Exorcism, Exorcist

Exorcism, Exorcist (ἐξορκιστής, Ac 19:13).

I. In General. — The belief in demoniacal possessions, which may be traced in almost every nation, has always been attended by the professed ability, on the part of some individuals, to release the unhappy victims from their calamity. In Greece, men of no less distinction than both Epicurus (Diog. Laertius, 10:4) and AEschines were sons of women who lived by this art, and both were bitterly reproached, the one by the Stoics, and the other by his great rival orator Demosthenes (De Cor.), for having assisted their parents in these practices. In some instances this power was considered as a divine gift; in others it was thought to be acquired by investigations into the nature of demons and the qualities of natural productions, as herbs, stones, etc., and of drugs compounded of them, by the use of certain forms of adjurations, invocations, ceremonies, and other observances. Indeed, the various forms of exorcism, alluded to in authors of all nations, are innumerable, varying from the bloody human sacrifice down to the fumes of brimstone, etc. SEE SORCERY.

II. In the Old and New Testaments. — The verb ἐξορκίζω occurs once in the New Testament and once ir. the Sept. version of the Old Testament. In both cases it is used, not in the sense of exorcise, but as a synonym of the simple verb ὁρκίζω, to charge with an oath, to adjure. Compare Ge 24:3 הַשׁבּיע -, A.V. "I will make thee swear") with 37, and Mt 26:63 with Mr 5:7; and see 1Th 5:27 (ἐνορκίζω, Lachmann, Tischendorf). The cognate noun, however, together with the simple verb, is found once (Ac 19:13) with reference to the ejection of evil spirits from persons possessed by them (comp. ἐξόρκωσις, ὁρκόω, Josephus, Ant. 8:2, 5). The use of the term exorcists in that passage, as the designation of a well-known class of persons to which the individuals mentioned belonged, confirms what we know from other sources as to the common practice of exorcism amongst the Jews (see the Talm. Babyl. Yoma, fol. 57:1). That some, at least, of them not only pretended to, but possessed the power of exorcising, appears by our Lord's admission when he asks the Pharisees, "If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your disciples (υἱοί) cast them out?" (Mt 12:27). What means were employed by real exorcists we are not informed. David, by playing skilfully on a harp, procured the temporary departure of the evil spirit which troubled Saul (1Sa 16:23). The power of expelling demons Josephus places among the endowments of Solomon, and relates that he left behind have the manner of using exorcisms by which they drive away daemons (for the pretended fragments of these books, see Fabricius, Cod. Pseud. Vet. Test. page 1054). He declares that he had seen a man, named Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal, in the presence of Vespasian, his sons, captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers. He describes the manner of cure thus: "He put a ring that had a root of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the duemoniac; after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils, and when the man fell down he adjured him to return no more, making still mention of Solomon and reciting the incantations he composed." He further adds, that even Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a cup or basin full of water a little way off, and commanded the daemon as he went out of the man to overturn it and thereby to let the spectators know he had left the man (Ant. 8:2, 5). He also describes the mode of obtaining the root baaras, which, he says, "if it be only brought to sick persons, it quickly drives away the daemons," funder circumstances whih, for their strangeness, may vie with any prescription in the whole science of exorcism (War, 7:6, 3). Among all the references to exorcism, as practiced by the Jews, in the New Testament (Mt 12:27; Mr 9:38; Lu 9:49-50), we find only one instance which affords any clue to the means employed (Ac 19:13); from which passage it appears that certain professed exorcists took upon them to call over a demoniac the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, "We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth."' Their proceeding seems to have been in conformity with the well-known opinions of the Jews in those days, that miracles might be wrought by invoking the names of the Deity, or angels, or patriarchs, etc., as we learn from Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, etc., and Lucian (Frag. page 141). The epithet applied in the above text to these exorcists (περιερχόμενοι, Vulgate, circumeuntes Judaei) indicates that they were traveling mountebanks, who besides skill in medicine, pretended to the knowledge of magic. Justin Martyr has an interesting suggestion as to the possibility of a Jew successfully exorcising a devil, by employing the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Dial. cum Tryph. c. 85, page 311, C. See also Apol. II, c. 6, page 45, B, where he claims for Christianity Superior but not necessarily exclusive power in this respect. Compare the statements of Irenmus, adv. Heres. 2:5, and the authorities quoted by Grotius on Mt 12:27). But Justin goes on to say that the Jewish exorcists, as a class, had sunk down to the superstitious rites and usages of the heathen (comp. Pliny, 30:2). SEE DEMON.

The power of casting out devils was bestowed by Christ while on eartb upon the apostles (Mt 10:8), and the seventy disciples (Lu 10:17-19), and was, according to his promise (Mr 16:17), exercised by believers after his ascension (Ac 16:18); but to the Christian miracle, whether as performed by our Lord himself or by his followers, the N.T. writers never apply the terms "exorcise" or "exorcist." Nor is the office of the exorcist mentioned by Paul in his enumeration of the miraculous gifts (1Co 12:9). Mosheim says that the particular order of exorcists did not exist till the close of the third century, and he ascribes its introduction to the prevalent fancies of the Gnostics (cent. 3, 11, c. 4). We notice John's remark upon the silence of John himself in his gospel on the subject of possessions, although he introduces the Jews as speaking in the customary way respecting demons and demoniacal possessions, and although he often speaks of the sick who were healed by the Savior; coupled with the fact, that John wrote his gospel in Asia Minor, where medical science was very flourishing, and where it was generally known that the diseases attributed to demons were merely materal diseases (Jahn, Archaol.: I, 2:232, 477-480; see also Lomeirus, De Vet. Gent. Lustra.; Bekker, Le Alonde Enchante; Van Dale, De divinat. idol. c. 6, page 519 sq.; Amnell, Diss. aid loc. in Acts, Upsal. 1758).

III. In the early Church. —

1. As Christians were supposed to be in constant conflict with the devil, they used not only prayer, but also exorcism, which was held to be a power given to the Church. Thus Tertullian (A.D. 220), speaking of the warfare of the Christian soldier (De Corona Milit. c. 11) with demons, says exorcismis fugavit (he routs them with exorcisms). So in his Apologeticus (c. 23) he says that the "evil spirit will confess himself to be a demon when commanded to speak by any Christian" (jussus a quolibet Christiano). So also Origen, cont. Celsum, lib. 7, ἰδιῶται τὸ τοιοῦτον πράττουσιν (the common unlettered people do the same). "'Oh, could you but hear,' says Cyprian (En. 76), 'and see those demons when they are tortured by us, and afflicted with spiritual chastisement and ve bat anguish, and thus ejected from the bodies of the possessed (obsessorum), moaning and lamuenting,' with human voice, through the power divine, as they feel the rods and stripes they confess the judgment to come.' The exorcists rule with commanding right over the whole army of the insolent adversary. Oftentimes the devil promises to depart, but departs not; but when we come to baptism, then indeed we ought to be assured and confident, because the demon is then oppressed, and the man is consecrated to God and liberated.' The invocation of Christ, attended by the sign; of the cross, and pronounced by persons formally appointed to the office, was the method by which those stupendous effects were usually produced; and one among the many ears which proceeded from this absurd practice was an opinion, which gained some prevalence among the less enlightened converts, that the object of Christ's mission was to emancipate mankind from thee yoke of their invisible enemy, and that the promised redemption was nothing more than a sensible, liberation from the manifest influence of evil spirits" (Waddington, Church History, chapter 13). The Apostolical Constitutions, 8:26, says: "An exorcist is not appointed, for the prize pertaineth to voluntary goodness and the grace of God, through Christ, by the influence of the Holy Spirit; for he who hath received the gift of healing is declared by revelation from God, the grace that is in him being manifest unto all. But if there be need of him for a bishop, or preslmyter, or deacon, he is appointed accordingly." Thus it appears

(1) that the power of casting out devils was held to exist in the Church;

(2) that as late as the third century it was not held to belong exclusively to the clergy, but to the whole Church, or at least to some among the laity. The use of exorcism seems to have been at first confined to thee case of persons "possessed with devils," ἐνεργούμενοι, who were given into the care of persons set apart for the purpose (Cyprian, Epist. 75, 76). SEE ENERGUMENS. But Cyprian also speaks here of baptismal exorcism (see below).

2. Exorcists. — A special order of exorcists arose as early as the third century. Before that time, although, as has been seen, the power of exorcising was held to be a spiritual gift common to all classes in the Church, it yet appears to have been chiefly exercised by the clergy. On the date of the rise of the order of exorcists, and of their ordination and office, Bingham (Onig. Ecclesiastes book 3, chapter 4) speaks as follows: "'I take Bona's opinion to be the truest, that it came in upon the withdrawing (Rerum Liturg. lib. 1, c. 25, note 17) of that extraordinary and miraculous poweer, which probably emas by degrees, and not at the same time in all places. Cornelius (ap. Euseb. Lib. 6, c. 43), who lived in the third century, reckons exorcists among the inferior orders of the Church of Rome; yet the author of the Constitutions, who lived after him, says it was no certain order (Constit. Apost. lib. 8, c. 26), but God bestowed the gift of exorcising as a free grace upon whom he pleased; and therefore, consonant tc that hypothesis, there is no rule among those Constitutions for giving any ordination to exorcists, as being appointed by God only, and not by the Church. But the credit of the Constitutions is not to be relied upon in this matter; for it is certain by this time exorcists were settled as an order in most parts of the Greek Church, as well as the Latin; which is evident from th.. Council of Antioch, A.D. 341, in one of whose canons (Cone. Antioch. c. 10) leave is given to the chorepiscopi to promote subdeacons, readers, and exorcists, which argues that those were then all standing orders of the Church. After this exorcists are frequently mentioned among the inferior orders by the writers of the fourth certury, as in the Council of Laodicea (Cone. Laodic. c. 24 and 26), Epiphanius (Expos. Fid. note 21), Paulinus (Natal. 4, S. Felicis.), Sulpicius Severus ( Vit. S. Martin. c. 5), and the Rescripts of Theodosius (Cod. Theodos. lib. 12, tit. 1, De Decurione Leg. 121), and Gratian (id. ib. lib. 16, tit. 2, De Episc. Leg. 24) in the Thaodosian Code, where those emperors grant them the same immunities from civil offices as they do to the other orders of the clergy. Their ordination and office is thus described by the fourth Council of Carthage (Conc. Carth. 4, c. 7: Exorcista quum ordinatur, accipiat de manu episcopi libellum, in quo scripti sunt exorcismi, dicente sibi episcopo: Accipe et commenda memoriae, et habeto potestatem imponendi manus super energmeumenum, sive baptizatum, sive catechumenumn): "When an exorcist is ordained, he shall receive at the hands of the bishop a book, wherein the forms of exorcising are written, the bishop saying, Receive thou these and commit them to memory, and have thou power to lay hands upon the energumens, whether they be baptized or only catechumens." These forms were certain prayers, together with adjurations in the name of Christ, commanding the unclean spirit to depart out of the possessed person, which may be collected from the words of Paulinus concerning the promotion of St. Felix to this office, where he says (Natal. 4, S. Felcis.: Primis lector servivit in annis, inde gradum cepit, cui munus voce fideli adjurare malos, et sacris pellere verbis), from a reader he arose to that degree whose office was to adjure evil spirits, and to drive them out by certain holy words. It does not appear that they were ordained to this office by any imposition of hands either in the Greek or Latin Church; but yet no one might pretend to exercise it either publicly or privately, in the church or in any house, without the appointment of the bishop, as the Council of Laodicea directs (Cone. Laod. c. 26); or at least the license of a chorepiscopus, who in that case was authorized (Concil. Antiochen. cap. 10) by the bishop's deputation."

3. Exorcism in Baptism. — In the third century (at least after the Council of Carthage, A.D. 256) we find exorcism used in the catechumenate in preparation for baptism, and also as part of the ordinary ceremony of baptism. Riddle (Christian Antiquities, book 4, chapter 2) gives the following view of its origin: "Baptism, as the sacrament of the Holy Ghost, contributes to deliver men from the power of Satan and evil spirits; and hence it appears expedient and right at the reception of that rite to renounce the devil and his works. And when the pumeber of candidates for baptism was multiplied from among the heathen, who are spoken of in Scripture as in a peculiar sense sinners (Ga 2:15), and who were regarded as being especially under the power of the prince of darkness, it seemed more particularly needful that admission into the Gospel Church — the kingdom of heaven — should be preceded by a formal abjuration of all heathen and superstitious practices or worship; in one word, by a renunciation of Satan. Such appears to be the most natural and simple account of the origin of exorcism at baptism in the Christian Church. Justin Martyr, the first uninspired writer who describes Christian baptism, knew nothing of this practice, although he was not unacquainted with the custom of exorcising evil spirits in the case of persons possessed. Tertullian, however, treats expressly of this matter, and says that the practice of renouncing the devil on occasion of baptism is founded not on Scripture, but on tradition (De Corona Mil. c. 3). Cyprian also treats of baptismal exorcism (Ep. 76, ad Magy.). At first, indeed, this ceremony was confined to a renunciation of the devil and all his works on the part of the person about to be baptized; and it was not until the fourth century that a form of abjuration by the officiating minister, commanding the evil spirit to depart from the new servant of Christ, was brought into use. And hence it is that some writers, making a distinction between the renunciation (ἀποταγή, abrenuntiatio) and exorcism (ἐξορκισμός), contend that the practice of exorcism was altogether unknown until the fourth, or, as others say, the seventh century. The fact, however, appears to be, that these customs are substantially one and the same, differing only in form. And the true state of the case with respect to baptismal exorcism appears to be as follows:

1. In the first century we find no trace of a renunciation of the devil in baptism.

2. In the second and third centuries this practice was in use, as appears from the testimonies of Tertullian and Cyprian, as well as of later writers who appeal to tradition.

3. In the fourth century the fathers speak of exorcism as not being highly expedient, inasmuch as, without it, children would not be free from the influence of evil spirits (Optat. Milev. De Schism. Donut. lib. 4, c. 6; Basil.

M. De Spiritu Sancto, c. 27; Gregor. Naz. Orat. 40). We find mention of baptismal exorcism also in the canons of the Council of Carthage held in the year 256, and those of the first Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381. The exorcists, who were concerned at first only with the energumens, or persons possessed, were afterwards called upon to assist at the baptism of all adults; but, as infant baptism gained ground, the duties of this office became superfluous, and they are very rarely mentioned in worls posterior tothe sixth century." Cyril of Jerusalem (+ 386) gives a somewhat detailed account of the form of exorcism. The ceremonies used were:

1. Preliminary fasting, prayers, and genuflections. These, however, may be regarded as general preliminaries to baptism.

2. Imposition of hands upon the head of the candidate, who stood with his head bowed down in a submissive posture.

3. Putting off the shoes and clothing, with the exception of an under garment.

4. Facing the candidate to the west, which was the symbol of darkness, as the east was of light. In the Eastern Church he was required to thrust out his hand towards the west, as if in the act of pushing away an object in that direction. This was a token of his abhorrence of Satan and his works, and his determination to resist and repel them.

5. A renunciation of Satan and his works thus: 'I renounce Satan and his works, and his pomps and his services, and all things that are his.' This or a similar form was thrice repeated.

6. The exorcist then breathed upon the candidate either once or three times, and adjured the unclean spirit in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to come out of him. This form of adjuration seems not to have been in use until the fourth century; and these several formalities were apparently introduced gradually and at different times. The whole ceremony was at first confined to the reninciation of 'the devil and his works' on the part of the person about to be baptized (Coleman, Christian Antziquties, chapter 14, § 9 ; Riddle, 1. c.).

IV. Roman Catholic Church. — In the Roman Catholic Church exorcists constitute one of the four minor orders of the clergy-acolytes, exorcists, readers, porters (Council of Trent, session 23, chapter 2, of Orders). When initiating the exorcist the bishop gives him a book containing the exorcisms (or the Missal), and says, "Accipe et commend e memori, et habeto potestatem imponendi manus super energumenum, sive baptizatum sive catechumenum" (Take this and commit it to memory, and have power to impose hands on persons possessed, be they baptized or catechumens). Every candidate for priests' orders in the Roman Church first receives the four lower orders, including that of exorcist. The process of exorcising water for baptism is given under BAPTISM SEE BAPTISM Children are regarded as belonging to the devil until baptized, and the priest or assisting exorcist blows out the evil spirit by the breath (exsufflation), and also breathes on the child again (insufflation), as a symbol of the gift of the Spirit. So the Rituale: "Sacerdos exsufflat ter in faciem catechumeaii, semel dicens: Exi ab eo (ea), spiritus immunde, et da locum Spiritui Sancto Paraclito. Hic in modum crucis halet in faciems ipsius dicat; Accipe Spiritum bon im per istam insufflationem, et Dei benedictionem. +Pax tibi." In cases where the priest is to practice exorcism on a person supposed to be "possessed of the devil," he is to prepare himself specially by prayer, fasting, confession, and mass. The ceremony may be performed in the church, or, if the sufferer be ill, at his house; but there must always be witnesses present. "Here, arrayed in robe, cope, and a blue stole, he first sprinkles the subject with holy water, and, kneeling down, prays the All Saints' litany, the Lord's prayer, and Psalm 53, Deus in nomine tuo (in our version Psalm 54); then two prayers in which, making the sign of the cross over the patient, he commands the evil spirit to depart, by the mysteries of the incarnation, the suffering and death, the resurrection and ascension of Christ, the sending of the Spirit, and the coming again to judgment. Thereupon follows the lesson from John 1, In piancipio erat Verbum, with Mr 16:15-18, and Lu 10:17-19. Then he lays both hands upon the head of the energumen, saying, 'Ecce crucem Domini: Jugite pantes adversae: Vicit leo de triba Juda,' and the prayer follows, with the proper formula of exorcism (Exorcizo te, immunde spiritus, etc.): 'I exorcise thee, unclean spirit, in the name of Jesus Christ; tremble, O Satan! thou enemy of the faith, thou foe of mankind, who hast brought death into the world, who hast deprived men of life, and hast rebelled against justice; thou seducer of mankind, thou root of all evil, thou source of avarice, discord, and envy', the priest meanwhile making three crosses, in the name of the Trinity, on the brow and breast of the possessed person. If the evil spirit does not depart, all these ceremonies must be repeated. In regard to the exorcism of

things, the view of St. Paul, that every creature of God, used with thanksgiving, is good, stands true at all times. But in consequence of the curse, which the first sin brought upon all nature, the Church of Rome exorcises beforehand things designed for sacred use, such as the water and salt required for holy water. Beasts also, horses, fields, and fruits, are so treated, more frequently in the Greek Cheurch than in the Roman" (Herzog, Encyclopadia, Bombuarger's transl., 1:255). When a house is infested with evil spirits the priest is sent for, who, on his arrival, sprinkles the place plentifully with holy water, repeats some prayers, and then pronounces the form of exorcism, whereupon it is supposed, the devils depart. Should they again return the ceremony of exorcism is repeated, and again if necessary until at length the Church proves itself victorious over the powers of hell (Encycl. Metropolitana; see also Jeremy Taylor, Dissuasive from Popery, § 9, for an account of the forms of exorcism; and the copious collection entitled Thesaurus exorcismorum atque conjurationem terribilim, potentissimorum, efficacissimorum cum practica, probatissima: quibus spiritus maligni, daemones maleficiage omni, de corporibus humanis obsessis, tanquam flagellis fustibusque fugantur, expellantur, doctrinis refertissimus atque uberrimus, Colonins, 1628, 8vo).

V. The Greek Church also continues the order of exorcists and the practice of exorcism. The exorcism of catechumens is designated ἀφορκισμός, and it is thrice admiuinistered in making a catechumen (see Euchologion, cap. εὐχὴ εἰς τὸ ποιῆσαι κατηχούμενον). Exorcism is also practiced upon the baptism of infants. The priest, having received the child at the church doer, marks him with the sign of the cross on the forehead, then carries him to the font, where, before his immersion, he is exorcised. The ancient forms are preserved with very little change in modern use. Three forms are employed, which may be found in Schmitt, Morgenland.-griech-russische Kirche (Mainz, 1826, page 141). In Assemanni, Codex Litarg. 2:318 eq., may be found twenty-one forms for exorcising the devil and all evil spirits. In Metrophuanis Critopuli Confessio (1661), cap. 7, de Ecclesia, is the statement that baptism must be performed with prayers and exorcisms (μετὰ εὐχῶν καὶ ἐξορκισμῶν); also (ἔχομεν δὲ ἐξορκισμοὺς παρὰ τῶν ἀρχαίων πατέρων θαυμασίως συντεθειμένους) "we have forms of exorcism admirably prepared by the ancient fathers;" and in cap. 11, de Sacerdotio, he states the duty of the exorcists to be "to exorcise the catechumens and catechize them" (see Kimmel, Monum. Fid. Ecclesiastes Orient. (Jens, 1840, 8eo).

VI. In Protestant Churches. — Luther approved of exorcism. In his Taufbeichlein he preserved the spirit of the Roman Catholic form of renunciation of the devil. He did not consider it as essential, but as very useful to "remind the people earnestly of the power of sin and the devil." The immediate successors of Luther adopted his views, and they were generally diffused in Saxony, Wutemberg, and the other strongly Lutheran parts' of Germany (Siegel, Alterthiinzer, 2:64; Wiedenfeld, De Exorcismi Origine, etc., Marburg, 1824). In 1583 Heshusius wrote in favor of abolishing its use. Justus Menius, in a treatise Voai Exorcismo, 1590, advocated its retention. Calvin (Instit. 4:12, 19), speaking of the "wax taper" and "exorcism" as used by the Romanists in baptism, says, "I am not ignorant of the ancient origin of this adventitious medley, yet it is lawful for me, and for all the faithful, to reject everything that men have presumed to add to the institution of Christ." In the Swedish Church, when the Augsburg Confession was proclaimed anew at the Council of Upsala, 153, exorcism was retained, in its milder expressions, "as a free ceremony, on account of its utility as an admonition to the audience looking on at the baptism" (Ranke, History of the Papacy, 1:11, Austin's transl., Edinb. 1851, 2 vols. 8vo). Zuinglius agreed with Calvin in rejecting exorcism and from the beginning the Reformed Chirch was disinclined to it. The question became a sort of test between Lutherans and Calvinists. In the Crypto- Calvinistic struggles the question of exorcism played a part, and one of the accusations against Nicolas Crell (v.r.) was that he "sought to extirpate exorcism from the Church, to its great injury (see Boelemer, Jis. Eccl. Protest. 3:843). Among later Lutheran theologians, Gerhardt, Quenstedt, and Hollaz place it among things indifferent; Baur, Baumgarten, and Reinhard urge its abolition. From Reinhard's time it has gradually become obsolete in the Lutheran Church. Since 1822 the "High" Lutherans have attempted to revive its use.

In the Church of England. — In the first liturgy of Edward VI, a form of exorcism at baptism is given. The priest, looking upon the children, was to say, "I command thee, unclean spirit, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, that thou come out and depart from these infants, whom our Lord Jesus Christ has vouchsafed to call to his holy-baptism, to be made members of his body and of his holy congregation. Therefore, thou accursed spirit, remember thy sentence, remember thy judgment, remember the day to be at hand wherein thou shalt burn in fire everlasting, prepared for thee and thy angels; and presume not henceforth to exercise any tyranny towards these infants whom Christ hath bought with his precious blood, and by his holy baptism, calleth to be of his flock." SEE BAPTISM. Bucer's remonstrance against the indiscriminate use of the form of exorcism, on the ground that it would be uncharitable to suppose that all were demoniacs who came to be baptized, was listened to by the Reformers; for in their revision of the Prayer-book in the 5th and 6th of Edward VI, they decided on omitting it altogether. The seventy-second canon of the Church of England forbids any minister attempting to expel a devil or devils, under pain of the imputation of imposture, and cosenage, and deposition from the ministry, except he first obtains the license of the bishop of his diocese, had under his hand and seal (Wheatly, On Common Prayer, chapter 7, § 2). In the form of baptism used in the Church of England, the Methodist Episcopal Church, and the Protestant Episcopal Church, the question is put to the candidate, "Dost thou renounce the devil and all his works?" etc. This is a remnant of the old form of renunciation (connected with the exorcism at the baptism of catechumens), but of exorcism itself there is nothing in their formularies.

Literature. — See, besides the works already cited, Suicer, Thesaurus, 5. ἀφορκισμός, ἐξορκισμός; Stolle, De Origine Exorcismi in Baptismo; Augusti, Denkwurdigkeiten, 7:268 sq.; Bingham, Orig. Eccles., Bohn's ed., 1:435; 2:110 sq.; Augusti, Christ. Archaeologie, 2:427 sq.; 3:402; Ferraris, Promta Bibliotheca, 3:927 sq.; Kraft, Ausfuhrl. Hist. von Exorcismo (Hamburg, 1750, 8vo); Elliott, Delineation of Romanism, book 2, chapter 15; Procter, On Common Prayer, page 365.