Skepticism Chic and The Exorcism of Emily Rose
by Dr. Marc T. Newman
September 9, 2005
(AgapePress) - Raising questions is what The Exorcism of Emily Rose does best. The film is based very loosely on the true story of a young Bavarian university student, Anneliese Michel, who endured an exorcism in the mid-1970s spanning 10 months which ended in her death. The priests who performed the exorcism were arrested for negligent manslaughter and placed on trial. Emily Rose uses the courtroom as a framing device and reveals the story in flashbacks which are truly frightening. The dramatization the audience sees depends upon who is on the stand at the time. When believers for the defense tell the tale, Emily is shown as a woman initially beset, and then possessed, by demons. When skeptics testify, the same scenes are shown but now Emily is a victim of epilepsy and psychotic delusions. Little effort is made in the film to sort out fact from fiction -- viewers are placed in the role of the jury; we are left to decide the truth for ourselves. Questioning spiritual claims is laudable. Luke, the chronicler of Acts, praised the Bereans because they did not blindly accept teachings but rather searched the Scriptures to see if what they were being taught by the Apostle Paul was true. Paul told the Thessalonians to "examine everything carefully." The Exorcism of Emily Rose puts theology on trial, uses ambiguity to draw the audience into the debate, and trades a tidy ending for increased conversation.
Marc Newman's analysis continues below
Publication of this analysis does not constitute endorsement of the film. Warning: MPAA has given this movie a PG-13 rating for thematic material, including intense/frightening sequences and disturbing images.
Theology on Trial
Erin Brunner, the defense attorney for Father Moore (the priest on trial), is an avowed agnostic who comes to believe in the priest's sincerity. Ethan Thomas, the prosecutor for the state, declares himself a Christian and a Methodist, but rejects Father Moore's claims that Emily Rose was demonically possessed. Early in the film, Ethan offers Erin a deal to avoid a costly and (he thinks) embarrassing trial. But in a move to rival Fred Gaily's defense of Santa Claus in A Miracle On 34th Street, Erin decides to put the Devil, or at least the possibility of possession, on trial. She takes Father Moore's beliefs seriously, even as the self-proclaimed Christian prosecutor casts doubt. Christian spiritual claims are not shunted aside as irrelevant in a scientific-materialist culture, but confronted. Evidence mounts on either side -- the prosecutor's physicians and psychiatrists against the defense's eye witnesses and anthropologists.
Lately, a rash of films have emerged asking viewers to consider spiritual claims -- but none of them ask an audience to consider specifically Christian truth claims. For example, The Skeleton Key discusses faith, but only from the viewpoint of belief as the doorway to danger. The Brothers Grimm, though set during a thoroughly Christian era, only proposes a debate between science and a fantastic pagan supernatural reality. And though these films raise important issues for Christians to discuss, Emily Rose boldly places Christian truth claims front and center -- well, sort of.
Use of Ambiguity
What is most electrifying about this film is its use of ambiguity. In William Friedkin's film, The Exorcist (comparisons are inevitable), ambiguity over whether or not adolescent Regan is demonically possessed becomes the devil's tool to draw in a skeptical young Father Karras. In The Exorcism of Emily Rose, ambiguity is a source of tension to draw in a skeptical audience --from beginning to end. As Emily's story is told, first from one perspective and then the other, the audience finds itself whipsawed between the competing positions. No "smoking gun" moment emerges to eradicate doubt.
Laura Linney, the Oscar-nominated actress who portrays Erin Brunner, said that before she agreed to take the role, she wanted to be sure that both sides of the story would be fully explored and presented in a balanced way. She got her wish. Questions abound, and answers are in short supply. The audience has to decide.
Less in the Movie, More Room to Talk
By purposefully choosing not to neatly wrap up the trial, screenwriters Paul Boardman and Scott Derrickson opened the door for audience members to talk and debate. Derrickson explains that beyond the need to create a scary, entertaining film was the desire to get people to consider ultimate questions, "Those essential questions: Does the spiritual realm exist? Is there a devil and, more importantly, is there a God? And if so, what's the implication of that? Those are questions to be reckoned with, and everyone lives their lives based on what they believe about that question."
Horror is the film genre best able to confront supernatural issues in the midst of a materialist culture. Supernatural fear has the capacity to bypass our cultured skepticism and initiate us into what theologians call the mysterium tremendum -- in other words, the creeps. Feelings of demonic dread are base experiences -- hard to push aside once felt. They drive us to ask the very kinds of questions Derrickson desires.
Are Questions Enough?
While it is the job of the filmmakers to elicit questions, Christians in the audience who talk to friends afterward cannot and should not let it end there. The Thessalonians were told to test all things -- that is true -- but they were also admonished to "hold fast to what is true." The Bereans used the Scriptures to determine that truth. In Western culture dogma is a dirty word. It is chic to be skeptical. As Harry Blamires notes in his book In Defense of Dogma, some people think that just about the worst thing Christians can do these days is to speak as if they have answers. Truth claims make people uncomfortable both because they take effort to sort out and because they divide people in an age in which we prefer to be gelatinously united. Despite what some would have us believe, the journey is not the thing. Journeys imply destinations. It is nice to know when you arrive.
Movies are supposed to be provocative, not propagandistic. The Exorcism of Emily Rose scores on both points. But when the lights come up, thoughtful Christians should be able to answer Derrickson's ultimate questions and defend those answers in discussions with non-Christian friends. There will be plenty of room for in-house debate among Christians after the film -- questions concerning Catholicism, the possession of the devout, and what to do if and when the Church gets something wrong. But on the fundamental question about God and the existence of a spiritual realm, we cannot afford to be like Erin Brunner, believing that asking the questions is enough. God has given us answers. And in a lost and dying world, we are expected to provide those answers, to all who ask, in manner that is gracious and seasoned with salt. After a screening of The Exorcism of Emily Rose, there should be plenty of asking going on.
Marc T. Newman, PhD (marc@movieministry.com) is the president of MovieMinistry.com -- an organization that provides sermon and teaching illustrations from popular film, and helps the Church use movies to reach out to others and connect with people.
