[Help] Is joining the catholic church worth it for protection in the working with infernal spirits?

[Gonzo]

(Disclaimer im a novice when it comes to practical magic so please excuse my naivety)

For the most part I operate under a buddhist cosmology where pagan gods and abrahamic entities are devas/spirits trapped in samsara with us with varying degrees of power according to their qualities and liberation status (Zeus for example although powerful within samsara would be an entity consumed with poisonous samsaric influence because of his thirst for power, hedonism, and large ego). These kinds of entities i use for magical workings because buddhist ones are more interested in strictly helping me reach liberation not provide me magical powers or cursing my enemies so this is why I find samsaric entities useful.

Pagan gods i invoke mostly for right hand path workings. Granting me or others wisdom, good luck, blessings in magical workings, harmony, good health, defense from low level spirits etc. But ive also been wanting to incorporate more offensive practices to my arsenal for drastic measures, which infernals/demons would be perfect for or even gleeful to do. Only thing stopping me is the blowback that could happen from working with these entities (obviously some karmic retribution is to be expected and unavoidable, but id rather not have a demon on my ass on top of that). And the pagan gods from what i know aren't really known for their battles against demonic spirits the same way abrahamic entities are.

So to help with this i was thinking about beseeching the infernal's arch-nemesis, Yahweh, Christ, the Angels and the Saints. My question is would this be a good or beneficial plan? My logic tells me that receiving communion regularly or baptism would help me boost my reputation with Yahweh and his entourage would be more likely to aid/protect me. The only issue with this is that from what i know Yahweh is insanely jealous, and i am an idol worshipper who does not believe him to be the only god or the ultimate ground for truth like i do with the buddhist dharmakaya or neoplatonic One. So it might not even be worth it in the end.

(Sorry if this this was confusing, alot of my worldview comes from my own perennialist ponderings rather than more established traditions, im more than happy to learn and here your thoughts on this.)

 

[coffeeandmagic]

No, this would not help in my opinion. I have worked with demons but I you can do baneful without calling upon entities.

 

[Morell]

There are many pagan beings that would love to go for more... drastic measures if you want them to. Norse mythology has them for sure. Dragons, thrushes, the undead, giants... pagan world is quite dangerous place.

I remember watching the Heilug concert and the singer lady with antlers right in front of me seemed to change into a dryad or something, a being from the forest with sharp teeth, free to choose if it decides to ignore me, help me or kill and eat me on the spot.

I would stay away from god of Abraham, he is indeed jealous as you said yourself. Also the membership itself doesn't mean much... and mixing practices can be a problem.

 

[Nembra]

Strongly unadvised. One of the most well-known properties of Yahveh is that he actually cares about what you do and why. The "sight piercing hearts and kidneys" thing. He won't ever let you use him as a tool for any goal not aligned with him. You'd get yourself in Simon the Magus kind of situation basically.

It is however very much worth it for being a happy, free and fulfilled human being.

 

[MorganBlack]

Catholicism and the Logos isn't totally required for protection in the Below, in the Dark.

One can seek protection in Multiplicity. In the older "shamanic" method of the Below, a magician would often form an alliance with a Big Bad against the little bads.

Set-Typhon being one; the spirit Nebiros of the GV another. There are others.

In Mexican Folk Catholicism, we're a bit more of a synthesis with indigenous practices, and here it is understood the saints can be called even if you are not Catholic. Many saints are ministers to the Below. But while in the Dark, they are still "Above / Overworld - facing. If you engage with them for protection, like St. Michael, or St. Cyprian, or Mary, just might find your heart being changed along the way. Do you even want this? Some people love and self-identify with their misery and trauma.

 

[Dyn Hysbys]

I just want to put in a word for Our Lady, Empress of Hell.
Mary, the Black Madonna, may be petitioned outside of any church.

 

[Nembra]

I just want to put in a word for Our Lady, Empress of Hell.
Mary, the Black Madonna, may be petitioned outside of any church.

Emperess of Hell...? Well, that's certainly interesting.

 

[Dyn Hysbys]

Emperess of Hell...? Well, that's certainly interesting.

The epithet comes from the Theophilus legend, and Her power over demons is attested to by Saint Alphonsus (The Glories of Mary).
More recently, She is honoured by Societas ex Maria Inferni, though I don't know much about them.

 

[Nembra]

The epithet comes from the Theophilus legend, and Her power over demons is attested to by Saint Alphonsus (The Glories of Mary).
More recently, She is honoured by Societas ex Maria Inferni, though I don't know much about them.

Seems like two rather different currents.

 

[MorganBlack]

It is not mainstream today, but between roughly 1100–1500 AD Catholic devotional literature in Northern Europe had a title for Mary: Imperatrix Inferni - Empress of Hell. See the Lambeth Manuscript Hymn, if i recall.

Her title - and her Marian manifestations - persisted into Folk Catholic practice and into the early grimoires - most notably the Liber Juratus. I know we treat these texts are often treated as fringe or "occult," but really, the grimoires can be said to be Folk Catholic in character, and were even created by Catholic monks and, in some cases, bishops.

We should add here the Marian mystical tradition sits a bit outside the Church's bureaucratic apparatus. Marian manifestations can be fraught theologically if one wants to argue for modifying the Magisterium. But I come to Catholicism through her, and honestly for us who were secular she is often our first vision. Well, she was for me, and it was love at first sight. Christ / Logos takes a bit more but she makes him understandable, imho

And the Church recently had to issue a statement against Mary as Co-Redemptrix. Pope Leo XIV in October 2025 had to tamp down the fervor and love people have for her saying it is not appropriate to use "Co-Redemptrix" and requiring "special prudence" with "Mediatrix". The Second Vatican Council had already rejected the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons.

So yeah, I get some flack from Anglo occultists when I say this - but we still need tred carefully not to erase the Catholic tradtion we sit within and a partake of. So it is not wrong for the Church to have our love for Mary gets reined in when we make her overshadow Christ's role in Redemption.

 

[Nembra]

It is not mainstream today, but between roughly 1100–1500 AD Catholic devotional literature in Northern Europe had a title for Mary: Imperatrix Inferni - Empress of Hell. See the Lambeth Manuscript Hymn, if i recall.

Her title - and her Marian manifestations - persisted into Folk Catholic practice and into the early grimoires - most notably the Liber Juratus. I know we treat these texts are often treated as fringe or "occult," but really, the grimoires can be said to be Folk Catholic in character, and were even created by Catholic monks and, in some cases, bishops.

We should add here the Marian mystical tradition sits a bit outside the Church's bureaucratic apparatus. Marian manifestations can be fraught theologically if one wants to argue for modifying the Magisterium. But I come to Catholicism through her, and honestly for us who were secular she is often our first vision. Well, she was for me, and it was love at first sight. Christ / Logos takes a bit more but she makes him understandable, imho

And the Church recently had to issue a statement against Mary as Co-Redemptrix. Pope Leo XIV in October 2025 had to tamp down the fervor and love people have for her saying it is not appropriate to use "Co-Redemptrix" and requiring "special prudence" with "Mediatrix". The Second Vatican Council had already rejected the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons.

So yeah, I get some flack from Anglo occultists when I say this - but we still need tred carefully not to erase the Catholic tradtion we sit within and a partake of. So it is not wrong for the Church to have our love for Mary gets reined in when we make her overshadow Christ's role in Redemption.

I mean, even disregarding more philosophical reasons it is kind of a weird title for her. She of all people was actually never in hell. It probably comes from the power she has over demons, but it comes as a bit unfortunate.

 

[MorganBlack]

Oh, right right! Exactly!

The medieval stories depict her descending into Hell on her own accord as an authority figure. Shaming, debating, and even physically assaulting the Devil to rescue souls. Using her voice as a weapon against demonic forces, causing devils to cower in fear. And Mary's descent into Hell were ongoing as she repeatedly descended down, down, down to Hades save souls from damnation.

In my very personal visions the demons obey her because they love her too, and she brings kindness and sweetness to the Underworld. But again this is personal and visionary based in my own practices , not theological.

But I also never understood why people feel they need to shove their own personal practices, visions , and manifestations outwards and make new religions. We barely use the one we have already.

 

[Nembra]

Oh, right right! Exactly!

The medieval stories depict her descending into Hell on her own accord as an authority figure. Shaming, debating, and even physically assaulting the Devil to rescue souls. Using her voice as a weapon against demonic forces, causing devils to cower in fear. And Mary's descent into Hell were ongoing as she repeatedly descended down, down, down to Hades save souls from damnation.

Kind of a funny image, an angry jewish woman screaming at the Devil to make him release souls from eternal damnation.

In my very personal visions the demons obey her because they love her too, and she brings kindness and sweetness to the Underworld. But again this is personal and visionary based in my own practices , not theological.

Kind of a Persephone figure type of deal?

But I also never understood why people feel they need to shove their own personal practices, visions , and manifestations outwards and make new religions. We barely use the one we have already.

I mean, pride, obviously.

 

[MorganBlack]

Kind of a Persephone figure type of deal?

Hmmm . In my visions, no. But in another sense yes, but she reached down and brought me out of Hell. But she is always the Virgin Queen of Heaven and only brings sweetness. Honestly I would accept her as any way she wants to be.

I hear of other Marian manifestations that are Mara, the bitter sea, more "Hecatean," but for me she was and is always pure Love, tenderness, compassion, and kindness.

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 10:12 PM

Not sure how to unpack it all everyone can accept, but if we conflate the mythic and symbolic objectives of religion and magic too much, I feel it makes each worse off.

" Magic" - a word i have an issue with - imho, is just a tool. Like a hammer. Or firearms. A left-hook to someone's jaw Needs to happen sometimes. No point getting married to it.

From Dr. Sebastian Morello, Wolfgang Smith Chair in Philosophy at St. Mary's University, Twickenham, London. Brit and Catholic.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Problem with Esotericism

"Put bluntly, and at the risk of losing some nuance, it was the rise of rationalism that created esotericism. And it is not just medieval intellectual culture that had achieved a healthy and dynamic integration of the esoteric into the institutional, making it hard if not impossible to distinguish them; material culture had achieved the same. In the 13th-century Wells Cathedral, there is a foliate corbel atop a pillar near the entrance of the chapter house, on which is sculpted a salamander crawling forth from flames. This image is not a biblical image, but an alchemical one. Whilst not denying the transmutational power of alchemy, this initiatic discipline was reinterpreted by the medievals to be part of a wider spiritual repertoire that took seriously the purificatory experience required for spiritual transformation, wherein the soul emerges into new life from the fires of purgation. To appeal to alchemical wisdom—which has its origins in the mystery schools of India, Mesopotamia, and Egypt—was considered neither eccentric nor demonic by the monastic masters of Wells and the other spiritual centres of Christendom. On the contrary, it was a way by which to keep such mysteries in their proper spiritual sphere."

I say, as a man, go do the "magic" thing you need to do, then engage with the stories that heal and and bring you back. If you blend them too much you never come back.

"Magic" is a gun. A tool. It is "Luciferian" only in that it often stands apart from the community and can embrace violence.

We can think of the Dark, of nature, kind as a Boxing Ring. The Boxing Ring is Liminal Space. The Ring is a temporary, bounded arena where violence happens. You step in and you do things that would be felony assault outside. Then you step out, and you're not a criminal. But might feel like one. The rules don't make the violence good for your soul.

But if you go home this way you are a danger.

In indigenous ceremony, warfare makes you closer to the animal, to the wolf. There is contamination for the entire tribe if you don't seek healing.
Notice the similarity to Catholic confession.

 

[HoldAll]

On paper, yes, Baptism is a sacrament, in itself a powerful magical act. Only… one of the baptismal vows (to be repeated at Confirmation) is: "Do you renounce Satan and all his works?" - "I do", and one of the vow's rewards is protection against evil spirits if I remember correctly. Now Catholicism isn't like Protestantism where the words of the Bible can be interpreted by any unordained Tom, Dick and Harry. Satan = dabbling in the occult, period. Ever since St. Augustine, the Church's authority supersedes any personal reading of the Bible. You can equivocate about "casting out unclean spirits in Jesus' name" all you want, you're not a priest, don't have an exorcist's licence, and where's the required permission from your bishop? If you decide to convert to Catholicism, you submit completely to the authority of the Church and are no longer free to create a private spirituality to your own liking. The Church is even against fucking ouija boards, and it condems any sort of esotericism and superstition.

You'd probably have to look up Canon Law but a sacrament obtained out of dubious motives is probably invalid anyway. Getting baptised in order to safely commit what are regarded as grave sins in the eyes of the Church? I was baptised as a newborn where baptismal my vows were spoken by my godfather but had to attend a catechism course (complete with a textbook and quizzes) held by the village priest before Confirmation; I guess it's similar with adult candidates, and you'd have to disguise your intention and your occult interests very well, or the priest may reject you because of your occult taint.

 

[MorganBlack]

I do not like the word "magic" and use it mostly out of convenience. What everyone calls "magic" here is not what Latinos mean by the same word.

And magia isn't a word that shows up in everyday Mexican conversation. Brujeria does. In English "magic" is a baggy word that swallows up everything from stage tricks to herbalism to demonic magic. Spanish keeps the categories separate. So to say "the Church condemns magic," a Mexican Catholic hears brujeria, and were like yeah, cool. Stay clear, unless you mean to do some business.

Brujeria carries deep connotations of maleficium - harmful magic, curses, working with dark spirits. In Haiti "magic" also means this. Not the Postive Mind Mysticism like you find in Chaos magic and New Thought.. and Wicca, and Lavey Satanism. Again neat stuff. But is it not sorcery / brujeria, and never was.

This is why I tend to use the words "brujeria "and "sorcery," and keep it seperate from Mysticism . The Church is not wrong to condemn it. Sorcery is mean-hearted. You can think of it more as the Church not liking you firing guns and killing people, it's the act, rather than the word.

Much of "magic" as I think of it, and as most folk Catholics I know think of it, are acts of sorcery that are absolutely NOT okay under most circumstances. Sorcery includes works of domination, spiritual subjugation, control, causing harm. There is no way to whitewash it.

Sorcery and brujeira are not Anglo "magic." And it is not this white-as-the-driven-snow "pagan witchcraft," which would just be called Natural Philosophy and was totally allowable by the Church (once you get rid of foreign gods). Most of the conversations I have had with priests are downstream from this divide