31 Comments - 47th Ward - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:17 am: Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! - Knome Sane - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:17 am: “Your Mother sews socks that smell!” Classic SNL skit. - wordslinger - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:20 am: The issue that prompted the bishop’s press release aside, I’m interested in the nature of the “prayers of supplication and exorcism.” The church does perform exorcisms — the thing most of us are thinking about — to drive demons out of people, but I don’t think this is the same thing. Exoricisms, as I’ve thought about them, are not public events, the possessed subject is present and there are very strict rules as to their performance, including considerations as to possibility of mental illness and the subject’s physical health. From my reading, this appears to be something else. - 47th Ward - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:23 am: ===this appears to be something else.=== Yes, this isn’t the Rite of Exorcism, but rather prayers. There is a big difference, but anytime you mention the E word, every thinks of Linda Blair. - Knome Sane - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:25 am: =From my reading, this appears to be something else.= Word, this may be the understatment of the year. Worthy of it’s own Golden Horseshoe Category - Rich Miller - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:27 am: Word, the ritual was apparently changed in 1999: http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0410-euteneuer You can read about the actual ritual on MIT’s site: http://web.mit.edu/dvp/fysm/vatican/exorcism.pdf - Knome Sane - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:30 am: It’s ironic that the Jesuits are the order that usually carries out exorcisms. With the new Pope a Jesuit, it makes me sad that the “who am I to judge” statement is lost on the Bishop of Springfield. - 47th Ward - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:32 am: ===The term “exorcism”" does NOT always denote a solemn exorcism involving a person possessed by the devil. In general, the term denotes prayers to “curb the power of the devil and prevent him from doing harm.” As St. Peter had written in Holy Scripture, “your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he may devour.” [1 St.Pet. 5:8] === http://www.catholic.org/prayers/prayer.php?p=682 - wordslinger - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:33 am: Rich, that’s some of the stuff I was reading. From my understanding, the actual ritual of driving out demons wasn’t changed that much. But there were some new rules issued, including no media, medical examination and consideration of mental illness (possession not being the same). Like 47 said, I think what the bishop announced is prayers. - Jim'e' - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:35 am: It will be interesting in the next few years, or whatever is determined to be the timeline for naming a replacement to Cardinal George. Maybe an indication of what the future promises is the election of the new chair of the American Council of Bishops. - 47th Ward - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:35 am: More from the link: “The Holy Father exhorts priests to say this prayer as often as possible, as a simple exorcism to curb the power of the devil and prevent him from doing harm. The faithful also may say it in their own name, for the same purpose, as any approved prayer. Its use is recommended whenever action of the devil is suspected, causing malice in men, violent temptations and even storms and various calamities. It could be used as a solemn exorcism (an official and public ceremony, in Latin), to expel the devil. It would then be said by a priest, in the name of the Church and only with a Bishop’s permission.” - wordslinger - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:51 am: –* WAND TV’s ten o’clock broadcast made no mention of the Bishop’s comments. The station covers Decatur and Springfield as well as Champaign. The story isn’t on WCIA’s website.– That’s weird. Whatever you think about it, it sure is news. - PublicServant - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 11:52 am: Thanks for the quote 47th. Do you think Bishop Paprocki might consider using that prayer in reference to pension reform, where the action of the devil is definitely causing malice in men? - RNUG - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 12:23 pm: Yawn … part of the reason I no long attend a Catholic church or pay any attention to them. - CircularFiringSquad - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 12:44 pm: Wonder if anyone asked the SPI Bishop of Bling where he has been the last week. Same goes for the Peoria whack job — Jencky. Will someone get video of the exorcism? Maybe a tour of the mansion? - Ghost - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 1:03 pm: === ‘well you know, I can love, no matter who it is.’ And I hope that’s in the heart of everybody,” ==== Well we cant have the kinds of christianity! it interfers with the ability to judge and cast stones! On a side note, where are the prayers and exorcisms for those who lie, steal, cheat on theri spouses, covet theri neighbors, use the lords name in vein…. I notice Gay is not in the 10 commandments… so lets start praying for those violating the top ten rules - Ghost - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 1:11 pm: I almost forgot, somone should let the catholic bishop know the church does not recognize “grave” sin. There are two types of sin, venial and mortal. and We arent supposed to rank venial sins as one being better then another…. - Belle - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 1:12 pm: Haters are going to hate and a law will not change how some people feel or react. But the Church seems to have made a change in course and the Priests, Sisters, etc who are interested in jumping on board, are the ones who will move ahead and get promotions. - Anonymous - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 1:20 pm: Paprocki is adept at getting the media’s attention. That’s why he used the work ‘exorcism’ instead of saying he was holding a prayer service. He is going to ride the SSM horse as far as he can, to what end I’m not sure. Although I think many read into Pope Francis’ words what they want to hear. Catholic teaching regarding the sacrament of marriage has not changed. But Francis has indicated he wants more focus on other problems facing the church, a direction that Paprocki apparently intends to ignore. Feeding the poor, etc. is just not as sexy. - Steve Downstate - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 2:02 pm: Forgive me for wishing that Bishop Paprocki would also exorcise his bigoted attitudes towards Muslims, including law-abiding Muslim Americans. He has neither retracted nor apologized for the anti-Muslim homily he gave on Christmas Eve 2010. Last time I checked, bigotry was a mighty bad sin. http://blogs.sj-r.com/podcasts/wp-content/uploads/12152010paprockihomily.pdf - This was news? - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 2:07 pm: Downstate editors are so acclimated to this type of tea party / ultra conservative hype that they did not recognize Paprocki’s press release as news. Plus, from a political standpoint, Paprocki is not Pope Francis’ guy. - Aldyth - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 2:42 pm: Nonsense like this is a big reason why I know a whole lot of lapsed Catholics and hardly any practicing Catholics. - Anonymous - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 3:24 pm: @ Steve Downstate Thanks for posting that Christmas Eve homily. It’s a fine example of the bishop’s flair for divisive, hateful political pronouncements. - Just The Way It Is One - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 3:42 pm: One interesting reflection here is that although the Catholic Church does indeed recognize not only Venial (lesser) Sins and Serious Sins (what the Bishop identifies the ssm passed bill/soon to be law as, in addition to being a “grave” matter), he did, despite the upcoming Exorcism Prayers to be said against ssm, interestingly hold back from pinning the category with the harshest implications attached: the “Mortal” Sin tag on it…! - Waldi - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 3:46 pm: To bad this wasn’t scheduled in time for Halloween. Is this bishop a publicity hound or is he just nuts? - GA Watcher - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 3:50 pm: Has the same ceremony been used in response to clergy sexual abuse? - Tilt - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 3:54 pm: The “who am I to judge?” statement has been taken out of context by the politicians. It was not unconditional. Pope Francis qualified his comment by referring to persons seeking Christ (i.e. working to live their faith). - Endangered Moderate Species - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 4:13 pm: ===The “who am I to judge?” statement has been taken out of context by the politicians.=== In what context should those five words be taken? The Pope’s question seems clear and rational. - Demoralized - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 4:18 pm: ==The “who am I to judge?” statement has been taken out of context by the politicians. It was not unconditional. Pope Francis qualified his comment by referring to persons seeking Christ (i.e. working to live their faith). == Gays can’t be seeking Christ? You get to decide that now, I see. Why anybody would support the nonsense that the Bishop is engaging in is beyond me. He’s not just preaching church doctrine, he is engaged in an active campaign against gay people. There is a big difference and he is handling the absolute wrong way. It’s hard to take it any other way than some form of hate. He has pretty much made it clear in all of his statements and actions that gay people are not welcome in his congregation. That is hardly a pastoral thing to do. It’s sad really. - wordslinger - Friday, Nov 15, 13 @ 4:27 pm: Steve Downstate, thanks for the link. There’s plenty more all over the google, as I’ve found over the months. The dude doesn’t hide his light under a bushel. I’ve had enough. Thomas Paprocki is a secular, right-wing, bigoted zealot of a certain sort, like Father Coughlin. Or Ayatollah Khomeni. Or Pat Robertson. They are not messengers of God, bringing Him to you for your salvation, but self-appointed gatekeepers of God, trying to keep you from Him if you don’t toe the secular, political line. They are charlatans. Nothing new here, Thomas. It’s been done. It’s a free country, he’s free to be that way. He will not be persecuted for it, but he will be criticized for it, in this free country. What Thomas does within sanctuary for those who want to follow him is none of my business. But when he comes in the public square — in the United States of America — his collar doesn’t get him Green Stamps. You win on your reason, that may or may not be based in faith. Thomas’ smug, unloving, perverted bent that God’s grace can only be handed down from high priests in the temple like himself — that’s not doing it for me, either. See, I was promised and have a personal relationship with my Savior. Which is nice. I’m one of God’s children, a Christian and a man of faith. I’ve read and re-read the Bible. I have never encountered in the lessons of my Lord the hatred that Thomas chooses to proclaim are necessary to be a good Christian and a good citizen. We’re all sinners, Thomas. Some times, we can’t even agree on what sin is. A little reflection and less vanity might be in order. Thomas had a lot of choices on whom he wished to minister. The sick. The hungry. The poor. The old and forgotten. Those who had lost faith. Those maimed and killed by war. But he chose right-wing American politics. And, I believe, he did so for his own vanity. A very profound and sinful vanity, in my opinion. But we’re all sinners. Thomas’ political obsessions with condemning to hell those who do not agree with his political views is foreign to my understanding of The Gospels. But as a guy who knows something about politics, especially in Springfield, Illinois, his motivations are clear. He’s trying to move votes. - wayne - Tuesday, Nov 19, 13 @ 10:16 am: Those who attend should bring mops and wear something washable…… Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.