Satan's Harvest Series: Ed & Lorraine Warren #6 Published by Dell on January 5, 1990
Genres: Biography & Autobiography, Nonfiction, Religion / Christian Living
Pages: 320
Where to buy: Affiliate Link
The shocking true case of demonic possession from the reporters who first covered it in the Boston Herald. The case was discussed and you can watch the real exorcism footage in the blockbuster horror film The Conjuring. When terrifying, bizarre things kept happening to a hard-working Massachusetts farmer, he did what anyone would do. First he went to the local police chief. Then he went to his priest. And then he went to Ed and Lorraine Warren, the world's most famous demonologists who investigated the The Amityville Horror and other terrifying cases of demonic possession. It was the Warrens who called in one of America's most renowned exorcists, Bishop Robert McKenna. What they all experienced is described in this extraordinary book. Absolutely terrifying. Absolutely true. Don’t miss the new film "The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It” based on the Warrens’ case files.
Satan’s Harvest is book #6 in the Ed and Lorraine Warren series, and the fourth one I’ve read. I’ve had some trouble tracking down a couple of the earlier titles (yes, I am glaring directly at my library for this), but honestly—that frustration pales in comparison to the reaction this book inspired.
I’m just going to say it outright: writing this review may very well be the literary equivalent of setting fire to any chance of being accepted as a paranormal investigator, but holy shit, this book is infuriating. Between the grotesque events and the victim-blaming in paranormal narratives, I barely know where to begin—which is why I’ll start here:
If you’re thinking about reading this one? Don’t.
Grotesque Events and Victim-Blaming
First and foremost, the book alludes to bestiality and then delivers an absolutely disgusting display of victim-blaming. His father forced Maurice Theriault, as a child, to participate in abuse—and the book frames this as the catalyst for his eventual “demonic possession.” I cannot stress this enough: the narrative treats a violently abused child as spiritually culpable for acts he was coerced into. What kind of God punishes a child for what was done to him? That framing alone is indefensible.
And somehow it gets worse.
Family Dysfunction and Fabrication
Let’s be real: Maurice treats his first wife with contempt because she can’t meet the domestic standard set by his mother. The book portrays that same mother as having witnessed her husband’s deviant abuse in the barn and choosing to remain with him, despite knowing her son was being harmed. I understand the era. I understand the constraints placed on women at the time. However, at a certain point, context stops being an explanation and starts sounding like an excuse. I have no words for the way this is brushed aside.
On that note, the book dives further into Maurice’s family story with an entire chapter that reads like horror fiction: it depicts his mother being murdered by his father in a terrifying supernatural encounter. The narrative presents this event through her perspective, with dialogue from what is portrayed as a demon — but this is a literary dramatization rather than a verifiable historical account. No source is cited, and no explanation shows how such detailed internal narration could exist.
When the authors include dramatic events like a fabricated murder scene or demon dialogue without any verifiable source, it raises serious questions about how much of the rest of the narrative is fact and how much is complete fiction built on sensationalism.
Language, Prejudice, and Smokescreens
Then there’s the language. Despite the book being written in the 1990s—and despite the term falling out of acceptable use decades earlier—the book literally describes a man as “coloured.” I wish I were exaggerating. Perhaps Maurice himself used the term, and the authors meant it to be “authentic,” but it only reinforced my growing suspicion that this entire possession narrative serves as a convenient smokescreen for an objectively awful human being.
In fact, reports about Maurice’s later life indicate that in 1992, he shot his estranged wife and then took his own life—an attack she thankfully survived.
His sister openly rejected the idea that Maurice was truly possessed, suggesting that he acted out symptoms and that his familiarity with occult concepts likely gave him a script for how “possession” was expected to look. Sounds like a great guy, no?
No Evidence, No Excuse
The suspicion I had that Maurice was simply a POS becomes undeniable at the end of the book, when Maurice faces child molestation charges. Ed Warren effectively excuses these charges. Because, of course, it wasn’t Maurice—it was a demon. Sure, Ed. Sure.
Here’s the thing: the book presents not one single piece of credible evidence that Maurice suffered possession rather than simply being a violent, abusive man. None. Zero. What the book gives instead is Ed Warren portrayed as a handsome, heroic crusader—bullying cops under the guise of “standing up” for this poor, innocent, possessed man—while the reader is expected to feel sympathy for a fucking pedophile.
Absolutely not.
I finished this book livid. Not disturbed in a thought-provoking way. Not unsettled. Just angry. Because Satan’s Harvest isn’t just irresponsible—it’s morally bankrupt.
CW / TW:
This piece contains graphic references to:
Addiction, Alcoholism, Animal Cruelty, Domestic Violence, Child Molestation, Bestiality, and Child Abuse
Recommended Age: 18
