The Witch Next Door

 

When people hear the word witch the image of Margaret Hamilton as the ugly and evil "Wicked Witch of the West" in the 1939 movie The Wizard of Oz comes to mind for many people. Witchcraft, in all its forms, is part of the occult and stands solemnly condemned by the Church. Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD; because of these same detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. (See Deuteronomy 18:10-12; Emphasis mine.) 

According to theologian Jone: Divination and sorcery are in themselves very grave sins since they contain an implicit or explicit invocation of the devil. (See Moral Theology, (1961), pg. 98: Emphasis in original). Witchcraft is a form of sorcery, which is any attempt to control events, nature, or other people (through spells, potions, charms, etc.), regardless of whether the intent is malicious or benevolent. 

Throughout the centuries of Christianity, witches/witchcraft were rightfully looked upon as evil and something to be avoided. Frank Baum sought to change that with The Wizard of Oz. Baum (1856-1919) was a practicing adherent of the occult Theosophy religion of Madame Blavatsky.

(See theosophical.org/publications/quest-magazine/sp-1469793668). 

Baum was the first to introduce the idea of "good witches" in modern culture. One only need to remember that his novel and the movie (The Wizard of Oz) contains Glinda "the good witch" that helps protagonist Dorothy get home to Kansas.

A brief survey shows the metaphorical connection between Theosophy and The Wizard of Oz: Dorothy represents the human soul on the path to enlightenment; the Yellow Brick Road of Oz begins as an outwardly expanding spiral. In occult symbolism, this spiral represents the evolving self, the soul ascending from matter into the spirit world; the Scarecrow, Tin Man, and Cowardly Lion, represent the need to adjust your mind, emotions, and will in order to become "enlightened by secret knowledge;" and the Wizard (omnipotent and omniscient) is shown to be a fake--just like the Christian God according to Theosophy. The "good witch" Glinda tells Dorothy that the power to go home "lies within you"--that she is all-powerful; a recurring theme in the occult, that "god lies within you." 

However, witchcraft remained on the outskirts of society and was looked upon badly, or at best, as something done by eccentric weirdos. All that has changed.

Coming Out of the Broom Closet

Some may wonder why there is any need to take a look at witchcraft. After all, there is seemingly no end to which people will go in their eccentric beliefs or practices. The reason a topic such as this merits examination is precisely because witchcraft is becoming less eccentric and more mainstream. For example, in the summer of 2004 the Parliament of the World’s Religions convened in Barcelona, Spain. Representatives from many of the world’s religions were present to “seek peace, justice and sustainability and commit to work for a better world” as well as to “deepen spirituality and experience personal transformation.” (See cpwr.org/ 2004Parliament/welcome/index.htm).

Present at the 2004 conference (as well as the 1993 and 1999 conferences) were representatives of the Covenant of the Goddess, “the world’s largest religious organization for Neo-Pagan Witches,” as described by an elder of the organization. A common theme that comes up in the context of such conferences is the increasing emphasis on “interfaith.” According to one source:

The numbers of Americans who identify with Wicca (witches) or paganism has risen from 134,000 in 2001 to nearly 2 million today, according to Helen Berger, a resident scholar at Brandeis University's Women's Studies Research Center, who has conducted extensive research and authored four books about witches and pagans. The witch community in America has been growing steadily since the 1960s, she said, and "much of the recent growth is coming from young women."  (See https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/10/28/celtic-festival-samhain-2021-celebration-wicca-witches/6182226001/). 

Newsweek had this to say:

The number of witches and Americans practicing Wicca religious rituals increased dramatically since the 1990s, with several recent studies indicating there may be at least 1.5 million witches across the country. A Trinity College study conducted in 1990 estimated only about 8,000 Wiccans in the U.S., but the increase has been led by a rejection of mainstream Christianity among young Americans as well as a rise in occultism. (See newsweek.com/witchcraft-wiccans-mysticism-astrology-witches-millennials-pagans-religion-1221019; Emphasis mine). 

Even a "conservative" Vatican II sect source sees an alarming growth. EWTN reports last year that:

An estimated 1 to 1.5 million people say they practice Wicca or paganism, a rise from an estimated 8,000 Wiccans in 1990, and 340,000 in 2008.

In 2014, a Pew Research Center survey found about 0.4 percent of Americans identify themselves Pagan or Wiccan, a significant increase over prior years... the Pew data would suggest that there are more self-identified “witches” in the United States than members of some mainline Protestant denominations. For example, according to 2017 figures, there are 1.4 million practicing Presbyterians in the United States. (See ewtnnews.com/world/us/number-of-americans-who-say-they-are-witches-is-on-the-rise). 

A very scary development is that now there are at least 35 books for children meant to introduce them into modern witchcraft. Some titles include:

C is for Coven: A Witchcraft Alphabet Book by Andrea Stein

"C is for Coven is a reinterpretation of a classic alphabet book, matching each letter of the ABCs with a rhyming phrase that teaches kids about witchcraft."

Wee Witches by Beth Roth

"This ABC primer is a playful and richly symbolic introduction to the world of Wicca and the magic of Nature. Illustrated poems bring to light the Pagan Path, with each letter featuring a Wee Witch learning about the wheel of the year, tools of the Craft, rites of passage, faerie friends, and meaningful colors. This is a helpful and affirming tool for Pagan families, as well as an appealing collection of subtle, educational light verse for their budding Wee Witches, including A for Acorn, M for Maypole, and S for Spiderweb. Accurate symbols of Witches’ worldview are woven throughout the magical artwork, as well as hidden clues to a secret “Witch Name” revealed at the end of the book."

The Little Witch's Book of Spells by Ariel Kusby

The Little Witch's Book of Spells is an enchanting compendium of spells, potions, and activities for kids 8 to 12 years old. Young witches-in-training will discover spells to resolve problems, foster friendship, and engage with the natural world. This spellbinding book guides readers on how to craft a magic wand, befriend a fairy, and read tea leaves, as well as glossaries of magical terms and symbols."

What Witches Wear by Andrea Stein

"What Witches Wear is an engaging and colorful exploration of what it means to be a modern witch. Matching each color of the rainbow with a unique witch, What Witches Wear reminds us that witches are everywhere—as our teachers, healthcare workers, artists, librarians, and even next-door neighbors."

"Even next-door neighbors." 

(See flyingthehedge.com/2023/07/35-childrens-books-about-witchcraft.html; All titles can be examined on Amazon.com). 

Jesus’ command to have His One True Church preach the Gospel and make disciples of all nations invariably includes witches. In order to do so, it is necessary that we understand who they are and what they believe. Knowing what we are up against is a primary element in being prepared to carry out His Great Commission. Hence, the purpose of this post.

Witch Basics

Witchcraft: (Also known as wicca, the craft, or the craft of the wise.) An antidogmatic, antiauthoritarian, diverse, decentralized, eclectic, experience-based, nature-oriented religious movement whose followers are polytheists and/or pantheists and/or panentheists, and in some sense believe in or experience and/or invoke and/or worship the "Mother Goddess" and generally her consort the "Horned God" as well. It is a generic term covering numerous perspectives on the subject.

Witch: Individuals who practice or concur with the views or experiences of witchcraft. Most view divinity as immanent in nature, seeing all life as sacred, thus, denying any sacred/secular distinction. They are nature-oriented and also see no ultimate distinction between matter and spirit—the material and the spiritual. They may believe in or invoke a pantheon of gods and goddesses, but they primarily experience, and/or invoke, and/or worship the "Mother" or "Triple Goddess" and her male consort, the "Horned God." Witches generally practice multiple forms of divination, participate in trance and other altered states of consciousness, and perform magical spells and incantations. Most observe seasonal holidays and festivals (e.g., the summer and winter solstices). Most believe in some form of reincarnation. The widely believed notion that a female is a witch whereas a male practitioner is a warlock or wizard is a misnomer. The terms witch or wiccan apply to both genders.

Witchcraft is a Worldview.

A worldview is the sum total of one’s view of the nature of reality. Everyone has a worldview even if only a few reflect on their own. One’s worldview encompasses one’s views of how reality is composed, how it works, and how we as humans fit in or relate to our universe. It can entail one’s views about the purpose of life and the origin and destiny of us all.

The chief tenets of witchcraft are:

Naturalism. Starting at the broadest level and working down, it is fair to say that the worldview of witchcraft is naturalism. Naturalism is the view that there is no transcendent reality such as God that can intervene in the natural world. Naturalism maintains that all of reality is interrelated and operates according to “laws.” Other expressions of naturalism would include materialism, which sees all of reality as being made up of matter that operates according to material laws.

Witchcraft, though an expression of naturalism, is not materialism. Witches recognize that reality extends beyond the realm of the material. This is sometimes confusing. A worldview can be naturalistic even if it accepts the reality of an immaterial realm; indeed, even acknowledging the existence of gods and goddesses does not preclude a worldview from being naturalistic. What stands in stark contrast to naturalism is a worldview that says that the natural realm (whether material, immaterial, or both) is the creation of a transcendent God. This is supernaturalism. This is the Truth taught by the Church. 

Occultism. Sharpening the focus, not only can we say that witchcraft is a worldview of naturalism, it is also a worldview of occultism. As I've written many times, the term occult is from the Latin occultus meaning “hidden,” or “secret.” The category covers a wide range of beliefs and practices that are characterized by two main points that are often thought to be “hidden” from the average person. First, the occult maintains that there is force or energy into which one can tap or with which one can negotiate to do one’s own bidding. This comes from a pantheistic/panentheistic grounding of the occult. "All is God" so you cab harness that "energy." 

The familiar term spell is applied to the technique of harnessing and focusing this power. The late witchcraft practitioner Scott Cunningham explains, “The spell is…simply a ritual in which various tools are purposefully used, the goal is fully stated (in words, pictures or within the mind), and energy is moved to bring about the needed result.” (See The Truth about Witchcraft Today pg. 7). 

Exactly what is the nature of this force or energy ("god"), according to the occultist, and what is the best way to work with it is what makes some of the main differences between the major occult groups such as shamanism, witchcraft, Satanism, New Age, and others.

Second, the occult maintains that human beings are divine. Obviously, if God and the world are one, or God is "within" the world, this idea logically follows. The practice of the occult arts is thus an endeavor to actualize one’s own divinity. As witchcraft practitioner Margot Adler claims, “A spiritual path that is not stagnant ultimately leads one to the understanding of one’s own divine nature. Thou art Goddess. Thou are God. Divinity is imminent in all Nature. It is as much within you as without.” (See Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids, Goddess-Worshippers, and Other Pagans in America Today, pg. ix)

Humanism. Witchcraft sees itself as a celebration of all life. This celebration involves the denial that there is anything wrong with the human race. Original Sin and the need of a Redeemer is thus denied. 

The Dangers of Witchcraft

1. Witchcraft is forbidden by God. The Bible makes it clear that witchcraft, sorcery, and divination are abominations to the Lord (Deuteronomy 18:10-12). In Galatians 5:19-21, witchcraft is listed among the works of the flesh that are contrary to the Spirit. The Church has likewise always condemned it, and the approved theologians condemn any use of witchcraft as mortal sin. 

2. Witchcraft involves communication with evil spirits. Those who practice witchcraft often seek to communicate with evil spirits, which is expressly forbidden in the Bible (Leviticus 19:31, Deuteronomy 18:11) and by the clear and constant teaching of the Church. Even those who do not believe in Satan may think it's "nature's secret's" they are tapping into, but it comes from the Father of Lies. 

3. Witchcraft can lead to demonic possession. The Bible records several instances of demonic possession resulting from witchcraft or sorcery (Acts 16:16-18).

4. Witchcraft can lead to spiritual deception. Satan is the father of lies, and those who practice witchcraft often fall under his deceptive influence. They may believe they are tapping into a higher power, when in reality they are being deceived (2 Corinthians 11:14-15).

5. Witchcraft undermines Catholic morality. The practices associated with witchcraft most often involve immoral or unethical behavior, which can lead to more and more grievous sins. 

Witchcraft in Popular Culture

Movies

Hexed (2026): The movie, releasing in theaters November 25, tells the story of a young teenage girl named Billie, an outcast struggling to fit in. She soon discovers she has magical powers and enters a world called Hexe, where she learns more about witchcraft, spells, and how to channel her supernatural abilities. It shows "good witchcraft." 

The Craft: Legacy (2020): A reboot of the 1996 cult classic which increased curiosity about witchcraft, follows a new generation of four teenage witches. It explores contemporary themes of manifestation, sisterhood, and casting spells.

Social Media

WitchTok on TikTok: A massive subculture under the hashtag #WitchTok (with billions of views) where creators share tarot card readings, crystal healing guides, and small-scale spell tutorials. Prominent creators like Frankie Castanea (@ChaoticWitchAunt) document daily folk witchcraft practices and break down misconceptions.

Digital Sigils and Altars: Practitioners use design software like Canva to create personalized magical symbols (sigils). They embed these symbols into their Instagram or TikTok bios, email signatures, or use them as smartphone lock screens to "cast spells with every scroll."

Manifestation Trends: Content focused on the "law of attraction," positive thinking, and intention-setting frequently trends on platforms like TikTok and Instagram, functioning as a mainstream, accessible form of folk magic that leads to embracing witchcraft outright.

Witches of Instagram: Creators build aesthetic feeds featuring altars decorated with herbs, crystals, and tarot cards. Influencers blend makeup tutorials, cozy "cottagecore" lifestyle content, and modern pagan spirituality. 

How Did Witchcraft Get So Popular?

If you thought I would write "Vatican II," you're correct. More than any other factor the Occult Revival (as I have called it) has one major driving force: Vatican II and the man-made sect of Counterfeit Catholicism it created. Witchcraft is one major component of occult practices. 

Three major evils of Vatican II have caused the spike in witchcraft:

1. The Mass replaced with the Novus Bogus. The countless graces that come from the unbloody Sacrifice of the Cross and Holy Communion have been taken away for a Neo-Protestant bread and wine service. As the number of Masses decreases, the power of Satan increases. The Novus Bogus service is so vapid as to destroy any sense of the sacred. Even pagan sociologists note that by stripping-down or "rationalizing" the liturgy, the Church left a spiritual vacuum. Modern witchcraft and ceremonial magic grew rapidly during this era precisely because they offered a sense of something mysterious and reverent unlike "clown mass." 

2. The Denigrating of Marian devotion. 

The Blessed Mother is the model for all women to follow. Follow her and you get to her Divine Son. Women now seek false ideas of womanhood from feminism as exemplified in witchcraft with "Mother Goddess." 

3. Ecumenism. 

The heretical document Nostra Aetate of Vatican II taught that there are elements of the truth in false religions. It adopted the false ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium, that the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Christ are not one and the same. The Church of Christ "subsists" in the Catholic Church in its fullness, but it subsists in other religions too, more or less, according to how many "elements of truth" it has. To have all the elements is best, but just some elements are good too, and salvific. The new ecclesiology denies the dogma Outside the Church there is no salvation. 

Nostra Aetate stated, "The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions." "These religions" included Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. While witchcraft is never mentioned, the heretical principle applies: if ancient Eastern religions held valid spiritual truth, then perhaps older, pre-Christian European traditions (like paganism and earth-based witchcraft) were also worth exploring, and even joining--salvation is not exclusive to the Catholic Church according to Vatican II. 

Witchcraft's appeal to the young.

Why is witchcraft on the rise and why does it appeal particularly to young people? First, young people are drawn to Wicca/Witchcraft because it has no orthodoxy and has no concept of absolute good or absolute evil. This is greatly appealing to impressionable young people. There are some common practices, rituals, and sayings, but for the most part practitioners can add and subtract to it at will. It is a perfectly postmodern religion. 

Second, witchcraft appeals to young people because it promotes glorification of self. "You are god/goddess." There is also a very strong feminist component so the attraction for girls is even greater.

Third, many young people embrace witchcraft because they, like adult witchcraft devotees, are bound by a passionate love of nature. Witches love the earth and care deeply for the environment; however, they take it too far.

Combating Witchcraft

Reclaim Halloween. 

I wince when I see children dress up as the evil supernatural characters of witches, vampires, and demons. What can be done? Have children dress up as a saint, and have your child learn all he can about this saint. These are the role models children should aspire to be. Does your son like things medieval? Dress up as King St. Louis IX! Want to be a lawyer? St. Thomas More will fit the role. For girls, there is the martyr of purity, St. Maria Goretti, and the equally brave St. Joan of Arc. Parents should take their kids trick-or-treating so they can explain the costume with their children to others who inquire.

Consider "All Saints Day" parties at home instead of trick-or-treating; have a parade of saints and fun in the house!

Talking to a Witch.

To convert a witch, it is important not to misstate their beliefs. You should always have on a St. Benedict medal. They will most likely attack alleged "witch burnings" and "Church persecutions." Don't let it go there. Ask what proof they have of "Mother Goddess" and their pantheistic worldview. Most are not well versed on it. Then, show the proofs of Christ's resurrection and also show the falsity of pantheism. Use my post on pantheism to help you: introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2018/07/east-meets-and-defeats-west.html. 

It is also important to point out gently where Wicca/Witchcraft is inconsistent. Without a God who is perfectly good, there are no absolutes, no standards by which to measure what is just or unjust. Witches borrow from Christian values of right and wrong. Witches might get upset at how women have been treated, but on what do they base their anger—that treating women poorly goes against their personal taste? Traditionalist Catholics believe mistreating women is wrong because God said so. We also believe that all life has dignity because we are made in God’s image. Witches don’t believe this, but without this belief they have only shaky ground on which to condemn injustice.

Conclusion

Witchcraft was once a rare thing. Now, it is becoming commonplace. As the number of those in witchcraft rises, it is important to understand it and combat it. We need to convert them, and not just in faraway lands. Thanks to Vatican II, you may need to convert your neighbor; the witch next door. 

Cultum Regi Regum: A Vindication Of Pope Pius XII

 

I have written before that Pope Pius XII is one of the most unfairly attacked pontiffs, especially among those purporting to be "Traditionalists." His Holiness has been attacked as "soft on Modernism," and his papacy allegedly "led to Vatican II." The charges are unfounded. He was one of the greatest popes in history, as I have always maintained. Years ago, my spiritual father, Fr. Gommar DePauw, JCD, told me that Pope Pius XII was planning a full-scale attack on Modernism. Father said that Pope Pius went to Judgement before it could be carried out. I took his word for it, as he was a truthful priest, but I only had his ipse dixit. Until recently.

The Pacelli archives (Eugene Pacelli being Pius XII's name) were opened in 2020. The German historian Matthias Daufratshofer found drafts of what would have been the most monumental encyclical of modern times. Researchers Sr. Sabine Schratz and Daniele Premoli published the reconstruction of the unpublished text of the encyclical, to be entitled Cultum Regi Regum---"Worship to the King of Kings."

The encyclical was to be a follow-up to the great Humani Generis, promulgated by Pope Pius XII in 1950, and which condemned "... some false opinions threatening to undermine the foundations of Catholic Doctrine." It was drafted by the great Dominican theologian Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange. 

Its salient points include:

• Encyclicals usually speak to matters already expounded upon in doctrine; however, should the Pope pass supreme judgment on a disputed matter, it should be considered closed for discussion.

• Divine revelation was given by God as guidance for the Church to exercise Her living teaching authority, not for private deterministic interpretation.

• Some dispute the divine authorship of Scripture in part or in whole and interpret it on the basis of exegesis, looking for hidden meanings, instead of on the Church’s teachings.

• They claim that a new exegesis of the Old Testament would replace literal difficulties with symbolic/spiritual truth.

• Their claims oppose the norms of interpretation explained in previous encyclicals.

• Doubt regarding revealed truths is a result of this way of thinking. (e.g. Creation out of love, God’s eternal foreknowledge of men’s free choices, etc.)

• Angels, essence, the supernatural order, original sin, sin in general, the efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice, and the Real Presence are all debated.

• The necessity and value of the Church and the faith itself is questioned.

• These errors are being pointed out herein because some Catholic theologians are committing them and are hereby censured.

• The Church relies on reason to understand the faith, God’s law, the mysteries, and even the existence of God. Reason comes with training and leads to truth.

• Teaching Authority only covers matters of faith and morals. "New" truth cannot overturn established truth, but it can correct errors.

• Priests must learn philosophy and Aquinas’ method is tried and true.

• Opponents claim that the traditional philosophy used by the Church is adequate for basic instruction but not for practical application, and that all other philosophies, albeit evolving, are ultimately compatible with Catholicism.

• They claim that the Church’s philosophy appeals to intellect and ignores the will and emotions; however, this is clearly and historically false, for the Church teaches that the will can see truth beyond what the intellect can deduce on its own.

• Theodicy and ethics (philosophical sciences) are threatened by these new opinions. Not only are they themselves debased, but so is the protection provided by the Church’s Teaching Authority.

• Discussion of theories not yet proven scientifically but merely hypothesized must follow. Theories can only be considered if they do not oppose Church teaching.

• Human evolution (origin of man from pre-existent and living matter) is up for discussion, but cannot contradict that God is the immediate creator of souls.

• Polygenism (origin from two or more distinct ancestors) is irreconcilable with the doctrine of original sin.

• The first eleven chapters of Genesis may not fit the modern concept of history, but any inclusion of folklore was done under divine inspiration.

• Thus, these are not imaginative myths but expressions of truth. Ancient sacred authors were clearly superior to secular ("profane") authors of the same period.

Hence, while condemning the modern errors, Pope Pius was careful to allow discussion on evolution of the body of humans, and a non-literal interpretation of Genesis in certain instances (which idea was advanced by Pope St. Pius X). 

Most importantly, Cultum Regi Regum, was to be promulgated in 1957, to mark the 50th anniversary of Pope St. Pius X's monumental condemnation of Modernism, Pascendi Dominici Gregis. It was to be called "the Pascendi of modern times." (N.B. This post is based on what I was able to gather from what the researchers [and commenters on that research] have written. Ergo, the information is not complete, and is subject to revision. It is not definitive as of this writing.---Introibo). 

What is Known: The Theologians Who Drafted It

On December 29, 1956, a commission of theologians was set up by Pope Pius XII to draft the encyclical. The commission was under the guidance of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, headed by the erudite and saintly Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani. At least five theologians are known:

1. Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange (1877-1964). A professor at the Angelicum, he championed a rigid scholasticism based on the philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas. He correctly held that the Church’s theological definitions were immutable and expressed in timeless, objective, metaphysical categories. 

Garrigou-Lagrange was a fierce opponent of the so-called Nouvelle Theologie (New Theology), which was a roll call of the most radical Modernist theologians, such as Henri de Lubac, Jean Danielou, and M. D. Chenu. These theologians held that truth is dynamic; its expression can evolve historically "without changing its essence."

 In 1946, things came to a fever pitch when Garrigou-Lagrange published a highly controversial article in the journal Angelicum entitled Where is the New Theology Leading Us? His answer was to the point: "It leads straight to Modernism." Garrigou-Lagrange used his significant influence as a consultor to the Holy Office to urge the pope to act. His efforts culminated in August 1950, when Pope Pius XII promulgated the encyclical Humani Generis, the document having Garrigou-Lagrange as its principal author.

As a result, several New Theology professors (including Henri de Lubac and Yves Congar) were censured and removed from their teaching positions. Some of their publications were censured as well. Garrigou-Lagrange was on the verge of total victory when Roncalli usurped the papal throne and rehabilitated all the censured Modernist theologians, welcoming them to the Robber Council. 

2. Abp. Paul Phillippe (1905-1984). A staunch Anti-Modernist, Phillippe was against the Modernists at Vatican II. After the Robber Council, he tried to stop as much damage as he could as Secretary of the Holy Office, now called "The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith." 

3. Fr. Sebastian Tromp (1889-1975). Tromp was a brilliant professor of dogmatic theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome from 1929 to 1964. His sharp mind and absolute loyalty to traditional scholasticism earned him the trust of Pope Pius XII. Tromp was the principal draftsman behind Mystici Corporis Christi in 1943; the landmark encyclical which reaffirmed and made manifest the traditional ecclesiology on the nature of the Church as the "Mystical Body of Christ." In it, Tromp strictly equated the Mystical Body of Christ only with the visible Roman Catholic Church; "IS" not "subsists." Tromp is wrongly criticized for allegedly pushing "subsists" in Lumen Gentium at Vatican II, when he was actually trying to prevent an even more heretical wording. 

Tromp became the Holy Office's premier orthodox defender of the Faith under Cardinal Ottaviani. He was deeply involved in vetting publications, investigating suspected Modernist tendencies, and enforcing strict Catholic standards across the global Church. Fr. Tromp was the principal author behind several of the original, orthodox schemas presented to the Council Fathers in late 1962. These drafts were written in a scholastic Latin style designed to condemn modern errors and reaffirm existing dogmas. 

4. Fr. Marie-Rosaire Gagnebet (1904–1983). Gagnebet was a major French Dominican theologian, historical researcher, and Roman curial advisor. He was Anti-Modernist yet was criticized for some methods used by Modernists. Gagnebet used it, however, not to move past Aquinas, but to restore Thomism to its original 13th-century purity and make it more rigorous. 

He helped craft the heretical Lumen Gentium. He thought that by actively helping to write the document, he could ensure that it did not contain actual theological errors or heresy. He was (obviously) wrong and became compromised. 

5. Fr. Augustin Bea (1881–1968). A snake-in-the grass if there ever was one. Bea served as a professor and later Rector of the prestigious Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome from 1930 to 1949. He was a master of biblical archaeology and ancient languages. From 1945 until 1958, Bea served as the personal spiritual director and confessor to Pope Pius XII. since he held an intimate position of trust, Bea was able to convince Pope Pius XII that certain clergymen were orthodox (or had been rehabilitated) and were worthy of promotion to the cardinalate or episcopacy. (The pope is not protected by the Holy Ghost in making ecclesiastical appointments). Bea was, by all outward indications, an Anti-Modernist. 

Even Fr. DePauw thought so. 

As soon as Roncalli came into power as the false "Pope" John XXIII, Bea showed his true colors as an ultra-Modernist. Roncalli wasted no time in making Bea a "Cardinal," and in 1960, Roncalli created the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity with Bea as its head. The purpose of the Secretariat was to promote radical ecumenism as it operated independently of the Holy Office and, therefore, Cardinal Ottavianni could not stop what they did.  

Bea raged against the anti-Modernist preparatory schemas. In 1962, Bea stood up on the Council floor and fiercely attacked them, arguing that the texts "lacked charity," a "pastoral spirit," and any understanding of modern biblical research. Bea's forceful opposition helped convince the Council Fathers to reject the curial drafts entirely and pave the way to the Great Apostasy. 

During Vatican II, he was a major drafter of the Modernist documents, specifically:

• Unitatis Redintegratio which officially committed the Catholic Church to heretical ecumenism

• Nostra Aetate which lauded paganism, Islam, and denied that the Jews are justly called the Deicide Race

• Dignitatis Humanae which declared all humans have a "right" to religious freedom, a complete repudiation of Church teaching on religious tolerance and the axiom that "error has no rights." 

Therefore, of the five theologians we know were on the commission, four were solidly Anti-Modernist at the time (I would argue Garrigou-Lagrange was never compromised as he died in 1964), and only one was a closet Modernist. The encyclical would be a theological masterpiece considering the authors. We must wait for the researchers to publish the exact Latin verbiage. 

What We Know of the Encyclical

The draft was dated on August 15, the Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in 1958. It was sent to be considered by the full commission on September 27, and Pope Pius XII died twelve days later, on October 9, never having signed it. It went through many revisions so the intended release in 1957 never came to pass.  Cultum Regi Regum was to consist of six chapters. Here is the breakdown:

Chapter One: The Nature of Religion

Highlights:

• It forcefully rejects Modernism and "vital immanence" ---the idea that religion does not start with intellectual beliefs or external doctrines. Instead, it begins as a blind, subconscious feeling; often described by Modernists as a "religious sense" or a sentiment of the heart. The encyclical says religion is a virtue, not a feeling or identity

• Religion consists in the adoration owed to God alone ("consistit in cultu latriae")

• Strong condemnation of the failure by individuals and society in not keeping Sunday holy  

Chapter Two: Liturgical Worship and Private Devotion

Highlights:

• As if seeing the future, the Novus Bogus type service is firmly rejected. The teaching of Mediator Dei is expanded upon

• Antiquarianism is condemned as is concelebration of Mass except in special or rare circumstances; "One Mass at which one hundred priests assist is not equal in value to one hundred Masses offered separately"

•  The priest is not the leader of an assembly the efficacy of whose actions depend upon collective participation of the people

• Private devotions are to be kept and encouraged, especially the Rosary 

Chapter Three: Moral Theology

Highlights: 

• Natural Law is to be emphasized and subjectivist moral theories rejected

• Condemnation of those who deny or call into doubt that the primary end of marriage is for the procreation and education of children, thereby making the mutual support of the spouses (the secondary end) equal to the primary end

• Consecrated virginity is the highest state and superior to marriage (reaffirming Trent)

• The dangers of materialism are condemned

Chapter Four: The Profession of Faith

Highlights:

• Catholics must boldly profess the One True Faith whole and entire, not partially, and never to compromise even on one point of doctrine 

• In regard to false religions, cooperation for the common good is permitted but doctrinal differences may never be set aside for a false notion of "brotherhood" ---"a healthy doctor may work beside a physician with a contagious disease, but closer work requires more vigilance against infection"

• True ecumenism consists in bringing those in false religions into the One True Church, and not in downplaying or failing to mention Catholic truths that offend them

Chapter Five: Authority and Freedom in the Church

Highlights:

• Our religion is "via auctoritatis et obedientiae," a way of authority and obedience

• Theologians have a vital role, however only when united and approved by the Magisterium

• Renewed and more expanded condemnations of the "New Theology" and Modernism

Chapter Six: The Religious Order and The Secular Order

Highlights:

• Quas Primas is reaffirmed; the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ

• Every State must strive to be a Catholic State because every State owes public recognition to the One True Church. A religiously neutral State is against the Will of God and all must strive to make it Catholic

• The views of John Courtney Murray are condemned

• The Social Kingship of Christ is a conclusion about human nature and not nostalgia for old times. Communities cannot organize themselves as if God is irrelevant

(Reference: Journal of Modern and Contemporary Christianity: “L’Enciclica Pascendi dei tempi moderni. Il progetto per l’ultima enciclica di Pio XII (1956-58).” Vol. 3, No. 1 (April 2024). 

A Greatly Misunderstood Pontiff

It is apparent that Pope Pius XII was no "Modernist." Much of the charges come from a misunderstanding of Catholic principles. Pius was trying to make Catholicism "combat-ready" against the attacks of the 20th century. As countries became more secularized, it was harder to get time off to attend the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Evening Mass was introduced, and with it the mitigated three hour Eucharistic Fast so all could receive Holy Communion.

The Holy Week reforms are often unjustly criticized as "reductions in prayers." If brevity means "less holy," then what are we to think of Pope St. Pius V? In his reform of the Roman Missal, he removed late medieval "farcings" (interpolated, localized tropes or poetic insertions added into standard chants like the Kyrie and Gloria) and doubtful accretions, while the number of liturgical sequences were reduced down to just four. St. Pius V also removed some localized sanctoral feast days and duplicate saints' celebrations to clear up a crowded calendar. In some dioceses, a Mass could take a very long time. Is the Missal of 1570 somehow "less traditional" or "less holy" since certain prayers and feasts were removed?     

Conclusion: A Vindication of a Great Pope

To those who have attacked Pope Pius XII as "soft on Modernism," on being "liberal," on "introducing novelties" in the liturgy, this encyclical that could have been shows a great Pontiff who loved the Catholic Faith and defended the One True Church. 

Far from being an "innovator," Pope Pius XII used Catholic principles to meet modern needs while simultaneously defending the One True Church from Her enemies. I can't help but wonder what would have happened (or not happened) had Cultum Regi Regum been promulgated. Could Vatican II have thus been prevented? Only God knows. One thing is now clear: Pope Pius XII was a true pope and therefore he was no Modernist. He had no sympathy for Modernism and was in complete possession of his faculties until the end. Let his critics be silenced. Should the papacy ever be restored, we may see the canonization of Eugene Pacelli as Pope St. Pius XII.

Contending For The Faith---Part 56

 

In St. Jude 1:3, we read, "Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." [Emphasis mine]. Contending For The Faith is a series of posts dedicated to apologetics (i.e.,  the intellectual defense of the truth of the Traditional Catholic Faith) to be published the first Monday of each month.  This is the next installment.

Sadly, in this time of Great Apostasy, the faith is under attack like never before, and many Traditionalists don't know their faith well enough to defend it. Remember the words of our first pope, "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." (1Peter 3:16). There are five (5) categories of attacks that will be dealt with in these posts. Attacks against:

• The existence and attributes of God
• The truth of the One True Church established by Christ for the salvation of all 
• The truth of a particular dogma or doctrine of the Church
• The truth of Catholic moral teaching
• The truth of the sedevacantist position as the only Catholic solution to what has happened since Vatican II 

In addition, controversial topics touching on the Faith will sometimes be featured, so that the problem and possible solutions may be better understood. If anyone had suggestions for topics that would fall into any of these categories, you may post them in the comments. I cannot guarantee a post on each one, but each will be carefully considered.

Proofs of the Resurrection

There are numerous attempts by the enemies of Christ to deny His physical resurrection from the dead.

There are four (4) basic arguments to explain away Christ's resurrection: (1) it was a hallucination of the Apostles; (2) the Apostles created a myth-- they did not mean what they taught to be literal; (3) the Apostles conspired to deceive the world; and (4) Christ didn't really die, he "swooned" and later fully recovered. 

In this post, I will refute the so-called "Hallucination Theory." (N.B. The information contained in this post comes from myriad sources, both in print and online. I take no credit other than condensing the material into a terse and readable post---Introibo). 

What is the Hallucination Theory?

The Hallucination Theory attempts to account for the testimony to the resurrection of Jesus by claiming both auditory and visual hallucinations on the part of Jesus’ disciples. Proponents of this view claim that Jesus’ disciples really did “see” Jesus, but that these sightings were merely hallucinations in the minds of Christ’s followers, not genuine encounters with a resurrected man. The hallucinations, or sightings, are claimed to have happened repeatedly and are said to have been so vivid as to convince Christ’s followers that Jesus actually had risen from the dead.

The advantage of this proposal is two-fold. First, the proponents of this theory need not engage the impressive evidence for the life-changing transformation of the disciples based on their newfound belief in Christ’s resurrection. Rather, the skeptic can grant that there were “appearances” of some sort without conceding the occurrence of a miracle. The second move is to then explain these “appearances” as subjective hallucinations, events that took place only in the minds of the disciples.

As a result, the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ are dismissible. After all, if you thought you saw a dead man walking and talking, wouldn’t you think it more likely that you were hallucinating than that you were seeing correctly? Why then not think the same thing about Christ’s resurrection? 

The Hallucination Theory misses the mark as a suitable alternative to Jesus’ resurrection as it fails to adequately handle matters such as the number of witness accounts, medical truths related to hallucinations, and the lack of explanation of other resurrection facts. This will be examined in the next section, with a closer look at the medical problems of claiming a hallucination accounts for Christ's resurrection.  

The Problems with the Hallucination Theory

• There were too many witnesses. Hallucinations are private, individual, subjective. Christ appeared to Mary Magdalene, to the disciples minus Thomas, to the disciples including Thomas, to the two disciples at Emmaus, to the fisherman on the shore, to James (his “brother” or cousin), and even to five hundred people at once (See 1 Corinthians 15:3-8). Even three different witnesses are enough for a kind of psychological trigonometry; over five hundred is about as public as you can wish. Paul says in this passage (v.6). that most of the five hundred are still alive, inviting any reader to check the truth of the story by questioning the eyewitnesses—he could never have done this and gotten away with it, given the power, resources and numbers of his enemies, if it were not true.

• The witnesses were qualified. They were simple, honest, moral people who had firsthand knowledge of the facts.

• The five hundred saw Christ together, at the same time and place. This is even more remarkable than five hundred private “hallucinations” at different times and places of the same Jesus. Five hundred separate Elvis sightings may be dismissed, but if five hundred simple fishermen in Massachusetts saw, touched and talked with him at once, in the same town, that would be a different matter. (See 1 Corinthians 15:6). 

• Hallucinations usually last a few seconds or minutes; rarely hours. This one hung around for forty days (Acts 1:3).

• Hallucinations usually happen only once, except to the insane. This one returned many times, to ordinary people (Jn 20:19—21:14; Acts 1:3).

• Hallucinations come from within, from what we already know, at least unconsciously. This one said and did surprising and unexpected things (Acts 1:4, 9)—like a real person and unlike a dream.

• Not only did the disciples not expect a resurrection, but they also didn’t even believe it at first—neither Peter, nor the women, nor Thomas, nor the eleven. They thought he was a ghost; he had to eat something to prove he was not (Lk 24:36-43).

• Hallucinations do not eat. The resurrected Christ did, on at least two occasions (Lk 24:42-43; Jn 21:1-14).

• The disciples touched him (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:39; Jn 20:27).

• They also spoke with him, and he spoke back. Figments of your imagination do not hold profound, extended conversations with you, unless you have the kind of mental disorder that isolates you. But this “hallucination” conversed with at least eleven people at once, for forty days (Acts 1:3).

• The apostles could not have believed in the “hallucination” if Jesus’ corpse had still been in the tomb. This is a very simple and telling point; for if it was a hallucination, where was the corpse? They would have checked for it; if it was there, they could not have believed.

• If the apostles had hallucinated and then spread their hallucinogenic story, the Jews would have stopped it by producing the body—unless the disciples had stolen it, in which case we are left with a conspiracy theory and all its inherent difficulties.

• A hallucination would explain only the post-resurrection appearances; it would not explain the empty tomb, the rolled-away stone, or the inability to produce the corpse. No theory can explain all these data except a real resurrection. 

How Do the Modernists/Skeptics Respond?

When confronted with these objections to a hallucination, Modernists counter by arguing:

1. A resurrection is a miracle, and miracles do not happen (pre-supposing an anti-supernatural worldview). OR

2. The Bible is a myth that contains religious truths, a dead Man didn't literally come back to life.

In either case, they then conclude a hallucination is the best explanation. Is it really?

Hallucinations: A Medical Examination

The following section was taken from four primary (but not exclusive) sources: 

 

Benjamin J. Sadock, Virginia A. Sadock, and Pedro Ruiz, Kaplan and Sadock’s Synopsis of Psychiatry, Behavioral Science/Clinical Psychiatry, 11th ed. (2015), pgs. 452–53.

Bryan Teeple, Jason Caplan, and Theodore Stern, “Visual Hallucinations: Differential Diagnosis and Treatment,” Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 11 (2009): 26–32.

Colm Owens and Simon Dein, “Conversion Disorder: The Modern Hysteria,” Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 12 (2006): 152–57.

Naomi M. Simon et al., “Informing the Symptom Profile of Complicated Grief,” Depression and Anxiety 28 (2011): 118–26.

 ---Introibo

 A hallucination is an experience involving one or more of the five senses in the absence of external stimuli that the conscious mind perceives as real. Most proponents of the hallucination hypothesis overlook the fact that hallucinations are symptoms of an underlying illness. Hallucinations generally arise from three disease categories: (1) psychophysiological causes related to an alteration of function or structure in the brain (a brain tumor, for example); (2) psychobiochemical causes due to alteration of chemical neurotransmitters within the brain (for example, delirium tremens in alcohol withdrawal); or (3) psychodynamic causes, namely the intrusion of psychiatric illness into the conscious mind.  ​

However, could Jesus’s disciples have all simultaneously suffered severe medical or psychiatric illness? This contention defies reason and probability. In Jesus’s time people with psychiatric illness were ostracized and considered incompetent or demonized. Could a group of people with uncontrolled psychiatric illness have deployed such a rapid and successful expansion of Christianity in the first century? This hardly seems plausible.

It must not be overlooked that hallucinations are private experiences occurring only in the milieu of the individual’s brain. No two hallucinations are identical from person to person. Two people cannot dream the same dream.  As such, the Hallucination Theory offers no explanation for group encounters with the resurrected Jesus.​

Mass Hysteria

Does mass hysteria explain group meetings of the disciples with the resurrected Jesus? In modern medical parlance, mass hysteria is more precisely termed mass sociogenic illness. This condition describes individuals within a group who have similar simultaneous collective psychological experiences, even visionary experiences in rare cases. The group dynamic is characterized by a heightened sense of collective excitement in the context of unique cultural or social expectation. However, Jesus’s disciples don’t fit that profile. They weren’t expecting his resurrection. They were frightened and in hiding (See St. John 20:19).​

It is noteworthy that no two persons in a group experiencing mass sociogenic illness have identical visual hallucinations. This is not surprising since hallucinations are private experiences within the individual’s mind. Thus, mass sociogenic illness fails to offer a plausible explanation for group meetings of the disciples with the resurrected Jesus.​

Conversion Disorder

In Freudian psychoanalysis, subconscious conflicts are sometimes “converted” into neurological symptoms, hence the term conversion disorder. Conversion disorder symptoms can be profound and can include blindness or paralysis. Symptoms are psychiatric, however, and lack identifiable pathophysiological causation.​

Conversion disorder is twice as likely to affect women than men and is often associated with other psychological comorbidities. It results from a psychologically painful experience. For example, a mother who finds her child has drowned may become blind. People with conversion disorder show a peculiar lack of distress about their condition, a demeanor sometimes called la belle indifference. Nevertheless, conversion disorder has a generally positive prognosis. Neurological symptoms most often subside in days to a few weeks.​

According to occult psychologist Carl Jung, the St. Paul had subconsciously been a Christian for some time but had repressed his true faith until it broke into his conscious mind, manifesting in a vision of Jesus followed by psychogenic (psychological-in-origin) blindness. Jung believed that Paul’s transient blindness after his Damascus road experience with Jesus (Acts 9:3–9) was a conversion disorder.​

Jung’s idea that St. Paul simultaneously experienced visual hallucinations and conversion disorder is antiquated. Visual hallucinations are not part of the current clinical pathognomy of conversion disorder. To propose that St. Paul had hallucinations and conversion disorder would require dual diagnoses.​

Additionally, St. Paul doesn’t fit the profile of someone suffering from conversion disorder. He had no misgivings or psychological turmoil about persecuting Christians (Gal. 1:13–14). He was a rising star in the Hebrew religious world of his day (Phil. 3:4–6, Gal. 1:14).  Had Paul merely experienced a conversion disorder, it would be expected that he would resume his usual life activities once the symptoms had subsided.​

Even Modernist scholars concede that St. Paul believed Jesus appeared to him bodily. This would be a peculiar lifelong belief had he merely experienced a conversion disorder. St. Paul made a lasting 180-degree change after he met Jesus. He became the most prolific proponent of Christianity to the Gentile world in his time, despite severe persecution and eventual martyrdom. He relentlessly preached of Jesus’s messiahship and resurrection from the dead. St. Paul’s radical, enduring change, prolific doctrinal writing, and Christian advocacy are inconsistent with the proposition that he experienced conversion disorder.​

Bereavement

Hallucinatory symptoms during bereavement are common, most often experienced by a widowed spouse. Unlike hallucinations, bereavement experiences are psychologically mediated but are not considered pathological (related to disease). The most common experience is a sense of closeness with the deceased. Auditory and visual experiences can occur but are less common.​

The rarest type of bereavement experience is visual apparitions. Visual experiences are reported to range from 4% or less but up to 10.8% in spouses suffering severe grief. Visual apparitions are typically noninteractive. Attempting to interact with an apparition causes it to disappear. Visual bereavement experiences would be doubly atypical among friends and disciples. Grieving the loss of a friend and mentor is dissimilar to the grief a widowed spouse may experience.​

A widowed spouse is typically reluctant to disclose such experiences. It is noteworthy that bereavement experiences neither cause the grieving spouse to believe the deceased had resurrected nor inspire them to make any particular life change. Bereavement experiences often diminish in frequency over time but can persist in some cases for months or years. Unlike bereavement experiences, Jesus’s disciples saw him only within the forty days after his resurrection.​

Meetings with Jesus included person-to-person visits, group and large crowd meetings, physical contact, eating together, and detailed conversations. Those who met him were convinced that he had resurrected. The disciples’ meetings with Jesus are simply unlike the psychological experiences reported in bereavement literature.​

Conclusion

Jesus’s disciples experienced something that made them believe he had resurrected from the dead. The effect on each was profound and lifelong. Proponents of the Hallucination Theory seem unaware of the psychiatric and neurophysiological pathologies that cause hallucinations. The disciples’ belief in Jesus’s resurrection cannot be reasonably explained away as the result of psychiatric illness. Moreover, psychological phenomena offer no plausible explanation for the group meetings between the resurrected Jesus and his disciples. The Hallucination Theory fails to offer any tenable explanation for the disciples’ belief in Jesus’s resurrection.  

Recognizing The Occult---Part 5

 

This is the fifth (and final) post I will publish on occult symbolism. I've written much on occult practices and how it influences things like music and movies, but not so much on occult symbols. Sometimes my friends will ask, "I want to buy [certain item they show me] but a writing or a picture on it looks strange. Is it occult?" Good question. Sometimes someone will know something is occult, but they don't know exactly why it's bad, other than the general condemnation of the occult by the Church and found in the Bible. 

This post will continue to expose occult symbolism. While many things today are occult, not every symbol or writing we don't understand is automatically "occult." We must learn to discern. You may be better equipped to help a family member or friend who has some occult symbol in his/her possession and may not realize it, thinking it harmless. My first post in this series was published on 4/27/26.  It is well worth reading first if you have not already done so--it gives some background on symbolism which I will not repeat here. This final post will deal with explicitly occult symbols most people recognize but may not understand exactly what it shows. I was not going to show these symbols since they are mostly known for what they are, but I thought it might be good to expose them fully. I think it is a fitting way to end this series of posts. 

I claim no credit for any of the material in this post. All I did was compile the research on the occult into a terse and reader-friendly installment on this blog. The material comes from many online and print resources.  I hope you find it useful. Please comment and let me know if you got something out of it.

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

Explicitly Occult Symbols

The Pentagram

Meaning: A geometric declaration of mastery. It visualizes the occult claim that the universe is a battery the human will can drain. The star represents the four elements (earth, air, fire, water) as raw materials to be ruled by the fifth point: Spirit (the self). When enclosed in a circle (the Pentacle), that boundary represents a containment field —a “magic circle” designed to keep spiritual energies in and dangerous influences out. It says, “I am the captain of my soul; I command the elements and bind the spirits.” 

Origin:The Pentagram has a long diverse history, even being used by medieval Christians to represent the five wounds of Christ. However, its modern meaning comes from 19th-century occultist Eliphas Levi. He established the distinction used today: the star pointing up represents “white” magic (control), and the star pointing down represents “black” magic (rebellion). 

Uses Today: The upright pentacle is the primary symbol of Wicca, worn as a protective talisman and displayed on altars. Wiccans use the pentacle in rituals to consecrate tools, invoke or banish elemental forces, and cast protective circles. It is also worn as jewelry to identify practitioners and ward off negative energy. It has also been used by Satanists. 

Why it is so evil: The Pentagram claims the elements contain divine power we can direct. However, from a Traditional Catholic worldview, creation is a masterpiece, not a battery. We don’t manipulate the painting to get power; we talk to the Artist who holds every atom together (Colossians 1:17). True authority isn’t seized; it’s received from the One who said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (St. Matthew 28:18). 

The Sigil of Bathomet

Meaning: A deliberate visual blasphemy. Encircling the image are Hebrew letters which, winding “widdershins” (against the natural order), spell Leviathan). Historically, this counterclockwise motion was believed to “unwind” creation, reverse blessings into curses, and defy the divine order. By writing the name of the biblical chaos-monster in this direction, the symbol is a display of rebellion—invoking an ancient enemy of God to champion the inner beast. The inverted star (two points up) symbolizes the material world and carnal instincts ruling over the spirit. It tells the wearer that their basest instincts are not sins to be mortified, but "gods" to be worshipped. 

Origin: This icon wasn’t found in ancient ruins; it was constructed to shock. Éliphas Lévi created the “Sabbatic Goat” in 1856 as a fusion of opposites (male/female, man/beast) to represent “equilibrium” and wholeness through embracing contradictions. Lévi inscribed SOLVE (dissolve) and COAGULA (congeal) on its arms. In 1966, Anton LaVey adopted it for the Church of Satan, adding the Hebrew text to create the “preeminent visual distillation of Satanism.” 

Uses Today: The primary emblem of the Church of Satan, worn as a badge of identity by atheistic and theistic Satanists alike. (Atheistic Satanists consider Satan to represent "doing your own will" and disavow belief in the supernatural which hinders people from doing what they want. Theistic Satanists believe in the devil and worship him as such). The symbol appears on jewelry, tattoos, album covers, and public monuments erected to challenge Christian displays. 

Why it is so evil: The Sigil of Baphomet promises that embracing our animal nature brings freedom and wholeness. Scripture says the flesh and the Spirit are at war (Galatians 5:17), and feeding the flesh never satisfies—it kills (Romans 8:6). Real joy isn’t found by indulging in our sinful nature; it’s found in God’s loving and glorious presence, where there are “pleasures forevermore” (Psalm 16:11). 

Leviathan Cross

Meaning: A badge of sulfurous pride. It takes the alchemical symbol for sulfur (brimstone)—the very substance of biblical judgment—and wears it as a crown. The infinity symbol at the bottom represents the eternal, autonomous self, while the double Cross of Lorraine symbolizes balance and protection. It creates the occult paradox “Fire of Water”—fiery will thriving in the abyss of the subconscious—declaring, “I would rather burn in my own kingdom than serve in Yours.” 

Origin: Originally a notation for sulfur (brimstone) in 17th-century alchemy (representing the soul or “animating fire” within matter), it was hijacked by Anton LaVey in the 1960s as the central emblem of the Church of Satan. He twisted this ancient chemical glyph into a modern symbol of defiance and self-sovereignty, renaming it after the biblical chaos-dragon, Leviathan. 

Uses Today: The official symbol appears in The Satanic Bible and is worn as jewelry and tattoos by practitioners and non-practitioners alike. Beyond fashion and occult circles, it has also spread through video games like The Binding of Isaac (2011), where millions of young people encountered it as the “Brimstone” power-up before discovering its occult meaning. 

Why it is so evil: It turns the picture of judgment (fire and brimstone) into a badge of personal sovereignty. The irony is heartbreaking: they wear the very badge of their own destruction, celebrating the flame that will consume the rebellion they cherish. Jesus Christ took the punishment we deserved so we could have eternal life with Him instead of eternal agony. 

The Sigil of Lucifer

Meaning:  The promise of forbidden knowledge. In modern Luciferianism (a belief system distinct from Satanism that views Lucifer not as a devil but as a liberator and bringer of light) the sigil represents the pursuit of knowledge (Gnosis), enlightenment, and the independence of the human mind. It is the visual representation of the “Light Bringer” (Lux + Ferre), symbolizing the “spark” of intellect that Luciferians believe was gifted to humanity in the Garden of Eden against the will of a "tyrannical Creator."

Origin: This design comes straight from a dusty instruction manual for summoning demons. It first appeared in the Grimorium Verum (The Grimoire of Truth), a textbook of magic likely from the 18th century, where it served as a tool to invoke and bargain with the spirit of Lucifer. 

Uses Today: The sigil is used in contemporary Luciferian and occult practices as a symbol of enlightenment, individualism, and self-empowerment. It is used as a tool of invocation—a “phone number” to the spirit realm to establish a connection with the “Light Bringer.” It appears widely as jewelry, tattoos, and fashion accessories, adopted by both practitioners committed to its spiritual meaning and those attracted to its aesthetic or countercultural associations. 

Why it is so evil: The Sigil of Lucifer celebrates the serpent’s lie—“You will be like God”—as the original act of enlightenment. St. Paul warns that Satan still disguises himself as “an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14). 

Conclusion

What I wrote as the conclusion in the first four parts of this series is perennially true and is a fitting final word on occult symbols:

Symbols have deep meaning and are important. They link things tangible to realities that are intangible. We can't see love, but when a man brings red roses to his wife, love is symbolized. The ultimate symbol of love is the crucifix, God died so we may live forever. Those are wonderful symbols. However, when the symbol is linked to intangible evils by symbolizing heresies, immoralities and calling upon (evil) spirits for "protection" they become an invitation (wittingly or not) for evil to enter your life. Invite evil in and it will take you up on your request.

Catholic And Modernist Development Of Doctrine

 

"Development of doctrine" means different things to Traditionalists and Modernists. As Vatican II and the sect it spawned changed what was believed into falsehoods, they claimed it was the same teaching that had "evolved" or "developed." Unfortunately, over 60 years after the sect was established, many Traditionalists think any change is "Modernist," and not just in matters of doctrine, but even matters of discipline. Some erroneously go so far as to suggest that Pope Pius XII was "Modernist" in truncating the Eucharistic fast from the midnight before reception of Holy Communion to three hours before receiving. 

What, exactly, constitutes a legitimate development of doctrine? What makes it legitimate? Isn't doctrine immutable? Is any change "Modernist" evolution? This post will try and address these fundamental questions. First, I must speak about the man who gave the best way to distinguish true from false development of doctrine. 

The great John Henry Cardinal Newman (1801-1890) had a methodology for distinguishing true development from Modernist evolution. Although virtuous and orthodox, I cannot call him "saint" since his "canonization" came from Begoglio--a false pope---in 2019. Likewise, I cannot call him a "Doctor of the Church" as that designation came from Prevost in 2025. You might be wondering "If he's orthodox, why is he given honors by the Vatican II sect?" I will explain how Newman's work was hijacked (so to speak) by the Modernists to make it seem like he was one of their own and therefore Modernist evolution of dogma must be "orthodox." 

The primary source of this post is Newman's book An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1878 edition). I have also culled much information both online and in print. I take no credit except for condensing all this information into a terse and readable post. 

Modernist Evolution of Doctrine

Modernism is an amalgamation of errors. It begins with agnosticism.  According to this teaching, human reason is confined entirely within the field of phenomena, which means things that appear to the senses, and it has no power to overstep these limits. Since we cannot know (or even infer) to the existence of things outside the scope of phenomena, the human intellect is incapable of knowing the existence of God.

As a result, Modernism denies the supernatural as an object of certain knowledge. The Modernists who challenge all rational proof of the existence of God as the First Cause of everything in existence, both material and spiritual, fall victims to a "scientific agnosticism." For these, God is something which comes forth from man's subconscious. Religion is therefore essentially about feelings, specifically what makes you feel good; if Christianity, or any other religion, is what makes you feel good and more in touch with the Divine, then it is true for you. Religion has never consisted of creeds or objective truth but of feelings. This doctrine is known as vital immanence. Religion is a feeling or sentiment that comes from a subconscious need for the Divine.

Modernists regard Divine Revelation as a purely natural emergence of religious knowledge from a natural sense known as the "religious sense." There is no "One True Church" and no Deposit of Revelation that needs to be guarded.  

The Modernist God is not transcendent; He is not "out there" but "totally within." As St. Pius X explained in Pascendi, the Modernist God was no more than a symbol and that "the personality of God will become a matter of doubt and the gate will be opened to pantheism." Do you notice how much of the Vatican II sect is infested with Eastern religion and philosophy, such as yoga and reiki? Have you seen in Nostra Aetate, how the Second Vatican (Robber) Council acknowledged "the good" that is in Hinduism and Buddhism? It comes from this erroneous idea of a "God within us all."

Since God is unknowable (as are miracles), the Bible cannot be held as historically accurate. We cannot consider Christ as God, or give credence to miracles. 

Dogmas are taught to be subject to evolution from one meaning to another. As man's religious feelings evolve, so must dogma.  Dogma evolves into whatever accommodates the needs of the current culture. 

"Same name, different meaning." When Modernists talk about Traditional doctrine, they affirm it with a different meaning so they sound orthodox while remaining heretics. When they profess, for example, "Our faith is based upon the Resurrection of Jesus Christ;" it could mean His physical and historical Resurrection as the Church teaches, or simply a symbolic story which was invented by the first Christians to promote faith in Christ who rose only in the mind of His believers.

Catholic dogma is but a common consciousness of the believers. Thus, prompted by this "common consciousness," the believers came together in a society [Church] to formulate and systematize its beliefs. This (according to the Modernists) is how the Magisterium of the Church began.

Condemnation by Pope St. Pius X

In 1907, Pope St. Pius X solemnly condemned sixty-five (65) propositions of the Modernists in Lamentabili Sane. Condemned propositions numbers 53 to 65 deal with Modernist evolution of doctrine.

CONDEMNED:

53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable. Like human society, Christian society is subject to a perpetual evolution.

54. Dogmas, Sacraments and hierarchy, both their notion and reality, are only interpretations and evolutions of the Christian intelligence which have increased and perfected by an external series of additions the little germ latent in the Gospel.

55. Simon Peter never even suspected that Christ entrusted the primacy in the Church to him.

56. The Roman Church became the head of all the churches, not through the ordinance of Divine Providence, but merely through political conditions.

57. The Church has shown that she is hostile to the progress of the natural and theological sciences.

58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, since it evolved with him, in him, and through him.

59. Christ did not teach a determined body of doctrine applicable to all times and all men, but rather inaugurated a religious movement adapted or to be adapted to different times and places.

60. Christian Doctrine was originally Judaic. Through successive evolutions it became first Pauline, then Joannine, finally Hellenic and universal.

61. It may be said without paradox that there is no chapter of Scripture, from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse, which contains a doctrine absolutely identical with that which the Church teaches on the same matter. For the same reason, therefore, no chapter of Scripture has the same sense for the critic and the theologian.

62. The chief articles of the Apostles’ Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first ages as they have for the Christians of our time.

63. The Church shows that she is incapable of effectively maintaining evangelical ethics since she obstinately clings to immutable doctrines which cannot be reconciled with modern progress.

64. Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be re-adjusted.

65. Modern Catholicism can be reconciled with true science only if it is transformed into a non-dogmatic Christianity; that is to say, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.

 In summation, according to Modernism, doctrine:

1. Shifts and changes; old dogmas can take on completely new meanings to suit the times.

2. Changes so completely over generations that it becomes something entirely new.

3. Has as its source internal human consciousness and subjective religious experience.

The One True Church and Development of Doctrine

Newman sets forth seven "notes" (or tests) to distinguish an authentic development from a counterfeit or corruption. Here is each one in summary:

1. Preservation of Type

The outward appearance and structure may change, but the essential character and "look" must remain the same. Think of a tiny acorn growing into a massive oak tree. It looks completely different, but it retains the "type" or identity of an oak tree, not a apple tree. True doctrinal development looks like the adult version of the young Church, not a completely different creature. This is readily suggested by the analogy of physical growth, which is such that the parts and proportions of the developed form, however altered, correspond to those which belong to its rudiments. The adult animal has the same make, as it had on its birth; young birds do not grow into fishes, nor does the child degenerate into the brute, wild or domestic, of which he is by inheritance lord. Vincentius of Lerins adopts this illustration in distinct reference to Christian doctrine. "Let the soul's religion," he says "imitate the law of the body, which, as years go on develops indeed and opens out its due proportions, and yet remains identically what it was. Small are a baby's limbs, a youths are larger, yet they are the same." (An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, pgs. 190-191). 

2. Continuity of Principles

The underlying rules, foundational values, and methods that drive the idea must never change. If a doctrine was originally built on the principles of prayer, the reality of sin, and the importance of sacraments, any new development must also rely on those same foundations. If the underlying principles shift, it is a corruption, not growth. Principle is a better test of heresy than doctrine. Heretics are true to their principles, but change to and fro, backwards and forwards, in opinion; for very opposite doctrines may be exemplifications of the same principle. Thus, the Antiochenes and other heretics sometimes were Arians, sometimes Sabellians, sometimes Nestorians, sometimes Monophysites, as if at random, from fidelity to their common principle, that there is no mystery in theology. Thus, Calvinists become Unitarians from the principle of private judgment. The doctrines of heresy are accidents and soon run to an end; its principles are everlasting. (Ibid, pg 197). 

3. Power of Assimilation

A living, healthy idea can interact with outside cultures, languages, and philosophies, absorbing what is good and using it to express itself better. ust like a healthy human body takes in food from the outside world and uses it to grow stronger, a true doctrine takes in new intellectual concepts or cultural settings and weaves them into the existing faith without losing its own identity. Thus, a power of development is a proof of life, not only in its essay, but especially in its success; for a mere formula either does not expand or is shattered in expanding. A living idea becomes many, yet remains one.(Ibid pg. 206).

4.  Logical Sequence

 Later developments should be the natural, logical next step of what came before, even if it takes centuries to clearly state them.  A true teaching doesn't pop out of nowhere as a sudden surprise. When you look backward through history, you should be able to see a clear trail of breadcrumbs showing how the early beliefs naturally and logically led to the later conclusion. Thus, the holy Apostles would without words know all the truths concerning the high doctrines of theology, which controversialists after them have piously and charitably reduced to formulae, and developed through argument. Thus, St. Justin or St. Irenaeus might be without any digested ideas of Purgatory or Original Sin, yet have an intense feeling, which they had not defined or located, both of the fault of our first nature and the responsibilities of our nature regenerate.(Ibid, pg. 212). 

5. Anticipation of Its Future

 Early in the history of an idea, you can often find early hints, tendencies, or "vague sketches" of what will later become full-blown doctrine. Long before a doctrine is officially defined by the Church, early saints and writers will drop hints or practice devotions that show they were already feeling out the truth that would later be formally taught. In the controversies with the Gnostics, in the second century, striking anticipations occasionally occur, in the works of their Catholic opponents, of the formal dogmatic teaching developed in the Church in the course of the Nestorian and Monophysite controversies in the fifth. (Ibid, pg. 219). 

6. Conservative Action Upon Its Past

A true development protects, illustrates, and strengthens the doctrines that came before it, rather than contradicting or erasing them. rue growth is conservative; it doesn't overturn previous dogmas. If a new teaching makes an old teaching obsolete or wrong, it is not a development—it is a corruption.

A true development, then, may be described as one which is conservative of the course of antecedent developments being really those antecedents and something besides them: it is an addition which illustrates, not obscures, corroborates, not corrects, the body of thought from which it proceeds; and this is its characteristic as contrasted with a corruption. (Ibid, pg. 223).

7. Chronic Vigor

A false idea or corruption burns out quickly, causes immediate decay, or loses its grip on people over time. A true development lasts and stays vibrant across centuries.  Time is the ultimate test. If a theological idea has "chronic vigor," it means it doesn't just flare up like a fad and vanish. It has a long, robust, enduring life that continues to nourish the faithful century after century.

While ideas live in men's minds, they are ever enlarging into fuller development: they will not be stationary in their corruption any more than before it; and dissolution is that further state to which corruption tends. Corruption cannot, therefore, be of long standing; and thus duration is another test of a faithful development.(Ibid, pg. 226). 

The Seven Notes Applied To Papal Supremacy

To illustrate how these notes are applied, let's look at papal supremacy.

1. Preservation of Type: The Church has always had an explicit structure, a hierarchy, and an essential drive to remain united as one global body. In the 1st century, the Church looked like a localized kingdom with local leaders; over time, it became a global kingdom. The "type" (a visible, structured, unified kingdom) never changed. The Pope emerged to keep that global structure intact, meaning the original "look" of a unified Church was preserved.

2. Continuity of Principles: The core principle is that Christ gave Peter the keys and promised that the Church would never fail. The underlying principle is "divine authority keeps the Church unified." The modern papacy operates on that exact same principle. If the Church decided it didn't need a single center of unity, that would be breaking the principle (a corruption). The Pope is just the permanent manifestation of Peter's authority.

3. Power of Assimilation: As the Roman Empire crumbled and European politics shifted, the papacy absorbed legal, political, and cultural structures to protect the faith. The Pope took on titles (like Pontifex Maximus) and legal administrative tools from ancient Rome. The Church didn't become pagan; rather, it "digested" secular Roman structures and used them to organize, govern, and protect the global Christian community.

4. Logical Sequence: Newman argues that a global church logically requires a global arbiter. While the Apostles were alive, their personal authority kept everyone in line. When they died, local conflicts arose, creating a need for local bishops. When local bishops began arguing across different regions, the Church logically needed a single, final court of appeal. The papacy is the next natural step in solving the problem of division.

5. Anticipation of Its Future: Long before the Pope was formally running everything, there were early historical "hints" of his supreme authority. Newman points to early history: in the 1st century, Pope Clement intervened in a dispute in Corinth while the Apostle John was likely still alive. In the 2nd century, Pope Victor regulated the date of Easter for the whole Church. These weren't fully formed modern papal decrees, but they were clear "vague sketches" of the authority to come.

6. Conservative Action Upon Its Past: The growth of papal power did not undo or contradict the authority of local bishops or previous councils; it protected them. Newman points out that during major early crises (like the council of Chalcedon in 449 AD), it was Pope Leo the Great's direct intervention that saved orthodox Christian teaching from being hijacked by heretics. The Pope's authority acted as a shield to preserve what Christians had always believed.

7. Chronic Vigor: Empires, dynasties, and heresies have all risen and fallen, but the papacy remains standing. The Bishop of Rome has faced persecution, internal corruption, political exile, and schisms, yet the office possesses an enduring, robust life. Its ongoing survival and ability to command the spiritual allegiance of millions century after century is a sign of true, divinely sustained development.

Falsifying Cardinal Newman

Modernists (from the early 20th century to those in the Vatican II sect), have purposely distorted Newman's teachings to make their heretical development of doctrine seem legitimate. There are four (4) areas they particularly weaponize:

Omitting the Seven Notes

They treat "development" as an open-ended green light for evolution, while completely ignoring Newman's actual seven notes. Newman designed those tests specifically to spot and condemn corruptions. If a proposed change fails Note 6 (Conservative Action Upon Its Past) or Note 2 (Continuity of Principles), Newman would explicitly label it a dead heresy, not a development.

Misuse of "The Power of Assimilation"

For Newman, Note 3 (Power of Assimilation) means the Church acts like a healthy organism that digests outside concepts to strengthen itself. A human body eats food to fuel its existing DNA; it doesn't turn into the food. Newman believed the Church purifies and masterfully subdues worldly philosophies to serve Christ, rather than allowing worldly philosophies to dilute and reshape Christian dogma. 

For Modernists, it means that the Church must constantly absorb modern secular ideologies, psychological theories, and political movements to remain "relevant."

"Consulting the Faithful" is not Taking an Opinion Poll

In 1859, Newman wrote a famous essay titled On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine. Liberal theologians frequently quote this to argue that if a majority of modern lay Catholics disagree with a Church teaching (such as on contraception), the doctrine is nullified by a "lack of consent."

Newman used the word "consult" in a precise, traditional Latin sense (like consulting a thermometer, not taking a democratic vote). He was pointing out a historical fact: during the 4th-century Arian crisis, the laity fiercely maintained the truth of Christ's divinity even when many bishops fell into heresy. Newman meant the faithful possess an intuitive supernatural instinct (sensus fidelium) to preserve the traditional faith, not a mandate to invent brand-new theology via modern opinion polls.

Isolating His "Toast to Conscience"

In a letter to the Duke of Norfolk, Newman famously penned: "I shall drink to the Pope, if you please—still, to Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards." Dissenting theologians routinely use this line to claim that private conscience overrides Church authority, allowing individuals to decide which dogmas to believe. However, Newnan correctly explained that conscience was the objective, echoing "voice of God speaking to the soul" demanding absolute obedience—not a subjective license for personal preference or private judgment. He argued that a properly formed conscience naturally recognizes and bows down to the external authority of Christ's Church. 

Specific Modernist Theologians Who Calumniated Newman

Alfred Loisy and George Tyrell. 

Two of the early proponents of the Modernist movement. Both priests were excommunicated by Pope St. Pius X. At the turn of the 20th century, these two leaders of the Modernist crisis directly claimed Newman as an inspiration for their theories on the "evolution of dogmas." Newman believed dogmas possess ontological, permanent factual truth. Tyrrell and Loisy were using Newman’s vocabulary of "growth" to sneak in a philosophy of radical relativism that Newman spent his entire life fighting.

"Cardinal" Avery Dulles

Dulles formulated an "ecumenical" framework that watered down the definitive, exclusive nature of Catholic dogma, stretching Newman's idea of Assimilation past its breaking point.

Charles Curran

Now 92 years old, Curran is a Modernist's Modernist. He teaches the acceptability of fornication, masturbation, contraception, and homosexuality. Although censured by Ratzinger in 1986 (with approval of Wojtyla), he has never been excommunicated by the Vatican II sect. Curran routinely isolated Newman's famous essay On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine. They argued that because the vast majority of modern Western Catholics did not accept the Church's ban on birth control, the doctrine had been "nullified" by a lack of lay consent. The same holds true for fornication, masturbation, and homosexuality.

Newman’s concept of sensus fidelium (the sense of the faithful) was a passive, supernatural instinct to preserve the ancient faith, not a democratic mandate or opinion poll to override the Magisterium

Calumny is defined by theologian Prummer as "the untruthful imputation of some fault not committed."

(See Handbook of Moral Theology, [1957], pg. 137). Can anyone doubt that these Modernists ascribed the fault of teaching heresy to Cardinal Newman?

So Many Modernists Love Newman: Shouldn't He Be Held Suspect?

Not in the least. Newman's greatest defender was none other than The Foe of Modernism, Pope St. Pius X himself. Since Newman had written extensively on how doctrine "developments" and "grows," the Modernists—whom Pius X heavily condemned—began trying to hide behind Newman’s coat-tails. They claimed that their radical ideas about the evolution of dogmas were just a continuation of Newman's philosophy. Conversely, hyper-critical anti-modernists began to suspiciously eye Newman as a "proto-Modernist." 

Bishop O'Dwyer, Ordinary of Limerick, Ireland, had written a detailed pamphlet entitled Cardinal Newman and the Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis. The pamphlet argued that Newman's writings were entirely orthodox and explicitly differed from Modernism. On March 10, 1908, Pope St. Pius X wrote a letter to Bishop O'Dwyer (a staunch Anti-Modernist) praising the good bishop's defense of Cardinal Newman. His Holiness wrote:

We hereby inform you that your essay, in which you show that the writings of Cardinal Newman, far from being in disagreement with Our Encyclical Letter Pascendi, are very much in harmony with it, has been emphatically approved by Us...

St. Pius X wrote that the Modernists deliberately used Newman's name deceptively to give their own heretical inventions "the commendation of a very famous man." He stated that they cherry-picked sentences out of context from Newman's vast body of work to deceive the faithful. The saintly Pontiff praised Newman's absolute obedience to the Catholic faith and the Magisterium. He noted that Newman wrote with an entirely pure intention to defend the Catholic faith, which was the polar opposite of the Modernists, who operated secretly from within the Church to undermine tradition.  By approving O'Dwyer's work, the pope affirmed that Newman’s Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine was completely orthodox. It was clear that Newman's growth of doctrine meant deepening the understanding of a fixed, unchanging truth, whereas the Modernist evolution meant changing the truth itself.

Conclusion

John Henry Cardinal Newman gave us seven tests for authentic development of doctrine, which were defended by Pope St. Pius X. The good Cardinal has had his name dragged through the mud by Modernists who twist what he wrote to make him seem like a fellow Modernist, and gain credibility for their evil "evolution of doctrine." Cardinal Newman should be studied so that all Traditionalists can tell true development from false, and be better equipped recognize and denounce truly Modernist teachings of the Vatican II sect.