Fragment 56

Recent events have inspired me to write a new "Fragment".The events that inspired me are the death of Pope Francis (Jorge Mario Bergolio) and the elevation of Leo XIV. As my frequent reader knows, I have been thinking about writing about the Catholic Church and Liberation Theology for a while. This is not going to be that "Fragment", but it will incorporate some of my research. The other issue is :Why would an Occultist be writing about the Catholic Church? The reason is simple: the Catholic Church is the spiritual center for over one billion people. It is time for occultists to comment on events about spiritual works and organizations. The Catholic Church has a lot of problems. In this "Fragment" I shall try to address the central and fundamental problem of the Church. The very identity and theology of the Church. Some critics of the Church have said that there are two churches in the Catholic Church. There are three different theologies that the Church is tearing itself apart over. The first theology is what some people mistakenly call "Traditional" theology. This is better called Tridentine theology. The theology and the reforms made during the Council of Trent.(1545-1563) This is the Church that the Traditionalist lay follower wants to have restored. The trouble is the Tridentine Church died with Pope Pius XII. This is not an option to the leadership of the Church. The two theologies that are in conflict are the Modernist theology of the Renewal theologians in the twentieth century, and Liberation theology, also from the twentieth century. To understand how this happened we must go back in history. We could go back to 1958 when Pope Pius died, but the trouble started long before. The trouble only surfaced when Pope Pius XII died. The trouble was Modernism. Modernism was the fuel of the Renewal theologians. The Renewal theologians wanted to replace Aristotle as the metaphysics of theology. They wanted another metaphysic to replace Thomism. I am not going to spend much time discussing the theology of the Renewal theologians. Instead I shall relate my first impression of reading them back when I was young and not sure of what they were about. In my early twenties I tried reading the Renewal theologians with unhappy results. I did not go into it with any previous information about the movement. While I was reading them a metaphor kept coming to mind. It seemed that they boldly walked out of the front door of the Church; only to sneak around the side of the Church to go in the backdoor. It seemed to me that they started out with bold heretical propositions. That they then turned into traditional sounding results. I did not realize at the time that they were using duplicitous language. They wanted to disguise the meaning under traditional sounding language. Making it matter of interpretation. One also observes this in both Liberation theology and wokeness. The big problem that the Renewal theologians had is they did not have a metaphysic to replace the old Aristotelian Thomism. This changed with Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. He had a new metaphysics to offer: evolution. Thomas Aquinas looked to Aristotle, so Chardin looked to H. Bergson for his metaphysics. Chardin was a Jesuit Priest who was also a paleontologist. Chardin's main idea is that he wanted to get rid of the historical Jesus, and substitute his idea of the Cosmic Christ. To understand his idea of the Cosmic Christ of Omega point, we must understand his idea of the "Noosphere". The noosphere is not a new idea. It is very much like Gitchtel's idea of the "Astral". It is the conscious envelope that encircles the world. For some reason Chardin seemed to think this mind sphere was something exalted. (a mistake that Gitchtel did not make) Chardin believed that the noosphere would evolve into the Omega point. This is the second coming of Christ, or at least Chardin's idea of Christ. What this would look like is everyone would think and act alike. That the noosphere would become the mind of Christ and everyone would be the body. The only sin would be individualism. Of course, this has no relation to scientific evolution. Chardin called it "a scientific assumption of faith'". A phrase that means nothing, but sounds impressive. Chardin's thought is unfinished and has holes all the way through it. It is more a vision than a theory. An example would be: is Chardin a pantheist? The answer is sometimes. He said different things at different times. That did not keep it from catching on. Some of the Jesuit order converted during his life. Even Pope Francis quoted him. (in Mongolia) It also had a big influence on Liberation Theology. Gustavo Gutierrez quotes Chardin. And it seems to be the metaphysics of LIberation Theology. Again like good modernists it was hidden under traditional language. This all came together in Vatican II. In 1958 Pope Pius XII died. Pius was the last of the Tridentine Pope. With John XXIII Modernism came to the surface in Vatican II. Most of the Cardinals and Bishops had Jesuit secretaries that wrote up the documents. Again they hid Modernism beneath duplicitous language. There was never a formal interpretation of the documents. At some time in the future the Church will have to call another council to standardize the Church's teaching. The Vatican moves slow, so do not expect anything to happen this century. This is the crisis in the Catholic Church. Many of the laity want to go back to the Council of Trent, but this is not going to happen. The question becomes what version of Modernism triumphs? As many readers may have guessed I have relied heavily on Malachai Martin's book "The Jesuits". We have two more historical issues to add. The first is Pedro Arrupe, the Father General of the Jesuit order. (1965-1981) He was elected to implement Vatican II, the radical modernist interpretation. Arrupe is an interesting man. He was at a Novitiate outside of Hiroshima Japan when the A Bomb was dropped. He was also with his fellow Jesuits the first medical aid into the city after the blast. He was also a dedicated Modernist and proponent of the social gospel. The Father General to the Jesuit order is often referred to as the "Black Pope". The "White Pope" and the "Black Pope" were going to war. When I say "White Pope" I mean the series of Popes after John XXIII. The war is which version of Modernism shall the Church adopt. The second issue is the Council of Latin American Bishops at Medellin, Columbia. A young Bishop named Jorge Mario Bergolio was there. It was also the debutante ball for Liberation Theology. Gustavo Gutierrez's book "A Theology of Liberation" was published in 1971. Liberation Theology was about to set parts of Latin America on fire. More later on that. One more note on the Jesuits. The Jesuits are a huge international organization that owns media outlets, publishing houses, schools, etc. So their ideas get a wide distribution, this is why Wokeness, and Liberation theology became so popular so fast. So let us observe the Popes since John XXII and look at the feud between the Popes and the Jesuit order. We shall begin with Paul VI. Paul was the gentilist man ever to become Pope. He was no match for the street fighter Arrupe. Paul believed in that hoary old fallicie. That you show people the good and they shall do it. Paul tried to remind the Jesuits of their historic mission to be the Pope's men. This of course did not work. Paul finally wised up and had a dossier composed on the Jesuits, to be passed on to his successors. We come to John Paul I who unfortunately died too soon to do anything. Next up was the rock star Pope John Paul II. John Paul II thought he was ready for a fight but did not realize the extent to the fight. This led to his humiliation that happened in his visit to Nicaragua. The revolution in Nicaragua was supported by the Jesuits. It is in Nicaragua that Liberation theology got its base in Latin America, and its ideas tried. Those of us who lived through the 1980s remember well the supposedly secret war that the U.S. fought in Central America. (Iran-Contra) Although as usual our worthless, lying media did an awful job explaining what was happening. It never mentioned The Jesuits or Liberation theology. It seems John Paul II was going to take action, but he got shot. And it took the fight out of him. Next up was Benedict XVI. (Joseph Ratzinger) Benedict XVI had been one of the premiere theologians of the 20th century. It is easy to say what Benedict did. He did nothing. I guess that means he was successful as a caretaker Pope. It seems that even the slow Vatican bureaucracy got tired of him doing nothing and he was forced to resign. We now come to Pope Francis. Francis is one of the few Popes I have taken a deep interest in. Francis was supposed to be the radical. The Liberal Pope that would finally clarify the Church's position, and move the Church in the new direction. As I said he was at the Council of Medellin. He was supposed to move the Church into modernism. The radicals had miscalculated. Even though he was a Latin American Bishop he was a Peronist. He was a supporter of Juan Peron, the controversial President of Argentina. For those who do not know Juan Peron; the best way to describe him is that he was a lot like President Trump. He was a populist and a showman, but he was not a Marxist. Donald Trump could be described as America's Juan Peron. For those who wanted women Deacons, married Priests, and blessings of same sex unions; he was a disappointment. Although he did try to destroy the hold the Tridentine Church still has on some of its members. (getting rid of the Latin Mass, etc.) So what is next? We do not know what Leo XIV shall do. As I said, the Church moves slowly. The Church also always believes it has time. They have been a huge player in the Occult War. The trouble is for the Church is this time they may not have time. Their Aeon is ending.

Fragment 55

I was in the middle of the "Fragment" on evolution, Utopia, the Jesuits,etc.; but have decided to get back to it later. I did this because I read a book that inspired me to write this "Fragment'. The book was Salaman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses". One of my principles is to never waste inspiration, so I got right on it. That shall be the second book in this review. The first book is "The Island of Dr. Moreau" by H.G. Wells. I have wanted to write a piece on this book for some time. That is why this book is included. Although it may seem the books are unconnected. An occult perspective shows a deep connection.Both of these books should be read by any serious occultist. I am not going to give a detailed review, because the purpose of this review is to get one to read it themselves. Before starting the review I have a tip for younger occultists. And this is to set time aside to think. I shall use Immanuel Kant as an example. After Kant took his morning walk he would sit in front of a window that had a view of a Church steeple. This was his thinking time. There is a story that the steeple for a time became obscured by trees. And that they got trimmed back so Kant could continue pondering. If one wants to have ideas one must ponder. The ideas in both of these books are worth pondering. To help one start the chain of associations that leads to pondering, I want to review some material by Gurdjieff and Crowley. To begin with we shall review Gurdjieff's parable of the "Black Magician and the sheep." In the parable there is a Black Magician that owns some sheep. The trouble is to keep the sheep from running away. The sheep want to run away because they do not want to be eaten or skinned for their pelts. The Magician does not want to spend the money to hire a shepard. So he hypnotizes the sheep into believing they are merchants, attorneys,etc. Once the sheep are hypnotized he can come and remove the sheep whenever he wants. Without the sheep running away. Now let us turn to Crowley. I am quoting excerpts from his poem "Aceldama". Aceldama was written after Crowley's first spiritual experience. The experience that led Crowley to devote his life to occultism and magic. I would like to write a whole "Fragment" on Aceldama. But I do not feel competent enough to do it now. So to the quotes. "I contemplate myself in that dim sphere whose hollow center I am standing at with burning eyes intent to penetrate the black circumference, and find out God." Again from the beginning of the piece. "God and Satan fought for my soul those three long hours God conquered now I have only one doubt seft-which of the twain was God Howbeit I aspire" From stanza V. "That was my sanity. Brought face to face Suddenly with the infinite I fear my brain snapped; broke; white orange wings appeared" From stanza VI. "I soared in the infinite" I would advise one to read all of Aceldama. It is available for free at the Internet Archive. Try to keep the above in mind as I review the books. I am going to review the books from an occult perspective. I realize there are viable perspectives. "The Island of Dr. Moreau" can be analyzed as an anti-vivisectionist and social commentary. And Rushie's "The Satanic Verses" can and has been analyzed by the immigrant experience. As I have said before any myth or work of art if it is any good must work on a multiplicity of levels.Those works of art that are one dimensional, or based on a gimmick lose interest after the gimmick is recognized. I shall start with the older novel: "The Island of Dr. Moreau". I would also advise the interested reader to watch the 1932 movie with Charles Laughton. Titled "Island of Lost Souls". The other two movies based on the book 1977 and 1996 are best avoided. Only the 1932 movie captures the mood of the novel. It is strange that a Fabian, socialist, Utopian like Wells should write one of the greatest dystopian and anti-Utopian novels of all time.It is as if all of Wells's repressed emotions and fears are expressed in the novel. The story of "The Island of Dr. Moreau" starts with a shipwrecked traveler; like all Utopian novels. Of course he is stranded on the Island of Dr, Moreau. The island is inhabited by Dr. Moreau, his assistant Montgomery and the traveler who has the unlikely name of Prendick. The island is also inhabited by a race of humanoid creatures created by Dr. Moreau. The humanoid creatures were created by Dr. Moreau in his vivisectionist experiments on animals. In the language of Utopians he is trying to create the 'new man". Creating the New Man has been a goal of Utopians for a long time. An example would be the U.S.S.R.'S "Soviet New Man". Moreau has created these creatures from animals both wild and domestic. These New men have built a primitive society, with one of them taking the role of 'Sayer of the Law". (The Sayer of the Law is wonderfully portrayed in the movie by Bela Lugosi) Let me take a quote from the book that explains how Dr, Moreau controls his creatures. (New Men); "In spite of their increased intelligence and their animal instincts to reawaken, they had certain Fixed Ideas implanted by Dr. Moreau in their minds, which absolutely bounded their imaginations. They were really hypnotized, had been told certain things were not to be done,and these prohibitions were woven into the texture of their minds beyond any possibility of divergence or dispute." Remember, this was written In 1895, and published in 1896 long before anyone had heard of Gurdjieff. And of course, they do reawaken in the novel, which is the cause of the action of the novel. The thing that reawakens the New Men to their animal nature is the taste of blood. (The Body and Blood of Christ?) When Prendick does finally get back to civilization, he views humans as beasts and has lost his faith in the sanity of the world. I have made this review purposefully brief, much has been left out. Because, the motive behind these reviews is to get people to read and think about the novel. Now we shall move to the next novel: "The Satanic Verses", by Soloman Rushdie. The book was published in 1988. And caused quite a controversy, because a fatwa was issued for Rushkie's death by Ayatollah Khomeni. A fatwa that is still in effect. The novel is full of occult allusions and associations. Gurdjieff is referred to in passing. Rushdie refers to "Gurdjieffian mystics" that gather at a certain restaurant. The restaurant also is the scene of much of the action of the novel. The Satanic verses refer to some verses that several authoritative Islamic scholars said that Muhammid received. To extend worship to three Goddesses that were at the center of pre-Islamic religion of the Arabs. Right away we observe the conflict between Matriarchy vs Patriarchy. The story concerns two Indian actors: Gibreel and Saladin. Both are very much anglicized Indians. Both of them are on a plane that gets blown up by terrorists in the air, and they are the only two survivors. Gibreel is an Indian actor of some fame who specializes in playing Gods and religious figures. The movies are referred to in Indian cinema as "Theologicals". Gibreel is also a paranoid schizophrenic. He has hallucinations that he is the angel Gabriel. Saladin is a voice actor in England. He is called the man of a thousand voices. He stars in a children's show on English T.V. along with doing voices for animated characters. It is said if you want the voice of a pea, you hire Saladin. There are three subplots in the book that are Gibreel's hallucinations, along with the main plot of the book. The main plot of the book concerns what happens to Gibreel and Saladin after the plane crashes. The three subplots are about a prophet in the city of Jahalia ( Mecca) that is named Mahound (Muhammid), who receives messages from the Angel Gabriel, the next subplot concerns an exiled muslim cleric (Khomeini), the third plot is about a prophetess by the name of Ayesha.who leads a pilgrimage to Mecca. There are many allusions already. Ayesha was the main character in the novel "She" by H. Rider Haggard. Rushdie has references to many authors in the book, Both veiled and unveiled. Let us take a closer look at the two main characters and some of their occult associations. Gibreel is more associated with Crowley, and Saldin with Gurdjieff.We shall start with Gibreel. As I said he is a charismatic star of Indian cinema. He specializes in gods and religious figures. It should be easy to connect this with the occult practice of taking on God-forms.Gibreel is also a person that knows his true will; to be an actor that plays Gods, angels, and so on. The trouble with Gibreel is he acts like a movie star. He has a long string of sexual partners, which he loves and leaves. The women always forgive him. With two tragic exceptions. He does not pick up after himself, and is basically irresponsible. The connection with Crowley is also brought out in that the woman he loves is a mountain climber, whose greatest ambition is to achieve a solo climb of Mt. Everest. She has already ascended Everest, but as part of a team. Gibreel also questions whether his hallucinations are sent from God the Devil, or from the unconscious. This also applies to the dream figures in the three subplots. Let us now turn to Saldin. Saldin is a voice actor that makes his home in London. He tries to distance himself from his Indian heritage and culture. Saldin has constructed an identity for himself as an Englishmen (a mask). He likes to wear a bowler hat. His ability to mimic, and to create different voices is a sign of all the different "I's" in him. He is a man at war with himself. He has no stable identity. After the fall from the exploding plane he finds himself being transmuted into a demon. He grows horns and hoofs. It is only when he acknowledges his hate for Gibreel that he reverses the transformation. I shall stop here. As I said, the purpose of the review is to get one to read the texts themselves.