Exorcists and theologians challenge a Vatican-linked article denying the devil in Genesis, citing Scripture, Tradition, and the Catechism
Newsroom (30/07/2026 Gaudium Press ) A theological controversy has erupted following the publication of an article in Donne Chiesa Mondo, the monthly supplement of L’Osservatore Romano, in which biblical scholar Marinella Perroni argues that the Genesis account of the Fall contains “no devil” and no divine power to which humanity is subject. The response has been swift and formal, led by the International Association of Exorcists (IAE), which contends that the article raises serious questions about Catholic biblical interpretation and established doctrine.
The dispute comes amid broader concerns about the doctrinal reliability of publications associated with Vatican media. Observers note that once any publication carrying the Vatican seal was widely regarded as a dependable reflection of Catholic thought, a reputation that some critics believe has diminished over recent decades. Against that backdrop, the task awaiting Montserrat Alvarado, the new Prefect of Communication who is set to assume office in November, is described by some as particularly significant.
Perroni’s Interpretation of Eden
Perroni’s article, “The Serpent, the Woman, and the Fruit. And Satan?”, appeared in the July 2026 edition of Donne Chiesa Mondo, an issue dedicated to the topic of the devil.
In her reading, the Garden of Eden is presented as “the original metaphor for life,” while the Fall narrative is characterized as “one of the most moving religious myths of antiquity.” Perroni maintains that identifying the serpent with Satan is a later theological development arising from reflection on evil spirits and reaching a distinct formulation only in the Book of Wisdom (Wisdom 2:24).
Her interpretation also offers a markedly different understanding of Eve’s role. Rather than depicting her as succumbing to temptation, Perroni argues that Eve demonstrates the courage to explore desire, assert her rights, and question existing limits.
The article concludes by attributing traditional readings of Genesis to what it describes as a patriarchal understanding of sexual difference, an interpretation said to reinforce social hierarchies between men and women.
The International Association of Exorcists Responds
The International Association of Exorcists has argued that the central problem extends beyond the question of whether the serpent should be identified with Satan. According to the association, the deeper issue concerns the manner in which Scripture is interpreted.
The IAE contends that the article appears to challenge the divine inspiration of Sacred Scripture, the authority of the Church’s Magisterium in biblical interpretation, and the consensus of the Church Fathers regarding matters of faith and truth. The association further criticizes the portrayal of Eden as chiefly a place of error and despair, insisting that after original sin it becomes the setting for God’s promise of redemption.
As part of its response, the IAE published a catechesis by Bishop Emeritus Raffaello Martinelli of Frascati. Martinelli is a respected theological figure who worked for many years at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith alongside Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and contributed significantly to the preparation of the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church.
His catechesis reviews six core themes: the identity of the devil, the activities attributed to him, Christ’s relationship to demons, the reasons God allows satanic activity, the Christian response to evil, and the nature of exorcism.
Martinelli begins with paragraph 391 of the Catechism, which teaches that behind the disobedience of humanity’s first parents stood a seductive voice opposed to God. The Catechism states that Scripture and Tradition recognize this being as a fallen angel known as Satan or the devil. It also cites the Fourth Lateran Council’s teaching that the devil and other demons were created good by God but became evil through their own choice.
Five Major Theological Objections
Theologians and Scripture scholars consulted on the controversy identify several points where they believe Perroni’s interpretation conflicts with established Catholic teaching.
The first concerns the classification of Genesis 3 as myth devoid of historical-salvific significance. Critics point to the Pontifical Biblical Commission’s 1909 decision affirming the historical sense of Genesis in matters touching the foundations of the Christian faith, including the sin of the first parents under the devil’s persuasion. They also cite Pope Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical Humani Generis, which described the early chapters of Genesis as belonging to the historical genre in a true sense.
The second objection involves the denial of the devil’s presence in the Fall narrative. Critics argue that this directly contradicts paragraph 391 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as Revelation 12:9, where the “ancient serpent” is explicitly identified as “the devil and Satan.”
Hermeneutics and the Role of Tradition
Scholars acknowledge that Perroni is technically correct in observing that the name “Satan” does not appear in Genesis 3. However, they argue that a theological conclusion cannot be drawn from that philological fact alone.
According to these experts, Catholic interpretation requires that individual biblical passages be read within the context of the whole of Scripture and in continuity with the Church’s living Tradition. They regard Perroni’s method as an overly narrow application of historical-critical analysis that neglects canonical interpretation and ecclesial tradition.
This concern echoes warnings frequently articulated by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who cautioned that the historical-critical method, while legitimate and valuable, becomes problematic when elevated into the sole criterion of interpretation and thereby dissolves the doctrinal meaning of biblical texts.
The Question of Original Sin
Critics also point to what they consider a significant omission within Perroni’s argument.
They note that although the article claims there is little evidence elsewhere in Scripture for the Genesis transgression, it does not engage with Romans 5:12-21, the key Pauline text on original sin. In that passage, St. Paul teaches that sin entered the world through one man, establishing a foundational link between Adam’s fall and the doctrine of redemption in Christ.
The article is also said to overlook Sirach 25:24, another biblical text traditionally cited in discussions concerning the origins of sin.
For the theologians consulted, these omissions weaken the article’s attempt to reassess the biblical foundations of original sin.
The “Ancient Serpent” in Catechism and Liturgy
Dominican Father Riccardo Barile has approached the controversy from the perspective of Catholic doctrine and liturgical practice.
Barile emphasizes that the Catechism instructs Catholics to interpret Scripture within the living tradition of the Church and according to the internal coherence of divine revelation. He points to New Testament passages in which Jesus speaks of the devil as a sinner and murderer “from the beginning,” as well as the Book of Revelation’s identification of the “ancient serpent” with Satan.
In Barile’s view, if the serpent in Genesis were merely an animal, key New Testament texts would lose their theological coherence.
He then advances what he regards as the strongest argument: the Church’s own Rite of Exorcism. Within the rite, prayers refer repeatedly to the devil as the “ancient serpent.” One prayer recalls Christ crushing the head of the ancient serpent through His death on the Cross, while another commands the “cursed serpent” to depart in the name of Jesus Christ.
For Barile, these liturgical references demonstrate that the Church’s worship presupposes the traditional identification of the Genesis serpent with Satan. Hence his pointed question: if the serpent is not the devil, then what exactly does exorcism expel? A serpent no longer present, an image, or merely a literary genre?
A Debate Beyond Exorcism
The controversy ultimately extends beyond demonology and exorcism. At its heart lies a broader debate over Catholic biblical hermeneutics, the authority of Tradition, and the relationship between modern scholarship and doctrinal continuity.
By responding with a detailed catechesis grounded in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the International Association of Exorcists has sought to frame the issue not primarily as an academic disagreement but as a question touching fundamental aspects of Catholic faith concerning original sin, Satan, redemption, and the Church’s interpretation of Sacred Scripture.
As the debate continues, it underscores the enduring tension between contemporary theological approaches and the interpretive framework that the Catholic Church maintains is rooted in Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium.
- Raju Hasmukh with files from INfocatholica
