Exorcise

Exorcise (pronounced ek-sawr-sahyz)

To seek to expel from a person or place an evil spirit by means of adjuration or solemn religious ceremonies.

1350-1400: The verb may have been in oral use as early as the twelfth century but use in Middle English is documented from the later, the form from the fourteenth century Old French exorciser, from the Late Latin exorcizāre, from the Ancient Greek exorkízein (bind by oath; banish an evil spirit) and the sense "call up evil spirits to drive them out" was dominant by the sixteenth century.  In England, exorcize was actually an alternative spelling but this is now one the rare instances in English where the US adopted -ise rather than -ize which some etymologists suggest may have been because of the influence of "exercise" although why that would be compellingly persuasive (this was the country which discarded "cheque" and used "check" for all purposes) seems never discussed.  What is more likely is the appearance of "exorcise" in so many church documents brought to the American colonies led to some reluctance to edit "sacred" works.  Some US academic sources do suggest exorcize is "a rare but correct" alternative, a concession not extended to exercize.  A number of the derived forms (exorcismal, exorcisory, exorcistical, exorcistic) are rare and appear only in specialist publications (or lists or the rare and obscure).  Exorcise is a verb, exorcism, exorcisation & exorcist are nouns, exorcistical, exorcismal, exorcisory & exorcistic are adjectives; the noun plural is exorcisms.

The noun exorcism (a calling up or driving out of evil spirits) was a fifteenth century creation formation from the Late Latin exorcismus, from the Ancient Greek exorkismos (administration of an oath) which, in Ecclesiastical Greek existed as exorkizein (exorcise, bind by oath), the construct being ex- (out of) + horkizein (cause to swear), from horkos (oath) of uncertain origin although some have suggested there's a link to  herkos (fence), the idea being of a oath with boundaries one accepts as "restrictions, ties & obligations" or "a magical power that fences in the swearer".  It's speculative and one etymologist noted dryly that the discipline's enthusiasm to adopt the view "was restrained".  A fourteenth century form describing the ritual was spelled exorcization.

Exorcism: Vade retro satana (Step back, Satan)

Saint Francis and the Dying Impenitent (1788) by Francisco Goya (1746-1828)

Exorcism in Christianity is the practice of casting out demons from a person or place possessed by the Devil.  Although the biblical origins are dubious (some translations to some extent support the notion), by early in the second century of Christianity the word was in general use and paintings of exorcists and their ceremonies are among the darker and more dramatic in medieval and later sacred art.  Whether or not the biblical foundations were solid, priests have always been good at spotting a gap in the market and the drama of a well-scripted exorcism was likely a lucrative venture, supply of which may well have stimulated demand.  In the Roman Catholic Church, the rituals were formalized in 1614 because of Rome’s concerns about clandestine, underground exorcisms performed without their consent and the guidelines remained substantially unchanged until the Vatican’s revisions in 1999, a process necessitated by a late twentieth-century spike in demand, the reasons for which are speculative but involve usually blaming the internet, an explanation at least plausible.  Interestingly, for more than a decade after the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II (1962-65)), it was really not done for clergy to speak of Satan as if "he" really existed, the modernizing church preferring the language of psychology and psychiatry for those displaying symptoms for centuries attributed to the Devil's demonic possession.

Exorcism of Nicole Aubry (1563), etching by an unknown artist.

Popular culture (especially cinema) revived interest in the ritual, with both churches and the medical profession reporting an upsurge in claims of demonic possession and most significantly, Saint John Paul II (1920–2005, pope 1978-2005) had a more robust attitude to the Devil’s role upon earth than any of his twentieth century predecessors.  In 2004, JPII again warned that occult and new age practices were raging out of control in Europe, providing gateways for evil that could result in demonic attachment and possession.  JPII's warning was effective and for the Holy See, it's been good business ever since; a recent Course on Exorcism and Prayer of Liberatio, hosted by the Sacerdos Institute at the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum (an educational institute under the auspices of the Congregation of the Legionaries of Christ) in Rome, attracted some 250 priests from 50 countries.  Supply tends to exist only to meet demand so around the planet, the Devil must in many places be afoot.  Interrupted only by the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic (which may have been the work of the Devil), the week-long course has been held annually since 2005, attendance more than doubling over the years.  Cost per head in 2025 was €575 (US$660); bookings were essential and an entry-ticket included discounts on rooms and food & beverage in several Rome hotels.

The Exorcist’s “spider walk” scene.

Based on the William Peter Blatty (1928-2017) novel The Exorcist (1971), the film version (1973) was directed by William Friedkin (1935-2023) and that it did not win the Best Picture Academy Award is a mystery explained only by the prejudices held at the time by those members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences who cast ballots for The Sting (1973) a competently-made but formulaic piece and hardly the a landmark like The Exorcist.  The “spider walk” scene was long the subject of speculation.  Not included in the original theatrical release, the director for years claimed it had never been shot and it was only when copies of takes were found in the archives he admitted it had been done but couldn’t be used because at the time the technology to "edit out" the wires securing the stunt double to a rail above (which made the performance possible) didn't exist.  Subsequently, it was revealed the scene had been shot without use of the harness because it was performed by an experienced stunt double with gymnastic training.  Apparently the director didn’t include it because he thought it appeared too early and disrupted the sequence which is interesting because, structurally, The Exorcist is far from perfect (unkind critics call the editing "a bit of a mess").  The spider walk scene was included in the “director’s cut” editions released the next century and the once genuinely shocking film has attracted parody, a demonically possessed Lindsay Lohan levitating in Scary Movie V (2013). 

The Exorcism of Charles II of Spain

Charles II of Spain (Carlos Segundo 1661–1700), was the last king of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty, sovereign of the Spanish Empire which stretched from Mexico to the Philippines.  The only surviving son of his predecessor, Philip IV (1605-1665) and his second wife, Mariana of Austria (1634-1696), his birth was greeted with enthusiasm by the Spanish people because, as was the fashion of the time, had the old king died without a male heir, a war of succession (traditionally a bloody business) would have ensued.  Unfortunately, Charles was physically disabled, disfigured, mentally retarded and found later to be impotent, usually a drawback for any king but a discovery which brought relief to many courtiers.  He uttered no words until the age of four, didn’t take his first step before he was almost nine, suffering throughout childhood a range of diseases including measles, varicella, rubella, and smallpox.  Left almost uneducated because of his frailty, his mother was regent most of his reign and he came to be known to history as El Hechizado (the Bewitched), the name applied because both court and country believed his mental and physical incapacities were due to an act of witchcraft.  

Modern science suggests otherwise, the condition actually the consequence of the strong preference for endogamy (the practice of marrying or requiring to marry within one's own ethnic, religious, or social group) within the Spanish branch of the Habsburg royal family which led to its segregation within related dynasties and thus the emergence of consanguinity (inbreeding).  Inbred Charles II certainly was; his grandparents were at the same time his great-grandparents; One relative's father was married to her sister's daughter, was also her great-uncle, and her mother happened to be her cousin as well.  One could see how things might not have turned out well and the condition was well-known in Europe and not restricted to aristocracy and royalty.  The slack enforcement of marriage laws in Germanic lands was one of the reasons there were so many victims of the Nazi's original euthanasia (Aktion T4, mass-murder of the physically disabled and mentally retarded on the basis of them being "useless eaters") programme and it went back a long way: the scandal of the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius (circa 575–641; emperor 610-641) marrying his niece Martina (circa 590-circa 644) made still worse by the tragic condition of some of the children the union produced.  However, to speak of incest in the royal family was just not done so the feeling at the time was to blame the stae of Charles II on witches or the Devil so the court sought advice from Fray Antonio Álvarez Argüelles, vicar of the Encarnación de Cangas del Narcea convent and a noted Asturian exorcist who suggested: “…last night the demon told me that the King is evilly bewitched to rule and to beget. When he was 14 years old, he was enchanted with a chocolate in which the brains of a dead man were dissolved to take away his health, corrupt his semen and prevent his generation”.

Exorcism of Charles II of Spain, engraving by Lechard, circa 1840.

The priest's "chocolate theory" must have been convincing because soon after the king was subjected to what was, even by the standards of the age, a most macabre exorcism.  By coincidence, the remains of his ancestors were being transferred to a new pantheon at the Royal Seat of San Lorenzo de El Escorial and the exorcist ordered their coffins opened.  The rationale was a ceremony in which the corpses of his relatives (and, in an advanced state of putrefaction, that of his beloved first wife (María Luisa de Orleans (1662-1689))), were exhibited would assist, the array of the dead helping to drive off the demons so tormenting the unfortunate monarch.  It was in vain and the suffering continued.  Ill his whole life and king since the age of three, he lingered until 1700, dying at 39, the announcement one of the more eagerly awaited events in the courts and chancelleries of Europe, such was the anticipation of the struggles which would erupt to decide the succession.  Summarizing a sad life in Carlos, the Bewitched (1962, published in the US as Carlos: The King who would Not Die), his English biographer John Langdon-Davies (1897–1971) wrote: "Of no man is it more true to say that in his beginning was his end; from the day of his birth, they were waiting for his death".  On his deathbed, his last words were: "Everything hurts".

Institutional exorcism: Pope Leo, modernity and the SSPX

Although the Holy See might find the simile appalling, in the Roman Catholic Church, the political equivalent of an exorcism is an excommunication, a legal and spiritual administrative act excluding a baptized Catholic from certain aspects of sacramental and communal life; although Rome’s most serious canonical censure, despite the common impression, it neither expels an individual from the Church or erases their baptism.  Additionally, while the very word seems to be associated with finality, the purpose of excommunication is medicinal rather than punitive.  Rather than a brute-force punishment, it’s a device the church can use as means of bringing the sinner to repentance and reconciliation; in most cases, once a transgressor confesses their offence and sincerely repents (and, in some cases, fulfils such “special conditions” as may be imposed) an excommunication can be lifted, meaning the individual is welcomed back into communal life.  In the Roman Catholic faith, "reformed sinners" are valued for the good example they set.

As a general principle, what a excommunication does is prohibit an individual so sanctioned from (1) receiving the sacraments (the Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick and such), (2) celebrating or administering the sacraments (if they be clergy), (3) exercising ecclesiastical offices, ministries, performing most official functions within the Church and (4) receiving most ecclesiastical privileges.  However, there’s a procedural hierarchy and because a baptism leaves on the soul an indelible spiritual mark, even the excommunicated remain Roman Catholics, their fate after death ultimately in the hands of God.  As such, they may still attend Mass (though not receive Holy Communion), pray and participate in any aspects of parish life not requiring the exercise of ecclesiastical ministry.  Interestingly, under Canon Law, there are two mechanisms of excommunication.  There is (1) Latae sententiae (sentence already passed) which means the penalty automatically is incurred upon committing certain serious offenses (apostasy, heresy, or schism; desecration of the Eucharist; physically attacking the pope; knowingly and freely participate in an act of abortion and (2) Ferendae sententiae (sentence to be imposed), that requiring a ruling by a competent Church authority after a judicial or administrative process.

Pope Leo XIV: Time will tell if Leo's pontificate will be as "modern" at that of his predecessor (Francis (1936-2025; pope 2013-2025)), accused by some theologians of "heresy".

The Vatican’s announcement in July 2026 that certain followers of the SSPX (Society of Saint Pius X) had been excommunicated a day after the organization had consecrated four new bishops in defiance Leo XIV's (b 1955; pope since 2025) explicit instruction was thus, in a technical sense, merely advisory because, under the provisions Latae sententiae, by engaging in “a schismic act”, those involved were at the moment of their transgressions no longer in communion with the Church.  However, following the usual protocols, the Vatican issued a decree stating all six of the Society's “bishops” had been excommunicated but what was unexpected was the inclusion of a paragraph stating any lay members who “formally adhere” to the group “are to be considered schismatic and excommunicated”.  Reaching out to the heretics, the statement concluded that those who repented and left the SSPX would be welcomed back to the Church “with sincere affection”.  Because the multi-national SSPX is not a small organization, questions were asked about the scope of the edict and the Vatican’s press office later clarified things by saying not all members would be subject to automatic excommunication but it would be imposed on those who “habitually participate” in SSPX rituals and “formally share its doctrinal positions”.

Pope Saint Pius X who thought "the old ways are the best".

The Vatican regards the SSPX as a splinter sect which has “left the Church” although, in the usual way schismatic squabbles play out, followers of the SSPX claim the “Church has left them”.  Saint Pius X (1835–1914; pope 1903-1914) was pope at the dawn of what would come to be called “modernity” and often is referred to as an “anti-modernist” pope who opposed not only the intrusion of “liberal interpretation” into Catholic doctrine but also any variation of the traditional forms such as the Latin liturgy.  According to Pius X, the last words on Church teachings and interpretation had been written by the Italian Dominican friar, philosopher & theologian Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274); perfection thus was achieved in the thirteenth century, the proceedings of the First Vatican Council (Vatican I; 1869-1870) not merely an affirmation of Thomist scholastic theology but a strengthening of a pope’s legal authority to veto any challenge to doctrinal or procedural orthodoxies.  Although clearly it had long been exercised, it was in Vatical I the doctrine of "Papal Infallibility" was codified and although it has (officially) since been invoked only once, popes increasingly have issued edicts and decrees "vested with infallibility in form if not word", Vaticanologists coining the phrase "creeping infallibility" to describe the development.     

Founded in 1970, the SSPX was a reaction to the distinctly “modernising” reforms imposed on the Roman Catholic Church by Second Vatican Council (Vatican II, 1962-1965, published 1970) and its adherents worldwide are believed now to number more than half a million, hence the interest of the press in the extent of the Vatican’s decree of excommunication.  Although in popular discourse there has been much focus on SSPX priests conducting the mass in Latin while facing the altar rather than following the reformed procedure in which local languages are used with the priest facing his congregation, the sect’s challenge to the authority of Rome is more fundamental and the dispute is not new, a number of SSPX bishops excommunicated in 1988.  It was Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) who in 2009 rescinded the order for four of that number, explaining he hoped his “act of reconciliation” would produce a “real and final unity”.  Benedict instead got a kind of uneasy truce, something emblematic of his papacy.  That state was neither an entente cordiale nor a peaceful co-existence but more a case of Rome “turning a blind eye” as long as the SPSS kept a low profile and did not attempt to “infect the Church” with their notions.  Probably a handful of congregations enjoying the undeniable beauty of the Latin Mass, delivered to conservatively dressed souls hearing only what had for centuries been preached could have been tolerated but the SSPX not only spread but became more dogmatic in claims of correctness and more aggressive in the promotion of their ideas.

Escutcheons of the SSPX (left) and Holy See (right).

The similarity between the Holy See's symbol and the "crossed keys" of the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d’Or is claimed by both to be wholly coincidental.  Modern in technology and media management if not theology, the SSPX have an on-line FAQ page discussing their differences with Rome.  Both sides are committed, well resourced, have skilled coaches and a good bench of reserves so this "ecclesiastical world cup" likely has some way to go and won't yet have reached the half-time break. 

Had it been just disagreements over arcane matters of form (how the communion bread was handled or whether the Mass was celebrated in Latin or the local language etc), it might have been possible for Rome to tolerate the SSPX and hope the cult would fade away as its congregants died off but not only are its numbers growing but the new adherents often are young and committed Catholics (committed certainly to what Catholicism “used to be”).  More troubling still is some of the underlying politics, one notorious SSPX bishop (among the four in 2009 reinstated by Benedict) repeatedly made anti-Semitic statements and, being not at all vague in his Holocaust denial, insisted (after his excommunication was lifted!) in a television interview: “I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, hugely against, six 6 million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler [Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945)].  I believe there were no gas chambers”.  Curiously, the Vatican didn’t reimpose the bishops excommunication but instead ruled he’d not be permitted to “perform priestly functions” unless he “recanted his views.”  Just as intriguingly, the SSPX didn’t demand a recantation but instead issued an order forbidding the talkative bishop from making “any public statements on political or historical issues.”  In other words: “Don’t mention the war”.  When eventually the SSPX expelled its turbulent priest, it was not for his views but because he defied the sect’s hierarchy.  Still, that meant Benedict was relieved of the strain of having to make a decision; that much pleased him. 

Reacting with remarkable alacrity to the controversy, the SSPX sanitized its web pages, removing anything which might be thought “suspect”.  Afterwards, anyone new to the sect would be forgiven for thinking it was nothing but an order of the Church for those nostalgic for the Latin liturgy, banished to the archives by Vatican II.  However, in the printed record there’s an extensive collection of publications detailing the organization's long history of anti-Semitism, some of it frankly “hate literature” and it also printed or distributed older texts containing a roll-call of the usual tropes: blaming the Jews for the French Revolution, Communism, Bolshevism and accusing them of corrupt practices in their alleged control of international finance etc.  At the root of it all was said to be the Jews' collective guilt of deicide (the old chant of “Christ killers” which didn’t disappear from Roman Catholic sermons until well into the twentieth century) but, to add a new twist, the SSPX also contributes to “replacement theory”, condemning Third World immigration into Western countries as “destroying our national identity and, furthermore, the whole of Christianity”.  The SSPX also is highly suspicious about the agenda of “international Freemasonry, some of its publications quoting the works (appearing also on white supremacist sites) of an author who warned of a “Judeo-Masonic conspiracy to destroy the church”.  To be fair, the SSPX probably are right to be concerned about the plotting & scheming of the Freemasons and even the pope would agree with that.  Leo has made the first decisive act of his pontificate and has drawn a line in the theocratic sand but, in creating a half million-odd schematic malcontents, he may have created more problems than he solved.

Exorcism and the Anglicans

Although the film The Exorcist and a well-publicized history of use may have led some to believe exorcism is exclusively "a Roman Catholic thing", other Christian denominations inherited the idea, some practicing the ritual more than others.  The Lambeth Conference is a (nominally) decennial assembly of bishops of the Anglican Communion convened by the AoC (Archbishop of Canterbury), 15 held since the first in 1867.  The Anglican Communion is an international association of autonomous national and regional churches, not a governing body and the office of AoC is in no way analogous with the Roman Catholic pope; while a pope is an absolute monarch atop a theocracy, the AoC is the "spirital head" of the Anglican community but holds no executive authority.  The conferences serve a collaborative and consultative function and are said to express “…the mind of the communion" on issues of the day; resolutions passed at a Lambeth Conference are without legal effect, but can be influential (if others are in the mood to be influenced).

Lambeth's latest.

Dame Sarah Mullally (b 1962) in the regalia of Bishop of London; in March 2026 she was installed ("enthroned" no longer preferred by modern Anglicans) as AoC.  No longer one of the world's more desirable jobs (essentially because it can't be done), all wish her the best of British luck.  In feminist theory, the phenomenon of women being appointed to suddenly undesirable jobs is known as the "glass cliff"; were it possible for the job still to be done, the Anglicans would have appointed the 106^th man rather than the first woman.  Of the previous 105 prelates, the first was Saint Augustine of Canterbury (circa 630s-circa 604) in 597 (not to be confused with the still influential Saint Augustine of Hippo (354–430)).

Conferences were never the pure and high-minded discussions of ethics, morality and theology some now appear to believe characterized the pre-modern (in this context those held prior to 1968 when "the troubles began") events.  Agenda and communiqués from all conferences have always included the procedural, administrative and jurisdictional although in recent years, they’ve certainly reflected an increasingly factionalized communion rent with cross-cutting cleavages, first over the ordination of women and of late, homosexual clergy.  During the 1998 conference, Bishop Emmanuel Chukwuma (b 1954) of Nigeria attempted to exorcise "homosexual demons" from the soul of Nigerian-born Richard Kirker (b 1951), a British priest and general secretary of the LGCM (Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement).  Recalling perhaps Ephesians 4:32 or (less charitability) the more cautionary Matthew 6:15, Kirker forgave him.  There have since (as far as is known) been no exorcisms at Lambeth conferences but the squabbles over gay male and female clergy have never been resolved and when, early in 2026, a woman was enthroned as the 106^th AoC, the schisms began with a number of African churches announcing they were no longer in communion with Canterbury.   

Exorcism and the Ayatollah

Umberto II while Prince of Piedmont, a 1928 portrait by Anglo-Hungarian painter Philip Asexius László de Lombos (1869–1937 and known professionally as Philip de László).  Note one un-gloved hand, ruffled collar and bubble pantaloons.

Umberto Nicola Tommaso Giovanni Maria di Savoia (1904–1983) was the last king of Italy, his reign as Umberto II lasting but thirty-four days during May-June 1946; Italians nicknamed him the Re di Maggio (May king) although some better-informed Romans preferred regina di maggio (May queen).  At the instigation of the US and British political representatives of the allied military authorities, in April 1944 he was appointed regent because it was clear popular support for Victor Emmanuel III (1869-1947; King of Italy 1900-1946) had collapsed.  Despite Victor Emmanuel’s reputation suffering by association, his relationship with the fascists had often been uneasy and, seeking means to blackmail the royal house, Benito Mussolini's (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & Prime-Minister of Italy 1922-1943) spies compiled a dossier (reputably several inches thick), detailing the ways of his son’s private life.  Then styled Prince of Piedmont, the secret police discovered Umberto was a sincere and committed Roman Catholic but one unable to resist his "satanic homosexual urges” and his biographer agreed, noting the prince was "forever rushing between chapel and brothel, confessional and steam bath" often spending hours “praying for divine forgiveness.”  Presumably, he contented himself he'd often found forgiveness though that didn't stop him afterwards repeating his sins.

After a referendum abolished the monarchy, Umberto II lived his remaining 37 years in exile, never again setting foot on Italian soil; while his turbulent marriage to Princess Marie-José of Belgium (1906-2001) produced four children, historians consider it likely none were his.  Despite extensive documentation confirming the prince was possessed by “satanic homosexual urges”, it’s most unlikely the Duce ever contemplated contacting the Vatican to seek the intervention of an exorcist.  Although baptized by his devout Catholic mother, Mussolini when young became an atheist and was stridently anti-clerical, something more than one biographer has attributed (at least in part) to the canings ill-discipline earned him from the monks who were his school teachers.  The Duce certainly understood the Church could be useful and knew his regime likely would not long have survived had the Vatican become his enemy but, although famously he signed the Lateran Treaty (1929) making Catholicism the state religion, he never took seriously the “devotional or mystical stuff” and, after he met a messy end, he was denied a religious funeral.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (1939-2026; Supreme Leader, Islamic Republic of Iran 1989-2026, Khamenei 1.0, left) with his son and successor, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei (b 1969; Supreme Leader, Islamic Republic of Iran since 2026, Khamenei 2.0, right).

One unexpected announcement after it was revealed Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei had been appointed supreme leader after the assassination of his father (Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) came from the White House, the claim being the US intelligence agencies had assessed the available information and concluded Ayatollah Khamenei (v2.0) “may be gay”.  Donald Trump (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) publicly confirmed he'd been briefed on the unconfirmed intelligence, “news” he seemed to receive with an amusement he made little attempt to supress.  The US agencies never provided anything substantive to support the claim and most analysts concluded the tale (although there may at least have been "youthful indiscretions") was likely part of a disinformation campaign intended to diminish the new supreme leader’s authority among religious elites in Tehran and destabilize the regime.  The lack of any authentication was tiresomely irrelevant to the meme-makers and response to the suggestion the man standing in the sandals of Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1900-1989; Supreme Leader, Islamic Republic of Iran, 1979-1989) might be “a bit of a homosexual” was swift, “gayatollah” memes soon circulating, generative AI (artificial intelligence) allowing intricately detailed, multi-media productions to be posted within minutes.  For whatever reason, since assuming the leadership, although written statements have in his name been issued, he’s been neither seen nor heard and while known to be recuperating from injuries sustained in the attack in which his father was among those killed, one doubtlessly mischievous suggestion was his absence being explained by a raqi (exorcist) undertaking the long and exacting task of driving from his soul the “satanic homosexual urges” alleged by US intelligence.

Exorcism is a part of Islamic theology and is known as al-'azm, ṭard al-shayṭān/al-jinn (expulsion of devils/spirits) or ruqya (spell, charm, magic, incantation).  A spiritual practice, rugya most often is deployed to heal ailments or cure sickness but practitioners can be called upon to deal with the mental distress attributed to spiritual entities like Jinn (witchcraft; supernatural entities), or the evil eye; certainly that would seem to extend to an ayatollah’s “satanic homosexual urges”.  In an authentic Islamic exorcism (Ruqyah Ash-Shar'iyyah), the core component is the recitation of Qur'anic verses (the most invoked the Surah Al-Fatihah, Ayatul Kursi, and the last surahs), augmented by prophetic prayers and supplications to seek Allah's protection and drive out malevolent entities.  For those not brought up in the Islamic tradition, the nature of Jinn sometimes is misunderstood because the supernatural creatures are forces with free will, capable of both good and evil.  In an exorcism, an exorcist, depending on what’s involved, might command the miscreant Jinn to depart or break their spell without harming them.  However, like Christianity, Islam over the centuries spread far and wide, coming into contact with many cultures with long traditions of rituals, magic, witchcraft and such; inevitably, there was “mixing & matching” meaning in some places “folk” elements can be detected in what are notionally Islamic practices, something especially prevalent in North Africa.  Islamic scholars and clerics of course tend to disapprove of departures from Qur'anic orthodoxies based on the words of the Prophet Muhammad (circa 570-632).  Because most scholars regard “folk healing” as “primitive superstition”, these methods frequently are discouraged and fatāwā have been issued, especially if the rituals involve fortune-telling, objects like amulets or the invocation of beings other than Allah; the last strictly is forbidden (Haram) and constituting the major sin of Shirk (associating partners with God).

Weimar

Weimar (pronounced vahy-mahr, wahy-mahr, veye-mahr or weye-mahr)

(1) A city in Thuringia, in central Germany, the scene (in 1919) of the adoption of the constitution of the German state which came (retrospectively) to be known as the Weimar Republic.

(2) A German surname (of habitational origin).

(3) As Weimar Republic, the sovereign German republic (1918-1933), successor state to the German Empire (1871-1918 and now sometimes referred to as the “Second Reich”) and predecessor to the Nazi regime (the “Third Reich”, 1933-1945).  In the narrow technical sense of constitutional law, the "Weimar Republic" came into existence only in August 1919 but among historians it's common (and convenient) to date it from Kaiser Wilhelm II's (1859–1941; Emperor of Germany & King of Prussia 1888-1918) abdication in 1918.

Pre 1100: The construct was the Old High German wīh (holy; sacred) + meri (sea; lake; pond; standing water, swamp).  The name can therefore be analysed as something like “holy pond” or “sacred lake” but what religious significance this had or which aquatic feature was involved is not known.  A settlement in the area of what is now Weimar has existed since at least the early Middle Ages and there is a document dated 999 which makes reference to the town as Wimaresburg but how long this, or some related form had been in use is unknown.  Over time, the changes presumably reflected as desire for convenience and simplification (not an imperative always noted in evolution of the German language) and during the early centuries of the second millennium the place seems to have been known as Wimares, Wimari & Wimar before finally becoming Weimar.  In a manner not unusual in the Holy Roman Empire (800-1806 and for certain purposes dubbed First Reich”), it was the seat of the County of Weimar, one of the administrative and commercial centres of Thuringia but in 1062 merged with the County of Orlamünde to form Weimar-Orlamünde which existed until 1346 when the Thuringian Counts' War (a squabble between several local barons) erupted.  In the settlement which followed, Weimar was taken by the Wettin clan as an agreed fief and over time developed into a major city.  Weimar is a proper noun, Weimarization & Weimarize are nouns and Weimarian is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is Weimars.

One native to or an inhabitant of Weimar is a Weimarer (strong, genitive Weimarers, plural Weimarer, feminine Weimarerin).  The adjective Weimarian (of or relating to the Weimar period (1918-1933) in German can be used in any context but is most often applied to the art & culture associated with the era rather than politics or economics.  The comparative is “more Weimarian”, the superlative “most Weimarian”).  The noun Weimarization (a state of economic crisis leading to political upheaval and extremism) is used exclusively to describe the political and financial turmoil of the Weimar years.  The verb Weimarize (to cause to undergo Weimarization) is the companion term and is applied in much the same was as a word like “Balkanize” as a convenient word which encapsulates much in a way no other can.  The Weimaraner is a breed of dog, bred originally in the region as a hunting dog, the construct being Weimar + the German suffix -aner (denoting “of this place”).

In a constitutional sense, the Weimar Republic came into existence on 11 August 1919 when the national assembly of the German state met in the city to adopt the new Weimar Constitution.  Despite that, many historians use the label to cover the whole period between abdication on 9 November 1918 by Wilhelm II and the Nazis taking office on 30 January 1933.  The constitution created what structurally was a fairly conventional federal republic (known officially as the Deutsches Reich (German Reich)), the constituent parts of which were the historic Länder (analogous with the states in systems like the US, Canada or Australia though the details of the power sharing differed), each with their own governments, assemblies and constitutions.  Historians regards the inherent weakness of the structure as one of the factors which contributed to the political instability, economic turmoil and social unrest for which the era is remembered but the external forces are thought to have been a greater influence, notably the harsh terms imposed by the Treaty of Versailles (1919) and the extraordinary level of war reparations, the latter associated particularly with the hyper-inflation of 1923.  However, it was a time of unusual social & political freedom, marked by an outpouring of innovative cultural creativity.  One thing which tends to be obscured by what came later was that by 1928 the system had been stabilized and the economy was stable; in the last election prior to the Wall Street Crash (1929), the Nazi vote had slumped, rendering the party an outlier with no immediate prospect of success.  In democratic politics, the the so-called "protest vote" can at scale be attracted only if a critical mass of people think things are so bad they're prepared to "take a risk" on an unproven alternative; it was only the depression of the early 1930s which doomed Weimar and even then, the Nazis gained power not by achieving an electoral majority but through a series of back channel deals by establishment figures who (at the time, understandably) underestimated the threat posed.

Lindsay Lohan in court, Los Angeles, 2011.

Actually, rather than the pleasant city in Thuringia which lent the constitution its name, it was Berlin, the national and Prussian capital which came most to be associated with the artistic and sexual experimentation of the republic.  Although most of went on in the place was little different than in other conservative German cities it was the small but highly visible numbers of those enjoying the excesses which attracted attention.  In his novel Down There on a Visit (1962) Christopher Isherwood (1904–1986) wrote of the sort of warning respectable folk would in the 1920s offer to anyone who seemed to need the advice:

“Christopher - in the whole of Thousand Nights and One Night, in the most shameless rituals of the Tantra, in the carvings on the Black Pagoda, in the Japanese brothel-pictures, in the vilest perversions of the oriental mind, you couldn’t find anything more nauseating than what goes on there, quite openly, every day. That city is doomed, more surely than Sodom ever was."  And then and there I made a decision - one that was to have a very important effect on the rest of my life. I decided that, no matter how, I would get to Berlin just as soon as ever I could and that I would stay there a long, long time.

Weimar art: Der Künstler mit zwei erhängten Frauen (The Artist with Two Hanged Women), watercolour and graphite on paper by Rudolf Schlichter (1890-1955).  Note the high-heeled jackboots.   

Isherwood left London by the afternoon train for Berlin on 14 March 1929, taking a room next to the Hirschfeld Institute for Sexual Science from which he explored the city’s “decadence and depravity” enjoying just about every minute and by his own account every gay bar and club (of which there were many).  That niche was only one of many to which the Berlin of Weimer catered, all fetishes seemingly there from morphine, cocaine and opium houses to a club at which membership was restricted to a “coven of coprophagists [who] gorged a prostitute on chocolate, gave her a laxative and settled down to a feast.”  Actually, at the time, there was plenty of depravity among the Nazis, however much the public platform of the party might stress traditional values and they were as condemnatory as the Pope of communists, homosexuals and Freemasons (by contrast, it was institutions such as the Roman Catholic Church, the British Empire and comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) which attracted the sometimes grudging admiration of Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945).  Indeed, in his writings and the recollections of his contemporaries, Hitler didn’t much dwell on moral matters but ceaselessly would condemn those aspects of German culture he believed the Weimar generation were corrupting including “modernist architecture, Dadaist art, Jewish psychoanalysis, experimental theatre, short shirts, lipstick, bobbed hair, dances like the foxtrot and jazz” (the last of which he derided as “a degenerate negroid sound”).

Weimar art: Sonnenfinsternis (Eclipse of the Sun (1926)), oil on canvas by George Grosz (1893-1959).  Weimar was not untouched by surrealism.

The lurid tales of Weimar Berlin from the diaries of Christopher Isherwood now entertain rather than shock as once they would have managed but the expressionist art which flourished at the time remains striking.  A stridently experimental fork of the European avant-garde, the Weimar artists chose to ignore traditional aesthetic conventions and, according to some critics, the painters were fascinated by ugliness, the composers by atonal dissonance.  They were also artists who were predominately urban and focused upon the city, its decadence and corrosive influence upon the individual.  The Weimar period was the time also when the phrase magischer Realismus (magic realism) was coined, more accurately to describe what had come to be known as the Neue Sachlichkeit (new objectivity).  Magic realism is now thought of as a literary genre in which fantastical elements are interpolated into life-like depictions of the world but the first use was in 1925 by German art historian Franz Roh (1890–1965) who observed many artists in the Weimar Republic rejecting (or at least ignoring) the idealistic style (fashionable before World War I (1914-1918) and which had combined naturalistic depiction with an amplification of beauty and virtue), in favor of something recognizably realistic yet blended with uncanny elements.  Roh’s understanding of magic realism was at least partially an acknowledgement of technology: the influence of photography and moving pictures (film).  Then as now, there was debate about whether there was some point at which realism stopped and surrealism began but the distinction was that magic realism was a distortion of the actual material world for some political or other didactic purpose whereas surrealism explored the abstractions which lurked in the subconscious mind. 

In the Weimar style: The Rt Hon Theresa May MP (2023), a portrait of Lady May (b 1956; UK prime-minister 2016-2019) by Saied Dai (b 1958).

Painted by Tehran-born Saied Dai, it will hang in  Portcullis House, Parliament's office complex where many MPs have their offices and not since Graham Sutherland’s (1903–1980) portrait of Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) was unveiled in 1954 has a painting of one of the country’s prime-ministers attracted so much interest, the reception of such works not usually much more than perfunctory.  Sutherland was commissioned (as second choice; Sir Herbert Gunn's (1893–1964) fee deemed too high) by the ad hoc “Churchill Joint Houses of Parliament Gift Committee” to paint a portrait to mark the prime minister’s 80^th birthday and, on 30 November 1954, members of the Commons & the Lords assembled in Westminster Hall to mark the occasion.  Paid for by parliamentary subscription (the idea of paying for such a thing from their own pockets would appal today’s politicians), it was intended the work would remain with Churchill until his death after which it would be gifted to the state to hang in the Palace of Westminster.

Winston Churchill (1954) by Graham Sutherland.

Things didn’t work out that way.  Churchill, not anyway much enjoying the aging process loathed the painting and felt betrayed by the artist, the preliminary sketches he’d been shown hinting at something rather different.  Initially, he sulked, first saying he wouldn’t attend the event, then that he’d turn up only if the painting wasn’t there but his moods often softened with a little coercion and he agreed to make a short speech of thanks at the unveiling, his most memorable lines being: “The portrait is a remarkable example of modern art. It certainly combines force and candour.”  It wasn’t hard to read between the lines and when delivered to Churchill’s country house, the painting was left in a storeroom, never unwrapped and never again to be seen, Lady Churchill (Clementine Churchill (Baroness Spencer-Churchill; 1885–1977) in 1956 incinerating it in what was described as “a huge bonfire”.  That she'd executed one of history’s most practical examples of art criticism wasn't revealed until 1979.  Curiously, when first she saw it in 1954 she admired the work, Somerset Maugham (1874–1965) who was with her at the time noting she “liked the portrait very much” and was much “moved and full of praise for it.”  Her view soon changed.

The better-received May portrait was commissioned this time by the Speaker's Advisory Committee on Works of Art at a cost to the taxpayer of Stg£28,000 (in adjusted terms somewhat less than the thousand guineas paid in 1954) and Mrs May (she doesn’t use the title gained in 2020 upon her husband being knighted (for “political service”) in Boris Johnson’s (b 1964; UK prime-minister 2019-2022) remarkable (and belated) Dissolution Honours List) was reported as saying she thought the portrait a “huge honour”.  When interviewed, the artist said his “…aim was to produce not just a convincing physical likeness, but also a psychological characterization, both individual and yet archetypal - imbued with symbolism and atmosphere.  A good painting needs to be a revelation and also paradoxically, an enigma. It should possess an indefinable quality - in short, a mystery.”

A work of careful composition, critics have found in it influences from the Renaissance and Mannerism but it’s most obviously in the spirit of the German expressionists identified with the Weimar Republic and the addition of a convallaria majalis (the "lily of the valley" which flowers in May) was the sort of touch they would have admired.  Interestingly, Mr Dai expressed relief he’d not been asked to render Mr Johnson on canvas which is understandable because while an artist could permit their interpretative imagination free reign and produce something memorable, Mr Johnson over the decades has been a series of living, breathing caricatures and it would be challenge for anyone to capture his “psychological characterization”.  The Weimaresque May in oil on canvas works so well because it’s so at variance with the one-dimensional image of the subject which has so long been in the public mind.  Whether it will change the perception of Mrs May in the minds of many isn’t known but critics mostly have admired the work and views of her premiership do seem to have been revised in the light of the rare displays of ineptitude which have marked the time in office of her three successors.

After Weimar: Der Bannerträger (The Standard Bearer (circa 1936)) oil on plywood by Hubert Lanzinger (1880-1950).  The post card with the inscription Ob im Glück oder Unglück, ob in der Freiheit oder im Gefängnis, ich bin meiner Fahne, die heute des Deutschen Reiches Staatsflagge ist, treu geblieben (Whether in good fortune or misfortune, whether in freedom or in prison, I have remained loyal to my flag, which is now the state flag of the German Reich) was issued in 1939, one of many such uses of the image which depicts Hitler as a knight in shining armor on horseback, bearing a Swastika flag.  As he did whenever a  postage stamp with his image was sold, the Führer received a tiny fee as a royalty; multiplied by millions, he gleaned quite a income from the use.  In one of the many examples of the fakery which underpinned Nazism (and fascism in general), in real life, Hitler was “terrible on horseback".

Der Bannerträger was an example of the type of art which proliferated in both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, works which constructed the the personality cult around Hitler and comrade Stalin, reinforcing the messaging of both regimes.  Although, understandably, biographers and others have much focused on the two as human characters, as historical figures they need also be understood as manufactured constructs something certainly understood by the Soviet leader who once explained the abstraction of the personality cult by pointing to one of his many huge portraits and saying “…you see, even I am not Stalin, THAT is Stalin!”  One remarkably succinct sketch of how these thing are done lies in the pages of Paris: The Memoir (2023) in which Paris Hilton (b 1981) detailed the way Paris Hilton (the blonde flesh & blood creature) has a full-time job being Paris Hilton (the blonde public installation), a dualism she treated seriously because its maintenance demands study and an understanding of the supply & demand curves of shifting markets; a personality cult needs to be managed because, while some aspects must remain static, others need to evolve.

Such imagery Hitler dutifully would acknowledge when they were presented but he really did think them a kind of kitsch and while understanding their utility as propaganda pieces, they aroused in him little interest.  What he really liked in a painting was beauty as he defined it and in this his differentiation was something like his views on architecture where the standards imposed on the “functional” varied from his expectations of the “representational”.  Hitler would admire modern architecture rendered in steel & glass if it was being used for a factory or warehouse; there it was a matter of efficiency and improving working conditions but for the public buildings of the Reich, he insisted on classical motifs in granite.  In painting, he distinguished between what was essentially “advertising” and “real” art which the expressionism of the Weimar era certainly was not; the “…sky is not green, dogs are not blue and anyone who paints them as such has a sick mind” was his summary of thought on the Weimar art movement.  His preference was for (1) the Neoclassical which drew inspiration from the Greek and Roman art of Antiquity and his fondness extended not only to the voluptuous female nudes historians like to mention but also to the idealized, heroic figures representing nobility and heroism; with these he identified, (2) realistic landscapes, particularly those of the German countryside at its most lovely, (3) German Academic Realism which produced intricately detailed realistic representations of subjects, (4) depictions from Norse mythology which created a link between the legends and the idealized vision of the Nazi project and (5), traditional portraiture, if realistic and flattering (certainly demanded of the many painted of him).

Women in Weimer art: Margot (1924), oil on canvas by Rudolf Schlichter (1890-1955) (left), Porträt der Tänzerin Anita Berber (Portrait of the Dancer Anita Berber (1925)), oil and tempera on plywood by Otto Dix (1891–1969) (centre) and Bean Ingram (1928), oil on canvas by Herbert Gurschner (1901-1975) (right). 

Books of which the Nazis didn’t approve could be burned and proscribed music not performed but the practical public servants in the finance ministry knew much of the Entartete Kunst (degenerate art) removed from German (and later Austrian) galleries was highly sought by collectors in other countries and valuable foreign exchange was obtained from these sales (some of which in the post-war years proved controversial because of the provenance of some pieces sold then and later; they turned out to have been “obtained” from occupied territories or Jews).  Hitler despised Dadaism, Expressionism, Cubism, Surrealism and just about every other modern "ism" in art and expected others in the Reich to share his view but an exhibition of Entartete Kunst in Munich in 1937 proved an embarrassing one-off for the regime because people from around the country travelled to see itm making it the most attended art show of the Third Reich.  It was Weimar’s revenge.