The Luciferian Doctrine
Stephen Flowers, in his book on the German magical order Fraternitas Saturni, (FS) says that "the FS is (or was) the most unabashedly Luciferian organization in the modern Western occult revival". Hans Thomas Hakl describes the theological doctrine of the Fraternitas Saturni in the following manner:
The Luciferian Doctrine
In this doctrine, the bible God Yahweh is considered to be the anti-life principle and is actually the primary evil oppressor of humankind, because he did not want humans to gain this knowledge of the tree of life. As a result of the murderous persecution of all those who disagreed with the Catholic Church, secret societies were formed in order for groups to discuss these theories, along with studying the ancient wisdom collected from the Gnostics and other sacred texts outside of the bible.
The Luciferian dogma and doctrines as expounded by Pike and others who at one time or another have been High Priests of the Luciferian reed can be summed up in very few words. It teaches 'inversion' of the Commandments of God. It teaches the exact opposite to what the Holy Scriptures tell was God's plan for the rule of the Universe before Lucifer led die Heavenly revolt. How do we know this statement to be the TRUTH?
O. That is something new for a man to be made a Christian by one who is not a Christian. When he joined the Arians into what faith was he baptized? Of course into that which the Arians held. If on the other hand we are to suppose that his own faith was correct, but that he was knowingly baptized by heretics, he does not deserve the indulgence we grant to the erring. But it is quite absurd to imagine that, going as a pupil to the master, he understands his art before he has been taught. Can you suppose that a man who has just turned from worshipping idols knows Christ better than his teacher does? If you say, he sincerely believed in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and therefore obtained baptism, what, let me ask, is the meaning of being sincerely ignorant of what one believes? He sincerely believed. What did he believe? Surely when he heard the three names, he believed in three Gods, and was an idolater; or by the three titles he was led to believe in a God with three names, and so fell into the Sabellian heresy. Or he was perhaps trained by the Arians to believe that there is one true God, the Father, but that the Son and the Holy Spirit are creatures. What else he may have believed, I know not: for we can hardly think that a man brought up in the Capitol would have learnt the doctrine of the co-essential Trinity. He would have known in that case that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not divided in nature, but in person. He would have known also that the name of Son was implied in that of Father and the name of Father in that of Son. It is ridiculous to assert that any one can dispute concerning the faith before he believes it; that he understands a mystery before he has been initiated; that the baptizer and the baptized hold different views respecting God. Besides, it is the custom at baptism to ask, after the confession of faith in the Trinity, do you believe in Holy Church? Do you believe in the remission of sins? What Church do you say he believed in? The Church of the Arians? But they have no Church. In ours? But the man was not baptized into it: he could not believe in that whereof he was ignorant.
24. As we have made mention of that distinguished saint, let us show also from his Apocalypse that repentance unaccompanied by baptism ought to be allowed valid in the case of heretics. It is imputed (Rev. ii. 4) to the angel of Ephesus that he has forsaken his first love. In the angel of the Church of Pergamum the eating of idol-sacrifices is censured (Rev. ii. 14), and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans (ib. 15). Likewise the angel of Thyatira is rebuked (ib. 20) on account of Jezebel the prophetess, and the idol meats, and fornication. And yet the Lord encourages all these to repent, and adds a threat, moreover, of future punishment if they do not turn. Now he would not urge them to repent unless he intended to grant pardon to the penitents. Is there any indication of his having said, Let them be re-baptized who have been baptized in the faith of the Nicolaitans? or let hands be laid upon those of the people of Pergamum who at that time believed, having held the doctrine of Balaam? Nay, rather, "Repent therefore," he says, "or else I come to thee quickly, and I will make war against them with the sword of my mouth."
Jesus did not refute the teachings of Jewish scripture but sought to bring into a sharper focus those tenets set forth in the covenant between God and the Jews. Jesus brought the concept that God's people were not only those of the Jewish race but included all those-regardless of social or economic standing - who sought reconciliation and fellowship with God as well as all those who would respond to his seeking after them. Christians, although differing with each other in many aspects of theology and doctrine, believe that Jesus' death on the cross as an atonement for sins, His resurrection from the dead, and His giving of the Holy Spirit are foundational to the faith.
With the development of the cult of the Virgin Mary the gap between Protestants and Roman Catholics was wider than that between Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox. Many excellent writings by Protestants in recent years attest to their loyalty to the Virgin Mary, their appreciation of her role as depicted in the New Testament. They fear, however, that the popular attention increasingly devoted to Mary in many areas will tend to withdraw attention from Jesus Christ, and that the devotion and veneration now paid to Mary may develop into real worship, and into her exaltation, therefore, both in practice and in theory, to a fully divine role. There are many Catholics who, while not criticizing the doctrines laid down, feel that the emphasis, especially the popular emphasis, on Mariology, the cult of the Virgin, is tending already to distract the minds of believers from the superior and more essential role of her divine Son.
It is one thing for Catholics themselves to go as far as their mind and their conscience lead them in their religious practices with regard to the Virgin Mary. It is quite another thing if they insist that all Christians must accept their full doctrine and practice in order to achieve adequate manifestation of Christian unity.
The same modernist critics who constructed the opposition between kitsch and avant-garde tended to view kitsch as a form of degraded Romanticism, suggesting that the attempt to isolate kitsch from art is related to the antagonism displayed by modernist writers toward Romantic poetics (and to the phantasmagorical properties of Romantic values in modernist texts).3 Further, we should bear in mind that modernist theories of kitsch emerged in the 1930s (the period when Pound revived the compositional principle of the ideogram) and that references to Romanticism in this context often served as a means of linking kitsch to the aesthetic ideology of National Socialism. In Pound's case, one finds encrypted in the modernist image a residue of Romantic hermeneutics and necrophilia which repeatedly disrupts his formalist doctrine, and which later contributed to the fascist coloring of the revised, mythical ideogram. Thus one could argue that the foreign body encrypted in the modernist image (and modernism in general) is the problem of kitsch (as a degraded form of Romanticism). Indeed, a cryptological reading of the problem of kitsch first becomes evident, as I indicated earlier, in Broch's alarming figure: "Kitsch is certainly not 'bad art'; it forms its own closed system, which is lodged like a foreign body in the overall system of art" (62). Similarly, Adorno writes, "It [kitsch] lies dormant in art itself, waiting for a chance to leap forward at any moment."4 Furthermore, Adorno explains, "the revolt against art's a priori affinity with kitsch has helped guide the development of art towards the decomposition of works. What art used to be, kitsch may become in the future. Kitsch may... 041b061a72