
Many a year a go, an intelligent and well read Catholic school teacher, who was politically Left-wing, said to me that “Social Justice” meant no more than the concepts that Thomas Aquinas discussed and anyone who had a problem with “Social Justice” was dissing the Western world’s Christian heritage. This is a cute little Motte & Bailey fallacy, the use of which is not limited to one purported political wing and not another. The question of “Natural Law” is also under attach using the same fallacy, as is hereinunder discussed, quoted in full below due to the limitations of Twitter/X embeds.*
The term “Natural Law” has been hijacked and repurposed by esoteric, occult, and Hermetic traditions in ways that profoundly distort its classical meaning. Many well-meaning people today are confused because they hear the same words (“Natural Law”) but they are being used to mean entirely opposite things, with opposite consequences for truth, morality, liberty and personhood. Thank you to @ChartingLiberty for prompting this thread, sorry it’s a bit late!
Let’s perform a scalpel-precise forensic distinction between:
Classical Natural Law (Aristotle → Aquinas)
vs.
Hermetic “Natural Law” (Gnostic / Occult / Esoteric)












