Diabolical Possession and the Case Behind The Exorcist
Sergio A Rueda
McFarland & Co 2018
Pb, 265pp, £9.99, photos, appx, notes, bib, ind ISBN 9781476673844
William Friedkin’s 1973 movie The Exorcist, adapted from the novel by William Peter Blatty, profoundly affected how we think about exorcism and possession. That it was supposedly based on the genuine case of “Roland Doe” only deepened the horror. The records of the 1949 exorcism rites upon an American teenage boy were not released by the Catholic Church and the boy remained officially anonymous. Subsequent investigative work revealed the family name and locations, and doubt was cast upon the legitimacy of the story.
This book presents several new aspects of the “Roland Doe” case and links it to the cinematic portrayal. Via verbal and written accounts, the author compares the case with the film depiction and briefly indicates the social and religious influences on novelist Blatty.
Rueda accidentally discovered correspondence between Father Schulze, the Lutheran pastor of the afflicted family, and parapsychologist JB Rhine while browsing the archives of the Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man, formerly the Duke Parapsychology lab. Because of Schulze’s interest in parapsychology, he first suspected the family was experiencing a poltergeist incident and contacted Rhine in March 1949. Schulze, who was interviewed along with his wife for this book, was convinced that something strange was going on with the boy but he did not consider it diabolical. The family, however, soon came to believe that the incidents were related to their straying from the Catholic faith. After consulting a spiritual healer, they called on Catholic clergy, excluding Schulze and Rhine before Rhine could investigate for himself.
Included in the documents recovered by Rueda was a copy of a journal from March and April 1949 written by a priest who was witness to the Roman ritual of exorcism on “Roland” (whose real name is revealed as Ronald). Reproduced across several chapters, with commentary, the “Jesuit diary” is referenced by the author to cite missteps taken by the priests. Rueda, trained in medical and religious studies, examines possible hypotheses to explain Ronald’s case, ultimately concluding that the Jesuits undertook the rite of exorcism without adequate evidence or preparation and failed to follow its rules. He is convinced that the suggestion of exorcism prompted Ronald and his family to conform to what was expected. The causes of the strange events are discussed in terms of unsubstantiated percentages – for example, there’s a “40 per cent” chance that this was a poltergeist event with a “very low” possibility of demon possession. Though it contains various new nuggets of interest, the book is about 40 per cent too long, padded with excessive repetition, extraneous verbatim interviews (including a bizarre section where the author interviews himself) and clunky Q&A sections. Important bits are scattered or buried throughout, not always emphasised or put into context. The timeline jumps around and the chapters are disjointed, making for a frustrating read. There are blatant terminological errors. The author uses some questionable web sources while leaving out the important work of Mark Opsasnick, who exposed Ronald’s case in 2006. Adding to this poor packaging is the lurid cover featuring the image of possessed Regan from The Exorcist. It’s an inconsistent, frequently confusing treatment of some fascinating material. Sharon A Hill
★★★★★