Rondelle:

Various people have found that poltergeist like activity can be caused by a pre pubescent child or a child going through emotional difficulty.  I remember reading an article which stated that Carl Jung and another psychologist I can't remember the name of have found that people with psychological problems are fifty times more likely to have supernatural ability than other people. Even when we inhabit bodies we are spirit beings. Perhaps people with pyschological problems find a way to tap into supernatural abilities. Why would an evil spirit have abilities human spirits don't have?

I read up on the true story of the Exorcist. One source I read was Thomas Allen's book "Possessed."  It didn't convince me that a demon was involved. Later on I read Mark Opsasnik's investigation of the case and he found a lot of informatin that didn't match Allen's book.

Attached is a link to a five part article he wrote:

http://www.strangemag.com/exorcistpage1.html

Some of the things Opsasnik found:

1. Father Halloran told him that Robbie, the boy alleged to be possessed, contrary to what Allen's book contends, didn't exhibit supernatural strength, didn't urinate, didn't throw up, and probably mimicked the priests when he said Latin phrases.
2. Allen wrote that Robbie displayed super strength when he pulled a bed spring from under his bed and used it to slash Father Hughes' arm. He also wrote that Father Hughes wasn't able to raise his arm in a normal way after this event, became deeply disturbed, and went away for a while. Read what I posted below to see what Opsasnick found out about Father Hughes.
3. Opsasnik found that long before the supposed his supposed possession happened Robbie was a neighborhood bully who would do things like sick his dog on the neighborhood kids.
4. Allen wrote that Robbie could spit with great accuracy. Opsasnik found that Robbie and his best friend used to practice spitting. They found a way to do so through their teeth so they could spit with great accuracy ten feet away.

It's a long article, but if you want to find a viewpoint other than Allen's perhaps it is worth reading.

"Truth and Consequences

After talking with so many people who had personally known Rob Doe it was disheartening to review the published material on the case from a new perspective and observe the various discrepancies between what has been written by others and what was told to me by individuals close to the family in question.

In Possessed Thomas Allen bases much of his investigation on a series of alleged events culled from the mysterious diary kept by Father Bishop during the St. Louis exorcism.

This diary, which also inspired William Peter Blatty’s novel and movie, began chronicling events on January 15, 1949 and ended on April 19, 1949, and was designed to act as a guide for future exorcisms. As a surviving case artifact it is shrouded in mystery. No one really knows for sure how many copies are circulating or even its actual page count (as previously mentioned, Steve Erdmann says 16 pages, Thomas Allen puts the number at 26). Passages from this case study have been published by both of the aforementioned writers and from their examples one discovers: the keeper of the diary, Father Bishop, did not arrive on the scene or meet any family members until Wednesday, March 9, 1949—almost two months after the initial symptoms occurred—rendering much of his reported background information as hearsay; Bishop does not always make it clear who actually witnessed the events being described—he often fails to mention when the priests are in the room, when they are absent, and when the information comes secondhand from the boy’s mother; the possibility of fraudulent activity is neither considered nor investigated (for example, no control experiment was set up where an individual could observe the boy’s actions when no one else was in the room); no mention is made whatsoever of the alleged first exorcism attempt by Father Hughes at Georgetown University Hospital; nothing is written of the boy’s father’s feelings or level of involvement (sources close to the family told me he did not believe the boy was possessed); and the possible presence of psychosomatic illness within the boy is never discussed.

In addition to the diary, an array of places and persons play critical roles in his story told by author Thomas Allen: the family’s alleged Mount Rainier homesite; the plight of the first exorcist, Father Hughes; information supplied by local expert Father Bober; and interviews with eyewitness Father Halloran. With so much questionable material being culled from the diary, I felt it was imperative to study these miscellaneous factors and sources with a critical eye.

I called Thomas Allen. After identifying myself and explaining what I was doing, he declined to comment for this article. I had planned to offer help in correcting the errors in Possessed (free of charge) for any revised edition he might be planning. I also planned to ask him a number of questions. Why, for example, does he have a mindset about the boy having lived in Mount Rainier? Did he ever consider the possibility that the priests involved in the case could have used Mount Rainier as a front to discourage the discovery of the boy’s true identity? How come he never checked the Cottage City address that Father Bishop’s diary listed with phone directory listings for the family in question from 1939 to 1958? Why had he never looked for former friends of Rob Doe in Cottage City (or talked with long-standing community members like the town chairman, fire chief, or residents of 40th Avenue—all of whom could have provided him with valuable facts)? Why did he never verify any of the information he wrote regarding Father Hughes’s involvement with the family and post-exorcism-attempt activities? And, finally, if he was really so concerned about keeping Rob Doe’s identity a secret, then why was he a writer of the video production In The Grip Of Evil in which the boy’s home at 3807 40th Avenue in Cottage City was shown, knowing full well that it would then be possible for anybody to locate the house and identify its occupants in local city directories from that period? Only Thomas Allen knows the answers.

Possessed is based on the widespread misconception that the family had resided in Mount Rainier. The book’s first four chapters are filled with references to this erroneous location: Allen claims neighbors knew something odd was happening at 3210 Bunker Hill Road; he claims neighbors heard maniacal cries and saw lights radiating around the house; and he claims the family moved to a similar house about a half-mile away. In reality, none of these things happened, as I have demonstrated. In fact, sources close to this case have verified that the diary kept by Father Bishop never once mentions 3210 Bunker Hill Road, Mount Rainier as the family’s home—but it does identify the site as 3807 40th Avenue. Allen does not mention this in Possessed.

Regarding the first exorcism attempt at Georgetown University Hospital by Father Hughes, Allen makes several bold presumptions: Hughes “apparently” visited the boy at his house, further claiming that there is some question about this action stemming from the priest’s own “confusion”; Hughes decided the boy belonged in a hospital, under restraints, and that “on Hughes’s orders” the boy was strapped down; when Hughes’s arm was allegedly slashed by the boy, the priest “screamed” and struggled to his feet while his arm hung limp; Hughes subsequently “disappeared” from St. James, suffered a nervous breakdown, and during later masses could only hold the consecrated host aloft with one hand.

The suppositions regarding Father Hughes seemed so absurd I decided to do some in-depth research into the actions of this mysterious priest from St. James Church in Mount Rainier, Maryland. Born Edward Albert Hughes on August 28, 1918, he was assigned as assistant pastor of St. James (the pastor at the time was Rev. William M. Canning) on Wednesday, June 16, 1948 and served without a break until Saturday, June 18, 1960. Despite what is written in Possessed, there is absolutely no written record of the alleged exorcism attempt by Father Hughes at Georgetown University Hospital. A source close to the case verified for me that Rob Doe was admitted to Georgetown University Hospital under his real name on the morning of Monday, February 28, 1949 and released at 12 noon on Thursday, March 3, 1949. The facts surrounding this Georgetown stay are: Father Hughes never initially visited the boy at his Cottage City home (Mrs. Doe took her son to the St. James parish for their one and only consultation); there is no evidence that Father Hughes was ever confused at all about this entire situation; there is no evidence whatsoever that Father Hughes had the boy admitted to Georgetown University Hospital or held under restraints—Thomas Allen himself gives no reference in Possessed regarding these alleged actions; there is no evidence that while hospitalized Rob Doe ever slashed Father Hughes’s arm or what the priest’s reaction to the attack may have been—Allen even mentions that while Father Hughes mentioned this exorcism attempt during a lecture at Georgetown University, he made no reference to the alleged attack at all. Of further significance is that the St. Louis contingency, Father Bowdern and Father Bishop, were never informed of the alleged first exorcism attempt and their diary makes no mention of the event.

Even if Rob Doe had slashed the arm of Father Hughes, would it really cause the priest to have a breakdown and disappear from St. James Parish? I easily located several individuals who were in daily contact with Father Hughes throughout the spring of 1949, the time period that immediately followed his alleged exorcism attempt on Rob Doe. I wondered if the priest showed any signs of injury, any change in behavior, or if any evidence existed of a breakdown or personal hiatus from his busy job. I found just the opposite.

Thomas Kearney, an eighth-grader at St. James during the 1948-49 school year revealed that Father Hughes was the parish’s CYO junior boys baseball coach that spring: “I saw Father Hughes every day at St. James that school year and I don’t remember him being missed and I don’t remember him being beat up or hurt or anything like that. He coached baseball that spring and would pitch us the ball and there was nothing wrong with him.”

Another eighth-grade classmate that year was Joan Flanagan, who recalled: “The recent story going around now was that Father Hughes’s arm was slashed back then. I never heard that at the time. I never noticed a slash or an injury and he was the P. E. teacher for our class. He never missed a class and I remember him pitching us softballs in the spring. Something like that would have been a big story at the time. I just don’t believe it happened.”

The prefect for the Ladies Sodality of St. James for all of 1949 and 1950 was Gloria Nowak, who today is 74 years old and is still a Mount Rainier resident. She told me, “I knew Father Hughes very well because he was director of the Sodality and would come to each meeting and start it off with a prayer. I never knew that he had any kind of arm wound. I had heard about the possessed boy but it was something we didn’t ask about. Father Hughes was a very nice person, very outgoing and friendly and a very holy priest. I never noticed any change in behavior or any absence while I was prefect. He was always there and always in a good mood.”

Furthermore, the neighborhood columns for Brentwood and Mount Rainier in The Prince George’s Post throughout the spring of 1949 seemed to go out of their way to document the activities of the very popular young priest. In their pages they document that Father Hughes, among other activities: attended a dinner given for Father William E. Kelly of St. Martin’s Church on Sunday, February 27, 1949; missed a social given by the Mother’s Club of St. James on Tuesday, March 1, 1949 (possibly the night he was visiting Rob Doe at Georgetown University Hospital); spoke at the “Communism in Religion” seminar sponsored by the Washington General Assembly Fourth Degree Knights of Columbus held at the Hyattsville Town Hall on Monday, March 7, 1949; said mass at the “KCs To Inaugurate Day Of Recollection,” an annual Day of Recollection inaugurated by the Prince George’s Council of the Knights of Columbus on Sunday, March 20, 1949 at St. John de Matha Monastery in Hyattsville; presided over a wedding between Mildred O’Dea and Edward A. Williams on Saturday, April 30, 1949 at St. Jerome’s Church; performed a wedding on Saturday, June 4, 1949 for Francis Wersick and Sam Morina at St. James Church; addressed Commencement Exercises for St. Jerome’s first graduating class on Sunday, June 12, 1949; and according to the June 16, 1949 Brentwood column, hosted an outing and picnic for the St. James graduating class at Chapel Point. Coverage of the dynamic Father Hughes in the pages of The Prince George’s Post continued throughout 1949, all the way up to his departure in 1960 without any noticeable break in the action. In the June 16, 1960 edition of The Prince George’s Post, Joseph Bianchini writes in the Mount Rainier column that Father Hughes had performed 2,712 baptisms, 486 marriages, 251 baptisms of converts, and 247 burial masses during his assignment. Not bad for a priest who “disappeared.” (Hughes was later reassigned to St. James in 1973 and remained there until his death in October 1980.)

The one local clergyman that Father Hughes confided in before his death was his assistant pastor Frank Bober, who has since figured prominently in this scenario, mainly because of his accessibility to journalists and general congeniality. Bober has appeared in literally dozens of television specials, news broadcasts, and printed articles on the subject. In Possessed Allen cites him as one of his “extremely reliable” sources for the first exorcism attempt that Hughes was involved in. However, despite the accolades, it was my opinion that over time the comments that these journalists attributed to Bober began to take on a more dramatic tone with each retelling."

Roger,

Children get possessed when they are enticed by imaginary playmates, who are actual spirits.  I have recounted my 2-year-old cousin's battle to stave off possession after a spirit was exorcised from a nearby woman.  Robert Bruce has confronted several cases of child possession.  No doubt there are other factors contributing to such possessions that are poorly understood.  I don't know why this phonomena is not more common.  Good question!

Albert,

I suspect that your debunker is confused because he is not asking the primary eyewitnesses present at some of these manifestations. When I was still teaching at St. Bonaventure University, my office was next door to that of Father Alphonse Trabold, one of the most famous exorcists on the east coast.  Alphonse discussed the possession case in question with the priest who was the major eyewitness and confirms the authenticity of the possession.  This confirmation is striking because Alphonse almost always debunked the possession cases assigned to him, even when water would supernaturally materialize out of thin air and bomb spectators from above, and carpets would suddenly burst into flame simply because the victim got very emotional.  Alphonse explained such spectacular phenemena as psychokinetic eruptions triggered by paranormal powers manifested by disturbed youngsters who had just reached puberty!  There were several eyewitnesses to these phenomena.

Don

Exactly Lucy. Minds seem to merge to varying degrees once we move out of C1 anyway, while the appearance of individuality/separation here seems likely to be an ego made illusion.

(it's often taught that ego projects an external reality including the body and the thinking intellect, perceives it as a separate 'me in an uncaring world' from a seemingly objective viewpoint, and as a result interprets it as fact when in practice it's all only a mind made dream anyway)

It's hard to know when dealing with this territory how much of it is the result of an almost medieval tendency to superstitiously rationalise almost anything extra-normal as a manifestation of 'evil'.

I can't claim to set carpets on fire, but for sure I seem to influence sensitive electric stuff when highly emotional - I posted before about more than once triggering a touch switched lamp. It fluttered wildly on and off simultaneously with my experiencing a fluttering sensation in the area of the heart chakra.

There was certainly no inkling of possession in my case, both times I'd simply experienced deep insights into stuff I was worried about while in a meditative/almost sleeping state.

It's very possible though (given the creative nature of mind) that if I (or another in a similar state) believed firmly that this was an unmistakable sign of possession, and in some spurious signs of possession that they could easily have manifested.

If so we'd be back into the circular scenario of beliefs (albeit based on no absolute reality) manifesting in our dream as a result of our creative abilities. (apparent reality leading to an inaccurate rationalisation of events creating belief creating reality creating belief ad infinitum - this is the cycle the spiritual path seeks to break free of)

I can't rule out the often reported possibility of possession by entities seeking survival at the physical level, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that this whole area (given our ego driven tendency to rationalise  explanations to events and turn them into beliefs (we really struggle to stay open), the (despite appearances) essentially collective nature of mind and the ability of creative mind to manifest what we believe)  is essentially a hall of mirrors.

This is the reason why Buddhism and more recently ACIM teach non-duality, non attachment/forgiveness/selflessness/love and assistance from Spirit/higher mind as the means of escape from circling in this maze - we can otherwise wander almost for ever... ..

Lucy, Vajra and others, when it comes to what is possible, here are some possible factors:

What precisely would an invading spirit attack and with what? Our minds are a mixture of often contradictory thought patterns. An invading spirit would also have a mixture of thought patterns. I've found that any thought pattern operates according to its own programming. You often can't get it to operate another way. What you can do is get yourself to the point where you no longer live according to an unwanted thought pattern, by seeing that it is unnecessary.  Sometimes this takes a lot of work. The part of you that enables you to gain freedom is a part of you that is free of your overall psychological conditioning, even though, people often allow this part of themselves to be entangled by their psychological conditioning to varying degrees. There are three key ways to get free of our conditioning. One way is to admit that we allow ourselves to be limited by psychological conditioning that doesn't represent the truth. Another way is to let go of the emotional attachments that allow our psychological conditioning to stay alive. For example, fear might cause us to cling to a particular way of thinking. Another way is to find that we can be free of our conditioning, by acknowledging the freedom of our inner spiritual self.  

If the above is considered, how difficult would it be for an invading spirit to take over the thought patterns of the person it invades? If an invading spirit isn't even in control of its own thought patterns, how is it going to control the thought patterns of a person? There would at least have to be some similarity between the thought patterns.

Another factor to consider is the decision making center/will center of a person's mind. I've been paying attention to this factor, and it sure seems as if there is a part of my mind which has freedom from my psychological conditioning. If a conditioned pattern comes to life, I don't have to choose it.  Does it make sense that the will center of an invading spirit could take over the will center of a person? I would think that the divine powers that be would design our will centers so that an invading spirit can take advantage of us against our will. If an invading spirit could do so, what would be the point of Jesus teaching as you sow so you reap? It would simply be a matter of a spirit taking over a person whenever it wants to do so.  Even people who believe in demonic possession often speak in a way which shows that they believe in free will, because they state that a person's decisions play a role in demonic possession. When it comes to Robbie's story, according to Allen, he had to make the choice to say dominus. Why would this be a factor if his free will wasn't intact?

I do believe unfriendly influences exist. Some of these influences are former human spirits and some might be alien. I haven't found anything which supports Satan based demonology. Spiritual experiences and messages I've received have shown that Satan and his demons don't exist.  If a kid like Robbie gets afflicted by a negative minded spirit, perhaps there is a better approach than repeating Latin phrases. Perhaps a better approach would be to tell a kid to tune into his or her spiritual power, and not allow an unfriendly spirit to influence his or her self. One of the secrets to empowering a kid would be to get this kid to understand that there aren't evil spirits who are so powerful, there is nothing he or she can do to resist such a spirit. I have received a number of spiritual experiences and messages that made the point that each of us has a choice when it comes to being influenced in a negative way. I also believe it is good to pray for help. When one does so, one chooses light over darkness.

Perhaps an unfriendly spirit could try to influence a person in a negative way by connecting to a person energetically and sending a person negative thoughts, but a person is always free to choose. Just like people are free to choose when they receive negative suggestions from people.

I really believe it is important to give beings who represent God's light more credit than people sometimes give them. Would they really just sit on their hands if an unfriendly being tries to take over a person who has good intentions? Wouldn't light beings have the ability to help in some way? I've found out that they do.

Another factor:

The cases of spirit merger I've read about involved consenting spirits and they would have a very pleasant experience of oneness.  If two spirits merged with each other, could they do so with one having hostile intentions? Even if they did, wouldn't the oneness factor cause the unfriendly spirit to change its mind? You can't be one and oppossed at the same time.

I believe this possession matter is an important issue to iron out. Our minds can create all kinds of things. There are a lot of people who buy into the possession thing to an extent where they end up creating an aspect of mind that causes them to believe they are possessed. People who won't consider this matter outside of the parameters of a Satan based belief system, probably do more to harm people than help people. I've watched videos of people going through exoricisms, and when it came to group exorcisms, it seemed as people were buying into a mass form of hypnosis.

Consider the case or Jersey I wrote about on an earlier post. It is very possible that her own mind with the aid of Scott Peck's suggestions caused her to experience what she experienced. I believe it is down right low to lead a lady who has already had a difficult life to believe that she was possessed by Satan and his demons. Scott Peck has passed away. The odds are that he'll find out how much he hurt people with his unwilligness to consider alternatives beyond what Mallachi Martin had to say.

Even if a person is troubled by a spirit, the last thing you want to do is disempower this person by causing he or she to believe that he or she is possessed by powerful satanic beings. It is so irresponsible for people to do so, simply because they won't consider explanations beyond their interpretation of what the Bible might say.

When it comes to dealing with a spirit who might be troubling a person, how can you help this spirit move towards the light if you start accusing it of it being a Satan based demon or Satan himself? When I've encountered unfriendly spirits I've dealt with them in a loving way, and never ran into problems. I'd tell them they are a divine spirit just like everbody else, and they can receive help if they move towards the light. I believe that beings who represent the light have a U.S. Marine Corps attitude. Nobody is left behind, rather than: "Go to hell for all of eternity."

I've found that Satan based belief systems can cause you to have blocks in your heart chakra. When you clear these uneccessary fears away, the blocks go away, you experience more love, and you have a more positive effect on the World. People who spread demon stories without considering the matter with an open mind, do more to increase the fear level in this World, than they do to increase the love level.  

You don't have to be afraid of the boogie man appearing around every corner in order to be alert. If you go through life without unnecessary fears, you'll be much more able to discriminate things accurately. Consider Bruce Moen's hounds of hell story. Bruce had a hard time helping a lady get free of beings her own mind created, because due to her beliefs she kept mistaking Bruce for the hounds of hell.

If you can hypnotize people to experience imaginary past lives, why can't you influence them to believe that they are possessed?

I'll end by sharing an out of body experience out of body explorer Steve Magnus  experienced (not certain about his first name).  He went out of body and he was taken hostage by Lucifer. Suddenly it occurred to him that he doesn't believe in the devil, and the experience ended.

Hi Recoverer, please pardon my slow response.

I find myself agreeing with most of what you have said on this topic. Possession is the obvious explanation when we see individuals and other beings that might be players as separate entities, as discrete minds.

As I was trying to say above this doesn't seem to be the way it is though. My instinct is that individuality/selfhood is mostly a local C1 perspective - the result of the tendency of the ego (in order to lock us into the belief in existence of a physical self separate from God in an external universe) to project those aspects of itself it fears as our physical body and mind, plus the external beings and realities they interact with - and to perceive these as external from an apparently independent and objective mental viewpoint. i.e. the whole lot is all an artefact of mind.

So those external beings and events that appear to influence us (for good or ill) from the outside are actually creations of our own split mind.

Add the possibility of our accessing all sorts of archetypes and views from other or other's lives through multiple connections at higher levels of mind and these creations need not just be drawn from suggestions in our own (this) life experience but from heaven knows where and when.

I'm not sure how this sort of rationale lies with you, but I think we end up at the same place in feeling that this creative power of mind combined with belief and suggestion may play a big part in apparent possessions...