Review of Forbidden History S04E02 "The Secrets of the Vatican"; Plus: Ben Radford Has More Reasons He Thinks I'm Wrong about Chupacabra
I was planning to review Forbidden History today, but then Benjamin Radford responded to my recent response to his recent response to an article I wrote about the Chupacabra six years ago. So, I will append the Forbidden History review below. Meanwhile, in the latest piece, Radford accuses me of purposely misrepresenting him and engaging in straw man arguments to promote a wacky, evidence-free hypothesis. As much as I respect Radford’s work, at times he is that tiresome type of skeptic who demands everything be spelled out in syllogisms and tends toward blindness in the weaknesses of his own arguments. He adds little new in the most recent piece, so I have very little to say about it except to point out some of those aforementioned weaknesses:
1. I was responding to his specific claims in his rebuttal piece, so my comments were confined to the argument he made there. Apparently, I needed to make clear that a criticism of an essay involves critiquing that essay and not the entirety of the Chupacabra literature. I am aware that he discussed folklore (of a different kind) in his book and in other articles, but in a blog post I cannot possibly address the body of his life’s work. My comments were limited to why Radford felt that folklore isn’t necessary to understand the Chupacabra name, not to the role of vampire lore in shaping its activities.
2. Similarly, my comments about Radford assuming that stories were transmitted formally by text rather than orally through folklore were again limited to the name of the Chupacabra. Given that the very shape of the creature derived from movies, it would be silly to argue otherwise. My comments, if poorly phrased, were intended to refer to the degree of proof he wants to prove that the goatsucker (bird) legend influenced the goatsucker (monster) legend. In the current piece, he is literally demanding pre-1995 published accounts of the use of the word “chupacabra” to prove that the goatsucker legend influenced the development of the goatsucker myth, while simultaneously maintaining that he does not require published accounts to prove the oral influence of folklore.
3. He accuses me of an argument from incredulity, wrongly stating that I can’t imagine that anyone would name a goat sucker a goatsucker without there being a mythology behind it. My entire point was that it seemed too coincidental to have two very similar stories passing under the same name.
Finally, Radford seems to feel that I am insisting that the goatsucker definitively is the source of the Chupacabra name. I have never insisted on it, especially since neither he nor I have done any research on Puerto Rico to try to document the prevalence of nightjar lore in the twentieth century. Let me try to rephrase this as clearly as I can:
I wrote my original article because Radford challenged his audience to find any reference to a Chupacabra prior to 1995. While conceding that there is no evidence of the monster before 1995, I noted that the same word existed (in a variant spelling) prior to 1995 and referred to similar lore about a vampiric animal that attacked goats. I said that this is something worth researching and not something to simply dismiss a priori on the assumption that no connection is possible, as Radford had done in his book. It is tedious to again remind Radford that I have no doubt that the modern Chupacabra myth emerged in 1995 and that it is a straw man argument of his own to pretend that I am insisting that the goatsucker bird lore is Chupacabra lore; my only point is that he was wrong in his book to suggest that he knew for a fact that the legend of the goatsucker bird had no influence on the story. You can’t know what you didn’t investigate. I hate to be in the position of the fringe historian here, but it is counterproductive to foreclose a possible avenue of research in an argument from ignorance.
Forbidden History S04E02 “The Secrets of the Vatican”
I know that many readers were wondering when I’d get back to wacky ideas after a week spent examining ancient texts for traces of Enochian wisdom traditions. Good news! Not only is Ancient Aliens back tonight with a new episode, but the AHC and Yesterday network pseudo-documentary Forbidden History returned this month with new episodes. Episodes air in the United States one week after their U.K. premiere. The first episode of the season focused on modern Nazi stuff, so I didn’t bother to watch it. This week’s American episode (last week in the U.K.) is about “Secrets of the Vatican” (S04E02), so let’s take a look at what a low-budget British History Channel knockoff thinks is going on inside the walls of St. Peter’s in Rome.
Well, technically not Rome, despite the show identifying the independent country of Vatican City as being part of the city of Rome. This is neither here nor there since the first segment is framed around (true) pedophilia rings, orgiastic sex scandals, and slave operations, which the show conflates with traditional (false) anti-Catholic propaganda claims about devil worship, pagan practices, and (of course) suppression of artifacts and secret knowledge.
Andrew Gough, the publisher of Heretic Magazine, and a man who thinks he knows much more than he does, suggests that the Catholic Church “could have built their capital” anywhere in the world but chose the Vatican because of its “ancient pagan temples, Mithra temples. I can’t believe for a second it’s an accident.” I imagine he’d be surprised to learn that the bishops of Rome were not always the heads of Christendom, or that the current St. Peter’s stands atop old St. Peter’s, a basilica built by Constantine the Great to mark the burial place of St. Peter. It wasn’t chosen by a conspiracy.
A man named Philip Willan explains what he thinks is hidden in the “Secret Archive” of the Vatican, a library that has long been open to qualified researchers. The show suggests that the Church is hiding documents from that archive, and Gough scoffs at the idea that the oldest documents date to the eighth century, suggesting that ancient truths are hidden in the library’s 53 km (33 miles) of documents, the length of which seems to boggle his mind. By contrast, just so you know, the Library of Congress has more than 1,380 km (838 miles) of shelves and somehow isn’t accused of hiding secret Jesus bloodline documents, as one talking head suggested of the Vatican.
Gough shows up again to allege that the Vatican Secret Archive (the Latin name, while using the word secretum, actually means the “Private” archive) contains the Holy Grail, the Ark of the Covenant, and all the other stuff that shows like this usually go in search of elsewhere. Gough spins some conspiracy theories about the Vatican locks away secret truths, and he keeps coming back to the idea that Christian churches were built atop pagan temples. Gee, no shit, Sherlock. Rome’s most famous temple, the Pantheon, became a Christian church. The same thing happened around the world where churches sprang up atop old pagan sites to show the dominance of the church and to Christianize pagan sites. Muslims did the same thing when they converted churches like Hagia Sophia into mosques. Gough literally claims that the Church is “satanic”—“a really, really dark place”—in which Isis became Mary Magdalene and Osiris became Jesus. Indeed, he adds a bunch of “Jesus myth” false claims about Mithra being born on December 25, having 12 apostles, and resurrecting from the dead. All of that is false and created in modern times as anti-Christian propaganda. It has no support in ancient texts. Gough seems to have some sort of fixation on old twentieth-century “Jesus myth” literature and has all of the critical capacity of a footstool.
Gough adds that there are “rumors” that the Catholic Church conducts pagan sacrifices to pagan gods. He is repeating old claims from the Protestant anti-Catholic tract The Two Babylons, which accused the Pope of being Nimrod’s secret worshiper, and it is sad to see a documentary uncritically accepting Victorian era anti-Catholic nonsense as some kind of revelation. Richard Felix and Linda Papadopoulos agree with Gough and declare paganism “the true religion,” which seems to reinforce the idea that shows like this aren’t really about their purported subjects but instead are New Age / Theosophical propaganda. The show folds in pedophilia scandals with the unstated implication that pedophilia is part of the Church’s satanic worship of demons and general evil. “This is an evil empire,” Lynn Picknett, the fringe writer, states in explicit terms.
I’m quite surprised that the show seems to think that the Vatican has all of the secrets of the world and the “truth” about the Bible in their basement, but the coeval Orthodox church somehow does not. We never really see conspiracy theories about Orthodoxy, presumably because shows like this aren’t really about Vatican conspiracies but carry a subtext of anxiety over whether Western civilization (defined tightly as Western Europe and its offshoots) is built on faltering foundations.
The show did a segment on exorcism, which had nothing to do with the preceding half-hour, except perhaps for the suggestion that the Vatican is in league with Satan. Gough makes this explicit when he says that exorcisms conducted by priests to combat evil only enhance the “rumors” that “they are evil” themselves. The remainder of the show focuses on the Vatican Bank and conspiracy theories about money laundering, which are of little relevance to us.
As the show winds to a close, the narrator says that some people believe that the Vatican keeps the corpse of Jesus alongside the Ark of the Covenant in the basement. I wish I was making that up. Some talking heads express doubt about the existence of Jesus and suggest that the Vatican is trying to control the beliefs of Christians through fear, and Gough claims that soon a priest will leak the secret history of Jesus and his Bloodline and destroy the all-powerful Vatican. It’s weird how powerful they think the Catholic Church is and how easily prelates can somehow manipulate all of the non-Catholic governments and churches of the world to conform to their view of history. After all, more than 50% of the world’s 2.3 billion Christians are not Catholic, not to mention the 1.6 billion Muslims who already believe that Jesus did not die on the cross (Qur’an 4:157-158), so you’d think the “truth” would have leaked out somehow.
7/7/2017 11:05:13 am
The Newport Tower, the Kensington Runestone and the Sauk Lake Altar Rock all bear signs of early American Catholic Christianity, though I think some would attribute these medieval Scandinavian evidences to "errant" Knights Templar and/or errant post-Templars.
7/7/2017 11:31:04 am
Hey buddy, let's YOU hold off on the excitement and not post your off-your-medication nonsense.
7/7/2017 03:53:16 pm
What is it with your obsession with land claims?
7/7/2017 04:07:42 pm
He always wanted to live in Otisburg.
7/7/2017 12:10:08 pm
Too good not to share / impose on you all: July 6 Wolter writes "Geology is the only science that is completely objective."
7/7/2017 01:43:36 pm
That was a feeble attempt to address the criticism of his work, which only highlighted the fatal flaw. Any science, no matter how objective, will always be interpreted through the subjective lense of the observer's biases (unless conscious effort is made to remove those biases) and that is the one thing Wolter excels at doing. He will never entertain the possibility he could be wrong about anything.
7/7/2017 03:58:31 pm
Wolter knows squat about other sciences. In fact, besides writing about agates, I've never seen anything to show he even knows much about geology, judging by some of the embarrassing remedial mistakes he made on his TV show that Jason drew attention to.
7/7/2017 04:15:25 pm
We know he doesn't history, but I mean, does the guy science at all? He seems completely unaware that different branches overlap and interconnect. Paleontology is another one that directly connects to geology. How exactly, is THAT not objective, either? How in his convoluted logic can only one science be objective, but others aren't? This guy's thought processes are bizarre. His ego has short circuited the synapses of his brain.
7/7/2017 04:53:34 pm
I love your use of "history" and "science" as verbs, it's reminiscent of the meme "Do you even lift, bro?" Because intellectually Wolter doesn't lift.
7/10/2017 12:33:38 am
"Geology is the only science that is completely objective."
7/7/2017 12:34:00 pm
What I always "enjoy" about this stuff is how all the anti-Catholic propaganda always insists Catholicism is pagan and ties it to Babylon or Egypt, and completely ignores the very real borrowings the Catholic Church adopted from the pre-existing pre-Christian polytheist Roman state cults. The cardinals, for example, have a lot of similarities with the flamens depicted on the aria pacis.
7/7/2017 01:51:22 pm
Since there were no Cardinals for the first 600 years, your argument sucks, you suck, and NO.
7/7/2017 12:38:40 pm
Just because a name or word exists prior to modern use doesn't mean there is a connection - Bugfoot anyone?
7/7/2017 03:51:38 pm
Your point about how conspiracy theorists never associate the Eastern Orthodox Church with this type of nonsense is an excellent one. I don't think I've ever heard a single fringe theory attached to any of its modern day branches, nor anything going back to the times of old Byzantium, when it was a direct rival to the power of Rome.
7/7/2017 04:06:19 pm
Well, fringe proponents learned to sprinkle just enough historical facts onto their claims to give those claims the veneer of credibility. Once a potential audience is hooked, they drop the fringe bomb.
7/7/2017 05:41:18 pm
I'm not convinced most of the (Western) fringe minds even know what Eastern Orthodoxy is, much less that their credulous, reactionary audiences will have for it the same deep fear and hatred as for the simultaneously nearby and familiar yet scary and foreign Catholic Church.
7/7/2017 04:28:19 pm
This may be teaching somebody's granny to suck nightjar eggs, but has anybody looked for goat-sucker legends in the "Bibliografía del folklore de Puerto Rico" (Alberto Arroyo Gómez, Instituto de Cultura Puertorriqueña, 1991)?
7/7/2017 04:33:41 pm
The really unhelpful text search at Hathi Trust shows "goat" on pages 35-36 of the above volume, but no "chupacabra" or "cabra" or their plurals.
7/7/2017 04:39:27 pm
No, because Puerto Ricans are asses, as established by the Instituto de Ass Puertorriqueño.
7/7/2017 06:57:10 pm
AMERICANEGRO You sound more and more like a troller....
7/7/2017 07:17:31 pm
He sounds like a troller because he is a troller. Like the old saying, if it sounds like a duck, looks like a duck and walks like a duck, then it probably is....a duck.
7/7/2017 07:41:52 pm
Probability is not fact .... So I can say for sure that he's probably a douche also. Face palm
7/8/2017 12:33:49 am
If you think Puerto Rican presidential assassins and terrorists were unfairly put upon, why don't you contact the Secret Service and the BATF?
1/4/2018 12:17:44 am
I think it’s safer to assume he’s just an unhappy person who expresses his unhappiness through aggressive attempts to dominate historic intellectualism.
7/8/2017 03:24:15 am
This episode sounds more confused than anything that could be seen as propaganda even if its sources clearly are. It can't decide on the protestant idea that Catholicism is evil because its pagan or the Wiccan take that paganism is the real religion because Christianity is just a disguised version of it.
7/8/2017 01:10:39 pm
There is a scene in the movie "American Graffiti" from 1973 that discusses the "goat killer" all the while a goat can be heard bleating in the background. This is the scene where Toad takes the girl to the levy to make out and the car gets stolen. When I first started to hear about the Chupacabra back in the nineties I thought of this and realized it was likely part of Mexican folklore as present in California. This is my favorite G. Lucas movie not Star Wars (which is great too).
7/8/2017 08:25:01 pm
The Goat Killer in American Graffiti is clearly presented as a human not an animal.
3/31/2019 01:26:59 am
I watched "The Secrets of the Vatican" tonight. I thought that it was an interesting show, but I can't really comment on the content of it. When will people finally wake up and decide that God does not exist nor is there life after death? I do believe that governments, political leaders, and religions work together and that religion is used to try to control humanity, and unfortunately religion/government succeeds and does control because most people are afraid of dieing and don't want to believe that they will cease to exist some day. Believing the lie that they will see their deceased loved ones some day after they die is just so ridiculous for anybody to believe nowadays in my opinion. People just can't seem to get a grip on themselves and need some type of religion to give themselves "hope". Can't people see how religion is used to divide and justify wars and injustice? We need "freedom from religion" not "freedom of religion". Religion in all forms and denominations should be outlawed and destroyed and we'd all be so better off. Equally, believing that the Devil or that Satan exists is just as ridiculous as believing in God. Neither exist!
Searching for the truth
5/22/2019 01:08:02 pm
I just saw the show "Secrets of the Vatican" and I found it interesting.
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.
I am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab.
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Terms & Conditions
Please read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.