., ed., ǼȣȤȠȜިȖȚȠȞ IJo ȂȑȖĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1927. 8. Originality. Currently, there is no integral published edition of the Xiropotamou 98 manuscript, nor are there any studies about its unique liturgical contents as regards to the healing and exorcistic prayers it contains. This manuscript is still largely unpublished except for a small extract quoted by professor Charles Stewart, who in his book himself states that it would be appropriate for someone to review the manuscript through more rigorous criteria17. It was through Prof. Stewart’s encouragement that this work was undertaken as a research on liturgical exorcisms.

8

General Introduction

9. Bibliography. The bibliography brings together all the sources that are used for this study. It includes books and articles that deal directly or indirectly, with the arguments discussed. The methodology used in this work is according to the system proposed by MEYNET, R – ONISZCZUK, J., Norme tipographice per la composizione dei testi con il computer, Roma 2011.

Notes 1

Homily of the Holy Father Pope Francis, Sistine Chapel, Thursday, 14 March 2013 [access 29.10.2014], http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/homilies/2013/documents/papafrancesco_20130314_omelia-cardinali.html. 2 The Associated Press, Vatican City, May 22nd 2013. «The devil’s influence and presence in the world seems to fluctuate in quantity inversely proportionate to the presence of Christian faith», said the Rev. Robert Gahl, a moral theologian at Rome’s Pontifical Holy Cross University. «So, one would expect an upswing in his malicious activity in the wake of de-Christianization and secularization» in the world and a surge in things like drug use, pornography and superstition: See the following link: [access 29.10.2014], http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/05/21/pope-francisexorcism/2347197. Besides this, one has to mention that as from the 13 June 2014 the The International Association of Exorcists (IAE) containing about 250 priests, now has a legal status. The Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano reported on the 2nd of July 2014 that the Congregation for the Clergy approved the association’s statutes and recognized it under Canon Law (Canon 322, par. 1) as a private international association of faithful in accordance with Canon 116, par. 2 and has all the rights and obligations stated within the Code. 3 Cf. De exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam. 4 It is important to underline that despite the growing literature on demons in late antiquity, there has been no detailed study of demons in the Cappadocian father’s theology. Demons occupy a liminal place in Cappadocian cosmology, eschatology and pastoral theology: demons were personal, rational beings, who were created good, fell from their original state, and became locked into an irreversible habit of willing evil, which contradicted but parasitically co-existed with their nature as part of God’s good creation. This liminal status explains the demons’ use in the Cappadocian theology not only to illustrate the power and nature of evil, but also as an exaggerated representation of humans’ own condition: especially in preaching and hagiography, demons served to highlight the way in which human sin contradicts humans’ original creation and to warn humans against the possibilities of locking themselves into a permanent habit of sin. Cfr. M. LUDCOW, «Demons, Evil and Liminality in Cappadocian theology», JEC 20 (2012) 179-211. 5 B. PETRA, «Demoni ed esorcismi nella tradizione ortodossa», 157.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16 6

9

One has to underline that as far as the Greek society is concerned Satan and his demons are a reality. They encounter these supernatural entities in the form of the evil eye and on very rare occasions through demonic possession. The evil eye is intensely integrated into the faith, culture and traditions of the Greek people, who go out of their way to avoid having the evil eye put on them or their families. What is considered to be a silly superstition in the West is a reality that is much feared in Greece and in much of the Mediterranean. From a sociological perspective it can be said that the Greeks have been conditioned to believe that Satan is a being with supernatural powers. Collectivist societies, such as the Geek societies, explain things, such as bad luck, on external factors such as the evil eye, instead of thinking that it could just be a coincidental event. Thus, the Greeks believe that Satan is a real threat to their well being. There is also a secret rite performed by superstitious people to avert the evil eye, which verges on the magical. Though the Church encourages even the laity to pray and exorcise evil, it rejects magical practices and rites. This secret rite is described as follows: The exorcist (not a priest, but an old woman) prepares a vial of olive oil and a small glass of water. She dips a finger in the oil, rubs it in a sign of the Cross on the victim’s forehead and lets one drop fall onto the water; she repeats the process, making a cross on the forehead, on the chin and both cheeks. If the devil is indeed present, the four drops of oil in the water join to form the ellipsoid shape of an eye. The ritual then calls for the reading of prayers and repeating the four signs of the Cross; the drops of oil will not join in the water, but will disperse. Cfr. M. LUDCOW, Demons, Evil and Liminality in Cappadocian theology. 7 F. DOSTOEVSKY, Demons, xiii. 8 I. FROC, Esorcisti e mistero del male, 37,43. 9 G. PAPADEMETRIOU, Exorcism and the Greek Orthodox Church, 10. 10 Homily given on the March 10th, 1974. . Here the Pope is referring to the exorcistic cited afterwards. 11 In the case in point, one notes that in the Byzantine rite there is a lack of published sources about exorcism. For example, in the Eastern Liturgies, only a minimal part of the most ancient sources of the exorcistic ritual attributed to St. John Chrysostom (the four prayers of exorcism) and Saint Basil (the three prayers of exorcism) is now published or accessible to scholars. However, with particular reference to the rite of exorcism, an important text still survives, at the Xiropotamou monastery of Mount Athos. 12 The comparative study of eastern and western liturgy was also advanced by I.H. DALMAIS í H.J. SCHULZ, The Byzantine Liturgy. Finally, a major aid in the study of the liturgical theology of the Byzantine Church is that provided by R. BORNET, Les commentaires byzantins de la Divine Liturgie du VIIe au XVe siècle. 13 A. PETRUCCI, La descrizione del manoscritto. Storia, modelli, problemi. 14 M.L. AGATI, Il Libro Manoscritto da Oriente a Occidente. Per una codicologia comparata. 15 P. CANART, Paleografia e codicologia greca, 22-29. 16 R.F. TAFT – A. BAUMSTARK, Comparative Liturgy Revisited; J. MATEOS, La célébration de la Parole dans la liturgie byzantine; R.F. TAFT, History of the Liturgy; ID., «Come crescono le liturgie», 219-252.

10

General Introduction

17 Cf. A. STEWART, Demons and the Devil. Stewart’s book offers the data collected

during his field research on the island of Naxos. In this work he combines a series of folkloric and theological materials found in the cultural historical context of Naxos which proved indispensable for his ethnographic material. The way people on Naxos currently live with ideas of the exotiká constitutes a synchronic moment where ideas about polymorphous evil demons take shape in relation to life in a particular place. The exotiká has been developing in the eastern Mediterranean, in relation to standard Orthodox Christian ideas of the Devil for at least 1500 years. The placement of the contemporary exotiká in historical context makes this work relevant to cultural historians. It challenges theologians to discern between folklore, magic and faith. My desire is that this work one day will be translated into modern Greek so as to augment the awareness that «our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places» (Eph. 6:12).

PART I

CHAPTER 1 JESUS THE EXORCIST

Jesus inaugurates his mission as God’s suffering servant1 through his baptism in the Jordan River. He allows himself to be numbered among sinners. Immediately after his baptism, God empowers him through the Holy Spirit to begin waging a cosmic war with Satan. Here just before his public ministry Jesus goes into the wilderness in order to confront the devil, «the tempter», who has claimed authority over «all the kingdoms of the world» (Mt 4:3; 4:8). In the Beelzebul controversy Jesus implies that by performing exorcisms he is waging a war against Satan’s «house», thus rupturing the authority of «the prince of demons» on earth, and shattering «his kingdom» of spiritual evil (Mk 3:22-30; Mt 9:34; 12:24-30; Lk 11:15-23). Jesus’ ministry then plays out as an ongoing battle with Satan, his minions, demons, and unclean spirits í a battle which does not reach its climax until the Romans nail Jesus on the cross. From that cross Christ announces his triumph over Satan’s empire, when he says, «It is finished» (Jn 19:30). Christian scripture attests to the belief that although victory has been declared, the battle against the «spiritual forces of evil» continues in the lives of Jesus’ followers (Eph 6:10-18; Rv 12:17). Only at his final coming, the parousia, when God makes a final apocalyptic judgment, will Jesus’ original work of destroying the authority of evil be complete, and the promised kingdom of God will be fully revealed. For this reason, Jesus’ exorcisms have cosmic, apocalyptic, and anti-imperial implications2.

1. Jesus, the Exorcist? 1.1 Jesus, as healer The demonical tradition pertaining to Jesus Christ, that is, his having authority over demons and the power to heal demoniacs is nothing new. James Dunn proposes emphatically that since Christianity’s inception there has been a demonical tradition which was faithfully preserved and transmitted in the early «Jesus community»3. Dunn’s unique approach asks the question of how Jesus had impact on his followers and how his followers

Jesus the Exorcist

13

remembered him. Jesus’ ability to heal and exorcize would have been an unforgettable facet of his ministry, one that touched his contemporaries enormously and not only during the ministry prior to the crucifixion, but for subsequent generations. While virtually all those engaged in research into the historical Jesus presuppose that Jesus was a teacher and that all his actions were part of a teaching ministry – the «fame» of Jesus was as a healer and exorcist, not a teacher (cf. Mt 4:24; Acts 10:37-38)4. Even the greatest anti-Christian apologists in the early centuries, such as Celsus, who tried to fight by every means the validity of the Christian message did not question the miracles of Jesus of healing and exorcism – so indisputable they were in the popular memory. Instead the only rational way Celsus could undermine Jesus’ miracles was to claim they flowed from a power that was not of God but was magical, proposing that Jesus had learned from magicians while he was in Egypt5. For Jesus in the synoptic Gospels, healing and exorcism were both signs and demonstrations of the reality of the reign of God, a reality that lay at the very heart of his proclamation (cf. Mk 1:14-15; Lk 11:20)6. For the disciples of Jesus, healing and exorcism continued to demonstrate a fundamental reality of the faith: if Christ is alive and enthroned in heaven as the King of the universe as promised in Scripture (cf. Ps 110:1; Dn 7:13-14), then he has endowed believers with royal power (cf. Dn 7:27), particularly the apostles7, who exercised authority to perform miracles, «Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. You received without paying; give without pay» (Mt 10:8). Along with the command to baptize and teach (Mt 28:19) – the faith is to be spread and its truth confirmed by power encounters, that is, exorcism and healing in the name of Jesus (cf. Acts 5:12; 19:11-17). These miracles confirm the divine authority of Jesus himself, and without them many would not believe that Jesus is who he claims to be (Jn 4:48).8 The Gospels tell us that «whenever» the people with unclean spirits saw Jesus, they fell down before him and cried out, «You are the Son of God» (Mk 3:11). This indicates that the demons and demoniacs know who Jesus is because in the realm of the spirit, the power and reputation of Jesus are undeniable. In the synoptic Gospels, demonic possession is different from sickness or illness, just as exorcism is distinct from healing. A demoniac is someone under the control of a hostile non-human force, thus exorcism would entail a full deliverance and restoration of the victim to family, to community and to God’s created order. Jesus commissioned the Twelve to be with him, to learn from him, and to proclaim the kingdom of God by participating with him in healing and exorcism – through the centuries Jesus’ message has endured by those who seek to embrace and teach it.

14

Chapter 1

It seems natural for a modern reader to include the phenomenon of possession in the category of disease, and to regard the exorcism narratives of the New Testament as «special case» narratives of healing of disease9. Since the New Testament does not seem to tell us about the healing of mental diseases, it seems natural to regard the exorcism narratives as exactly that: people suffering from mental disorders who were healed10. However the authors of the Gospels inhabited a symbolic universe quite different from that of many modern readers11. Thus, without surrendering their own scientifically-based models of sickness and health, modern cultural analogies can be instructive with respect to shaping the Gospel accounts. In them, a crucial theological affirmation is awaiting discovery: the forces that oppose health also oppose the will of God, that is to say, God’s final purpose, as Jesus discloses it, is not sickness but health, not death but life. Both spiritual illness and physical illness are interrelated, and God is not indifferent to either. Thus, by whatever model we explain the phenomena of sickness and healing, this affirmation of God’s desire for human wholeness must stand at the centre of a theology of healing informed by the Gospels. The fact that so many of Jesus’ acts of healing (at least in the synoptic Gospels) are exorcisms indicates that such maladies reflect, not sins for which the sufferer should repent, but oppression from which liberation is necessary. The goal is that the victim may be restored in body and also liberated from oppressive thought patters that vex the heart and mind – which, in the language of the Gospels, are caused by oppressive spirits. Jesus is not a dualist; he does not separate body and soul, but treats the whole person, and in his exorcisms both the mind and body undergo spiritual and physical restoration. Undoubtedly this language of demonic possession and exorcism poses a challenge for the interpreter today. As with the miracles generally, many modern readers of the Bible reject (or simply ignore) exorcisms, regarding them as the expression of an outmoded worldview. Exploring the exorcism narratives as special cases of disease narratives may explain the causes of disease as the work of evil spirits or demons. In antiquity, possession and exorcism were not a phenomenon of disease but had a different and more comprehensive hermeneutic framework. To identify and examine the beliefs of Jesus and the early Christians regarding exorcism, one may use the lens of modern notions regarding exorcism. But in contrast to Western Christian ideas of magic and the activities of Jewish exorcists of the first century, Jesus and the early Christians after him did not follow the magical practices of the contemporary pagan world12. The unique features in the exorcisms performed by Jesus and his disciples will be brought to light in the present study.

Jesus the Exorcist

15

1.2 Exorcisms of Jesus and the early Christians In two of the six exorcism stories of the Gospels, namely, Mt 9:32-34 and Mt 12:22f (par. Lk 11:14), there is nothing said about the technique used by Jesus. In three exorcism stories Jesus expels demons with short, succinct commands such as, «Be silent and come out of him!» (Mk 1:25; Lk 4:35); «Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!» (Mk 5:8; Lk 8:29)13. The brevity and authority of such commands and the absence of the invocation of divine or angelic names are aspects which contrast sharply from the lengthy adjurations and invocations that characterize formulas seen in the papyri indicative of magic and sorcery in early times. That Jesus could confidently command demons and expect instant obedience indicates that he regarded himself as someone in full possession of the supernatural power necessary for the performance of such acts. Unlike other Jewish exorcists, Jesus never uses secondary means in his exorcisms, such as fumigations, rings, roots or herbs. Nor does Jesus use incantations, liturgical prayers or specially-composed psalms of praise as part of his exorcist practice. When the disciples were unable to drive out a demon, Jesus explains that there are different types of demons, and some of these can only come out by prayer (Mk 9:14-29; Mt 17:14-21; Lk 9:37-43a). However there is no indication that Jesus himself used prayer as a means of exorcism. Rather, Jesus drives out demons simply by directly commanding the demon(s) to come out of a person14. When exorcizing the boy with the demon that caused him to be deaf and dumb, for example, Jesus says, «You deaf and mute spirit…I command you, come out of him and never enter him again» (Mk 9:25). Moreover, unlike other Jewish exorcists, Jesus does not appeal to any authority for these exorcisms other than himself, not even to YHWH15. This is different from the exorcist whom the disciples discover casting out demons but who was not one of their group (the so-called «strange exorcist» Mk 9:38-41). This unidentified exorcist did indeed cast out evil spirits but did so only on the basis of Jesus’ authority. Likewise, the disciples themselves practiced exorcism, but they also did so by Jesus’ authority (Mk 3:15; 6:7). When they returned from being sent out to announce the kingdom of God, they marvelled: «Lord, even the demons submit to us in your name» (Lk 10:17). Clearly Jesus was also unique among exorcists because evil spirits submitted to him without opposition or struggle. Sometimes the demons engaged Jesus in dialogue and in one instance they appealed to him for leniency. The «Legion» in the Gadarene demoniac for example sought to have Jesus promise that he would not torment them16. But there is never a sense of a real power struggle between Jesus and the evil spirits that he removed from people, unlike with other exorcists (e.g. Acts 19:13-16). The

16

Chapter 1

fact that Jesus exorcized without opposition probably explains why witnesses of his exorcisms were astonished at what they experienced (Mk 1:27; Lk 4:36; Mt 9:33). Jesus’ complete «authority and power» (Lk 4:36) over evil spirits also explains the alarm and terror that the spirits exhibit when they encounter him; they fear for their continued well-being because they believe that Jesus has the power to torment them and to send them to the Abyss (Mk 5:10; Lk 8:31). In fact, the demons recognize Jesus as the kingly Davidic Messiah who has been given authority over the spiritual world. Just as David had received exorcistic power after his anointing (cf. 1 Sa 16:13, 23) so Jesus displays this royal, messianic power in performing exorcisms. Thus the demons fall down before Jesus, addressing him with the appropriate messianic titles: «O son of God» (Mt 8:28; cf. 2 Sa 7:14; Ps 2:7; 89:26), «the holy one of God» (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34; cf. Ps 16:10), «You are the son of God» (Mk 3:11; Lk 4:42), and «Jesus, son of the most High God» (Mk 5:7; Lk 8:28). Mental illness and psychosis cannot explain this characteristic insight that many of the demoniacs have into Jesus’ messianic identity, especially since most «normal» Jews lack this insight. Jesus was a first-century Palestinian Jew, and the writers of the New Testament documents were Christians of the first, or perhaps, 2nd century writing for Christians of their own time. For Jews of this historical period, in addition to God and his material creation, there existed a world of spiritual beings, some good and some evil, both of which can interact with human beings. The evil spiritual beings would seek to do harm to humans and God permitted these spirits to lead people into disobedience to God’s law. There are three principle sources of the formulation of this belief. Firstly, in Genesis 6:1-4, there is the story of the «sons of God» or Watchers who were angelic beings of the antediluvian period that «took brides for themselves» from the daughters of men, thus corrupting themselves and the human beings over whom they were perhaps responsible to keep watch17. From this the tradition developed that the angels and humans had spiritual offspring who continued the corrupting influence on the human race begun by their fathers. This topic we will discuss in greater detail below (cf. 3.4). Secondly, after king Saul has been rejected by God because of disobedience, God sends an evil spirit to afflict Saul (1 Sa 16:14-16; 18:10; 19:9-10). This happens immediately after David received the Spirit of the Lord at his anointing, because he will eventually replace Saul as king (1 Sa 16:13). Interestingly David, as newly anointed messiah, is given a divine power of exorcism, so that when he is invited to play the harp in Saul’s court every day, the evil spirit departs from Saul (1 Sa 16:23; 18:10). This «royal gift» seems to have passed to David’s son Solomon who gains the reputation

Jesus the Exorcist

17

as one of the great exorcists of antiquity18, even in non-Jewish circles. Thus exorcism comes to be associated with God’s anointed (i.e. messiah) – a detail which, as we have seen, the writers of the Gospels were well aware. Thirdly, many texts speak of the existence of evil spirits in the postdiluvium period who are subordinate to a ruling evil spirit, variously named Belial (or Beliar), Satan, Mastema, angel of darkness, spirit of deceit, Melchirešha, and the devil (įȚȐȕȠȜȠȢ), but without any reference to the story of the Watchers19. To understand and highlight beliefs, held either against or in common with their contemporaries, it is perhaps helpful to ask an a priori question: What did the people of the New Testament world and its cultural context think about such things as spirits, demons, possession, magic, healing, healers, exorcism and exorcists? Jesus’ ministry traversed the area of Palestine. Most of the Gospel material came to its present form as the faith expanded into the wider Greco-Roman world. To clarify what Jesus and his audience thought about exorcism, one must examine the background material concerning the social and religious life in first century Palestine. On the other hand, it is not accurate to think of two separate, clearly defined «worlds» between Jewish and Gentile beliefs, separated by a cultural and intellectual barrier, implying that Christianity passed from an exclusively Jewish to an exclusively Hellenistic milieu. The New Testament writers themselves, who were both Jews and non-Jews, have a largely shared worldview; the ancients, both pagans and Jews alike, conceived of the world as ordered by divine forces for the purpose of worship20. Even before the «conquest» of Canaan by the bulk of the Hebrew tribes, what was to become the homeland of the Jews had been a cultural, political, and economic crossroads of the ancient world. For this reason, and because of its small size, this homeland was never able to remain a closed society. Indicative of this is the great number of Jews from different parts of the ancient world who came annually to celebrate Passover in Jerusalem bringing with them new customs, including the language of their new homes (cf. Acts 2:5-12). The wider Greco-Roman world was not one homogeneous «Hellenistic» culture but included a vast number of Jews whose position in society, in Hellenistic Egypt for example, was not marginal.

1.3 Hebrew personification of evil, the Jewish Tradition Despite the view that, «God was responsible for everything, good or evil», ancient Israel maintained a belief in the existence of evil spirits that Jewish scripture related to idolatry and the pagan gods21. The importance and significance of this view requires investigation into the Old Testament

18

Chapter 1

development of ancient demonology. Robert C. Dunston states: «Further influences on Israel’s ideas concerning demons came from the wilderness and from neighboring religions. The wilderness was a sinister, forbidding place and seemed to be a fitting abode for demons (Is 34:14). In some cases, phrases may indicate the names of earlier demons…but in other cases, specific names were used. The demons Resheph, Lilith, and Azazel clearly show the influence of the desert and other religions on Israel. Resheph was the Canaanite god of plague and pestilence (Dt 32:24 ‘burning heat’, ‘plague’; Hab 3:5), Lilith was the Mesopotamian storm demon who in the O.T. became a night demon of the wilderness (Is 34:14 ‘night hag’), and Azazel was the desert demon to whom the scapegoat was sent on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:8,10,26). Demons such as these survived in Israelite thought and practice and eventually found a place in Israel’s theology»22.

Israelite demonology extended into the realm of angelology. Judaism accepted and adopted the gods of other nations but neither considered them divine, nor worthy of worship. Rather they were considered guardian spirits/angels of each nation (cf. Dt 32:8), nations who had become corrupted by worship of these spirits in place of their Creator, and, therefore, these nations were under God’s judgment23. As such, the children of Abraham were not henotheists. By the time of the New Testament, however, the influence of Hellenistic culture had undoubtedly exerted itself with regard to the understanding of supernatural deities. In fact, «Demon is a transliteration of a Greek term referring originally to either good or bad spirit beings» – įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ24. Perhaps the Israelite conception of demons arose from the fact that «ancient people feared demons because they inhabited lonely places such as dark, shadowy, deserted areas, places of waste, or ruins of crumbling buildings»25. Pre-exilic Hebrew religion held that YHWH made all that was in heaven and earth, both good and evil. The «devil» as such did not exist, at least, not as Christian and later Jewish thought conceived of him. However the idea that human good was disrupted by a created being, an adversary, can be seen for example in the astonishing «serpent» of Eden who tempts Adam to sin, an act for which God curses the serpent and makes him and his «offspring» the eternal enemies of the «offspring» of Eve. The serpent’s offspring must afflict all humanity in subsequent generations (Gn 3:15)26. Could not the offspring of the serpent be a reference to demonic forces? Such a theory is not articulated later in the Hebrew Bible27. An interesting case of a spiritual enemy of human good is from the Book of Job, perhaps the oldest book in the Bible and a beautiful example of Hebrew poetry; it sings of Job’s great sufferings coming as a direct result of a kind of wager between God and a mysterious «Adversary», satan. This

Jesus the Exorcist

19

Satan is one of the bene-ha-Elohim, «the sons of God» (Jb 1:6) and so he has a unique relationship with his Creator. In Job as in Zachariah God permits this Satan to stand before him and speak to him in the heavenly court (cf. Zec 3:1-3). God boasts to him of the goodness of Job: «And the LORD said to Satan, ‘Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?’» (1:8). Satan says Job’s goodness is a result of God’s blessings and protection, but if God were to remove his protection over Job «he will curse you to your face» (1:11). So God allows Satan to bring great calamities upon Job, «And the LORD said to Satan, ‘Behold, all that he has is in your hand’» (Jb 1:8-11; 2:1-7). Despite the loss of everything including his health and family, Job maintains his integrity; he does not curse God, but blesses him – he only maintains that it was unfair that he suffer, and so he complains until the final chapters. Then in an act of total surrender to God’s will, Job gives all glory and credit to the Creator to do whatever he likes with his creation, and repents of having accused God of injustice (Jb 42:2-6). God then blesses Job enormously and makes him an intercessor for humanity, a role for which he became famous (Jb 42:10; Ez 14:14, 20; Jas 5:11). Therefore by means of Job’s patience and sincerity, his love of God and total surrender, clearly God has won the «wager» and Satan has lost. Despite the crucial role of the serpent in the temptation ordeal of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3, and «Satan’s» effort to disrupt Job’s relationship with God, an understanding of the devil as both tempter and accuser, that is, both serpent and Satan, developed only gradually in Jewish tradition, arising from certain tensions within the concept of YHWH28. The fact that the spirit of evil, the devil, is not a fully unified concept in the Old Testament is not grounds for rejecting his existence in later Jewish or Christian theology. Such rejection would be a case of the genetic fallacy: the notion that in order to find the truth of a word or concept one must look at it in its earliest form. Rather, historical truth is a development through time, and theological understanding likewise can mature as generations reflect upon their experience of suffering and joy in the light of providence confirmed in the sacred writings of their faith tradition. The devil could be considered the personification of evil in any culture. But several difficulties arise in discussing this concept in Hebrew religion. The word «devil» derives through Latin from the Greek diabolos, which is a rendition of the Hebrew satan29. Conceptually, the Hebrew word satan is not par essence identical to the spirit of evil, but merely descriptive of one of the characteristic roles that he plays. Satan derives from a Hebrew root meaning «to oppose», «obstruct», «accuse». It was translated into the Greek as diabolos, «adversary», whence it passed into Latin diabolus, German

20

Chapter 1

Teufel, and English devil. Satan appears as a common noun several times in the Old Testament in reference to a human opponent, as when David says to the sons of Zeruiah, «What right have you…to oppose me today»?30 In another early passage, an angel of the Lord blocks the road on which Balaam seeks to travel riding an ass. Since the angel obstructs the road, he is referred to as Satan (Num 22:22). The sense is clearly that of a common noun. The angel is not being called a «Satan», but in this instance, is merely an obstructer of the road. In order to posit the «prince of demons» as a possible metaphysical reality, the origin and existence of demons/evil spirits must to be further clarified. Dunston noted above that at least several demons came into Hebrew tradition from foreign gods or from the desert. Indeed humans by nature associate what is unknown with evil, tending to demonize it. But this is only a first glance at evil, to grasp the more profound and spiritually rich elements in the Hebrew concepts of demonic power, one needs to first understand and underscore the tremendous love by which Israel believed herself to be upheld and sustained through the centuries: God’s covenant love. Israel’s national identity was partly formed out of the oral tradition of the patriarchs to whom God had accorded blessings and promises, and this identify would be further solidified by the covenant through Moses at Sinai. The God of Abraham liberated Israel from bitter slavery in Egypt because, as God says to Pharaoh, «Israel is my firstborn son... Let my son go that he may serve me» because the worship of God is true freedom (Ex 4:22-23; Ps 19:7-10). In the desert God calls Israel to covenant because he wants them to be exclusively devoted to him so as to fulfil a special vocation he promised Abraham: to be God’s blessing to «all nations» (Gn 22:18), «a kingdom of priests and a holy nation» that, by keeping the covenant with God, will invite all the other children of God back to the freedom and joy of worshiping their true Creator (Ex 19:4-6; Dt 28:10). But this universal vocation is wounded by Israel’s own unfaithfulness. The apex of all evil for humanity is what prevents God from blessing the world through Israel’s worship, namely, rupture of the covenant (Dt 32:16-26; Is 24:5-6). This evil is much greater in God’s eyes, in fact, than the religious practices of the goyim who are not bound by a covenant with him (cf. Dt 6:4-15; 29:24-26). Furthermore, it is covenant faithfulness and not cultural superiority that sets Israel apart as a nation. According to Ezekiel Jews cannot claim to have a different origin that their goyim enemies; by blood Jews are the same as the Canaanites, Amorites, and Hittites31. In this context it cannot be stressed enough that even before Moses the «foreign gods» were never truly foreign to Israel. The people of Israel were quite familiar with the sexual rituals that pagan worship entailed, just as Aaron knew precisely how to build a golden

Jesus the Exorcist

21

calf and invite the people «to play» around it (Ex 32:1-35; Nm 25:1-9). Although Israel had sworn their fidelity to God in fear and trembling before stormy mount Sinai (Ex 19:16-19), just forty days later they broke that covenant without any fear whatsoever, not through ignorance of foreign gods, but through knowledge of them. So there must be another reason for why foreign gods became demons besides cultural ignorance and prejudice. The covenant in Exodus 24 cannot be broken, because its promise is sealed by the word of the Eternal God: «I have loved you with everlasting love... O virgin Israel!» (Jer 31:3-4). Despite centuries of betrayal, God is still a faithful «husband» and longs for the time when his people would love him «as a bride» (31:32; 2:2)32. The nuptial imagery connotes a spiritual truth: the golden calf incident, the orgy of Baal of Peor, etc. ruptured the covenant marriage with God with such severe contempt for God’s love that it rendered Israel on par with Sodom and Gomorrah (cf. Is 1:10-11). Reflection upon the contrast between Israel’s infidelity to the covenant through Baal worship vis-à-vis the pristine fidelity of monotheism practiced by Abraham and the «fathers» of oral tradition may have influenced the very roots of the Hebrew language33. It is no coincidence that Israel’s idolatry involved cult prostitution and promiscuity with «foreign women» in worship of the erotic (Ex 32:6, 25; Nm 25:1-3). «How sick is your heart, declares the Lord GOD, because you did all these things, the deeds of a brazen prostitute» (Ez 16:30). The scriptural witness is unanimous: idolatry is spiritual adultery. Both male and female cult prostitution, through which Israel spiritually fornicated with foreign gods in contempt for her husband, became the quintessential evil urge34. Now we can see why the Hebrew word for foreign gods was not principally something abstract like evil spirits or shadim, «demons», but baalim, ၱၬၰၸၢ «husbands», «masters»35. God ordered the prophet Hosea to marry a prostitute, so he would become a living sign to the people of God’s frustration with Israel (Hos 1:2). But God promises to cast aside Israel’s lovers: «I will remove the names of the Baals [baalim] from your lips... And I will betroth you to me forever» in a new «covenant» (Hos 2:17, 19). At this stage in Jewish history the word baalim would be more filthy and suggestive to Jews, and hence more evil than any unseen spirit could be. In the Torah the worship of these foreign «husbands» brought death to any Israelite who merely suggested it, even if that person were a family member (Dt 13:6-10). The lesson here is very concrete: foreign nations may follow their own gods to their own loss, but Israel is to abide by her promise to worship YHWH alone. Only when one understands in Jewish eyes the unconditional love of God for his special people could we understand how anything that sought to break that love was seen as hideous – even if, at this stage, evil was not conceived of as a concrete

22

Chapter 1

entity, we can already see the trajectory of where evil must finally take shape: as enemy of the God of the covenant, not through Jewish ignorance of evil but through intimacy with it. Therefore it is essential to see that the Hebrew Bible, especially the prophets, did not permit Israel simply to project evil onto foreign cultures and their gods, the experience of evil required of Israel, a very personal, if harrowing, look in the mirror. How did worship of the baalim pass from being innocent games with stone, wood, and stars to something understood to be concretely evil? How did occult practices lead to the opening of a metaphysical world in Jewish consciousness where spiritual evil is not just a perpetual, natural urge to sin (or fornicate), but something manifest in the actions of demons afflicting human beings? One can see how the Greek Septuagint, composed in the 2nd – 3rd centuries B. C., was indicative of this process of the demonization for both disease and foreign gods in Jewish post-exilic theology – a process that has influenced the modern concept of daemon as a malefic spirit. A prime example is Ps 91:6, where God promises to protect his faithful from mysterious plagues such as «the pestilence that stalks in darkness… the destruction that wastes at noonday». But the LXX translates pestilence (ႁၢ႟) as ʌȡ੺ȖμĮIJȠȢ «thing» (ʌ. įȚĮʌȠȡİȣȠμ੼ȞȠȣ ਥȞ ıțંIJİȚ «thing walking in darkness»), and destruction (ၢၪၿ) as įĮȚμȠȞ઀Ƞȣ μİıȘμȕȡȚȞȠ૨ «the daemon of noonday». What were Hebraic metaphors for the invisible action of disease became in Greek spiritual entities «walking in darkness». This is one example of a process: demons that cause disease had begun to take shape in the Jewish mind; but why? Here one could demonstrate the influence of Egyptian or Babylonian mysticism, or Hellenistic influences from Greek philosophy, the Platonic forms or the daimonia of Greek religion. But we can also see this as a deepening of spiritual elements already present in Hebrew tradition, a tradition which was never separated from its diverse Near Eastern socio-cultural milieu. Psalm 91 is about spiritual combat, God sends his angels to protect humans from invisible evil vv. 11-12. So even without the insertion of free-floating demons this passage already posits the existence of guardian angels, unseen spirits who inhabit a metaphysical realm of good and evil that is invisible but real. Into this world these disease-causing spirits bring death, which is not a new idea in Hebraic thought. That angelic spirits brought death is confirmed in the Pentateuch, most memorably the angels who destroy Sodom (Gn 19:13), the angel of death of Exodus (personified by YHWH himself), the plagues against Egypt, and plagues that killed tens of thousands of Israelites because of Baal worship and disobedience to Moses (Ex 12:29; Nm 15:9; 16:49). Later during the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem in 701 B.C. in a single night

Jesus the Exorcist

23

«the angel of the LORD went out and struck down a hundred and eightyfive thousand in the camp of the Assyrians» (Is 37:36; 2 Kgs 19:35)36. God’s angels also conducted Israel out of Egypt and lead them into battle against all their enemies (Nm 20:16; Ex 33:2). So the power of unseen spiritual forces, both good and evil, already exists in the Hebrew scripture and operates in accordance with God’s blessing or his wrath. Whatever the precise origin of the idea that disease was caused by įĮȚμóȞȚĮ, this idea had already become commonplace in the Judeo-Hellenistic worldview in which the New Testament was written, and in which exorcism and healing were related though not identical. However it should be noted that the process of demonization of evil predates the Septuagint. An «evil spirit» or «Satan» was sometimes sent by God to seriously afflict people, as in the case of Job, Abimelech (Jg 9:23), and the unfaithful king Saul (1 Sa 16:14; cf. 18:10; 19:9). Here evil is clearly under God’s direct control, as Satan was in Job, but the novelty of the LXX of Ps 91 seems to be the concept of spiritual combat between invisible forces of good and evil, between the aȖȖİȜȠȚ who protect God’s people and the įĮȚμóȞȚĮ who would seek to harm them in darkness37. As we have seen not all gods were made demons; įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ only occurs eight times in the Septuagint, whereas Baal occurs eighty-one times. Regardless of the influence of Hellenic thought, Jews of post-exilic period may have been already inclined to consider the worship behind the idols as indicative of real spiritual evil, i.e. non-human entities with intelligence. It is worthwhile to reflect on the context of Dt 32:17 and Ps 106:36, the only two passages where foreign gods are explicitly identified with demons, because the context here is sacrificial worship, «they sacrificed to shedim» (A›ru «demons» NRSV) who are both «not gods» and «new gods» (Dt 32:17). In these contexts we will see an awareness of something new: the emergence of religious practices in biblical history that could not be relegated to the category of spiritual fornication in violation of Israel’s covenant, but they were objectively evil from any perspective, namely, the sacrifice of one’s own children. «And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?» (Ez 16:20-21). To whom are the children being sacrificed? The word akal, «devoured», is the common word for eating, indicating that some «thing» has eaten these children, but who? Answering that question would bring Israel to confront an evil force they likely never wanted to face. The insane, exalted fury by which the kings of Israel and Judah fed the blood of their children to gods – practices which

24

Chapter 1

caused disaster, confusion, and exile for the whole nation – does not make sense if the idols are nothing more than «wood and stone» as earlier tradition had maintained38. Unlike cult prostitution the evil of these acts could have no logical explanation in human nature; therefore they must point to the existence of concrete spiritual evil, an unholy yet intelligent influence, that is, unseen demonic forces. This realization was compounded by the fact that these senseless acts were not committed by the ignorant but by the educated elite, such as Manasseh, the son of great King Hezekiah, descendant of the glorious David. God said King Manasseh’s «abominations» would be cause the destruction of Jerusalem and the Babylonian exile (2 Kgs 21:11-15), not only because he defiled God’s temple with idols but because Manasseh «made his son to pass through the fire, used magic, and used divination, and dealt with mediums and necromancers… Manasseh shed very much innocent blood, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another» (2 Kgs 21:6, 16). How is magic involved? A post-exilic Jewish understanding seemed to develop that if occult spiritual power was directly invoked somehow demons or evil spirits could infiltrate the human will. Just as when God sent the «evil spirit» to infiltrate the mind of king Saul, provoking him to insanity and murder, so also the spiritual forces behind divination, necromancy, and sorcery were the goal that motivated Judah’s kings to do intrinsically evil acts such as human sacrifice (2 Kgs 17:17; 21:6; 2 Ch 33:6, Ps 106:36f). The example of King Saul in 1 Samuel is telling. Saul is warned by Samuel that his disobedience to God was equivalent to «the sin of divination» and «idolatry» (1 Sa 15:23). In the next chapter we see evidence that spiritual infiltration by demonic power has occurred: «The Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrified him» (16:14). This evil spirit continued to afflict Saul day by day so that he called David to comfort him with music that made the spirit leave him (16:23). But once again «the evil spirit from God came on Saul» and it motivated several insane attempts to kill David, «Saul threw the spear, and said, I will strike David» (18:10-11; cf. 19:9-10). To believing Jews Saul’s malady may have appeared to be a mixed kind, natural and diabolical. There is too much of apparent human nature in it to believe it was all spiritual; and there is too much of apparently supernatural influence, to believe it was all natural. In any case the illness of Saul becomes paradigmatic of spiritual infiltration – scriptural proof that evil spirits exist and afflict those who venture outside God’s protection. It is very significant that Saul’s peccata capitalia was that he sought the counsel of a spiritual medium to obtain secret knowledge which instead of helping him led to his death (1 Sa 28:7f; 1 Ch 10:13). Saul’s case is a warning to future kings to avoid all contact with spirits

Jesus the Exorcist

25

outside the Mosaic norm, but the warning went unheeded. What happened to Saul would happen to Israel’s and Judah’s kings time and time again, the paradigm is simple: murder and insanity are provoked by evil spirits, which come as a result of seeking occult power in defiance of God’s law. Through the sacrifice of children post- exilic Jews had lost their innocence, so to speak, and had been shocked by evil to the core. They came to believe that evil spirits exist and operate within pagan rituals, not as gods but as demons who work towards human misery and insanity. Thus Dt 32:17- 30 and Ps 106:37f are actually songs that lament how the tragic story of demonic infiltration played out historically: «They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons» and so God rightly delivered the Judah to foreign captivity and terrible suffering (Ps 106:37, 41). But the Jews in exile cried out to God for mercy, and he saved them because he «remembered his covenant» of everlasting love, vv. 44-46. The conclusion that demons exist and seek to undermine God’s covenant bond with the nation was reinforced by the deep suffering of the people in exile, a direct result of the actions of kings who exchanged the blood of their children for the secret knowledge thought to be gained in sorcery (2 Kgs 16:3; 17:17; 21:6). Clearly the desire for occult power plagued Israel’s and Judah’s kings from Saul onward (1 Sa 15:23; 28:7; 1 Ch 10:13; 1 Kgs 1:2) which climaxed in motivating the most heinous of all crimes and the total devastation of the nation. Because of these historical tragedies the secret knowledge in divination, sorcery and magic came to be thought of as the source and summit of all evil, as the apocalyptic sources such as 1 Enoch bear witness (1 En 65:6-11). But it is important to see that this richness of understanding of demonic forces is found not only in the apocalypses of Judaism but also in the Massoretic text of the Hebrew Bible; where demonic powers are not marginal but manifest themselves at the climaxes of Israel’s history, namely, at the beginning of the united kingdom period with Saul and at end of the divided kingdom period with Manasseh and others. We can see demonic infiltration is not an exception but a general trend toward which the Davidic dynasty is tending. The raw horror of demonic evil, a projection of what cannot be explained by nature or illness, is finally exposed as the unseen forces underlying ritual human sacrifice. Thus even before the Septuagint was written, systematically insane crimes against humanity and the killing of innocent family members revealed through Israel’s history the work of demons. This demonic power is progressively unveiled not as a systematic demonology but sequentially through Israel’s reflection on its covenant history from Saul onward39. The attraction of occult practices was the esoteric knowledge and power offered by pagan deities as spiritual sources of «light» who reveal beautiful secrets, but,

26

Chapter 1

because their power is secretly set against humanity in that it requires human sacrifice, they are indicative of a unified power of evil set against the God of the covenant. Scripture records how the Jewish people, including the royal family, secretly «despised [God’s] statutes and his covenant… and the warnings he gave them» and objectively acted against their own best interest when they «burned their sons and their daughters as offerings and used divination and omens and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking him to anger» (2 Kgs 17:15, 17). The term sell is makar, as when Esau sold his birthright to Jacob (Gn 25:33), so the Jewish people «sold themselves to do evil», that is they sold their royal dignity as «the sons of the LORD your God» (Dt 14:1) to become slaves of a non-human, evil intelligence. The Hebrew Scriptures attest to the belief that these Jews had become slaves of demonic evil long before they ever were slaves in Babylon. No other logical explanation – neither insanity nor nature – can suffice to explain why the kings and the people brought death to their families, addicted as they were to occult practices. Psychosis cannot explain why evil was so attractive and destructive for generations with a few exceptions. Thus Israel’s covenant history exposed evil to be much more than sorcery as a discrete phenomenon, if generations of kings willingly became their own worst enemies it was because they were truly victims of something greater than themselves. Greater than the kingdoms of Babylon or Assyria was this subtle but overpowering demonic influence that, conceived of in its totality through Israel’s history, seemed to constitute nothing less than an occult empire set against the covenant that held the kingdom together. If this empire of demons existed it was cunning, baffling, and powerful, its agents had disguised themselves within occult practices and successfully deceived generations of Jewish elite. The demons had wisely targeted the royalty, the very people who would bring curses down upon the whole nation if they fell (2 Kgs 21:11). Thus demonic success depended on unity; all treachery and deception must be fused and directed toward one sole purpose: to destabilize the covenant that is God’s protective relationship with his children. A unity of opposition under one demonic being who opposes Israel’s covenant with God can be seen clearly in the figure of Satan in the second to last of the prophets. Zechariah 3 describes one of the most striking developments of the word Satan in Jewish history. Though shorter in content than Job, the ordeal of Zechariah’s Satan is theologically richer, because Job was likely written before it became central to Jewish thought that the cosmic order was held in balance through the high priest. Zechariah, a priest himself, depicts a spirit named Satan who appears before God and the angels seeking to accuse the high priest:

Jesus the Exorcist

27

«Be silent, all flesh, before the LORD, for he is raised up from his holy dwelling. Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, with the Adversary (Satan) standing at his right hand to accuse him. The Lord said to the Adversary, ‘The Lord rebuke you, Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?’ Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments» (Zec 2:13-3:3).

In Job Satan tested Job’s integrity, but here we have a comprehensive judgment scene. In order to understand this scene in ancient Jewish eyes we must understand the uniquely crucial role the high priest played in their culture. He alone could pronounce the Divine Name; he alone could stand before God to make atonement for all their sin; he alone could enjoy full communion with YHWH by ascending up into God’s presence in the Holy of Holies, but all of these things he could do only once a year on the most solemn feast in the Jewish calendar (Lv 16:29-31)40. Leviticus 16 explains the ritual of a high priest on that day, the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur (ႁၧၻႬ ၱၧၬ): «He shall make atonement (uGsʥ) for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins... the priest shall bathe his body in water in a holy place... wearing the holy linen garments... he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the assembly... once in the year because of all their sins» (Lv 16:16, 24, 32-34).

Israel celebrated this day when all their sins could be washed away and cosmic order restored, but only if the high priest was himself pure. If he was unworthy, he would die (Lv 16:13) – so the solemn nature of the context cannot be overstated. The great anticipation for Israel on this day was that the high priest would come out from God’s presence alive, then they would celebrate a tremendous feast. Sirach describes the splendour of the priest on Yom Kippur being like the sun that lights all creation: «And as the sun when it shines, so did he shine in the temple of God... when he put on the robe of glory, and was clothed with the perfection of power» (Sir 50:7, 11). And it’s not only Israel who wants to be free of death and the destructive power of sin – the Jews understood that all creation, all mankind is longing to enter back into that original relationship of shalom with God and nature that Adam enjoyed in Eden. This return to paradise was symbolized by the Jerusalem temple, not only for Jews but for the goyim as well, as God says of the nations in Isaiah: «I will bring them to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer» so that by worshiping God an ocean of his blessings could flow to «all peoples» (Is 56:7). But all these blessings

28

Chapter 1

(or curses) to Israel and through them to all the nations, hinged on one event: God’s judgment of the high priest on the Day of Atonement. Unlike Job, Joshua is a high priest, so this judgment scene’s significance is deeper than Job’s personal ordeal with Satan. Joshua’s trial is the trial of all Israel, in a deep Jewish sense, it is the trial of all humanity and even the cosmos itself, because in Judaism the high priest in his ministry represents all of these realities. The high priest is a living temple, like the conductor of a symphony, he manifests the cosmic temple of all creation in its collective worship of God41. But in Zechariah’s day (520 B.C.) the temple was destroyed and priestly sacrifice had been cut off. Zechariah prophesizes that by the reconstruction of the temple and reestablishment of the high priest all humanity will come to benefit: «Sing and rejoice... I will dwell in your midst, declares the LORD. And many nations shall join themselves to the LORD in that day, and shall be my people» (Zec 2:10-11a). But there is a problem: humanity’s terrible state of injustice and sin prevents them from entering peacefully into God presence, and therefore atonement must be made for «all flesh», that, is all mankind (2:13). That all humanity is implicated in Joshua’s trial is evident from the opening verse of the trial, Zec 2:13 reads: «Be silent, all flesh, before the LORD, for he is raised up from his holy dwelling» (ႂၤၿ ၵၧၸၳ ma’on qadosh, elsewhere in Scripture this term invariably refers to the dwelling of God in heaven, it is the celestial Holy of Holies)42. The vision of Joshua is either in the future temple or more likely it is symbolic of the heavenly one. Indeed, since Joshua stands before angels and Satan and has ascended to God’s «holy dwelling» as representative of «all flesh», the atonement ceremony at hand is something much greater than a typical Yom Kippur. As all Jerusalem held its breath while the high priest made atonement for the sins of the year, here «all flesh» is holding its breath «silent… before the LORD» (2:13) because as Satan accuses Joshua it is man’s eternal destiny and the cosmic order that hang in the balance. But who will make atonement? In God’s tribunal there is «the angel of the Lord» who plays the role of man’s advocate (Zec 3:5-6), while this certain Satan plays the role of prosecuting attorney «standing at his right hand to accuse him»43 v. 1. But v. 2, «the LORD says to Satan, ‘The LORD rebuke you, O Satan... Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?» Fire indicates divine wrath44; being «plucked from the fire» is being rescued from the just execution of it. Thus when Lot was saved from God’s justice he was «as a brand plucked out of the burning» «when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah» (Am 4:11). This fire of God is sometimes described to be in Satan’s power, as when God permitted Satan to afflict Job, his servant reports: «The fire of God fell from heaven» destroying Job’s goods (Jb 1:16). The essential truth here is that

Jesus the Exorcist

29

YHWH, as supreme judge and redeemer, will rescue Joshua from the fire of divine justice; and God himself, and not Joshua, will make atonement for Israel and all human guilt «in this earth» vv. 4, 9. Therefore it is not only reasonable but crucial to see Zechariah 3 as a kind of exalted Yom Kippur scene implying a universal redemption, where the atonement is not described in terms of its external ritual but its spiritual significance. Why must God make atonement? Because by their own power humans are incapable of it, «I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake» (Is 43:25). «Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the LORD of hosts» (Zec 4:6). In salvation history from the Exodus onward God alone can save, cure spiritual illness, restore fallen humanity, and reestablish his people who are hopelessly wounded by sin. The prophets promised that not only will God forgive but, by the transforming power of God’s Spirit, God’s rebellious people would finally be capable of obedience, love, and fidelity as true children of the covenant relationship and thereby become worthy of the promise: all God’s fatherly blessings of joy and peace45. Man stands condemned because his spiritual condition is atrocious: «Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments» v 3. For Jews, such dress for a high priest is worse than someone wearing swimming trunks on their wedding day; it is nothing less than a death sentence (Lv 16:2, 13). The high priest was held to the highest standard of obedience to ritual purity, above all on Yom Kippur (Lv 16:4). In shocking defiance of God’s law the high priest Joshua is impure and thus incapable of making atonement, without divine assistance his doom is certain, v. 446. Joshua’s uncleanness is symbolic of the whole cosmos being «defiled» by human injustice and covenant unfaithfulness for which the earth is under a «curse» of utter destruction of apocalyptic proportions47. Humans are incapable of elevating themselves to God because from the abyss of their transgressions they cannot simply wash their hands – a great chastisement of fire, presumably inflicted by Satan, who showed this power in Job 1:16 and 2:7, is coming on the whole world according to God’s justice. In Judaism Adam and Eve are responsible as the care-takers of creation, so violation of God’s law throws the whole universe into chaos. But by the mercy of God who has freely «chosen Jerusalem» v. 2, the angel of the Lord will miraculously cleanse Joshua: «Remove the filthy garments from him», the angel says and to Joshua, «I have taken your iniquity from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments» v. 4. The omnipotence of God’s mercy has accomplished what all the sacrifices and rituals of Yom Kippur were meant to do: to remove the condemnation of death and the curses of the covenant (Dt 28:15f), and to give God’s people new life. But how will this come about? «I will bring my servant the Branch48», a Messiah

30

Chapter 1

figure, v. 8, and God promises to «remove all iniquity in this land [earth, eretz] in a single day» v. 9. This confirms that Joshua’s judgment ordeal is representative of a something on the order of a rehabilitation of the cosmic order under a restored priesthood and kingdom, vv. 4-5, to which Joshua is an «omen» or sign v. 8. This sign has meaning for the salvation of all God’s people, not just Israel but «many nations» as well (2:11). God is effectively promising to strip all human kind from fear of death and judgment «in a single day» so that they may be joyfully re-clothed in «the garments of salvation» (Is 61:10). Only by understanding the universal salvific/apocalyptic aspect of Zechariah 2- 3 can we appreciate the role of Satan in this context. As we have seen in the case of Job, here again YHWH permits Satan the accuser to stand in the heavenly court and disrupt, if possible, man’s relationship with God. Satan aims to enforce the divine curses brought down on the earth by human injustice, as he initially made Job suffer by God’s leave. But here Satan is more than the punisher of one man, as we have seen, Judaism has exalted the high priest to be a cosmic figure, representing all people in the fullness of their primordial vocation. God, by restoring Joshua, promises to restore humanity to Adam’s original vocation as the image and likeness of God. Adam was called to be king of creation and the priest of Eden which is the primordial garden sanctuary (Gn 1:27-28)49. But Jewish tradition attests that the spirit of evil was there in Eden in order to tempt Adam and Eve to oppose God’s plan, and they lost some of their original dignity when they willingly consented to do evil, bringing the tyranny of death on their progeny (Gn 3:15-19). The significance of this judgment scene of the high priest cannot be overstated in the advance it lends to the Hebrew understanding of the devil, ò įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ (Zec 3:1 LXX). There is one high priest and one Satan to accuse him, just as there is one human race and one «Adversary» who seeks its ruin. Whether it be the serpent of Eden or the Satan in Zechariah, man’s primordial enemy is always at hand. Let us take the hypothesis for a moment that the serpent whom God «cursed» in Genesis 3:14 is the Satan whom God «rebukes» in Zechariah 3:2. Why does this comparison make sense? Just as it was the serpent who first tempted humans to sin against God, a vocation which God seems to have appointed him forever (3:15), so then it makes sense that this same spirit «accuses» man of sin. Just as the ancient serpent sought to lead humanity into death and mistrust of God (Gn 2:17; 3:1-5), so this Satan aims to see mankind both stripped of his dignity as priest-king of creation, and punished for his guilt in the court of God’s justice. But when God takes away man’s guilt, Satan is defeated; the unfathomable divine mercy triumphs over his justice. God’s mercy rebukes Satan and silences his

Jesus the Exorcist

31

accusations – in fact Satan does not say a word in Zechariah 3, furious perhaps that he has failed as Accuser, and that God will give humans a second chance to find peace and prosperity, v. 10. Nevertheless Zechariah reveals Satan in his essential role as chief Accuser of God’s people and humanity in general. Satan’s role of enemy fits with the serpent whom God established at the beginning of human history as the hidden but ever-present archenemy (ଛʖɽʌʊʎ) of mankind, for in this spirit God has placed eternal «hatred» (ଜʖɽʌɲ) toward the sons of Eve (Gn 3:14-15 LXX)50. We have seen that this Satan fulfils the role God gave the serpent in Genesis 3 to afflict mankind. Therefore Zechariah’s elegant unification of the concept of Satan as chief Accuser in this atonement scene makes it reasonable to identify this spirit with the ancient tempter of Genesis 3, even though such identification is not explicit in the text. The theological advance of Zechariah’s Satan is that he symbolizes several key roles: the enemy of Israel’s essential vocation as «a kingdom of priests» (Ex 19:6), the enemy of human salvation in general which is secured and sanctified by Israel’s priesthood, and the disrupter of the cosmic order. Again in Jewish eyes to condemn the high priest is to be the diabolos obstructing God’s blessings from flowing to humanity, nature and the cosmos. At certain points the Septuagint gives insight into how Jewish scholars of the Second Temple period began to conceptualize God’s kingdom vis-àvis the demons. In Ps 96:5 for example, «idols» is not translated as the usual İíįȦȜȠȞ but as įĮȚμóȞȚĮ. The context here is crucial, the Hebrew reads vv. 4-5: «Great is the LORD and greatly to be praised; he is to be feared above all gods. All the gods of the peoples are worthless idols, but the LORD made the heavens». But the Greek reads: «all the gods of the nations are demons [įĮȚμóȞȚĮ]», v. 5. Why the change? This is one example that seems to be indicative of a general trend. In the light of post-exilic Jewish suffering the gods of nations can no longer be considered as totally insignificant, they do have a certain spiritual power, and that power is seductive but ultimately destructive. What before was a «non-entity» (eliylim ၱၬၰၬၰၠ), is now a metaphysical reality, a daemon whose existence and character is weighed against that of the Creator of the heavens, v. 5. The įĮȚμóȞȚĮ were once neutral in the Greek culture; now the word daemon is imbued with an evil connotation, because if the įĮȚμóȞȚĮ are gods who demand blood sacrifice of children (Ps 106:37), they must be forces opposing the lordship of the true God. The Greek version of Ps 96 states that this psalm was composed for the «house» of the Lord «after the captivity» (Ps 96:0 LXX). Post- exilic Judaism had already endured a kind of metaphysical enlightenment due to the trauma of the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem. As the faith of Jews was tested, Judaism discovered more deeply that God is truly enthroned in

32

Chapter 1

the heavens (cf. Dt 26:15; Ps 2:4; 11:4; 103:19; 123:1), as God says: «Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me?» (Is 66:1). And conceivably if almighty God had an invisible throne and a metaphysical kingdom, evil could also have both throne and kingdom51. Observe how the Ps 96 LXX, which has apocalyptic themes of final judgment vv. 10, 13, squares off the majesty of God majesty against the demonic forces: «Great is the LORD… he is fearful above all the gods. For all the gods of the nations are demons, but the LORD made the heavens… say among the nations that the Lord reigns», vv. 4-5, 10. Like the offspring of the ancient serpent who strike the heel of the sons of Eve (Gn 3:15), metaphysical evil was at first difficult for Israel to perceive, but now history has revealed it to the Jews to be something concrete: through captivity caused by the insane actions of Judah’s kings, the gods are exposed as malignant demons. The idols are no longer mere lifeless non-entities, beneath them spiritual evil has taken form and substance. Thus the malevolent actions of demons will be explored, and further exposed and elaborated upon in the Jewish apocalyptic literature, in which sorcery, magic and idolatry will be grouped together and emerge as not only the cause of death and destruction (1 En 10:7), but the direct result of demonic teaching, that is, the secrets that are at the root and apex of all evil will inevitably destroy the world52. The apocalyptic literature such as 1 Enoch gives evil a solid, metaphysical category, and of course exalts it to apocalyptic proportions: the secrets of idolatry and specifically sorcery are the cause of the destruction of the universe, these secrets were revealed to humans by the fallen angels, for which they will be punished forever53. This Jewish apocalyptic literature is not so much an exaltation of evil as the elaboration of what the Tanakh implies, and thus it gives natural expression to Israel’s own self- awareness of her spiritual triumphs and defeats contemplated by the light of God’s word and her own unique salvation history. Traditions and trajectories for the origins of the devil are rooted in scripture, because the prophets of the Hebrew bible make reference to a tradition that had already existed by the time the Major Prophets were writing. Thus in Isaiah and Ezekiel we also have indirect references to the Jewish tradition that a certain heavenly creature, an angelic being, had tried to make himself God, but he fell into destruction and was cast down to earth due to the wickedness of his filthy pride. Isaiah and Ezekiel compare the fall of this heavenly spirit to the fall of the king of Babylon and Tyre respectively (Is 14:12-15; Ez 28:2, 12-19). The fallen angel theme is elaborated upon in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature where the three concepts of the devil are consolidated and unified: the fallen angel, the

Jesus the Exorcist

33

tempting serpent, and Satan the accuser54. Now that we have seen a brief sketch of the concept of spiritual forces of evil gradually developing in Jewish history, let us turn to the issue of defining the devil in Hebrew tradition. In modern times, there are several interpretations of the origins of the Hebrew devil, that is, how did ancient monotheistic Jews come to conceive of a master spirit of evil and incorporate him into their tradition: The first is that Satan is a personification of the evil impulse within man. In this argument, he is an earlier, parallel, and more personal expression of the Rabbinic yester ha-ra, «evil inclination». It is a possibility that all cosmic conceptions of good and evil may ultimately be psychological projections. At least some of the Old Testament authors themselves considered the spirit of evil an objective reality, and so this argument fails to reflect the tradition in which scriptures were written, and the tradition by which the Jewish religious identity was consolidated and preserved. The second is that the personification of evil arose out Israel’s experience with idolatry, namely, the tendency to project evil onto what is unknown or foreign. By this hypothesis the gods of Israel’s neighbours and enemies were demonized. As mentioned above by Dunston, at least two demonic spirits in the Hebrew Scripture Lilith and Resheph were foreign divinities, so there is some evidence for this theory. It is a well-known phenomenon in the history of religions that the gods of one nation become the devils of its rival. When the Aryans divided into Indians and Iranians, for example, the Devas remained gods for the Indians, but became devils (daevas) for the Iranians, while the Ahuras remained gods for the Iranians and became devils (asuras) for the Indians55. Israel disobeyed God and fell into the worship of the Canaanite god Baal (introduced by Jezebel) and countless other Baals: Baal-peor, Baal-berith, Baal- tamar, Baal-hamon, Baal-gad or Gad, «luck», the latter is translated as įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ (Is 65:11 LXX). The Babylonian deity Fortune has become simply «demon» in the Septuagint. This kind of demonization is the exception rather than the rule because, as we have seen, the foreign gods were never foreign to Israel. Why the Septuagint does not demonize the Hebrew Baal and Baals, but transliterates them as ǺĮĮȜ and ǺĮĮȜȚμ, is also the reason why the Hebrew authors did not demonize all the foreign gods in the first place – it has to do with the covenant with YHWH and the original Jewish concept of evil. Therefore this anthropological explanation whereby foreign gods are demonized is not comprehensive enough, and it fails to «go all the way» and unify all evil spirits under one supreme head, the Satan of the Gospels. The third interpretation is that the devil arose from a Jewish understanding in the post-exilic period that sacrifice to gods was sacrifice

34

Chapter 1

to demons (cf. Ps 106:37; Dt 32:17). In other words the Hebrew concept of the devil arose very gradually from consideration of what Israel itself practiced, when it committed idolatry in contempt of God’s covenant. If violation of the first commandment was the worst possible evil, what did it lead to? Much of scriptures attest that idolatry was simply the adoration of wood statues, or stars, which were «nothing» they had no sensory capacity, no deep spiritual reality behind them, they were blind, and «those who adored them would become like them» (Ps 96:5; 115:2-8). But after the Babylonian captivity Jewish prophets and writings attest to the emergence of metaphysical evil, an active force of blindness, as stated above. Finally Judah had learned its lesson of why the Torah was so serious about preventing human sacrifice and sorcery (Lv 18:21; Ex 22:18). When sacrificial practices of Judah’s kings became so hideous that they willingly sacrificed their own children in occult rituals for which the nation was put in exile (2 Kgs 17:17; 21:11-15), who was the real beneficiary of such acts of raw evil if not the devil? This evil was ancient: it seduced Eve to rebellion against God. This evil was intelligent: it operated through history and ensnared many generations, thus it seemed to pose itself above time and space. This evil was united and organized: by prospering from the most unnatural and inconceivable violations of the Torah, this evil prevented Israel from fulfilling its vocation to be a blessing to all the nations (Gn 22:18), and thus it took dead aim on the God of the covenant. The fourth, is that Satan was the name of a demon among demons who rose to the position of their chief. This interpretation seems to fail in the sense that it seems that there is no evidence of «Satan» having a hierarchical relation to other angelic beings or demons. But as we have seen «Satan» in the Old Testament is not a name but a function, namely, an Adversary of man who appears in the court of God like a prosecuting attorney. The Satan of Job is not explicitly the same Satan in Zec 3:1-3. Even though there is no specific demonology of the legalistic «Satan», from the description given in Job and Zechariah one can infer quite a vivid picture of his activities and his power: this Satan is included among the bene ha-Elohim (Jb 1:6) thus he has a relation to other celestial beings of the God of heaven. These «sons of God» were created to sing God’s praises (Jb 38:7; Is 6:2-3), but some of the sons of God rebelled, such as those who fell into fornication with the daughters of men (Gn 6:2-4). In Job Satan’s character takes shape: he spends his time crossing «to and fro on the earth» 1:7, and he is eager to augment human suffering by causing disaster, death, and disease vv. 12-19. Since he does this under God’s permission, it seems to be Satan’s job to met out God’s punishments and apply his curses, tasks which Satan seems to enjoy56. As if that was not evil enough, Satan says to God that Job’s

Jesus the Exorcist

35

goodness is merely based on divine favour, let suffering fall upon Job «and he will curse you to your face» v. 11. Here the great desire of the Satan is not only causing suffering but fomenting apostasy and rebellion from God. But as we have seen Job surrenders and gives glory to God, and God greatly rewards him. Therefore, though the intention of Satan is wicked, he is useful, under constraint, to God’s plan of helping man to grow in godly virtue and love. But in the Jewish mind Satan’s primordial character transcends the context of Job and took shape around a goal: to bring people, through suffering and despair, toward a position of hatred for God. The fifth, is that the concept of the devil arose from an awareness of sin, that is, the failure of the Jewish nation to abide by Mosaic law, this failure was ascribed to demonic forces, among whom one demon in particular came to be recognized as both as the origin and destination of evil. There are many manifestations of evil among Hebrew demons, and no demon, with the exception of Azazel, ever approaches the lofty position of apotheosis of evil. Azazel is the mysterious spirit in the desert who received the scapegoat on Yom Kippur (Lv 16:7-26). Before the goat was lead out to Azazel to be killed, the high priest would lay his hands on the goat’s head and «confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel, and all their transgressions, and all their sins» (Lv 16:21). The scapegoat-as-sin-bearer practice may have reinforced two ideas latent in Jewish tradition: the punishment for sin is death (Gn 2:17), and the one who denies this fact and encourages sin is a demonic force, the spirit of evil himself57. The tradition of a demonic origin of evil was deeply elaborated upon in later Jewish apocalyptic writing, where an intelligent spirit is once again the principle source of humanity’s rebellion and misery. In the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36, written about 200 - 300 B.C.) the demon Azazel teaches primordial mankind weaponmaking and seduction, educating mankind in «all the works of godlessness and unrighteousness and sin» (8:1-4; 13:2-3). Although other demons taught sin, the angels specifically report Azazel’s crimes to God (9:7) and God tells them: «Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert… and cast him therein… cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgment he shall be cast into the fire» (10:4-7). So we see that of all the corrupting spirits of 1 Enoch, this spirit in particular seems to be the object of divine wrath. God says «the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin» (10:8-9). If for Jews Azazel was the end point of «all their sins» on Yom Kippur (Lv 16:21) this demon would be revealed to be the principle source of sin as well. Just as YHWH was the true source and end of all blessings, one demon above all came to be such for sin.

36

Chapter 1

But does the Jewish apocalyptic tradition propose a demonic hierarchy? In the Book of Parables of Enoch (1 Enoch 37-71) one can see the first inklings of a demonic hierarchy emerging with Azazel once again taking centre stage, which will be discussed more below in the section on the New Testament (2.1). The sixth interpretation, mentioned briefly above, holds that Satan was once one of God’s most splendid celestial spirits who fell from heaven. Although this interpretation has the weakness of being somewhat difficult to decipher where historical information blends into religious tradition, it seems to be the tradition with the most scriptural attestation. Fairly strong support for the view can be found in the New Testament, where Jesus identifies Satan with the fallen spirit: «I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven» (Lk 10:18; cf. Rv 12:7-9). The Jewish tradition, which was most likely an oral one long before it was found in Scripture, is reflected in Ezekiel 28:12-19, Isaiah 14:12-15, and Job 1:6-7, 38:7. The traditions in Ezekiel and Isaiah are found within laments of pagan kings whose falls are compared to the fall of a mysterious primordial spirit – so whatever cannot logically be attributed to the earthly king58, one can safely attribute to the tradition of the fallen angelic being. In the case of Ezekiel this being is explicitly named a cherub59: «Thus says the Lord GOD: ‘You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the paradise of God... You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God... You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, till wickedness was found in you» (Ez 28:12-15).

The cherubim in Hebrew Scripture are winged, heavenly, intelligent, non- human spiritual beings who guard Eden (Gn 3:24) and have the privilege of being the closest creatures to YHWH «who sits enthroned upon the cherubim» (2 Sa 6:2). But if this ancient cherub spirit was «blameless» and «full of wisdom» how did he become evil? «Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom» (Ez 28:17); mesmerised by his own image he fell into narcissistic self- adulation, and thus became unworthy to serve in God’s sanctuary. Also he became violent: «You were filled with violence and you sinned, so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God... O guardian cherub... I cast you to the ground» vv. 16-17. And once he was cast down to the earth God exposed his wickedness before all humanity, making him utterly contemptible, vv. 16-19. Isaiah’s prophecy of the king of Babylon makes reference to a tradition of a spirit that in the light of Judaic symbolism is strikingly similar to that of Ezekiel:

Jesus the Exorcist

37

«How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the earth, you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’ But you are brought down to Sheol, to the far reaches of the pit» (14:12-15).

Here is another mysterious and luminous heavenly being who exalts himself out of pride in his glory. Ezekiel’s and Isaiah’s primary point is not to teach about the fall of this angel/cherub from oral tradition, whose story, it is assumed, everyone knows. Their point is that the kings of Tyre and Babylon, despite all their glory and wisdom, fell into the same error that the angelic being fell into: they forgot God and worshiped themselves, abandoning reason for madness, and so like him their end is utter ruin. What can one reconstruct from the traditions of the fallen spirit that these prophets draw from? The following is a kind of sketch that seeks to unify these fallen spirits under one head, based on the traditions in Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Job. In the middle of Isaiah’s taunt of the king of Babylon, he suddenly draws from a tradition that, like Ezekiel, has elements that cannot possibly describe a human king (14:12-15). There is no mention here of a cherub, though to any Jewish audience unmistakable angelic references are made. «Stars of God» v. 13, is a unique expression found only here, but angelic beings are elsewhere called «stars». This makes sense for two reasons: the fallen angel is himself called a «morning star, son of the dawn» so the concept of star is already personified in v. 12, and in Job Satan appears in the heavenly court among «the sons of God» (1:6), heavenly beings who are called «morning stars» (Jb 38:7 ႁၿၢ ၬၢၯၧၯ). And yet in Job Satan does not spend his time in heaven with the other sons of God, but he is always «going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it» (2:2). Therefore is reasonable to assume that the Satan of Job has already fallen to earth, having lost his heavenly position among the other «sons of God», «the ten thousands of holy ones» who serve God in the celestial court (Dt 33:2; cf. Ps 89:5-7). The importance of Job is that it allows us to identify purely from a single source that Satan is one of the primordial sons of God, but unlike the other sons of God in heaven (38:7), Satan is a spirit who traverses the earth (1:7; 2:2). The references to the sons of God in Job 1:6-7, 2:1-2 and 38:7 are essential for the key background information about the origin of the fallen angel being named «Satan» and is among the sons of God. This association is fair because the fact that the «sons of God» were celestial beings that

38

Chapter 1

make up God’s court is not peculiar to Job, but is found in Genesis 6:1-8, Deuteronomy 32:8, and the psalms 29:1, 82:1,6, 89:6; their existence would be common knowledge from the Semitic oral tradition. The picture is simple: this «Day Star, son of the Dawn» (Is 14:12)60, can be easily identified as the Satan of Job because he is 1) indeed among the «stars of God» / «sons of God» who were created at the beginning of time for the glory of God and 2) he now finds himself confined to the earth (Jb 2:2). As one of the «sons of God» (Jb 1:6; 2:1) Satan has a primordial vocation, even prior to that of accuser, as we learn towards the end of the book of Job. Here God asks if Job were present when God first designed the universe and created the heavens «When the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?» (Jb 38:7). The «sons of God» are created to «sing together» with joy before God, a theme taken up in the psalms where the angelic beings stand (or fly) before God’s throne in the heavenly sanctuary: «Let the heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones» (Ps 89:5; cf. 148:2). Isaiah, in his vision of the exalted throne of YHWH, introduces the angelic beings called seraphim, the «burning ones» who have six wings and who worship God constantly, singing «Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!» (Is 6:2-3). The original vocation of Satan was to do what all the other sons of God do: participate in the angelic choirs, as God says «you were an anointed guardian cherub» (Ez 28:14). God created Satan to join his brothers who «shouted for joy» since time began. «Bless the LORD, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, obeying the voice of his word!» (Ps 103:20). But Satan chose neither to bless the Lord nor to obey his word. Now we can better understand why the celestial spirit of Isaiah 14 fell, he apparently rejected the original vocation for which God had created him. One of the «mighty ones» refused to join the other celestial spirits in praise of the Creator; one of the cherubim defected from his brethren, and instead he thought «I will set my throne above the stars of God» v. 13, that is to say, «I will become the object of praise». When the morning star seeks to set his throne above the other stars, a catastrophe ensues – after all, can there be two Gods in heaven? Can there be two thrones and two gods who dictate independently of each other? «Throne» is not only a symbol of authority and judgment but a sign of worship. The tradition of the failed exaltation of Satan’s throne may have influenced Christian scripture, as John writes in Revelation that in his fall Satan brought down «a third of the stars of heaven» who are «his angels», and he «gave his power and his throne» to the beast so that he might be worshiped as God61. Without any New Testament reference this angelic being was clearly seen in heaven and he

Jesus the Exorcist

39

was cast down to the pit, and the reason for his fall is clear, as in Ezekiel 28, it is presumption, excessive self-trust, but more fundamentally, he denied his own essential nature to sing and worship God. By refusing to love God the proud angel spoiled his relationship with his Creator and he disfigured his own nature that was originally so beautiful and pristine, as Ezekiel puts it so vividly 28:15-19. What picture can one synthesize from the fallen spirit of Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14? We can see here that a powerful and intelligent spirit willfully set himself apart as evil and stood alone from the beginning of time («Eden», «son of Dawn» connote a primordial period prior to human history). In this way this spirit defined evil, he gave it form and substance. Evil had never before existed in the universe because God had created all things «very good» (Gn 1:31). Evil did not even exist originally in this spirit himself («you were blameless on the day I created you» Ez 28:15). God is Goodness itself, it is never God’s will that a free agent choose evil; for example, God calls Cain to master his sin lest it devour him (Gn 2:17; 4:7; Sir 15:11-12). So how did this angel rebel? He looked at himself instead of God. Perceiving no limit to his beauty, he could not contain his ecstasy of adoring himself – to the point that he developed a secret desire: to be adored as God by others (Ez 28:2; Is 14:13-14). So he «filled with violence» rebelled against the created order «above the stars of God I will set my throne» (Ez 28:16; Is 14:13). But in that same moment God stripped him of his glory and justly cast his presumption down «to the earth» and to death (Ez 28:17), leaving an indelible mark on cosmic history. All evil after him would in some way be a mere imitation of his primordial act. His overconfidence would be repeated again and again in Jewish history. Ezekiel 16 reminds Israel that when God made Israel rich and beautiful «you trusted in your beauty and played the whore» (16:15) until ruin and exile ravaged the nation because «The Lord resists the proud, but he gives grace to the humble» (Pv 3:34 LXX). The fallen angel did not find mercy, because his sin was committed in full knowledge that God was his Maker. He knew that his revolt was an act of pure contempt and a direct assault on the majesty of God. Wanting to usurp God’s power, he treated his Creator like a stranger. Perhaps he was ignorant of God’s true goodness and love, and that the worship of Goodness itself could guarantee eternal joy. In any case Satan turned away from God at the dawn of time and killed the love he should have had for his Father. God forlornly allowed this rebellion, but there is no evidence that he encouraged it. Having lost his first son to pride, God’s hope in creating Adam from the humble mud was that though humanity, God could reveal the glory of humility and the beauty of loving service. These are indeed more godlike attributes than self-obsession and the thirst for

40

Chapter 1

power. Job 1:6-19, 2:1-2, 38:7 are crucial pieces of tradition because they identify Satan as an angelic being who roves the earth and inflicts curses, instead of singing God’s praise in heaven with the other sons of God. But why would the fallen angel want to play the role of Satan the Accuser, as seen in Zechariah and Job; he is the adversary of human good? Perhaps by the fact that misery loves company; the fallen angel is hopeless of ever finding a place in heaven again (Is 14:15; Ez 28:16), but he wants to see humanity puff itself up in pride and fall like he did – just for the sake of schadenfreude, the joy of seeing others suffer. This insane fury of destroying humans through temptation, addiction, and accusation, would be one of the few ways he can get back at God. He knows that God loves humanity, evident in the great care by which God endowed man with intelligence and sovereignty over creation (Gn 1:28). Man was created in God’s image, so the tempters delight is in seeing that image of God plunged into the filth of injustice, rapine, and murder – all what offends God, things that the devil delights in (Gn 4:7; 6:5-6). This is so that he can then accuse God’s creatures of the injustice he provoked, claim humanity for himself, and keep them forever imprisoned in «shame and everlasting contempt» at the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Not because he loves man, but when man suffers God «is grieved to his heart» (Gn 6:6). So God’s mercy triumphs over retribution, as we see in Zechariah 3 by the redemption, the Messiah that God promises, vv. 8-10. For his own sake God will take away man’s sin in a single day, so that over mankind Satan will have no claim. From these books of the Old Testament Satan emerges here as the aȡȤȘȖȩȢ of evil, he is the pioneer, monarch, and author of it, as the first to experience death and the one who will later use death and suffering to enslave humanity in fear and illness62. Here in Job, Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 Satan is already the quintessential rebel among the bene ha-Elohim laying foundation of what will become «his kingdom» of evil that opposes God and is attributed to Satan by Jesus in the New Testament (cf. Mt 12:26). By exalting his «throne above the stars of God» (Is 14:13) Satan sought to establish a rebel kingdom with himself as king, and though he is cast down into death God conceivably allowed his first son to maintain a certain sphere of authority; he would have dominion over death and evil, dealing out God’s wrath as he does in Job and, arguably, in Genesis 3:15. «His kingdom» will not be in heaven but on earth (Mt 12:26), not a kingdom of light but one of darkness, not working in the open but in the human heart and conscience. If he may be associated with the «evil spirit» that afflicted Saul and inspired Israel’s kings who «sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons» (1 Sa 16:14; Ps 106:37), this spirit’s activity is to recapitulate in mankind

Jesus the Exorcist

41

his own inglorious rebellion by turning mankind away from the adoration of the Creator. He is the first «self-made» individual, who stubbornly prefers the misery of evil to the joy of loving what is good. In Job, Ezekiel 28, and Isaiah 14 one can clearly see then that these elements of the Hebrew tradition point to an origin of evil at the dawn of time, evil conceived of in the very Jewish sense of everything that knowingly refuses to fulfill the purpose for which the universe was made: to know and love God, «You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might» (Dt 6:5). This refusal against nature is the source of all that is intrinsically evil and disruptive to the cosmic order, and Satan’s rebellion epitomizes this disruption. This act of choosing darkness can only be understood as evil if God is totally innocent, the God who infinitely loves his creatures and invites them to share his divine life in the family bond established by the covenant relationship63. The seventh explanation attempts to grasp the historical metabolism of the concept by proposing a dualist tension: Satan is the personification of the dark side of divinity, that element within YHWH which obstructs the good. Isaiah 45:7 seems to engage this paradoxical idea when God says: «I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these», where «evil» ra’ is sometimes translated here «woe» or «disaster». The view that God has a good and a evil side is dualism, which is rejected by Modern Orthodox Judaism and most of Jewish tradition (except some forms of Kabbalism). Scripture affirms that God allows evil but he does not condone it: «The LORD is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works» (Ps 145:17); «There is no injustice in him» (Ps 92:15). Dualism is further rejected by the Jewish Christian authors of the New Testament, where the devil cannot be considered the dark side of God because «God is light, and in him is no darkness at all» (1 Jn 1:8). In fact Jesus will say in the Gospels, «No one is good except God alone» (Mk 10:18) – God is so good that everything is empty of goodness in comparison. So the dualist tradition cannot form the trajectory within which orthodox Judeo-Christian concepts of Satan emerged. The overwhelming data of Hebrew Scripture attests that God acts in justice, he does not choose evil nor encourage it: «What God hates he does not do... he has no need of wicked man» (Sir 15:11-12). The Biblical YHWH has no dark side, he is the «light», «the Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice, a God of faithfulness without iniquity» (Ps 27:1; Dt 32:4). But Second Temple Judaism recognized that God allows evil so that his creatures to be tested by evil and good, so that by freely rejecting evil their true dignity may be revealed, and they may be worthy of receiving the reward of sharing in the resurrection

42

Chapter 1 from the dead in the age to come (olam haba)64.

So what is the origin of evil? In Genesis’ two accounts of creation, God made all things perfectly good (Gn 1:31), but evil entered the universe along with suffering and death by the free choice of intelligent agents whom God created (cf. Gn 3:1-24). The path of evil is revealed to man by the serpent who lied to Eve, saying «God knows» that if you eat the fruit that God forbid «you will be like God [Elohim] knowing good and evil» (Gn 3:5). The serpent is hardly interested in humans becoming like God or gaining wisdom. His only goal is to reproduce in humans the same rebellion he chose – to become their own gods – so that he could watch them endure the same fall he suffered. It is never God’s will that humans sin (Gn 2:17; Sir 15:11-13), but God allows his beloved creatures the freedom to choose: «I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life!» (Dt 30:19). The tension between good and evil in relation to God is resolved by the concept of salvation. One perpetual historical motif of Hebrew scripture65 is that God permits evil and suffering only if in his mercy and wisdom he can bring a greater good out of it in the fullness of time.

2. The Devil in the New Testament 2.1 Understanding the devil’s identity The topic of evil, and consequently Satan and demons is often neglected in Biblical Theology. However M. F. Unger correctly stated that «together with angelology and satanology, demonology forms an important branch of theology»66. In Christian theologies the subject of Satan and demons is not very popular, and yet it is essential for understanding the New Testament 67. According to M. J. Erickson consideration of the topic of evil angels presents a problem, since dealing with them in connection with good angels would tend to suggest a parallel68. While there is some kind of parallel between good and evil angels they are both created beings subject to the will of God. Satan and demons play a central role in opposing the kingdom of God in the New Testament where every writer makes reference to demonic powers in some way or another69. For the New Testament writers several unifying themes emerge as crystal clear concerning satanic power, its nefarious influence and how to be freed from it: Firstly, in the New Testament worldview Satan has great authority because, as John writes in an uncontroversial way: «We know that we are from God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one» (1 Jn

Jesus the Exorcist

43

5:19). Thus the devil is often called «the ruler of this world» by Jesus (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), «the deceiver of the whole world» (Rv 12:9), and even «the god of this world» (2 Cor 4:4). Hence it is not surprising that the final supplication in the «Our Father» prayer is for protection from satanic power. It is not, as it is commonly translated, «deliver us from evil» but precisely «deliver us from the evil one», that is, from the devil70. The present world is described as «the present evil age» (Gal 1:4) or «an evil and adulterous generation» (Mt 12:39) whose people are unwittingly enslaved to «the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places» who are «the cosmic powers over this present darkness» (Eph 6:12; cf. 2:2-4). In this dark milieu believers in Jesus are called to shine like luminaries, «You are the light of the world» as Jesus said in his greatest sermon (Mt 5:14; cf. Phil 2:15). Although Satan has power over the world, he is powerless to harm the followers of Jesus who have «overcome the world» by faith (1 Jn 5:4, 18). The authors of Christian scripture were convinced that in the midst of Satan’s empire over the world, the spread of the reign of Christ in the hearts of humanity would be unstoppable71. Thus in Matthew Jesus so boldly promises Peter: «You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it» (Mt 16:18). Satanic power is crushed under the feet of those who are baptised and accept to live by Christ’s grace that is limitless and life-changing (Acts 2:38; Rom 16:20). How is satanic power crushed? Secondly, Satan was one of «the sons of God» as a creature (cf. Jb 1:6; 2:1; 38:7) but he is not divine. Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God by nature «for in him the whole fullness of divinity dwells bodily» (Col 2:9). The mystery of Christ thus sheds light on understanding the mystery of Satan. As defined from scripture Jesus is the Word though whom all things were created; he is «true God and eternal life» (Jn 1:1-4; 1 Jn 5:20). Christ is a divine person, eternally existing in God before time began (Jn 17:5). Thus he is uncreated, one in being with God the Father. And so the Fathers explained that in the fullness of time this eternal Son assumed a human nature in order to save mankind. He was born of a virgin and revealed to the world at his baptism when God said: «This is my beloved Son with whom I am well pleased» (Mt 3:17; cf. Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22)72. The devil however is a mere creature, finite and dependent on God for his existence – because of his rebellion, he is doomed to destruction. Jesus warns humanity of the danger of falling into «the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels» (Mt 25:41; cf. Rv 20:10). Thirdly, the New Testament is clear that the reason the Son of God came into the world was «to destroy the works of the devil» (1 Jn 3:8; cf. Jn 12:31). So to understand the devil and his work one must understand Christ

44

Chapter 1

in the fullness of his divinity. In order to accomplish his work destroying evil the Son of God assumed a humble human nature (Phil 2:5-11), «to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross» (Col 1:20). Christ-God’s humble «obedience unto death even death on the cross» destroyed the proud devil, showing that God is infinitely powerful not because he rules in heaven but in his tender humility he chooses to suffer. He became human in order to demonstrate divine love: to make his life a gift of love, a gift of life to those who were dead (Mk 10:45). By self-sacrifice as «our Paschal Lamb» (1 Cor 5:7), Christ makes atonement for all sin, which is the true cause of death (Heb 9:26) and thus he breaks Satan’s cruel empire over mankind. Jesus freely protects believers under his precious blood and saves them from the destructive power of Satan just as the Israelites were saved from the angel of death by hiding under the blood of the Passover lamb (Ex 12:12-13). All this is due to faith and baptism where the believer came to participate in Christ’s death and resurrection: «that through death [Jesus] might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery» (Heb 2:14b-15; cf. Rom 6:1-6). It should not surprise us then that for the New Testament writers in order for their message to be successful it must expose, though the light of Christ, the empire of Satan and his intimate power over human psychology, which Jesus reveals to be things «hidden from the foundation of the world» (Mt 13:35) 73. John’s gospel shows how difficult Christ’s message about Satan is for people to hear, Jesus is rejected when he tries to reveal that human desires are corrupt, addicting them to sin, for «everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin» (Jn 12:31; 8:34). Thus even to «the Jews who believed in him» but refused to recognize their sins, Jesus says plainly «you are sons of your father the devil, your will is to do your father’s desires» (Jn 8:31, 44)74. Jesus calls sinners back to God because the «ruler of this world» has injected desires like poison into the human heart, such as greed, malice, envy, etc (Mt 15:19). Sometimes this message did not win Jesus many friends, as this pericope in John 8 ends with Jesus «hiding in the temple» as his audience picks up stones to kill him (Jn 8:59). But after Christ’s resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit his apostles are empowered to preach «with gentleness and respect» (1 Pt 3:15) the fullness of the message of eternal life that Jesus commanded them: «that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem» (Lk 24:47). The apostolic community of early Christians celebrated their faith in unity and humility (Acts 2:42-47). They rejoiced in the resurrection of Jesus as a victory of

Jesus the Exorcist

45

God over Satan (26:18) and by their faith in the victory of Christ they also were victorious, even martyrs were crowned as princes of eternal life as Jesus says to the persecuted community in Smyrna: «Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested... Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life» (Rv 2:10). Like in Job, suffering under the devil is allowed by God to make the spiritual excellence shine in his elect through their unbreakable union to Christ (Rom 8:17f). The martyrs remembered how Christ died for love of them, and they rejoiced to die for love of him, as St Peter was «to glorify God» by the gift of his life (Jn 21:19). Only by understanding the malice of Satan’s power as a kingdom that had enslaved humanity in fear of death can it be explained how Jesus had liberated mankind from all fear. Jesus inspired Stephen to be fearless to do good and love the truth even in the face of hatred and evil, forgiving and praying for those who were killing him (Acts 7:60). Jesus has ushered in a new kingdom, a new order, by the power of his resurrection and heavenly enthronement, not a kingdom built on fear but on freedom, the total gift of self: «the glorious freedom of the children of God» (Rom 1:4; 8:21).

No doubt, modern scholarship tends to shy away from directly talking about demonic forces and their malice toward human beings. But the New Testament reflects a spiritual richness of these concepts, interpretations, and assumptions, deriving in part from Hellenistic thought and partly from that of contemporary Judaic traditions which were synthesized and capitalized upon. The New Testament authors remark that their Messiah came «in the fullness of time» (Gal 4:4) or «at the last of the times» (1 Pt 1:20) so that God’s salvation would be announced at a time when man was most ready to hear it, that is, they would be ready to accept the full truth about the kingdom of God vis-à-vis the authority of darkness75. Indeed without acknowledging the kingdom of Satan one cannot welcome the kingdom of God, so the tension between darkness and light of the two kingdoms is vital76. This tension is summed up by the author of the Acts of the Apostles when Jesus tells Paul of his mission, «To open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me» (Acts 26:18; cf. 1 Pt 2:9). This is essentially the message of salvation; without Satan there is no need for salvation. It is also the reason why Christian scripture is full of thanksgiving and praise, thanking God that he had «transferred us» from «the authority of darkness» to «the kingdom of his beloved Son» (Col 1:12-13). If Christians communities were not joyful their message would not have succeed – a main source of Christian joy is the experience of freedom, peace, and unity – even in the midst of persecution. Of this divine joy Paul reminds the new believers: «You

46

Chapter 1

received the word in much affliction, with the joy of the Holy Spirit» (1 Th 1:6). The conviction is that God’s love lives in them, love which had set them apart from the world and saved them from demonic influence. The demonic terminology, so central to the Christian message, is found especially in the apocalyptic and rabbinic traditions from which the Christian authors synthesized Greek and Jewish concepts of the devil, thus the New Testament’s diabology and demonology are essentially those of Hellenistic Judaism77. Moreover, the New Testament does not move the tradition of the concept of the devil strikingly beyond the position of late Second-Temple Jewish Apocalyptic tradition. Indeed it is precisely because of the possibility of sincere belief that demonic powers exist and effectively rule the world that the New Testament message succeeds within the cultures in which it was proclaimed. The two literatures, apocalyptic Jewish sources and the New Testament, are almost contemporary and arise from the same Hellenistic-Jewish milieu. In these two literatures the devil is a creature of God, yet regarded as the chief of the fallen angels. Most of the time the devil acts as if he had far greater power as lord of this world, chief of a vast multitude of spiritual and physical powers, angelic and human, arrayed against the kingdom of God. Satan is not only the chief opponent of God but he has under his sovereignty all who oppose God’s will. In other words, all who disobey God’s commandments place themselves unknowingly under the control of Satan, they are «bound» by him, at least partially (Rom 11:32; Gal 3:22). In this capacity, Satan appears very much as the principle of evil. Christianity, like apocalyptic Judaism, refused to embrace dualism, as we find for example in Mazdaism78. As Satan is the opponent of the good God, YHWH of Judaism, so he is the opponent of Christ, the Son. As Christ commands the armies of light, Satan commands those of darkness to make war on humanity (Rv 12:17; 13:7; 16:14; 17:14; 19:11-21), and the human soul and the whole cosmos is torn between the two realms, good and evil.79. In the end, Satan and his powers will be cast down and annihilated, and Christ’s new heavens, new earth and a redeemed humanity will be established forever (Rv 21:1; 2 Pt 3:13; Rom 8:19-23). The traditions of Mazdaism, Orphism, Hellenistic religion and philosophy, and late Judaism assigned wide powers to «the evil one» inherent to their tradition. This power assigned to the devil remains evident in New Testament Christianity of the first century. Cultures accepted and perhaps, reinforced, these traditions because they partially answered the question of theodicy, to which the Christianity gives a response in the fullness of its Jewish/Hellenistic context.

Jesus the Exorcist

47

Jesus did not teach his followers that Satan and the demons existed, they already knew that from their culture; Jesus taught them how to subdue these forces through exorcism. Before delving directly into the New Testament demonology as such, one should note its unity with Jewish demonology. When we, from our modern perspective, understand with greater lucidity the similarity of New Testament writings and Jewish traditions about demons we can understand better the sheer amazement of the apostles at seeing how their ancient Adversary had truly been made subject to them (Lk 10:17-19). How far the Jesus traditions exceed or transcend the basic boundaries set by Jewish tradition, or if they do so at all, will become clear as Jewish elements are enumerated, and one can see the Christian character stand in relief. Jewish apocalyptic traditions propose the first indications of a demonic hierarchy that will be crystallized in the New Testament with Satan emerging so clearly as the head while all the other demons remain nameless, almost disappearing behind the shadow of their leader. The only exception to this is found in Revelation, were we see the name of several significant demons alongside Satan such as Abaddon or Apollyon (Rv 9:11), and Wormwood (8:11). But Revelation also gives us the clearest indication of Satan’s absolute lordship over the demonic world. In the Book of Parables of Enoch (1 Enoch 37-71) Azazel stands forth as not only the most wicked of demons as we saw in the section above, but as their chief; to him is ascribed many the same motifs as are ascribed to Satan in the Gospels80. The Enochic tradition of Azazel and the «devil and his angels» in the New Testament (Mt 25:41), share the same characteristics, they have provoked the same rebellion among humans and will endure the same chastisement – and will be judged by God’s Elect, the Messiah who sits on God’s throne (1 En 55:4; cf. Mt 25:31; Acts 17:31; Rom 14:10). What the New Testament will reveal in much greater depth is how the mysteries of Satan’s kingdom play out in human life, how «the whole world [that] lies in the power of the evil one» (1 Jn 5:19) will be redeemed by Jesus, how the mystery of Satan’s deceptive power is successful and yet defeated by Christ’s word (Jn 8:44; Rv 12-13; 19:15f), how Satan is «to make war on the saints and to conquer them» by means of the antichrist (Rv 13:7; 1 Pt 5:9; 2 Th 2:3-12), and how precisely «his kingdom» of death will be destroyed in the end (Mt 12:26; 13:43; 1 Cor 15:26; Rv 20:9-10). Thus it is safe to conclude that the spirits of evil in these traditions are not only influential and parallel but roughly identical to the Satan depicted in the Gospels. None of these parallels should surprise us. The Christian authors did not inhabit a symbolic universe that was different from the worldview of their Jewish tradition; the experience of knowing Christ did not deny that

48

Chapter 1

worldview, it confirmed it. Jesus’ astounding resurrection confirmed for the Galilean fishermen that these bizarre religious traditions were actually true, especially the exalted visions of apocalyptic Judaism. With all its spiritual symbols, the rebellion of demons, the victory of the Lord of Spirits, and the final judgment – themes that Jesus himself speaks about in the Gospels – all this spiritual metaphor had become a reality by the raw fact of the resurrection. How? Thomas who first doubted the resurrection later exclaimed, as he fell to his knees before the risen Jesus, «my Lord, and my God» (Jn 20:28). And the New Testament records that the apostles had seen with their eyes that Messiah had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven; Christ’s ascension confirmed for them the prophecies of heavenly enthronement. Every New Testament book reveals a conviction that Jesus the Messiah is enthroned at the right hand of God, for this reason Psalm 110:1, which predicts/confirms this enthronement, was by far the most commonly referenced verse in the New Testament. 1 Enoch confirmed as well that as soon as Messiah was enthroned in heaven, he was thus ready to judge the living and the dead (1 En 55:4) as Jesus promised and his apostles proclaimed81. Although the phenomenon of Jesus may have opened the apostles eyes to more deeply engage the demonic world as a metaphysical reality, he did not do so by esoteric study but by direct experience: He sent them to proclaim the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7; Lk 10:9), and to touch with their hands and see with their eyes the miraculous signs of the kingdom, including exorcism (Mt 10:8; Lk 10:17). Being free of demonic influence was no longer an issue of maintaining ritual purity through washing, a privilege for the elite who had the «luxury» of being holy. Jesus shocked his society by teaching the opposite: «Blessed are the poor, theirs is the kingdom of God» and, «It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God» (Lk 6:20; 18:25). For Christ purity is a quality of the humble heart; it is not in the external appearance afforded by wealth (Mt 23:25; Lk 11:39). Furthermore, since God reveals the secrets of the kingdom to simple children (Mt 11:25; Lk 10:21) no longer is demonology an esoteric study only for people like the Essenes, the strictest and purist sects of religious visionaries at Qumran, but the secrets of demonic power were something that the uneducated men of Galilee could explain without fear. Their message was that all people, great and small, who accept faith in Jesus had been set free from all demonic forces by the «new covenant» in the blood of Christ: «You who were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ... you are fellow citizens with the saints in the family of God» (Eph 2:13, 19). Christ’s only mention of covenant, in fact, is right during the Passover meal on the eve of his crucifixion: «This

Jesus the Exorcist

49

cup is the new covenant in my blood» (1 Cor 11:25a) showing that his blood was the new Passover, not an execution but a free gift of liberation from evil and thus the fulfilment of the Jewish Passover that was at the centre of all their tradition (Ex 12:13). Christ asked his apostles to «do this, whenever you drink it in remembrance of me» (1 Cor 11:25b)82. For the New Testament authors «the blood of the covenant» is the foundation of the Christian faith and the everlasting sign of God’s love (cf. Ex 24:8). Nothing communicates more eloquently the love of God than «the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ» (1 Pt 1:2; Heb 12:24) which represents both the Father’s free gift of eternal life though the gift of his only Son (Jn 3:16) and Christ’s tender self-sacrifice «poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins» (Mt 26:28). The Church Fathers believed that by worthily consuming the «New Testament» (Lk 22:20)83, that is, Christ’s «blood» in the Eucharist, God would protect his children from all demons, wash away the sins of the world and reproduce in human beings the fidelity, love and divine sonship of Christ84. What is dark and uncertain at Qumran, namely the efficacy of exorcistic prayer85, is brought into the full light of confidence by the resurrection of Christ celebrated every Sunday, «the Lord’s day», by Christians in the «breaking of the bread» in Jerusalem and eventually throughout the empire (Rv 1:10; Acts 2:46). What was for Jews a fearful supplication for deliverance from demonic evil became the rite of baptism as a manifestation of total salvation for the soul, an infusion of Divine Life, and an act of union to a victory already accomplished on the cross (Ti 3:4-7). In the New Testament language, «baptism now saves you»; just as Noah’s family was saved from the flood while all the godless perished (1 Pt 3:2), so Christian initiation has apocalyptic importance: «Jesus... delivers us from the wrath to come» (1 Th 1:10). The old creation passed away in the flood, and likewise this «present evil age» will be totally destroyed (2 Pt 2:5) because it is corrupted by the domination of Satan and «the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away» (1 Cor 2:6). The fact that the apostles saw Christ as «the stone that the builders rejected [which] has become the cornerstone» (Ps 118:22; 1 Pt 2:4, 7) means that God wants a whole new cosmic temple, a new creation, built on Christ who «appeared as a high priest of the good things that are coming» (Heb 9:11) – salvation is being integrated into this new living temple (Rv 3:12), but how? By his love and humility Christ transformed the curse of death into an act of praise, «a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God» (Eph 5:2). Jesus’ sacrifice and resurrection «destroyed» the devil «who has the power of death» because death is no longer terrifying or uncertain but is now a means «to glorify God» and to enter with Jesus into heaven (Heb 2:15; Jn 21:19). Like the Jewish high priest on Yom Kippur

50

Chapter 1

discussed above (1.3), Jesus the high priest represents all Israel, humanity, and the cosmos that will be reconciled to God «once and for all… by the sacrifice of himself» (Heb 9:26)86. Therefore Christ’s crucifixion is the sacrifice of all creation as an act of worship; it constitutes a prophetic destruction of the whole cosmos and the reconstruction of a new one87. «If anyone is in Christ he is a new creation» (2 Cor 5:17) because as the old world passes away God is busy constructing a new cosmic temple with «living stones», human souls, built upon «the cornerstone» of God’s Son who «grows into a holy temple in the Lord»88. To be an everlasting dwelling place for God (Zep 3:17) seemed to be, to the amazement of the apostles, a fulfilment of the original vocation given to Israel to call all the nations to worship God as «a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation» and to be the blessing of Abraham to «all the nations» (1 Pt 2:5,9; Gal 3:8-14; cf. Ex 19:5-6; Gn 22:18). What is the blessing? God’s blessing is not the wealth of this age but eternal life in the kingdom, a blessing that is only hinted at in the Torah but confirmed elsewhere in Hebrew Scripture: «On the mountains of Zion... there the LORD has commanded the blessing, life forevermore» (Ps 133:3b). Daniel prophesies: «Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever» (Dn 12:2-3)89.

This idea is proclaimed by Jesus says in John «I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live» (Jn 11:25; cf. 5:29). So baptism into Christ was conceived of as an exodus for God’s people from this world into the resurrection, entry into God’s family and a whole new creation (Gal 1:4; 3:27: 6:15). For early Christians the perspective of full assurance in eternal life in Christ would be essential for confronting and understanding the full reality of the devil who has «the power of death» (Heb 2:14). Baptism is seen as a spiritual union with Christ’s death as victory over this world dominated by the devil and as a resurrection into Christ’s eternal glory90. Therefore baptism acts as Jesus’ most powerful exorcism by which «the ruler of this world will be cast out» for «all people» (Jn 12:31-32; Mk 10:39). Paul writes of Christ’s victory over the demonic forces: «Having forgiven us all our trespasses, cancelling the record of debt that stood against us... This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them» (Col 2:13-15)91. If all sins are washed away, Satan can no longer «accuse» a person in the final judgment, and so Jesus fulfils the high priestly role of Joshua in Zec 3:1-1092. Through simple

Jesus the Exorcist

51

baptism commanded by the risen Christ to all nations (Mt 28:19), the eschatological judgment and the doom of demonic forces was no longer just an esoteric hope for the Essene religious elite but something joyfully announced from the rooftops by fishermen: «Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished» (Acts 4:13a). The devil is responsible not only for the corruption of human minds and the cosmos but for natural ills as well, such as death, disease, and storm, whether simply sent as diabolical afflictions of innocent people or meant as punishment for sins. Thus Jesus says about the woman with a «spirit of infirmity» whom he heals: «this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years» (Lk 13:11, 16). Moral evil, i.e. seduction to harm self or others for the sake of a perceived gain, may exist in mankind without Satan, but his role as «tempter» is primordial; that is, from the devil come the thoughts or suggestions to the human mind that, if acted upon, would result in disaster (Mt 4:3; Gn 3:1-24). Satan and his powers resist the kingdom of God every day, in every place by working in a hidden way in order to convince human beings that they need to rebel in some way and that they desire the evil that they in no way need, because Satan knows that all those who disobey God’s rules fall under his power (Jn 8:34, 44; 1 Jn 3:8). The horns and darkness of the evil one (Rv 12:3), his spiritual authority over the air and the underworld (Eph 2:2; Jude 6), his ability to change shapes «into an angel of light» so as to deceive (2 Cor 11:14), and his malice by which he prowls like a roaring lion to devour human souls (1 Pt 5:8), and the other iconographical features assigned to the devil in the New Testament, are figures of speech that can only hint at the insane fury of «the god of this age» (2 Cor 4:4) and his immense power on earth. Thus the devil, as we have amply shown, is neither merely symbolic nor peripheral to the New Testament message. The fact that the modern western culture has largely lost belief in the devil cannot be proof of his nonexistence, but could be evidence of the magnitude of his deceptive power. In the absence of scientific proof into the subject, majority opinion cannot be a good indication of whether unseen realities exist93. So what can empirical reality tell us? Despite technological advances in science, human beings find themselves more ethically deficient than ever, that is, they choose things that are objectively bad for them. This fact is seen politically as even «advanced» nations slip all too quickly into war, racism, and genocide. It is seen socially as the fraternal love in many communities and families has grown cold: poverty, isolation, and homelessness abound. It is seen individually as people are led to «cope» with their life through drugs and alcohol, or other forms of self-inflicted abuse. Suicide, mental illness,

52

Chapter 1

hopelessness and depression consume a large percentage of western society, even children. The horrifying statistics of human misery seem to be not only the result of irrational forces, nor to an organic deficiency that brings about a common hysteria, but they are indicative of a will inclined towards dehumanization, a will capable of blinding a person from seeing that his desires are his own worst enemy (cf. Jn 8:44). Who can explain the mindless annihilation of innocent life in war and famine unless mankind were victim of deception on a mass scale? Who else but the devil would have the intelligence, patience, and malice capable of warping and consolidating human selfishness and greed down through the centuries into the machinery of war in which so little is gained and everything is lost? All this is contrary to the mind of God, expressed in his commandment blessing of Adam and Eve: «Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth» (Gn 1:28). God loves human life and created humans to flourish as care-takers of creation. Christian scripture, about which society has become largely ignorant, tells us that human beings are responsible to decide between right and wrong. God who is light has given every man the light of reason: «And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, but men loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil» (Jn 3:19). If man ignores his conscience, forgets God and chooses evil, God respects man’s freedom in a terrifying way – by giving him the desire for evil that destroys him instead of the desire for the simple good that will benefit him (Rom 1:24-25). In his war against mankind (Rv 12:17) Satan is the manifestation of the malicious will bent towards human corruption. His claim over mankind is achieved by enslaving them to self-destructive and perverse desires that are contrary to God’s law: violence, theft, manipulation, lies, sexual immorality, greed, etc. God, in his infinite mercy, gave the world his Son Jesus who is always ready to heal every person that turns toward him for forgiveness. This is Christianity, and if it is true then it would be to the devil’s advantage not to be known, not to be exposed – so that his enslavement of humanity may continue undetected. Thus from the New Testament perspective at least, the fact that people do not believe in the devil is only confirmation of his talent. He seems to have been true to his role as the «father of lies» and «Satan, deceiver of the whole world» (Jn 8:44; Rv 12:9). He is not only deceiver but destroyer, bent on bringing humanity to destroy itself and the planet through senseless wars (cf. Rv 20:8). As Paul says: «The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light» (2 Cor 4:4). And so, as world suffering increases it goes without saying that the devil has performed one of his greatest tricks on the «educated» West in the modern era: convincing the world that he does not exist.

Jesus the Exorcist

53

The chief characteristics of the devil at the time of the New Testament can be enumerated in the following points: 1) The personification of evil; 2) A cause of physical harm to people by attacking their bodies, infiltrating their members, or possessing them; 3) The tester of people and tempting them to sin in order to destroy them or recruit them in his struggle against the Lord; 4) The accuser and punisher of sinners; 5) The head of a host of evil spirits, fallen angels, or demons; 6) The one who has assimilated most of the qualities of ancient destructive nature spirits or ghosts; 7) The ruler of this world of matter and bodies until such time as the Lord’s own kingdom would come; 8) One who is in constant warfare against Jesus Christ and 9) One who would be fully annihilated by Christ at the end of the world. Herein the concept of the devil in Christian Scripture is given its basic contours94. However, as time passed, the Jewish and Christian traditions began to part company. Judaism generally followed the Rabbinic tradition in strictly limiting the role of the devil. Christianity – both erudite and popular – developed the concept much more expansively. Christian tradition came to identify the devil and the demons more completely with the fallen angels, removing the devil further from his heavenly origin as one of the sons of God, and allocating him to the demons as their prince. The nature and ranks of the good and evil angels, along with the extent of their powers over nature and over humankind, became further elucidated in early Christian tradition. Some questions addressed included whether devils and demons had bodies, and, if so, what kind. Satan’s rebellion and subsequent fall from grace came at the beginning rather than at the end of time, where he is identified as serpent of Genesis and as Lucifer, the fallen celestial being.

2.2 The Gospels All Gospel accounts portray a virtual explosion of demonic activity that takes centre stage in numerous episodes during the ministry of Jesus and his disciples. The significance of demonic activity in early Christian literature, such as cases of possession, affliction of humans and exorcism of evil spirits, perhaps denotes that a shift in the Jewish perception of the demonic has occurred in the era leading up to the first century A.D. The understanding found in the Jewish Scriptures (both Hebrew and Greek traditions) of demonic affliction does not include autonomous or semi- autonomous evil spirits that are able to afflict humanity whenever they desire95. As already mentioned, the limited exposition of evil spirits in these traditions depicts them operating under the authority of God to test the faith of his people.

54

Chapter 1

In the Western world these confrontations of Jesus with demons in the synoptic Gospels pose interpretive problems for many readers of these texts96. Since the ancient world views things differently from those of today,97 scholars of ancient Christianity and theologians frequently look for ways to read the texts about Jesus’ encounters with malevolent forces in order to make it easier for contemporary readers to come to terms with them. As to be expected, such readings have gone in several directions, with religious communities as well as scholars sometimes adopting more than one line of interpretation at the same time. Before offering a perspective that is commonly overlooked, we note some of these more widely held interpretations. First, readers understand Jesus’ demonic encounters as stories written to depict him as one engaged in activity subversive to political oppression. For this, the Roman domination of Judea-Palestine during the first century B.C. serves as the obvious backdrop. Thus, for example, the successful exorcism of «Legion» from the Gerasene demoniac (cf. Mk 5:1-20)98 is made to reflect the conviction that in Jesus’ ministry God’s rule manifests itself more strongly than the military might of Rome; in Jesus God’s power is already at work in the present and, as such, marks a visible form of protest against oppressive socio-political realities99. Second and closely related to the previous point, the defeat of demonic beings in the ministry of Jesus is interpreted as having been a way for the Gospels to say something about the significance of Jesus himself. By ridding people of evil or unclean spirits, Jesus acts as God’s representative who manifests the reality of Israel’s eschatological hopes and a new exodus from slavery into freedom. Exorcisms performed by Jesus thus signify a grander narrative. The deliverance of God’s people from slavery under demonic power illustrates the restorative power of God who longs for Israel to rise up and become the covenant faithful people they were called to be100. Third, Jesus’ exorcisms underscore his activity in a Jewish context, as a Jew. Because he engaged in the expulsion of demonic beings, Jesus can be compared with a number of Jewish miracle-workers purportedly based in Galilee. Such a comparison underscores Jesus to have simply been doing the kind of thing that a Galilean «charismatic» ‫ۊ‬asid would have done101. Fourth, There are those interpreters whose comparisons of Jesus’ activities stand in sharp contrast with those of contemporary healers and exorcists. They stress features that make Jesus’ ministry distinct and without parallel in his contemporary world, whether these comparisons draw with sources from the Ancient Near East, with non-Jewish and non-Christian pagan sources, or with Second Temple Jewish literature102. As such, their focus is on the character of Jesus’ exorcisms as miraculous and to be read

Jesus the Exorcist

55

alongside the stories of his healing and nature miracles. Fifth, exorcisms, insofar as they have individuals in view, are concerned with the re-integration of people who, for any number of reasons, find themselves excluded from socio-religious institutions of their society. Jesus’ exorcisms have to do with those who on account of illness or some condition were marginalized, dispossessed and ritually «unclean». They signify the hope that Jesus brings for their full inclusion within the worshiping community, doing so despite the criticisms he would incur from his contemporaries103. Sixth, exorcisms are sometimes comprehended as stories about the salvation of people who are, on a profound level, delivered from evil and its effects. This soteriological interpretation is bound up with an understanding of Jesus as the essential conduit to salvation. His ministry makes transparent the dawning of God’s rule (i.e. as an eschatological, salvific event) within the confines of the present world order104. One may argue that good reasons have been put forward for any one of the interpretations outlined above, though some of them take more literally than others the accounts of Jesus’ encounters with demons. However, these readings seem to lose some of their force to the extent that they do not view Jesus’ exorcisms as straightforward, but principally they see them as illustrating something else. Thus these accounts variously take the exorcisms as communicating something about the significance of Jesus on a grander scale, to symbolize religious salvation, or perhaps they mirror sociopolitical and religious circumstances of conflict surrounding Jesus, his disciples, and his followers among the early post-Easter communities of faith. However there is another side of the coin. Exorcisms can be seen based on what they present themselves to be, that is, encounters by Jesus and others with demonic forces at work in human beings. It is precisely here in this unedited, prima facie interpretation that the interpretations shaped by modernist sensibilities frequently balk, but it is here also that fundamental insights may be recovered. For the ancient readers of the Gospels the symbolic power of stories about the defeat of evil and demonic forces (see interpretations 1, 2, 5 and 6 above) could be more clearly perceived if, in the first instance, they were understood as extensions of more basic issues such as the power and nature of evil itself, and its harmful effects on human beings created in God’s image. Another basic issue, largely unexplored, includes the temporal and cosmological framework within which encounters with evil occur. One reason why Jesus’ exorcisms have been held as problematic within religious circles has to do with the following question: can or should exorcisms be performed today and, if so, what can be learned for this

56

Chapter 1

purpose from the New Testament Gospels? This question is controversial precisely because it either looks for or tries to avoid something normative within the particular worldview of the Gospel writers. A negative answer to the above question has opened the way for interpreters to adopt some of the reading strategies outlined above. But a positive answer, which holds that exorcism may be a valid religious praxis, places the burden of authenticity for exorcism on diagnostic discernment. Such diagnosis is made to stand in tension with approaches to various illnesses and disorders in the medical professions105. For all their problems, perhaps both of these positions have something to learn from the other, so that a practical synthesis can be found.

2.3 The Gospel traditions What fundamental perspective on demonic power, on the human being, and on Jesus’ challenge to malevolent forces do the exorcism passages of the Gospels convey? What understanding of the world and God’s activity within the world can be inferred? In order to be able to answer these questions we have to regard the Gospel traditions themselves as indispensable, and at least, hypothetically true. Jesus interprets his exorcisms as a manifestation of the kingdom of God. In continuity with Second-Temple Jewish expectation, he sees the time of Israel's eschatological expectation as a time of freedom from evil spirits and Satan who rules over them106. The Messianic expectation in the Old Testament was that the eschatological Davidic king would reign over Israel and the nations (Ps 2:8; 72:8) and he would establish an unbreakable kingdom of everlasting righteousness (Is 9:6-7; 42:1-4; Dn 2:44; 7:14), but nothing is said directly of the Messiah’s subjugation of evil spirits and his assault on Satan's kingdom (which the Qumran sectarians called the «dominion of Belial»)107. As indicated, in one Essene text, it is the angel or messenger Melchizedek who, as a messianic figure, will eschatologically judge and punish Belial and the spirits of his lot 108 . Similarly, in the pseudepigraphical Testament of Levi chapter 18, the eschatological priest is given authority over Belial and the evil spirits under his authority. It should be noted that Jesus’ success as an exorcist caused the people to wonder whether he might be the Messiah, the «son of David» (Mt 12:23). This is not surprising given the expectation that the eschaton would see the removal of Satan, «the unclean spirit», and spirits under his control from Israel and the world generally (Zec 13:2). Some Jews drew the conclusion that it is the Davidic Messiah who, in bringing God’s kingdom of justice on earth, would bring an end to the kingdom of Satan, even though not every Jew shared this view.

Jesus the Exorcist

57

3. Exorcistic Activity in the Gospels: The Position of Eric Sorensen A full study of all the terms associated with exorcism in the New Testament, including their usage in the ancient Near Eastern, Jewish, and Greco-Roman contexts, would be the comprehensive way to approach a study of exorcism in general, but that approach is beyond the limits of this study and unnecessary for the more limited aspect of exorcism being addressed here. There are many New Testament passages that mention exorcisms but few have the biographical information that gives a sense of the role that demons played in the life of the people who were being exorcized109. The passages that do give some biographical information, including significant figures who received exorcism, such as «Mary Magdalene, from whom [Jesus] had cast out seven demons» (Mk 16:9; cf. Lk 8:2), should be studied to determine whether exorcism in the New Testament applied to cases of ethical possession (i.e. demonic infiltration as a result of sin). At first glance it may seem difficult to find a comprehensive framework around possession and exorcism in the literature of the ancient Church110. It may also seem as if possession and disease are regarded as belonging to the same category, and that the border between them may by blurred. However there seems to be a relatively clear distinction in the New Testament between the stories where Jesus heals diseases and the stories where Jesus expels demons111. This position is comprehensively defended by Eric Sorensen in his book Possession and Exorcism in the New Testament and Early Christianity where he extensively debates this issue112. Sorensen states that the identification between the ministry of healing and that of exorcism in the New Testament is dubious. The confusion arises because exorcism and healing ministries in the New Testament are often paired, thus making it difficult to understand the relationship between them. This difficulty is compounded by the fact that John does not mention exorcism of evil spirits in his accounts of healings113. Dennis Hamm summarizes this situation well: «On the one hand, such passages make it difficult to appreciate deliverance/exorcism as a distinct ministry [from healing]; on the other hand, some of the passages tempt one to think that all healing is a kind of deliverance»114. Sometimes, however, there are symptoms of demon possession that seem impossible to reconcile with illness which would require healing. For example, often a demon speaking through a person conveys knowledge Jesus’ secret messianic identity as the «holy one of God»115 (see Mk 1:23-24; 5:7; Mt 8:29; Lk 8:28). Assuming that there is a distinction between healing and exorcism116,

58

Chapter 1

the general correlation between healing and exorcism is prevalent (e.g. Mt 4:24; 15:28; 17:17f; Lk 6:18; 8:2; 9:42; Acts 5:16). According to Eric Sorensen exorcism was performed only on those with physiological or psychological problems as a result of demonic possession and not to those with ethical problems as a result of demonic possession or influence. It was believed that the effect of demons was medical, and thus possession manifested itself «as physiological ailments or as self-destructive and isolating behaviours that often appear as the subjects of medical treatment in the Greco-Roman world»117. Many demoniacs are not represented as sinners in need of repentance, so much as victims in need of healing because in the world of the New Testament demon possession is ostensibly a medical issue (though the Judaism in Jesus’ day generally viewed medical problems as a result of sin, see Jn 9:2-3). That demon possession is a medical issue seems to be a fair description considering the portrayal of many of the victims themselves, for example: 1. The Gerasene demoniac is clearly suffering from insanity or mental illness of some sort (Mk 5:1f; Lk 8:26f; Mt 8:28f). 2. Jesus heals Peter’s mother-in-law from a fever with language that sounds like he is casting out a demon (Lk 4:39; Mt 8:15-16; cf. also 5:13f with leprosy). 3. A boy suffers from a spirit that makes him mute, and it causes him to roll around on the ground and foam at the mouth (Mk 9:19 ff; Lk 9:39 ff.; Mt 9:32-33;12:22 ff.). 4. Jesus heals the ‘unclean spirit’ in the man who speaks of Jesus’ identity, but it is not clear what the demon’s effect was upon the man beyond throwing him down on the ground (Lk 4:33 ff.). 5. Jesus heals the boy who is suffering from a spirit that inflicts him with epilepsy (Mt 17:14ff.). 6. Jesus casts out a demon that causes muteness in a man (Lk 11:14). 7. It is unclear what the little daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman was suffering from, though the mother is extremely concerned and cries out «My daughter is severely oppressed by a demon» (Mt 15:22 ff., cf. Mk 7:24 ff.). On the other hand, other cases may seem to come closer to a description of ethical possession (i.e. as a result of sin); the accusations against Jesus and John the Baptist appear as such. The crowd accuses Jesus of having «a demon» because Jesus accuses them of desiring to kill him (Jn 7:20). However, they seem to be accusing him more of madness than slander. Even if one considers this as an accusation of ethical possession (compare Mk

Jesus the Exorcist

59

3:21-30, where the crowd accuses Jesus of being «out of his mind» and of having an unclean spirit) these examples do not provide any instances of exorcism that could be applied to these cases. John’s practice of fasting from food and drink, and probably his living in the wilderness, explain why he might have been considered mentally disturbed and was accused of being demon possessed (Lk 7:33). Again, even if John’s alleged demon possession is understood as a supposed ethical possession, no exorcism is performed on John. Therefore, these examples also do not provide support that exorcism was applied to ethical possession. In addition to these instances of accusation, the parable in Lk 11:24-26 (also Mt 12:43-45) does not refer to an ethical spirit, but rather is referring to a prophecy of the afflictions the people will endure for their rejection of the Messiah (cf. Lk 11:14-26). Lastly, there is the incident where the seven sons of Sceva attempt to exorcize a man with an «evil spirit», but instead, the man who had the evil spirit savagely jumps upon them, tears off their clothes, and sends them running out of the house naked (Acts 19:14-16). Now, conceivably this spirit could be called a «spirit of anger»; however, it seems that this is more like madness than anger because of the almost beastly nature of the man’s reaction to the name of Jesus. In the rest of the New Testament, instances of exorcism are surprisingly absent. Exorcism may be in view in 1 Corinthians 12:10 and 2 Corinthians 12:7, but even so, no information is provided that would suggest that these passages support exorcism in cases of ethical possession118. In summary, the survey above indicates that exorcism in the New Testament applies to those who exhibit phenomena associated with psychological or physiological disorders that are understood to be the result of demon possession. While exorcism in the New Testament is performed on those who exhibit strange phenomena often associated with these disorders, none of the examples of exorcism involve people who exhibit phenomena associated with ethical problems119. Other means, primarily baptism, are instead applied to ethical possession, which is something all Christians are subject to before they are baptized into Christ. Because baptism and exorcism are distinguished in this way, this recent application of exorcism informally conflates exorcism with baptism by applying exorcism to ethical possession. This is a misapplication of the New Testament practice of exorcism, similar to the application of some Jewish exorcists in the inter-testamental period, as well as those in the early Church who formally conflated baptism and exorcism.

60

Chapter 1

3.1 The synoptic Gospels Exorcism is a major theme of the Christian Scriptures. References in the synoptic Gospels for the practice of exorcism are not wanting120. The presentation of activity that expels demons is preserved among each of the main literary sources in and behind the synoptic Gospels; here is a summary of its distribution121: ƒ tradition in Mark alone – 2 times Mk 3:13-15 (omitted in par. Lk 6:12-13) – Jesus’ commissioning of his disciples Mk 6:13 (omitted in par. Lk 9:6) – summary of the disciples’ deeds ƒ tradition shared by Mark and Matthew – once Mk 7:24-30 par. Mt 15:21-28 – the Syro-Phoenician woman ƒ tradition shared by Mark and Luke – 3 times Mk 1:23-28 par. Lk 4:33-37 – exorcism of a man in the synagogue Mk 3:11-12 par. Lk 6:18 – summary of Jesus’ deeds at the sea Mk 9:38-41 par. Lk 9:49-50 – the «strange» exorcist ƒ tradition shared by Mark with Matthew and Luke – 5 times Mk 1:32-34 pars. Mt 8:16-17 and Lk 4:40-41 – summary of Jesus’ activity Mk 3:22-27, pars. Mt 12:24-30 and Lk 11:15-23 accusation of Jesus’ collusion with Beelzebul (perhaps an overlap of Mark and «Q») Mk 5:1-20 pars. Mt 8:28-34 and Lk 8:26-39 – exorcism of the Gadarene man (two men in Mt.) Mk 6:7 pars. Mt 10:1 and Lk 9:1 – Jesus’ commissioning of his disciples Mk 9:14-29 pars. Mt 17:14-21 and Lk 9:37-43 – exorcism of a boy ƒ tradition in Matthew alone – 3 times Mt 7:21-23 (omitted in pars. in Lk 6:46 and 13:25-27) – saying about inauthentic followers of Jesus Mt 9:32-34 – exorcism of a mute man Mt 10:7-8 (omitted in par. Lk 10:9) – Jesus’ commission of his disciples ƒ tradition in Luke alone – 4 times Lk 7:18-23 (omitted in par. Mt 11:2-6) – Jesus’ response to John the Baptist Lk10:17-20 (cf. Mark’s longer ending, 16:17-18) – the return of the seventy disciples Lk 13:10-17 – exorcism of a crippled woman in the synagogue Lk 13:32 – summary of Jesus’ activity ƒ tradition shared only by Matthew and Luke – 2 times Mt 12:22-23 par. Lk 11:14 – exorcism of a blind and mute man Mt 12:43-45 par. Lk 11:24-26 – return of an evil spirit

Jesus the Exorcist

61

This list is, in the first instance, revealing because it provides evidence for the multiple attestation of the exorcism traditions in the synoptic Gospels. And such attestation comes not only in relation to a documentary hypothesis122, but also in relation to identifiable tendencies of the Gospels independent of each other, each of which alone refers to the tradition at particular points. A look at these passages as a whole allows us to make several further observations. First, exorcistic activity in the Gospels is preserved in different forms. Far more than simply being the subject matter of Jesus’ encounters in narrative form, Jesus refers to exorcisms in his teachings and sayings. Exorcisms are also included in more general summaries of Jesus’ or his disciples’ activity. Second, it is significant that successful exorcisms in the synoptic Gospels are not attributed to Jesus alone. Not only do Jesus’ disciples perform exorcisms (Mk 6:7, 13-15; Mt 10:1, 7-8; Lk 9:1; 10:17-20), 123 but exorcism is assumed to be a condonable activity practiced by those who are not among Jesus’ immediate followers. This is, for instance, the case with the «strange exorcist» in Mk 9:38-41 (par. Lk 9:49-50). To the Pharisees that oppose him, Jesus says, «And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul by whom do your sons cast them out?» (Mt 12:27 par. Lk 11:19). Jesus question cannot be understood as a mere argumentum ad hominem, but it only makes sense if his Jewish contemporaries were exorcising demons. Thus Jesus speaks of exorcism here as a common practice in his society. Indeed the Jewish religious elite could not deny the marvellous success of Jesus’ exorcisms, but they ascribed his exorcisms to the power of Beelzebul in order to deny Jesus the glory of performing them124. Therefore, in the synoptic Gospels Jesus’ encounters with the demonic world take place within a religious climate in which exorcisms had a certain legitimacy as an effective way to combat evil. According to the Gospels, Jesus in his role as exorcist, participated in a worldview in which exorcism makes sense125. Third, both the multiple attestation of exorcism in the Gospels and their recognition as an effective practice among non-devotees of Jesus strengthen the likelihood that these Gospels constitute the preservation of an early exorcistic tradition that was circulating at least during the time of Jesus’ ministry. Contemporaries of Jesus believed that he was, controversially or not, engaging in open conflict with demonic beings. However, such relevant individual events, especially exorcism episodes, were shaped by conventional oral and literary forms. Nevertheless, there is no reason to doubt that a reconstruction of Jesus’ life and ministry would be omitting something essential if it did not include the claim by Jesus and others that he expelled evil spirits. Furthermore, since each of the Gospel writers wished to

62

Chapter 1

emphasize the unprecedented magnitude and uniqueness of Jesus’ life, teaching and ministry126, there is no compelling reason why a post-Easter community would generate stories that acknowledged the performance of exorcisms by people other than Jesus and his disciples. Both on the level of their respective presentations and in the traditions they variously preserve, the synoptic Gospels leave a portrait of Jesus, who, as a pious Jew of his time, believed he was able to confront and subdue demonic power127.

3.2 «Demons» as Evil and Unclean Spirits Another feature belonging to the early Jesus tradition has to do with the consistent presentation of «demons» as evil powers128. In the synoptic Gospels the following designations occur, sometimes as a single term and sometimes in combination with one or more qualifying adjectives: (a) «demon» – įĮȓμȦȞ or įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ (Mk 1:34 bis, 39;3:15, 22; 6:13; 7:26, 29, 30; 9:38; Mt 7:22;9:33, 3410:8;11:18;12:24 bis, 27, 28;17:13; Lk 4:33, 35, 41; 7:33; 8:2, 27, 30, 33, 35, 38;9:1, 42, 49;10:17;11:14 bis, 15 bis, 18, 19, 20;13:32) (b) «evil spirit(s)» – ʌȞİñμĮ ʌȠȞȘȡȩȞ (Lk 7:21;8:2; cf. Acts 19:12, 13, 15, 16)129 (c) «unclean spirit» – ਕțȐșĮȡIJȠȞ ʌȞİ૨μĮ (Mt 1:23, 26, 27;3:11, 30;5:2, 8, 13; 6:7; 7:25; 9:25; Mt 10:1;12:43 (Q); Lk 4:36; 6:18; 8:29; 11:24 (Q) (d) «spirit of an unclean demon» – ʌȞİ૨μĮ įĮȚμȠȞȓȠȣ ਕțĮșȐȡIJȠȣ (Lk 4:33 [cf. Mk 1:23]) (e) «spirit of weakness» - ʌȞİ૨μĮ … ਕıșİȞİȓĮȢ (Lk 13:11) (f) «dumb» or «deaf-and-dumb spirit» - ʌȞİ૨μĮ ਙȜĮȜȠȞ (Mk 9:17), țĮì țȦijòȞ ʌȞİñμĮ (Mk 9:25) (g) «spirit» - ʌȞİñμĮ (Mt 8:16; 9:20; Lk 9:31 [cf. Mk 9:17], 38) With regard to the history of ideas, three aspects of these expressions are noteworthy. First, on the level of the Gospel narratives, the expressions «demon» and «unclean spirit» are used interchangeably (cf. Mt 10:1, 8; Mk 3:22,30; Lk 8:27, 29). Whereas these terms, respectively, flourished independently in socio-cultural and religious Graeco-Roman and Jewish spheres, they are here brought into a synonymity which in a Jewish context could be understood as the «demonization of impurity» – in other words, everything impure was consigned to the province of demons130. While this development might imply that exorcism functioned as a means of reintegrating someone

Jesus the Exorcist

63

deemed «impure» or outside proscribed perimeters of Jewish society, the early Enochic traditions (so 1 En 6-16) make clear that, as far as Jewish belief was concerned, much more than halakhic impurity is at stake131. Second, it is well known that the terms įĮȓμȦȞ or įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ are, on the whole, used neutrally to denote intermediary agents capable of carrying out good or ill in relation to humans among Greek writers during the preceding and subsequent centuries132. By contrast, in the Gospels – indeed, in the New Testament as a whole – the term has acquired an irrevocably negative meaning. It suffices to say that the emphasis on įĮȚμȩȞİȢ as evil powers was able to flourish within a Jewish apocalyptic setting, as has been set forth in a study by A.T. Wright133. We have seen the nefarious įĮȚμóȞȚĮ take on a more amplified role, being mentioned eight times in the Septuagint whereas the shedim are only mentioned twice in the Tanakh (Dt 32:17; Ps 106:37). The įĮȚμóȞȚĮ replace the idols in some key instances, and they are a cause of disease and disaster in the LXX (e.g. Ps 91:6; 96:5; Is 65:11). However it is important to note that already in the Hebrew Bible the worship of shedim (A›ru «demons» NRSV, Dt 32:17f; Ps 106:37f) and the example of Saul’s affliction by an «evil spirit», a paradigm of later demonic infiltration into Judah’s royal dynasty, expose demonic forces as a root cause of insanity and exile for the nation (see section 1.4 above). Third, one notes in the Gospels the remarkable distribution and frequency of the designation «unclean spirit». This expression is without parallel in non-Jewish literature from pre-Christian antiquity. Here, at least as far as the synoptic Gospels are concerned, we are on Jewish soil with which Jesus and those who spoke and wrote about him would have been familiar. This language harkens back to Zechariah 13:2, where in an association with idolatry, the «unclean spirit» (ၥ ။ၠၳ၃၃ ၎Ⴇ ၊ၥ ၊ၩ၊Ⴃႁ, IJઁ ʌȞİ૨μĮ IJઁ ਕțȐșĮȡIJȠȞ, LXX) describes Judah and Jerusalem in an dangerous state of religious unfaithfulness, which, the prophecy foretells, will be cleansed in the times of Messiah134: «On that day there shall be a fountain opened for the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and uncleanness... I will cut off the names of the idols... I will remove from the land the prophets and the spirit of uncleanness» (Zec 13:1-2).

For Jews of the first century who awaited the reign of Messiah king, the removal of the spirit of uncleanness would have implications for the Jewish Redemption. In other words Jesus’ exorcisms of unclean spirits are signs from God that the Davidic Messiah has come to save the nation and restore the kingdom. Jesus is then on solid theological ground with his Jewish audience when he points out that his exorcisms of unclean spirits are signs

64

Chapter 1

that God’s kingdom has come135. Other important references, preserved among the Dead Sea materials, bring us closer to the climate of the Gospels in that the «spirit of uncleanness» pertains to a state of being from which individuals seek deliverance or relief from these spirits136. The malevolent spirit renders its victim ritually unclean and thus unable to participate in the religious life of Israel. However the Gospels themselves offer virtually no information about what it is that made the exorcized spirits unclean137; nevertheless, the impurity of such spirits is taken for granted. As we will see in section 3.4, the origins of spiritual beings such as unclean spirits can be understood within the larger context of the Dead Sea Scrolls and their reception of the Enochic traditions.

3.3 Demonic Possession as Entry into the Human Body: the Earlier Traditions Despite the diversity of traditions preserved in relation to the exorcisms of Jesus, his disciples and others in the Gospels, there is an extraordinary uniformity when it comes to the way the Gospels describe demons in relation to their human victims. Almost all the texts portray exorcism as a disembodiment of spirits: they are «cast out» (ਥțȕȐȜȜİȚȞ) of the victims whom they have ‘inhabited’ or possessed138. The image of exit from within reinforces the ubiquitous notion of evil spirits «entering» (İੁıȑȡȤİıșĮȚ) 139 into individual human beings or «departing» (ਥȟȑȡȤİıșĮȚ)140 from them. Underlying this language is the assumption that people can be victims of demons inhabiting their bodies. There is no reason to think that Jesus’ understanding of the relationship between demonic powers and human bodies was any different, however shocking it may be to our modern sensibilities. Among the Jesus sayings, this understanding of exit and entry is perhaps most clear in a passage from a tradition shared by Matthew and Luke (Mt 12:43-45 par. Lk 11:24-26) and often referred to as «the return of the spirit». Luke’s account, which seems to be a slightly less redacted version, reads as follows: (24) When an unclean spirit departs (ਥȟȑȜșૉ) from a person, it passes through dry places seeking rest; and when it does not find (it), it says, «I will return to my house from whence I left». (25) And it goes and finds it swept and put in order. (26) Then it goes and takes seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter (İੁıİȜșȩȞIJĮ) and dwell there. And the last state of that person is worse than the first.

Jesus the Exorcist

65

The saying is straightforward, and it simply concludes with a warning, v. 26b, without an accompanying exhortation or explanation. In its present form, this logion is referring to exorcism141. Here Jesus is remarkably open about the danger that seems to follow an exorcism: the «last state» being worst than the first is not presented as a remote possibility, but rather as what can be expected to happen if, presumably, further measures are not undertaken. In this scenario, without specifying whether the exorcist is Jesus or not, the exorcistic activity is ultimately ineffectual and even counterproductive. For this reason a number of interpreters regard this tradition as one which neither Jesus’ disciples nor the early church would have been likely to create; because the thrust of the saying is counterintuitive to the portrait of Jesus provided in the Gospels in which his exorcisms would ideally be portrayed as successful142. In tracing this saying back to Jesus it is significant that the case described presupposes that the human body can be the dwelling of a demon, its «house»143 in v. 24, to which it can return bringing in other spirits with it. The uniformity of demonic corporeal indwelling in the synoptic Gospels stands out, given that it is relatively rare in sources that pre-date the New Testament writings144. Far more widespread in Greco-Roman antiquity is language that depicts demonic activity more in terms of affliction or attack rather than as literal entry. It remains possible that writers thought demons could inhabit bodies, while not choosing to depict demonic affliction in precisely this way. However, it is conspicuous that the language of corporeal habitation that characterizes the Gospel traditions is not as widespread as one might be led to assume. The distinction between ‘entry’ of demonic forces into bodies and their ‘afflicting’ people, is a semantic problem that must be clarified. Thus, before noting a few analogies in Jewish sources for demonic possession, there are several texts predating the Gospels that have sometimes been misleadingly understood as references to ‘possession’ in the strict sense, these include: First, in the Book of Tobit, there are the fatal attacks by the «evil demon» Asmodeus against the seven would-be husbands of Sara, as well as the threat posed to Tobias (Tob 3:8; 6:8,14-15; 8:2). Here the means undertaken to gain control of the demon (i.e. the smoking of a fish’s heart and liver) are protective and do not formally amount to any expulsion from a body. Second, there is the well-known account in the Aramaic document Genesis Apocryphon (1Q20 xx 16-29) which relates to the biblical story of Abraham and Sarah in Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Although Pharaoh and his household are made to suffer physical sores from a plaguing spirit, the trouble is described more in terms of an affliction (as in Gn 12:17) than as possession. In line with this, the evil spirit is not described as entering the

66

Chapter 1

body of Pharaoh and then ‘being expelled’ from his body, but rather, when Abram lays his hands on Hyrqanosh145, the spirit is merely «banished» or «driven away» (ႁၸၣႄၠ, line 29)146 from the vicinity so it can no longer come near and trouble him from the outside. Third, another example is seen in the fragmentary Apocryphal Psalms text from Qumran Cave 11 (11Q11), which includes a version of Psalm 91 in the final column vi. Here the psalms of this text (one of which is called an «incantation»147 11Q11 v 4: ၰႂၩ) form a collection of short pieces to be sung or recited for the purpose of warding off demonic attacks. Again, there is no evidence that the demonic powers in view are being thought to «possess» or «indwell» the human body148. The same is true in a fourth document which has come to be called Songs of the Maskil (4Q510-511; 4Q444); in the text, the Maskil’s proclamation in praise of the splendour of God’s radiance is intended «to frighten and terrify» malevolent powers who might strike without warning to lead people astray149 (4Q510 1.4-6 par. 4Q511 10.1-3; 4Q511 8.4; 35.69; 48+49+51 ii 2-3). Fifth it is the «afflicted» (i.e. not necessarily the «possessed») for whom David in 11Q5 xxvii 9-10 is said to have composed four songs150. Sixth, Less clear in distinguishing between affliction and possession is the text of Jubilees 10:7-14. According to this passage, the angels of the Presence give instructions to Noah on how, for example, to use herbal remedies to ward-off evil spirits. The herbs are used to combat the malevolent effects of the remaining evil spirits (a tenth of their original number) who, following the Great Flood, sought to afflict mankind in an unspecified way and the language of exorcism is not used151. In all the above cases we note that the verbs for the spirits entering, indwelling, and/or exiting the body are absent, thus we cannot establish these cases as demonic possession in the strict sense. There are, in any case, only a few extant Jewish sources outside the New Testament and composed before the end of the first century B.C. which, analogous to the synoptic Gospels, speak of demonic effects in terms of an inhabitation of demons within the human body. Perhaps the most wellknown instance of an exorcism is the story of «a certain Eleazar» recounted by Josephus who illustrates the continuing potency of exorcistic prayers attributed to Solomon (Ant 8.42-49)152. Three further examples from the Dead Sea Scrolls may likewise offer evidence for the embodiment of evil power. The first of these is contained in the so-called Damascus Document, a portion of which is unattested among the later materials recovered from the geniza (storeroom) of the Ezra Synagogue in Cairo: 4Q266 = 4QDa 6 i 5-7

Jesus the Exorcist

67

(with more fragmentary parallels in 4Q269 = 4QDd 7; 4Q272 = 4QDg1 i-ii; and 4Q273 = 4QDh 4 ii)153. The text describes with precision a condition located «under the hair» (4Q266 6 i 7 + 272 i 15) attributed to a spirit that has «entered the head or the beard, taking hold of the blood vessels» (4Q266 6 i 6-7) and has rendered the person «unclean» (4Q266 6 i 11)154. As the text focuses on the priest’s duty to confirm when the diseased person is cured, no procedure of dealing with the spirit itself (such as exorcism, prayer or other purification ritual) is described in the text. The cure is deemed to have taken effect when the priest can observe (1) that there are no further living hairs beyond the dead ones after seven days (4Q266 6 i 11-12), (2) that the artery is filled with blood again (line 12), and (3) that the «spirit of life» ascends and descends in it (line 12). While it seems that the cure is effected by the removal of the disease-causing spirit, the text implies that the «spirit of life» can either co-exist with it or replaces it within the person once the malevolent spirit is gone. I find it plausible, then, to regard this text as an instance of «possession», though perhaps a softer expression such as «habitation» is preferable. A second text to note occurs within the Treatise of the Two Spirits preserved within the Community Rule at 1QS iii 13 – iv 26. At first glance it might not seem clear that the Treatise refers to ‘possession’. In 1QS iv 912 «the spirit of deceit»: (ၰၧၸ ၩၧႁၥ line 9) is thought to underlie a number of vices, and the influence of this spirit, for those who fall sway to its rule, leads them to an «abundance of afflictions» (ၱၬၸၧၣၶ ၢၧႁ) brought about by «all the angels of destruction» (ၰၢၩ ႉၯၠၰၳ ၰၧၯ, line 12). Though the precise relation of this spirit of deceit to human beings is not clear, towards the end of the Treatise such a notion becomes apparent: at the appointed time of divine judgment, the deeds of humans will be purified from all wrongdoing, and God will «finish off every spirit of deceit from the inward parts of his (the human’s) flesh» (1QS iv 20-21 - ၧႁႂၢ ၬၳၩႄၳ ၥၰၧၸ ၩၧႁ ၰၧၯ ၱႄၩၰ) and in the following phrase it describes this as a cleansing from every wicked deed through the spirit of holiness. The Treatise thus portrays eschatological judgment in terms of a global exorcism155, this global exorcism is anthropologically focused í it will take place in the flesh of the human, so that anything that remains from the spirit of deceit within humanity will be completely annihilated. The text declares that in the present age, the spirit of deceit indwells human beings, though it is not alone, for both «the spirits of truth and deceit contend (against one another) in the hearts of man»: (1QS iv 23 ႁၢၣ ၢၢၰၢ ၰၧၸၧ ႄၳၠ ၬၩၧႁ ၧၢၬႁၬ) in an attempt to control a person’s actions. The language of possession does not occur and the habitation of the spirit of deceit is not exclusive; nonetheless, such a spirit, insofar as it is pitched in conflict with the spirit of truth, manifests itself within the

68

Chapter 1

psychology of the human being as the cause of reprehensible deeds and attitudes (1QS iv 9-11). Whereas the last two texts only approximate the idea of possession as we encounter it in the New Testament Gospels, a third offers the clearest example there is among the Dead Sea materials. The source in question consists of two small Aramaic fragments bearing the numerical designation 4Q560156. The incompletely preserved text refers to male and female poisonous beings that invade the human body and its parts: they gain «entry into the flesh» (1 i 3: ၠႁႂၢၢ ၰၰၸ) where, presumably, their activities become the cause of «iniquity and guilt», on the one hand, and of «fever, chills» and problems in the «heart» on the other: (1 i 4: ႄႂၠၧ ၥၬႁၸၧ ၠႂၠ ၸႂၻၧ ၵၠၧၸ ၢၢၰ)157. Column ii of the fragment (lines 5-6) preserves the beginning of an adjuration formula in which a malevolent spirit is directly addressed by an exorcist («I, O spirit, adjure» - ၥၳၧၳ ၩၧႁ ၥၶၠ and «I adjure you, O spirit» ၠၩၧႁ ၯႄၬၳၧၠ, respectively) who by such means is to bring the spirit (along with its effects) under control. To be sure, the text does not explicitly refer to expulsion; however, one may infer that the formula to be recited by the practitioner was intended to reverse what occurs when the spirit has invaded the body. While the last three examples do not provide evidence for practices that immediately underlie episodes recorded in the Gospels, they do preserve language that conceives of demonic influence in terms of corporeal invasion or habitation. On the basis of the texts reviewed thus far, a conclusion is that these texts give a background which enhances the plausibility of the literal theological anthropology of possession and exorcism assumed in the synoptic Gospels within a Jewish setting. From what has been written thus far, from the motifs of the proclamation of God’s reign vis-à-vis the kingdom of Satan to the belief that daimones are evil and unclean, and that they affect humans by gaining entry into their bodies – we have seen all these reflected and vividly presented in the early Jesus tradition. Taken together, they could reflect what Jesus thought his exorcisms signified, how they affect the human body, and what happens when they are dealt with. We are now in a better position, perhaps, to inquire into the nature of this convergence of ideas. Is, for example, the link between the kingdom of God and expulsion of demonic powers the creation of Jesus? While there is no doubt that the Gospel writers attribute to Jesus, at least in terms of his ministry, a distinctiveness that underscored his own extraordinary power and the power of exorcizing in his name, we may still ask whether the notion of successful exorcisms provides evidence that God wants to do something new in his creation, to bring forth new fruits of restoration, and thus make his healing presence felt among humans158.

Jesus the Exorcist

69

3.4 The Demonic in an Apocalyptic Perspective It is at this point, perhaps, we can best recognize the value of early Enochic traditions for the present discussion – especially the Book of Watchers (1 En 1-36), the Book of Giants (found at Qumran and related to Enoch), and the Book of Dreams (1 En 83-90). These texts have gained increasing prominence during the last several decades for a number of reasons, including what we find here about the introduction of evil into the world159. In the Enochic traditions evil on earth is increased by the «watchers». These are angels who rebelled against the intention for which God had created them and, like the parallel myth of «the sons of God» in Gn 6:2-8, they came down from heaven and took human wives who bore them children, a race of giants, or the «Nephilim». First Enoch embellishes the Genesis tradition with a detailed account of the watchers’ corruption of humanity and the forbidden knowledge they revealed to their human brides, such as the secrets of astrology, magic, and divination. In both Genesis and Enoch the watchers influence humanity in ways that were fundamentally contrary to God’s purpose for the created order160. In Genesis God is so saddened by the evil he sees among his beloved creatures that God becomes «sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart» (Gn 6:6). God decides that a great flood is the best solution: to wipe away all the filth on earth, and start a new creation through the salvation of Noah and his family. The early Enochic traditions draw heavily on this specific interpretation of the Great Flood, namely, as a decisive act of divine judgment due to the excessive evils provoked by the fallen angels and their giant offspring. It is significant that we find in Enoch the same motifs and imagery associated with the deluge being employed to describe the final judgement161, as envisioned by the Enochic authors as God’s final, eschatological triumph over evil. The Book of Watchers is perhaps the most influential form of this tradition which, as a whole, while dating to the third century B.C. contains traditions that may be even earlier. The earliest extant copy of it, 4Q201162, already combines the once separate strands of tradition in 1 En chapters 611 and 12-16163. The resulting narrative, reading chapters 6-16 as a unit, focuses on the fallen angels who give bad council to humanity during the antediluvian period (1 Enoch 7:1; 8:3; 9:6-8a; 13:2b), these chapters also recount the violent activities of their progeny, the giants, who correspond to the «mighty men» or «Nephilim» from Gn 6:4. In contrast to Genesis 6, which makes no direct mention of the giants’ involvement in the events leading up to the Flood, the giants in the Book of Watchers are prominent among those being held accountable for the increase of oppression and suffering on the earth (1 En 7:3-6; 9:1, 9-10). It is in response to the cries of

70

Chapter 1

the human victims of these giants that, through four principal angels, (1 En 8:4-9:3; cf. 7:6) God’s divine judgment is set in motion, ch. 10. The giants are then punished through both infighting among themselves (1 En 7:5; 10:9, 12)164and, though less clearly, through the Great Flood (1 En 10:15; Jub.7:21-25)165. The emphasis placed on the divine judgment of these giants in the Book of Watchers and, subsequently, the Book of Giants was not simply based on the violence and oppressiveness of their deeds. More fundamentally, there was something inherently mistaken with the very form of their existence, in that, according to the Shemihazah strand of the narrative, they are the offspring of an illicit sexual union between angels and women (1 En 6:1-4; 7:1-2; 9:7-8; 10:9, 11; 15:3-7, 12; cf. Book of Giants at 4Q531 1). In 1 En 15:3-7, the reason for the loathsomeness of this union is made explicit: God made heaven and earth and separated the two, but the beings God assigned to two separate spheres in the cosmos, i.e. heaven and earth, had come together; by definition, then, their offspring, the giants, were an embodiment of the violation of the created order (15:4, 9-10; cf. Jub 7:21). Since the giants, as the offspring of such an illegitimate union, were neither fully angel nor fully human, God calls them «bastards» and «children of fornication» in 1 Enoch 10:9166. Both the Book of Watchers and the Book of Giants make it clear that God’s wrath is against the fallen angels and the giants whom, through an act of divine intervention (the Flood), had to be categorically and decisively held to account167. Nonetheless, although the giants are not spared, they are not completely annihilated, but being subject to the divine judgment, they end up surviving in a radically altered state. God says: «Now the giants... shall be called evil spirits upon the earth» (1 En 15:8-9). How this alternation of existence has occurred none of the preserved textual witnesses to 1 En 15 tell exactly168, but the transformation is assumed to come by the power of God’s command, that is, by his creative word. By God’s command their physical nature was destroyed while their souls «emerged» from their flesh as «evil spirits» (1 En 15:9-10). From the bodies of these giants many spirits «have proceeded» (1 En 15:9) and «gone forth» (1 En 16:1). In their disembodied state these spirits are commanded to «destroy», that is, to engage in the sort of activities that they had done before the Great Flood. In particular God commands them to afflict human beings and work destruction on the earth (1 En 15:10-11); they are to «destroy without incurring judgment» but only until the eschaton, when God’s justice will finally triumph and liberate humanity from such evil (16:1). So how influential was this Enochic tradition? It is important to note that among the Dead Sea materials several references to demonic beings reflect

Jesus the Exorcist

71

a direct influence from the Enochic tradition and may even have the giants’ postdiluvian existence in view. For example, the Songs of the Maskil speak of the «spirits of the bastards» (ၱၬႁၨၳၳ ႄၧၩၧႁ 4Q510 1.5), this bizarre and unforgettable expression is named within a longer catalogue of malevolent forces; and so we would rightly compare it to 1 En. 10:9, where the Codex Panopolitanus reads IJȠnȢ μĮȗȘȡȑȠȣȢ, «bastards» as a transliteration from Hebrew (ၱၬႁၨၳၳ) or Aramaic (ၠၬႁၨၳၳ). Another likely reference to the spirits of the giants is also made in at 4Q511 35.7; 48+49+51.2-3 and at 4Q444 2 i 4 where these spirits are beings who must be brought under control through the hymns of the Maskil directed to God169. Furthermore, in the above mentioned Apocryphal Psalms text (section D.3), at 11Q11 v 6, the demon visiting during the night is, assuming the text restoration is correct, addressed as «offspring of] Adam and seed of the ho[ly] ones»170. This explanation of the origin of demons as disembodied spirits emanating from the giant offspring of the fallen angels continues in later Christian literature, picked up in Testament of Solomon (5:3; 17:1), the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies (8.12-18: giants designated as «bastards» and «demons»), Tertullian’s Apology (22), Lactantius’ Institutes (2.15) and Commodianus’ Instructions (3)171. So 1 Enoch gives us an interesting picture of the possible origin of evil spirits of greater and lesser authority, which afflict humans by divine decree. For one thing, one might ask ‘why are spirits destructive?’, ‘why are they unclean or evil?’ and ‘why do evil spirits hate humans?’ The New Testament itself cannot answer these questions. But in the light of Enochic tradition we discover a plausible explanation: the giants were by nature destructive because their birth was against the will of God, after the flood their spirits are commanded by God to destroy (1 En 16:1), and they disrupt human life out of jealousy for humanity that has managed to escape the deluge with both body and soul intact. Also Enoch fits well with the Gospel message that in the final judgment God has reserved peace, blessing, and mercy for his righteous elect (1En 1:8), whereas these spirits are all doomed.

3.5 Jewish Apocalyptic Perspective and the Gospel Traditions Before determining the significance of the Jewish traditions just reviewed with regard to understanding Jesus’ confrontations with demonic power in human beings, it is appropriate there to draw several negative conclusions. First, none of the Enochic traditions contains any of the more technical messianic language such as «kingdom of God» which in the Gospels is related to Jesus’ exorcism ministry and plays such a prominent role in Jesus’ proclamation.

72

Chapter 1

Second, the Enochic traditions do not provide any narrative accounts of exorcisms that may serve as examples to be compared with stories about Jesus’ activity. 1 Enoch is apocalyptic literature, not historical narrative like the Gospels and the Book of Acts. Third, unlike the Dead Sea Scrolls, not a single instance among the Gospels, whether narrative or saying, explicitly identifies a demon as a giant or «bastard spirit» living in a postdiluvian state of its existence. However, God’s destruction of the «ancient giants» or «proud giants» in the Flood is explicitly mentioned in late Jewish extra-canonical literature written just before New Testament times: Wisdom 14:6; Sirach 16:7; Baruch 3:26-28172. These references are in keeping with the Dead Sea Scrolls, revealing that the tradition of the giants was not a religious peculiarity of Qumran, but the story was widely known and current among mainstream Judaism from Jesus’ day through the time of the New Testament authors173. What, then, might the early Enochic traditions and the trajectory of development they set within the Dead Sea documents contribute to the picture of Jesus the exorcist? Let us hypothesize for a moment that the Enochic traditions contributed to the narrative background in which the Gospels were written; in that case the story of the giants could function in several ways in understanding the exorcism ministry of Jesus. First, it could offer one way of explaining why demons were thought to be so intent on entering the bodies of human beings. Demons entering bodies is a distinctive feature of demonic possession in the synoptic tradition, as we have shown (cf. 3.3). In the light of 1 Enoch demonic entry in the Gospels could be understood as an attempt to recover a form of existence the giants had lost. Entering in human flesh the spirit would seek to recover its «house» or something reminiscent of its former body (Mt 12:43-45; par. Lk 11:24-26) and set up a kind of ‘base of operations’ or ‘resident evil’ from which it could «afflict, oppress, destroy» its victim like a parasite, causing the maladies, violent behaviour, and psychosis seen in the Gospels (1 En 15:11)174. Second, the story of the giants gives an explanation as to why unclean spirits would make humans suffer, and what is the source of their rage. The birth of the «bastard» giants was against the will of God who had separated angels from mankind for their own good, as Baruch writes «the giants were born... not these did God choose, nor did he give them the way of understanding» (Bar 3:26-27). So the giants are by their very nature selfdestructive, violent, grotesque, and distorted. Although they neither fear God nor love him, God found a use for them: after the flood their disembodied spirits were commanded by God to «destroy without incurring

Jesus the Exorcist

73

judgment» until the eschaton (1 En 16:1). «The spirits of the giants afflict, oppress, destroy, attack, do battle, and work destruction on the earth… And these spirits shall rise up against the children of men and against women because they proceeded [from them]» (1 En 15:11-12, emphasis mine). The giants would be furious that God rescued Noah’s righteous descendants from the Flood and had not rescued them, and so their spirits would conceivably delight in afflicting humans out of jealousy and malice. Just as «the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot» (Rom 8:7), so the spirits of the giants are unclean, unruly, and godless, with their mind set on consuming human «flesh». The giants have nothing but contempt for humanity, reminiscent of Paul’s axiom «for the mind of the flesh is death» (Rom 8:6). Their goal is thus to reproduce in humanity their own godlessness, war, and chaos, and eventually to make them taste death, that is, the separation of soul and body that they experienced under God’s wrath. This violent, domineering depiction of the giants fits well with the picture of possession in the Gospels. For example the father of a possessed boy in Mark complains that he has a spirit seeking «to destroy» the child, ruthlessly casting him into situations of danger and severe pain (Mk 9:22; par. Lk 9:38). This abuse is comparable to the self- inflicted misery suffered by the Gerasene demoniac who cuts himself175. Third, the story of the giants serves to locate the problem of demonic evil within an apocalyptic/eschatological framework that makes sense; in other words, it would explain for Jews of first century the origin and the final destiny of the «unclean spirits» of the Gospels. Although Jesus indicates their destiny is eternal destruction when he says that damned souls must go to «the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels» (Mt 25:41), the Gospels offer virtually no information about what made the exorcized spirits unclean, nor why the angels fell, nor why they must be punished. The Enochic tradition provides a possible background that can address these questions. On the one hand, the giants’ punishment (the loss of their bodies) was a decisive act of God. On the other hand, although the giants were allowed to survive into the postdiluvian period as disembodied spirits, their altered mode of survival was that of powers who are conscious of living in an already defeated state. Even the demonic world knows its obliteration is assured (cf. Rv 12:12). God wiped away evil from the face of the earth by the water in the Flood and he will do so again by the fire of «the Day» of judgment (1 Cor 3:13; 2 Pt 2:5-9; 3:6-13). This fire will not only dissolve the world, but it will separate, according to their works, the wicked who will fall into ruin from the righteous who will shine with eternal peace and joy

74

Chapter 1

in God’s light176. Accordingly, imagery from the Flood narrative is adapted in 1 En 10 as the prophecy looks forward to an eschatological judgment when all evil, including evil spirits, will be destroyed once and for all, «led off to the abyss of fire, to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined forever... and destroy all the spirits of the reprobate and the children of the Watchers, because they have wronged mankind» (1 En 10:13-16). Thus an interval or «meantime» is established between the Flood and final judgment; this is the age during which evil spirits originating in the giants can operate, testing human beings under God’s permission, albeit under restriction, knowing their time to wreak havoc on humanity is limited (1 En 16:1; Jub 10:7-9). Interestingly the spirits’ awareness of this judgement is reflected in the Gospels where we see the evil spirits saying to Jesus such things as: «O Son of God, have you come to torment us before the time?» (Mt 8:29) and «Ha! What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us?» (Lk 4:34). That the spirits fear torment and destruction «before the time» makes sense only these spirits were aware of the coming time when their torment is assured, that is, at the final judgement 177. This selfawareness of the coming judgment of evil spirits is fascinating because in the Old Testament canon it is not explicit, and seems totally absent – only in Jewish apocalyptic literature of the Second Temple period, and in the Christian literature that continued in that tradition, is this affirmation made explicit. In many New Testament epistles and in Jesus’ sayings in the Gospels we find an interesting comparison between the coming day of judgment and the Flood of Noah; since these two events form the central backbone of the Enochic tradition, we can infer that the same apocalyptic milieu is at play. Jesus warns (Mt 24:37-39; par Lk 17:26) «For as were the days of Noah so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man». The Flood was the sudden manifestation of divine justice; it is the timeless reminder to man of the importance of choosing between good and evil – salvation for the just and punishment for the wicked178. The letter of Jude 14-15, in warning of the coming of God for eschatological judgement, famously quotes from the prologue of 1 Enoch (1:9). This prologue describes the prophecy of Enoch as a word of blessing (1 En 1:1) for God’s faithful remnant in the end times who like righteous Noah will be saved while the rest of civilization í all evil men and evil spirits í will be destroyed in a cataclysmic recapitulation of the Deluge.

Jesus the Exorcist

75

In this sense the Gospels present us with a world order which, as in Qumran and Jewish apocalyptic tradition, temporarily falls under «the dominion of wickedness»179 or, similarly, the «kingdom» of Satan (Mt 12:26 par. Lk 11:17-18). who claims authority over «all the kingdoms of the world»180. Jewish contemporaries of Jesus who undertook means to curb the influence of demons could, against such a background portrayed in 1 Enoch, proceed with a certain measure of confidence because they believed the God of Israel would have the final victory. The Jesus tradition does not introduce the notion of an eschatological tension between the ‘already’ and ‘not yet’ as far as the fate of demons are concerned, but his tradition intensifies this tension as the space for the confident practice of exorcism characterizing Jesus’ ministry. Fourth, God’s act of delivering humanity in the deluge and punishment of evil is associated with royal divine authority, that is, the power that a king would exert over his kingdom. God’s response to evil and his promise to save the righteous happen following petitions in which the archangels address God inter alia as «King of kings» (1 En 9:4). Moreover, one of the Book of Giants fragments (4Q203 9) is understood as a petition appealing to God as king, by «your great rule»: (ၥၯႄၧၢႁ ႄၧၯၰၳ), in the hope that God intervene and punish the fallen angels and giants, as he did in the Deluge. Indeed, Enoch’s petition for justice in the Book of Dreams (1 En 84:2-6), which also appeals to God’s kingship, anticipates and is followed by the punishment of the terrible state of corruption in the world before the Flood181. This fits well with the Gospel narratives, where the Jewish people who have suffered Roman occupation and the false messianism of Herod, are anticipating the restoration of the royal power of the kingdom of David and «waiting for the consolation of Israel» promised by God (Lk 2:25; cf. Is 40:1). Fifth, in view of the framework outlined here, one may then well ask: what do the Gospel stories of exorcisms performed by Jesus and others assume happens to demonic powers when they have been expelled? Those who understood themselves to live in a world inhabited by demons would not have thought exorcism is a matter of extermination or total destruction. Instead, spiritual forces are by these means relocated. This is the view affirmed in Lk 11:24-26 (par. Mt 12:43-45; cf. section 3.3 above) and is presumed by all the accounts of Jesus’ confrontation with malevolent spirits. Even the Gadarene demoniac episode provides another case in point, with its two-stage exorcism that builds on the presumption (articulated by ‘Legion’ in Mk 5:12, «send us into the swine so that we may enter into them») that such a transfer is what customarily happens. Therefore, despite the story’s attempt to highlight the distinct authority with which Jesus has

76

Chapter 1

commanded the situation, the drowning of two thousand swine indwelt by the spirits (5:13) does not mark the end of those spirits. The final act of complete subjugation lies ahead. Sixth, and following from the last point, the «return of the spirit» logion, as we have seen, acknowledged that exorcized powers can return, and they do so in such a way that the person’s condition is worse than before. This reflects an outlook that evil power is malicious and eager to destroy human victims, and, once extricated from the human body, needs to be kept at bay or negotiated in order for the person to remain in an improved state of being. Seventh and finally, the very idea that exorcism is needed at all is not based on an understanding of a person as someone objectively perverse, weird, or invaded by evil. The Enochic tradition and a number of texts that drew upon it regarded demonic powers as inherently out of place in the world and alien to the cosmic order as God has established it182. If the notion of possession is considered a possibility within the worldview of 1 Enoch, instead of undermining the dignity of this or that individual, it could actually function to preserve their integrity – in that they would be innocent victims loved by God and in need of deliverance and spiritual restoration. Whatever their problems, human beings are God’s beloved creatures, sharing his image and likeness, and thus they remain integral to the created order.

3.6 Conclusions 1. The synoptic Gospels underline the success of Jesus as one whose power is superior to that of demonic powers in the present age and into eternity. Jesus’ prominence as the exorcist par excellence is also reflected in the effectiveness attributed to the use of his «name» by others (Mt 7:22; Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49; 10:17). There is every reason to think, then, that the presentation of Jesus in the Gospels stressed the miraculous character of his deeds. At the same time, Jesus’ counter- demonic manoeuvres fit logically within the framework of an apocalyptic worldview that some, even if not many, of his pious Jewish contemporaries shared. The consideration of the Second Temple context may provide one way of getting past the hermeneutical conundrum associated with Jesus’ exorcisms. In parts of the Western world, readers of the Gospels have become accustomed to the dramatic, spectacular character with which the descriptions of these episodes are invested in the text. While such a reading rightly picks up on the significance being attached to the person of Jesus, it may inadvertently serve to make Jesus more remote or even bifurcate readers around the misleading question of whether or not there is any place in religious communities today for such or similar activity. It is possible to perceive

Jesus the Exorcist

77

exorcism, a hermeneutically, cosmologically and sociologically controversial part of Jesus’ activity in which he directly combats demonic forces, not only as miraculous but even as a realistic approach, informed by his pious Jewish context. Such a conceptualization proceeds on the basis of a twin-fold recognition that (i) evil is a persistent reality that cannot be wished away or extricated from human experience through scientific advancement alone and that (ii) from a standpoint of faith, spiritual health is assured through divine victory in the created order and the humans who suffer. 2. If one aims to take the theology of the New Testament sincerely, that is, in the light and context within which it was written, the exorcisms of Jesus must be understood within a larger framework of conflict between God and Satan. Satan's goal is to lead people away from God, to denature the human created in God’s image, and generally to destroy God’s good creation. In this battle both God and Satan have at their command an invisible army of spiritual beings, angels and demons respectively. One means employed by Satan in his effort to destroy God’s creation is infiltration into human life, that is, demon possession. The fact that possession and «indwelling sin» (cf. Rom 7:20) exist in human bodies is evidence of the power of Satan in our world. And therefore it is also clear what is the significance of exorcism. Jesus illustrates this by using a startling image of demonic possession: «Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? An then he will plunder his house» (Mt 12:29, par. Lk 11:21-22). The strong man here is Satan and the world is his house (cf. Mt 12:25). Jesus the exorcist will «bind» the strong man and «will plunder» his house; thereby he will give spiritual health and salvation of human beings who had been suffering under the tyranny of Satan. When Jesus expels demons from tormented people, it is visible evidence that the power of Satan is broken. Jesus the exorcist is in the unique position of re-establishing human membership in the peace and joyful freedom of God’s «family», his kingdom (cf. Eph 2:1-8; 12-22). Hence, Jesus indicates the final goal of his ministry is entry into the kingdom, «But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you» (Mt 12:28). The exorcisms of Jesus lose their meaning if they are disconnected from this context. In this context we see that Jesus’ exorcism ministry, and that of his disciples who exorcize demons in Jesus’ name, constitutes the proclamation of the fall of the kingdom of Satan and the opening of heaven to blessed souls. We can now better understand how Jesus can so boldly encourage his disciples who have performed exorcisms in his name (Lk 10:18-20): «And he said to them, ‘I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have

78

Chapter 1

given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven’». Thus the followers of Jesus can rejoice, because they march forward with him into heaven, and have nothing to fear from Satan, death, or suffering at the hands of demons. 3. Jesus himself speaks about Jewish exorcists who did not believe in him, and at the same time exorcism was being performed in the contemporary pagan environment183. As we have seen, the Gospel writers single out Jesus among all exorcists, emphasising the ease and simplicity of Jesus’ exorcist ministry. But the ‘ordinary’ exorcism apparently did not free people from anything except the concrete sufferings that came with the possession. These victims were not transferred into a completely new reality but rather continued to exist in a realm where demons had to be appeased, scared off, etc. The whole culture of antiquity was dominated by fear of demons and possession, and the ancient practice of exorcism rather supported and emphasized this fear, rather than serving to remove it. Here the exorcisms of Jesus are significantly different. He not only frees the possessed from their sufferings, he transfers them into a brand new reality, a new realm, where the power of the demons are finally broken and thus where there exists no longer any fear of demons (cf. Mk 9:25; Col 1:13). 4. In the New Testament we do not find explicitly pronounced the same combination of demons and idols, paganism and possession, that we found in the literature of the ancient Church. We have to remember, however, that the Jewish conceptual material which forms the background for the texts of the ancient Church, are older than or contemporary with the New Testament. One would therefore a priori expect that the same understanding was presupposed also in the New Testament. Perhaps this Jewish context tells us why the evil spirits in some places of the New Testament are called «unclean», a likely reference to Zec 13:2 (cf. Mt 10:1; 12:43; Mk 1:23; 3:11; etc., see 3.2 above). It is also striking that even in the New Testament the majority of the exorcisms take place in the «border area» against paganism, in «the Galilee of the Gentiles», while not one takes place in Jerusalem184. 5. There is a large degree of continuity in all of the material presented. We are confronted with a set of ideas which received its first expression in Judaism in the «inter-testamental» period, which was carried forward and received a Christological centre in the New Testament writings, and which was developed further in its Christian form in the literature of the ancient church. Central elements in this set of thoughts are the following: (i) the connection between demons and idolatry, between paganism and possession (a theme which we will explore further in the next chapter); (ii) Christ as

Jesus the Exorcist

79

the conqueror of the demons; (iii) Christ having «bound the strong man» showing the power in Christian exorcism that prefigures his resurrection; and (iv) situating exorcism primarily on the Church's border toward paganism. 6. The evidence that Jesus was an exorcist is not confined to the New Testament185. In particular, the memory of Jesus’ success in this field may be alluded to in a tradition by the rabbis which goes back to the earlier period during which such traditions were gathered and codified (A.D. 70-200). According to this tradition: Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously a herald had cried, «He is being led out for stoning, because he has practised sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy»186. This is probably an echo of the charge laid against Jesus by the Pharisees preserved in Mark 3:22, «He is possessed by Beelzebul and by the prince of demons he casts out demons». These two very different sources provide mutual confirmation that neither the Pharisees nor their heirs were able to dispute the success of Jesus' power and renown where demons or evil spirits were concerned. What they could do was cast doubt on the source of that power, to give reason for their non-belief. The tradition of Jesus’ exorcistic prowess therefore quite securely grounded in historical reminiscence and can be reasonably considered authentic. 7. The use of Jesus’ name in exorcisms by others testifies to the fact that Jesus was a renowned exorcist. His own disciples used his name in exorcism with great effect both before and after Easter (Lk 10:17; Acts 16:18), and interestingly, others outside the circle of Jesus followers evidently sought to harness the same power by evoking Jesus’ name in the same way (Mk 9:38; Acts 19:13). The lasting fame of Jesus as a powerful exorcist is attested by the occurrences of his name in the incantations preserved in the magical papyri (PGM IV:1233, 3020). It is a logical conclusion that the power attributed to Jesus’ name in exorcism reflects the considerable success of Jesus’ own ministry of exorcism187. 8. We have seen not only exorcism stories but exorcism sayings in the Gospels: that is, sayings of Jesus where he clearly refers to his exorcisms. Several of these have been gathered together by Mark and Q (assuming Q to be the common source of traditions shared by Matthew and Luke): i) Mark 3:22-26, Jesus’ house divided saying as a reply to the Beelzebul charge (parallel in Q, Mat 12:24-6/Lk 11:15-18), «How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end».

80

Chapter 1

ii) Matthew 12:27-28 the Spirit of God/finger of God saying (par. Lk 11:19-20): «And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you»188. iii) Mark 3:27, the strong man saying (Mt 12:29 follows Mk; Lk 11:2122 may preserve the Q version): «No one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man; then indeed he may plunder his house». iv) Mark 3:28, the blasphemy saying (Lk 12:10 may preserve the Q parallel in a different context, while Mt 12:31-2 has joined both versions into a composite saying): «Truly I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin». According to Twelftree and Dunn few today would deny that all these sayings go back to Jesus. Moreover, they are all placed in the narratives precisely where Jesus’ exorcisms had stirred up controversy. As Jesus’ response to accusations made against him, they provide an invaluable insight into Jesus’ own understanding of his ministry and of the significance of his exorcisms, as we shall see here below189. 9. For the moment we need simply note that since such sayings can be traced back to Jesus himself with a fair degree of certainty, they provide adequate confirmation that Jesus, among other things, was an exorcist. Had the picture of Jesus as exorcist been entirely the creation of the early church, we would not have expected Jesus to have the obligation of defending his exorcism ministry from social attacks or the religious elite. If the Gospel authors made up these stories they would have reason to portray him as successful exorcist, yes, but not a highly controversial one in the eyes of the Jewish authorities. The Gospels portray Jesus’ exorcisms and healings as motivation for these Jewish authorities who sought Jesus’ execution. Therefore since Jesus’ execution is a historical fact that no one questions, the motives behind the execution must also be clear, identifiable, and unquestionably true. If not the Gospels themselves would lose all credibility to their first century Palestinian Jewish audience, in Matthew’s case at the very least. These authors would have no reason to risk retelling the Beelzebul controversy in such detail if it were not true, which operated as a smear campaign against Jesus: unable to deny the raw fact of his exorcisms his religious enemies sought to paint him as an agent of Satan. But if those who sought Jesus’ death could not deny the exorcisms of Jesus then neither can the modern reader, without the gross historical oversight of assuming they are false before examining the available data.

Jesus the Exorcist

81

Therefore let us take a critical eye to the exorcisms of Jesus. If these exorcism accounts were fake we would expect them either to be (i) less in number, (ii) less controversial, or (iii) less unique and more like the exorcisms of Jesus’ contemporaries. If we take seriously for a moment the hypothesis that Jesus’ exorcism ministry is a fabrication, it would make sense for the gospel writers to depict that aspect of his ministry as something that could be kept secret, revealed only to a select few. This is so that, conceivably, when the Gospel narratives were published this «revelation» of Jesus’ «true exorcist identity» could be believable, because it would have been information that was previously unknown to the reader. But the opposite is true: it assumed that this information is well known to the reader. Regardless of their opinion of Jesus of Nazareth, the oral tradition that Jesus was a successful exorcist is not presented as a little-known-fact but a wellestablished, indisputable truth, one that sparked no little controversy by the Jewish authorities who attributed the power of his exorcisms to the prince of demons (Mt 9:34). As they stand, the Gospels depict the exorcisms of Jesus not as esoteric but ubiquitous; not as hidden but famous; not as secondary but central – even and especially in John’s gospel where Jesus as the cosmic Exorcist par excellence plays a crucial role in the Johannine understanding of Christ’s crucifixion190. If exorcism were not a facet of Christ’s ministry that the masses found unforgettable, how could Matthew for example, in writing to a Jewish audience in Palestine, have the audacity to claim in his first chapter depicting Christ’s ministry that Christ’s «fame» as an exorcist and healer spread «throughout all of Syria» so much so that «great crowds followed him» bringing their possessed loved ones across great distances to be exorcised by Jesus?191. Here one can plausibly imagine a gospel writer exaggerating the exorcistic fame of Jesus to make a point, but simply to invent ‘Jesus as exorcist’ totally out of thin air would seem unlikely given the sheer quantity of data to the contrary, throughout the Gospels and beyond. Exorcism was Jesus’ claim to fame, far and wide, from the hill country of Judea to the northern port cities of Phoenicia, Tyre, and Sidon (Mt 15:21-22). All people, from Jesus’ bitter enemies to his friends, seem to have had to deal with the raw fact that Jesus was successful in performing many exorcisms, and the Gospel writers themselves are willing to gamble the authenticity of their entire message on this proposition. If the accounts of Jesus the exorcist were fake we would expect at least some of them to confirm more closely to contemporary parallels of exorcism in Jesus’ time. For example, there is no report of Jesus using physical aids, as in Tobit (burning the heart and liver of a fish), or Josephus (the smell of a root), or the magical papyri (use of amulets) – all such formulae are totally absent. He does not pray in his exorcisms, as does

82

Chapter 1

Hanina ben Dosa192 nor lay his hands on the demoniac, as in the Genesis Apocryphon193. Perhaps most striking of all, he does not invoke any authority or power source. In his healing ministry, like in exorcism, Jesus is depicted as ever serene, with gentleness he gives the simple word that heals. In contrast the use of a powerful name was quite typical if not mandatory in exorcisms of antiquity and the formula, «I adjure you by …», is very common in the later magical papyri (e.g. PGM IV). Had the early church, in their depiction of the action of Jesus’ exorcisms, been illustrating a saying like Mt 12:28, quoted above, we might have expected Jesus to say something like, I adjure you by the Spirit of God. And where Jesus’ habit of prayer was so important, as in Luke, we might have expected Jesus to be depicted as praying before tackling the demon. If the Gospel accounts were not true we would expect Matthew, Mark, or Luke to have ‘slipped up’ somewhere in their elaborate fabrication of Jesus the exorcist, and included at least one element of exorcism common between Jesus and his contemporaries. What we do find is Jesus saying I command you (Mk 9:25). This is wholly unprecedented. And yet it is in accord with Jesus’ distinctive style; because unlike the Jewish scribes/rabbis who teach by referring other eminent teachers of Halakhah, Jesus shocks the crowds by teaching in a totally new way: «as having authority» all his own194. This personal authority by which Jesus so naturally and effortlessly exorcises spirits, is something that no one had clearly anticipated and no one since has repeated. Jesus was remembered as one who cast out demons with authority during his ministry í a memory preserved by historical documents that depict the invocation of his name by would-be exorcists both during and after his ministry, both within and without Christian tradition195. It seems well-founded, therefore, to conclude by the uniformity, quality, and sheer quantity of data presented here that the manner of exorcism attributed to Jesus in the synoptic Gospels is plausible. Even with a critical eye on the metaphysics of exorcism itself, what is written in the Gospels could be seen as an echo of Jesus’ own distinctive style, at least, as far as the eye-witnesses understood it and Jesus spoke about it. This position is justified by close examination of the earliest and best data available: the uniformity and ubiquity of the gospel depictions of exorcism, their place within first century Judaism and the larger Hellenistic world, and the apparently unforgettable way that Jesus conducted himself as an exorcist was something remembered by critics and devotees alike. To dispute the historicity of the Gospel narratives which depict Jesus as a successful exorcist seems unfair, flying in the face of the mass of the plain evidence available. This evidence because it fits well within the context in which it is presented and can be traced back to the earliest centuries in its raw and un-manipulated form, still

Jesus the Exorcist

83

stands up to criticism and retains its plausibility in the modern era. In the light of the data presented and without new evidence to the contrary, to write Jesus the exorcist off as fantasy would be a seemingly unwarranted abuse of the historical-critical method. 10. Finally, the approach to the phenomenon of possession during the first period of Christianity does not primarily stem from the problem of a «disease» that needs to be cured, but so much as a case of spiritual infiltration of the non-baptised in a society where idolatry was commonplace. Idolatry, or occult spiritual practices conducted outside the protection of Jesus’ name, can often leave the soul vulnerable to spiritual attack and penetration without the person’s awareness of danger. Here the spiritual entities invoked – be they gods, goddesses, angels, or daemons – become merely a spiritual mask under which degenerate spiritual forces may infiltrate the will, a phenomenon noted even in the Hebrew Bible (cf. section 1.3 above). Demonic infiltration and occult practice will be discussed in the next chapter with reference to the Church Fathers’ interpretation of New Testament texts. In any case the Gospels depict that the spirits seeking to indwell human flesh are not neutral in their attitude to humans. As Jesus’ teaching reveals, the demons are eager to find a point of infiltration to return to their «house» (Mt 12:44) so that like a «strong man» who binds his victim (12:29), they may bind their hapless victims to the misery of self- destructive behaviour patterns (Mk 5:5; 9:22). This topic is not completely without relevance in our neo-religious age where one plays with the spirits – and where a certain type of paganism is on its way back!

Notes 1 In Acts of the Apostles Jesus is called ʌĮiȢ, «servant» four times by the early Christians, making reference to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah (Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30; cf. esp. 8:32-33; ʌĮiȢ, suffering «servant» of see Isaiah 52:13 LXX). Scripture had foretold that God would redeem Israel and bring salvation to the nations (Is 49:6) through this mysterious servant who the Jews before Jesus’ time had already identified as representative of Israel, and even the Messiah (cf. Targum of Isaiah 52:10- 53:12). But why must he suffer? Through the mystery of redemptive suffering the power of God to destroy evil is released (1 Pt 2:24; 4:1), not only is sin washed away – but new life is born. Jesus manifests this connection between suffering and divine power in Mark and all the New Testament. For example, Jesus «gives eternal life» in John precisely by offering himself in sacrifice as «the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world» (Jn 10:28; 1:29). 2 See S.T. ROCHESTER, Good news at Gerasa; E. SORENSEN, in his book Possession and Exorcism, 132-133, explains that the Greek term ਥȟȠȡțȓȗȦ only occurs once in the New Testament, and it occurs as the noun «exorcist» ਥȟȠȡțȚıIJȒȢ

84

Chapter 1

in Acts 19:13. However through history it came to have a technical meaning for the ritual. This ritual refers to all the incidents in the synoptic gospels and Acts in which an exorcist (usually Jesus or the disciples) would cast out from a person a demon or spirit. In fact, there are many different verbs used in reference to this. According to Sorensen: «By far the most common terms are ਥȟȑȡȤȠμĮȚ ‘come/go out’ and ਥțȕȐȜȜȦ ‘cast out’ but six other words occur once each in contexts of exorcism». 3 J. DUNN, Jesus Remembered. Christianity in the Making; Dunn’s approach is distinctive and significant as he inquires as to how Jesus had impact on his followers and how his followers remembered him. See also ID., A New perspective on Jesus. 4 S. DAVIES in his book Jesus the Healer, 18-91, develops his own thesis as to why Jesus was able to heal and exorcize. Davies liberally applies insights from cultural anthropology to make Jesus a typical shaman or holy man. Jesus was one who was «possessed» by the Spirit of God, and that in him there were two distinct personages: Jesus of Nazareth and the Spirit/Son of God, the latter of which took «over» when it was time to say something divine. This new approach to research is one way to overcome the stumbling block of Jesus’ miracles for modern scholarship. 5 C.P. THIEDE, Jezus, Waar of Niet?, 75: «Of the greatest critics was Celsus, a man who tried to fight by every means the validity of the Christian message, but in no way did he question the historicity of the miracles of Jesus. Rather he proposed that while Jesus was in Egypt as a young man he learned healing techniques from the Egyptian magicians». 6 C. EVANS, «Defeating Satan and Liberating Israel»; ID., «Inaugurating the Kingdom of God and Defeating the Kingdom of Satan», 75. On Mark 1:14-15 as a summary of the proclamation of Jesus see J. DUNN, Jesus Remembered, 407-409, 437-439, 498. 7 As Jesus confers royal authority to the apostles at the Last Supper, Lk 22:29-30: «I assign [įȚĮIJȓșİμĮȚ – lit. ‘covenant’] to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel». This could be seen as a fulfilment of Daniel 7:13 ff., where the kingdom of God is given to «the Son of Man» (7:14) who in turn assigns it to the saints: «And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High» (Dn 7:26a). This transfer of power would not diminish the supreme authority of Jesus as the king of kings if his followers are members of Christ’s body, as in the Pauline understanding: «Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior… we are members of his body» (Eph 5:23, 30; cf. Rom 12:5; 1 Cor 6:15; 12:12-27). 8 On this point, see C. EVANS, Paul the Exorcist and Healer, 363-379. 9 David Instone Brewer, whose approach to these matters is formed both by an understanding of modern psychiatric thinking and person experience of exorcism, argues that while a psychiatrist might suggest reinterpreting Biblical accounts of exorcism in terms of various psychiatric disorders, such an approach has «only limited value as explanations of what is described in the Gospels». D. INSTONE BREWER, Jesus and the Psychiatrists, 133-148. Keith Warrington also suggests that the demons attempted to complicate life for Jesus by proclaiming his status at an inopportune time, but that Jesus refused to allow any slowing down of his

Jesus the Exorcist

85

ministry and saw through the unsubtle (at least to him) strategy of the demons. He states that psychiatry cannot explain the insight than many of the demonised have into Jesus’ identity: The man in the synagogue shouted out that Jesus was the Holy One of God (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34). The mad man of Gadera called him Son of the Most High God (Mk 5:7; Mt 8:29; Lk 8:28). Many other demonised people are also recorded as shouting that he was the Son of God and having to be silenced (Mk 1:34; 3:11; Lk 4:41). This insight into Jesus’ character cannot be explained in psychiatric terms. One explanation for the demon's actions is that they are disturbed by the mere presence of Jesus and vocalize their discomfort, a pattern recognizable from contemporary accounts of possession. See K. WARRINGTON, Jesus the Healer,45. 10 G.T. TWELFTREE examined the world of thought contemporary to Jesus’ exorcisms. His conclusion was that: «[People] were not uncritical in their acceptance of a report of a miracle…Not everyone believed in demons and exorcism. People in the New Testament world [were able] to discriminate between those sicknesses which were and those which were not thought to be caused by demons». G.T. TWELFTREE, Christ Triumphant, 169. It is interesting to note that all three synoptic Gospels record that, during the evening of the day on which Peter’s motherin-law was healed, many who were sick and demonised were brought to Jesus for ministry, each category of affliction kept separate in the accounts. Again, compare the cures of deaf, dumb and blind persons in Mark 7 and 8, where there is no exorcism (despite Mark’s interest in such events), with the similar cases in Matthew 9 and 12, where mute and blind people are exorcised: There must have been some diagnosis or discernment by Jesus at the time, whereby he was able to tell which cases required the casting-out of evil spirits and which did not. See M. PERRY, Deliverance, 146; K. WARRINGTON, Jesus the Healer, 45. 11 Respect for ancient ways of understanding what we call «illness» will help us also to hear and appreciate the theological affirmation the text is delivering to modern readers as well. «On the other hand, a cavalier disregard of the ancient mythological model of illness is inappropriate and makes it difficult for us to understand the context of the topic in question». See J.T. CARROLL, «Sickness and Healing in the New Testament Gospels», 139, 142. 12 G.T. TWELFTREE notes several marks of authenticity in Jesus’ exorcisms, unusual facts about his mode of operation that cannot have been borrowed from the common practice of the day and thereby pass the criterion of dissimilarity: Jesus used no material devices (in contrast to other ancient cases), neither did he require departing demons to give proof of their exit, nor did he use common formulas such as «I bind you». Jesus did not pray to remove the evil spirits or invoke any authority beyond his own: As a result of our examination of the Jesus tradition we are able to conclude, at least, that Jesus was an exorcist, at one with his time, that the synoptic Tradition is correct to give considerable emphasis to this aspect of Jesus' ministry, and that Jesus was the first to associate exorcism and eschatology. «Be quiet!» said Jesus sternly. «Come out of him!» The evil spirit shook the man and came out of him with a shriek. The people were all so amazed, they asked each other, «What is this? A new teaching - and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him» (Mk 1:25-27, cf. Lk 4:31-37). G.T. TWELFTREE, Christ Triumphant,

86

Chapter 1

169. And again: «He rebuked the unclean spirit and said to it, ‘I command you, come out of him and never enter him again!» (Mk 9:25;Mt 17:18;Lk 9:42). 14 Keith Warrington writes that «the amazement of the people may have been due to the fact that Jesus dealt with the demon by a word, without resorting to magic». See K. WARRINGTON, Jesus The Healer, 45. 15 G.T. TWELFREE, Jesus, the Exorcist, 163. 16 Mk 5:8; see also Lk 8:31: «And they begged him repeatedly not to order them to go into the Abyss, or Pit». 17 In Second Temple Judaism angels were commonly called «Watchers». Already in late Hellenistic Judaism, these spirits were thought to have brought magic to their human brides, according to the Book of Watchers in the Apocalypse of 1 Enoch. For a general account of the tradition, see J.C. VANDERKAM, «Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition», 124-126. In the Christian monotheist tradition, there was the assumption that sorcerers make use of negative superhuman beings which coexist with God in the spirit realm, those pagan gods who now have been unveiled as evil demons and who either are or are not identical with the fallen angels of Jewish tradition. 18 According to Josephus, Ant. 8.45, Solomon «composed incantations with which illnesses depart, and left behind forms of exorcisms with which those possessed by demons drive them out, never to return» (ਥʌ૳įȐȢ IJİ ıȣȞIJĮȟȐμİȞȠȢ ĮੈȢ ʌĮȡȘȖȠȡİ૙IJĮȚ IJ੹ ȞȠıȒμĮIJĮ țĮ੿ IJȡȩʌȠȣȢ ਥȟȠȡțȫıİȦȞ țĮIJȑȜȚʌİȞ, ȠੈȢ Ƞੂ ਥȞįȠȪμİȞȠȚ IJ੹ įĮȚμȩȞȚĮ ੪Ȣ μȘ țȑIJ’ ਥʌĮȞİȜșİ૙Ȟ ਥțįȚȫțȠȣıȚ); text and translation by H.S.J. THACKERAY – R. MARCUS, Josephus V. Jewish Antiquities, 594-595. 19 W. WINK, Naming the Powers, 23-26. See also W. BOUSSET – H. GRESSMAN, Die Religion Des des Judentums in Späthellenistischen Zeitalter, 321-342. 20 Consider, for example, the way that the author of Acts depicts Paul, a monotheist, addressing his pagan audience at the Areopagus: «Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you» Acts 17:22b-23. Despite their differing beliefs Paul begins by affirming their culture and common religious sentiment. He then goes on to affirm their common relation to a supreme Divinity by quoting Greek poetry: «[God] is actually not far from each one of us, for ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are indeed his offspring’» 17:27b-28. Clever rhetoric aside, ancient Jews and pagans had much in common. 21 R. DUNSTON, «Demon in the Old Testament», 208-209. The Old Testament testifies to the existence of a demonic being in conflict with God and His people. This archenemy of God is found throughout Old Testament narratives, hymns, and prophetic speeches. A good place to begin to understand Jewish demonology is to look at Deuteronomy 32:16-17 for example where we read: ʟ˒ʤʗʱʗʩ ʑˆʔ ʍʫʩ ʖʺ ʖʡʒˆˣʺ ʍˎ ʭʩʸʕ ʑ ଉʕʑ ʦ ʍˎ ˒ʤʑʠʗ ʗଉ ʑʰʔ ʍʷʩ16 ʟʭʓʫʩʓ ʺʡʏ ʖ ʒ ʠ ʭ˒ʸʕˆˈʕ ʍ ʠʖ ʬ ˒ʠ ʕˎ ʕଉ ʖʡ ʖʸˠʕ ʮʑ ʭʩˇʑʑ ʕʣʏʧ ʭ˒ʲʍ ʕʣଉʕ ʍʩ ʠʖ ʬ ʭʩ ʑʤʬʑʖ ʠʎ ʔʤʔʖ ʬʠʎ ʠʖ ʬ ʭʩʣʑ ʑʝଉ ʒˡʔʬ ˒ʧʘ ʍʡଉʍʍ ʦʑ ʩ17 13

Jesus the Exorcist

87

«16 They made him jealous with strange gods (, with abhorrent things they provoked him.17 They sacrificed to demons, not God, to deities they had never known, to new ones recently arrived, whom your ancestors had not feared» (NRSV). 22 R. DUNSTON, «Demon in the Old Testament», 208-209. That Lilith was a storm demon is of particular importance to understanding Mark 4:35-41 as an exorcism narrative. 23 G. CAIRD, New Testament Theology, 102. 24 B. CROCKETT, Demon in the New Testament, 208, the English word demon comes from. 25 Cf. Lv 16:6-10; Ps 91:5; Is 13:21;34:14; Mt 12:43-45; Lk 4:1-2; the ancients believed that tombs were dwelling places for demons. See J.ǹ. BROOKS, Mark, 124. 26 The Old Testament does not feature a systematic demonology, because the monotheistic nature of the Jewish religion did not allow for the existence of intermediate beings on a more or less divine level. Yet even in the Pentateuch we find angels, the «sons of God», «the ten thousands of holy ones», Dt 33:2, and cherubim – elaborated in the Psalms, prophets, etc. YHWH commands Moses to make two gold cherubim to adorn the arc of the covenant, Ex 25:18. In Ps 8:5 God has made «man little less than the heavenly beings» or «gods» elohim, who are translated «angels» in the LXX. So there was the concept of intermediate, ministering spirits that operate between God and man, Ps 104:4. Isaiah, in his vision of the exalted throne of YHWH, introduces the seraphim, the «burning ones» who have six wings and praise God constantly before his throne, Is 6:1-7. Ezekiel also has a famous vision of God’s heavenly throne and the cherubim flying below, Ez 1:25-28. In the Old Testament we also find traces of demons of Eastern origin, with whom the Jewish world had once come into contact. They appear in the Jewish text under various names and are represented in various forms. All worship of these demons and any divining practice were forbidden explicitly. However, the devil is not associated with these demons in the Old Testament. Only in the late Judaic period do we find in spurious works the emergence of certain conceptions, under Persian and Hellenistic influences, that admit both the grouping and the ordering of evil spirits, as well as their ability to interfere in human life. See J. BURTON RUSSELL, The Devil, 174-221. 27 There is no further mention of the offspring, literally seed, of the serpent. Though there are several references to «sons of Belial» being very wicked, perverse and godless men (Jg 19:22; 1 Sa 2:12; 1 Kgs 21:10; etc.). «Children of the devil» or «sons of the evil one» is a concept that will be developed more in the New Testament (1 Jn 3:10; Mt 13:38; cf. Jn 8:44; Acts 13:10). 28 See, A. YOSHIKO REED, Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity, 24-160. In the early history of Jewish–Christian relations, we find a focus on the traditions about the fallen angels. The Book of the Watchers, (see 3.4 below) is an Enochic apocalypse from the 3rd century B. C. where the «sons of God» from Gn 6:1-4 are accused of corrupting humankind through their teachings of metalworking, cosmetology, magic, and divination. By tracing the transformations of this motif in Second Temple, Rabbinic, and early medieval Judaism and early,

88

Chapter 1

late antique, and Byzantine Christianity, one can better understand the history of interpretation of Genesis, the changing status of Enochic literature, and the place of intertestamental sources and traditions in the interchange between Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. In the process, this book explores issues such as the role of text-selection in the delineation of community boundaries and the development of early Jewish and Christian ideas about the origins of evil. 29 The name satan, (ၵ ။ၪႼ)။ and the feminine form sitnah: ( ။ၥ။ၶၪ၃ Ⴜ) ၇ «opposition», literally «accusation», (cfr. Ezra 4:6) - come from the verb (ၵၪႼ) (satan) meaning to resist or be an adversary and is used six times in the Bible, for instance in Psalm 38:20, where it reads: «...they resist (ၵၪႼ) me because good follows me». The noun (ၵ ။ၪႼ) ။ is used much more frequently, and only a few of these occurrences denote the big bad guy:1 Kings 11:14, «And YHWH raised up an adversary (ၵ ။ၪႼ) ။ to Solomon; Hadad the Edomite...»1 Kings 11:23, «And Elohim raised up a (ၵ ။ၪႼ။ ) to him; Rezon son of Eliadah...» In Numbers we even see this noun ascribed to the Angel of YHWH: Numb 22:22, «..and the Angel of YHWH set Himself in the road as a (ၵ ။ၪႼ)» ။ ...And verse 32, «I have come as (ၵ ။ၪ ။Ⴜ) because your way is contrary to Me». 30 2 Sm 19:22. Other appearances of Satan as a common noun in the Old Testament: 1 Sm 29;24; 1 Kgs 5;4; 11:14-25; Ps 109:6. 31 Cf. Ez 16:3 God chides Jerusalem with the sardonic revelation: «Thus says the Lord GOD to Jerusalem: Your origin and your birth are of the land of the Canaanites; your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite». This would be an offensive prophecy for the «sons of Abraham» who set themselves apart as superior to the nations, cf. 1 Ch 1:28. Ezekiel’s hyperbole is clear: Israel has no right to think herself superior to other nations, for Israel would be helpless without God’s saving her by his life-giving word, Ez 16:6, and greatly blessing her through the covenant,16:8. 32 God’s covenant with Israel is like a marriage covenant it that it is an exclusive promise that forms a bond of kinship symbolized by blood, Ex 24:7-8. 33 Cf. Dt 32:17. The word Baal originally could have referred to the national God of Israel in an innocent way, as evidenced by Jonathan’s and David’s own children whose names have Baal in them, Merib-baal 1 Ch 8:31; 1 Ch 9:40 and Beeliada 1 Ch 14:7. But after Jezebel brought to Samaria the worship of the Phoenician deity by the name of Baal, it may have took on a negative connotation – and the prophet Hosea thus announces that God no longer wanted to be called by the name my baal but by the name my ish, my man, a more intimate term for husband, Hos 2:16. 34 Cf. Ex 34:14-16; Dt 23:17; Nm 25:1-2; 1 Kgs 14:23-24; 2 Kgs 17:9-10; Is 57:78; Jer 3:9; Ez 16:17; 20:28; 23:17; Hos 1:2; 4:11-13. 35 Demon, shed, is only found only two times in reference to foreign gods, Dt 32:17 and Ps 106:37, both in the context of sacrifice. Baal/baalim is found 81 times in the same context. Thus all the gods can collectively be grouped as baalim, Jgs 10:6 «The people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of the LORD and served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the gods of Syria, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the Ammonites, and the gods of the Philistines. And they forsook the LORD and did not serve him».

Jesus the Exorcist 36

89

This famous siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib is recorded the Historical Appendix of Isaiah (36:1-39:8) and also in 2 Kgs 18-19. 37 For references to combat of angels in the Old Testament, cf. Ex 33:2; Dan 10:21. 38 Pre-exilic prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah adamantly refuse to ascribe to foreign gods any existence or power, Jer 10:5 «Their idols are like scarecrows in a cucumber field, and they cannot speak; they have to be carried, for they cannot walk. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, neither is it in them to do good». Cf. also the prayer of king Hezekiah around 701 B.C., Is 37:18-19 «The kings of Assyria have laid waste all the nations… they have cast their gods into the fire. For they were no gods, but the work of men's hands, wood and stone. Therefore they were destroyed». 39 Although certain elements such as the demonic hierarchy remain nebulous in Hebrew Scripture, its existence can be inferred as we shall see. 40 For the high priest’s role as representative of man’s spiritual condition before God, cf. Ex 28:29- 30; 30:10; Lv 16:2-20. On the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the year, the holiest man (high priest) would enter the holiest place in the holiest city on earth, the ‘Holy of Holies’ of the Jerusalem temple (forbidden to all other intruders), as proscribed in mosaic law, bringing blood sacrifice to make atonement for himself and the nation. Yom Kippur was the one day of the Jewish calendar when the Divine Name, YHWH, could be pronounced but only by the high priest, apparently, he could pronounce the Name in blessing of the people who came to bow down in worship, cf. Sir 50:1, 5-24. 41 In Judaism the cosmos is a temple ordered to worship, cf. Ps 19:1-6; 68:34-35; Bar 3:24-25. The high priest in his person was exalted as both a kind of living temple and cosmos: «For in the priestly robe which he wore, was the whole world (cosmos): and in the four rows of the stones, the glory of the fathers was graven, and thy majesty was written upon the diadem of his head» Wis 18:24. Compare the great detail, splendour and purity of high-priestly vestments as described in Ex 39:1- 28 and the temple in 1 Kgs 6-7. The high priestly vestments mimicked the very decorations of the one temple which itself mimicked the paradise of Eden, the original «sanctuary» of God. There are many examples of this, cf. Ez 28:13, 18; comp. 1 Kgs 1:45, 6:35 to Gn 2:13; 3:24: the river «Gihon» and «the cherubim» are found only in the temple and in Eden. The construction of Solomon’s temple in 1 Kgs 7 is the climax of Hebrew Biblical history; for ancient Jews the Temple was a microcosm, while the cosmos itself is a macro-temple: «O Israel, how great is the house of God [i.e. the universe], and how vast is the place of his possession! It is great, and hath no end: it is high and immense» Bar 3:24-25. It is significant that Jerusalem’s temple and the high priest are decorated lavishly with exactly the same paradise imagery: precious stones, gold and pomegranates Ex 28:29, 34; 1 Kgs 6:35; 7:42; cf. Gn 2:8-12. The high priest wore «twelve stones [which] were engraved with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel» (Ex 39:14), he wore this over his heart, symbolizing God’s everlasting love for his people. God calls Israel «my firstborn son» and a «priestly kingdom, and a holy nation» Ex 4:22; 19:6, because through little Israel God will extend his love to all, and save all the nations, God’s other «children» Hos 1:10. In her priestly role Israel is to bring all the world to worship the true God (Ps 22:27; 66:4; 86:9; 117:1; Is 2:1-4) and through the Messiah of Israel

90

Chapter 1

whom God establishes as the «a covenant for the people, a light for the nations» Is 42:6; 49:6, God will reveal his glory and justice to all nations, in bringing them mercy, peace and salvation. 42 Ma’on qadosh «holy habitation» is used five times in O.T. the first four of these explicitly refer to God’s dwelling place in heaven not on earth, cf. Dt 26:15; 2 Ch 30:27; Ps 68:4-5; Jer 25:30; Zec 2:13. Ma’on in general can refer also to God’s tabernacle on earth, cf. 2 Ch 36:15; Ps 26:8, the refuge that men take in God cf. Ps 71:3; 90:1; 91:9, or any dwelling of humans, beasts, or perhaps even demons, cf. Jer 9:11; 51:37 LXX both translate A›Ln rʥrG (m. tanniym) as țĮIJȠȚțȘIJýȡȚȠȞ įȡĮțóȞIJȦȞ «dwelling of dragons». 43 Cf. Similar motifs given to a kind of prosecuting attorney at Psalm 109:6-7a «Appoint a wicked man against him; let an accuser (satan) stand at his right hand. When he is tried, let him come forth guilty». There seems to be a negative connotation latent in the very name satan, perhaps due to the suffering of Job; accusation and spiritual hypocrisy was condemned, Is 65:5. 44 Cf. e.g. Dt 29:23: «The whole land shall be burned» by God’s wrath if Israel breaks the covenant. For the fire of God’s justice descending from heaven, cf. Gn 19:24; Nm 10:2; 16:35; 2 Kgs 1:10-12; Ps 11:6; 106:18; In the N.T. when the Samaritans did not accept the gospel message James and John ask Jesus Lk 9:24: «Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them?». But Christ rebukes them. YHWH himself is «a consuming fire» Dt 4:24; Heb 12:29. 45 Cf. Zec 3:10; For the power of God’s Spirit that will transform humanity and the world that turns from sin: Is 32:15-18; 42:1; 43:25; 44:3-5; 59:20-21; 61:1. For the transforming power of God to heal, bless, and restore in a new covenant, cf. Jer 31:31f; 32:35-40; by God’s Spirit Ez 36:25-28. 46 Cf. Lv 16:32. 47 Cf. Zec 5:3, 6: «This is the curse that goes out over the face of the whole land» [eretz can mean earth or land] «This is their iniquity in all the land». Cf. Is 24:1, 56: « Behold, the LORD will empty the earth and make it desolate… The earth lies defiled under its inhabitants; for they have transgressed the laws, violated the statutes, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore, a curse devours the earth, and its inhabitants suffer for their guilt… and few men are left». See Dt 28:15f, the curses of the covenant will «burn up» and destroy the whole land/earth eretz, Dt 29:23. 48 For references to Messiah being the «righteous Branch» who «shall reign as king» see Jer 23:5; Zec 6:12; Is 11:1; 53:2. 49 Thus God took the original man Adam and placed him «in the garden of Eden to serve and to guard» which is priestly language; the same verbs (abad and shamar) are used to describe the work of Aaronic priests in the tabernacle, cf. Nm 3:7-8; 8:26; 18:7. For more imagery describing Eden as God’s sanctuary cf. Ez 28:12f. For language that Adam is king of creation, cf. Gen 1:26-28. 50 Cf. Gen 3:14-15: «The LORD God said to the serpent, ‘Because you have done this, you are cursed… I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel’». The fact that God speaks of the serpent’s offspring, or literally «your seed», is interesting. Who are the spiritual offspring of the serpent? Can we see here the

Jesus the Exorcist

91

first traces of demonic hierarchy? For the idea of Satan’s throne, the N.T. bears witness that such a tradition existed; e.g. Jesus speaks explicitly of it to the «church in Pergamum… I know where you dwell, where Satan's throne is» Rv 2:12-13; cf. 13:2. Although such a throne is not explicitly defined in the O.T. it is not out of the question for several reasons: Dt 32:8 shows that God had divided regions of the earth into parts, setting «the sons of God» to have dominion over them. In Job 1:6 and 2:1 «Satan» is present among these «sons of God». Also Ezekiel seems to make reference to a tradition of Satan’s throne in prophecy of the fall of the king of Tyre, Ez 28:2: «Thus says the Lord GOD: Because your heart is proud, and you have said, ‘I am a God, I sit in the seat of the gods, in the heart of the seas’». This logically refers to the fallen angel; it cannot exclusively refer to the king of Tyre because in v. 8 the «heart of the seas» is identified as «the pit», or Sheol, i.e. the land of the dead, where the fallen angel is originally cast down and will remain, Is 14:15; Ez 28:19. Since by Hebrew tradition the sea represents «the cords of death» or Sheol, Jon 2:2; Ps 18:4-5; 88:6-7, it is conceivable that Satan’s throne is in the pit/Sheol/land of death in «heart of the seas», Ez 28:8. This accords well with the N.T. on several key points: 1) Satan is explicitly is «the one who has the power of death» Heb 2:14; 2) when Satan brings forth the antichrist it looks like «a beast rising out of the sea» Rv 13:1, and to this beast Satan «gave his power and his throne and great authority» 13:2; and 3) in Rv 21:1 John sees after final judgment «a new heaven and a new earth» where «the sea was no more», symbolic that Satan’s authority has ended, and his throne in «heart of the seas» is gone. 52 For the idea in the N.T. that the teaching of demons would bring apocalyptic war, cf. 1 Tm 4:1, Rv 16:14. Cf. e.g. The Book of the Parables of Enoch when Noah is troubled over a vision of utter destruction for the world, his grandfather Enoch replies: 1 Enoch 65:6-7: «A command has gone forth from the presence of the Lord concerning those who dwell on the earth that their ruin is accomplished because they have learnt all the secrets of the angels, and all the violence of the Satans, and all their powers the most secret one í and all the power of those who practice sorcery, and the power of witchcraft». Note the evil of the Satans, plural, perhaps an indirect reference to violence inflicted upon Job, 1:11-12, 16; 2:5-7, and threatened upon Joshua, Zec 3:1-2. «The most secret power» is mysterious, but it is related to the power of sorcery and witchcraft, and reminiscent of Jesus’ disapproval of disciples learning «what some call the deep things of Satan» Rv 2:24. 53 Cf. 1 En 65:10-11: «Because of the sorceries which they have searched out and learnt, the earth and those who dwell upon it shall be destroyed. And these - they have no place of repentance forever, because they have shown them what was hidden, and they are the damned». 54 An excellent example that unifies the three ideas of the devil alluded to in Hebrew scripture, fallen angel, serpent and accuser is Rv 12:9-10: «The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world… the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God» (emphasis mine). Such traditions that identify Satan with the fallen angel were consolidated before the New Testament was written as Jesus identifies Satan with the fallen spirit: «I saw Satan fall like 51

92

Chapter 1

lightning from heaven» Lk 10:18. J. ORR, «Definition for ‘Beelzebub’», [on line edition, access: 04.10.2014] http://www.bible- history.com/isbe/B/BEELZEBUB. 56 Thus the destruction Satan caused Job is considered the hand of God, as if Satan were God’s tool of destruction, Jb 1:11-12, 16; 2:5-7. But unlike Satan, God does not delight in causing suffering, his final goal is healing and restoration Jb 42:12-17. The lesson of Job is that no one can accuse God of injustice, not even Job, because God is absolutely sovereign, just and free to do whatever he deems fit to do with his creation. The Creator’s infinite wisdom and fatherly plan are higher than man’s comprehension, but in the end his love will conquer, Jb 38:1-41; Is 55:9f. In the end all that matters is Job’s surrender to God’s will which is always love and mercy itself, even though humans cannot see it except with the eyes of faith. This childlike trust is what Hosea encourages as he writes: «Come, let us return to the LORD; for he has torn us, that he may heal us; he has struck us down, and he will bind us up» Hos 6:1. 57 God had given Adam all the trees to eat from, but warned him not to eat from the tree that brought death (Gn 2:17). The Jewish tradition for the origin of evil begins with the words of the clever serpent, the one who first deceived Adam and Eve by claiming that rebellion from God would not result in death but divine illumination: «You will not surely die! For God knows when you eat of it… you will be like Gods (Elohim), knowing good and evil» Gn 3:4-5; cf. Ez 18:4. The meaning is clear: humans are in no position to define for themselves what is good and evil independent of God. God as the supreme Good has already established in himself what is eternally good, and so in his creation he has placed a reflection of this goodness in the natural order of things. God separated light and darkness, according to his will Gn 4:1; this is reflected in the human conscience that must decide between right and wrong as it is revealed by God not as it is invented by man, Gn 3:10; 4:7. 58 For example in Ezekiel 28:12f, these elements cannot possibly refer to the king of Tyre: that he was in the paradise of Eden, that he was a cherub, that he was placed on the mountain of God. Tyre was not on a mountain but an island city off the Lebanese coast, rich in trade it had built up its walls and was almost impenetrable to attack, posing a great challenge even to the likes of Alexander the Great, whose siege and destruction of the city is perhaps predicted in Ezekiel’s prophecy. 59 Cf. Gn 3:24. Cherub, plural cherubim, are a kind of angelic being that symbolize the holy presence of God in his tabernacle, their wings covered the mercy seat of the arc of the covenant, and Solomon’s temple on mount Zion, Ex 25:18-22; 37:7-9; 1 Kgs 6:23-35; 8:6-7. Ezekiel’s longer account here is one of the richest descriptions of the mysterious heavenly cherubim who are mentioned no less than 70 times in the Old Testament, so they are not marginal to Jewish tradition. Though not all Jews believed in their existence, the highly influential Pharisees did. The earthly tabernacles of Israel with golden cherubim were copies of the true sanctuary of God in heaven/paradise, conceived of as the holy mountain of God, cf. Ex 25:40; Heb 8:5; 12:22. The cherubim resemble angels because they have wings, Ex 25:20, and a head comparable to a human’s Ez 10:14; they form the throne of God, 2 Sa 6:2; Is 37:16; Ps 80:1; 99:1; Ez 10:1-20. This description in Ezekiel cannot refer to an earthly king, 55

Jesus the Exorcist

93

nor even to Adam (as the LXX interprets it). «Lucifer» as a name for the devil comes from this prophecy of Isaiah, specifically 14:12 KJV from the Latin Vulgate lucifer, ‘light bearer’, LXX ਦȦıijંȡȠȢ, ‘dawn bearer’, from the Hebrew NN›» heylel ‘morning star’. 61 Cf. Rv 12:4, 7; 13:2-4. Revelation also refers to «stars» as Satan’s angels and demons, Rv 8:11; 9:1; 12:4, whom the dragon has thrown down from heaven to earth with his tail, that is, he has drawn them away from worship of the true God of heaven and made them serve himself, 12:4,7-9. The goal of all Satan’s machinations seems to be to force the world to worship him as if he were divine or semi-divine, 13:4. But only God is worthy of worship (Acts 10:25; 14:14; Rv 19:10; 22:9). 62 Cf. Is 14:15; Ez 28:16; 19; Jb 1:12-19; 2:7. This theme becomes clear in the N.T. cf. Lk 13:6; Heb 2:14-15. 63 The covenant was sealed by blood, Ex 24:8 «this is the blood of the covenant», blood symbolized life, «For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life», Lv 17:14a. The sprinkled blood on the people and on God’s altar, covenanted Israel into a new sharing in the life of God. As God had promised Abraham: «And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you» Gn 17:7. So Moses can say to Israel not only are they sons of Abraham, but «You are the sons of the LORD your God», Dt 14:1. Israel is in God’s family, as his children. Satan was once counted among the sons of God, cf. Jb 1:6, 2:1, but he scorned that privilege. 64 The Jewish belief in the resurrection of the dead, while not explicit in the Pentateuch is attested in the canonical prophets and psalms, Is 26:19; 66:22-24; Dn 12:2-3; Ez 37:12; Hos 6:2; Ps 16:10; 133:3. To have a share in the resurrection of the dead, the age to come (olam haba), «the new heavens and new earth», Is 65:17; 66:22, was the hope of Jews since the Second Temple period. Believers in the doctrine included the highly influential Pharisees, who set the tone for Orthodox Judaism from the Maccabean revolt through the revolt of Bar Kokhba in 135 A.D. 65 E.g. after the Babylonian captivity and destruction of the temple, God promises to draw the people into greater intimacy and glory with God than they had before, Hg 2:4-5, 9. Cf. also the story of Joseph whose brothers left him for dead and sold him into slavery. After much suffering, Joseph becomes a prince in Egypt, and he says to his brothers Gn 50:20: «As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today». Joseph saves his brothers and their families from famine. God’s love, wisdom and mercy triumph in the end, bringing the family together. 66 M.F. UNGER, Biblical Demonology, 1-2. 67 In terms of sheer quantity the spirit of evil is named about 120 times in the N.T. with various names and titles, he is called Satan (33 times), devil (32), evil one (12), dragon (12), Beelzebul (7), serpent (5), enemy (4), prince of demons (4), ruler of this world (3), tempter (2), prince of the power of the air (1), Belial (1), god of this world (1), etc. 68 J.M ERIKSON, Christian Theology, 18-19. Matthew depicts Jesus speaking of «the devil and his angels» (Mt 25:41). Satan’s demonic horde is referred to as «his angels» (Rv 12:9). And Paul complains that he has been afflicted by an angel of 60

94

Chapter 1

Satan (2 Cor 12:7). T. LING, The Significance of Satan, 84. 70 Matthew 6:13 seems not to be referring to abstract evil, but to a person, hence the masculine/neuter singular adjective with the article IJȠñ ʌȠȞȘȡȠñ, «the evil one». That ʌȠȞȘȡȩȢ was a name for the devil in early Christian communities can be inferred from its common usage in the New Testament, not only in the synoptics (e.g. Mt 5:37; 13:19, 38) but also in Jesus’ high priestly prayer in John 17:15, «I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one». This term for the devil had also found its way into Johannine (1 Jn 2:13-14, 3:12, 5:18-19) and Pauline epistles (2 Thes 3:3; Eph 6:16). 71 The unstoppable power of faith in Christ is a common theme throughout the New Testament. Faith moves mountains 1 Cor 13:2; Mt 17:20; 21:21. The epistles of the late first century reflect a towering confidence that the power of believers is from God and thus is omnipotent. Ephesians speaks of «the immeasurable greatness of [God’s] power in us who believe» which is nothing less than the power of the resurrection from the dead and enthronement with Christ on God’s heavenly throne, Eph 1:19; 2:6. While acknowledging that «the whole world lies in the power of the evil one» early Christians are confident that the devil is no match for believers in the Son of God, «this is the victory that has overcome the world – our faith» 1 Jn 5:19; 5:4. Where did this confidence come from? In Acts and Matthew Jesus sends out the apostles, in order «to make disciples of all nations» Mt 28:19, as the witnesses of his resurrection they are to bring God’s kingdom «in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth» Acts 1:8. For this mission Jesus gives them «the promise of my Father,» the Holy Spirit, so that they be «clothed with power from on high» Lk 24:49. Indeed the first chapters book of Acts bears witness to the boldness of the early Church even when faced with torture or martyrdom. But that’s not all. The conviction that all nations were destined to embrace faith in Christ may have stemmed from the belief that God’s fulfilment of the Davidic covenant which Christ fulfilled and is fulfilling through his Church as the Gospel spreads. That the kingdom of Messiah would reign over all nations is clearly implied in the messianic psalms and Danielic prophecy, «Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession» Ps 2:8, cf. 72:8. In Daniel the Messiah is «the Son of Man» who will receive «dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion… his kingdom shall not be destroyed» Dn 7:14; that Messiah’s kingdom will put an end to all other kingdoms, see Dn 2:44. 72 The Church Fathers from St Ignatius of Antioch onward (107 A.D.), challenged by heresies, began to define Orthodox belief in the early centuries, they recognized the full divinity of Jesus which they supported through reflection upon scripture, cf. Rom 9:5; 1 Jn 5:20; Ti 2:13. Jesus does things that only God can rightly do, such as forgive sins, Mt 9:2, and receive worship Mt 2:11; 14:33; 28:17; Lk 24:52. John’s Gospel is especially revealing of Christ’s divine nature, cf. Jn 1:1,18; 8:58; 10:30; 17:5, 21. That all things were created through him and for him, cf. Jn 1:3; Col 1:1617. 69

Jesus the Exorcist

95

73 For Jesus as the one who reveals the devil’s deceptive power over human psychology cf. Jn 8:44; Mt 5:37; 15:18-20; Eph 2:2-14; 2 Tm 2:26; Rv 3:17; 13:34. 74 In John’s first letter he elaborates on the relation of the sinner and the devil: «Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning», 1 Jn 3:8. Ironically Satan’s rule lasts as long as a person claims to be innocent, because «if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us» but «if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness», 1 Jn 1:8-9. 75 Paul, for example, writes in Gal 4:4, «When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son» (emphasis mine). For «last days» or «end of time» see also Acts 2:17; 1 Pt 1:20; Heb 1:2; Jas 5:3; Eph 1:10 where the «last days» are viewed by writers the New Testament as the time when the salvation prepared by God in the Old Testament in accomplished by Christ who through the Church will bring the triumph of God’s peace on earth and gift of God’s Spirit (cf. Jl 2:28-32; Is 2:1-4; Mi 4:1-4; Gn 49:1). 76 For the essential tension between God’s kingdom of light and Satan’s authority of darkness see especially Johannine literature and the Pauline epistles e.g. Jn 1:5;3:1921;8:12;11:9-10;12:31- 36,46; 1 Jn 1:5; 2:8-9; Rom 13:12; 2 Cor 4:4-6; Eph 5:8-14; Col 1:12-13; 1 Thes 5:5. This tension explodes into a cosmic war in the apocalyptic literature, Rv 12:7-17; 19:11-21. 77 Like the O.T., the N.T. does not contain a systematic teaching on demons. Traces of late Second Temple Jewish demonology are nonetheless clear. What distinguishes the Old from the New Testament is that the latter accepts the existence of the devil’s dominion, which constitutes the opposite of God’s heavenly polity. At the same time, ‘evil’ acquires a more specific form and the devil is considered the chief of all evil spirits. Initially, certain notional differentiations were made on the basis of these spirits’ provenance, but these were finally abandoned. The Evangelists and St. Paul employ various names for the devil and his instruments. 78 Mazdaism is the proper name of Zoroastrism which bases its faith in Ahura Mazda (Divine Mind/Wisdom), the Great God and only creator of the reality, has been proclaimed by his prophet Zarathustra (Zoroaster) as the original faith of the Aryans (Indo-Europeans and Indo-Iranians). 79 The good God is the creator of all and the guarantor of their goodness, who gave mankind intellect and responsibility to be good stewards of creation, Gn 1:26-28. But Satan and his kingdom have infiltrated the minds of humans, seducing them to ignore God and to use creation for selfish ends, abusing themselves and others. The devil, in his desire to destroy what God loves, has corrupted humans, convincing them to turn the planet into a war zone for the sake of perverse desires, greed, hate, lust, pride, etc, Jas 3:6; 4:1-17. But Christ comes to destroy this old world, to cleanse human hearts, to recreate humanity, and proclaim the kingdom of God on earth; that is, a new human community that resembles a family, based on love of the Father and love of neighbour, this family alone will receive salvation in the final judgment. E. KOSKENNIEMI – I. FRÖHLICH, Evil and the devil, 131. 80 All the writers of the New Testament seemed to be familiar with the Enochic traditions and were influenced by it in thought and diction. See J.C. VANDERKAM,

96

Chapter 1

1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature, 124-126. Enochic demonology is particularly parallel to the Christian scripture, for example: The fallen angels are described as «the hosts of Azazel» which is a military idiom that indicates a captain-army relationship, 1 En 54:5; 55:4; this is comparable to the war in heaven led by «the dragon and his angels» Rv 12:7-9. For these spirits «chains [are] being prepared», 1 En 54:4, which is a precise motif found in 2 Pt 2:4; Jd 1:6; Rv 20:1-2. On the «great Day» God’s vengeance will cast them into «the burning furnace», 1 En 54:6, parallel to Jesus words in Mt 13:42; 25:41; Rv 9:2; 20:10. And until that day these ungodly beings are bound in the outer «darkness», 1 En 10:4-7 parallel to Jd 1:6; Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; Eph 6:12; Col 1:13. Final judgment in 1 Enoch 55:4 reveals a flurry of royal motifs in which God’s mysterious «Elect One» presumably the Messiah, is revealed, he «who sits on the throne of glory» and who finally «judges Azazel and all his associates, and all his hosts in the name of the Lord of Spirits», 1 En 55:4. The place accorded to Azazel is a significant attribution, because in 1 Enoch many wicked spirits are named, but only one emerges as their representative – as if he were himself their scapegoat. No other demon but Azazel is called the source of all sin. Although Azazel is not named in the New Testament where many other names for the devil are given, it seems reasonable, nevertheless, to see this Jewish tradition by which a chief demonic spirit clearly existed as sharing to some degree the same general worldview as, for example, the Pharisees of New Testament who speak of «the prince of demons», Mt 9:34; Mk 3:22; Lk 11:15. 81 Jesus speaks of final judgment in Mt 25:31-32a: «When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats». For Jesus as final judge see also Acts 17:31; 1 Tm 4:1; 1 Pt 4:5, etc. 82 Paul faithfully records in the Eucharistic institution narrative which is by far the longest tradition that Paul records from Jesus’ life, 1 Cor 11:23f parallels the Synoptic Gospels which were probably written after Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. 83 Novum Testamentum is the Latin translation of țĮȚȞy įȚĮșȒțȘ, Lk 22:20, «new covenant». Cf. also 1 Cor 11:25; Heb 8:8; 9:15; 12:24; all related to the blood sacrifice of Christ as a fulfillment of «new covenant» promised by Jer 31:31f, cf. Ez 37:26; Hos 2:18. 84 Cf. 2 Pt 1:4; Gal 4:6; John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of John, PG XXXVI, 3. 85 See section 3.3 below for discussion of exorcism at Qumran. 86 Cf. Heb 9:12 in Hebrews Christ’s death is seen as the ministry of the high priest on Yom Kippur: «he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption». 87 Christ’s death means the destruction of three temples: the temple of Jesus’ body (Jn 2:21), the Jerusalem temple (Mt 24:2; 27:51), and the whole cosmos at «the close of the age» (Mt 24:3f).

Jesus the Exorcist 88

97

Cf. 1 Pt 2:52; Eph 2:21; Gal 1:4; 6:15. For other references in Jewish tradition to the resurrection of the dead cf. Is 26:19; Ez 37:1-12; Hos 13:14. The bodily resurrection of the dead was a tenant of the belief of the Pharisees but denied by the Sadducees. Cf. Mt 22:23f; Acts 23:6f; 24:21 Jesus and Paul defend the doctrine of Pharisees against the doubting Sadducees. The resurrection in Daniel is paralleled in John 5:28-29; 11:23-26. 90 Cf. Jn 16:33; Rom 6:2-5; Jesus speaks of his death as a baptism into which his disciples will be baptised, Mk 10:39. For Pauline discussion of the everlasting glory of all who were dead and now, by God’s grace, are alive and enthroned with Christ in heaven see Eph 2:4-9. For new heavens and new earth cf. 2 Pt 3:13; Is 66:22. 91 For strong evidence that «rulers and authorities» refers to demonic forces see Eph 6:12. Ephesians is a letter that is theologically parallel to Colossians. 92 Jesus playing the role of Joshua in Zec 3 may have been what Paul had in mind in writing about Christ’s atonement in Rom 8:1-4. Note especially the metaphor of Jesus, though innocent, is being clothed «in likeness of sinful flesh and for sin» v. 3, seems parallel to Joshua «being clothed in filthy garments» Zec 3:4. On the cross Jesus brought «in the flesh» all mankind’s sin before God to receive condemnation. God, by accepting Christ’s pure sacrifice in atonement for sin, took away that sin so that «There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus» Rom 8:1. Raising Christ from the dead God clothed him in a new, pure garment like Joshua, Zec 3:4, making Christ «the firstborn of all creation… the firstborn of the dead» (Col 1:15, 18). Also Jesus’ name happens to be Yeshua, Aramaic from the Hebrew ruʥ»› Joshua. 93 E.g. If the majority of people did not believe in or were ignorant of the Pythagorean Theorem, it would not be any less true. 94 G. GILBERT, Demonology in the New Testament; S. JOUBERT, When the Dead Are Alive! See also C. YEBOAH, Demon, 338. 95 However, Job is afflicted as a result of a kind of «wager» between God and Satan, by which Satan received God’s permission first to take everything away from Job, and then to afflict him with illness: «Behold, he is in your hand; only spare his life», Jb 2:6. Cf. section 1.4 above. 96 The methodology of interpreting the synoptic Gospels, and Mark in particular, has also been the subject of debate. Some scholars are attempting to refine the technique of redaction criticism as it may be applied to Mark, and in this respect we might mention two other methods that are being used in recent study of Mark. The first is sociological analysis, exhibited in Howard Clark Kee’s Community of the New Age. Kee analyses Mark’s community, suggesting that it was moulded by an apocalyptic perspective and that Mark was seeking to redefine and encourage the community in light of God’s purposes in history. Another direction is determined by the recent interest in the application of modern literary techniques to the Gospels. These studies focus on the way in which Mark, as a narrative, is put together and how it may be understood by the contemporary reader. Mark’s significance is then often seen to lie not in what he actually says but in the deeper structures created by his ‘narrative world’. Older questions and methods continue to crop up in the recent literature as well. Notable in this respect is the series of articles by Martin Hengel, which show that Mark must be taken seriously as a historian of early Christianity and that his 89

98

Chapter 1

obvious theological interests do not force us to abandon his material as historically worthless. See: E. PRYKE, Redactional Style in the Marcan Gospel; C. CLIFTON BLACK, The Disciples According to Mark; H. KEE, Community of the New Age; E.S. MALBON, Narrative Space and Mythic Meaning in Mark; B. MACK, A Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins; M. TOLBERT, Sowing the Gospel. 97 Many have felt it necessary to explain how Jesus could have expelled demons, almost as if it was an embarrassing aspect of his activity. A frequent (ethic) response to Jesus’ exorcisms assumes that one is obliged to find or retain something normative that does not rest on the exorcisms as such: since people today (i.e. in the West) do not believe in the existence of demons, we are to regard Jesus’ activity as an exorcist as an accommodation to beliefs at the time, an accommodation that no longer needs to be made. So e.g. E. LANGTON, Essentials of Demonology, 147-183, 219-225; S. BLANCH, Encounters with Jesus, 56-66. 98 See. J. MICALLEF, Marco 5:1-20: Gesù il più forte che signoreggia sul male. Un percorso esegetico. Scholars treat this passage with greater depth than other exorcism passages. Perhaps this is because the gospel writers provide a fuller account of the Gerasene demoniac than the other demoniacs. Perhaps this is because of the remarkable results of the exorcism; namely the response of the pigs and later the town’s people. However, the net result of the commentaries is not markedly different from those of Mark 1:21-28. In an attempt to find useful this passage, Western theologians have searched for metaphorical meanings in the details of the account. The destructive behaviour of the demoniac becomes the result of sin. The need of the demoniac to be freed from the possessing demons becomes every man’s need to be freed from the bondage of sin. The plea of Legion for Jesus to leave him becomes every man's aversion to change. The story is no longer about a man possessed of a demon but about every man’s struggle with sin and the weaknesses of human nature. Even scholars who give credence to the existence of demons and take the passage largely at face value make metaphorical applications. R. Guelich, who supports the idea that the demoniac was in fact possessed by a legion of demons concludes, «one can hardly miss the repeated emphasis on the uncleanness of impurity found in the original story…The story of the deliverance of a man becomes the story of the deliverance of a land». L. Hurtado, who likewise accepts the presence of demons draws a similar conclusion, comments: «All of this is a powerful picture of how the N.T. describes the condition of humans apart from Christ: spiritually dead and in bondage to evil», L. HURTADO, Mark, 83. Also R. GUELICH, Mark 1-8:26, 283. 99 This view is argued by S. EITREM, Some Notes on the Demonology in the New Testament; R. HORSLEY, Jesus and the Spiral of Violence, 184-190; C. MYERS, Binding the Strong Man, 191-194; H. WAETJEN, A Reordering of Power, 313-318. 100 Cf. N. WRIGHT, Jesus and the Victory of God, 193-197, 226-229. Referring to Jesus’ legion in Luke 11:20; Mat 12:28 («If by the finger of God I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you»), Wright concludes that Jesus’ exorcisms are clear signs that the God of Israel is beginning to defeat the enemy that has «held Israel captive».

Jesus the Exorcist 101

99

So variously G. VERMES, Jesus the Jew, 58-82; M. BORG, A New Vision, 3032; B. EHRMAN, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium; ID., Jesus the Magician; J. CROSSAN, The Historical Jesus, 142-158, takes up a position that ends up mediating between the views of Vermes and Smith, arguing that traditions about the originally «magical» ণoni and ণanina were domesticated when we meet them in early literature that mentions them (e.g. m. Ta‘an. 3:8 and t. Ta‘an. 2:13 which is chronicle called also the Scroll of fasting, enumerating 35 eventful days on which the Jewish nation either performed glorious deeds or witnessed joyful events). 102 See G.H. TWELFTREE, Jesus the Exorcist, 157-174, who states that Jesus is different in the connection he established between his own expulsion of demons and the dawning rule of God; ID., In the Name of Jesus; See further H. STEGEMANN, The Library of Qumran, 237-238; E. EVE, The Jewish Context of Jesus’ Miracles, 231; T. SÖDING, Wennichmitdem Finger Gottes die Dämonenaustreibe. (Luke 11,20), 519-549. 103 S.J. PATTERSON, The God of Jesus, 69-73; B.D. EHRMAN, Jesus Apocalyptic Prophet, 187-188; T.E. KLUTZ, The Grammar of Exorcism, 156-165. 104 So the emphasis of B. NOACK, Satanás und Sotería: Untersuchungen zur neutestament lichen Dämonologie. 105 See for example the very different approaches in D. BASHAM, Deliver us from Evil; F. MACNUTT, Deliverance from Evil Spirit; For a thorough exegetical treatment see J.C. THOMAS, The Devil, Disease and Deliverance. 106 E. BOURGUIGNON, Possession; M. DOUGLAS, Natural Symbols; C. ROTHENBERG, Spirits of Palestine; G.N. STANTON, Jesus and Gospel; A. WITMER, Jesus, The Galilean Exorcist. 107 If we take Is 14:12-15, and Ez 28:17-19 as literal descriptions of the tradition of the devil’s humiliation and utter destruction, they only indirectly point to the falling of his kingdom, in so far as his fall is reflected in the fall of kings of Babylon and Tyre, respectively. 108 Sectarian writings of the Qumran 11 Q Melch 2.11-14. For the Messiah depicted as an angel, see Malachi 3:1, the «messenger» (ၯၠၰၳ i.e. angel) who will fulfil the messianic hopes of Israel: «Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts». This messianic figure will purify the priesthood, v. 2-4; cf. Mal 1:11, and usher in the day of God’s final judgment, v. 5. 109 Eric Sorensen in his book Possession and Exorcism in the New Testament, 122, estimates forty- eight cases. Sorensen cites F.J. DOLGER, Der Exorzismus im altchristlichen Taufritual, 12-13, 127. 110 Though the Catholic Encyclopaedia of 1910 defends the origins: «The practice of exorcism was not confined to clerics in the early ages, as is clear from Tertullian (Apology 23; cf. On Idolatry 11) and Origen (Against Celsus, VII.4). The latter expressly states that even the simplest and rudest of the faithful sometimes cast out demons, by a mere prayer or adjuration, Mk 15:17, and urges the fact as a proof of the power of Christ’s grace, and the inability of demons to resist it… the order of exorcists…the Western Church… were instituted shortly before the middle of the third century. Pope Cornelius (251-253) mentions in his letter to Fabius that there

100

Chapter 1

were then in the Roman Church forty-two acolytes, and fifty-two exorcists, readers, and door-keepers (Eusebius, Church History VI.43), and the institution of these orders, and the organization of their functions, seems to have been the work of Cornelius’s predecessor, Pope Fabian (236-251). The fourth Council of Carthage (398), in its seventh canon, prescribes the rite of ordination for exorcist; the bishop is to give him the book containing the formulae of exorcism, saying, ‘Receive, and commit to memory, and possess the power of imposing hands on energumens, whether baptized or catechumens’; and the same rite has been retained, without change, in the Roman Pontifical down to the present day». When explaining why exorcism is not as common as it once was, «Infant baptism has become the rule…with the spread of Christianity and the disappearance of paganism, demonic power has been curtailed… It is only Catholic missionaries labouring in pagan lands, where Christianity is not yet dominant, who are likely to meet with fairly frequent cases of possession». [See: on line edition, access: 04.10.2014], http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05711a.htm. 111 In the synoptic gospels, those in need of exorcism are said to «have» ਩ȤİȚȞ «demon(s)», «įĮȓμȦȞ»; «įĮȚμંȞȚĮ» or an «unclean spirit» ʌȞİ૨μĮ ਕțȐșĮȡIJȠȞ Mk 7:25; 9:17; Lk 8:27;13:11). Lk 4:33 speaks of «having a spirit of an unclean demon». In Lk 6:18, one finds the phrase «those troubled from unclean spirits» Ƞੂ ਥȞȠȤȜȠȪμİȞȠȚ ਕʌઁ ʌȞİȣμȐIJȦȞ ਕțĮșȐȡIJȦȞ. In addition, it is said that a person is «demonized» įĮȚμȠȞȚȗİıșĮȚ Mk 1:32; Mt 8:16; Mt 4:24; 8:28; 12:22; 15:22; or is «in an unclean spirit» ਥȞ ʌȞİȪμĮIJȚ ਕțĮșȐȡIJ૳ Mk 1:23; 5:2. «The act of exorcism itself is most frequently referred to as driving out» (ਥțȕȐȜȜİȚȞ) Mk 1:34; Mt 8:16; Mk 1:39;6:13;16:9; Mt 9:3334; Lk 1:14. Sometimes exorcism is called healing: ੁĮIJȡİ઄Ȧ, șİȡĮʌİȪȦ, Mt 15:28; Lk 6:18; 8:2; 13:14. 112 See E. SORENSEN, Possession and Exorcism, 124-135. Eric Sorensen examines how religious tradition is maintained when in conflict with social convention. The author is specifically interested in how Christianity overcame stigmas of magic and superstition in its practice of exorcism as it extended into Greek and Roman areas of Christian mission. Using an historical-critical approach, he argues for three principal factors at work in confirming the exorcist’s place in religious society: cultural adaptation (Near Eastern influences on Greek and Roman thought and practice), a tradition of exorcism founded upon authoritative scriptural example, and innovative theological interpretations applied to that tradition. Eric Sorensen proposes that the exorcist’s role was adapted in part by Christianity’s interpretation of demonic possession relative to the concept of divine possession long familiar to Greco-Roman sensibilities. Early Christians found a suitable metaphor to express this correlation in the doctrine of the Two Ways, which itself had literary antecedents both in Greek literature and in Christianity’s own scriptural tradition. Sorensen, concludes that the application of exorcism to ethical possession is not found in the New Testament, but rather was a development of the early church due, in part, to changes in the church’s setting as it spread out into the Greco–Roman world. He summarizes his conclusion about the New Testament understanding of possession and exorcism saying, «Although the New Testament juxtaposes divine and demonic possession in ethical contexts, neither

Jesus the Exorcist

101

Paul nor any other New Testament author connects exorcism with the ethical purification achieved through one’s renunciation of demonic forces», E. SORENSEN, Possession and Exorcism, 167. 113 John’s gospel is unique in many respects, one of which being that John is very selective about the material that he includes in his narrative. He symbolically mentions six or possibly seven of Jesus’ miracles, or what he calls «signs» while in the synoptic Gospels we find mention of countless miracles and exorcisms. However the concept of demonic possession is not alien to John. During his preaching Jesus is often accused of «having a demon», Jn 7:20; 8:48; 10:20, ironically perhaps to this same audience Jesus returns the favour, telling them: «You are of your father the devil», Jn 8:44. The liberation of the world will come from Jesus death: «Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out» Jn 12:31; for «ruler of this world» see also Jn 14:30; 16:11. The victim here is not just a crazy demoniac, but the whole world that is under the possession of Satan, its «ruler». In John the sacrificial death of the Son of God is the definitive blow to the kingdom of Satan on earth, his judgement, and expulsion from itíwith connection to the final judgement. To speak of this macro-exorcism John uses the same term that is used over thirty times to describe exorcisms in the synoptic Gospels, (ਥțȕȐȜȜȦ) «cast out». The casting out of Satan is declared on the cross where Christ announces his victory saying, «It is finished», Jn 19:30. 114 D. HAMM, The Ministry of Deliverance and the Biblical Data, 56. For the below discussion, I am indebted to the conversations I had with Dennis Hamm through our personal communications. According to Hamm the word ‘exorcism’ connotes a church-approved ritual and thus it should be carefully used when related to Jesus’ and the apostles’ healing and deliverance ministry. Regarding the relationship between healing and deliverance from evil spirits in the New Testament, it seems to me that the Palestinian culture ascribed to the power of evil spirits to many more maladies that we would in our medical culture today. But we do know from experience in our own day that some kinds of human suffering that do not yield to medical and psychiatric therapy have been mitigated or healed in the context of prayer for deliverance and formal exorcism. Regarding the Gospel of John, as stated in the previous note, John presents healings but no individual exorcisms. However the expulsion of «the ruler of his world» Jn 12:31 (understood as Satan) is achieved as Jesus describes the culmination of his whole life, death and resurrection as a kind of «macro-exorcism». This sounds like a way of simply proclaiming that Christ’s death and resurrection is a definitive victory over the power of evil, but does not give us a clarification about the relationship between physical healing and demonic deliverance. 115 The implication in these outbursts is not only indicative of illness but of knowledge into Jesus’ messianic identity «What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are – Holy One of God», Mk 1:24. The demoniacs have a knowledge that would be impossible to explain if they suffered from a mere illness. 116 A distinction that is perhaps more noticeable in Mark who, unlike Matthew and Luke, always distinguishes the two but who sometimes uses the verb for healing in reference to exorcism.

102 117

Chapter 1

E. SORENSEN, Possession and Exorcism, 124. Neither Paul nor any other New Testament author connects exorcism with the ethical purification achieved through one’s renunciation of demonic forces. 118 H. WADDELL, Becoming Friends, 22. 119 According to Sorensen these two kinds of possession arise from a survey of the New Testament, but that exorcism is not applied to the ethical kind of possession. Because the New Testament idea of possession relates to both ethical and physiological/psychological problems, one can see how natural it would be to assume that exorcism is applied to both, especially when one adds the corollary idea found in ethical contexts of being filled, or ‘possessed’, by the Holy Spirit. According to Sorensen, a plausible shift was occurring in Mesopotamia around the first century. In particular, many began to view demonic activity not only as an external activity upon people, but also as an inward activity within people (this shift is also evident in a comparison of the Old Testament with the New Testament with respect to demonic activity). Sorensen thinks that Zoroastrianism, was a likely forerunner to this shift, which he supposes was motivated by its ethical dualism, in which the human being makes a conscious decision to side with what is wise and good, or with what is deceitful and evil. Likewise, some sources from intertestamental Judaism thought that the demonic world, through indwelling possession, both influences the human ability to make ethical decisions and adversely affects human physiology. So, he concludes that the New Testament had been greatly influenced by this shift, even saying that the New Testament writings presuppose the Jewish demonology of the inter-testamental period. However, in one significant way as related to exorcism, the New Testament did not follow the practice of some Jewish exorcists in the inter-testamental period, namely, as Sorensen concludes, «in the New Testament, it is as indwelling possessors who adversely affect human physiology that they are subject to exorcism, not as possessors who affect human ethical decisions». See E. SORENSEN, Possession and Exorcism, 160. See also H.A. KELLY, The Devil, Demonology and Witchcraft, 102. The practice of exorcism in the New Testament followed the trend by internalizing demonic possession in ways that the Old Testament did not. It must be shown that though some exorcists took this shift to the point of applying their practice to ethical problems, the New Testament apparently did not apply exorcism to ethical problems, but only to physiological/psychological disorders that resulted from demonic possession. 120 See e.g. Mt 4:24; 7:22; 8:2,3,16,28-33; 10:1,8;12:22,26,43,45; 13:38,41; 14:26; 15:22;1 7:15,18; Mk 1:23,27,32,34,39; 3:11,15,22,30; 5:2,8,12,15; 6:49;7:25,26,30; 9:17-18,25; 16:17; Lk 4:33, 35,36,41; 5:12; 6:18; 7:21; 8:2,27,29,30,33-38; 9:39,42,49; 11:14,15,20,26; 13:11,16,32; 22:3; & in John, refs. to demonic possession: Jn 7:20; 8:48,52; 10:20-21; «Satan entered into» Judas 13:27. 121 The categories set forth below do not strictly follow the four source hypothesis, though omissions of references to exorcisms within parallel passages in some literary relationship are noted. The presentation below, which does not presume a particular direction in literary dependence, bears the advantage of reflecting the proclivities of each Gospel while noting where the parallel pericopes occur.

Jesus the Exorcist 122

103

If one accepts, for example, such categories as the «triple tradition», «Q», «special Matthew», «special Luke». 123 See, however, the disciples’ lack of success to exorcise in Mk 9:18 par. Lk 9:40 and Mk 9:28-29 par/ Mt 17:19-20. Presenting the disciples’ inability underscores Jesus’ role as the expert exorcist. 124 Baal-zebul means «lord of the dung» in Aramaic, it was the most filthy term imaginable. Jesus himself is called this term by his enemies, cf. Mt 10:25. Beelzebul probably originates as a pejorative deformation of Baal-zebub, «lord of (the) fly», god of Akron, cf. 2 Kgs 2:1. But Jesus is undaunted; he uses the term of disrespect launched at him as a springboard to reveal his quintessential teaching about the kingdom of Satan and the unforgivable sin, Mt 12:24-37. 125 Such a worldview fits well also with material outside the Gospels, such as Acts 19:13 ff. where «itinerant Jewish exorcists» begin using Jesus’ name in their work. Here it is as if exorcism were an uncontroversial occupation familiar to Jewish society. The author of Acts includes this account in an off-hand way not to defend or refute the legitimacy of exorcism but simply to illustrate the power and fame of Jesus’ name. 126 Example Mk 1:22; 1:27b (par. Lk 4:36); 2:12b; 4:41 (pars. Mt 8:27;Lk 8:25); Mt 7:29; 9:33; Lk 5:26. Of these texts, the depiction of Jesus’ superior ability in performing exorcisms occurs in Mk 1:27b (par. Lk 4:36) and Mt 9:33. 127 For a discussion which stresses inter alia the importance of multiple attestation as a criterion, see W.R. TELFORD, The Theology of the Gospel of Mark, 88-103. The present study is limited to the synoptic Gospels precisely because the Gospel of John does not preserve any account of an exorcism performed by Jesus. This does not mean, however, that the Fourth Gospel completely ignores this aspect of the Jesus tradition; traces of it are, instead, reconfigured to reinforce characteristic Johannine interests: (a) The language of casting out (ਥțȕȐȜȜİȚȞ) demonic power is taken up in John 12:31, according to which Jesus’ crucifixion is the decisive exorcism of Satan from the world and all history; Christ’s death is «the hour» of the final «judgment» of «the ruler of this world» (vv 27, 30-31). By this John can underscore the absolute supremacy of Jesus Christ crucified as the Exorcist of the whole universe, not just several individual demoniacs. (b) The accusations of «having a demon», which in the synoptic Gospels are linked to the performance of exorcisms (cf. Mk 3:22-30; Mt 12:24-32; Lk 11:15-23) and also involve John the Baptist (Mt 11:18; Lk 7:33), are more widespread in John 7:20; 8:48-49, 52; 10:2021), where they are made to function as labels in order to exercise social control over the threat from religious opponents. The motif of «having a demon» is thus reminiscent of, and perhaps grew out of, accusations surrounding exorcistic activity as attested in the synoptics. For an excellent discussion and overview of the Johannine tradition, see R.A. PIPER, The Absence of Exorcisms in the Fourth Gospel, 252-278. 128 See M. PSELLOS – M. COLLISSON, Psellus’ Dialogue on the Operation of Daemons. Also R.C. THOMPSON in his work The devils and Evil Spirits of Babylonia, I, 28 lucidly writes that there is scarcely any perceptible difference between įĮȓμȦȞ and įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ. In fact this acute critic observes (Diss. vi. p. 1, § 8) that ¨ĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ (dæmon), occurs frequently in the Gospels, and always in reference

104

Chapter 1

to possessions, real or supposed; but the word įȚ੺ȕȠȜȠȢ (devil), is never so applied. The use of the term įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ is constantly indefinite but the term įȚ੺ȕȠȜȠȢ is always definite. Thus when a possession is first named, it is called simply įĮíμȠȞȚȠȞ, or dæmon, or ʌȞİñμĮ ațȐșĮȡIJȠȞ, an unclean spirit; never IJò įĮíμȠȞȚȠȞ, or IJò ʌȞİñμĮ ațȐșĮȡIJȠȞ; but when in the progress of the story mention is again made of the same dæmon, he is styled IJઁįĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ, the dæmon, namely, that already spoken of; and in English, as well as Greek, this is the usage in regard to all indefinites. Further, the plural įĮȚμȩȞȚĮ occurs frequently, applied to the same order of beings with the singular; but what sets the difference of signification in the clearest light is that though both words, įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ and įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ, occur often in the Septuagint, they are invariably used for translating different Hebrew words; įȚ੺ȕȠȜȠȢ is always in Hebrew (ႁ ၊ၾ၊) tsar, enemy, or ((ၵ ။ၪႼ); ။ Satan, adversary, words never translated įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ. This latter, on the contrary, is made to express some Hebrew term signifying idol, Pagan deity, demon, apparition, or what some render satyr (for įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ in LXX see Dt 32:17; Ps 91:6; 96:5;106:37; Ez 13:21;Is 65:3). From this data we conclude that the word įĮȓμȦȞ as signifying in its abstract sense an intelligence, was occasionally applied from the earliest times to deities of the very first order, imaginary beings, but afterwards came to be appropriated to deified men in Greek tradition; and that the heathen (philosophers excepted) believed in no being identical with or bearing the slightest resemblance to our God. 129 The restricted distribution of the expression within Luke-Acts suggests that it is a Lucanism. 130 S. KLUTZ, The Grammar of Exorcism in the Ancient Mediterranean, 56-165. 131 The account in 1 Enoch explains the story of Gn 6:1-8 where the rebellious angels breed with women of the earth (and, in Enoch’s account, these angels teaches the women witchcraft), see section 3.4 below. This illicit fornication of angels with humans provokes nothing less than the most extreme corruption of humanity in history: God sees that «the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually» (Gn 6:5). God decides to destroy all life by the Flood and start a new humanity through Noah’s family. D.W. SUTER, Fallen Angel, Fallen Priest, 115-135, for whom this myth of rebellious angels who breed illegitimate offspring through women functions as a protest against priests who were thought to be falling prey to reprehensible incursions of Hellenistic culture. See also A. WRIGHT, The Origin of Evil Spirits, 46-47. 132 To be sure, there are occasional instances in which įĮȓμȦȞ or a related verb denotes inimical powers as e.g. in Hippocratic school’s criticism of those who think they (įȣıμİȞȑİȢ, įĮȓμȠȞİȢ) lie behind illnesses such as epileptic seizures («the sacred disease») and related conditions; Plutarch’s view that the notion of «evil demons» (ijĮ૨ȜȠȚ, įĮȓμȠȞİȢ) derives from Heracleon, Plato, Xenocrates, Chrysippus and Democritus and the vilifying rhetoric used by orators in Athenian law courts (e.g. Aeschines, In Ctesiphontem 157; Dinarchos, In Demosthenem 91; Isocrates, Areopagiticus 73). However as much as daimones could be regarded as harmful to humans, their malevolence was not addressed by means of exorcistic practices in Greek and Roman culture. On their essential neutrality in early folk traditions, Homeric and post-Homeric literature, the philosophical literature (esp.

Jesus the Exorcist

105

Plato), Neopythagorean thought, Philo, Plutarch, Lucian, Apuleius and Philostratus (on Apollonius of Tyana). See E. SORENSEN, Possession and Exorcism, 75-117. 133 A. WRIGHT, The Origin of Evil Spirit, 46-47. 134 Zohar in Gen fol. 53. 4. & 73. 1. 135 «If it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you», (Mt 12:28; par Lk 11:20). 136 cf. 11Q11 xix 15; 4Q444 1 i 8; 1QS iv 22; perhaps also 4Q458 2 i 5. 137 The Gospels give us graphic accounts of the severe harm inflicted by the unclean spirits on their victims leading up to the exorcisms of the Gerasene demoniac (Mk 5:1-20 and par.) and the possessed boy (Mk 9:14-29 and par.) though without explanation of how the spirits became impure to begin with. 138 So in Mk 1:34, 3; 3:15, 22, 23;6:13;9:18, 28; Mt 7:2;8:16, 31;9:33, 34;10:1, 8; 12:24, 26, 27 bis, 28;17:19; Lk 9:40, 49;11:14, 15, 18, 19 bis, 20;13:32. 139 Mk 3:27; 5:12, 13; 9:25; Mt 12:29; Lk 8:30, 32, 33; 22:3. 140 Mk 5:13; 7:29, 30; Mt 12:43 (Q); Lk 8:2, 33; 11:14, 24 (Q). 141 We have no reason to believe that this logion is about anything other than exorcism because in the context of the discourse of both Luke and Matthew, Jesus is talking about, and defending his exorcism ministry. See Luke’s text (Lk 11:17 ff.) where it is the Beelzebul controversy of that gives us the context of the the return of the spirit logion and leads right up to it. Matthew places this logion (Mt 12:43-45) also in the context of his Beelzebul discourse (Mt 12:25 ff.), though his discourse slightly longer and spread out than Luke’s. Furthermore the language of this logion, the verbs for spirits ‘going out’ or ‘entering into’ bodies is the same language that the Gospel writers use when Jesus commands spirits to «go out» of a person’s body in exorcism (Lk 4:35; Mk 1:25;5:8; 9:25; Mt 17:18, etc. note the verb is used ਥȟȑȜșૉ (v.24), the 2nd aorist active subjunctive of ਥȟȑȡȤİıșĮȚ, «to go out»). 142 This difficulty is recognized by N.T. Wright who, however, tries to resolve this problem by arguing that the tradition is less about the possible long-term risks of exorcism than it is a parable about Israel. He also demythologizes Mt 12:43-45 par. Lk 11:24-26 through the perspective of a grand narrative shared by the Gospel writers rather than to consider it as a tradition of its own and that may have circulated independently and alongside other reports of Jesus’ exorcisms. 143 Cf. The metaphorical use of «house» in the Beelzebul discourse of Mk 3:25, 27; Mt 12:25, 29 which seems to correspond to «the kingdom» of «Satan» (Lk 11:18) rather than the «house», i.e. the body of the demoniac (Lk 11:24). And, in fact, «house» in the sense of «house divided against itself» has gotten lost in its Lucan redaction at 11:17. This further strengthens Luke’s preservation of a tradition that ultimately derives from another source. 144 J.P. MEIER in his book A Marginal Jew, 405, overstates the matter when he asserts that «demonic possession as well as obsession became a frequent theme in the Jewish literature of the intertestamental period». But the instances that Meier cites as evidence (i.e. Genesis Apocryphon and 4QPrayer of Nabodinus) relate more to what he calls «obsession» than to «possession» (i.e. entry of spirits into the victim’s body), and he cites with approval the conclusion of J.M. HULL, Hellenistic Magic and the synoptic Tradition, 62-63 that despite considerable evidence for

106

Chapter 1

exorcism in the Ancient Near East B.C. actual stories of such encounters remain relatively rare. 145 Although there may be a similarity of method between Abram’s laying on of hands in this passage and the same by Jesus in Lk 13:13, the significance of a comparison between Jesus’ exorcistic ministry and that of Genesis Apocryphon is minimized by the fact that in the latter the injurious spirit is acting on behalf of God; see E. EVE, The Jewish Context of Jesus’ Miracles, 180- 181. 146 For a similar use of the verburt, without any concern for the interiority of evil within humans, see the Hebrew War Rule at 1QM xiv 10: «You (i.e. God) have driven away from [us] the spirits of [de]struction». 147 According to 11Q11 v 4-5, this incantation may be «spoken at any time to the heavens» when a demon «comes to you during the night». 148 The term «afflicted» (ၱၬၸၧၣၻၥ, cf. 11Q11 v 2) is frequently, without due reflection, rendered as if it refers to demonic possession in the strict sense (also in relation to the other occurrences of the root rtG in 11Q5 xxvii 10; 4Q510 1.6; 4Q511 11.4, 8), and the verb used describe the activity of dealing with the evil forces is ၸၬၢႂၳ (hiph. of ၸၢႂ, which carries the sense of adjuring with force). 149 Though at times casually referring to «exorcism», Bilhah Nitzan has emphasized the apotropaic nature of 4Q510-511 and designated them broadly as a variety of «anti-demonic songs». See B. NITZAN, Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry, 227272. 150 Within the collections of psalms in 11Q5 as a whole, it is important to note that the twin notions of exorcism, on the one hand, and possession, on the other, are not necessarily absent by virtue of not being explicitly mentioned. For language that comes closer to that of exorcism, see e.g. the petition (or perhaps self-exorcism?) in the prayer for deliverance in 11Q5 xix 15-16, especially if both parts of the petition are to be read as synonymously parallel: «Do not let Satan rule over me, nor an unclean spirit; let neither pain nor evil inclination take possession of my bones». 151 In any case, text of Jubilees does not clearly affirm whether the stated herbal remedies deliver one from the effects of evil spirits in the same way as an exorcism (i.e. insofar as they affect physical ailments), or if the remedies are simply a prophylactic to ward-off evil spirits, or both. 152 According to Josephus, Ant. 8.45, Solomon «composed incantations with which illnesses depart and left behind forms of exorcisms with which those possessed by demons drive them out, never to return» (ਥʌ૳įȐȢ IJİ ıȣȞIJĮȟȐμİȞȠȢ ĮੈȢ ʌĮȡȘȖȠȡİ૙IJĮȚ IJ੹ȞȠıȒμĮIJĮ țĮ੿ IJȡȩʌȠȣȢ ਥȟȠȡțȫıİȦȞ țĮIJȑȜȚʌİȞ, ȠੈȢ Ƞੂ ਥȞįȠȪμİȞȠȚ IJ੹ įĮȚμȩȞȚĮ ੪Ȣ μȘțȑIJ’ ਥʌĮȞİȜșİ૙Ȟ ਥțįȚȫțȠȣıȚ); text and translation by H.S.J. THACKERAY – R. MARCUS, Josephus V. Jewish Antiquities, 594-595. 153 For the edited text and translation, see J.M. BAUMGARTEN, Qumran Cave 4 XIII, 52-53. 154 See further J.M. BAUMGARTEN, The 4Q Zadokite Fragments on Skin Disease, 153-165. 155 Cfr. Jn. 12:31, see footnotes 111, 112, 125 above. 156 For important previous studies, see D.L. PENNEY – M.O. WISE, By the Power of Beelzebub,627- 650; J. NAVEH, Fragments of an Aramaic Magic Book from Qumran, 252-261; K. BEYER, Die aramäischen Textevom Toten Meer, 168.

Jesus the Exorcist 157

107

Following the interpretation of Puech (‘560. 4Q Livret magiquear’, 298) contra Penney and Wise (By the Power of Beelzebub, 631-632, 640). 158 Cf. e.g. Ex. 15:26b, «I am the LORD, your healer» and «who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases» Ps 103:3, cf. Hos 6:1. The role of YHWH as healer would be taken up by the Messiah, cf. Is 35:5, 40:1, 53:5; 61:1, whose coming would be like the dawn of justice and healing for the nation: «But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings» Mal 4:2; cf. Lk 1:78. Thus it is the healing aspect of Christ’s ministry that is in Jesus’ opinion the sign par excellence that Messiah has come, cf. Mt 11:4-5; par. Lk 7:22; 4:18. 159 Since the seminal research in the 1970’s a large number of studies have focused on the significance of the fallen angels myth within Second Temple Judaism and in relation to the New Testament. Among the publications we find: D. DIMANT, The Fallen Angels’ in the Dead Sea Scrolls; M. DELCORLE, Myth de la chute des anges. 3-53; J.T. MILIK, The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4; P. SACCHI, Jewish Apocalyptic and its History; J.C. REEVES, Jewish Lore in Manichaean Cosmogony; M.J. DAVIDSON, Angels at Qumran, 72-108; J.C. VANDERKAM, «1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature»; J.C. VANDERKAM–W. ADLER, The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, 33-101; L.T. STUCKENBRUCK, The Book of Giants from Qumran; D.R. JACKSON, Enochic Judaism: Three Defining Paradigm Exemplars; C. AUFFARTH–L.T. STUCKENBRUCK, The Fall of the Angels; S. BHAYRO, The Shemihaza and Asael Narrative of 1 Enoch; A.YOSHIKO REED, Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity; A.T. WRIGHT, The Origin of Evil Spirits ; G. BOCCACCINI – G. IBBA, Enoch and the Mosaic Torah. 160 Genesis 6:1-8 predates 1 Enoch, but both texts attest that the influence of these spirits provokes nothing less than the most extreme corruption of humans in history, where in Genesis God laments that «the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually» (Gn 6:5). Thus God chooses Noah to start a new creation: «God said to Noah, ‘I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence through them… For behold, I will bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under heaven. Everything that is on the earth shall die’» (Gn 6:13a,17). 161 Cf. 1 En 10; 83-84; 91:5-10; 93:1-3 and 93:12-15; 106:13-107:1; Book of Giants at 4Q530 2 ii + 6-7 + 8-12, lines 4-20. 162 There is no reason to question Milik’s paleographical dating of this manuscript to «the first half of the second century B.C.» – see J. MILIK, The Books of Enoch, 140-141. Scribal errors in the manuscript make it possible to push the date of a Vorlage to at least the latter part of the 3rd century. 163 On this, see the still useful discussion of C. NEWSOM, The Development of 1 Enoch 6-19, 329. 164 See also Jub 5:9; 7:22; and the Book of Giants at 6Q8 1 and 4Q531 7. 165 Within the early Enochic tradition, punishment of the giants through the deluge is clearest in the Animal Apocalypse at 1 En. 89:5. In service of paradigmatic interests, the Flood soon became the primary, if not only, means for the giants’ destruction in Second Temple literature from the 2nd century on. So esp. 4QExhortation Based on the Flood (= 4Q370) i 6; Damascus Document (CD A ii

108

Chapter 1

19-20); the destruction of «the giants» is mentioned in Sir 16:7; Wis 14:6; Bar 3:26ff.; 3 Bar 4:10. 166 In 1 En 15:3-4 God pronounces to Enoch his judgement on the ‘crime’ of the watchers, «Ye left the high, holy, and eternal heaven, and lain with women, and defiled yourselves with the daughters of men and taken to yourselves wives, and done like the children of earth, and begotten giants (as your) sons. And though ye were holy, spiritual, living the eternal life, you have defiled yourselves with the blood of women». For a fuller account of this, see L.T. STUCKENBRUCK, Giant Mythology and Demonology, 143-151. 167 It is possible that in taking this view, the apocalyptic Enochic writers were responding to the view, preserved among Pseudo-Eupolemos traditions cited by Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. 9.17.1-9 and 9.18.2), that retold the biblical story to allow for the survival of the deluge by the giants who became a key link in the transmission and spread of revealed culture between pre- and postdiluvian times. See further, L.T. STUCKENBRUCK, The Origins of Evil, 118-187. 168 It is possible to reconstruct an aetiology behind the existence of demons based on 15:3-16:3 where the Book of Giants which may have been an elaboration on parts of chapter 10. 169 Armin Lange describes the procedure of this text as a «hymnic exorcism»; cf. Lange, «The Essene Position on Magic and Divination», 383, 402-403, and 430-433 (bibliography in n. 48), who applies the same category to 1QapGen xx 12-18; Jub 10:1-14; and 12:16-21. On the problem of categorising the passage from 1QapGen in this way, see L.T. STUCKENBRUCK, Pleas for Deliverance, 560-562. 170 For the expression «holy ones» as referring to the fallen angels, see also Genesis Apocryphon (1Q20) ii 1, vi 20 and Book of Watchers at 4Q201 1 i 3. 171 See the overview e.g. in VANDERKAM, 1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature, 76-79 and A. YOSHIKO REED, The Trickery of the Fallen Angels, 141-171, including a discussion of texts in which the fallen angels themselves are identified as demons. 172 The context of the flood as an apocalyptic event is fascinating: cf. Wis 14:6: «And from the beginning also, when the proud giants [ਫ਼ʌİȡȘij੺ȞȦȞ ȖȚȖ੺ȞIJȦȞ] perished, the hope of the world fleeing to a vessel, which was governed by thy hand, left to the world seed of generation» (i.e. Noah’s family); and Sir 16:7: «The ancient giants [IJ૵Ȟ ਕȡȤĮ઀ȦȞ ȖȚȖ੺ȞIJȦȞ] did not obtain pardon for their sins, who were destroyed trusting to their own strength». See also Bar 3:26-28. These references can be compared thematically and linguistically to 2 Pt 2:5 «If [God] did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah... when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly». The phrase «world of the ungodly» (țȩıμ૳ ਕıİȕ૵Ȟ) is unique in the N.T. and highly reminiscent of the Enochic tradition. Firstly, «ungodly» (ਕıİȕȒȢ) is only used nine times in the N.T., over half the instances are in 2 Peter and Jude in passages evocative of the judgment spoken of in 1 En 1:9 which is quoted in Jude 14-15: «It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, ‘Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly (ਕıİȕİ૙Ȣ) of all their deeds of ungodliness (ਕıİȕİȓĮȢ) that they have ungodly committed (਱ıȑȕȢıĮȞ), and of all the harsh things that ungodly (ਕıİȕİ૙Ȣ) sinners have spoken against him’» (emphasis mine). So we

Jesus the Exorcist

109

can see here a strong thematic and linguistic parallel between late Jewish Wisdom literature (Wis, Sir, Bar), and the N.T. catholic epistles of 2 Peter and Jude precisely on the same subjects peculiar to 1 Enoch: (1) the Flood as a decisive act of divine judgment against the «ancient giants» and the «world of the ungodly» (Sir 16:7; 2 Pt 2:5); (2) the judgment in Noah’s day as a prefiguring of God’s final judgment as a cataclysm where «the heavens and the earth... will be set on fire an dissolved», bringing about a «new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells» (2 Pt 3:6-13; cf. 1 En 10:13ff; 72:2; Is 66:16, 22; Rv 21:1). 173 The New Testament Epistle of Jude 14-15 makes a famous quotation of 1 Enoch 1:9 (see previous note) concerning God’s final judgment. Although 1 Enoch was apparently widely known during the development of the Jewish canon, due to its midrashic nature (i.e. 1 En 1 is a midrash of Deut. 33), it was excluded from the Jewish Tanakh and Septuagint canons. See VANDERKAM, 1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature, 76-79. 174 For examples of demonic possession provoking violence, destruction, and insanity, see e.g. Mk 9:17-22, Lk 9:38-42; A classic example is the Gerasene demoniac: «And no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain… he wrenched the chains apart, and he broke the shackles in pieces. No one had the strength to subdue him. Night and day among the tombs and on the mountains he was always crying out and cutting himself with stones» (Mk 5:3-5; par. Mt 8:28-34; Lk 8:26-39). 175 Cf. previous note on the Gerasene demoniac. In Mark the possessed boy’s father expresses his grief to Jesus: «‘And whenever it seizes him, it throws him down, and he foams and grinds his teeth and becomes rigid… From childhood… it has often cast him into fire and into water, to destroy him. But if you can do anything, have compassion on us and help us’» (Mk 9:18, 21-22) 176 Compare 1 En 58:3: «And the righteous shall be in the light of the sun, And the elect in the light of eternal life» to Jesus’ words on the final judgment at the end of the age in Mt 13:43: «Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father». Both of these may be references to the famous resurrection of the dead and final judgment spoken of in Dan 12:2-3 or possibly the eternal light of Zec 14:7. Although in Dan 12:2-3 the righteous teachers will «shine… like stars forever», but no mention of the sun is made. 177 Mk 5:7; Lk 8:28; cf. also Mk 1:24 par., and Jas 2:19: «You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe – and shudder!». They shudder presumably because they know their doom is near; God judgment over them is imminent. 178 Cf. Dt 30:19: «I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live» (cf. Sir 15:16-17; Jos 24:15; Pv 1:29). For other references to Noah and God’s judgment see Heb 11:7; 1 Pt 3:20-21; 2 Pt 2:5; 3:3-7. 179 For «the dominion of wickedness» among the Dead Sea materials, see esp. 4Q510 1.6-7 par. 4Q511 10.3-4. Cf. 1QS i 23-24, ii 19; 1QM xiv 9-10 par. 4QMa = 4Q491 8-10 i 6-7; 4Q177=4QCatenaa iii 8; 4Q390 2 i 4. For a thorough treatment of demonic powers at Qumran as a whole, see the article written by L.T. STUCKENBRUCK, Demonic Beings and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

110 180

Chapter 1

Lk 4:5-6; par. Mt 4:8-9; cf. Lk 22:31-32; cf. «the ruler of this world» Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11. 181 The theme of royal divine authority in curbing or dealing with the effects of demonic power may be also implied in the Songs of the Maskil mentioned in section E above. The writer of the songs holds two convictions in tension: a belief that one now lives during a time of «a dominion of wickedness» during which «the sons of light» can be expected to suffer and be «plagued by iniquities», and a belief that despite this the threats posed by such evil powers, which are temporary in any case, can be neutralized until the present age is brought to an end (cf. 4Q510 1.6b-8 par. 4Q511 10.3b-6). 182 For a discussion of this as a fundamental principle within some of the early Enochic texts, see L. STUCKENBRUCK, The Eschatological Worship by the Nations, 191-208. 183 Cf. e.g. Mt 12:27; Mk 9:38-41. Pagan here means non-Jewish. 184 The most profiled stories are Mk 7:24-30: the daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman (in modern Lebanon); Mk 5:1-20 par.: the man in the tombs in Syria east of the sea of Galilee, where the villagers held pigs, and therefore were pagans. The two remaining complete exorcism stories leave the question whether paganism was involved unanswered: Mk 1:23-28 par.: the man in the synagogue of Capernaum; Mk 9:14-29 par: the boy with an unclean spirit.) Here we also have to mention one exorcism story outside the gospels, the one in Acts 16:16-18. This story is especially interesting because it so clearly does not connect possession with disease, and because the connection with pagan cult here is unequivocal (cf. v. 20f). O. SKARSAUNE, «Possession and Exorcism», 157-171. 185 J.D. DUNN í G.H. TWELFTREE, Demon-Possession and Exorcism 175. 186 Sanhedrin 43a. 187 J.D. DUNN – G.H. TWELFTREE, Demon-Possession and Exorcism, 214. 188 These two verses make perfect sense together thematically, and they are logically joined by the conjunction İí įc «but if». The same verses are echoed in Lk 11:19-20 where the only notable difference is that the «Spirit of God» is replaced by the «finger of God». 189 J.D. DUNN – G.H. TWELFTREE, Demon-Possession and Exorcism, 214. 190 How John depicts Jesus as the Exorcist for the whole cosmos is explained in footnotes 111, 112, 125 above. For an excellent discussion and overview of the Johannine tradition, see R.A. PIPER, The Absence of Exorcisms in the Fourth Gospel, 252-278. 191 Cf. Mt 4:24-25: «So his fame spread throughout all Syria, and they brought him all the sick… those oppressed by demons, epileptics, and paralytics, and he healed them. And great crowds followed him from Galilee and the Decapolis, and from Jerusalem and Judea, and from beyond the Jordan». This text leads right up to Christ’s greatest teaching in Matthew, the Sermon on the Mount. 192 Berakhoth 34b; G.H. TWELFTREE, Jesus the Exorcist, 160. 193 See G. VERMES, Jesus the Jew, 74. 194 Cf. Mt 7:29. For examples of Jesus’ deliberate, bold modification of Jewish tradition: You have heard it said… but I say to you; Mt 5:21, 27, 33, 38, 43; cf. Lk 6:27; Jn. 5:34 and his confidence in the supreme authority of his words, Amen, amen,

Jesus the Exorcist

111

I say to you Jn 1:51; 3:3, 5, 11; 5:19, 24, 25; 6:26, 32, 47, 53; 8:34, 51, 58; 10:1, 7; 12:24; 13:16, 20, 21, 38; 14:12; 16:20, 23; and 21:18. 195 J.D. DUNN – G.H. TWELFTREE, Demon-Possession and Exorcism, 214.

CHAPTER 2 EXORCISTIC PRAYER AND DEMONOLOGY IN BYZANTIUM: A BRIEF SURVEY THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY1

In the introduction to his magisterial eight-volume work History of Magic and Experimental Science, Lynn Thorndike argues that Magic and experimental science have been connected in their development, that magicians were perhaps the first to experiment, and that the history of both magic and experimental science can be better understood by studying them together2. We have to admit that the study of Byzantine science, occult arts, magic, superstitions and folklore is a topic that modern Byzantinists have probed very little3. However any comprehensive study concerned with both the reality and the image of the occult sciences in Byzantium would certainly demonstrate that this city was not marginal to the scientific culture of the Middle Ages, and that the occult sciences were not insignificant to the learned culture of the medieval Byzantine world. Indeed, as Paul Magdalino and Maria Mavroudi write in their introduction to their book The Occult Sciences in Byzantium, some of the educated, sophisticated masters of occult knowledge were leading social figures in Byzantium and were also leading practitioners of magic in late antiquity4! The learned practitioners of the occult had a basic general education including philosophy, and tended to combine their special expertise with a variety of intellectual interests, which made it appropriate to describe them as «philosophers». Philosophos was the generic label for the intellectuals of Byzantium, namely those who were thought to possess extraordinary mental and spiritual powers. These powers went beyond the rational exposition of logic and metaphysics and had much in common with the charisma of Christian holy men who were also called philosophers by their apologists. This assertion could imply that the occult practitioners offered an alternative religion, or a superstitious substitute for orthodox worship. However this was not case. In any case,

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

113

occult science cannot be regarded simply as the learned and nonsuperstitious side of magic. Although later it came to denote an objective cultural reality, it never lost its negative connotation. Magic was seen as what the «other side» of the culture practised as a substitute for true religion, where orthodoxy was the religion of the Empire. Instead of serving the true deity, magic was criticized as seeking to usurp divine power by mechanical or demonic means; its rituals mimicked religious cult, but in exclusive, private setting5. Yet the Late- Antique period and the Medieval world articulated a concept of occult wisdom that deserves to be considered in its own right6. Mapping out the stages in the development of the Byzantine understanding of the occult, «is made difficult by the relative dearth of theoretical texts on the topic that can be dated and attributed to known authors with certainty» 7 . This investigation is further complicated by the Byzantine scholars and historians themselves, who, in documenting the close and tense relationship between occult science and imperial power during the period of the 9th to 12th centuries, tend to attribute involvement in sorcery and occult science to their political enemies (be they rulers, patriarchs or members of the elite circles of advisors) in order to tarnish their memory. The trends and shifts in popularity between one form of occult science and another that took place over the centuries were very strong as were the ambiguities that are revealed in the historians own attitudes to these sciences, particularly that of astrology8. Most of the magical and divinatory texts of the late Byzantine or postByzantine manuscripts are almost entirely anonymous and undated9. Modern scholars gather much of their information concerning the Byzantine understanding of the occult not so much by examining direct statements made by Byzantine authors but by examining the surviving manuscript tradition (or Nachleben/Survival as they are traditionally called), and the quotations by other writers and reception among professional and literary circles of ancient «classics» such as the Testament of Solomon or the Chaldean Oracles (2nd century A.D.)10. However there is an exception to this in the work of Michael Psellos discussed later. Psellos emerges from the surviving written record as the most learned, prolific writer of his time who perhaps best understood and appreciated among his contemporaries the philosophical legacy of antiquity11. In this chapter, the Byzantine period is divided into three parts12. Employing a panoramic view, we will try to demonstrate the evidence that demonology in Byzantium and the riches of the Byzantine church with regard to demonology, exorcistic prayer and spiritual combat had influences from both popular folkloric culture and Orthodoxy rooted in Scripture and the tradition of the Church Fathers. These subjects were not marginal to the learned culture of the medieval Byzantine world.

114

Chapter 2

1. The challenges of the early church The account reported in Mark’s Gospel of the woman afflicted with the issue of the blood (Mk 5:25-34) shows Jesus working a miracle without first being conscious of it beforehand. Mark recounts how a woman from the crowd comes up behind Jesus and, by simply touching his garment, she is healed from her disease after twelve years of medical ordeal. Christ neither says nor does anything to cure her. Unaware of her presence, he realizes only that the power within him has suddenly gone out of him. This miracle comes as close to the essence of Graeco-Roman magic as anywhere in the Bible13. From that perspective «it appears that Jesus healing power is functional in this narrative exactly like those of the magico-medical amulets made of hematite which were meant to prevent or cure haemorrhaging. In this episode someone makes contact with Christ’s clothes and is immediately healed as if somebody makes purposeful contact with a supernaturally charged medium»14. A pagan would probably have constructed it as an act of magic – except that here, as Mark stresses, it is the woman’s faith in the person of Jesus that has cured her, and not only her brush with a charged «object». Magic and miracles share the same techniques even if not always the same sponsorship. It is not sufficient to distinguish them from each other by saying that one appeals to the aid of angels, or God, while the other appeals to the aid of demons í because both utilize the invisible help of either the Creator who is «Spirit» (Jn 4:24) or «spiritual creatures» to achieve something outside the reality of the accepted norm15. So it was always difficult for the uninitiated to distinguish between magic and miracles. This is a problem that confounded the Church from the earliest of times. Given the range and various styles of his miracles, Christ would easily be reckoned by pagans as a magos. Even during the life of Jesus there were often disputes, as to the nature of his miracles, and to their source. One group of Pharisees were of the opinion that Jesus utilised Beelzebub to perform his miracles16. In fact, looking back, it is not sufficient to say that miracles were performed by saints and magic by magicians, or even to claim that miracles have always had beneficial results and magic not always so. What can be said with certainty is that in the early days of Christianity, or else the last days of widespread paganism there was much competition between practitioners on both sides of the fence; much of this took place in the Eastern Empire, or Greek Byzantium. An interesting question could be asked here: if Christ had promised to answer all petitions made in his name (Jn 14:14) could he not also be invoked in a magical operation? Gary Vikan reminds us that the cross (or

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

115

crucifix) often replaced the evil eye aportropaion on early Christian amulets in the eastern Mediterranean17. However, Christianity’s reaction to magic was at first very moderate. The passages of the New Testament which specifically oppose magicians are few (but very forceful in their condemnation of them, e.g. Gal 5:20-21; Rv 21:8; 22:15), and these cannot be compared either in number or in content with the multitude of analogous passages in the Old Testament (Dt 18:10-12; Ex 22:18; Lv 19:26, 31; 20:6) where the death penalty is given for magicians. However there is no evidence to show that God’s prohibition of magic and sorcery in the Old Testament had been abrogated by apostolic teaching, on the contrary the apostles encouraged repentance from magicians and do not hesitate to tell them they are on the path to ruin (cf. Acts 8:9-24; 19:1820). The confusion with magic stems from a basic misunderstanding of Judaic and Christian law. Apostolic teaching reflected in the New Testament dispenses Christians from observing koshrut, that is, Jewish dietary laws (cf. Acts 11:9; 15:28-29; Gal 2:14-21). But the new faith does not dispense them from the moral laws of Judaism reflected in the commandments (Mt 19:17). Indeed, Jesus condemned the Pharisees for hypocrisy (Mt 15:7) but he admired their zeal for moral law, as he tells his Jewish audience: «For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven» (Mat 5:20). The Judaic moral law is not abrogated by Jesus in the Gospels who upholds the Decalogue and says, «If you would enter life, keep the commandments» (Mt 19:18). Jesus never says, It’s permissible to lie, cheat, practice magic, etc. The Gospels demand amoral teaching is in many ways more demanding than the law of Moses (who permitted, for example, divorce and the hatred of one’s enemies, Mt 19:6 cf. Dt 24:1; Ex 17:14-16). And Paul asks whether believers in Christ have to obey the moral law: «Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law» (Rom 3:31; cf. 2:6-16). Although in Christianity the punishments for violating these laws are no longer as harsh as in Judaism í Jesus words in the Gospels still must have filled the community with fear that, as he says, any un-repented sin is punished in the afterlife (Mt 5:26; 10:28; par Lk 12:59; Mk 9:43-48; Jn 5:29). In keeping with Old Testament moral law the New Testament condemns sorcery and idolatry, along with murder, wrath, malice, slander, adultery, sexual immorality, incest, sensuality, covetousness, theft, idolatry, debauchery, orgies, obscenity, deceit, envy, pride, wickedness, etc.,18. Some of these are mentioned only a few times, such as incest (1 Cor 5:1) or sorcery (Gal 5:20; Rv 9:21; 21:8; 22:15) or male prostitution (1 Cor 6:9), but the fact that they are not mentioned often is not a sufficient reason to determine that they were acceptable behaviours

116

Chapter 2

in the early Christian community. Thus it seems likely that magicians were thought to have God’s judgment on them and public repentance was appropriate for them to enjoy full communion with the faithful (cf. Acts 19:18-20). The assumption of New Testament authors, and later as we will see in the Fathers of the Church, is that, questions of halakhic purity aside, what was morally illicit under Judaic law remains so. A good example of this is Acts 19, where we find a very interesting insight into early Christian attitudes towards magic in a heavily pagan context. Paul has been vigorously preaching in Ephesus for two years, v.10. This port city was of course, was a major centre of paganism in Asia Minor, attracting pilgrims from around the Mediterranean to the remarkable temple of Artemis, the pride of the Ephesians, v.34, and one of the seven ancient wonders of the world. In this context Paul’s teachings would be inflammatory and dangerous, as St John Chrysostom puts it, «To say [as Paul did], ‘They be no gods which men worship, but demons19; He who was crucified is God;’ ye well know how great wrath it kindled, how severely men must have paid for it, what a flame of war it fanned»20. Could Paul survive, let alone preach in Ephesus for two years? Although Paul’s preaching sparked a sizzling controversy and riots nothing could not stop his message from spreading like wildfire, vv. 23-41. The fact that his message had turned away «a great many people» from pagan practices «not only in Ephesus but almost all of Asia» was testified by Paul’s worst enemies, who had come to consider Paul a major threat to the economic and religious life of their society21. In this heady environment Jewish exorcists began imitating Paul by using Jesus name in their exorcisms, but in one instance the demoniac physically attacked the exorcists which made Jesus’ name even more famous22. Acts 19 aims to show that Paul’s message was being supported and protected by the supernatural power of God: «God was doing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that even handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were carried away to the sick, and their diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them», v.11-12. Why is this is distinct from magic, is not Paul a magician? The difference is that magic is done with the goal «my will be done», and miracles «thy will be done» – Paul had sacrificed his own wellbeing in complete surrender to the purposes of God in Ephesus, thus God demonstrated the glory of his Son through the miracles and signs that confirm in the eyes of all Ephesians that Paul’s message about Jesus is true, and his ministry is blessed by God. The difference between miracle and magic becomes even clearer in the next verses which recount the central issue of our topic: the repentance of magicians. Luke writes how there was a kind of a public confession of sins and hidden practices, «And many of those who were now believers came,

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

117

confessing and divulging their practices», v.18. Among the converts to Christianity were magicians, «Those who had practiced magic arts brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all. And they counted the value of them and found it came to fifty thousand pieces of silver», v.19. This is very interesting, because it shows that these magicians were so passionate about confessing something, that it wasn’t enough for them to quietly stop practicing magic, they felt they had to act against their own best interest. If magic had not become utterly repugnant to them, why would they do this? Could not these magicians have sold their texts worth a fortune; why go to such extremes? A logical explanation for this is to assume that what these former magicians did was in keeping with the spirit and beliefs of the Pauline community to which they belonged. The Pauline condemnation of sorcery and idolatry (cf. Gal 5:20) is what most likely forms the spiritual background that motivated this public confession of occult practices and the destruction of magic texts. What is the evidence that burning magic books was in keeping with direction of the early Christian movement? Firstly we notice how uncontroversial and acceptable the burning of these magic books is to the Christians of Ephesus who would apparently take pride in such an act of defiance against the dominant culture. The context is a free act of divulging of occult practices, and the burning is a clear sign of the repudiation of such practices. By acting against their own best interest (financially) the magicians testify to the necessary repentance from sin that Paul preached, taught, and practiced himself, as he confides to Timothy: «Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost» (1 Tm 1:15)23. Their act proves to all the pagan people of Ephesus that these magicians had discovered something by faith in Jesus that was of far greater value than even their old magic texts that were worth their weight in gold. It also shows that these magicians came to believe that magic was harmful not just for them but for anyone, and so they would not sell these books even to their worst enemy. Secondly we notice the verse right after the burning of magic books: «In this way with might the word of the Lord grew and strengthened» (Acts 19:20) (ȅ੢IJȦ țĮIJ੹ țȡȐIJȠȢ ੒ ȜȩȖȠȢ IJȠ૨ ȀȣȡȓȠȣ Ș੡ȟĮȞİ țĮ੿ ੅ıȤȣİȞ). By burning the books the power of magic was extinguished and a new power is rising in Ephesus. What is that power? «The word of the Lord»24 is used 243 times in the Old Testament, and now, amazingly, it refers not to a new phenomenon – not directly to the burning of texts but to the teaching of St Paul as confirmation of the truth of God’s word (cf. Acts 13:46-49)! To the author of Acts the burning is an act of obedience to God, not mere compliance with Pauline doctrine. This phrase reveals a hermeneutic of

118

Chapter 2

continuity between the moral law of the Old Testament and the teaching of the nascent Church – both in condemnation of occult practice. In Mosaic law the «word of the Lord» had condemned sorcery and idolatry, now, it is the same «word», ȜȩȖȠȢ, that is being preached by Paul and glorified in the public destruction of magic books. But how is burning books a demonstration of the power of God’s word? It is not the burning that is critical. It is that «those who had practiced magic arts» freely burn their own texts. This freedom manifests the power of God’s word to change human hearts of those who choose to turn, as Paul says, «from idols to serve the living and true God» (1 Th 1:9). The word of God empowers the former magicians to renounce their practices; God strengthens them so that they could endure coming into the light «confessing and divulging their practices» without fear (Acts 19:18). God’s word spoken by Paul inspires them to live in transparency with their sisters and brothers so that the whole community could be «of one heart and soul» shining with «the glorious freedom of the children of God» (Acts 4:32; Rom 8:21). Just as exorcism is a demonstration of the power of Jesus name (Acts 19:13), the magicians burning their books is sign of the transforming power of God’s word in fulfilment of the mission to these same «Gentiles» that Jesus gave St Paul on the road to Damascus: «to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in me» (Acts 26:18). Thirdly, the wider context here is one of deliverance. Luke is telling an amazing history of how Christianity began in Ephesus which was the economic and cultural capital of paganism in Asia. Now through the insane love of Paul for Jesus, the most unlikely of cities is being spiritually transformed into a capital for Christ, a little community of faith that will grow into a regional centre of teaching and healing. We see this in the book of Revelation where Ephesus is the first of «the seven churches in Asia», Rv 1:4; 2:1-7, an importance evident also in the letter of St Ignatius of Antioch c.107 A.D. In Paul’s time citizens of Ephesus without distinction are being liberated from demonic oppression by an adhesion to the truth of the Gospel that is being preached at the risk of severe persecution, v. 29. The author’s point is that despite fierce hostility and peer pressure of a pagan environment, some of the people of Ephesus have made a clean break with occult practices and idolatry which in the language of St Paul is «sacrificed to demons» an idea taken directly from the Hebrew Bible (Dt 32:17; Ps 106:37)25. From these we can conclude that the author’s point in Acts 19:18-20 is that where the word of the Lord prevails in a Christian community, the occult arts are extinguished; where God’s commandments are observed,

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

119

idolatry is trampled down; where Paul’s teaching succeeds, magicians are repenting and freely burning their texts26. As with the case of Simon magus (Acts 8:9-24) in these passages we see that the repentance of those who practiced magic arts was uncontroversial and/or encouraged by the apostles (Paul and Peter). Indeed repentance was necessary if magicians would come into full communion with the early Christian community27. The accusations levelled against Christians, however, that they supposedly performed acts of magic (as testified by apocryphal «apostolic» texts, which recount miracles attributed to magical tricks), and the confusion that often ensued, made it necessary to clarify the situation. Thus, in the earliest prescriptive ecclesiastical works, such as the «Instructions» the socalled «Epistle of Barnabas» and, in particular, the Didache, «Apostolic Commands», prohibitions of clear Judaic origin gradually appear. The transition from the apologetic nature of the initial reactions to the Church’s attempt to bring under control all forms of association with supernatural powers becomes obvious in these provisions. In her earlier life, the Church found itself in a syncretistic confusion which became an ongoing problem. Because Christianity arose out of Judaism but did not accept the entire Mosaic law, there remained the need for clear apostolic teaching and consensus. The pagan elements, such as stoicism, persisted in Christian thinking, even into the Church Fathers. In this environment of syncretism it became more difficult to distinguish between a heathen charm and a Christian hymn, pagan and Christian rites, heathen magic and Christian miracle, or holy litanies and demoniac murmuring, the crucifix and pagan amulets28. The background of these everyday difficulties was far from trivial. To distinguish the seemingly indistinguishable was the enormous challenge of the first centuries of Christianity. However its success implies that from a certain time onward, it was no longer difficult to recognize Christ as different from other pretenders to divine qualities. The task was now to single out the supernatural exotiká29 from a mass of ordinary worshipers, their prayers, invocations, rites, and behaviours and to determine which were practiced for the good of mankind in obedience to God’s commands and others that were dangerous. Thus, the early Church wanted to draw a clear line between magic and the emergent religion, between the true and false, right and wrong, high and low. The Church saw that the distinction was straightforwardly theological and moral: magic, indeed the entire gamut of pagan religious practices (of which magic was in fact part) was reclassified as demonic in the pejorative Jewish sense, and thus the work of the devil accomplished through the incorporated beings (originally the fallen angels) who served him30.

120

Chapter 2

According to the early Christian writers, even when magic was not an illusion meant to impress and ensnare, it was always an act of disobedience to God’s commandments. It was thus the work of evil forces, while miracles were the work of a loving God in cooperation with his children. Possession for the ancient Church is a phenomenon that is closely connected with paganism and idolatry31. The preaching and literature of the Church during this time were aimed at people outside the Church, and so the great mass of evidence in the sources are to be found in apologetics or missionary literature. In the literature directed to a Christian audience, exorcism is very seldom mentioned, and usually only in connection with the exhortations or statutes which have reference to baptism and the exorcisms prior to its administration. Exorcism occurs primarily at the border between church and paganism; it is primarily a missionary phenomenon. Significantly, exorcism is a «power encounter», a sign event which demonstrates that the house of the «strong one» has been robbed by the one who is stronger; that Christ has conquered Satan and all his army (Mt 12:29; Heb 2:14; 1 Pt 5:89). It is obvious that Christian exorcism made a deep impression on people in antiquity, both Christians and non- Christians. The fact that the pagan spirits often reveal, through the mouth of their victim, that they are subject to the name of Jesus led Tertullian to remark: «It has not been an unusual thing for these testimonies of your deities to convert men to Christianity»32. The power of Jesus’ name in exorcisms is a proof of his victory over the forces of evil. In the language of the ancient Church, there was no demon who did not bow to the name of Jesus (Phil 2:10). The Christian exorcism was in principle one hundred percent efficient. The great critic of Christianity, Celsus,33 who had levelled a charge of sorcery against Jesus, admits that the Christians seemed to possess power over the demons, and both Origen and Tertullian say that the pagans used to fetch a Christian when they wanted help for a possessed person34. Several of these testimonies, both from Christian and pagan authors, confirm that even the simplest Christians were recognized as exorcists. Besides the efficiency of the Christian exorcism, people in antiquity must also have been struck by the fact that all Christians could do it, and that they did it without the usual complicated pagan incantation techniques but only with a simple command in the name of Jesus35. There is a definite contrast between the Christian exorcism and the formulae of exorcism found in the ancient magical papyri. Here different names of gods and other unintelligible names were invoked ad infinitum. This massive number of supposedly efficacious names was probably the best evidence that this method was not particularly efficacious. Old Testament names of God and the name of Jesus were also included in these

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

121

syncretistic magical formulae, maybe an indirect testimony about the fame of Jewish and Christian exorcism. It also looks as if the practice of the Church in its exorcisms was not completely free from magical influences: one finds them in the adjuration formulae that eventually became common. If we look at healing and exorcism as confirming signs which accompany the preaching of the church, it may actually look as if one in the ancient church would place more emphasis on exorcism than on miraculous healings. The reason for this is not difficult to grasp: the Christians were not alone in doing and experiencing miracles; also the «spirits of demons» might perform «miracles» (cf. Rv 16:14). But in an exorcism the demon is directly confronted and revealed in the name of Christ. The exorcism functions time and time again as «a miracle of confrontation», where the demons speak through their victims and acknowledge Jesus in his sublime identity and that as such he is their superior. This is the reason for the great significance ascribed to exorcism in the missionary literature of the ancient Church, because in the eyes of the non-Christian world it seemed to confirm the tenants of the Christian faith36.

2. The Early Byzantine period: 33-843 A.D. By the fourth century, Christianity had evolved as a syncretic religion – not simply a religious faith of Jewish antecedents. It had absorbed many strands of Hellenic philosophy and Hellenistic religious experiences. Many of the rituals, religious festivals, popular piety, superstitions and other aspects of Greek and Roman paganism which were observed in the pagan Græco-Roman œcumene, survived in the religious life of the Byzantine Empire37. Their influence on Byzantine religiosity can be discerned primarily in three areas of religious practices and custom: salvation rituals and superstition, popular festivals and demonology. In the ecclesiastical world, which was governed by successive bishops who held to the traditions of the apostles and Church Fathers, any recourse to magical means and methods was forbidden and considered absolutely incompatible with Christian life. In the eyes of the Church, in fact, every supernatural event which ostensibly was provoked by human action could only be ascribed to the assistance of evil spirits or demons. All Church Fathers, both East and West, were involved in fighting magic to a greater or lesser degree38. St. John Chrysostom gives a vivid description of the relationship of magicians and diviners with the devil: «For when the demon falls upon their soul, he incapacitates their mind and darkens their thought and thus they utter everything without realizing what they are saying, like a soulless flute uttering sounds»39. It is as if the magicians and diviners through their

122

Chapter 2

identification with the devil, shed their personality and become his mindless instruments. Starting with the magician Simon of the Acts of the Apostles – an episode which was greatly elaborated in the apocryphal Acts of the first centuries – the «hagiographical texts generally bring out magic as a typically Jewish activity. Among the various activities attributed to the devil is the corruption of the true faith. Thus he is thought to be responsible for the emergence of the great heresies»40. The iconoclasm is a characteristic example of this, which in the eighth and ninth centuries shook not only the Byzantine Church, but also the entire empire. «The Byzantines did not fail to attribute to the devil the entire upheaval [iconoclasm] which lasted more than a hundred years, and in successive stages fashioned a myth about the origin of the prohibition and destruction of icons»41. Thus from a certain period onwards the devil was considered the personification of all evil and consequently he was at the source of every criminal act, even from a legal standpoint. While such a position might seem bizarre by today’s standards, such was the conviction of Emperor Justinian (emperor from 527-565 A. D.) as noted in Chapter 1 of his Novella 77. In a later period Manuel I Komnenos as well (emperor from 1143-1180) portrays the devil in vivid terms as the source of all crime in his legislative act of Neara, 1166 A. D.42.

2.1 From Roman secular law to Byzantine canon law There is no doubt that the Church felt obliged to meet its pastoral needs as regards to the rising phenomenon of magic and divination and it did this by delineating its own place in an authoritative manner through the enforcement of canons 43 which basically alienated practitioners of the occult from the sacramental life of the Christian community. As we shall see in greater depth, the first local synods of the fourth century show an acute awareness of the danger of magic in the life of the early Christians, expressing concern at people’s growing search for other, new sources of knowledge. In these synods the bishops of the Church attempted to bring under control the personal search for association with supernatural powers and all forms of knowledge beyond accepted orthodoxy. The synods deliberated the topic of magic extensively with the outcome that a number of canons were written which condemned magicians and diviners. At the Synod of Ankyra, the first in the Eastern section of the empire (c. 358 A.D.), it was decided to punish with five-year excommunication «those involved in divination and persisting in pagan habits, or introducing certain persons into their homes in order to supply them with spells (pharmakeiai) and purifications»44.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

123

A few years later the Synod of Laodicea (c. 380 A.D.) prescribed a stricter penalty for the «heretics or clergy proven to be magicians, charmers, mathematicians, astrologers or makers of the so-called amulets, for these are prisons of their souls. Complete excommunication is prescribed in these cases»45. The Church Fathers of the fourth century also tried to suppress magic outside the synods. The contribution of St. Basil was of particular importance, because he repeatedly dealt with this issue from various angles in his canonical epistles, wherein he ranks magic among the most serious of canonical offences. The anonymous codifying works of the first centuries along with the canons of the synods and that of St. Basil equate the magical arts with idolatry, without however making an explicit reference to the magicians’ relationship with evil spirits in general. The association is only indirect but its application is universal: whatever is outside the Church’s realm – and this applies to pagans – falls under the devil’s jurisdiction. 2.1.1 St. Gregory of Nyssa For the first time in the field of canon law, the devil was directly linked with magic as we see in Canon 3 written by Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335 – c. 395 A.D.) a bishop from Cappadocia. Here it is clearly stated that magicians operate through the agency of demons after forming an alliance with them. In the Canon he «canonizes» (i.e. gives a precise penalty for) sorcery and divination: «Anyone who goes to sorcerers and soothsayers, or to those who promise to purify them with the help and through the operation of demons from diseases or misfortunes or predicaments such as the evil eye, or any other evils they happen to be suffering, ought to be asked. If they insist that they believe in Christ, but that on account of some necessity arising from illness or from some great injury or loss they became faint-hearted and did this, thinking that they would thereby be relieved from these afflictions by means of divination or other magical means, they shall be canonized like those who denied Christ as a result of tortures, or, more expressly speaking, nine years. But if, on the other hand, they appear to have disregarded the belief in Christ and to have scorned God’s help as coming from the God adored by Christians, and to have resorted to the demons’ help, they are to be canonized like those who have wilfully and voluntarily denied Christ»46.

Both sorcery and divination, even for the sake of healing, are considered serious sins of the cognitive faculty tantamount to apostasy.

124

Chapter 2

The Byzantine state and canon law penalized magic, formally and persistently: this was in effect a continuation of the anti-magical legislation of the Roman Empire after Constantine. However the fact that the Byzantines felt the need to reinforce anti-magical legislation suggests a certain tenacity of occult practices during this period47. 2.1.2 St. Basil the Great St. Basil (c. 329 - 379 A.D.), bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia and brother of St. Gregory of Nyssa, wrote influential ecclesial canons against the practice of the occult arts. In Canon 65 he writes: «As for anyone practising incantation or sorcery, he shall be allotted the time of a murderer, it being proportioned to him in such a manner as though he had convicted himself of each sin for a year»48. Thus this present canon punishes incantation and sorcery in a manner similar to involuntary manslaughter49. Similarly, in Canon 72 St. Basil asserts: «Anyone who places himself in the hands of fortune-tellers or any other such persons professing, to foresee future events or to discover the whereabouts of lost property, persons in hiding, etc., shall be sentenced to the same penalty as is prescribed for murderers and shall do the same length of time and the same penances»50. In this canon as well St. Basil canonizes those who surrender themselves to clairvoyants and fortune-tellers as if they had committed voluntary manslaughter í or, more expressly, twenty years of penance and separation from the sacramental life of the Church. In Canon 83 St. Basil continues thus: «Those resorting to divination and continuing the customs of the heathen nations, or admitting certain persons into their homes with the view to discover sorcerers and purification, let them fall under the Canon of six years, one year weeping, and one year listening, and for three years co-standing among the faithful, then they shall he accepted»51. This present Canon borrowed certain elements verbatim from Canon 24 of Ancyra52; but whereas Ancyra had apportioned the five years economically and in a different manner, Canon 83 punishes consulters of divination six years, one year for them to weep, one to listen, etc. It is interesting to note that Basil canonizes diviners and sorcerers as murderers in his 7th Canon, but here he canonizes them lightly, on the basis of the penalty set by the council Fathers preceding him in time. Though St. Basil came from central Asia Minor, he is recognized in the West as one of the most distinguished Doctors of the Church; and his influence on ideas about the danger of occult arts was felt in both Byzantium and Rome for centuries to come.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

125

2.1.3 Canons of the Church The sixty-first canon of the Synod in Trullo (692 A.D.) stated that: «Those who consult diviners, or so-called hecantontarchs or other such fortune tellers in the hope of learning from them whatever may be revealed to them, in accordance with what the Fathers had formerly decided in regard to them, let them incur the canon of six years to abstain from the Eucharist for six years. As for those who are called cloud-chasers, wailers, providers of phylacteries, and seers, if they persist in their practices and refuse to change their occupation and their ruinous habits and Hellenic customs, we decree that they be thrown out of the Church altogether»53. Here the canon specifically condemns any of those epitedeumata (pursuits, customs) which the «Hellenes» used to observe. By the end of the seventh century, the term «Hellenic» had undergone a semantic change and meant «pagan». A «Hellenic» pagan tradition may or may not have been of Greek origin. But since the dominant culture of the empire was GræcoRoman, there is every reason to believe that most of the habits the canon condemned were of ancient Hellenic, Hellenistic or Hellenized Near Eastern origin. The canon mentions occult practices that need some explanation. Wailers were persons identified as instruments of the demons, who foretold the future by reading the palms of the hands, looking into a bowl of water, offering sacrifices and using other arts and signs which the canon calls Hellenic customs. The hecantontarchs, who had practised soothsaying the longest, enjoyed more respect and sympathy from society. Phylacteries were accessories that included bear hairs, dyed cords, the skin of snakes and other items inscribed with invocations to demons. They were given to people to ward off diseases and, especially, the baskania, or the evil eye. Cloud-chasers were people who observed the shape of clouds, especially at sunset, to foretell the future. They too were considered possessed by demons. The seers are of special interest because they were syncretists, who combined beliefs and practices of Greek antiquity with readings from the Christian Bible; they invoked the demons as well as the name of the Holy Trinity, the Theotokos and the saints. The seers were present in Byzantine society in St. John Chrysostom’s time and well through the eighth century. Chrysostom condemned such Christians who were, as he claimed, mostly elderly women who employed the name of Christ in vain, and pursued the practices of the Hellenes. Such practices and the persons who engaged in them were condemned by several Church canons and churchmen in the fourth century54.

126

Chapter 2

These early canons were influential in the later periods of Byzantine history. Although canons were issued to correct what was being practiced, these condemnations reflected the contemporary social and religious conditions. However the efficacy of such measures is open to question. The canons were issued not to define Christian doctrine on these issues, so much as to deal with pastoral problems and to prevent the spread of heresy and syncretism. Despite the anathemas and condemnations, many of these elements of religiosity and superstition persisted, surviving among laymen and clergymen alike throughout the Byzantine and post-Byzantine eras. That is why as late as the 18th century one still sees ecclesial censure of a plethora of popular occult practices, such as the condemnation of Nikodemos the Hagiorite against «those old hags who divine with barley or with broad beans, or by dumping coal, or by yawning, or who are snatched up in the air by demons and go from region to region, like that wizard named Heliodorus, and like those named Cynops in Patmus and Simon. Likewise those shepherds who put some little bone in the feet of sheep, or of goats, in order to make them grow fast and augment their flock. Likewise those who pass their children through rigols. And, speaking generally, all sorcerers and witches, and all men and women who go to sorcerers and witches, if they all repent, are to receive the penance prescribed by the present Canon; if, on the other hand, they persist in this diabolic delusion, they are to be driven away from the Church of the Christians altogether as being a portion of Satan, and not of Christ»55. Those who practiced magic and used amulets to cure bodily diseases or to prevent damage to crops were condemned by Patriarch Photios as well as by canon law and the legislation of Emperor Leo VI. The canonists Theodore Balsamon and John Zonaras confirm the persistence of many of these pagan religious customs persisted into later centuries56. While some of these superstitions are universal phenomena, the canons and their commentaries indicate that many of them were of specific Hellenic origin and not of Slavic origin, as some modern Byzantine scholars have proposed. The problem is that the Church Fathers of the Synod in Trullo knew of no Slavic paganism among their flock, and there are no relics of Slavic religiosity in Byzantine provinces that can be traced back to the seventh century. Slavic religiosity was substantially different from that of the Greeks, so while specific ancient Greek gods and cults were mentioned, there is no evidence of such Slavic gods as Perun, Svarog, Stribog, etc in Byzantine provinces in the seventh or eighth century57. In their commentaries on the sixty-fifth canon of the Synod in Trullo (692 A.D.), the famous twelfth-century canonists Zonaras and Balsamon wrote that some Christians, not only of the seventh century but up into their

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

127

own times were involved in occult practices and superstitions. For example, their canon ordains: «We command that henceforth the bonfires lit by some persons on the occasion of the new moon in front of their own workshops or houses and over which some persons leap in accordance with an ancient custom, shall be abolished and done away with. Whoever, therefore, does any such thing, if he be a clergyman, let him be deposed from office, but if he be a layman, let him be excommunicated»58.

Their concern with this ‘ancient custom’ of Hellenic-pagan origin, is that this was a form of augury used to ward off bad luck and to foresee the future. The people believed that their bad luck would be burnt up, allowing good fortune to replace it. ǿn addition to the foregoing practices, Zonaras writes that some of his Christian contemporaries used to resort to other forms of augury, based on the study of the bones and claws of birds, especially of ravens and cranes. Balsamon provides even more concrete information about a variety of divinations that were practiced in the twelfth century, including the use of bonfires, omens, astrology and oracles. «The bonfires have been identified with the ancient Greek Kledona, a divinatory custom. On June 23, the evening before the birthday of St. John the Forerunner, men and women would assemble in certain houses or streets. Following a banquet and a kind of Bacchic festival, they gathered around a copper bucket filled with sea water where the people had thrown various items such as rings, necklaces, pins and other kinds of jewellery. A first-born girl dressed like a bride was asked to pick out from the bucket an item for each person. The nature and the quality of the item revealed good or bad luck»59. Balsamon writes that the eleventh-century patriarch Michael ǿ Keroularios had tried to eliminate all these divinations from Constantinople with some success. But the customs survived in the provinces and have outlived various condemnations to the present day60. As in centuries past, churches both in the cities and in the provinces held annual feasts and traditional seasonal observances, which until today retain their particularly ancient character. The sixty-second canon of the Synod in Trullo condemned «the socalled festivals of the Calends, the so-called Vota, the Brumalia, the public festival celebrated on the first day of March...ritualistic ceremonies performed by men or women in the name of what are falsely called gods among the Hellenes»61. It condemned men and women who put on comic, satyric or tragic works and those who invoked the name of Dionysus while squeezing grapes in the wine presses.

128

Chapter 2

The first day of every month was called by the Romans kalendæ and it was celebrated in the hope that the month would be a merry one. But by the 7th the Calends were held on the first day of January. Both the Vota and Brumalia were Greek festivals celebrated primarily by shepherds and peasants in honour of Pan, the patron of sheep and other animals, and in honour of Dionysus, the Roman Brumalius, the giver and patron of wine. ǿn his honour men and women put on masks and danced ecstatically, a custom that is still observed even today during cheese-eating week. Both laymen and clergymen participated in these Hellenic festivals. Zonaras and Balsamon write that all these Greek rites continued into the 12th century and «were observed by many in their own times, especially by the peasants, who did not know the significance of what they were doing»62. The sixty-ninth canon of the Council of Carthage (c. 419 A.D.) confirms that in the first half of the 5th century pagan banquets and dances were held in many regions of the empire in honour of Dionysus, Poseidon and other Hellenic deities, many of which were observed on the memorial days and feasts of Christian martyrs63. Thus Christians and pagans mingled their traditions. But when the report went out that some pagan dancers made indecent and lascivious assaults on «decent women», causing them to avoid attending church services, the Council of Carthage appealed to Emperors Theodosios II (408-450 A.D.) and Honorius (395-423 A.D.) to abolish those pagan customs64. Balsamon writes later in the 12th century that festivities, dances, games and other amusements were held on the memorial days of saints, not only in various regions of the country but also in cities. He states that they originated in Hellenic antiquity65. As is well known, in the Byzantine world, like its predecessors, the Hellenistic and the Roman worlds, the people commonly thought the world to be full of demons and evil spirits. The 11th century intellectual Michael Psellos wrote extensively on Byzantine demonology, and his essays, «The Operations of the Demons» and «The Opinions of the Greeks Concerning Demons» reflect the opinions of the period. A modern scholar, Perikles Petros Joannou, in his search for Psellos’ sources of demonology, sifted through more than two hundred lives of saints of the fifth to the eleventh centuries66. He concludes that Psellos did not seek his information on demonology in the distant Orient or in the writings of Proklos and other Neoplatonists but in the beliefs and practices of Byzantine society. Psellos’ demonology seems to be impregnated with elements contained in contemporary popular beliefs. The affinity between Christian and ancient Greek demonology is striking. In both systems demons were identified with the pagan gods; they lived in temples and heathen areas; they possessed human beings and could

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

129

control animals. However when they were exorcised by the Church, they were thought to flee to hide in deserted places, in mountains, rivers and caves. Many believed in a kind of syncretism between Jewish and Hellenic traditions, namely, that the pagan gods of Greek antiquity were incarnations of the demons who, after having caused the fall of Adam, seduced the human race into idolatry. The sixtieth canon of the Synod of Trullo takes issue with certain persons who pretended to be possessed by demons, mocking and imitating their gesticulations in order to deceive the innocent and naive for profit67. The Church condemned such people in the seventh century, and patriarchs and bishops could even have them chained and imprisoned. Zonaras and Balsamon claimed that similar behaviour existed in their own time. Balsamon writes that he saw many who claimed to be possessed by demons and acted, for example, like a prophetesses of the Hellenes, visiting one city after the other with impunity. ǿn fact, some people received them as if they were saints or holy men. An example of how much ancient demonology and even popular Hellenic belief influenced the beliefs and rituals of the Church can be seen in the second prayer used for the reception of catechumens in the Christian sacrament of baptism: «The Lord condemns you... ǿn fear, get out and depart from this creature, and return not again, neither hide yourself in him or her, neither seek to meet him or her, nor to influence him but depart hence to your own Tartarus until the determined day of judgement». This exorcistic prayer is strikingly parallel to 2 Pt 2:4: «For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but thrust them down into Tartarus [IJĮȡIJĮȡȫıĮȢ] and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment» (emphasis mine). Tartarus is of course a famous place of punishment from Greek mythology, it is the deepest abyss of Hades. But the Jewish translators of the Septuagint had already translated the Hebrew Sheol as Hades ઌįȘȢ which is also found even in the Gospels68. One can observe in 2 Peter and this exorcistic prayer both Hellenic and Jewish apocalyptic elements. In the same Church service the priest breathes upon the catechumen, saying: «Expel from him every evil and impure spirit which hides and makes its nest in his heart»69. The devil is called the spirit of error, of guile, of idolatry and of every concupiscence. Following several prayers, the catechumen or the sponsor is called upon to renounce Satan and all «his angels» and his works70. So after the 4th century, when the canonists began prescribing punishments for involvement in the occult arts, the effort to curb the popularity of magic and superstition became more and more a «domesticated» issue of civil

130

Chapter 2

concern71. In the early Byzantine period, secular power provoked excitement and chaos in trying to bring popular belief in line with the official orthodoxy of the empire. The Church officials were greatly concerned with defining orthodoxy itself and distinguishing it from paganism. But from the 4th to the fourteenth century, while occult practices survived, the attitude of Church leaders and secular powers had changed and gradually gave way to a professional handling which ended in a matter of routine. Popular superstitions and magic were no longer considered a threat to the state nor to the integrity of the faith, though the Church continued to criticize such practices. Canon law and its experts had worked to transform what was seen as a cause for instability and heresy into the normal execution of religious discipline. 2.1.4 The Fathers of the Church and popular saints The historical era of early Byzantium, which extended from the proclamation of Christianity as the official religion of the empire by Constantine in 313 A.D. to the death of Justinian in 565 A.D., was a period of expansion and consolidation of the eastern Roman empire72. During this period, Christianity became the universally accepted ideology. Byzantine Christianity, by viewing all things in the light of a Creator who loves his creatures, explained adequately the mystery of creation and the working of the world; it provided ideals for people’s behaviour and upheld human dignity, while proposing an image of heavenly rule which served as a model for the rule of the empire. The importance of religion in Byzantium, which was later labelled Byzantine theocracy, was exemplified by the involvement of emperors and secular powers in ecclesial affairs such as the convoking of ecclesial councils where Christian dogmas were interpreted and defined. Throughout this period there was a continuous struggle of emperors and people to remain united in the midst of religious issues which provoked great controversy, division, and civil strife (e.g. the Arian heresy that denied the divinity of Christ). Thanks to the popularity of the teaching of the Church Fathers in early Byzantium, Christian beliefs were being systematized to the point in which they had obtained a coherent worldview, a clear explanation of man’s place in the kosmos. To the Byzantine mind, even at the level of popular culture, the world was a battlefield between Good and Evil, that is, God and Satan, and between their agents, angels and demons respectively. In this spiritual combat, Man was directly implicated, and not only in his earthly life but in his eternal destiny. The brute fact that these cosmic powers existed was nothing new. The idea of an Eternal Creator, the personification of good and evil, the gods, the demons, angels, spirits, etc. were all concepts

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

131

that had long existed in the cultures and religious beliefs of the Near East, among the Jews, Greeks, Babylonians, and Egyptians. However, these religious beliefs and different schools of philosophy vied against each other; they lacked integration into a single coherent system accepted by both the masses and philosophers alike. This integration was achieved by the Church Fathers in the Christian era. In Byzantium, demonic power was thought to be present in every aspect of life73. Demons caused diseases and misfortunes to individuals, to communities, and to the state, either by direct intervention or by influencing people’s decisions. The emperors themselves had declared that the devil was the source of all criminal acts (see section 2.0 above). However, man was not left alone in the battlefield between Good and Evil. Popular saints who lived among the people, fought demons through the power of God and directed the faithful to stay on God’s path. Furthermore, the Fathers of the Church, with their words, recorded in sermons and letters, helped the faithful to understand Christ’s teaching and to use it as a guide for everyday life. In this historical and cultural milieu demonic interference can be conceptualized in two distinct ways, which S. Kotsopoulos identified as «intrusion» and «internalisation»74. The intruding form of the demonic forces reflects a popular conscious of demons that was presented, for example, in the hagiographies of popular saints. The internalization form of the demonic forces was presented and elaborated upon by the Fathers of the Church in their interpretation of Scripture. Each of the two forms of demonic interference probably appealed to different social groups. The idea of demons physically intruding in human life was simple and coherent and likely appealed more to peasants living in the interior of the empire. The educational level of the peasants was probably low, most of them being illiterate. In this social context, popular saints, as true athletes of God, fought the «great red Dragon» (Rv 12:3), Satan, and expelled demons from their victims in the name of Jesus Christ. At the same time, through their miracles, they provided a powerful message about the godly origin and the mission of the new religion. These saints were never idle, even if they were sitting at the top of a column as the famous stylites did; they were always interacting with crowds of beleaguered people who sought their help. In addition to expelling demons, the saints also provided spiritual guidance and practical advice, performing roles somewhat similar to the social workers and ombudsmen of our times. On the other hand the Fathers of the Church elaborated on the Christian dogmas and dealt with the more psychological or internalised form of the devil. They addressed urban audiences and the educated. In their sermons and letters, among other important aspects of the new faith, the Fathers dealt

132

Chapter 2

with the sinister interference of the devil in the everyday life of people. They addressed temptation and other deceptive interventions by the devil, such as stirring emotions, inflaming passions, and blurring judgement or putting thoughts in the minds of people, particularly those trying to perfect themselves (e.g. monks). The devil’s objective was always intended to make them transgress the rules of God. The faithful were to be aware of the devil’s deceptions and to be prepared to defend themselves. 2.1.5 The devil’s physical intrusion against his psychological internalisation. As stated above, to the Byzantine mind the devil’s interference with man could be described as having two distinct forms which we may identify generally as «physical intrusion» and «psychological internalisation». Psychological internalisation was better understood by the educated than the common people and was elaborated upon by the Fathers of the Church. Intrusion, however, remained the most striking and characteristic demonic interference with man, it was legendary not only in the Gospels but the historical conscious of ordinary people. These two forms of demonic interference are compatible with one another and could coexist in a coherent worldview in which all evil was consolidaded under the power of the devil, that is, his nefarious influence is the source of all mental illness, social corruption and ethical failure. Physical intrusion was seen as an invasion of the body by demons or impure spirits that took possession of the person and could cause madness and other illnesses75. The physical intrusion by the devil or his demons is a hallmark of the Synoptic Gospels (see chapter I, 3.2). For example, the characteristics of intrusion are spelled out in the incident of the Gadarene demoniac. According to the accounts of Matthew and Luke, the demons first challenge Jesus, but they capitulate to him knowing they cannot resist his authority. Jesus casts them out with a simple order thus restoring health to the victim who clearly had been driven insane by demonic possession (cf. Lk 8:27.29). This understanding of demonic interference and its cure prevailed, and it became the norm for possession and exorcism till modern times, as we see this basic model repeated in the Byzantine hagiographies. The stories of people who had been invaded and possessed by demons which were then confronted and expelled by saints, were told many times in hagiographies of early Byzantium such as Daniel Stylite, Theodore of Sykeon, St. Simeon Stylite the Younger, and others. Here the saints are combating the devil in his intrusion form.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

133

Psychological internalisation is a form of demonic interference that was seen as more subtle, less glamorous, but all the more sinister. Although this demonic internalisation was not thought to cause mental illness it affected people unconsciously, that is, without their being aware of where these thoughts are coming from. Demonic forces secretly perverted the minds of people by injecting thoughts, inflaming passions and interfering with judgements, and thus leading to erroneous actions, contrary to the commands of God. A characteristic model of psychological internalisation of the devil is provided in the Synoptic Gospelswhen Jesus rebukes his foremost apostle Peter calling him «Satan», not because Peter’s behavior was bad but because his way of thinking was blocking God’s plan (Mt 16:21-24). Here Peter says Jesus should never have to suffer rejection and be killed. And Jesus rebukes him: «Get behind me, Satan! ...for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man» (Mt 16:23)76. What was Peter’s error? In this case Peter is motivated by the universal fear of death, a fear that the devil has exploited to enslave mankind (Heb 2:14-15). Here perhaps, Christ reveals a subtle demonic influence has infiltrated human thinking making it satanic in so far as it is obstructing God’s purposes for human good. According to Christianity, through the death of Jesus God will bring the gift of eternal life to all who believe. Another example is Judas betrayal of Jesus where Luke writes, «Satan entered into Judas… He went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers how he might betray him to them» (Lk 22:3-4). Here Satan works not to cause illness in Judas’ body but he poisons his mind, driving his human reason toward perversion, against what his conscience knew was right. The devil leads Judas into insanity; not only the insanity of Judas selling his master for thirty pieces of silver, and betraying him with a kiss, but the insanity of despair and suicide. As Matthew writes «after he saw Jesus condemned» Judas repented of his betrayal, «changing his mind»; he even confessed «I have sinned» (Mt 27:3-4). Judas knew what he did was wrong, but he lost hope in God’s boundless mercy. In this whole psychological process we note that Judas is unable to flee from the poison Satan had planted in his mind which drove him along a downward spiral: initial seduction, self-deception, betrayal, guilt, dispair, suicide. Thus Jesus and the Gospel writers depict the devil working in human thoughts and desires beyond our full knowledge or awareness77. All these instances are comparable to the serpent’s role in the seduction of Eve in Eden where she was led by her desires to act in a way that is objectively against her best interest – which leads to suffering and death (Gn 3:1-6). Furthermore we have the incident, as told by Matthew, Luke, and Mark, of

134

Chapter 2

Jesus’ temptation in the desert, in which the devil enticed him to transgress the rules of God (Mt 4:1-11). This approaches the model of psychological internalization, but with one important difference. It seems that the temptation in this incident is not only psychological (i.e. unseen) but originates from a possibly visible form of the demon, one who tells Jesus «fall down and worship me» (Mt 4:9). And to this Jesus replies verbally, as if Satan were standing in his very presence: «Begone Satan» reminding him that God alone is worthy of worship. In this temptation sequence (Mt 4:1-11) we have a case that can give us a model of the internalised devil manifesting himself through the person’s internal dialogue, in which we can trace the following characteristics. First, a person is an ethical being who is imperfect. Thus humans are considered vulnerable and prone to personality weaknesses, often identified as passions. Jesus has been fasting forty days and is hungry, the devil tempts him to change stones into bread (Mt 4:3). Second, the devil may inflame passions, excite perverse desires, and at the same time weaken the person’s judgement, capitalizing on misunderstanding, and leading him or her to a course of action contrary to the rules of God. Though God’s rules are known, the devil uses all his skill to convince individuals to «bend the rules a little» and use their power to commit a «small» injustice for some perceived gain. Third, God’s basic rules are known, but Christian ethics has much to be elaborated upon. This is a task performed by the Fathers of the Church who explain the rules in concrete examples and make people aware of the devil’s deceptive tactics, advising them how to defend themselves through examination of conscience, prayer, and self-knowledge. Exposing the devil’s schemes makes people aware of how he works subtly in their thoughts, so that once the devil is rejected and the faith adhered to, the faithful may be divinized by grace in the Holy Spirit. This is the essence of baptismal promises. Thus when Christ’s temptation ordeal is over he is aided by God’s supernatural power, «the devil left him, and behold, angels came and were ministering to him» v. 11. Fourth, the informed person is expected to use his or her judgement and decide what to do, therefore becoming responsible for his or her own actions. A person may be vulnerable to several passions, which the devil may target and exploit, but these derive from a fundamental «excessive love of self» which can easily lead to disaster. Other faults include gluttony, love of money and vanity. A special case is fornication. In this case, it was explained that the natural attraction between the sexes for the purpose of reproduction is abused to selfish ends. The one responsible for this passion was the «demon of fornication».

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

135

2.1.6 From desert combat to philosophy in the Church Fathers Taking inspiration, perhaps, from Jesus’ tempation in the desert, the psychological internalization of the devil was concieved of in terms of an ongoing «spiritual warfare» or the «battle of the thoughts» according to the desert Fathers who were holy monks and hermits from the fourth century onward that formed a subdivision of the Church Fathers. We see in the lives of these desert saints a vivid manifestation of demonic forces. Their psychological battles and temptations are described in terms of nothing less than a cosmic war between Good and Evil, in cooperation with the angels these saints fought the demons who tempted them to give up their prayer. The goal was that through humility and obedience to the commandments, God would do for them what St. Paul promised the Romans: «the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet» (Rom 16:20). This is because the desert saints were not only seeking to purify themselves but to intercede for all humanity by uniting with God’s Son through the cross, and thus truly conquer the devil and destroy his authority on earth. Therefore the desert Fathers teach one who has totally abandoned his life to God, that he must eliminate all thoughts, (logismoi, ȜȠȖȚıμȩȚ) both good and bad. This is because these saints humbly admit that they do not know which thoughts were from the devil and which were from God. All thoughts must go so as to live in the fulness of reality. As we will see in the example of St Antony, the proud devil is crushed through the humility of such souls who unite their suffering to God. The souls of these saints are purified and become «rivers» of blessings and teaching poured out to all humanity for the salvation of many souls (Jn 7:38; Col 1:24; 1 Pt 1:9). Thus by uninhibited contemplation of God in the desert and by their «stand» in refusing to do any evil these saints came to see their vital role in a great cosmic war between the forces of Good and Evil as it was fiercely being fought between angels and demons for the salvation of souls78. The devil’s interference with a person trying to perfect himself might at times change from subtle temptation to more dramatic manifestations such as those illustrated in the Life of St Antony, a classic work written by St Athanasius of Egypt. Athanasius is himself a spiritual giant of the Council of Nicaea (325); as a tenacious defender of Christ’s divinity in an epoch of widespread Arian heresy even among a majority of bishops, he won the title «the Father of Orthodoxy». The fact that St Athanasius would take such interest in St Antony tells us just how influential the desert Fathers had become in mainstream Christianity in the «golden age» of the Church Fathers. St. Antony is a major inspiration of the entire movement of the desert Fathers, he was a legendary hermit who lived to the ripe age of 105

136

Chapter 2

and became Patriarch of Alexandria. His biography gives us some of the most engaging of all Christian accounts of demons in what is here dubbed their «psychological internalization» form79; the vividness with which it portrays demons besetting the hermit makes it easy to understand why it had such an enormous impact on iconographers. The memory of St. Antony and the admiration he inspired were the prime factors in the ready acceptance of the idea of the demons as a factor useful to monastic progress. According to the Life of Antony he was moved by hearing the Gospel message and decided to give his riches to the poor and follow Jesus (Mt 19:21). But he was beset by the devil and his attendant demons from the moment he renounced his property and family, and went out alone into the desert. The demons in the Life of Antony are still creatures of the air, like the Greek daimones: they are all wicked spectres, with a touch of hell-fire about them. They bring Antony to remember all he had lost, and incite him to lustful thoughts. But Antony is so determined to continue in prayer night and day, that the demons are permitted to beat him and try to frighten him with terrifying sounds and horrifying images80. The saint is undaunted. Antony’s Letters also provide us with a clear example of how a monk would have received previous traditions about demons and adapted them as they were found not only in such theologians as Clement and Origen, but also in Gnostic and Valentinian literature81. In his demonology the monk is understood as a single, unified personality (monos) in opposition to the multiple, divisive demons. Like Origen, Antony writes that all rational beings originated in a lost unity, from which they fell because they engaged in evil conduct, being seduced by the ancient serpent. Since the destiny of the devil and his demons is everlasting destruction in the hell to come, they are enraged with God and plot against God’s most dear creatures, his human beings. The demons want all mankind to rebel from God and be lost with them. Their means of attack are diverse, and thus to recognize their secret ambushes monks need a contrite heart and a spirit of discernment. In particular, the monk must discriminate between three kinds of physical movements: those natural to the body, those caused by the monk’s own negligence regarding food and drink, and those caused by demons. The soul that is not docile to the Spirit of God or the mind that disobeys God’s teaching becomes disordered, allowing the demons to stir up movements within the body, and this miserable person becomes enslaved to the evil spirits working in its members. Still, even this pitiful condition can bring the monk to weariness, conversion, and healing if in his despair he cries out for God’s help. Once humbled again and again the monk will be totally purified and united to God. The demons themselves are invisible, but a monk’s capitulation to their suggestions renders them visible in the monk’s person.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

137

Echoing a discussion of Origen in his First Principles, Antony speaks of the diversity of rational creatures in terms of their names – archangel, principality, demon, human being, and so on – which God assigned to them based on the quality of their conduct. Inspired in part by the spiritual combat of monks such as St. Anthony, the Fathers of the Church dealt also with the internalised devil extensively, but not systematically. St. John Chrysostom (344-407 A.D.) and St. Basil the Great (329-379 A.D.), both considered pillars of the early church, St. John Cassian (360-435 A.D.) and St. Diadochos of Photiki (400-486 A.D.) among others, all contributed to the development and understanding of this theme. The thoughts and comments of St. John Chrysostom, who was a prolific writer, are scattered in homilies, letters and other texts dealing with this subject. In one of his homilies he elaborates on the incident of Jesus being taken to the desert and tempted by the devil. Speaking of temptations he explains that: «The following [passions] are responsible for numerous failures: caring for the stomach, acting out of vanity, driven by the desire to amass money...What makes us servants of the devil is seeking for more and being insatiably greedy...The enemy is irreconcilable and wages undeclared war against us...We should turn away from the devil, not only in our minds but also in our acts; and we should not do what he tells us to do, but do what God directs us to do»82. St. John encourages the faithful to resist the devil by conquering themselves, in obedience to God’s will, and to become truly master of their passions, responsible for all their actions. In another homily, St. John Chrysostom also points to the thoughts the devil puts in unwary minds: «We speak what the devil puts in our minds, at times laughing or talking about frivolous and ridiculous things, or cursing, swearing, or perjuring ourselves»83. Elsewhere he points to the responsibility of the person. In Homily 6 for example he states: «God has given us serious and humble reasoning, self-controlling and repenting thoughts. These are gifts of God which we will very much need. Difficult struggles have been imposed upon us, to fight against invisible forces, against evil spirits and their domain. [But] it is sufficient, with calmness and alertness, to fight back these wild armies and defeat them. However, if we laugh and are frivolous and unconcerned, we will be defeated even before the fight begins»84. The first step in this fight is to cry out to Jesus and not identify with desires that could lead to disaster. Thus St. John views demonic influence as spiritual combat that all the faithful must fight. St. Basil the Great of Caesarea in Asia argues also in a similar manner. In a letter addressed to Amphilochos, bishop of Ikonion, (letter 233) he states: «There are two forces present [in the mind], according to the

138

Chapter 2

understanding we have who believe in God; one is sinister, demonic, which drives us towards defection; the other is godly and of good nature and brings us close to God. If the mind abandons itself to the deceiver, giving up its judgement, it will turn to faulty images... If it opens itself to the godly side and welcomes the graces of the Spirit, it will become capable of comprehending truth which is in keeping with its own good nature»85. Similarly, in a letter addressed to Valerius, bishop of Illyicum, (letter 91), referring to the Arian heresy, Basil expresses concern with the Christians who are weary from the attacks of evil spirits: «Those here, who defend the faith of our fathers, are tired of the attacks by the devil, with the many and varied assaults he crafts and engineers»86. John Cassian (360-435 A.D.) pays special attention to demons in Book 7 of his Conferences (which he wrote for a new monastic foundation he had established at Ménherbes). He says that the soul of the monk is surrounded by countless demonic enemies which are again like the daimones of the Greeks, airy spirits, far lighter in substance and greater in power than human beings, yet similar to them in certain of their attributes. They are perceptive and intelligent, able to detect a monk’s inner weaknesses by means of analysing his external behaviour. Cassian, like Antony, presents us with a wide variety of demonic postures, abilities and possible habitations including persons, practices, and shrines. Interestingly he also offers a kind of demonic hierarchy. He names eight vices all procured by the demons who try to win over the monk as he progresses in the spiritual life and during which he may suffer assaults of an ever deepening intensity. These vices are: gluttony, unchastity, avarice, anger, dejection, listlessness, inflated selfesteem and pride87. Each demon has his own speciality in the matter of temptation; some demons are good at targeting lust, for instance; others target vainglory. They vary their onslaughts on their chosen targets at different times, places, states and dispositions. Cassian describes the aptness of demons; their specialisation may lead them to be attached to particular places on earth and some may be more skilful than others. There are demons which work during night shifts and some which are particularly powerful at the hour of noon (Ps 91:6). There is also the familiar, and partly biblically inspired, assemblage of demons in animal forms such as serpents, asps, lions and scorpions88. Concerning unchastity he said: «Our struggle is against the demon of unchastity and the desire of the flesh, a desire which begins to trouble man from the time of his youth. This harsh struggle has to be fought in both soul and body, and not simply in the soul, as is the case with other faults. We therefore have to fight it on two fronts. Bodily fasting alone is not enough to bring about perfect self-restraint and true purity; it must be accompanied by contrition of heart, intense prayer to God, frequent

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

139

meditation on the Scriptures, toil and manual labour. These are able to check the restless impulses of the soul and to recall it from its shameful fantasies. Humility of soul helps more than everything else»89. For Cassian speaks about the virtue of being citizens of heaven: «a sign that we have acquired the virtue perfectly is that our soul ignores those images which the defiled fantasy produces during sleep. For even if the production of such images is not a sin, nevertheless it is a sign that the soul is ill and has not been free from passion. The way to keep guard over our heart is immediately to expel from the mind every demon-inspired recollection of women»90. Cassian also adds forcefully to the growing evidence that the most evil among the demons may be especially concerned with magic91. He argues, like the Book of Enoch and the Clementine recognitions,92 that the wicked Ham allowed magic to survive the flood. Cassian even tells us how Ham learnt the magic arts from the demonically assisted and magically adept, daughters of Cain. Then, because he knew that Noah would allow no book containing such arts into the ark, he inscribed their secrets upon water resistant material, metal and stone; all which led to his own downfall and that of all humans who followed him in his forbidden knowledge93. Diadochos of Photiki (400-486 A.D.), a bishop in north-western Greece, identified two types of demons affecting man: the ones affecting the soul and the others affecting the body with their lustful enticements. The mind, Diadochos states, produces good and evil thoughts. The latter are conceived as a result of attacks by demons. A man who has fought and controlled almost all passions still has to confront two demons which fight him: The first demon troubles the soul by diverting it from the great love of God into a misplaced zeal, so that it does not want any other soul to be as pleasing to God as itself. The second demon inflames the body with sexual lust. «This happens to the body in the first place because sexual pleasure, with a view to procreation, is something natural and so it easily overcomes us»94. He continues explaining that Satan «uses the body’s humours to befog the intellect with mindless pleasures»95. The concepts of demonic intrusion and internalisation were not mutually exclusive. The Fathers of the Church, such as St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil, who elaborated on the concept of internalised devil, also accepted the notion of demonic intrusion. This becomes particularly evident in their exorcism prayers, which are appeals to God to free those possessed by intruding demons96. In the spiritual world of early Byzantium, the personified devil is depicted as a being who interferes with people as a wicked person would do, taking pleasure in making them sin and getting them into trouble with God. He was crafty and when his deceptive tricks failed, he grew angry and more determined to return with new plans to attack his victims. The

140

Chapter 2

devil could even take on human forms if he wished and if God permitted it. We have seen how the psychological and physical seem to unite in the case of St. Antony. For example, when St. Antony fought back, by turning his mind away from all «foul thoughts» the devil had presented him with, the latter took the form of a woman in order to seduce him and then appeared in the form of a black boy who questioned the saint about how he dared to oppose the «spirit of fornication». The angry diabolos then sent a team of demons who beat the saint, leaving him unconscious97. The ideas of demonic intrusion and internalisation very likely had developed from different historical roots including Greek philosophy which merged into Christian thought as taught by the Fathers, in a cultural melding process that they believed to be the grace and foresight of Almighty God. The Church Fathers believed that God had not only prepared the Jewish people for the Messiah, but he had planted the seeds of important ideas within the cultures of the Near East that once touched by the light of Christ’s Church would come into their full flourishing. Beliefs in demons and demonic interference with man thrived in the Jewish, Hellenic and Egyptian contexts and in other cultures of the Eastern Mediterranean98. Some of the specific characteristics of intruding demons which became prevalent in early Byzantium probably originated in Babylon99 where testimonies remain of cuneiform inscriptions telling of demonic possession and incantations for protection against demons. Malevolent demons were thought to be lurking everywhere in order to attack people and to cause illness, suffering and death. The demons were expelled with magic incantations or were tricked into leaving the bodies of their victims to enter an animal or a statuette offered in lieu of the patient100. Particularly influential upon the Christian beliefs on demonic interference were the Egyptian «demonological fantasies» that were introduced with the hagiography of St Antony101. Passions were considered by the Fathers of the Church as the stepping stone for demonic interference from within; these passions had similarities and differences with the passions as they were conceptualized by the Stoic philosophy prevalent in the Hellenistic world102. According to the Stoics, passions which determined behaviour, at least in part, had to be controlled by those aspiring to be persons of virtue. Virtue was vital because without it one could not achieve Stoic happiness, aIJĮȡĮȟȓĮ, «tranquillity»103. The Stoic passions have been rendered in modern English as affections, emotions, or impulses, and included such states as anxiety, fear, anger, sorrow, pleasure, and excitement104. Many of these passions, with the exception of compassion and holy fear of God, for example, were, according to the Fathers, imperfections in character or maladies of the soul, which the true Christian had to address and eradicate105. The Stoic ideal of apatheia

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

141

or dispassion is accepted to this day as the perfect moral state by the Eastern Orthodox. Even though the word apetheia, dispassion, is not mentioned in the Bible it is thought to explain Jesus’ words «If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me» (Mt 16:24). In other words, in order to follow Jesus in the path of love one must deny the egocentric passions, and thus discover perfect self- forgetfulness and trust in God. Both Christianity and Stoicism declare an inner or spiritual freedom in the face of the external world, the likeness of human beings to a higher Nature or to God, a sense of innate depravityíor «persistent evil»íin humanity, and the futility of worldly possessions and attachments. Both encourage discipline with respect to the passions and inferior emotions such as lust, envy and anger, so that what is best and noblest in human nature can come forth and flourish. But unlike Stoicism personal self-forgetfulness and tranquillity are not the goal of Christianity, but it is the first step and the means to the goal perfect union with God (divinization) achieved purely through God’s grace, not human merit. Stoics deliberated about passions consistently from Chryssipus (3rd century B.C.) down to Galen (2nd century A.D.) before the Church Fathers started borrowing extensively from their scholarship106. Stoicism provided the Fathers with the philosophical language to address the passions or what the New Testament calls «the flesh» and «the old man», which is simply the basic human nature before baptism and regeneration in Christ107. According to St. Paul Stoicism or any philosophy may encourage war on the passions but could not truly set anyone free from the power of «the flesh» (Col 2:23). Without the grace of baptism that comes from God and is actualized through faith in Christ’s death and resurrection, the Stoic may gain perfect «virtue» in his own eyes but his fallen nature could not be perfect. Achieving the Stoic ideal might only make a person prideful, for example, or stubborn, lacking the openness, self-sacrifice and humility of Christ. Being like Christ not living up to a human ideal is the true goal. In the language of the Fathers, the perfect Stoic would still be under the devil’s control if he shared in the devil’s chief vices: self-satisfaction or lack of compassion for the poor and unfortunate. Unlike Christians, the Stoics did not consider mercy a virtue – and there is no real sense that God’s grace, and not human effort, is what saves humanity108. For them the disciplined man can save himself, he does not need a Saviour. Therefore, although Stoic philosophers both provided Christianity with psychological terms to describe the struggle for moral purity in terms of the internalization of the devil and succeed in locating the problem as an intrinsic weakness embedded in human nature, they did not recognize the source of the problem of ethical failure as the Church Fathers did. The stoics

142

Chapter 2

did not conceptualize human weakness as being exploited by non- human spiritual forces of evil who seduce people to act in a way contrary to God’s rules, and then enslave them into destructive cycles of behaviour called vices. The Church Fathers, however, especially moral theologians such as St. Gregory the Great, St. Ambrose, and St. Basil, would much elaborate this theme by skilfully melding concepts learned in their Greek philosophical educations within the structure of orthodox Christian theology as defined by Scripture and the consensus of tradition. The idea that the devil is the real source of the seduction of human weakness in the exploitation of the passions is clearly present in the thinking of the authors of the New Testament109. Demonic interference with man, intrusion in particular as shown in the hagiographies of popular saints, has had an enduring effect on religious and spiritual culture till modern times but to develop this topic further would be beyond the scope of the present study110. 2.1.7 The evil eye The evil eye, the power to inflict illness, damage to property, or even death simply by gazing at or praising someone, is among the most pervasive folk beliefs in the Indo-European and Semitic world111. Even the most highly educated and sophisticated Christians of the late fourth and early fifth centuries found it hard to rid themselves of the idea that envy lends a malign power to men’s eyes112. The difficulty that the Fathers of the Church such as St. Basil, St. Jerome, and St. John Chrysostom had with pulling themselves away from this pagan idea, is some indication of how deep-seated it must have been in the general population. And although they have no reservations about condemning all forms of magic-working, in which category they certainly included the casting of the evil eye,113 they waver on the question of whether it has power to inflict harm or not114. There is no doubt that for the Fathers of the Church magic is the devil’s work and that it is an illusion, but they are not at all certain how the demonic powers help magicians to create what appears to be change. The attitude of the Fathers of the Church to magic reflects in part the hostility of the Roman civil authorities to magic as a socially disruptive force. It also reflects the general feeling of scepticism found in educated pagan circles regarding the possibility of a person’s being able to set aside the laws of nature, and also the feeling that endowing some people with supernatural abilities is something contrary to Christian doctrine115. According to Matthew Dickie, Scripture has a surprisingly small part to play in shaping Christian attitudes toward magic116. He claims that the little

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

143

support the Church Fathers can find in it for their condemnation of magic is apparent in Jerome’s palpable delight in his commentary on Galatians at Paul’s mentioning sorcery [ijĮȡμĮțİíĮ] immediately after idolatry amongst the deeds of the flesh (Gal 5:18). Jerome remarks that we are not to imagine that magical spells and the maleficent arts are not forbidden in the New Testament – they are forbidden amongst the deeds of the flesh. Paul’s letter to the Galatians makes a well-known reference to the evil eye (Gal 3:1), and this is the source of the majority of patristic commentary on the subject. Paul writes, «O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified». Literally he says IJȓȢ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ ਥȕȐıțĮȞİ, who has evil eyed you, or who has cast a spell on you? What Paul precisely means by ਥȕȐıțĮȞİ seems difficult to assess without considering the wider context. The context is that some Jewish Christians were apparently recommending that the Galatian Christians need to add circumcision and Jewish traditions to their faith in Christ. Paul’s main point in the letter is to contradict this teaching by emphasizing the absolute sufficiency of Jesus death on the cross for salvation, and that we receive salvation «not by works of the law» (2:16) but through faith in Christ and baptism (3:24-27). So is it possible that Paul means by ਥȕȐıțĮȞİ (3:1) that these Jewish teachers of circumcision literally employed magic/evil eye to «bewitch» people from Paul’s gospel? That would seem unlikely if, as Paul implies, these Jewish teachers were «zealous for» Christians «to be under the Law» (4:17, 21). Since magic as is strictly forbidden in the Torah it seems unlikely that these orthodox rigorists would be casting the evil eye. But the basic meaning interpreted by the Fathers such as Chrysostom is that just as the evil eye is a «spell» motivated by envy that puts someone under a curse, so Paul says that these Jewish teachers who impose circumcision were motivated by envy of «our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus so that they might bring us into slavery» (2:4). Paul is «perplexed» at how the Jewish teachers could have «bewitched» (4:20; 3:1) these Christians into «desiring to be under the Law» (4:21) even though, according to Paul, «all who rely on works of the law are under a curse» (3:10) but «Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law» (3:13). Thus St John Chrysostom writes, «You must not suppose that the glance of the eye has any natural power to injure those who look upon it», commentating on Gal 3:1 he continues, «To behold in an evil manner belongs to a mind depraved within… And [Paul] speaks thus, not as if envy had any power of itself, but meaning that the teachers of these doctrines acted from envious motives»117. Apparently they would be envious of the joyful freedom of those unburdened by «the curse» of ritual law. Paul is marvelling here not at the power of magic, but at how easily these «false

144

Chapter 2

brothers» (2:4) and «mutilators of the flesh» (Phil 3:2) had fooled the Galatians í «O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?» (3:1). There are two questions to ask here: Firstly, does early Christian literature condemn magic and the evil eye? Secondly, why would magic be condemned by anybody, what could be the actual danger of magic in the New Testament? Firstly, we see many significant condemnations of magic in the early Christian literature, as Dickie himself cites118. When the question of eternal destiny is at stake the New Testament material seems to be in fact even more severe than the Old Testament in the sense that in ancient Israel those who used magic fell under the judgment of YHWH only in this life but nothing is said about their being punished eternally. But we have seen that Paul condemns «sorcery, idolatry, enmity, strife... envy, drunkenness, orgies» etc. as among the «works of the flesh» (Gal 5:20-21), and solemnly declares these works render a person in danger of being unworthy of eternal life, he says: «I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God» (5:21)119. These works of the flesh, such as magic, envy, strife, etc. are essentially human means to work retribution or «vengeance» which is forbidden in Mosaic law (cf. Lv 19:18). Paul contrasts them with the commandment: «You shall love your neighbour as yourself» which Paul says is the fulfilment of the «whole law» (Gal 5:14; Lv 19:18). Another question must be asked why do «works of the flesh» render a person unable to enter the kingdom of heaven (Gal 5:20)? Following the interpretation of Chrysostom and the Fathers, when Paul juxtaposes of «works of the flesh» v. 19, against «fruit of the Spirit» v. 22, he is not talking about the physical body vs. the immortal soul120. Rather Paul contrasts flesh and Spirit because he is speaking about «two covenants» one in the flesh and one in the Spirit (Gal 4:24). The old covenant in the flesh (Gn 17:13) is incapable of giving eternal life, precisely because it is powerless to destroy the works of the flesh, envy, hatred, etc. It is not by works of the law, but by God’s grace that flows from Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, that change of heart and eternal life flows to all who believe (Gal 1:4; 2:16, 21). Paul’s basic point in Galatians is that circumcision, which is a good thing, along with «works of the flesh», which are not good, both belong to this age, i.e. the fallen world, «this present darkness» (Eph 6:12) í or what he simply calls «the flesh». If these works become fixations that distract a person from receiving God’s free gift of salvation in Christ, they could prevent them from inheriting the kingdom. What matters for Paul is that Christians have faith that «the Lord Jesus Christ gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age» (Gal 1:3-4). Not so that we would cease to live, but so

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

145

that in dying with Jesus to this world (Gal 5:23) we would pass into the «new creation» (Gal 6:14-15), the life of the world to come121. Sorcery and idolatry are «works of the flesh» because their power belongs to this passing world. « For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds» (2 Cor 10:4). Paul does not boast of himself, but what «Christ accomplished through me to bring the nations» into surrender to God through faith in Christ from Antioch in Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece, all the regions where God confirmed Paul’s teaching «by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God» (Rom 15:18-19). Unlike the flesh the power of the Spirit is from God is the power of miracles which are signs of the new creation that God reveals in order to confirm that the apostolic teaching is true, that forgiveness and conversion of heart are possible through faith in Jesus. Magic changes the outward flesh, the appearance, but it cannot change human nature towards love of God; it cannot change hatred into kindness. But only by faith in God’s infinite love for humans – in that he gave Jesus to be «crucified» for our sins and «raised him from the dead» – is the power released, «the Spirit», purifies and transforms human hearts and «works miracles among you» (Gal 1:1; 3:1, 5)122. In the end, Paul says, God’s Spirit brings about the only thing that matters: «love working through faith» (5:6) by which the whole law is fulfilled (5:14). We see clearly now this dichotomy between the old creation of the flesh vis-à-vis the new creation in the Spirit is the same dichotomy between the kingdom of this world dominated by Satan vis-à-vis the kingdom of God. This dichotomy likely forms the background Paul’s discussion of the flesh and the Spirit in Gal 5:16-25. It is in this context that Paul speaks about sorcery and idolatry being works of the flesh. Magic is in the kingdom of Satan, not of God, because it is against God’s will, and so when it focuses people’s thoughts toward a desired result by using some invisible, supernatural power that power cannot be under God’s blessing. In the realm of the spirit, all spirits are subject to God, but none are neutral, they are either under Satan and doomed to eternal fire or they are angels in heaven who always obey God’s word (Rv 12:7f; Ps 103:20). Magic proceeds by self- justification, let my will be done because..., not, O God, if it be thy will...; without regard to God’s will the magicians speak about manipulating the forces of Nature, «channelling power» and «moving energy» through artefacts, rituals, spirits, or pagan deities. In the world of magic God’s law is basically forgotten, no honour is paid to his sovereignty, no fear accorded to his judgment, and no gratitude for his gift. The magician emerges as the master and manipulator of the spirit. Christian writings such as Acts of the

146

Chapter 2

Apostles, Pauline letters, and the book of Revelation123 take it for granted that these actions are extremely dangerous are explicit that those who practice magic, sorcery, envy (which motivates the evil eye), unless they repent are in danger renouncing their place in the kingdom of eternal life. Magic and sorcery are addressed in the Didache (or The Lord’s Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations), an early Jewish Christian text from the late 1st to early 2nd century124. The document begins famously: «There are two Ways, one of life and one of death, and there is a great difference between these two ways». The context of the two ways fits perfectly with Galatians idea of «the present evil age» vis-à-vis «new creation» (Gal 1:4, 6:15). The way of life is essentially to love God and neighbour as Jesus taught, and to abstain from gross sin such as theft, murder, sexual immorality and abortion, as well as the practice of magic and sorcery (Ƞ੝ μĮȖİ઄ıİȚȢ, Ƞ੝ ijĮȡμĮțİ઄ıİȚȢ)125. Later in the Didache «magic, sorcery, idolatry» (μĮȖİiĮȚ, ijĮȡμĮțíĮȚ, İíįȦȜȠȜĮIJȡíĮȚ) are explicitly named as constituting the Way of Death126. We see an even greater severity of condemnation of occult practices in Revelation, a book saturated with the ecstasy and doom of the final eschatological judgment, and here it is sorcery and magicians who are named in particular as the object of divine wrath. As in Gal 5:20 and the Didache, the word ijĮȡμĮțİíĮ is used, and here in Revelation it describes the occult arts in general, and ijĮȡμĮțİíĮ especially connotes the deceptive, drug-like power or spell power that magic can wield. What about the final judgment, can practitioners of magic hope to fair well when «the books are opened» and God judges all people «according to their works?» (Rv 20:12). Those who have «triumphed» will gain eternal life, and their reward is to become sons of God; «But as for the cowards, unbelievers, abominable, murderers, whore-mongers, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death» (Rv 21:7-8). Sorcerers are also explicitly grouped with murderers and the gravest of sinners who refused to repent and thus will be cast out of paradise: «Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and whoremongers and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood» (Rv 22:15)127. For anyone who takes seriously these texts, it is difficult to imagine a condemnation of occult practice that could be more severe. In the light of the Christian condemnations of magic considered thus far in Galatians, Revelation, and the Didache, sources which the Church Fathers knew well, it seems very odd that Dickie would state: «The Church Fathers may have found condemnations of magic hard to come by. They are even less well-placed when it comes to adducing scriptural authority for their contention that magicians and sorcerers are impostors and charlatans.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

147

They are firmly convinced that men cannot alter the course of nature but cannot find chapter and verse to support that view»128. The New Testament, which the Fathers esteemed, both condemns magic, and it holds firmly to the conviction that men can indeed alter the course of nature. And they do so by participating in the work and miracles of God for human salvation129. The Bible testifies that humans also could choose «alter the course of nature» in another way; by participating in works such as magic and sorcery men perform amazing wonders through the help of the «spirits of demons performing signs» and «by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders» (Rv 16:14; 2 Th 2:9). The author of Acts of the Apostles for example, does not deny that Simon the Magician performed impressive feats of magic: «From the least to the greatest... they paid attention to him because for a long time he had amazed them with his magic» (Acts 8:1011). Magicians’ intentions may be golden, but the end result is never benign: «All the nations were deceived by your sorcery, and in her was found the blood of the prophets and saints and all that were slain upon the earth» (Rv 18:23-24). Revelation depicts that by magic and sorcery the course of nature is indeed altered; in fact the whole world which was created for God’s praise is led into confusion, deception and ultimately mutual destruction130. Magic in the New Testament constitutes the deformation and manipulation of nature in a way that the Creator did not intend. If these early Christian texts are to be taken in the light how the Church Fathers interpreted them, then the occult arts such as sorcery, magic, and the evil eye constitute a grave danger to human freedom; they prevent a healthy understanding of God’s love for man expressed in his commandments; and they do indeed change the course of nature inflicting a serious wound against the cosmic order. Essentially they seem to offend God’s desire for humanity to discover kindness, simplicity and loving providence – and stifle man’s natural desire to praise the Creator, to «rejoice in the Lord» (Phil 3:1) and to sing joyfully, for example, with the angels at Christ’s birth: «Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men!» (Lk 2:14). Instead of rejoicing in God, by occult practice man becomes his own god, autonomous, cut off from the Source of all life. Thus sorcery and idolatry, in Galatians and Revelation, are dangerous snares of the devil on par with adultery, idolatry, murder, and «those who do such things» are in grave jeopardy of eternal punishment, unless they repent131. Secondly the question should be asked why do the Church Fathers condemn magicians as frauds and charlatans, and yet speak of them as though they posed a real threat? First of all these Fathers were pastors and teachers who, if they were faithful to the teaching of Christ, would have loved their fellow human

148

Chapter 2

beings, including the magicians and people who would cast the evil eye. Because the Fathers cared about people and did not want to see them perish under the wrath of God in hell; they took seriously the warnings of scripture about sorcery (Rv 21:8; 22:15) and so they called magicians to repentance just as in Acts 19:18-20. Secondly they did not want them to lead others astray by the power of their illusions. In the case of Simon Magus (Acts 8:924) for all his power and reputation the magician Simon was deceiving himself most of all. But if he continued he would deceive many others as well. All the Samaritans agreed, «This man is the power of God that is called Great!» (Acts 8:10). Compare this to Peter who when he performed miracles in Jesus name, he denied, for example, that it was in any way by his own glory, «power or piety» that he made the paralytic walk (Acts 3:12). Unlike Simon Peter gave all credit for the healing to God and Jesus Christ. Simon Magus is depicted as someone suffering from severe psychologically illness (Acts 8:21-23), and in the end Simon begs Peter to pray for him that he might not perish under God’s wrath, v. 24. With these attitudes in mind, early Christians and the Fathers as teachers of Scripture naturally wanted to distance themselves from magicians. Early Christian literature such as the Epistle to Diognetus, Shepherd of Hermes, and the New Testament all testify to the fact that Christ alone was sufficient to fill their lives with joy and peace – no special philosophy or occult practice was needed. For the Church Fathers the threat magicians posed was in the power of their illusions, magic may indeed cause some kind of change in nature, but always with the illusion that it is a change for good, when actually the source of power and the final result are ambiguous. Magic is dangerous precisely because it ignores or tries to get around the fact that Judeo- Christian Scripture clearly forbids it and warns that those who practice it place themselves under a curse132. The whole practice of magic seems profoundly contrary to the heart of the Christ’s message in the New Testament: loving God above all through obedience to his commands: «For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome» (1 Jn 5:3; cf. Mt 22:37-40). God’s commandments are lifegiving (cf. Mt 19:17; Ps 119:93). And Jesus said «If you love me, you will keep my commandments» (Jn 14:15), and to his apostles he said, «The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me» (Lk 10:16). So in the New Testament it is not possible to love Jesus and disobey the teachers that he chose. Jesus called Paul to proclaim «the obedience of faith among all the nations» (Rom 1:4). Faith is a child-like trust to God as father, a total surrender of the intellect to God in obedience to apostolic teaching. Such faith is incompatible with manipulation of the created order in disregard for God’s will.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

149

In the case of the evil eye, it is not the action that is important, but the intention behind the action that counts, in this case, envy. «A tranquil heart gives life to the flesh, but envy makes the bones rot» (Prv 14:30). Envy is like poison or acid in the soul. Furthermore in the New Testament, final judgment is according to works (Mt 16:27; Rom 2:6-9, Rv 20:12), but a work is judged according to the attitude that motivated it. Envy is not a legitimate motivation for any action, magical or mundane. Thus we see that the casting of the evil eye in so far as it is motivated by envy, makes sense to be prohibited in the context of Galatians 5:19-21 where Paul condemns sorcery and idolatry, along with envy, hatred, strife, murder, etc. It is precisely these dispositions against which Jesus speaks vehemently in his Sermon on the Mount: «You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire» (Mt 5:21-22).

Jesus is challenging his audience to consider that actual murder is just the physical playing out of what has already taken place in the heart. According to this Gospel teaching, any act of hatred or envy such as the evil eye is equivalent to murder in the heart. People are inevitably going to offend each other, but Jesus calls his followers to the higher standard of forgiving, praying for and loving their enemies (Mt 5:44; Lk 6:27). Old and New Testaments depict a God that does not so much judge actions by their success or failure, but he looks at the personal intention behind the action in his judgment of human behaviour133. According to Dickie the attitude of the Fathers of the Church to the evil eye is ambiguous: they are not prepared to accept that the eyes of envious men can on their own inflict harm, but they are willing to concede either that the virtuous and the fortunate do have something to fear from envious forces or that a supernatural force may exploit them, employing the eyes of the envious to cause harm. This is their considered position when their mind is fully focused on the issue and its implications. When their mind is on something else, they speak of the eyes of the envious doing harm. St. John Chrysostom makes reference to various apotropaic practices evident in the community. For instance, the preacher speaks about people in Antioch «who use charms and amulets, and encircle their heads and feet with copper coins of Alexander of Macedon»134. As expected, Chrysostom does not praise this action, instead criticizes the people for placing hope in an image of a former Greek king. This was not to be the only instance in

150

Chapter 2

which he would observe and condemn the use of amulets. However he finds himself having to address people’s arguments that their amulets did not constitute idolatry as they were simply charms. What is striking about Chrysostom’s retort, however, is his disbelief that amulet-users are unashamed to fear such things now that they had heard the Christian message. At first there may be an inclination to think that he is dismissing the fear of the harmful spirits repelled by these practices135. Yet, it becomes clear that his concern lies not with people’s fear of daimones, but with the persistence of that fear despite the protection of the Christian God. Chrysostom’s concern is with the spiritual well-being of the flock under his charge. He encourages them to lay fear aside, to take responsibility for themselves and to choose between good and evil. Thus he urges them to say: «I leave your ranks, Satan, and your pomp, and your service, and I join the ranks of Christ. And never go forth without this word»136. For Chrysostom to say these words with conviction constitutes a renewal of the baptismal promises when Satan was first rejected by the catechumen; thus accompanied by the sign of the cross on the forehead, they shall provide a spiritual armour, that neither a person nor the devil shall be able to penetrate upon seeing137. Chrysostom encourages the same action to be used for children to protect them from the evil eye and other dangers138. In a world in which people surrendered to apotropaic methods and superstitions, regardless of religious affiliation, Chrysostom is promoting a stronger form of spiritual protection that involves faith, the conscious rejection of evil and Satan its author along with firm allegiance to the Christian God, the signing of the cross on the body, and the wearing of the cross as a sign to demons of their defeated state139. However, it was not just the Christian gesture, amulet, and incantation that Chrysostom asserted as potent; the shield of baptism also attracted his attention. In the protection of babies or children, in particular, a number of traditional or local practices were used in Syria that concerned the Church Father. Amulets and bells were hung around babies for luck, inscriptions (grammateiva) were put on their head immediately after birth, and children had a red ribbon tied around them140. In addition women and nurses marked children’s faces with mud while bathing them in order to avert the evil eye, fascination, and envy141. Such action is condemned by Chrysostom: «God has honoured you with spiritual anointing; and do you defile your child with mud?... And when you should inscribe on its forehead the Cross which affords invincible security; do you forego this, and cast yourself into the madness of Satan?»142. St. John’s concern in this action lay in abandoning faith in Christ for the sake of superstition and not respecting the seal of the living God which was provided through the priest to the child at baptism143.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

151

Finally, St. John Chrysostom addresses the people’s practice of utilizing the apotropaic power of ligatures (legaturae), texts, such as the Gospel texts, written on paper and kept in a sack worn around the neck. He comments on the tradition used by women and children of suspending the Gospels from their necks for use as a powerful amulet, and urges them conversely to carry instead the Gospel with them in their mind as their guardian144. As with the sign of the cross, St. John Chrysostom promotes an apotropaic power which differs itself from the traditional and popular methods. In this case he assigns the power to the memory, learning and the language of scriptural texts. By dismissing tangible forms of protection, Chrysostom is asking people to shift their understanding and perception of communicating with, controlling, and repelling the demonic, arming Christians with an knowledge of spiritual concepts to protect them from the craftiness of spiritual enemies who seek to infiltrate the will, provoking envy, strife, hatred, etc145. Thus, all of the Fathers of the Church who attack belief in the evil eye take it for granted that Christians have reason to fear a supernatural force and identify this force with the devil146. St. Basil and St. Jerome, go further and suggest that the devil or his demons use men’s envious eyes to accomplish their own envious purposes. Others such as Tertullian, St. John Chrysostom, and Eusebius exclude the action of human intermediaries and propose that the bad fortune suffered is the direct action of the devil. Only Eusebius puts forward the view that the devil deliberately contrives to make his envious assaults on the fortunate when there are men around whose envious gaze or praise is the source of the catastrophe147. The tendency of Christians of this time to blame their misfortunes on ijșóȞȠȢ (envy) of the devil or his demons makes perfectly good sense when put within the framework of a theological system in which the primary defining characteristic of the devil and his demons is their envious resentment of all that is good. However a premature death for example, was blamed on an envious force of an indeterminate nature, and not on the envy of the devil. This from one point of view is not surprising since the devil’s envy should not in theory be directed at the merely young and beautiful but at those whose virtue throws his own moral failure into relief. On the other hand, there is no obvious place in the Christian scheme of things for an envious force of indeterminate identity. That men should still continue to be attracted to it shows how powerful a hold a pagan way of looking at the world had over even theologically formed men – and to this day the Orthodox church recommends to priests a prayer against the evil eye148.

152

Chapter 2

3. The Middle Byzantine period: (843–1204) After the series of government-driven persecution against the Christians had ended in the 4th century, the Fathers of the Church were able to teach openly about how to reach God and develop the means of organized worship149. Gradually, a more mystical, purified perspective evolved as if rediscovered and refreshed from the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. While being strong in the central teachings of the Church, this approach focused on the inner, personal relationship with God, as opposed to the external requirements needed to be a good Christian (ascetic or secular). Clearly, St. John Climacus (525 A.D.), St. Gregory of Nyssa (335 A.D.) and several others were at the forefront of this spiritual development. Later, St. Maximos the Confessor (580 A.D.) continued this movement more fully and laid the foundations of Christian mysticism in the mid- Byzantine period. Ultimately, this mystical approach to salvation found its fullest expression in St. Symeon the New Theologian (949 A.D.), whose tremendous contribution fuelled the emergence of the Hesychast Movement of the later Byzantine years150. The middle byzantine period saw the emergence of two heresies which troubled Byzantium in this period: Paulikianism and the new heresy, Bogomilism. Paulikianism was a dualistic heresy that emerged and was active in Asia Minor in the 7th century. The Paulikians remained a threat throughout the 7th, 8th and 9th centuries, despite the repeated persecutions they suffered at hands of Byzantine Emperors. According to this heresy, there were two separate gods: Satan, the creator of matter and god of the earthly world, and the celestial divinity who would govern the cosmos in the future. They condemned matter as the «work of the devil» and refused to accept the birth of Christ by the Virgin Mary, his Incarnation, Death and Resurrection, considering them all as fraudulent deceits. They were uninterested in the Old Testament, the mysteries of Baptism and the Holy Eucharist, the cross, icons and holy relics and the Orthodox wedding ceremony (although weddings themselves were not condemned). Closely related to the Paulikian heresy was that of the Bogomils, a set of beliefs created in Bulgaria in the middle of the 10th century. According to the Patriarch Theophylaktos, it was a mixture of Manichaean and Paulikian beliefs. The teaching of the Bogomils was perfectly consistent with that of the Paulikians, the one difference being that the former were totally opposed to weddings. The heresy, begun by Paulikians who had settled in Bulgaria and developed unimpeded until the reign of Alexios I Komnenos. The age of military power and of the cultural renaissance of the Byzantine Empire began with the reign of Basil I (867-886). For the next

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

153

150 years the smooth functioning of institutions, peace within the Church, and competent emperors of the Macedonian dynasty contributed to an effective defence of the Empire against the Bulgarian threat. After the death of Basil II (1025 A.D.) the Empire enjoyed a period of peace, but also of gradual disintegration. At the same time, Byzantine civilization of that period was being shaped by a flowering of intellectual life, the conversion of neighbouring peoples to Christianity, and monastic organization, as well as by the development of internal economic structures. Although scholars have little firm evidence of the organization or the content of education at the beginning of the Middle Byzantine period, the top schools of this period had already disappeared and even schools of higher education were rare. It seems, thus, that educational activity was downgraded. Young people seeking to overcome ignorance had to employ the services of private tutors as did Leo the Philosopher (c.790-869 A.D.) by finding a «wise man» (probably a monk) on the island of Andros who taught him philosophy, rhetoric, and arithmetic. The situation started to change in Constantinople in the 9th century this period: Caesar Bardas (d. 866 A.D.) who was a Byzantine noble and high-ranking minister, organized a higher school (university) in Magnaura in the reign of Michael III, possibly in 856 A.D. Leo the Philosopher was appointed director of the school, where he taught philosophy, while other scholars taught mathematics, astronomy and grammar. At roughly the same time in Constantinople the Stoudios Monastery became a centre of cultural activity. In other monasteries a similar pattern was repeated throughout the Empire. In the Stoudios Monastery, which was the most important centre, hymnography flourished and a great scriptorium was created which eventually became one of the first and most well-known in Byzantium. There the art of copying manuscripts was organized with great discipline. This art spread to the Holy Mountain of Athos which today boasts over 11,000 manuscripts in its 20 monasteries, comprising one of the richest collections in the world. Most of these manuscripts concern texts of an ecclesiastical nature, with some texts that describe exorcism151, the remainder being texts of ancient Greek literature. The oldest, such as no. 61 at Pantokrator Monastery, date back to the years shortly after the iconoclastic movement had ended (843 A.D.) and provide invaluable evidence of the nature of Byzantine art. Among the copyists Theodore of Stoudios and the calligrapher Nicholas of Stoudios stand out. Some of the latter’s manuscripts still exist. Indicative of the intensity of this cultural revival, was the invention of a new, quicker way of writing, lower case script (upper case script had been in use until then), and this met the increased demand for literary texts.

154

Chapter 2

The School of Magnaura, founded in 425 A.D. as the Imperial University of Constantinople, (sometimes known also as the University of the Palace Hall of Magnaura) came to flourish in 10th century when it provided highlevel education as well as a spiritual and educational activity appropriate to a monastic establishment. This signalled also the initiation of a new phase of development for education and letters, which characterizes, the 10th-12th centuries. Among the most important and colourful literary personalities of this period who left legacies from this period were Maximos the Confessor, John Climacus, Theodore the Studite, as well as three Patriarchs: Germanos, Tarasios and Nikephoros152.

3.1 The contribution of Mount ǹthos The historical documents on the origins of ancient Mount Athos, a PanOrthodox, self-governed Greek monastic community are very few. According to Averil Cameron it is difficult for any researcher to try to position the monasteries of Mount Athos and their influence in the context of the Byzantine world. First of all this is because it is difficult to define what the Byzantine world actually consisted of on account of the geographical limits of Byzantium at any one period153. It is almost certain that monks have been living there since the fourth century, and possibly earlier. However by then, Mount Athos was already international and when monks travelled, as they often did, their strong attachments of master and disciple carried their consciousness beyond geographical or political boundaries. During Constantine’s reign (324-337 A.D.) both Christians and pagans were living there. During the reign of Julian the Apostate (361-363 A.D.), the churches of Mount Athos were destroyed, and Christians hid in the woods and in inaccessible places. Later, during Theodosius’ reign (383395 A.D.), the pagan temples were mostly destroyed, though the lexicographer Hesychius of Alexandria states that in the fifth century there was still a temple and a statue of «Zeus Athonite». After the Islamic conquest of Egypt in the seventh century, many orthodox monks from the Egyptian desert tried to find another calm place, and, as a result, some of them went to the Athos peninsula. An ancient document states that monks «built huts of wood with roofs of straw (...) and by collecting fruit from the wild trees were providing themselves improvised meals»154. Beginning with the tenth century Athos became the main centre of Byzantine monasticism and the speculative tendency in Orthodox theology155. The peninsula of Mount Athos surely profited from this development described earlier. The autonomy of this international «monastic republic» is not only famous in the Eastern Church, but it started to become a locus of

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

155

cross-border piety and diplomacy, manuscript exchange and translation, and thus a microcosm of the pan-European processes156. Here, too, monasticism passed through all the phases of its development: the life of the hermit; later the Laura, which combined solitary asceticism with some community; and finally monasteries with a strictly regulated life. The founder of this regulated monasticism on Athos is considered to be St. Athanasius of Athos, in whose time was founded the famous Laura that bears his name as well as new communities at Iviron, Zographou, Xeropotamou, Xenophontos, Esphigmenou, Panteleimon, Hilandar and Vatopedi. By the beginning of the next century the number of Athonite houses was very large, and the peninsula welcomed new foundations. It was in the twelfth century, under Emperor Alexius Comnenus, that Athos was finally sanctioned as the recognized centre of Byzantine monasticism. All the threads of speculative theology by which Eastern monasticism had lived since the time of the desert Fathers converged here. In the late Byzantine period Athos was the centre of an intense theological life. Nothing so reveals the dichotomy in theological thinking of Byzantium between official theology and the theology of experience, as the disputes over «hesychasm» that began on Mt. Athos in the fourteenth century, associated with the name of St. Gregory Palamas. Outwardly the dispute concerned almost technical aspects of ascetic practice, the so-called hesychia (silence) through which the «gathering of the mind» is achieved and the contemplation of the Divine Light is attained. Very soon, however, the basic question was asked: What does the holy man contemplate, see, and commune with? The opponents of Hesychasm felt that its theology of «divinization», or mystic union with God í by which the human being is transformed by grace to become what God is by nature í violated the bounds between creation and God, that in its extremes the Hesychast doctrine bordered on pantheism. If God has made Christians truly «partakers of the divine nature» (2 Pt 1:4) as Scripture promises, what does this mean? For the Hesychasts the answer was simple: to share in God’s nature is to shine with the same light as God shines. «God is light» (1 Jn 1:5), and Jesus is both God and man, and he shines with uncreated light157. The theological dispute thus came to concern the nature of the light of the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor, when Scripture says Jesus’ «face shone like the sun» (Mt 17:2). Here theologians disputed: was this created light or uncreated light? Created light fills the physical universe ever since God said «Let there be light» (Gn 1:3) but with the Incarnation comes the uncreated, Divine Light into the world, «the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. And we have seen his glory» (Jn 1:14). The Fathers taught that Jesus is the promised «Sun of Righteousness» (Mal

156

Chapter 2

4:2) who illuminates all creation, «in him was life, and the life was the light of men» (Jn 1:3). For Hesychasts Jesus saying to his disciples, «You are the light of the world» (Mat 5:14); is not a contradiction to him saying «I am the light of the world» because Jesus and those who love him shine together; they are one: «Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life» (Jn 8:12; Mt 5:14). Although the world, full of darkness and ignorance, cannot see the «children of light» (1 Th 5:5), nor the light of the glory of God in the face of Christ who lives in his children (2 Cor 4:47), the final judgement will reveal them: «Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father» (Mt 13:43). Humans give glory to God just by being who they were created to be. «Children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world» (Phil 2:15). This is the quest of the Hesychast mystic, to be stripped of the domination of human nature that was corrupted by sin and to unite with God who is pure light: «God is light… If we walk in the light, as [God] is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin» (1 Jn 1:5, 7). Thus to be fully divinized is to become one with God through the Spirit of Jesus in whom there is no darkness, as St. Paul writes: «The one who is joined to the Lord becomes One Spirit with him» (1 Cor 6:17). God’s desire is to unite with his humble creatures and give them the free gift of Divine Life; therefore nothing «will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord» (cf. Is. 57:15; Rom 8:39). For those who share in God’s nature even suffering and death are cause to celebrate (Acts 5:41; Jas 1:2) because all who share in the sufferings of Christ will share in the joy of his eternal glory (Jn 16:20; cf. Rom 8:17-18; 1 Pt 4:13; Heb 12:2). The Hesychast movement maintained that the true calling of all Christians is to be transformed into God, to be fully clothed in Divine Light, as St Paul says in a verse that has been central in the Orthodox liturgy since the time of St. John Chrysostom: «all you who are baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves in Christ» (Gal 3:27). St. Gregory Palamas, a monk of Athos and later, archbishop of Thessalonica (1296-1359 A.D.), came to the defence of the Hesychasts. Although he was undoubtedly among the greatest Byzantine theologians, Catholic historians have frequently interpreted his doctrine as an unprecedented innovation in the history of Orthodox theology, expressing all the extremes and peculiarities of Eastern mysticism. As recent research has well demonstrated, however, in fact his contribution only completes traditional teaching and renews in a creative way the basic and most authentic direction of the Orthodox view of Christianity. This is the idea that God really is present in the world, that we perceive Him and unite with

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

157

Him, not by abstract deductions or philosophically, but ontologically. In this defence of real union with God lies the meaning of the doctrine of Palamas on divine energies that permeate the world, through which the world, without merging with God (which is essentially impossible) is united with Him and can commune with Him, having Him within itself, and endlessly growing nearer to Him. The whole tradition of the Fathers of the Church was revived in the experience of Hesychasm and the theology of Palamas: through the image of Christ the God-Man and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the fullness of God is in the essence of man, and from this fullness and holiness man finds «communion with God» in everything in the world. For St. Simeon the New Theologian and for St. Gregory Palamas (speaking only of these two pinnacles of Byzantine mysticism) the authority of the Fathers was just as important as it was for the theologians of the patriarchal school in Constantinople who sought to preserve the Fathers’ teachings but not freely interpret them. However these two theologians had no reason to question the tradition of the Holy Fathers. For them it was not an outward authority requiring blind submission, but a living tradition built in Jesus Christ into which they also were being built. They lived in the tradition and perceived it from within as a unity of faith and experience. They tasted, as it were, the fruit of the same Spirit that had inspired the Fathers as well. For them, as for the earlier Fathers, theology was not abstract knowledge but the work of life and the creative solution of vital problems. They were free, free to interpret and celebrate the patristic tradition, precisely because they had in themselves and their religious experience a living part in that tradition and the criterion for their unity in faith with the Fathers. According to A. Schmemann, this limitation imposed on official Byzantine theology by the external authority of texts resulted in a renewed outbreak of the «dechristianized», that is, Hellenism (classical Greek philosophy) on the one hand and of conflict with the Hesychasts on the other. This attempted to reduce all these controversies to a struggle between two fundamental philosophical positions which, he alleges, define the history of Byzantine thought: Aristotelianism and Platonism158. The philosophers and mystics, he maintains, stem from Plato, while the official doctrine of the Church, including that of St. John of Damascus, is expressed in the language of Aristotle. The fallacy of such a dichotomy has been demonstrated a number of times. For example, one of Palamas’ main enemies, Nicephorus Gregoras, was by his philosophy a convinced Platonist. Actually the question of whom to follow in the structure of Christian moral dogma – Plato or Aristotle – could not have arisen for Palamas or St. Simeon. For them the primary reality was God’s word in

158

Chapter 2

Christian revelation and the theory of contemplation, which they attempted to explain in words. Palamas could refer to both Plato and Aristotle and criticize both, because neither had defined his religious experience, yet both are evaluated on the basis of it. In other words Greek philosophy did not dominate theology, rather theology used philosophy. The categories of Plato and Aristotle were put to work to serve and express the ineffable beauty of God’s divine wisdom. But the philosophers themselves, Plato and Aristotle, would be the first to confess their weakness to grasp the whole truth in the absence of a kind of divine revelation. Christian theologians and even many philosophers understood that God is always transcendent, God cannot be fully limited by any category of human thought, no, God in his essence is a Mystery no mind can fathom. However humans can come to know him by studying his attributes through reflecting on the created order and revelation. Christian theology by its very essence was necessarily eclectic in its relation to pre-Christian philosophy, however highly it might honour it and boldly utilize its language to express its own «inexpressible mysteries». Therefore the synthesis with Hellenism and the absorption of it into the Church which had taken place in the writings of the Fathers was quite naturally revived in Byzantine mysticism. Athonite literary production at the outset of this period was conditioned, first, by the victories of the Hesychasm of Gregory Palamas at Constantinopolitan church councils (1341, 1347, 1351 A.D.) and among its secular patrons in the Byzantine Civil War (1341-1347 A.D.); and second, by the schism between Serbia and Byzantium following the crowning of Stefan Dušan (1331-1355 A.D.) as emperor in 1346, the year after Serbian authority was established over Athos. If the first events provided a unifying framework for the great renewal of Greek and Slavic monastic letters, the second may have encouraged a degree of literary and scholarly autonomy on the part of the Serbs on Athos. The end of this period was marked by the expansion of the Ottomans into Europe, emblematized by the battles of Marica (1371 A.D.) and Kosovo (1389 A.D.): an eschatological mood, encouraged by the proliferation of hesychasm, began to be felt in literature written well beyond the Holy Mountain. Recovered by the Byzantines after the Serbian defeat in 1371 A.D., Athos was occupied by the Turks in 1387 A.D. and again from 1393 to 1403 A.D., finally becoming an Ottoman tributary in 1430. The life of Mount Athos during Byzantium began with the arrival of the first hermits after the 8th century, forming small monastic communities until the mid-10th century when St. Athanasius the Athonite arrived there and founded the Great Lavra159. This was the time when other large monasteries, such as Vatopedi and Iviron were built. By the 11th century Athos had

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

159

become one of the largest monastic centres attracting mainly members of Byzantine aristocracy who dwelled there as monks. During the 12th century, mainly due to the death of monastic centres in Asia Minor from the gradual occupation by the Turks, Athos had already become the most important monastic centre of the Byzantine world. On a theological level Athonite monasticism played a key role for the development of the Hesychast movement in Orthodox monasticism, and was at the centre of the great controversy between saint Gregory Palamas and the anti- Hesychast Barlaam the Calabrian. Athos was also one of the main centres that supported and strengthened the anti-Latin sentiment especially during the 14th and 15th centuries. Our knowledge of the beginnings of monasticism on Mount Athos is scant. We have a better picture only about the founding of the Great Lavra in the year 963 A.D. by Athanasius who drastically changed the course of events on Athos, opening the way for the foundation of other similar monastic institutions. However, for the majority of monasteries founded before or shortly after Athanasius’ Lavra, we rarely have enough archival or other evidence to trace back the events related to their foundation, while primitive Athonite eremitism remains almost totally obscure160.

3.2 Michael Psello sand Michael Italikos During the eleventh and twelfth centuries in Byzantine the study of magic among intellectuals was a commonplace. However two prominent figures which made the cut above the others in studying the aspects of magic theory and practice were Michael Psellos (1018-1078 A.D.) and Michael Italikos (1090-1157 A.D.). If Psellos receives a somewhat larger share of attention herein, it is because he single-handedly was responsible for reviving, almost from the dead, an entire group of occult authors and books whose existence had long been neglected. His studies formed the bridge between Neo-Platonic, Gnostic and Hermetic texts and the theology, philosophy and daemonology of the late Byzantine eraía bridge between the classical view of the daemon as a beneficial guiding spiritual presence, and the later Christian view of demons as intrinsically evil fallen angels. Byzantine magic was later destined to be the source of the principle grimoires (magic text books) of Western European magic from the 14th century onwards161. For Byzantine literature of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the world of Hellenic magic and mysticism was part of their cultural heritage, and they felt obliged to take account of its existence in one way or another. Acknowledgement did vary, ranging, for example, from the nodding acquaintance of Anna Comnena to the intimate familiarity of

160

Chapter 2

Michael Psellos. Between the time of Photios in the ninth century and the arrival of Psellos in the eleventh century, one would be hard pressed to find in extant Byzantine sources any references to Hermes Trismegistus and the Hermetica, to Julius Africanus and the Kestoi, to Proclus’ De arte hieratica, or to the Chaldaean Oracles (fragmentary texts from the 2nd century A.D.), which are all the authors and works that are considered the classics in the field of mysticism and magic. When Psellos in his major historical work, the Chronographia, says that he was unable eventually to find in or outside of Greece any trace of wisdom (sophia) or teachers of it, we may take him to be including the works of the kind mentioned here, because for him «mystic books», as he calls them, have their place at a very high level on the path to wisdom. And we are not dealing with mere name-dropping on his part. A glance at the introductions to any modern published version of the four works mentioned above will reveal that Psellos was one of its few readers in the Greek-speaking middle ages and is even an important source for the texts themselves. Michael Psellos, served for many years as a political advisor to a succession of several Byzantine Emperors. He was the leading professor of the then newly founded University of Constantinople, bearing the honorary title ‘Consul of the Philosophers’; he was schooled in law, religion, and philosophy, astronomy, medicine, grammar, physics, and magic. Psellos was a driving force behind the formation of the University curriculum which specialized in the Greek Classics, especially Homeric literature. His contribution to the middle Byzantium period with regards to the development of the understanding of exorcism and demonology lies in his important work entitled On the Operation of Dæmons, a classic that was hid in obscurity for many years until its recent re-discovery162. This work was probably written around 1050 A.D. in Constantinople within the Byzantine Empire. On the Operation of Dæmons, was unknown in the West for many years and appears for the first time in an English press in 1843. It was so highly prized in the 17th century that it was named by the learned Barthius (1587 1658) as The little Golden Book. Psellos’ work discusses the classical view of the Dæmon as a helpful guiding spiritual being vis-à-vis the later Christian view of all demons as evil creatures. The work of Psellos is laid out as a dialogue or discourse between 2 people, Timothy and Thracian who were apparently monks. It relates chiefly to the practices of the Euchitae and Manes, a Persian who, in the third century, announced himself as the promised Paraclete, or Comforter, who was to guide men to all truth. The style is very much in the spirit of the classic Socratic dialogues of Plato, whose dialogues had a strong influence on Psellos himself. Throughout this

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

161

discourse, both Timothy and Thracian and discuss the various points and beliefs concerning the diverse types of spirits, angels, and beings and how these beings can affect humans. There is an obvious Christian bias in some aspects of the writing, considering the time the work was originally written, but Psellos is also able to convey a great deal of thinking in relation to how the people from the pre-Christian eras thought about the relationships of these spiritual beings. In this work he attempted to examine historical syncretism, the combination of the Christian Faith with the Magian Philosophy while promulgating some extraordinary doctrines. Psellos makes Thracian put forward a dualist doctrine, namely, that there were two gods opposed to each other: the Author of Evil and the Creator of every good. He also recounts the history of the Euchitae, or Massalians (praying men), who made their appearance as a distinct body about the end of the fourth century. They may originally have had comparatively pure doctrines, but it would appear that both the Manichea, or Maniacal sect, and that of the Euchitae subsequently developed strange beliefs and rites. The Euchitae, for example, divided the universe into three regions, the government of which they alleged was in the hands of the father and his two sons; the father having the supramundane region, the younger son the atmospheric region, and the elder the government of affairs in the world, a system closely related to the figures of Greek Mythology. A variety of opinions was entertained as to the powers of these rulers, and a variety of worship was paid to them. Those who were deepest sunk in ‘impiety’ worshipped Satan (the earthly son) alone, and dignified him with the most august names, such as First Begotten, Estranged from the Father, Creator of Plants and Animals, and other compound beings. Timothy remarks that once men had thus, by a strong delusion, believed a lie, there was no measure to their wickedness (cf. 2 Th. 2:11-12; Rom 1:18-32). Timothy asks by what train of reasoning they could bring themselves to believe Satan worthy to be called a son of God? Thracian making reference to Isaiah 14:12-15 answers that the Prince of Lies has darkened «the understanding of his witless votaries by vainglorious fictions, boasting that he will place his throne above the clouds, and averring that he will be equal to the Most High. For this very reason he has been consigned into outer darkness. And when he appears to them, he announces himself the first begotten son of God and creator of all terrestrial things, who disposes of everything in the world, and by this means… he mocks the fools [who believe him], and who ought to have considered him an empty braggart and the arch-prince of falsehood, and [ought to have] ridiculed his pompous pretensions, instead of believing everything he says, and suffering themselves to be led about by the nose like oxen»163.

162

Chapter 2

Thracian then proceeds to explain the operations of the demons, who are Satan’s instruments. What is interesting is the distinction the editor makes which the ancients had made also between demons and the devil. After remarking that there is scarcely any perceptible difference between įĮíμȦȞ and įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ, he observes (Diss. vi. p. 1, § 8): įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ, dæmon, occurs frequently in the Gospels, and always in reference to possessions, real or supposed; but the word įȚ੺ȕȠȜȠȢ, devil, never refers to possession164. The use of the term įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ, dæmon, is as constantly indefinite as the term įȚ੺ȕȠȜȠȢ, devil, is definite. Thus when introducing a case of possession, the Gospel writers call it simply įĮ઀μȠȞȚȠȞ, or ʌȞİ૨μĮ ਕțȐșĮȡIJȠȞ, a daemon, an unclean spirit; never IJo įĮ઀μȠȞȚȠȞ, or IJȠ ʌȞİ૨μĮ ਕțȐșĮȡIJȠȞ, the demon, the unclean spirit (but when, in the progress of the story, the text refers to the same dæmon, it receives the article). Further, the plural įĮȚμȩȞȚĮ occurs frequently, and is applied to the same order of beings with the singular; but what sets the difference of signification in the clearest light is that though both words, įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ and įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ, occur often in the Septuagint, they are invariably used for translating different Hebrew (ႁ ၊ၾ၊) tsar, «enemy», or (ၵ ။ၪႼ); ။ satan, «adversary»; these terms are never translated as įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ. This word, on the contrary, is made to express some Hebrew term signifying idol, pagan deity, apparition, or what some render satyr. What the precise idea of the dæmons to whom possessions were ascribed then was, it would, perhaps, be impossible for us with any certainty to affirm; but as it is evident that the two words įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ and įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ are not once confounded, though the first occurs in the New Testament upwards of thirty times, and the second about sixty, they cannot be rendered by the same term by any rule of interpretation. Furthermore the Gospels never attribute cases of possession to the being termed ò įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ (the devil), nor do they ever ascribe his authority and dominion to dæmons. In this work, Psellos says that Demons are amongst the spiritual creatures that are involved in works of magic, and possibly also in the production of miracles. He introduces a classification system of demons which according to him dates back to Plato and which later became an inspiration for the system Francesco Maria Guazzo composed. According to this division there are six different types of demons as we find described in the following dialogue: «Thracian – He said, there were in all six species of dæmons, I know not whether subdividing the entire genus by their habit!, or by the degree of their attachment to bodies – be it that as it may, he laid that the six types [of dæmons] were corporeal and mundane, because in that number all corporeal circumstances are comprised, and agreeably to it the mundane system was constituted; afterwards he observed, that this first number was represented

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

163

by the scalene triangle, for beings of the divine and celestial order were represented by the equilateral triangle, as being consistent with itself, and with difficulty inclinable to evil, whilst human beings were represented by the isosceles triangle, as being in some measure liable to error in their choice, yet capable of reformation on repentance. On the other hand, that the dæmonic tribe were represented by the scalene triangle, as being at variance with itself, and not at all approaching to excellence. Whether he were really of this opinion or not, this is certain, he counted off six species of dæmons, and first he mentioned Leliurium, speaking in his barbarous vernacular tongue, a name which signifies Igneous. This order of dæmons haunts the air above us, for the entire genus has been expelled from the regions adjacent to the moon, as a profane thing with us would be expelled from a temple, but the second occupies the air contiguous to us, and is called by the proper name Aërial; the third is the Earthly, the fourth the Aqueous and Marine, the fifth the Subterranean, and the last the Lucifugus, which can scarcely be considered sentient beings. All these species of dæmons are haters of God, and enemies of man, and they say, that the Aqueous and Subterranean are worse than the merely bad, but that the Lucifugus are eminently malicious and mischievous, for these, said he, not merely impair men’s intellects, by fantasies and illusions, but destroy them with the same alacrity as we would the most savage wild beast. The Aqueous suffocate in the water all that approach them; the Subterranean and Lucifugus, if they can only insinuate themselves into the lungs of those they meet, seize and choke them, rendering them epileptic and insane; the Aërial and Earthly, with art and cunning stealthily approach and deceive men’s minds, impelling them to unlawful and unnatural lusts»165.

In this categorization one can see the four classical elements, Fire, Air, Earth and Water, plus a further two categories of demons who «flee the light». This is much simpler than the Hebraic Kabbalistic or grimoire division of demons. The classical Greek view however is that the demons occupy the space between the heavens and earth, and are therefore sublunar or «under the Moon». The Platonic view, seen in the life of Socrates, was that each person had a personal daemon, who acted to help and to preserve that person. With the rise of Orthodox Christianity, the concept of a personal demon transformed itself into the idea of the holy Guardian Angel, a concept which re-appears in the practices of the 19th century Golden Dawn.

164

Chapter 2

3.3 Michael Italikos Michael Italikos a contemporary of Anna Comnena, was like Psellos, a man of multiple interests who made a name for himself both as a teacher and a literary stylist. Before he became metropolitan of Philippi around the year 1145 A.D., he taught rhetoric, philosophy, medicine, and bible studies in the capital. His name is included in a thirteenth-century list of authors recommended as models of style for students of rhetoric. A. Kazhdan characterizes him as «a paradigm of the Byzantine intellectual»166. Like Psellos, Italikos pushes his intellectual curiosity to the limits and defends himself by appealing to the same concept of philomatheia (i.e. love of learning) a positive idea, as opposed to a somehow objectionable curiosity that is called polymatheia in Italikos, and periergasia or polypragmosyne in Psellos167. The limits in this instance too are represented by the world of mysticism and magic and, in particular, the Chaldaean variety. There are frequent hints of Italikos’ interest in that subject matter, because the language of his letters and speeches is fairly peppered with terms borrowed from the vocabulary of magical practices. These range from the most general words like «charm» and «spellbind» to the very specific technical terms such as «iynges», «strophalos», and «theourgos»168. That his acquaintance with magic is not just casual or superficial is proved by much more substantial evidence in two of the extant letters, which we shall now examine. Letter 28, addressed to a correspondent whose name is not preserved, is in effect a short exposition on the Chaldaean system, laying out in some detail the main divisions of powers and the interrelationships between them. The general Neoplatonic slant and one specific reference to the «commentator of the Oracles make it nearly certain that Italikos’ source is the commentary of Proclus, as it had been also for Psellos. The two expositions are in fact quite close, but P. Gautier is probably right when he argues, on the basis of differences in details, for the independent use of Proclus by Italikos»169. There is also a noticeable difference in attitude. Italikos consistently denigrates the subject matter and compares it to stupidity and mythical nonsense, and this general negative tone is reinforced by his frequent reference to the Chaldaeansas barbaroi, suggesting that they are on a level below the Hellenes, the pagan Greeks. It is worth noting that in another document, a monody on Pantechnes, we find Italikos making a distinction within the works of Proclus, namely, between his commentaries on Plato, for which admiration is expressed, and his exegesis of the Oracles, which are dismissed as absurdities170. In a second letter (no. 31, addressed to an otherwise unknown Tziknoglos), we come upon Italikos as he is faced with a real problem: the well-read intellectual and adept in Chaldaean lore has to confront, as a

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

165

medical expert, the case of an incurably ill woman who wants to make use of the services of a magos. Reconstructing the events from the letter, the following approximate story emerges. The sister of Tziknoglos developed some type of malignant ulcer which conventional medicine could not cure; she and her brother hear about a magos who promises to help, but they decide to consult Italikos first; he knows a lot about magic and even has a large collection of spells and incantations, including some for the relief of swellings and tumours; however, he flatly refuses to become involved in any of these practices, which are outlawed by the Church, and tries to dissuade the pair from going to the magos. This is what has taken place before the present letter. Italikos is now writing to Tziknoglos to find out whether his sister has submitted herself to the care of the magos, and if so, whether the process has produced any results. In the meantime, Italikos finds an ancient remedy which he writes down, but will deliver to Tziknoglos orally when they next meet. Several details are worth noting. The opening of the letter would support a general observation that, just as in the case of recourse to healing saints, sick people were likely to look for the help of magic only after the failure of more standard and traditional medical care. One cannot exclude that Italikos is hinting that he will provide for the patient with an appropriate charm. It is impossible to decide, but this assumption is not out of the question. It would not have to imply belief, on his part, in the efficacy of the method, but just a willingness to accommodate the hopes of others. In this connection it might be useful to cite a remark of Psellos concerning his expertise in astrology and interest in horoscopes. In the course of that autobiographical digression in the Chronographia, he makes the following statement: «The truth is, my role as a teacher and the great differences in the interests of those who consult me have led me to study every science, and I can prevent none from questioning and pressing me on the subject and meaning of horoscopes»171. It would not be outlandish to conclude from these words that Psellos might have been willing on occasion to accommodate the needs of others, in this matter, possibly by interpreting or even by casting a horoscope. Thus one can conclude that both Psellos and Italikos, as intellectuals, set no limits to their reading and study, and even sound proud to announce their intimate familiarity with the literature of forbidden arts. As a justification they appeal to the concept of Philomatheia, which is understood as a positive zeal for learning, as opposed to an idle or unhealthy curiosity. However both are aware of the dangers of other people suspecting them of being involved in outlawed practices, such as magic. It is not surprising, then, that they repeatedly proclaim their innocence. In the matter of the Chaldaean Oracles we can detect some real differences in their reactions. Italikos keeps the system very

166

Chapter 2

much at arm’s length; he piles on the traditional derogatory epithets and attempts to dissociate the material from Hellenic learning. Not that the reaction is a great surprise, but the contrast with Psellos is evident. The difference is rooted in their approach to philosophy. Italikos did study and teach the subject, but compared to Psellos he was not a serious philosopher and lacked the philosophical instinct. Psellos, for one thing, had a probing mind and was an engaged thinker. He also respected the thinkers of the past and professed a special admiration for Proclus. That is one reason why he maintained a relaxed and open mind when dealing with Chaldaean material. As something of a creative thinker, he was also willing to explore the possibility of finding in it some theological ideas that might be in harmony with Christian thinking.

4. Late Byzantine period: 1204-1453 A.D. The late Byzantine period which extends to the last two hundred years of the empire during the dynasty of the Palaeologi, produced a relatively well-ordered, internally coherent and refined set of ideas about the devil and the demons which were legitimized and confirmed by the seal of Orthodox Christian doctrine172. During a span of one thousand years, from the beginning of the period of history which may be termed «Byzantine» to its end, many changes in the beliefs, ideas and practices of Byzantine people occurred. It is true also that the deep respect which the Byzantines had for tradition, and in particular the Orthodox church, meant that change in the area of religious belief was very slow to take place; any innovation was typically regarded as evil. However it is clearly a mistake to suppose that change never took place at all. On a number of important doctrinal issues the beliefs of the church in the fourth century differed, or were at least far less carefully defined, than those of the church in the fourteenth. If this is true of major points of dogma it is certainly true of the margins of Orthodox belief such as demonology which forms the subject matter of our study. Richard Greenfield points out that this late period, through the diversity of literature it offers, gives us an enormous corpus of works containing the inherited, standard Orthodox tradition concerning the supernatural powers current to Byzantine belief of the time173. However given the obscurity of the subject matter one finds í not an orderly system of demonology í but many variations, ambiguities, and paradoxes. The description of these beliefs taken on their own cannot pretend to be complete but one finds an inherent fluidity and changeableness. Thus it is a subject which can easily become complicated. One thing is for certain: Byzantine demonology was not

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

167

conceptualized into a unified system, and there is no official Orthodox ecclesial teaching on the subject. Instead one finds in the literature of this period, that loose ends and contradictions abound174.

4.1 The origins and nature of the Demons In the thought and religious practice of late antiquity magic and demons formed part of the same subject matter, although in some ways both more subtle and more surprising than we have always been led to believe. It is clear from the material examined that the Church Fathers in their tradition «demonized» magic to its discredit, and the likely relation of magic with demons became a means towards the condemnation of occult practices. The topic of demonization and the reasoning of the Church Fathers will be taken up in the conclusion. In any case, the process of demonization opened up a whole range of other opportunities175. It could support compromises and active concern of quite extensive kinds. Magicians could be demonized for the purposes of persecution, but also for those of rescue and conversion; and these, in turn, allowed many of the less objectionable exercises to survive and be adopted by the late antique Christian church. It must be remembered that many of the demons and practices of which we have spoken here were, in one sense, popular ones. The treatises, sermons, saints’ lives and letters found during this period, were meant to excite responses from within a theatre larger than that provided by scholarly readers and perhaps from an audience at an early stage in it spiritual progress. One looks largely in vain for demons and magic in the learned commentaries on the Bible of the Western Fathers (Ambrose on Luke 8:27-33; Jerome or Augustine on Matthew 10:8) and some of the Christian Fathers such as St. Basil, seem to have been wholly uninterested in demons. The Church Fathers used the concept of the demons, hovering over, around and even inside the Christian of late antiquity, in a psychological way to sway the emotions of the mass of the people away from the old pagan religions and towards the new one which offered them the protection and assurance of Jesus definitive victory over evil spirits on the cross. The demons of this early period in the history of witchcraft and magic are, however, serious players in world affairs. They are certainly far from the knockabout demons of the late medieval mystery plays; but they are, many of them, also far from those monsters which will be invoked in the later prosecutions for witchcraft. The emotions these demons were allowed to provoke was specific, and they mark a clear contrast with those which the demons of early modern Europe often came to arouse. Demons and their magic are conscripted here to drive out terror and hatred, and to condemn

168

Chapter 2

profit and every form of persecution. Both are expected, in their redefined states, to encourage the very opposite, or so, at least, it was hoped by many of the Christian Fathers. Magic and the demons did come together in the world of late antiquity, yet that world too produced some of the most energetic efforts at redefinition we can trace – redefinitions and descriptions of Christian counter-magic which left a permanent mark upon the medieval Christian Church. The late Byzantine beliefs and practices concerning magic are divided up in three general categories for purposes of examination namely those of protection, manipulation, and the attainment of normally hidden knowledge176. In each case there is evidence of a wide range of approaches, from sophisticated and complex ideas, to simple, almost naive concepts. The first category involves magical practices and devices designed to render a person, his family, or his possessions safe from harm caused by evil spirits, other men, diseases, or the forces of nature. Perhaps the simplest magic-oriented mindset, or the most obvious form of what we would call superstition, seems to have involved the wearing of amulets and the deliberate location of related objects in specific places. The second category has to do with the manipulation of natural forces, of the physical well-being of people, animals and crops, of human relationships, and the manipulation of supernatural beings themselves which lay at the heart of a large proportion of these magical processes. Again there is a great range of levels of conceptualization apparent here in both the techniques employed and the theories on which these depended. The third category involved common belief that magic could be employed to discover knowledge that was otherwise inaccessible í to delve into the secrets of time and the mysteries of God but without his permission. Divination was thus practised in a vast variety of ways ranging, once again, from the crude to the sophisticated in technique and in theory. In his Traditions of Belief in late Byzantine Demonology as well as in his article Contribution to the Study of Paleologan Magic, Richard Greenfield employs a distinction between what he terms as «the beliefs of the Standard Orthodox Tradition» and «Alternative Traditions»177. In the conclusions to his works, Greenfield emphasizes that this division is a device he employed in order to bring some much needed clarity to a very complicated subject178. However this brings forth a dichotomy between the ecclesiastical establishment and the occult scientist, as well as the rejection of the occult sciences by the church179. Greenfield states that: «It is clear that the relationship between the central Christian orthodoxy and the peripheral semi-Christian (or actually non-Christian) elements of belief and practice in the Palaeologan religious mentality is one that is complex

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

169

and far-reaching. At the popular level, belief and practice embraced a range that simply did not recognize distinctions between religion and magic and was not only uninterested in separating areas of orthodoxy and unorthodoxy, but was almost entirely incapable of doing so. What is being described here is thus merely one end of a largely continuous spectrum which shades, as it were, quite smoothly from white to black. Any divisions in it are imposed either by subsequent historical misconceptions or by the views of the small minority of trained Christian theologians who believed in and were both capable of and interested in establishing such divisions. It is vital not to let the minority speak in place of the vast majority»180.

So Greenfield poses a broad spectrum of belief concerning the demonic. However, the late Byzantine demonology occupied a fairly consistent «monarchian» dualist position when questions concerning the origin of evil and its animate powers and forces were raised explicitly. That is, demons were seen as actually being fallen angels, or else being closely related to angelic powers in origin. Demons were created for a good end by a supremely good God, and possessed no naturally inherent trace of evil at all but, through actions determined by their own free will, they rebelled against God’s purpose for them and became evil. They fell from heaven and, turning from God’s light, cast themselves into darkness and death. According to R. Greenfield, it is evident that the ideas about the nature of the demons were less consistent in the overall tradition than were those concerning their origin. Overall it may be said that their nature was seen as being closely related to the angelic nature they possessed before the fall, for in some aspects this was retained unchanged, while in others it was perverted to its exact opposite181. There was uncertainty as to whether the demons were at all material or corporeal. However the overall tradition held unanimously that the demons were, like angels, immortal, and almost the same unanimity may be found in its attitude to their natural characteristics which were seen as being a perversion of those possessed by the angels. Besides, the standard tradition tended to hold that the demons really were immaterial and incorporeal, although there were strong alternative currents in late Byzantine thought which attributed to the demons varying degrees of materiality. Some effects of demonic possession might thus, for instance, be explained by reference to this materiality in their nature. A degree of inherent materiality might provide a reason for the way demons were sometimes believed to be frightened and compelled by mortal exorcists or magicians simply by the use of physical objects, while the varying degrees of intelligence were ascribed to different groups of demons might also be regarded as correlative to their involvement with matter. Another striking feature of the overall tradition of later Byzantine demonology which also derived, to some extent, from the angelic origin

170

Chapter 2

they were believed to have had, is the arrangement of the demons into hierarchies and their distribution among detailed categories. The standard tradition, in which a hierarchy was assumed, usually ranked the demons beneath a single, all important leader, Satan or the devil. The demons were believed to have occupied the equivalent positions to those they held in heaven when their leader was an archangel and they were angels. Further details in this hierarchy were supplied from the military metaphors that were frequently employed. Alternative traditions give carefully ordered, elaborated and detailed classifications of the demons where demons and angels were allotted to every hour of each of the seven planetary days of the week. This was a late Byzantine tendency which saw every aspect of time and space as having its own proper demon and/or angel. Such are those which divided the demons in terms of their relative materiality or by way of their «geographical» place of habitation182. There was also a tendency in the standard tradition of demons to individualise, if not systematically categorise, the demons. This tendency is apparent in the identification by the standard tradition of demons with individual sins and passions, misfortune and disease of which vast and complex lists were produced.

4.2 Francesco Maria Guazzo Francesco Maria Guazzo, (1570-1630 A.D.) is most well known for the writing of the Compendium Maleficarum (Book of Witches)183. Guazzo had firsthand experience of the practice and profession of witchcraft and bewitchment and was widely travelled and highly regarded in the field of possessions and demonology and the cures thereof. During his life he is credited with performing several exorcisms including to members of several ducal and princely families, notably the bewitched Cardinal Charles of Lorraine and his relative, Eric, Bishop of Verdun. On another occasion Guazzo was called to Düsseldorf in order to exorcise the mad Duke Johann Wilhelm of Julich, Kleve and Berg (15621609 A.D.). Guazzo first diagnosed possession, but after five months of unsuccessful attempts at spiritual healing and in the summer of 1604 A.D. the diagnosis was changed to bewitchment as the cause of the poor Duke’s mental illness. Guazzo had been sent to Düsseldorf by Duke Charles III of Lorraine (a family with which he had a long running association, having exorcised the Cardinal, Charles of Lorraine) on behalf of his daughter Antoinette (1569-1610 A.D.), Duke Johann Wilhelm’s wife. It was these direct experiences that inspired Guazzo to write his Compendium Maleficarum which was published in 1608 and was widely regarded among his contemporaries as the authoritative manuscript on the theme of

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

171

Witchcraft. Within his text, Guazzo discusses the witches’ pacts with the devil, detailed descriptions of witches’ powers and poisons. He also formulated a classification of the demons based on a previous work by Michael Psellos. Guazzo is not the most distinguished of demonologists by any means, although his work was compiled out of a vast array of sources. He is however interesting because he introduces the idea whereby the devil induces diseases. Guazzo mentions also the appeal to medical authorities and adopts the usual line on the Sabbat (the satanic liturgy of a monstrous sect that goes against tradition), namely that in their liturgy everything was absurdly performed in an inversion of normal practice. He claimed to be moderate rather than credulous, and denied that werewolves were actually transformed. Like many other demonologists, he neglected the issue of the gender of witches. Guazzo’s book is divided in 3 books, here are some selected parts. Book One: x Here the author describes The witches’ pact with the devil. First, The witches deny their Christian faith and insult the Virgin Mary. A literal trampling on the Cross is not mentioned in the text, although it is implied later. Second, they are re-baptized. Third, they are renamed. Fourth, they deny their godparents and are given new ones. Fifth, they give the devil a piece of their clothing, as a sign of their acquired goods being as much devoted to the devil as their spiritual goods. Sixth, they swear allegiance within a circle. Seventh, they pray to be struck out of the book of life, and written in the black book of death. Eighth, they promise to sacrifice to the devil. Ninth, they make an annual gift of something black to their demonic masters to avoid being beaten. Tenth, the devil places various marks on them. Eleventh, they make various vows, such as promising never to adore the Eucharist, to revile the Virgin Mary, to abstain from making the sign of the Cross, and so forth. In return for their loyalty, the devil promises that their prayers in this world will be fulfilled and he will bring them happiness in the world hereafter. x Witches produce rain and hail by their deeds and words. Witches can even produce lightning, when God permits. According to Andrea Cesalpino, in his work Daemonum Investigatio Peripatetica they could raise storms but could only injure those whom God had forsaken184. Examples are also provided from Guazzo’s Malleus Maleficarum and from Nicolas Rémy for example, but Guazzo also provides cases from Trier and Swabia, which are not attributed to published sources185. The former involves a man discovering that his daughter could make rain by urinating

172

Chapter 2

in a trench. She told him that her mother had taught her how to do it, so he handed them both over to the judge in a neighbouring town, to which he had lured them by pretending he had been invited to a wedding feast. The Swabian example, taken from the Malleus, also involved a young daughter, this time helping her peasant father whose fields were drought-stricken186. x Witches have power over external objects. If witches show that they have done evil since the previous Sabbat, the devil instructs them in how to create crop infestations, how to bewitch cattle, how to use poisons. They can conjure up feasts, either illusory ones which leave the eaters hungry or real ones composed of bad food, since God will not permit the conjuring of good food. Various examples are provided, of witches stealing milk with the aid of a demon, of a garden wrecked with slugs after a Sabbat, and other tales. x The author questions whether witches are really transported to their nocturnal assemblies. Followers of Luther and Melanchthon have claimed that witches are only transported to the Sabbat in their imagination, by diabolical illusion. However, the devil can clearly place a likeness of a man’s wife in bed to deceive her husband. The devil in the shape of a goat or some other animal really does transport witches, as many citations prove. The witches anoint themselves with filthy unguents before going, and sometimes walk to the Sabbat. The devil presides, sitting on a throne in the shape of a goat or a dog. They bend the knee or kick their legs high, pointing their chins skyward. They offer black candles or infants’ navel strings to the devil, and kiss his buttocks. Great numbers meet at Sabbats and there are far more women than men present. There are tables laid, but the food is foul, badly cooked and bitter in taste. The wine is black. There is plenty of everything except bread and salt (these are ingredients used for the bread of the Eucharist). All is confused to the eyes, and sometimes the devil deludes witches into believing they are at the Sabbat when actually they are fast asleep at home. There is dancing in circles, but always to the left, and they are not for pleasure but are tiring work. When they approach the demons to venerate them, they approach backwards. When they speak, they face the ground. All things that they do are contrary to other people’s usage. The desire for wanton dancing always leads by evil example to lust and sin. Sometimes they dance before eating and sometimes afterwards. Three or four tables are set aside for the richest or most honoured witches. They each sit with their familiar demons, sometimes side by side and sometimes face to face. Afterwards, demons and witches join in frenzied dancing and obscene songs. Finally, the witches copulate with their demon lovers. Many pages of examples are provided, mainly from recent demonologists. Whether witches can transmute bodies, Guazzo is certain that this cannot be

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

173

done, and that it is dangerously close to heresy to believe in actual transformation. A human soul cannot inhabit the body of a beast. Rather, this is an illusion created by the devil. «Sometimes, in accordance with the pact of the magus, he surrounds a witch with an aerial effigy of a beast, each part of which fits on to the correspondent part of the witch’s body, head to head, mouth to mouth, belly to belly, foot to foot, and arm to arm; but this only happens when they use certain ointments and words...and then they leave the footprints of a wolf upon the ground». This is why the witch can be found wounded after the wolf has been attacked. If, however, the witch is not bodily present at all, it is the devil who wounds the body in the part where the beast was wounded. Book Two: This book deals with the soporific malefices. Sorcerers and witches put people to sleep in order to poison them, steal their children, rob them, or pollute them with filth and adultery. This can be done with a wide variety of natural drugs, but demons have perfect knowledge of the effects of such potions and can also, with the permission of God, perform such things without external aids. Demons also give witches the power to turn into mice, cats or locusts, as the witches believe, to enable them more easily to insinuate themselves into houses for this purpose. Witches also use strange lights, parts of corpses, and human fat to induce sleep. All those who go to sleep should therefore recite a psalm and prayer, such as Qui habitat in adiutorio Altissimi or Inte Domini speravi. They should cross themselves, recite the Salve Regina Mater misericordiae, the Paternoster, and the Ave Maria. They should also have a wax Agnus Dei blessed by the Pope or some holy relics by their bed to be safe. Witches use human corpses to kill men. Witches dig up corpses to use them for murderous purposes, especially the bodies of those condemned to death. They also use the executioner’s implements. Others cook the whole body to ashes and mix it into a lump. Various examples of this are provided, with witches using human remains for murder and for rendering vines and fruit trees barren. x Of witches’ poisons. According to the author, the poisons are mixed from many substances, from leaves and stalks and roots of plants, from animals, fishes, venemous reptiles, stones and metals. Sometimes they are administered to be swallowed and sometimes as an ointment to be applied externally. In the first instance, they mix a powder into food or drink; in the second, they bewitch their victim while asleep by anointing various parts of the body, so that the poison is absorbed by the heat of the body, causing great pain. A third method is by inhalation, which is the worst kind because it is quickly drawn through the mouth and so to the heart.

174

Chapter 2

Various examples provided, including one from Girolamo Cardano’s De Rerum Varietate xv. 80, concerning a hermaphrodite who crept about the houses of Saluzzo at night in 1536, as part of a poisoning conspiracy involving some forty men, including a hangman. x Of the malefice of binding [ligaminis]. Guazzo says that learned men give seven causes of impotence. The first is if a couple is made hateful to one another, by slander or disease. The second is when a couple are kept apart, in separate places or by a phantasm coming between them. The third is when the vital spirit is prevented from flowing to the male genitals. The fourth is when the semen is dried up. The fifth is when the male member becomes flabby [flacida]. The sixth is through the application of natural drugs which deprive a woman of the power to conceive. The seventh is rarer, when the female genitals are closed up or narrowed, or when the male genitals are retracted, hidden or removed. None of these seven examples are ligatures (magical working by tying in a string). Perhaps that form of witchcraft was not widely feared in the regions known to Guazzo. x Of incendiary witchcraft. Witches not only inflame souls but also set fire to bodies, houses, and whole towns. They are evidently fuel for the eternal fire. The reason behind this is because the devil wishes to perpetuate the race of witches. The infection of witchcraft [sortilegiilues] is spread to children by a sort of contagion [veluticontagione]. One of the sure proofs of witchcraft is that the parents of the accused were guilty of the crime. The devil urges and compels his servants to corrupt their children. x Of the witchcraft of love and hatred. Guazzo produces a standard treatment, drawing especially on classical authors, such as Virgil, Lucan and Ovid rather than from the demonologists of the thirteenth century who were predominant during the Roman and Venetian Inquisitions. He explains the various forms of the witches’ vindictiveness against the human race who are feared everywhere although they do not have an infinite capacity to harm. x Of the different diseases brought by demons. The author argues against the naturalistic position of many Galenists and Aristotelians who claimed that natural diseases cannot be induced by demons. Among others, he cites Codronchi, Jean Fernel and Cesalpino who argue against this position. He asks why God permits the devil to act through witchcraft. The answer is that God permits this so that his glory may be increased in us. God permits man to sin, as a proof of divine benevolence even in allowing free will to the devil. He shows mercy to the human race by restraining the harm done by the devil while not allowing him to accomplish various things to show justice in punishing sin even in this life.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

175

x Of vain practices and superstitions. This chapter deals with various forms of idolatry and divination taken mainly from classical sources. x Of oracles [de sortibus]. In this chapter Guazzo deals with various forms of divination and necromancy. The best remedy for the ills they inflict is by striking fear into the witches by word and deed. The fear of prison can cause witches to remove their spells. The external cures used by witches have no efficacy but merely act as a cover for witchcraft. The demons do not remove a disease from one person without transferring it to another. He uses a lot of citations taken mainly from classical and biblical sources but also brings plenty of modern examples of the activities of the devil, finishing with the tale of a wretched English heretic girl, Elizabeth Croft. The devil is quick to harm but witches find many obstacles in their path when they try to heal. The harsh bondage in which the devil keeps his servants induces despair. When they try to kill themselves, they are instantly beyond help. The devil thus drives them to their eternal death but, if they will confess with penitential joy, voluntarily and without torture, God will grant them the chance to save their souls. Book 3 speaks of whether it is lawful to remove a spell in order to cure the bewitched. Guazzo argues that it is indeed permitted to burn, untie, dig up or otherwise destroy the physical instruments of the curse in order to break the devil’s hold. The rest of Book 3 deals with the diagnosis of possession and bewitchment including the lawful Catholic sacraments and sacramentals that can be used to cure such afflictions. It is worthy of note that Guazzo does not distinguish between direct possession and obsession caused by a witch. He acknowledges only two categories of possession: that caused by a witch and the other caused by bewitchment. Thus, any strange afflictions noticed are to be attributed presumably to the agency of a witch and not to the sins of the afflicted or the independent activity of the devil

4.3 Power attributed to the Demons There is a great difference of opinion in the late Byzantine demonology as regards the question of the power that demons were believed to possess. That demons had any real power was not the belief of many Christians, however, neither was it in accordance with orthodox belief. The standard tradition, in order to safeguard belief in the omnipotence and complete goodness of God maintained that evil was not from him. However no act, good or evil, was ever performed without his permission. In consequence of this doctrinal position, the demons were regarded by the orthodox tradition

176

Chapter 2

as having no real power of their own, and being able to work freely was only an illusion of the specific activity God allowed them. The demons are empowered by human sin to do what is evil, infiltrating the world through the corrupt and weak human will that is seduced into handing over to evil forces its God given responsibility to do good (Rv 13:3-4; 17:12). God’s permitting evil was attributed always to a need either to chastise sinners bringing them to reject evil or to test, train, and prove the faithful so that, in both cases, as many as possible could be saved from going to perdition in the final judgement187. The demons on this view were God’s instruments and, although they had become entirely evil and unredeemable, they were still used by divine providence for the ultimate good of those they aimed to lead astray. However, there were alternative views about this since many people at this time did not agree that all demonic misfortunes were allowed by God. Perhaps, in the catastrophic social, political, and economic climate of the late Byzantine period, people had difficulty in believing, as they were required to by strict Orthodox principles, that God gave his permission for all the demonic activity that was affecting them personally or was disturbing their world in general. Rather than believe the terror of God’s wrath was upon them, it was in some ways simpler to believe that the demons caused such evils and misfortunes of their own free will and by their own power, and were thus directly responsible for them. Here again, demons were invested with real power of their own188, but also, as a result, man himself was believed to be capable of controlling them, harnessing their power simply on the basis of the right knowledge. However this went against the fundamental tenets of Christianity, especially God’s omnipotence, as it was for this reason of course that orthodoxy was opposed to magic and sorcery and other notions which attributed independent power to the demons.

4.4 The activities and uses of the Demons The range of activities and uses ascribed to the demons by the majority of the people who accepted the overall tradition of late Byzantine demonology always contained a mixture of standard and alternative beliefs. Only a few people, for instance those who followed orthodox doctrine most assiduously, would have been concerned to make a distinction between various areas of demonic operation. It is clear from the beliefs about demonic activity and its use that most Byzantines were generally not interested in a logical division between the alternative and standard beliefs. The standard tradition view of demonic activity was necessarily conditioned by its belief that the forces of evil had no independent power of their own, and thus they believed that the demons were only used by God

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

177

and never by men. After the creation and elevation of Adam, the devil was permitted to tempt him and so ensure that Adam’s response to God’s goodness was a choice of free and genuine obedience, being made in the face of an evil alternative. When however man succumbed to seduction and chose the evil option, the demons were allowed more widespread power over him and on the earth which was originally man’s exclusive domain (Gn 1:28). This was for a twofold purpose: first so that they might act as agents in man’s re-education by letting him see how dreadful was the consequence of sin, and second in order that they might be able to punish human wickedness by making life hard and by making man subject to death (Gn 3:15; 6:3). However God, in accordance with his inherent righteousness, allowed the demons to engineer the loss of the increased power they had been granted. The demons could tempt man, they could bully him psychologically, but they had no authority at all to back up the threats and inducements they employed í man was always free to choose between good and evil. And yet by God’s decree the devil had the power of death, which vowed to consume the entire human race and thus loomed over every person’s psyche like a dark cloud. Thus the devil and the demons retained a shadowy hold over the kingdom of death. In the orthodox tradition of this time more stress was laid on the sufferings of evil souls in hell and less stress on the demons as their torturers. However, they were thought to be involved in a whole range of activities against man. Among their most common manifestations were appearances in waking life, dreams and visions. Such manifestations might be designed to frighten the victims into believing in their power or to achieve this end in some other way, such as the pretence of being able to tell the future. In other cases these appearances had the purpose of leading the victim into sin or despair. For example, the sight of a seductive woman might incite lust in a man, while the vision of angels might make a good Christian woman prideful in her holiness. In short, the demons were thought to use every possible deception and delusion, to employ every conceivable subtly to lead Christians aside from the truth into lies, away from virtue into sin, and to shake their belief in the goodness, mercy and omnipotence of God, and to cast doubt in the victory and love of Christ. However, if the Christian held true to the faith in humble trust of God’s goodness, such testing would actually make him or her stronger (like Job). In addition, the standard tradition also accepted that the demons, as spirits, were able to enter people and tamper with their minds more directly by manipulating the passions that lay within them or by actually possessing them. The standard tradition, through the concept of demonic possession, also provided an explanation for all manner of socially unacceptable behaviour, as well as for

178

Chapter 2

mental illness most commonly associated with possession, and even for some physical illnesses and disabilities. Obviously these forms of demonic attack were explained by the orthodox tradition along the accepted lines which maintained that the demons were acting under God’s permission for the punishment of sin and the testing of virtue. Thus to explain the belief in demonic sorcery and divination, standard tradition resorted to the usual arguments of illusion or divine permission. In addition, the standard tradition argued so vehemently against these beliefs and practices that by taking these beliefs so seriously it lent to them a credibility it would have logically sought to undermine.

4.5 The control of the Demons and their resistance There is a considerable amount of material present in the overall tradition of demonology in the late Byzantine period, related to the control and use of the supernatural forces of evil but this material stemmed mainly from alternative traditions, i.e. from unorthodox beliefs. As it has been already mentioned, the standard tradition believed that only God could really control the demons and use them directly. Men were entirely dependent on God’s will, on his grace, if they wished to avert or counter something they believed had been worked by the demons. All men could do, strictly speaking, was to make use of prayer and penance in the hope, but never in the certainty, of moving God to feel compassion and save the victim(s). Even when problems of demonic possession or illness believed to have been caused by demons were involved, such an approach was thought to be the only correct one and, indeed, the only one possible. According to the standard tradition the priest or layman performing an exorcism acted solely in exercise of his function to pray in Jesus’ name and thus to open a victim up to God’s healing power; but there was never any suggestion that he could make God do what he wanted. The actual words and objects that such a person used in the course of rituals which were formally established by the Church (e.g. the rite of Baptism), were symbols, that through the power of Christ given to the Church had divine power to actualize what they signify, make clear to the victim, the audience, and to the demons that evil is powerlessness in the face of God’s name invoked by sincere believers, and that, thanks to Christ’s victory, death and the demons have a defeated status. However we find instances where the demons could likewise be described as having power, apparently of their own, to resist the exorcist or as being able to injure, against God’s will, either the exorcist himself or the victim from whom the demons were being cast out.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

179

Since the orthodox tradition saw the demons as creatures able to do only what they were allowed to by God while depriving them of much of their power by Christ, it is possible to understand how it was thought that they could be resisted and controlled by ordinary men. All that was needed to combat the demons was a firm commitment to God and his power. Such commitment starts with Christian baptism which was the most obvious and vital point of contact with the demonic in the standard orthodox tradition for ordinary people. Such commitment needed to be lived out by a virtuous way of life and frequent prayer. The use of particular forms of prayer and the practice of specific virtues against various forms of demonic assault are thus widely attested189. The sign of the cross was thought to be the Christian’s most powerful weapon in front of which the demons were believed to turn tail and flee at its sight190. Most of the elements mentioned here, along with some other elaborations, appeared in the actual rites of exorcism. Here in exorcism the confrontation between the forces of good and evil was vividly and sharply revealed. It is here also that the beliefs about man’s ability to control the demonic powers reached their greatest development in the standard orthodox tradition. The stories which appear with relative frequency in the New Testament about the exorcisms performed by Jesus and his followers provided ample evidence and the basic support for the practice of exorcism in the later tradition, but the idea of exorcism was very deeply rooted owing to its presence in the catechumen service before baptism and in the liturgy of baptism itself, as well as in rituals employed for curing the possessed. As the Gospels show191, sometimes demons did not always obey the orders by the exorcist to leave and never return, especially if the exorcist lacked authority. Mention may also be made of what is thought to be resistance by the demons and violence or attempted violence on their part. On other occasions it was thought necessary to take precautions to prevent the spirit from returning or hiding in a victim until the practitioner was deluded into believing that he had succeeded in his aim. Here a sign of genuine departure might thus be demanded192. From the simple to the most complicated, the rituals that were meant to rebuff demonic forces seem to have followed a relatively common pattern containing various combinations of frequently repeated formulaic statements, biblical citations, commands and ritual actions193. In essence, the Byzantine exorcist or priest established and made clear to the patient and audience by these formulae, firstly the identity of the God involved and the nature of his power, as well as the fact that he was working through him, and secondly, the nature and comparative weakness of the opposing power. Thus the person conducting the exorcism could command the opponent by his God

180

Chapter 2

and remove him from the scene, whether this focused upon an actual person or simply a substance, because of the demonstrated imbalance in their power. The verbal elements of these rituals drew on a relatively limited range of sources, almost exclusively Biblical. The identity of God was generally established first by the use of various Biblical titles, like for example Lord God, Son of God, God of gods, Lord of Lords, YHWH Sabaoth, God of Israel, and so on194. His nature and power were then made clear, usually by mention of his role as creator of the universe and everything in it, of his complete dominance over the angels and all natural phenomena, of his ability to inspire all with fear and of his incarnation and victory over death, as well as of his role at the end of time. These latter elements fulfilled a dual function because they also reminded the demons of their principal defeat by God’s hand and of the punishment he was going to inflict on them. The inferiority of demons was further stressed and their fallen nature established by mention of the devil’s original fall, of Jesus’ exorcisms of various types of spirit, and of the power given to his followers. Once he had defined the situation, the exorcist was in a position to command the demons to leave or to beg God for protection from it, depending on the nature of the case in hand or the particular stage the ritual had reached. Such commands and demands again drew heavily on Biblical language particularly that of the New Testament exorcisms and Old Testament military victories. However the repetition of the «Holy Name» of God or Christ and the mention of the «Cross of Christ» was common in cases of possession, a reminder that the cross had definitively liberated man from demonic power, and that God created man in his image and still loved him even if this image was wounded by sin195. Most of these elements of standard orthodox exorcism are well illustrated in the following formula which is one of several pronounced during the catechumen service for initiation in the Orthodox Church196. This prayer is called the First Exorcism, and it precedes the candidate renouncing the devil, pledging allegiance to Christ, baptism and anointing with chrism: «The Lord rebukes you, O devil, for he came into the world and dwelt among men in order to shatter your tyranny and free mankind; hanging on the Cross, he triumphed over all the hostile powers, when the sun was darkened and the earth was shaken, when the graves were opened and the bodies of the Saints rose; he destroyed death by death and conquered you, O devil, who had the power of death. I adjure you in the name of God who revealed the tree of life and appointed the Cherubim and the fiery sword that turns each way to guard it. Be rebuked and depart; for I adjure you in the name of him who walked on the water as if it were dry land, and calmed the tempest whose look dries up the abyss and whose threatening makes the mountains melt away. It is this same Lord who now commands you, through us... Fear,

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

181

come out and depart from this human being, and never return... Come out and depart from this soldier of Christ our God, for he (she) has been marked with the sign of the Cross and newly enlisted...Come out and depart from this human being, with all your power and your angels. For the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is glorified, now and ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen God the holy, the fearful, the glorious, incomprehensible and inscrutable in all his works and all his might, who ordained for you, O devil, the punishment of eternal torment, through us his unworthy servants, orders you, and all the powers that work with you, to depart from him (her) who has been newly sealed in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, our true God. Therefore, I adjure you, most wicked, impure, abominable, loathsome and alien spirit: Come out of this human and never again enter into him (her). Depart, admit the vanity of your power which could not even control the swine... Come out and depart from him (her) who is now preparing for holy illumination. I adjure you by the saving Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ and his sacred Body and Blood and his awesome return; for he shall come without delay to judge all the earth, and shall assign you, and all the powers working with you, to the fire of hell, having deliver you to the outer darkness, where the worm constantly devours, and the fire is never extinguished. For the power belongs to Christ our God, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and ever unto the ages of ages Amen. O Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, who heals every illness and every infirmity, look upon your servant (N); seek out, examine and expel from him (her) all the workings of the devil. Rebuke the impure spirits and banish them, and cleanse the work(s) of your hands; by your swift action crush Satan under his (her) feet, and grant to him (her) victory over the devil and his impure spirits; so that, having received your mercy, he (she) may become worthy of your immortal and heavenly mysteries and may give glory to you, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, now and ever, and to ages of ages. Amen».

Accompanying these pre-baptismal prayers of exorcism were a number of ritual actions which could be performed by the practitioner or his catechumen. A frequent element here was the employment of fasting and vigil for the purpose of exorcism, following the accepted version of Jesus’ statement in Mark 9:29. This practice could also be elaborated by various dietary prohibitions and other conditions of behaviour following cure from possession197. Most commonly however the physical actions in an exorcism took several forms: the form of the imposition of a sign or holy object upon the patient, the symbolic blowing of the priest upon the catechumen to symbolize the action of the Holy Spirit, and the baptism itself involved a descent into waters that had been previously exorcised. In both baptism and exorcism one finds similar rituals: anointing with holy oil, reading from the Bible, and imposition of relics of saints or similar «power objects» whose efficacy was well known198. Above all, the sign of the cross was employed,

182

Chapter 2

often being drawn many times upon the patient with holy oil or water, or being physically imposed in the form of a crucifix. It was in exorcism and the other apotropiac (intended to ward off evil) practices mentioned here that man, in the standard orthodox tradition, came closest to being invested with individual power over the demonic forces199. For this reason there was a constant danger of transgressing the limits of what could be accepted as orthodox doctrine. It was all too easy for exorcists/baptizers to see the names, the rituals, and the objects they used as possessing power of their own, as having an automatic effect on the demons if they were properly employed. It was easy for practitioners to slip from language of invocation of God in prayer, of his angels and saints, into language of command. Thus a phrase such as «Christ, drive out this demon» could be quite easily interpreted in both ways í a prayer or a command í but to say it as a command would result in a complete transformation of the structure of power believed to be involved. Instead of God being invoked as a deity who is omnipotent and free, God is being commanded and thus his name reduced to the level of the demons being opposed. It is as if the exorcist makes himself lord and God his serf, a kind of cosmic errand boy who must do his bidding. Thus in order to guard against such subtle but extremely important changes in outlook, the standard orthodox tradition laid a common stress on the supreme, free power of God and the Holy Spirit in these practices, denying man any power of his own200. However the standard orthodox tradition here never succeeded to eradicate and counter ideas about demons and exorcism that were fundamentally in opposition to it. Many of these ideas, stemming from Byzantium’s pagan heritage, were rooted too firmly in the minds of the masses and provided alternatives that were too attractive to be swept away completely by the dominant doctrines of orthodox Christianity201.

4.6 Demonization of «gods» and occult practice «Were not all men worshipping demons? Were not all used to make gods of the elements?» – St John Chrysostom202

The demonization and canonization of occult practices by the Fathers left a lasting impression in Byzantine culture and religious life, and caused the charge of dabbling in the occult arts to be one of the most serious and dangerous accusations one could wield, not only in the early but well through the late Byzantine period. Many modern scholars accuse early Church writers and canon lawyers of the Byzantine Church of unfair demonization of magic and idolatry, their argument is that the Christian leaders wanted to scare people away from alternative belief systems, so they

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

183

exaggerated the story of demonic forces with the intention of monopolizing religious life. Before making a judgment, let us examine the issue from the perspective of Judeo-Christian Scripture and its depiction of idolatrous practices, because these depictions are the sources which the Fathers took most seriously in their own learning. The process of demonization in the Old Testament, Septuagint and Jewish apocalyptic literature is an issue we have discussed at some length in chapter 1 (section 1.3, 3.3). In short, demonization of occult practices, worship, and even illness had already happened in Hellenistic culture and in Judaism itself before the time of Christ and well before the time of the Church Fathers. In the Septuagint of Dt 32:17; Ps 91:6; 96:5; 106:37; Is 65:3, 11; we see the word įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ being used to refer to idolatry, specifically, that demons had become the object of sacrificial worship by the rebellious children of Israel. Demonization in the Hebrew Bible is attested by the A›ru (shedim) who were destructive spirits that lie behind the «gods» of pagan worship. These demons were accorded a hideous nature, not because Jews were particularly hateful of daemons, but because these «gods» of pagan rituals demanded blood sacrifice of innocent human beings: «Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons» (shedim, Ps 116:37; cf. Dt 32:17). The Gospels are saturated with the idea that demonic forces are the root cause of spiritual and physical illness, though the idea was not alien to Jewish scripture203. Jesus identifies himself as one casting out demons beyond count in the Gospels: «Behold, I cast out demons» (Lk 13:32). Idolatry and heresy are the result of demonic influence in the epistles and Revelation. Paul refers to idolaters who «sacrificed to demons» as partaking in «the table of demons» (1 Cor 10:20- 21; cf. Is 65:11 LXX). Heresy he calls «cleaving to deceiving spirits and teachings of demons» (1 Tm 4:1). James says that to believe in one God is insufficient if «even the demons believe – and shudder!» (Jas 2:19). Also Revelation equates idolatry essentially with «worshiping demons» relating it to sorcery, and blames «the spirits of demons performing signs», i.e. sorcery which leads the kings of the earth into a powerful delusion that will provoke the final, apocalyptic war in Armageddon, killing off most of humanity (Rv 9:20-21; 16:14; 18:23-24). In light of these texts, it is not hard to find in the New Testament a sense of horror and almost impending danger for the world with regard to sorcery and the occult practice. These practices manifest themselves in Scripture as opposing the kingdom of God through demonic influence and work against the safety of humans. This negative idea of the occult was taken seriously by the Church Fathers in their writings, canons and admonitions, but it was not invented by them; it has roots in Judeo- Christian Scripture which is part

184

Chapter 2

of a larger Hellenistic, Near Eastern cultural milieu. Thus Paul can say to the Galatians in a matter-of-fact way: «Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods» (Gal 4:8, emphasis mine). What does he mean? Paul is likely making an allusion to the song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32, one of Paul’s favourite sources204. The LXX of Dt 32:17a reads: ਩șȣıĮȞ įĮȚμȠȞ઀ȠȚȢ țĮ੿ Ƞ੝șİ૶, șİȠ૙Ȣ, ȠੈȢ Ƞ੝ț છįİȚıĮȞ, «They sacrificed to demons and not to God, to gods whom they did not know/see». These gods are demons because they are unknown to true worshipers of God, they have no resemblance to the true God. Although they appear like gods, beautiful on the exterior, in reality they are destructive shedim who have lost all resemblance to the divine nature. Paul and the Septuagint refer to these false gods as idols, İíįȦȜȠȞ which means «image», that is, the outward form or appearance that does not express the true nature or substance. Paul’s understanding seems to be that these mysterious objects of pagan worship have a hidden forces at work underneath their external veneer; although these forces are not gods by nature μȘ ijȣıİȚ, nevertheless they are powerful enough to bind humans. In fact, Paul says, all those who do not «know God» are «enslaved» to these «gods», who are actually demons by nature, the ၱၬၤႻ shedim (Dt 32:17) or įĮȚμȠȞíĮ in the LXX. That non- Jewish gods are the spiritual forces of evil is an opinion Paul confirms in 1 Cor 10:21, where the «cup of demons... table of demons» are taken from the Septuagint of Is 56:11. The Hebrew of Isaiah reads: «You who forsake the LORD… who set a table for Fortune and fill cups of mixed wine for Destiny» but the LXX is IJ૶ įĮ઀μȠȞȚȦ IJȡ੺ʌİȗĮȞ, preparing the «table to the demon». The Jewish translators replaced the Babylonian goddess of Fortune with demon, įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ. In any case when Paul equates the pagan gods with demons he is referring to a Jewish belief that had become current by the Second Temple period205, this he makes explicit in the first Corinthian correspondence: «What pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants [țȠȚȞȦȞȠnȢ] with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons». (1 Cor 10:20 -21)

Paul’s conviction that idolatry was worship given demons is clearly expressed in Revelation 9:20-21: «The rest of mankind… did not repent of the works of their hands nor give up worshiping demons and idols of gold and silver… nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts».

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

185

This is the interpretation of St. John Chrysostom who thus takes it for granted that before Christ basically all mankind was worshiping demons (unknowingly)206. So we can see the demonization of occult practices by Church Fathers has direct parallels with the Judeo-Christian scripture. When we read Paul and the Church Fathers they describe idolatry in a way that can cause confusion so it is imperative to clarify our terms. They describe idolatry as being at the same time both false and in some sense real. Idolatry is false in the sense that it is not what people believed it to be. The Fathers took the stories of the «gods» to be the invention of poets, and not the inspired revelation of divine truth. The stories of the gods’ physical beauty, exploits, and powers were often self-contradictory. For the Fathers, as for Paul, the gods and goddesses of the Greek Pantheon or Mayan religion were idols, İíįȦȜȠȞ, «images» without true spiritual substance. Thus Paul says «we know that an idol has no real existence… although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth... for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist» and Jesus Christ his Son «through whom are all things» (1 Cor 8:4-6). However when men make anything other than God the focus of all their attention, be it a desire for something, a goal, a fantasy, an addiction; then God allows them to become delusional and to believe their fantasy is true and good. And when anything replaces the true God and natural desire to worship him; when the false is worshiped as if it were true, then there are spiritual forces at work: «God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness» (2 Th 2:11-12). This power of delusion is in essence demonic. To the Church Fathers idolatry and magic are real in the sense that unseen spiritual forces exploit human desires in order to receive sacrificial worship and cause mass human suffering: Firstly, Satan is happy for people to worship or desire anything other than God (Rom 1:21f). As soon as people worship something in place of the Creator who is Goodness and living Truth, and in their heart they replace God with something else, it begins the inevitable process of the decline of civilization that has happened all through history207.When the love and worship of God is forgotten, all things begin to slide into suffering, confusion, war and chaos until «a curse devours the earth» and the evil one becomes true to his name as «the ruler of this world» as Jesus calls him (Is 24:6; Jn12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Once the goal of chaos has been established, it is the essential work of the son of lawlessness, who comes with Satan’s help, to use magic, that is, «false signs and wonders», in order to deflect worship away from the true God and deceive man to worship his own ideas

186

Chapter 2

and passions, and to adore himself by having «pleasure in unrighteousness» (2 Th 2:4, 9-12). Secondly, the devil is «the prince of the power of air, the spirit at work in the sons of disobedience» (Eph 2:2). What does disobedience have to do with suffering? Satan is immaterial and has no visible effect on the world, but he is «at work» deforming human minds and warping their desires, pushing people – without their being aware of it – towards disobedience, physical addictions, hatred, envy, strife and bestial behaviour like a master of puppets. All people think they are freely following their desires, but they are so addicted to those desires (which are often shameful or self-destructive in some way) they become blind to both the fact they are hardly free and to the fact that devil has injected these desires like poison into their hearts208. Why? Satan will do anything he can to bind individuals in this way because he is eager to augment God’s curses due to human forgetfulness of God, injustice and disobedience to the covenant. Satan does this by inciting humans to act like selfish beasts, without true compassion and in ignorance of or defiance to the laws of nature set up by God, thus triggering curses209. The end result of human disobedience to God’s law is greater demonic infiltration, death and destruction of the earth210. In the language of the Gospels a person who is afflicted by demons is a person whom «Satan has bound» (Lk 13:11, 16). Thus we see clearly that human suffering caused by demons is done under the authority of «the prince of demons» as Satan is called in the synoptic Gospels (Mt 9:34; 12:24-26; Mk 3:22; Lk 11:15). Jesus came «to destroy the works of the devil» that is, the inroads that evil has made in the human heart (1 Jn 3:8). Christ liberates man so he may enjoy «what is good» the peace and freedom «to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God» (Mi 6:8). But to those who taste Christ’s freedom but reject his love by preferring to serve themselves, Jesus states that they are doomed to «the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels» (Mt 25:41). Satan himself «knows that his time is short» (Rv 12:12; cf. 20:10), and that is why he is so full of rage. He is jealous that many humans are saved from his grip by Christ’s redemption (Heb 2:1415), that the repentant sinners who «wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb» are given the eternal rewards of heaven while Satan is doomed to suffer forever in the lake of fire (Rv 22:14-15). Since there is no truth in him, on earth Satan has no real power except the power of illusion, seduction, deception (Rv 13:12-14). Thirdly: What is really going on in idolatry, as Scripture reveals, is that Satan wants to be worshiped (Rv 13:4), even though in reality he is ugly and repulsive, he loves to pretend he were God, he also loves to play many roles. That is precisely why Satan is depicted as having «seven heads and ten

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

187

horns» (Rv 12:3), the heads symbolize the multiplicity of his personalities, that he is always faking, always changing his shape, while the horns symbolize the power of his delusions. If Paul is right that idolatry is sacrifice given to demons (1 Cor 10:20), then all the roles that Satan plays as chief of the demons would naturally find expression in every idolatry system in the world, from Greek gods, to Norse, to Hindu deities. Humans have invented, perhaps through spiritual inspiration, these beautiful myths that typically do not feature the Creator as the centre of worship, and thus, Satan can capitalize on them. But how does the devil capitalize on magic and idolatry? In his book F. Graf underlines that from the sixth century B.C. through late antiquity, Ancient Greeks and Romans often turned to magic to achieve personal goals. «Magical rites were seen as a route for direct access to the gods, for material gains as well as spiritual satisfaction»211. But who are these «gods»? According to the Hebrew Bible, Dt 32:17, and Paul and Revelation in the Christian scriptures, worship of such gods is the «worshiping demons» along with «the rest of mankind» (Rv 9:20), it gives a person the feeling of sexual pleasure or power in an idolatrous system that is under the control of the false deity, who is Satan, worshiped not in his essence but in his deceptive image. The «seven heads» of Satan connotes the plenitude of power to fit into any given idolatrous system, make himself the object of worship because his devotees see him in the appearance of majesty and beauty in their imagination. But, as we shall see from two examples in history, in reality and act Satan the idol is filthy, and leads people into darkness by his power is to deceive, seduce, and change his shape before humans. Thus Paul writes «even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light» because in reality he is an imposter, on the outside he appears to offer something beautiful, but like a rotten apple he is full of worms, and nevertheless he is worshipped by those who let themselves be fooled. How does Satan disguise himself under idolatry? Let us take, for example, the Greek religion, which was essentially adopted by the Romans, and become perhaps the most influential in European history. Let us try to view this system not from human eyes, but hypothetically in the eyes of the evil one as he is presented as «the god of this world» (2 Cor 4:4), that is, our hypothesis is that Satan is the object of worship in any given pagan religion. In playing the devil’s advocate we must of course set aside the more positive cultural elements of Greek religion. Here the devil and his demons get the great privilege of covering themselves and hiding their true ugliness behind a pantheon of countless deities under the mastery of Zeus Olympios who shine with an ornate genealogy of their sexual generation that created the cosmos, and who by their beauty and power, are worthy of worship and

188

Chapter 2

sacrifice. In this pantheon Satan would conceivably play the role of Zeus, the king of the gods, God of justice, thunder and ruler of mighty Olympus. This system proved seductive not only to man but to Satan himself, who could gain the honour of the masses and pretend like he was a real winner. But what is interesting is when we remember what is often forgotten beneath all the glamour, there is the intrinsic acts of evil and injustice that Zeus, Kronos and the gods committed, for example: the killing and eating of their children, Cronos’ cutting off his father’s genitals to usurp his throne, Zeus’ war against his parents’ generation and imprisoning them, his infidelity, jealousy, philandering, etc. The depiction of Zeus as a bull, the form he took when raping Europa, is found today on the Greek euro coin, despite the apparent celebration of rape. All this is brushed aside and forgotten. But in truth it would be a disastrous model for human families to imitate (as Plato recognized). But injustice for almighty Zeus and the gods must be accepted by humanity a fortiori or even praised as a ‘sublime’ injustice212. To play the role of Zeus perhaps could give Satan a feeling that although he is not the Creator he was above God’s justice and thus omnipotent. There are some startling similarities: just as Zeus had attacked his father Cronos who had attacked his father Uranus the god of heaven, the devil had attacked the Father of Heaven his Creator (Rv 12:7). Even though the devil was cast down to earth (12:9), through paganism he had tricked mankind to worship him as a god. Thus Satan, through the cult of idolatry, could boast to God’s face that he had successfully taken revenge on the God who had created man to worship him alone (Rv 4:10; 14:7). Through Zeus Satan deluded humans into imagining a god who had usurped control of Heaven from his Father and declared himself «the Father of men and gods» ʌĮIJyȡ aȞįȡ±Ȟ IJİ șݱȞ IJİ, Zeus epithet in the Greek poet Hesiod and elsewhere213. Through Zeus Satan redefined fatherhood, not so much as responsibility and charity, but as philandering and rebellion. Whereas Satan the «Son of Dawn» failed to «exalt his throne» and usurp God’s rule of heaven at the beginning of time214, Zeus Olympios and his fellow Olympians had triumphed: the rebel son had established his rule in heaven over all things, crushing his Father. And just as Zeus’ injustice was exonerated by humans who feared him, Satan could thereby delude the natural human intellect and their critical faculty to the lie that «might makes right» which became almost creed of corrupt Athens during the Peloponnesian war. Under the same rule Satan could conceivably tyrannize God’s beautiful human beings with impunity, because the humans themselves had freely chosen Satan’s path by embracing what he offered them through idolatry: the pleasure of illusion, the escape from reality, the freedom from moral responsibility and total ‘freedom’ to abandon oneself to vice. The Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

189

Epiphanes erected a statue of Zeus Olympios in the Second Temple in Jerusalem; he «shed innocent blood... defiled the holy place» (1 Mc 1:39), and transformed the altar into a place of cult prostitution, an unspeakable «abomination» to pious Jews215. Part of the irresistible lure of paganism was the adoration of the erotic: this amounts to the worship of drunkenness, gluttony, and leisure under Dionysus, or the worship of sexual pleasure in the cult of Aphrodite216. Let us take another famous religious system to see how the devil could have hypothetically exploited it. The Aztecs had deluded themselves into thinking that in order to prevent the world’s destruction they had to feed their gods with human blood, in obedience to this lie they chained hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of innocent people and murdered them in the Templo Mayor and the temple of the sun god in Tenochtitlan. Aztec sacrifices were simply part of the long cultural tradition of human sacrifice in Mesoamerica. How could it happen? From a rationalist perspective the slaughter served no purpose, and so we modern «enlightened» people tend to assume it was done out of a kind of ignorance. But it had deep meaning for the Aztecs themselves, and from a spiritual and social perspective there is a deeper reality at work that needs to be exposed: satanic power. If the Bible is right that demonic forces are behind idol worship, then Aztec human sacrifice would seem to be no exception. The prophet describes the Lord’s sadness over Israel’s descent into idolatry as human sacrifice: «And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your whorings so small a matter that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?» (Ez 16:20-21).

The word akal, «devoured», «eating», indicates that some «being» has eaten these children. To answer the question «who is being fed?» in human sacrifice would bring Israel to confront evil forces: «They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons [shedim]; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood» (Ps 106:37-38).

These texts reflect the tragedy of what Jewish people had lived through, and it reveals the painful, horrifying spiritual reality behind human sacrifice. The Hebrew Bible217 reveals that demons are the spiritual reality behind idols and that they feed on human sacrifice. The Aztec system shows itself to fit the mould quite well, as they also conceived of human souls as the much needed alimentation for their gods. The Aztec would be perhaps the

190

Chapter 2

most effective system known in human history for feeding the demons with rivers of innocent blood. Throughout history murder is almost always justified for religious or ideological reasons. The Aztecs were no exception, they were not ignorant, but had a rich cultural religious system and verified everything they were doing by astronomical observation and calculation. How could they being such an intelligent, culturally rich and advanced civilization sink so low? The model given by Jewish and Christian scripture is that they, like all humanity, had been fooled. They were deceived by the demons they worshiped as gods. The temptation offered them by the evil one was too strong, too embedded in the collective psyche of the people. The Aztecs were fooled into feeling a tremendous sense of indebtedness to the gods and even guilt if they did not feed the gods with blood. This is because they believed that all human life had sprung from a sacrifice that the gods had accomplished so that humans could live: «Life is because of the gods; with their sacrifice they gave us life... They produce our sustenance... which nourishes life»218. The greatest tragedy of all about Aztec religion was that they thought they were free, and that their sacrifices set the world free, yet they were totally enslaved, more enslaved, in fact, than their sacrificial victims. The devil always leads humans to some «little» injustice by offering them the sweetness of the idea that the sin can be justified, that some advantage in power or pleasure can be gained. But the devil does not hesitate to «bind» humans, addicting them to evil as soon as they slip. Indeed human sacrifice likely gave the Aztecs the feeling of power, prestige, and responsibility, it was they who were responsible for keeping the cosmos in existence, they fulfilled man’s sacred duty to feed the gods219 í and thus they were the masters of the universe. Satan had blinded them from seeing the truth of the terrible acts of cruelty and injustice they were inflicting on the tribes they dominated and their own people (who were filled with shame if they did not sacrifice). Aztec oppression was justified by Aztec religion which, by means of human sacrifice, gave worship to the devil and his angels. Demons playing the role of Tlaloc and the gods of the Aztec pantheon got the luxury of drinking rivers of human blood. These examples have helped us see that Satan could capitalize on all forms of idolatry – be it Greek, Aztec, Indian, or whatever – because they is based on the worship of images, İíįȦȜȠȞ, which like masks for Satan without the worshiper knowing the reality. Idolatry therefore reveals the essence of sin: the selling of freedom to do evil, the external mask of the act must be praised as beautiful and innocent, but the interior reality of the act is evil to the core. All evil is intimately connected to a horror that is so insane it is beyond the human capacity to comprehend. The devil’s malice is

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

191

insane, because he is fixated on the perverse delight of inflicting suffering on the innocent even to his own destruction, and thereby exacting revenge upon the innocent God who is forever faithful in his deeds, sincere in his word, and who infinitely loves his creatures. The essence of Judaism is that the Creator alone «you shall love with all your heart» and God’s worship is to be held «above» one’s «highest joy»; anything less a violation of the first commandment against idolatry (Dt 6:5; Ps 137:6). Satanic worship is not just by idolaters but by anyone who unknowingly follows the beast, that is, they will satisfy their carnal desires, no matter what the cost (2 Cor 11:14; Rv 13:4-12). Now we see why Paul refers to Satan as «the god of this world» (2 Cor 4:4), not that he is god but he has fooled the world into worshiping him as such by enslaving them to sinful desires. His goal is simple: he wants to be worshiped, for men to love injustice and turn from God (Rv 13:4), so he promises to give the delight of the thought of sin, but when the sin is performed the pleasure is fleeting as soon leaves a person empty. He uses powerful forms of deception and magic «the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing» (2 Th 2:9-10). Magic, media manipulation, and injustice are keys by which Satan infiltrates into human desires and injects psychological poison to fool people because if people saw how ugly and cruel Satan was, they could never worship him. No mind can fathom the intensity of glee he takes in doing what is evil. Satan must deceive because if people saw how beautiful and good God was they would all worship God – that is why Jesus says that Christians are the light of the world, in a time of universal ignorance of God they bring the light of truth. This is prophesied in Isaiah: «For behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the LORD will arise upon you, and his glory will be seen upon you. And nations shall come to your light» (Is 60:2-3). But Paul says: «the god of this world has blinded the mind of unbelievers». Why? So that they will never be able to see the true God and worship him. All people desire to know the truth, but Satan blinds them in order «to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel», that is the truth of God’s glory that «shines in the face of Jesus Christ» (2 Cor 4:4-6). Ignorant of the joy of loving Christ and God, they instead settle for the meaningless desires which they will do anything to achieve. Fourthly: Idolatry is «real» in the sense that those who practice it are really destroyed by it, thus the danger is real. Idolaters might in their own mind feel exalted, empowered, or seeming to possess special wisdom. Old and New Testaments agree that reality idolaters become as unable to perceive truth as the statue they worship, «professing to be wise they became fools» and their minds were darkened (Rom 1:22). Psalm 115

192

Chapter 2

explains how those who worship fake gods «will become like them», that is, they become like demons who know God exists, but they are hopelessly blind to God’s goodness and thus are incapable of enjoying, touching, or tasting any goodness in general – their only delight is in evil (Ps 115:4-8). But God pities the insanity of these demons and has found a temporary use for them, ultimately for the glory of his Son, «that all may honor the Son» (Jn 5:23). By sending his Son into the world God has revealed his mercy, mastered the demons and destroyed Satan’s rule through his Son’s role as exorcist par excellence in the Gospels220. But God’s mysterious will is that his Son and all creation with him must pass through the curse of death in order to enter into the blessing of eternal life221. Jesus came to encourage man to suffer death nobly without fear and in loving surrender to the Divine Will – Jesus came to accompany man in all his sufferings, even to die with man, so that all who believe in him may live forever with him222. Satan has the power of death and leads the world to death, but when Christians understand that this is by the will of God, and that «the evil one does not touch» those who believe in Jesus (1 Jn 5:18), then there is no fear but only surrender into God’s will and the joyful expectation of the eternal rewards: «Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him» (Jas 1:12). But in the mean time satanic power and demons are active in deceptive signs or magic which leads to the destruction of the earth, for biblical evidence of this note Rv 16:13-14: «And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon» (who is Satan, cf. 12:9) «spirits of demons performing signs which go forth to the kings of the earth, even of the whole habitable world to assemble them to the war of that day». Elsewhere these signs are related to magic of the beast under Satan’s power, such as «great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people» (Rv 13:13), as in Job Satan commanded that «the fire of God fell from heaven» with God’s leave (Jb 1:16). The son of perdition, (the beast or the Antichrist) will be a magician who operates «by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders» and «with all wicked deception... so that they believe what is false», 2 Th 2:9-11. But why would the devil want to fool people and create mass death? In the New Testament of «the one who has the power of death, that is the devil» Jesus says that «he was a murderer from the beginning» (Heb 2; Jn 8:44). The devil does not just profit from murder, he invented it. What does it mean to have the power of death—it means that death empowers the devil, it is his greatest weapon. The Old Testament suggests that the devil actually feeds on death223. Speaking of the devil’s hunger for human souls Peter writes (1 Pt 5:8-9), «Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

193

devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world». Satan kept like booty the beautiful, immortal souls of all humans who had died, until Christ came to rescue the elect from the underworld224. When Christ-God freely experienced death instead of empowering the devil, it robbed him of all his riches and freed the just souls í because God is Life itself he cannot truly die – by God’s humbly submitting to Satan in death, God destroyed Satan in his pride. In Christ’s death God had taken away all Satan’s legal condemnation and malice of humans «nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him» (Col 2:14-15). That means, the cross exposed the devil as he really is: a liar and a murderer. And at the same time the cross justified God, who had loved human so much he suffered from them «He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed» (1 Pt 2:24; Is 53:5-6). Jesus had taken into his own flesh all their wounds and all the weapons of the devil: hate, lies, envy, greed, etc; and he put an end to them. But given that Satan feeds on death, how could he convince human culture to celebrate death? Through the system of idolatry and magic. Humans were deluded in these myths to thinking that they had to kill innocent babies in order to sustain the natural order or bring about some natural effect: rain for the crops, fertility, sunshine, etc. Thus in war and destruction, and Satan is the real recipient of worship not only in, for example, the Aztec or Canaanite rituals of human sacrifice, but also in death frenzied World War I and II. Here supposedly faithful «Christian» and «Muslim» nations devoured each other, even putting their own citizens to death in concentration camps. This is because they filled their minds with fantasy of what could be gained in war, and replaced God’s law thou shalt not kill with the satanic motto the ends justify the means. So we see that human sacrifice is not a relic of the ancient world, it is very modern phenomenon. That is why after Christ the worship of images no longer made sense, it was clearly a sham – and yet modern man’s bestial nature has once again emerged because man has slipped back into the worship of fake ideologies and man’s own image. Pagan religions are incompatible with each other, they cannot all be true, but they are all perfectly compatible with Satan. Revelation reveals him as a dragon with seven heads, each head like a different god seeking worship, a mask forged by the master of deception, «Satan, the deceiver of the whole world í he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him» (Rv 12:9). Although he is on earth he is busy making war on

194

Chapter 2

mankind; his war is spiritual but the consequences are universal. The goal of the war is to scare humanity away from God and into mythology and pagan religions. By causing «those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain» (Rv 13:4, 15), the devil augments his power on earth but inevitably leads God’s chosen to eternal life. So if what has been said so far is reasonable, the reality is not that pagan religions were demonized by the Church fathers or Jews before them, it was that the demons had cleverly paganized themselves, cloaked themselves within the systems of idol worship and human sacrifice around the world. The demons seem to love «playing god» and getting blood sacrifice from humans who let their good reason fall into the snare of idolatry. So from the perspective of demons as postulated in the Bible, a perspective that early Christians always took seriously, the teaching of the Fathers about idolatry was not a demonization meant to frighten people but a clarification meant to liberate them. The Father’s gave the faithful the chance to free themselves from fear through self-knowledge and spiritual insight. In the case of the tribes that were being sacrificed by the Aztecs for example, such selfknowledge in Jesus Christ was indeed liberating and, in the long run, lifesaving – not to excuse the bloodshed of the conquistadors. What the New Testament calls idolatry225 and which it and the Old Testament essentially equates to magic, sorcery and «worshiping demons» (Rv 9:20)226, is a practice that the Fathers of the Church considered intrinsically demonic. The reasoning of the Church Fathers may have been the following: if Christian and Jewish scripture, which clearly reveals the violence of demonic forces, is right to posit that the demons were the reality behind the worship of pagan «gods», would it not make sense to assume that the magic that invoked those «gods» was inherently demonic as well? As we have shown, the scriptural data in support of this view is not lacking. All sorcery, black magic, astrology and the like that appeal to spiritual forces outside the protection of Jesus’ name and the blessing of his Church are deemed fruitless, according to the Fathers, because although these spiritual intermediaries promise to give man a special power, they actually strip him of his power and dignity; for as Paul says: «in Jesus Christ you are all sons of God through faith» (Gal 3:26). Occult arts and sorcery are pinpointed in Revelation as the source of mass deception on earth and the spilling of all innocent blood. This topic also has eschatological implications for the destruction of the planet. The end of the world cannot happen says Paul until «the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction» (sometimes called the Antichrist, 2 Th 2:3); who will be a potent magician that comes «by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders» in order to deceive the whole

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

195

world «with all wicked deception» (2 Th 2:9-10). When this impostor finally «exalts himself… proclaiming himself to be God» (2:4) his magic will have deceived those who «did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness» (2:12) so that they abandon the worship of the true God and worship him. When finally much of the world has been destroyed having fallen under this spell, like a «strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false» (2:11), the lawless one will fully reveal himself but Lord Jesus will in fact destroy him by the power of his second coming (2:8). Thus it is not surprising that Paul indicates that «idolatry, sorcery» are opposed to «the kingdom of God» (Gal 5:20-21). Magicians are grouped with the worst criminals who refuse to repent and are excluded from paradise: «Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood» (Rv 22:15). For the good of magicians they should repent, but their stubbornness not to is not the main reason why is sorcery condemned so severely in the book of Revelation. Magic is not only damaging to the individual but to the whole cosmic order, in which man finds his greatest joy in having peace with God through friendship with the Creator and worship of his supreme goodness. The cosmos operates smoothly when God’s will is respected, «Great peace have those who love your law» (Ps 119:165). But magic, since it is done in contempt God’s law, is a rape of the cosmic order, and thus it brings curses upon the whole planet, mass confusion and destruction. Speaking of Babylon, the symbol of the prevailing world system that will rule over all world leaders by the end of time (Rv 17:18), and that will fall at the end of time, John writes: «All nations were deceived by your sorcery, and in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all who have been slain on earth» (Rv 18:23). This implies that specifically by means of sorcery «all nations» have been fooled or even «drugged» (ijĮȡμĮțİíĮ) into killing masses of innocent people. When one considers all the useless wars and genocides of history, who did they benefit in the end if not Satan? And yet Scripture reveals that the world leaders led humanity like lemmings falling into the abyss were themselves deceived by a powerful delusion. Humanity was fooled throughout history. Who or what fooled them? Revelation 16:13-14, could give us a clue: «And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon», that is, «Satan» cf. 12:9, «spirits of demons doing signs, which go forth to the kings of the earth, even of the whole habitable world to assemble them to the war of that day». The Bible reveals the source of this mass death to be demons under their chief, «Satan, the deceiver the whole world» (Rv 12:9) í and his power to deceive is through magic, the wonders/signs performed by «spirits of demons» which lead man to

196

Chapter 2

apocalyptic war. Satan runs an empire of death, destruction, and war on the innocent people of earth through his puppet «the son of destruction», or «the beast»227. The beast’s power seems to be the deformation of human desires, that is, mankind’s forgetfulness of God and fixation of self, especially on the inordinate desire for money, pleasure, and power. By the beast Satan «deceives those who dwell on earth» (Rv 13:14); into false worship, that is, idolatry.

Final comments and conclusions In recent years scholarship has given considerable attention to magic in the societies of ancient Greece and Rome, late antiquity, and the medieval West. Much less attention, however, has been given to the phenomenon of magic in Eastern Christendom during the medieval period. Anyone who has looked at Byzantine texts will have been struck by the periodic mention of magical or semi-magical practices. There is, for example, the story in the 11th century Chronography of Michael Psellos, which describes how Empress Zoe had made for herself a private image of Christ that forecast the future by changing its colour. Or there is the tale in the Life of Irene of Chrysobalanton, about the lead idols of a nun and her suitor with which love magic had been worked228. The story recounts how these effigies were miraculously retrieved from a magician in Cappadocia through the agency of St. Anastasia and St. Basil and given to Irene as she was at prayer in the chapel of her convent in Constantinople. Are such stories to be dismissed merely as quaint footnotes to the history of Byzantium, or do they represent something more important and more fundamental, which historians should better examine in order to understand Byzantine civilization as a whole? From the most fundamental problem, that of definition of terms, one clear conclusion emerges, namely the need to make a distinction between what we might wish to call magic viewed at from an external definition and an internal definition, that is, what the Byzantines, at any place or time in their history, might call magic. From our external viewpoint magic and miracles may look similar, as might pagan amulets and Christian tokens, but from an internal viewpoint they were very different. The modern anthropologist attempts an external definition of magic that will hold good for all societies, and it will have to be consistent, but as Alexander Kazhdan writes, we should not expect consistency of the Byzantines when they made their internal definitions229.The distinctions between good and bad miracles, what was phoney and what was real, were for them areas of ambiguity and conflict, which might have important social implications. We should keep in mind also that the psychological benefits of the Byzantines’ belief in

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

197

miracles were mixed. With the hope for holy miracles and cures came the dread of sorcery and its effects. There can be no doubt, in the light of the evidence presented here, that the Byzantines themselves felt that magic was a significant factor in their society. Richard Greenfield demonstrates that magic was still flourishing, at least according to contemporary sources, during the last phase of the Byzantine Empire. Magic, then, was a part of the Palaeologan Renaissance, but was it an unchanging legacy from late antiquity?230 The answer to this question, as in other aspects of Byzantine culture, is mixed. As we have seen, the Church Fathers, by keeping distinct the powers of human and of supernatural agencies, were able to combine and to pass onto the Byzantines a continued belief in the evil eye with orthodox Christianity, as attested in the prayers against the evil eye accepted in Byzantine and orthodox liturgical life231. In patristic theory, it was the devil who caused the harm and not jealous humans, although some maintained that the devil might still try to use envious people for his purposes. The belief in the powers of envy and the evil eye certainly survived through the Byzantine period and beyond even in mainstream orthodox circles. On the other hand, while there was a measure of continuity, it can also be said that in many important respects the Byzantines succeeded in changing the status of magic in their society. The changed position of magic can be seen in both material culture and written documents. In the discussion of material culture, it is useful to make a distinction between artefacts that were marked with non-Christian devices, such as ring-signs and the names of pagan deities, and those marked with Christian signs or images, such as crosses and portraits of the saints. In the case of the first class of objects, those with non-Christian devices, the issues of church discipline were more clear-cut. Yet amulets of various kinds marked with essentially non- Christian signs were relatively widespread in the early Byzantine period232. Though many churchmen certainly disapproved of these objects, the authorities were unable to prevent their use. St. John Chrysostom, for example, inveighed against those who used charms and amulets and who made chains around their heads and feet with coins of Alexander of Macedon. However two centuries later people were still wearing tunics decorated with strips of medallions depicting Alexander as a potent rider. Alexander of Tralles (525 - 605 A.D.) was prepared to prescribe amulets for his wealthier patients who objected to the indignities of physical cures. We may infer that in his day such amulets were employed quite openly, and not only by the poor or uneducated233. These types of devices that the Church Fathers of the fourth century had found most offensive, the amulets with «satanic» characters such as ring-

198

Chapter 2

signs, were purged from the overt material culture in the later medieval period, to be replaced by more acceptable objects, such as crosses, relics, and intercessory icons of the saints. At early Byzantine Anemurium the number of excavated pendant crosses was smaller than that of the nonChristian apotropaic objects. But after the iconoclasm, many of the functions that had previously been performed by profane amulets were performed by objects of explicitly Christian character. This change was encouraged by the church authorities themselves. In the fourth century St. John Chrysostom recommended that infants be protected from envy by the sign of the cross rather than by magical signs, while at the end of the Byzantine period Joseph Bryennios, proposes the wearing of the cross or the Virgin’s image instead of profane amulets234. The church, therefore, was successful in marginalizing the non-Christian magical remedies, but it could not eliminate them altogether; the apparatus of magic responded to opposition by becoming more occult. People in the medieval centuries of Byzantium were less likely to wear amulets of metal or stone inscribed with heathen signs and symbols, but in the Palaeologan period we still hear of amulets written on pieces of paper or parchment. We hear mention of these paper amulets, for example, in the proceedings of trials before the patriarchal court. It may be surmised that these scraps were a safer medium for the inscribing of forbidden texts and signs, since they could be more easily manufactured and destroyed than amulets in more durable materials. The question of the magical use of Christian images is much more complicated than it seems. In the early period many ecclesiastical authorities had strong reservations about the private, unofficial use of Christian signs and images, and about their roles in practices and belief systems that were not accepted by the church. Suspicions about the misuse of Christian images by private individuals certainly added fuel to the arguments made by the opponents of Christian icons. In this case, also, the church after the iconoclasm was able to exert a much stronger control. In the later centuries of Byzantium, both the theory and the conditions of use of Christian images were much more closely regulated, with results that were visible in the forms of the images themselves. Christian icons became less ambiguous and thus less suspect. Nevertheless, we still encounter instances of the magical use of Christian images and symbols in the post-iconoclastic period, one of the most interesting being letter 33 of Michael Italikos235. This letter was written to accompany the gift of a gold coin, which according to Italikos, was from the reign of Constantine. Italikos described the coin as «an imperial nomisma invested with an ineffable power», which was effective against «all evils» but particularly against disease. It is clear that Italikos himself

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

199

believed in its supernatural powers. He said explicitly that the powers came not simply from the cross but from the coin itself. The letter of Michael Italikos, therefore, brings us once again to that unstable border where Christian content begins to fade into magic, even while it shows us the continuity that underlies change. Important changes occurred also in the treatment of magic by Byzantine legislators236. The attacks on magic by secular authorities became less harsh and less crude than they had been in the imperial legislation of the fourth century. By the twelfth century the problem of illicit contacts with the supernatural became a matter of religious discipline. This was because Byzantine canon law, as exemplified by the Council in Trullo of 691/92 A. D. and Balsamon’s twelfth-century commentary, provided greater precision in defining the practitioners of magic than had the late antique imperial legislation, while the scale of punishments became less draconian. Thus magic, while not permitted, was in a way «domesticated» in the medieval centuries of Byzantium. In part this change came about because magic had been brought into a single unified system of relationships between human beings and the supernatural. In this system there was ultimate divine justice, despite whatever the demons might be allowed to get away with in the interim. Any attempts to control demons through magic could bring only short-term advantages; in the end they would fail, man would himself become ensnared. So magic found a place in later Byzantine culture, but it was a defined place within the larger paradigm of the prevailing worldview. In the late antique period there was more open-ended competition between the different supernatural forces that vied for people’s attention, and hence more conflict. I am aware that we have entered a relatively uncharted territory of magic in the Byzantine middle ages. Now that they have provided signposts, indicating the scope of magic, its forms, and its functioning in Byzantine society, other areas of research have come into view. The most intriguing of these unexplored areas is that of comparative studies: how did magic in Byzantium differ from magic in western Europe during the same period, and why? Why were there virtually no witches to speak of in the East, but only «foolish old women»? How does magic in the Islamic world relate to early Byzantine practices? What were the connections between the magical learning of the Italian Renaissance and the Byzantine tradition? Such questions await further investigation by the practitioners of magical scholarship and provide grounds for further scholarly worker. The exorcistic prayer contained in the 17th/early18th century manuscript of Xiropotamou 98 shows that the Orthodox view of the devil does not differ from the Roman Catholic position, which was also formulated in the

200

Chapter 2

Patristic period, that is, before the Great Schism. In effect both Churches agree that the devil is the personification of evil; yet a more detailed exposition of Orthodox assumptions involves more difficulties, in as much as the Orthodox Church is not headed by a leader whose official pronouncements on doctrinal issues are held to be universally binding. For this and other reasons, it may be misleading to speak of Orthodox dogma regarding the devil, since its thinking on this matter is continually interpreted and re-presented rather than fixed and formalized in a code of unalterable pronouncements. In regard to the devil, the Orthodox Church has remained flexible and has constantly assimilated new representations so long as they did not contradict basic principles. This attitude makes it all the more difficult to draw rigid distinctions between local beliefs and official Orthodoxy, and must be borne in mind when examining the devil in Orthodox tradition. Generally speaking the demons of Byzantine tradition continue to share many characteristics with the fallen angels. Satan is their leader, thus Jesus refers to the fire of hell being prepared for «the devil and his angels» (Mt 25:41; cf. Rv 12:7-8). They are immaterial, sexless, formless, do not need food, and generally have no carnal desires. They do not die and they may reside in the air, on the earth, or beneath the earth. In order to carry out their machinations the demons are able to transform themselves and assume any gender or shape they please. Satan is likened to a serpent or a lion or even a dragon, all taken from Biblical imagery. As is the case with the order of God’s blessed spirits «Michael and his angels», Satan also has «his angels», the demons, who do battle with God’s angels and thus may be ranked on the model of an army (Rv 12:7; cf. 16:14; 19:19). The Orthodox Church has always unambiguously considered the devil a created intelligence, inferior and subordinate to God. God created, through his only Son, all the ranks of angels, the «principalities and powers», in perfect splendour and beauty, including Satan (Co1 1:16; 2:15; Ez 28:1215) who of their own free will disregarded God and fell from heaven onto the earth (Ez 28:15-19). They continue, under this same autonomy, in a relentless rebellion from God’s justice. Although they themselves operate under God’s just rules, because they are neither able to disobey God’s justice nor able to please God through recognition of his goodness, but their focus is to incite rebellion in humans. Thus in contempt for God’s beloved human creatures Satan and his demons «make war on...those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus» (Rv 12:16-17). Their hatred for man was ordained by God because of the fall (Gn 3:15). The power of God is absolute, but Satan is allowed to operate under divine constraints. The Old and New Testaments testify that God is purely good,

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

201

«God is light, in him there is no darkness at all» (1 Jn 1:5) and «the LORD is righteous in all his ways and kind in all his works» (Ps 145:17; cf. Dt 32:4). Evil, that is, the malice of intentionally doing harm, comes from another source altogether: the devil. Evil and suffering would never be allowed to exist unless Godíin his great power and wisdomícould bring a greater good out of them, «where sin abounded, grace did abound all the more» (Rom 5:20b). The Orthodox moral world emerges as an arena in which good struggles against evil, the kingdom of Heaven against the kingdom of darkness, and this battle is waged through human actions. In this passing life, human beings are called to eternal life, enjoined to embrace their Creator, Christ-God, who by becoming human helps them achieve virtues that flow from God himself: modesty, humility, patience, selfsacrifice and love. At the same time, lack of discernment, incontinence, and ignorance can impede the realization of these virtues and thereby conduce to sin; and sin in turn brings one closer to the devil (1 Jn 3:8). The Church, as Christ’s mission on earth (Mt 16:18-19), maintains, with the help of St Michael the archangel and the outpouring of God’s Spirit, the protection of the body of Christ through a large, overarching framework of sacraments and rites. Through the rite of exorcism a priest seeks to aid the deliverance of a victim of demonic infiltration. Deliverance is accomplished through prayer and on-going ministry that can bring healing. This spiritual wholeness is sought by to those who, after baptism, are struggling with bondage to sin and unable to conquer themselves; or they struggle with what is perceived to be the influence of demons, sinful desires, or the effects of overwhelming psychological and/or spiritual trauma. Participation in such rituals can bring about life changing experiences, through them the individual is invited to live in closer communion to Divinity. And exorcism endows him or her with confidence in God’s goodness, with a purity and grace that weaken the hold of despair and sadness that the devil seeks to bring about. Even if the nature and breadth of Orthodox tradition make it difficult to establish where Orthodoxy ends and alternative tradition begins, Orthodox tradition concerning the devil does observe certain doctrinal essentials. One who has accepted Christ should properly disdain demons as vain and ineffectual, because God has «placed enmity between» the offspring of Eve and the offspring of the devil, so demons will ever seek to gain intimacy with human beings so as to destroy them (Gn 3:15). The faithful are to reject Satan, despise the evil spirits and to cling to faith and to love God, which is the greatest commandment (Mt 22:36). The main doctrinal point in Orthodoxy is thus very simple: there is no room for dualism237. Satan is not regarded as divine, nor is he a part of God, nor a power equal to God.

202

Chapter 2

Though Satan constantly says «I am God» (Ez 28:2), his is in reality «the father of lies» (Jn 8:44). He is God’s creation, dependant on God for existence, and is in a sense the first servant of the divine will. So he may tempt but his success is strictly dependent on humans willingly handing over their sovereignty to him through lapses of human will and human error, cases that God allows for infiltration. We have seen why sacrificial idolatry was repugnant to God, according to Paul, because it established «communion with demons» that was incompatible and a mockery of the communion with God through Jesus’ sacrifice in the Eucharist: «The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation [țȠȚȞȦȞȓĮ] in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?» (1 Cor 10:16). Christianity holds that the reason human beings were created was «to enter into the joy of your Master» (Mt 25:21), to live intimacy with Christ. In the face of all this bloodshed offered to the demons there is Christ’s blood that is offered to his Father. This alone has the power given by God to put an end of all bloodshed on earth í because the crucified Jesus absorbs all evil, redirects it, and offers it to God. Jesus’ sacrifice transforms the devil’s hate into the perfect act of love, because he is totally innocent. His act is the total abandonment to his Father’s will for him to carry the guilt of the world. Thus God’s own blood establishes peace with God who is innocent and eternally loving, and who proves his love by offering his most beloved Son whom he loved in eternity to mankind for their healing and forgiveness. Mirroring his Father’s love, Jesus offers his own blood saying «Drink this all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins» (Mat 26:27-28; par Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). Luke it is specifically «the new covenant in my blood» (22:20), emphasizing that the promised «new covenant» (Jer 31:31-34) has been inaugurated by the offering of Christ’s blood (Heb 8:6-12; 9:15). Although human sacrificial systems like the Aztecs were stopped when the mass of Mexicans embraced the Christian faith, mankind has yet to fully tapped into the power that Christ has to bring peace on earth. Jewish scripture shockingly says in its vision of Messiah «His name shall be called... Mighty God... the Prince of Peace, of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore» (Is 9:6-7). For Christians Jesus is indeed God, mighty to save, he is «our peace» (Eph 2:14), but the hope is that he will bring peace for the suffering people of the whole world. God has already done his part, he has reconciled all things to himself «whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

203

cross» (Col 1:20). It is now up to humanity to turn to Christ and use that power for doing good, for healing and exorcising people in the name of Jesus as he commanded. All this glorifies God by establishing and restoring humanity to God’s joyful friendship and the peace of his kingdom. That is why as we have seen idolatry, magic and sorcery are so repugnant to God in the Old and New Testament, especially the book of Revelation which is a book rich in symbolism and, in a sense, a recapitulation of all salvation history. It has been shown how the bible shows that through occult arts people unknowingly open themselves to demonic infiltration, become tools of the enemy of salvation. Magicians may think they are masters of their destiny, but if Christian scripture is true, they are most likely setting themselves up for disaster. Because unlike God, the master of puppets uses and abuses his victims, and he will «devour» anyone he can get his hands on (1 Pt 5:8). Thankfully the devil’s sphere of control in humanity is narrowed to what people give him by sinning; he may not harm the souls who trust in God (Lk 21:18; 1 Jn 5:18). The conflict between God and the demons is not one that is resolved as soon as one embraces Christianity, or one lives in a Christian community, and consecrates one’s house and belongings. It is a continuous struggle: «For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places» (Eph 6:12.) Exorcism, if employed with humility and prudent discretion for the glory of God, can be an effective tool in this battle with the spiritual enemies of mankind.

Notes 1

Late Byzantium was resolutely Orthodox especially after the Battle of Manzikert (1071 A.D.) when the geographical borders coincided with the linguistic and religious ones: Greek language and Orthodox faith, and the enduring aftermath of the 4th Crusade was the deepening of the sense of alienation and difference from the Western Church. Byzantium need not be considered an outlived chapter of Church history. Not only does its liturgy continue to live in the Orthodox Church, but in a sense still defines Orthodoxy itself, constituting its historical form. In a sense the Byzantine period must be acknowledged as decisive in the history of Orthodoxy, as the age of the crystallization of Church life. Thus for the sake of clarity, I have opted to use the word Orthodox because Oriental can be confusing and in English it means something else. The nomenclature «Oriental» may be synonymous with «Eastern» and is often used for the non-chalcedonian churches. However Oriental Orthodox churches are distinct from those that are collectively referred to as the Eastern Orthodox Church. The terms Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox are generally accepted designations for these churches in ecumenical venues. 2 L. THORNDIKE, A history of magic and experimental science, 2. Magic is here

204

Chapter 2

understood in the broadest sense of the word, as including all occult arts and sciences, superstitions, and folklore. 3 F. PRADEL,Griechische und süditalienischeGebet. See also L. DELATTE, Un office byzantin d’exorcisme. 4 P. MAGDALINO – M. MAVROUDI, The Occult Sciences in Byzantium, 12. In their category of occult science, the authors include astrology, alchemy, dream interpretation, and a variety of other divinatory traditions that fall somewhere between the poles of science and magic. They argue that the problem with the label «magic» is that it collapses any distinction between, on the one hand, the muchmaligned practitioners of magic at the poorest and least educated levels of society and, on the other hand, those «sophisticated masters of occult knowledge», who sometimes held, in Byzantium, the highest offices of church and state. An example of the latter group is Michael Psellus. 5 F. GRAF, Magic in the Ancient World, 2. In his book F. Graf underlines that from the sixth century B.C. through late antiquity, Ancient Greeks and Romans often turned to magic to achieve personal goals. Magical rites were seen as a route for direct access to the gods, for material gains as well as spiritual satisfaction. 6 According to V. FLINT, The Rise of Magic in Early Medieval Europe, 146, «the rise demons of lower air came into the early Middle Ages in part because there were scriptural and philosophical foundations for a belief in them, and in part because they were useful as a means of isolating evil from good, and of inspiring an appropriate fear of it». 7 R. MATHIESEN, «Magic in Slava Orthodoxa», 164. 8 P. MAGDALINO – M. MAVROUDI, The Occult Sciences, 119-163. 9 Relatively recent book-length studies by a single author treating any subject of Byzantine occult folklore are exceedingly few. See P. MAGDALINO – M. MAVROUDI, The Occult Sciences in Byzantium, 35. 10 The initial composition or subsequent usage of the Chaldaean Oracles can only by approximation be dated, localized, and attributed to an identifiable individual. Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ – Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓIJȠȣ ǿİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ, 99. 11 Michael Psellos (1018 - ca.1076) was certainly the most important intellectual of the eleventh century Constantinople and one of the most prolific authors in Byzantine history. He wrote extensively on a wide range of topics from theology and philosophy to science and medicine. He treated of the hitherto neglected forms of possession and exorcism in the Early Byzantine Empire. His study was carried out through a literary and analytical study of hagiographic sources. Between the fourth and the seventh centuries B.C. few terms define the notions of possession, exorcism, and possessed person, thus rendering more arduous the identification of these notions in the literary sources. 12 The large world of Late Antiquity may be distinguished from the apostolic period of Christian history in four main ways. First, with the conversion of the Emperor Constantine (commonly dated 312). Second, when bishops became Christianity’s principal officers. Third, and largely as a result of these first mentioned events, the Christian Church became more thoroughly structured and organised, especially so through its monastic foundations and liturgy. Fourth, and perhaps most important of

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

205

all for our subject, some fourth century Christian emperors found it increasingly convenient to prosecute their own enemies by means of a charge of sorcery and magic. Prosecutions of this kind were of great significance to Late Antique Christian attitudes to demons and to magic. There is no doubt that the concept of the wickedness of the demons and the idea that they were active in magic above all, came firmly together in this last period. Cf. S. CLARK – W. MONTER, Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, 315. 13 V. GARY, «Magic and visual culture in late antiquity», 53-57. 14 J.C.B. PETROPOLOUS, ed., «Magic in Byzantium», 41. 15 By spiritual creatures here is meant the whole spectrum of non-physical creatures from imps, elements, spirits, angels, and daemons. See J. DEE, The Enochian Magic. 16 The Gospel of Matthew 12:24-27 records this event. Interestingly, Jesus did not directly deny that he used a daemon, but simply asked what daemon the children of Israel used. «And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you» (Mt 12:27-28). The classic Christian interpretation is that Jesus does not cast out demons by Beelzebul but by the Spirit of God, and the accusation of performing exorcisms by Beelzebul is merely slander. 17 V. GARY, «Magic and visual culture in late antiquity», 53. «Apotropaion» refers to an object that is mainly designed to turn aside or avert evil. In Greek antiquity it refers to a symbol, a sign or amulet that serves as a charm against bad luck. 18 Cf. Mk 7:20-23; Mt 15:19-20; Mt 19:17-19; 1 Pt 4:3; Col 3:5-9; Gal 5:19-21; 1 Cor 5:1; 6:9-10; 1 Tm 1:10; Jud 1:4-7; 1 Jn 5:21; Rom 1:18-32, etc. 19 This indeed was Paul’s message to former pagans in Corinth: «What pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons» (1 Cor 10:20-21). And he says in the same letter, «We know that an idol has no real existence...for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ...but not all have this knowledge» (8:4.67). It is inconceivable for Paul to preach Christianity without undermining the basic tenants of Greek religion, particularly the sacrifice to the gods. 20 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily XII on I Corinthians, PG LXI, 106, 158-162;.PG LXI, 38, 14-20. Chrysostom continues, speaking of the unlikely success of the apostolic teachers who «achieved a splendid victory; a victory which fulfils the prophecy that says, ‘Even in the midst of your enemies thou shall have dominion.’ (Ps 110:2) For this it was, which was full of all astonishment, that their enemies having them in their power, and casting them into prison and chains not only did not vanquish them, but themselves also eventually had to bow down to them» (IV.10). 21 In Acts 19:25-27 Demetrius and the angry silversmiths who sold silver shrines of Artemis testify to danger of Paul’s shocking success: «Men, you know that from this business we have our wealth. And you see and hear that not only in Ephesus but in almost all of Asia this Paul has persuaded and turned away a great many people, saying that ‘gods made with hands are not gods’. And there is danger not only that this trade of ours may come into disrepute but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis may be counted as nothing, and that she may even be deposed from her magnificence, she whom all Asia and the world worship». The proceeding verses

206

Chapter 2

describe a riot that ensues, and the dragging out of Paul’s companions. 22 Acts 19:13-16 recounts the incident: a group of travelling Jewish exorcists began exorcising demons thus: «‘I adjure you by the Jesus whom Paul proclaims’» v.13. But in one instance «the evil spirit answered them, ‘Jesus I know, and Paul I recognize, but who are you?’» v.15. Then the demon possessed rose up, «mastered them», and gave them a severe beating. News of this spread among all the Ephesians and because of it «fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified» v.17. Apparently without baptism and actual faith in Jesus Christ, a person is not in the position of spiritual «authority» [cȟȠȣıȓĮ] required to master demons, and «tread upon... all the power of the enemy» as Jesus promised, Lk 10:19. This authority is freely given by God, as John puts it, «to all who did receive him [the Word, Jesus Christ], to those who believed in his name, he gave the authority to become children of God» (Jn 1:12). 23 For more examples of the Pauline concern for the continual need of repentance, cf. e.g. 1 Cor 6:11; 12:2; Col 3:5-7; Ti 3:3-7; Rom 6:17-22; Phil 2:1-10; Eph 2:1-6; 5:1-21. 24 «The word of the Lord» is a stock phrase used 243 times in the Old Testament. The hermeneutics of continuity, i.e. that «the word of the Lord» is the same between the Old and New Testaments shines very clear in these verses (v.19-20). How can Peter can say so boldly: (1 Pt 1:25) «‘The word of the Lord remains forever.’ And this word is the Good News that was preached to you»? After receiving the Holy Spirit, the apostles and writers of the New Testament who proclaimed the Gospel saw themselves as continuing the tradition of the Old Testament prophets who had received the «word of the Lord» (cf. Acts 13:46-49). But even more than that, the apostles saw the Old Testament prophets as servants of the Gospel of Christ, as if the prophets only saw from far off what they had seen with their own eyes! (1 Pt 1:10-12; 1 Jn 1:1-3). Paul (two times) and Acts (10 times) also use «word of the Lord» in reference to apostolic teaching. 25 This means idolatry, see 1 Cor 10:20-21; cf. Rv 9:20-21a: «The rest of mankind... did not repent of the works of their hands nor give up worshiping demons and idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk, nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries». 26 For Paul’s emphasis on following God’s commandments, see 1 Cor 7:19; against sorcery and Gal 5:20. 27 The Acts of the Apostles describes the unity of the early Church in profoundly vivid terms: «the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul» (4:32). Such unity is impossible without the people’s fidelity to apostolic teaching (Acts 2:42-47; 4:32-35; 5:11-32; 15:1-32). This apostolic teaching of the author of Acts is in pains to describe as nothing less than «the word of the Lord» Acts 8:25 which refers to Peter and John’s teaching, 11:16 refers to Jesus’ words; 13:44; 15:35; etc. refers to Paul and Barnabas’ teaching). This is a reflection of Matthew’s gospel where Jesus’ final commandment to the apostles is to make disciples, baptize, and teach his commandments to all nations: Mt 28:16-20. Paul himself is concerned to maintain unity with the other apostles, and thus he visits Jerusalem to gain their approval of the gospel he preaches «in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain» (Gal 2:2.9).

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium 28

207

Early Christian writers identified and depicted vividly the devil’s work in a dazzling number of events in scripture, in Roman history, and in many areas of contemporary social, political, and religious life. These notions of diabolical presence and activity saturate early Christian texts. However, for a variety of reasons, modern scholars have tended to suggest that the devil was just «good to think with», a way of getting at other more pressing theological or anthropological issues; or they simply elide the devil and evil, dealing with him as a mere «personification» or «symbol» of evil or they suggest that he is a «convenient device for explaining awkward events». In these early texts Satan was said to direct, control, attack, goad, tempt, persuade, seduce, inspire, and conspire with humans, whether directly, in disguise, or using tools and servants, especially his myriad minions, the demons to accomplish his aim. See S. LUNN í ROCKLIFFE, The diabolical problem of Satan’s first sin, 439-457. 29 Anthropologist C. STEWART, Devil and Demons, 15, states that the modern Greek term exotica refers to a class of malevolent demons, fairies and spirits – manifestations of the devil-that bring madness and misfortune. He also suggests that the modern Greek popular perception of the exotiká stands halfway between the abstract theological notion of evil represented by the devil and the world of men. Similarly, early modern popular beliefs cannot be forced into the absolute definitions of good or evil laid down by the official church. He also gives examples of these exotiká. For example he argues that baptism is effective against the exotiká and that those who are not baptised properly are more likely to see them or be attacked by them. See also L. ALLATIUS, On the Beliefs of the Greeks. Leo Allatius was one of the great scholars of the 17th century, born on the Greek island of Chios in 1586 or 1587. Although he was born into a Greek Orthodox environment, Allatius lived the greater part of his life in Rome as a pious Catholic and signed in Latin or Italian most documents that survive. At the time of his death in 1669, he was Custodian of the Vatican Library. His cultural background, bestriding the Greek and Roman worlds, afforded him a unique view of the traditional question of the union between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. The Gennadius Library of Athens has a collection of Allatius’s works which includes at least 40 of the 59 books described in C. JACONO, Bibliografia di Leone Allacci (1588-1669), Palermo 1962. 30 According to M.T. FOGEN, «Balsamon on Magic», 104, the fourth-century legislation was not concerned with a neat distinction of pagan and Christian practices and rites. However this separation was later provided by a social and mental discrimination of the pagan forms. According to Gary Vikan (through personal communication) this was because of 3 major factors: (1) The work of magic is «other» people’s work, so the Church’s authority would be compromised; (2) The work of magic leads to direct effect, unlike the work of the Church (conventional Christianity), which works by way of intercession; (3) The work of magic makes use of the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Testament of Solomon, Classical Mythology, and any and all forms of words, symbols, and incantations to achieve an outcome. Jesus is pretty much at the back of the field. 31 See O. SKARSAUNE, Possession and Exorcism, 157-171. The author states that already in the church order of Hippolytus (ca. 210 A.D.) there existed a broadly developed pre- baptismal repeated exorcism during the time immediately prior to

208

Chapter 2

baptism. In Hippolytus’ conditions for admission for those who want to follow the baptismal instruction we read the following, «If anybody has a demon, then let him not hear the Word from the teacher before he has been cleansed» (Apostolic Tradition 16,8). And further: «From the day that they (who are to be baptized) are elected, let there be laying on of hands with exorcism every day. When the day of baptism approaches, let the bishop perform exorcism on each one of them, so that he may be certain that the baptizand is clean. But if there is anybody who is not clean, he should be set aside because he did not hear the instruction with faith. For the alien spirit remained with him». (Apostolic Tradition, 20,3). In Hippolytus it seems as if the pre-baptismal exorcisms were meant to be used «diagnostically» to reveal and heal possible possession in the baptizands. The possession is here presupposed to be something that may occur in baptisms, but not necessarily often. Secondly, there is reason to believe that a preventive effect is ascribed to the exorcism; it is supposed to prevent possession. Exorcistic prayers often include a phrase where one prays that the spirit in the future may stay away from the person for whom the prayer is made, or the spirit is ordered to do so in direct speech. 32 S. THELWALL, Ante-Nicene Christian Library, 514. 33 ORIGEN, Contra Celsum 1:6,25, PG XI, 666-667. 34 A. ROBERT, Ante-Nicene Fathers IV. 35 Cf. e.g. Acts 16:18 36 A. FRIDRICHSEN, The Problem of Miracle, 170. no. 29. 37 This a term originally used in the Greco-Roman world to refer to the inhabited universe. Constantine, in two edicts of 319, forbade only the itinerant practice of the diviners (under the punishment of being burnt alive), but allowed them to practice quietly in their own houses. In later edict, he ordained severe punishment of those sorcerers who, through their art, had harmed the life or the sexual integrity of other people. It seems that to Constantine magic was not in itself a punishable offense, but is only harmful in its applications. See F. GRAF, Magic and Divination, 286. 38 J.L. CROW, Miracle or Magic? The Problematic Status of Christian Amulets. 39 S.N. TROJANOS, Magic and the Devil, 47. 40 S.N. TROJANOS, «Magic and the Devil», 48. 41 Ibid., 48. 42 J.M. HUSSEY, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire; S.N. TROJANOS, «Magic and the Devil», 49. 43 The Canons of the church belonging to this period that deal with magic and divination are basically concerned with defining the penalties to be imposed by the Church on those Christians guilty of engaging in the practices in question. The severity of the penalties is a reflection of the seriousness with which the Church took all dealings in magic. See V. ALEKSANDROV, Ecclesiology and some of its Orthodox critics. 44 AGAPIUS (a) HIEROMONK – NICODEMUS(a) MONK, The Rudder, 302-317. The Synod of Ancyra A.D. 314 presents the first canon concerning certain forms of divination, but did not cover all of its forms. Only in the last decades of the 4th century, in canon 36 of the synod of Laodicea (ca.380), is the equivalence of magicians, astrologers, and other diviners, already expressed in Theodosian code (CTh) 9.16.4 (divination), formulated also in canon law. St. Basil, on the other hand,

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

209

does not even isolate diviners and the like from murderers, poison brewers, and other very traditional criminals; cf. canons 7, 8, 65, 72,83(=canon 24 Ankyra). (CTh) 9.18.2. See. M.T. FOGEN, «Balsamon on Magic»,104. 45 Canon 72, The Rudder, 342-360. That priests and clerics behaved in very much the same way as those around them is hardly occasion for surprise. It is necessary, nonetheless, to look a little more closely at who it is in the clergy who practise magic and what kind of magic it is in which they engage. See M.W. DICKIE, «Sorcerers and Sorceresses from Constantine», 274. 46 Canon 3, The Rudder, 528-529. See also N.G. MIHAIL, Language and theology in St Gregory of Nyssa; GREGORY OF NYSSA: The Letters, Introduction. Canon 61 of the 6th Ecumenical (The Rudder, 224-225) states that: «Those who give themselves up to soothsayers or to those who are called hecatontarchs or to any such, in order that they may learn from them what things (1) they wish to have revealed to them, let all such, according to the decrees lately made by the Fathers concerning them, be subjected to the canon of six years. And to this [penalty] they also should be subjected who carry about (2) she-bears or animals of the kind for the diversion and injury of the simple; as well as those who tell fortunes and fates, and genealogy, and a multitude of words of this kind from the nonsense of deceit and imposture. Also those who are called expellers of clouds, enchanters, amulet-givers, and soothsayers. And those who persist in these things, and do not turn away and flee from pernicious and Greek pursuits of this kind, we declare are to be thrust out of the Church, as also the sacred canons say. «For what fellowship hath light with darkness?» as saith the Apostle, «or what agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what concord hath Christ with Belial?» Commenting on Canon LXI of the The Quinisext Council, P. SCHAFF – H. WALLACE, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 228 states that «old people who had the reputation of special knowledge were called hecatontarchs. They sold the hair [of these she bears and other animals] as medicine or for an amulet. St. Chrysostom in his Homilies on the Statutes explains, in answer to certain who defended them on this ground, that if these incantations are made in the name of Christ they are so much worse than those who abuse the name of God. In fact he comments: ‘Moreover I think that she is to be hated all the more who abuses the name of God for this purpose, because while professing to be a Christian, she shows by her actions that she is a heathen’». 47 J.C.B. PETROPOLOUS, ed., Greek magic, ancient, medieval and modern, 42, points out the fact that «under state and canon law heresy, mental disease and all types of crime were eventually branded as diabolical». See also D. CONSTANTELOS, Christian Hellenism;ID., Byzantine and Ancient Greek Religiosity. 48 Canon 65, The Rudder, 504. 49 See also Canon 52 of the 6th Ecumenical Synod, The Rudder, 501. 50 Canon 72, The Rudder, 506-507. 51 Canon 83, The Rudder, 510. 52 Canon 24, The Rudder, 312. «They who practice divination, and follow the customs of the heathen, or who take men to their houses for the invention of sorceries, or for purification by sacrifices, fall under the canon of five years’ [penance], according to the prescribed degrees; that is, three years as prostrators, and

210

Chapter 2

two of prayer without oblation». 53 Canon 61, The Rudder, 224-225. «Soothsayers» are persons who have consecrated themselves to demons and who are supposed to be able to foresee future events by looking in the palm of the hand or into a bowl of water, or by sacrifices and other deceptive arts and signs. «Enchanters» is the name applied to those who lure demons into whatever things they will with some incantations and invocations. They are also those who bind wild beasts, such as wolves, etc., (by a spell of some kind) in order to prevent them from eating their cattle when they are outside at night or those who grasp snakes in their hands and cause them not to bite. The name enchanters is also bestowed upon those who bind married couples with diabolic art and witchery. The word «sorcerers» designates those who by magical art prepare poisonous draughts either in order to put somebody to death or to muddle his brain or to allure him to their love; which draughts women are especially wont to employ as a means of drawing men into love. As regards «enchanters and conjuring ventriloquists» God says that they are to be stoned (Lv 20:27). Those called «amuletics» comprised not only those who made amulets, winding them with silk threads and inscribing them with invocations of demons, but also those who bought them from the makers of them and hung them round their neck in order to have a preventive of every evil. 54 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily XV, PG XLIX, 158-162; ID., Homily XX, PG XLIX, 199. 55 A. ȆǹȆǹ¨ǾȂǾȉȇǿȅȊ., ed., ȆȘįȐȜȚȠȞ, note 5, 273-274. 56 R. JENKINS, Byzantium: The Imperial Centuries, A.D. 610-1071, 55. 57 The myths of the Slavs go back thousands of years, but unlike the Greeks their stories were not written down until roughly the 6th century A.D. As these myths and stories were gathered, Perun was the most prominent of the Slavic gods. A Byzantine historian Procopius was the first to record the triumphs of Perun as his exploits were mostly known by Slavs who lived in the eastern sections of Europe. 58 Canon 65, The Rudder, 228; G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma V, 456457 (Also ȈȪȞIJĮȖμĮ IJȦȞ șİȓȦȞ țĮȚ İȡȫȞ țĮȞȩȞȦȞ IJȦȞ IJİ ĮȖȓȦȞ țĮȚ ʌĮȞİȣijȒμȦȞ ǹʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ, țĮȚ IJȦȞ ȚİȡȫȞ țĮȚ ȠȚțȠȣμİȞȚțȫȞ țĮȚ IJȠʌȚțȫȞ ȈȣȞȩįȦȞ, țĮȚ IJȦȞ țĮIJȐ μȑȡȠȢ ĮȖȓȦȞ ȆĮIJȑȡȦȞ, ī.ǹ. ȇǹȁȁǾ – Ȃ. ȆȅȉȁǾ, EȖțȡȓıİȚ IJȘȢ ǹȖȓĮȢ țĮȚ ȂİȖȐȜȘȢ IJȠȣ ȋȡȚıIJȠȪ ǼțțȜȘıȓĮȢ. 59 ī.ǹ. ȂǼīǹȈ, ǼȜȜȘȞȚțȑȢ İȠȡIJȑȢ țĮȚ ȑșȚμĮ IJȘȢ ȜĮȧțȒȢ ȁĮIJȡİȓĮȢ, 212-221. 60 G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma V, 458-59 61 Canon 65, The Rudder, 228; G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma II, 448452. 62 G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma III, 449-450. For the theme about Calends, Vota and Brumalia, see ĭ. ȀȅȊȀȅȊȁDzȈ, ǺȣȗĮȞIJȚȞȩȢ ǺȓȠȢ țĮȚ ȆȠȜȚIJȚıμȩȢ, 13-31. 63 Canon 69, The Rudder, 231. 64 G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma III, 456-66. 65 ǹȡȤȒȞ İıȤȘțȩIJĮ İț IJȘȢ İȜȜȘȞȚțȒȢ ʌȜȐȞȘȢ (ʌȠȣ ȑȤİȚ ĮȡȤȒ (Ȓ İȟȠȣıȓĮ) Įʌȩ IJȘȞ İȜȜȘȞȚțȒ ʌȜȐȞȘ). G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma III, 456-66; A. VON HARNACK, History of Dogma III. 66 P.P. JOANNOU, Démonologie populaire-démonologie critique au Xǿ siecle, 4647; M. PSELLUS, De daemonum operatione, PG CXII, 849ff.; L. ALLATIOS, On the

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

211

Beliefs of the Greeks. To what extent Psellos can be regarded as representative of the Byzantine mainstream, and even the occult sciences of Byzantium, remains uncertain. He was apparently the first scholar to take a serious interest in the Oracles since Proclus. Judging from his scholarship and research on the extant sources is ultimately impossible to decide whether he was the supreme representative of the Byzantine tradition, the inaugurator of a new phase who moved the tradition on to a higher level, or an exceptional polymath who was typical of no-one but himself. In the current state of research there seems to be little interest in developing further this interesting theme. For further information see P. MAGDALINO – M.V. MAVROUDI, The occult sciences in Byzantium. 67 Canon 60, The Rudder, 224. G.A. RHALLES – M. POTLES, Syntagma II, 441. 68 For uses of Hades ઌįȘȢ in the N.T. see: Mt 11:23; 16:18; Lk 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27; 2:31; 1 Cor 15:55; Rv 1:18; 6:8; 20:13; 20:14. 2 Pt 2:4 is the only reference to Tartarus in either the N.T. or LXX. 69 H.A. KELLY, The Devil at Baptism: Ritual, Theology, and Drama, 164. 70 Any Euchologion includes these prayers. For a critical edition see P.ȃ. TREMBELAS, Mikron Euchologion, I, 338-347. See also the author’s introduction, 275-285. 71 ǿn its efforts to spread the Christian faith, the Church did not systematically reject everything that had derived from pagan religious feelings and symbols. Theodoret of Cyrrhus implies that the Church adopted certain cults in order to fulfil some of the psychological needs of her flock. He speaks of the tradition of saints and martyrs, which was likened to the honours paid to ancient heroes and demigods. ǿn an attack on pagans he writes that even if all others should ridicule the Christian practice of honouring the martyrs, the Greeks should be the last to do so because they too had the cult of venerating annually their heroes and demigods, such as Herakles, Asclepius, Klemedes, Machaon and several others. Also, the ninety-fourth canon of the Synod in Trullo condemns «those who take Hellenic oaths» and makes them liable to penance and even excommunication. Christians used to swear by the gods, for example «by Zeus» or by other elements of Greek religion such as «by the Sun» or «by the Heavens». The canon summarizes the structures of Church Fathers such as Basil the Great, Chrysostom, and others who were responsible for harsh canons. Nevertheless Christians, who were urged to despise Hellenic customs, continued to swear by and invoke the names of ancient deities. Another religious cult which has retained an unbroken continuity from ancient Greek times through the Byzantine era to the present is the offering of panspermia, ʌãȢ/ʌãȞ (pas/pan) «all» and ıʌȑȡμĮ (sperma) «seed» or pankarpia, (ancient Greeks used to offer to the dead, once a year, what they called «Panspermia» (medley) or «Pankarpia», which is a mixture of fruits of all kinds) which refers to a small cake which in Greek religion was a mixture of several kinds of fruit offered to the dead on the third day, called Chytroi, of the Anthesteria or Dionysia.ǿn Christian Byzantium panspermia was transformed into the offering of kollyba, boiled wheat, distributed to the congregation on certain memorial days and on the day of a funeral as well as on the third, ninth, and fortieth days after death).See HESYCHIOS OF ALEXANDRIA, Lexicon, 502; J.E. HARRISON, Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion, 32, 80, 159. The trichokouria, or the cutting of hair from the head of the newly baptized, practiced

212

Chapter 2

in early Christianity and the Byzantine Church, was of ancient Greek religious origin. ǿn Greek antiquity, when the young reached puberty, they offered sacrifices to Apollo and had their hair cut. Pseudo-Athanasios confirms that the Christian haircutting immediately following baptism was an inheritance from Greek religious practices. These and several other ancient Greek customs such as polysporia, libation rituals, the Kallikantzaroi (Christmastide spirits), the kalogeroi ceremony, workshop of the Nereids, or water-nymphs, have survived through the Byzantine era and have remained an integral part of popular religiosity. 72 The demonization of magic and sorcery during this period came after centuries of thought about demons. This happened on a grand scale only towards the end of this period until the death of Augustine in 430 but when it happened, it was founded on a real belief in demonic power, a belief made all the more intense by its long gestation. See S. CLARK– W. MONTER, The demonization of Magic and Sorcery in Late Antiquity, 281-281. 73 S. KOTSOPOULOS, «Intrusion and Internalisation of the Devil», 79-85. 74 S. KOTSOPOULOS, «Intrusion and Internalisation of the Devil», 79. The terms «intrusion» and «internalisation» are used in the present study instead of «possession» and «temptation» respectively, to denote specific psychological activity and in the opinion of the present author are more in tune with modern psychological vocabulary. 75 Sophie Lunn í Rockliffe looks at ideas of «the devil within man», starting with invention of empathetic and psychologically astute first-person speeches for him in dialogue hymns, and then exploring his presence and role in liturgies of baptism and exorcism. S. LUNN í ROCKLIFFE, The Devil and his works in Late Antiquity. 76 The accusation of Peter being Satan is all the more shocking and ironic considering that Jesus has just blessed Peter (16:18), naming him the «Rock» upon which Jesus says «I will build my Church». But suddenly Peter is harshly rebuked by Jesus because, out of fear, Peter cannot understand the fullness of Jesus’ mission to die and be risen on the third day (Mt 16:21). It is natural and ‘human’ to think like Peter, but God is calling his apostles to begin thinking supernaturally, that is, by preaching «Christ crucified» reveal the «wisdom of God and the power of God» (1 Cor 1:23-24). Why is that? Because it is not by human wisdom, but by God’s wisdom hidden in the cross that humans will conquer the devil and inherit eternal life. 77 Psychological internalization is further elaborated in the Johannine literature. We recall that in John’s Gospel Jesus does not perform an exorcism on any one demoniac, but rather, Christ expels Satan from the whole cosmos. As the cosmic Exorcist Jesus wills to suffer and die in order to «cast out» «the ruler of this world» from «all people» (Jn 12:30-32). John stresses that all humans are unknowingly oppressed by this «ruler». Jesus says boldly to those who believed in him but failed to recognize their sin: «You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies» (Jn 8:44). All humans are sinners (1 Jn 1:8), and as such, victims of false consciousness, thinking they are free to act in their best interest, they are really slaves to desires Satan has proposed to them. He

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

213

does this in order to gain psychological power over those who refuse to confess their faults and receive forgiveness and protection from Jesus (Jn 8:33-34; 1 Jn 1:8; 3:8). 78 St. Paul describes famously and vividly this combat (Eph 6:11-18). He begins: «Put on the whole armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places» (v.11-12). The fight against these cosmic powers of evil was indirect because the desert Fathers do not attack the devil. They describe their resistance in terms of «standing firm» in faith despite all the temptations of the evil one and his agents who «attacked them» with thoughts, fantasies, and images. 79 The devil targeted Antony who as a young man who gave his riches away in obedience to the Gospel and withdrew to the desert as a hermit. The devil «first attempted to lead him away from the discipline, suggesting memories of his possessions, the guardianship of his sister, the manifold leisure of food, the relaxations of life, and finally the rigour of virtue». Thus, the devil raised in Antony’s mind a «great dust cloud of considerations, since he wished to cordon him off from his righteous intention». But Antony, through prayers and resolve, was able to suppress these ideas. The devil then changed tactics. He «hurled foul thoughts at him, resorted to titillation», and one night the devil assumed the form of a woman, imitating «her in every gesture». 80 ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA, Life of Antony, 22-24; See also V. FLINT, The Demonisation of Magic and Sorcery in Late Antiquity, 310-348. 81 S. RUBENSON, The Letters of St. Antony. 82 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on Matthew XIII, PG LVII, 212-213. 83 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies: Works from Constantinople, PG LII, 30. 84 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on Matthew VI, PG LVII, 71. 85 St. BASIL THE GREAT OF CAESAREA, Letter addressed to Amphilochos, PG XXXII, 865b. 86 St. BASIL THE GREAT OF CAESAREA, Letter addressed to Valerius, PG XXXII, 476c. 87 S. NIKODIMOS – S. MAKARIOS, The Philokalia, 73. 88 J. CASSIAN, Conferences, 32-33. See also B. ANKARLOO – S. CLARK, Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, 312. For biblical accounts of demonic scorpions and serpents see Lk 10:19; Rv 9:3-11. 89 The Philokalia, 75. 90 J. CASSIAN, Conferences, 76. 91 V. JANE FLINT, The Athlone history of Witchcraft and Magic in Europe. 92 These ten volumes of the «Anagnoseis» (Calling to Mind) purport to be Clement’s autobiographical account of how he learned the faith from St. Peter, and in turn delivered it to the Church. 93 Conferences, 8.21. 94 The Philokalia, 294. 95 The Philokalia, 279. 96 GOA:579, ZER:148, ROM:359, PAP:108, BAR: 206. 97 ATHANASIUS «The Life» (cit. n.35), 34-35.

214 98

Chapter 2

E. FERGUSON, Demonology of the Early Christian World; J. BURTON RUSSELL, The Devil. 99 T.K. OESTERREICH, Possession, 147-158; H.W.F. SAGGS, The Greatness that was Babylon, 486. 100 T.K. OESTERREICH, Possession,312; P. PRIORESCHI, A History of Medicine, 417-429. 101 H. ANSGAR KELLY, The Devil, 107. 102 W. TARN – G.T. GRIFFITH, Hellenistic Civilization, 325. 103 A.A. LONG, Hellenistic Philosophy, 205-209; W. TARN – G.T. GRIFFITH, Hellenistic Civilization, 329. 104 A.A. LONG, Hellenistic Philosophy, 206. 105 J.C. LARCHET, Théologie de la Maladie Theologies, 151-170. 106 I. AB ARNIM, Fragmenta Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, 110-133; W. DE BOER, De Propiorum Anim; F.H. SANDBACH, The Stoics,18. 107 Cf. Rom 7:5.14; 8:2-14; Eph 4:17-4:24; Gal 5:19-21; Tit 3:3-7; 1 Pt 4:2; Jn 3:6; Jas 4:1:7. 108 Cf. Ti 2:11; Eph 2:4-10. 109 Cf. Mt 4:1-11; Lk 22:3-6; 1 Tm 3:6-7; Eph 4:26-27; Jas 4:1-7; 1 Jn 3:8-10; 1 Pt 5:8. 110 H. ANSGAR KELLY, The Devil, 123-132; J. BURTON RUSSELL, The Devil, 17-35. 111 The theme of the evil eye as an ancient superstition and touches other themes such as: sympathetic magic, totems, portents, tree worship, symbols and amulets, crescents, horns, gestures, the cross, the manopantea, the cimaruta, sirenes, tablets, cabalistic writings, magical formulae, incantations, protective acts, pixies, the celestial mother, divination and incantations etc. See F.T. ELWORTHY, The Evil Eye. 112 A. DUNDES, The Evil Eye. The basic belief in the evil eye consists in the notion that there are people, animals, demons or gods who have the power to cause harm to those of whom they are envious or jealous, just by looking at them. People may become ill, have accidents, misfortunes, or even die. Those who possess the evil eye may cause harm to others, knowingly or unknowingly. Some people are not aware that they have the ability to harm another with an envious glance. The eye is believed to be the window to the soul, physically exposing a person’s inner being. Through this window evil spirits/demons enter the body, empowering the jealous or envious person to cause harm to others. Evil eye is associated with envy, greed, stinginess and not wanting to share one’s possessions with those in need. It exposes «a heart that was hardened and a hand that was shut to a neighbour in need». Socially this means that the evil eye is prominent where there is a large gap between the «haves» and the «have-nots». In the two-class social system of antiquity the privileged worried about the evil eye. Persons who had a sudden turn of fortune could become the object of envy and therefore become vulnerable to the evil eye. The privileged were most susceptible to the evil eye, as were children, work places and animals. Those suspected of having the power of the evil eye were neighbours, relatives, those with ocular impairments (e.g. the blind), those with strange ocular features (e.g. joined eyebrows), those with physical deformities (e.g. humpbacks), those with

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

215

physical disabilities (e.g. epileptics), those who were socially displaced (e.g. widows), social deviants, strangers and enemies, 147-159. See J.H. ELLIOTT, Paul, Galatians, and the Evil Eye, 262-273. 113 For the views of the ante-Nicene fathers on magic see C.R. FRANCIS THEE, Julius Africanus and the Early Christian View of Magic, 316-448. For Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine see N. BROX, Magie und aberglauben, 157-80. 114 Julius Africanus a Christian traveller and historian of the late 2nd and early 3rd century A.D. states that «the small number of references to magic and related areas and the rhetorcial use of them when they do appear, leaves the impression that magic was basically an alien factor, which was regarded as presenting some danger to the Church members but was far from being the Church’s main worry and was of no interest to them». C.R. FRANCIS THEE, Julius Africanus, 327. 115 On the tendency to deny that humans can perform sorcery and yet to blame everything negative on the demonic see P. BROWN, Sorcery, Demons and the Rise of Christianity, 32. 116 M.W. DICKIE, «The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye». 117 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily V on Galatians, PG LXI, 613-656. 118 Magic and sorcery are condemned in the Old Testament as among the very most serious sins: Dt 18:10-12, Ex 22:18, Lv 19:26, 31; 20:6; and directly in the New Testament: Gal 5:20, Rev 21:8, 22:15; and in literature of the early Christian era: Didache, 2.2, 5.1, Aristeides [Apologia, 8.2, 13.8], Justin [Apologia, 1.14.2]; Pseudo- Phocylides, 149 and Oracula Sibyllina, 283. Scripture also condemns magic indirectly through examples of lives that were ruined by the practice of the occult arts, and thus they fell under divine wrath, cf. 2 Kg 17:17; 21:6; 1 Chr 10:13; 1Sm 15:23. 119 We should not imagine that Paul, by listing these sins as unworthy of the kingdom of God was particularly eager to condemn sinners or exclude people from eternal life (an exclusion which Jesus did not make, see Mt 21:31). In these lists of sins (Gal 5:19-21, 1 Cor 6:9-11) Paul simply makes clear what kind of actions are in need of repentance, such as sorcery, idolatry, murder, theft, and sexual immorality. Furthermore, Paul says elsewhere that the Christian community itself is composed of people who once did such things (1 Cor 6:11; Ti 3:3), but who have repented and are being saved «by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom [God] poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life» (Ti 3:5-7). In other words, the Christian community is composed of people who were sinners, but are being saved by grace and transformed, infused with the «Divine Nature» (2 Pt 1:4). In the language of Paul, the true Christian has become a «new creation» (Gal 6:15). He or she is a new person who being joyfully set free from the bonds of sin, now «bears fruit for God» by giving up selfish desires in order to «serve one another through love» (Rom 7:4; Gal 5:13). Thus the grace of God fills all aspects of their lives so much so that they learn to joyfully lay down their life for others. To Paul the essential «law of Christ» is to bear one another’s burdens, to love one another; this is the fulfilment of all Old Testament law (Gal 6:2; 5:14; cf. Jn 13:34). Thus in pursuit of love, believers begin to shine with «the fruit of the Spirit» that is God’s essential characteristics: «Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness,

216

Chapter 2

goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control» (Gal 5:22-23). 120 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily V on Galatians, PG LXI, 613-656. 121 Jewish Rabbis of Paul’s time spoke of two ages. To them salvation is spoken not so much in terms of the immortality of the soul, but in ‘sharing in the age to come’ (olam haba). That is, passing from the present age (olam hade) into the resurrection or new creation in the Messianic age, including the resurrection of the body and the restoration of this fallen world. This is perhaps Paul’s background for discussion of the flesh and the Spirit in Galatians, Romans, (Gal 5:16-25, Rom 8:1-17) where the flesh corresponds to this fallen world and the Spirit corresponds to the life in a new creation. «For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor un-circumcision, but a new creation» (Gal 6:15). 122 Paul indicates that by baptism Christians have been crucified with Christ, and yet began to live in the new creation (Rom 6:4). But the new creation will not be fully realized until the revelation of «the Sons of God» when the power of God’s Spirit will bring about mysteriously a new heavens and a new earth (Gal 6:12-16; Rom 8:19-23). Paul, speaking about the resurrection of the dead into the new creation: 1 Cor 15:50 «And I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood is not able to inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption». Human nature must be glorified by God’s light, transformed in Christ by passing through his crucifixion and resurrection, that is, by putting on the new nature that was born in baptism and is renewed in the image of God himself (Rom 6:4; Col 3:10). Christian hope for Paul is more than immortality it is to receive a glorified body: «So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power» (1 Cor 15:42-43). 123 Cf. Gal 5:20-21; Rv 22:15. 124 The full title of the Didache is cited by St. Jerome and the Church Fathers as ‘The Lord’s Teaching through the Twelve Apostles’, in Greek: ¨ȚįĮȤ੽ ȀȣȡȓȠȣ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ įȫįİțĮ ਕʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ. 125 Didache, 2.2: «And the second commandment of the Teaching You will not murder, commit adultery, practice paedophilia, fornicate, steal, practice magic, engage in witchcraft, kill a child by abortion» etc. 126 Didache, 5.1 «And the way of death is this: First of all it is evil and full of curse: murders, adulteries, lusts, fornications, thefts, idolatries, magic arts, witchcrafts, rapines, false witnessing, hypocrisies, double-heartedness, deceit, haughtiness, depravity, self- will, greediness, filthy talking, jealousy, over-confidence, loftiness, boastfulness; persecutors of the good, hating truth, loving a lie» etc. 127 «Dogs» is a negative term that Scripture often applies to misguided shepherds, i.e. false prophets and corrupt religious leaders, who have received graces from God to govern and instruct but instead they squandered those graces, seeking neither God’s glory, nor the peoples good, but only the satisfaction of their own base desires. See Is 56:10-11, «The dogs have a mighty appetite, they never have enough. But they are shepherds who have no understanding; they have all turned to their own way, each to his own gain, one and all». Thus Paul condemns those walking as enemies of the Cross of Christ, Phil 3:2.19, «Beware of those dogs… evildoers, mutilators of the flesh… Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

217

glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things». And perhaps Jesus warns of these when he says, Mt 7. 6.15, «Do not give dogs what is holy» and «Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly they are ravenous wolves». The warning «do not to give dogs what is holy» is also found in Didache 9.5. Like thieves these «wolves» «came only to steal and kill and destroy» the flock of God’s lovely sheep for whom Jesus came to protect and lead into eternal life (Jn 10:10.27-28). 128 M.W. D ICKIE, «The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye», 11. 129 The Church Fathers were convinced in the literal truth of Scripture, including the power of miracles. Cf. e.g. Gal 3:5: «Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?»; also for signs, miracles, and wonders worked by early Christians including raising people from the dead, see Acts 2:43; 3:6-7; 5:12; 8:13; 9:40; 14:8-10; 19:11-12. 130 For satanic power and demons active in deceptive signs or magic which leads to the destruction of the earth, cf. Rv 16:13-14: «And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon [i.e. Satan, cf. 12:9]... spirits of demons doing signs [or wonders], which go forth to the kings of the earth, even of the whole habitable world to assemble them to the war of that day». For more deceptive wonders worked by evil power or magic, cf. Rv 13:13-14; 17:17, 19:20. To Babylon it is said: «all nations were deceived by your sorcery» Rv 18:23b. The Antichrist himself, according to Paul, will be a magician who operates «by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders» and «with all wicked deception... so that they believe what is false», 2 Th 2:9-11. 131 Gal 5:21, for repentance from them see Rv 9:20-21; 2:20-21; Acts 18:18-20. The sense in these warnings is that among the outcasts who will be shut out of eternal life are those who practiced sorcery or murder or some grave sin and they did not repent. However those who repented have «washed their robes» and they receive the free gift of life: «Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city», Rv 22:14. God is infinitely merciful and generous to all who repent, but his justice is perfect (i.e. he will punish the sins) those who do wrong but refuse to confess their guilt, Rv 2:5; 2:16; 3:3; 3:19; Rom 2:4-5. Jesus says in Luke 13:3 «No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish». 132 Cf. curses due to human injustice and violation of God’s covenant: Dt 11:28; 30:19; Jer 23:10-20; 44:8; Dn 9:11; a curse in which the whole earth is implicated: Is 24:5-6. 133 To see where God looks at the heart and judges the secrets therein, 1Sm 16:7; 1 Ch 28:9; Ps 7:9; 44:21; Jer 11:20, Jesus also manifests this divine gift, Mt 9:4; 12:25; Lk. 11:17; Jn 2:24-25; 21:17; Heb 4:13, and the Father has given Jesus the duty to judge humanity, because he is «the Son of Man», i.e. the God who became man, Jn 5:22-27. For example Jesus words are revealing when he warns the false «prophetess» Jezebel who led members of the church in Thyatira into idolatry and adultery: Rv 2:21.23 «I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality… I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works». Elsewhere Jesus is more lenient towards sinners, Mt 9:13; to the

218

Chapter 2

chief priests he says «Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you», Mt 21:31. The point is that the sinner who repents is closer to God that the righteous person who is pridefulíbecause «all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God», Rom 3:23. Therefore God judges according to the heart: the intention to come to the light of truth vs. the intention to hide in darkness, Jn 3:19-21. 134 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Ad illuminandos catechesis 2.5, PG XLIX, 240. Translations of Chrysostom here and throughout the thesis are based on the Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (see: http://www.ccel.org/fathers2), unless otherwise cited. Many Alexander amulets have been found; see B. WYSS, «Johannes Chrysostomos», 266. 135 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily VIII on Colossians., PG XVII, 358; ID., Homily IV on 1 Corinthians., PG LXI, 38, 14-20; Homily X on 1 Timothy, PG XVII, 552; Ad illuminandos Cat. 2; PG XLIX, 240 33-35. Note also that it appears from Canon 36 of the council of Laodicea that the leaders of the wider church community, like St. John Chrysostom, were also keen to reduce the use of amulets. This ruling prohibited the clergy from themselves providing amulets. 136 It must be noted here that these amulets could have included a broader range of powers such as protection against other daimonic threats or even healing qualities. 137 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Ad illuminandos cat. 2, PG XLIX, 240 57-61. On the apotropaic features of the ritual language prescribed in baptismal instructions see D.S. KALLERES, Exorcising the Devil. 138 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily XII on 1 Corinthians., PG LXI, 106. 139 For other references to the use of the cross see: J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily VIII on Colossians, PG LXII, 357-8; Adv. Jud. Or. 8, PG XLVIII, 940. Wilken raises an interesting point in relation to Chrysostom’s promotion of the cross in the context of his homilies on the Judaisers. Wilken argues that for Chrysostom, Judaism posed a threat because it may have seemed more powerful to his congregation than Christianity and would thus have been able to swing people’s allegiance. St. John Chrysostom’s primary goal, in his view, was therefore to win back Judaisers to the Christian rites and to provide them with the power of the «sign of the cross» which could ward off daimones. See R.L. WILKEN, John Chrysostom and the Jews, 8788. 140 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily XII on 1 Corinthians; PG LXI, 105; Commentary on Galatians; PG LXI, 623. See also R. MACMULLEN, Christianity and Paganism, 143 and R.W. STRICKLER, A dispute in dispute: forgery, heresy, and sainthood in seventh century Byzantium. 141 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily XII on 1 Corinthians, PG LXI, 106 9-38. Salt, soot, and ash were also used (J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily VIII on Colossians, PG LXII., 359. 142 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily XII on 1 Corinthians, PG LXI, 106 9-38. 143 H. MAGUIRE, Magic and Christian Image, 61. It should be noted here that the baptism of infants was probably minimal compared to adult and death-bed baptism. 144 «De statuis», Homily XIX, PG XLIX, 196 37-46. 145 In D.S. KALLERES, Exorcising the Devil, provides a strong argument for the potency of ritual language in emerging Christian baptismal discourse. 146 M.W. DICKIE, «The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye», 10.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium 147

219

Particularly Basil, Jerome, Chrysostom, Tertullian and Eusebius of Alexandria. See M.W. DICKIE, «The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye», 9-34. E.M. YAMAUCHI, Magic in the Biblical World, 169-200 and J.H. ELLIOTT, Paul, Galatians, and the Evil Eye, 262-273. 148 M.W. DICKIE, «The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye», 34. Greek Orthodox Christians regard Satan and his demons as a reality. These supernatural entities are encountered in the form of the evil eye and on rare occasions also through demonic possession. The evil eye is part of the faith, culture and traditions of Greek people, who go out of their way to avoid having the evil eye put on them or their families. What is regarded as superstition in the West is a reality that is much feared in Greece and in much of the Mediterranean world. From a sociological perspective it can be said that the Greeks have been socially conditioned to believe that Satan is a being with supernatural powers. Collectivist societies, such as Greek societies tend to blame «bad luck» on external factors such as the evil eye, rather than on coincidence. Greek people see Satan as a very real threat to their well-being. On that note, the Orthodox Church has a prayer against the evil eye which the priests recite in favour of their faithful. It carries the following contents: «Let us pray to the Lord…Lord have mercy. O Lord Our God, the King of the ages, almighty and all powerful, who create and alter all things by your will alone; who changed into dew the flames of the furnace in Babylon that had been heated seven times more than usual, and preserved in safety your three holy youths; the physician and healer of our souls; the security of those who hope in you; we pray you and beseech you: Remove, drive away and banish every diabolical activity, every satanic attack and every plot, evil curiosity and injury, and the evil eye of mischievous and wicked men from your servant (Name); and whether it was brought about by beauty, or bravery, or happiness, or jealousy and envy, or evil eye, do you yourself, O Lord who love mankind, stretch out your mighty hand and your powerful and lofty arm, look down on this your creature and watch over him(her), and send him(her) an angel of peace, a mighty guardian of soul and body, who will rebuke and banish from him (her) every wicked intention, every spell and evil eye of destructive and envious men; so that, guarded by you, your supplicant may sing to you with thanksgiving: The Lord is my helper, and I shall not be afraid; what can man do to me? And again: I shall fear no evil because you are with me. For you are God my strength, the powerful ruler, the Prince of Peace, the Father of the age to come. Yes, Lord, our God, spare your creature and save your servant (Name) from every injury brought about by the evil eye, and keep him (her) safe above every ill. For you are our King and all things are possible to Thee, O Lord. Therefore, we ascribe glory to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen» in N. ȆǹȆǹ¨ȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ, ǼȣȤȠȜóȖȚȠȞIJo ȂȑȖĮ, 517. 149 G.A. MALONEY, Pseudo Macarius. 150 As Christian mysticism was developing, two distinct but somewhat overlapping theological currents became apparent in early Byzantium – the period between 4th and 7th centuries. The first had Semitic (e.g. Syrian) origins and a more emotional, deep feel that strove to help the faithful experience the «immanence» of God, i.e. his very real and loving presence one can perceive nearby, and eventually inside, at every moment of one’s lives. Along these lines, Fathers like St. Ignatius of Antioch,

220

Chapter 2

St Antony the Great and St Macarios of Egypt focused on a spiritual centre, most often called the «heart», and showed that fervent ascetic training, spiritual vigilance «ĮȖȡȣʌȞíĮ» and incessant prayer lead to drastic lessening of thought chatter, to a peaceful state they called «ȘıȣȤíĮ» where one experiences his relationship with God in a very calm, intimate and tender way, as one can now listen better to his words. The guide on this path is pure love for God, his special love for each person, a deeply spiritual feeling that helps us go past our emotions and be open to his grace, in all humility. As emotional baggage is left behind, one encounters God always present interiorly, in a spiritual «darkness» (ȖȞóijȠȢ), the understanding of which has deep biblical roots. Other Fathers, e.g. St. Clement of Alexandria, Evagrios of Pontus and St. Maximos the Confessor, had a more intellectual approach (of Greek origin) to this mystical process, focusing primarily on the «transcendence» of God. This is the realization that as we think and understand what we can about our Creator and then go through our thought process itself through prayer, we become able to merge with the transcendental aspects of his energies (never with His Essence.) For them, prayer develops as a state that is characterized by a persistent noetic focus on God, but with no attachment to any particular thought. This prayer gradually becomes purified and allows the increasingly still mind to transcend itself; while the spiritual momentum from our intense seeking for God prepares us to accept His presence and let Him pull us in union «sȞȦıȚȢ» with Him. At that point, we experience God in «șİȦȡíĮ» a kind of vision, as a real Person, manifesting in a formless clear, bright light within ourselves. 151 The presence of exorcisms in early medieval liturgical manuscripts is normally taken to reflect the church’s ongoing response to lively, vibrant traditions of possession behaviour in early medieval Europe. The textual transmission and manuscript context of liturgical exorcisms paint a different picture, however. The vital, elaborate exorcisms of the earliest tradition (the Old Gelasian Sacramentary, especially as preserved in the Paris Supplement of the Vatican Sacramentary) quickly give way to procedural exorcisms in the Eighth Century Gelasian Sacramentary and the subsequent Gregorian Sacramentaries. P. DENDLE, Liturgical Exorcisms in Early Medieval Europe: From Demons to Desk Job. 152 H. WADDELL, The Desert Fathers; N.F. ROBINSON, Monasticism in the Orthodox Churches; C. CAVARNOS, Anchored in God. 153 A. CAMERON, Athos and the Byzantine World. The Athos monasteries only got going from the 10th century. The impact on surrounding areas was strongest in the Palaeologan period and after the fall of Constantinople. One needs to look at monasteries founded on Athos by non-Byzantines, e.g. Serbians, Russians, Georgians. 154 Biography of Saint Athanasius the Athonite. Also, St. Gerasimos the New Ascetic of Kefallonia (+1579) is known as a renowned healer of the demon possessed. The demon- possessed and the mentally ill flock to his holy shrine, which contain his incorrupt relics, on a daily basis to receive healing. He became a grace-filled exorcist because of his great discipline for fasting and prayer. The Saint lived as an ascetic on Mount Athos for five years in the Cell of St. Vasilios in the desolate place known as Kapsala. Throughout this time he survived only on boiled zucchini with no oil. It was here that he gained many spiritual experiences and received the monastic tonsure. The demons had no power over him, but rather he acquired the power to

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

221

cast them out. His nickname became «Kapsalis» (the burning one), after the desolate place of Kapsala. The demons would cry out: «Kapsalis, you have burned us». 155 N. OIKONOMIDES, Mount Athos: Levels of Literacy, 167 states that «On the other hand, all the sources (starting with the biographies of the main «stars» of the monastic community, its saints) constantly mention the average rustic monks whose lack of education was notorious and who constituted a very large part of the inhabitants of the peninsula. Educated or not, all monks were engaged in the pursuit of the spiritual life and prayed in several ways, none of which was directly related to or dependent on a high level of culture. Mount Athos never pretended to be an elitist social or cultural center. Consequently, the educational level of its inhabitants varied over time in proportion to the general cultural level, in a society where basic schooling was mainly the job of laymen or of the secular clergy. Also: J. MEYENDOR, Mount Athos in the Fourteenth Century, 157-160. The latter writes: «It appears that, since the time when the first hermits settled on the Holy Mountain and, in spite of the creation of the first great coenobitic monasteries in the tenth century, Athonite monks remained rather uninvolved in literary activities. Together with the vast majority of their brothers and sisters in other monastic centres of the Byzantine world, they accepted, as permanent criterion of asceticism and spirituality, the legacy received from the early Christian monastic traditions of Egypt, Palestine, Syria, and the Constantinopolitan Stoudios. The predominantly rural recruitment of the Athonite communities and their remoteness from major urban centres were not conducive to intellectual creativity. Their isolation was, in fact, deliberately sought and was protected by the imperially approved status of the Holy Mountain». 156 Liturgical ritual was a major element of the Christian cultures of Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. This was especially true of Byzantium, where court and church ritual, often intertwined, achieved a splendour unparalleled by any other aspect of civic or religious life. Robert Taft has brought together a series of studies on the formation and development of these rites and on the meaning they had for contemporaries. Particular articles look at the role of Jerusalem, Constantinople, then Mt. Athos, in this process, and at the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. See R.F. TAFT, Mount Athos: A Late Chapter in the History of the Byzantine Rite, 179-194. 157 Orthodox teaching has always affirmed the mystery that while Jesus is fully human (Heb 2:17; 4:15) he is also fully divine; Jesus is «true God and eternal life» (1 Jn 5:20) and «Christ who is God over all, blessed forever» (Rom 9:5). The divinity of Christ is affirmed throughout the New Testament, not only in the Johannine literature (cf. e.g. Phil 2:6-7; Col 1:15-20). The unknown author of Hebrews described Jesus as «the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the Word of his power» (Heb 1:3). All authors of New Testament depict Jesus sharing in exclusively divine qualities, the authority to forgive sins (Mat 9:2-6), to raise the dead (Mk 5:41), to give life (Jn 5:21), to know the secrets in the minds and the hearts of people (Lk 6:8; Jn 2:25; Rev 2:23), and to judge the world (Acts 10:42; Mt 25:31-32; 2 Cor 5:10). 158 A. SCHMEMANN, The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy. [on line edition, access: [04.10.2014] http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/historical_road_a_schmemann.htm. 159 In the Middle Ages exorcistic rituals were an inseparable part of a saint’s life.

222

Chapter 2

This Christian ritual par excellence was propagated by the first hagiographers (St. Athanasius, Sulpitius Severus, St. Gregory the Great, etc.); the 12th century saw a rise in the numbers and versatility of the accounts about exorcistic rituals. For a saint the healing of the demoniac primarily meant a fight with a demon. The victim was as if a battlefield to the divine and infernal forces. Exorcism, however, served a much more practical purpose for a saint: statements uttered by the demon during exorcism played an important role in his «career». All the exertion and trouble he had to go through during the ritual was well worth it: successful performance helped to increase his fame and credibility. 160 This article focuses on an anonymous ascetic text which is unpublished until now, and offers the critical edition of this short work containing a series of recommendations to Athonite monks, alphabetically organized and ending with the letter gamma; the text is preserved in two manuscripts: Athous, Dionysiou 269, of the XVth century and Athous-Lavra K.116, of the XVIth century. See P. VANDEUN, Some Anonymous Recommendations to Athonite Monks in the online journal [04.06.2014]: https://www.academia.edu/1172906/Some_anonymous_recommendations_to_Ath onite_monks. 161 J. DUFFY, «Reactions of Two Byzantine intellectuals», 35-61. 162 (PSEUDO-) M. PSELLOS, Dialogue on the Operation of Daemons, 1843. A complete list of his works is given in Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, x.41. A number of scholars, such as Bidez and Gautier, are of the opinion that Michael Psellos was not the author of this work but that it was the work of another writer of the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century (specifically the Palaeologan period). Accordingly the author of this work is sometimes referred to as Pseudo-Psellos. Until a definitive answer is known, I prefer to reserve judgment on the issue. See also R. GREENFIELD, «Contribution to the Study of Palaeologan Magic», 127. 163 (PSEUDO-) M. PSELLOS, Dialogue on the Operation of Daemons, 20. 164 With the possible exception of Lk 13:11-16, Jesus says, speaking of a woman with a «spirit of infirmity» that she was bound by the devil: «And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?» v. 16. Satan is equivalent to įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ in the N.T.: compare Mt 4:5 įȚáȕȠȜȠȢ devil to Mt 4:10 ȈĮIJĮȞã Satan speaking of the same individual. 165 (PSEUDO-) M. PSELLOS, Dialogue on the Operation of Daemons, 31-32. [on line access: 04.10.2014] http://www.esotericarchives.com/psellos/daemonibus.pdf) 166 Cod. Jerus. Taph. gr. 106, fol. 7r, where Italos is clearly a mistake for Italikos. Cfr. The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, II, 1368. 167 Philosophica minora. I, op. 32, 100 í Letter 30, 198, 6; Philosophica minora. I, op. 7, 117-122, where the term, though inclining to the positive, provokes a certain amount of unease. 168 Letter of Italikos (no. 33) where, in the course of discussing a Constantinian coin endowed with apotropaic powers, he refers directly to the Chaldaeans and their connection with magic. 169 This was also the view of L.G. WESTERINK, Proclus, Procopius, Psellos, 275280, who, however, stresses more the likelihood of Procopius being an intermediary and common source.

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium 170

223

P. GAUTIER, Le de Daemonibus du Pseudo-Psellos, 17-20, 105-194. Gautier suggests a possible late thirteenth or early fourteenth century date. 171 (PSEUDO-) M. PSELLOS, Dialogue on the Operation of Daemons, II, 77. 172 In the early Middle Ages, the image of the devil absorbed features of certain pagan gods (the satyrs and Pan): the cloven feet, the horns, the claws and the goatee. However, other features, such as wings, came from the Christian tradition and emphasized the primordial angelic nature of demons. In Orthodox tradition, too, the iconography of the devil and his servants was among the main sources of transmission of the Christian perception of evil to the masses of the Orthodox population. Many scholars have drawn attention to the so-called «demonic invasion» of Western Europe that began in the fifteenth century and continued well into the sixteenth. The terror of the devil was transmitted through many sources. By contrast one cannot find any signs of extreme ‘demonization’ in Orthodox iconography. The devil and his servants almost never constituted a separate subject either of icons or of woodcuts. As a rule they were shown in hagiographic depictions as a fearsome but at the same time miserable addition. The devil appears as a character in only a very few iconographic subjects, for example the Fight of the Archangel Michael with the devil and the Harrowing of Hell. On most of the former icons, the devil is portrayed as a man with wings whose appearance does not differ much from that of the Archangel. In the rare cases when the devil appears on an icon picturing Christ descending into Hell, he is portrayed as a horrible dark beast with horns whose contours are only roughly outlined in the darkness of the threshold beneath Christ’s feet (which, as a rule, is dark and empty). D. NICHOLLS, «The Devil in Renaissance France», 234. 173 Greenfield states that the catalogues he consulted were many. The list includes the Greek manuscripts in the libraries of the Meteora (Greece), Milan, Oxford, Paris, the Vatican, Venice and Vienna besides some two hundred and fifteen works from the pens of forty-five authors who lived between early Christian and middle Byzantine time and more than five hundred and thirty works of some one hundred and ten authors ranging from the years 1260-1453. The evidence culled from this considerable mass of source material help us to create a picture of standard orthodox demonology as it existed in the period in question See R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 5, 307. 174 It is interesting to note that R. Greenfield used the device of dividing these beliefs into what have been called «standard orthodox» and «alternative» traditions of demonology in the attempt to bring some much needed clarity and order to this subject. However this study follows the standard orthodox belief. 175 B. ANKARLOO – S. CLARK, Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, 46-47. 176 One problem with such a categorization is that in each case there is obviously significant overlap, particularly when the manipulation of spiritual powers is concerned. On some occasions it is almost entirely pointless to try to distinguish between rituals or devices designed to secure protection from such powers and those designed to enforce their cooperation, while the same sort of manipulation is necessarily seen to be involved in many of the more elaborate techniques and theories of divination. See. R. GREENFIELD, Contribution to Palaeologan Magic, 131.

224 177

Chapter 2

R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 309; ID., «Contribution to the Study of Paleologan magic», 117-153. Alternative traditions (not being the standard orthodox) regarded angels and demons as being essentially equal in power and which believed that both might be commanded by men. 178 R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 307. 179 R. GREENFIELD, «Contribution to the Study of Palaeologan Magic», 150. See also P. MAGDALINO, The Byzantine reception of Classical Astrology, 33-37. Here the author adds a component which he describes as the orthodox establishment as having not only the religious facet outlined but also the national one, identified with the Greek texts of Ptolemaic astronomy inherited by the Byzantines from antiquity and contrasted with the Islamic science imported in Byzantium in what Magdalino chronicles as four distinct phases between the ninth and the 14th century. See also P. MAGDALINO í M.V. MAVROUDI, Occult Sciences in Byzantium, 64-66. 180 P. MAGDALINO – M.V. MAVROUDI, Occult sciences in Byzantium, 65. 181 R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 310. 182 See Thesis’ appendix. 183 F.M. GUAZZO, Cornell University Library Witchcraft Collection (online collection). The Compendium Maleficarum was the ultimate field guide for the beginning demonologist in the 17th century. Guazzo’s Compendium was accepted by his contemporaries as the authoritative manuscript on witchcraft. Later demonologists continued to hail the conciseness and clarity with which Guazzo analyses the practice. The Compendium not only gives an organized account of the subject matter but also provides a glimpse at the Christian view of witchcraft during the early 17th century. 184 A. CESALPINO, De Daemonum Investigatione, chap 17. In this chapter the author speaks of the different diseases brought by demons. He is also quoted by F.M. GUAZZO, Compendium Maleficarum, 106. 185 N. RÉMY, Daemonolatreia libri tres. Remy wrote his Demonolatry after relocating to the French countryside in 1592 to escape the plague. Like the Malleus Maleficarum and other demonological works, Demonolatry lays out the basic beliefs and practices of witches with the goal of convincing the reader of the imminent danger of the devil and the need for all pious citizens to work to rid the world of the influence of demons and witches. Demonolatry also draws from Remy’s experience as a lawyer in its discussion of the correct methods of prosecuting witches. 186 F.M. GUAZZO, Compendium Maleficarum, 48. 187 For the danger of damnation without repentance and good works, cf. Mt 10:28; 25:31-46; Lk 13:3. For God’s desire to save all mankind, cf. 1 Tm 2:4; Jn 3:16; Ti 2:11. 188 It is interesting to note that Russian peasants as well as other neighbouring populations living in rural areas traditionally believed that they were surrounded with unclean forces (nechistaiasila). There are spirits in the forest (leshii), spirits in the water (rusalka, vodianoi and bolotnik), spirits in homes (domovoi), spirits in banya (bannik), and even spirits in barns (ovinnik) and stables (koniushik). As F. WIGZELL writes in «The Russian Folk Devil», 63: «Peasants’ attitude to the unclean forces was one of profound fear coupled with the recognition that respect offered protection». Wigzell explained to me in a personal communication, that this

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

225

means that peasants were terrified of the unclean forces. Reactions to this might have simply been to try and avoid contact (e.g. the hostile water spirit ‘vodianoi’ might pull you under the water but you could avoid this by not going into deep water). However avoidance was generally impossible as in its various manifestations the unclean force could be anywhere. You could ward it/them off with various rituals (hopefully), but perhaps the most effective way was to address the spirit (say the ‘leshii’ or forest spirit) with respect and he might then even be helpful – e.g. by seeing that you made your way out of the forest safely instead of leading you astray. Disrespect your house spirit and he could cause chaos in the house. Give him the things to eat that he liked and he could protect your house. The figure of the sorcerer – there was usually one in each village – was believed to be able to draw on the unclean spirit and this power that the sorcerer used could be for good. You always invited the local sorcerer to a wedding to protect the bride and the wedding. In the case of the unclean force that most closely approximates to the devil (and increasingly over time came to be equated with the devil), it was essential not to anger it. The more frightening the manifestation of the unclean force and the more it was equated with the devil, the less likely it was to protect you. 189 The use of the passages from the Bible as prayers invoking divine protection against spiritual enemies include Psalms 27:3; 35; 40:15-16; 18:37-38; 68; 91; 144:1. 190 Bogomilism was a dualist heresy and maintained that the effect of the cross was due to pretence by the demons who really loved it as the instrument of Christ’s death. 191 For the idea of the spirit returning in the New Testament see Mt 12:45; Mk 9:25; Lk 11:26; cf. Acts 19:13-16. R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 144. 192 See Mk 5, the Gerasene demoniac and the swine, and other stories where the demons tear, hurl down the victims or cause them to cry out on departure in the N.T. 193 L. DELATTE, Un office byzantin d’exorcisme, 36-37; R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 142. An example from the tradition of late Byzantine monasticism of such prayers and rituals warding off evil spirits is the manuscript of Xiropotamou 98. 194 L. DELATTE, Un office byzantin d’exorcisme., 52. 195 For commanding language in the New Testament see for example Mt 8:32;17:18; Mk 1;25; 5:8:9,25; Lk 4:35; 8:29:9; 13; 7;21-23; Mk 9:38-40; 16:17-18; Lk 9:49; 10:17-20: Acts 16:16-18; 19:11-19. 196 The rite of baptism in the Orthodox church include many euchologies which differ greatly in their contents. Such euchologies include the 1647 edition of Goar’s prayer book (Euchologion sive rituale greocorum, Venice) and the Barberini Gr. 336 among others. See Appendix VIII. Various baptismal homilies from the fourth century suggest that the rite was already much as it is today. E. YARNOLD, The Awe Inspiring rites. 197 R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 146. 198 For the efficacy of contact with relics note in the New Testament in particular the stories of Peter’s shadow (Acts 5:15), Paul’s handkerchiefs (Acts 19:12), and the cases where Jesus touched the people he healed. Also in the Old Testament we have the relics of Elisha’s bones causing a dead man to come alive: (2 Kgs 13:21) «One time during a funeral, one of those bands was seen, and the people threw the corpse

226

Chapter 2

into Elisha's tomb and ran off. As soon as the body came into contact with Elisha's bones, the man came back to life and stood up». 199 R. KOTANSKY, Incantations and Prayers, 111. Kotansky mentions a lead tablet inscribed with the ÉijȑıȚĮ īȡȐμμĮIJĮ, (Ephesian Words) which dates back to the 4th B.C. and they were said to be used spoken as an apotropiac charm while walking in a circle around newlyweds. 200 See Mt 7:22 and Lk 10:20 which play down the importance of the ability to exorcise, and also the Belzeboul controversy at Mt 12:28 and Lk 11:20 where it is stressed that Jesus exorcism was performed by the power of the «Holy Spirit» or the «finger of God» respectively. 201 R. GREENFIELD, Traditions of belief, 148. 202 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily IV on 1 Corinthians, PG LXI, 57-58. 203 For a discussion of how the demonization of illness, plague, and insanity had already taken place in Jewish sacred writings before the N.T. see section 1.3 and 3.3 of chapter 1, particularly in the Septuagint, i.e. Ps 91:6 LXX, but also in the case of king Saul’s affliction by an «evil spirit», 1 Sa 16:14, 23; 18:10; 19:9-10. 204 Cf. e.g. quotations: Dt 32:21 / Rom 10:19; Dt 32:35 / Rom 12:19; Dt 32:43 / Rom 15:10. For allusions cf. Dt 32:4 / Rom 9:14; Dt 32:5 / Phil 2:15; Dt 32:17 / 1 Cor 10:22. 205 The Bible depicts that the gods of the pagans were essentially demons (Dt 32:17; Psalm. 106:37). This is also clear in the Septuagint which is the fruit of Jewish scholarship that translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek from the 3rd to the 2nd century B.C. Thus Psalm 106:37 reads «They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons» (LXX Greek daimoniois, here demons is clearly referring to pagan gods, as elsewhere but referring to the same event the pagan gods, e.g. Moloch, are mentioned, see Lv 18:21; 20:2-5; 2 Kgs 17:17; Jer 32:35, etc.). Also the famous passage of Dt 32:17a LXX «They sacrificed to demons, and not to God íto gods in whom they did not know» where the word daimoniois «demons» is paralleled and equated to the word theois «the gods». Paul was of course familiar with the entire LXX and from it he constantly derives his quotations. Ps 106:37 and Dt 32:17 thus can at least give us a suitable background to Paul’s statements about the equivalence of idols, demons, and the gods in Gal 4:8 and 1 Cor 10:20-21. 206 J. CHRYSOSTOM, Homily IV on 1 Corinthians, PG LXI, 57-58. 207 Cf. Rom 1:18-32. 208 Cf. Jn 8:44, to those who believe in Jesus but do not truly follow his word, he says: «You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies». The devil has manipulated and deformed human desires, pushing them towards the «works of the flesh», cf. Gal 5:19-21. 209 Cf. Dt 28:15-29:28; Is 24:1-11; Rv 16:1-21; for human nature becoming bestial and triggering catastrophe, see Rom 1:21f; esp. Rv 13:3: «the whole earth marvelled as they followed the beast» who is summoned by the operation of Satan, v. 1. 210 Cf. Rv 9:1-21; 11:6; 16:13-14; 18:2-3. 211 F. GRAF, Magic in the Ancient World, 2. 212 In any case the injustice of Zeus was necessarily forgotten because his strength

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

227

was unconquerable, and so the human mind justified him out of fear. In another sense, Greeks could look to the good characteristics of Zeus that made him worthy of human confidence: insuring laws of cosmic justice, defending the stranger, promoting friendship, giving asylum, helping Greeks in war, etc. 213 Hesiod, Theogeny 542. Jupiter is from the Indo-European root equivalent to «Zeus, father». 214 Is 14:13; cf. ch. 1, sec. 1.3 for a discussion of Satan as the fallen angel in Job 1, 2, 37:8, Ezekiel 28, and Isaiah 14:13-15. 215 Cf. 2 Maccabees 6:2-5; 1 Mc 1:54; Antiochus attempted to stamp out the Jewish religion. The apex of his evil acts was to install the image of Zeus Olympios in the Holy place, which the Hellenizing Jews named with the Syrian Baal Shamim, «Lord of the heavens» which became a contemptuous pun «Horrible abomination», in the original Hebrew of Mc 1:54 is likely «Shiqquts shomem» ၱၳၧႻၳ ၽၧၿႻ; ȕį੼ȜȣȖμĮ ਥȡȘμઆıİȦȢ in the Greek is taken from Dn 9:27 LXX; cf Dn 11:31. The Hellenizing Jews convinced many to abandon their Jewish traditions and make a «covenant», with the goyim 1 Mc 1:11. Antiochus «burnt with fire the books of the law of God... and whosoever observed the law of the Lord, they put to death, according to the edict of the king», 1 Mc 1:56-57. For the first glorious historical description of holy martyrdom of Jews who refused to abandon God’s law cf. 2 Mc 6:18-7:42. 216 At the many temples of Aphrodite throughout the Greek world, Aphrodite, which in Greek also means the pleasure of sex, was worshipped by clientele who came to offer money and have sex with temple prostitutes. 217 By Hebrew Bible, it is meant specifically this psalm 106:37, Dt 32:17, and Ez 16:20- 21 taken together in the larger context of Jewish suffering before the Babylonian exile. 218 Aztec scientists had determined that the world cycle would end unless sufficient blood was given to their gods that held the natural order in balance. For example, Huitzilopochtli the sun god was said to be in a constant struggle with the darkness and required nourishment in the form of sacrifices to ensure the sun would survive the cycle of 52 years, which was the cyclic basis of many Mesoamerican myths. 219 H.B. NICHOLSON, Handbook of Middle American Indians. 402. 220 Cf. Ch. 1; 1.1, as the cosmic Exorcist on the cross in John’s Gospel cf. Jn 12:3133 here Jesus will bring judgment upon this world, draw all men to himself, and exorcise the devil by the power of his death on the cross. 221 Cf. Dt 23:5, «The LORD your God turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the LORD your God loved you». For the destruction of the whole earth and its rebirth into eternal life cf. The Apocalypse of Isaiah, Is 24-26. Isaiah says that the whole earth will be utterly destroyed Is 24:5-6 «The earth lies defiled under its inhabitants; for they have transgressed the laws, violated the statutes, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore a curse devours the earth». But the apocalypse is only a purification, for which God will be glorified, Is 25:1-3. Finally, Is 25:8, God «will swallow up death forever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from all faces» at the resurrection of the dead 26:19: «Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy!... the earth will give birth to the dead». 222 Cf. Jn 3:16; 1 Th 5:10 «who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep

228

Chapter 2

we might live with him»; cf. 2 Ti 2:11-12. 223 After the fall of Adam, God says to him, «you are dust, and to dust you shall return» (Gn 3:19). God also curses the serpent saying «dust you shall eat all the days of your life» (Gn 3:14). When Adam dies he returns to dust, and is conceivably eaten by the serpent. See also Isaiah, where in the Messianic times all creation will be restored and violence will cease, yet the serpent will still eat dust and death himself will be destroyed. 224 Cf. 1 Pt 3:18-20, Before his resurrection Jesus «preached to the souls in prison» who had died during the cataclysmic Great Flood. A somewhat obscure but fascinating text. 225 In the New Testament idolatry is not just the pagan religion (1 Cor 10:20-22), but any kind of «covetousness» (Col 3:5), that is, the desire for anything that replaces the desire for God. Idolatry can be simply following what «the world» follows: money, pleasure, and power, in indifference to God’s law (Mt 6:25-31; Rom 1:1832; 1 Pt 4:3). Jesus teaching is that although humans have physical needs, they should not be overly worried about acquiring them, «But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you» (Mt 6:33). 226 To see instances where magic/sorcery are paired with idolatry: in the New Testament (Gal 5:20; Rv 9:20-21; 21:8; 22:15) in the Old Testament (Dt 18:10; 1 Sm 15:23; 2 Kg. 17:17; 21:6; Ch 33:6); in the Didache 5:1. 227 To «worship the beast», to worship one’s own desires, man becomes a beast when he lives to gratify his fear and hatred, all that is lowest in him. Satan’s work in «giving authority to the beast» (Rv 13:2-4) is to get humans so caught up in the fastmoving world with its pleasures and distractions as to make man forget his royal dignity as children of the King, to forget about justice, truth, kindness, peace, and the simple joys that flow from loving God and being a simple human being they were created to be. 228 See J.O. ROSENQVIST, The Life and Conduct of Our Holy Mother Irene, Abbess of the Convent of Chrysobalanton, 3-113. 229 A. KAZHDAN, «Holy and unholy miracle workers», 73-82. 230 R. GREENFIELD, «A Contribution to the Study of Palaeologan Magic», 117153. 231 M. DICKIE, «Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World», 32. 232 J. DUFFY, «Byzantine Intellectuals to the Theory and Practice of Magic», 3551. 233 An inference supported by the archaeological record from the city of Anemurium located on the south coast of Cilicia (Turkey), just 65 km across the sea from Cyprus and where three sixth century churches attest its active Christian population. Tralles was near Ephesus in modern Turkey. 234 R. GREENFIELD, «A Contribution to the Study of Palaeologan Magic»,123, 138. 235 J. DUFFY, «Reactions of Two Byzantine Intellectuals to the Theory and Practice of Magic», 83-97. 236 M.T. FÖGEN, «Balsamon on Magic», 99-115. 237 Practically speaking, dualism could be expressed in a person who, for example, split loyalty between good and evil, between serving God and serving a created

Exorcistic Prayer and Demonology in Byzantium

229

thing, which is impossible according to Jesus’ teaching, «No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money» (Mt 6:24; par Lk 16:13). John’s first epistle also makes it clear that loving «the world» is a kind of idolatry incompatible with loving God (1 Jn 2:15-17). James writes that «love of the world» is «hatred of God» (Jas 4:4). Their point is that either God will take first place in a person’s heart or God will end up being rejected all together (Mt 6:21; 2 Cor 6:14f). This is illustrated in John’s gospel by the «authorities» who secretly believed in Jesus but would not dare suffer the humiliation of making their belief in him known, «for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God» (Jn 12:43; cf. Gal 1:10).

PART II

CHAPTER 1 PALEOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE XIROPOTAMOU 98 MANUSCRIPT

Explanations In this description, which is based upon the Politis-Hunger model as described below, the following conventions are used:

Transcriptions [ . . . ]: explanations inserted into the collation; omissions [- . . . ]: the minus sign within square brackets indicates the absence or loss of something. Notes are transcribed or translated following the principles of diplomatic editing. For example, line divisions are marked by vertical lines (|); duplicated words as written by the writer are set in curly brackets {…}, omissions are set in square brackets [ … ], abbreviations are expanded in parentheses (…), etc.

Identifications of texts and lacunae Texts are identified by the titles given in the codex, transcribed with corrected orthography and accentuation. These transcribed titles are presented in italics. If no titles are given in the codex, a title is given – either a made-up title or a title found for that text in an edition. Titles provided in this manner are in parentheses, not italicized. In the case of texts which begin or break off in a lacuna, the initial surviving words (incipit, abbreviated inc.) or last surviving before the lacuna (explicit, abbreviated expl.) are given. Lacunae in the middle of a text are similarly defined, that is, by citation of the explicit of the surviving text followed by the incipit of the text where it resumes. Where possible, the lacuna, like the text itself, is defined by citation of the pages and line numbers from the edition.

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

233

Authors of texts Authors are identified at the beginning of contents entries in boldface when the attributions have been confirmed by research. Otherwise, the authors’ names occurring in manuscript titles are boldfaced.

Citation of sources Sources cited in abbreviated form in the codex description: the surname of the author or editor or a standard abbreviation is given in Italics. The full bibliographical citation is given in the bibliography at the end of the codex description. This chapter consists of two parts. The first is a narrative part covering the history of the codex and its usage. This part also includes a narrative introduction to the codicological description of the codex with comments on critical issues. The second is the manuscript description proper, which is organized according to the Politis-Hunger model that is more fully described below. This organization necessarily occasions some duplication of information, since some of the information presented in the manuscript description proper is commented on in the first, narrative part.

Part One: Introduction to the Manuscript Description History of the Manuscript: Origin and Ownership. The manuscript Xiropotamou 98 is located in the Eastern Orthodox monastery of Xiropotamou (Greek: ǿİȡȐ ȂȠȞȒ ȄȘȡȠʌȠIJȐȝȠȣ) in the monastic state of Mount Athos, a protectorate of Greece. The monastery is situated on the southwest side of peninsula, on the main road from the Athonite port, Dafni, to the capital, Karyes. It is one of the 409 manuscripts found in the library of the Monastery, which boasts also 4,000 volumes of printed books. We have little information regarding the history of the manuscript, Xiropotamou 98. From my interviews conducted during my visits at the Holy Mountain, it seemed that the manuscript must once have belonged to the Athonite monastery of Osiou Grigoriou (Gregory’s Monastery; Greek: ǿİȡȐ ȂȠȞȒ ੘ıȓȠȣ īȡȘȖȠȡȓȠȣ). This hypothesis finds strength from the fact that, although the scribe of the manuscript is unidentified, from the notes written in the manuscript it appears that it is in some way related to Grigoriou Monastery where monks have been performing exorcisms for centuries, a tradition which is still strong today1. Specifically, on the front

234

Chapter 1

flyleaf (fol. Ir) an early possessor of the codex, Hieromonachos Ioasaf Grigoriatis (of the Athonite monastery of Osiou Grigoriou), originally from the Greek island of Tinos, wrote a note identifying himself as the one who in 1738 bought this codex, which he called an Agiasmatarion,2 for 24 aspra3. This manuscript seems to have been so important to Hieromonachos Ioasaf that he wrote a dƝfixio (a curse) upon those who might steal the manuscript4. So, although there are no indications or information to show that the manuscript was written or originally used only in the Osiou Grigoriou monastery, it is nevertheless clear that it was purchased in 1738 by the Monk Ioasaf of the Monastery of Grigoriou, and that from a certain point onwards it was found in the Xiropotamou monastery. From that time until the present it was used there by the priest-monks who successively lived there, since it is a book which is intended more or less exclusively for priest-monks. Use of the Codex in previous research. To my best knowledge, the only researcher who mentions the manuscript is Charles Stewart in his book Demons and the Devil. Moral imagination in modern Greek culture5. Datation. The codex may be dated to the 17th/early 18th c. based on the codicological features described below, especially its script, binding and paper. The date of acquisition by the Hieromonk Ioasaf, written by him on f. Ir, provides a date ante quem for its origin. Format, Dimensions, and Foliation. Codex Xiroptamou 98 is a codex in 16o format composed of regular quires of 8 folios. The quires are unnumbered, but the last folio of each quire is marked by a catchword written by the hand of the original scribe. The size of the paper is approximately 141×96 mm. The original Euchologion text is written in 13-14 lines, but the prefatory supplementary texts added later (ff. IVv-IXv) are written in 14-17 lines per page. The supplementary texts at the end (ff. 159-162) were written, apparently in imitation of the original Euchologion text, in 13-14 lines per page.

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

235

The Material. The paper of the manuscript originated in the West and is quite thick, not rough, and with a yellowish hue, and also has faint watermarks measuring approximately 20 x 28 mm. We could not identify the countermarks which are everywhere combinations of the letters C, B (?) and S (for example: folio 5). Neither could we fully decipher the watermark motif, except to say that it includes a half moon and three leaves cut off in the upper part of the pages. It seems likely that the papers now found in the codex, including the flyleaves, were all originally a part of it; that is, that none of the flyleaves were added later. The bases for this conclusion are the consistency of the papers used and that the binding appears to be the original binding, and typically flyleaves were added only when the codex was rebound. Black ink is used in the original text of the manuscript, folios IIIr-IVv, 1-158, and a lighter shade of black in folios IIv, IVv-IXv and folios 159162v. The titles and initials in the original parts of the codex are usually written in a most delicate manner, always using red (a dilute vermilioncolored) ink and probably produced by the scribe himself6. The Evolution of the Codex. The original codex, consisting of a table of contents and the Euchologion, was written by a single, now anonymous scribe sometime prior to the year, 1738. The contents of the manuscript evolved over time as other owners added to the contents and wrote notes and personal matter in the blank folios at the beginning and end of the codex. At least three other hands of the 18th century appear in the manuscript, supplementing the original contents of the codex. Finally, one or more later writers recorded financial transactions on blank pages. The stages of its evolution appear to be as follows: Stage 1: An anonymous scribe (Hand 1) wrote the manuscript in its original form (table of contents and Euchologion) sometime prior to 1738. Stage 2: Hieromonk Ioasaf Grigoriatis of the Island of Tinos, bought the book in the year 1738 for 24 aspra and wrote on its first folio (f. Ir ) the date of acquisition and his note of possession. The date is in the top margin. This date is clearly in his hand (for example, he wrote his number 8 in the same way in the note and in the date, and the inks are the same (dark brown ink, now affected by water damage). The hieromonk Ioasaf may also have written some the supplementary texts at the end of the codex which we have

236

Chapter 1

not been able to transcribe from the photographs available to us (ff. 159 – 162). Stage 3: An anonymous near contemporary of Ioasaf writing in very similar script wrote items 25-27 on fols. 159-162, which were apparently originally unnumbered flyleaves. Among the distinguishing features of this script which may suggest a writer other than Ioasaf, are the letter B in a form resembling a letter C with loops on each end of the C, and formation of Arabic numerals differing from those of Ioasaf (dilute, medium-brown ink). Stage 4: In the 19th century or possibly even as late as the early 20th century, another owner or user of this codex added, in the blank pages following the table of contents, the akolouthia (service) containing the Small Office Canon for the Virgin Mary from the Paraklitiki (fols. IVv – IXv). The ending is now lost in the lacuna of 20 folios after f. IX (see present condition of the codex, below). Characteristic of this script are the heavy, ornamented initial letters adorned with beads and elaborate but crudely executed serifs and finials. A date ante quem of 1932 for this late addition to the codex is provided by the catalogue description by Evdokimos who includes it in his description of the contents of the codex. Stage 5: One or more other late hands at various times recorded financial transactions on ff. Ir bottom, Iv, IIr (dark brown ink). The codex has been subjected over time to several different numbering systems (foliations), as follows: 1. The main part of the codex, the original Euchologion itself excluding the table of contents, was foliated by the original scribe, who numbered the folios of the text 1-158 in Arabic numerals in the upper outer corner corners of the recto side of the folios. This scribe numbered neither the folios bearing the table of contents, nor originally blank folios following it and at the end of the codex – a conventional treatment for preliminary matter and flyleaves in his time. 2. At a later date, the initial folios beginning with the first folio of the table of contents were numbered in Greek numerals Įǯ - ȗǯ (1-7), corresponding to the later Roman numerals III-IX (see foliation 4, below). This numbering continued to leave the initial two flyleaves, which were at that time blank, unnumbered. 3. The monk who supplemented the content of the codex by adding the prayers at the end (items 25-27 in the description of contents below) extended the first foliation with Arabic numerals to the end of the book to include his new content, thus adding folio numbers 159-162. This foliator mis-numbered the first of these folios 158, which he then overwrote with the correct number 159.

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

237

4. In modern times, the initial folios were renumbered in pencil with Roman numerals on the upper outer corners of the rectos, beginning with the previously unnumbered flyleaves. Thus the folios III-IX bear two folio numbers, since the earlier Greek numbers Įǯ - ȗǯ were not erased. Since this foliation with Roman Numerals is not referred to in the catalogue description by Evdokimos of Xiropotamou, who cited the unnumbered initial folios using his own Greek numerals, which he did not write in the codex itself (his numbers Ǻǯ, Ǻȕǯ apparently refer to folios IIIr, IVv), it may be hypothesized that this foliation was written in the codex subsequent to 1932 when he published his catalogue. In this study, we use the current folio numbering: I-IX, 1-162. The Present Condition of the Codex: The manuscript is currently in a bad condition, especially the sewing of folios 11 to 13 which are loose, almost detached from the rest of the folios. Folios 114 and 159-162 are slightly detached. Several losses in the codex are identified in the collation and in the contents description and listed immediately below. All of these losses except the first and last in this list occurred after the folios received their current numbering. These include: x Lacuna of 20 folios after f. IX. (20 ff have been lost from the akolouthia that begins on f. IVv. The title of the Akolouthia text includes a folio total, indicating that the Akolouthia originally occupied of 25 ½ folios, of which only the first 5½ folios of the text now survive). x Lacuna of 1 folio (f. 14). x Lacuna of 10 folios after f. 139 (f. 140, 1 quire consisting of ff. 141148, and f. 149, the initial folio of the next quire). x Lacuna of 1 folio (f. 154). x Loss of 1 folio after f. 162. (This folio, apparently the penultimate folio of the final quire of the codex, was lost apparently in association with damage to the binding. The unnumbered final folio of the quire was preserved because it was pasted to the inside of the back coverguard.) In addition to the above losses, folio 162 is torn with a loss of text. Folios. 157-158 and 162 have been damaged by worms. Water stains are evident around the folio edges of the manuscript up to folio 27, in some parts of which the intensity of color of the ink appears diluted. There are wax stains throughout the manuscript particularly around folios 48v-54v, 114-130 and 162.

Chapter 1

238

Binding. The binding constructed of wooden boards, in an early-modern western style with the wood grain running vertically, is covered with leather that is now black. The leather lost from the spine has been replaced by a patch of brown leather of an irregular cut measuring 28 mm at one end and 61 mm at the other. The blind-stamped decoration is blurred and not very much visible. On the front cover there is a border composed of two lines with a floral motif between them. On the panel framed by this border are three floral motifs with a rhombus-shaped seal in the centre whose design and significance cannot be distinguished. Outside this border there is a delicate repeating floral design. Elements of a similar decoration also appear on the back cover, two thirds of which are practically covered by the added piece of leather. The physical deterioration of the manuscript is largely due to usage. The spine is scratched and carries in its upper part a label written in blue ink with the numbers from the 1932 Evdokimos catalogue: 2660 | 98. The leather of the spine has been consumed by worms; it was apparently for this reason that the leather patch was added on the spine and the back cover. The wooden cover boards are now detached and split vertically, held in place only by the leather. The last page is detached from the manuscript and even the initial part of the codex is about to come off. Two labels are glued in the inner part of the title page, one over the other. On the last label there is written in blue ink: ī. ȁ. 2431 | İȚį. ȁ. 98 | ǹȡȚș. Ȃ. 98 That is: Genikos Lambrou 2431 | eidikos Lambrou 98 | arithmos monis 98 Lambros general no. 2431 | [Lambros] individual no. 98 | Monastery no. 98 (The monastery adopted for its own use the individual codex numbers from the Lambros catalogue.) The three outer pages are burnt and blackened from exposure to the smoke of candles. There are also bases and receptacles for clasps that are now lost. Script. The script is basically a very ordinary, monastic book script of the time. Its ductus is inclined towards the right and great attention was taken in its execution. The script retains throughout its characteristic angle. A special characteristic of the script are the letters: į, ı, ıʌ, ĮȢ and ī, all of which, at

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

239

the beginnings of words, are elaborated in the form of designs. Its writer was an experienced scribe but the many phonetic spellings indicate that he did not observe the principles of orthographic spelling7. A fine-tipped pen was used for the script of the original, main part of the Corpus (ff. IIIr-IVv and 1-158 of the codex).

Part Two: The Manuscript Description Cod. Xiropotamou 98. Late 17th/early 18th c. — Paper, 16o — folio dimensions: 141×96 mm — column dimensions: 88×70 (f. I), 105×75/82 (f. IIv), 111/121×75 (ff. IVv-IXv),103/110×55/65 (ff. IIIr-IVv (beginning) and ff. 1-162)] — foliation: I-IX, 1-162 — lines: 14-17 (ff. IVv-IXv), 13-14 (ff. IIIr-IVr and ff. 1-162). — Lambros: 98; Evdokimos: 2660) I. CONTENTS 1. (IIIr - IVr ) ȆަȞĮȟ IJȠࠎ ʌĮȡȩȞIJȠȢ ȕȚȕȜȓȠȣ (Table of Contents). 2. (IVv-ij.IXv) ȂİȖĮȜȣȞ‫ޠ‬ȡȚĮ ȥĮȜȜިȝİȞĮ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޟ‬Ȣ ǻİıʌȠIJȚț‫ޟ‬Ȣ ‫ݒ‬ȠȡIJ‫ޠ‬Ȣ (Small Office Canon for the Virgin Mary from the Paraklitiki: Supplicatory Canon to the Virgin Mary). (PAP, 439-448). Text ends in lacuna; expl. țĮȓ ܻȞİijȫȞȘıİ ijȦȞȒ ȝİȖȐȜȘ, țĮȓ İ‫ݭ‬ʌİȞ (PAP, 426). 3. (1r-13v) ݃ȡȤ‫ ޣ‬ıީȞ Ĭİࠜ ݃Ȗȓ࠙ IJȠࠎ ȂȚțȡȠࠎ ݄ȖȚĮıȝȠࠎ ȝİIJ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ İ‫ރ‬ȜȠȖȘIJާȞ . . . (Office for the small water blessing). Lacuna of nine folios after f. 13. Expl.: ‫ބ‬ʌ‫ޡ‬ȡ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJࠛȞ Ȥȡ߯ȗȩȞIJȦȞ IJ߱Ȣ ʌĮȡ‫ ޟ‬ĬİȠࠎ ȕȠȘșİȓĮȢ țĮ‫ޥ‬ ܻȞIJȚȜİȓȥİȦȢ IJȠࠎ ȀȣȡȓȠȣ įİȘșࠛȝİȞ:~, inc (f. 23r) ʌȜȘıș߱ȞĮȚ IJȠࠎ ܼȖȚĮıȝȠࠎ ıȠȣ. ȈȪ Ȗ‫ޟ‬ȡ İ‫ܼ ݸ ݭ‬ȖȚĮıȝާȢ ‫ݘ‬ȝࠛȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ıȠȓ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ įȩȟĮȞ ܻȞĮʌȑȝʌȦȝİȞ ıީȞ IJࠜ ܻȞȐȡȤ࠙ ıȠȣ ʌĮIJȡ‫ ޥ‬. . . (PAP, 252-259; DMI, 451) The resumption of the text is the ending of the service for blessing the water; rubrics follow the end of the text: İ‫ݭ‬IJĮ ȜĮȕࠛȞ IJާȞ IJȓȝȚȠȞ ıIJĮȣȡާȞ İ‫ރ‬ȜȠȖİ߿ IJ‫ވ ޟ‬įĮIJĮ· . . .). Prayers: 4. (23v-26r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ ޣ‬IJȠࠎ ݄ȖȚȠȣ ‫ދ‬ʌĮIJަȠȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ‫ݸ‬ʌȠȓĮȞ ȜȑȖİ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ țȐșİ ܼȖȚĮıȝާȞ ‫ݸ‬ʌȠࠎ Ȟ‫ ޟ‬țȐȝİȚȢ (Prayer of Saint Ypatios). (PAP, 511-512) 5. (26r-27r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ ޣ‬IJȠࠎ ݄ȖȓȠȣ ǺȜĮıȓȠȣ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ʌިȞȠȞ ȜĮȚȝȠࠎ (Prayer of Saint Blase to relieve the pain in the Throat). Inc.: ‫ ݾ‬ĬİާȢ ‫ ݸ‬IJࠛȞ ‫݋‬Ȟ ܻȜȘșİȓĮ ‫݋‬ʌȚțĮȜȠȣȝȑȞȦȞ ıİ IJ‫ޟ‬Ȣ Į‫ݧ‬IJȒıİȚȢ ʌȡȠijșȐȞȦȞ, ‫ސ‬Ȣ ‫ ݸ‬șİȓȠȢ ʌȡȠijȒIJȘȢ ijȘı‫ޥ‬Ȟ țĮ‫ޥ‬ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ Į‫ݧ‬IJȚȝĮıȓĮȞ IJ߱Ȣ țĮȡįȓĮȢ ʌȡȠijșȐȞȦȞ IJާ Ƞ‫ބ‬Ȣ ıȠȣ, țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȕȠȘșާȢ ʌĮȡȓıIJĮıİ…, expl.: ‫ ݸ‬ĬİާȢ IJ߲ ʌȡİıȕİȓߠ IJȠࠎ șİȡȐʌȠȞIJȠȢ ıȠȣ ǺȜĮıȓȠȣ ‫݋‬ʌȚIJĮȤȪȞȦȞ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ȕȠȒșİȚȐȞ ıȠȣ IJĮȤİȓĮȢ ܻʌȠȜĮȪıȘȢ, țĮ‫ ޥ‬Į‫ރ‬IJާȢ IJ߱Ȣ șİȡĮʌİȓĮȞ, İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ įȩȟĮȞ IJȠࠎ ȝİȖȐȜȠȣ ıȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİީȢ ‫ݷ‬ȞȩȝĮIJȠȢ….

240

Chapter 1

6. (27r-28r) ǼȣȤ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ ĮȣIJȠࠎ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ Į‫ރ‬IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ‫ބ‬ʌȩșİıȚȞ. Inc.: ‫ ݸ‬șİާȢ IJࠛȞ įȣȞȐȝİȦȞ ‫ ݸ‬țĮșȒȝİȞȠȢ ‫݋‬ʌ‫ ޥ‬IJࠛȞ ȤİȡȠȣȕ‫ޥ‬ȝ țĮ‫ܻ ޥ‬ȞȠȓȖȦȞ țĮIJĮȡȐțIJĮȢ Ƞ‫ރ‬ȡĮȞࠛȞ, expl.: ʌȡȩijșĮıȦȞ Į‫ރ‬IJާȞ ǺĮıȚȜİީȢ IJާȞ ‫݋‬Ȟ İ‫ރ‬ȜȠȖȓĮȚȢ ȤȡȘıIJȩIJȘIJȠȢ țĮ‫ ޥ‬IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ‫݋‬ʌȚșȣȝȓĮȞ IJ߱Ȣ țĮȡįȓĮȢ Į‫ރ‬IJȠࠎ įާȢ Į‫ރ‬IJȩ· țĮ‫ ޥ‬IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ IJࠛȞ ȤİȚȜȑȦȞ șȑȜȘıȚȞ, ȝ‫ܻ ޣ‬ʌȠıIJİȡȒıȘȢ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ įȩȟĮȞ .... 7. (28v-30v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ ޣ‬ȜİȖȠȝȑȞȘ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޟ‬Ȣ ȞިıȠȣȢ IJࠛȞ țIJȘȞࠛȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ țȐșİ IJİIJȡȐʌȠįȠȞ IJȠࠎ ݃ȖަȠȣ ȋĮȡĮȜ‫ޠ‬ȝʌȠȣ (Prayer of Saint Charalambos for the healing of sick animals). Inc.: Ǽ‫ރ‬ȤĮȡȚıIJࠛ ıȠȚ ȀȪȡȚİ ‫ ݸ‬ĬİާȢ ȝȠȣ ʌȐȞIJȠIJİ, ‫ݼ‬IJȚ ‫݋‬ȜİȒȝȦȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ijȚȜȐȞșȡȦʌȠȢ ‫ބ‬ʌȐȡȤİȚȢ..., expl.: ‫ބ‬ʌ‫ޡ‬ȡ IJȠࠎ ܼȖȓȠȣ, țĮ‫ܻ ޥ‬ȤȡȐȞIJȠȣ ıȠȣ ‫ݷ‬ȞȩȝĮIJȠȢ ȞĮ‫ ޥ‬į‫ ޣ‬ȀȪȡȚİ ‫ ݸ‬ĬİȩȢ ȝȠȣ įާȢ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ȤȐȡȚȞ ıȠȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ʌȜȠȣıȓĮȞ țĮ‫ޥ‬ ܿijșȠȞȠȞ ‫݋‬ʌ‫ ޥ‬ʌȐȞIJĮȢ IJȠީȢ ‫݋‬ʌȚțĮȜȠȣȝȑȞȠȣȢ IJާ ʌȐȞIJȚȝȠȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝİȖĮȜȠʌȡİʌ‫ޡ‬Ȣ ‫ݷ‬ȞȠȝȐ ıȠȣ IJȠࠎ ʌĮIJȡާȢ .... 8. (30v-32v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ ޣ‬İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ȝİȜަıȚĮ (Prayer for the bees). (PAP, 510-511). 9. (32v-36r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ ޣ‬IJȠࠎ ݄ȖަȠȣ ȈȣȝİޫȞ IJȠࠎ ȈIJȣȜަIJȠȣ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ ޟ‬ȝİIJ‫ޠ‬ȟȚĮ (Prayer of Saint Simon the Stylite for Worms). Inc.: ‫݋‬Ȟ ‫ݷ‬ȞȩȝĮIJȚ IJȠࠎ ʌĮIJȡާȢ . . . ‫ݾ‬ ݀ȖȚȠȢ IJȠࠎ șİȠࠎ țĮ‫ ޥ‬įȓțĮȚȠȢ ʌĮIJ‫ޣ‬ȡ ‫ݘ‬ȝࠛȞ ȈȣȝİޫȞ ‫݋‬ʌȠȓȘıİȞ ‫݋‬Ȟ IJࠜ ıIJȪȜ࠙ ‫ݏ‬IJȘ IJİııĮȡȐțȠȞIJĮ. ‫ ݸ‬į‫ ޡ‬ʌȠࠎȢ Į‫ރ‬IJȠࠎ ‫ ݸ‬įȑȟȚȠȢ ‫݋‬țȡȑȝĮIJȠ…, expl.: IJࠛȞ ܼȖȓȦȞ țĮ‫ޥ‬ ‫ݨ‬ĮȝĮIJȚțࠛȞ ܻȞĮȡȖȪȡȦȞ, IJࠛȞ ܼȖȓȦȞ ‫ݨ‬İȡȠȝĮȡIJȪȡȦȞ ȋĮȡȓIJȦȞȠȢ ȈȣȝİޫȞ, țĮ‫ޥ‬ ȋĮȡĮȜȐȝʌȠȣ, IJࠛȞ ܼȖȓȦȞ ‫ݰ‬ȦĮțİ‫ޥ‬ȝ țĮ‫݇ ޥ‬ȞȞȘȢ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ʌȐȞIJȦȞ ıȠȣ IJࠛȞ ܼȖȓȦȞ· ‫ݼ‬IJȚ ıީ İ‫ ݸ ݭ‬İ‫ރ‬ȜȩȖȦȞ țĮ‫ܼ ޥ‬ȖȚȐȗȦȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ʌȜȘșȪȞȦȞ IJ‫ ޟ‬ıȪȝʌĮȞIJĮ ȋȡȚıIJ‫ ݸ ޡ‬ĬİާȢ ‫ݘ‬ȝࠛȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ıȠ‫ ޥ‬IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ įȩȟĮȞ… 10. (36v-38r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݋ ޣ‬ʌ‫ ޥ‬ıʌިȡȠȣ. ‫ݼ‬IJĮȞ șȑȜİȚȢ Ȟ‫ ޟ‬ʌȡࠛIJĮ İ‫ރ‬ȖȐȜ߯Ȣ ıʌȩȡȠȞ, ʌȠȚ߱ıȠȞ ܼȖȚĮıȝާȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝİIJ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ ܼȖȚĮıȝާȞ, įȚȐȕĮıȠȞ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ İ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ޣ‬Ȟ IJȠࠎ ıʌȩȡȠȣ (Prayer for the blessing of the Seeds). (PAP, 375/506).` 11. (38r-38v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݋ ޣ‬ʌȓ ݀ȜȦȞȠȢ ‫ݷ‬ȝȠȓȦȢ ȖȓȞİIJĮȚ ܻȖȚĮıȝާȢ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝİIJ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ ܼȖȚĮıȝާȞ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ İ‫ރ‬ȤȒȞ (Prayer for the blessing of the flour-thrashing floor). (PAP, 357/506). 12. (39r-48v) ȉȠࠎ ݄ȖަȠȣ ȉȡȪijȦȞȠȢ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ țȒʌȠȞ, țĮ‫ܻ ޥ‬ȝʌİȜȫȞĮ țĮ‫ޥ‬ ȤȦȡȐijȚȠȞ. ʌȡࠛIJȠȞ ȖȓȞİIJĮȚ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮ, țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝİIJ‫ ޟ‬IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ ܼȖȚĮıȝȩȢ, țĮ‫ޥ‬ įȚĮȕȐȗȠȣȞ IJ‫ޟ‬Ȣ İ‫ރ‬ȤȐȢ (Prayer of Saint Tryphon for garden, vineyard and field). (PAP, 378-381; DMI, 110, p. 119, attributed to St. Modestou). 13. (49r-54v) Ǽ‫ރ‬ȤĮ‫ ޥ‬IJȠࠎ ݄ȖަȠȣ Ȃ‫ޠ‬ȝĮȞIJȠȢ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ʌȠȓȝȞȘȞ ʌȡȠȕȐIJȦȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ țȐșİ IJİIJȡȐʌȠįȠȞ· ʌȡࠛIJȠȞ ȖȓȞİIJĮȚ ܼȖȚĮıȝާȢ, țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝİIJ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ ܼȖȚĮıȝާȞ ȜȑȖȦȝİȞ IJ‫ޟ‬Ȣ İ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ޟ‬Ȣ IJĮȪIJĮȢ:~ (Prayer of Saint Mamas for a flock of sheep and any four-footed domestic animal). (PAP, 509/510/511/512). Three Sets of Exorcisms: 14. (ff. 55r-68v) Basil the Great, Ǽ‫ރ‬ȤĮ‫ޥ‬, İ‫ݫ‬IJȠȚ ‫݋‬ȟȠȡțȚıȝȠ‫ ޥ‬IJȠࠎ ȂİȖ‫ޠ‬ȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİަȠȣ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ‫ݷ‬ȤȜȠȣȝȑȞȠȣȢ ‫ބ‬ʌާ ʌȞİȣȝȐIJȦȞ ܻțĮșȐȡIJȦȞ, țĮ‫ݐ ޥ‬țĮıIJȠȞ ܻıșȑȞİȚĮȞ (Prayers, that is, Exorcisms of Basil the Great for those afflicted by Unclean Spirits and for Every Illness). A set of three exorcistic prayers:

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

241

(f. 55r) no individual ms title, (f. 56v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ, (63v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ޣ‬ ‫݌‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ. (This set of exorcistic prayers occurs as the second exorcism in some Euchologies, attributed to St. John Thaumatourgos)8. (PAP, 107-111). 15. (68r-79v) Exorcisms attributed to John Chrysostom. A set of four exorcistic prayers: (f. 68r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ ȋȡȣıȠıIJȩȝȠȣ, (69v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ, (70v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ, (71v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ. (PAP, 111-115). 16. (80r-128v) ਫȟȠȡțȚıȝȠ੿ IJȠ૨ ਞȖȓȠȣ īȡȘȖȠȡȓȠȣ, İੁȢ ʌ઼ıĮȞ ਕıșȑȞİȚĮȞ ȜȓĮȞ ੩ijȑȜȚȝȠȚ (Exorcisms of Gregory the Theologian)9. A set of seven exorcistic prayers: (80r) no individual ms title, (92v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ, (97v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ IJȠࠎ Į‫ބ‬IJȠࠎ, (99v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ܻıșȑȞİȚĮȞ ȜȓĮȞ ‫ޏ‬ijȑȜȚȝȘ, (106r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ܻıșȑȞİȚĮȞ ʌȠȜȜ‫ ޟ‬İ‫އ‬ȝȠȡijȘ, (115) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݋ ޣ‬ʌ‫ ޥ‬ʌߢıĮȞ ܻȡȡȦıIJȓĮȞ, (116r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫݌ ޣ‬IJȑȡĮ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ܻıșİȞİ߿Ȣ ʌİȡȚȑȤȦȞ IJȠީȢ ܼȖȓȠȣȢ. (cf. VELOUDO 1863, 225 (Teol 4319); ǽǼȇǺOȈ, 1862, 231) Prayers: 17. (128v-132v) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ ޣ‬IJࠛȞ ݄ȖަȦȞ ‫݌‬ʌIJ‫ ޟ‬ȆĮȚįࠛȞ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ܻıșȑȞİȚĮȞ ʌȠީ įȠțȠȚȝȐIJİ (Prayer of the Seven sleepers). (PAP, 287-289; DMI, 967 /GOAR, 559-561). 18. (133r-138v) ǻȚ‫ޠ‬IJĮȟȚȢ IJࠛȞ įĮȚȝȠȞȚȗȠȝ‫ޢ‬ȞȦȞ, IJާ ʌࠛȢ ‫݋‬ȡȦIJߢȢ, İ‫ ݩ‬Ȟ‫ ޟ‬İ‫ݫ‬ʌİȚ ıȠȚ, ‫ ݸ‬įĮȓȝȦȞ IJާ ‫ݻ‬ȞȠȝȐ Į‫ރ‬IJȠࠎ (Instruction for those possessed by demons, how to ask if the demon will tell you his name). Inc.: ‫ݑ‬ȞIJĮࠎșĮ ȗ‫ޤ‬IJȘıȠȞ IJ‫ݷ‬ ‫ݻ‬ȞȠȝĮ IJȠࠎ ʌȠȞȘȡȠࠎ ʌȞİުȝĮIJȠȢ, expl.: ‫ݼ‬IJȚ ȝ‫ޢ‬ȖĮȢ ި ijިȕȠȢ IJȠࠎ ĬİȠࠎ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝİȖ‫ޠ‬ȜȘ ‫ ݘ‬įިȟĮ IJȠࠎ ȆĮIJȡިȢ. 19. (139r-v) Ȇİȡ‫ ޥ‬ȕȠȣȡțȠȜ‫ޠ‬țțȠȣ, IJާ ʌࠛȢ Ȟ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ ȤĮȜ‫ޠ‬ıȘȢ (Prayer against the Vampires and how to destroy them). Inc.: ȉȠࠎIJȠ į‫ޡ‬Ȟ İ‫ݭ‬ȞĮȚ ܻȜȘș‫ޢ‬Ȣ ܻȝ߱ İ‫ݭ‬ȞĮȚ IJȑȤȞȘ IJȠࠎ ǻȚĮȕȩȜȠȣ. Lacuna after f. 139v due to the loss of ff. 140r149v; expl. țĮ‫ ޥ‬IJȠ ʌİȡȓıİȣȝĮ IJȠࠎ ܼȖȚĮıȝȠࠎ IJާ ȤȪȞȘȢ ܻ[ . . .]. (Athos, cod. Lavra Ĭ20, fols. 129-135v, as cited by DELATTE, 95-97). Lacuna of 10 folios after f. 139 (ff. numbered 140-149). 20. (150r) Unidentified encomium. (Only the last two lines of the concluding doxology survive: ܻİ‫ ޥ‬țĮ‫ ޥ‬ʌȐȞIJoIJİ, IJȠީȢ Į‫ࠛݧ‬ȞaȢ:~). 21. (150r-151r) ‫ݔ‬IJİȡȠȞ. ‫ݑ‬ȖțȫȝȚȠȞ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ʌĮȞȣʌİȡȑȞįȠȟoȞ ǻȑıʌȠȚȞĮȞ ĬİȠIJȩțȠȞ (Encomium to the most glorious Mistress Mother of God). Inc. ȌĮȜȝȠ߿Ȣ țĮ‫ވ ޥ‬ȝȞȠȚȢ ı‫ބ ޡ‬ȝȞࠛ, ȆĮȡșİȞȠȝȒIJȠȡ țȩȡȘ· țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȤĮȡȚıIJȒȡȚȠȞ ijȠȞ‫ޣ‬ ʌȡȠıijȑȡȦ ıȠȚ, expl.: ‫ݳ‬įİ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȝ‫ ޣ‬ʌĮȡަį߯Ȣ ȝİ, ǻ‫ޢ‬ıʌȠȚȞĮ. Megalynaria and Prayers for Christmas: (ਝʌȠȜ઄ıİȚȢ): 22. (151v-153r) ݃ȡȤ‫ ޣ‬ıީȞ Ĭİࠜ IJࠛȞ ȂİȖĮȜȣȞĮȡަȦȞ IJࠛȞ ȋȡȚıIJȠȣȖ‫ޢ‬ȞȞȦȞ (Megalynaria for Christmas) (PAP, 474-476)

242

Chapter 1

23. (153r-154r) Ǽ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ȆİȡȚIJȠȝ‫ޤ‬Ȟ (Megalynarion for the Circumcision of Christ). (PAP, 474-476; DMI, 43). 24. (154v-155r) Ǽ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJާȞ Ȃ‫ޢ‬ȖĮȞ ǺĮıަȜİȚȠȞ (Megalynarion for Saint Basil the Great) (PAP, 474-476). 25. (155v-157r) Ǽ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ‫ދ‬ʌĮʌĮȞIJ‫ޤ‬Ȟ IJȠࠎ ıȦIJ߱ȡȠȢ ‫ݘ‬ȝࠛȞ (Prayer for the Presentation of our Savior). (PAP, 479-481; DMI, 36). 26. (157r-158v) Ǽ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJ‫ޣ‬Ȟ ‫ݏ‬ȞįȠȟȠȞ ݃Ȟ‫ޠ‬ıIJĮıȚȞ (Prayer for Resurrection). Inc.‫ܿ ݾ‬ȖȖİȜȠȢ ‫݋‬ȕȩĮ IJ߲ țİȤĮȡȚIJȦȝȑȞ߯, ȤĮ߿ȡİ ȆĮȡșȑȞİ ȤĮ߿ȡİ, expl.: ȤĮ߿ȡİ įİįȠȟĮıȝȑȞȘ ‫ ݸ‬ıާȢ Ȗ‫ޟ‬ȡ ‫ބ‬ȚާȢ ܻȞȑıIJȘ IJȡȚȒȝİȡȠȢ ‫݋‬ț IJȐijȠȣ. Supplementary Prayers: 27. (159r-160r) Ǽ੝ȤȘ IJ૵Ȟ ਬȠȡIJĮıȓȝȦȞ ȀȠȜȜ઄ȕȦȞ (no ms title). Inc. ‫ݾ‬ ʌȐȞIJĮ IJİȜİıijȠȡȒıĮȢ IJࠜ ȜȩȖ࠙ ıȠȣ, ȀȪȡȚİ, țĮ‫ ޥ‬țİȜİȪıĮȢ. (PAP, 376, under the subtitle of OTHER PRAYERS; from the Lenten Triodion, Sat. of the first week, for liturgy, koinonikon10). 28. (160v-162r) Ǽ‫ރ‬Ȥ‫ݼ ޣ‬IJĮȞ șȑȜ߯Ȣ İ‫ݧ‬ıİȜșİ߿Ȟ İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ ȞȑȠȞ Ƞ‫ݭ‬țȠȞ (Prayer for the blessing of a new house; ms title written in upper margin). (PAP, 372). 29. (162r-v) Ǽ੝Ȥ੽ İੁȢ IJઁ İ੝ȜȠȖȒıĮȚ ਥįȑıȝĮIJĮ țȡİ૵Ȟ IJૌ ȀȣȡȚĮțૌ IJȠઃ Ȇ઼ıȤĮ (prayer for the blessing of meat and other food on Easter Sunday (no ms title). (PAP, 382; GOAR, 526-528; VELOUDO, 496. The latter says that he took the text from the Athos, Lavra, cod. 1089, 17th c.). II. CODICOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION Collation: 7 (8-1 [the first folio of the quire, now glued to the front cover]: VII). 8 (ff. VIII-ǿȋ, 1-6). 7(8-1[-f. 14]: 13). [- 1 quire: ff. 15-22]. 13x8 (126). 6(132). 7(8-1[-f. 140]: 139). [-1 quire: ff. 141-148]. 6(8-2[-ff. 149, 154]: 156). 7(8-1: 162 [unnumbered pastedown]). Note: the quire structure in unclear for the initial quire. Also unclear is whether the final quire was originally a regular quire of eight folios including the unnumbered pastedown. — Quire signatures: none; catchwords on the last folio verso of each quire. — foliation: topr, upper outer corner: 1-162 (hand 1), plus unnumbered pastedown at end. Script: (hand 1) The script of the main part of the manuscript is a rightinclined, meticulous, angular script written with a narrow pen by an experienced hand characterized by frequent phonetic spellings (ff. IIIr-IVv: black ink; 1-158: faded black ink). — (hand 2, Ioasaf Hieromonachos Grigoriatis from the Island of Tinos) a personal script of the 18th century (the ex libris and curse on f. Ir and, at the end, possibly some of the notes on ff. 159-162; — (hand 3) a coarse script written phonetically (ff. IIv, IIIvIXv and probably most of the notes on ff. 159r-162v).

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

243

Ornamentation. (hand 1) The usual rubrication of titles and incipits. Simple headpieces in red and black ink. Paper: Thick, glossy, yellowish western paper. Chain lines: 20 to 28 mm. Watermarks: These are mixed throughout the manuscript: three-leaf clover with the letters C, B (?) and S (e.g. f. 5), half-moon with a three-leaf clover and an unidentified watermark (cut off the tops of the folios). Ruling: 02_1 U (Leroy-Sautel) [- prickings]. Binding: Post-Byzantine, contemporary with the codex, with later repairs. Cover: Original dark leather on front and back boards, but lost from spine. Spine cover repaired by an additional piece of brown leather, irregularly cut and glued all around, extending 28 mm onto the front cover and 61 mm onto the back cover, overlapping the original leather on the cover boards. Blind stamping on original leather (very faint): Front cover: rectangular triple-line frame, central rhomboid stamp, but the design depicted by the stamp cannot be identified. Outside the frame are faint traces of a vegetal decoration. Back cover: Traces of a similar decoration, about two thirds of which is covered by the leather repair overlapping it. — Spine: three protuberances (corresponding to raised binding cords) creating 4 panels: two large central panels and two smaller ones at top and bottom of the spine. The upper large panel bears a white paper label, with a doubleline border within which are the numbers 2660 | 98 (all in modern blue ink). — Boards: wooden, cut square at edges. — Inside covers: first and last folios of the codex are pasted to the inside of the boards. Inside front cover (upper outer corner): two labels are glued one over the other. The under label is the original characteristic blue trimmed label applied by Lambros. The upper one is a simple white paper label with rounded corners written (in blue ink): ī(ǼȃǿȀȅȈ) ȁ(ǹȂȆȇȅȊ) 2431 Ǽǿǻ(ǿȀȅȈ) ȁ(ǹȂȆȇȅࢢ) 98 ǹȇǿĬ(ȂȅȈ) Ȃ(ȅȃǾȈ) 98. — Spine: rounded. — Sewing: quires sewn apparently in western style around three coarse binding cords across the spine. — Headbands: post-Byzantine (extending over the top and bottom edges of cover boards), sewing threads wrapped around a coarse cord forming a single band, the top headband missing and the bottom one poorly preserved (natural-colored: brown; traces of decorative red and black oversewing originally formed alternating bands of color on the headband). — Clasps: The bases remain of two brass clasps, that on the front cover having a hinge for the now missing clasp, and that on the back being a plate to receive the hinged clasp. Condition: Poor. Apart from the binding, ff. 11-13 are cut and about to fall out of the spine. F. 114 is slightly torn. Ff. 159-162 are cut off from the

244

Chapter 1

spine together with the back cover, to which they are now glued. In addition, f. 162 is torn, with some loss of text. Ff. 157-158 and 161 are slightly motheaten. There are water stains on the periphery of the folios from the beginning of the manuscript through to f. 27, with resulting fading in places of both the red ink (e.g. ff. 23r, 150r) and the black ink (e.g. f. Ir). There are oil stains throughout the manuscript, especially near the edges of the leaves. Many wax drippings. Ff. 48v-54v, 114-130, 162 are very worn from use. Also on the three outer edges, the leaves are blackened from candle smoke. Spine: abrasions on the top and bottom edges and protuberances. The added leather on the spine and on the back cover is moth-eaten, and the board of the back cover is broken vertically, being held together only by the leather. This back cover is completely separated from the main part of the codex, the cords that formerly attached it to the spine having broken, and the cords holding the front cover are likewise fragile, the central one broken. Scribal notes: (Back pastedown, middle of the folio) Only a few letters are legible on the photograph. (faded brown ink) Other Notes (f. Ir, top margin, above headpiece) 1738 (Hand 2, dark brown ink) (f. Ir, below rectangular interlace headpiece) ਫijİȡĮ IJȠ(ȣ)IJȠ ਕȖȚĮıȝĮIJȐȡȚȠȞ ੆ȞĮ | ț(Į੿) ਲʌĮȡȤȘ țĮȝȠ૨ Ï੩ȐıĮij | ਲİȡȠȝȠȞȐȤ(ȠȢ) īȡȘ(ȖȠȡ)İȚĮIJȘȢ ਥț | ȞȘıȠȢ ȉİȚȞȠȣȢ țȚ . . . (ĮıʌȡĮ) 24 | ț(Į੿) . . . | . . . Ȟ‫ ޟ‬ȑȤȘ IJߢȢ ܿȡ(ĮȢ) | IJࠛȞ {IJࠛȞ} IJȡȣĮțȠıȚ(ȦȞ) · įȑțĮ ț(Į‫ )ޥ‬8 șİ(Ƞ)|ijȠȡȦȞ ʌĮIJȑȡȦȞ IJࠛȞ ܻȖȓ(ȦȞ) țĮȚ | . . . — ܻȝȒȞ | ‫ ݾ‬Ȗȡ‫ޠק‬ȥĮȢ IJĮࠎIJĮ ‫ݯ‬Ȧ‫ޠ‬ıĮij ‫ݨ‬İȡ‫ק‬Ƞμȩ(ȞĮȤȠȢ) īȡ‫ק‬ȘȖȠȡ‫ק‬Ț‫ޠ‬IJȘȢ (Hand 2, dark brown ink) English translation: I got this agiasmatarion so that it might be mine, Hieromonk Ioasaf Grigoriatis from the Island of Tinos, and I bought it for 24 aspra. And [. . . ] whoever removes it from me] let him have the curses of the three hundred and 18 godbearing holy fathers and [ . . . ] amen (Back pastedown, top and bottom of the folio) notes in various later hands; only a few letters survive on the photograph (dark brown inks). Decoration: (f. Ir) Interlace headpiece (Hand 2, dark brown ink). — (f. 1r) A simple headpiece with red and black ink. — (f. 39r) S-chain vignette (red and black inks). — (f. 49r) A simple, zoomorphic banderole headpiece with red and black ink and a characteristic human form inside the initial O. — (f. 55r) spiked rope-twist vignette (red and black inks). — (f. 80r) s-chain vignette with three beaded asterisks (red and black inks).

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

245

Bibliography: BLAKE, R, «Catalogue des Manuscrits Georgiens de la Bibliotheque de la Lavre d'Iviron au Mont Athos», Revue de l' Orient Chretien, XXVIII (1931-32), 289-361; XIX (1933-34), 114-159; 225-271. DELATTE, L., Un Office Byzantin d'Exorcisme. (Ms de la Lavra du Mont Athos, Ĭ20). (Académie Royale de Belgique. Classe des lettres et des sciences morales et politiques. Mémoires. Collection in-8°. tom. 52. fasc. 1., Brussels, 1957). DMITRIEVSKIJ, A., Opisanie liturgic eskich rukopisej chranjas c ichsja v biblioteka chpravoslavnao Vostaoka, t.II, Eûxológia, Kiev 1901. EHRHARD, A., «Uberlieferung und Bestand der hagiographischen und homelitischen Literatur der Griechischen Kirche», I, xxi-lvii, in Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, E. KLOSTERMANN í C. SCHMIDT. ed., Leipzig 1936-1937. EUDOKIMOS XIROPOTAMINOS, [Prohigoumenos of Xeropotamou], ȀĮIJȐȜȠȖȠȢ ܻȞĮȜȣIJȚțާȢ IJࠛȞ ȤİȚȡȠȖȡȐijȦȞ țȠįȓțȦȞ IJ߱Ȣ ȕȚȕȜȚȠșȒțȘȢ IJ߱Ȣ ‫݋‬Ȟ ݄Ȗȓ࠙ ‫ށ‬ȡİȚ IJȠࠎ ݇șȦ ‫ݰ‬İȡߢȢ țĮ‫ ޥ‬ȈİȕĮıȝȓĮȢ ǺĮıȚȜȚț߱Ȣ ȆĮIJȡȚĮȡȤȚț߱Ȣ țĮ‫ޥ‬ ȈIJĮȣȡȠʌȘȖȚĮț߱Ȣ ȂȠȞ߱Ȣ IJȠࠎ ȄȘȡȠʌȠIJȐȝȠȣ. Thessaloniki, 1933, 39, no. 2660. Ǽ‫ރ‬ȤȠȜȩȖȚȠȞ IJާ ȂȑȖĮ, Athens: There are 33 euchologia at the National Library of Athens which are catalogued as follows (duplicates and originals; those marked with an asterisk contained no relevant information because they were missing the pertinent pages): 1963: *4324 ED/-a 1963: *4324 EG 1963: *4324 EH 1963: *4324 EI 1963: *4324 EK 1963: *4324 EL 1958/1964: *4324 EM 1970: 4318 x/xa : ed. Spiridonos Zerbros 1899: 4323/-a/-b: ed. Ioannis Martinos 1839: 4306/-a: (printed in London) 1802: 4309.4309a 1839: *4313 1850: *4315 1863: 4319: edited by Giovanni Veludo 1851: 4317/-a-b: edited by Spiridonos Zerbos 1869: 4321: edited by Spiridonos Zerbos 1962: 4324E (untitled) 1927: 4324.4324a: ed. N Papadopoulos (enhanced by notes and prayers)

246

Chapter 1

1730: 4307/-a/-b: GOAR 1821: 4311: (In Russian) 1861-62: 4325/-a: Michael Bajewsky (in German) 1862: 4325b: Michael Bajewsky (translated from the original) 1837: 4327/-a: Laurentius Cementius Gratz (in Greek and Latin) 1841: 4329/-a: Antonius Barossius 1930: 4324 EN: (In Albanian) 1811: 4310/-a: (Printed in Bucharest by someone with the name Alexandros) 1895: *4324 EK 1928: *4324 F/Fa 1956: *4324 K/Ka 1962: *4324 N/Na 1968: *4324 P/Pa 1976: 10129DN/-a (Rhodes) LAMBROS, S.P., Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts on Mount Athos. II, Cambridge 1895-1900. LEROY, J., Les Types de Réglure des Manuscrits Grecs, Paris, 1977. SAUTEL, J.H., Répertoire de Réglures dans les Manuscrits Grecs sur Parchemin, Turnhout, 1995. STEWART C., Devil and Demons Moral Imagination in Modern Greek Culture, New Jersey 1991. VELOUDO, G., Ǽ‫ރ‬ȤȠȜȩȖȚȠȞ IJާ ȂȑȖĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ, 1863. ǽǼȇǺOȈ, Ȉ., Ǽ‫ރ‬ȤȠȜȩȖȚȠȞ IJާ ȂȑȖĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1862. ȁǿȉȈǹȈ, E., «Ǿ ǺȚȕȜȚȠșȒțȘ țĮȓ IJȐ XİȚȡȩȖȡĮijĮ IJોȢ ȂȠȞોȢ ȄȘȡȠʌȠIJȐȝȠȣ», ȀȜȘȡȠȞȠȝȓĮȢ 31 (1999) 161-204. ȆǹȆǹǻȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ, N., ed., ǼȣȤȠȜȠȖȚȠȞ IJާ ȂȑȖĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1927.

Notes 1

A special thank you to Fr. Philippos the curator of the Lavra Library of Mount Athos who patiently explained to me the tradition besides supplying me with other details. Here is a piece of our correspondence: «ȆĮȞIJȠ૨ ıIJઁ ਢȖȚȠȞ ਜ਼ȡȠȢ țȐȞȠȣȞ ਥȟȠȡțȚıȝȠȪȢ, țĮ੿ ȤȐȡȚIJȚ ĬİȠ૨ ਲ ੂİȡ੹ȝȠȞ੽ īȡȘȖȠȡȓȠȣ į੻Ȟ İੇȞĮ ਥȟĮȓȡİıȚȢ, IJઁ ਕȞIJ઀șİIJȠ». 2 The term, agiasmatorion, here applied to a Euchologion, is a generic term meaning a book of purifications. 3 .This is a formerly a small Turkish silver coin the 120th part of a piaster. 4 I have to thank Mr Agamemnon Tselikas of the ȂȠȡijȦIJȚțȩ ੎įȡȣȝĮ ਫșȞȚțȒȢ ȉȡĮʌȑȗȘȢ (National Bank Cultural Foundation) ǿıIJȠȡȚțȩ țĮȓ ȆĮȜĮȚȠȖȡĮijȚțȩ ਝȡȤİȓȠ (Center for History and Paleography Athens, Greece) who patiently read the manuscript and found this information for me. But most of all I am indebted to Prof.

Paleographical Description of the Xiropotamou 98 Manuscript

247

Robert W. Allison Professor Emeritus of Bates College, whose guidance helped me throughout the various stages in completing this work. 5 C. STEWART, Demons and the Devil, Appendix 2 (255-259). 6 Since chemical analysis of the ink has not been done, the specificity of the color remains generic. Our praxis is to use the words brown (light, medium, dark), black (which is probably carbon black), magenta-red (carmine), bright orangey-red (probably vermilion). 7 Most Athonite monks of the era of this codex were poorly educated, and their learned representatives argue for the supremacy of grace over reasoning. The extremely low educational level of Western Europe in the Middle Ages has been outlined by A. WENDEHORST, «Wer konnte im Mittelalter lesen und schreiben?» in Schulen und Studium im sozialen Wandel des hohen und spiiten Mittelalters, J.F. SIGMARINGEN, ed., 1986, 9-33. In contrast, a rather optimistic evaluation of literacy in late medieval Bulgaria is expressed by V. GJUZELEV, «Bildungsstand in Bulgarien wahrend des Hochmittelalters (13.-14. Jh.)», Miscellanea bulgarica 3: Forschungen zur Geschichte Bulgariens im'Mittelalter. On this subject see also N. OIKONOMIDES, «Mount Athos: Levels of Literacy», DOP, 42(1988) 167-178. Here the author notes: «Were the Byzantines interested in correct spelling? One may at times wonder, especially when faced with manuscripts or documents that are literally riddled with errors. Yet these documents show an obvious lack of competence, and not by any means a lack of interest. In a milieu that was so much impressed with and inspired by the ancient classical authors, a profound knowledge of grammar and correct spelling is frequently extolled. I list some specific examples from the ninth to the fifteenth century, the period that concerns us here». Today we recognize that it is more appropriate to speak of phonetic vs orthographic spelling, since the orthographic conventions that we follow today were not consistently a part of Greek education in the time when this codex was produced, and since even highly educated scribes often reverted to phonetic spellings in informal contexts. Phonetic spellings thus are not, technically speaking, spelling errors. 8 An example is found in the Sinaitic-Greek Eucology, cod. Sinai Gr. 973 (A.D. 1153). 9 The manuscript (fol. 68r) attributes this exorcism to Saint Gregory the Theologian; Evdokimos lists the author as unknown (ȀĮIJ‫ޠ‬ȜȠȖȠȢ, p. 39). 10 ȉȡȚࠚįȚȠȞ țĮIJĮȞȣțIJȚțȩȞ, http://analogion.gr/glt/#03. Ǽditions: Mother Mary of the (Orthodox) Monastery of the Veil, and Archimandrite (now Metropolitan) Kallistos Ware published a Lenten Triodion containing selected material for the Great Fast in 1969. PAP in a footnote says that this prayer is found in the following Athonite manuscripts: Hilandar 59 (17th c.); Xenophontos 61 (16th c.); Vatopedi 1069 (17th c.).

CHAPTER 2 TRANSCRIPTION OF THE MANUSCRIPT

ǹ. Table of contents CONTENTS OF THE MANUSCRIPT. The contents of the manuscripts are rather confused and very complicated to decipher. Since the manuscript contains a number of missing pages and is not in a healthy state, it was not easy to make up the contents. Interestingly enough though a lot of information is found on the flyleafs of the manuscript (ij.Iv-IIrv). Here are the contents of the Xiropotamou 98 manuscript after correction was done. This differs from the one published by Fr. Zacharias, the person responsible for the Xiropotamou library and the person who generously donated the images of the manuscript. The reason behind this is that until now, no one has ever done a thorough study of this manuscript and the contents were reported and written as they appear on the first pages of the manuscript. Also, references from other euchologia are given only when the text is reported exactly as it is found in the Xiropotamou 98. ǹ’- Table of Contents: (ij.ĮIIIrv - ȕIVr) Ǻ’- (ij.ȖIVv-ij.ȗIXv) Instructions regarding the recitation of the small Office Canon for the Virgin Mary: ǹțȠȜȠȣșȓĮ ȂȚțȡȠȪ ȆĮȡĮțȜȘIJȚțȠȪ ȀĮȞȩȞĮ ıIJȘȞ ȊʌİȡĮȖȓĮ ĬİȠIJȩțȠ [(ij.ȗIXr is missing]. Here are the missing parts from the phrase “țĮȓ ਕȞİijȫȞȘıİ ijȦȞȒ ȝİȖȐȜȘ, țĮȓ İੇʌİȞ”. The index says that this is included but it is not found in the original manuscript. It is probable that this was included on pages ij.ȘXr and following which are missing. ī’- Office for a small water blessing:(ij. 1r-[13v-22v are missing]23r). DIM 500. ij. 10; p. 524.ij.103. ǻ’x Prayer of Saint Ypatios for the blessing :(ij.23v -25r). x Prayer of Saint Blasil to relieve the pain in the Throat: (ij.25r-28r).

Transcription of the Manuscript

249

x Prayer of Saint Charalambos for the healing of sick animals: (ij.28v29v). x Prayer for the bees: (ij.29v -32v). x Prayer of Saint Simon the Stylite the Elder. (ij.32v-36r). x Prayer for the blessing of the Seeds: (ij.36v -38r). DIM: 412 (ij.417); 416 (121); 497 (102); 524(114). x Prayer for the blessing of the flour mill (ij.38r-38v). x Prayer of Saint Tryfonas: (ij.39r-48v). x Prayer of Saint Mamas: (ij.49r-54v). Ǽ’-Exorcisms (3) of Saint Basil the Great (ijij.55r-68v - 2nd in some euchologies this is attributed to the St. John the Miracleworker), Saint John Chrysostom (4th - third is attributed to Saint Epiphanius) (ijij.68r80r)1 {GOA: 578; ZER: 147; ROM:359; PAP 108} and of Gregory the Theologian (ijij.79v-128v). Ȉȉ’- Prayer of the Seven Sleepers. (ij.128v-132v). DIM 967 ij.385; 916 ij.85; 805 ij.98 ǽ’- Prayers against the demons: (ij.133r-138v). Ǿ’- Prayer against the Vampires and how to destroy them: (ij.139r-[140r149v=missing]150r). Ĭ’- Prayers to the Virgin Mary: (ij.150-151v). ǿ’- Beginning of the Megalynarion for Christmas (ij.151v -153r). x Prayer for Circumcision of Christ: (ij.153r-[153v-154r: Missing]154v). x Prayer of Saint Basil the Great: (ij.154v -155r). x Prayer for the Presentation of the Lord: (ij.155v -157r). x Prayer for Resurrection: (ij.157r -158v). ǿǹ’- Prayer for the Kollyba: (ij.159r-160r). GOAR 524 (second ed). ǿǺ’- Prayer for the blessing of a new house: (ij.160v -162r). GOAR 484 (2nd ed). ǿī’- Prayer for the blessing of meat and other food: (ij.162). 1The

Manuscript attributes this exorcism to Saint Gregory the Theologian and at one point on the index says that the author is unkown.

CHAPTER 3 EDITION AND CRITICAL APPARATUS OF FOLIOS: 133V-139V

GREEK ORIGINAL TEXT ǻȚȐIJĮȟȚȢ IJ૵Ȟ įĮȚȝȠȞȚȗȠȝȑȞȦȞ ij.133v. ǻȚȐIJĮȟȚȢ IJ૵Ȟ įĮȚȝȠȞȚȗȠȝȑȞȦȞ. ȉò ʌ૵Ȣ ਥȡȦIJઽȢ, ੆ȞĮ İ੅ʌૉ ıȠȚ ੒ įĮȓȝȦȞ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝĮ Į੝IJȠ૨. ਫȞIJĮ૨șĮ, ȗȒIJȘıȠȞ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝĮ IJȠ૨ ʌȠȞȘȡȠ૨ ʌȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ. ǽȒIJȘıȠȞ ੆ȞĮ ıȠȚ İ੅ʌૉ ʌȩıȠȣȢ ਩ȤİȚ ȝİș’ਦĮȣIJȠ૨, ț(Į੿) ਥț ʌȠ઀ĮȢ IJȐȟİઆȢ ਥıIJȚȞ, ț(Į੿) ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝĮ IJȠ૨ ਙȡȤȠȞIJȠȢ Į੝IJȠ૨, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀઺ įȣȞȐȝİȚ ț(Į੿) ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ ਥıIJȓ, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀૳ IJȩʌ૳ İੇȞĮȚ ધțİȚȝȑȞȠȢ. ij.133r. ਥȞ IJíȞȚ ਫ਼ʌȠIJ੺ııİIJĮȚ, ʌȩIJİ ਥȟȑȡȤİIJ IJ઀ ıȘȝİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙ ੒ʌંIJĮȞ ਥȟȑȡȤİIJ ਥț IJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡઆʌȠȣ. īíȞȦıțİ, ੒ʌȩIJĮȞ ਥȡȦIJઽȢ, ȜȑȖİ ਥȞ ੑȞંȝĮIJȚ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡઁȢ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ, İੁ į੻ ț(Į੿) į੼Ȟ ıȠȚ ਕʌȠțȡȓȞİIJĮȚ, Ȝ੺ȕİ IJઁ ਙʌȣȡȠȞ ਖʌIJંȝİȞȠȞ ਥȞ ʌȣȡ੿ ț(Į੿) țĮ૨ıȠȞ IJ੽Ȟ ȖȜ૵ııĮȞ Į੝IJȠ૨, ț(Į੿) ੕ȥİȚ, İ੅IJİ ȜȑȖİ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJĮȪIJȘȞ: – ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıİ, ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, ਥȤșȡ੻ IJોȢ ਕȜȘșİȓĮȢ įȚ੹,

ENGLISH TRANSLATION Instructions for those possessed by demons: How to ask so that the demon will tell you its name. At this point seek to find out the name of the evil spirit. Seek to make him tell you: how many are with him, and to which class he belongs, and what the name of his leader is; under which power and authority he is; in which place he dwells; ij.133r.

to whom he is subordinate; when he comes out; and what sign does he make when he comes out of the person? Be mindful when you are enquiring. Say, «In the name of the father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; see and give». If it does [not] respond, take a piece of coal that is alight with fire and burn his tongue and face, or say this prayer: «I exorcise you, evil Devil, enemy of truth,

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v

ij.134v. IJȠ૨ ijȡȚțIJȠ૨ ț(Į੿) ਖȖȓȠȣ ੑȞંȝĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐȝȠȣ șİȠ૨, ȆĮIJȡંȢ, YੂȠ૨ ț(Į੿) ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ, ੆ȞĮ ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ İ੝șઃȢ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖ઀ȦȞ ਕȖȖȑȜȦȞ, șȡȩȞȦȞ, țȣȡȚȠIJȒIJȦȞ, ਕȡȤ૵Ȟ, įȣȞȐȝİȦȞ, ਥȟȠȣıȚ૵Ȟ, IJ૵Ȟ ʌȠȜȣȠȝȝȐIJȦȞ ȤİȡȠȣȕ੿ȝ ț(Į੿) IJ૵Ȟ ਥȟĮʌIJİȡȪȖȦȞ ıİȡĮij੿ȝ, ੆ȞĮ ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌȘȢ İ੝șઃȢ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝȐ ıȠȣ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹

ij.134v.

ij.134r. IJોȢ ੥ʌİȡȐȖȞȠȣ ĬİȠIJȩțȠȣ ȂĮȡȓĮȢ, įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ਝʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ įઆįİțĮ ț(Į੿) IJ૵Ȟ ਦȕįȠȝ੾țȠȞIJĮ, įȚ੹ IJોȢ ijȠȕİȡ઼Ȣ ț(Į੿) ਕįİțȐıIJȠȣ țȡȓıİȦȢ ț(Į੿) įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȓȠȣ Į੆ȝĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਥțȤȣșȑȞIJȠȢ ਥț IJોȢ ʌȜİȣȡ઼Ȣ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ ਲȝ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨, įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ İ੅țȠıȚ IJİııȐȡȦȞ ʌȡİıȕȣIJȑȡȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ įȚ੹ ʌĮȞIJઁȢ ʌĮȡİıIJઆIJȦȞ IJઁȞ șȡȩȞȠȞ IJઁȞ ਕȩȡĮIJȠȞ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ țĮ੿ ȥĮȜȜȩȞIJȦȞ Į੝IJ૶.

ij.134r.

ij.135v. IJઁȞ ਕțĮIJȐʌĮȣıIJȠȞ ੢ȝȞȠȞ, țĮ੿ įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ șĮȣȝĮıIJ૵Ȟ ਩ȡȖȦȞ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐȝȠȣ ĬİȠ૨ IJ૵Ȟ ਥȞ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞ૶ ț(Į੿) ਥʌ੿ ȖોȢ ȖİȖİȞȘȝȑȞȦȞ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ȆĮIJȡȚĮȡȤ૵Ȟ ਞȕȡĮ੹ȝ, ੉ıĮ੹ț ț(Į੿) ੉Įțȫȕ ț(Į੿) ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ʌȡઁ ȞȩȝȠȣ ț(Į੿) ȝİIJ੹ ȞȩȝȠȞ, įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ įİțĮIJİııȐȡȦȞ ȤȚȜȚȐįȦȞ ȞȘʌ઀ȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਫ਼ʌઁ ਺ȡȫįȠȣ ਕȞĮȚȡİșȑȞIJȦȞ ț(Į઀) įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ, ț(Į੿) ʌĮı૵Ȟ

ij.135v.

251

by the awful and holy name of All-Powerful God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost to tell me immediately how your name is called. I adjure you by the holy angels, thrones, dominions, principalities, powers, and authorities; by the many-eyed Cherubim and the six-winged Seraphim to tell me immediately how your name is called. I adjure you by the supremely pure Maria, Mother of God, by the twelve and seventy holy apostles; by the terrible and unimpeachable judgement and by the holy blood that flowed from the side of our Lord, Jesus Christ; by the twenty-four presbyters, forever presiding at the invisible throne of God and singing the

unhalting song and by all the wondrous works of All-Powerful God that have occurred in heaven and on earth, by the holy patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the saints [who lived] before the Law; by the holy fourteen thousand infants, those slaughtered under Herod; by all

252

Chapter 3

ij.135r. IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ਕȞįȡ૵Ȟ IJİ ț(Į੿) ȖȣȞĮȚț૵Ȟ, IJ૵Ȟ IJ૶ ਖȖȓ૳ Ĭİ૶ İ੝ĮȡİıIJȘıȐȞIJȦȞ ਥȞ IJૌ ȗȦૌ Į੝IJ૵Ȟ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼ȝ઼Ȣ ʌ੺ȞIJĮ IJ੹ ʌȠȞȘȡ੹ ʌȞİȪȝĮIJĮ įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ੆ȞĮ ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝȐ ıȠȣ:- ǼੇIJĮ įİ૙ȟȠȞ IJઁȞ IJȓȝȚȠȞ ȈIJĮȣȡંȞ, țȡĮIJ૵Ȟ İੁȢ IJઁ ȤȑȡȚ ıȠȣ ț(Į੿) ȜȑȖİ: ੉įȠઃ ੒ IJ઀ȝȚȠȢ ȈIJĮȣȡઁȢ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ Ȓȝ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨, ijİ૨Ȗİ ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, ੉ȘıȠ૨Ȣ ȋȡȚıIJઁȢ

ij.135r.

ij.136v. ȞȚțઽ, ੒ ȜȑȦȞ ੒ ਥț ijȣȜોȢ IJȠ૨ ੉ȠȪįĮ ੒ ਥț ૧઀ȗȘȢ ǻĮȕ੿į ੒ ਫȝȝĮȞȠȣȒȜ. ੘ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȕĮıȚȜİȪİȚ, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ਥȟȠȣıȚȐȗİȚ, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ șĮȞĮIJȠ૙, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȗȦȠȖȠȞİ૙, ਢȖȚȠȢ ਢȖȚȠȢ ਢȖȚȠȢ Ȁ઄ȡȚȠȢ ȈĮȕĮȫș, ʌȜȒȡȘȢ ੒ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞȩȢ ț(Į઀) ਲ Ȗો IJોȢ įȩȟȘȢ Įਫ਼IJȠ૨, ੪ıĮȞȞ੹ ਥȞ IJȠ૙Ȣ ਫ਼ȥ઀ıIJȠȚȢ, ੒ ੫Ȟ İ੝ȜȠȖȘȝȑȞȠȢ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ ਕȝ੾Ȟ. ਝȞĮıIJ੾IJȦ ੒ ĬİȩȢ țĮ੿ įȚĮıțȠȡʌȚıșȒIJȦıĮȞ Ƞੂ ਥȤșȡȠ੿ Į੝IJȠ૨ țĮ੿ ijȣȖȑIJȦıĮȞ ਕʌઁ ʌȡȠıȫʌȠȣ Į੝IJȠ૨,

ij.136v.

ij.136r. ੪Ȣ ਥțȜİ઀ʌİȚ țĮʌȞઁȢ ਥțȜȚʌȑIJȦıĮȞ, ੪Ȣ IJȒțİIJĮȚ țȘȡઁȢ ਕʌઁ ʌȡȠıઆʌȠȣ ʌȣȡંȢ, ț(Į੿) ਲ ȤȚઅȞ ਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ țĮȪȝĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਲȜ઀Ƞȣ. ȀĮIJȘȡĮȝȑȞİ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, IJ઀ ȕȡĮį઄ȞİȚȢ țĮ੿ Ƞ੝ ȜȑȖİȚȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ; ǻઁȢ įȩȟĮȞ IJ૶ ਖȖ઀૳ șİ૶, ijȠȕȒșȘIJȚ IJȠઃȢ IJȠȚȠ઄IJȠȣȢ țĮ੿ IJȠıȠȪIJȠȣȢ ੒ȡțȚıȝȠȪȢ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ ਲȝ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠૣ, İੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ’ Į੝IJȠ૨ ਥȞ મ ʌ઼Ȟ

ij.136r.

holy men and women, those who pleased holy God in their lifetime. I adjure all you evil spirits, by all the saints, that you tell me your names’ - then show the holy cross, holding it in your hand and say, - ‘Behold the holy cross of our Lord, Jesus Christ. Depart evil Devil! Jesus Christ conquers.

The lion from the line of Judah’s race; he of the root of David; the Emmanuel [the Saviour]. Christ reigns, Christ holds power, Christ slays, Christ grants life; holy, holy, holy Lord Sabaoth, heaven and earth are filled with his glory, Hosannah in the highest, and who is blessed through the ages. Amen. Let God arise and let his enemies be scattered and let them flee from his countenance. As smoke vanishes so may they disappear; as wax melts away from the face of fire, and snow from the burning heat of the sun. Cursed Devil, why do you delay and not speak your name? Give glory to holy God; take fright at these varied and many oaths [exorcisms]. I adjure you by our Lord Jesus Christ. Speak your name. I adjure you by him for whom every

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v

ij.137v. ȖȩȞȣ ț੺ȝʌIJİȚ ਥʌȠȣȡĮȞȓȦȞ ț(Į੿) ਥʌȚȖİȓȦȞ ț(Į੿) țĮIJĮȤșȠȞȓȦȞ, ੆ȞĮ İ੃ʌૉȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJઁȞ țİȞઆıĮȞIJĮ ਦĮȣIJઁȞ ț(Į੿) ȝȠȡij੽Ȟ įȠ઄ȜȠȣ ȜĮȕȩȞIJĮ, İੁʌ੻ IJ઀ ıȠȚ ਩ıIJĮȚ ੕ȞȠȝĮ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ IJઁ ĮੈȝĮ IJઁ ੅įȚȠȞ ਥțȤ੼ȠȞIJȠȢ ਥʌ੿ ıIJĮȣȡȠ૨, İੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ, İੁʌ੻ ijĮȞİȡ૵Ȣ, ਥȖઅ ੒ įȠ૨ȜȠȢ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ਥȡȦIJ૵ ıİ: IJ઀ ıȠ઀ ਥıIJȚ ੕ȞȠȝĮ;

ij.137v.

ij.137r. Eੁʌ੻ İੁ ț(Į੿) ਙȜȜȠȣȢ ਩ȤİȚȢ ȝİIJ੹ ıȠ૨ ıȣȞİȡȖȠ઄Ȣ, ț(Į઀) ʌ૵Ȣ ਩ȤİȚȢ ț(Į੿) ਥț ʌȠ઀ĮȢ IJ੺ȟİȦȢ, ਵ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ ੒ ਙȡȤȦȞ ıȠȣ, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀઺ ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ țĮ੿ įȣȞȐȝİȚ, İੁ ʌȠ૨ ț(Į੿) ਥȞ IJ઀ȞȚ IJȩʌ૳ İੇıĮȚ ધțİȚȝȑȞȠȢ, Ȟ੹ ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ ʌȡ੿Ȟ ਥțȕોȞĮȚ ਥț IJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡȫʌȠȣ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ ਥȞ IJȓȞȚ ਫ਼ʌȠIJȐııૉ, İੁʌ੻, İੁʌ੼ ʌȩIJİ ਥȟȑȡȤİȚ, țĮ੿ IJ੿ ıȘȝİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙Ȣ ੖IJĮȞ ਥȟȑȜșૉȢ, ੒ȡțȓȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȓȠȣ

ij.137r.

ij.138v. IJȠ૨ ijĮȞİȡઆıĮȞIJંȢ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ țȠȡȣijĮȓȠȣ IJ૵Ȟ ਞʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ ȆȑIJȡȠȣ, ਥȞ ȈȓȝȦȞȚ IJ૶ ȝȐȖ૳ ț(Į੿) ਥȞ ț઄ȞȦʌȚ IJ૶ ਕȖȤȓıIJ૳ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨IJȠ ੒ ਕʌȩıIJȠȜȠȢ ੉ȦȐȞȞȘȢ ੒ șİȠȜȩȖȠȢ ਥȞ Ȇ੺IJȝ૳ IJૌ Ȟ੾ı૳. Ǽੁʌ੻ ਘ ਥȡઆIJȘıȐ ıȠȣ, ʌĮȞȠ૨ȡȖİ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, IJĮʌİȓȞȦıȠȞ ਦĮȣIJȩȞ, ੒ ઌįȘȢ ਥıIJ੿Ȟ İੁȢ țĮșȑįȡĮȞ ıȠȣ, ਥțİ૙ ਥıIJȚȞ ਲ Ƞ੅țȘı઀Ȣ ıȠȣ. ȁȠȚʌઁȞ Ƞ੡ț ਥıIJȚ țĮȚȡઁȢ IJȠ૨ ਕȞĮȝȑȞİȚȞ.

ij.138v.

253

knee bends in heaven and on earth and in the underworld, that you tell your name. I adjure you by him who made himself of no reputation and assumed the form of a servant. Tell what your name is. I adjure you by that which poured out his blood upon the cross. Speak your name; say it plainly. I, the servant of God, ask you what is your name. Tell whether you have other accomplices with you as well, and how you are and from what class, or what your leader is called. In what power and authority or where and in which place are you dwelling? Before coming out of this person you must tell me to whom you are subordinate. Tell me when you emerge and what sign you make when you emerge. I adjure you by the Holy Spirit that revealed you through Peter, supreme among the apostles, in Simon Magus, and in Kynops Angkhistos, by the Apostle John the Theologian on the island Patmos. Answer what I have asked you, wily Devil. Humble yourself. Hades has been appointed as your seat of power; therein is your dwelling. So, there is no time to wait.

254

Chapter 3

ij.138r. ੘ ȀȪȡȚȠȢ ਥȖȖઃȢ ਸ਼ȟİȚ ț(Į੿) Ƞ੝ ȤȡȠȞ઀ıİȚ țȡ૙ȞĮȚ IJ੽Ȟ ȖોȞ, ț(Į੿) ı੻ ț(Į੿) IJ੽Ȟ ıȣȞİȡȖȩȞ ıȠȣ į઄ȞĮȝȚȞ țȠȜȐıİȚ İੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȖȑİȞȞĮȞ IJȠ૨ ʌȣȡંȢ, ʌĮȡĮįȠઃȢ İੁȢ IJઁ ıțંIJȠȢ IJઁ ਥȟઆIJİȡȠȞ, ੖ʌȠȣ ıțઆȜȘȟ ੒ ਕțȠ઀ȝȘIJȠȢ ț(Į੿) IJઁ ʌ૨ȡ Ƞ੝ ıȕȑȞȞȣIJĮȚ. Ǽੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ, ੖IJȚ ȝȑȖĮȢ ੒ ijȩȕȠȢ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ț(Į੿) ȝİȖȐȜȘ ਲ įȩȟĮ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡંȢ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ, Ȟ૨Ȟ țĮ੿ ਕİ੿ țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ IJ૵Ȟ ĮੁઆȞȦȞ. ਝȝ੾Ȟ.

ij.138r.

ij.139v. Ȇİȡ‫ ޥ‬ȕȠȣȡțȠȜȐțțȠȣ IJާ ʌࠛȢ Ȟ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ ȤĮȜȐı߯Ȣ.

ij.139r.

ȉȠ૨IJȠ į੻Ȟ İੇȞĮȚ ਕȜȘș੾Ȣ ਕȝ੽ ਩ȞĮȚ IJȑȤȞȘ IJȠ૨ įȚĮȕȩȜȠȣ ț(Į੿) ijĮȞIJȐȗİIJ(ĮȚ) įȚ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ਕʌȚıIJȓĮȞ ਲȝ૵Ȟ, ੖ȝȦȢ ਥ੹Ȟ İਫ਼ȡİșૌ IJȠȚȠ૨IJȠȞ ȜİȓȥĮȞȠȞ, ʌȡȑʌİȚ Ȟ੹ ȖȑȞૉ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮ įȚ੹ IJઁȞ ਕʌȠșĮȝȑȞȠȞ ȝİIJ੹ țȠȜȜȪȕȦȞ ț(Į੿) İੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ, Ȟ੹ İ੝ȖȐȞȠȣȞ ੢ȥȦȝĮ İੁȢ ȕȠȒșİȚĮȞ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ ੒ȝȠ઀ȦȢ ț(Į੿) įȚ੹ IJઁȞ ਕʌȠșĮȝȑȞȠȞ ij.139r. ț(Į੿) ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ Ȗ઀ȞİIJĮȚ ਖȖȚĮıȝઁȢ ȝȚțȡઁȢ ȝİIJ੹ ਖȖȓȦȞ ȜİȚȥȐȞȦȞ ਥʌ੺ȞȦ İੁȢ IJȠ ȝȞોȝĮ, ț(Į੿) ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıȝȠૣ įȚĮȕȐȗȠȣȞ IJ੹Ȣ İ੝Ȥ੹Ȣ IJȠ૨ ȂİȖȐȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ, İ੅IJİ IJȠઃȢ ਥȟȠȡțȚıȝȠઃȢ țĮ੿ ੖ȜĮȢ IJ੹Ȣ ੕ʌȚıșİȞ ȖİȖȡĮȝȝȑȞĮȢ İ੝ȤȐȢ, țĮ੿ ੪ı੹Ȟ įȚĮȕĮıIJȠૣȞ Įੂ İ੝ȤĮ੿ ૧ĮȞIJ઀ȗİȚȢ IJઁȞ ȜĮઁȞ ȝİIJȐ IJȠ૨

The Lord will soon arrive and [ . . . ] in judging the earth and He will punish you and your accomplice force, in hell-fire, giving you over to the outer darkness where there is the unsleeping worm and the unquenchable fire. Speak your name, for great is the fear of God and great the glory of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and always and to [the ages. . .]» About the vampire and how to destroy him. He is not real, but a creation of the Devil and he is imagined through our lack of belief. Nonetheless is such a corpse is found, there must be a liturgy for the deceased with kંllyva and at the liturgy they must distribute Ǥsoma for the salvation of everyone as well as for the deceased person.

ij.139r.

An after the liturgy there should be a small ceremony of agiasmިs with holy relics upon the tomb and with the agiasmިs they read the prayers of Basil the Great, or the exorcism and all the prayers written below, and after the prayers have been read you sprinkle the congregation with the holy water and what is left of

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v

ਖȖȚĮıȝȠ૨, ț(Į੿) IJઁ ʌİȡȓııİȣȝĮ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıȝȠ૨ IJઁ ȤȪȞİȚȢ ਕ…{...}.

the holy water you pour out [on the ground, tomb].

ij.129.(ǹthos 882:Lavra Ĭ 20)

The text is presented almost exactly as written in the manuscript. However I have published the principal text in a corrected version using the standard spelling, aspirations (breathings), and accents of educated Byzantine authors and modern katharevousa Greek, with alternate readings relegated to the apparatus, obvious misspellings and misplaced or missing accents regularized according to the norms proposed in the dictionaries of Liddell and Scott, and grammatical infelicities of iotacisms and ismomphonia corrected. The line-breaks, though corrected, faithfully reproduce the original. All abbreviations have been resolved automatically in the apparatus and punctuation normalised according to modern ecdotic without following the punctuation of the manuscript. The «f.» numbers in the Greek text correspond to the folio numeration in the manuscript. This mode of presentation conveys something of the atmosphere of the original, which would have been a text consulted by monks/priests before performing exorcisms. I am indebted to professors Xristos Palatov, Mixalis Kondis (Athens) and Santo Lucà for their assistance with the transcription and interpretation in correcting and translating the original text. The few diacritical signs used in the text are the following: [ ]: square brackets: indicate those parts lost in the text due to physical damage. ( ): round brackets: are used to dissolve the abbreviations. : indicate words added later on.

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v

259

{ }: indicate what should have included the text. L: Lavra Ĭ 20 (ǹthos 882). Ĭ: Philotheou 186 (Athos 1850). L: = The original scribe. L¹: = Later corrections by the first scribe. L²: = Corrections by a later scribe. L୻: = Readings from the first draft of ff. 9-10 of the Office, written in the first two leaves of the manuscript. L୽: = Readings from the exorcisms written in the later sections of the manuscript (ff. 105-128 and 136 to the end).

Edition of the Text ij.133v. ǻȚȐIJĮȟȚȢ IJ૵Ȟ įĮȚȝȠȞȚȗȠȝȑȞȦȞ. ȉò ʌ૵Ȣ ਥȡȦIJ઼Ȣ, ੆ȞĮ1 İ੅ʌૉ2 ıȠȚ ੒ įĮȓȝȦȞ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ Į੝IJȠ૨. ਫȞIJĮ૨șĮ, ȗȒIJȘıȠȞ3 IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝĮ IJȠ૨ ʌȠȞȘȡȠ૨ ʌȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ4. ǽȒIJȘıȠȞ5 ੆ȞĮ6 ıȠȚ7 İ੅ʌૉ8 ʌȩıȠȣȢ ਩ȤİȚ ȝİș’ਦĮȣIJȠ૨, ț(Į੿)9 ਥț ʌȠ઀ĮȢ10 IJȐȟİઆȢ ਥıIJȚȞ, ț(Į੿)11 ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝĮ IJȠ૨ ਙȡȤȠȞIJȠȢ Į੝IJȠ૨, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀઺ 12 įȣȞȐȝİȚ ț(Į੿)13 ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ ਥıIJȓ, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀૳ 14 IJȩʌ૳ İੇȞĮȚ 15 ੩țİȚȝȑȞȠȢ16. ij.133r. ਥȞ IJíȞȚ ਫ਼ʌȠIJ੺ııİIJĮȚ, 17 ʌȩIJİ ਥȟȑȡȤİIJ IJ઀ ıȘȝİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙ 18 ੒ʌંIJĮȞ19 ਥȟȑȡȤİIJ20 ਥț IJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡઆʌȠȣ. īíȞȦıțİ,21 ੒ʌȩIJĮȞ ਥȡȦIJઽȢ, ȜȑȖİ ਥȞ ੑȞંȝĮIJȚ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡȩȢ22 ț(Į੿)23 IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨24 ț(Į੿)25 IJȠ૨ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ26, İੁ į੻ ț(Į੿) į੼Ȟ ıȠȚ27 ਕʌȠțȡȓȞİIJĮȚ, Ȝ੺ȕİ IJઁ ਙʌȣȡȠȞ ਕʌIJંȝİȞȠȞ ਥȞ ʌȣȡ੿ ț(Į੿)28 țĮ૨ıȠȞ29 IJ੽Ȟ ȖȜ૵ııĮȞ30 Į੝IJȠ૨, ț(Į੿)31 ੕ȥİȚ, İ੅IJĮ ȜȑȖİ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJĮȪIJȘȞ: – ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıİ, ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, ਥȤșȡ੻ IJોȢ ਕȜȘșİȓĮȢ, įȚ੹ ij.134v. IJȠ૨ ijȡȚțIJȠ૨ ț(Į੿)32 ਖȖȓȠȣ ੑȞȩȝĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐȝȠȣ ĬİȠ૨, ȆĮIJȡંȢ,33 YੂȠ૨ț(Į੿)34 ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ,35 ੆ȞĮ 36 ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ 37 İ੝șઃȢ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖ઀ȦȞ38 ਕȖȖȑȜȦȞ, șȡȩȞȦȞ,39 țȣȡȚȠIJȒIJȦȞ,40 ਕȡȤ૵Ȟ, įȣȞȐȝİȦȞ,41 ਥȟȠȣıȚ૵Ȟ,42 IJ૵Ȟ ʌȠȜȣȠȝȝȐIJȦȞ ȤİȡȠȣȕ੿ȝ43 ț(Į੿)44 IJ૵Ȟ

260

Chapter 3

ਥȟĮʌIJİȡȪȖȦȞ ıİȡĮij੿ȝ,45 ੆ȞĮ ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌȘȢ 46 İ੝șઃȢ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝȐ ıȠȣ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ ij.134r. IJોȢ ੥ʌİȡȐȖȞȠȣ ĬİȠIJȩțȠȣ ȂĮȡȓĮȢ,47 įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ਝʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ48 IJ૵Ȟ įઆįİțĮ49ț(Į੿)50 IJ૵Ȟ ਦȕįȠȝ੾țȠȞIJĮ,51 įȚ੹ IJોȢ ijȠȕİȡ઼Ȣ ț(Į੿)52 ਕįİțȐıIJȠȣ țȡȓıİȦȢ ț(Į੿)53 įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȓȠȣ Į੆ȝĮIJȠȢ54 IJȠ૨ ਥțȤȣșȑȞIJȠȢ ਥț IJોȢ ʌȜİȣȡ઼Ȣ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ55 ਲȝ૵Ȟ56, ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨57, įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ İ੅țȠıȚ IJİııȐȡȦȞ ʌȡİıȕȣIJȑȡȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ įȚ੹ ʌĮȞIJઁȢ ʌĮȡİıIJઆIJȦȞ58 IJઁȞ59 șȡȩȞȠȞ60 IJઁȞ61 ਕȩȡĮIJȠȞ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ țĮ੿ ȥĮȜȜȩȞIJȦȞ Į੝IJન62. ij.135v. IJઁȞ ਕțĮIJȐʌĮȣıIJȠȞ ੢ȝȞȠȞ, țĮ੿ įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ șĮȣȝĮıIJ૵Ȟ ਩ȡȖȦȞ63 IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐȝȠȣ ĬİȠ૨64 IJ૵Ȟ ਥȞ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞ૶ ț(Į੿)65 ਥʌ੿ ȖોȢ ȖİȖİȞȘȝȑȞȦȞ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ȆĮIJȡȚĮȡȤ૵Ȟ66 ਞȕȡĮ੹ȝ,67 ੉ıĮ੹ț68 ț(Į੿)69 ੉Įțȫȕ 70ț(Į੿)71ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ72 IJ૵Ȟ ʌȡઁ ȞȩȝȠȣ ț(Į੿)73 ȝİIJ੹ ȞȩȝȠȞ, įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ įİțĮIJİııȐȡȦȞ ȤȚȜȚȐįȦȞ ȞȘʌ઀ȦȞ, IJ૵Ȟ ਫ਼ʌઁ ਺ȡȫįȠȣ74 ਕȞĮȚȡİșȑȞIJȦȞ75 ț(Į੿)76 įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ, ț(Į੿)77 ʌĮı૵Ȟ ij.135r. IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ਕȞįȡ૵Ȟ IJİ ț(Į੿)78 ȖȣȞĮȚț૵Ȟ, IJ૵Ȟ IJ૶ ਖȖȓ૳ Ĭİ૶79 İ੝ĮȡİıIJȘıȐȞIJȦȞ ਥȞ IJૌ ȗȦૌ Į੝IJ૵Ȟ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼ȝ઼Ȣ ʌ੺ȞIJĮ IJ੹ ʌȠȞȘȡ੹ ʌȞİȪȝĮIJĮ įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ80 ੆ȞĮ ȝȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ81 IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝȐ ıȠȣ:í ǼੇIJĮ įİ૙ȟȠȞ IJઁȞ IJȓȝȚȠȞ ȈIJĮȣȡંȞ, țȡĮIJ૵Ȟ İੁȢ 82 IJઁ ȤȑȡȚ ıȠȣ ț(Į੿)83 ȜȑȖİ: ੉įȠઃ ੒ IJ઀ȝȚȠȢ ȈIJĮȣȡઁȢ84 IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ85 Ȓȝ૵Ȟ 86 ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨,87 ijİ૨Ȗİ ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, ੉ȘıȠ૨Ȣ ȋȡȚıIJઁȢ88 ij.136v. ȞȚțઽ, ੒ ȜȑȦȞ ੒ ਥț ijȣȜોȢ IJȠ૨ ੉ȠȪįĮ89 ੒ ਥț ૧઀ȗȘȢ ǻĮȕ੿į90, ੒ ਫȝȝĮȞȠȣȒȜ91. ੘ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ92 ȕĮıȚȜİȪİȚ,93 ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ94 ਥȟȠȣıȚȐȗİȚ, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ șĮȞĮIJo૙, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ,95 ȗȦȠȖȠȞİ૙, ਢȖȚȠȢ ਢȖȚȠȢ ਢȖȚȠȢ96 Ȁ઄ȡȚȠȢ97 ȈĮȕĮȫș,98 ʌȜȒȡȘȢ ੒ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞȩȢ ț(Į઀)99 ਲ Ȗો IJોȢ įȩȟȘȢ Įਫ਼IJȠ૨, ੪ıĮȞȞ੹100 ਥȞ IJȠ૙Ȣ ਫ਼ȥ઀ıIJȠȚȢ, ੒ ੫Ȟ101 İ੝ȜȠȖȘȝȑȞȠȢ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ, ਕȝ੾Ȟ. ਝȞĮıIJ੾IJȦ102੒ ĬİȩȢ țĮ੿ įȚĮıțȠȡʌȚıșȒIJȦıĮȞ Ƞੂ ਥȤșȡȠ੿ Į੝IJȠ૨103 țĮ੿ ijȣȖȑIJȦıĮȞ ਕʌઁ ʌȡȠıȫʌȠȣ Įਫ਼IJȠ૨,104 ij.136r. ੪Ȣ ਥțȜİ઀ʌİȚ105 țĮʌȞઁȢ ਥțȜȚʌȑIJȦıĮȞ,106 ੪Ȣ IJȒțİIJĮȚ țȘȡઁȢ ਕʌઁ ʌȡȠıઆʌȠȣ ʌȣȡંȢ, ț(Į੿)107ਲ ȤȚઅȞ ਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ țĮȪȝĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਲȜ઀Ƞȣ. ȀĮIJȘȡĮȝȑȞİ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, IJ઀ ȕȡĮį઄ȞİȚȢ108 țĮ੿ Ƞ੝ ȜȑȖİȚȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ; ǻઁȢ įȩȟĮȞ IJ૶ ਖȖ઀૳ șİ૶,109 ijȠȕȒșȘIJȚ IJȠઃȢ IJȠȚȠ઄IJȠȣȢ110 țĮ੿ IJȠıȠȪIJȠȣȢ ੒ȡțȚıȝȠȪȢ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v

261

Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ111 ਲȝ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠૣ İੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ’ Į੝IJȠ૨ ਥȞ મ ʌ઼Ȟ ij.137v. ȖȩȞȣ ț੺ȝʌIJİȚ 112 ਥʌȠȣȡĮȞȓȦȞ113ț(Į੿)114ਥʌȚȖİȓȦȞ ț(Į੿)115 țĮIJĮȤșȠȞȓȦȞ, ੆ȞĮ116 İ੃ʌૉȢ117 IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJઁȞ țİȞઆıĮȞIJĮ ਦĮȣIJઁȞ ț(Į੿)118 ȝȠȡij੽Ȟ įȠ઄ȜȠȣ ȜĮȕȩȞIJĮ, İੁʌ੻ IJ઀ ıȠȚ 119 ਩ıIJĮȚ ੕ȞȠȝĮ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ IJઁ ĮੈȝĮ IJઁ ੅įȚȠȞ ਥțȤ੼ȠȞIJȠȢ120 ਥʌ੿ ıIJĮȣȡȠ૨, İੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ,121 İੁʌ੻ ijĮȞİȡ૵Ȣ, ਥȖઅ ੒ įȠ૨ȜȠȢ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ਥȡȦIJ૵ ıİ :122 IJ઀ ıȠ઀ ਥıIJȚ 123 ੕ȞȠȝĮ; ij.137r. Eੁʌ੻ İੁ 124 ț(Į੿)125 ਙȜȜȠȣȢ ਩ȤİȚȢ ȝİIJ੹ ıȠ૨ ıȣȞİȡȖȠ઄Ȣ, ț(Į઀)126 ʌ૵Ȣ ਩ȤİȚȢ ț(Į੿)127 ਥț ʌȠ઀ĮȢ 128 IJ੺ȟİȦȢ, ਵ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ ੒ ਙȡȤȦȞ129 ıȠȣ, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀઺ 130 ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ țĮ੿ įȣȞȐȝİȚ, İੁ131 ʌȠ૨ ț(Į੿)132 ਥȞ IJ઀ȞȚ IJȩʌ૳ İੇıĮȚ133 ધțȘȝȑȞȠȢ, Ȟ੹ ȝȠȚ 134 İ੅ʌૉȢ 135 ʌȡ੿Ȟ ਥțȕોȞĮȚ 136 ਥț IJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡȫʌȠȣ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ ਥȞ IJȓȞȚ ਫ਼ʌȠIJȐııૉ 137 İੁʌ੼, ʌȩIJİ ਥȟȑȡȤİȚ, țĮ੿ IJ੿ ıȘȝİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙Ȣ 138 ੖IJĮȞ ਥȟȑȜșૉȢ, ੒ȡțȓȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ139IJȠ૨ ਖȖȓȠȣ140 ij.138v. IJȠ૨ ijĮȞİȡઆıĮȞIJંȢ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ țȠȡȣijĮȓȠȣ141 IJ૵Ȟ ਞʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ142 ȆȑIJȡȠȣ,143 ਥȞ ȈȓȝȦȞȚ144 IJ૶ ȝȐȖ૳ ț(Į੿)145 ਥȞ ț઄ȞȦʌȚ IJ૵ ਕȖȤȓıIJ૳ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨IJȠ ੒ ਕʌȩıIJȠȜȠȢ146 ੉ȦȐȞȞȘȢ ੒ șİȠȜȩȖȠȢ ਥȞ Ȇ੺IJȝ૳147 IJૌ Ȟ੾ı૳. 148 Ǽੁʌ੻ ਘ ਥȡઆIJȘıȐ149 ıȠȣ, 150 ʌĮȞȠ૨ȡȖİ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, IJĮʌİȓȞȦıȠȞ ਦĮȣIJȩȞ, ੒ ਚįȘȢ ਥıIJ੿Ȟ İੁȢ țĮșȑįȡĮȞ151 ıȠȣ, ਥțİ૙ ਥıIJȚȞ ਲ Ƞ੃țȘı઀Ȣ152 ıȠȣ. ȁȠȚʌઁȞ Ƞ੡ț ਥıIJȚ țĮȚȡઁȢ IJȠ૨ ਕȞĮȝȑȞİȚȞ ij.138r. ੘ ȀȪȡȚȠȢ153 ਥȖȖઃȢ 154 ਸ਼ȟİȚ155 ț(Į੿)156 Ƞ੝ ȤȡȠȞ઀ıİȚ157 țȡ૙ȞĮȚ IJ੽Ȟ ȖોȞ, ț(Į੿)158 ı੻ ț(Į੿)159 IJ੽Ȟ ıȣȞİȡȖȩȞ ıȠȣ į઄ȞĮȝȚȞ țȠȜȐıİȚ160 İੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȖȑİȞȞĮȞ161 IJȠ૨ ʌȣȡંȢ, ʌĮȡĮįȠઃȢ İੁȢ IJઁ ıțંIJȠȢ162 IJઁ ਥȟઆIJİȡȠȞ, ੖ʌȠȣ ıțઆȜȘȟ ੒ ਕțȠ઀ȝȘIJȠȢ ț(Į੿)163 IJઁ ʌ૨ȡ Ƞ੝ ıȕȑȞȞȣIJĮȚ.164 Ǽੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ, ੖IJȚ ȝȑȖĮȢ ੒ ijȩȕȠȢ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ț(Į੿)165 ȝİȖȐȜȘ ਲ įȩȟĮ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡંȢ 166 ț(Į੿)167 IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨168 ț(Į੿)169 IJȠ૨ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ, 170 Ȟ૨Ȟ țĮ੿ ਕİ੿ țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ IJ૵Ȟ ĮੁઆȞȦȞ. ਝȝ੾Ȟ. ij.139v. Ȇİȡ‫ ޥ‬ȕȠȣȡțȠȜȐțțȠȣ171 IJާ ʌࠛȢ Ȟ‫ ޟ‬IJާȞ ȤĮȜȐı߯Ȣ.172 ȉȠ૨IJȠ į੻Ȟ İੇȞĮȚ ਕȜȘș੾Ȣ173 ਕȝ੽ ਩ȞĮȚ174 IJȑȤȞȘ IJȠ૨ įȚĮȕȩȜȠȣ ț(Į੿)175 ijĮȞIJȐȗİIJ(ĮȚ) įȚ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ਕʌȚıIJȓĮȞ176 ਲȝ૵Ȟ, ੖ȝȦȢ ਥ੹Ȟ İਫ਼ȡİșૌ IJȠȚȠ૨IJȠȞ ȜİȓȥĮȞȠȞ, ʌȡȑʌİȚ Ȟ੹ ȖȑȞૉ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮ įȚ੹ IJઁȞ ਕʌȠșĮȝȑȞȠȞ ȝİIJ੹ țȠȜȜȪȕȦȞ177 ț(Į੿)178 İੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ, Ȟ੹ İ੝ȖȐȞȠȣȞ179 ੢ȥȦȝĮ İੁȢ ȕȠȒșİȚĮȞ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ ੒ȝȠ઀ȦȢ ț(Į੿)180 įȚ੹ IJઁȞ ਕʌȠșĮȝȑȞȠȞ

262

Chapter 3

ij.139r. ț(Į੿)181 ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ Ȗ઀ȞİIJĮȚ ਖȖȚĮıȝઁȢ ȝȚțȡઁȢ ȝİIJ੹ ਖȖȓȦȞ ȜİȚȥȐȞȦȞ ਥʌ੺ȞȦ İੁȢ IJȠ ȝȞોȝĮ, ț(Į੿)182 ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıȝȠૣ įȚĮȕȐȗȠȣȞ IJ੹Ȣ İ੝Ȥ੹Ȣ IJȠ૨ ȂİȖȐȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ, İ੅IJİ IJȠઃȢ ਥȟȠȡțȚıȝȠઃȢ țĮ੿ ੖ȜĮȢ183 IJ੹Ȣ ੕ʌȚıșİȞ ȖİȖȡĮȝȝȑȞĮȢ İ੝ȤȐȢ, țĮ੿ ੪ı੹Ȟ įȚĮȕĮıIJȠૣȞ Įੂ İ੝ȤĮ੿ ૧ĮȞIJ઀ȗİȚȢ IJઁȞ ȜĮઁȞ ȝİIJȐ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıȝȠ૨, ț(Į੿)184 IJઁ ʌİȡȓııİȣȝĮ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıȝȠ૨ IJઁ ȤȪȞİȚȢ 185 ਕ…{…}186. ij.129. 188 īȚȞȫıțİIJİ ʌİȡ੿189 IJȠȪIJȠȣ ੒ʌȠ૨ ਥ੹Ȟ İਫ਼ȡİșૌ (੒ʌȠ૨)190 ʌȠȜȜȐțȚȢ IJȚȞ੻Ȣ ਕȞȠȡȪIJIJȠȣıȚ IJઁȞ IJȐijȠȞ țĮ੿ İ੝Ȗ੺ȜȠȣȞ IJઁ Ȝİ઀ȥĮȞȠȞ ਩ȟȦ țĮ੿ ıȣȞ੺ȖȠȣıȚ ȟ઄ȜĮ țĮ੿ țĮ઀ȠȣıȚȞ Į੝IJઁ țĮ੿ ʌȠȚȠ૨ıȚ ȝİȖ੺ȜȘȞ ਖȝĮȡIJ઀ĮȞ, țĮșઅȢ Ȝ੼ȖİȚ ੒ ਚȖȚȠȢ ੉Ȧ੺ȞȞȘȢ ੒ ȃȘıIJİȣIJ੽Ȣ İੁȢ IJઁ țİij੺ȜĮȚȠȞ 191 IJȠ૨ ȞંȝȠȣ Į੝IJȠ૨. ȉૌ ʌĮȡĮțıİȣૌ ਦıʌ੼ȡĮȢ ʌȠ઀ȘıȠȞ ʌĮȞȞȣȤ઀įĮ ij.129v. ਵȖȠȣȞ țંȜȜȣȕĮ, țĮ੿ ȥ੺ȜȜȦıȚȞ 192 ਥȞ IJૌ ਥțțȜȘı઀઺. ȉઁ į੻ Ȉ੺ȕȕĮIJȠȞ ʌȡȦ૘ ʌȠ઀ȘıȠȞ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖ઀ĮȞ țĮ੿ ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ਕʌંȜȣıȚȞ IJોȢ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖ઀ĮȢ ʌȠ઀ȘıȠȞ ਖȖȚĮıȝઁȞ țĮ੿ ੢ȥȦıȠȞ ʌĮȞĮȖ઀ĮȞ193. ǼੇIJĮ ਩ȡȤİIJĮȚ ੒ ੂİȡİઃȢ ੖Ȣ ਥıIJȚȞ ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ੂİȡĮIJȚț੽Ȟ ıIJȠȜ੽Ȟ İੁȢ IJઁ ȝȞȘȝİ૙ȠȞ ੒ʌȠ઄ ’ijȠȡ઼IJĮȚ194 IJઁ țĮțઁȞ țĮ੿ Ȝ੼ȖİȚ IJȠઃȢ ਕijȠȡțȚıȝȠઃȢ ਥʌ੺ȞȦ IJȠ૨ IJ੺ijȠȣ țĮ੿ Ƞ੝ț ਕȞȠ઀ȖİȚȢ Į੝IJȩȞ. ȉȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ įİȘș૵ȝİȞ. ij.131v. ૅǼʌȚIJȚȝઽ ıȠȚ Ȁ઄ȡȚȠȢ, įȚ੺ȕȠȜİ, ਩ȟİȜșİ țĮ੿ ਕȞĮȤઆȡȘıȠȞ195 ਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ ȜİȚȥ੺ȞȠȣ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ ıઃȞ ʌ઼ıȚ IJȠ૙Ȣ ਕȖȖ੼ȜȠȚȢ ıȠȣ ੖IJȚ įİįંȟĮıIJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠȝ੺ ıȠȣ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡઁȢ țĮ੿ IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨ țĮ੿ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȓȠȣ ȆȞİȪȝĮIJȠȢ, Ȟ૨Ȟ țĮ੿ ਕİ੿ țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ. ȉȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ įİȘș૵ȝİȞ196 ‘ȅ ĬİઁȢ ੒ ਚȖȚȠȢ, ੒ ijȠȕİȡઁȢ țĮ੿ ਩ȞįȠȟȠȢ, ੒ ਥʌ੿ ʌ઼ıȚ IJȠ૙Ȣ ਩ȡȖȠȚȢ țĮ੿ IJૌ ੁıȤ઄ȧ Į੝IJȠ૨ ਕțĮIJ੺ȜȘʌIJȠȢ ij.132. țĮ੿ ਕȞİȟȚȤȞ઀ĮıIJȠȢ ਫ਼ʌ੺ȡȤȦȞ197 (ਫ਼ʌ੺ȡȤİȚȢ=Lavra), Į੝IJઁȢ ੒ ʌȡȠȠȡ઀ıĮȢ ıȠȚ, įȚ੺ȕȠȜİ, IJોȢ ĮੁȦȞ઀Ƞȣ țȠȜ੺ıİȦȢ IJ੽Ȟ IJȚȝȦȡ઀ĮȞ, įȚૃ ਲȝ૵Ȟ IJ૵Ȟ ਕȤȡİ઀ȦȞ Įਫ਼IJȠ૨ įȠ઄ȜȦȞ, țİȜİ઄İȚ ıȠȚ țĮ੿ ʌ੺ıૉ IJૌ ıȣȞİȡȖ૶ ıȠȣ įȣȞ੺ȝİȚ ਕʌȠıIJોȞĮȚ ਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ ȜİȚȥ੺ȞȠȣ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ, ਥʌૃ ੑȞંȝĮIJȚ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ ਲȝ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨ IJȠ૨ ਕȜȘșȚȞȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ਲȝ૵Ȟ. ૽ȅȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ198 Ƞ੣Ȟ, ʌĮȝʌંȞȘȡȠȞ{...}

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v

263

ij.133r. ıijȠįȡ૶ IJȡ઀ȕȠȣȢ ਕıijĮȜİ૙Ȣ,199IJઁȞ ਖʌIJંȝİȞȠȞ200IJ૵Ȟ ੑȡ੼ȦȞ țĮ੿ țĮʌȞ઀ȗȠȞIJĮȚ,201 IJઁȞ ਕȞĮȕĮȜȜંȝİȞȠȞ IJઁ ij૵Ȣ202੪Ȣ ੂȝ੺IJȚȠȞ, IJઁȞ ਥțIJİ઀ȞĮȞIJĮ IJઁȞ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞઁȞ ੪ıİ੿ į੼૦૧ȘȞ, IJઁȞ ıIJİȖ੺ȗȠȞIJĮ ਥȞ ੠įĮıȚ IJ੹ ਫ਼ʌİȡ૶Į Į੝IJȠ૨, IJઁȞ șİȝİȜȚȠ૨ȞIJĮ IJ੽Ȟ ȖોȞ ਥʌ੿ IJ੽Ȟ ਕıij੺ȜİȚĮȞ Į੝IJોȢ, Ƞ੝ țȜȚș੾ıİIJĮȚ İੁȢ IJઁȞ Įੁ૵ȞĮ IJȠ૨ Įੁ૵ȞȠȢ, IJઁȞ ʌȡȠıțĮȜȠ઄ȝİȞȠȞ203 IJઁ ੢įȦȡ IJોȢ șĮȜ੺ııȘȢ țĮ੿ ਥțȤ੼ȠȞIJĮ Į੝IJઁ ਥʌ੿ ʌȡંıȦʌȠȞ ʌ੺ıȘȢ IJોȢ ȖોȢ, ਩ȟİȜșİ țĮ੿ ij.133v. ਕȞĮȤઆȡȘıȠȞ204 ਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ ȜİȚȥ੺ȞȠȣ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ. ૽ȅȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ țĮIJ੹ IJȠ૨ ıȦIJȘȡȚઆįȠȣȢ ʌ੺șȠȣȢ – țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ205. ij. 134v. Ȁ઄ȡȚİ ȈĮȕĮઆș, ੒ ĬİઁȢ IJȠ૨ ǿıȡĮ੾Ȝ {...} IJ૵Ȟ ĮੁઆȞȦȞ 206. ȉȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ įİȘș૵ȝİȞ207. ੘ ફȞ, ǻ੼ıʌȠIJĮ Ȁ઄ȡȚİ, ੒ ʌȠȚ੾ıĮȢ IJઁȞ ઋȞșȡȦʌȠȞ țĮIJ’ İੁțંȞĮ ı੽Ȟ țĮ੿ ੒ȝȠ઀ȦıȚȞ țĮ੿ įȠઃȢ Į੝IJ૶ ਥȟȠȣı઀ĮȞ ȢȦોȢ ĮੁȦȞ઀Ƞȣ, İੇIJĮ ਥțʌİıંȞIJĮ įȚ੹ IJોȢ ਖȝĮȡIJ઀ĮȢ ȝ੽ ʌĮȡȚįઆȞ, ਕȜȜૅ ȠੁțȠȞȠȝ੾ıĮȢ įȚ੹ IJોȢ ਥȞĮȞșȡȦʌ੾ıİȦȢ IJȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨ ıȠȣ IJ੽Ȟ ıȦIJȘȡ઀ĮȞ IJȠ૨ țંıȝȠȣ, Į੝IJઁȢ țĮ੿ ij. 135r. IJȠ ʌȜ੺ıȝĮ ıȠȣ IJȠ૨IJȠ ȜȣIJȡȦı੺ȝİȞȠȢ ਥț IJોȢ įȠȣȜİ઀ĮȢ IJȠ૨ ਥȤșȡȠ૨‚ ʌȡંıįİȟĮȚ İੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȕĮıȚȜİ઀ĮȞ ıȠȣ IJ੽Ȟ ਥʌȠȣȡ੺ȞȚȠȞ208 țĮ੿ ı઄ȗİȣȟȠȞ IJૌ ȥȣȤૌ 209 Į੝IJȠ૨ ઋȖȖİȜȠȞ ijȦIJİȚȞઁȞ ૧ȣંȝİȞȠȞ Į੝IJઁȞ ਕʌઁ ʌ੺ıȘȢ ਥʌȚȕȠȣȜોȢ IJȠ૨ ਕȞIJȚțİȚȝ੼ȞȠȣ, ਕʌȩ ıȣȞĮȞIJ੾ȝĮIJȠȢ ʌȠȞȘȡȠ૨, ਕʌઁ įĮȚȝȠȞ઀Ƞȣ ȝİıȘȝȕȡȚȞȠ૨, ਕʌઁ ijĮȞIJĮıȝ੺IJȦȞ ʌȠȞȘȡ૵Ȟ. ȀĮ੿ ʌȠ઀İȚ ıIJĮȣȡઁȞ ਥʌ੺ȞȦ IJȠ૨ IJ੺ijȠȣ ijȣı૵Ȟ ਥț IJȡ઀IJȠȣ țĮ੿ ਥțijઆȞİȚ. ૅǼȟ੼ȜĮıȠȞ ਕʌૃ Į੝IJȠ૨ ʌ઼Ȟ ʌȠȞȘȡઁȣ țĮ੿ ਕț੺șĮȡIJȠȞ ʌȞİ૨ȝĮ ij. 135v. țİțȡȣȝȝ੼ȞȠȞ, țĮ੿ ਥȝijȦȜİ૨ȠȞ Į੝IJȠ૨ IJૌ țĮȡį઀઺, ʌȞİ૨ȝĮ ʌȜ੺ȞȘȢ, ʌȞİ૨ȝĮ ʌȠȞȘȡ઀ĮȢ, ʌȞİ૨ȝĮ İੁįȦȜȠȜĮIJȡ઀ĮȢ țĮ੿ ʌ੺ıȘȢ ʌȜİȠȞİȟ઀ĮȢ, ʌȞİ૨ȝĮ ȥİ઄įȠȣȢ țĮ੿ ʌ੺ıȘȢ ਕțĮșĮȡı઀ĮȢ IJોȢ ਥȞİȡȖȠȣȝ੼ȞȘȢ țĮIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ įȚįĮıțĮȜ઀ĮȞ IJȠ૨ įȚĮȕંȜȣ210. ȀĮ੿ ȝȞȘȝȠȞİ઄İȚ ਯIJȚ țĮ੿ ਩IJȚ ਥȞ İੁȡ੾Ȟૉ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ įİȘș૵ȝİȞ211. ਯIJȚ įİંȝİșĮ212 ਫ਼ʌ੻ȡ țȠȚȝ੾ıİȦȢ (țĮ੿)213 ਕȞ੼ıİȦȢ (IJȠ૨ įİ૙ȞȠȢ). ૽ȅ ĬİઁȢ IJ૵Ȟ ʌȞİȣȝ੺IJȦȞ țĮ੿ ʌਕıȘȢ ıĮȡțંȢ. ȀĮ੿ ʌȠ઀İȚ ਕʌંȜȣıȚȞ. ȀĮ੿ ijİ઄ȖİȚ IJઁ țĮțઁȞ țĮ੿ ੒ IJ੺ijȠȢ Ƞ੝ț ਕȞȠ઀ȖİIJĮȚ, İੁȢ įંȟĮȞ ĬİȠ૨214.>

264

Chapter 3

Notes 1

Cod. ਷ȞĮ. 2 Cod. İ੆ʌİȚ. 3 Cod. ǽȒIJȚıȠȞ. 4 Cod. ʌৼȢ. 5 Cod. ȗȒIJȚıȠȞ਩. 6 Cod. Ȟ੹. 7 Cod. ı੻. 8 Cod. ੝ʌİ૙. 9 Cod. ț. 10 Cod. ʌíĮȢ. 11 Cod. ț. 12 Cod. ʌȓĮ. 13 Cod. ț. 14 Cod. ʌíȦ. 15 Cod. ਷ȞĮȚ. 16 Cod. ȠੂțİȚȝȑȞȠȢ. 17 Cod. ਫ਼ʌȠʌȠIJIJ੺ıİIJ(ĮȚ) . 18 Cod. ʌȚો. 19 Cod. ੒ʌ੺ȞIJȦȞ. 20 Cod. ਥȟȑȡȤȘIJĮȚ. 21 Cod. Ȗ઀ȞȠıțİ. 22 Cod. ʌȡȢ. 23 Cod. ț. 24 Cod. ȊੂȠ૨. 25 Cod. ț. 26 Cod. ਖȖíȠȣ ʌৼȢ’. 27 Cod. ı੻. 28 Cod. ț. 29 Cod. țĮȪıȦȞ. 30 Cod. ȖȜ૵ıĮȞ. 31 Cod. ț. 32 Cod. ț. 33 Cod. ʌȡȢ. 34 Cod. Ȁ. 35 Cod. ʌৼȢ. 36 Cod. İ੅ȞĮ. 37 Cod. İ੅ʌİȚȢ. 38 Cod. ਝȖ੿ȦȞ. 39 Cod. ਝȖȖȑȜȦȞ ĬȡȩȞȦȞ. 40 Cod. ȀȣȡȚȠIJȒIJȦȞ. 41 Cod. ਝȡȤ૵Ȟ ǻȣȞȐȝİȦȞ. 42 Cod. ਬȟȠȣıȚ૵Ȟ. 43 Cod. ȋİȡȠȣȕİȓȝ. 44 Cod. Ȁ. 45 Cod. ਰȟĮʌIJİȡȪȖȦȞ ȈİȡĮijȓȝ.

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v 46

Cod. İ੅ʌİȚȢ. Cod. șİȠIJȩțȠȣ ȝĮȡȓĮ.Ȣ 48 Cod. ਞȖȓȦȞ ਞʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ. 49 Cod. įȠįİțĮ. 50 Cod. ț. 51 Cod. İ੝įȠȝ઀țȦȞIJĮ. 52 Cod. ț. 53 Cod. ț. 54 Cod. ਞȖȓȠȣ ਞੂȝĮIJȠȢ. 55 Cod. țȣ. 56 Cod. Ȓȝ. 57 Cod. ȚȘ Ȥȣ. 58 Cod. ʌĮȡİıIJȩȞIJȦȞ. 59 Cod. IJ૵Ȟ. 60 Cod. șȡȩȞȦȞ. 61 Cod. IJ૵Ȟ. 62 Cod. Į੝IJȠ૨. 63 Cod. ਩ȡȖȠȞ. 64 Cod. șİȠૣ. 65 Cod. ț. 66 Cod. Ȇ[...]ȡȚĮȡȤ૵Ȟ. 67 Cod. ਕȕȡĮ੹ȝ. 68 Cod. ȚıĮ੹ț. 69 Cod. ț. 70 Cod. ȚĮțȫȕ. 71 Cod. ț. 72 Cod. ਞȖȓȦȞ. 73 Cod. ț. 74 Cod. ȘȡȫįȠ. 75 Cod. ਕȞİȡİșȑȞIJȦȞ. 76 Cod. ț. 77 Cod. ț. 78 Cod. ț. 79 Cod. șİ૶. 80 Cod. ਞȖȓȦȞ. 81 Cod. İ੅ʌİȚȢ. 82 Cod. țȡĮIJȩȞIJĮȢ İੁȢ. 83 Cod. ț. 84 Cod. ıIJĮȣȡઁȢ. 85 Cod. țȣ. 86 Cod. ਲȝ. 87 Cod. ੂȘȤȣ. 88 Cod. ȤȢ. 89 Cod. ੂȠȪįĮ. 90 Cod. įĮȕȓį. 91 Cod. İȝȝĮȞȠȣȒȜ. 47

265

266 92

Cod. ȤȢ. Cod. ȕĮıȚȜİȪȘ. 94 Cod. ȤȢ. 95 Cod. ȤȢ. 96 Cod. ਚȖȚȠȢ, ਚȖȚȠȢ, ਚȖȚȠȢ. 97 Cod. ȤȢ. 98 Cod. ıĮȕĮȫș. 99 Cod. ț. 100 Cod. ੩ıĮȞ੹. 101 Cod. ੯Ȟ. 102 Cod. ਝȞĮıIJ੾IJ૳. 103 Cod. ǹȣIJȠ૨. 104 Cod. ǹȣIJȠ૨. 105 Cod. ਥțȜȒʌȘ. 106 Cod. ਥțȜȘʌȑIJȦıĮȞ. 107 Cod. ț. 108 Cod. ȕȡĮįȓȞȘȢ. 109 Cod. ਞȖ઀૳ Ĭİ૶. 110 Cod. IJȠȚȠȪIJȠȢ. 111 Cod. țȣ. 112 Cod. ț੺ȝʌIJȘ. 113 Cod. ਥʌ’Ƞ੝ȡĮȞȓȦȞ. 114 Cod. ț. 115 Cod. ț. 116 Cod. İ੅ȞĮ. 117 Cod. İੁʌİȚȢ. 118 Cod. ț. 119 Cod. ıȣ. 120 Cod. ਥțȤĮ઀ĮȞIJȠȢ. 121 Cod. ıȠȚ. 122 Cod. ਥȡȦIJȩ ıİ. 123 Cod. ਧıIJĮȚ. 124 Cod. ਵ. 125 Cod. țĮ੿ 126 Cod. țĮ੿. 127 Cod. țĮ੿. 128 Cod. ʌ઀ĮȢ. 129 Cod. ਙȡȤȠȢ. 130 Cod. ʌ઀Į. 131 Cod. ਵ. 132 Cod. țĮ੿. 133 Cod. İ੅ıİ. 134 Cod. ȝİ. 135 Cod. İੁʌİ૙Ȣ. 136 Cod. ਥțȕİ૙ȞĮȚ. 137 Cod. ਫ਼ʌȠIJȐııİȚ. 93

Chapter 3

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v 138

Cod. ʌȠȚોȢ. Cod. ʌৼȢ. 140 Cod. ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ. 141 Cod. țȠȡȚijĮȓȠȣ. 142 Cod. ਕʌȠıIJંȜȦȞ. 143 Cod. ʌȑIJȡȠȣ. 144 Cod. ı઀ȝȦȞȚ. 145 Cod. ț. 146 Cod. ਕʌȩıIJȠȜȠȢ. 147 Cod. ʌ੺IJȝ૳. 148 Cod. Ȟ઄ı૳. 149 Cod. ોȡઆIJȘıȐ. 150 Cod. ıİ. 151 Cod. țĮșȑįȡĮ. 152 Cod. ਷țİȚıȒȢ. 153 Cod. țȢ. 154 Cod. ਥȖțઃȢ. 155 Cod. ਴ȟȘ. 156 Cod. ț. 157 Cod. ȤȡȠȞ઀ıİȚ. 158 Cod. Ȁ. 159 Cod. ț. 160 Cod. țȠȜȐıȚ. 161 Cod. ȖȑİȞĮȞ. 162 Cod. ıțȫIJȠȢ. 163 Cod. ț. 164 Cod. ȈȕȑȞȘIJİ. 165 Cod. ț. 166 Cod. ȆȡȢ. 167 Cod. Ȁ. 168 Cod. ਲȠ૨. 169 Cod. ț. 170 Cod. ʌৼȢ. 171 Cod. ǺȠȡțȠȜĮțțȠȞ. 172 Cod. ȤĮȜȐıȚȢ. 173 Cod. ਕȜȘșȑȢ. 174 Cod. ਕ ȝ੽ İੇȞĮȚ. 175 Cod. ț. 176 Cod. ਕʌȚıIJİȓĮȞ. 177 Cod. țȠȜȪȕȦȞ. 178 Cod. ț. 179 Cod. İȕȖȐȞȠȣȞ. 180 Cod. ț. 181 Cod. ț. 182 Cod. ț. 183 Cod. ੖ȜȜĮȢ. 139

267

268 184

Chapter 3

Cod. ț. Cod. ȤȪȞȘȢ ਕ. 186 This marks the beginning of a new prayer for deceased who have become vampires. Unfortunately, the actual prayers that are referred to as following (੖ʌȚıșİȞ) are missing since the manuscript is defective. Where there is the missing parts, I am including the text found in another manuscript at the monastery of the Great Lavra of ȂȠunt Athos number 882 (Ĭ 20) which presumably should contain the same missing context of the prayer used namely as instructions to the priest of how to conduct prayers in case a vampire is found. This manuscript is a small one formed of paper sized 15x10 cm and made of 218 folios. This prayer is found on foglios 3 to 104. This manuscript is not listed in the catalogue compiled by S.P. LAMBROS (1895) but it is listed in the Catalogue of the greek manuscripts in the library of the Lavra on Mount Athos compiled by S.S EUSTRATIADES, Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts in the Library of the Laura on Mount Athos, 123, Nr. 813. See also S.Y. RUDBERG, Les manuscrits à contenu profane du Mont-Athos, Eranos 54 (1956) 181. The added text is marked with the signs < >. 187 After the word İȣȡİșૌ, it is evident that the word ਕț੼ȡĮȚȠȢ (incorrupt) has been added. 188 Cod Ĭ 20 (from here onwards we will use this code for Lavra Ĭ 20.) This word was missing in the original but it was inserted later on. 189 Cod. ȖȓȞȦıțİ į੼. 190 Cod. ੖ʌȠ૨. 191 This was added by L. ALLATIUS, De Graecorum hodie quorundam opinationibus. 192 Cod. ȥ੺ȜȜȠȣıȚȞ. 193 Cod. ʌĮȞĮȖ઀Į. See GOAR(1793) on page 865 with notes on page 867. The expression ‫ވ‬ȥȦıȠȞ ʌĮȞĮȖަĮȞ consists of a brief office or akoluthia celebrated only in male monasteries by which the priest blesses the bread in front of an icon and «offers» it to the Virgin Mary. «ʌĮȞĮȖȓĮȞ» is the triangle pieces of bread from the prosforon for the Our Lady. 194 Cod. (ਫ਼)ijȠȡ઼IJĮȚ 195 See. GOAR, 35. 196 This prayer is the same one used for baptism according to the GOAR, 336. The latter puts it as the second exorcistic prayer. 197 Cod. ਫ਼ʌ੺ȡȤİȚȢ. 198 ‫ݾ‬ȡțަȗȦ ıİ - ܻıijĮȜİ߿Ȣ = supra, f. 24v sq in second edition of Lavra Ĭ 20. 199 IJާȞ ܻȞĮȕĮȜިȝİȞȠȞ - țĮ‫ ޥ‬İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJȠީȢ Į‫ࠛݧ‬ȞĮȢ = Psalm103,32sq; GOAR and second edition of Lavra Ĭ 20 = IJȡ઀ȕȠȞ ਕıijĮȜો. 200 In reference to Psalm 103,32. 201 Cod. țĮʌȞ઀ȗȠȞIJĮ. 202 GOAR ommits the article IJઁ. 203 IJާȞ ʌȡȠıțĮȜȠުȝİȞȠȞ IJ߱Ȣ Ȗ߱Ȣ = In reference to Amos 5,8; 9,6. 204 GOAR, 336. 205 ȅȡțަȗȦ țĮ‫ ޥ‬İ‫ݧ‬Ȣ IJȠީȢ Į‫ࠛݧ‬ȞĮȢ = in supra, f. 25 sq. 206 ȀުȡȚİ ȈĮȕĮެș IJࠛȞ Į‫ެݧ‬ȞȦȞ = supra, f.28vsq (and following) = GOAR, 337. 185

Edition and Critical Apparatus of Folios: 133v-139v 207

269

In reference to: ਕʌȩ ıȣȞĮȞIJ੾ȝĮIJȠȢ ʌȠȞȘȡȠ૨, ਕʌઁ įĮȚȝȠȞ઀Ƞȣ ȝİıȘȝȕȡȚȞȠ૨ ਕʌઁ ijĮȞIJĮıȝ੺IJȦȞ ʌȠȞȘȡ૵Ȟ; See L f.135, 6. GOAR, 337. 208 Following the word ਥʌȠȣȡ੺ȞȚȠȞ, GOAR puts everything into the plural. 209 L uses IJ੽Ȟ ȥȣȤ੽Ȟ while GOAR puts IJૌ ȢȦૌ. 210 ૅǼȟ‫ޢ‬ȜĮıȠȞ IJȠࠎ įȚĮȕިȜȣ = f.35v=GOAR, 337. 211 ਯIJȚ etc., GOAR, 527 212 ਯIJȚ įİંȝİșĮ: GOAR, .525. 213 This is added in L. 214 ȅ ĬİઁȢ etc. GOAR, 525.

PART III

CHAPTER 1 ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY ON SOME SINGLE LITURGICAL UNITS OF THE EXORCISTIC PRAYER (FOLIOS [ĭĭ] 133V-139V)

This chapter attempts to analyse the XirȠpotamou exorcistic text piece by piece looking at some fundamental ideas which emerge and possible inspiration behind the author’s writing. One of the conclusions that clearly emerges from study of these units is that to the Greek mind of the period, the moral construction of reality that distinguishes evil from good is based upon two ostensibly opposite discourses which contribute to one unified worldview: on the on hand, the exotițá (malicious entities living at the margins of society) as they are experienced by laypeople, and, on the other, demons and the devil, representing the official Orthodox church dogma concerning evil. ij.133v ¨ȚȐIJĮȟȚȢ IJ૵Ȟ įĮȚμȠȞȚȗȠμȑȞȦȞ. ȉò ʌ૵Ȣ ਥȡȦIJઽȢ, ੆ȞĮ İ੅ʌૉ ıȠȚ ੒ įĮȓμȦȞ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ Į੝IJȠ૨. ਫȞIJĮȪșĮ, ȗȒIJȘıȠȞ[IJઁ ੕ȞȠμĮ]A IJȠ૨ ʌȠȞȘȡȠ૨ ʌȞİȪμĮIJȠȢ. A [IJò oȞȠμĮ:] Find out the name of the evil spirit. The word of God (੒ ȜȩȖȠȢ, ႁၢၤ) created the cosmos, and we see that God’s word is praised in Old and New Testament Scripture1 as having creative power: «God said, ‘Let there be light’ and there was light… And God said, ‘Let the earth sprout vegetation…’ and it was so» (Gn 1:3, 11). God’s word made the light shine out of darkness of the original void, and the word called life into being. This word accomplished what it said. The Creator brings forth what was nothing into existence by the sheer power of his speaking action. In the Gospel of John not only is the word of God present and active at the beginning of time as God’s creative instrument, but the word is a divine person, the Son of God. This Son is eternally «in the bosom of the Father» (Jn 1:18), but whom God finally communicates out into the world at the incarnation: «The Word became flesh and made his

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

273

dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory as of the only Son who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, ‘This was he of whom I said, “He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me”’» (Jn 1:14-15). Thus this word is more than language; it is a person full of power and truth, and a word that communicates God’s grace through action. The words used in liturgical exorcisms are likewise more than mere speech acts; they also aim to accomplish what they say2. Their power stems from God, who is always at work, pouring graces into his creation. Jesus testifies that God’s creative work is unfinished: «My Father is working until now, and I am working» (Jn 5:17) í God is at work perfecting creation, recreating it, and bringing new life from the dead. We may ask: is God working alone? Jesus, the creative word of God, promised: «Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; greater works than these he shall do» (Jn 14:12). Just as God used his beloved word to create all things, he wants to use believers as instruments of blessing in the world – but how? Jesus tells them: «Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son» (Jn 14:13). One aspect of God’s work is thus people asking things in Jesus’ name for the glory of God, the biblical model for this are the «greater works» or power encounters that one finds throughout the New Testament, that is, the supernatural events such as exorcism and healing. God’s creative power is seen clearly in liturgical exorcisms, where Jesus’ name is invoked for blessing and liberation. Thus it is no surprise that Alexander Schmeman remarks that an exorcism is a poem in the deepest sense of the word; as «poem» in Greek means creation or making, in essence exorcism is imbued with God’s creative power. By God’s power exorcism brings forth a new creation, new life and spiritual health where before there was death and spiritual oppression3. We have also seen that in many significant instances the Gospels depict Jesus commanding his followers to do the «greater works» in his name, which includes performing exorcisms (Mt 10:1-8; Mk 3:15; 6:7-13; 16:17; Lk 9:1-6; 10:17-20). Luke portrays the exuberance of the apostles who participate in this exorcistic work: «The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, ‘Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!’» (Lk 10:17). Why is exorcistic power a cause for joy? Because it is proof that God has deemed man worthy to participate in his mighty and wonderful works4. Just as the work of the Word of God was to create all things, and bring light into the darkness, so his followers must perfect creation until the end of time (cf. Acts 26:18; Mt 28:18-20). St. Paul says boldly «we are God’s co-workers» and «ambassadors for Christ» through whom the Creator himself is

274

Chapter 1

speaking (1 Cor 3:9; 2 Cor 5:20) í this is true in all aspects of ministry, but especially exorcism. Why is exorcism a special aspect of God’s work? Because in exorcism God is speaking and working through the exorcist, often beyond words. One example is in Acts 19, we see that God was conferring to Paul, during his two years at Ephesus, extraordinary exorcistic power, so much so «that even handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were carried away to the sick, and their diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them» (19:12). This power is clearly from God, the power is flowing through Paul’s body and into everything he touches, not because Paul himself possesses any special «power or piety» (Acts 3:12), but because he has surrendered himself totally to the purposes of God. Paul, like all the apostles, firmly believes in the power of Jesus’ name to heal and exorcise people5. Paul is not the source, but simply the channel through which the divine blessings flow6. Here is just one small example in the work of Paul of a clear continuation of Jesus’ healing and exorcism ministry7. In all instances the New Testament speaks of these extraordinary events as normal, everyday aspects in the growth of the faith in Christian communities8. God’s purpose as seen in Jesus’ ministry was to bring blessing and health, and so through those who surrender to his purposes, it should not be surprising to us that God is capable of doing «miracles». However the miracles and exorcisms of the New Testament are not ends in themselves, but they are pointers meant to encourage faith, thus Jesus says, «Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe» (Jn 4:48). Faith is the goal; as John famously writes: «For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life» (Jn 3:16). Faith that Jesus is truly the Messiah risen from the dead opens to believers the source of everlasting life, but miracles, exorcisms, and healings cannot give eternal life9. Jesus warns his disciples that these «signs» can be dangerous if they become a distraction from what is important: «Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness» (Mt 7:21-23).

The danger here is if these miracles distract a person from what is really important in the final judgment: whether a person chose to obey God’s will or not, were they faithful to the knowledge God gave them or not, did they avoid «works of lawlessness» or not. A faith relationship with Jesus Christ leads to eternal life, and the Biblical data characterizes this relationship by

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

275

obedience and discipleship, but not necessarily on the performance of miracles and exorcisms. On the other hand, exorcism can be a striking indicator that God’s power is active in the world. But it is more than that. As we have seen exorcism announces that the kingdom of God has come10. Entering the kingdom is more than a change of authority, it is a change from this world to the next, it is becoming a «New Creation» (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Why is this important? Because only the person who is a new creation is capable of bearing fruit for God in harmony with his Spirit of love, peace, joy, patience, etc without resorting to human means to force his will on others. (Rom 7:4; Jn 15:16; Gal 5:13-14, 22). And therefore because exorcism is an act of love and service of someone who is suffering, it is a sign that the new creation has come. The purpose of all this is greater trust in God’s goodness and his promises in Scripture. The exorcism truly manifests the mystery which it announces; it actualizes that which it states by God filling human words with the divine energy which they invoke11. Exorcism does all this because it is proposed in the name of Christ who is God and has «broken» into the enemy territory not by force but by assuming a humble human life. In Jesus God made human words his own, because Christ-God has already destroyed the demonic power from within, he is fully and serenely free of all evil, and thus opened in himself the way for man’s full restoration12. Jesus, God’s living Word says «Behold, I make all things new» (Rv 21:5). Since the time that God’s Word has been given to humanity, exorcism is a creative manifestation of divine power for the restoration of humanity wounded by sin. By surrendering to God’s purposes exorcism restores man’s original dignity as the king of the earth, entrusted with the care of creation to direct it toward the praise of God’s name and the joy of all people. Liturgical exorcism can be seen as «divine speech» pronounced or mediated through the person of the priest. This divine speech comes forth in exemplary performative utterances or «strong illocutionary acts»13. A good example of this is in the rite of Baptism. The belief that exorcism announces a new creation is attested by the naming of a child at Baptism, marking the beginning of a new spiritual life in Christ and the liberation from the fallen human nature – what the Byzantine fathers called «illumination»14. Clearly the exorcisms that precede Baptism comprise an important part of the ceremony itself but the climax of the ceremony is when the child is simultaneously given a name. However, in the Greek Orthodox Church the name is revealed only on the day of Baptism. It is significant that this occurs after the conclusion of numerous exorcistic utterances and practices15. They precede the candidate renouncing the devil, pledging allegiance to Christ, Baptism and Chrismation. When the Christian name is

276

Chapter 1

pronounced, it is «in the name» of the Trinity. As the ceremony proceeds, the name of the baptized person is seen as being held in suspension between the authority of demons and the authority of God. The possibility of bestowing this name, so important for the child’s social and spiritual identity, arises precisely when Divinity has triumphed through faith and thus the demons who had claimed authority over humanity are expelled. The ceremony must be performed completely for proper Baptism dissociates the individual from the demonic and confers power to the baptized over demonic forces through union with Christ crucified and raised16. The significance of this in popular culture can be seen in Greece where it is traditionally believed that if the priest omits any words the demons may not be completely banished and, they might haunt the child throughout his life17. Exorcism texts consistently speak of a kind of struggle of names: the name of the Trinitarian God vis-à-vis the names of the devil and his assistants. This is the reason for example why during exorcism the devil is addressed, but always in imperative forms: «I banish you»; «I adjure you»; «Depart»; «Come out»; «Take fear» (ijİ૨Ȗİ ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ; ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ; ੘ȡț઀ȗȦıİ; İੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ ıȠȣ; ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ’Į੝IJȠ૨; ਥȞ મ ʌ઼Ȟ; Eੁʌ੻ İ੃; Ǽੁʌ੻ ਘ ਥȡઆIJȘıȐ…etc.). On the other hand many of the texts begin with the passage: «In the name of the Holy Trinity, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, in the beginning was the Word» thus establishing the original sacred ground on which the exorcistic struggle will take place while at the same time laying claim to the sacred performative power of language18. This invocation is not a summoning or creation of sacred ground but an acknowledgement of the bedrock of spiritual reality that is already there: the unconquerable work of God. The God who truly created and penetrated the cosmos by the eternal Word has already made peace through that Word, forgiven sins, conquered all evil by his cross, and «He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son» (Col 1:13, cf. vv. 14-19). Exorcism is simply a call of demons to a reality to which they are bound as creatures living in a universe created by God, a reality that they cannot escape. Every time the key phase, «I exorcise you», is pronounced, it is eventually followed by a sub-phrase, «in the name of…[one or all of the persons of the Trinity]»19. Outside the context of the rite of Baptism, one has to keep in mind that the force of exorcism, is not, in the first instance, to make the demon depart, but rather to make it speak. The scope of exorcism lies in forcing the demon to reveal its name because by revealing its names it surrenders itself to the God-given authority of the exorcist20. Thus in the Xiropotamou 98 text it reads: «I exorcise you, evil devil, enemy of truth, by the awful and holy name of All-Powerful God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, to tell

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

277

me immediately what your name is called»21. In the Middle Ages the word «oȞȠμĮ» (name) could also mean person because the name is the revelation of the person22. This is the precisely the issue in the Xiropotamou 98 document, practically the whole text is taken up with the effort to elicit the name of the demon23. At the beginning of the text, the priest is instructed to follow a certain path: «Find out the name of the devil spirit. Seek to make him tell you how many are with him, and to which class he belongs, and what is the name of his leader»24. By faith in the prevailing name of Jesus the exorcist brings the demons face to face with themselves, their name and that of their «cohort» is the reality of their creaturely nature. Later he is told: «Whenever you ask, say in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit»25. The exorcist has authority, acting in the name of the Trinity, to reveal to the demons the reality that they are not gods but mere creatures created by God, and over this reality they have no power. At numerous points the stubborn devil is called mute or deaf and in one place he is described as «deaf, insensate, holding the tongue, and grinding the teeth»26 indicative of his blindness to divine Goodness and perhaps of the demon’s reluctance to reveal his name. But these characteristics of the demons may in fact be the attributes of the possessed person. To know the demon’s name means ipso facto to control it, because forcing the demon to name himself subjects him to the exorcist’s mastery. The eschatological importance of the procedure perhaps explains the Byzantines’ abiding interest in the names and especially the categories of demons27. Sometimes, in texts that seemingly exceed the bounds of Orthodox tolerance, the demons are given many names, all of which the priest must recite. The exorcisms found in the athonite manuscript of Philotheou 186, include various demonic names, secret names, which were whispered into the ear of the victim, among which we find: Abiron, Abrian, Abriane and Konsegramine28. At another point the specific names, «Vileth, Missanou, Arka and Avouzamba» are spoken aloud and then paired with the names of the four archangels Michael, Gabriel, Samael and Raphael who neutralize them29. The names and attributes of the demons are important, especially insofar as they can be matched, opposed, and controlled by the more powerful Christian names. Holy names undoubtedly dominate the demons in the language of the ritual texts. The priests with whom I spoke at the various monasteries of the Athos and the participants themselves all expressed definite agreement on this point. Contradictions (for example continued signs of possession even after a first exorcism) may cause the priest to refer the victim to a doctor or else to perform another exorcism at a later date augmenting the prayers, vigil and fasting.

278

Chapter 1

The exorcisms published by Louis Delatte are the most specific regarding names for the demons, but they also express the greatest elaboration of names of Divinity: «I exorcise you by the holy names of almighty God which are: Messiah, Saviour, Emanuel, Sabaoth, Adonai, only begotten, way, truth, life, consubstantial, beginning, first-born, wisdom, spring, root, Paraclete, mediator, lamb, sheep, alpha and omega, beginning and end, serpent, ram, lion, worm, word, sun, bread, flower, vine, mountain, door, earth, stone, far-corner, bridegroom, shepherd, prophet, priest, immortal, sturdy, all-seeing, merciful, eagle, tetragrammaton, Lord Jesus Christ, by these holy names I exorcise you»30. According to another opinion, Marcel Detienne, the Belgian historian and specialist in the study of ancient Greece, the plurality of demons stands nameless and thus in direct contrast to the named, sanctified individuality of people31. In Orthodoxy the tendency of names is toward inclusion: all beings incline toward one name, the name of God. This trajectory is evident, for example, in the Trinity where, according to Orthodox theology, three persons ʌȡȩıȦʌĮ share only one essence ȠnıȓĮ – and one name ĘȞȠμĮ32. This tendency toward onomastic singularity (which parallels the spiritual quest of humanity to merge with God) also appears in the practice of naming a vast populace after a limited number of saints. Demons, on the other hand, tend toward entropy, chaos, and become indistinguishable. The conviction evident in many exorcistic texts is that to succeed in naming them at all is to exercise control over them. The liturgical exorcism preserved in the athonite manuscripts of Lavra Ĭ 20 (ǹthos 882) and Philotheou 186 (Athos 1850) which probably used to be recited by priests or monks in the past, explicitly addresses itself to a body of local belief concerning the exotikà33, which the Church normally considers as substandard superstition. One may altogether deny that such prayers belong within the Christian corpus, indeed, many texts examined here are not included in any established prayer-book, but it would be difficult in any case to distinguish the precise identity of a possessing demon from one of the exotikà. The exotikà may often have been the attacking force that prompted exorcism. The Orthodox Church has admitted certain demons a place within its cosmology. That these «orthodox demons» would be confused in exorcisms with exotikà who were not officially recognized by the Church, perhaps posed less of a problem to the Church than one might think. After all, the purpose of exorcism is to get rid of a nagging evil as quickly and as expediently as possible. The expulsion of evil and liberation from it (the pragmatic value of exorcism) is more important that the specifics of where the evil is coming from. Nevertheless we see that exorcism, and Baptism as well, are points of mingling contact between standard Orthodoxy and – from the Church’s

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

279

point of view – substandard folk belief. ij.133v ǽȒIJȘıȠȞ ੆ȞĮ ıȠȚ İ੅ʌૉ ʌȩıȠȣȢ ਩ȤİȚ μİș’ਦĮȣIJȠ૨, ț(Į੿) ਥț ʌȠíĮȢ IJȐȟİઆȢ ਥıIJȓȞ ț(Į੿) ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚIJઁ ੕ȞȠμĮ IJȠ૨ ਙȡȤȠȞIJȠȢB Į੝IJȠ૨, ਥȞʌȠȓ઺ įȣȞȐμİȚ ț(Į੿) ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ ਥıIJȓ, ਥȞʌȠí૳ [IJȩʌ૳]ī İੇȞĮȚ ૲ țİȚμȑȞȠȢ. B [ਙȡȤȠȞIJȠȢ]: The leader One of the elements of the standard tradition that, to a large extent, derived from the angelic origin of the demons was the loose hierarchy in which they were believed to be organised. Basically this hierarchy followed that of the ranks of the fallen angels with the devil as their head. Biblical language played an important part both in the titles used for him and for this division of the demons. Thus in Psalm 82:7 for example, we find a reminder of the fall of one of the princes (İੈȢ IJ૵Ȟ ਕȡȤંȞIJȦȞ, LXX). Ezekiel 28 is a prophecy concerning the fall of the king (ਙȡȤȦȞ, vv. 2, 12) of Tyre compared by Ezekiel with the fall of another mysterious Edenic creature from Hebrew tradition. This angelic being from ancient history fell to earth at the beginning of time, «You were in Eden…you were an anointed guardian cherub... I cast you to the ground» (v. 13-14, 17, cf. part 1 ch 1, 1.3). Whatever the case may be, the fall of this Edenic creature seems to be taken for granted as strikingly similar to the oral tradition concerning the ancient serpent of Eden, the Satan who «roves» the earth in Job, both of whom Revelation identifies with Satan34. In the synoptic narratives Jesus is accused of performing exorcisms by the power of the aȡȤȦȞ IJȦȞ įĮȚμȠȞíȦȞ «the ruler of demons» (Mt 12:24) whom Jesus equates with Satan and the power/kingdom of Satan that must not be divided against itself but is united under his lordship (Mt 12:26). In John’s Gospel Jesus makes number of references to the devil as the aȡȤȦȞ IJȠñ țóıμȠȣ IJȠnIJȠ «ruler of this world»35. Ȃost significant however, are perhaps the passages in Ephesians 2:2 and 6:12. Here the «prince of the authority of the air» ਙȡȤȠȞIJĮ IJોȢ ਥȟȠȣıȓĮȢ IJȠ૨ ਕȑȡȠȢ is openly spoken of as the spirit of evil, «the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience» (2:2). The author says that this spirit of evil rules ipso facto over all human beings the «rest of mankind» who are all dead through the power of sin, including the author and his audience before they were freed by faith in Christ (2:3–8). In Ephesians 6:12 the spiritual enemies of man’s salvation are perhaps described more vividly than anywhere else in the New Testament: «For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers (ਕȡȤȐȢ), against the authorities (ਥȟȠȣıȓĮȢ), against the cosmic powers (țȠıμȠțȡȐIJȠȡĮȢ) over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of

280

Chapter 1

evil in the heavenly places». This demonic hierarchy in Ephesians is a conglomeration of the power wielded by ò įȚȐȕȠȜȠȢ «the devil» (v. 11) who is «the evil one» (v. 16) and whose satanic power is set against God and his saints (v. 18). In the later tradition many authors, when expressing their ideas of the demonic hierarchy, were simply content to repeat these formulaic titles individually or in various combinations36. Gregory of Nazianzus for example, speaks of a mixture of principalities and powers, invisible tyrants and persecutors, world rulers of the darkness of this age and in the heavens37. The most usual title for the devil was, then aȡȤȠȞIJĮ, but this was sometimes replaced by similar ones such as IJĮȟíĮȡȤȠȢ, İȟĮȡýȢ, ĮȡȤȘȖóȢ, ʌȡóIJȠȢ, or áȡțȠȢ38. The title țȠıμȠțȡáIJȠȡĮȢ «world ruler» and others which implied that the devil ruled the world were the subject of particular attention. St John of Damascus thus explained the idea of the țȠıμȠțȡáIJȦȡ by saying that the devil was the commander (ʌȡȦIJȠıIJáIJȘȢ) of the rank of angelic powers surrounding the earth (IJȚȢ ʌİȡȚȖİíȠȣ IJáȟİȦȢ), the guardianship of which God had committed to him39. This idea was echoed by such writers as Saint Basil and George Scholares (Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople from 1454 to 1464) who mentions not only that the air is the place of the devil’s rule but also that he is called «world-ruler» since his rule is perigeial, «worldsurrounding»40. However Gregory Palamas states similarly that the devil does not really rule heaven, earth, and the creatures of God in between, but he rules only where humans abuse and misuse things in the world, and that it is from this that he derives his title41. He does not directly dictate sin and force people out of the Church, but slowly eats away of their love of God by deviously infiltrating their thoughts with the idea of selfsufficiency, the thinking that they can remain virtuous on their own without attending church and without obeying the teachers of the Church. So, in general, when the devil manages to get someone away from the worshipping life of the Church, he distances them from the grace of God in the Eucharist and delivers them to the slavery of lust. George Scholares refers to a disagreement over whether the devil was the leader of the angels about the earth or of all the angels, but the tradition was generally united in seeing the demons who fell with him as comprising or being drawn from one rank, IJáȖμĮ42. By comparison with alternative traditions there was very little attempt made here to divide this group up, although some use was made of the notion of the seven wicked spirits or demons mentioned in the New Testament and of the μİıȘμȕȡȚȞȩȞ įĮȚμȩȞȚȠȞ of Psalm 91:6 and occasionally the demons were individualised or categorised in terms of their actions43. Other developments were brought about by the addition of obvious details such as describing the demons as

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

281

the devil’s servants or workers, or by use of the common military metaphor where titles may be given to the leader of leaders44. Jewish apocalyptic traditions propose the first indications of a demonic hierarchy that will be crystallized in the New Testament with Satan emerging so clearly as the head while all the other demons remain nameless, almost disappearing behind the shadow of the aȡȤȦȞ IJȦȞ įĮȚμȠȞíȦȞ. The only exception to this is found in Revelation, were we see the name of several significant demons alongside Satan such as Wormwood (8:11), and «the angel of the bottomless pit», Apollyon or Abaddon, also mentioned in Hebrew tradition45 (Rv 9:11); his name means «destroyer» because he is «king over» the scorpionlike demons who afflict mankind in all the earth. Despite these would be rivals, Revelation also gives us the clearest indication of Satan’s selfproclaimed lordship over the demonic world46. ǹ

[IJȩʌ૳]: The place.

If the demon cannot be named precisely, at least his sphere of activity can be determined and circumscribed. The exorcist first and foremost attempts to identify the times and places of demonic assault as well as all sorts of illness provoked. These various details furnish an elaborate picture of the demons. In most respects this picture is consistent with the Orthodox conception of the devil. According to the theology of the Orthodox Church, the dwelling place of the devil is Hell (ȀȩȜĮıȚȢ, DZįȘȢ, ȉȐȡIJĮȡȠȢ, īȑİȞĮ, ȀĮIJĮȤșȩȞȚȠȞ), although through his attendant demons or his own metamorphoses the devil could reach most anywhere. Local Greek traditions elaborate still further the association of exotikà with all parts of the physical world. The question of place of demons in the environment was therefore one more ground for conflating the identities of doctrinal and local conceptions. The following catalogue of places from the exorcism attributed to St. Basil is fairly comprehensive: «Depart from wherever you may appear, Beelzebub, whether from the sea, a river, from beneath the earth, from a well, a ravine, a hollow, a lake, a thicket of reeds, from matter, land, refuse, whether from a grove, a tree, a thicket, from a fowl, or thunder, whether from the precincts of a bath, a pool of water or from a pagan sepulchre or from any place where you may lurk; whether by knowledge or ignorance or any place not mentioned»47.

Another list from the exorcisms or prayers of deliverance for general use by Saint John Chrysostom makes some additions: «either of the dry land or of the water, or one in a forest, or among the reeds, or in trenches, or in a

282

Chapter 1

road or a crossroad, in lakes, or streams, houses, or one sprinkling in the baths and chambers»48. We note that there is an emphasis on water and water sources which is very striking and which recalls the particular association of the nereids with such places49.Anselm Strittmatter presents another passage from a different exorcism where the demons occupy the four classical divisions of the world: air, water, earth and underworld: «Those flying in heaven, those flying in air, those wandering in either, those upon the earth and those beneath the abyss»50. By late antiquity, there was a division between the upper air, aither [ĮíșȒȡ], inhabited by gods and lower air, air, realm of demons. This division of space crosses the division of the world into four elements – earth, water, air and fire í all of which could contain demons. The belief that spirits dwell in houses, or sometimes in the foundations of these houses before they are built, is also directly confirmed in passages quoted by the same Strittmatter such as the following: «Those in the foundations of a house, or in their entrance or exit or in storage room, or in the middle courtyard, or in a room, or in lairs, or in the ground, or in foundation, or in a room, or in dung, or in a bath house, or in a work place or in deserted places or in graves»51. ij.133r. ਥȞ IJ઀ȞȚ ਫ਼ʌȠIJȐııİIJĮȚ, C[ʌȩIJİ] ਥȟȑȡȤİIJ‹ĮȚ›, IJ઀ ıȘμİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙ ੒ʌóIJĮȞ ਥȟȑȡȤİIJ‹ĮȚ› ਥț IJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡઆʌȠȣ. ī [ʌȩIJİ]: When. One of the principles of exorcistic completeness requires that all possible times of demonic assault should be mentioned. Thus the exorcism of Saint John Chrysostom adjures that: «Every…night time spirit as well as daytime, midday and evening, imaginary spirit and molesting spirit… forthwith depart from the creature of the Creator Christ»52. Another exorcism published by Anselm Strittmatter specifies the time by reference to specific activities: «Do not have contact with them whether through eating or through drinking, neither seated nor while standing up, nor in entering or departing; neither while putting clothes on or in taking them off»53. Many exorcisms share in the general Greek conception that demons attack particularly at midday and midnight54. The origin of this belief is most likely from the Greek version of Psalm 91 that speaks of God’s protection against night attacks «from the thing travelling in darkness» and also from the «demon of midday» (įĮȚμȠȞíȠȣ μİıȘμȕȡȚȞȠñ, Ps 91:6, 90:6 LXX). In many texts only these two times, midnight and midday, are mentioned. The distinction between demons that are physically encountered (ıȣȞĮȞIJȚțȩȞ) and those that are imagined (ijĮȞIJĮıIJȚțȩȞ) may well be bound up with

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

283

specific times of attack. As was pointed earlier, demons appearing at midday or midnight are often apparitions (ijĮȞIJȐıμĮIJĮ), but they are not rigorously distinguished from demons encountered while one is awake. In the final Baptismal exorcism the angel of the light (guardian angel) is enjoined to protect the catechumen from «every snare of adversary, from encounter with evil, from the demon of midday and from evil apparitions»55. The exorcism of Basil refers to demons that appear «in daydreams and in heavy sleep»56. This last phrase probably refers to nightmares, evoking a direct link with conceptions regarding a certain exotikà, the vrakhnas which were believed to be demons that jump on people’s chest while they are sleeping or a small child who sits on sleepers’ chests and causes nightmares. This function clearly conveys the idea of heavy sleep. The exorcism texts also mention demons that appear either with the new or old moon57, and even specify spirits that vary according to the phase of the moon58. Richard Green goes further than this and mentions a list of demons for every week, day and month and for each hour59. These exorcisms declare that any phase of the moon may be dangerous. That the appearance of demons was associated particularly with the full moon may correlate with the occurrence of epilepsy at or around this time. An orthodox priest from the Athos had the following to say about the spiritual properties of epilepsy: «Speaking as a priest I can say that the church does not accept the idea of any good power in the epileptic. In ancient times, when God had not revealed himself, the people were pursing belief and would believe in anything. One thing they believed was that the light-shadowed are related to the epileptic. One can see that when the epileptic is in trance he is very powerful because he is possessed by a genius which supports him in exercising power. When he is not in a trance there is no genius possessing him; at such times he is without any special powers»60.

ij.133r īíȞȦıțİ, ੒ ʌȩIJĮȞ ਥȡȦIJઽȢ, ȜȑȖİ ਥȞ ੑȞંμĮIJȚ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡȩȢ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪμĮIJȠȢ, İੁį੻ț(Į੿) į੼ȞıȠȚ ਕʌȠțȡȓȞİIJĮȚ, Ȝ੺ȕİIJઁ ਙʌȣȡȠȞ61 ਖʌIJં μİȞȠȞ ਥȞ ʌȣȡ੿ țĮ੿ țĮ૨ıȠȞ [IJ੽Ȟ ȖȜ૵ııĮȞ Į੝IJȠ૨, ț(Į੿) ੕ȥİȚ]¨ If it does [not] respond, take a piece of coal that is alight with fire and burn his tongue and face This practice of burning with a hot coal may have roots in longstanding folkloric practices to ward off the evil eye; ĘȥİȚ in Greek literally refers to the eyes or the countenance. The nature and breath of Orthodox tradition makes it difficult to establish precisely where Orthodoxy ends and alternative tradition begins even though the Church tradition concerning the

284

Chapter 1

devil does observe certain doctrinal essentials. This is due to a number of factors including the historical interrelation among Hellenistic Greek, Hebrew and Christian cosmologies. Greek paganism, which largely set the tone of religious culture in Greece at the time of Christ, drew almost no distinction between daimones and theoi (Demons and Gods)62. They existed together as a class of fair spirits situated in the lower atmosphere between man and an absolute god who, in Stoic and Neo-Platonist thought, was increasingly considered as unitary and more akin to a philosophical principle than a personal deity to whom cult should be addressed. Thus in examining many original sources the reader finds himself on the boundary between the holy and the secular or between the Church practice and sorcery. This is the case with spells and amulets which greatly resemble the Orthodox rituals, a unity that reflects their mutual influence and ultimately suggests a common cultural basis. In the above passage, we come across the phrase «take a piece of coal and alight it with fire and burn his tongue and face» where ĘȥİȚ, here translated «face» can mean eyes, literally «vision, sight, countenance». One may ask: why in a text of exorcisms do we find the coal mentioned and in a way as to burn the tongue and the face/vision of the sufferer? The origin of purification with a hot coal could be biblical, we see for example in Isaiah’s famous throne-room vision of YHWH that in order to speak in God’s presence Isaiah’s tongue must be purified by contact with a hot coal in the hand of a seraphim (Is 6:6-7). The burning with a hot coal is also strikingly reminiscent of the ritual purification from the evil eye, found commonly among the fringes but still within Greek Orthodox tradition63. The evil eye predates Jesus and is considered a superstition by many in the West. It is the idea that a person who envies other people can cause harm to them simply by looking at them with envy, scorn, or hatred. «Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer» says St John (1 Jn 3:15) echoing Jesus teaching (Mt 5:21-22) í so we know that, regardless of its effects, the evil eye is a grave offense. St. Basil the Great wrote a homily on envy, explaining how envy is of the devil, and that it is harmful to those who are consumed by it, as well as to those they envy: «As rust wears away iron, so envy corrodes the soul it inhabits. More than this, it consumes the soul that gives it birth, like the vipers which are said to be born by eating their way through the womb that conceived them»64. St Basil goes on to explain how envious people secretly enjoy seeing those that they envy fall into misfortune, «In a word, he is an enemy of present good fortune but a friend when it is no longer possessed»65. The Greeks who themselves have become Westernized in many other aspects of life still hold firm to the belief in the evil eye. The evil eye is believed to be able to penetrate the window to the soul, physically

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

285

exposing a person’s inner being. It is believed that through this window evil spirits/demons enter the body, empowering the jealous or envious person to cause harm upon others66. In Greece a distinction is made between μȐIJȚĮıμĮ and ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮ. Matiazma comes from the word mati (μȐIJȚ), which means eye; it is an inadvertent gesture of scorn that is unknowingly caused by most people at one time or another. Vascania (ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮ) on the other hand which literally means to «kill with the eye», is considered extremely harmful and can, in extreme cases, even cause death. It is believed that a person who puts a vaskania on another person does so knowingly67. Many methods and devices are used to ward off the evil eye. Precautions include, avoiding the direct stare of another person, the concealing of women and children, food, and prized possessions. Personal protection includes the wearing of protective amulets such as jewellery of blue «eyes», phalluses and gestures; blue or red cloth, sacks filled with rue and garlic, coal and others. The Greek Orthodox Church recognizes the evil eye in so far as the Church acknowledges that demonic forces may be at work to heighten the ability of some people to cause other people malicious harm. It believes that there are people who through jealously and/or envy can bring harm upon other people just by looking at them. Thus when members of the Church feel that the evil eye has been put on them the priest reads the prayers that have been included in the Eucologion for exorcising the evil eye68. This practice is known as ȟİμȐIJȚĮıμĮ!69. For the ȟİμȐIJȚĮıμĮ in the absence of a priest, the following prayers are recommended along the standard one70. The prayers to be recited are: ǼȣȤȒ 1: «ǿȘıȠȪȢ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȞȚțȐ, țȚĮȞİȓȞ ĮȚμȐIJȚ IJȠ ıțȠȡʌȐ, Ș țȣȡȐ Ș ȆĮȞĮȖȚȐ». ȅ ǿǾȈȅȊȈ ȋȇǿȈȉȅȈ ȃǿȀǹ Ǽǿ ȀǹǿǾȆǹȃǹīǿǹ ¨ǿŸȋȃǼǿ ȂǹȀȇǿǹ ȉȅ ȀǹȀȅȂǹȉǿ (ȉǾȃ ǺǹȈȀǹȃǿǹ). ǼȣȤȒ 2: «ǿȘıȠȪȢ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȞȚțȐ țȚȩȜĮIJĮ țĮțȐ ıțȠȡʌȐ» ȅ ǿǾȈȅȊȈ ȋȇǿȈȉȅȈ ȃǿȀǹ Ǽǿ Ȁǹǿ ¨ǿǹ ȈȀȅȇȆǿǽǼǿ ȂǹȀȇǿǹ ȅȁǹ ȉǹ ȀǹȀǹ! ǼȣȤȒ 3: «DZȖȚȠȚ ǹȞȐȡȖȣȡȠȚ țĮȚ șĮȣμĮIJȠȣȡȖȠȓ, įȦȡİȐȞ İȜȐȕĮIJİ įȦȡİȐȞ įȩIJİ ȘμȓȞ». ǹīǿȅǿ ǹȃǹȇīȊȇȅǿ, ǼȈǼǿȈ ȆȅȊ ȀǹȃǼȉǼ ĬǹȊȂǹȉǹ, ȆǾȇǹȉǼ ǹȆȅ ȉȅ ĬǼȅ ¨Ÿȇȅ (ȉǾ ¨ȊȃǹȂǾ ȃǹ ĬǼȇǹȆǼȊǼȉǼ), ¨ŸȈȉǼ Ȁǹǿ ȈǼ ȂǹȈ ¨Ÿȇȅ (ȉǾȃ ĬǼȇǹȆǼǿǹ). ǼȣȤȒ 4: «ǹȖȓĮ ǼȚȡȒȞȘ, ȡȒȞİȥȑ IJȠ ȆĮȞĮȖȚȐ μȠȣ ȆİȡĮıȚȐ, ʌȑȡĮıİ IJȠ». ǹīǿǹ ǼǿȇǾȃǾ, ǼǿȇǾȃǼȊȈǼ ȉȅ (ǾȈȊȋǹȈǼ ȉȅ, ĬǼȇǹȆǼȊȈǼ ȉȅ) Ȁǹǿ ȈȊ Ȇǹȃǹīǿǹ ȂȅȊ ȆǼȇǹȈǿǹ (ĮȣIJȩ İȓȞĮȚ μȐȜȠȞ țȐʌȠȚȠ ȩȞȠμĮ ȖȚĮ IJȘȞ

286

Chapter 1

ȆĮȞĮȖȓĮ, ȩʌȦȢ Ȝȑμİ ȆĮȞĮȖȓĮ Ș ȅįȘȖȒIJȡȚĮ) ȀǹȃǼ ȉȅ ȃǹ ȆǼȇǹȈǼǿ, ȃǹ ĭȊīǼǿ ȂǹȀȇǿǹ. A typical example of ritual purification from the evil eye proceeds as follows: The above prayers are said while the suffer takes a dish of water and makes across over it. He/she then drops a live coal into the water and as it falls to the bottom, as the coal is extinguished, it is believed that the «evil eye» is extinguished with it. He then signs the cross three times over the water and takes a little dust from the coal, sprinkles salt on it, and rubs the sufferer’s head with the mixed coal and salt. He then concludes by throwing three pinches of salt into the fire to banish the evil eye. Other variances of the ritual are the throwing of five coals in succession while repeating for each a narrative charm, the usage of three nails, three live coals and three splinters with holy water to be drunk, the dipping of the finger in the oil and with it make the sign of the cross on the victims forehead and so forth71. These Greek rituals vary from person to person and from town to town depending on which village the family originated from. The Greek Orthodox Church forbids its members to consult and make use of individuals who use magic rituals to get rid of the evil eye72. It does not recognize the wearing of amulets as a form of protection against the evil eye. But many members of the Greek Orthodox Church can be seen wearing these amulets (usually blue stones or small «eyes») in conjunction with their crosses believing that «prevention is better than cure»73. [IJ੽Ȟ ȖȜ૵ııĮȞ Į੝IJȠ૨, ț(Į੿) ੖ȥİȚ]: Tongue and face.

¨

The texts speaking about liturgical exorcisms exhaustively catalogue those parts of the body in which demons may manifest themselves. However this idea appears already in many non-liturgical exorcisms or magical texts where we find the so-called litany of the parts of the body. One of the most well-known texts is The Secret Book of John (The Apocryphon of John)74. In the section about the Creation of man [Construction of the Human Body] the author narrates thus: «The seven Powers began to work: Goodness made a psyche of bone Providence made a psyche of sinew Divinity made a psyche of flesh Lordship made a psyche of marrow kingdom made a psyche of blood Zeal made a psyche of skin. Understanding made a psyche of hair»

The text continues, giving demons credit for building the human body: «The host of demons took these substances from the Powers to create the limbs and the body itself. They put the parts together and coordinated them.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

287

The first ones began by making the head: Abron created his head; Meniggesstroeth created the brain; Asterechme the right eye; Thaspomocha, the left eye; Ieronumos, the right ear», etc. going through all body parts75. Interestingly enough, many of the liturgical exorcisms consulted in this research similarly catalogue those parts of the body giving an exhaustive list of the places where demons may infest themselves. As in other cases, the intention of the author was toward completeness because if any member of the body was overlooked it could remain afflicted. But such a worry seems to reveal lack of trust in God who has promised to protect his faithful who are sealed in his name. This is why baptism as an «immersion» is so important and effective, as it is a spiritual cleansing and protection of every part of the body that is thereby immersed into the pure and holy body of Christ. Specifying the parts of the body, was also a means of identifying and thus controlling the demons. By naming the anatomical parts of the body, the author had in mind the integral protection of the whole body against any infiltrations of the evil spirits. Many texts which speak of exorcisms, contain anatomical litanies76. The Xiropotamou manuscript 98 gives mention of only two of these anatomical parts, namely the tongue and the face. However, other texts and manuscripts mentioned in this work and reproduced by Strittmatter and Delatte give other examples77. Strittmatter for example reproduces the following text taken from the Car.C 143 b manuscript that he discovered in the library of Zurich. The text reads: «May the demon be expelled: From the crown, from the forehead, from the ears, from the eyelashes, eyebrows, eyes, nostrils, lips, teeth, tongue, taste, spine, arteries, pharynx, neck, joints, shoulders, chest, arms, muscles, armpits, elbows, hands, finger, nails, lungs, mammary glands, heart, stomach, liver, lung, spleen, kidneys, gall bladder, sides, tendons, belly, navel, hip, joints, buttocks, thighs, knees, ankles, shins, calves, ankles (ǹıIJȡȐȖĮȜȠȢ), balls of feet, toes, feet, from the hair of the head to the hair of the feet, from the right to left, from the backside, from the inside and from the outside, from bones, veins, marrow, joints and from the whole body»78.

The Athonite manuscript of Filoteou, asks the demons not to have the power to reside in: «…the four humours, blood, bile, phlegm, and black bile, nor in the flesh and bones, nor in marrow or nerves, veins and arteries, feet, kidneys, intestines, sides, back, shoulders, arms, nails, heart, spleen, liver belly, stomach, viscera, windpipe, anus, leg, anklebone, ankle, hip socket, buttocks, coccyx, back, genitals, pubes, navel, breastbone, thorax, elbow,

288

Chapter 1 palm, nape, pharynx, joints, shoulder blades, spine, neck, extremity, ear lobes, temple, cerebral membranes, marrow, brow, wrinkles of the womb, furrows of the brow, face, tongue, lips, cheeks, teeth, eyes, pupils, chin, ears, mouth, nostril, nasal passage, eye brows, brain, crown, forehead, top of the head, neck/thalamus, temple, sinciput, occiput, scalp line, cranium, face, callouses, forehead, cartilage, digestive tract/sphere, uvula, membrane, diaphragm, beard, jaw bones, hearing, jaw, muscles, head, hair, outside or inside in garments or other such places»79.

It is interesting to note that such lists demonstrate a considerable knowledge of anatomical terminology and must have been influenced by medical science. The Church, in any case, does not pretend to be able to treat all illnesses by exorcism. It concedes today, as it has done since the Middle Ages, that certain complaints are best treated by physical, rather than spiritual techniques. The Roman Ritual (De exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam) for exorcism prescribes that the priest verify in modern exorcisms more than ever before, that the person thought to be possessed is not actually suffering from some natural or psychological illness80. Reduced anatomical lists give a more specific sense of the areas of the body thought to be most vulnerable. Chrysostom lists only the mind, the soul, the heart, the kidneys and the senses (and, for good measure, «all members»)81. In the Orthodox Church, most attention was paid to sense organs, which were usually associated with the Spirit. The openings of the body were also an area of special interest, for these were the points through which demons could enter. During the course of an exorcism it was expected that the demon would depart through one of these natural exits82. One text likens the departure of the demon to natural human waste. «Get rid of them through the intestines of the person and send them downward through the natural action of the anus, that is without any psychic or somatic damage. Amen»83. In another passage by Mylonas and Koukas the demon is told the exorcist to descend into the toe (big toe) of the left foot and not to have the power to go into any other part of the body without his permission84.So that the exorcists would know when the demon(s) were departing, they commanded them to give a sign (ıȘμİiȠȞ) in a form of a scream, or perhaps a flash of light85.«Often they come out through the mouth, fiery like a flame like congealed cold wind (ਙȞİμȠȢ ʌİʌȘȖμ੼ȞȠȢ) and swelling the wind pipe while emerging. Often they come out of the ears, leaving from the stomach and the heart»86. These standard exorcisms are very similar to the lay exorcisms practised in Greece which the Greek call «charms» or «spells» (ȟóȡțȚĮ). However the difference is quite noteworthy. Liturgical exorcisms are always performed

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

289

by a priest and are always consistent with the Church’s doctrine while the lay exorcisms are not usually performed by the priest but rather by family members usually a mother or a grandmother. The language of the spells is very simple, sometimes in verse form. While they may contain vulgar language, frequent appeal is made to the saints, Christ, or God and phrases from known prayers or passages from the New Testament. Spells in Greece are not necessary perceived by people as belonging to a tradition distinct from Orthodoxy. The form and imagery of these spells do, however, constitute objective differences between the spells and Orthodox practice and this is because of their unorthodox language and the non-priestly performance. Although the Church censures the spells labelling those who intone them «sorcerers», for the Greek villagers who do not have any special knowledge of Church doctrine, these differences are not always perceived and many village priests, belonging to this group than any other, would sometimes read spells along with ecclesiastically accepted prayers. This confusion is perhaps due to the low level of education among the clergy in Greece to the effect that the local priest basically accepts the local traditions, superstitions and beliefs í or at least he is tolerant of them. According to the latest statistics, by 1975 only 9% of the clergy had received university training. Even if the percentage today has risen, few are those who decide to enhance their academic life87. It seems that the standard orthodox tradition failed to eradicate and counter ideas that were fundamentally in opposition to it. Such ideas, many of which stemmed ultimately from Byzantium’s pagan heritage, were rooted too firmly in popular customs that provided alternatives that were too attractive to be swept away completely by the dominant doctrines of orthodox Christianity. Rather such alternative practices could be seen flourishing in its shadow during the Palaeologan period. This relationship between the pagan pre-Christian system and Christianity represents and mediates, relationships between different categories which are typically opposed, such as magic and religion, Greek and Christian beliefs, sinfulness and chastity, piety and impiety, good and evil, literacy and illiteracy, religious and national identity, but, in the final analysis, between secular and ecclesiastical authority and control. This regulatory role was enhanced within the framework of the Greek traditional culture, within which literacy corresponds to a «high status state» by virtue of the fact that clerics and the Church constituted virtually the only purveyors of education not only during the time Greece was under Turkish rule, but also at a later time, extending that role up until the beginning of the 20th century. It is little wonder, then, that most of the clerics who reviewed folk tradition and worked on collecting and recording popular folklore were highly literate people and, in numerous cases, also teachers.

290

Chapter 1

ij.133r İ੅IJİ ȜȑȖİ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJĮȪIJȘȞ: - ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦE ıİ, ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, ਥȤșȡ੻ IJોȢ ਕȜȘșİȓĮȢ, įȚ੹F E [ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ]: I exorcise you. Although the verb ȩȡțȓȗȦ is at least as old as Xenophon the Greek historian, soldier, philosopher (c. 430 354 B.C.) with the form (ȑȟ)ȠȡțȩȦ attested earlier in his writings, it was not used early on in adjuratory (a solemn spell) formulae spoken to demons, but in the context of oaths sworn between contracting parties. The use of ȩȡțȓȗȦ especially to adjure demons is a comparatively recent development and seems to be attested no earlier than the 1st century B.C.88. Here we see in pagan magic texts the erotic and related curses on papyri and leaden tablets ȩȡțȓȗȦ is the normal term of compelling a nekydaimon (a demon which brings death) to perform a task on behalf of the practitioner89. The adjured demon acts as a kind of malign servant or ally. In the contexts of a more healing sort, on the other hand, ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦ is used rather differently. The demons (or the diseases they cause) are actually adjured to depart from an afflicted patient; the sense of the verb becomes truly «exorcistic». In Jewish and exorcistic rituals, the verb ȩȡțȓȗȦ is widely used and its use gives rise to the special category in the history of magic of a healing amulet that will have important ramifications for the development of later Christian ritual. However, we shall also find that ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦ is widely used in the adjurations of the defixiones (a type of curse found throughout the Graeco-Roman world) which points to a particularly Jewish use of the verb. Here a curious cross-over from the Jewish exorcisms of benevolent magic to the more malicious adjurations of the aggressiveísexual spells can be detected. The serial adjurations of the Jewish God and of his saving acts found in the early Judeo-Greek exorcisms reappear in the context of the curses and defixiones. Linguistically, as well, there can be little doubt that the use of ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦ to adjure demons-whether those who fetch and serve or those that are expelled í mirrors an originally Semitic ၬ၇Ⴄႎ၇ ၃ ႛ၊ ျ Ⴛ၃ ၥ, ၇ «to adjure» í a verb used in the Dead Sea Scrolls for exorcism, as well as in later Aramaic amulets90. The formula ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ91, «I adjure you», is most frequently encountered in aggressive-coercive magic operations that compel nekydaimones and kindred spirits to render personal service on behalf of the practitioner. When occurring on protective amulets, on the other hand, the formula implies an altogether different purpose: it provokes wicked and disease-causing spirits to depart from a «possessed» or afflicted person; in this context alone are they said to be truly «exorcised»92.When studying the exorcistic amulets

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

291

(for example the Great Magical Papyrus of Paris from Graeco-Roman Egypt, which each contain a number of magical spells, formulae, hymns and rituals dating from the 2nd century B.C. to the 5th century A.D.)we come across the adjurations with the exorcism formula which has as its title ȆȡȐȟȚȢ ȖİȞȞĮȓĮ ȑțȕȐȜȜȠȣıĮ įĮȓμȠȞĮȢ, that is intended to expel indwelling demons93. The first lines of a particular Greek custom involving an exorcistic amulet give a unique involving the crowning of the demoniac’s head with olive branches and then, in Coptic, an invocation of the «God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob». A widely acknowledged interpolation, «Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, the son of the Father», then follows. The Coptic section concludes by describing the driving away of «the unclean demon Satan who is in him (that is the patient)»94. The hallmark of this exorcism is its use of the verb ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦ with specific verbs of expulsion: «I adjure you (ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ)... to come out of (ȑȟİȜșȐȞ)...and stand away from (ȐʌȩıIJȘșȚ) so-and-so». These attendant imperatives, in effect, turn the adjuration itself into a true exorcism, for the imperatives represent the resultant action of the adjuration. The adjuration formula specifically aims at expelling the demon: «I adjure you out» (ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ... ȑȟİȜșİȚȞ); hence, «I exorcise you» (i.e., «I compel you under oath to come out»). In the Manuscripts of Lavra Ĭ 20 and Philoteou 186, we find a series of different conjurations which usually precede sections of the Gospels but which surely have been influenced by these earlier secular texts. In these manuscripts we find 4 different conjurations: ਥȟȠȡțȓȗȦ (mentioned 50 times), ਥȟȠȡțȓȗμંȢ (mentioned 12 times), ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ (mentioned 16 times), ੒ȡț઀ıμંȢ (mentioned 2 times) ਕijȠȡț઀ȗȦ (mentioned 4 times). These verbs are further reinforced with the adverbs: ੁıȤȣȡ૵Ȣ ਥȟ, ਥȟȠȣıȚĮ ıIJȚț૵Ȣ ਥȟ, ਥȟȠȣıȚĮ ıIJȚț૵Ȣ țĮ੿ Į੝șİȞ IJȚț૵Ȣ ਕij. In the exorcistic prayer of Xiropotamou the verb ਥȟȠȡțȓȗȦ is mentioned only one time while ਥȟȠȡțȓȗμંȢ is never mentioned. However òȡțíȗȦ is mentioned 8 times while ੒ȡț઀ıμંȢ and ਕijȠȡț઀ȗȦ are never mentioned. These verbs are further reinforced with the adverbs: ੁıȤȣȡ૵Ȣ ਥȟ, ਥȟȠȣıȚĮ ıIJȚț૵Ȣ ਥȟ, ਥȟȠȣıȚĮ ıIJȚț૵Ȣ țĮ੿ Į੝șİȞ IJȚț૵Ȣ ਕij (see 312-316). The exorcist obliges or imposes upon the demon to make an oath to a higher being who in turn obliges him to keep the oath or at least to realise what he had promised to do. In all these cases a form of the verb ਥȟ/੒ȡț઀ȗȦ is used where such a relation is indicated by the prepositions įȚ੹ (genitive) which is most frequently used, İੁȢ, ਥȞ,ਥȟ, ਥʌ઀ (dative), țĮIJ੺, ʌĮȡ੺ (gen) and also dative alone which is rare95. The construction ȑȟȠȡțȓȗȦ with the dative never appears although it is very frequent in other religious and magical manuscripts. When the words «I adjure you» are followed by țĮIJó with the

292

Chapter 1

genitive or the use of no preposition at all (double accusative), we are introduced to a powerful agent by which the spirits are controlled. This phenomenon can be seen in the Xirpotamou text where the ıİ, with no apparent noun in apposition, stands completely isolated from what follows, be it accusative plural nouns or accusative singular nouns, etc. that immediately follow96. However the ıİ, precisely because it remains anonymous, is deceptively benign. It is, in truth, the afflicting demon. No better illustration of this ambiguous use of the pronoun ıİ, in exorcistic contexts can be found than that occurring in a much-discussed spell of the Great Paris Magical Papyrus. This «Approved Spell of Pibechis for those Possessed by Demons» (ʌȡઁȢ įĮȚμȠȞȚĮȗȠμ੼ȞȠȣȢ ȆȚȕ੾ȤİȦȢ įંțȚμȠȞ) shows, like the Xiropotamou text, an unidentified use of ıİ, though the context eventually tells us it will be a demon97. In lines 3033-3034 of that spell, amidst a long, running series of òȡțȚıμȠí, one reads in particular, í ੒ȡțíıȦ ıİ IJઁȞ ੑʌIJĮȞș੼ȞIJĮ IJ૶ ੗ıȡĮ੽Ȝ [sic] ਥȞ ıIJ઄Ȝ૳ ijȦIJȚȞ૶ țĮ੿ Ȟİij੼Ȝૉ ਲμİȡȚȞૌ «I adjure you (by the) one who appeared to Israel in a shining pillar and a cloud by day». The Greek gives the same, sometimes confusing, double accusative (ıİ + IJòȞ óʌIJĮȞșsȞIJĮ); but only in lines 3037-3038 are these specifically named as the demon: ੒ȡțȚıȦ ıİ ʌ઼Ȟ ʌȞİ૨μĮ, įĮȚμંȞȚȠȞ, ȜĮȜોıĮȚ, ੒ʌȠ૙ȠȞțĮ੿ਗȞઞȢ, «I adjure you every spirit, demon to tell what kind you are». Within the same series of oaths in the exorcism, we also encounter less ambiguous adjurations with țĮIJó (+ genitive), as well as the double accusative; but in each case we see little mention of the demon. In fact, out of the fourteen adjurations contained in the whole Pibechean exorcism, only two actually name the ıİ as the possessing demon Some texts also have İíȢ + accusative (as in some examples, given below). Though ıİ is unidentified in our text, the use of a plural genitive (ıİ į੿Į IJȦȞ ĮȖ੿ȠȞĮȖȖ੻ȜȦȞ) or accusative genitive (IJȘȢ ਫ਼ʌİȡ੺ȖȞȠȣ șİȠIJંțȠȣ, IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣਲμ૵Ȟ, ǿȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨) immediately following ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ, means, as a rule, «I adjure you by the God who...» and not, «I adjure you, the God who...»98. The use of ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıİ, in some texts can also be found in the imperative plural form (ff. 135b=I adjure all you evil spirits)99.In the Xiropotamou text although we do not find directly the verb used imperatively in the plural, however we see it refers to the plurality of the object, in fact the author of the texts puts the preposition ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ (accusative plural),the imperative is given in the plural a plurality of demons (though unnamed) which suddenly become the object of an ‘exorcism’ and thus enlighten the text. The phrase ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıİ seems at times to behave as a kind of «fossilized» formula in which the pronoun becomes inextricably fused to the verb of adjuration; little care is taken to make known the identity

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

293

of the pronoun. There must have also come a time, too, when ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ alone proved sufficient enough to refer automatically to the expulsion of demons (hence «ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦ» singular or plural), without any accompanying verb of departure. Although ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıİ («I adjure you») on Greek curse and magical tablets (papyri) routinely addresses spirits of the dead, the locution in liturgical exorcisms become a plain formula of exorcism with no strings attached except to cast out the demons. Ȣ

[ਥȤșȡ੻ IJોȢ ਕȜȘșİȓĮȢ]: Enemy of Truth.

The battle with Satan is not something artificial or invented by man, but this war was declared by God himself. In the book of Genesis the serpent has just incited Adam and Eve to sin and God said to the serpent: «I will put enmity (਩ȤșȡĮȞ, LXX) between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel» (Gen 3:15). This is what the Fathers called the protoevangelium, because it announced the victory of a much-longed-for Saviour who would both crush the head of «that ancient serpent, who is called the devil» (Rev 12:9) and teach his brothers to do the same: «The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet», Paul says to the church in Rome (16:20). Here at the dawn of humanity just after the fall, God has drawn the battle lines between the devil and mankind who must heretofore decide between good and evil, God and Satan, truth and lies; he has effectively declared a war that will dominate the rest of human history. In this battle there are no bystanders, those who refuse to reject Satan and his works are de facto under his power and subject to the wrath of God (Eph 2:1-3). But God has indeed loved humanity, that’s why he sent a faithful Saviour, one who taught his children to pray always: «Our Father in heaven... deliver us from the evil one (aʌò IJȠñ ʌȠȞȘȡȠñ)» (Mt 6:9,13). Not surprisingly one of the metaphors with which the devil is often defined is «enemy» (ਥȤșȡȩȢ). This title is important in the New Testament, where the devil is the enemy of the message of salvation100. Jesus calls «the devil» with the notorious title «the father of lies» affirming that «there is no truth in him» (Jn 8:44). Therefore by his own nature Satan is the enemy of the truth by which humanity is «set free» (Jn 8:32). In the context of exorcism in the New Testament, the role of Satan as ਥȤșȡȩȢ is paramount. For example, in Luke’s Gospel when Jesus sends his disciples out to perform exorcisms, we read: «The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, ‘Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!’ And [Jesus] said to them, ‘I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on

294

Chapter 1 serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in Heaven’ » (Lk 10:18-20, emphasis mine).

Here we see that in the fierce battle with evil, clearly manifested in exorcisms, the disciples are not afraid of the enemy, but joyfully confident that «nothing shall hurt [them]». This is because Jesus has bestowed upon his disciples a unique dignity: heavenly authority over all the power of the enemy. Satan, who once had authority in heaven, has fallen like lightning, and Jesus’ disciples have a mysterious but real part in his demise. The disciples are to rejoice not so much that the enemy is beaten down by Christ, but that the original dignity of man is restored, for God created Adam to rule as king of creation and to live forever (Gn 1:26-28; 2:17). Although Adam fell and all humanity fell with him, Christ’s disciples are no longer slaves through fear of death and Satan (Heb 2:15) but they are heirs of the kingdom of heaven, endowed with royal authority as sons and daughters of God (Lk 6:35; 12:32; Gal 3:26; 1 Pt 2:9). This royal power is the essence of being a disciple, «But to all who did receive [Jesus], who believed in his name, he gave the authority (ਥȟȠȣıȓĮ) to become children of God» (Jn 1:12). In the climax of his greatest letter Paul lauds the unbelievable grace of receiving divine sonship: «For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’» (Rom 8:15). The liberated slave becomes an adopted son, not by a juridical pronouncement but by the true gift of Trinitarian life, because God has chosen to dwell within man through the Holy Spirit, conferring to Christ’s followers what was unthinkable to ancient Jews: fraternal and familial communion with God as partakers in the Divine Nature101. The Son of God came to heal wounds due to sin, forgive those who repent, and restore fallen man to his original dignity and fullness of life102. In the aim of restoration Jesus gave his disciples the power over the demons who up to the time of Christ had exploited man’s forgetfulness of God by enslaving mankind to increasingly corrupt and perverse desires «contrary to nature... men committing shameless acts with men» (Rom 1:26-27). And not only mankind but nature is wounded as well. Thus all creation eagerly awaits the restoration from God in «hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God» (Rom 8:20-21). According to the New Testament the judgment against Satan was first declared at Christ’s crucifixion (Jn 12:31) and the battle against him continues through Christ’s servants until the end of the age103. But is this

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

295

war truly against the devil, and if so why? At the end of time Satan will be bound to hell forever (Rv 20:10). In Revelation John thus reveals the source of the devil’s rage against mankind: he and «his angels» have been cast out of heaven (Rv 12:9, cf. Lk 10:19) at which the angels of heaven say: «Woe to you, O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows that his time is short!» (Rv 12:12). God has given Satan the task on earth «to make war…on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus» (12:17); he tempts them to lead them to disobedience and sin (Eph 2:2). He does this because he is furious that Jesus promises his disciples «rejoice that your names are written in heaven» (Lk 10:20), that is, rejoice that you are heirs of the eternal rewards. But why would God allows spiritual combat with the devil? Because through resisting his snares the faithful are made even stronger, and they become saints who lead many others to salvation. Thus Peter writes: «Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour... resist him firm in your faith... And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you» (1 Pt 5:8-10). The apostle’s point is clear: by resisting temptation and rejecting Satan the faithful are profoundly strengthened by God, and they come to resemble Jesus more and more which is God’s ultimate purpose for humanity104. It is not surprising then that almost every aspect of human encounter with the demonic could be described as a kind of battle with the declared enemies of mankind, that is, the devil and his demons. In fact much of the language in the LXX, particularly that in the Psalms, was interpreted as symbolic of the cosmic struggle with demons (cf. e.g. Ps 91:6; 18:1-50). This war song, Psalm 144:1, for example, «Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle» would be interpreted as spiritual combat, where Israel’s battles become battles against the demonic forces. In this war God’s power will always triumph, and he confers his triumph to people who have absolute trust in him. Even God’s sovereignty over the cosmic ecology and the forces of nature (e.g. Ps 104) could be interpreted as a spiritual battle. In the book of 2 Maccabees for example, the struggle of martyrdom begins to be described as a struggle with evil, and this idea was taken up by the early church in light of its own experience. Christian martyrs were often called «athletes of multiple combats» not so much because they battled beasts in the arena but because by their blood they defeated the satanic forces in the cosmic sphere, sharing in the glorious victory over evil displayed in Christ’s crucifixion (Jn 12:31; Col 2:14-15). This is related to the basic idea that had counterparts in Stoic and other Hellenistic philosophy as well as in the Bible, in which the

296

Chapter 1

virtuous life resembles a continuous contest or battle against evil forces whether external or internal. The demons were always pictured as tempting, confusing, pushing, wrestling, beating, boxing the athletes of God (cf. 2 Cor 12:7; 1 Cor 9:24-27; Rev 2:10) in the ring of the contest in order to trip them up and throw them down if given the chance, and so prevent them winning their garlands and trophies105. Liturgical exorcism gives symbolic form to the conflict between malignant demonic forces on the one hand and social and religious ideals on the other. These positive values are represented in the Holy Trinity that subsists in perfect unity. The demons are repeatedly referred to as enemies as seen in the Xiropotamou 98 exorcisms because they foment chaos and rebellion against God106. The exorcisms always confirm God’s greater power and treat the devil as a traitor, impostor, or defector107. It is God who has power over all living things and who heals all illness108. He inspires virtue (ĮȡİIJ੾), wisdom (ıȠijȓĮ), purity (ĮȖȞİȚȐ), self-control (İȖțȡ੺IJİȚĮ,), love (ĮȖ੺ʌȘ, as opposed to ȑȡȦIJĮȢ, eros), hope (İȜʌ઀įĮ), gentleness (ʌȡĮંIJȘIJĮ), long-suffering (μĮțȡȠșȣμȚȐ), patience (ȣʌȠμȠȞ੾), prudence (ıȦijȡȠı઄ȞȘ), and caution (ʌȡȠıȠȤ੾)109. Armed with these virtues man can valiantly confront his spiritual enemies, taking refuge in Christ, he can continue in loving faith even unto death. The world as seen through the liturgical Orthodox exorcisms is one in which the forces of good are basic and prior to anything else. The forces of evil constitute, by God’s permission, an overlaying opposition (forces opposed to salvation) that presents itself to the human heart and may sometimes sway people to its cause. This picture is accepted by a great many Greek people and held as an apt explanation of how one may aspire toward the values of good and yet only partially achieve them in life. This moral cosmology rationalizes the human position. In an ideal world everyone would live in harmony. The world is not, however, ideal; it is fallen and the condition of humanity is one of imperfection and suffering. Diabolical influence in the form of illness (whether physical or spiritual) or the tendency towards harmful action often exerts itself and cannot be avoided. Prayer, fasting, the observance of Orthodox rituals and the participation in the liturgical life of the Church are ways of warding off such destructive influence. They are a preventive approach. Exorcism is a wholly direct resort. It is taken once the moment of evil has arrived and when the demonic influence is already evident, or when the subject is in a state of demonic possession. In these rituals the values of God are restated performatively. The priest in the name of God chases the demons from the person and prays for the deliverance of the person from the demonic influence as he did at Baptism and prays that God should restore the individuals to their former

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

297

state of purity and health. One holistic-relativistic approach to exorcism views the goal to be psychological reassurance of the victim, and thus the effectiveness of exorcism is not in the power of words spoken by the priest110. It is rather the presence of the priest and correct performance (along with the anointing with oil, insufflations through the mouth of the victim, benediction with blessed water and the use of the relics of the saints) that are most reassuring. The words are not unimportant, but they are only one aspect of a larger framework that exorcism erects. The incorporation of the possessed or sick person into this framework is both the object and the end result of exorcistic ritual. The rite is itself the cure even if this sometimes can take years to bear fruit. Another approach aims at lasting spiritual health and independence of the victims of demonic infiltration. The victims can be encouraged to renounce the devil, retrieve their will from all evil, and adhere to the creed of orthodox faith, as John says: «This is the victory that has overcome the world – our faith» (1 Jn 5:4). Thereby the victims can stand on their own feet, having renewed the powerful, life-giving promises of their Baptism. ij.134v . IJȠ૨ ijȡȚțIJȠ૨ ț(Į੿) ਖȖȓȠȣ ੑȞȩμĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐμȠȣ șİȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡੑȢ, ȊੂȠ૨, țĮ੿ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪμĮIJȠȢ, ੆ȞĮ μȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ İ੝șȪȢ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμȐ ıȠȣ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖ੿ȦȞ ਕȖȖȑȜȦȞ, șȡȩȞȦȞ, țȣȡȚȠIJȒIJȦȞ, ਕȡȤ૵Ȟ, įȣȞȐμİȦȞ, ਥȟȠȣıȚ૵Ȟ,111G IJ૵Ȟ ʌȠȜȣȠμμȐIJȦȞ ȤİȡȠȣȕȓμ ț(Į੿) IJ૵Ȟ ਥȟĮʌIJİȡȪȖȦȞ ıİȡĮijȓμ ੄ȞĮ μȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ İ੝șઃȢ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμȐ ıȠȣ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ Ǿ [IJ૵Ȟ ʌȠȜȣȠμμȐIJȦȞ ȤİȡȠȣȕȓμ ț(Į੿) IJ૵Ȟ ਥȟĮʌIJİȡȪȖȦȞ ıİȡĮijȓμ]: by the many-eyed Cherubim and the six-winged Seraphim Angels and archangels abound in liturgical and non liturgical texts, being named singularly or in groups, with the most common enumeration being the famous four, Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, and Ouriel112. The Xiropotamou exorcism mentions generically «angels, thrones, dominions, principalities and Cherubim». Cherubim are the second of the nine orders of angels in medieval angelology. They are often referred to as two in number, and rarely are they named separately. One place where the peculiar phrase, «the two archangels», is encountered again occurs in a liturgical context113. In an exorcism that also lists adjurations by the great name of God, the seven heavens, and the Cherubim, the two archangels are specified as Gabriel and Raphael114. The relevant portion reads as follows: «੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ, ʌȞİ઄μĮIJĮ, İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ į઄Ƞ ਖȡȤĮȖȖ੼ȜȠȣȢ. īĮȕȡȚ੾Ȝ țĮ઀ ૮ĮijĮ੽Ȝ, ੆ȞĮ ਩ȜșİIJİ ਩μʌȡȠıș੼Ȟ μȠȣ IJ੺ȤȚıIJĮ țĮȚ ıȣȞIJȠμઆIJĮIJĮ».

Chapter 1

298

«I adjure you, spirits, by the two archangels, Gabriel and Raphael, that you come (out) before me, most quickly and immediately»115.

Virtually the same text occurs in a portion of a manuscript labelled Traité de Magie de Salomon: «੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ, ʌȞİ઄μĮIJĮ, İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ į઄Ƞ μİȖ੺ȜȠȣȢ ਖȡȤĮȖȖ੼ȜȠȣȢ. īĮȕȡȚ੾Ȝ ț(Į઀) ૮ĮijĮ੽Ȝ, ੆ȞĮ ਩ȜșİIJİ ੰįİ ʌȡȠș઄μȦȢ, IJ੺ȤȚıIJĮ, ıȣȞIJȠμઆIJĮIJĮ», «I adjure you, spirits, by the two great archangels, Gabriel and Raphael, that you come here eagerly, most quickly and immediately»116.

In a broader liturgical context one can see the fuller role that the Cherubim (and Seraphim) play: they attend the throne of God singing together the heavenly Trisagion. A typical exorcistic text reads, for example, as follows: «੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ țĮIJ੹ IJȠ૨ țĮșȘμ੼ȞȠȣ ਥʌȚ șȡંȞȠȣ țĮȚ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ ਥʌȚ ıțȚ੺ȗȠȞIJĮ IJઁ ੂȜĮıIJ੾ȡȚȠȞ ț(Į੿) Ȝ੼ȖȠȞIJĮ ਘȖȚȠȢ, ਘȖȚȠȢ, ਘȖȚȠȢ, Ȁ઄ȡȚȠȢ ȈĮȕĮઆș, țIJȜ. »

which is translated as: «I exorcise you by the One who sits upon the throne of his own glory ...whereby the Seraphim stand, crying out above the throne, and the Cherubim overshadow the mercy-seat and say, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord Sabaoth’, etc»117. «ਥȟȠȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ ʌĮȞIJĮ IJĮ įĮȚμંȞȚĮ İੁȢ IJȠ μ੼ȖĮ ੓ȞȠμĮIJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJ੹ ʌȠȜȣંμμĮIJĮ XİȡȠȣȕ઀μ, țIJȜ.», «I exorcise all you demons by the great name of God and by the many-eyed Cherubim», etc.118

Any mention of the «Great Name» would refer to God, specifically to his divine and ineffable Name; it could not be a reference to the Cherubim, for the Cherubim’s task is to be the throne upon which God rests. In liturgical exorcisms, the μ੼ȖĮ੓ȞȠμĮ is never used of the Cherubim, but only in reference to God119. In fact, in such contexts, though μ੼ȖĮ੓ȞȠμĮ and XİȡȠȣȕ઀μ are juxtaposed they are always kept separate. Parallels from the liturgical exorcisms again provide a plausible nexus: And also: «ੑμȞ઄ȦıĮȢ İੁȢ IJઁȞ șİઁȞ IJ૵Ȟ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ țĮș੾μİȞȠȞ, Ƞ੤IJઁ ੕ȞȠμĮ Į੝IJȠ૨ ਫȜȦ੻ Ȁ੼ıĮȡ, ਦȜȦ੼, țIJȜ.»

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

299

«I abjure you by the God who sits upon the Cherubim, whose name is Elôe, Kesar, Helôe», etc.;120 «੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ ਥʌ੿ șȡંȞȠȣ ĬİȠ૨ ȈĮȕĮ੪ș, șİȠȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ İੁȢ IJ੹ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ țĮ੿ İੁȢ į’İ੝ĮȖȖİȜȚıIJĮ઀Ȣ, ȁȠȣț઼Ȟ, ȂĮIJșĮ૙ȠȞ, Ȃ੺ȡțȠȞ, ੉Ȧ੺ȞȞȘȞ, IJઁȞ ਥʌ੿ IJ૵Ȟ ȈİȡĮij઀μ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦıĮȢ İੁȢ IJઁ μ੼ȖĮ ੕ȞȠμĮIJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ », «I exorcise you, on (sic) the throne of God Sabaoth, I ‘Godexorcise’ you by the Cherubim and by the four Gospels, Luke, Matthew, Mark, John, the One upon the Seraphim; I exorcise you by the great name of God»121.

An exorcism by the Great Name and the Cherubim serves as a mere reminder of the long liturgical forms of exorcisms that included God sitting on his heavenly throne with the many-eyed Cherubim, and possibly winged Seraphim, in attendance. This is very clear in the exorcistic texts that I have consulted which exorcises an «unnamed» demon by the celestial realms and their inhabitants and which mentions the entities by which evil spirits are adjured along with the celestial components122. ij.134rIJ IJ IJોȢ ੥ʌİȡȐȖȞȠȣ șİȠIJȩțȠȣ ȂĮȡȓĮȢ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ਝʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ įઆįİțĮ țĮ੿ IJ૵Ȟ ਦȕįȠμ੾țȠȞIJĮ,123 įȚ੺ IJોȢ ijȠȕİȡ੹Ȣ țĮ੿ ਕįİțȐıIJȠȣ țȡȓıİȦȢ țĮ੿ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ਕȖȓȠȣ Į੄μĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਥțȤȣșȑȞIJȠȢ ਥț IJોȢ ʌȜİȣȡ੹Ȣ IJȠ૨ ȀȣȡȓȠȣ ਲμ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨,124 įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ İ੅țȠıȚIJİııȐȡȦȞ ʌȡİıȕȣIJȑȡȦȞ125 IJ૵Ȟ įȚȐ ʌĮȞIJઁȢ ʌĮȡİıIJȫȞ IJȦȞ IJઁȞ șȡȩȞȠȞ IJઁȞ ਕȩȡĮIJȠȞ IJȠ૨ șİȠ૨ țĮ੿ ȥĮȜȜȩȞ IJȦȞ Į੝IJ૶. «[through] the very holy Mother of God, Mary, through the holy Apostles, the twelve and the seventy, through the terrifying and unfavourable judgment and through the Holy Blood poured out from the side of our Lord Jesus Christ, through the twenty four elders and through all those standing by the unseen throne of God and singing praise to him»

[įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ਕȖȓȠȣ Į੄μĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਥțȤȣșȑȞIJȠȢ ਥț IJોȢ ʌȜİȣȡ੹Ȣ IJȠ૨ țȣȡȓȠȣ ਲμ૵Ȟ ǿȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨,]: through the Holy Blood poured out from the side of our Lord Jesus Christ126 Given the juxtaposition of these two themes here: the day of judgment and the blood of Christ, we can ask the question: Is there any intrinsic connection between these two in the context of spiritual warfare and exorcism? As early as St. Polycarp and St. Ignatius, Church Fathers who were born while the apostles were still alive, the blood of Christ was being invoked in the context of the final judgment of spirits. St. Ignatius writes: Ĭ

300

Chapter 1 «Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation»127.

And St Polycarp testifies to the Philippians that God «raised up our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead, and gave Him glory, and a throne at His right hand. To Him all things in heaven and on earth are subject. Him every spirit serves. He comes as the Judge of the living and the dead. His blood will God require of those who do not obey [believe in] Him»128. What does it mean «His blood will God require»? Orthodox Christianity in the tradition of the Fathers holds that the Son of God became human «the Son of Man» to become the representative of all men, and he died for the sins of all humanity129. As Peter writes: «For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit» (1 Pt 3:18). Therefore God gave Jesus’ blood as a free gift to wash away all human injustice (Mt 26:28, Eph 1:7), because both Old and New Testaments attest that «without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins» (Heb 9:22). But to those who consciously reject Jesus and reject the gift of his blood for the forgiveness of their faults that blood will not save but «condemn unbelievers»130. Thus the Gospels and Pauline letters generally depict those who reject Jesus as having the wrath of God on them131. Furthermore Jesus himself says the Pharisees who reject him must answer for all the «righteous blood» shed from «innocent Abel» onward (Mt 23:35; Lk 11:51). Who escapes the wrath of God? All those who embrace Jesus for who he is, «the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world» (Jn 1:29); «Christ our Paschal Lamb has been sacrificed» (1 Cor 5:7) by his blood the people are saved. From the earliest tradition of the Church Fathers we see that all who believe that the Lamb’s blood was shed for their sins will receive forgiveness and salvation132. Thus the healing and life-giving properties of Christ’s blood are actualized by faith, but the wrath-provoking properties are actualized by unbelief. St Ignatius writes: those who «believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation» including the demons «the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible» whose doom is the final judgment precisely because they must answer for the blood of Christ133. Thus we see here the Blood of Jesus seems to be the divine means, or the litmus test, by which the final judgment will be decided. Those who reject Christ’s blood are facing judgment, while «everyone who lives and believes in» him have already passed over judgment, there is no more condemnation or wrath for them134. Before his death Jesus says: «‘Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

301

I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.’ He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die» (Jn 12:31-33). So the devil and all the evil of this world will come under «judgment» and be «cast out» in a kind of macro-exorcism (ਥțȕȐȜȜȦ is an exorcistic term, cf. Mt 7:22; 8:16; 10:1; 12:24; etc.). In John’s Gospel Christ will be «exalted» on the cross as the Cosmic Exorcist (Jn 3:14) who will refine the world by freely pouring out his blood in the ultimate sign of love: «This blood poured forth washed clean all the world» the Church Fathers insist, because from the cross God’s love crushed the devil in the fury of his cruelty135. John is explicit that «the judgment of this world» is the death of Christ, or more specifically, how one reacts to it: for those who accept Christ the judgment of their sins is over, it has already happened at Calvary í all sins died with Christ and are forgiven, and for those reject Christ what happened at Calvary will be their final judgment. «Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him» (Jn 3:36). The power of the Blood of Jesus for the destruction of demonic power has been recognized since the patristic period, and even in some of the later literature of the New Testament cannon. This Blood plays a decisive role in the battle between good and evil as John writes in Revelation: «Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back» (12:7) but the forces of evil are defeated, «and the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world í he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him» (v. 9). This is the famous fallen angel theme, but in the next verses we see clearly by what means Satan is cast down and by what authority: «And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, ‘Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death’» (Rv 12:10-11).

Satan, whose name means accuser, is naturally «the accuser of our brothers» who wants to see God’s image plunged it into sin and hell. But what does it mean to say «the kingdom of God and the authority of his Christ have come»? It means that mankind has a glorious new hope: Jesus Christ has ascended to heaven with his newly acquired humanity, offering his most precious blood to his eternal Father in forgiveness of sins136, and now reigns on God’s throne as the supreme king of the universe (cf. Dan 7:1314). How

302

Chapter 1

did Jesus as a human person gain this royal authority over all things? He earned it. St Paul tells us that God’s eternal Son, though he was equal to God «emptied himself» to assume human nature, and embraced crucifixion «he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name» (Phil 2:7-9). The basis of spiritual combat is that all believers share in the royal authority of Christ’s blood that has vanquished the powers of evil. In fact they have conquered and continue to conquer Satan by Christ’s authority: «And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death» (Rv 12:11). Who has conquered? Since angels do not fear death, this verse cannot refer to angelic combat, it must refer to humans «our brothers» (v. 10) who have conquered in bearing witness to the faith even at the risk of their lives. The blood of martyrs is united to the actual Blood of Christ, spilled «once and for all» for human salvation «by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption» (Heb 9:12; 10:19). Christ’s blood is the power by which all the saints would overcome the fear of spilling their own blood, and thus the power of Christ’s blood would continue to conquer Satan long after Christ’s earthly life. John is telling us that this cosmic war is still going on in his time, and that the martyrs and confessors participate in the eschatological triumph of God over evil in a decisive way: they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb. Many of the Church Fathers interpret «by the Blood of the Lamb» as a reference to blood of the Passover lamb in Exodus 14137. By the death of the firstborn son (of Pharaoh) Israel was finally freed from bondage, and by the blood of the lamb the firstborn sons of Hebrew families were spared í both types of Christ who is God’s firstborn Son and sacrificial Lamb, the GodVictim (Jn 1:29; Rv 5:6; 22:1; etc.). Just as the destroying angel had no power to kill the first born sons of the Israelites who had the blood of the lamb on their doorposts (Ex 12:12-13), so the devil has no power «to touch» the faithful who hide under the blood of Jesus (1 Jn 5:18). By Christ’s death they will be freed from death and enter the promised land of heaven (Rom 5:9-10, 15, 21; 2 Tm 1:10). Thus John is intent on calling Jesus here the new Passover Lamb, whose blood will not save people from physical bondage to Pharaoh but from the spiritual death of sin, slavery to the devil, «the accuser of our brothers who accuses them day and night before our God» (Rv 12:10). Satan’s accusations are silenced for those for whom the Lamb’s blood has washed clean of all sin, for Christ will «snatch from the Evil One the souls that are precious above all, for by nothing can they be bought, save by the blood of Christ»138.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

303

The final victory over the demonic powers is achieved by the blood of Jesus that frees, unites and strengthens Christ’s faithful disciples to persevere to the end. The blood of Christ is terrifying to demons because it constitutes the sign par excellence that their doom is sealed. It is precisely because the «Blood of God»139 was poured out in infinite love, that wrath comes on all who reject such love. As the Xiropotamou exorcism indicates the eschaton will indeed be a «terrifying and unfavourable judgment» for Satan and his agents, because the blood of Christ will annihilate them. Satan boasted to swallow all souls in the pit of Hades. But when Satan devoured the innocent humanity of Jesus on the cross, unaware of his hidden Divinity, Satan’s jaw was broken by his own cruelty, as Jerome explains140. In choosing to suffer death for poor sinners the Son of God perfectly surrendered to his Father’s will, though it was hard on his flesh, his Divine Nature secretly entered the jaws of death where he finally revealed the hidden power of his Divinity, smashing open the gates of Hades. The demons were shocked at their master’s powerlessness to stop the Son of God from pillaging hell141. Christ’s loving cross has already publically humiliated the devil as the quintessential «murderer» and not a god, defeated the empire of death, and «disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them» (Jn 8:44; Col 2:15). Jesus’ divine blood dealt a powerful blow to the demonic stranglehold over the human heart. Christ’s sacrificial death essentially brings the spiritual fulfilment to God’s covenant oath of blessing to Abraham after the sacrifice of Isaac: «I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven… And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies» (Gn 22:17). By Christ’s outpouring of blood man’s spiritual enemies are defeated and the gate of death and hell is conquered; thus Jesus says: «I am the Living One. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades» (Rv 1:18). So after Jesus descended to Hades to release Abraham and the other «spirits in prison» of death (1 Pt 3:19) he fulfilled the scripture by leading the «host of captives» to heaven when he «ascended on high» (Eph 4:8-10; Ps 68:18). This «gift» of heaven is also for all the spiritually «dead» people in this age, the prisoners of sin142. God had promised to make stars of Abraham’s offspring, and Paul says those who belong to Christ are «the offspring of Abraham, heirs according to promise» (Gal 3:29). The spiritual reality of the promise is not a long life with many children on earth but Christ reveals it as being «born from above» and raised up «as the stars in heaven» into God’s presence (Jn 3:3; Gn 22:17). Thus the power of God’s blood make humans be born again «from above... by water and Spirit» into God’s family as «sons of God» who are described elsewhere as «stars» (Jn 3:3, 5; Gal 3:26; Jb 38:7). Just as Satan

304

Chapter 1

was once a «Day Star» who fell into death and caused the fall of «a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth» (Is 14:12; Rv 12:4), so God’s loving Son became man to make humanity alive, lifting them up to heaven to become «stars» and «sons of God» who will love God forever «to the praise of his glorious grace» (Phil 2:15; Eph 1:6), thus replacing the void left by the rebels who refused to praise. Even during this age of darkness the profound spiritual reality of God’s children is that they shine as « ijȦıIJોȡİȢ ਥȞ țȩıμ૳ »143 enthroned «in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus» (Phil 2:15; Eph 2:6). In light of man’s celestial destination God’s promise to Daniel 12:2-3 makes sense: «Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever». The fact that God’s blessing to Abraham in Gn 22:17 constitutes heavenly beatitude is also indicated by the blessing of Eph 1:37: «Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places... he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ... In him we have redemption through his blood». To Paul Christ’s blood gives man right now nothing less than citizenship in heaven as sons of the Most High, a citizenship and sonship that the ancient serpent rejected. In the historical context of the doctrine of Christ’s blood, it could be argued, that Ignatius and Polycarp are merely concerned with refuting the heresy of Docetism and thus they used belief in the blood of Jesus as the sign to distinguish orthodoxy from heresy144. Thus St Irenaeus questions the Docetists: «And how, again, supposing that He was not flesh, but was a man merely in appearance, could He have been crucified, and could blood and water have issued from His pierced side?»145. But regardless of the original motivations the early apostolic tradition has stood the test of time, proving influential to subsequent Church Fathers who also stress the power of the blood of Christ, and it is not without biblical precedent. The blood of Christ is recognized to this day as an invincible armour against evil. Even John XXIII, a Catholic pope who began the reform of Vatican II in the 1960s, writes in an apostolic letter about the blood of Christ: «Unlimited is the effectiveness of the God-Man’s Blood í just as unlimited as the love that impelled him to pour it out for us... Such surpassing love suggests, nay demands, that everyone reborn in the torrents of that Blood adore it with grateful love... Nourished by his Body and Blood, sharing the divine strength that has sustained countless martyrs, they will stand up to the slings and arrows of each day's fortunes even if need be to martyrdom itself for the sake of Christian virtue and the kingdom of God»146

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

305

St John Chrysostom lauds Jesus’ blood in the context of spiritual combat147: «This blood poured forth washed clean all the world… Christ has purchased us with His blood, and adorned us with His blood. They who share this blood stand with Angels and Archangels and the Powers that are above, clothed in Christ’s own kingly robe, and having the armour of the Spirit. Nay, I have not as yet said any great thing: they are clothed with the King Himself». To «share in this blood» means for Christians to be clothed in spiritual armour, that is to drink worthily the consecrated wine of the Lord’s Supper. St Chrysostom clearly believes this wine is Jesus’ blood, a belief shared by all of the Church Fathers from at least the time of St Ignatius (107 A. D.) if not St Paul himself148. Chrysostom encourages the faithful to drink worthily the blood of Christ for the purpose of spiritual war: «Let us then return from that table like lions breathing fire, having become terrifying to the devil; thinking on our Head, and on the love which He hath shown for us… [this blood] waters our souls, and works in them some mighty power. This blood, if rightly taken, drives away demons, and keeps them afar off from us, while it calls to us Angels and the Lord of Angels. For wherever they see the Lord’s blood, demons flee, and Angels run together». And if the demons do chase Christians in their pilgrimage towards the cross which is the ocean of God’s mercy, the demons will be swallowed in the ocean of God’s wrath í to use the imagery of the Church Fathers. Because, as the Fathers saw it, just as Pharaoh’s army was drowned in the Red Sea when they tried to chase the Israelites on their way to the promised land (Ex 14), so the demons will be drowned by the blood and water from the side of Christ in baptism, which opens for humans as ea of mercy but for demons utter destruction149.As Moses said to the Israelites being pursued by the Egyptian army: «Fear not, stand firm, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will work for you today. For the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall never see again. The LORD will fight for you» (Ex 14:1314). To the Fathers the Egyptian army was symbolic of the demonic forces, drowned in the ocean of the waters of baptism (cf. 1 Cor 10:2). The New Testament imagery of Baptism, baptizing with water and with fire in the Holy Spirit (Mt 3:11) is drawn from Isaiah 43 where the Lord says again: «Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine. When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you» (Is 43:12). Thus as the original Exodus was a redemption of the nation of Israel through the sacrifice of a lamb and passing through the sea, so baptism is the New Exodus that will redeem God’s people through baptism into the new Paschal Lamb who, in the fire of his love, poured out blood and water destroying all

306

Chapter 1

man’s spiritual enemies. And by revealing the ocean of his mercy at his death, the Lamb gave new life and liberty to his children. The blood and water as symbols of Baptism: Speaking of his death Jesus says to his disciples: «The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized» (Mk 10:39). Jesus’ death is a baptism, into which all humanity has been or will be crucified with Christ and those who believe in him are resurrected with him, reborn to eternal life with Christ «the firstborn from the dead»150. Thus Paul writes: «one has died for all, therefore all have died» (2 Cor 5:14) and «We were buried therefore with [Jesus] by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life» (Rom 6:4). Christ died to pour out his life for all people; he transformed death into a gateway into eternal life: «For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive» (1 Cor 15:22). The Xiropotamou text clearly makes reference to John 19:34 «One of the soldiers pierced [Jesus’] side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water». St John Chrysostom, St Ignatius, and many Fathers as well, saw in these lines a reference to baptism: «In this place blood and water show forth the same thing, for baptism is His passion»151. Jerome and other Fathers also interpreted this flow of blood and water as the birth of the Church. Just as Eve was formed out of Adam’s rib while God put him into a deep sleep, so the Church, the new Eve and bride of Christ, was born out of «the blood and water» from Christ’s «rib» while he was ‘sleeping’ on the cross.152 One of the hallmarks of the liturgical exorcisms, discussed above, is the repeated mention of baptism (or some other allusion to washing) in the context. Since exorcism and baptism were closely linked in the early Church, the proliferation of such liturgical texts with these elements juxtaposed probably met a growing need in the fourth century153. Liturgical exorcisms were regularly performed at Baptismal initiations since Baptism signifies liberation from sin and from its instigator the devil. Thus prepared, he is able to confess the faith of the Church, to which he will be «entrusted» by Baptism154. It is no surprise then that the Xiropotamou text mentions the holy blood of Jesus as a clear indication of Baptism. The traditional Greek Orthodox view holds that through Baptism, one becomes not only a Christian, but a person in the full moral and legal sense. For many Greeks to be Greek is to be Orthodox. Most of the Greeks believe that without baptism one is vulnerable to demonic assault and if a child should die in this state, the soul goes neither to heaven nor to hell. So to be properly baptized means to be under the protection of God and the Church. The rite of Baptism, properly performed, dissociates the individual from the devil:

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

307

«when such people [catechumens] come forward to receive the waters of salvation and the sanctification of Baptism, we ought to be convinced and firmly believe that the devil is there overpowered and that through God’s mercy the man now dedicated to him is set free155». The Baptismal ceremony itself evokes a broad spectrum of themes rich in symbolism. The central mystery of Baptism, both textually and performatively, is a process of death and rebirth. When the initiate is baptised into Christ, the faithful believe that the person dies and is reborn just as Christ died and was resurrected (Rom 6:3-4). Alongside its associations with death and rebirth, the Baptismal water also forms part of an elaborate imagery of purification from the unclean and polluting spirits. Impurity is sin and all prior sin is washed away in the Baptismal immersion. The general orientation of all churches in Greece is along an eastwest axis, with the main entrance in the west with the altar towards the east. The various rites of the Baptismal office that take place at the church are woven into a whole by the movement through space. The overall direction is from outside to inside, from west (symbolic of the end of the day, darkness, exile) to east (symbolic of birth, Eden, divine origin). The first part of the service is meant to take place outside the main sanctuary (west, outside). The renunciation of the devil (through the action of blowing on the catechumen) is performed while facing west. The Baptism itself takes place in the centre of the church and at the moment of immersing the child in the front, the priest is instructed to face the east. The progression from west to east also represents movement from darkness to light; the demons of darkness are defeated by the light of Christ. The initiate is illumined by Baptism and Chrismation (anointing) and becomes a child of light (1 Th 5:5). A set of spiritual associations with the respective states is set out schematically below: Unbaptised devil Darkness Black West Impure Sin Nameless Death Outside Wicked Spirits (demons)

Baptised Christ Light White East Pure Sinless Named Life Inside Righteous Holy Spirit (God)

308

Chapter 1

There is no doubt that even if Baptism is heavily concerned with the endowment of the Holy Spirit, yet it is largely considered to be an exorcistic ceremony with the expulsion of evil spirits, symbolized by the crossing of the Red Sea as we have seen. It is important to observe that exorcism is not effected solely through the usual verbal commands such as «I exorcise you» or «come out and depart», but also through gestures such as insufflations, the reading of the Gospels, the use of the blessed water and the litanies of Saints. Blowing, spitting, immersing in water, and anointing with oil may all serve to expel demons. Virtually every aspect of the ritual may be viewed as apotropaic against demons. Even the cross is one of the most apotropaic objects in case of demon assault. Almost every church in Greece has an image of Christ on the cross figured on its icon screen. Beneath this cross are the skull and bones of Adam. The blood of Christ drips from the cross onto these bones, symbolizing Christ’s redemption of earlier sin and the release from death that his crucifixion has conferred. The naming of the child helps join the child to the community socially, while the instilment of the Holy Spirit incorporates the new member spiritually into the body of Christ. Similarly, the gift of the Holy Spirit at Baptism creates a spiritual bond between the initiate and fellow Christians while allowing for the fact of individual difference. All this shows the importance of the exorcism in the rite of Baptism because without the negative, there can be no positive. ij.135v IJȩȞ ਕțĮIJȐʌĮȣıIJȠȞ ੠μȞȠȞ,156 țĮ੿ įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ șĮȣμĮıIJ૵Ȟ ਩ȡȖȦȞ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐμȠȣ șİȠ૨ IJ૵Ȟ ਥȞȠȣȡĮȞ૶ țĮ੿ ਥʌȓȖોȢ ȖİȖİȞȘμȑȞȦȞ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ʌĮIJȡȚĮȡȤ૵Ȟ ਞȕȡĮ੹μ, ੉ıĮ੹ț țĮȓ ੉Įțȫȕ157 țĮ੿ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ʌȡઁ ȞȩμȠȣ ț(Į੿) μİIJ੹ ȞȩμȠȞ,I įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ įİțĮIJİııȐȡȦȞ ȤȚȜȚȐįȦȞ ȞȘʌ઀ȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਫ਼ʌઁ ਺ȡȫįȠȣ158 ਕȞĮȚȡİșȑȞ IJȦȞ ț(Į઀) įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ, ț(Į੿) ʌĮı૵Ȟ «The un-halting hymn, and through all the wonderful works of Almighty God both heavenly and earthly that came through the holy patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the saints who lived before the law, through the fourteen thousand holy children slain by Herod and through all, and all»

[IJ૵Ȟ șĮȣμĮıIJ૵Ȟ ਩ȡȖȦȞ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįȣȞȐμȠȣ șİȠ૨... ȖİȖİȞȘμȑȞȦȞ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ] The wonderful works of Almighty God... that came through the saints.

ǿ

The demons are opponents par excellence to the Christ’s disciples and their challenge enables the saints to refine and express their holy nature that grows in them by the power of sanctifying grace. Theologically it is not a

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

309

contest of equals, but symbolically there is often a convergence between the image of the enemies (Demons) and that of the holy figures. This pattern may be observed in the Old Testament where God’s all encompassing power is tested, and so revealed, by the rebellious angel Satan who, like him, was considered immaterial. This distinction between divine immateriality and angelic immateriality was debated by theologians159. At Baptism the evil spirits that possess the uninitiated are expelled by the Holy Spirit; the same space is contested by similarly conceived supernatural forces (both called pneumata) that operate through the same materials (air and water). At other times there may be symbolic convergences that cannot immediately be related to a particular contest. An example would be St. Christopher of Tilos. The inhabitants of the Greek island of Tilos say that the saint was so handsome that female admirers would not allow him the peace to pursue his chosen path toward God. Seeing his situation, God bestowed a dog’s head on him so he could observe his prayers unmolested. Animal features, including those of a dog, are common among demonic beings, especially the devils. According to certain widely circulated medieval traditions, devils were said to transform themselves into dogs for the express purpose of entering convents and deflowering nuns160. Given the fine line that transpires between on the one hand, the exotikà (malicious things living at the margins of society) as they are experienced by laypeople and, on the other, demons and the devil, representing the official Orthodox church dogma concerning evil, we find a variety of stories throughout Greece relating to how people in recognition of the protection given to them by Virgin Mother (Ǿ ȆĮȞĮȖȓĮ) or various saints, offer votives, candles or money. Thus at times Saints and exotikà which normally oppose one another, can be also similar in relation to certain events and contexts. On some occasion this may lead to quite specific similarities, as both are constrained to operate at similar times across identical media161. In a number of cases sailors would save themselves by supplicating the saints. Many ships also carry an icon of the ȆĮȞĮȖȓĮ or of other saints. This applies also to many cars and buses. This concept very clearly points to the similarity and the inter-changeability between what we call the Christian sacra and the exotikà. This is more realistic and more true on the level of the village, family and individual where the relation between saints and exotikà reveals itself to be more subtle162. It is not strange therefore that we find instances where demons and saints intermingle, sometimes borrowing formal features from one another, in other instances expressing or representing values and powers opposite to those we might have expected following a structural model. Like saints whom people appeal to through votives or by offerings of wine, oil, or liturgical service in their chapel the

Chapter 1

310

exotica may also be appealed to with offerings. ij.135r IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ਕȞįȡ૵Ȟ IJİ ț(Įȓ) ȖȣȞĮȚț૵Ȟ, IJ૵Ȟ IJ૶ ਖȖȓ૳ șİ૶ İ੝ĮȡİıIJȘıȐȞIJȦȞ ਥȞ IJૌ ȗȦૌ Į੝IJ૵Ȟ. ੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ ʌ੺ȞIJĮ IJȐ ʌȠȞȘȡ੹ ʌȞİȪμĮIJĮ įȚ੹ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖȓȦȞ ੄ȞĮ μȠȚ İ੅ʌૉȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμȐ ıȠȣ: - EੇIJĮ įİȓȟȠȞ IJȩȞ IJȓμȚȠȞ ıIJĮȣȡંȞ, țȡĮIJઆȞ İੁȢ IJઁ ȤȑȡȚıȠȣ ț(Į੿) ȜȑȖİ: ੉įȠȪ ੒ IJ઀μȚȠȢ ȈIJĮȣȡઁȢ IJȠ૨ ȀȣȡȓȠȣ ਲμ૵Ȟ ǿȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨, ijİȪȖİ ʌȠȞȘȡ੻ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, ੉ȘıȠ૨Ȣ ȋȡȚıIJઁȢȀ «[By all the] the holy men and women, full of virtue in holy God during their life. I adjure all you evil spirits by all the saints in order that you tell me your name. Take in the right hand the honourable cross of powers and he says: Behold, the honourable Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, flee O evil devil, Jesus Christ!» Ȁ

[੉ȘıȠ૨Ȣ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ]: Jesus Christ

The Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles attest to the existence of secular exorcists who were not explicitly in communion with the group of Jesus’ disciples and apostles but who actively used Jesus name for exorcisms163. St Paul writes that God has highly exalted Jesus and «given him the name that is above every name» (Phil 2:9; cf. Eph 1:21). As is reported by secular traditional texts, in secular exorcisms the names of holy people and the names of saints are widely mentioned even though such exorcisms are non-ecclesial. Secular exorcisms can be defined as those performed by someone who is not a member of the clergy or affiliated with any particular religion or Church. Secular exorcists were and still today speak in the name of a «higher being», be it medical science or some psychological, metaphysical or spiritual belief system. They might invoke also the name of Jesus, speak of God or the devil, depending upon the particular delusions, hallucinations or religious belief system held by the patient. They may firmly and literally believe in the physical reality of the pathological problem manifested in the patient’s symptoms and suffering, and dispense solutions or encouragement while joining with the patient in a «therapeutic alliance» against the wicked and debilitating forces bedevilling them. However, in this framework, it is clear that the degree of emphasis on the unique power of the name Jesus Christ is the element which distinguished and differentiated the apostolic work of the early Church from the work of the magicians of those times164. On the other hand, an exorcism performed by the Church through its ordained clergy who has first ruled out any case of psychiatric illness, tends to take literally the phenomenon of demonic possession and the casting out

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

311

of demons, while a secular exorcist looks at this process from a more psychological, symbolic or metaphorical perspective. However, the methods and, hopefully, the results are similar. It is generally held that in late antiquity the accusation of magic was used by Christians to attack the pagans. However, there is quite ample documentation to show that Christians themselves accused other Christians of dabbling in the magic arts, in order to strike at their respective adversaries, especially when doctrinal disputes arose between bishops and their principal collaborators. With such a charge, they not only aroused the fears of the masses, but also provoked the intervention of the imperial authorities, which could bring about the removal and the exile of the condemned and even execution, as in the case of Priscilian. The efficacy of this accusation was facilitated by a widespread belief in the terrible power of magic and the fear of evil, but also by the ambiguity of the powers of the magician, which could be easily confused with the supernatural powers of a saint. Where the distinction between them depended on the source of their powers, respectively, demons or God165. However, we must not forget, that the accusation of using demonic power to perform miracles was also directed at Jesus. The synoptic Gospels show that Jesus shared the ideas of his time, but so far transcended them that by a commanding word alone, without the use of any magical practices, he cast out unclean spirits. ij.136v ȞȚțઽ, ੒ ȜȑȦȞ ੒ ਥț ijȣȜોȢ IJȠ૨ ੉ȠȪįĮ, ੒ ਥț ૧઀ȗȘȢ ¨Įȕȓį, ੒ ਫμμĮȞȠȣȒȜ. . ੘ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȕĮıȚȜİȪİȚ, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ਥȟȠȣıȚȐȗİȚ, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ șĮȞĮIJȠ૙, ੒ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȗȦȠȖȠȞİ૙, ਢȖȚȠȢ ਢȖȚȠȢ ਢȖȚȠȢ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ੒ ıĮȕĮȫș, ʌȜȒȡȘȢ ੒ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞȩȢ țĮ઀ ਲ Ȗો IJોȢ įȩȟȘȢ Į੝IJȠ૨, ੩ıĮȞȞ੹ ਥȞ IJȠ૙Ȣ ਫ਼ȥ઀ıIJȠȚȢ, ੒ ੫Ȟ İ੝ȜȠȖȘμȑȞȠȢ İੁȢ IJȠȪȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ ਕμ੾Ȟ. ਝȞĮıIJ੾IJȦ ੒ ĬİȩȢ ț(Į੿) įȚĮıțȠȡʌȚıșȒIJȦıĮȞ Ƞੂ ਥȤșȡȠ੿ Į੝IJȠ૨ ț(Į੿) ijȣȖȑIJȦıĮȞ ਕʌઁ ʌȡȠıȫʌȠȣ Įਫ਼IJȠ૨, «He is victorious, the Lion from the tribe of Judah, the root of David, the Emmanuel. The Christ reigns, Christ has authority, Christ puts to death, Christ makes alive, Holy, Holy, Holy, Christ the [God of] hosts, heaven and earth are full of his glory, Hosanna in the highest, blessed is he unto the ages, Amen. Let God arise and let his enemies be dispersed and let them flee from his face»

In the Hebrew scripture YHWH possesses divine attributes that are proper to him alone; his power and glory are infinite, and no other divinity or created intelligence can exhibit them. But according to the Nicene Constantinople Creed of Orthodox belief Christ himself is God, homousias with the Father; Christ is the Son of God, and the eternal word. Christ reigns on the throne of God, exhibiting all divine power and was infinitely glorified

312

Chapter 1

with the Father before creation began (cf. Jn 17:5). In a display of the splendour of Christ’s divine power, we see in this text we see a fusion of Old and New Testament divine epithets. Here the classic divine qualities of YHWH are accorded to Christ perhaps for the purposes of exorcism, so that Christ’s power may be displayed through faith, just as the unconquerable power of God in the Old Testament was displayed through faith of Israel in their God (cf. e.g. 2 Ch 20:1-26). For example «Christ puts to death, Christ makes alive» is a quote directly from 1 Samuel 2:6 LXX, and «Holy Holy Holy... full of his glory» is from Isaiah 6:3 í both with ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ inserted in place of the divine name, YHWH. But it is simpler than that. In the mind of these exorcists, it may have been that the divine name YHWH was not being replaced but only the milder țȣȡȓȠȢ. It was only natural for Christians familiar with the LXX to replace what was originally YHW Hwith ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ for two reasons: 1) the Jewish translators who made the LXX had already replaced YHWH, out of reverence for the divine name, with țȣȡȓȠȢ (Lord, adonai) in their translation and 2) the affirmation that «Jesus is țȣȡȓȠȢ» is found in every book of the New Testament. Thus, replacing țȣȡȓȠȢ with ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ was natural and reflected a foundational tenant of Christian faith from the beginning, namely, that is that Jesus is Lord (1 Cor 12:3). This replacement was most likely done without regard for the original Hebrew setting of the divine epithets. So țȣȡȓȠȢ is replaced with ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ but notice that where the ĬİȩȢ is used from the LXX quotation it is not replaced with ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ: as in the end of the above citation, Let God arise and let his enemies be dispersed... flee from his face, «ਝȞĮıIJ੾IJȦ ੒ ĬİȩȢ... ʌȡȠıȫʌȠȣ Įਫ਼IJȠ૨» is an exact quotation of Ps 68:1 (LXX). But the God-Man Christ has achieved a new victory, one that the incorporeal YHWH of the Old Testament could not. «Weep not the lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David has conquered» (Rv 5:5), the elder consoles John thus in Revelation 5:5 (cf. 1 Sam 2:6). God has fulfilled his promise to David to bring forth a Messiah from the tribe of Judah who would rule the whole earth: «Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession» (Ps 2:8). It was not enough for God to simply destroy Satan by his own omnipotent power, he wanted to do it through the very virtues that the devil lacked: obedience, servitude, and humility. Christ humbled himself to become human, to serve mankind by pouring out his blood for all people, bearing the penalty of their bad behaviour, «He committed no sin... He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed» (1 Pt 2:22, 24). He did this so that all who humbled themselves to accept Jesus in repentance would be freely washed, justified, and raised up with Jesus to heaven (1 Cor 6:11; 2 Cor 5:21; Eph 2:5-6). Thus

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

313

through the humble Christ God crushed the pride of the devil who enslaved humanity, and opened the way to paradise. But Jesus was resurrected and ascended into heaven. This is Christ’s victory over the beast of Daniel 7:1114 í the Lion of the tribe of Judah has triumphed, announcing his victory from the Cross he said «it is finished» (Jn 19:30), what is finished? The devil’s kingdom. No longer can Satan tyrannize God’s precious human creatures, because «our citizenship is in heaven» God has made humanity sit with Jesus on his throne (Eph 2:6). God has given mankind a new master and a new brother, a new hope and a new friend – and through him someday all creation will be restored in the new heavens and the new earth (Is 66:22; Rv 21:1; Rom 8:21). ij.136r ੪Ȣ ਥț ȜİȓʌİȚ țĮʌȞȩȢ ਥțȜȚʌȑIJȦıĮȞ, ੪Ȣ IJȒțİIJĮȚțȘȡȩȢ ਕʌȩ ʌȡȠıઆʌȠȣ ʌȣȡંȢ, țĮ੿ ਲȤȚઅȞ ਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ țĮȪμĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਲȜȓȠȣ. ȀĮIJȘȡĮμȑȞİ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, IJ઀ ȕȡĮįȪȞİȚȢ țĮ੿ Ƞ੝ ȜȑȖİȚȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ ıȠȣ; ¨ઁȢ įȩȟĮȞ IJ૶ ਖȖ઀૳ șİ૶, ijȠȕȒșȘIJȚ IJȠઃȢ IJȠȚȠ઄IJȠȣȢțĮ੿ IJȠıȠȪIJȠȣȢ ੒ȡțȚıμȠȪȢ, ੑȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ ਲμ૵Ȟ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠૣ İੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ ıȠȣ, ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ’ Į੝IJȠ૨ ਥȞ મ ʌ઼Ȟ ij.137v ȖȩȞȣ ț੺μʌIJİȚ ਥʌȠȣȡĮȞȓȦȞ țĮ੿ ਥʌȚȖİȓȦȞ țĮ੿ țĮIJĮȤșȠȞȓȦȞ, ੆ȞĮ İ੃ʌૉȢ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ ıȠȣ.੘ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJઁȞ țİȞઆıĮȞIJĮ166 ਦĮȣIJȩȞ țĮ੿ μȠȡij੽Ȟ įȠȪȜȠȣ ȜĮȕȩȞIJĮ, İੁʌ੻ IJ઀ ıȠ઀ ਧıIJĮȚ ੕ȞȠμĮ, ੒ȡțȓȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ IJં Į੆μĮ IJઁ ੃įȚȠȞ ਥțȤȑȠȞIJȠȢ ਥʌȓ ıIJĮȣȡȠ૨, İੁʌ੼ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ ıȠȣ, İੁʌȑ ijĮȞİȡ૵Ȣ, ਥȖઅ ੒ įȠ૨ȜȠȢ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ਥȡȦIJ૵ ıİ: IJ੿ ıȠ઀ ਧıIJȚ ੕ȞȠμĮ; ij.137r Ǽੁʌȑ İੁ țĮ੿ ਙȜȜȠȣȢ ਩ȤİȚȢ μİIJ੹ ıȠ૨ ıȣȞİȡȖȠ઄Ȣ, țĮ઀ ʌ૵Ȣ ਧȤİȚȢ țĮ੿ ਥț ʌȠ઀ĮȢ IJ੺ȟİȦȢ,ȁ ਵ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ ੒ ਙȡȤȦȞ ıȠȣ, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀઺ ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ țĮ੿ įȣȞȐμİȚ,ȁİ੃ ʌȠ૨ țĮȚ ਥȞ IJ઀ȞȚ IJȩʌ૳ İੇıĮȚ ੩țİȚμȑȞȠȢ, Ȟ੹ μȠȚ İੁʌİ૙Ȣ ʌȡȓȞ ਥțȕİ૙ȞĮȚ ਥț IJȠ૨ ਕȞșȡȫʌȠȣ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ ਥȞ IJȓȞȚ ਫ਼ʌȠIJȐııİȚ, İੁʌ੻,İੁʌȑ ʌȩIJİ ਥȟȑȡȤİȚ, țĮ੿ IJ઀ ıμİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙Ȣ ੖IJĮȞ ਥȟȑȜșૉȢ, ੒ȡțȓȗȦ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ ʌȞİȪμĮIJȠȢ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȓȠȣ. [ʌȠ઀ĮȢ IJ੺ȟİȦȢ, ਵ ʌ૵Ȣ țĮȜİ૙IJĮȚ ੒ ਙȡȤȦȞ ıȠȣ, ਥȞ ʌȠ઀઺ ਥȟȠȣıȓ઺ țĮ੿ įȣȞȐμİȚ]: to which class do you belong, or what is your name of your leader, and which is your authority and power.

ȁ

It is already clear that the demons described in the exorcism texts are many and unnamed. According to the Orthodox doctrine, many angels fell together with Satan. In the exorcism of Basil they are referred to as «all the ranks falling with him [the devil]»167. As we see here in the Xiropotamou 98 text, the demons are compared with an army where it is said that they have classes (IJ੺ȟİȚȢ) and a commander (੺ȡȤȦȞ)168 a term which we have discussed above. There are points on which the exorcisms correspond

314

Chapter 1

closely to the Orthodox doctrine. One must not forget that in the New Testament, Christ asks the demon what is his name and it responds, «My name is legion, for we are many» (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). The name legion is of course a Latin military term, where the Roman legion of the first century consisted of several thousands of soldiers both foot and cavalry í but here the enemies are spiritual, arrayed in battle against the people of God. The throng of demons is also referred to in the exorcisms as a «crowd», as the «collaborators» (ıȣȞİȡȖȐIJİȢ ıȣȞĮíμȠȚ) of the devil who is described as «dragon like» (įȡĮțȠȞIJȠİȚįȒȢ) or «beast-faced» (șȘȡȚȠʌȡȩıȦʌȠȢ)169. This accords with the Jewish perceptions of the tyrannical human empires which persecuted God’s people, and were thus represented as beasts in Jewish apocalyptic literature such as the book of Daniel (Dan 7:3-12; 8:20-21). In the New Testament it is precisely over these beast-like empires that Satan claims to have authority (Mt 4:8-9; Lk 4:5-7) which corresponds well Jesus’ name for the devil in John’s Gospel «the ruler of this world» (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11). This world ruler țȠıμȠțȡȐIJȦȡ along with his angels (Eph 6:12), would presumably continue to wield authority after the resurrection (cf. Rv 2:10) as attested by historical fact, where the Roman empire, from time to time, terrorized God’s people in the brief but severely bloody persecutions of the first three centuries A. D. This bestial imagery also corresponds to folk perceptions of the exotiká as monstrous, having the face or feet of various animals. Elsewhere in the exorcisms they are referred to as «donkey-limbed» or able to metamorphose into a variety of forms170. While the demons may cause disease and illness, their much more widely recognized activity is to lead people astray and to cause them to sin. They were purported to elicit desire (İʌȚșȣμȓĮ), and accentuate lewdness (ȜĮȖȞİȓĮ), shamelessness (ĮȞĮȓįİȚĮ), greed (ijȚȜĮȡȖȣȡȓĮ), envy (ijșȩȞȠȢ), lethargy (ȜȘșȐȡȖȠȣȢ ʌȠȚȠȪȞIJĮȚ); stir up illusions (ȚȞįȐȜμĮıȚȞ IJĮȡȐııȠȞIJĮȚ); lies (ȥİȣįİȓȢ), pride (ȣʌİȡȘijȐȞİȚĮ), vanity (μĮIJĮȚȩIJȘȢ), evil (ʌȠȞȘȡȓĮ), idolatry (İȚįȦȜȠȜĮIJȡȓĮ), and covetousness (ʌȜİȠȞİȟȓĮ). In short, the demons are always inviting humans to break God’s commandments, they incite sin, and so wherever anyone is doing anything displeasing to God, the demons are there to capitalise on it. Paul cautions those whose «life is hidden with Christ in God» to avoid «sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness (ʌȜİȠȞİȟȓĮ), which is idolatry» (Col 3:3, 5). Idolatry, Paul says, is a sacrifice that brings «communion with demons» (1 Cor 10:20-21). What is gained in this sacrifice is the fleeting pleasure of sin, what is «sacrificed» is the presence of God, or the life of the human soul. By sin the divine life of freedom and joy that God has given becomes slavery to demons. Demons actually feed on the life-blood of their poor human slaves who fall into sin

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

315

and away from God’s commandments (Ez 16:20; Gal 4:8). «The wages of sin is death» (Rom 6:23) and human death is the nourishment of Satan; it is «the serpent's food» (Is 65:25). Demons thus are at the root of all evils171. St John writes: «Little children, let no one deceive you... whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil» (1 Jn 3:7-8). So if one desires to be free of the devil’s power, he must desire to separate himself from sin. Through exorcism, faith, and/or renewal of baptism the liberating power of Jesus’ name flows into the human soul, resurrecting it from the dead, and liberating it from the destructive power of Satan. This is a beginning of the process of sanctification by which the wounds the devil has made in the human psyche are slowly healed and Divine Life in the soul is increasingly restored. ij.138v IJȠ૨ ijĮȞİȡઆıĮȞIJંȢ ıİ įȚ੹ IJȠ૨ țȠȡȣijĮȓȠȣ IJ૵Ȟ ਞʌȠıIJȩȜȦȞ ȆȑIJȡȠȣ, ਥȞ ȈȓμȦȞȚ IJ૶ μȐȖ૳ ț(Į੿) ਥȞ ț઄ȞȦʌȚ IJ૵ ਕȖȤȓıIJȦ172 įȚ੹ IJȠ૨IJȠ ੒ ਕʌȩıIJȠȜȠȢ ੉ȦȐȞȞȘȢ ੒ șİȠȜȩȖȠȢ ਥȞ Ȇ੺IJμ૳ IJૌ Ȟ੾ı૳. Ǽੁʌ੻ ਘਥȡઆ IJȘıȐıȠȣ, ʌĮȞȠ૨ȡȖİ įȚȐȕȠȜİ, IJĮ ʌİȓȞȦ ıȠȞ ਦĮȣIJȩȞ, ੒ ઌįȘȢ ਥıIJ੿Ȟ İੁȢ țĮșȑįȡĮȞıȠȣ, ਥț İ૙ ਥıIJȚȞ ਲ Ƞ੃țȘı઀Ȣ ıȠȣ. ȁȠȚʌઁȞ Ƞ੡ț ਥıIJȚ țĮȚȡઁȢ IJȠ૨ ਕȞĮμȑȞİȚȞ. ij.138r ੘ ȀȪȡȚȠȢ ਥȖȖઃȢ ਸ਼ȟİȚ ț(Į੿) Ƞ੝ ȤȡȠȞ઀ıİ૙ țȡ૙ȞĮȚ IJ੽Ȟ ȖોȞ, ț(Į੿) ı੻ț(Į੿) IJ੽Ȟ ıȣȞİȡȖȩȞ ıȠȣ į઄ȞĮμȚȞ țȠȜȐıİȚ İੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȖȑİȞȞĮȞ IJȠ૨ ʌȣȡંȢ, ʌĮȡĮįȠઃȢ İੁȢ IJઁ ıțંIJȠȢ IJઁ ਥȟઆIJİȡȠȞ, ੖ʌȠȣ ıțઆȜȘȟ ੒ ਕțȠ઀μȘIJȠȢ ț(Į੿) IJઁ ʌ૨ȡ Ƞ੝ ıȕȑȞȞȣIJĮȚ. Ǽੁʌ੻ IJઁ ੕ȞȠμ੺ıȠȣ, ੖ IJȚ μȑȖĮȢ ੒ ijȩȕȠȢ IJȠ૨ ĬİȠ૨ ț(Į੿) μİȖȐȜȘ ਲ įȩȟĮ IJȠ૨ ȆĮIJȡંȢ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ȊੂȠ૨ ț(Į੿) IJȠ૨ ਞȖ઀Ƞȣ ȆȞİȪμĮIJȠȢ, Ȟ૨Ȟ țĮ੿ ਕİ੿ țĮ੿ İੁȢ IJȠઃȢ Įੁ૵ȞĮȢ IJ૵Ȟ ĮੁઆȞȦȞ. ਝμ੾Ȟ. ij.139v Ȇİȡ੿ ȕȠȣȡțȠȜȐțțȠȣȂ IJઁ ʌ૵Ȣ Ȟ੹ IJઁȞ ȤĮȜȐıૉȢ. ȉȠ૨IJȠ į੻ ȞİੇȞĮȚ ਕȜȘș੾Ȣ ਕ μ੽ ਩ȞĮȚ IJȑȤȞȘ IJȠ૨ įȚĮȕȩȜȠȣ ț(Į੿) ijĮȞIJȐȗİIJ(ĮȚ) įȚ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ਕʌȚıIJȓĮȞ ਲμ૵Ȟ, ੖μȦȢ ਥ੹Ȟ İਫ਼ȡİșૌ IJȠȚȠ૨IJȠȞ ȜİȓȥĮȞȠȞ, ʌȡȑʌİȚȞ ੹ȖȑȞૉ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮ įȚ੹ IJઁȞ ਕʌȠșĮμȑȞȠȞ μİIJ੹țȠȜȜȪȕȦȞ 174 İੁȢ ȕȠȒșİȚĮȞ ʌȐȞIJȦȞ ੒μȠ઀ȦȢ ț(Į੿) įȚ੹ IJઁȞ ਕʌȠșĮμȑȞȠȞ… ij.139r. ț(Į੿)175 μİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ Ȗ઀ȞİIJĮȚ ਖȖȚĮıμઁȢ μȚțȡઁȢ μİIJ੹ ਖȖȓȦȞ ȜİȚȥȐȞȦȞ ਥʌ੺ȞȦ İੁȢ IJȠ μȞોμĮ, ț(Į੿)176 μİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıμȠૣ įȚĮȕȐȗȠȣȞ IJ੹Ȣ İ੝Ȥ੹Ȣ IJȠ૨ ȂİȖȐȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ, İ੅IJİ IJȠઃȢ ਥȟȠȡțȚıμȠઃȢ țĮ੿ ੖ȜĮȢIJ੹Ȣ ੕ʌȚıșİȞ ȖİȖȡĮμμȑȞĮȢ İ੝ȤȐȢ, țĮ੿ ੪ı੹Ȟ įȚĮȕĮıIJȠૣȞ Įੂ İ੝ȤĮ੿ ૧ĮȞIJ઀ȗİȚȢ IJઁȞ ȜĮઁȞ μİIJȐ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıμȠ૨, ț(Į੿)IJઁ ʌİȡȓııİȣμĮ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıμȠ૨ IJઁ ȤȪȞİȚȢ ਕ…{…} Ȇİȡ੿ȕȠȡțȠȜțઆȞ (ij.139r-[140r-149v=missing]150r).

316

Chapter 1

[Ȇİȡ੿ ȕȠȣȡțȠȜȐțțȠȣ]:177 About the Vampires. (175)

Ȃ

In the Pedalion, 176 which is an annotated collection of Greek canons (ecclesiastical rules) compiled by Nicodemus Hagioreites and Agapios Leonardos and published in 1800 we find a subject index and an entry which reads: «Vampires (ȕȡȚțȩȜĮțİȢ), that they do not exist and how people who burn them ought to be punished»178. This entry in the subject index refers the reader to a note to Canon 66 of St. Basil the Great, which prescribes ten years excommunication for grave robbery. The Greek vampire or vrykolakas does not correspond to the «Hollywood vampire». According to the Greek Folklore, the vampire is the non-decomposed body of an excommunicated individual which has been possessed by the devil and terrorizes the environs. The Greek belief in vampires is not documented before the mid-fifteenth century. The hierarchy of the Orthodox Church was hostile to the popular belief in vampires and tried repeatedly to eradicate it179. The provision of the Pedalion on vampires is a part of this church policy against the belief in vampires. The note to

318

Chapter 1

Canon 66 of St. Basil the Great states how priests and laypersons who open graves to search for and kill so-called vampires ought to be punished. Nicodemus denounces this practice as childish and stupid. He states that there is no such thing as vampires and that the devil does not have the power to raise the dead180. He claims to have investigated the matter carefully and has never met someone who actually has seen a vampire but only people who have heard that other people have seen them. He thus urges the faithful to reject this as fantasy and delusion. But if they because of their weak faith believe that demons have possessed a deceased person, they should get the priest to chant and sprinkle holy water on the grave181. However they should not open the grave in order to chop up or burn the corpse. If they do that the bishop should not only punish them as grave robbers but also as murderers. At the end of the note Nicodemus recounts that it is believed (falsely in his opinion) that people who have been killed, hanged, or died a violent death can become vampires. He repeats in the end a condemnation of the Bogomils who are said to believe that demons can possess corpses. Nicodemus mentions only those who have been killed, hanged or died a violent death as possible candidates for becoming vampires according to popular belief. But in the earlier documented folklore it is often the corpse of an excommunicated person which was believed to become a vampire, as we will see below. In any case Nicodemus repeats the traditional objection towards belief in vampires: (a) it is said to be a childish delusion caused by a weak faith; (b) it seems to ascribes too much power to the devil (i.e., the power to raise the dead); and (c) it results in the desecration of graves and corpses when people try to destroy the vampire. This treatment of vampires in the Pedalion is an interesting example of the tension between the worldview of the educated elite and that of popular folklore. As a concession to folklore Nicodemus offers the possibility of having a priest chanting and sprinkling holy water at the grave of a suspected vampire but the traditional ways of destroying vampires (i.e., dismembering and burning the corpse) were to be eradicated by severe punishments. Belief in vampires commonly called ȕȡȣțȩȜĮțĮȢ (vrykolakas), though also referred to as țĮIJĮȤĮȞȐįİȢ in Crete, persisted throughout Greek history and became so widespread in the 18th and 19th centuries that many practices were enforced to both prevent and combat vampirism182. The deceased were often exhumed from their graves after three years of death and the remains placed in a box by relatives; wine was poured over them while a priest would read from scriptures183. However, if the body had not sufficiently decayed, the corpse would be labelled a vrykolakas and dealt with appropriately184.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

319

In Greek folklore, vampires could come about through various means, from people who died after being excommunicated, desecrating a religious day, committing a great crime, living a bad life, or dying alone185. Other supposed causes included having a cat jump across one’s grave, eating meat from a sheep killed by a wolf, and being cursed. The vampires were usually thought to be indistinguishable from living people, giving rise to many folk tales with this theme. Crosses and antidoron (blessed bread) from the church were used as wards in different places. To prevent vampires from rising from the dead, their hearts were pierced with iron nails while resting in their graves, or their bodies burned and the ashes scattered. Because the Church opposed burning people who had received the myron of chrismation in the Baptism ritual, cremation was considered a last resort. Leo Allatios (15861669) dealt extensively with contemporary Greek folklore in his treatise «De Graecorum hodie quorundam opinationibus» (1645), «On the beliefs of some modern Greeks»186. In particular, he wrote about the «vampires» who haunted the Greek islands, describing them as un-decayed dead bodies who were believed to come out of their graves at night to terrorize and even kill people. Allatios himself promoted the belief that was gaining ground in the West through the sixteenth-century, namely that Vampires were real and were themselves the work of the devil. Just as the Inquisition in the previous century had championed the idea that witchcraft was real and that witches actually communed with the devil, so vampires were thought to be actually walking around the towns and villages of Europe. They were not the dead returned, they were bodies reanimated by the devil and his minions. Allatius even quoted the witch-finders bible, the Malleus Maleficarum (The Witch's Hammer), which noted the three conditions necessary for witchcraft to exist: the devil, a witch, and the permission of God. In like measure, Allatios asserted that for vampires to exist all that was needed was the devil, a dead body, and the permission of God. The tying of vampirism to the devil by Allatios and his colleagues brought Satan into the vampire equation. Vampirism became another form of Satanism and the vampire became the instrument of the devil in the popular psyche. Also, his victims were tainted by evil. Like the demons, vampires were alienated from the things of God. They could not exist in the realms of the sacred and would flee from the effective symbols of the true God, such as the crucifix or from holy things, such as holy water and the Eucharistic wafer, which both Orthodox and Roman Catholics believed to be the very body of Christ. In like measure, the offices of the church through the priest were believed to be an effective means of stopping the vampire. Eastern Orthodox common people always invited the priest to participate in

320

Chapter 1

their anti-vampire efforts. In its attempt to counter the superstitious beliefs in vampires, the Orthodox Church ordered its priests not to take part to such activities, even threatening excommunication. Allatios does not distinguish between burculaca and tympaniaios (the two species of vampires found in Orthodox canon law texts) and tries to explain this phenomenon in two ways: either these corpses are animated by the devil, or they are still inhabited, as a penance, by the sinful souls of their former owners. Some scholars have argued that Allatios’ handling of this matter is heavily influenced by his Catholic faith and his belief in Purgatory. A thorough analysis of Greek folklore, travellers’ accounts and Byzantine texts seems to demonstrate that Allatios’ views were widespread and dated back to Byzantine times, and that they were influenced, moreover, by the diffusion of the medieval heresy of Bogomilism187. The Orthodox Church denied the existence of vampires, seen as evil, reanimated corpses, but admitted that in some cases the devil could create fantastic visions, making a possessed corpse seem «alive» (well-fleshed, engorged with blood...) and appear to people to scare them and lead them into sin. However, if the people terrorized by the devil decided to burn the corpse (as often happened), they would have committed mortal sin: therefore the need arose to exorcise the alleged «vampires», not because they were really reanimated corpses, but because it was feared that the devil had taken possession of them to lead the faithful astray188. This explanation, among other things, is given in a different version of Chapter 710 of the Nomocanon of Malaxos189. The idea that the evil spirit lurks in the heart has various testimonies of this belief in the modern age, from the account of the famous French botanist Joseph Pitton deTournefort (1656 – 1708) who in 1700, on the island of Mykonos, witnessed several exorcisms against an alleged vampire. In one case, besides performing the rite, it was thought best to extract the heart from the corpse, believing that the devil was hidden inside it190. In truth the ecclesiastical authorities, faced with a real mass hysteria in the population aroused by the appearance of an alleged vrykolakas, had to recognize that it was probably not wise to stubbornly deny the existence of the phenomenon, as was stated in Chapter 710 of the Nomocanon of Malaxos. The Church began to take on a more flexible attitude and, in fact, a different version of the particular chapter is attested in various manuscripts. However it is to be noted that condemning and prohibiting practices relating to divination, healing ailments through charms, casting spells, bearing amulets or pentagrams do not appear to have exerted considerable influence not only upon the common people, but also upon the clerics themselves, particularly the lower ones, who, by means of exploiting

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

321

the Christian element of this hybrid system, legitimized, either consciously or unconsciously, their participation in these practices191. Such inconsistencies between the official point of view of the Church and the practice of priests, some of whom «were more than willing to take the initiative or even benefit from practicing certain customs that were unmistakably pagan in their origin» is substantiated by numerous ethnographic data192. Following a categorical introduction stating that «it is inconceivable that a dead person could turn into a vrykolakas», the alternative text however admits that the devil, in a bid to lead men astray, «will make unprecedented actions to expose them to the wrath of God»193.The text explains that it therefore often occurs to some people at night that some dead man whom they knew in their lifetime, comes along and talks to them for example, and in their sleep they see him walking in the street or standing still and also suffocating people. «People feel upset; they hurry to the tomb, open it and dig up the corpse. And because their faith in God is not flawless, the devil transforms itself and enters the dead body. And though it may have been in the tomb for some time, to these men the corpse would still appear as if retaining flesh, blood, nails and hair. In the presence of these manifestations, he continues, the Vrykolakas, should not be set aflame. The priests should instead be called to invoke the Virgin Theotokos and also do a Minor Blessing of the water. They should then celebrate the liturgy and invoke the Blessed Virgin, imploring her aid; they should also make a commemoration of the dead with Kollyba [sweet boiled wheat]. Then the exorcisms and the two Baptismal exorcisms should be recited over the corpse. The faithful present should then be sprinkled with the holy water, but the greater part of the holy water should be sprinkled on the corpse: by the grace of God, the devil will flee from there»194. ij.139r ț(Į੿) μİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȓĮȞ Ȗ઀ȞİIJĮȚ ਖȖȚĮıμઁȢ μȚțȡઁȢ μİIJ੹ ਖȖȓȦȞ ȜİȚȥȐȞȦȞ ਥʌ੺ȞȦ İੁȢ IJȠ μȞોμĮ, ț(Į੿) μİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ İ੝Ȥ੽Ȟ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıμȠૣ įȚĮȕȐȗȠȣȞIJ੹Ȣ İ੝Ȥ੹Ȣ IJȠ૨ ȂİȖȐȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ,ȃ İ੅IJİ IJȠઃȢ ਥȟȠȡțȚıμȠઃȢ țĮ੿ ੖ȜĮȢ IJ੹Ȣ ੕ʌȚıșİȞ ȖİȖȡĮμμȑȞĮȢ İ੝ȤȐȢ, țĮ੿ ੪ı੹Ȟ įȚĮȕĮıIJȠૣȞ Įੂ İ੝ȤĮ੿ ૧ĮȞIJ઀ȗİȚȢ IJઁȞ ȜĮઁȞ μİIJȐ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıμȠ૨, ț(Į੿) IJઁ ʌİȡȓııİȣμĮ IJȠ૨ ਖȖȚĮıμȠ૨ IJઁ ȤȪȞİȚȢ ਕ…{[…..]}. ȃ [įȚĮȕȐȗȠȣȞIJ੹Ȣ İ੝ȤȐȢ IJȠ૨ μİȖȐȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ İ੃IJİ IJȠȪȢ ਥȟȠȡțȚıμȠઃȢ țĮ੿ ੖ȜĮȢ IJ੹Ȣ ੔ʌȚıșİȞ ȖİȖȡĮμμȑȞĮȢ İ੝ȤȐȢ,] With... the prayers of the Great Emperor wither the exorcisms and all the previous written prayers The Euchologion (prayer-book) of the orthodox tradition includes different prayers of exorcism attributed to persons of great esteem and which are used in particular situations. It also includes a prayer of

322

Chapter 1

intercession to the Paraclete in favour of persons tormented by demons. The first to be evoked are the four prayers attributed to Basil the Great which concern persons who suffer because of the demons but which can be used against any infirmity195. The first prayer asks God to intervene with the power of his action to expel the demons and give strength and the Spirit to the believer: «੘ ĬİȩȢ IJ૵Ȟ șİ૵Ȟ, ț(Įȓ) ȀȪȡȚȠȢ IJ૵Ȟ țȣȡȓȦȞ, ੒ IJ૵Ȟ ʌȪȡȚȞȦȞ IJĮȖμȐIJȦȞ įȘμȚȠȣȡȖȩȢ...». «The God of gods and the Lord of lords, the demiurge of the fiery ranks... ». The second prayer is a direct and strong exorcism which takes into consideration innumerable possible forms of demonic presence and identity: « ਫȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıȑ IJȩȞ ਕȡȤȑțĮțȠȞ IJોȢ ȕȜĮıijȘμȓĮȢ...», «I exorcise you the archevil of blasphemy... ». The third prayer asks God to intervene with the power of his action as the God of the heavenly lights from whom all good things come: « ੘ ĬİȩȢ IJ૵Ȟ Ƞ੝ȡĮȞ૵Ȟ, ੒ ĬİȩȢ IJ૵Ȟ ijȫIJȦȞ...». «The God of heavens, the God of lights... ». The last prayer asks God to command the evil and impure spirits and demons to depart from the soul and body: « ੘ ĬİȩȢ ੒ ĮੁȫȞȚȠȢ, ੒ ȜȣIJȡȦıȐμİȞȠȢ IJȩ ȖȑȞȠȢ IJ૵Ȟ ਕȞșȡȫʌȦȞ...» «The God the eternal, the redeemer of the race of humans... ». The second exorcism to be evoked are the four prayers attributed to St. John Chrysostom which concern persons who suffer because of the demons, but which can be used against any infirmity. Itasks for the mercy o God to purify and free his servant: « ੘ ʌȐıȚȞ ਕțĮșȐȡIJȠȚȢ ʌȞİȪμĮıȚȞ ਥʌȚIJȚμȒıĮȢ...». The third prayer asks pray God to send down upon the person a peaceful angel, a mighty angel, a guardian of soul and body, that will rebuke and drive away every evil: « ਫʌȚțĮȜȠȪμİșĮıȑ, ¨ȑıʌȠIJĮ, Ĭİȑ ȆĮȞIJȠțȡȐIJȠȡ...». The fourth prayer is a direct command to the devil to depart swiftly from this creature of the Creator Christ our God: « ȉȒȞ șİȓĮȞIJȑ țĮȓ ਖȖȓĮȞ, țĮȓ μİȖȐȜȘȞ, țĮȓ ijȡȚțIJȒȞ, țĮȓ ਙıIJİțIJȠȞ ੑȞȠμĮıȓĮȞ țĮȓ ਥʌȓțȜȘıȚȞ ».

Conclusion The exorcistic prayer contained in the late 17th/early 18th century Xiropotamou 98 manuscript, shows that the Orthodox view of the devil does not differ substantially from the Roman Catholic view, which was also formulated in the patristic period, that is, before the Great Schism. In effect both historical Churches agree that the devil is the personification of evil; yet a more detailed exposition of Orthodox assumptions involves more difficulties, in as much as the Orthodox Church is not headed by a leader whose pronouncements on issues of defining doctrine are held to be

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

323

infallible and final. For this and other reasons, it may be misleading to speak of Orthodox dogma regarding the devil, since its thinking on this matter is continually interpreted and re-presented rather than fixed and formalized in a code of unalterable pronouncements. In regard to the devil, the Orthodox Church has remained flexible and has constantly assimilated new representations so long as they did not contradict basic principles. This attitude makes it all the more difficult to draw rigid distinctions between local beliefs and official Orthodoxy, and must be borne in mind when examining the devil in Orthodox tradition. The demons continue to share many characteristics with the fallen angels. Satan is their leader. They are immaterial, sexless, formless; do not die and they may reside in the air, on the earth, or beneath the earth – but their main point of contact, or point of entry, from the metaphysical world into this physical reality is the human psyche. The human mind is the door, the key region of flux between the two worlds, spiritual and physical. And it is precisely here that the demons mount their attack. In order to carry out their machinations the demons are able to transform themselves and assume any gender or shape they please. As the angels form the army of God, demons may be ranked on the model of an army under Satan. The Orthodox Church has always unambiguously considered the devil inferior and subordinate to God. God created Satan and the other angelic powers through his Son, the eternal Word (Col 1:16). The powers who fell into darkness did so of their own free will. They cannot see the good, but they fear God’s justice, and so they continue to sow rebellion through human agents. They would utter every kind of blasphemy against God, and aim to destroy humanity; but they are under God’s law and can only «destroy» in so far as God permits for the testing and ultimate good of mankind. The power of God is absolute, but Satan is allowed to operate under divine constraints. While God is love and goodness beyond our imagining, the rebellious devil is the author of evil, who not only hates God, but arouses an indescribable sense of horror and rage in humans. This is because the mental capacity of the mortal mind is insufficient to understand the manifold variations of Satan’s malice, the rage of his Satan’s poisonous fury, and the insanity of his delight in inflicting pain. Suffering and death, the weapons of Satan, are a result of the curses mankind puts on itself by rebelling from God. But through these very same weapons Jesus conquered the ancient serpent by accepting to suffer and die in love – showing that God’s love is infinitely greater than all the power of the enemy. The Orthodox moral world emerges as an arena in which good struggles against evil and the battleground is in every human heart, where the kingdom of heaven battles against the kingdom of this world dominated by darkness.

324

Chapter 1

While the topic is broad Orthodox tradition concerning the devil does observe certain doctrinal essentials. One who has accepted Christ should properly disdain demons as vain and ineffectual. Though the devil has already been vanquished by the cross of Christ, even as a defeated foe, can still do a lot of harm if one does not fight, «Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you» (Jas 4:7). By embracing evil and refusing to resist temptation offered by the devil, the human can wound himself, and destroy his own soul. But by turning to God and asking for mercy, God’s miraculous grace can begin to restore human life that chooses to walk down the path of penitence. Penance is the «narrow way», the only way that leads to eternal life «for the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many» (cf. Mt 7:13). But Jesus builds virtue and love of God in the truly repentant soul to a greater degree than if sin had never happened (Lk 7:40-50). In this way the devil and his angels serve the purposes of God on earth training his elect to reject all evil in all its seductive forms. These tests purify the heart that chooses the good for God’s sake and rejects evil in all humility; the soul and faith are purified just like gold is purified in the fire (1 Pt 1:7). The Church, Christ’s mission on earth, maintains the protection of the body of Christ through a large, overarching framework of sacraments and rites; through the rite of exorcism the priest seeks to bring the deliverance that Christ achieved on the cross to the afflicted. Deliverance is accomplished through prayer and on-going ministry to those who, after Baptism, are liable to struggle with bondage to sin, the influence of demons, sinful drives, or the effects of overwhelming psychological and/or spiritual trauma. Participation in exorcism should be combined with the renewed will and desire of the victim to stand on the spiritual ground that Jesus won for their salvation. And thus exorcism can help a soul come fully into the light of Christ, with greater wellness and confidence, having rejected the devil and his poisonous weapons of self-pity and deceit.

Notes 1

Cf. Gn 1:3; 9; 11; 14; etc. Ps 33:6 (32:6 LXX): «By the word (ȜંȖ૳) of the LORD the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host». This creative word is referred to as ȜȩȖȠȢ in the LXX, and dabar in the Masoretic text which reads: ၱၠၢၾၔၰၯ ၧၬၻ ၩၧႁၢၧ ၧႼၸၶ ၱၬၳႻၬႁၢၤၢ (for the creative power of God’s speech cf. also Ps 148:5; Jb. 33:4; Jn 1:1-5; Heb 11:3). 2 For the sake of clarity I am using the word «liturgical exorcisms» to distinguish them from «secular exorcisms». This work is about liturgical exorcisms. 3 A. SCHMEMAN, Of Water and Spirit, 24. Father Alexander writes that the meaning of the exorcisms is to face evil, to acknowledge its reality, to know its

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

325

power, and to proclaim the power of God to destroy it. The exorcisms announce the forthcoming Baptism as an act of victory. 4 C. f., e. g. Jb 5: 9; Ps 107; Rom 11: 33; Eph 3: 18. 5 Elsewhere Paul exorcises demons in Jesus’ name as he did in Acts 16: 18, when he commands a spirit to leave a little possessed girl. Healings are performed in Jesus name by Paul and the apostles, e. g. Acts 3: 6; 5: 12; 9: 34; 14: 3; 14: 9-10, 19: 1112; Gal 3: 5; Rom 15: 19; 2 Cor 12: 12; etc. and also by the other Christian communities in general Heb 2: 4; Gal 3: 5 as a signs confirming apostolic teaching that Jesus is truly the Messiah risen from the dead. 6 Cf. Acts 3: 12, Peter admits that miracles and healings are not achieved by human «power or piety» but by God’s power that flows through faith in Jesus’ name (3: 16). The message in Acts 19 is that God’s power is exorcistic, and it is flowing through Paul’s ministry leading to a kind of mass liberation for the people in this heavily pagan society. Luke thus uses Ephesus as a prime example of the victory of Christ, the city is leaving the chains of oppression under evil spirits and freely coming to joyful communion within the Christian community, though not without some controversy and opposition from those who profited from the pagan culture (Acts 19: 23 ff.). 7 See also Heb 2: 4; Gal 3: 5; Acts 5: 12; 14: 3. 8 Cf. Gal 3: 5; Acts 14: 3-10, 19: 11-12; Rom 15: 19; 1 Cor 1: 4-5; 2 Cor 10: 4, 12: 12, 13: 3. 9 Cf. that man is saved by faith cf. Rom 10: 9; 6: 4,22; cf. also Jn 3: 36; 20: 31; Col 2: 12; 1 Pt 3: 21; Eph 2; Tit 3: 4-7; 1 Jn 5: 13 for faith, baptism, and regeneration unto eternal life. 10 Concerning his exorcisms, Jesus says in Mt 12: 28. «But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you». 11 Poem in Greek is ʌȠȓȘıȚȢ - meaning a ‘making’. See ī. ȃ. ĭǿȁǿǹȈ, ȅȚ İȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ ȦȢ șİȡĮʌİȣIJȚțȒ ȜİȚIJȠȣȡȖȚțȒ įȡĮıIJȘȡȚȩIJȘIJĮ. 12 Cf. Christ victory over evil on the cross gives man access to God, Heb 10: 19-20: «We have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh». Cf. Jn 4: 4 «Little children, you are from God and have overcome them, [for Spirit of God] who is in you is greater than he who is in the world». Thus John explains that the power that Christ possessed over the internalization of demonic influence is conferred to those who believe (cf. 1 Jn. 5: 18-19). 13 J. L. ǹUSTIN, How to do things with words. According to Austin a number of conditions must be met for a perfomative utterance to succeed. Failure to fulfill any one of these conditions may void the effect of the utterance. ī. Ĭ. ǺǼȇīŸȉH, ȁİȟȚțò ȁİȚIJȠȣȡȖȚțuȞ țĮì IJİȜİIJȠȣȡȖȚțuȞ oȡȦȞ, 54. [਺ ਥȟȦ ȤȡȚıIJȚĮ ȞȚț੽ ਩ȞȞȠȚĮ IJȠ૨ ੖ȡȠȣ įȘȜȫ ȞİȚIJ੽ «įȑıμİȣıȘțȐʌȠȚȠȣμ੻ ੕ȡțȠ»] Also. Ĭ. ȋȇǿȈȉȅ¨ȅȊȁȅȊ, ਫȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ, ਥȟȠȡțȚıIJ੻Ȣ țĮ੿ ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮ, 11. 14 Infants in Greece are not baptized immediately after birth. This is surprising given the importance of Baptism in establishing the child’s chances for salvation, not to mention simple membership in the Christian community. It is the godparent’s prerogative to select a name for the child. Baptismal names are sacred and for the

326

Chapter 1

most part shared in common with a saint of holy figure of the Orthodox tradition. At Baptism only a personal name is bestowed and this name, never the family name, will be used in church to refer to the individual. The Christian name allows the child to be recorded in the book of Life. Interestingly, in Greece generally unbaptized children are not addressed by their eventual name. They are usually called simply μȦȡȩ (baby), a neuter noun or else ȕİȕs in the case of boys and ȕİȕá in the case of girls. In the case of the first example, the name represent that the new-born child as barley incorporated into humanity. In the second instance, the foreign provenance of the term perhaps underscores the conviction that the child does not yet belong to the Greek Orthodox community. 15 The ceremony of Baptism has been unchanged for hundreds of years, certainly since the 1647 edition of the J. GOAR, Euchologion sive Rituale Graecorum. There is a long and stable tradition at least in Greece, which reflects the church’s success in conserving its rituals and theological positions. It is no surprise, therefore, to find a standardized text (ǹțȠȜȠȣșȓĮ IJȠȣ ĮȖȓȠȣ ȕĮʌIJȓıμĮIJȠȢ) for the Baptismal rite containing instructions to the priest for carrying out this rite. 16 As Cyprian puts it «When such people (catechumens) come forward to receive the waters of salvation and the sanctification of Baptism, we ought to be convinced and firmly believe that the devil is there overpowered and that through God’s mercy the man now dedicated to him is set free». Epistulae IXIX, 15 17 According to local folklore, on the island of Crete these ‘half baptized’ people become vampires called «katakhanades» while in Tinos they are called as «the poorly baptized ones». See A. ĭȁŸȇǹȀǾȈ, ȉȒȞȠȢ: ȁĮȧțȩȢʌȠȜȚIJȚıμȩȢ, 235; ī. ȀǹȁǹǿȈǹȀǾ, «ȀȡȘIJȚțĮȓ ʌȡȠȜȒȥİȚȢ» IJİȪȤȘ 1, 2, 5 (#233-236, 241-2); «Exorcism, Exorcist», in A new Dictionary of Liturgy. 230; H. LECLERQ, «Exorcisme, exorciste», 970. 18 See also the article written by P. MYLONAS – G. KOUKAS «MĮȖsȚĮ țĮȚ ȗóȡțȚĮȢ IJȘȞ ǼȜȜáįĮ» [access: 14. 05. 2014] www.etypos. com/content/entheta_pdf/9magic. pdf/. 19 Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ – Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ǿİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ . 20 See for example the Testament of Solomon where the devil refuses to give its name. nos 46. «But I said to him: ‘Tell me his name’. But he answered. ‘I cannot tell thee. For if I tell his name, I render myself incurable. But he will come in response to his name’». Also: O. BAUERNFEIND, Die Worte der Dämonen im Markus evangelium, 36-37; A. JIRKU, Die Dämonen und ihre Abwehr im alten Testament, 25; A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia 1, 36); E. VOUTRIAS, «Euphemistic names for the prayers of the nether world»,73-82. 21 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 134. 22 See D. F. MOKE, Eroticism in the Greek magical papyri. Here the author makes a close connection between names and persons as well as Jewish elements and numbers. See also E. PACHOUMI, The Erotic and Separation Spells of the Magical Papyri and Defixiones. F. GRAF, Magic in the Ancient world, 120-121 differentiates between: 1) defixiones iudicariae (judicial spells) in which one attempts to do harm to one’s adversaries at a trial. Although these spells most often come from Athens and from the fifth and fourth centuries B. C., there are examples in all eras and from

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

327

all regions; 2) defixiones amatoriae (erotic spells and curse tablets), which have the aim of causing reciprocal and wild love in a beloved person; 3) defixiones agonisticae (agonistic spells) in the context of the amphitheater or other spectacles and which are especially well attested to in the imperial era; defixiones against slanderers and thieves; 4) defixiones against economic competitors, attested to from the fourth century B. C. up to the imperial era (in magic papyri). 23 ĭ. ǿ. īǿŸȇīȅȈ, Ǿ μĮȖİȓĮ İȞIJȩȢ IJȦȞ IJİȚȤȫȞ, 71. 24 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 133. 25 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 133b. 26 L. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia ij.7v, 30 «Ǽੁ į੼ İੁıȚțȦijȠ੿ țĮ੿ Ƞ੝ ȜĮȜȠૢȞIJİȢ»; F. PRADEL, Griechische und süditalienische Gebete, 11. 27 D. JORDAN in Magic and ritual in the ancient world, 25 demonstrates the replication, albeit with permutations, of six basic categories of demons in a succession of extraordinary texts which includes a third-century B. C. papyrus exorcism, an excerpt from pseudo-psellos and an exorcism attributed (probably) wrongly to St. Ephrem the Syrian. 28 L. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia,ij. 68v, 70. The presence of exorcisms in early medieval liturgical manuscripts (early Medieval Europe) is normally taken to reflect the church’s ongoing response to lively, vibrant traditions of possession-like behavior in early medieval Europe. The textual transmission and manuscript context of liturgical exorcisms paint a different picture, however. The vital, elaborate exorcisms of the earliest tradition (the Old Gelasian Sacramentary, especially as preserved in the Paris Supplement of the Vatican Sacramentary) quickly give way to procedural exorcisms in the 8th Century Gelasian Sacramentary and the subsequent Gregorian Sacramentaries. The exorcisms become demonstrably fragmented and adapted to cover a wider range of procedural uses (mostly preBaptismal exorcisms). Exorcisms shift in rubric, also: the Medelam tuam deprecor prayer appears as a solemn exorcism in the Leofric Missal, for instance, but is prescribed instead more generally for a sick person in the 11th century sacramentary Missal of Robert of Jumieges and in the Cambridge Corpus Christi College 163, 422 (ab hac vexatione becomes instead ab hac valitudinis; references to demons and the devil are omitted). In some cases these shifts imply a diversity of local ecclesiastical needs, a diversity which could lead to creative, dynamic responses on the part of early medieval liturgists to the received body of church prayers and practices. Often, however, the rubrics imply increasing use of exorcisms not for possessed persons, but for inclusion in more routine liturgical roles: preparation of the materials for mass, and preparation of the catechumen for Baptism. There is a generic gap, then, between the lively and widespread role of exorcism as it is portrayed in the dramatic saints’ lives, and the much more mundane role implied for it in the liturgical tradition itself. I will show how this trend develops and what its applications are most specifically to Anglo-Saxon England, where demon possession may have been a much rarer phenomenon than is commonly presumed. 29 L. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, ij. 98v-102, 89-93. 30 L. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, ij. 40v «ਫȟȠȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ įȚ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖ઀ȦȞ ੑȞȠμ੺ IJȦȞ IJȠ૨ ʌĮȞIJȠįșȞ੺μȠȣ ĬİȠ૨ ȠੈȠȞ Ȃİıı઀Ƞȣ, ȈȦIJોȡȠȢ, ਫμμĮȞȠȣ੾Ȝ, ȈĮȕĮઆș, ਝįȦȞĮ૘, μȠȞȠȖİȞȠ૨Ȣ, ੒įȠ૨, ȗȦોȢ,ਕȜȘșİ઀ĮȢ, ੒μȠȠȣı઀Ƞȣ, ਕȡȤોȢ, ʌȡȦIJȠIJંțȠȣ,

328

Chapter 1

ıȠij઀ĮȢ, ʌȘȖોȢ, ૧઀ȗȘȢ, ʌĮȡĮțȜ੾IJȠȣ, μİı઀IJȠȣ, ਕȡȞ઀Ƞȣ, ʌȡȠȕ੺IJȠȣ, ਙȜijĮțĮ੿૵, ਕȡȤોȢțĮ੿IJ੼ȜȠȣȢ, ੕ijİȦȢ, țȡȚȠ૨, Ȝ੼ȠȞIJȠȢ, ıțઆȜȘțȠȢ, ȜંȖȠȣ, ȜĮμʌȡંIJȘIJȠȢ, ijȦIJંȢ, İੁțંȞȠȢ, įંȟȘȢ, ਲȜ઀Ƞȣ, ਙȡIJȠȣ, ਙȞșȠȣȢ, țȜ੾μĮIJȠȢ, ੕ȡȠȣȢ, ș઄ȡĮȢ, ȖોȢ, Ȝ઀șȠȣਕțȡȠȖȦȞȚĮ઀Ƞȣ, ȞȣμijੁȠȣ, ʌȠȚμ੼ȞȠȢ, ʌȡȠij੾IJȠȣ, ੂİȡ੼ȦȢ, ਕșĮȞ੺IJȠȣ, ੁıȤȣȡȠ૨, ʌ੺ȞIJĮș੼ȠȞIJȠȢ, ਥȜ੼ȠȣȢ, ਕİIJȠ૨, ȉİIJȡĮȖȡĮμμ੺IJȠȣ, Ȁȣȡ઀Ƞȣ ੉ȘıȠ૨ ȋȡȚıIJȠ૨, įȚ੹ IJȠ઄IJȦȞ IJ૵Ȟ ਖȖੁȦȞ ੑȞȠμ੺IJȦȞ ਥȟȠȡțȚȗȦ ਫ਼μ઼Ȣ». 31 M. DETIENNE, Demoni, 559-571. 32 Cf. Mt 28: 19, where in Jesus words one single name is shared by the three persons: «Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit». Notice Jesus did not say names. 33 Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ – Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓIJȠȣ ǿİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ 100, note 4. The term exotikà here will refer to the «demons» or «demonic beings». The term «Demon» (the root meaning of the șİíĮȢ, Greek word «daimon» is «knowing» or «intelligence») refers to beings in the pagan myths. The term «devil» (which means «slanderer») on the other hand expresses very clearly a developed doctrinal orthodox conception of evil. It’s for this reason that one only hears about demonic possession, but never of devilish possession. Men may cast out demons, and rebuke them in the name of God, but devils are stronger and older, more powerful than anything but beings of an equal, divine weight class. It’s for these reasons that while demons might possess people, the devil always shows up in person. Thus the literal meaning of the word exotikà is «things outside or beyond». It offers us a way of navigating between the fine line of the sacred (doctrinal) and the magical (local level) within a morally structured cosmos as is the one found in many villages in Greece. In his Preface (xvi) to his book The Demons and the devil, Charles Stewart comments that «whatever view one may take of these being does not change the fact that exotica is an indigenous category in Greek culture and has been so since the Middle Ages at the very least». See also E. PACHOUMI, The Erotic and Separation Spells, 53 (2013) 294-325. This article, an inventory of extant erotic and separation spells, calls into question the view that the practitioners were always male and that the female victims were sexual innocents sought for marriage. See also P. MIRECKI – M. MEYER, Ancient magic and ritual power; A. APOSTOLIDES – Y. DREYER, «The Greek evil eye», 64 (2008) 1021-1042. 34 Cf. part 1, ch. 1, 1. 3; Rv 12: 9. The Masoretic text of Ezekiel 28: 13-19 identifies this angelic being itself as the victim of the fall, v. 14: «You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you, you were on the holy mountain of God», but the LXX opens the way for another interpretation, v. 14 LXX: «With the guardian cherub I put you on the holy mountain of God» (μİIJ੹ IJȠ૨ ȤİȡȠȣȕ ਩șȘț੺ıİ ਥȞ ੕ȡİȚ ਖȖ઀૳ șİȠ૨, emphasis mine) as if he were speaking of Adam accompanied by the angel. Also v. 16b reads in the Masoretic: «You sinned, so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire» compare the LXX «You sinned. You were wounded from the mountain of God, and the guardian cherub led you out from the midst of the stones of fire» țĮ੿ ਵȖĮȖ੼Ȟ ıİ IJઁ ȤİȡȠȣȕ ਥț μ੼ıȠȣ Ȝ઀șȦȞ ʌȣȡ઀ȞȦȞ). It seems therefore that the LXX slightly tweaks the translation to conform it to the story of Adam’s fall, to which the angel is merely witness. The fall of one of the cherubim, however, is what we find it in the original

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

329

Hebrew text. 35 The title for the devil as «the ruler of this age» is often used by St Ignatius of Antioch d. 107 A. D. (replacing the Johannine «this world» with «this age», perhaps a Pauline influence), which is which is somewhat strong evidence that Ignatius was familiar with John’s Gospel, cf. Jn 12: 31; 14: 30; 16: 11. Cf. 1 Jn 5: 19 the whole world is in the power of the Evil One; 2 Cor 4:4 ੒ șİઁȢ IJȠȣ Įੁ૵ȞȠȢ IJȠ઄IJȠȣ, «the god of this age». On the rule of Satan in the New Testament see H. KRUSE, Das Reich Satans, 29-61. 36 See also Mt 12: 24; Mk 3: 22; Lk 11: 15. On the names of demons in extracanonical apocalyptic literature to A. D. 100, see G. A. BARTON, The Origin of the Names, 156-167. 37 GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS ȅr 11 4c837. 38 On the origin and development of the standard orthodox hierarchy see B. RUBIN, Der Fürst der Dämonen, 469-481. 39 JDamOrth 2. 4. 40 BasAitKak 9 c352a-b: 41 PALAM Hom 33, 188. 42 R. GREENFIELD, Tradition of Belief, 20. George (Gennadius) Scholares was a theologian and first patriarch of Constantinople during the Turkish occupation (1454-1456, 1463, 1464-1465). At first, he supported the union of the Churches and participated in the Synod of Florence (1439), but later he became a fervent opponent of the union. He mastered Latin language and respected Latin culture, especially Thomas Aquinas. He was a great supporter of Aristotle. 43 Mt 12; 45 and Lk 11: 26 refer to the demon returning to a formerly possessed man with seven worse spirits while Mk 16: 9 and Lk 8: 2 refer to Mary Magdalene having had seven demons. ǹlso the Church’s monastic tradition sees as one of the most dangerous enemies of the spiritual life what the psalmist calls «the noonday devil» (Ps 91: 6). The monks took this phrase as an apt description of the lethargy or fatigue they battled at about midday. 44 Examples of the division of demons in general may be found in eg. Origen, Phil 17. 1, 91; 20. 20, 145. 45 Cf. Jb 26: 6; 28: 22; Prv 15: 11 Abbadon is mentioned along with Sheol. 46 Cf. Wormwood 8: 10-11 and Abaddon 9: 1,11 are called individual «stars» that fall from heaven. But John sees Satan as the dragon who has «swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth», Rv 12: 3-4, showing his superiority over other stars, i. e. angels, cf. Jb 38: 7. Satan is the principle spirit of evil who leads «his angels» against the archangel Michael’s angels who defeat the dragon and cast his impious horde out of heaven, 12: 7-9. Rv 13: 1-18 shows how the devil comes to dominate the earth through his beasts, he deceives the world to make war on the blessed city of God’s people, and is finally thrown into the lake of fire to be tormented forever, 20: 7-10. 47 GOAR 579; ZER 17; ROM 359; PAP 108. 48 GOAR 582; ZER 153; ROM 364; PAP 112; POR 134 with slight differences. It is interesting to note that St. Basil refers to the evil spirit by 63 different epithets and names which are descriptive of evil affliction, such as «deceiver», to name one. Basil even mentions exorcism prayers for insects which inflict damage upon vineyards,

330

Chapter 1

fields, etc. Characteristic of exorcism prayers of St. Chrysostom is the mention of the works, passion and Resurrection of Christ, one by one, throughout the prayers, with the specific phrase, «Jesus Christ rebukes you, O Demon. . . », repeated extensively throughout his prayers. Some of these exorcism prayers are lengthy, while others are short. There is also a prayer for the banishment of the «evil eye». 49 In modern Greek folklore, the term «nereid» (ȞİȡȐȧįĮ, neráïda) has come to be used of all nymphs, or fairies, or mermaids, not merely nymphs of the sea. Nereids are particularly associated with the Aegean Sea, where they dwelt with their father in the depths within a silvery cave. The Nereids were fifty Haliad Nymphs or goddesses of the sea. They were the patrons of sailors and fishermen, who came to the aid of men in distress, and goddesses who had in their care the sea’s rich bounty. Individually they also represented various facets of the sea, from salty brine, to foam, sand, rocky shores, waves and currents, in addition to the various skills possessed by seamen. The Nereid Thetis was their unofficial leader, and Amphitrite was the queen of the sea. Together with the Tritones they formed the retinue of Poseidon. 50 A. STRITTMATTER, «Ein griechisches Exorzismusbuchlein», 26 (1932) 129. Strittmatter re-discovered the unedited Ms. Car, C 143 manuscript which was listed in the catalogue published by Henri Omont under the title of «11th century prayers for those who suffer from impure spirits –who are under the influence of evil» and which has the following contents: 12 foglios 17 x 124 mm, made of hard paper. f. 1,1-2r,3 (GOAR,716); f. 2r, 4-2r, 21(GOAR,733); f. 2r, 22-2v, 11 This seems to be unedited. No manuscript reports this: f. 2v, 12 -2v, 26 (GOAR,733); f. 5r, 1-5r, 13 (GOAR, 737); f. 5r, 14 -5v, 9= this is unedited and no manuscript reports this; f. 5v, 10-20r, 26 (GOAR,734); f. 10v, 1-3v, 22; (GOAR, 729); f. 3v, 23-11r, 29 in Cryptensis ī. ȕ. VI (s. XIII-XIV); f. 11v, 1 - 12v, 19 in Cryptensis B. a. XXIII – T. SCHERMANN, OC 4 (1904) 151-163. See appendix for the text. 51 A. STRITTMATTER, «Ein griechisches Exorzismusbuchlein», 26 (1932) 141. 52 GOAR 582; ZER 153; ROM 364; PAP 112; POR 134 53 A. STRITTMATTER, «Ein griechisches Exorzismusbuchlein», 26 (1932) 135. 54 Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ–Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ȚİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ, 106 note19,20, 41. 55 Baptismal rite. 56 GOAR 579; ZER 17; ROM 359; PAP 108. 57 Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ– Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ȚİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ,119-120, note 51. 58 See L. DELATTE, Un Ƞffice byzantin d’exorcisme, 32ff. 59 See Appendix. 60 Personal communication. Interview with an orthodox priest in April 2013, Mount Athos. 61 This refers to the piece of coal used in an incense burner. 62 Thus when speaking to his pagan audience in Corinth in 1 Cor 8: 5-6, Paul distinguishes the many so-called theoi and kurioi of heaven and earth, from the one God from (ਥȟ) whom the universe came into existence through (įȚ੹) the one Lord Jesus Christ.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

331

63 There exists a great collection of ancient magic-related materials, a compilation from classical and even a few early Christian sources with introductions, for example G. LUCK’s Arcana Mundi. This book, among others, is eye-opening. The ancients were right about a whole lot more than we «sensible» moderns often think, and strange things happened then, just as they happen now, but weren’t ignored. Among other interesting aspects we find these following Corsican and Calabrese folklore dialect formula for evil eye: «Due occhi ti docchiaru/Tri ti sanaru/ Lu Patriu, lu Figghiu, lu Spiritu Santu/Lu mali mi va a mari/Lu boni mi venicca`/Per la Santissima Trinita`/Lu Signuri, dillu celu calau/‘na parma d’oliva all artaru posau/Cu li so mani benediciu/Docchiatura e cornatura/Fori ogni mali la tu persona» which is translated as «Two eyes have struck you/Three will cure you/The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit/The evil go to the sea/The beneficial come here/In the name of the Holy Trinity/Our Lord who has descended from heaven/Has placed an olive palm on the altar/Blessed with His hands/(?)Befallen by eyes and by horn». Another one says: «A nome della Santissima Trinita`/Di Santu Lune. . . di Santo Sabato e/Mattina di Pasqua, ogni mali/Interra mi casca» which is translated as «In the name of the Holy Trinity/Holy Moon, Holy Mars, Holy Mercury, Holy Jupiter, Holy Venus, Holy Sabbath, and Easter Morning, all evils the world go/Away from me». (The names may also be translated as the days of the week.) We find also the Calabrese «fushinate», a prayer recited while rubbing the forehead of someone with a headache. The words of the prayer can only be revealed on Christmas day, and the one who passes them on loses his or her healing power. Calabrian spirits are also called «munaceddi» (little monks) í moderately harmful evil forces who engage in simple mischief such as petty thefts and deceptions. See also the book by D. CARRINGTON, The Dream-Hunters of Corsica. 64 BASIL THE GREAT, Homily on envy, PG XXXI, 380bc. 65 BASIL THE GREAT, Homily on envy, PG XXXI, 380bc. 66 W. L. MOSS – S. C. CAPPANNARI, Mal’occhio, 2. See also M. H. HARDIE, The evil eye in some greek villages. 67 R. DIONISOPOULOS – MASS, The evil eye and bewitchment in a peasant village, 51. 68 G. C. PAPADEMETRIOU, Exorcism and the Greek Orthodox Church. 69 This is a term used for the ritual healing of the evil eye affliction. It entails holy spells accompanied by symbolic acts. It is a common form of expression to denote both the attack and the ritual healing of the evil eye. It is a system of relations where the two processes form a unity, given that the first necessarily entails the second and the latter in turn ritually completes the first. 70 «ǼȣȤȒ İʌȓ ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮȞ. ȉȠȣ ȀȣȡȓȠȣ įİȘșȫμİȞ. ȀȪȡȚİ Ƞ ĬİȩȢ ȘμȫȞ, Ƞ ǺĮıȚȜİȪȢ IJȦȞ ĮȚȫȞȦȞ, Ƞ ʌĮȞIJȠțȡȐIJȦȡ țĮȚ ʌĮȞIJȠįȪȞĮμȠȢ, Ƞ ʌȠȚȫȞ ʌȐȞIJĮ țĮȚ μİIJĮıțİȣȐȗȦȞ μȩȞȦ IJȦ ȕȠȪȜİıșĮȚ, Ƞ IJȘȞ İʌIJĮʌȜȐıȚȠȞ țȐμȚȞȠȞ țĮȚ IJȘ ijȜȩȖĮ IJȘȞ İȞ ǺĮȕȣȜȫȞȚ İȚȢ įȡȩıȠȞ μİIJĮȕĮȜȫȞ țĮȚ IJȠȣȢ ĮȖȓȠȣȢ ıȠȣ IJȡİȚȢ ȆĮȓįĮȢ ıȫȠȣȢ įȚĮijȣȜȐȟĮȢ, Ƞ ȚĮIJȡȩȢ țĮȚ șİȡĮʌİȣIJȒȢ IJȦȞ ȥȣȤȫȞ ȘμȫȞ, Ș ĮıijȐȜİȚĮ IJȦȞ İȚȢ ıİ İȜʌȚȗȩȞIJȦȞ, ıȠȣ įİȩμİșĮ țĮȚ ıİ ʌĮȡĮțĮȜȠȪμİȞ, ĮʌȩıIJȘıȠȞ, ijȣȖȐįİȣıȠȞ țĮȚ ĮʌȑȜĮıȠȞ ʌȐıĮȞ įȚĮȕȠȜȚțȒ İȞȑȡȖİȚĮȞ, ʌȐıĮȞ ıĮIJĮȞȚțȒȞ ȑijȠįȠȞ țĮȚ ʌȐıĮȞ İʌȚȕȠȣȜȒȞ, ʌİȡȚȑȡȖİȚȐȞ IJİ ʌȠȞȘȡȐ

332

Chapter 1

țĮȚ ȕȜȐȕȘ IJȦȞ ȠijșĮȜμȫȞ ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮȞ IJȦȞ țĮțȠʌȠȚȫȞ țĮȚ ʌȠȞȘȡȫȞ ĮȞșȡȫʌȦȞ ȣʌȩ IJȠȣ įȠȪȜȠȣ ıȠȣ […], țĮȚ Ȓ ȣʌȩ ȦȡĮȚȩIJȘIJȠȢ Ȓ ĮȞįȡİȓĮȢ Ȓ İȣIJȣȤȓĮȢ Ȓ ȗȒȜȠȣ țĮȚ ijșȩȞȠȣ Ȓ ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮȢ ıȣȞȑȕȘ, ĮȣIJȩȢ, ijȚȜȐȞșȡȦʌİ ¨ȑıʌȠIJĮ, ȑțIJİȚȞȠȞ IJȘȞ țȡĮIJĮȚȐȞ ıȠȣ ȤİȓȡĮ țĮȚ IJȠȞ ȕȡĮȤȚȠȞȐ ıȠȣ IJȠȞ ȚıȤȣȡȩȞ țĮȚ ȪȥȚıIJȠȞ, țĮȚ İʌȚıțȠʌȫȞ İʌȚıțȩʌȘıȠȞ IJȠ ʌȜȐıμĮ ıȠȣ IJȠȪIJȠ, țĮȚ țĮIJȐʌİμȥȠȞ ĮȣIJȫ DZȖȖİȜȠȞ İȚȡȘȞȚțȩȞ, țȡĮIJĮȚȩȞ, ȥȣȤȒȢ țĮȚ ıȫμĮIJȠȢ ijȪȜĮțĮ, ȠȢ İʌȚIJȚμȒıİȚ țĮȚ ĮʌİȜȐıİȚ Įʌ’ĮȣIJȠȪ ʌȐıĮȞ ʌȠȞȘȡȐȞ ȕȠȣȜȒȞ, ʌȐıĮȞ ijĮȡμĮțİȓĮȞ țĮȚ ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮȞ IJȦȞ ijșȠȡȠʌȠȚȫȞ țĮȚ ʌȠȞȘȡȫȞ ĮȞșȡȫʌȦȞ, ȓȞĮ ȣʌȩ ıȠȣ Ƞ ıȠȢ ȚțȑIJȘȢ ijȡȠȣȡȠȪμİȞȠȢ, μİIJ’ İȣȤĮȡȚıIJȓĮȢ ȥȐȜȜȘ ıȠȚ «ȀȪȡȚȠȢ İμȠȓ ȕȠȘșȩȢ, țĮȚ Ƞȣ ijȠȕȘșȒıȠμĮȚ IJȚ ʌȠȚȒıİȚ μȠȚ ȐȞșȡȦʌȠȢ» țĮȚ ʌȐȜȚȞ «Ƞȣ ijȠȕȘșȒıȠμĮȚ țĮțȐ, ȩIJȚ ıȠȚ μİIJ’ İμȠȪ İȚ, ȩIJȚ ıȣ İȚ Ƞ ĬİȩȢ, țȡĮIJĮȓȦμȐ μȠȣ, ȚıȤȣȡȩȢ İȟȠȣıȚĮıIJȒȢ, ȐȡȤȦȞ İȚȡȒȞȘȢ, ʌĮIJȒȡ IJȠȣ μȑȜȜȠȞIJȠȢ ĮȚȫȞȠȢ». ȃĮȚ, ȀȪȡȚİ Ƞ ĬİȩȢ ȘμȫȞ, ijİȓıĮȚ IJȠȣ ʌȜȐıμĮIJȩȢ ıȠȣ, țĮȚ ıȫıȠȞ IJȠȞ įȠȪȜȠ ıȠȣ Įʌȩ ʌȐıȘȢ ȕȜȐȕȘȢ țĮȚ İʌȒȡİȚĮȢ IJȘȢ İț ȕĮıțĮȞȓĮȢ ȖȚȞȠμȑȞȘȢ, țĮȚ ĮȞȫIJİȡȠȞ ĮȣIJȩȞ ʌĮȞIJȩȢ țĮțȠȪ įȚĮijȪȜĮȟȠȞ, ʌȡİıȕİȓĮȚȢ IJȘȢ ȣʌİȡİȣȜȠȖȘμȑȞȘȢ, İȞįȩȟȠȣ ¨İıʌȠȚȞȒȢ ȘμȫȞ ĬİȠIJȩțȠȣ țĮȚ ĮİȚʌĮȡșȑȞȠȣ ȂĮȡȓĮȢ, IJȦȞ ijȦIJȠİȚįȫȞ ǹȡȤĮȖȖȑȜȦȞ, țĮȚ ʌĮȞIJȫȞ ıȠȣ IJȦȞ ǹȖȓȦȞ. ǹμȒȞ». PAP: 517. [O Lord Our God, the King of the ages, almighty and all powerful, who create and alter all things by your will alone; who changed into dew the flames of the furnace in Babylon that had been heated seven times more than usual, and preserved in safety your three holy youths; the physican and healer of our souls; the security of those who hope in you; we pray you and beseech you: Remove, drive away and banish every diabolical activity, every satanic attack and every plot, evil curiousity and injury, and the evil eye of mischievous and wicked men from your servant (Name); and whether it was brought about by beauty, or bravery, or happiness, or jealousy and envy, or evil eye, do you yourself, O Lord who love mankind, stretch out your mighty hand and your powerful and lofty arm, look down on this your creature and watch over him (her), and send him (her) an angel of peace, a mighty guardian of soul and body, who will rebuke and banish from him (her) every wicked intention, every spell and evil eye of destructive and envious men; so that, guarded by your, your supplicant may sing to you with thanksgiving: The Lord is my helper, and I shall not be afraid; what can man do to me? And again: I shall fear no evil because you are with me. For you are God my strength, the powerful ruler, the Prince of Peace, the Father of the age to come. Yes, Lord, our God, spare your creature and save your servant (Name) from every injury and brought about by the evil eye, and keep him (her) safe above every ill. For you are our King and all things are possible to Thee, O Lord. Therefore, we ascribe glory to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen] 71 M. HARDIE, The Evil eye in some Greek villages, 107-123. 72 G. C. PAPADEMETRIOU, Exorcism and the Greek Orthodox Church, 49-51. 73 There exists a great collection of ancient magic-related materials in culture, a compilation from classical and even a few early Christian sources with introductions, for example G. LUCK’s Arcana Mundi. This book, among others, is eye-opening. The ancients were wrong about a lot of things, but they were right about a whole lot more than we «sensible» moderns often think, and strange things happened then, just as they happen now, but weren’t ignored.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

333

74 The Secret Book of John (The Apocryphon of John) which is considered by scholars to be the locus classicus for the Gnostic mythological system. 75 The text continues: «Bissoum, the left ear; Akioreim, the nose; Banenrphroum, the lips; Amen, the front teeth; Ibikan, the molars; Basiliademe, the tonsils; Achcha, the uvula; Adaban, the neck; Chaaman, the neckbones; Dearcho, the throat; Tebar, the shoulder; Mniarcon, the elbow; Abitrion, the right arm; Evanthen, the left arm; Krys, the right hand; Beluai, the left hand; Treneu, the fingers of the right hand; Balbel, the fingers of the left hand; Kriman, fingernails; Astrops, the right breast; Barroph, the left breast; Baoum, the right shoulder joint; Ararim, the left shoulder joint; Areche, the belly; Phthave, the navel; Senaphim, the abdomen; Arachethopi, the right ribs; Zabedo, the left ribs; Barias, the right hip; Phnouth the left hip; Abenlenarchei, the marrow; Chnoumeninorin, the skeleton; Gesole, the stomach; Agromauna, the heart; Bano, the lungs; Sostrapal, the liver; Anesimalar, the spleen; Thopithro, the intestines; Biblo, the kidneys; Roeror, the sinews; Taphreo, the spine; Ipouspoboba, the veins; Bineborin, the arteries; Atoimenpsephei, respiration; Entholleia, the flesh; Bedouk, the right buttock; Arabeei, the penis; Eilo, the testicles; Sorma, the genitals; Gormakaiochlabar, the right thigh; Nebrith, the left thigh; Pserem, the kidneys of the right leg; Asaklas, the left kidney; Ormaoth, the right leg; Emenun, the left leg; Knyx, the right shin; Tupelon, the left shin; Achiel, the right knee; Phnene, the left knee; Phiouthrom, the right foot; Boabel, its toes; Trachoun, the left foot; Phikna, its toes; Miamai, the toenails». M. WALDSTEIN – F. WISSE, The Apocryphon of John. Section 14,15-20, 5. 76 The mentioning of the anatomical parts of the body shows us the kind of progress in medicine society had obtained at that time. See Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ– Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ǿİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ,108, note 28. 77 I. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ – Ȃ. ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ǿİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ,51, f. 28v - 29. 78 A. STRITTMATTER, «Ein griechisches Exorzismusbuchlein Ms. Car. C 143 b der Zentralbibliothek in Zurich», 134. The whole text is reproduced in the Appendix. 79 The Athonite manuscript of Filoteou ijij.44 -44v.ਥȞ IJȠ૙Ȣ IJ੼ııĮȡȚ ıIJȠȚȤİ઀ȠȢ, Į੅μĮIJȚ, ȤȠȜૌ, ijȜ੼ȖμĮIJȚ țĮ੿ μİȜĮ઀ȞȘ ȤȠȜૌ Ƞ੡IJİ ਥȦ IJĮ૙Ȣ ıĮȡȟ੿ țĮ੿ ੑıIJ੼ȠȚȢ Ƞ૨IJİ ਥȞ IJȠ૙Ȣ μȣİȜȠ૙Ȣ țĮ੿ Ȟİ઄ȡȠȚȢ, ijȜ੼ȕĮȚȢțĮ੿ਕȡIJȘȡ઀ĮȚȢ, ʌȠı઀, ȞİijȡȠ૙Ȣ, ਫ਼ʌȠȖĮıIJȡ઀ȠȚȢ, ʌȜİȣȡȠ૙Ȣ, ȞઆIJȠȚȢ, ੭μȠȚȢ, ȕȡĮȤ઀ȠıȚȞ, ੑȞȣȤ઀ȠȚȢ, țĮȡį઀઺, ıʌȜ੾Ȟ઺, ਵʌĮIJȚ, țȠȚȜ઀઺, ıIJȠμ੺Ȥ૳, ıʌȜ੺ȖȤȞȠȚȢ, ȕȡંȖȤ૳, ʌȡȦțIJ૶, ıț੼ȜİȚ, ਕıIJȡĮȖ੺ȜȠȚȢ, ıijȣȡȠ૙Ȣ, țȠIJ૨ȜȠȚȢ, ȖȜȠșIJȠ૙Ȣ, ઀İȡȠ૙Ȣ, ੑıIJ੼ȠȚȢ, ȡ੺Ȥૉ, ĮੁįȠ઀ȠȚȢ, ਵȕૉ, ੑμijĮȜ૴, ıIJ੼ȡȞȠȚȢ, șઆȡĮțȚ, ਕȖț૵ȞȚ, ʌ੾ȤİȚ, Į੝Ȥ੼ȞȚ, ij੺ȡȣȖȖȚ, İȚȜĮμȚıȚ, țȜİȚį઀ȠȚȢ, ੩μȠʌȜ੺IJĮȚȢ, ıʌȠȞį઄ȜȦ, IJȡĮȤ੾Ȝ૳, IJ੼ȡșȡ૳, ʌĮȡȦIJ઀ıȚ, μ੾ȞȚȖȖȚ, İੁȜĮμ઀ıȚ, μȣİȜȠ૙Ȣ, ʌȡȠμİIJȦʌȚį઀૳, ıIJȠȜ઀ıȚ, ਕμĮȡȣȖĮ૙Ȣ, ʌȡȠıઆʌȦ, ȖȜઆIJIJȘ, Ȥİ઀ȜİıȚ, ʌĮȡİȚĮ઀Ȣ, ੑįȠ઄ıȚȞ, ੑijIJĮȜμȠ૙Ȣ, țંȡĮȚȢ, ʌઆȖȦȞȚ, ੩ı઀, ıIJંμĮIJȚ, ȡȚȞ઀, μȣțIJ੾ȡȚ, ੑijȡ઄ıȚ, ਥȖțİij੺Ȝ૳, țȠȡșijૌ, ıIJİij੺Ȟૉ, μİIJઆʌ૳, ȕȡ੼ȖμĮIJȚ, țȡȠIJ੺ijȠȚȢ, ੁȞ઀ȠȚȢ, ʌİȡȚįȡંμ૳, țȡĮȞ઀૳, ੕ȥİȚ, IJ઄ȜȠȚȢ, μİIJȦʌ઀૳, ȤંȞįȡ૳, ੁıșμ૶, șĮȜ੺μȠȚȢ, ੑȤİIJİ઄μĮıȚ, ıijĮȚȡ઀૳, ț઀ȠȞȚ, ıIJȣȜ઀įȚ, įȚĮijȡ੺ȖμĮIJȚ, ਫ਼ʌ੾ȞȘ, ȖȞ੺șȠȚȢ, ਕțȠૌ, ıȚĮȖંȞȚ, μ઄ĮȚȢ, țİijĮȜૌ, IJȡ઀ȤĮȚȢ, ਩ȟȦșİȞਲ਼਩ıȦșİȞਥȞੂμĮIJ઀ȠȚȢਲ਼ਙȜȜȠȚȢIJંʌȠȚȢȠ੆ȠȚȢį੾IJȚıȚȞ. See also GOAR (1647) 729 and L. DELATTE, Un office byzantin d’exorcisme, 55-56. 80 The full title page reads: RITUALE ROMANUM EX DECRETO SACROSANCTI OECUMENICI CONCILII VATICANI II INSTAURATUM AUCTORITATE

334

Chapter 1

IOANNIS PAULI II PROMULGATUM, De exorcismis et supplicationibus quibusdam. This was approved on the 21 September 2001 and a new revised edition was published in 2004. The new ritual gives the priest a choice of two forms of exorcism, which it calls «deprecatory» and «imperative». Deprecatory means a prayer to God, in this case to ask Him to deliver the demoniac. «Imperative» means a command issued to the demon in the name of God to depart. The imperative formula is a real exorcism, but the deprecatory form is not a true exorcism per se. A prayer is a request to God; an exorcism is a command to a demon. The so-called «deprecatory exorcism» is simply a petition, not an exorcism. 81 From his/her mind, from his/her soul, from his/her heart, from his/her reins, from his/her senses, from all his/her members = POR: 134 cf. Gb 4: 114v (cf. GOAR: 582; ZER: 153; ROM: 364; PAP: 112) 82 At Mount Athos for example, when monks yawn, they quickly make the sign of the cross on their mouth as open gaps are considered dangerous. In fact the act of yawning is often found in conjunction with evil-eye or other spells. It is excoriated in the canon law as a practice of sorceresses. 83 Ȇ. ȂȊȁŸȃǹȈ – ī. ȀȅȊȀǹȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıIJýȢ, 15-16. 84 Ȇ. ȂȊȁŸȃǹȈ – ī. ȀȅȊȀǹȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıIJýȢ, 2. 85 «…țĮ੿ IJ઀ ıȘμİ૙ȠȞ ʌȠȚİ૙Ȣ ੖IJĮȞ ਥȟȑȜșȘȢ», XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 137r. 86 Lavra Ĭ 20, ij. 7v. 87 The clergy is classified under categories A B C D (See the Orthodox Yearly Directory of 2011, 12001), A being the highest. The majority of priests, especially outside urban areas, have a primary or secondary education and a modicum of religious training. Most urban priests have at least studied theology at a seminary; priests and bishops in larger cities normally have degrees in theology from universities in Athens or Thessalonica. The village priest is the traditional preserver of Greek culture and traditions, and as such he usually enjoys high respect among his parishioners. In poorer parishes, peasants often went into the priesthood for economic advancement, and in many cases a married rural priest continued his secular trade after ordination. By the 1980s, however, the social prestige of the priesthood had dropped, so children received less encouragement to enter that profession. The lack of intellectual functions in the priesthood (priests do not regularly give sermons, and few become theologians, the latter being more for lay people.) and the higher pay received by teachers are the reasons for this decline. This information was obtained from Father Maximos Pafidis an Orthodox priest, Athens 2014. Church of Greece 2014. 88 J. PRESCIA, The Oath and Perjury. The social context of early oaths in magic ritual is most recently discussed in C. A. FARAONE, Molten Wax, 60-80. The noun óȡțȠȢ is cognate with Greek ȑȡțȠȢ, «enclosure», «fence». 89 Nekydaimon is, a term found predominantly in the Greek Magical Papyri but denoting a concept that spans ancient magical practices, refers to the soul of a dead person. And interesting example was found in Crete, Greece. A folded and inscribed lead tablet from Phalasama in Crete, dated to the 4th or early 3rd century B. C., comes close to what we might imagine as a magic incantation for banishing unwanted demons. The inscription had evidently been doubled over several times into a compact square to be worn as an amulet. Much of the text is clearly difficult;

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

335

however, there is enough material preserved to demonstrate that incantations were written against noxious spirits described variously as Epaphos, a she-wolf (ȜȪțĮȚȞĮ), a dog (țȔȦȞ) í or pair of dogs (țȪȞİ) í and the like. In a section that seems to mention magic ingredients targeted to injure the bearer of the verses, there are further allusions to composite, mythic beings: the tongue of a lion-serpent, something from a chimera, a hawk’s feather, and the claw of a lion. Despite some lacunae, these seem to describe the «wicked things» (țĮțȐ) that some sorcerer had apparently concocted in an ointment or potion; the hexameters work as a counter í charm against ghosts and demons sent against the holder of the amulet. This text shows at an early stage two crucial procedures for the expelling of demons: the use of the «flee»í formula and the application of an oath (ȩȡțȠȢ). Though the demonology of this relatively early Greek charm does not contain a notion of a possessing demon, the tablet’s rich folklore shows animal-plagues being vanquished by invocations that become standard in the later, true exorcistic texts. The method is rather straightforward: alongside the summoning of Greek healing gods, the incantation wards off the demons by commanding them to flee (ijİȔȖİ). This stratagem of expulsion is widely found in late antique magic spells, particularly in exorcisms, but can also be used for banishing diseases and ailments in general í themselves the manifestation of demonic activity. The ijİȪȖİ-formula is used several times in commanding the animal-demons with the aim of driving them back mad to their own domains. 90 The language of adjuration tends to divide down the middle, in terms of «Greek» versus «Jewish» application and utilization. What distinguishes the adjurations of the Jewish «exorcistic» type from the Greek «evocation» type is the fact that each type has its own characteristic understanding of the numinous. The Semitic ʌȞİȪμĮ ȐțȐșĮȡIJȠȞ is an entity to be expelled from the sufferer (the demon-possessed); the Greek įĮȓμȦȞ, on the other hand, is a genie awakened from the dead to render service. Further, the coercive Greek netherworld adjurations (written on lead and papyrus defixiones) regularly set oaths upon the ghosts of the dead, compelling them to bitter necessity (ʌȚțȡnĮȞȐȖțȘ). The Jewish exorcisms, on the other hand, adjure the demons by the great God of Israel, YHWH, a Lord made splendid and alive in the recounting of his mighty deeds of history. Further, the presentation of demons in their omorphic form is common to both paradigms. Primarily, however, we have concluded that the «Greek» adjurations conjure up the underworld dead to serve. True «Jewish» adjurations, on the other hand, cast out (i. e., «exorcise») the demons represented as actually indwelling the afflicted. Jews, as much as Greeks, would have been inclined to curse their enemies as to heal their friends. When dealing with highly individual matters of personal gain or the preservation of health and wellbeing, synthetic reconstructions of cultural models prove insensitive to racial and ethnic boundaries. The enactment of the «oath» (ȩȡțȠȢ) is common to most ancient societies, and there is an intrinsic risk in assuming that its use in magic would have been particularly, or exclusively, Jewish rather than Greek. Nonetheless, at least in the context of the phenomenology of spontaneous demon-possession and subsequent expulsion, the epigraphic and papyrological records repeatedly point to a practice tightly influenced by Jewish exorcists. It has also been shown that ancient practitioners may have advised the use of the serial «Jewish oath» (İȟȠȡțȚıμȩȢ) for

336

Chapter 1

the evocation of the dead, as well as for the healing of the aggrieved. See R. KOTANSKY, «Greek Exorcistic Amulets», 260. 91 The original sense of ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦ is to place one under, to oblige someone to accomplish an action under a false oath, or bind one by another or, to administer an oath to someone, as noted in R. MERKELBACH, Astrologie, 1(1993)49-62, esp. 61 (ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦ is «ich vereidige», not «ich beschwöre»). «Adjure», though not exact, is the best the English language has; it is no longer equivalent to the Latin adjuro (= «to swear»); see P. B. GOVE, Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, s. v., 27: «1: obs. to put on oath 2: to charge or command solemnly as if under oath or penalty of curse». A glance at the published catalogues of medieval manuscripts in major European and American libraries suggests that many such collections of ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ, still remain unedited. These liturgical exorcisms as a whole, though preserved in manuscripts of late date, share many points of contact with their older counterparts on papyrus and contain a valuable source of information on the whole history of exorcistic texts and amulets. 92 Webster’s Third New International Dictionary defines «exorcise», as: «1a: to expel (an evil spirit) by adjuration b: to get rid of (something troublesome, menacing, or oppressive); 2b: to be freed of an evil spirit by use of a holy name or magic rites» (798). This specialized sense is already observed in ancient Greek, s. vv. ǼȟȠȡțȚıμóȢ, («exorcise an evil spirit», esp. in Acts 19: 13,14 v. ll.). See also R. KOTANSKY, «Greek Exorcistic Amulets», 243-279. 93 PGM IV, 3007 ss; H. R BETZ, The Greek Magical Papyri in translation, xli; W. M. BRASHEAR, The Greek Magical Papyri,3380-3730. 94 R. KOTANSKY, «Greek Exorcistic Amulets», 261. 95 The grammar of incantations has been well established in research. See W. L. KNOX, «Jewish liturgical exorcism», 191-203; B. CAMPELL, «The technique of exorcism», 39- 49; T E. KLUTZ, «The grammar of exorcism »,156-165. 96 It is mentioned eight times throughout the text. ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦıİ [preposition to, at], įȚà= «through, across, by, over» and takes the Genitive in this case. 97 PGM IV. 3007-3086. On this important exorcism see also A. DEISSMAN, Light from the Ancient East, 250-260. Pibecchis was a legendary magician from Egypt. 98 On the problem see A. D. NOCK, «Magical Texts from a Bilingual Papyrus», 266 (line 19). 99 ǹn isolated use of the ÉȟȠȡțȓȗȦ ıİ in the imperative plural which becomes ijȣȜóȟĮIJİis beautifully represented by a bilingual silver amulet in the Ashmolean Museum, R. KOTANSKY í J. NAVEH í S. SHAKED, «A Greek-Aramaic Silver Amulet», 5-24, lines 31f. 100 Other references to Satan as the Enemy of God, particularly as the one frustrating God’s good purposes for giving eternal life to humans: see in the parable of the weeds and the wheat, Mt 13: 24-30, 37-43. Here the devil is referred to three times as the «enemy» cȤșȡȩȢ, who sows weeds in the field of God’s kingdom (Mt 13: 25, 28, 39). Also in the Davidic prophecy of Psalm 110: 1, the Messiah is exalted to «sit at the right hand» of God who will put «all enemies under his feet»; 110: 1 is by far the most quoted or referenced psalm in the NT, cf. Mt 22: 44; 26: 64; Mk 12: 36; Lk 20: 43; Acts 2: 35; 7: 55-56; 1 Cor 15: 25; Eph 1: 22; Heb 1: 13; 8: 1; 10: 13; 12: 2. 101 Gal 4: 6; 2 Pt 1: 4; For how communion with God and sharing in his nature seems

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

337

inconceivable in Hebrew scripture cf. Is 42: 8; 45: 6; 48: 11; 55: 9. Yet it is prophesied as well that YHWH would come and dwell in the midst of his people Zec 2: 10; Ez 48: 35; Jer 3: 17; Zep 3: 17; and transform their hearts and souls to his liking through a new covenant, Jer 3: 17; 31: 31f; 32: 40; Ez 36: 25-28. 102 Cf. e. g. Mt 1: 21; 8: 17; 1 Tm 1: 15. 103 For examples in the New Testament epistles of the Christian spiritual combat against the devil and his kingdom, cf. especially: 1 Pt 5: 7-10; Eph 6: 10-18; Col 1: 12-14; 2: 8-15; 2 Cor 2: 10-11; 10: 3-5; Eph 4: 27; 1 Jn 5: 18. 104 Cf. Rom 8: 28-29; 2 Cor 3: 18: 105 The term nʌȠıțİȜȚȗȦ appears in the LXX at eg. Psalm 16: 13; 36: 31; 139: 4. For other examples of athletic metaphors used to describe Christian spiritual combat see: Eph 6: 12; 1 Tm 6: 12; 2 Tm 2: 4-5, 4: 7; Phil 1: 30, 2: 16; Jud 1: 3; Heb 12: 1. Some key words here are aȖȫȞ, aȖȦȞȓĮ, aȖȦȞȓȗȠμĮȚ. The aȖȫȞ originally was the assembly of Greeks gathering at the arena for their national games, but even by the classical period aȖȫȞ came to refer to any contest for a prize, struggle for victory, or even a legal dispute. In the New Testament the aȖȫȞ is a struggle for victory in spiritual combat. This is exemplified by the Passion of Jesus, Heb 12: 1b-2: «Let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race (aȖȫȞ) that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God». Jesus’ spiritual aȖȫȞ ended in victory but passed through much suffering on the way, thus the term aȖȦȞȓĮ (agony) comes from Luke 22: 44: «And being in an agony [aȖȦȞȓĮ] he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground». The aȖȫȞ of the Christian is perseverance in faith, hope, and love until the end: «Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him» (Jas 1: 12). The «garland» of victory in the Olympic aȖȫȞ becomes the «crown» of eternal life (1 Cor 9: 25; 2 Tm 4: 8; Jas 1: 12; 1 Pt 5: 4, Rv 2: 10), exemplified by Christ’s resurrection and heavenly enthronement. Thus Stephen, at his martyrdom, saw the glory of Jesus at the right hand of God in heaven calling him homeward (Acts 7: 55) and Stephen received the stephanos, the crown befitting his name. In the struggle for eternal life, the clear adversaries are personal sin and the «tempter» Satan (Mt 4: 3). Thus when Jesus asked if only a few will be saved he uses athletic language: «Strive (aȖȦȞȓȗİıșİ) to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able» (Lk 13: 24) because of their evil works (v 27). 106 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 134. 134, 137b. This is also confirmed by Ȇ. ȂȊȁŸȃǹȈ í ī. ȀȅȊȀǹȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıIJýȢ, 15. 107 «ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ǹȖȓȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ», ǼúȤȠȜȩȖȚȠȞ IJȩ ȂȑȖĮ, 150. 108 A. STRITTMATTER, «Eingriechisches Exorzismusbuchlein»,127-144. 109 «ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ IJȠȣ ǹȖȓȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİȓȠȣ», ǼúȤȠȜȩȖȚȠȞ IJȩ ȂȑȖĮ, 152. 110 This is the direct opposite to the ritual of Baptism where, according to the common Greek belief its effectiveness comes with the correct reading of the ritual. 111 These were classes of angels, «the sons of God», and subsequently divisions of the universe (or of the heavens) that the various angels were appointed to watch over,

338

Chapter 1

cf. Dt 32: 8. Col. 1: 16 says, «For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him for him». See also Eph. 1: 21. 112 Amulets containing exorcistic texts from Jewish tradition show the particular influence of angel-names as a standard of apotropaic power. The names appear inevitably in lists, which are sometimes quite extensive and may point to a lively circulation of texts behind them. While some lists are too brief and typical to assume a literary source, the complexity of some of them suggests a dependence upon angelological formularies circulating in some form among the craftsmen who manufactured gems or amulets with exorcistic prayers inscribed on them (who may in this case be Rabbis). Through the long invocation of angels of the cosmos one can deduce that the manufacturers had a certain dependence upon a widely-circulating hierarchy. The proximity of the seven archangels for example to those of the ancient Jewish apocalypse the Book of the Watchers also makes a literary relationship quite certain. This important text, part of the apocryphal 1 Enoch corpus, was known throughout ancient Judaism and Christianity (notably to the author of Jude in the New Testament). The date of this amulet in the first century B. C. would make it (or its source) important evidence of the early circulation of the Enoch tradition amulets. See I. FRÖHLICH, «Theology and demonology in Qumran texts», 101-129. 113 R. D. KOTANSKY, «Remnants of a liturgical exorcism on a gem», 143-156. 114 A[IJòĘȞȠμĮ: ] THE NAME mentioned earlier. 115 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, I, 27, 23-25. 116 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, 420, 9f. 117 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, 229,16-21. See also 231,12: (੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μĮȢ) …İੁȢ IJ੹ ʌȠȜȣંμμĮIJĮ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ țĮȚ İੁȢ IJ੹ ਦȟĮʌIJਦȡȣȖĮ ȈİȡĮij઀μ, țIJȜ.(followed by the trisagion); Also: ੒ȡț઀ȗȦıİ, ʌȞİ઄μĮ ʌȠȞȘȡંȞ, İੁȢ IJȠȞ ਕંȡĮIJȠȞ șİઁȞ ȈĮȕĮઅș IJઁȞ țĮș੾μİȞȠȞ ਥʌ੿ IJ૵Ȟ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ, țIJȜ., 231,37/232,1f; ੒ਥʌ੿IJ૵ȞȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ, țĮș੾μİȞȠȢ (İ੝Ȥ੾ of Gregory the Theologian, followed by the trisagion) ID., 242,14; ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ țĮIJ੹ IJ૵Ȟ ʌȠȜȣȠμμ੺IJȦȞ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ țĮȚ IJ૵Ȟ ਦȟĮʌIJİȡ઄ȖȦȞ ȈİȡĮij઀μ, 246,27,35); ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ਫ਼μĮȢ țĮIJ੹ IJ੹Ȣ ਖȖȚĮȢ įȣȞ੺μİȚȢ ʌȠȜȣંμμĮIJĮ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ ਦȟĮʌIJ੼ȡȣȖĮ ȈİȡĮij੿μ IJ੹ ʌİȡïʌIJ੺μİȞĮ ț઄țȜ૳ IJોȢ įંȟȘȢ IJȠ૨ șİȠ૨ țĮ੿ țȡ੺ȗȠȞIJĮ ਘȖȚȠȢ, ਘȖȚȠȢ, ਘȖȚȠȢ Ȁ઄ȡȚȠȢ ȈĮȕȕĮઆș, țIJȜ.(İ੝Ȥ੾ of the Great Martyr Trypho) in F. PRADEL, 263,28-30; ȂİȞȦijȡȓ, ੒ ਥʌȓ IJ੹ ȋİȡȠ[ȣ]ȕ੿μ țĮș੾μİȞȠȢ (PGM VII.633f) țĮș੾μİȞȠȞ ਥʌĮȞȦ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ ਩μʌȡȠıșİȞ Į੝IJȠ૨ (PGM V.21.5f.:); ੒ȡț઀ȗȦ ıİ IJȠȞ…(sc. God), ੔Ȟਫ਼μȞȠ૨ ıȚIJ੹ ʌIJİȡȣȖ૵μĮIJĮ IJȠ૨ ȋİȡȠȣȕ੿μ (PGM IV.3058-3060): țĮ੿ Ȝ੻ȖȠȞIJİȢ ਘȖȚȠȢ, ੒ șİંȢ, ੔Ȟ ਕȞȣμȞȠ૨ ıȚIJ੹ ȤİȡȠȣȕ੿μ, țIJȜ.; (PGM XXIIb 5, 14). 118 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, 232, 26-30. 119 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, 231, 33f. 120 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, 504, 25-27. 121 A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia, 97, 23-27. 122 Here I refer to the manuscripts of the Athos 882 (Lavra Ĭ 20), the Athos 1950 (Philoteou 186), Hieromonk Benedict Tzankarolos (nos. 2115 - 1627) and the Ms. Car, C 143 der Zentralbibliothek in Zürich. 123 The seventy were the wider circle of Christ’s disciples, comprising a secret body in existence during his lifetime and that may have continued after the resurrection

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

339

(Lk. 10: 1ff). 124 This is the first mention of the name Jesus Christ in the entire exorcistic prayer and it holds its importance because it shows the importance of this name in exorcism. «For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them» (Mt. 18: 20). «And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues» (Mk 16: 17); «And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son» (Jn 14: 13); «For whosoever shall call upon the name of the lord shall be saved» (Rom. 10: 13); «And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus…» (Col. 3: 17); «Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord» (Jas 5: 14). See also S. A. DIAMOND, The Psychological Genesis of Violence, where the daimonic can be described as any natural function with the power to control the emotions. 125 The twenty-four elders is a reference to the presbyters seated around the throne of God in Revelation (4: 4, 10; 5: 5, 6, 8, 11, 14; etc.). Significantly it is one of these elders who first announces to John the victory of Christ: «Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered» (5: 5). It is possible that these elders were a model for the elders on earth, who announce the Good News of Christ’s victory as saviour of the world, since the earthly order was based on heavenly order. Presbyters were the board of elders (English: aldermen) in the early Church. However during the time in Jesus ministry the term still refers to Jewish leaders (e. g. Mt 15: 2; 26: 3; Lk 9: 22; Acts 4: 8; but Acts 11: 30 seems to be the first reference to Christian elders). Luke speaks of the «ordaining of elders» (Acts 14: 23) and the leaders of the Jerusalem church are «apostles and elders» (15: 2, 4, 6, 22, 23, 16: 4) but there were also «elders» in Ephesus and other churches (Act 20: 17; cf. Tit 1: 5; 1Tm 5: 19; 1Pt 5: 1). At first it seems they were quite similar to bishops (cʌȓıțȠʌȠȢ), as Paul calls the elders in Ephesus bishops, cʌȚıțȩʌȠȚ (Acts 20: 28; cf. Php 1: 1, 1Tm 3: 2, Tit 1: 7). 126 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ijij. 137v 127 ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH, Letter to the Smyrnæans (shorter version) ch. 6. (‘incur condemnation’ is written literally ‘judgment is to them’). 128 St. Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians, ch. 2. 129 1 Jn 2: 1b-2 «But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world» for the scapegoat bearing away the sins of the nation see Lev 16: 21-22. 130 Cf. Heb 10: 29; 1 Cor 11: 27-30. As we have seen in the witness of Ignatius and Polycarp, other Church Fathers are also in agreement. Cf. ST. JEROME, Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed, XXIII, 1418: «It is written that when the side of Jesus was pierced ‘He shed thereout blood and water’ (Jn 19: 34). This has a mystical meaning. For Himself had said, ‘Out of His belly shall flow rivers of living water’ (Jn 7: 38). But He shed forth blood also, of which the Jews sought that it might be upon themselves and upon their children. He shed forth water, therefore, which might wash believers; He shed forth blood also which might condemn unbelievers».

340

Chapter 1

131 Cf. Jn 3: 36. For St Paul a central purpose of faith is to be saved from the coming wrath of God, 1 Thes 1: 10; Rom 1: 18. Faith in the blood of Christ has saved believers from all wrath: «Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God», Rom 5: 9. 132 cf. e. g. JUSTIN MARTYR, First Apology, XXXII, 457: «And after this He was crucified, that the rest of the prophecy might be fulfilled. For this ‘washing His robe in the blood of the grape’ (Gn 49: 10) was predictive of the passion He was to endure, cleansing by His blood those who believe on Him» (cf. Jn 20: 31; Mt 10: 32-33; Rom 10: 9; Eph 2: 8). 133 Who will have to answer for this blood? The demons and unrepentant sinners who would, at least in Paul’s estimation, fail to recognize that «all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith» (Rom 3: 23-25). To the New Testament authors, it is not simply Roman soldiers or the Jewish authorities who were responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion, but more importantly, in reflecting on Old Testament prophecies, especially Isaiah 53 (cf Acts 8: 28-36), these authors came to believe that all humanity was responsible (Mt 26: 28; Jn 1: 29; Heb 9: 28). All in some way participated in the death of this innocent Jesus who was «wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities… and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all… like a lamb led to the slaughter… although he had done no wrong» (Is 53: 4,6-7,9). As Peter quoting from Isaiah 53 writes: «He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. ‘By his wounds you have been healed’» (1 Pt 2: 24, Is 53: 5, emphasis mine). 134 Jn 11: 26; Cf. e. g. Jn 5: 24 «Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life». Cf. also 1 Jn 3: 14; Rom 8: 1. In the words of Paul true Christians have «died to sin» and passed through death into life because through baptism their sins were destroyed by Christ’s crucifixion, and they now live a new life of service and love to God (Rom 6: 1-7; Col 2: 12). «Now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord» (Rom 6: 22-23). 135 JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on the Gospel of John, PG LIX, 3. For blood as the symbol and reality of God’s love, St Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians, VIII, 190, writes: «I love you greatly, and foresee the snares of the devil. Therefore, clothing yourselves with meekness, be ye renewed in faith, that is the flesh of the Lord, and in love, that is the blood of Jesus Christ». 136 Heb 9: 11-12 «Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that are coming, then through the greater and more perfect tent - not made with hands, that is, not of this creation - he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption». 137 Cf. e. g. ST. BASIL, De Spiritu Sancto, XIV. xxxi, 182; ST JOHN OF DAMASCUS, Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, IV. iv, 718; ST JUSTIN MARTYR, Dialogue with Trypho, XL, 575.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer 138

341

ST. EPHRAIM, The Nisibene Hymns, XIXv, 365. Expression of ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH, Letter to the Ephesians, I, 139. 140 St Jerome uses a metaphor inspired by Ez 29: 3-5; Satan is destroyed by the hidden Divinity of Christ: «The divine virtue of the Son of God [is like] a hook concealed beneath the form and fashion of human flesh [so that] might lure on the ‘Prince of this world’ to a conflict, whereby offering His flesh as a bait, His divinity underneath might catch him and hold him fast with its hook. Through the shedding of His immaculate blood… he alone who knows no stain of sin hath destroyed the sins of all… As, therefore… a fish seizes a baited hook… so he who had the power of death seized the body of Jesus in death, not being aware of the hook of Divinity enclosed within it, but having swallowed it he was caught forthwith, and the bars of hell being burst asunder, he was drawn forth as it were from the abyss», from A Commentary on the Apostles Creed, 16. 141 Cf. 1 Pt 3: 18-22; Eph 2: 5-6; 4: 8-10. 142 Cf. e. g. «God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ – by grace you have been saved… and seated us with him in the heavenly places» (Eph 2: 5-6). 143 Lit. «luminaries in the cosmos», «lights in the world», or «stars lighting up the sky». 144 For many early Church Fathers, and perhaps for the author of St John’s Gospel, the outpouring of blood and water (Jn 19: 34) from the crucified body of Christ was put forward as proof against those who denied the incarnation, and believed that Jesus was ‘god’ in the sense of a divine spirit but not a true man of flesh and blood. To the Docetists, Christ’s earthly manifestation was only the appearance of humanity, and his death mere illusion (įȠțȑȦ to seem). 145 ST. IRENAEUS, Adv. haeres. 4, 33, 2, 1260. 146 JOHN XXIII, Apostolic Exhortation: Inde a primis, June 30, 1960. 147 JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on the Gospel of John, PG XXXVI, 3. 148 cf. 1 Cor 10: 16; 11: 27; St Ignatius, referring to the Eucharist, writes «I desire the bread of God, the heavenly bread, the bread of life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became afterwards of the seed of David and Abraham; and I desire the drink of God, namely His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life» (Letter to the Romans, VII, 205). Ignatius is also famous for exalting the bishopric and coining the terms «catholic church» to refer to the ‘universal’ church (katholicos) and Eucharist as referring to the Lord’s Supper: «Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church» (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnæans, VIII, 232). 149 Cf. JUSTIN MARTYR, Dialogue with Trypho, XL. ST. BASIL THE GREAT, De Spiritu Sancto, XIV, 18: «So in like manner, the history of the exodus of Israel is recorded to show forth those who are being saved through baptism. For the firstborn of the Israelites were preserved, like the bodies of the baptized, by the giving of grace to them that were marked with blood. For the blood of the sheep is a type of the blood of Christ; and the firstborn, a type of the first-formed… And the 139

342

Chapter 1

firstborn were preserved by God from being touched by the destroyer, to show that we who were made alive in Christ no longer die in Adam… the sea is typically a baptism bringing about the departure of Pharaoh, in like manner as this washing causes the departure of the tyranny of the devil. The sea slew the enemy in itself: and in baptism too dies our enmity towards God. From the sea the people came out unharmed: we too, as it were, alive from the dead, step up from the water saved by the grace of Him who called us». 150 Rv 1: 5; cf. Act 26: 23; Rom 8: 11; 1 Cor 15: 20; Col 1: 18; 1Pe 1: 3. Christ’s death is a birth into eternal life, thus he is «the firstborn among many brothers» Rom 8: 29. He died to destroy death, so that in dying with Christ people might no longer perish but be born into eternal life, 2 Tm 1: 10; Heb 2: 12-15. 151 JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, PG LVXIII,832, cf. also Jerome, A Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed, XXIII, 1418. 152 Thus John makes the parallel with Genesis, for in Jn 19: 34 «blood and water from the side» is literally «from the rib» of Christ: cț IJyȢ ʌȜİȣȡàȢ which is undoubtedly a reference to Gn 2: 22 and God’s forming Eve from Adam’s rib: ધțȠįંμȘıİȞ ț઄ȡȚȠȢ ੒ șİઁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ʌȜİȣȡ੺Ȟ, ਴Ȟ ਩ȜĮȕİȞਕʌઁ IJȠ૨ ǹįĮμ, İੁȢ ȖȣȞĮ૙țĮ (LXX), «And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman». 153 For the study of exorcisms at Baptism see H. A. KELLY, The devil at Baptism. 154 Some exorcistic amulets have ‘Baptismal’ prayers inscribed on them and were worn as protective amulets (see R. KOTANSKY, «Greek Magical Amulets», 174-180. One is reminded also of the sort of amulets studied most recently by J. SPIER, «Medieval Byzantine Magical Amulets», 25-62; cf. C. BONNER, «Liturgical Fragments on Gnostic Amulets», 362-367. Note also F. C. CONYBEAREí A. J. MACLEAN, Rituale Armenorum, 391 - 394, for exorcisms in Baptismal contexts. A study of the exact relationship between the late Christian liturgical exorcisms and their early (Jewish) counterparts in the magical papyri and kindred texts has yet to be undertaken. 155 Epistulae lxix, 15, 4: 44. 156 The unhalting hymn here is referring to the Trishagion: «ĮȖȚȠȢ ĮȖȚȠȢ ĮȖȚȠȢ țȣȡȚȠȢ ıĮȕĮȦș». It occurs in the liturgy after the Eucharistic prayer (cf. Isaiah 6: 3; Rev, 4: 8). 157 The recurring allusions to the powerful acts of God, or of heroes like Moses, David, Solomon, and others, give as many liturgical variations as biblical tradition and doctrine would allow. Equivalent exorcisms, containing both Jewish and Christian elements have been found somewhat intact in the Greek magical papyri, and, in more fragmentary conditions, on the magic lamellae and curse-tablets. In these texts, too,the unclean demon is adjured by God’s creative and salvific acts, hisdivine attributes, his celestial throne, or the hosts of angelic beings. Exorcistic adjurations (ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓ) expelling evil spirits by their citation of the mighty deeds of God are also widely documented from texts of a somewhat later period. Such liturgical exorcisms are preserved in medieval manuscripts in the form of separate handbooks or are scattered among larger collections that house various divinatory astrologoumena, magico-medical recipes, and pseudo-Solomonic anecdota. The more important of the longer corpora are those published by J. GOAR, Euchologion; A. VASSILIEV, Anecdota graeco-byzantina; A. DMITRIEVSKIJ, Opisanie litur gic eskich rukopisej chranjas c ichsja v bibliotekachpravoslavnao Vostaoka; F.

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

343

PRADEL, Griechische und süditalienische Gebete; A. DELATTE, Anecdota Atheniensia. Examples of shorter handbooks or only partially edited exorcistic manuscripts have also been published by REITZENSTEIN (1904), STRITTMATTER (1932), L. DELATTE (1957), and most recently JACOB (1971), and Ȃ. ȆǹȆǹĬŸȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ í Ȃ. BǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıμȠȓIJȠȣ ǿİȡȠμȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ, to name a few; See also: R. KOTANSKY, Greek Magical Amulets,148. 158 Mt. 2: 16. 159 ȋ. ǹȃ¨ȇȅȊȉȈ, ¨ȠȖμĮIJȚțȒ IJȘȢ ȅȡșȠįȩȟȠȣ ǹȞĮIJȠȜȚțȒȢ ǼțțȜȘıȓĮȢ, 123. ID., ǼțțȜȘıȓĮ țĮȚ ʌȠȜȚIJİȓĮ İȟİʌȩȥİȦȢ ȠȡșȠįȩȟȠȣ. 160 Many other magical practices are common in Greece. According to R. BLUM í E. BLUM, Health and Healing, 161, in Naxos, spells are transferred alternately to successive generations, from mother to son, from one daughter to another, and so on. In other parts of Greece spells are transferred only from woman to woman. It is also believed that these formulas should be kept secret in order to maintain the strength and effectiveness. Writing about his research trips to Naxos, the folklorist S. IMELLOU, ȆcȡȚIJȠȣİȞIJȘ ȃáȟȦ, 176, noted that spells against jaundice are very common in Greece, they seem to be historically attested and there seems to be an astrological component to many of the spells. Usually the ceremony against jaundices begin with an invocation to the Holy Trinity. See. C. Stewart, Demons and the devil, 227-228. According to R. BLUM – E. BLUM, Health and Healing, 136, 155, and S. IMELLOU, ȆcȡȚIJȠȣİȞIJȘ ȃáȟȦ, 185-86, particularly important is the Moon (either full moon or new moon) and the stars, which constantly refer to spells related to defects. The importance of astrological and meteorological phenomena in spells and other rituals such Klidonas is huge but is not the scope of this study. In Naxos there is a similar spell jaundice followed by a ceremony consisting in placing wine in glass (the amount is proportional to the age of the victim), then throwing inside an object of pure gold, like a wedding ring or another ring that has precious stones on it. On top of the beaker is placed an open scissors in a form of a cruciform which is left out all night under the stars and gathered before the sun. This operation is repeated for three days, but the scissors must remain all the time on the glass. In the village of Komiaki in Naxos, the xorkistra should go the person who brings the well and return midnight following a different route. And in this case, fill a glass with water from the well and pour into a gold object. From e-typos www. e-typos. com/content/entheta_pdf/9magic. pdf. 161 One important consideration to make is that for the Byzantines there were no well- defined boundaries between the natural and the supernatural as there were no palpable boundaries between evil magic and the beneficial miracle…«his frontier was obscured in the minds of the population of the empire». A. KAZHDAN, «Holy and unholy miracle workers», 73. 162 Of these there are other examples. See for example the article by A. KAZHDAN, «Holy and unholy miracle workers», 73-82. 163 «And John answered him, saying, ‘Master, we saw one casting out demons in thy name, and he does not follow us: and we forbade him, because he does not follow us’. But Jesus said, ‘Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me’». See Mk 9: 38-39, note this is before

344

Chapter 1

Jesus’ death and resurrection. Christian exorcism is founded in the belief that Jesus commanded his followers to expel «evil spirits» in his name, cf. Mt 10: 1; 10: 8; Mk 6: 7; Lk 9: 110: 17; Mk 16: 17. 164 See G. MARASCO PAGES, «L’accusa di magia». The references regarding the theme of magic in the New ȉestament are ample. See: D. E. AUNE, «Magic in Early Christianity» and S. BENKO, Pagan Criticism of Christianity During the First Two Centuries A. D.,1055-1101. The same can be said regarding the Byzantine traditional magic. See R. GREENFIELD, «A contribution to Paleographic Magic», 117-153. And Ȉ. N. ȉȇŸǿǹȃȅȈ, Ǿ μĮȖİȓĮ ıIJĮȕȣȗĮȞIJȚȞ ȐȞȠμȚțȐ țİȓμİȞĮ. According to Professor Troianos, the term «white magic» contrasts the apotropaic magic by black magic, which acts to cause harm to potential victims, unlike the white magic which seeks to chase away evil and cure diseases. See Ȉ. ȃ. ȉȇŸǿǹȃȅȈ, ȂĮȖİȓĮ țĮȚ ¨ȓțĮȚȠıIJȠ ǺȣȗȐȞIJȚȠ, 449-572. For details about white magic in Byzantium and the texts of the Byzantine physicians, see Ȃ. ȋȇȅȃǾ, șİȡĮʌİ઀İȢ ĮıșİȞİȚઆȞ, 379-406. 165 On this theme see also S. GARRETT, Light on a dark Subject, 142-165. 166 A reference to Phil. 2: 7 167 EXORCISM OF ST. BASIL THE GREAT, PAP 107-111. 168 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 137r 169 Cf. Rv 12: 3; 13: 1-2; St. Basil calls the demons stíphos or co-workers of the devil, 147 -149. 170 L. DELATTE,Un Ƞffice byzantin d’exorcisme, 93. 171 A. VASSILEV, Anecdota graeco-byzantina, 332-333. 172 Simon Magus was a sorcerer at the time of the apostles who converted to Christianity but was later rebuked by St. Peter for attempting to obtain spiritual powers from the apostles for money, hence, «simony» (Acts 8: 9-24). Simon was also said to have asserted that his magic was a greater force than Peter’s faith in Christ. He sought to demonstrate this in Rome by flying, but fell to earth and died of his injuries. This incident revealed the true and greater power of Peter, who thus unmasked the Devil in Simon. All sorcerers were thought to work in collusion with the Devil. These events are reported in the apocryphal Acta Petri. See J. MONTAGUE RHODES, The Apocryphal New Testament, 331-332. In a similar fashion the Decil in Kynops was exposed by St. John the Theologian. Kynops was a sorcercer who lived in a cave on a shoutheastern promontory on Patmos (this area today is called Genoupa). Kynops could conjure up and command the spirits of the dead and he challenged St. John to a contest. Kynops drove into the water to prove his supernatural power and St. John turned him to stone. Their encounter is mentioned in T. ZAHN, Acta Joannis, 90ff. 173 Kollyva is a mixture of boiled grains, honey, nuts, raisins, and sugar that is distributed at memorial services (μȞȘμȩıȣȞȠ»Į) held after 3 days, 9 days, 40 days, 6 months and one year. When people are given Kollyva, these say, «May God forgive him/her». The Kollyva mixture is then placed on a platter and shaped into a mound or cake, to resemble a grave. The Kollyva are symbolic of the resurrection of the dead on the day of the Second Coming of the Lord. St. Paul said, «what you sow does not come to life unless it dies» (I Cor. 15: 36), and St. John, «unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit» (Jn 12: 24). There is also a practice on Mount Athos whereby the icons of saints are

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

345

incorporated onto the surface of the Kollyva offerings made in their honour. 174 Ypsoma is a term for the bread that is offered (ʌȡȠıijsȡĮIJĮȚ, hence also ʌȡȠıijȠȡá) for the preparation of the Eucharist. It has the lamb stamped on it along with the words «Jesus Christ Conquers – ǿȘıȠȪȢ ȋȡȚıIJȩȢ ȃȚțȐ» At the end of the liturgy it is distributed to the congregation as antidoron (blessed bread). 175 Greece produced the first modern writer on vampires, Leone Allacci (commonly known as Leo Allatius). In 1645, he authored De Graecorum hodie quorundam opinationibus, a volume on the beliefs of the Greek people, in which he discussed the vrykolakas at great length. 176 A 19th-century collection of canon law by Nicodemus the Hagiorite 177 The modern Greek vrykolakas (from a Slavic word meaning «werewolf»). Cf. J. C. LAWSON, Modern Greek Folklore, 377. A comprehensive treatment of the Greek vampire is found in chapters seven and eight of K. HASTRUP’s, Fieldwork among friends, in A. JACKSON, ed., «Anthropology at Home», 173-236. Also L. ALLACCI, De Graecorum hodie quorundam opinationibus, 142-149. See appendix for the full text. In 1645 he completed the De Graecorum hodie quirundam opinationibus,in which he discussed many of the beliefs common to the people of Greece. Allatios covered the Greek vampire traditions in great detail. He described the Vrykolakas, the un-decomposed corpse that has been taken over by a demon, and noted the regulations of the Greek Church for the discernment and disposal of a Vrykolakas. The tying of vampirism to the devil by Allatios and his colleagues brought Satan into the vampire education. Vampirism became another form of Satanism and the vampire the instrument of the devil. Confer also T. BRACCINI, Prima di Dracula. All’origine del vampiro. 178 The Rudder: Canon 66 of St. Basil the Great says that «A grave-robber shall remain excluded from Communion for ten years». 179 Nicodemus in view of Canon 66 of St. Basil comments that: «It is fitting that we add in the present footnote how great condemnation those priests or laymen deserve who open graves in order to find, as they say, the Vrykolakas, as they call them, and put them to death. Oh, to what a wretched condition and lack of knowledge presentday Christians have reached! Christian brethren, what delusions are those you have? What foolish and infantile imaginings are those in which you believe? What mockeries are those with which the demons separate you from an implicit belief in God, and make sport of you like silly children? I tell you and I inform you with every assurance that Vrykolakas never occur, nor are there any in the world. Vrykolakas, as you call them, are nothing else than a false and childish prejudice born of your fear and unbelief; and they are a silly notion which fools you and tells you that the dead rise out of their tombs and come forth and trouble you. There are no Vrykolakas, because it is impossible for the devil ever to raise a dead person and to make a corpse that has been dead a month or two have blood, or finger nails, or any bodily movement or motion, such as you imagine. Vrykolakas are a silly notion, because, if one examines carefully those who claim to have seen Vrykolakas, he will find that after saying that someone else told them about it they finally come to believe that they themselves have seen them. That is my impression from having many times and in many places investigated the facts. Hence, my brethren, when you learn these, dismiss any such prejudice and imagination from your thought, and

346

Chapter 1

henceforth believe not that there are any such things as Vrykolakas in reality». 180 The Xiropotamou text insists on the fact that Vampires are not real. See ij. 139. 181 XIROPOTAMOU 98, ij. 139 182 R. DE TRACI, A Cretan Tale of Vampires. See. http://gogreece.about. com/od/weirdgreece/a/weirdcrete. htm. 183 J. TOMKINSON, Haunted Greece: Nymphs, Vampires and other Exotiká. 184 M. SUMMERS, The Vampire in Europe. 185 «Persons guilty of abominable crimes, those who die under a parent’s curse, or who die excommunicated, all children conceived on one of the great festivals of the Church (when abstinence is ordained) become vampires. They arise from the tomb any night except Saturday, and live by sucking the blood of living men, especially of their own nearest and dearest» Cf. W. H. ROUSE, «Folklore from the southern Sporades», 173. Also, M. SUMMERS, The Vampire in Europe, 221, mentions Robert Pashley, who in his book Travels in Crete (1837), recounts that «the Vampire, or Katakhanas, as he is called in Crete, is denominated Vurvúlakas, or Vrukólakas, in the islands of the Archipelago, where the belief is generally prevalent, that if a man has committed a great crime, or dies excommunicated by a priest or bishop, the earth will not receive him when he dies, and he therefore rambles about all night, spending only the daytime in his tomb» See also the testimony relative to Sphakia (Crete) dating back to 1888 and cited by J. C. LAWSON, Modern Greek Folklore, 372-373 who states that: «it is popularly believed that most of the dead, those who have lived bad lives or who have been excommunicated by some priest…become vrykolakes; that is to say, after the separation of the soul from the body there enters into the latter an evil spirit…it keeps the body as its dwelling-place and preserves it from corruption, and it runs swift as lightning wherever it goes, and causes men great alarms at night and strikes all with panic». 186 M. SUMMERS, The Vampire in Europe, 29 says that: «One of the earliest – if indeed he were not actually the first – of the writers of the seventeenth century who deals with vampires is Leone Allacci». 187 L. ALLACCI, De templis Graecorum recentioribus. 188 T. BRACCINI, Prima di Dracula, 151. 189 The official view of the church on popular prejudices was also reflected in the collections of the Ecclesiastical canon (Nomokanones) as reported in Ȉ. īȀǴȃǾȈ – N. I. ȆǹȃȉǹǽȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ – M. MANOYH, NȠmȠțȐȞȦȞ, İIJİȞİȤșİȓȢ, İȚȢ ȜȑȟȚȞ ĮʌȜȒȞ,which constitute the manifestation of the official Ecclesiastical law defining acceptable religious conduct See ī. ȆȅȁǿȉǾȈ, ǼȞțİijȐȜĮȚȠȞ ȃȠμȠțȐȞȠȞȠȢ, 381389. A large part of these laws concerned prohibitions imposed on participation in unacceptable folk events and laid down harsh punishments and penalties which were to be imposed on the practitioners, such as fortune tellers, charmers, astrologers and folk healers. ȉhe response caused by the stance of the Church is recorded and corroborated by ethnographic interjections suchas the following example reported by Ǽ. Ȉǹȇǹȃȉdz – ȈȉǹȂȅǶȁǾ, ȆȡȠȜȒȥİȚȢ țĮȚ įİȚıȚ įĮȚμȠȞȓİȢIJȘȢ ĬȡȐțȘȢ, 223: «Ǿ ȖȣȞĮȓțĮ ʌȠȣ ȑțĮȞİȖȘIJİȚȑȢ țĮȚ IJȠȟȠμȠȜȠȣȖȠȪȞIJĮ ȞİıIJȠȞʌĮʌȐ, ȠʌĮ ʌȐȢ IJȘȞ ȑȡȚȤȞİ țĮȞȩȞĮ (IJȚμȦȡȓĮ) ȞĮȞȒıIJİȣİ įȪȠ μȒȞİȢ țȐșİʌȡȦȓ țĮȚ ȕȡȐįȣȞĮțĮμȞİ Įʌȩ ıĮȡȐȞIJĮ μİIJȐȞȠȚİȢ, ȞĮ ȕȐʌIJȚȗİ ȑȞĮ įȪȠ ʌĮȚįȚȐ, įİȞIJȘȞ μİIJĮȜȐ ȕĮȚȞİ țĮȚ IJȘȞ ȑįȚȞİĮȞIJȓȢ ǹȖȓĮ ȀȠȚȞȦȞȓĮ ȑȞĮȤȠȣȜȚĮȡȐțȚ ȂİȖȐȜȠ ǹȖȚĮıμȩ. DzȞĮ ȤȡȩȞȠ

Analysis and Commentary on Some Single Liturgical Units of the Exorcistic Prayer

347

įİșĮțȠȚȞȦȞȠȪıİ». [«To the woman who cast a spell or performed a charm and who confessed her evil deed to the priest at confession, the priest would impose severe punishment, demanding of her to fast for two months, to kneel forty times every morning and night or to stand godmother to one or two children. In addition, he (the priest) would refuse to administer communion to her, giving her instead a spoonful of holy water, which had received holy blessing during the Feast of Theophany. Last but not least, she would be denied communion for a whole year»]. This kind of evidence corroborates the religious exclusion of the offenders, an act virtually effectuating social exclusion. The various punishments and penalties imposed upon those who participated in folkloric events systematically validated the identification of these customs with sin and evil, as ī. ȆȅȁǿȉǾȈ, ǼȞțİijȐȜĮȚȠȞ ȃȠμȠțȐȞȠȞȠȢ, 388 writes «ǹȣIJȐ ȩȜĮIJĮ ĮμĮȡIJȒμĮIJĮ Ƞ įȚȐȕȠȜȠȢ μĮȢ ʌĮȡĮțȚȞȐİȚ țĮȚ IJĮ İȡȖĮȗȩμİıșİȞ țĮȚ ĮȜȓμȠȞȠȞ İȚȢ IJȠȞ ȐȞșȡȦʌȠȞ ȠʌȠȪ ȞĮ μȘ įȚȠȡșȫıİȚ IJȠȣ ȜȩȖȠȣ IJȠȣ ȑȦȢ ȗİȚ İȚȢ IJȠȞ țȩıμȠȞ IJȠȪIJȠȞ, ȞĮ ǼȟȠμȠȜȠȖȘșİȓ ȞĮ μİIJĮȞȠȒıİȚ ȞĮ țȜĮȪıİȚ țĮȚ ȞĮ țȐμİȚ IJȠȞ țĮȞȩȞĮ IJȠȣ ȠʌȠȪ ȞĮ IJȠȣ įȫıİȚȠ ʌȞİȣμĮIJȚțȩȢ IJȠȣ ʌĮIJȒȡ, įȚȩ IJȚșȑȜİȚ țȠȜĮıșİȓ» [«all these sins we commit are incited by the devil and woe betide anyone who fails to correct themselves during their lifetime in this world, to confess, to repent, to weep and to fulfill their religious duty in the way it has been handed over to them by their religious confessor, because they will be committing a sin»]. The above identification of these categories as religiously unacceptable, offensive, blasphemous and, therefore, punishable was facilitated by the structure of the religious system itself permeating the traditional communities, a system based upon the bipolar relationship between the sacred and the profane, according to which misfortunes stem from offences that must be punished. 190 This shocking case is discussed in depth in the publication T. BRACCINI, Prima di Dracula particularly, 151-152. 191 ī. ȆȅȁǿȉǾȈ, ǼȞ țİijȐȜĮȚȠȞ ȃȠμȠțȐȞȠȞȠȢ, 385-387. 192 M. ǹLEXIOU, The ritual lament in Greek tradition, 106. 193 ī. ȆȅȁǿȉǾȈ, ǼȞ țİijȐȜĮȚȠȞ ȃȠμȠțȐȞȠȞȠȢ, 385-387. 194 The sprinkling of holy water besides being a strong force in repelling evil, holy water has the twofold benefit of providing grace for both body and soul. 195 See appendix.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ARNIM ab, I., Stoic Fragments Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta collegit Ioannes ab Arnim, I, Leipzig 1905. AFANASIEV, N., «Ecclesiology and Some of its Orthodox Critics», Sobornost 31 (2009) 45-68. AGER, J., ed., Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World, New York 1992. AGATI, M.L., Il Libro Manoscritto da Oriente a Occidente. Per una Codicologia Comparata, Roma 2009. AGAPIUS A HIEROMONK – NICODEMUS A MONK., The Pidalion, tr., D. Cummings, Athens 19085 . —. The Philokalia, London 1979. ALBINUS, L., «The Greek ǻĮȓȝȦȞ between Mythos and Logos», in A. LANGE, ed., Alchimiques Grecs, Brussels 1928. ALEXANDER, D. – ALEXANDER, P., ed., «Magic in the Old Testament», in The Lion Handbook to the Bible, Oxford 19993. ǹLEXIOU, M., The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition, Cambridge 1974. ALLATIUS, L., De templis Graecorum recentioribus, ad Ioannem Morinum; de narthece ecclesiae veteris, ad Gasparem de Simeonibus; nec non de Graecorum hodie quorundam opinationibus, ad Paullum Zacchiam, Cologne 1645. —. On the Beliefs of the Greeks: Leo Allatios and Popular Orthodoxy, Leiden – Boston 2004. ALLEN, W.C., The Gospel ǹccording to Saint Mark. The Oxford Church Biblical Commentary, London 1915. ANDERSON, J.C. – MOORE, S.D., Mark & Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies, Minneapolis 1992. ANKARLOO, B. ௅ CLARK, S., ed., Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, Philadelphia 2002. ANSGAR KELLY, H., The Devil, Demonology and Witchcraft: The Development of Christian Beliefs in Evil Spirits, Oregan 2004. APOSTOLIDES, A. – DREYER, Y., «The Greek Evil Eye, African Witchcraft, and Western Ethnocentrism», HTS 64 (2008) 1021-1042. ARRANZ M., Sacramentaria Bizantina. Saggio di Introduzione. Dispense ad usum studentium, Roma 2003.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

349

—. L’Eucologio Costantinopolitano agli inizi del secolo XI. Hagiasmatarion & Archieratikon (Rituale e Pontificale) con l’aggiunta del Leitourgikon (Messale), Roma 1996. ARNAUD, L., «L’ Ǽxorcisme Gnostique par le ‘grand nom’ dans l’Euchologe Grec», EO 16 (1913) 123-133. —. «L’Exorcisme de Tryphon le Martyr», EO 12 (1909) 201-205. ASCH S. S., «Depression and Demonic Possession: the Analyst as an Exorcist», JCP 7 (1985) 149-164. ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA, Life of Antony and the Letter to Marcellinus, tr., R. Meyer, New York 1950. AUNE, D.E., «Magic in Early Christianity», in H. TEMPORINI – W. HAASE, ed., Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt, II, Berlin – New York. AUFFARTH, C. – STUCKENBRUCK, L., ed., The Fall of the Angels, Leiden – Boston 2004. AUS, R.D., My Name is «Legion»:Palestinian Judaic Traditions in Mark 5:1-20 and other Gospel Texts, Maryland 2003. ǹUSTIN, L., How to do Things with Words, Harvard 19752. BARTON, G.A., «The Origin of the Names of Angels and Demons in the Extra- The Devil in the Details: A Survey of Research on Satan in Biblical Studies», CBR 9 (2011) 200-227. BASHEAR, W.M., «The Greek Magical Papyri», Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, 18 (1995) 3380-3730. BASHAM, D., Deliver Us from Evil: A Pastor’s Reluctant Encounters with the Powers of Darkness, Michigan 2005. BAUERNFEIND, O., Die Worte der Dämonen im Markus Evangelium, Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament, Stuttgard 1927. BAUMGARTEN, J.M., Qumran Cave 4 XIII: The Damascus Document (4Q266-273), Oxford 1996. BAUMSTARK, A. – BOTTE, B., «Comparative Liturgy Revisited», R. TAFT – G. WINKLER, ed., Comparative Liturgy Fifty Years after Rome, 25-29 September 1998, Rome 1998. BENKO, S., Pagan Rome and the Early Christians, Indiana 1984. —. Pagan Criticism of Christianity During the First two Centuries A.D., Ǻerlin 1980. BEYER, B., Die aramäischen Texte vom Toten Meer, Göttingen 2005. BERENDS, W., «The Biblical Criteria for DemoníPossession», WTJ 37 (1975) 342-365. BETZ, H.D., ed., The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, including the Demonic Spells, Chicago 19922.

350

Bibliography

BHAYRO, S., The Shemihaza and Asael Narrative of 1 Enoch: Introduction, Text, Translation and Commentary with Reference to Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Antecedents, Münster 2005. BINNS, J., An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches, Cambridge 2002. BLANCH, S., Encounters with Jesus, London 1988. BLUM, R. – BLUM, E., The Dangerous Hour: The Lore of Crisis and Mystery in Rural Greece, London 1970. —. Health and Healing in Rural Greece: A Study of Three Communities, Stanford 1965. BOCCACCINI, G. – IBBA, G., ed., Enoch and the Mosaic Torah: the Evidence of Jubilees, Grand Rapids 2009. —, ed., «Enoch and Jubilees», Henoch 1 (2009) 1-122. —, ed., «Angels and Demons», Henoch 2 (2006) 11-42. —. I Giudaismi del Secondo Tempio da Ezechiele a Daniele, Cambridge 2008. —. Oltre l’Ipotesi Essenica. Lo Scisma tra Qumran e il Giudaismo Enochico, Brescia 2003. BONNER, C., «Liturgical Fragments on Gnostic Amulets», HTR 25 (1932) 362-367. BORG, M., A New Vision, San Francisco 1988. BORNET, R., Les Commentaires Byzantins de la Divine Liturgie du VIIe au XVe siècle, Paris 1966. BOURGUIGNON, E., Possession, Chicago 1976. BOUSSET, W., ௅ GRESSMAN, H., Die Religion Des des Judentums in Späthellenistischen Zeitalter, Tubingen 1966. BRACCINI, T., Prima di Dracula. Archeologia del Vampiro, Bologna 2011. BRASHEAR, W.M., Magica Varia, (Papyrologica Bruxellensia), Brussels 1991. BRENK, E.F., «In the Light of the Moon: Demonology in the Early Imperial Period», in HAASE, W., ed., Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt II.16.3, Berlin 1986. BROOKS, J.A., «Mark», in D.S. DOCKERY, ed., New American Commentary, ȋȋǿǿǿ, Nashville 1991. BROWN, P., «Sorcery, Demons and the Rise of Christianity», in M. DOUGLAS, ed., Witchcraft, Confessions and Accusations, London 1970. BROX, N., «Magie und Aberglauben an den Anfangen des Christentums», Thierer Theologische Zeitschrift 83 (1974) 157-80.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

351

BUFFORD, R.K., «Demonic Influence and Mental Disorders», JPC 8 (1989) 305-309. BULTMANN, R. Jesus Christ and Mythology. Charles Scribners’s Sons, New York 1958. CAIRD, G., New Testament Theology, New York 1994. CAMERON, A., «Athos and the Byzantine World», in G. SPEAKE – K. WARE, ed., Mount Athos: Microcosm of the Christian East, Bern 2012. CAMPBELL THOMPSON, R., The Devils and Evil Spirits of Babylonia, I, London 1903. CANART, P., Paleografia e Codicologia Greca. Una Rassegna Bibliografica, Città del Vaticano 1991. CASSIAN, J., The Conferences, B. RAMSEY, ed., New Jersey 1997. CAVARNOS, C., Anchored in God, Athens 1959. CESALPINO, A., De Daemonum investigatio peripatetica:in qua expicatur locus Hippocratis in Proga, «si quid divinum in morbis habetur», Florence 1580. CHADWICK, H. – CHADWICK, O., ed., Oxford History of the Christian Church, Oxford 1986. CHAFF, P. – WALLACE, H., Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, XIV, New York 2007. CYPRIANUS, Epistulae, in G.W. CLARKE., ed., The Letters of Cyprian of Carthage, I-III, New York 1989. CLARK, S., «Witchcraft and Magic in Early Modern Culture», in B. ANKARLOO ௅ S. CLARK., ed., Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, III, Philadelphia 2002. CLIFTON BLACK, C., The Disciples According to Mark: Markan Redaction in Current Debate, Michigan 2009. COLLINS, A.Y., The Beginning of the Gospel: Probings of Mark in Context, Minneapolis 1992. CONSTANTELOS, D., Christian Hellenism. Essays and Studies in Continuity and Change, New York – Athens 1999. —. «Byzantine and Ancient Greek Religiosity», in S. VRYONIS, Jr, ed., The ‘Past’ in Medieval and Modern Greek culture, Malibu 1978. CONYBEARE, F.C. – MACLEAN, A.J., ed., Rituale Armenorum, Oxford 1905. CRANFIELD, C.E., The Gospel According to Saint Mark, Cambridge 1963. CROCKETT, B. Jr., «Demon in the New Testament», MDB 208. CROSSAN, J.D., The Historical Jesus, San Francisco 1993. CUNNINGHAM, M., Mount Athos and the Byzantine Monasticism, Michigan 1996.

352

Bibliography

DALMAIS, I.H., – SCHULZ, H.J., The Byzantine Liturgy, New York 19862. DALRYMPLE, W., From the Holy Mountain:a Journey in the Shadow of Byzantium, London 1960. DAVIES, S., Jesus the Healer:Possession, Trance and the Origins of Christianity, I, London 1995. DAVIES, J.G., A New Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship London, Norwich 1986. DE BOER, W., Galen on the Passions and Errors of the Soul, tr., P.W. Harkin, Ohio 1963. DETRACI, R., A Cretan Tale of Vampires. [on line edition, access: 04.10.2014], http://gogreece.about.com/od/weirdgreece/a/weirdcrete.htm. De Exorcismis et Supplicationibus Quibusdam, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2003. DEE, J., The Enochian Magic, Minneapolis 2002. DEISSMANN, A., Light from the Ancient East, New York – London 1910. DELATTE, A., Anecdota Atheniensia, Tome I. Textes grecs inédits relatifs à l’histoire des religions, Liège – Paris 1927. DELATTE, L., Un Office Byzantin d’Exorcisme (Ms. de la Lavra du Mont Athos, Q20) Académie royale de Belgique, Classe des lettres, Mémoires, 52, Brussels 1957. DELCOR, M., «Le myth de la chute des anges et de l‘origine des géants comme explication du mal dans le monde dans l’apocalyptique juive histoire des traditions», RHR 190 (1976) 3-53. DETIENNE, M., «Demoni», in Enciclopedia IV:Costituzione-Divinazione, Torino 1978. DIAMOND, S.A., The Psychological Genesis of Violence, Evil, and Creativity, New York 1996. DICKIE, M.W., «The Fathers of the Church and the Evil Eye», in H. MAGUIRE, ed., Byzantine Magic, Washington 1995. —. «Sorcerers and Sorceresses from Constantine», in Magic and Magicians in the Greco-Roman World, Oxford 2004. DIMANT, D., The fallen Angels’ in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Books related to them, Jerusalem 1974. DIONISOPOULOS – MOSS, R., «The Evil Eye and Bewitchment in a Peasant Village», in C. MALONEY., ed., in The Evil Eye, Columbia 1976. DMITRIEVSKIJ, A., Opisanie liturgic eskich rukopisej chranjas c ichsja v biblioteka chpravoslavnao Vostaoka, t.II, Eûxológia, Kiev 1901.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

353

DOLGER, F.J., Der Exorzismus im altchristlichen Taufritual: Eine religionsgeschichtliche Studie, Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums 3:1-2, Paderborn 1909. DOSTOEVSKY, F., The Brothers Karamazov, tr., C. Garnett, Winsconson 2013. —. Demons, tr., R. Pevear – L. Volokhonsky, New York 1995. DOUGLAS, M., «Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology» in Mary Douglas Collected Works, III, London 2003. —. «Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo», in Mary Douglas Collected Works, II, London 2003. DRISCOLL, J., Unfolding God of Jung and Milton, Lexington, Kentucky 1993. DUFFY, J., «Reactions of two Byzantine Intellectuals to the Theory and Practice of Magic», in H. MAGUIRE., ed., Byzantine Magic, Washington 1995, 35-51. DUNDES, A., The Evil Eye: A Casebook, Wisconsin 1992. DUNN, J., A New Perspective on Jesus: What the Quest for the Historical Jesus Missed, Grand Rapids 2005. —. Jesus Remembered Jesus Remembered. Christianity in the Making, I, Grand Rapids 2003. DUNN, J. – TWELFTREE, G. H., «Demon - Possession and Exorcism in The New Testament», in The Christ and the Spirit, II Pneumatology, Grand Rapids 1998. DUNSTON, R., «Demon in the Old Testament», MDB 209, Geneva 1990. EARLE, R., The Gospel according to Mark, Evangelical Commentary, Grand Rapids 1957. EHRMAN, B.D., Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium, Oxford 1999. EITREM, S., Some Notes on the Demonology in the New Testament, Oslo 19662. ELLIOTT, H., «Paul, Galatians, and the Evil Eye», Cross Currents in Theology and Mission 17 (1990) 262-273. —. «20:1-15: A parable of invidious comparison and evil eye accusation», BTB 22 (1992) 52-65. ELWORTHY, F.T., The Evil Eye: The Classic Account of an Ancient Superstition, New York 2003. EVANS, C., «Inaugurating the Kingdom of God and Defeating the Kingdom of Satan», BBR 15 (2005) 49-75. —. «Defeating Satan and Liberating Israel: Jesus and Daniel’s Visions», JSHJ 1 (2003) 161–170.

354

Bibliography

—. «Paul the Exorcist and Healer», in S.E. PORTER., ed., Paul and His Theology, Leiden (The Netherlands) 2006. EVE, E., «The Jewish Context of Jesus’ Miracles», JSNTS Sup 231, London 2002. ERIKSON, M.J., Christian Theology, Grand Rapids 20133. EUSTRATIADES, S. í (Father) ARCADIOS., Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts in the Library of the Monastery of Vatopedi on Mt. Athos, Cambridge 1924. —. Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts in the Library of the Monastery of Laura on Mount Athos, Cambridge 1925 FARAONE, C.A., «Molten Wax, Spilt Wine, and Mutilated Animals: Sympathetic Magic in Near Eastern and Early Greek Oath Ceremonies», JHS 113 (1993) 60-80. FERGUSON E., Demonology of the Early Christian World, New York 1984. FLINT, V., The Rise of Magic: In Early Medieval Europe, New Jersey 1994. —. The Athlone History of Witchcraft and Magic in Europe: Ancient Greek and Rome, II, London - New York 1998. —. «The Demonisation of Magic and Sorcery in Late Antiquity», in ANKARLOO, B. ௅ CLARK, S., ed., II, Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, Philadelphia 2002. FOGEN, M.T., «Balsamon on Magic: from Roman Secular Law to Byzantine Canon Law», in H. MAGUIRE, ed., Byzantine Magic, Washington 1995. FOLLIERI, E., Initia Hymnorum Ecclesiae Graece, I-V (S T 211-215), Città del Vaticano 1960-1966. FRIDRICHSEN, A., The Problem of Miracle in Primitive Christianity, Minneapolis 1972. FROC. I., ed., Esorcisti e Mistero del Male. Vere e false possessioni diaboliche, malefiici, sortilegi, complessi e paure, Milano 2000. GARNSEY, P. – R. SALLER., The Roman Empire: Economy, Society, Culture, Berkeley 1987. GARRETT, S.R., The Demise of the Devil: Magic and the Demonic in Luke’s Writings, Minneapolis 1989. —. «Light on a dark Subject and vice-versa: Magic and Magicians in the New Testament», in J. NEUSNER – al., ed., Religion, Science and Magic in Concert and Conflict, New York – Oxford 1989. GARCIA MARTINEZ, F., Testi di Qumran, Brescia 20032. GAUTIER, P., «Le de Daemonibus du Pseudo-Psellos», REB 38 (1980) 105-194.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

355

GERSI, D., Faces in the Smoke: An Eyewitness Experience of Voodoo, Shamanism, Psychic Healing, and Other Amazing Human Powers, Los Angeles 1991. GETTIS, A., «Psychotherapy as Exorcism», JRH 15 (1976) 188-190. GILBERT, G.H., «Demonology in the New Testament», BW 18 (1901) 352360. GILDEA, P., «Demoniacal Possession», ITQ, 41 (1974) 289-311. GJUZELEV, V., «Bildungsstand in Bulgarien wahrend des Hochmittelalters (13.-14. Jh.)», in Miscellanea bulgarica 3: Forschungen zur Geschichte Bulgariens im’Mittelalter,Vienna 1986. GKINE, S. – PANTAZOPOULOU, N.I., Nomokanon Manouel Notariou tou Malaxou, Thessalonica 1985. GOAR, J., Euchologion Sive rituale Graecorum, Rituale Graecorum complectensritus et ordines Divinae Liturgiae, officiorum, sacramentorum, consecrationum, benedictionum, funerum, orationum, etc. Editio secunda expurgata, et accuratior, Venice 1730. GOODMAN, F.D., How about Demons? Possession an Exorcism in the Modern World, Indiana 1988. GOVE, P.B., ed., Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Springfield- MA 1981. GRAF, F., Magic in the Ancient world, London 1997. GREENFIELD, R., «Fallen into outer darkness later byzantine deceptions and conceptions of the Devil and the demons», Etnofoort 5 (1992) 6180. —. Traditions of Belief in Late Byzantine Demonology, Amsterdam 1988. —. «A Contribution to the Study of Palaeologan Magic», in H. MAGUIRE, ed., Byzantine Magic, Washington 1995. GREGORY OF NYSSA., The Letters., tr., A.M. Silvas, Boston 2007. GUAZZO, F.M., Compendium Maleficarum, tr., E.A. Ashwin, New York 19882. GUELICH, R.A., Mark 1-8:26: Word Biblical Commentary, XXXIVa, Texas 1989. HAG, H., La credenza nel diavolo: idea e realtá del mondo demoniaco, Milano 1976. HANNEKEN, T.R., «Angels and Demons in the Book of Jubilees and contemporary apocalypses», Henoch 28 (2006) 11-25. HANSON K.C., – OAKMAN, D.E., Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts, Minneapolis 1998. HAMM, D., «The Ministry of Deliverance and Biblical Data», in M. LYNN – D. LYNN, ed., Deliverance prayer, New Jersey 1980.

356

Bibliography

HARAKAS, S.S., Health and Medicine in the Eastern Orthodox Tradition. Faith, Liturgy and Wholeness, New York 1990. HARDIE, M.H., «The evil eye in some Greek villages and the upper Haliakom valley in west Macedonia», in A. DUNDES, ed., The evil eye A Folklore Casebook, II, New York 1981. von HARNACK, A, – al., History of the Dogma, California 1987. HARRISON, J.E., Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion, Cambridge 1903. HARRINGTON, D.J. – DONAHUE J.R., ed., The Gospel of Mark, II, Minnesota 2002. HARTNUP, K., On the Beliefs of the Greeks: Leo Allatios and Popular Orthodoxy, Leiden (The Netherlands) 2004. HEIBERT, P.G., «The Flaw of the Excluded Middle», Missiology 10 (1982) 35-47. HENDERSON J., «Exorcism and possession in psychotherapy practice», Can J Psychiatry 27 (1982) 129-134. HOLLENBACH, P.W., «Jesus, Demoniacs, and Public Authorities: A Socio-Historical Study», JAR 49 (1981) 567-588. HORRELL, D.G., – TUCKETT, C.M., «Christology, Controversy, and Community: New Testament Essays in Honour of David R. Catchpole», Supplements in Novum Testamentum XCIX, Leiden – Boston – Köln 2000. HORSLEY, R.A., Jesus and the Spiral of Violence: Popular Jewish Resistance in Roman Palestine, San Francisco 1987. —. Hearing the Whole Story: The Politics of Plot in Mark’s Gospel, Louisville 2001. HULL, M., Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition, London 1974. HURTADO, L., Mark. New International Biblical Commentary, Massachusetts 1983. HUSSEY, J.M., The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire, Oxford 1984. IMASOGIE, O., Guidelines for Christian theology in Africa, Ghana 1983. INSTONE BREWER, D., «Jesus and the Psychiatrists», in A.N.S. LANE., ed., The Unseen World: Christian Reflections on Angles, Demons and the Heavenly Realm, Grand Rapids 1996. IOANNES, A.B., ed., Fragmenta Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, III, Chrysippi Morali, Stuttgart 1964. JACOB, A., «Un exorcisme inédit du Vat. gr.1572», OCA 37 (1971) 244249. —. L’Euchologe de Porphyre Uspenski, Co. Leningr. gr. 226 (X esiècle), Munich 1965.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

357

JACKSON, D.R., Enochic Judaism: Three Defining Paradigm Exemplars, London 2004. JACONO, C., Bibliografia di Leone Allacci:(1588 - 1669), Quaderni dell’Istituto di Filologia Greca della Università di Palermo, Palermo 1962. JANOWITZ, N., Magic in the Roman World: Pagans, Jews and Christians, London 2001. JENKINS, R., Byzantium: The Imperial Centuries, A.D. 610-1071, Toronto 1987. JOANNOU, P.P., Démonologie populaire=Démonologie critique au XI siècle. La vie inédite de S. Auxence par M. Psellos, Wiesbaden 1971. JOHN CASSIAN., The Conferences, B. RAMSEY – J. BIDEZ, ed., New Jersey 1997. JORDAN, D.R. – MONTGOMERY, H. – THOMASSEN E., The World of Ancient magic, Bengen (Sweden) 1999. JOUBERT, S., «When the Dead Are Alive! The Influence of the Living Dead in the Letter of Jude», HTS 58 (2002) 576-592. JUNG, C., Jung on Evil, Princeton 1996. —. Four Archetypes, Princeton 1970. KALLERES, D.S., Exorcising the Devil to silence Christ’s enemies: Ritualized Speech Practices in Late Antique Christianity, Rhode Island 2002. KARLBERG, M.W., Demon, Michigan 1996. KASPER, W. – LEHMANN, K., Diavolo – Demoni – Possessione, Brescia 1983. KATO, B., Theological pitfalls in Africa, Nairobi 1987. KAZHDAN, A., «Holy and unholy miracle workers», in H. MAGUIRE, ed., Byzantine Magic, Washington 1995, 73-83. KAZHDAN, A., – TALBOT, M., ed., The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, I-III, New York – Oxford 1991. KEE, C., Community of the New Age, Philadelphia 1977. —. Medicina, miracolo e magia nei tempo del N.T., Brescia 1993. KELLY, H.A., The Devil at Baptism. Ritual, Theology, and Drama, Ithaca –London 1985. —. The Devil, Demonology, and Witchcraft: the Development of Christian Beliefs in Evil Spirits, New York 1968. KEMP, S. – WILLIAMS K., «Demonic possession and mental disorder in medieval and early modern Europe», Psychol Med 17 (1987) 21-29. KENT, W., Demonology, New York 1908.

358

Bibliography

KHATHIDE, G.A., Hidden Powers – Spirits in the first-century Jewish world, Luke-Acts and in the African Context: An analysis, Johannesburg 2007. KEE H., Community of the New Age, Philadelphia 1977. KLEINMAN, A., Patients and Healers in the Context of Culture: An Exploration of the Borderland between Anthropology, Medicine, and Psychiatry, Berkeley California 1980. KLUTZ, S., «The Grammar of Exorcism in the Ancient Mediterranean world: some cosmological, semantic, and pragmatic reflections on how exorcistic prowess attributed, contributed to the worship of Jesus», in The Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism: Papers from the St. Andrews Conference on the Historical Origins of the Worship of Jesus, Leiden í Boston – Köln 1999. —. «Reinterpreting Magic in the World of Jewish and Christian Scripture: An Introduction», in ID., Magic in the Biblical World: From the Rod of Aaron to the Ring of Solomon, Edinburgh 2003. —. Magic in the Biblical World: From the Rod of Aaron to the Ring of Solomon, Edinburgh 2003. —. The Exorcism Stories in Luke-Acts: A Sociostylistic Reading, Cambridge 2004. KNOX, W.L., «Jewish Liturgical Exorcism», HTR 31 (1938) 191-203. KOSKENNIEMI, E. – FRÖHLICH, I., ed., «Evil and the Devil», in Library of New Testament Studies, London 2013. KOTANSKY, R. – NAVEH, J. – SHAKED, S., «A Greek-Aramaic Silver Amulet from Egypt in the Ashmolean Museum», Le Muséon 105 (1992) 5-24. —. «Incantations and Prayers for Salvation on Inscribed Greek Amulets» in C.A. FARAONE. – D. OBBINK, ed., Magika Hiera, Oxford 1991. —. «Greek Exorcistic Amulets», in M. MEYER – P. MIRECKI, ed., Ancient Magic and Ritual Power, Leiden 1995. —. «Remnants of a liturgical exorcism on a gem» in A.D. NOCK. – H. THOMPSON., Magical Texts from a Bilingual Papyrus in the British Museum, Oxford 1932. KOTSOPOULOS, S., «Intrusion and internalisation of the devil: popular saints vs. the Fathers of the Church», AIHM (Vesalius), 7 (2001) 78-85. KUNZLET, M., La Liturgia della Chiesa, X, Milano 2003. KRAEGER, L. – BARNHART, J., Dostoevsky on Evil and Atonement, Cambridge 1992. KRUSE, H., «Das Reich Satans», Biblica 58 (1977) 29-61. LANDMANN, S., Agape Satana: Katholische Exorxismen. Z fur Religions und Geistesgeschichte 28 (1976) 265-267.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

359

LANE, W.L. The Gospel according to Mark, Grand Rapids 1974. LANGE, A., «The Essene Position on Magic and Divination», in B. MOSHE – F. GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ – J. KAMPEN, ed., Legal Texts and Legal Issues»: Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Cambridge, Leiden – New York – Köln 1997. LANGTON, E., Essentials of Demonology. A Study of Jewish and Christian Doctrine: Its Origin and Development, London 1949. LARCHET, J. C., Théologie de la Maladie Theologies, Paris 1991. LATTE, K., ed., Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon, I, Copenhagen 1966. LAVATORI, R., Satana un caso serio, Bologna 1996. LAWSON, C.J., Modern Greek Folklore, and Ancient Greek Religion: A Study in Survivals, South Carolina 2010. LECLERQ, H., «Exorcisme, Exorciste», Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de Liturgie, V, Paris 1922. LEON, C.A., «El duende and other incubi. Suggestive interactions between culture, the devil, and the brain», Arch Gen Psychiatry 32 (1975) 162. LEWIS, C.S., Surprised by Joy:the shape of my early life, London 1955. LEWIS, I.M., Ecstatic Religion: A Study of Shamanism and Spirit Possession, Oxford 2003. LEROY, J., Les Types de Réglure des Manuscrits Grecs, Paris 1977 LICHTENBERGER, H. ௅ RÖMHELD, K.F.D., ed., Die Dämonen – Demons, Tübingen 2003. LIMBECK. M., «Le raidici della concezione biblica del Diavolo e dei Demoni», Concilium 39 ( 1975) 45-61. LING, T., The Significance of Satan, London 1961. LONG, A.A., Hellenistic Philosophy, London 1974. LUCK, G., Arcana Mundi: Magic and the Occult in the Greek and Roman Worlds: A Collection of Ancient Texts, Baltimore 2006. LUDCOW, M., «Demons, Evil and Liminality in Cappadocian theology», JEC 20 (2012) 179-211. LUNN–ROCKLIFFE, S., The Devil and his Works in Late Antiquity, London 2014. —. «The Diabolical Problem of Satan’s First Sin: Self-Moved Pride or a Response to the Goads of Envy?», Studia Patristica 54 (2014) 1-20. —. «Visualizing the Demonic: The Gadarene Exorcism in Early Christian art and Literature», in The Devil in Society in pre-modern Europe. R. RAISWELL – P. DENDLE., ed., Toronto 2012. MACK, B.L., A Myth of Innocence: Mark and Christian Origins, Philadelphia 1988.

360

Bibliography

MACMULLEN, R., Christianity and Paganism, Yale 1999. MACNUTT, F., Deliverance from Evil Spirits: A Practical Manual, Michigan 2009. MAGDALINO, P. – MAVROUDI, M., ed., The Occult Sciences in Byzantium. Geneva 2006. MAGUIRE, H., ed., «Magic and Christian Image», in ID., ed., Byzantine Magic, Washington D.C., 1993. MALBON, E.S., Narrative Space and Mythic Meaning in Mark, San Francisco 1986. MALINA, B.J. – NEYREY, J.H. Calling Jesus Names:The Social Value of Labels in Matthew, California 1988. MALONEY, G.A., tr., The Fifty Spiritual Homilies; and the Great Letter/Pseudo-Macarius; New York 1992. MALTESE, E.V., «Il Diavolo a Bisanzio: Demonologia Dotta e Tradizioni Popolari», in ID., Dimensioni Bizantine. Donne, Angeli e Demoni nel Medievo greco, Torino 1995. MANSFIELD, M., Spirit and Gospel in Mark, Massachusetts 1987. MARASCO PAGES, G., «L’accusa di magia e i cristiani nella tarda antichità», Augustinianum, CI, December 2011. MARCONCINI, B. – AMATO, A. – ROCCHETTA, C. – FIORI, M., Angeli e demoni. Il dramma della storia tra il bene e il male, Bologna 1991. MARTÍNEZ, F.G. ௅ TIGCHELAAR, E.J.C., The Dead Sea Scrolls Studies Edition í 1179 (11Q5 xxvii 10). 1203 (11Q11 v 2), I-II, Leiden (The Netherlands) 1999. MARVIN, M. – MIRECKI, P ed., Ancient Magic and Ritual Power, Boston – Leiden 1995. MATEOS, J., «La Célébration de la Parole dans la Liturgie Byzantine», OCA 184 (1973) 90-91. MCCOWN, C.C., ed., The Testament of Solomon, Leipzig 1922. MCALPINE, T.H., Facing the powers, California 1991. MEIER, J.P., A Marginal Jew, I-II, London 1994. MEYNET, R. – ONISZCZUK, J., Norme Tipographice per la Composizione dei Testi con il Computer, Roma 2011. MENZIES, A.W., Demonic Possession in the New Testament:Its Relations Historical, Medical and Theological, Edinburgh 1902. MERKELBACH, R., «Astrologie, Mechanik, Alchimie und Magie im Griechisch-Römischen Ägypten», Riggisberger Berichte 1 (1993) 4962. MEYENDOR, J., «Mount Athos in the Fourteenth Century: Spiritual and Intellectual Legacy», DOP 42 (1988) 157-165.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

361

MEYER, R.T., St. Athanasius: The Life of St. Antony, London 1950. MICALLEF, J., Marco 5:1-20: Gesù il più forte che signoreggia sul male. Un percorso esegetico, Firenze 2012. MIGNE, J.P., PATROLOGIAE CURSUS COMPLETUS SERIES GRAECA, J. P. MIGNE., ed., CLXI, Paris 1857-1866. MILIK, J.T., The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4, Oxford 1976. MIRECKI, P. – MEYER, M., Magic and ritual in the ancient world, Leiden (The Netherlands) 2001. MITTON, C.L., The Gospel According to Saint Mark. Epworth Preacher's Commentary, London 1957. MOKE, D.F., Eroticism in the Greek Pagical Papyri, Minnesota 1975. MONTAGUE RHODES, J., The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford 1924. MOORE, E.G., «Theories Underlying Exorcism: Theological and Psychic», JRSM 72 (1979) 220-221. MOSS, W.L., í CAPPANNARI, S.C., «Mal’occhio, Ayin ha ra oculus fascinus, udenblock», in C. MALONEY, ed., The Evil Eye Hovers Above, New York 1976. MYERS, C., Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus, New York 1988. MYLONAS, P ௅ KOUKAS, G. [on line edition, access: 04.10.2014] http://www/etypos.com/content/entheta.pdf/9magic.pdf/ NAVEH, J., «Fragments of an Aramaic Magic Book from Qumran», IEJ 48 (1998) 252-261. NEAMğU, G.M., Language and Theology in St Gregory of Nyssa, Durham 2002. NEWSOM, C., «The Development of 1 Enoch 6-19: Cosmology and Judgment», CBQ 24 (1980) 310-329. NEWHEART, M.W., My Name is Legion. The Story and Soul of the Gerasene Demoniac, Minnesota 2004. NICHOLLS, D., «The Devil in Renaissance France», in D. OLDRIDGE, ed., The Witchcraft Reader, Oxford 2001. NICHOLSON, H.B., Handbook of Middle American Indians, Texas 1971. NICOLOTTI, A., Esorcismo Cristiano e Possessione Diabolica tra II e III Secolo, Turnhout (Belgium) 2011. —. «Sul Metodo per lo Studio dei Testi Liturgici», Medioevo Greco. Rivista di Storia e Filologia Bizantina 0 (2000) 143-179. NITZAN, B., Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry, tr., J. Chipman, Leiden –New York – Köln, 1994. NOACK, B., Satanás und Sotería: Untersuchungen zur neutestamentlichen Dämonologie, Copenhagen 1948.

362

Bibliography

NOCK, A.D.– al., «Magical Texts from a Bilingual Papyrus in the British Museum», in Proceedings of the British Academy, 17 (1931) 266 (line 19) on Mark 5:717(1931) 266 (line 19). OESTERREICH, K., Possession:demoniacal and other, London 1930. OGILVIE, L.J., Life Without Limits: The Message of Mark’s Gospel, Texas 1975. OIKONOMIDES, N., «Mount Athos: Levels of Literacy», Dumbarton Oaks Symposium on Mount Athos, 1-3 May 1987, Washington D.C. 1987. O’MEARA, D.J., ed., Philosophica Minor, II, Leipzig 1989. ORR, J., «Definition of Belelzebub» in International Standard Bible Enyclopedia [on line edition, access: 04.10.2014] http://www.internationalstandardbible.com/. PACHOUMI, E., «The Erotic and Separation Spells of the Magical Papyri and the Defixiones», Greek, Roman and Byzantine studies 53 (2013) 294-325. PAPADEMETRIOU, G., «Exorcism and the Greek Orthodox Church», in A. NAUMAN, ed., Exorcism through the ages, New York 1974. PARENTI, S. – VELOVSKA E., L’Eucologio Barberini gr. 336, Roma 20002. PASCAL, B., Pensées, tr., W.F. Trotter, New York 2002. PATTERSON, S.J., The God of Jesus: the historical Jesus and the search for meaning, Michigan 1998. PENNEY, D.K. – WISE, M.O., «By the Power of Beelzebub: An Aramaic Incantation Formula from Qumran (4Q560)», JBL 113 (1994) 627-650; PERRY, M., ed., Deliverance, London 1996. PETRA, B., «Demoni ed Esorcismi nella Tradizione Ortodossa», in SODI, M., Tra Maleficio, Patologie e Possessione Demoniaca, Padova 2003. PETROPOLOUS, Y., Greek Magic, Ancient, Medieval and Modern, London 2008. PETRUCCI, A., La Descrizione del Manoscritto. Storia, Modelli, Problemi, Roma 2001. PIPER, R.A., «The Absence of Exorcisms in the Fourth», in Christology, Controversy and Community: New Testament essay in honour of David Catchpole., D.G. HORELL – C.M. TUCKETT, ed., Leiden (The Netherlands) 2000. PSELLUS, M., Epitre sur la Chrysopée. Catalogue des manuscrits, Leiden (The Netherlands) 1995. PLUMBER, E., «The Absence of Exorcisms in the Fourth Gospel», Biblica 78 (1997) 253-278.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

363

POPOVITCH, J., «Philosphie Orthodoxe de la Verité. Dogmatique de l’Eglise orthodoxe», I, L’âge d’homme, Paris 1992. PRADEL, P., Griechische und süditalienische Gebete, Beschwörungen und Rezepte des Mittlelalters, Giessen 1907. PRESCIA, J., The Oath and Perjury in Ancient Greece,Tallahassee 1970. PRIORESCHI, P., A History of Medicine, I, Omaha 1995. PRYKE, E.J., Redactional Style in the Marcan Gospel: A Study of Syntax and Vocabulary as Guides to Redaction in Mark, Cambridge 1978. PSELLOS, M. ௅ COLLISSON, M., Psellos’ Dialogue on the Operation of Daemons, J. TEGG., ed., Sydney 1843. RAHNER, K., Devil, London 1975. RAISWELL, R. – DENDLE, P., ed., The Devil in Society in the Pre-Modern Europe, Toronto 2012. REEVES, J.C., Jewish Lore in Manichaean Cosmogony: Studies in the Book of Giants Traditions, Cincinnati 1992. REISEN-DANZ, K.P. – ENRICHS, A.H., Papyri Graecae Magicae. Die Griechischen Zauber Papyri, II, Stuttgart 1973. RÉMI, N., Daemonolatreia Libri Tres, 1595., tr., E.A. Ashwin, Demonolatry, New Jersey 1974. RHALLES, G.A. – POTLES, M., Syntagma ton theion kai hieron kanonon, II, Athens 1852. RHOADS, D., Reading Mark Engaging the Gospel, Minneapolis 2004. Rito degli Esorcismi e Preghiere per Circostanze Particolari, Città del Vaticano 2001. Rituale Romanum ex Decreto Sacrosancti Ooecumenici Concilii Vaticani II Instauratum Auctoritate Ioannis Pauli II Promulgatum, De Exorcismis et Supplicationibus Quibusdam, Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, Citta del Vaticano 2000. ROBERT, A., ed., Ante-Nicene Fathers, IV, New York 1885. ROBINSON, N.F., Monasticism in the Orthodox Churches, London 1916. ROBBINS, R.H., The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology, London 1963. ROMILLY, J., Byzantium. The Imperial Centuries A.D. 610-1071, New York 1966. ROSENQVIST, J.O., ed. and tr., The Life and Conduct of Our Holy Mother Irene, Abbess of the Convent of Chrysobalanton, Stockholm 1986. ROUSE, W.H., «Folklore from the Southern Sporades», Journal of American folklore 12 (1899) 173. ROTHENBERG, C., Spirits of Palestine: Gender, Society and Stories of the Jinn, Lanham, MD. 2004.

364

Bibliography

RUBENSON, S., The Letters of St. Antony: Monasticism and the Making of a Saint, Minneapolis 1995. RUBIN, B., Der Fürst der Dämonen: ein Beitrag zur Interpretation von Prokops, Munich 1951. RUDBERG, S.Y., «Les Manuscrits à Contenu Profane du Mont-Athos», Eranos 54 (1956) 181. RUSSELL, J.B., The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity, Cornell University 1997. —. Satan, the Early Christian Tradition, Itacha – London 1981. SACCHI. P, Jewish Apocalyptic and its History Supplements, Sheffield 1997. —. Storia del Secondo Tempio. Israele tra VI secolo a.C. e I secolo d.C., Torino 1994. SAGGS, H.W.F., The Greatness that was Babylon, New York 1961. SAKENFELD, K. ed., «The Testament of Solomon», in The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, V, Nashville 2009. SANDBACH, H., The Stoics, Indianapolis 19892. SARTORE, D. – TRIACCA, A.M. – CIBIEN, C., ed., Liturgia, Milano 2001. SAUTEL, J.H., Répertoire de Réglures dans les Manuscrits Grecs sur Parchemin, Turnhout 1995. SATHAS, K.N., ed., Letter 187 of M. Psellos, Mesaionike Bibliotheke, VII Athens 1872í1894. SCAFOGLIO, D. – de LUNA, S., La Possessione Diabolica, Salerno 2002. SCHAFF, P. – WACE, H., ed., A Selected Library of the Nicene and PostNicene Fathers of the Christian Church.Second Series, I-XIV, Grand Rapids (MI) 1975-1979. SCHMEMANN, A., Of Water and Spirit, London 1989. —. The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy. [on line edition, access: 04.10.2014],http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/historica l_road_a_schmemann.htm. SCHERMANN, T., «Griechische Handschriftenbestände in den Bibliotheken der christlichen Kulturzentren des 5-7. Jahrhunderts», OS 4 (1904) 151-163. SEGEMANN, W., – MALINA B, J., – THEISSEN, G., ed., The Social Setting of Jesus and the Gospels, Minneapolis 2002. Select Writings and Letters of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, A. ROBERTSON, ed., NPNF 2.4, 10-1348 [on line edition, accessed 30.10.2014], http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/Athanasius%20Select%20 Writings%20and%20Letters.pdf.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

365

SHEETS, D., «Jesus as Demon-Possessed», in S. MCKNIGHT. – J.B. MODICA, ed., Who do my opponents say that I Am? An Investigation of the Accusations Against the Historical Jesus, New York 2008. SCHULZ, H.J., The Byzantine Liturgy: Symbolic Structure and Faith Expression, New York 1986. SKARSAUNE, O., Norsk Tidsskrift for Misjonsvitenskap, III, Oslo 1997. SMITH, J. Z., «Towards Interpreting Demonic Powers in Hellenistic and Roman Antiquity», in Aufstieg und Neidergang der römanischen Weld 16.1: New York 1978. SMITH, M., Jesus the Magician, New York 1978. SODI, M., Tra Maleficio, Patologie e Possessione Demoniaca, Padova 2003. SOPHOCLES, E.A., Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods, New York 1887. SORENSEN, E., Possession and Exorcism in the New Testament and Early Christianity, Tubingen 2002. SPIDLIK, T., La spiritualité de l’Orient chrétien. Manuel Systematique, Roma 1978. SPIER, S., «Medieval Byzantine Magical Amulets and their Tradition», JWarb 56 (1993) 25-62. STANTON, G. N., Jesus and Gospel, Cambridge 2004. STEGEMANN, H., The Library of Qumran: On the Essenes, Qumran, John the Baptist, and Jesus, Leiden 1998. STERLING, G. E., «Jesus as Exorcist: An Analysis of Matthew 17:14-20; Mark 9:14-29; Luke 9:37-43a», CBQ 55 (1993) 467-493. STEWART, C., Devil and Demons Moral Imagination in Modern Greek Culture, New Jersey 1991. STRITTMATTER, A., The «Barberinum S. Marci» of Jacques Goar, The Vatican City 1933. —. «Ein griechisches Exorzismusbüchlein. Ms Car. C. 143 b der Zentralbibliothek in Zurich, II», OCA 26 (1932) 125-144. —. «Ein griechisches Exorzismusbüchlein. Ms Car. C. 143 b der Zentralbibliothek in Zurich, II», OCA 20 (1930) 169-178. STUCKENBRUCK, L.T., Giant Mythology and Demonology: From the Ancient Near East to the Dead Sea Scrolls, Tubingen 2001. —. «Pleas for Deliverance from the Demonic in Early Jewish Texts», JSS Supp., 17, Oxford 2005. —. «The Eschatological Worship by the Nations. An enquiry into the Early Enoch tradition», in K. DOBOS – al, ed., Wisdom as a Robe, Sheffield 2009.

366

Bibliography

—. «Personified Evil in the Dead Sea Texts», in E. KOSKENNIEMI – I. FRÖHLICH, ed., Demonic Evil in Ancient Judaism and the New Testament, London 2011. —. Qumran Cave 4 XXVI. Cryptic Texts and Miscellanea, Part 1, Oxford 2000. —. The Book of Giants from Qumran, Tübingen 1997. —. «The Origins of Evil in Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition: The Interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 in the Second and Third Centuries B.C.E.», in The Fall of the Angels, Leiden (The Netherlands) 2004. SUTER, D.W., «Fallen Angel, Fallen Priest: the Problem of Family Purity in 1 Enoch», HUCA 50 (1979) 115-135. SUMMERS, M., The Vampire in Europe, Wellingborough 1980. SVOBODA, D., La Démonologie de Michel Psellus, Brno 1927. TAFT, R., Mount Athos: A Late Chapter in the History of the Byzantine Rite DOP XXXXII, Washington D.C. 1988. TAFT, R. – G. WINKLER., Comparative Liturgy Fifty Years after Anton Baumstark (1872-1948): acts of the international congress, Rome, 2529 September 1998, CCLXV, OCA 265 (2001) 963-979. —. The Byzantine Rite: A Short History, Collegeville 1992. —. «Lo Spirito della Liturgia Cristiana Orientale», in Oltre l’Oriente e l’Occidente. Per una Tradizione Liturgica Viva, Roma, 1999. TARN, W. í GRIFFITH, G.T., Hellenistic Civilization, London 1952. TASSINARIO, A., Il Diavolo Secondo l’Insegnamento Recente della Chiesa, Roma 1984. TAYLOR, V., The Gospel According to Saint Mark, London 1952. TELFORD, W.R., The Theology of the Gospel of Mark, Cambridge 1999. THACKERAY, H.S.J. í MARCUS, R., Josephus V. Jewish Antiquities. tr., R. Marcus í A. P. Wikgren, Harvard 1998. THEE, F.C.R., Julius Africanus and the Early Christian View of Magic Tülbingen 1984. THELWALL, S., Ante-Nicene Christian Library, XI, Edinburgh 1868. THOMAS, J.C., «The Devil, Disease and Deliverance: Origins of Illness in New Testament Thought», JPT Supp 13, Sheffield 1998. THOMPSON, E.T., The Gospel according to Mark and its Meaning for Today, Richmond, VA. 1954. THORNDIKE, L., A History of Magic and Experimental Science, New York 1923. TOLBERT, M.A., Sowing the Gospel: Mark’s World in Literary-Historical Perspective, Minneapolis 1989. TOMKINSON, J., Haunted Greece: Nymphs, Vampires and Other Exotikà, Athens 2004

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

367

TREMBELAS, P.N., Mikron Euchologion, I, Athens 1950. —. Texte und Forschungen zur byzantinisch-neugriechischen Philologie, Athens 1935. —. Dogmatica della Chiesa Cattolica Orientale, Atene 19892. TRETHOWAN, W.H., «Exorcism: a Psychiatric Viewpoint», JME 2 (1976) 127-37. TROJANOS, N., «Magic and the Devil, from the Old to the New Rome», in J.C.B. PETROPOULOS, ed., Greek Magic: ancient, medieval and modern, London – New York 2008. TWELFTREE, G.H., In the Name of Jesus: Exorcism Among Early Christians, Grand Rapids 2007. —. Jesus the Exorcist. A Contribution to the Study of the Historical Jesus, Edinburgh 1993. —. Christ Triumphant, London 1985. —. «Exorcisms in the Fourth Gospel and the Synpotics», in R.T. FORTNA – T. THATCHER, ed., Jesus in Johannine Tradition, Louisville 2001. UNGER, M., Biblical Demonology, Illinois 1953. VAN DEUN, P., «Some anonymous recommendations to Athonite monks», [on line edition, access: 12.05.2014], www.academia.edu/1172906. VANDERKAM, J.C., «1 Enoch, Enochic Motifs, and Enoch in Early Christian Literature», in J.C. VANDERKAM – W. ADLER, ed., The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, Minneapolis 1996. —. «Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition», CBQ XVI, Washington D.C. 1984. —. Enoch: a Man for all Generations, Columbia 1995. VASSILIEV, A.A., Anecdota Graeco-Byzantina, I, Moscow 1893. VERMES, G., Jesus the Jew:A Historian’s Reading of the Gospels, Philadelphia 1973. —. «Art, Medicine and Magic in Early Byzantium. Symposium on Byzantine Medicine», DOP 38 (1984) 65-66. VIKAN, G., «Magic and visual culture in late antiquity», in Y. PETROPOLOUS, ed., Greek Magic, Ancient, Medieval and Modern, London – New York 2008. VOS, N. – OTTEN, W., Demons and Devil in Ancient and Medieval Christianity, Boston 2011. VOUTRIAS, E., «Euphemistic Names for the Prayers of the Nether World», in D.R. JORDAN – H. MONTGOMERY – E. THOMASSEN, ed., The world of Ancient Magic, Athens 1999. WADDELL, H., The Desert Fathers, London 1936. —. Becoming Friends: Worship, Justice, and the Practice of Christian Friendship, Grand Rapids 2002.

368

Bibliography

WAETJEN, H.C., A Reordering of Power: A Socio-political Reading of Mark’s Gospel, Minneapolis 1989. WALDSTEIN, M., – WISSE, F., The Apocryphon of John: Synopsis of Nag Hammadi Codices II,1; III,1; and IV,1 with BG 8502,2, Boston 1995. WARRINGTON, K., Jesus the Healer Paradigm or Phenomenon, Carlisle 2000. WENDEHORST, A., «Wer konnte im Mittelalter lesen und schreiben?», in Schulen und Studium im sozialen Wandel des hohen und spiiten Mittelalters, J.F. SIGMARINGEN, ed., Stuttgart 1986. WESTERINK, L.G., «Proclus, Procopius, Psellos», in Mnemosyrle 10 (1942) 275-280, WILKEN, R.L., John Chrysostom and the Jews: Rhetoric and Reality in the Late Fourth Century, Berkley 1983. WINK, W., Naming the Powers, Philadelphia 1984. WINKELMAN, M., «Shamans and other Magico-Religious Healers: A Cross-cultural study of Origins, Nature and Social Transformations», Ethos 18 (1990) 308-352. WISE, M. – ABEGG, M. ௅ COOK, M. E., The Dead Sea Scrolls, London 1996. WITMER, A., Jesus, The Galilean Exorcist: His Exorcisms in Social and Political Context, London 2012. WIGZELL, F., «The Russian Folk Devil and His Literary Reflections», in DAVIDSON, P., ed., Russian Literature and its Demons, York – Oxford 2000. WRIGHT, N.T., Jesus and the Victory of God, London 1996. —. The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1-4 in Early Jewish Literature, Tübingen 2005. —. «Evil Spirits in Second Temple Judaism: the Watcher Tradition as a Background to the Demonic Pericopes in the Gospels», Henoch 28 (2006) 189-207. YAMAUCHI, E.M., «Magic in the Biblical World», Tyndale Bulletin 34 (1983) 169-200. YARNOLD, E., The Awe Inspiring Rites of Initiation. The Origins of the RCIA, Minnesota 19942. YEBOAH, C., Demon, Michigan 2000. YOSHIKO REED, A., Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: the Reception of Enochic Literature, Cambridge – New York 2005. —. «The Trickery of the Fallen Angels and the Demonic Mimesis of the Divine: Aetiology, Demonology, and Polemics in the Writings of Justin Martyr», JECS 2 (2004) 141-171.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

369

ZAHN, T., ed., Acta Joannis, Hildeshein 1975. ǹȃǻȇȅȊȉȈȅȈ, ȋ., ǻȠȖȝĮIJȚțȒ IJȘȢ ȅȡșȠįȩȟȠȣ ǹȞĮIJȠȜȚțȒȢ ǼțțȜȘıȓĮȢ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1907. ǺǼȇīȍȉH, ī.Ĭ., ȁİȟȚțާ ȁİȚIJȠȣȡȖȚțࠛȞ țĮ‫ ޥ‬TİȜİIJȠȣȡȖȚțࠛȞ OȡȦȞ, ĬİııĮȜȠȞȓțȘ 1991. HȂǼȁȁȅ, Ȉ.ǻ., «Ȇ੼ȡȚ IJȠȣ İȞ IJȘ ȃ੺ȟȦ Eș઀ȝȠȣ IJȠȣ TȡȣʌȠʌİȡ੺ıȝĮIJȠȢ». ǼʌİIJȘȡަȢ IJȘȢ ǼIJĮȚȡİަĮȢ ȀȣțȜĮįȚțެȞ ȂİȜİIJެȞ, N੺ȟȦ 1961 ȀǹȁǹǿȈǹȀǾ, ī., «ȀȡȘIJȚțĮȓ ȆȡȠȜȒȥİȚȢ», ī ǻİȜIJȓȠȞ IJȘȢ ǿıIJȠȡȚțȒȢ țĮȚ ǼșȞȠȜȠȖȚțȒȢ ǼIJĮȚȡȓĮȢ IJȘȢ ǼȜȜȐįȠȢ. DzIJȠȢ Ȁǹ', ȉĮ IJİȪȤȘ 1, 2, 5 (#233236, 241-2), ǺȩȜȠȢ 1956. ȀǹȁȁǿȃǿȀȅȊ, K., ȅ ȋȡȚıIJȚĮȞȚțȩȢ ȃĮȩȢ țĮȚ IJĮ ȉİȜȠȪȝİȞĮ İȞ ǹȣIJȫ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1958. ȁǹȂȆȇȅȈ, Ȉ., ȆĮȜĮȚȠȜȩȖİȚĮ țĮȚ ȆİȜȠʌȠȞȞȘıȚĮțȐ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1910. —. ȀĮIJ‫ޠ‬ȜȠȖȠȢ IJࠛȞ ‫݋‬Ȟ IJĮ߿Ȣ ȕȚȕȜȚȠș‫ޤ‬țĮȚȢ IJȠࠎ ݄ȖަȠȣ ‫ށ‬ȡȠȣȢ EȜȜȘȞȚțࠛȞ KȦįަțȦȞ, II, Cambridge 1900. MAPTINOY, I., ed., ǼȣȤȠȜިȖȚȠȞ IJȠ ȂȑȖĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1902. ȂǼīǹȈ, ī.ǹ., ǼȜȜȘȞȚțȑȢ EȠȡIJȑȢ țĮȚ EșȚȝĮ IJȘȢ ȁĮȧțȒȢ ȁĮIJȡİȓĮȢ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1956. ȆǹȆǹǻȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ, N., ed., ǼȣȤȠȜިȖȚȠȞ IJȠ ȂȑȖĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1927. ȆǹȆǹĬȍȂȅȆȅȊȁȅȈ, M. – ǺǹȇǺȅȊȃǾȈ, M., ǼȟȠȡțȚıȝȠȓ IJȠȣ ǿİȡȠȝȩȞĮȤȠȣ ǺİȞȑįȚțIJȠȣ ȉȗĮȞțĮȡȩȜȠȣ (1627), ǹșȒȞĮ 2008. ȆǹȆǹǻǾȂǾȉȇǿȅȊ, A., ed., ȆȘį‫ޠ‬ȜȚȠȞ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1970. ȆȅȁǿȉǾȈ, ȃ.ī. ǼȞ ȀİijȐȜĮȚȠȞ ȃȠȝȠțȐȞȠȞȠȢ Ȇİȡȓ īȠȘIJİȚȫȞ, ȂĮȞIJİȓȦȞ țĮȚ ǻİȚıȚįĮȚȝȠȞȓȦȞ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1911. ȈǹȇǹȃȉǾ-ȈȉǹȂȅȊȁǾ, Ǽ., ȆȡȠȜȒȥİȚȢ țĮȚ ǻİȚıȚįĮȚμȠȞȓİȢ IJȘȢ ĬȡȐțȘȢ, Thessalonica 19513. ȉȇȍǿǹȃȅȈ, Ȉ.N., ǹȡȤĮȚȠȜȠȖíĮ 20 (1986) 41-44. ĭǿȁǿǹȈ, ī., «Ǿ ȂĮȖİȓĮ ǼȞIJȩȢ IJȦȞ ȉİȚȤȫȞ: ȈIJȡİȕȜȫıİȚȢ IJȘȢ ǼțțȜȘıȚĮıIJȚțȒȢ ȈȣȞİȓįȘıȘȢ», ȈȪȞĮȟȘȢ 67 (1998) 71-94. ĭȁȅȇǹȀǿȈ, A.E., ȉȒȞȠȢ: ȁĮȧțȩȢ ȆȠȜȚIJȚıȝȩȢ, ǹșȒȞĮ 1971. ȋȇǿȈȉȅǻȅȊȁȅȊ, Ĭ., ǼȟȠȡțȚıȝȠȓ, ǼȟȠȡțȚıIJȑȢ țĮȚ ǺĮıțĮȞȓĮ, ǹșȒȞĮ 2003. ȋȇȅȃǾ, Ȃ., «ǽȦȚțȐ ʌȡȠȧȩȞIJĮ ıIJȘȞ įȚĮIJȡȠijȒ țĮȚ ıİ ȚĮIJȡȚțȒ ȤȡȒıȘ ıIJȠ ǺȣȗȐȞIJȚȠ: ıȣȝȕȠȜȒ ıIJȘȞ ȝİȜȑIJȘ IJȦȞ ĮȞIJȚȜȒȥİȦȞ ȖȚĮ IJĮ ȗȫĮ țĮȚ IJȘȢ ȤȡȒıİȦȢ IJȦȞ ʌȡȠȧȩȞIJȦȞ IJȠȣȢ țĮIJȐ IJȘȞ ȕȣȗĮȞIJȚȞȒ ʌİȡȓȠįȠ», Ǻyzantina Symmeikta 20 (2010) 143-194.

ABBREVIATIONS

All biblical abbreviations are taken from the Chicago Manual of Style, 14th edition. AIHM: Acta Internationales Historiae Medicinae Arch. Gen. Pyschiatry: Archives of General Psychiatry. BBR:Bulletin for Biblical Research. BTB: Biblical Theology Bulletin. BW: The Biblical World. Can J Psychiatry: Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. CBQ: Catholic Biblical Quarterly. CBR: Currents in Biblical Research. C.th: Teodosion Code. CTM:Comments in Theology and Missions DOP: Dumbarton Oaks Papers. DACL: Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de Liturgie, EO: Échos d’Orient. HUCA: Hebrew Union College Annual. HTR: Harvard Theological Review HTS: Hervormde Teologiese Studies. ITQ: Irish Theological Quarterly. IEJ: Israel Exploration Journal. J. R. Soc Med: Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. JAF:Journal of American Folklore. JBL: Journal of Biblical Literature. JPTSup: Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement series. JWarb: Journal of the Warbuck and Courtauld institute. JAR: Journal of American Academy of Religion. JEC: Journal of Early Christian Studies. JHS: Journal of Hellenic Studies. JRH: Journal of Religion and Health. JECS: Journal of Early Christian studies. JSHJ: Journal for the study of the Historical Jesus. JCP: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. JME: Journal of Medical Ethics. JPC: Journal of Pyschology and Christianity.

The Efficacy of the Exorcistic Prayers in the Athonite Manuscript of Xiropotamou 98, (2260) 16

371

JRH: Journal of Religion and Health. JSNTSup: Supplements Journal for Study of the New Testament. MDB: Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. NDL: New Dictionary of Liturgy. REB: Revue des études. OCA: Orientalia Christiana Analecta. OC: Oriens Christianus. PG: Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Graeca, J-P. MIGNE, ed, I-CLXI Paris. 1857-1866. PL: Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina, A. HAMMAN, ed., I-V, Paris. 1958-1974. PGM: Papyri Graecae Magicae. RHR: Revue de l’histoire chrètien. RMB: Revue des etudes Byzantines. SNTS Sup. Society of New Testament studies. STDJ: Studies in the texts of the desert of Judah. THZ: Thierer theologische Zeitschrift. WTJ: Westminster Theological Journal. BasAitKak :‫ݾ‬ȝȚȜަĮ ‫ݸ‬IJȚ Ƞ‫ރ‬ț ‫݋‬ıIJ‫ޥ‬Ȟ Į‫ݧ‬IJȚȠȢ IJࠛȞ țĮțࠛȞ ‫ ݸ‬ĬİިȢ. PG 31 col: 329353 PALAM Hom: Gregory of Nazianzus: ȅr 11 4c837:ǼੁȢ īȡȘȖંȡȚȠȞ ȃ઄ııȘȢ, IJઁȞ IJȠ૨ ȝİȖ੺ȜȠȣ ǺĮıȚȜİ઀Ƞȣ ਕįİȜijંȞ, ਥʌȚıIJ੺ȞIJĮ ȝİIJ੹ IJ੽Ȟ ȤİȚȡȠIJȠȞ઀ĮȞ . ǼੁȢ IJઁȞ ʌĮIJ੼ȡĮ ਦĮȣIJȠ૨ ਲȞ઀ț ਥʌ੼IJȡİȥİȞ Į੝IJઁȣ ijȡȠȞIJ઀ȗİȚȞ IJોȢ ȃĮȗȚĮȞȗȠ૨ ਥțțȜȘı઀ĮȢ ǼੁȢ IJ੽Ȟ ȤİȚȡȠIJȠȞ઀ĮȞ ǻȠĮȡ૵Ȟ ੒ȝȚȜ઀Į ਥțįȠșİ૙ıĮ Ǽ੝ȜĮȜ઀૳. JdamOrth: ǼțįȠıȚȢ ĮțȡȚȕȘȢ IJȘȢ ȠȡșȠįȠȟȠȣ ʌȚıIJİȦȢ. Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos II. P.B. Kotter. Patristiche Texte und studien 12. Berlin-New York 1973. Origen Phil: ĭȚȜȠțĮȜަĮ. ȉhe Philocalia of Origen ed. J. ArmitageRobinson, Cambridge 1893. ARR: M. ARRANZ, L’Eucologio Costantinopolitano agli inizi del secol XI 4a, Rome 1995. BAR: BARBERINI gr 336. BAR: BAROCCIANUS VIII (s. XVI). COI: EUXOLOGIO STRATEGIOS, MS COISLIN gr 213. CRYPT: CRYPT. Z.į. EBE: ǼUXOLOGIO ATENIESE, Atene gr 662. GOAR: GROTT.īȕ: GROTTAFERRATA īȕ. LAURAE: LAURAE ATHANASII 882 (a. 1735).

372

Abbreviations

MAR: EUCOLOGIO SAN MARCO, ms. B.A. Vaticana. MAR: MARIANUS gr. MAT: MATRITENSIS gr CV. PAP: ǼYȋȅȁȅīǿȅȃ TO MEGA ed. N. PAPADOPOULOS, Atene 1927. POR: EUXOLOGIO PORFIRIJ USPENSKIJ, ms. S. Pietroburgo gr 226. ROM: EUXOLOGIO TO MEGA Roma 1873 SIN: EUXOLOGIO SINAITICO, ms B.M. SINAI gr 959. ZER: EUXOLOGIO TO MEGA ed. S. Zerbos , II ed. Venezia 1862