During Halloween and All Saint’s Day, there’s a renewed awareness of the occult in our cultural landscape. This is a time of year when mystical symbols, esoteric beliefs, and New Age practices often emerge in popular culture, enticing those in search of self-knowledge.
One such trend, the Enneagram, presents itself as a tool for unlocking wisdom about human nature, yet closer inspection raises critical questions about its claims, origins, and potential spiritual risks.
The Enneagram claims to unlock a form of understanding about human nature, beginning with understanding one’s own “true self.” Yet, this claim of being a “tool” for self-discovery is in dire need of discernment from a perspective rooted in true wisdom and a judgement informed by Church teaching.
The Enneagram stands or falls on its assertion that it is a tool. But is it truly a tool? Does it serve the purpose it claims? Or could it be a tool for something else altogether? What if those promoting the Enneagram, whether teachers or followers, are themselves unwittingly being used? Could the creators of the Enneagram have been instruments of malevolent forces, perhaps even tools of the devil?
After years of research, and being a former student of the Enneagram, I propose that those who teach or learn the Enneagram risk becoming unwitting instruments or victims of spiritual harm. If the Enneagram opens individuals to misjudgment and misunderstanding about themselves and others, it becomes a catalyst not for understanding, but for its opposite and for error. By leading people away from truth and moral clarity, it may invite sin, in the same way that poorly calibrated tools lead to injury rather than their intended results.
Consider the simple test of a tool: it should reliably achieve its intended purpose. A keyboard is a tool for typing; if pressing the keys does not produce input, it fails as a tool. A thermometer, similarly, should consistently and accurately measure temperature, especially in critical settings like a hospital. An unreliable thermometer would be not just unhelpful, but harmful, endangering those who depend on it. When a “tool” repeatedly fails to fulfill its purpose or leads to inconsistent results, it is no true tool at all.
The Enneagram rests on a similar foundation: its claim to be a useful tool. When people talk about the Enneagram, the conversation inevitably focuses on its utility. The initial appeal often lies in its perceived value as a “tool” to understand oneself and others. Few pause to consider that the devil might use this “tool” to lead them away from truth, making them agents of his deception as they share it with others.
This promise of “usefulness” is a sophisticated trap. By framing itself as a helpful tool, the Enneagram subtly deflects questions about its truthfulness, its origins, or its scientific validity. The Enneagram essentially offers the Barnum Effect to people, a false sense of self-validation that horoscopes and tarot readers do. Does this sound like you? “While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them.” If this rings true, you are definitely a (fill in the blank) type! This is how it works, a description sufficiently unspecific and unclear so as to be true for everyone.
Proponents claim its usefulness or point to anecdotal benefits, even though one’s subjective experience is inherently fallible. Humans are often wrong about themselves and others, and this flaw is especially pronounced in self-assessment. Personal experience alone is not a reliable measure of truth. When drilling down into those experiences, oftentimes it is just a regular experience considered through the lens of the Enneagram, and since it produces a Barnum effect, it will always be self-justifying.
The Enneagram causes a person to filter everything through a false lens, and encourages false judgments and misunderstandings about oneself and others, which from a moral standpoint is deeply concerning. It encourages stereotyping and assumption about what causes others to do what they do, say and think, when the causes are in reality only known when revealed by the other. If the Enneagram fosters erroneous views, it ultimately violates the moral duty to seek truth and misleads individuals ethically.
So, does the Enneagram yield consistent insights into human nature? Are its insights grounded in reason or divine wisdom? When tested against God’s truth and subjected to rigorous rational analysis, does it stand or fall? Or is the very claim of it being a “tool” a cunning distraction, drawing individuals into a system of false self-understanding?
The notion that the Enneagram is a tool for wisdom or truth is, in fact, a diversionary tactic—an intricate trap that leads followers away from an authentic understanding of human nature. Far from offering consistent insight, the Enneagram introduces confusion and inconsistency, which are often hallmarks of deception. If, in any part, it feels unreliable or confusing, one should not dismiss or rationalize these concerns. For those who are familiar with the Enneagram, reflect upon these doubts and examine them carefully.
The origins of the Enneagram itself reveal layers of mysticism and esotericism that should prompt caution. Its roots trace back to George Gurdjieff, a mystic who strayed from his Orthodox upbringing to study various occult and spiritual traditions, including Sufism. The original “enneagon” was a nine-pointed symbol representing cosmic reality rather than personality types. Over time, followers expanded upon it, adding layers of symbolic meaning that would eventually be adapted into the modern personality system we see today.
Later, figures like Chilean mystic Oscar Ichazo and psychiatrist Claudio Naranjo integrated further mystical and occult elements, transforming the Enneagram from a symbolic diagram into a personality system. Oscar received Enneagrammatic ideas from two demons he names “Metatron and Green Q’tub”. Oscar was at the same time also experimenting with psychedelic drugs and occult shamanism. Naranjo’s contributions are influenced in a similar way by “automatic writing,” a practice strongly associated with the occult.
This dark mystical foundation continued to shape the Enneagram’s spread into secular and even Christian circles, culminating with a Jesuit priest Bob Ochs (and a young Fr. Mitch Pacwa!) teaching Franciscan priest Fr. Richard Rohr, who in turn wrote a book effectively baptising the Enneagram. From there it spread rapidly among liberal Catholic and non-Catholic Christian communities with little question as to where it came from, and on whose authority it had been established. Little did they know two of its authors were fallen angels.
This influence is apparent in the work of Fr. Richard Rohr, who frequently engages with New Age concepts and aligns closely with the Perennial Philosophy movement—a movement that diverges significantly from orthodox Catholic teachings.
In this season, when people are exposed to occult influences, it’s worth questioning the spiritual implications of embracing such a tool. The Enneagram’s rise in popularity—despite its mystic and occult origins and lack of grounding in Christian truth—should prompt those who seek true wisdom to work to expose the truth about it. Those attracted to the Enneagram’s promises may want to pause and reflect: is this personality typing system true and leads to true understanding, or is it another snare of the devil, drawing people away from divine truth?
The Enneagram, for all its claims, fails to provide a consistent or reliable framework for understanding oneself or others. Rooted in drugs, deceit, demons and devoid of scientific validation, and masked by subjective interpretation, it may ultimately be a tool of confusion and darkness rather than clarity and truth.
For those in search of true wisdom, a solid foundation grounded in reason and faith offers a far more trustworthy tool to understand our nature.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Thankyou for this clarifying piece which confirms this reader’s rejection of the enneagram. When I was a university undergraduate in the 1990s, this was presented to the University Novos Ordo “Catholic” Society by a habitless “nun”. Just part of the anti-Catholic “post-conciliar movement” to which we were subjected by well-meaning but lost Novos Ordo Catholics.
Praise the Lord He enabled me to discover Real Deal Sacred Tradition and TLM in my wiser years.
Are you suggesting that NO Catholics are lost or that Latin Mass Catholics are superior in some way?
Good question James, even though the grammar of my comment was perfectly clear.
However, in response, I would suggest: N.O. catholics have lost what TLM Catholics have found and it is a pearl of great treasure.
I’ll answer the question of the title. There is no wisdom in idiocy.
The Enneagram needs to go the way of the Vatican’s Kewpie doll dumb mascot for the Jubilee Year.
I wish the author had listed his “years of research” and those with whom he studied. That might lend some credence to his arbitrary and very personal opinion, undoubtedly based on his own fearful approach to understanding what Thomas Merton called ‘the True Self’. Any fear based argument simply plays into the already polarized politics of the church. Too bad we can’t be synodal about everything!
You question the author’s claim of years of experience/research but seem downright magisterial in your ridiculous assessment of his “fear.” And then somehow manage to drag Merton, church politics, and synodality into the mix. But, do you have an actual, substantive response?
About dragging stuff around, the compressed and parenthetical reference to “young Fr. Mitch Pacwa” makes him (Pacwa) sound like an advocate. Reading the link clarifies otherwise, and even offers a (very informatively detailed) definition of the Enneagram, which is too-much missing in the article.
But, then we read from Fr. Pacwa that the diagram is really only 30 years old, while in his (Pacwa’s) opening article he writes: “The Enneagram is alleged to be a 2000-year-old Sufi system of personality types from Islamic mystics who lived before the time of Christ.” How could such an alleged allegation (!) be 2,000 years old, when Islam (and its Sufi variant) traces back to Muhammad who was not even born until A.D. 570 (some say A.D. 571).
Fr. Mitch Pacwa was an advocate and taught others priests like Fr. Richard Rohr when he was younger, now he is not. The first time I met him and asked him about the Enneagram, he said point blank “do not trust it.” The article is not for those who want to get to know the Enneagram and its contents, but is a warning for those who are presented with it or already know it.
The allegation that it is 2000 years old is part of the deceit of the whole thing. Fr. Mitch in his article uses the word “allegation” to indicate this. The Enneagram mythology alleges many false things, which again, are indicative of spiritual darkness and the devil’s work.
Fr. Pacwa wrote one of the first sensible critiques of modern occult practices: “Catholics and the New Age” back in 1992. He spoke on the subject at Steubenville conferences (and I’m sure elsewhere) in 1990 and 1991. His book also discusses how he was initially fooled by the Enneagram years earlier.
See. Fr. Mitch Pacwa or National Catholic Register both claim research and quote facts about the enneagram and its occult origins. Thomas Merten has nothing to do with it and our true selves ought have nothing to do with any occult nonsense. We are made in God’s image, and that is what we should burnish. We do not burnish the image of God by looking for it in gnostic nonsense.
catholicstand.com/a-quick-catholic-guide-to-personality-types/#:~:text=As%20Fr.%20Mitch%20Pacwa
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/my-spiritual-director-uses-the-enneagram-whats-wrong-with-that
Thank you for engaging with the article! You raise a valid point about the importance of credibility. I’ve aimed to convey that the Enneagram’s origins and inconsistencies pose legitimate concerns, not merely personal apprehensions that you should take on my personal authority, credentials or experience. This is why I cited historical figures, and the chain of authors involved in its development and explored its ultimate root in occult practices, which diverge from traditional Christian teachings on self-knowledge.
My intent was to encourage prudent discernment and faith-based reflection on the Enneagram and its heritage, which doesn’t stem from fear but from a desire for truth and clarity. Approaching so-called spiritual tools with rational discernment doesn’t have to mean we end up in polarized views; rather, it invites us to examine deeply our conscience and the truth of Church teaching, and call evil and good for what it is.
See also the Vatican document “Jesus Christ The Bearer Of the Water of Life: A Christian Reflection on the New Age.” Note the extensive list of scholarly works and resources at the end of the document.
From the document itself: “John Paul II warns with regard to the “return of ancient gnostic ideas under the guise of the so-called New Age: We cannot delude ourselves that this will lead toward a renewal of religion. It is only a new way of practising gnosticism – that attitude of the spirit that, in the name of a profound knowledge of God, results in distorting His Word and replacing it with purely human words. Gnosticism never completely abandoned the realm of Christianity. Instead, it has always existed side by side with Christianity, sometimes taking the shape of a philosophical movement, but more often assuming the characteristics of a religion or a para-religion in distinct, if not declared, conflict with all that is essentially Christian”.(6) An example of this can be seen in the enneagram, the nine-type tool for character analysis, which when used as a means of spiritual growth introduces an ambiguity in the doctrine and the life of the Christian faith.”
Tim Vail does justice to what he correctly suggests is a spiritual trap. It’s designed to identify patterns of behavior and by doing so tends to entrap you into an unrequited pattern of behavior. Unrequited in the sense of making you a victim devoid of the means to be the recipient of salvific grace.
Enneagrams are among New Age novelties. Behavior that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Vail gives us an informative history of its occult, apparently demonic creation. Christ’s grace by nature draws us out of deleterious, self inflicted behavior patterns.
Becoming aware of our unconscious patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving helps us to act differently. It is not automatically or necessarily a trap.
Thank you for your comment and for highlighting the importance of reflection. My concern with the Enneagram, however, lies in the assumptions embedded in its origins and use. The Enneagram often claims to uncover “unconscious patterns,” but it does so based on an arbitrary typology sourced from evil spirits and automatic writing, surrounded by a false origin story. I also agree, no reasonable person would claim self-reflection itself is a trap. Moreover, relying on a tool rooted in verifiable occult origins may indeed help us act differently, but in a way that God does not intend, leading us away from true spiritual growth in Christ.
Thank you Fr. Peter for your support. Christ truly saves in every sense of the word!
The gift of the Holy Spirit is creative by nature, which is what draws out fixed behavior patterns a person may entrap himself [especially and inclusive of habitual sin], particularly with the false presumption of his personality as indicated by the Enneagram.
As a Christian counselor and life coach, I avoid anything that has to do with the Enneagram like the plague. Its roots come from the occult. Thus, I believe it is not an appropriate tool to use for anyone. A while back I wrote a blog about occult tools, including the Enneagram, that are infiltrating Christianity. I invite you to read the blog: https://abcsministries.wordpress.com/2023/10/14/satanic-practices-infiltrating-christianity/.
For gaining self knowledge, knowing the four temperaments is helpful. the below links gives a brief introduction of the temperaments
https://www.academia.edu/5271941/The_Four_Temperaments
https://www.goodcatholic.com/a-catholic-guide-to-the-four-temperaments/
The knowledge of the four temperaments are a better guide for self knowledge
I was exposed to the Enneagram in 1991. At the end of the “course” I had doubts and said, this number was dumped on me. I ignored it from then on. Praise God His grace of discernment. I was able to avoid the Enneagram endangering our sisters several years later with assistance of a wise person. Praise God for His truth always shines forth when we seek His truth.
Enneagram is a tool of Modernism. You escaped Enneagram, but did you escape Modernism ?
“The Enneagram, for all its claims, fails to provide a consistent or reliable framework for understanding oneself or others. Rooted in drugs, deceit, demons and devoid of scientific validation, and masked by subjective interpretation, it may ultimately be a tool of confusion and darkness rather than clarity and truth.”
I am ultimately confused how this statement can’t also be substituted for the usage of Christianity as a tool for understanding morality. I find the arguments referenced to in the article akin to arguing that the (using your metapho) ‘thermometer’ and ‘keyboard’ are instruments of evil, simply because the user uses them improperly. Here though – you attempt to claim the Enneagram is ‘broken’ – however, I personally wouldn’t be able to claim when it has been used properly. Just as with any other tool for understanding oneself, I find that it’s true purpose and usage are still being uncovered. Otherwise, we would all be living in peace with ourselves and others.
Simply put, whether one decides upon themselves to follow Christianity, Enneagram, Islam, Sufism or whatever modality – it is always up to the individual to evaluate their own intention when engaging in practice. To simply call one modality ‘better’ or ‘worse’ than the other is to be simply commenting on one’s own limited knowledge/understanding in the subject at hand.
Morality is not a science.
Anna writes: “Morality is not a science.” And: “I am ultimately confused how… Christianity [can be used] as a tool for understanding morality.”
It seems you have yet to appreciate or experience the grace of Christian baptism, or you have yet to accept the gifts of faith, hope, and charity which baptism offers. You seem not to have read or studied the science of Christian moral philosophy.
You likely have not read St. Thomas Aquinas. His Summa is summarized, and germane quotes can be found at http://www.catholictheology.info/summa-theologica/summa-part1.php?q=19
“Sacred doctrine is a true science. For a science is a body of truths established with certitude, and sacred doctrine is a body of truths imparted on God’s own authority, and hence established with absolute certitude.
“Sacred doctrine is a single science rather than a group of related science
Sciences are speculative or practical. A speculative science contemplates truth; it fixes on what is so. A practical science considers what is to be done in consequence of the truths it contemplates; it fixes on what to do. Sacred doctrine is both speculative and practical, but it is primarily a speculative science, for its chief effort is to teach men truths about God.
“Under either aspect, speculative or practical, sacred doctrine is the most noble of sciences. On the speculative side, it treats of the noblest object, that is, God himself, and it affords the most nobly satisfying certitude because it speaks with God’s own authority. On the practical side, sacred doctrine is the noblest of sciences because it guides man to the noblest goal – God and everlasting happiness.
“Sacred doctrine is wisdom. Wisdom involves deep knowledge of a valuable end to be attained together with a suitable and pleasing plan for attaining it. Sacred doctrine gives man the deepest knowledge of his infinitely valuable end, and stirs and directs him to attain it.”
This is only a summation of the beginning of the Summa, a very large multi-volume tome. You’d best get busy reading, praying, and getting baptized. Good grace to you!
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I appreciate the way you’ve brought up the complexities around tools for self-understanding and moral discernment, as well as the influence of the user’s intention.
To address your main point: while it’s true that both the Enneagram and Christianity aim to provide insights into human nature and morality, there are significant distinctions between the two in terms of origin, purpose, and consistency. Christianity claims direct revelation from God through Jesus Christ, upheld by centuries of theological and philosophical study, councils, and tradition, rooted in an objective moral truth. This foundation provides a consistent, long-standing basis for understanding human purpose and ethics, grounded in a God-centered worldview rather than self-centered mysticism or human constructs.
The Enneagram, on the other hand, originates from various mystical and esoteric traditions, without a clear, stable foundation. Figures like Oscar Ichazo and Claudio Naranjo, whose work is integral to the Enneagram as we know it, introduced elements via occult practices (e.g., “automatic writing” and guidance from supposed spiritual entities). This raises reasonable caution, as such origins naturally lead to concerns about reliability and truthfulness from a Christian perspective.
Your metaphor about the thermometer and keyboard is fair—it’s true that even a functional tool can be misused. But a key question here is whether the Enneagram was designed for the purpose it claims (self-knowledge and growth) or if it is fundamentally flawed in a way that distorts rather than clarifies. Reliable tools should yield consistent, measurable results, which is generally not the case with the Enneagram. As I stated above, its supposed “types” are often vague and can apply to anyone, leading to the Barnum effect, where people accept general statements as uniquely applicable to themselves, as in horoscopes.
Morality, from a Catholic perspective is a science and a philosophy. We can understand how we should live and what we should and should not do, and what is good and true. This is grounded in objective reality rather than subjective or evolving self-discovery. The Enneagram, rather than being a “neutral tool,” may actually lead individuals to adopt a self-concept based on arbitrary typologies, which can overshadow objective truths about their nature and ethical responsibilities.
Finally, while individual intention is important, it’s not the sole factor in discerning whether something is a healthy tool. Some practices or systems can mislead, regardless of intention. Therefore, it’s wise to question and investigate the origins, intentions, and theological compatibility of such systems to ensure they align with a genuinely moral and truthful path.
mr. vail my first husband clive entwistle was in fourth way groups with Ouspensky from mid 30s to his death in’47 when he was finally told that Gurdjieff was alive in paris. He spent the last two years of G’s life living with the group until G died in October ’49. He had his own group of pupils in NYC when I met him. The diagrams in Search for the miraculous by Ouspensky were accurate not contested by G who knew after his death his work was going to be distorted and destroyed. He spoke of this outcome openly describing the source. People would ask clive about the enneagram and he never suggested it as a “tool” for personality desconstruction nor said it was used as such by either G or ouspensky. After Clive died in ’76 i began to see many places some still in operation today such as the fellowship of friends and scientology where his ideas have been distorted to the great detriment of people involved. I feel you are unlikely unaware that Gurdjieff had told people early in 20th century that Roman Catholicism was the repository of the genuine truths of faith. This resulted in the conversion of many such as JD Bennett to the faith from his followers. I have viewed these developments with great despair through the decades since that time to now where there are many such groups and organisations promulgating an incorrect understanding of his teachings. One especially troubling to me is a “church” on the UWS whose pastor encourages his parishioners to use use the enneagram in this manner. I read years back the detailed history mitch Pacwa had with it through the Jesuits and I cannot say I disagreed with much of his analysis but I failed to effect a meeting where I had hoped to be able to explain the activities of such people as Ichazo and Naranjo have absolutely nothing to do with the beliefs and teachings of Mr. gurdjieff who experienced great suffering in his year aware of the likelihood of such occurrences.
“that Gurdjieff had told people early in 20th century that Roman Catholicism was the repository of the genuine truths of faith”
Decades ago, I read both Gurdjieff and Uspensky. They were both Gnostics i.e. those who are after some “hidden knowledge”, sadly unable to understand that the True Mystery is openly given to all. All that is needed is to enter into a relationship with Jesus Christ. God brilliantly made Himself (the Ultimate Mystery) inaccessible to those who want power. He is only inaccessible to those who want Christ = Him before anything else.
An example of esoteric thinking: the mentioned Gurdjieff went into a discourse on how important it is that the eastern Orthodox Liturgy comes from Hebrew tradition – but much more important is that Hebrew Liturgy has an origin in ancient Egyptian mysteries. When he spoke of the Last Supper, he said:
“For instance, in all the denominations of Christianity a great part is played by the tradition of the Last Supper of Christ and his disciples. Liturgies and a whole series of dogmas, rites, and sacraments are based upon it. This has been a ground for schism, for the separation of churches, for the formation of sects; how many people have perished because they would not accept this or that interpretation of it. But, as a matter of fact, nobody understands what this was precisely, or what was done by Christ and his disciples that evening. There exists no explanation that even approximately resembles the truth, because what is written in the Gospels has been, in the first place, much distorted in being copied and translated; and secondly, it was written for those who know.
To understand what took place at the Last Supper it is first of all necessary to know certain laws. You remember what I said about the ‘astral body’? Let us go over it briefly. People who have an ‘astral body’ can communicate with one another at a distance without having recourse to ordinary physical means. But for such communication to be possible they must establish some ‘connection’ between them.”
And so on. This is a favourite motto of Gnosticism, “the Church does not know, we know”. To me, who is now within the Church and its mystical tradition this discourse is a delirium. When I did not know Christ, it was very “enigmatic”. Now I feel like screaming reading it because it is EMPTY and DELUDED. Gnostic is blind to Christ the Person, the living Lord i.e. to the core of Christianity. To put it bluntly, Gnostic strive to de-incarnate Christ and Christianity. When such a man says that the Church holds the truth he means “an esoteric tradition, closed to the Church itself”.
I also have met so-called “white witches” or “Orthodox witches/healers” who also claimed that Eastern Orthodoxy holds the truth. Yet, they engaged in their practices which are “abomination before God”. The problem with the “lighter” occult is its “tolerance” of Christianity. Unlike a hardcore stuff like Satanism or theosophy they do not rage at Christ. “Orthodox healers” (occultists) even tell their clients to go and confess and receive communion and then to return to them. They treat sacraments as “sources of power”. They do not get what it.
While I know that my attempts to state the truth about Gnosticism/occult are mostly futile, I still have to do that. There is an emptiness in Gnosticism /occult/esoteric/whatever. Furthermore, those who get themselves involved into Gnosticism/occult lose a sensitivity to Christ.
Thank you for sharing such a personal and detailed perspective on this topic. It’s clear that you’ve had unique insights into Gurdjieff’s teachings through this Clive Entwistle and his involvement with Ouspensky and Gurdjieff’s groups, and I thank you for trying to accurately describe their intentions.
Your comment highlights a crucial point: Gurdjieff himself did not seem to promote the Enneagram as a personality tool, and indeed, it’s likely he would have objected to its use in this way. This however only muddies the waters of the Enneagram’s supposed origin story and its original intended significance and purpose.
As you noted, Gurdjieff foresaw that his work might be distorted after his death. The evolution of the Enneagram into a personality typing system by figures like Oscar Ichazo and Claudio Naranjo, who incorporated mystical practices and occult influences that Gurdjieff likely did not endorse—has indeed led to confusion and potential harm.
It’s intriguing to hear that Gurdjieff spoke favorably about the Catholic Church as a repository of truth, especially given the nature of his beliefs and teachings. Gurdjieff, although raised in the Russian Orthodox tradition, later diverged from mainstream Christianity to develop his own unique spiritual system. His work blended aspects of Sufi Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Orthodox monastic practices into a form of mysticism spoke of an integrated “soul” with what he proposed was the development of body, emotion, and something called “thought—yet”, without traditional religious intent.
What stands out about his regard for the Catholic Church is that Gurdjieff’s personal beliefs were quite eclectic, even contradictory at times, compared to orthodox Christian teachings. He viewed most people as “soulless,” in need of rigorous spiritual cultivation to attain any kind of true self. His method deliberately set aside conventional religious doctrines, instead relying on an amalgamation of esoteric practices. His personal life, too, was far from the ascetic ideal he promoted; he enjoyed material comforts and had numerous relationships with female followers.
I’m glad that some of his followers converted to the Catholic faith, but I would attribute that primarily to God’s grace and not to his comments about Catholicism, however well meaning.
Just to let the regular readers know that the above “Anna” is not me (an Eastern Orthodox iconographer) – although it is signed by the same name. My comments always come with “an avatar”.
And yes, “Enneagram” is a nonsense.
What an honor to receive an award from the Society of Catholic Social Scientists, and how inspiring to hear of the journey and dedication that led you here! Your love for the Church, for the written word, and for sharing the beauty of our faith has left an great impact on so many. May the Lord bless you abundantly for the work you do.
Yes, I guessed so, as Anna said: «And yes, “Enneagram” is a nonsense», with no evidence, but now I see much bettter.
Thank you.
I believe Metatron is a projection of Lucifer’s, of himself, that he uses 1. to suggest and insinuate himself and provide openings for his underlings to do his bidding and 2. to provide a teaching guide into the workings of Satanic occult.
CATHOLIC CULTURE should be more forthcoming in providing the dating of their own postings! It seems to be a clipping drawn from an Australian source, originally written September 1999. Not clear when it was posted online by them.
‘ This ‘typing’ system, and its ‘Sufi’ origins, are quite problematic.
‘ First of all: It cannot be a 2000-year-old Sufi system. That is absolute nonsense. Sufism is part of Islam. Islam is from the 7th century AD. Sufism is from the 10 Century AD. How can the Sufis invent something 1000 years before they exist?
Secondly: As the Enneagram proponents pointed out, it is based on the decimal point to form these 2 figures inside the circle. The decimal point was not invented until the late 14, more likely the 15th century AD. How can something based on the decimal point exist before the decimal point was invented? ‘
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2622