How would Apotropaics work?

In an earlier post there was a comment about the seeming “relic-nonsense” in the Catholic Church, yet that appears to be confirmed by scripture in such cases as Acts 19:12 where we apparently have relics of St. Paul (here they are technically 2nd degree relics) healing people who touch them. In the Catholic Church there is the idea of “sacramentals”, things such as Holy Water and Oil that become, like sacraments, channels of divine grace. 

Many movies play off of this idea during encounters with the demonic. At times holy water will burn them, or a cross/crucifix will repel evil. When sacramental objects are used in this manner they are called “apotropaics” or things that act as a repellent for evil (technically even prayers such as Pslam 91 would fall in this category). 

At this point the more Protestant one is, the more likely they are to use phrases such as “superstition”, “magic”, or the dreaded “popery”. It this fair?

First, there is some scriptural support for God working through physical objects in really unusual ways. Second there is already the precedent of the sacraments where God works his power through physical reality and third…

Third, I wish to propose a way that some apotropaics might work without even needing to accept all of Catholic theology on the sacramentals. This would not mean they do work, but it would provide some conceptual framework to determine if it is possible.

The argument runs like this:

1. Demons are spirits and so are simple creatures

This does not mean they are “simplistic” but that they are non-complex. In terms of emotion they experience it different from humans. For humans emotions are tied up with physicality. When we love or hate, we do so as a physical creature with material chemicals in our brain. This is proven by the way drugs can alter emotions. Angels and Demons, however, do not have this physical connection to their emotions like we do. So when they experience “love” or “hate” or “fear” they do so as a matter of volition more then passion. This also means that they would experience this “emotion” at a higher core part of their being, and perhaps cannot express the complexity of emotion that we can.

2. Symbols create emotional responses

To many people a Nazi flag brings up images in the mind of war and terror. To even more people (Hindu) in brings to mind feelings to good luck. Either way the fact is that the symbol produces a certain response in the brain. To a Jew, especially one who lived though the holocaust, the Nazi flag would bring up images and feelings of hate, fear, ect. Same with people who have had a horrible experience with water, they are truly terrified on a deep level of water sometimes. An event can cause a phobia, which in turn even symbolic representations of that phobia can create strong reactions. 

3. The Cross (and maybe others) act as a symbol of fear in the demonic

St. Paul said that the Cross is where Christ disarmed the powers of evil (Col 2:14-15), the crucifixion of Christ is the focal point where Christ triumphed over the demonic. This event not only is the ultimate defeat of the demonic but also signals their eventual banishment to the abyss of hell. Now consider that the sign of the Cross would have to have some reaction on the part of the demonic. Perhaps it brings to their mind images of defeat and future punishment. Now because they are simple spirits, these are not just chemical reactions but connected to their very wills. So when a demon comes into “contact” with a Cross/Crucifix they are repulsed by the overpowering images on their wills that the symbol brings.

Now also combine this with ideas from scripture of sacred objects and with God’s omnipresence and omnipotence and the testimony of Church history, and we have a strong possibility for the reality of apotropaic sacramentals. Perhaps these same principles even apply to Holy Water and Oil. It is hard to say just how the physical and spiritual worlds effect each other. Perhaps blessings make a symbol out of a non-symbol and can have the same effect. Or maybe not?