Jindal the true believer

...but I'd guess that most Americans wouldn't find it unbelievable or beyond the pale

well...as far as whether or not it is beyond the pale on a national scale, it all depends on what sort of role that person has.

The local grocer down the street, or your plumber believes in demons and writes about impromptu exorcisms, well okay.

The President of the United States - not so much

Bobby Jindal may be going further in his career. I like him and wish him well.

I've got no problem believing him either. Don't most people believe that evil is a real thing in the world? To me, that's precisely what made "The Exorcist" so scary - evil really is manifest in the world. The only thing I'd be concerned about is whether Jindal and his friends should have called a priest first and not acted as quickly as they did. But, I'd bet Jindal would probably say that now too.

Steve - he's not 21 anymore. I'm pretty sure he has some life experience and realizes there are real people affected by his policy ideas. Also, there may be some similarities to Clinton, but nothing about Jindal says "sleazy" the way it always did about Clinton.

Bobby Jindal's article in New Oxford Review ("Physical Dimensions" of Spiritual Warfare")is an account of his bizarre experiences with the largely evangelical University Christian Fellowship at my alma mater Brown University. At the time Jindal describes, he was a fledgling Catholic convert, hanging out with Pentecostal-style Christians. The "exorcism" he witnessed was performed by adherents to the fundamentalist Campus Crusade for Christ sect -- not by Catholics, not by Jindal himself.

Jindal will no doubt have some explaining to do about, but he didn't perform an exorcism nor did he ever claim to be an exorcism as Andrew Sullivan, Wonkette et al are claiming.

Full disclosure: I am an Associate Editor at NOR, but was not associated with NOR at the time Jindal's article was published (1994). At that time, I was a graduate student at Brown University, where the alleged events took place.

"The only thing I'd be concerned about is whether Jindal and his friends should have called a priest first and not acted as quickly as they did. But, I'd bet Jindal would probably say that now too."

Kimberly- If someone falls down in your church with a seizure you will first call for a priest? Even if it is your own child?

Michael- I thought they made it pretty clear he did not perform an exorcism. The articles did seem to portray Jindal as having thought the conduct of those involved was good. When someone has a seizure at Brown is that a typical response?

Steve

It certainly sounds like old Beelzebub and the boys are losing their touch if they are so blithely banished by a bunch of undergrads in a sham exorcism. Maybe M. Luther might have spared his inkwell and just asked the silly bloke to leave.

The comparisons between Jindal and Clinton are mounting. I'm not sure that they are entirely valid however. After all, it appears the Jindal did inhale.

Steve, something pretty similar has actually happened in our family. It wasn't a seizure, it was psychotic behavior. We called the priest on the way to the hospital. I think both helped. Of course, my family member was baptized, so it couldn't have been possession, but the priest helped reassure the family member about that.

Bill Clinton inhaled and then, as usual, lied about it.

For me, the test is not whether Jindal participated in some activities reflecting questionable judgment at the age of 20. The question is whether he has acquired good judgment since, and whether he can be honest, frank, and forthright (high bar, but occasionally politicians cross it) about his life.

I'm acquainted with a Roman Catholic priest ordained by the Diocese of Lahore in Pakistan. He tells me exorcism is practically a full-time activity for him when he's there (not to get him in trouble with his bishop, but I don't think I am or I wouldn't be posting this). I'm not Catholic or a Bible-thumping Christian and I'm not sure I take the good father entirely literally on this or not, but people of various faiths or no faith can agree the symbolism is sometimes apt. As I read the Bible, which I do take seriously if not literally, the red flag would be whether Governor Jindal, now, would seek to command demons in Governor Jindal's name. We already have had the "God talks to me" president. We don't need an "I talk to the Devil" vice-president. Exorcism in and of itself, however, is an open issue to me.

OK, if no one else will, I will mention the obvious. This board went nuts over something Michelle Obama wrote in a term paper at 21. Jindal, not having the sense to get aid for someone having a seizure at the same age is ok?

Steve

Reads like the bio of Bill Clinton; small town hard working youth. Achieving. Rhodes Scholar. Then Governor.

Exorcisms can take a high-Church or low-Church form. Both rely upon the name of Jesus for success.

The International Association of Exorcists founded by Father Gabriele Amorth is a body of Catholic priests that has assembled historical information, lessons learned, advocates good practices, and trains novices to the point that they almost just do not miss in either appropriately calling for exorcism, and when performing exorcism, fail. The horror stories of the past, often exaggerated, are over. These guys supposedly do not miss.

When we talk about possession or obsession, we get into a mix. Rarely is there a totally autonomous, independent entity like the well know "Legion" of the Gospels who was exorcised by Jesus into a herd of swine never to return. Most often demonic possession, (whatever that is), is better described in the parable of the "strong man", who is bound by the exorcism, but is still present. In this case the entity is not expelled but is simply driven into remission. This is a more rationalized anthropology of the issue and we do not really know where rational psychological condition ends and possession begins. As Jesus comments about demons being expelled and then returning with others worst than itself, this implies that some of the exorcism Jesus performed simply did not hold.

Typically exorcisms here in the developed world should be by trained priest-exorcists after written agreement is granted by the possessed; and accompanied with the presence of relatives or guardians of the possessed as well as medical or other personel. The possessed should have new clothes during the rite(s) as this seems to provide some positive affect.

Exorcisms can sometimes be performed successfully by persons who are not priests or not even Catholic or Orthodox if this exorcist has a certain charisma for the function. But I think a cautious approach by an experienced priest-exorcists is best. I think the actions of the group that did the exorcism on Jindal's friend is not ideal at best and innappropriate at worse. I do not hold Jindal to blame for anything here, however. Appearantly the exorcism worked.

"...one in four believes in astrology."

But where could a person win office if they ran their lives acccording to astrology? That might be a hard sell even in san fran.

Memes are quite amazing, even if they are 100% bull.

Well, they didn't know about that until AFTER they were elected, I think. And they certainly didn't run on the idea they listened to astrologers.

http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2008/06/bobby_jindal_creationist_georg.php
"If Jindal does sign this bill I believe he will be have to make his mark as governor of Louisiana as opposed to being a national figure; evolution is a marginal issue to most people but cultural elites, both Left and Right, perceive anti-evolutionism as a sure sign of yokel-identification."

"On a slightly different note, the prominent conservative public intellectual George Will recently admitted to being an agnostic on the Colbert Report. Will's rather forceful and uncompromising opposition to Intelligent Design comes into somewhat sharper focus now I would think."