How Fucked is the Occult?

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:07 am

The other day I went to listen to a Rune Soup podcast after someone recommended the guest, thinking, "Give Gordon a chance." I skipped ahead to a random point and right away heard GW talking about his favorite Crowley book. At that point I thought, why do i want to pay attention to someone who is peddling this shite?

Is occultism synonymous with deluded will-to-power and power-abuse practices - is it totally tarnished by association with ritual abuse and other execrable excesses of the elite? Or is there a baby somewhere in all that bathwater that is worth rescuing?

DMV
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:32 am

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by DMV » Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:00 am

I'm not an expert nor practitioner of it, but the Occult definitely has a sketchy history with plenty of creepy adherents. So while I'm still wary of a lot of occult stuff and its practitioners, it doesn't seem to be all bad.

Some examples I know of:

In the 90s some guys created the servitor Fotamecus, who'll manipulate time to reduce your hour-long commute to just ten minutes if you ask nicely.

This group seems to be about empowering and liberating humanity through magick. Only recently found about these guys, so I can't say for sure yet if most are quiet admirers of Crowley or not.

I also like the promotional video they put out:


User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Wed Feb 22, 2017 3:52 am

DMV wrote:
Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:00 am
This group seems to be about empowering and liberating humanity through magick.
Aren't they always?

Isn't occultism always about self-empowerment? Getting free of social indoctrination by using the socially indoctrinated ego and its methods to do so....

The video has a definite mind-control vibe to it. Why do these guys always have to be dark & edgy and cool to sell their product?

The thing with Crowley is, even if you aren't into his stuff directly, if you are into Western occultism, it probably means you are dancing to his drumbeat.

Otherwise it would be like applying psychology and not paying tribute to Freud.

My feeling about psychology is that it was founded on sound principals that have been misused and misunderstood, but the principals are still sound.

With occultism, I am not sure the principals were ever sound to begin with, and if they were, Crowleyanity may have obscured them as thoroughly as Christianity has obscured Christ.

BigEyeTenor
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:23 am

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by BigEyeTenor » Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:39 am

You don't need magick if you can get in touch with what most people would describe as "God".

In fact, magick is the counterfeit God and is a trickster.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by C_D » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:17 am

deep state wrote:
Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:07 am
The other day I went to listen to a Rune Soup podcast after someone recommended the guest, thinking, "Give Gordon a chance." I skipped ahead to a random point and right away heard GW talking about his favorite Crowley book. At that point I thought, why do i want to pay attention to someone who is peddling this shite?

Is occultism synonymous with deluded will-to-power and power-abuse practices - is it totally tarnished by association with ritual abuse and other execrable excesses of the elite? Or is there a baby somewhere in all that bathwater that is worth rescuing?
Incidentally, I used to read Gordon until he went totes commersh. Now it's all about books and data collection.

Deep S - what is occultism, though? What is occultism accessing? Tell me yours and I'll show you mine. ;kule*

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:39 pm

BigEyeTenor wrote:
Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:39 am
You don't need magick if you can get in touch with what most people would describe as "God".

In fact, magick is the counterfeit God and is a trickster.
To reconnect to what some people refer to as the Soul, and of course the counter-argument of occultists is that it is directed towards this one true goal, the Great Work, Gnosis, etc, etc.

The religious, God-centric viewpoint & the occultic one make a kind of polarity and the one seems to reinforce the other by opposing it (e.g. Christianity & Satanism).
C_D wrote:
Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:17 am
Deep S - what is occultism, though? What is occultism accessing? Tell me yours and I'll show you mine.
Briefly, it has to do with using methods to access the unconscious and harness that energy via the conscious will, in other words, a recipe for disaster.

I think the occultist MO of evoking and invoking powers and principalities (demons etc) in order to command them is equivalent to trying to work with one's own psychic fragmentation (auto-mind control, complete with ritual self-abuse) in a way that postpones integration (deepens fragmentation) in order to empower a particular fragment: like hacking into the id into order to direct the energy into the ego and create the Super-Ego.

That's the downer viewpoint. I think there could be a benefit from attempting this which has to do with magnifying one's neurotic complexes in order to recognize them as oneself and own (up to) them, that would be the post-magick blues when the magus comes down to earth and realizes that the Great Work was just an especially elaborate infantile attempt to become the Father and fuck the mother. Archetypal possession was the goal but it doesn't work because the archetypes we resonate with are mommy-daddy imagos (ancestral fragments), and no "god" is a substitute for the Soul.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by C_D » Tue Feb 28, 2017 10:32 am

deep:
Briefly, it has to do with using methods to access the unconscious and harness that energy via the conscious will, in other words, a recipe for disaster.

I think the occultist MO of evoking and invoking powers and principalities (demons etc) in order to command them is equivalent to trying to work with one's own psychic fragmentation (auto-mind control, complete with ritual self-abuse) in a way that postpones integration (deepens fragmentation) in order to empower a particular fragment: like hacking into the id into order to direct the energy into the ego and create the Super-Ego.

That's the downer viewpoint. I think there could be a benefit from attempting this which has to do with magnifying one's neurotic complexes in order to recognize them as oneself and own (up to) them, that would be the post-magick blues when the magus comes down to earth and realizes that the Great Work was just an especially elaborate infantile attempt to become the Father and fuck the mother. Archetypal possession was the goal but it doesn't work because the archetypes we resonate with are mommy-daddy imagos (ancestral fragments), and no "god" is a substitute for the Soul.
What has made you sure it's the unconscious that is being accessed?

I regard what is termed as 'the occult' as something quite distinct and seperate from mind. An infinite pool, in and of itself, provided courtesy of reality, which can be accessed in a variety of ways. Open to every sentience to use as they see fit - providing they know it's there to be accessed. Some even access it without realising, especially in what we rather dismissively term 'the animal kingdom'. And it's there for 'good' or 'bad' use - the individual gets to decide which works best for them.

Some methods of access are far clunkier, time consuming and self-gratifying than others - i.e. satanic ritual. This is a purely human method that has developed over centuries, providing sporadic results, fueled mainly by personal emotional responses to the ritual. These emotional highs - feelings of power, ownership of knowledge that very few others possess, collective secrets, the spilling or letting of lifeblood, sacred fluids :lol: etc - are a great deal of faffing about for actual access - and have become part of the fabric of satanic cultists rituals because they rather like all the pomp and circumstance surounding it. And, to a fair extent, the domination route does work for them.

Bear in mind, my personal observations regarding How Things Work are odd, to say the least.

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:59 pm

C_D wrote:
Tue Feb 28, 2017 10:32 am
What has made you sure it's the unconscious that is being accessed?
What else is there?
C_D wrote:
Tue Feb 28, 2017 10:32 am
I regard what is termed as 'the occult' as something quite distinct and seperate from mind.
In my view, the unconscious doesn't correlate with the mind but with the body, tho this is an all-too common mistake.

Admittedly the term "unconscious" is problematic, especially since by definition there's no way to go there except by becoming unconscious.

I don't really understand your model of an infinite pool that can be accessed (unless you mean the unconscious). Where is this infinite pool and if it's infinite how can there be anything that is outside it or separate from it?

My main point about the occult is that it is nothing more nor less than a hidden (unconscious) aspect of ourselves; nothing really new there, since occultism is all about tapping our "infinite" potential. But insofar as we use conscious will to access our own "infinite" capacity, we are attempting to put the whole in service to a fragment, and make the tail wag the dog. If it's achievable, it's hardly desirable.
C_D wrote:
Tue Feb 28, 2017 10:32 am
Some methods of access are far clunkier, time consuming and self-gratifying than others - i.e. satanic ritual.
I am no longer so confident in putting "SRA" down as an aberration of occultism; it seems more and more like there is a clear continuum and that ritual abuse is there at both the origins (in primitive times) and the apotheosis of occultism, being the path of transgression or forced individuation via the breaking of social taboos.

Maybe occultism is a system of knowledge that is neutral and can be applied in ways both harmful and healing; there do seem to be healers who use some of the same basic "keys" and don't get sucked into the domination route. But I tend to think that's true of everything: even heroin can be used medicinally to save a life. But that quality is inseparable from it being an addictive and deadly substance if used compulsively.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by C_D » Sun Mar 05, 2017 10:48 am

deep:
I don't really understand your model of an infinite pool that can be accessed (unless you mean the unconscious). Where is this infinite pool and if it's infinite how can there be anything that is outside it or separate from it?
There are things that exist outside of the mind of human beings, but are also a part of. Our reality is a constant trade-off between what is and what isn't. Connecting these two concepts together - a bridging mechanism, if you like - is what I call 3state. I'm working on a way of explaining it, but sometimes the most simple concepts can be extraordinarily complex to explain coherantly. I'll start a thread on it at some point. I realise this is no answer to your question and I'll come back to it later.
I am no longer so confident in putting "SRA" down as an aberration of occultism; it seems more and more like there is a clear continuum and that ritual abuse is there at both the origins (in primitive times) and the apotheosis of occultism, being the path of transgression or forced individuation via the breaking of social taboos.

Maybe occultism is a system of knowledge that is neutral and can be applied in ways both harmful and healing; there do seem to be healers who use some of the same basic "keys" and don't get sucked into the domination route. But I tend to think that's true of everything: even heroin can be used medicinally to save a life. But that quality is inseparable from it being an addictive and deadly substance if used compulsively.
'Occult' is series of vocalised sounds that we call a word. It may be that the particular series of vocalised sounds - 'Ock' 'cahlt' - has a specific meaning in the form of chanted prayer or ritual. Sound as frequency and vibration was, in antiquity, (and still is, in some cultures) very important in the process of invoking certain states or summoning. The 'Ock-cahlt' is generically used to describe the darker side of access to knowledge and I find it interesting that there is no word (or series of vocalised sounds) for the lighter side. So, we have the Occult, which to the general layman is sinister, mysterious and best kept away from - and no alternative (under a unified banner of a particular word) to turn to as an opposing and balancing alternative. This is a clue in itself that something is being hidden. There is irony in the fact that 'Occult' means hidden, yet it is the binary opposite of the Occult that is hidden from us. They do love to revel in their ability to hide the obvious from plain sight.
One should always pay attention to words that appear to have no binary opposite, because everything has an opposite.

Commenting
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:21 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by Commenting » Thu Mar 09, 2017 2:17 am

I got interested in occultism through conspiracy research. I ran with the somewhat contrarian notion that the Illuminati were probably actually benevolent, and any portrayal of occultism as malevolent was probably disinformation circulated by the real evil-doers. Occultism was obviously there to help us evolve, and anyone saying otherwise was (probably) working against humanity.

Of course, there were the "dark" gothic types-- the whole transgression thing -- but that always struck me as an immature reaction to some objectively horrific historical practices by various religious branches. Or to put it another way, what is the point of wasting time trying to be the polar opposite of the christian church? If one opposes it, wouldn't a more reasonable approach be to simply ignore it, or better yet, pick and choose the valuable insights and quietly discard the rest?

At any rate, in earnest, I dove into occult research. I found validation in learning of the many influential historical figures who were apparently open occultists. If occultism was all BS, how could all these people spend their whole lives focused on it? Couple that with the fact that so much modern commentary on occultism intuitively rang really true, and even matched up with my personal experience. And though I spent the bulk of my time reading and pondering (I mostly meditated - the actual ritual resume consisted of trying the qabalistic cross ritual maybe five times), I had plenty of periods of intense synchronicity. Enough to feel that something really seemed to be going on.

This all started around 2012. Fast forward to about a year and a half ago. The connection between occult groups and intelligence agencies begins to knaw at me. MK Ultra; the idea that the drug movement was incepted by the CIA (or whoever) as a form of social engineering; etc etc. I'd also avoided researching the whole spirits/angels/demons/channeling thing due to a general icky feeling, and after looking into that a bit in earnest, I found it was all indeed fishy in some way. The type of occultists who focus on "entities" emit such a damaged feeling - something felt off. MK Ultra research seemed to indicate that the promotion of occultism itself could be a form of mind control/self derangement rather than liberation. "Entity" contact seems to require a form of deliberate dissociation from parts of one's self, at least in many cases. To quote Jan Irvin, could mysticism be "the tool of tyrants"? More and more this rang true as well.

After looking at the world of occultism (and psychedelics) through this lens for a while now, the current existence things like SRA and cannibalism seem way more plausible. After all, blood and semen is magical, right? :shock: Plus occultism can seem like such a blatant retreat into mental space, as deep state has so aptly pointed out. What better way to ensnare people and get them navel gazing than occultism and it's endless mysteries and secrets?

This is all a very long-winded way of saying that as revolted as I am with occultism at the moment, I'm still divided. I sometimes miss the feeling of accelerating insights with strange coincidence around every corner. I can't deny that the occult research period was pretty amazing in many ways, and like a junky, I still find myself dipping back into the morass from time to time. I still have about $300 worth of unread Amazon purchases from my most feverish phase looming on my bookshelf. Mostly the spark seems to be gone, and yet...

Sorry for the word spew; just kind of happened. I should try to answer the OP question: I currently think it's quite fucked, but part of me is still somewhat transfixed by it, annoyingly. *uhh^ :?

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:14 pm

Great summation of a rapid discovery curve.

Mine was a lot longer, needless to say, more like 20 years.

It still believe in a magical universe (i.e., a place where rationally impossible things happen all the time); just not in any way that needs to be or can be systematized and categorized, much less subjected to human manipulation.

Commenting
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:21 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by Commenting » Sun Mar 12, 2017 2:21 am

deep state wrote:
Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:14 pm

Mine was a lot longer, needless to say, more like 20 years.
20 years! So in the midst of that, did you have any inkling of your future/current worldview, or were you pretty much all in?

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:25 pm

Commenting wrote:
Sun Mar 12, 2017 2:21 am
So in the midst of that, did you have any inkling of your future/current worldview, or were you pretty much all in?
That question dovetails nicely with the Supreme Being thread and my comments (repsonding to yours) about being in it as the only way out.

I was "all in" but only so far as that was my way out (i.e., I always knew at some level that occultism was a dead-end, one that I had to reach before turning all the way around).

User avatar
carpe verum
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by carpe verum » Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:43 pm

I didn't know where to post this because I didn't want to start a new thread so I thought it does answer the question, "How Fucked is the Occult?" because, in my humble opinion, the occult is the demonic realm. Simplistic, maybe? But after looking into it for ten years or so (I rarely used Christian sources), I think it's not all that complicated and scary especially when the role of the Pope has been so blatantly compromised. I mean, this is as in your face as you can get.
“Blasphemous,” “Disgusting,” & “Demonic”: Archbishop Paglia’s Homoerotic Mural

Image: The mural, commissioned by Archbishop Paglia for his cathedral Church in Terni-Narni-Amelia, depicts homoerotic themes, trangender persons, prostitutes, drug dealers and other material highly inappropriate for a church setting.

Last week on the 1P5 podcast, I talked to Joseph Sciambra about the revelation that Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, Pope Francis’ newly-appointed head of the Pontifical Academy for Life and Grand Chancellor of the John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family, had commissioned an openly homosexual artist to paint a homoerotic mural in his cathedral Church in 2007.

Reactions to that story are now coming in from Catholic leaders, including former members of Paglia’s freshly-gutted Pontifical Academy for Life. At LifeSiteNews, Pete Baklinksi reports that the fallout from these revelations among Catholic leaders has been strong and vocal:
Critics are saying the work commissioned by Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia is “blasphemous,” “disgusting,” and even “demonic.”

“There is a need for reparation for this blasphemous work. And it is blasphemy because of the effeminate depiction of Christ in a context that the artist himself said was meant to be ‘erotic,’” said Dr. Thomas Ward, president of the National Association of Catholic Families and former corresponding member of the Pontifical Academy for Life.

“It is especially insulting that this image is in the presence of the tabernacle, in the presence of Our Blessed Lord. It is no stretch to say that in this context, and with the image’s clearly erotic content, it is demonic,” he told LifeSiteNews.

Paglia, former bishop of the Italian diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia where the mural hangs in the cathedral, has been elevated to influential levels of responsibility.

After serving as President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Pope Francis appointed him last year to head the Pontifical Academy for Life and also made him Grand Chancellor of the St. John Paul II Pontifical Institute for Studies of Marriage and Family. As the former head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, he oversaw the development and launch of a sex-ed course for teens that experts criticized as “thoroughly immoral,” “entirely inappropriate,” and “quite tragic.”
Descriptions of the mural make clear the reason for the outrage:
The image of the Savior is painted with the face of a local male hairdresser, and his private parts can be seen through his translucent garb.

In one instance, one male can be seen with his hand between another male’s legs groping his reproductive organ.

Included in one of the nets is Paglia, the then diocesan bishop. Wearing his skull cap, he is depicted as clutching another semi-nude man who is tenderly embracing him.

Cinalli told La Repubblica that the naked people in the nets were meant to be “erotic,” although Paglia drew the line when Cinalli proposed to show people actually copulating.

“In this case, there was not – in this sense – a sexual intention, but erotic, yes,” Cinalli said. “I think that the erotic aspect is the most notable among the people inside the nets.” He later added, “The one thing that they didn’t permit me to insert was the copulation of two people within this net where everything is permitted.”
Answers are lacking as to why a man who would commission such a work would be put in such significant positions of influence within Church institutions responsible for the implementation of Catholic sexual teaching:
Dr. Ward questioned Paglia’s recent appointments to influential posts within the Vatican given his artistic sensibilities.

“Given that Archbishop Paglia is in the net of erotic figures going to heaven, and given that he discussed every detail with the painter, the question has to be asked by parents worldwide why was this man put in charge of a prototype of sex education aimed at Catholic children throughout the world?” he said.

“Catholic parents must look at the scale of evil [that has infiltrated the Church at the highest levels]. They have to wake up to what is going on: It’s a moral nuclear wasteland,” he added.

Christine Vollmer, president of the Latin American Alliance for the Family as well as a founding member of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, called the mural “disgusting.”

“This work is absolutely disgusting,” she told LifeSiteNews. “Added to this scandal is the huge debt Bishop Paglia allegedly left in his diocese. Given this, along with his elevation to key posts in the Church, it’s obvious that this man has high-ranking protection at the Vatican.”
Is the implication of “high-ranking protection at the Vatican” comparable to what Michael Brendan Dougherty described in his January 3rd column at The Week as pertains to clerical sexual abusers?
Pope Francis and his cardinal allies have been known to interfere with CDF’s judgments on abuse cases. This intervention has become so endemic to the system that cases of priestly abuse in Rome are now known to have two sets of distinctions. The first is guilty or innocent. The second is “with cardinal friends” or “without cardinal friends.”

[…]

Consider the case of Fr. Mauro Inzoli. Inzoli lived in a flamboyant fashion and had such a taste for flashy cars that he earned the nickname “Don Mercedes.” He was also accused of molesting children. He allegedly abused minors in the confessional. He even went so far as to teach children that sexual contact with him was legitimated by scripture and their faith. When his case reached CDF, he was found guilty. And in 2012, under the papacy of Pope Benedict, Inzoli was defrocked.

But Don Mercedes was “with cardinal friends,” we have learned. Cardinal Coccopalmerio and Monsignor Pio Vito Pinto, now dean of the Roman Rota, both intervened on behalf of Inzoli, and Pope Francis returned him to the priestly state in 2014, inviting him to a “a life of humility and prayer.” These strictures seem not to have troubled Inzoli too much. In January 2015, Don Mercedes participated in a conference on the family in Lombardy.
OnePeterFive reached out to Greg Burke, Director of the Holy See Press Office, for comment on the Paglia revelations. At the time of this writing, we have not yet received a response.

In our prior reporting, we’ve raised questions about the pope’s closeness to clerical sexual-abuse enabler Cardinal Godfried Daneels, as well as his appointment of accused abuser Bishop Juan Barros to the see of Osorno in Chile. We’ve shared allegations that Cardinal Reinhard Marx — Archbishop of Munich, head of the German Bishops’ Conference, and close adviser to Pope Francis — has been accused of negligence in dealing with clerical sexual abuse while he was the bishop of Trier. We have highlighted that the administrator of the Domus Sanctae Marta and papal-appointed liasion to the Vatican bank reform process, Msgr. Battista Ricca, has been accused of living a scandalous homosexual life in Latin America, and was the figure about whom the pope famously asked, “Who am I to judge?” We have noted that Fr. Timothy Radcliffe, whom the pope appointed as a consultor to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, advocates for Catholic acceptance of gay relationships and identity, women’s ordination, and has speculated about the “Eucharistic” nature of sodomy.

While this list is not comprehensive, the number of times such figures are appointed or honored by Francis pushes the suggestion that these are mere accidents beyond credulity. As the number of figures associated with sexual misconduct but nevertheless favored by Pope Francis continues to grow — with no remedial action in sight — hard questions need to be asked about whether any moral standards are being applied to candidates in positions of power in Francis’ Vatican. Or perhaps more to the point, whether noteworthy moral weakness is a characteristic preferred by the pontiff for reasons of his own.

Two Catholic psychologists of note — Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons and Dr. Gerard J. M. van den Aardweg — recently published an op-ed making the situation clear:
To begin with, the exposition of homoerotic art in Archbishop Paglia’s Cathedral from 2007 raises the important question of how he could ever have been chosen to lead the Pontifical Council for the Family and later the Pontifical Academy for Life and the John Paul II Institute for Studies in Marriage and Family. It is now clear that he opposes the Church’s teaching on sexual morality. This question in itself requires an inquiry as to the intentions and criteria used within the Vatican for appointments under Pope Francis.

Archbishop Paglia’s use of homoerotic art reinforces the earlier views, presented to the Vatican by several Catholic mental health professionals, that Archbishop Paglia should be suspended from his responsibilities at the Vatican and be required to undergo an evaluation required of clergy who abuse youth with a focus on psycho-sexual development. This request was made because the initial Meeting Point online sexual education program for youth, developed under Archbishop Paglia’s direction when he headed the Pontifical Council for the Family, contained homoerotic and heterosexual pornography which was like that employed by adult sexual predators of youth.

[…]

However, even more troubling is the role of Pope Francis. His apparent approval of the release of the Meeting Point program at World Youth Day with its homoerotic content and heterosexual pornography was severely negligent.
The authors conclude:

In the United States, a member of the hierarchy who deliberately places youth at risk of abuse by a known sexual predator is expected to resign from his Episcopal ministry. This norm is valid for all countries. In addition, such a Bishop would also face criminal charges of severe negligence for contributing to the sexual abuse of a minor, which could have been prevented.

With all due respect, it is time that Pope Francis takes a firm stand in favor of Catholic moral doctrine, publicly distancing himself from those prelates who favor homosexuality as an alternate form of love by removing them from positions of leadership in the Vatican.
Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect."

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Fri Mar 17, 2017 5:17 pm

Time to call in The Young Pope. ;)


semper occultus
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by semper occultus » Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:16 pm

carpe verum wrote:
Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:43 pm
I didn't know where to post this because I didn't want to start a new thread
...why.....they're not being rationed afaik !

but yes there's a lot of stuff out there on this issue of occult infiltration of the Catholic Church - that seems to evolve around the same miasmic mix of gay/paedo/satanism that we see in other unrelated contexts - and it comes from some influential catholic insiders so whilst they have an axe to grind you can't brush it off just as Ian Paisley style anti-Catholic ranting about the whore of Rome etc..Malachi Martin's stuff like Windswept House, William Kennedy's Lucifer's Lodge spring to mind

I wonder if this was the daddy of them all by a notable Catholic journalist & writer dating back to 1983

The Broken Cross by Piers Compton

semper occultus
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by semper occultus » Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:47 pm

there's an interesting bit in one of Dion Fortune's books about what preparation you need to undertake the occult "path" in terms of mental state, preparedness, studying - generally being of very sound mind & body. She may even say its like going on a mountain walk - studying the maps-taking the right equipment etc - altogether a rather benign message ( & I'm sure Israel Regardie says something about having psychotherapy beforehand aswell (!) ) - sort of like testing a plane for metal fatigue - the problem being I'm sure people are attracted into it as a way of compensating for or trying to cure deficiencies in their personality.
Other than that I suppose I have assumed it basically re-inforces the underlying personality of the person involved - good, bad or indifferent. As a childhood Tolkien freak I guess I didn't absorb the moral of his story ( which is basically his re-telling of Christian teaching afaics)

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by C_D » Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:25 am

semper occultus wrote:
Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:47 pm
...the problem being I'm sure people are attracted into it as a way of compensating for or trying to cure deficiencies in their personality.
The occult is an oxymoron. Something that is hidden and secret, but it's existence is known by all. It attracts oxymoronists. What sort of people are attracted to a belief system that fails utterly at it's basic premise? Would it be fair to call them needy of a belief system? Superstitious?
Maybe the rituals are a smoke-screen, a public front for what really goes on - of which we are blissfully unaware. Something truly occult.
Maybe ignorance truly is bliss.
What is the concensus here about the power of the occult - do other members believe that it has influence over the turn of human events?

batipsto
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:11 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by batipsto » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:32 pm

I think that the discussions already sprouting up on this board might be viewed as occult or esoteric by some, hope nobody's bothered by that idea

We wouldn't be here if we hadn't been through the looking glass a few times

The symbolic regalia associated with the occult are pretty fucked, especially when their presence is abuzz with insistence on their harmlessness.

Probably a few of us here are pretty interested in "fucked" topics, though? :P

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: How Fucked is the Occult?

Post by deep state » Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:44 pm

batipsto wrote:
Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:32 pm
Probably a few of us here are pretty interested in "fucked" topics, though? :P
That's a big 10-4.

semper makes an interesting point; brings to mind all the ritual of stage magick, top hat and vampire cape and all.

I think the thread about the Santeri haunted apartment is a good practical juxtaposition to this one, so far as how fucked the occult is and how that doesnt relate to it being bogus but blind and compulsive and rank with unforeseen side effects.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jakell and 1 guest