Thanks! You are correct, I have her horary book right here; just got it from a friend and haven't opened it yet. Here is the relevant quote:
"Any planet or angle in the same degree as the Nodes points to a catastrophe, casualty, fatality or tragedy in a horary or natal chart, the more far-reaching when a malefic is involved."
The example chart she gives with this statement had Jupiter in the 8th at 13 Aries and the Nodes at ~13 Pisces/Virgo, so it's clear that "in the same degree" did not necessarily mean in the same sign. Still, horary is an ancient art and I'm skeptical that she came up with this on her own in 1960.
The only reference I can find to this statement comes from Olivia Barclay, founder of the QHP course. She cites Watters and agrees with the statement that any planet in the degree of the nodes is unfortunate. In fact she attibutes the idea to Watters, listing it as a modern contribution to horary. Clearly she got the attribution wrong any way but there does not seem, as far as I can tell any traditional source for the claim. The problem with Barclay is that she then goes on to quote Lilly's attributions of dignity and debility to the Nodes, which contradicts Watters/Goldstein-Jacobson completely.
Lilly took the later medieval view that the North Node was a benefic and awarded 4 points to a partile conjunction with it, which according to the quote should be a catastrophic situation.
He awards -4 to a partile conjunction with the South Node, which is less than the partile conjunction with Mars or Saturn or being combust or retrograde or within 5 degtees of Caput Algol.
The greater importance given to the nodes seems to have begun in medieval times, being one of the relatively few innovations brought in by Arab or Persian Astrologers. There are a variety of views about them, some Astrologers took them as both being good if they were with the benefics or both being malefic if they were with malefics. Barbara Dunn, in a text which draws heavily on medieval sources as well as Lilly, agrees with Lilly that conjunction with the North Node strengthens any planet. As she now runs the QHP, started by Olivia Barclay, I'd tend to take her view as being the stronger here. I'm not particularly a fan of her book, other than as a source that can point to the relevant texts. It's basically 500 pages which are turgid prose. I've checked all her references to the nodes and nowhere does she mention the above view, even if only to dismiss it.
I think the Watters/Goldstein-Jacobson/Barclay claim is faulty or at least it's perculiar to them. I've not come across a writer before or since that makes this claim. I'll keep looking though as they may have come across a text somewhere. Given that Barclay only cites Watters, I'm not sure that the said missing text exists though.
Edited to add:
I just found a passage in John Frawley's Horary Textbook. He again takes the North Node as generally benefic and the South Node as generally malefic, or rather that the North Node will add to good things or ameliorate bad things and the South Node will do the opposite.
He goes on to say.
'Although the Nodes do not cast or receive aspects. you will often find a significator square the nodes (i.e. exactly half way between them) This seems to show a person torn between two courses of action, often with neither of them being appealing. The planet is not affected by being square the Nodes. The idea in some modern books of the degree of the Nodes in any sign as "a degree of fatality" is groundless'
I'm not sure I go along with his idea of the nodes not being able to receive aspects, though the Hellenistic idea of being seen or configured could still apply. I'll have to think about that one.
The quote is perhaps most valuable because it bears out Barclay's view that the idea was introduced in modern times by writers who were at the very beginning of the rediscovery of Horary and did not have anything like the texts that we have. I have Barclay's book but I regard it as of 'historical' significance only in terms of the practice of Horary.
Incidentally Frawley's comment about the half way point harks back to a Hellenistic concept of the 'bendings', where the Moon changes direction from North to South or vice versa. These two points together with the nodes themselves were seem as denoting high levels of activity.
