A Chronology On "anne" A Lay Apostle

[Laudate_Dominum]

Thank you for the reply. I understand that you do not want to detract from the real topic of this thread so I will not actually respond to your post (which is difficult for me I must confess).

I must just add something regarding this quote.
[quote name='Sean O L' post='1417261' date='Nov 10 2007, 11:47 PM']Indirectly, however, by specifying the evil practices charged against the witches — for example their intercourse with incubi and succubi, their interference with the parturition [ = act of bringing forth young, childbirth. S.O.L.) women and animals, the damage they did to cattle and the fruits of the earth, their power and malice in the infliction of pain and disease, the hindrance caused to men in their conjugal relations, and the witches' repudiation of the faith of their baptism — the pope must no doubt be considered to affirm the reality of these alleged phenomena. But, as even Hansen points out (Zauberwahn, 468, n. 3) "it is perfectly obvious that the Bull pronounces no dogmatic decision"; neither does the form suggest that the pope wishes to bind anyone to believe more about the reality of witchcraft than is involved in the utterances of Holy Scripture. Probably the most disastrous episode was the publication a year or two later, by the same inquisitors, of the book "Malleus Maleficarum" (the hammer of witches).[/quote]
It is very sad that [i]Malleus Maleficarum[/i] was so influential for so many centuries considering that it was condemned by the Pope and put on the index almost immediately after it was written. It is also sad because there are much better writings on the subject which were not nearly as popular or influential during those centuries. Basically I don't consider [i]Malleus Maleficarum[/i] to be a legitimate text pertaining to orthodox demonology (it is no doubt a deplorable text in many regards).
There are many things pertaining to the Catholic religion that are not dogmatically declared. I admit that the specifics of demonology are largely speculation but I accept the reality of intercourse with incubi and succubi for reasons that I shall not explain because of your desire to not detract from the true subject.
I wonder if by "interference with parturition" they are referring to such things as satanic midwives who would secretly pierce the baby's skull with a small rod at delivery (sounds about as unbelievable as partial birth abortion). There aren't any things in the list above that I disbelieve [i]a priori[/i], although I reject the notion of demonic offspring which was never more than a superstition as far as I can tell. Ultimately I don't consider these subjects to be essentials to faith - they are certainly not necessary to be known or believed for salvation - but I do think such knowledge can be important for persons such as priests and in particular exorcists.

[Sean O L]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1417410' date='Nov 11 2007, 06:44 PM']Thank you for the reply. I understand that you do not want to detract from the real topic of this thread so I will not actually respond to your post (which is difficult for me I must confess)...[/quote]
And thanks for that!

The only things I would add is that the comment in the Catholic Encyclopedia on Pope Innocent VIII's "[b][i]Summis disiderabtes affectibus[/i][/b]" was in respect of the "specifying the evil practices" - which carried no dogmatic weight!

A further source on how the devil tempts us and the means of resisting hin, and demonic [u][b]possession[/b][/u] is contained in the well respected "[b]The Spiritual Life[/b]" by The Very Rev. Adolphus TANQUEREY, S.S., D.D., Desclee & Co. (My copy is Imprimatured May 24, 1930. He makes no mention at all regarding non-corporeal pure spirits having physical sex with human beings.

However, I would urge you to follow-up your concerns with Br. Ignatius Mary at the St Michael's site.

With kind regards and God bless,

Sean O L

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Sean O L' post='1417547' date='Nov 11 2007, 04:55 AM']And thanks for that!

The only things I would add is that the comment in the Catholic Encyclopedia on Pope Innocent VIII's "[b][i]Summis disiderabtes affectibus[/i][/b]" was in respect of the "specifying the evil practices" - which carried no dogmatic weight!

A further source on how the devil tempts us and the means of resisting hin, and demonic [u][b]possession[/b][/u] is contained in the well respected "[b]The Spiritual Life[/b]" by The Very Rev. Adolphus TANQUEREY, S.S., D.D., Desclee & Co. (My copy is Imprimatured May 24, 1930. He makes no mention at all regarding non-corporeal pure spirits having physical sex with human beings.

However, I would urge you to follow-up your concerns with Br. Ignatius Mary at the St Michael's site.

With kind regards and God bless,

Sean O L[/quote]
Thank you sir, excellent info. Two sentences or less since again I feel guilty for this wee hijack.

I am not surprised that Tanquerey would not mention such things since besides being extraordinary it is a morbid and unseemly subject not particularly suited to a general treatise of mystical and ascetical theology. It is probably not an appropriate subject for general curiosity either and perhaps there is here an implicit message that we should forget about it.

[Guest KevinSymonds]

While my knowledge of demonology may not be what some others' might be, I do know a couple of things from an exorcist friend of mine.

It is entirely possible for demons to [b]simulate[/b] conjugal relations. There was a case of this a number of years ago and was on the Sci-Fi channel about 5 years ago. One of those things (incubus or sucubus, I don't recall) was haunting a couple. One night, the husband woke up to discover he was paralyzed and had a 'woman' on him, simulating sex. Apparently, after it 'reached climax,' the demon disappeared but left some ecto-plasm behind. The Sci-Fi special didn't say anything further about this substance. One day, I asked my friend about the case.

Priest: "Oh yes, I know about that one."

Me: "Really? I have had a burning question about this for a number of years now. Mind if I ask you?"

Priest: "Sure, go ahead."

Priest: "The special on TV mentioned ecto-plasm being left behind yet didn't say anything further than that. Do you know anything about this?"

Priest: "Yes."

Me: "What was it?"

Priest: "They don't know. It was unidentifiable."


Simulate, yes, actually have? No.

-KJS

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='KevinSymonds' post='1417867' date='Nov 11 2007, 07:07 PM']Simulate, yes, actually have? No.[/quote]
This is my understanding as well. Thanks for the info.

[Guest KevinSymonds]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1417871' date='Nov 11 2007, 06:11 PM']This is my understanding as well. Thanks for the info.[/quote]


It just makes sense.

-KJS

[Sean O L]

[quote name='KevinSymonds' post='1417867' date='Nov 12 2007, 11:07 AM']Simulate, yes, actually have? No.

-KJS[/quote]

Thanks Kevin! I didn't know that! Which raises lots more questions, doesn't it?

Regards,

Sean O L

[jeffpugh]

For some reason, this stuff is interesting. It's sorta like good horror stories around a campfire type thing. Start a thread on demonology?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1418013' date='Nov 12 2007, 12:12 AM']For some reason, this stuff is interesting. It's sorta like good horror stories around a campfire type thing. Start a thread on demonology?[/quote]
Yeah, I think its interesting too. I thought about starting a thread but I'm too scared.

[Justin86]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1418013' date='Nov 12 2007, 02:12 PM']For some reason, this stuff is interesting. It's sorta like good horror stories around a campfire type thing. Start a thread on demonology?[/quote]
*lifts eyebrow* Well whatever turns you on...

[Guest KevinSymonds]

This talk of demonology is a bit removed from Kathryn Ann Clarke so I vote a new thread.


-KJS

[clg01]

Kevin, Kevin, Kevin... still at it I see.

[Guest KevinSymonds]

I thought that was you, Mr. C[mod]full name withheld for privacy -777[/mod]!

's'up?

-KJS

[clg01]

I can't believe you typed my entire name on a forum board................

[Guest KevinSymonds]

Delete?