Dictator

Dictator (pronounced dik-tey-ter)

(1) A person exercising absolute power, especially a ruler who (at least ostensibly) has absolute control (ie effectively not restricted by a constitution, laws, recognized opposition, etc) in a government (and officially without hereditary succession); applied particularly to those exercising tyrannical rule.

(2) In republican ancient Rome, a person vested by the senate with supreme authority during a crisis, the regular magistracy being subordinated to him until the crisis was met (typically by conducting a war).

(3) A person who makes pronouncements, as on conduct, fashion etc, which are regarded as authoritative.

(4) A person who dictates text to someone or some sort or mechanical or electronic recording device.

(5) In Ancient Rome (during certain periods), an elected chief magistrate.

1350–1400: From the Middle English dictatour, from the Old French dictator, from the Latin dictātor (genitive dictātōris), (Roman chief magistrate with absolute authority) the construct being dictā(re) (inflection of dictō (I repeat, say often; I dictate (to someone for writing))), frequentative of dicere (to say, speak); I compose, express in writing; I prescribe, recommend, order, dictate)) frequentative of dicere (to say, speak)" (from the primitive Indo-European root deik- (to show (also "solemnly to pronounce") (and related to dīcō (say, speak) + -tor (from the Proto-Italic -tōr, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr from -tor-s; the suffix added to the fourth principal part of a verb to create a third-declension masculine form of an agent noun).  The feminine forms were dictatress or dictatrix, both probably now obsolete except in historic reference or as a jocular form; the old alternative spelling dictatour is obsolete.  Some European languages (including Dutch and Romanian) were like English and borrowed directly the Latin spelling while others used variations including Catalan (dictador), French (dictateur) Italian (dittatore), Piedmontese (ditator), Polish (dyktator), Portuguese (ditador), Russian (дикта́тор (diktátor)), Sicilian (dittaturi), Spanish (dictador) and German (Diktator).  The feminine forms dictatoress & dictatrix are now rare.  Dictator, dictatoress & distatorship are nouns, dictatory is a noun & adjective, dictatorial, dictatorlike & dictatorless are adjectives and dictatorially is an adverb;the noun plural is dictators.

The noun dictatorship (office or term of a (Roman) dictator) came into use in the 1610s to describe the historically specific terms of office the Roman Senate sometimes granted individuals in extraordinary and reprehensible circumstances while the now familiar general sense of "a ruler exercising absolute authority" evolved by the late seventeenth century.  The noun dictator had already proceeded along this path, the historical sense being first used in English circa 1600, the extension to “one who has absolute power or authority" (in any context and not just political power) noted by the 1690s.  The nasty and not infrequently genocidal nature of some of the dictators of the twentieth century and beyond certainly influenced the understanding of the word which, as late as the 1800s could be used neutrally, effectively as a synonym for president.  The adjective dictatorial (pertaining to a dictator; absolute, unlimited), dating from 1901 evolved also to enjoy use outside of descriptors of absolute government and by 1704 had acquired the general sense of "imperious, overbearing", usefully (and often applied as required to husbands, mothers-in-law, parish priests etc); the related form was the adverb dictatorially.  In that vein, to convey the notion of "pertaining to a dictator" there had been dictatorian (1640s) & dictator-like (1580s).  Etymologists insist historic duality of implication in "dictatorial" ((1) a disposition to rule & (2) a sharp insistence upon having one's orders accepted or carried out) has survived in modern use but instances of the former are now less common.

1929 Studebaker Dictator Royal Coupe with rumble seat and "artillery wheels" in the style made famous on Bugatti's roadsters and race-cars.

Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) was of course the dictator who has for almost a century loomed over the word and “Hitler” was used figuratively for "a dictator" from as early as 1934, a use persisting despite there being no shortage of dictatorial tyrants in the years since his assumption of power.  One amusing variation emerged in England in the early years of World War II (1939-1945), a “little Hitler” being someone appointed to a minor post (archetypically an air-raid warden (someone employed to walk the streets during a “black-out” telling folk to extinguish their lights)) and, cloaked in this brief, unaccustomed authority, soon intoxicated by their power.  In the post-revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran (1979-), the regime encouraged a similar put-down aimed at opponents, the US being شيطان بزرگ (Shaytân-e Bozorg (the great Satan)) and Israel شیطان کوچک, (Shaytân-e Kuchak (the little Satan)) and it’s a worse slight even than it sounds because “great” is not the perfect translation, the idea of the great Satan being one of derision rather than awe.  When ayatollahs are in a bad mood (it does happen), sometimes the UK is also described as a “little Satan”.

Lindsay Lohan, glad to see a dictator go.

Lindsay Lohan never forgave dictator Hosni Mubarak (1928–2020; president of Egypt 1981-2011) for shouting at Bill Clinton (b 1946; POTUS 1993-2001).  When told in 2011 he’d fallen from power as one of the victims of the Arab Spring, she responded: “Cool.”  When told it was brought about by a military coup she replied: “Gross!”  Lindsay Lohan doesn’t approve of coups d'état and believes soldiers should "stay in the barracks", allowing due constitutional process to be followed.   

Because of the evil of Hitler and his many spiritual successors in this century and the last, dictator really doesn’t cry out for synonyms but autocrat, despot, tyrant, absolutist, authoritarian, oppressor & totalitarian all tend in the direction.  Associatively however, the noun generalissimo (supreme military commander), dating from the 1620s and a borrowing of the Italian generalissimo (superlative of generale, from a sense development similar to the French général), can in some cases be applied to dictators because in the twentieth century the title was granted (ie self-conferred) to the dictators comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953), Chiang Kai-shek (1887-1975; leader of the Republic of China (mainland) 1928-1949 & the renegade province of Taiwan 1949-1975) and Francisco Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975).  Despite that roll-call, it has never come into use as a general term for "in the manner of dictator", possibly because historically it's too specific (to the military context) and has just too many syllables to be catchy slang.

1935 Studebaker Dictator phaeton (left) & 1936 Studebaker Dictator sedan (right).

The Studebaker Dictator was produced between 1927-1937, the naming scheme using titles from government service to indicate a model’s place in the hierarchy, the Dictator replacing the Standard Six as the entry-level model, the progressively more expensive models being the Commander and President.  Other manufacturers have adopted the concept idea, Opal in Germany once merging admiralty and political ranks, offering the Kapitän, Commodore, Admiral & Diplomat.

Some of the opposition to crooked Hillary Clinton's (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) presidential campaign in 2016 accused her of wanting to turn the US into a dictatorship.  Given that she couldn't manage even to keep her husband "on the porch", fears crooked Hillary might in the Oval Office morph into dictatorial Hillary may have been hyperbolic but the meme makers any responded with agitprop.

To many it will seem strange a US manufacturer would, as late as 1937, call one of its cars the Dictator but in 1927 the Nazis were years from power and Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943), was far from the tainted character he would later become, public perception of his rule still in the moment of admiring him for “making the trains run on time”.  Whether any improvement in punctuality was noted by many Italians is dubious but the Duce would anyway have been pleased at least one train arrived in good time.  Because the image of a mass-movement black-shirted supporters taking to the streets to overthrow an old, corrupt government was just the sort of propaganda dictators adore, the 1922 "March on Rome" became part of fascist mythology but although a good "photo opportunity", Mussolini joined the march only for it's final stage; he caught the Naples-Rome train.  Studebaker anyway had always explained the name as suggesting “a fine car at a moderate price” that would “dictate the standards” in the vital mid-priced field.  That was fair enough but with the benefit of post-Nazi hindsight, when the option of a straight-eight engine was offered as an upgrade from the straight-six, Studebaker probably would not to have used the marketing slogan “a brilliant example of excess power”.  By 1937, the use of excess power by the Third Reich’s dictator was becoming obvious and Studebaker quietly dropped the Dictator name for 1938, re-positioning the Commander as the base model, the cars exported to the Europe, the UK and the British Empire having early been renamed Director.  Of those changes, probably just about everyone except Henry Ford (1863-1947) approved.  Briefly, Studebaker had also offered the Chancellor but, presumably because it wasn’t a title that much resonated in the American imagination, it was short-lived (only in the catalogue for the 1927 season); that was a stroke of luck for Studebaker because Hitler took over the Reich Chancellery in January 1933 and had the Chancellor remained in production, it too would have faced the linguistic cull for 1938.  

So Studebaker’s tale is an example of how the shifting meaning of words can influence many things.  Still, if in 1937 any association with Hitler had become distasteful for a US corporation, even by 1940, some two years after the Nazi’s most publicized pogrom against the Jews (Kristallnacht (Night of Broken Glass)), Charlie Chaplin (1889–1977) released his satirical comedy The Great Dictator which parodied both dictators (Hitler and Mussolini), his argument being that however controversial it might be, “…Hitler must be laughed at."  He later admitted that had he known in 1940 what would later be understood, he’d never have produced the film.  When in 1940 Lord Halifax (Edward Wood, 1881–1959) arrived in Washington DC to take up his appointment as UK’s ambassador, he was taken to lunch by a group of Republican senators and told they regarded Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR, 1882–1945, POTUS 1933-1945) as “a worse dictator than Hitler or Mussolini” so Studebaker clearly made the right decision.

Studebaker US6 truck in Red Army use, configured as mobile Katyusha rocket launcher, circa 1943.  Under Lend-Lease arrangements, some 152,000 US6's were supplied during Great Patriotic War (1941-1945).

Comrade Stalin’s favorite cars by the 1930s were the big Packards but he acknowledged the importance of Studebaker trucks supplied by the US under Lend-Lease and the company also greatly benefited; like many US corporations, some of its golden years came during World War II (1939-1945) when industrial capacity was given over to government contracts fulfilling military demand.  A variety of materiel was produced but Studebaker’s most notable contribution to the war effort was the versatile US6 (G630 in the government purchasing system) 2½ (short) ton 6x6 trucks, over 150,000 of which were supplied to the Soviet Union.  Built in many configurations, the most memorable adaptation by the Red Army was as a mobile platform for the BM-31-12 (nickname: Andryusha) Katyusha rocket launcher, known to the enemy as “Stalin’s organs” because of the distinctive sound; before drones emerged as the preferred front-line weapon, the Russian army widely deployed such rockets in the “special military operation” (invasion) against Ukraine.  The US6 proved popular with Red Army troops who judged it superior to the locally-made ZIS-5 & GAZ-AA and better even than the captured German trucks with Maybach engines which (belying the German reputation for “good beer, good engines, good sausages”), were prone to overheating under extreme loads, unlike the Studebakers that never boiled.

Tough, durable and easy to repair, it was the WS6 that made possible the movement of the Red Army at the scale and speed achieved by 1943-1944 and it proved equally adept at handing the both the muddy and freezing conditions that became notorious on the Eastern Front; affectionately the troops nicknamed the things “Studer”.  The tale circulated that comrade Stalin even wrote a letter of appreciation to Studebaker, mentioning how important the US6 had been to the Red Army; that turned out to be apocryphal but in the Studebaker archives there are documents from Soviet officials expressing their satisfaction with the machines.  The flow of information between across the Iron Curtain was once highly restricted and one Soviet diplomat, arriving in the US in the late 1960s, expressed surprise Studebaker was no longer in business.  Brought up on the legends of the part the WS6 had played in Great Patriotic War, he'd assumed the company would still be a fixture in US manufacturing.  Of course, if corporate comings & goings in Detroit (actually South Bend, Indiana, where Studebakers were built, a place that wouldn’t again make the international headlines until 2020 when Pete Buttigieg (b 1982; US secretary of transportation 2021-2025), who served as mayor from 2012 to 2020 sought the Democratic presidential nomination), were a mystery to Russians, the Kremlin was just as opaque, even to experienced diplomats.  Probably no figure in the twentieth century was as dominating a dictator as comrade Stalin but even at the Yalta Conference (February 1945) there were senior figures in the US State Department and the UK’s Foreign Office who believed the one Russians knew as their vozhd (from the Russian вождь (vožd) (chieftain, leader) was a figure whose freedom of action was constrained by “hard liners in Moscow”.

The Hijab Police

Of the many “morality police” forces that have existed in countries with a majority Islamic population, the best known was Afghanistan's Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice which actually pre-dated the Taliban takeover in 1996 but they certainly deployed it with an enthusiasm which went much beyond it functioning as “burka police” and in one form or another, it actually operated for most of the (first) post-Taliban era.  When the Taliban regained power in 2021, immediately they created the "Ministry of Invitation, Guidance and Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice" and, in a nice touch, allocated as its headquarters the building formerly used by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs.

The institution is infamous also in Iran.  In the West, it’s usually referred to as the “morality police” and among women the sardonic slang is “hijab police” but technically, the instrument of the Islamic Republic of Iran which enforces, inter alia, the laws governing the wearing of the hijab is گشت ارشاد (Gašt-e Eršād (Guidance Patrol)).  On 16 September 2022, the hijab police arrested Mahsa Amini (2001-2022) because she was wearing her hijab in “an un-Islamic way”.  While in custody, Ms Amini suffered a medical event, dying two days later without recovering consciousness, the hijab police claiming the cause of death was heart failure, induced by pre-existing conditions.  Her family dispute this, saying the evidence suggests she was severely beaten and many witnesses have confirmed she was tortured in the back of a van before arriving at a hijab police office.

Handy guide for the hijab police.  Not only must hijab must be worn correctly but clothing must also be (1) not brightly colored, (2) not patterned with extravagant designs or shapes and (3) be loose enough that the shape of the body is not discernible.

Her death triggered waves of protests in Iran, which, on the basis of footage seen in the West, seem dominated by school girls and young women; that's not unique in the context of political protest but is historically unusual.  With protest signs and banners rendered in TikTok-friendly English, the headline issue is of course the matter of the hijab and whether women should be beaten to death for letting a lock of hair slip from beneath but the protesters are making clear they're there to highlight corruption (noting the poverty of most while the clerical elite have become very rich), the structure of the state, the economy and the very question of whether the republic should be an Islamic theocracy.  The ayatollahs are no doubt well aware that the standard calculation in political science is that if 3½% of the population can be mobilized to revolt, regimes can be toppled and most recently, the Afghan Taliban did it with a fraction of that.  For many reasons, Afghanistan may be a special case and the Iranian state, on paper, is much better equipped to suppress internal dissent but then the security apparatuses around Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Gaddafi (circa 1942–2011; Libyan dictator 1969-2011) both looked impregnable until the volume of the protesters reached critical mass.  These things are however hard to judge from afar, Bashar al-Assad (b 1965; ophthalmologist and Syria dictator 2000-2024) looked vulnerable long before Gaddafi and Mubarak fell yet he sat as dictator in Damascus for another 14 years.  The ayatollahs of course watched things with concern but so did individuals in the Kremlin, aware their security apparatus proved inadequate to execute the battle plan of the "special military action" in Ukraine and observed, in a nice echo of the 1979 revolution, the protesters in Tehran again chanting the cry once spat against the Shah: “Death to the Dictator!”.

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).