Exorcism in the Catholic and Evangelical Traditions

by Aiden Carter
In the past fifty years there has been a renewed interest in exorcism in North America. A
practice that had largely fallen out of use and been ignored by the church at large, exorcism
began to receive a great deal of attention in the 20th century. This is especially noticeable in the
explosion of movies and books about possession ever since The Exorcist was released in 1973.
This paper seeks to examine and analyze the practice of exorcism as it has developed in the past
fifty years, primarily with regard to the differing beliefs and practices surrounding it in the
Catholic and Evangelical church traditions.
Possession in the Catholic Tradition
At its core, exorcism is the process of expelling a demon from a human being. Catholic
and Evangelical Christianity teach that demons, which are fallen angels, are active and attempt to
harm people. Gabriele Amorth separates demonic activity into two categories: ordinary and
extraordinary (1999). Ordinary activity is something everyone suffers from and is the most
common kind of demonic activity. It is the temptation to sin that all people experience; in the
Bible even Jesus experiences this kind of temptation when he is sent into the wilderness to be
tempted by Satan.
Amorth (1999) and other Catholic theologians place extraordinary demonic activity into
six different categories. The first, external physical pain, is when demons are said to beat and
physically harm people. This is noted in the lives of people such as Saint Paul of the Cross and
Padre Pio (Amorth, 1999); not much is said on the topic other than that it does not require any
form of exorcism because the soul is not affected. Diabolical obsession involves an intense and
persistent attack on the mind of the victim (Baglio, 2009, p. 49) which is often accompanied by
depression and nightmares. This is followed by diabolical infestation, where a house, location,
item, or animal is inhabited by a demon. Amorth also includes diabolical subjugation, which
occurs when people voluntarily submit to Satan or make a blood pact with him.
Diabolical oppression is closely related to possession, but varies in intensity and does not
involve a bodily takeover by a demonic presence. Job suffered demonic oppression when he lost
his family and his goods, and the sick that Jesus healed in the New Testament were afflicted as
well. Amorth and Baglio both state that Saint Paul was oppressed by some kind of demonic
force, and that this is the thorn of the flesh he mentions in his writings (Amorth, 1999; Baglio,

2009). Healing an oppression related illness is no easier than diagnosing and curing someone
who is fully possessed, and the time involved can be just as great (Amorth, 1999).
The final category, demonic possession, is the most well-known and most studied form of
demonic activity. Possession occurs when Satan takes full control of the bodyhe speaks and
acts without the knowledge or consent of the victim, who therefore is morally blameless. It is the
gravest and most spectacular form of demonic afflictions (Amorth, 1999, p. 33). Malachi
Martin describes possession as an attack simultaneously on the source of humanness, Jesus, and
on the humanness of an individual man or woman. The process of possession in any individual
consists of an erosion of the humanness Jesus confers (1976, p. 411). Matt Baglio further
specifies that this [physical] control [of the possessed persons body] doesnt last indefinitely,
but rather only occurs during moments of crisis in which the victim enters a trance state
(2009, p. 49).
Identifying Demonic Possession
Demonic possession manifests itself in many different ways, some natural and other
distinctly supernatural. The natural manifestations often go unnoticed and are rarely associated
with possession, but they are important nevertheless. Possessed people often experience
nightmares and outbursts of anger that do not seem to fit with their character. Religious symbols
and topics irritate them, they behave erratically and begin to take less interest in their families,
and oftentimes they refuse help or lash out at those who attempt to help them (Peck, 2005). Even
with clearly supernatural manifestations of possession people rarely consider the possibility that
they may be possessed; it is almost always family members or friends that bring them forward
(Martin, 1976).
Supernatural signs of demonic possession are varied, dramatic, and one of the primary
reasons movies about exorcism are so popular. Malachi Martin writes:
Objects fly around the room; wallpaper peels off the walls; furniture cracks; crockery
breaks; there are strange rumblings, hisses, and other noises with no apparent source.
Often the temperature in the room where the possessed happens to be will drop
dramatically. Even more often an acrid and distinctive stench accompanies the person.
(Martin, 1976, p. 10)
Amorth also includes speaking in tongues, abnormal strength, and knowledge of secret
things that the person has no way of knowing (1999), and Martin adds levitation, facial

distortions, and the opening and slamming of doors (1976). In The Rite, Matt Baglio writes about
the most infamous manifestation of possession, usually caused by a curse: supernatural vomiting.
As in The Exorcist when the young possessed girl shoots her vomit as if it were a projectile,
exorcists often tell of victims vomiting either strange objects or copious amounts of fluid. Blood,
sperm, nails, glass, black goo, or even live animals are all dramatic indications of possession.
Exorcists believe these objects dont necessarily come from the persons stomach, but instead
materialize in the mouth. In this way, such people are not harmed physically (Baglio, 2009, p.
151).
The issue of possession is almost always accompanied by strict warnings and regulations
regarding mental health. Especially with the advent of psychology in recent centuries it has
become evident that certain abnormal behaviors have psychological causes and should not be
treated with an exorcism. The Catholic Church requires an in-depth examination process to make
sure that a person is indeed possessed and not merely suffering from some kind of mental illness.
In the past, a victim of disseminate sclerosis, for example, was taken to be possessed because of
his spastic jerkings and slidings and the shocking agony in spinal column and joints (Martin,
1976, p. 11). Gabriele Amorth takes issue with this position because, while care should certainly
be taken to make sure the victim is actually possessed, an unnecessary exorcism never harmed
anyone; all the exorcists whom I questioned agree with me, whereas mistakenly denying an
exorcism has led to cases where a much more entrenched demonic activity was later detected
(Amorth, 1999, p. 45).
Who can be Possessed and Why
Accounts of demonic possession cause fear because they raise the questions of who can
be possessed and why. Most Catholic theologians agree that the most common causes of
possession are involvement in the occult or spiritualism. Visiting psychics, practicing witchcraft,
consulting mediums, and eastern forms of meditation are all seen as extremely dangerous and
likely to lead to possession or oppression. Amorth blames Western consumerism and the
abandoning of the Christian faith in popular culture as well as the increasingly violent and sexual
nature of the entertainment industry (1999). Even committed Catholic believers may be
possessed, as is seen when Baglio narrates the story of a nun who was possessed because of her
fathers involvement in satanic rituals (2009).

More specifically, Amorth and Baglio list three ways people become possessed or fall
prey to other demonic activity. First is with Gods permission, as in the cases of Job, Saint Paul,
Padre Pio, and Giovanni Calabria. Nothing happens without Gods permission, and so the
demonic activity in these peoples lives must have been allowed by God to serve his greater
purpose (Amorth, 1999). The second way is by being on the receiving end of an evil spell such
as the evil eye, binding, a curse, or sorcery. God is not obligated to intervene in these cases, just
as he would not be obligated to intervene if someone hired a hitman to commit murder.
However,
those who live in a state of grace, those who pray most fervently, have a much better
chance of obtaining divine intervention against the evil one than those who do not
practice their faith or, worse, who live in a habitual state of mortal sin. (Amorth, 1999, p.
58)
Baglio agrees that curses are one of the primary causes of possession and that they can also
break up marriages, cause businesses to fail, induce illness, invite possession, and so on (2009,
p. 60).
The third cause of possession is living a life of hardened sin, a cause which is on the
increase in modern society (Amorth, 1999). Judas Iscariot is a primary example of this, as the
Bible says that the Devil entered him after betraying Jesus, an action that was the culmination of
his greed and dishonesty. Malachi Martin states that a person is perfectly possessed when they
are completely unwilling to give up their sinful ways and therefore cannot be exorcised, because
exorcism requires some degree of cooperation from the possessed persons will (1976). Demons
can also latch on to a particular sin that, unless the person renounces it, will prevent the person
from being liberated (Baglio, 2009).
It should also be noted that possession, contrary to how it is portrayed in the media, is not
contagious. It is not like the common cold and cannot be spread through close contact (Baglio,
2009). Amorth fully mirrors this belief, stating that, diabolical possession is not a contagious
disease, neither for the relatives nor for those who witness it, nor for the places in which
exorcisms are held (1999, p. 84). This erroneous belief irritates many exorcists who encounter
difficulty receiving aid from family members and friends who are too scared to come near the
possessed person.
Authority to Exorcise

One of the key principles in Roman Catholicism is that of authority. The hierarchy of the
churchs government, how it structures its services, and the source of much contention with other
faiths are all rooted in its view of authority. The Roman Catholic Church holds that it is the one
true church descended from the first Pope, Saint Peter the Apostle. As such it is the supreme
authority on all matters, from interpreting the Bible to ordaining priests. In light of this focus on
authority, the church instituted a specific sacrament of exorcism which may only be administered
by bishops and priests (therefore, never by lay persons) who have received specific and direct
license to exorcise (Amorth, 1999, p. 43). The reasoning behind this is that the laity must be
protected from charlatans and magicians who could imitate the practice and thus diminish its
effectiveness.
The effectiveness of an exorcism depends in great part on it having the full authority of
the church behind it. An exorcist must have official Church sanction, for he is acting in an
official capacity, and any power he has over Evil Spirit can only come from those officials who
belong to the substance of Jesus Church (Martin, 1976, p. 12), otherwise he will most certainly
fail. In the past there was no official appointment of exorcists, but in 2004 the Congregation for
the Doctrine of Faith sent out a request to Catholic dioceses around the world requesting that
every bishop appoint an official exorcist (Baglio, 2009). Now that there is an official position it
is absolutely prohibited that anyone other than an ordained exorcist examine and exorcise a
possessed individual.
The Ritual
Up until now this article has only touched upon the precursors to an exorcism, but not the
process itself. In the Roman Catholic Church, the process for conducting an exorcism is
described in depth in the Ritus Exorcizandi Obsessos a Daemonio the Rite of Exorcism, almost
universally referred to in Catholic texts simply as The Ritual. It was originally compiled and
published in 1614, solely in Latin, but vernacular translations are now readily available.
Following the Second Vatican Council it was revised and re-published, again in Latin, although
most of it was left largely unchanged from the original version.
Malachi Martin, when describing the Ritual, divides it into three chapters. Chapter one
contains general instructions for exorcists, chapter two is the actual ritual for exorcising people,
and chapter three is meant for the exorcism of places (1976). Martin is quick to point out that the
efficacy of the ritual does not depend on the rigid use of an unchanging formula or on the

ordered sequence of prescribed actions. Its efficacy depends on two elements: authorization
from valid and licit Church authorities, and the faith of the exorcist (Martin, 1976, p. 459).
While Amorth disagrees with Martin and does view exorcism as sacramental, he does agree that
it may not be necessary to intone all the prayers in the Ritual, or it may be necessary to add
many other prayers (1999, p. 44). Baglio quotes Father Amorth as encouraging exorcists to find
their strengths and weaknesses and see what works best for them, a practice that the International
Association of Exorcists somewhat frowns upon. All Catholic theologians would agree that the
Ritual must never be treated as if it were a magical incantation to be repeated meaninglessly, for
that would void its power and discredit the church (Baglio, 2009).
The Ritual itself is a mixture of instructions for the exorcist, Psalms, prayers to Jesus,
Mary, angels, and saints, as well as commands directed at the demonic presence and excerpts
from the Gospels regarding Jesus ministry of exorcism. Interspersed are prompts for personal
and group prayer, times to make the sign of the cross, and instructions regarding the usage of
holy water and other elements (Weller, 1964). The prayers directed at demons themselves are
divided into two types, deprecatory and imperative, and exorcists say that the difference
between the two is very important. The deprecatory prayer asks God to intervene on behalf of the
person, while in the imperative prayer, the exorcist himself commands the demon to depart in
the name of Jesus Christ (Baglio, 2009, p. 74). Due to their highly suggestive nature, imperative
prayers are only to be used if the exorcist is absolutely certain that the person is possessed.
Demons usually want to avoid exposure at all costs. In the initial stages of an exorcism
the number one tactic used is to hide and make the exorcist believe there is no demon to deal
with. But, as one exorcist describes it, demons are like boxers. They can take a lot of hits without
actually giving in, but their endurance will eventually collapse. When this finally occurs, the
possessed person falls into a trance and the demon assumes complete control of the body. This is
often accompanied by the eyes rolling up or down, the hands clenching into claws, and a violent
rage towards holy objects and words (Baglio, 2009).
The duration of the exorcism and its effectiveness vary wildly in the Catholic tradition.
According to Martin, rarely is an exorcism shorter than some hours more often than not ten or
twelve hours. Sometimes it stretches for two or three days. On occasion it lasts even for weeks
(1976, p. 16). Amorth also affirms this, stating that most exorcisms begin with people who have
already been possessed for a great deal of time and hence have very deeply entrenched demons

within them. Multiple sessions are usually required for these people, often lasting for years.
Baglio lists numerous cases of people going to an exorcist weekly for years, including a woman
who had been undergoing exorcisms for 9 years (2009). While Martin argues that the success of
an exorcism depends on the faith of the exorcist, Amorth firmly states that He who frees is the
Lord (1999, p. 48) and that the faith of the exorcist, prayers by others, holy water, etc. are
secondary to this.
One unique aspect of Catholic exorcism is the emphasis on praying to angels and saints
for aid. Much of the content of the Ritual consists of long lists of saints that can be implored for
aid in casting out a demon. Exorcists quoted in Baglios book mention particular saints that help
them in unique ways but produce no visible reaction when called upon by others (2009). Amorth
agrees that, the power of the Rosary and devotion to the Virgin Mary are well documented. Less
powerful is the intercession of angels and saints (1999, p. 49). Angels are great allies in the
fight against Satan and his demons, and every believer has a guardian angel that can protect
against demonic forces (Amorth, 1999).
Another well-known element of Catholic exorcism is the use of sacramentals, such as
exorcised water, holy water, exorcised oil, and exorcised salt (Amorth, 1999, p. 48). Amorth
lists these elements as extremely beneficial when combined correctly with the prayers of the
Ritual. Amorth is quick to clarify that without faith these elements are absolutely useless, but he
does affirm their great effectiveness, and Martin agrees. Baglio takes a slightly different view
and argues that the objects have no intrinsic value but rather serve as effective symbols. But all
agree that when used in exorcisms alongside the Sign of the Cross they often cause possessed
people to wail or manifest their demonic presence (Martin, 1976; Amorth, 1999; Baglio, 2009).
Exorcised water is widely used in many different liturgical rites and is viewed as a means
of imparting grace, forgiveness of sins, and protection from Satan. Exorcised oil is used almost
exclusively in exorcisms because of its unique ability to dispel the power of demons. Amorth
adds: there is one property that is particular to exorcised oil: that of separating impurities from
the body (1999, p. 118). It is especially useful against curses and spells as it helps separate
cursed objects from the victims. The use of exorcised oil often leads to people vomiting strange
objects or spitting grainy pap (Amorth, 1999). Finally, exorcised salt functions specifically as
a purifier and protector of places from demonic occupation; it is placed at the threshold and
corners of homes to ward off spirits.

While vernacular translations of the Ritual exist, most exorcists prefer to read it in the
original Latin. Martin gives no particular reason for this preference for the Latin, simply stating
that, there seems to be a persuasion born of experience that the Latin text has some special
unction and disruptive value for Evil Spirit (1976, p. 460). Baglio on the other hand says that
many exorcists prefer using Latin to avoid auto-suggestion. They argue that if the person cannot
understand what is being said then there is no chance of stimulating them to act possessed, but
that if there is a demon present it will understand no matter what (2009).
Possession in the Evangelical Tradition
Evangelicals in general avoid using the term demon possession. Ed Murphy argues that
this term is not an accurate translation of the Greek term found in the Bible and that
demonized is a much better word to use (1992). Respected biblical scholar Merrill Unger
agrees with this, stating that, daimonizomai [means] being demonized, i.e., under the control
of one or more demonsAll demonic invasion is demonization of whatever degree of mildness
or severity (1977, p. 86). Murphy also dislikes the term possession because it implies an all-ornothing split, as opposed to a broader view of spiritual warfare, and because it seems to place
total responsibility for human evil on the demonic (1992).
Thomas White, similarly to Amorth, splits the influence of the demonic into three levels,
the first of which General Warfare Against the Believer. This consists of temptation to sin as
well as attacks (flaming arrows) on a believers ministry or personal weakness. The next level
up is oppression, where the victim experiences persistent, continuous affliction of their body or
soul, either outward (vexation) or inward (demonization). Lastly, control is the complete
dominance of a soul by the Devil either through subtle means or the direct intervention of
demons (White, 1990, p. 42-43).
Most Evangelicals who specialize in this field agree with Catholics on many of the
manifestations of demonic activity. However, in general Evangelical literature is more reserved
and shies away from the most dramatic examples seen in Catholic counterparts. Arnold argues
that focusing on the dramatic manifestations obscures the more subtle ways in which demons can
affect peoples lives (Arnold, 1997). Symptoms of demonization are approached more from the
viewpoint of the demonized then those around them. Evangelicals see deception as being Satans
main tool for causing harm, and this seems to be affirmed by the negative voices that demonized

people hear. These voices often council the victims to do evil deeds or constantly tell them
degrading things that lead to depression and suicidal thoughts. Mild symptoms include
extreme distraction during devotional times, strong feelings of irrational anger or bitterness, and
night terrors.
Who can be Demonized and Why
While in popular Evangelical culture it is believed that Christians cannot become
possessed (or demonized), the majority of respected authors on the subject and most deliverance
ministries affirm the opposite. In accordance with his previously mentioned scale, White
affirms that Christians may be demonized but never fully controlled or owned (1990). Neil
Anderson argues that the idea of Christian immunity weakens the church and allows people to
become complacent:
If Satan cant touch the church, why are we instructed to put on the armor of God, to
resist the devil, to stand firm, and to be alert? If we arent susceptible to being wounded
or trapped by Satan, why does Paul describe our relationship to the powers of darkness
as a wrestling match? (Anderson, 1990, p. 22)
Arnold agrees that the popular Evangelical view is inaccurate. He mentions that Merrill Unger
originally held to this position but later changed his mind; experience and a reevaluation of
biblical texts had led him to the conclusion that true believers could indeed be demonized.
During the past twenty years there has been a reaction against the idea that Christians can
be demonized, largely because of the belief that Christian cannot be inhabited by both the Holy
Spirit and a demonic entity. But this conflict is mainly rooted in the misuse of the term
possession as mentioned earlier (Arnold, 1997). Evangelical scholars agree that true Christians
can never be controlled or owned by Satan because they are Gods children. [True believers]
can be demonized. Such demonization can range from mild to severe. I am not affirming that
true believers can be demon possessed. They cannot be. Satan does not truly possess anything
but his own kingdom of fallen spirits (Murphy, 1992, p. 430).
For the most part Catholic and Evangelicals also agree on the causes of
possession/demonization. Murphy gives two explanations for the demonization of Christians.
The first possibility is that they were demonized before conversion and have yet to experience
deliverance. The second is that they were demonized after conversion because of serious sin
committed by them or against them. The major sin areas that occasionally bring about

demonization are: generational sins, child abuse, social sins (anger, bitterness, rage, rejection,
and rebellion), sexual sin, curses, and occult practices (Murphy, 1992). However, these are often
interwoven and cannot be arbitrarily separated.
While Evangelical scholars admit that there is no direct scriptural evidence of demonic
transference across generational lines, there are a multitude of passages that discuss the fact that
sin has consequences that are passed down the familial line. Arnold calls this a familial spirit and
argues that it is almost always tied to a family because of previous involvement in the occult or
false religions by an authority figure (1997). Child abuse is also seen as a primary cause of
demonization because of its incredibly sinful nature. When children are physically, sexually,
emotionally, and spiritually abused by those in authority, the gravity of the sins committed
against them and the negative attitudes it produces in them later on often lead to demonization.
Arnold also affirms that a life of unrepentant sin and involvement in the occult are primary
causes of demonization and that they give demons a legal right to be present in the victims
life (Arnold, 1997; Kraft, 2010).
Authority to Cast Out Demons
One of the primary differences between Catholics and Evangelicals pertains to their
views of authority. The Evangelical church places much less weight on the institutional church
and has no unified hierarchy with a figure like the Pope at its top. Doctrinal and practical
questions are decided by an examination of the Bible, and very little weight is given to church
tradition. As such, Evangelicals do not limit the practice of exorcism to approved members of the
clergy. They argue that the New Testament clearly delegates Jesus Christs authority over Satan
to all believers, and that the commands to cast out demons do not only apply to a select few.
When Jesus sent out his disciples to cast out demons he did not only give authority to his 12
apostles, but also to the 70 others who followed him and who would now be called laymen
(Murphy, 1992; White, 1990, p. 57).
Avoidance of Ritual
The main point of contention between Catholics and Evangelicals revolves around the
process of exorcism itself. While Catholics follow the prayers and practices codified in the
Roman Ritual of Exorcism, Evangelicals abhor this practice and want nothing to do with it.
Arnold severely criticizes almost every aspect of exorcism that Catholics use in the Ritual and
compares them to the syncretistic magical practices found in early Christianity. First he maligns

the emphasis on formulaic prayers, whether they are found in the Catholic Church or any others.
He argues that: [they give] the impression that the power resides in the prayer rather than in the
one the person is praying torather than seeing these prayers as models, some people
erroneously take them as powerful formulas. Catholic exorcists argue that the church has found
the most effective types of prayers over centuries of experience dealing with the demonic, but
Arnold also criticizes an overemphasis on what works and says that it devaluates the person
of Christ by putting technique above relationship (Arnold, 1997, p.132).
The practice of invoking angels and saints is also offensive to Evangelicals for multiple
reasons. Early Christian magic was obsessed with invoking angels, often through ritualized
prayer, and Evangelical scholars argue that Pauls letter to the Colossians clearly forbids this
practice and instead urges believers to rely on Christ alone. This is also seen as applicable to the
invocation of saints or Mary, along with the fact that in Protestant tradition any prayers that are
not directed to a member of the Trinity are viewed as idolatry (Arnold, 1997). Examining the
larger worldview of Evangelicals also shows a dislike of items such as crucifixes, holy water, or
any other kind of symbol that Catholics see as powerful or effective. While there are very few
written explanations as to why this dislike exists, it is most likely due to a general wish to
disassociate from the Catholic Church and any of its practices that Evangelicals see as magical,
ritualistic, or idolatrous.
The same can be said for the use of Latin in the exorcism ritual. Evangelicals have long
objected to the use of Latin in Catholicism in any context because of the belief that people must
be taught in their mother tongue. The multiple arguments listed earlier as to why the Ritual
should be prayed in Latin are not convincing to Evangelical scholars. Evangelicals strongly
believe that there must be cooperation from the demonized person for deliverance to be possible.
They must repent of their sins and sever all ties that could leave them open to further attack, and
to do this they must completely understand the process that is going on. To an Evangelical,
praying in Latin would most likely render the exorcism completely ineffective (Anderson, 1990;
Arnold, 1997; Murphy, 1992).
The length of the deliverance process is another point of contention between scholars of
the two churches. While the length also fluctuates on a case by case basis, in the Evangelical
tradition there are no accounts of exorcisms lasting years. Most accounts describe the actual
amount of time spent confronting a demon as quite small usually no more than a few hours and

oftentimes only minutes. However, the process of confessing hidden sin, breaking addiction,
changing sinful attitudes, and achieving complete freedom does often require many sessions
over the course of several months. Still, the concept of exorcisms going on for years due to the
strength of the demon is nowhere to be found in evangelical literature (Murphy, 1992; Kraft,
2010).
It must be mentioned that there is some disagreement in Evangelical circles as to the most
appropriate way to deliver demonized individuals. The first view advocates a truth encounter;
Neil Anderson and Mark Driscoll are strong proponents of this view, arguing that confronting a
demonic presence only makes matters worse. Instead the victim should be taught the truth of
their situation, be converted if they are not already, confess hidden sins, and recognize their
freedom in Christ (Driscoll, 2008; Anderson, 1990). The second view advocates a power
encounter in certain situations: a power encounter is a crisis point where the exorcist directly
confronts a manifested demon and commands it to depart in the name of Jesus Christ. But even
this approach must always be paired with the truth encounter approach as neither one is effective
on its own. Ed Murphy states that: casting out demons always involves power encounter, even
where truth encounter is the approach used (Murphy, 1992, p. 342).
Conclusion
It is evident that Catholics and Evangelicals have much common ground when it comes
to the rising issue of possession and exorcism. When it comes to matters of definition,
manifestations, and effects, both sides can find points that they agree with and appreciate. There
is variety within both sides, and some scholars are more open to members of the other side than
others. But the two parties are obligated to part ways with regards to putting into practice the
biblical command to cast out demons in my name (Mark 16:17).

Works Cited:

Amorth, G. (1999). An exorcist tells his story. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press.

Anderson, N. T. (1990). The bondage breaker. Eugene, Or.: Harvest House Publishers.

Arnold, C. E. (1997). 3 crucial questions about spiritual warfare. Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Baker Books.

Baglio, M. (2009). The rite: the making of a modern exorcist. New York: Doubleday.

Kraft, C. H. (2010). Two hours to freedom: a simple and effective model for healing and
deliverance. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Chosen Books.

Martin, M. (1976). Hostage to the devil: the possession and exorcism of five living
Americans. New York: Reader's Digest Press :.

Murphy, E. F. (1992). The handbook for spiritual warfare. Nashville, Tenn.: T. Nelson.

Peck, M. S. (2005). Glimpses of the Devil: a psychiatrist's personal accounts of

possession, exorcism, and redemption. New York: Free Press.

Prayer After Low Mass. (n.d.). Sancta Missa. Retrieved December 4, 2012, from
www.sanctamissa.org/en/resources/prayers/leonine-prayers-after-low-mass.pdf

Prayer of Exorcism. (n.d.). Catholic Doors Ministry. Retrieved December 4, 2012, from
http://www.catholicdoors.com/prayers/latin/latin040.htm

Unger, M. F. (1977). What demons can do to saints. Chicago: Moody Press.

White, T. B. (1990). The believer's guide to spiritual warfare. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Vine
Books.

Weller, P. T. (n.d.). The Roman Ritual. EWTN: Global Catholic Network. Retrieved
December 4, 2012, from www.ewtn.com/library/prayer/roman2.txt