Do you worry that when people who have responsibility problems read about possession they will start blaming the Devil for their own irresponsible behavior?

Somebody through pure carelessness might think, "Peck says that the Devil is real and therefore the Devil made me do it," without reading the book or knowing anything more. But I don't feel I can be responsible for people using my work sloppily or inaccurately.

The key issue, and what attracted me to Malachi Martin's work on possession, was that he said that his cases became possessed for a reason: People cooperate in their own possession, and that means that they have a considerable degree of responsibility for it.

Shortly after People of the Lie was published, I was contacted by a lawyer from Chicago about a client he had who was guilty of murder and who he thought might be possessed. He asked if I would come out to Chicago at top dollar and interview his client to find out whether he was possessed. I said I would be happy to do that, but that he ought to realize that even if I found the patient was possessed, that wouldn't make him not guilty of the murder. This element of cooperation means that he would still have responsibility for being possessed. As soon as I told that lawyer that I wouldn't be able to testify that his client had no responsibility because he was possessed, he was no longer interested.

If a person has to cooperate to become possessed, what is the role of that person in the exorcism? What degree of will is involved, and how does that compare to the role of the exorcist and the role of Christ in exorcism?

There are four exorcists. The most important, the one that determines whether exorcism succeeds or not, is the patient himself or herself. Their choice ...

Subscriber access only You have reached the end of this Article Preview

To continue reading, subscribe now. Subscribers have full digital access.