Why Does The Church Oppose Magic And What Counts As Magic?

[mortify ii]

So are you suggesting, that black magic and everything else, has a physical affect / effect on the physical world ?  Meaning if someone who is into black magic ran upon me or you and threw some kinda dust or something on us ( not chemically lethal ) and babbled off some incantation that we should be terrified that something bad is going to happen to us and go running to a priest for protection ?

 

Yes, magick is efficacious, whether something can harm you or not is another question. I generally believe if a person is close to God they are protected by such things, but consider the story of Job or some of the other saints. 

 

And then how and why could someone who has been a good person, not engaged in any of this, become possessed by an evil spirit from satan and need an exorcist ?  But those engaging in black magic an the like do not need an exorcist ?? or do they ?

 

 

I had a friend who engaged in witchcraft. Interestingly enough he said while he was pagan nothing preternatural happened, but as soon as he stopped and started to practice Catholicism suddenly all hell broke lose. It may be possible that fallen influences have an influence on a person without making it apparent, keep in mind they prefer to be hidden and make people believe they are not there. 

 

As for why not to engage, again the answer being that it is dangerous. It requires you to open yourself up to maleficent forces. Furthermore the intention is worldly, involving some vain curiosity or abuse of power that is sought after. 

[Nihil Obstat]

There is incredible esoteric unity as well, Nihil. I think I have shared my experience here before that I was an initiate in the Naksibendi Tariqat before returning to Catholicism. Those murids reached a level of spiritual advancement and sanctity that I have not found among Catholics who are exposed to the sacraments. That does not mean the sacraments are ineffective, only that souls receiving them have not properly disposed themselves. Nor am I saying non-Catholic rituals are salvific, but it is demonstratively apparent to me that certain non-Catholics have tapped into something very real and genuine that if practiced will bring them closer to God. 

 

So these paganistic, broadly occult practices are not salvific but actually......... maybe they kind of sort of are? What are you trying to say here? Any time paganism touches upon Truth, we find that Truth more clearly and more efficaciously in the Catholic Church. Anything else is evil by virtue of the fact that it is opposed to the Truth.

 

 

Then what is it called when Catholicism takes a pagan ritual ie, the winter solstice and mingles it with the faith by using the  " Christmas Tree and Wreaths " at Christmas, and has never stopped using that practice.  very serious question by the way.

The Church has long been able to 'baptize' those practices from the pre-Christian eras inasmuch as some of those practices point, albeit in a veiled manner, towards the Truth of Christ who was to come later.

What you will not find is the Church attempting to make use of rituals formed by groups in active opposition to Christianity, as the occult is.

[mortify ii]

Then what is it called when Catholicism takes a pagan ritual ie, the winter solstice and mingles it with the faith by using the  " Christmas Tree and Wreaths " at Christmas, and has never stopped using that practice.  very serious question by the way.

 

That is called baptizing a pagan practice. Catholics are open minded contrary to popular belief. We don't destroy culture we Christianize it. There is nothing wrong with taking the externals of practice and infusing it with Catholic meaning. As for your suggestion that the winter solstice was purely pagan I disagree with you. The solstices had a significance in many cultures and calendars and it's not surprise it had a significance to Christians. For this reason it's not justified to simply label it as a Christian borrowing of pagan practice, especially considering we celebrated the Annunciation nine months prior to December 25th much earlier than Roman Pagans worshiped the Winter Solstice as the birth of the sun god. 

[mortify ii]

So these paganistic, broadly occult practices are not salvific but actually......... maybe they kind of sort of are? What are you trying to say here? Any time paganism touches upon Truth, we find that Truth more clearly and more efficaciously in the Catholic Church. Anything else is evil by virtue of the fact that it is opposed to the Truth.

 

Nihil, I don't know how to explain this to you as I myself don't understand. I can attest that non-Catholics have achieved a high level of sanctity and spiritual advancement. Either this was all the demonic deception or it was authentic and I personally lean towards the latter. As for how this is I don't know other than to say that dogmatically God gives every soul the grace to make it to heaven and perhaps these non-Catholics tapped into it systematically. 

[Nihil Obstat]

Nihil, I don't know how to explain this to you as I myself don't understand. I can attest that non-Catholics have achieved a high level of sanctity and spiritual advancement. Either this was all the demonic deception or it was authentic and I personally lean towards the latter. As for how this is I don't know other than to say that dogmatically God gives every soul the grace to make it to heaven and perhaps these non-Catholics tapped into it systematically. 

So, while you accept, and rightly so, that false religions are not salvific, how do you then claim that non-Catholics, presumably some sort of occultists, are able to attain a "high level of sanctity" and accept the grace necessary for salvation, through their practice of a false, non-salvific religion?

Do you not see the massive contradiction here? Like I said, this is dangerous stuff.

[ChristianGirlForever]

So are you suggesting, that black magic and everything else, has a physical affect / effect on the physical world ? Meaning if someone who is into black magic ran upon me or you and threw some kinda dust or something on us ( not chemically lethal ) and babbled off some incantation that we should be terrified that something bad is going to happen to us and go running to a priest for protection ?

I mean the people into voo doo , do creep me out, for some reason them and wegee boards to me seem more closely related to satan, versus people walking into some supposed black magic shop buying some goth looking potions and books and or calling upon what ever wicca powers they have to actually do something.

And then how and why could someone who has been a good person, not engaged in any of this, become possessed by an evil spirit from satan and need an exorcist ? But those engaging in black magic an the like do not need an exorcist ?? or do they ?

I think this is a great question, SuperBlue. Yes, unfortunately, things like hexes do work. It's embarrassing to admit, but I did have an experience where my First-gen Rumanian-American grandmother placed a hex on some people who were giving us trouble about buying their house. She was gleeful when it worked. (This grandmother, I am sorry to say, is not a Christian, nor is she a very nice person.). They were renovating their new house and suddenly everything imaginable went wrong. The plumbing failed, the workers weren't showing up on time. It was a mess.

The thing is, these kinds of occurrences---a person going to the priest because he/she believes they've been hexed, is quite common in Eastern Europe and Russia, even today. When I told my priest about this, he was entirely unsurprised and not surprised that it worked.

Growing up in the West, we are taught that this sort of thing is superstition and doesn't work and that the only reason to stay away from it is because it isn't Christian, but they don't usually explain why it isn't.

[ChristianGirlForever]

So, while you accept, and rightly so, that false religions are not salvific, how do you then claim that non-Catholics, presumably some sort of occultists, are able to attain a "high level of sanctity" and accept the grace necessary for salvation, through their practice of a false, non-salvific religion?
Do you not see the massive contradiction here? Like I said, this is dangerous stuff.

Thank you so much for writing this, Nihil. I, too, noticed the rather shocking contradiction. Thank you for pointing it out and for reiterating the dangers of dabbling in the occult while still calling yourself a faithful Catholic. This is very scary.

[mortify ii]

So, while you accept, and rightly so, that false religions are not salvific, how do you then claim that non-Catholics, presumably some sort of occultists, are able to attain a "high level of sanctity" and accept the grace necessary for salvation, through their practice of a false, non-salvific religion?

Do you not see the massive contradiction here? Like I said, this is dangerous stuff.

 

Occultists refers to a particular group of people and I am not referring to them. I said that in my experience the Naksibendis I associated with did achieve a high level of spiritual advancement. As for how this is possible, I don't know other than to say God can act outside of the sacraments and seeks to draw all to himself.

[mortify ii]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVUvmGFZLqk[/youtube]

[Nihil Obstat]

Occultists refers to a particular group of people and I am not referring to them. I said that in my experience the Naksibendis I associated with did achieve a high level of spiritual advancement. As for how this is possible, I don't know other than to say God can act outside of the sacraments and seeks to draw all to himself.

Does the practice of their religion bring them grace?

[mortify ii]

Does the practice of their religion bring them grace?

 

This is a question that I would not approach like a scholastic. It's beyond logical syllogisms and as I said earlier I myself don't understand. In general yes, group and private zikr as practices by the Naksibendi Haqqani tariqat as practiced by the late Shaykh Abd Karim Kabrisi is efficacious, the efficacy would have to be so only in a subjective and personal level. 

[PhuturePriest]

Serious question: Why was everyone posting in this whack thread when instead you should have been watching Germany's glorious victory over Argentina?

[Nihil Obstat]

This is a question that I would not approach like a scholastic. It's beyond logical syllogisms and as I said earlier I myself don't understand. In general yes, group and private zikr as practices by the Naksibendi Haqqani tariqat as practiced by the late Shaykh Abd Karim Kabrisi is efficacious, the efficacy would have to be so only in a subjective and personal level. 

Were you not arguing only days ago that no false religions can possibly be salvific in any of themselves? Very different from what you seem to be arguing in this thread. Does your past experience somehow make you a bit less cautious in this regard?

[mortify ii]

Were you not arguing only days ago that no false religions can possibly be salvific in any of themselves? Very different from what you seem to be arguing in this thread. Does your past experience somehow make you a bit less cautious in this regard?

 

There is not contradiction here because I am not suggesting that some ritual in and of itself can confer sanctifying grace. Such sanctification would be despite the doctrinal tenets of the false religion, even though the practices can be subjectively efficacious to a particular individual. The practices I speak of are not rituals, they are very basic recitations of God's names, essentially mantras (dhikr in Sufi parlance) to instill God's name in one's heart. I think practices like these are so primordial that they are almost naturally effective, but again not to the degree and magnitude of a Sacrament, 

[Nihil Obstat]

There is not contradiction here because I am not suggesting that some ritual in and of itself can confer sanctifying grace. Such sanctification would be despite the doctrinal tenets of the false religion, even though the practices can be subjectively efficacious to a particular individual. The practices I speak of are not rituals, they are very basic recitations of God's names, essentially mantras (dhikr in Sufi parlance) to instill God's name in one's heart. I think practices like these are so primordial that they are almost naturally effective, but again not to the degree and magnitude of a Sacrament, 

Ah, I think you hit on something by accident here. It is quite possible that such rituals, tapping somehow into a primordial facet of the human experience, are indeed naturally effective at showing some spiritual benefit. But inasmuch as they are properly natural, they cannot in themselves be salvific. They cannot in themselves bring a man to the Faith. They cannot in themselves confer grace.

Faith, grace, salvation, are supernatural. That is why pagan rituals are in vain, and false religions 'worship' ineffectively. At best they can more or less correspond with the natural human desire for God. What they can never do is in any way correspond with the supernatural. To do so would be for them to do nothing less than accept the Truth of the Catholic Church.