Читать книгу Deliver us from the Evil one - Bernardo Olivera - Страница 12

Inaugural Exorcism at Capernaum

According to the Gospels, the exorcism that Jesus performed in the synagogue of Capernaum was the first way by which he established his identity for the people of Galilee.15 It is there that he first guaranteed his authority and from there his reputation rapidly expanded.

In general, the differences among the three synoptic Gospels increase the difficulty of pinpointing the historical nucleus of their accounts of Jesus’ exorcisms. In that of Capernaum, Matthew does not describe the episode of the exorcism itself, but simply summarizes Jesus’ activity of curing different types of sickness, suffering, possession, mental disorders and paralysis. Luke tells what happened and speaks of “a man who had the spirit of an unclean demon” (Lk 4:33), but it is not the first event in Jesus’ public ministry, which according to Luke took place in the synagogue of Nazareth.

For his part, Mark tells of the expulsion in Capernaum of an “unclean spirit” (Mk 1:21-23), but in other places he refers to “Beelzebul”, “Satan” or the “strong man” (Mk 3:22-30), as opposed to the Spirit of God. The name given to the Evil One show that Mark is emphasizing the reality of this personal spiritual being who is an enemy of Jesus and his kingdom, a pervert who perverts others.

Concerning the historicity of the inaugural exorcism, we can say that it expresses the more general fact that Jesus probably cured and exorcised many persons in Capernaum, which was his base of operations in Galilee. In this sense, it is significant that he accuses several cities of Galilee for their lack of repentance despite all the powerful works he had performed in them. After warning Chorazin and Bethsaida, his harshest words are for Capernaum,16 which suggests that among the cities of Galilee, Capernaum was the principal beneficiary of Jesus’ ministry, thus becoming the guiltiest because of its lack of faith.

If the man with the unclean spirit had simply been sick, and not possessed by an unclean spirit, we would have to conclude that Jesus was not God, since he was wrong in his discernment. Instead of threatening and expelling the spirit, he should have laid his hands on the person, as he would have for someone sick. Nor would he have been a good master or teacher, since a good instructor would have explained to the people that it was not a possession, but a sickness, thus teaching them not to be superstitious. Besides, what type of sickness would this be, that lets the sick person know that Jesus is “the Son of the Most High God”? (Mk 5:7). Denying that Jesus was God or saying that he was not a good teacher have no basis in any of the Gospels.

The Gerasene Demoniac

The account of the demoniac of Gerasa, in the fifth chapter of Mark’s Gospel, has four elements: the possessed demoniac, the herd of swine, the people, and finally the cleansed demoniac. Historically speaking, the drowning of the herd of swine is the least probable element, but the many details concerning the demoniac seem to correspond very well with what we know from present-day exorcisms, a point to which we will come back later.

Mark’s different accounts of demoniacs seem to have several recurring elements, as we can see by comparing this one with that of the synagogue of Capernaum in 1:23 and the other accounts. The common features are a loud cry of the possessed, his prostration at Jesus’ feet with the question, “What have you to do with me?”, then an acknowledgement of Jesus as the Messiah, an attempt to dominate the Exorcist, a fear of being expelled and finally a plea seeming to come from the possessed person.

It is hard to establish the precise form of the original story of the Gerasene demoniac and its historical nucleus. This is because of to the different problems involved, the main one being the structural complexity of the text. There seem to be two beginnings: “When he had stepped out of the boat, immediately a man out of the tombs with an unclean spirit met him” (Mk 5:2), but shortly afterwards the same man “saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and bowed down before him” (v.6). There are also the two different names given to the “man with an unclean spirit.” He is referred to either as a “demoniac” (vv.16 and 18) or as “Legion, for we are many” (vv. 9 and 15). There is also the added fact that the exorcism takes place in pagan territory, although this also happens in the case of the healing of the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:24-30). Finally, there is a difficulty with the term, “Gerasenes”, since Matthew calls them “Gadarenes” (Mt 8:28).

Despite these difficulties however, it is very probable that the episode is historically true. Perhaps the disciples remembered it as one of Jesus’ miracles precisely because it took place near a pagan city of the Decapolis on the west side of the Sea of Galilee, since the normal zone of Jesus’ activity was the other side of this large lake. We should also consider other elements, such as the exorcism’s context, the concept of historicity that one has, the message that the evangelist wants to communicate and Jesus’ ongoing controversy with the scribes. These factors bring us even closer to the historical nucleus of the account.

Concerning the exorcism’s context, we should note that the four successive episodes in Mark’s Gospel – the calming of the storm, the healing of the Gerasene demoniac, the woman healed of hemorrhages and the girl restored to life (4:37-5:43) – all show the supreme power of Jesus. To empty them of their historical basis is equivalent to denying the validity of whole Gospel. Moreover, there are accounts of the same event in all three Synoptic Gospels and all of them are coherent in showing that Jesus’ authoritative manner is clearly distinct from the way the contemporary Jewish exorcists acted.

The expulsion of the demons also confirms the reality underlying the message the writer of the Gospel wants convey, namely that Jesus conquers pagan idolatry. The possessed demoniac becomes a Christian missionary among his own people and, at the same time, Jesus respects the freedom of those who ask him to get out of their country. This Christological message would be empty of meaning if it did not describing something that actually happened. Even the Jewish scribes did not question the power of Jesus to cast out demons, but they were probably afraid that he would take away their exclusive religious privileges and so tried to disqualify Jesus by calling him a demoniac possessed by Beelzebul (Mk 3:22-30).

If we relate this episode to the life of the Church, we can speak of an “existential interpretation” of Sacred Scripture, which expresses the reality of God’s saving action in the personal life of each of his faithful. In this sense, several details of the story of the Gerasene demoniac are strikingly similar to contemporary experiences of spiritual liberation or of exorcisms over persons possessed. For example, there is usually the brute force of the possessed person, his or her dialogue with the exorcist, the importance of discovering the identity of the evil spirit, the fact that there are many demons and their preference to staying in this world rather than having to go “back into the abyss”.17

Such an existential interpretation of a biblical text sees the life of the Church as a “theological place” where God reveals himself. It helps us understand many biblical details more realistically, which, in its turn, shows the historical reality of what Christ did and suffered.

The Possessed Epileptic Boy18

Many interpretations of this episode try to reduce the case to a simply psychiatric disorder that Jesus cures. At the same time, it is generally accepted that behind the story there is an historical fact. According to what both psychiatrists and many biblical commentators say, the symptoms presented by this boy are those of an attack of epilepsy. Here is first a cry, which is immediately followed by a collapse on the ground, a loss of consciousness, then becoming rigid, followed by convulsive movements, difficulty in breathing, drooling at the mouth and grinding of the teeth, sometime with the risk that the person bite his own tongue. After the attack, there is a long and difficult recovery.

The question at stake here is that of confusing a diabolical possession with a mere psychological disorder. Are we dealing here with a simple cure or with an exorcism? To answer, we should bear in mind the vocabulary used by Matthew as well as other important elements in the account. Matthew describes the boy by using the unusual Greek word, selêniádsesthai (Mt 17:15), literally someone moonstruck, a lunatic, which presupposes some type of attack caused by the moon, selênê. Translations of the word vary from “off his head,” “lunatic” or “demented” to “epileptic,” which is that of the New Revised Standard Version.

Although many of the symptoms described here are also present in an attack of epilepsy, we should realize that many translations have sought to adjust their descriptions to the symptoms of epilepsy. For instance, the word, sparassei, throw into spasms, tare to pieces (Lk 9:42), means that the boy was not only dashed to the ground but also distorted and violently twisted around. Here again, the New Revised Standard Version translates it as “in convulsions.”

However, there are some aspects of his condition that have nothing to do with epilepsy, such as being unable to speak, or having suicidal impulses: “It has often cast him into the fire and into the water, to destroy him” (Mk 9:22). Similarly, the boy’s violent reaction to meeting Jesus: “They brought the boy to him. When the spirit saw him, immediately it convulsed (sparassei, tare to pieces) the boy, and he fell on the ground and rolled about” (v.20). These reactions are typical of diabolical possession and its hatred for what is sacred.

We should also see that Jesus and his evangelists clearly distinguish between possession and sickness. In cases of possession, a dialogue occurs with the evil spirit and there can be violent reactions that end with Jesus’ command, whereas with sickness there is the therapy of laying on of hands, anointing with oil or some other sign of healing. In dealing with demons, Jesus acts with authority and harshness, but he is condescending and merciful towards those who are sick.

We can now answer the questions of confusing a diabolical possession with a mere psychological disorder. Was there a cure of the healed boy, or was it anexorcism? It is clear that the account recalls an historical event during the ministry of Jesus that underlies the episode. The boy may have been both epileptic and suffering from attacks of diabolical possession. It is for this second reason that Jesus says to his disciples, “This kind can come out only through prayer” (Mk 9:29).19

The Controversy over Beelzebul

Jesus’ successful ministry as an exorcist soon became a source of conflict. The dispute was not only with the scribes and Pharisees, who “kept demanding from him a sign from heaven” (Lk 11:15), but also with many others and even with his own family, who left Nazareth and “went out to restrain him, for people were saying, ‘He has gone out of his mind’” (Mk 3:21). His activity in this regard was the excuse for accusing him of having “Beelzebul, and by the ruler of the demons he casts out demons” (Mk 3:22), which would mean that he has an unclean spirit, in fact Satan himself. When faced with the undeniable fact of a successful exorcism, the only possibility lies in destroying or discrediting the person of the exorcist, in this case, Jesus.

Several different texts refer to this controversy as being important and thus indicate its historicity. Even the Gospel of John shows that Jesus was accused of “having a demon.”20 Jesus thoroughly rebuts these arguments, revealing and explaining their falsehood. First he explains the absurdity of the accusation, “If Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but his end has come” (Mk 3:26). Then he gives the underlying principle: the expulsion reveals his power over Satan, “No one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his property without first tying up the strong man; then indeed the house can be plundered” (v.27). He ends his rebuttal with a severe warning to those who refuse to accept them, “‘Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin,’ for they had said, ‘He has an unclean spirit’” (vv.29-30).

The parallel passage of Luke makes it clear that Jesus expels demons by “the finger of God,”21 a sign that “the kingdom of God has come to you,” which, in the intention of the evangelist, means to us, his readers. Several factors show that we are dealing here with words that come from the mouth of Jesus himself, all of which points once again to the importance of exorcisms for guaranteeing the divine truth of Jesus’ ministry.