Monday, February 24, 2020

Deceptive Decalogues


This week we will observe Ash Wednesday, the official beginning of the Lenten Season. Many Traditionalist priests preach on the Ten Commandments and their observance, to the edification of the laity. In addition, many Lenten meditations (from good pre-Vatican II devotional books) also have inspirational  messages concerning the Ten Commandments and how they are to be obeyed. Holy Mother Church realizes the importance of Her children knowing that they must "do good and avoid evil" to escape Hell and achieve Heaven.When you understand what you must do, and why you must do it, the keeping of the Commandments becomes easier, bringing us closer to God.

In the days before the Great Apostasy, brought about at the Robber Council Vatican II, catechisms stressed the Ten Commandments. In order to receive First Holy Communion, priests and nuns would make sure the children understood the basics of the Commandments (the knowledge and practice of which was reinforced at home by the good Catholic parents). For the Sacrament of Confirmation, a more in-depth understanding of the Decalogue was required to make young ladies and gentlemen "soldiers of Christ."  With the advent of Modernism creating the Vatican II sect (and infecting the Protestant sects as well) most people in our society are woefully ignorant of the Ten Commandments.

As a result, we have a society that is clueless regarding our duties to God and our neighbor. In 2007, a professional survey was conducted regarding the Ten Commandments which produced frightening results:

How many of The Ten Commandments can you name? Put to the test, Americans recalled the seven ingredients of a McDonald’s Big Mac hamburger and members of TV’s "The Brady Bunch" more easily than the Bible’s Ten Commandments.

A survey by Kelton Research found 80 percent of 1,000 respondents could name the burger’s primary ingredient — two all-beef patties — but less than six in 10 knew the commandment "thou shalt not kill."

Less than half of respondents — 45 percent — could recall the commandment "honor thy father and mother" but 62 percent knew the Big Mac has pickle.

Bobby and Peter, the least recalled-names from the fictional Brady Bunch family, were remembered by 43 percent of respondents — topping the 34 percent who knew "remember the Sabbath" and 29 percent recalling "do not make false idols." (See https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bible-commandments/americans-know-big-macs-better-than-ten-commandments-idUSN1223894020071012). Since sin is "negative theology," and is no longer taught in the Vatican II sect, why bother knowing the Ten Commandments when you can watch reruns of The Brady Bunch and examine your hamburger?

In 2014, two atheists decided to have a contest to come up with "Ten Non-Commandments" which people feel they should do in the absence of God. Here are the winning "Secular Imperatives," as I call them:

1. Be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence.

2. Strive to understand what is most likely to be true, not to believe what you wish to be true.

3. The scientific method is the most reliable way of understanding the natural world.

4. Every person has the right to control of (sic) their body.

5. God is not necessary to be a good person or to live a full and meaningful life.

6. Be mindful of the consequences of all your actions and recognize that you must take responsibility for them.

7. Treat others as you would want them to treat you, and can reasonably expect them to want to be treated. Think about their perspective.

8. We have the responsibility to consider others, including future generations.

9. There is no one right way to live.

10. Leave the world a better place than you found it.
(See https://www.cnn.com/2014/12/19/living/atheist-10-commandments/index.html).

I could go on and on about the absurdity of this bastardized Decalogue, but I'll just point out two glaring problems. First, they are called "non-Commandments" yet they carry a moral "ought." Namely, you ought to believe that every person has a "right to control" their body (read: "murder by abortion and euthanasia").  If you don't believe this "non-Commandment," then you are wrong. Second, how does #9 square with the others? How can we be told to leave the world a better place and think of others if there really is "no one right way to live"? Which one is it: Do as we say, or Do as you please? It can't be both.

This post will focus on false substitutes for the Commandments and the teaching of the Church regarding the basic truths and importance of the authentic Ten Commandments.

New Age--New Commandments
Besides the secular humanist "non-Commandments," there exists the "Georgia Guidestones" put together by what I can only imagine are New Agers. The story is as fascinating and bizarre as it is disturbing. The Guidestones are comprised of four upright slabs, one center stone resembling a squared pillar (called the Gnomen stone), a flat capstone, and five base pieces. Each of the four upright stones weighs 42,437 lbs., and the combined weight of all the stones is approximately 119 tons. Inscribed within the stone are ten new "commandments" for humanity—a vision of earth servitude and New Age philosophy. Chiseled within the edges of the upper capstone is a message in four languages—Sanskrit, Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Babylonian Cuneiform, and Classical Greek— which reads, "Let these be Guidestones to an Age of Reason." Upon the eight sides of the four monolithic upright stones, eight languages—English, Russian, Hebrew, Arabic, Hindi, Chinese, Spanish, and Swahili—are etched within the granite. Each upright contains the same message in a different language.

No one knows who paid for their construction. As the story goes, an elegant, well-spoken, well-dressed, and grey-haired man who identified himself only as "R. C. Christian" appeared at a granite company in nearby Elberton, GA one day requesting a quote on the project. Figuring he was some "nut," the granite specialist purposely claimed a ridiculous price, figuring Mr. "Christian" would balk. Instead, Mr. Christian agreed to the price. The project’s builders’ had to sign a legal agreement never to reveal the identity of the financiers. They also swore to destroy all legal papers regarding the Guidestones’ construction once the project was finished. It was completed in 1980, and still stands. (See https://thoughtcatalog.com/jeremy-london/2018/08/27-bizarre-facts-about-the-georgia-guidestones/). 

These ten New Age commandments (with my comments next to each) read:

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature. (Massive reduction in the human population through birth control, abortion, euthanasia and infanticide).

2. Guide reproduction wisely—improving fitness and diversity. (Social Darwinistic claptrap regarding "survival of the fittest Master Race").

3. Unite humanity with a living new language. (Not Latin, a dead language that cannot be twisted, but an Orwellian "Newspeak").

4. Rule Passion—Faith—Tradition—and all things with tempered reason. ("Tolerance" over truth).

5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts. (International Law of a One World Government).

6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.(Sovereignty no longer exists; all must submit to a New World Order).

7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials. (You must do whatever the powers that be tell you is law and obey only their servants).

8. Balance personal rights with social duties. (Humanity will be subject to the group concept of social responsibility--whatever that may be).

9. Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite. (We are to see God alive in all things—plants, rocks, animals, space, water, fire, air, and people. The idea is simple: God is in all because God is all. Pantheistic conception of the universe; in a real sense each person "becomes god").

10. Be not a cancer on the earth—Leave room for nature—Leave room for nature. (Nature, embodied as a "god," comes first; even over the "god" that is humanity).

We've heard from atheists and pagans, now let's turn to the real God, His Decalogue, and the teaching of His One True Church.

Ten Truths Regarding the Ten Commandments

1. The Ten Commandments encompass the Natural Law. The Natural Law is so-called for the following reasons: (a) it is received by people, not through special promulgation, but along with his rational nature. Hence, St. Paul says that the Gentiles, who had not received the laws specially promulgated, were a law unto themselves, that is, through their rational nature (Romans 2:14); (b) it includes only such precepts as can be known or deduced from the very nature of Man, and thus some pagans fulfilled the Law of Moses naturally, i.e., as regards its natural precepts (Romans 2:14); (c) it can be known from the natural light of reason without instruction, being a law written on the heart of every human (Romans 2:15).

2. The Decalogue expresses the duty of humanity: (a) towards God by loyalty (First Commandment), reverence (Second Commandment), and service (Third Commandment). These are called the Laws of the First Table; (b) towards our fellow human beings we must honor parents and authority (Fourth), ensure that no injustice be done to anyone by sins of deed (Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh), by sins of mouth (Eighth), and by sins of the heart (Ninth and Tenth). These are Laws of the Second Table. 

3. The further moral precepts that were given after the Ten Commandments may all be reduced to one or the other of them. Examples: Fortune telling is prohibited by the First; perjury is prohibited by the Second; prohibition against detraction to the Eighth.

4. Unlike the moral laws which had existed before Moses as the Natural Law, and which continue in perpetuity, ceremonial laws were temporary. After the coming of Christ, distinctions of food, new moons, and other Mosaic laws were abrogated and are not enjoined by the Ten Commandments.

5. The judicial laws which were observed under Moses and prior to Christ regulated the civil life of the Jews and ceased to have binding force after the establishment of the Church by Christ.

6. Christ did not abolish the moral precepts of the Ten Commandments. Rather He promulgated them anew and perfected them. (St. Matthew 5:17). The Ten Commandments are not good because God decreed them, but He decreed them because they are good, even as He is the Highest Good.

7. In the New Law of Christ there are no new moral precepts except such as follow from the truths of faith which Our Lord made known to us, and from the institution of the Sacraments.

8. If Christ called His precept of love "new," He did not mean that the Great Commandment did not bind under the Old Law, but only that He (a) urged it anew, (b) gave us new motives to practice it, (c) and gave it special emphasis by His Divine example and express command.

9. The evangelical counsels (poverty, chastity, and obedience) were proposed by Christ as a means of perfection in the life of Christians, but He did not command all to follow under pain of sin.

10. The Ten Commandments, as perfected under the Law of Christ and His One True Church, are not meant for a particular nation, race, or group of people--it is for all human beings to embrace and follow until the end of time.

This section was composed from theologian Slater, A Manual of Moral Theology, [1925], pgs. 74-75; and theologians McHugh and Callan, Moral Theology, [1929], 1:95-117.

Conclusion
It has been said that humans are incurably God-centered. The First Commandment does not say, "Thou shalt not be an atheist." Rather, "Thou shalt not have false gods before Me." Whatever comes first in our life is our "god." Having divorced themselves from objective moral values, that can only exist by virtue of God, atheists seek to fashion their own "non-Commandments" for guidance. All they got was a mass of contradictory statements that amount to no more than empty feelings of what is "right." New Age pagans want the earth decimated so that "Mother Earth" can take the place of  the head "god" in a kind of pantheistic universe where we are all "gods" to one degree or another. These are the "Deceptive Decalogues" of the world.

The real Ten Commandments of Our Lord God must be studied and meditated upon this Lent. Get to know, love, and keep the Laws of God. As Christ Himself told us, "If you love Me, keep My commandments." (St. John 14:15). 



Monday, February 17, 2020

Angels And Demons

 In our increasingly secular world, brought about by the evil of Vatican II, people seek to fill the void that only Christ and His One True Church can fill. Unfortunately, many seek refuge in various false religions and pagan beliefs. In the mid-1990s, there was a surge of interest in angels, which seems to be enjoying some renewed popularity. Driving through New York City, I saw a car with a bumper sticker that read "Protected by Angels." You might be wondering, "What's wrong with that?" The answer, depending on the circumstances, could be "nothing," or "everything." There was a bumper sticker to either side of the one about angels I saw on that same car. One read, "Magic Happens," and the other read, "Visualize World Peace." The driver was not Christian, but a New Ager, whose ideas about angels (and demons) are decidedly at odds with Church teaching.

This post will focus on the false teachings about both angels and demons, and will give the true teaching of the Church.

A Survey of The Angel and Occult Connection
Are there "counterfeit angels"? The Bible reminds us that  "For such false apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light." (2 Corinthians 11: 14-15; Emphasis mine). Angels are friends of God who would never do (or induced anyone to do) that which is contrary to the Will of God. In Deuteronomy 18:10-12, we read, "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord; because of these same detestable practices the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you." (Emphasis mine). 

The teaching of the Church echos these prohibitions listed in Deuteronomy. According to theologian Jone, "Spiritism claims to be able to communicate with the spirit world and endeavors to establish such commerce with it. Although spiritism is for the most part fraud, still the intention alone to enter into communication with spirits is gravely sinful. Therefore, it is mortally sinful to conduct a spiritistic seance or to act as a medium." (See Moral Theology, pg. 100; Emphasis mine). 

With this in mind, let's see what some people are claiming is being performed by "angels:"

  •  In Angel Wisdom,by Terry Lynn Taylor and Mary Beth Crain (HarperCollins, 1994), people are encouraged to use mantras, shamanistic "vision quests," contact one’s power animal (a "spirit guide" who appears in the form of an animal), manipulate chakras, and get involved with psychic healing
  • Angelic Messenger Cards, ask people to learn and accept contacting the dead (See Angelic Messenger Cards: A Divination System for Spiritual Discovery [Walpole, NH: Stillpoint, 1993])
  •  In Creating with the Angels, people are told, "Dream time is spirit time and offers a great opportunity to play with the angels…. Allow the angels to help you interpret your dreams." (See Terry Lynn Taylor, Creating With the Angels: An Angel-Guided Journey into Creativity [1993], pp. 39, 41)
  •  In The Angels Within Us, angels are said to take people deep into altered states of consciousness in order to establish contact with them (See John Randolph Price, The Angels Within Us: A Spiritual Guide to the Twenty-two Angels that Govern Our Lives  [1993], p. 16)
  • Rosemary Ellen Guiley, author of Angels of Mercy and many books on the occult and mysticism, such as The Encyclopedia of Witches and Witchcraft, recalls that her life has been directed by unseen presences, which she interprets as angels, who have guided her into her career (See Angels of Mercy, pg. 91)
It is obvious that these "angels" are demons. However, one of the leading "experts on angels"  mentioned above, Rosemary Ellen Guiley, a member of the Vatican II sect, seeks to counter this objection immediately to ensnare souls in evil practices. On page 217 of her book she writes,

 If we start mistrusting the agents of light, fearing that they are demons in disguise, then we paralyze ourselves—which is precisely what the dark side wants. They would like us to trust nothing and encase ourselves trembling in fear. Fear is the best weapon the darkness has. Fear is the fertile breeding ground for all evil…. The engines of darkness have terrible power, but nonetheless, they cannot stand up to the greater, more awesome power of light and love. (Emphasis mine). 

Delusions About Demons
On the flip side, there are also many incorrect ideas about demons that I've read in both books and online sources. In order to effectively battle an enemy, you must first "know thy enemy." Here are three incorrect beliefs about demons:
  • Spirits of a Pre-Adamic Race
This theory claims a pre-Adamic race existed on Earth before it became "dark and void" (See Genesis 1:2). These human-like creatures lived under the government of God and were presided over by Lucifer, "the anointed cherub that  covereth" (See Ezekiel 28:14). When these pre-Adamites joined Lucifer in revolt against God, a disaster fell upon the Earth, killing all inhabitants prior to Adam and Eve. The souls of these creatures roam the Earth seeking to possess people because they were meant to be united to flesh.

Errors: Despite what New Age literature would like you to believe, there is not even a hint in the Bible or Church teaching that would justify belief in any intelligent creatures upon Earth prior to our First Parents. It is also heretical in that it denies Hell, and has God leaving rational souls "wandering about the Earth" to possess human bodies. The original thesis was adopted by racists who claimed whites (or Gentiles) came from pre-Adamites, and non-whites (or Jews) came from Adam and Eve.This was to justify ideas that some had of "racial superiority." The New Age version puts a twist on it to explain the origin of demons.
(For more details of this erroneous opinion, See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12370a.htm)

  • Aliens
This theory comes from a book written over 50 years ago. In 1968, Eric Von Daniken wrote a runaway bestseller entitled Chariots of the Gods. It sold more than seven million copies worldwide and was made into a movie of the same name in 1970. The thesis of the book is that extraterrestrials came to Earth and are the basis of religion. For example, the angels of the Bible were really aliens in spacesuits, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was by an alien nuclear weapon. These aliens also allegedly explain the pyramids of Egypt and Stonehenge which were built by them. Hence, demons are "evil aliens" that come to Earth to wreak havoc.

Errors: It denies the existence of God. It also fails to explain why "evil aliens" would not just take over. Scientifically and historically, there is so much wrong with it, I would need another post to explain it all. For a great and thorough refutation of Von Daniken's nutty theory, See Crash Go The Chariots by Clifford Wilson.

  • Spirits of the Deceased Wicked
This theory is purely pagan. It teaches that good people who die will have their souls assume a "god-like" state in Heaven, while the evil who die will roam the Earth to incite the living humans to do evil. This pagan conception (with its roots in ancient Greek myths), has been used by Hollywood in movies. In the horror movie franchise Nightmare on Elm Street, the main character of Freddy Krueger is the maniacal killer and indestructible soul of a deceased child murderer.  In Child's Play, a doll is possessed by the soul of a dead voodoo strangler.

Errors: The souls of the Blessed in Heaven do not become "god-like," or "demi-gods," rather they enjoy the Beatific Vision of God for all eternity. Likewise, the souls of the damned suffer the pains of Hell forever; they do not "roam the Earth."

The Teaching of the Church
The following section is taken in large part from the eminent theologians Tanquerey, A Manual of Dogmatic Theology, (1959), 1:371-393 and from theologian Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, [1955], pgs. 114-122. Theologian Pohle is cited on one point, as is theologian Delaporte, and are given due attribution. 

1. In the beginning of time God created spiritual essences out of nothing. It is a dogma declared by the Fourth Lateran Council and the First Vatican Council that "simultaneously at the beginning of time He created from nothing both spiritual and corporeal creation, angelic and mundane." The creation of the angels is directly attested to in Colossians 1:16, "For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him." (Four of the angelic choirs are mentioned; Emphasis mine).

2. The number and hierarchy of the angels. There is no definitive teaching on how many angels exist, although it is certain they are very numerous. Apocalypse 5: 11, "I heard the voice of many angels...and the number of them was thousands of thousands." The so-called "orders" or "choirs" of angels are not an article of faith, but the theologians hold it to be a theologically certain truth. The theological schools have put them into three hierarchies with three choirs in each hierarchy. The supreme hierarchy has the Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones. The intermediate hierarchy is composed of the Dominations, Virtues, and Powers. The lowest hierarchy is made of the Principalities, Archangels, and Angels. It is speculated that the difference in rank is due to the supreme hierarchy assisting at the Throne of God and getting their orders directly from Almighty God Himself. They then hand these orders down to the intermediate hierarchy which, in turn, hands them down to the lowest hierarchy, and the angels bring messages (when necessary) to men. The name angel means "messenger."

3.  The angels have an intellect superior to men and are endowed with free will. The angels were given a test, like humans, to earn the Beatific Vision. They were subjected to a probation which a number failed and became demons in Hell. The angels are vastly superior to humans, but cannot produce a true miracle which is something only God can do. The leader of the rebellious angels became known as "Satan" or "adversary" and it is conjectured that approximately one third of the angels followed his rebellion against God, Who created and condemned them to Hell. What was the test? We don't know for certain. Most theologians agree it was a sin of pride. Some theologians speculate that they did not want to serve God. Other theologians, most notably the great Suarez, teach that the sin of pride was in refusing to obey and worship God the Son when it was made known He would take on a human nature (Hypostatic Union).

4. Every human being has a Guardian Angel who should be venerated and invoked. There are four points on this:
  • Angels have a general guardianship over the human race. It is good and salutary to pray to them and venerate them. All humans, not just members of the One True Church are given a Guardian Angel upon conception. Theologians agree that even the Antichrist will have a Guardian Angel, but all his efforts to turn him from utter wickedness will be in vain because of the sheer perversity of his will.It is to be rejected that every person also has a demon to tempt him. It is impious to even think God, Who wills the salvation of all, would permit it. 
  • Guardian Angels ward off dangers of body and soul consonant with the Will of God.
  • They inspire good and salutary thoughts and covey our prayers to the Throne of God.
  •  They assist us at the hour of death and bear the souls of the elect to Heaven. 

In regard to Satan and his demons:
Satan and his demons are fallen angels. As such, they are pure spirits with intellect and will. They are capable of things people cannot do, as humans are both body and soul. The Devil and his demons can hurt humanity in the following ways:

  • Temptation. According to theologian Pohle,"Satan and his demons...continually strive by lies and false pretenses to seduce men to commit sin and thereby incur eternal damnation." (See Dogmatic Theology,  [1945], 3:345). 
  • Physical injury. According to theologian Ott, "The evil spirits also seek to hurt mankind physically also, through the causing of physical evil (e.g., Tob. 3:8, Job 1:12, 1 Cor. 5: 5)."
  • Possession. Once more, from theologian Ott, "In some cases people are possessed, in which case the demon takes forcible possession of the human body, so that the bodily organs and the lower powers of the soul, but not the higher powers of the soul, are controlled by him. The possibility and reality of possession is firmly established by the express testimony of Christ, Who Himself drove out evil spirits and Who bestowed power over the evil spirits on His disciples (Church's power of exorcism---St. Mark 1:23; St. Luke 10: 17 et seq)." 
  • Diabolic Obsession . There is diabolic obsession, in which strong disturbances are imposed on the mind, e.g., thoughts of suicide, committing serious sins, or gender dysphoria. It can also take the form of an "infestation" in the house (e.g., hearing mysterious footsteps, bad odors with no cause--and all experienced by more than just the one primarily afflicted). According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, "But the influence of the demon, as we know from Scripture and the history of the Church, goes further still. He may attack man's body from without [obsession], or assume control of it from within [possession]." (See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12315a.htm).  
According to theologian Delaporte, "Although very rare in ordinary life, obsession is very frequent in the heroic lives of the Saints...Persons of a nervous temperament and lively imagination, imagine themselves haunted by the  Devil, when there is nothing of the kind. People should not believe in obsession without the most convincing proof." (See The Devil, Does He Exist and What Does He Do?, [reprint from 1871], pgs. 129-130).  We must be on guard against Satan, yet not ascribe anything to direct demonic activity without ruling out natural causes.
Conclusion
Angels are very real. Unfortunately, so are the fallen angels. We must understand Church teaching about both. It is wonderful to pray and to be devoted to our Guardian Angel, St. Michael the Archangel, St. Gabriel, St. Rafael, and the Choirs of angels. However, we must be careful that we are are really praying to the angels, and not some New Age counterfeit. If anyone claims "angels" revealed something to them, is that so-called revelation at odds with Church teaching? Before you buy any book that references angels, check if there is anything regarding faith or morals that is incompatible with Church teaching, and therefore equally incompatible with the angels of God. When it comes to demons, we must understand what they really are so as not to get involved with other errors.

"My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests; because you have ignored the law of your God, I also will ignore your children." (Hosea 4:8). Make sure you understand Church teaching before getting involved with anything claiming to be "angel devotion" or something to "keep away evil spirits/demons." Truly, fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

Monday, February 10, 2020

There's Only One Race


It was the First Saturday Mass in January at the Ave Maria Chapel, twenty-four years ago. Father DePauw, my spiritual father who led me to the One True Church, would always have the first pews reserved for the children so he could quiz them on their monthly catechism lessons. It was also the Feast of the Epiphany. There was a beautiful and large manger outside the Chapel. Inside all could see an equally beautiful (yet decidedly smaller) one, on the Epistle side of the altar, just outside the Sanctuary. After his quiz, Father would deliver an approximately 10 minute sermon aimed at teaching the kids.

From the pulpit Father pointed to the indoor manger. "Do you see the Three Wise Men? They were blessed to be among the very first to see the Infant Savior. I want you to notice that one of the three has decidedly black skin, and the others have white skin. In life, you will meet some people with white skin who will tell you to hate people with black skin. You will also meet people with black skin who will tell you to hate people with white skin. These people who hate other people with different skin color would like everyone to live apart according to their color, and they also want you to believe that one skin color is better than others. This is stupid and not Catholic. Jesus Christ did not die on Good Friday for the black race, the white race, or the yellow race. He only died for one race--the human race to which all skin colors belong." (Written from my memory as best I remember. Father used that same sermon for the children virtually every First Saturday in January).

There is a disturbing trend among Millennials to take extreme positions. As a Generation Xer, I believe it is the effect of growing up in a world where all remaining vestiges of Catholicism were eliminated in the Great Apostasy by the Vatican II sect. If you look at the supporters of Communist Senator Bernie Sanders, there are overwhelming numbers of 23-38 year olds. There is a tendency among this generation to take extreme right-wing positions as well, such as Fascism/Neo-Nazism. Add to the mix the fact that four in ten millennials now say they are religiously unaffiliated, according to the Pew Research Center; therefore large numbers of young people are left without any thought of God and remain feeling empty. The extreme positions give the definitive answers regarding right and wrong/good and bad that the Church used to give before Vatican II created a new sect falsely claiming the title "Roman Catholic Church." (See https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/).

As a result of these sad circumstances, a new racism is being touted among some young people calling themselves "Traditionalist." Many of them are attracted to the fact that sedevacantism "sounds extreme" and are not really searching for the Truth. Their knowledge of the Faith is very superficial. Adding fuel to the fire, the media and political climate cause distrust among races. The liberals are making non-whites "victims" and want job quotas (think Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ), while conservatives are claiming racial superiority in the form of "White Nationalism." Both are causing a new and real hatred based on skin color. Some of these racists also think they can be Traditionalists simultaneously without contradiction in their beliefs. This post will explore Church teaching on racism, and the correct type of nationalism we need today.


Essential Unity of Humanity
In his first encyclical, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum (1914), Pope Benedict XV declares that the relations between people should be one of brothers and sisters, i.e., of those who are one in nature because they are of the same family created by God. Discussing the ravages of the First World War (1914-1918), His Holiness writes, "Who would imagine as we see them thus filled with hatred of one another, that they are all of one common stock, all of the same nature, all members of the same human family?" (para. #3; Emphasis mine). 

In Mortalium Animos (1928), Pope Pius XI teaches, "... it is easily understood, and the more so because none now dispute the unity of the human race, why many desire that the various nations, inspired by this universal kinship, should daily be more closely united one to another." (para. #1; Emphasis mine). The same holy pontiff ordered the Sacred Congregation for Seminaries and Universities to compose a letter refuting and condemning racism and Nazi "Aryan race" ideology in order to prevent it from infecting Catholic educational institutions. The result was a privately circulated document entitled Instruction Concerning Racism, Its Doctrinal Errors and the Measures to be Employed Against Their Spread (hereinafter "Instruction"). The Instruction was dated April 13, 1938 and a complete English translation was made by canonist Bouscaren in the Canon Law Digest-Supplement 1941 (pgs. 165-167). The Congregation's Instruction condemns no less than eight (8) propositions as being both "pernicious" and "absurd:"

I. The human races, by their natural and immutable characters, are so different from each other that, the humblest of them is further from the highest race than of the highest animal species.

II. We must by all means, preserve and cultivate strong race and purity of blood, so that all which leads to this result is therefore honest and permitted.

III. It is blood, seat of the characteristics of the race, that all the intellectual and moral qualities of man derive as their main source.

IV. The basic purpose of education is to develop the characters of the race and inflame the minds of a burning love of their own race as the supreme good.

V. Religion is subject to the law of race and must be adapted to it.

VI. The first source and the supreme rule of law and order is racial instinct.

VII. There exists only the Cosmos or living universe; all things, including humans, are only various forms growing over the ages of universal life.

VIII. Each man exists only by the State and for the State. All that he rightly possesses derives exclusively from a concession to the State.

It shouldn't be too hard to understand that racism is inexorably linked to the damnable doctrine of Social Darwinism. It is taken from the false teaching of Charles Darwin (d. 1882) regarding evolution. The term "evolution" is used to refer to the general theory that all life on earth has evolved from non-living matter and progressed to more complex forms with time; humans are not special in any way--both body and soul (or "consciousness")-- comes from brute matter. This stands condemned by the Church.

As the late leading evolutionist George Gaylord Simpson observed:

"In the world of Darwin, man has no special status other than his definition as a distinct species of animal. He is in the fullest sense a part of nature and not apart from it. He is akin, not figuratively, but literally, to every living thing, be it an amoeba, a tapeworm, a seaweed, an oak tree, or a monkey—even though the degrees of relationship are different and we may feel less empathy for forty-second cousins like the tapeworm than for, comparatively speaking, brothers like the monkeys…." (See George Gaylord Simpson, "The World into Which Darwin Led Us," Science, Vol. 131 (1960), p. 970).

As a consequence of this error, when Darwinism is applied to society ("Social" aspect), you will get one of two malevolent results:

(a)  All higher forms of life are to be considered equal. Hence, there was a case here in New York, where a lawyer argued to give legal rights (and constitutional protections) to chimpanzees.
(See https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/do-apes-deserve-personhood-rights-lawyer-heads-n-y-supreme-n731431).

While we must be good stewards of all God has given us, and not abuse the animals God gave to Earth, it is insanity to assert (as some "animal rights activists" have done) that eating meat is "murder." According to the "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals" (PETA), "We are taught the Golden Rule as young children, and all major religions teach principles of nonviolence and kindness. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Ethical treatment—the Golden Rule—must be extended to all living beings: reptiles, mammals, fish, insects, birds, amphibians, and crustaceans." To include animals in the Golden Rule, which was given to humans by Christ, is blasphemous.(See https://www.peta.org/features/what-peta-really-stands-for/).

(b) As a consequence of the Darwinian principle of the "survival of the fittest," the superior have the right to dominate the inferior. Humans are animals and each race is different, insofar as it is alleged that certain races are inherently superior to others (Hitler's "Master Race"). According to the National Socialist Movement's (Neo-Nazi) website:

National Socialism is a worldview that is based upon the application of Natural Law to the individual, the family, the economy, and the nation. Natural Law is the organic expression of Truth found within all of nature. The nation within National Socialism is made up of a people who share the same language, heritage, culture, customs, and blood. (This is a perverted definition of "Natural Law" and there is no mention of God or religion; Emphasis mine) We seek to preserve and advance our culture, traditions, and our genetic inheritance based upon the principles of love and duty for our Faith, Family, and Folk. This can be summed up in the famous Fourteen Words "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children."( See https://www.nsm88.org/; Emphasis mine)

You also can't get more blunt than "King Shamir Shabazz" the leader of the New Black Panther Party's Philadelphia chapter, who said in a National Geographic documentary (January 2009), "I hate white people. All of them." The Panthers believe that the "superior race" is "Afro-centric."

True Nationalism and National Unity Can Only Be Built Upon The One True Church
As Pope Pius XI taught in his 1937 encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge, "Whoever exalts race, or the people, or the State, or a particular form of State, or the depositories of power, or any other fundamental value of the human community - however necessary and honorable be their function in worldly things - whoever raises these notions above their standard value and divinizes them to an idolatrous level, distorts and perverts an order of the world planned and created by God; he is far from the true faith in God and from the concept of life which that faith upholds." (para. #8). 

The Teachings of the Popes
1. In the absence of a restraining principle by which individual passions are controlled, moral unity of a nation becomes impossible.

Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, para. # 21: Nor can it be said that these atrocities are a transitory phenomenon, the usual accompaniment of all great revolutions, the isolated excesses common to every war. No, they are the natural fruit of a system which lacks all inner restraint. Some restraint is necessary for man considered either as an individual or in society. Even the barbaric peoples had this inner check in the natural law written by God in the heart of every man. And where this natural law was held in higher esteem, ancient nations rose to a grandeur that still fascinates - more than it should - certain superficial students of human history. But tear the very idea of God from the hearts of men, and they are necessarily urged by their passions to the most atrocious barbarity. (Emphasis mine)

2. People can choose the form of government they want, as long as it is not opposed to the Church and Her teachings.

Pope St. Pius X: Notre Charge Apostolique,  In the Encyclical on political government which We have already quoted, they could have read this: 'Justice being preserved, it is not forbidden to the people to choose for themselves the form of government which best corresponds with their character or with the institutions and customs handed down by their forefathers.' (Emphasis mine)

3. The State has an obligation to be a Catholic State, and the Church will bring blessings upon the people.

Pope Leo XIII: Immortale Dei: As a consequence, the State, constituted as it is, is clearly bound to act up to the manifold and weighty duties linking it to God, by the public profession of religion...Now, it cannot be difficult to find out which is the true religion, if only it be sought with an earnest and unbiased mind; for proofs are abundant and striking. We have, for example, the fulfillment of prophecies, miracles in great numbers, the rapid spread of the faith in the midst of enemies and in face of overwhelming obstacles, the witness of the martyrs, and the like. From all these it is evident that the only true religion is the one established by Jesus Christ Himself, and which He committed to His Church to protect and to propagate...the abundant benefits with which the Christian religion, of its very nature, endows even the mortal life of man are acquired for the community and civil society. And this to such an extent that it may be said in sober truth: "The condition of the commonwealth depends on the religion with which God is worshiped; and between one and the other there exists an intimate and abiding connection." (para. #6, 7, 19; Emphasis mine). 

4. Errors Concerning The One True Church and the State

Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, CONDEMNED PROPOSITIONS:

27. The sacred ministers of the Church and the Roman pontiff are to be absolutely excluded from every charge and dominion over temporal affairs.

40. The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well- being and interests of society.

42. In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails.

48. Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church, and which regards the knowledge of merely natural things, and only, or at least primarily, the ends of earthly social life.

55. The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.

Conclusion
Father DePauw's Chapel is approximately 30% non-white, and always was that way. It showed me the true "universal" (i.e., "Catholic") Nature of the Church. I remember one Sunday sitting between an Hispanic man and a Haitian woman. Neither spoke English other than a few simple phrases. Yet here we were at the same Mass. I looked over and saw one hand Missal was in French and English and the other in Spanish and English. Christ came to all three of us in Holy Communion that day regardless of race, language, or other worldly consideration.

God created one race, the human race. While we are composed of different skin colors, it should neither unite us like the Nazis or divide us like so-called "separatists." Let the One True Church unite us all in He Who is Truth Itself. "There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28). 



Monday, February 3, 2020

When Strangers Come Knocking---Part 6


This is the next installment of my series to be published the first Monday of each month.

There are members of false sects, like Jehovah's Witnesses, that come knocking door-to-door hoping to convert you. Instead of ignoring them, it is we who should try and convert them. In 1 Peter 3:16, our first Pope writes, "But in thy hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks thee to give the reason for the hope that thou hast. But do this with gentleness and respect,..." Before the Great Apostasy, the Church would send missionaries to the ends of the Earth to make as many converts as possible.

Those in false religions don't always come (literally) knocking at your door. It may be a Hindu at work who wants you to try yoga. It could be a "Christian Scientist" who lives next door and invites you to come to their reading room. Each month, I will present a false sect. Unlike the Vatican II sect, I do not see them as a "means of salvation" or possessing "elements of truth" that lead to salvation. That is heresy. They lead to damnation, and the adherents of the various sects must be converted so they may be saved.

In each month's post, I will present one false sect and give an overview of:



  • The sect's history
  • Their theology
  • Tips on how to share the True Faith with them

The Unification "Church"
Called "The Moonies" after their founder, "Reverend" Sun Myung Moon (d.2012) of South Korea, The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, as this sect is formally called, can rightfully be branded a cult. I use the word "cult" with great caution, and never to designate a false religion. The appellation correctly carries a very negative connotation in modern society. It is used to designate those groups that use coercion (either physical, mental, social, financial, or any combination thereof) to (a) get people to join or (b) prevent people from leaving. Hence, Scientology is a cult, since it has been proven that they have blackmailed people and even threatened the lives of their members should they dare to leave. The Moonies have the infamous distinction of using mental coercion (i.e. "brainwashing") to get people in and stop others already members from leaving. They even had a run in almost twenty years ago with the Vatican II sect. 

In order to understand and convert The Moonies, it is necessary to understand their founder and the false claim that they are "Christian" in any sense of that word. The cult is based on a false "Messiah" and they encourage occult practices. 

Bad Moon Rising
Sun Myung Moon was born on January 6, 1920, in northwestern Korea. Raised as a Protestant, Moon claimed that on Easter Sunday 1936, the 16 year old was praying on a mountainside when Jesus Christ appeared to him, and requested Moon to "complete the mission" which He began nearly 2,000 years ago. Moon realized that he was the only one who could save the world, and accepted the "call to become the Messiah."  Moon then spent the next nine years "battling Satan," in which the devil tried to get Moon to sin (and thereby become unworthy of his role as "Messiah"), and also tried to convince him he could not be the alleged Messiah. In 1945, Sun Myung Moon declared his "victory over Satan." 

The year 1946 saw Moon under the Communist regime of North Korea, when the country was divided by the Americans and the Soviets at the 38th parallel. At this time, he began studying under Paik Moon Kim who ran a "Christian monastery" with bizarre and occult teachings regarding Christ. It was from Kim that Moon developed most of his theology. In 1948, Moon's religious activity caused the Communists to sentence him to five years of hard labor. He escaped during the Korean War and made it into South Korea. He was subjected to torture at the hands of the Communists resulting in making anti-Communism and pro-American political ideology part of his cult.

 In 1954, Moon officially established the Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, commonly known as the Unification Church.

In 1957 he published Divine Principle. Moon claims that Divine Principle is a revelation he received from God and is the "Third Testament" alongside the Old and New Testaments. Paik Moon Kim, also fancied himself to be a "Messiah" of sorts. In 1960, Moon married Hak Ja Han, with whom he had fourteen children. She now controls the cult since Moon's death in 2012.

On New Year's Day, 1972, Moon said that God "sent him to America." He came to America and toured under the guise of patriotism with the theme "God Bless America." On his second tour he supported President Richard Nixon during the Watergate investigation, stating that "God made Nixon president, and only God should remove him." Three hundred fifty followers fasted for seventy-two hours on behalf of Nixon, asking Congress to "forgive, love, and unite." The President personally thanked Moon for his support. Since that event the Unification Church has had the public eye. He began initiating an aggressive proselytizing effort using techniques aimed at getting the disenfranchised to join, and make them feel worthless without the cult so they would never leave. He bought The Washington Times to give his cult an aura of respectability, and with the help of his followers, he made tens of millions of dollars.

In the 1980s, he performed the first of many mass wedding ceremonies in which more than 2000 couples were married. In 1984, he was convicted of tax evasion in the U.S. and sent to prison for 13 months. Moon was the ultimate authority within the cult; an authority passed on to his widow Hak Ja Han. The administration of Unification organizations is by a board of elders. The Unification cult's main religious text is the Bible. It is seen as teaching truth, but is not viewed as truth in itself. It is only a partial revelation. Moon's interpretations of Christian beliefs and additional revelations from God are all recorded in the Divine Principle. (See Frederick Sontag, Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church, [1977]; for detailed accounts of cult activity, See Crazy for God: The Nightmare of Cult Life, by Christopher Edwards, [1979]).

The "Third Adam"
The beliefs of Moon are further out there than the actual moon. Here is a brief summary:
  • God is both positive (male) and negative (female) aspects, which are in perfect harmony with each other. A variation of the Asian pagan belief of "yin" and "yang" 
  • The Holy Ghost is not a Person, but God's "feminine counterpart" --a form of energy derived from God
  • The Fall of Humanity was caused by two illicit sex acts: Eve had sex with Satan, and had pre-marital sex with Adam before God had the chance to marry them. They could no longer form the perfect family and Satan took over the world
  • Communism is of Satan and American's democratic republic is of God
  •  Jesus Christ was a unique human being who was born without original sin. After his crucifixion, he was spiritually resurrected, although Satan took his body away
  • God's original intent was for Jesus Christ to form a perfect marriage in order to redeem humanity, and undo the harm perpetrated by Adam and Eve. Since Jesus was executed before accomplishing his mission, it will be up to a third Adam to form this perfect marriage and complete Jesus' task
  • Since Jesus did not complete his original task, physical salvation is not possible on earth during one's lifetime. Complete salvation (spiritual and physical) awaits the arrival of the third Adam and his subsequent perfect marriage
  • St. Paul was the "creator" of Christianity. Through his teachings, he converted the tenets of Jesus concerning the kingdom of God into a formal religion about Jesus
  • The main purpose of the Unification Church is to unite all of the fragments of Christianity into a single body through ecumenism
  • The "Third Adam" who will form the perfect family was born in Korea between 1917 and 1930. Moon is the long awaited Third Adam, who with Hak Ja Han, will have a perfect family that will ultimately redeem humanity

The Unification cult is primarily a cult of personality; the narcissistic rambling of the late Sun Myung Moon and now his "perfect wife and family." These wacky teachings actually made inroads with the Vatican II sect. Besides being ecumenical, like the V2 sect, there was quite an unusual event involving the Modernist Vatican II sect itself in 2001 which will be examined.

The Strange Case of "Archbishop" Milingo
Emmanuel Milingo was born in Africa in 1930. He was validly ordained a priest in 1958, at the age of 28. Eleven years later Montini (Paul VI) "consecrated" him a "bishop" in the new and invalid rite of Holy Orders. Montini made him "Archbishop" of the Diocese of Lusaka. He was known for performing exorcisms at the drop of a hat. The True Church does not randomly go about performing exorcisms without the necessary investigation, which takes time to rule out non-supernatural causes.

Dabbling in such endeavors is dangerous. Wojtyla removed him as "Archbishop" as a result in 1983, and made him a "delegate" of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers. Milingo saw Satan in the Vatican II sect, but wrongly considered the sect as the Catholic Church. He teamed up with "Fr." Nicholas Gruner of the "Fatima Industry" claiming the hierarchy was doing Satan's work. Then in May of 2001, the almost 71-year-old got deeply involved with the Unification cult when he went to a  doctor said to be using pagan "Reiki healing." Milingo "married" a 43-year-old acupuncturist named Marie Sung in a "group wedding," comprising many couples getting legally married by Moon simultaneously. Sung was chosen by Moon himself for Milingo, and he only met her two days before the "wedding." (See https://zenit.org/articles/zambian-archbishop-marries-in-moon-wedding/).

Milingo participated in mass-marriages organized by the sect in Japan in 1999, and in Korea in 2000, yet the Modernist Vatican never censured him. After his "wedding" he was told by the then "Cardinal" Ratzinger to leave Sung. Milingo said, "For 43 years as a celibate priest ... I only knew God as a male. Now, through my union with Maria, I have come to see the other side of God's heart, which is female."  This is Moonie teaching. (See https://www.cesnur.org/2001/moon_july25.htm; Emphasis mine)

He briefly reconciled with Wojtyla, but then rejoined his "wife." He targeted celibacy. "Secret affairs and marriages, illegitimate children, rampant homosexuality, pedophilia and illicit sex have riddled the priesthood to the extent that the UN Commission on Human Rights has investigated the church for sexual abuse, and the western media is filled with stories of lawsuits and scandals surrounding the Church," Milingo said.(See http://www.wewillstand.org/media/20010808_9.htm).

Just like the Modernists, he is right about the scandals but wrong about the source; it is not celibacy but Vatican II. Milingo began an organization urging Vatican II sect "priests" to marry, calling it Married Priests (sic) Now! It still took until 2006, after he "consecrated" four so-called priests as "bishops" that he was "excommunicated" by Wojtyla, and in 2009, he was reduced to the lay state (he is no longer referred to or recognized as a member of their clergy--being called "Layman Emmanuel Milingo." [See http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bmilingo.html]).

Now, at age 89, he has made many "bishops" all with the same desire--to end celibacy and draw "priests" into their movement. In 2010, he was pronounced "patriarch" of his own sect, "The Ecumenical Catholic Apostolic Church of Peace." (See https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=7203).
I believe Milingo is being used by the very Satanic forces he denounces to promote the denigration of celibacy.

Consider:

  • He is an apostate priest having broken his Anti-Modernist Oath, and was "consecrated" by Montini himself
  • His so-called exorcisms were accused of being "indigenous"--using African pagan elements, which would attract, not repel, demons
  • He met Moon through a doctor he went to for a knee problem, and the doctor was alleged to be using "Reiki healing" which is pagan 
  • The Moon cult "Unification Church" has many occult practices that open one to demonic forces

The Unification cult has direct occult connections. The Divine Principle itself supports occult practices. "Thus, the spirit men pour out spiritual fire on earthly men, give them the power to heal diseases, and help them do many mighty works. More than that, they enable earthly men to see many facts in the spirit world in a state of trance, give them the gift of prophecy, and inspire them spiritually. Through such activities, substituting for the Holy Spirit, they cooperate with earthly men to fulfill the will of God." (pg. 182; Emphasis mine). Further, Moon said, "If you are a clairvoyant...you should know whether your spirit guide is higher than you in spirit. If he is higher, it is all right. If he is not higher than you and you consult him, you lose…. They want to control you…. It is always dangerous, and you don’t gain anything, to be controlled by spirit. By understanding the Principle, you are in such a position that you can control and use and guide them." (See Unification publication, The Master Speaks, pg. 16)

Moon is clearly a medium. He has urged his followers to engage in mediumistic contacts as part of their "spiritual growth." This is in direct contradiction to Church teaching and Biblical warnings that tell us such activity is an abomination to God: "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord,…" (Deuteronomy 18:10-12). Satan hates purity. Pope Siricius (334–399), described his opponent Jovinian as a tool of "the ancient enemy, the adversary of chastity, the teacher of luxury," because he had attacked the celibacy of the clergy.

Bringing Someone Back from the Moon
When engaging a Moonie, please remember these important points:
  • Not all are brainwashed, and do not insinuate they are, or you will lose them
  • Do not call them Moonies or a cult; call them "Unificationists" or they will not hear you out
  • Do not directly attack the person of Sun Myung Moon or Hak Ja Han; lead them to draw their own conclusions about them from their theology
Talking points:


  • Moon claimed that Jesus had failed in His mission. He declared this entirely on the advice of some unknown spirits who had given him revelations and possessed him. On what logical or historical precedent can those possessed by spirits be trusted? 


  • Moon said he would convert Korea and America. He died over seven years ago and none of this happened. What does the Bible say about a failed prophet? Deuteronomy 18:22 says, "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him." Is this someone you should follow?


  • In the Unification publication Master Speaks, 1, p. 1 Moon says, "From childhood, I was clairvoyant and clairaudient. I could see through people, see their spirits." In Master Speaks, 2, pp. 18-19, Moon alleges, "I can appear to a thousand people at once." In Master Speaks, December 29, 1971, p. 10, members of the Unification church may become mediums themselves, as it is written, "They [spirits] are free to associate with you and contact you at any time."


  • Now hit them with Unification teaching in direct contradiction. The January-February, 1977 issue of Unification publication The Way of the World (pages 45-49) lists twelve "theological affirmations" of official Unification Church beliefs. Of number 10, "The Bible," it declares: "Truth is unique eternal and unchanging, so any new messages from God will be in conformity with the Bible." They accept the Old and New Testaments. Read to them the passage from Deuteronomy cited above;  "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord,…" (Deuteronomy 18:10-12). Ask, "How is this in conformity with Master Speaks and Divine Principle? How are Moon's failed prophesies in conformity with Deuteronomy 18:22? 


  •   Conclusion
    It is especially difficult in dealing with members of cults. Even a Vatican II sect "bishop" bought into their false occult-based teachings from a false "Messiah" who was a crook and a master manipulator. He ruined people's lives (and souls). You must get these poor souls to question Moon in a gentle manner so they may begin to think for themselves. Always pray for them and offer a Green Scapular if they will accept one (they are ecumenical, so they may be receptive). Remember well the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ to His Apostles, "Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves." (St. Matthew 10:16). 

    Monday, January 27, 2020

    Neurotheology


    Last year, a psychotherapist who I knew through a friend, called me and asked for legal advice. He told me that he had participated in a study of the "God Effect," and wanted to bring it into the mainstream. The study was a small scale version of the following test, which was reported by Religious News Service (RNS) in 2016.

    Cancer patient Tony D. Head wasn’t sure he’d call it "God" exactly, but some extraordinary power touched him during his psychedelic-assisted therapy session.

    “It was so powerful and so profound that it just took my breath away,” said Head, a a research subject in a new study of psychotherapy fueled by psilocybin, the active ingredient in the mind-altering drug known as magic mushrooms.

    “Whatever it was, it was a power that is in the universe," he added after the session at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore. "I feel like it changed my life.”

    Head, an actor who played Major Bobby Reed in the popular HBO series "The Wire," was one of 80 cancer patients who volunteered to participate in two studies. The findings were published Thursday (Dec. 1, 2016) by researchers at Johns Hopkins and the New York University School of Medicine.

    The separate but similar clinical trials were designed to see if a single dose of psilocybin could reduce psychological illness and existential distress among patients with a life-threatening diagnosis.

    In a press release, Johns Hopkins University said the drug had been given "in tightly controlled conditions in the presence of two clinically trained monitors" and that use of the compound was not recommended "outside of such a research or patient care setting."

    Psilocybin is illegal in many countries. In the United States, it is classified along with heroin, marijuana and LSD as a Schedule I controlled substance, which means that, according to the federal government, it has "no currently accepted medical use in treatment."

    Still, the trials suggest that spiritual feelings triggered by the drug may play a role in alleviating depression and severe anxiety, especially when dealing with a life-threatening illness.

    “Many of the patients,” NYU researcher Stephen Ross observed, “would say something like, ‘Now I’ve experienced the death of the body, so I’m not so afraid.’ They get through it. They come out the other side.”

    The study of 51 depressed cancer patients at John Hopkins reported reduced depression in 92 percent of those who received a high dose of psychedelic psilocybin, compared with only 32 percent among those who got an extremely low dose that should not have had much of an effect. Tests to measure depression were done five weeks after the psilocybin session.

    NYU researchers found that 83 percent of volunteers treated with psilocybin had a significant reduction in depression symptoms seven weeks after they received a single dose of the psychedelic compound. That compared with only 14 percent of a control group that got all the therapy — but with a placebo pill containing niacin. There were a total of 29 research subjects in that group.

    Both research teams found that most of the improvement in mood remained six months after the psychedelic sessions. Those who randomly received the placebo pills in the double-blind trials were later able to undergo a high-dose psilocybin session, and they also showed significant long-term psychological gains.

    Ross, director of addiction psychiatry at NYU Langone Medical Center, said half of the New York volunteers going into the study described themselves as agnostics or atheists, and half had some kind of religious affiliation. But roughly equal numbers in both groups had experiences that could be described as "mystical." (See https://religionnews.com/2016/12/01/study-drug-induced-spiritual-experiences-help-cancer-patients/; Emphasis mine).

    I told the psychotherapist I couldn't (and wouldn't) help him in getting a Schedule I drug made accessible to the public. The possible consequences of such studies was not lost on the enemies of God. The subject of "religious experience" is not encountered by many of us. It may only come into our lives when a neighbor's 20 year old goes travelling to "find themselves," or when someone at the Vatican II sect parish takes up yoga. For me, it was this phone call with an eccentric psychotherapist. Luckily, the True Faith is not based on experiences and feelings as is the Modernist Vatican II sect.

    Beginning around the year 2000, neuroscientists have published a great deal of research showing numerous brain regions to be especially active during religious practices. Have these discoveries proven that religious experiences are products of the brain? What about Catholic mystics and seers? Has neuroscience filled in a gap in which God is squeezed out? Many atheists are claiming the "death of God" has finally arrived. There is even a term for such studies---Neurotheology---where brain science meets religious experience.

    In this post, I will examine the claims of neurotheology and its impact and value to both the True Faith and the Vatican II sect.

    Is God in the Frontal Lobes of the Brain?
    Professor Andrew Newberg has pioneered studies, such as brain imaging techniques, to see how the brain reacts during various religious experiences in different religions. Interestingly, all religious experiences are not the same. According to Medical News Today, Newberg:
    ...draws from his numerous studies to show that both meditating Buddhists and praying Catholic [V2 Sect] nuns, for instance, have increased activity in the frontal lobes of the brain.

    These areas are linked with increased focus and attention, planning skills, the ability to project into the future, and the ability to construct complex arguments.

    Also, both prayer and meditation correlate with a decreased activity in the parietal lobes, which are responsible for processing temporal and spatial orientation.

    Nuns, however — who pray using words rather than relying on visualization techniques used in meditation — show increased activity in the language-processing brain areas of the subparietal lobes.

    But, other religious practices can have the opposite effect on the same brain areas. For instance, one of the most recent studies co-authored by Dr. Newberg shows that intense Islamic prayer — "which has, as its most fundamental concept, the surrendering of one's self to God" — reduces the activity in the prefrontal cortex and the frontal lobes connected with it, as well as the activity in the parietal lobes.

    Here's another interesting finding from the same source:

    Researchers led by Dr. Jeff Anderson, Ph.D. — from the University of Utah School of Medicine in Salt Lake City — examined the brains of 19 young Mormons using a functional MRI scanner.

    When asked whether, and to what degree, the participants were "feeling the spirit," those who reported the most intense spiritual feelings displayed increased activity in the bilateral nucleus accumbens, as well as the frontal attentional and ventromedial prefrontal cortical loci.

    These pleasure and reward-processing brain areas are also active when we engage in sexual activities, listen to music, gamble, and take drugs. The participants also reported feelings of peace and physical warmth.

    "When our study participants were instructed to think about a savior, about being with their families for eternity, about their heavenly rewards, their brains and bodies physically responded," says first study author Michael Ferguson.

    These findings echo those of older studies, which found that engaging in spiritual practices raises levels of serotonin, which is the "happiness" neurotransmitter, and endorphins.

    The latter are euphoria-inducing molecules whose name comes from the phrase "endogenous morphine." Such neurophysiological effects of religion seem to give the dictum "Religion is the opium of the people" a new level of meaning. (See https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/322539.php#6 for both stories; Emphasis within both from the original).

    This information immediately generates two profound questions: (a) Does brain activity mean the religious experience isn't real? and (b) Does brain activity prove that God doesn't exist as some atheists assert, but He is merely a byproduct of the brain?
    Both questions will be answered in turn.

    1. The experience and the brain are distinct.
    Just because we know where in the brain something is happening, does not mean we have explained the experience it produces. An example may help to illustrate my point. I love eating chocolate ice cream (people who  know me will confirm this is my guilty pleasure). The thought of eating a scoop of chocolate ice cream starts a neural network firing in the so-called "reward centers" of the brain, and there is a release of chemicals that send me to my "happy place" as I eat my chocolate ice cream. Note well: it is one thing to understand the workings of the brain when going to eat chocolate ice cream, and something altogether different to experience the taste.

    There is a famous "thought experiment" in philosophy which illustrates this point well. Let's suppose their is a scientist named "Mary" who is unable to see in color, and has apprehended all objects in black and white since birth. Mary is a neuroscientist who understands perfectly how the cones in the eyes transmit colors to the optic nerve and how they are properly understood by the brain at the base of the occipital lobe. Mary understands color. She has been praying to God for a cure to her eyesight problem, and one day she wakes up to find that God has given her the miracle for which she prayed; she can see perfectly in color! Does Mary's experience of color give her new information that her knowledge of color could not possibly have given to her before? The answer must be YES. 

    Just because brain areas are more at work during prayers, meditation or other religious experiences, it does not follow that (1) the experience can be properly understood and (2) that it is only a product of the brain. Something distinct from neurons firing is taking place. 

    2. Brain activity does not mean God doesn't exist.
    Just because something is experienced through the brain doesn't mean it originated in the brain. I experience eating chocolate ice cream, but that by no means implies that the ice cream doesn't exist. Likewise, a drug that induces an hallucination of an apple, doesn't thereby prove that all apples are illusory.
    Moreover, brain activity during prayer doesn't negate God. If anything, it is a plausible argument for the existence of God. If our brains are active during the eating of chocolate ice cream, isn't it reasonable that God created our brains to respond when we encounter Him? 

    Neurotheology, Modernism, and the True Faith
    The New Atheists are jumping on board the "neurotheology train" to attack the existence of God. I have shown that nothing about brain states requires a disbelief in the Christian God. However, neurotheology is a big help to the Vatican II sect, built as it is upon Modernism. 

    If all brains show reactions when engaged in religious activity, doesn't that mean that everyone comes into contact with God regardless of their beliefs? How do we call the belief of the seer at Fatima true, and that of a Hindu "guru" false? Pope St. Pius X,  as part of his condemnation and campaign against Modernism, composed the Anti-Modernist Oath, to be sworn by every Catholic cleric in the world beginning in 1910. (It was abolished, for obvious reasons, in the Vatican II sect on July 17, 1967). The Oath affirms five chief Catholic Truths:

    1. The existence of God can be demonstrated by human reason

    2. Miracles and prophecies are a criteria of divine revelation

    3. The Catholic Church was founded by the historical Person of Jesus Christ, and is attested to by history

    4. Catholic doctrine is immutable

    5. The Catholic Faith is both supernatural and reasonable

    Note well that all of this is based on objective criteria extrinsic to a person. It is not subjective. This is how we can ascertain the Fatima seer as true (The Miracle of the Sun witnessed by thousands), versus the Hinu "guru" and his demonic "gods." The fifth paragraph of the Oath states:

    "Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our Creator and Lord."

    Modernism will hold all religions as equally valid, since every religion springs from the "Vital Immanence" within man. Every religion is a believer’s legitimate "experience of God" (brain states!) A "Church" is simply a group of people who adhere to the same religious feelings. So all religions are good, providing that they satisfy the yearnings of the human heart. There is no "One True Church." All religions are of God and more or less true, because they come from the source of all things divine, which is the religious inner feelings (experience) of humans. Modernists, by necessity, must be ecumenical.

    Conclusion
    Neuroscience is a fascinating field of study. However, there are definite limits to what it can tell us. Those who wish to reduce belief in God to brain states have failed miserably to prove such. Modernism is based on the idea that Faith is not external and rational, but subjective and experiential. They would also love to prove all experiences of God, regardless of religion, are true. Expect to hear about how neurotheology "confirms the teachings of Vatican II" by the sect's apologists in the near future.

    True Catholics go "out of their minds," to escape the truly insane proposition of the Vatican II sect, namely, that all religions are more or less good, valid, and come from "God." 

    Monday, January 20, 2020

    Poor Theology At A Steep Price

    The pseudo-Traditionalist website 1 Peter 5 or 1P5, is run by Steve Skojec, whose name I prefer to write $teve $kojec. When you enter his website, you will be greeted by a large pop-up which reads:

      We've made it our mission to offer the unfiltered truth about the crisis in the Church and the beauty of the Faith. Your financial support makes our work possible. WE CAN'T DO THIS WITHOUT YOU! (Emphasis in original). You can click to make a donation, and he's making six figures from people gullible enough to donate (P.T. Barnum's old aphorism immediately comes to mind). The site is hard to define. It's not simply R&R like the SSPX. In $kojec's wacky world of theology-free "Catholicism," heretics can be pope, the Church can (and did) defect, and the teachings of the approved theologians must (of course) be eschewed. How that version of the "Church" can be passed off as "the unfiltered truth about the crisis" and the "beauty of the Faith (sic)" is beyond me.

    1P5 has different members of the Vatican II sect writing articles. One such contributor, Michael Massey, authored a December 2, 2019 piece entitled, "Sedevacantism is Modern Luciferianism." The title had its intended shock value, as I thought $kojec had allowed someone completely off their rocker (as opposed to only "partially") to write for him. Mr. Massey is a young man (he appears to be in his 20s) from Australia, and we are informed that, "He writes history pieces for the Remnant newspaper in his spare time and struggles through law school the rest of the time." His writing made evident to me why he struggles through law school, and how the quality of lawyers in Australia must be abysmal if he was accepted to study.

    Massey's tripe does not (as you would be led to believe from the title) claim that sedevacantists worship Satan. It actually is a reference to a Catholic bishop named Lucifer who fought the Arian heretics in the fourth century. You can read it in full at https://onepeterfive.com/sedevacantism-luciferianism/. The article is a masterpiece of shoddy "scholarship." To wit:

    • It makes claims assumed to be proven ("facts not in evidence")
    • Has no relevant citations to any approved theologians (pre-Vatican II or otherwise)
    • It makes a passing reference to a work of Ecclesiastical History, with no page number or context in which it could be read
    • Makes false and/or unproven claims about Pope Liberius
    • Has false analogies 
    I will now dissect the many problems with Mr. Massey's work, and why no one should bother with 1P5. As always, I bring this to you, the readership, free of charge! 


    The Devil's Advocate-In-Training

    Massey begins his anti-sedevacantist drivel thus: 
    At some time, we have all encountered a sedevacantist — if not in person, at least online.  I won’t bore you with the theology of the sedevacantism except to say they hold that a heretic cannot be pope, with the most common strain affirming that Pius XII was the last legitimate pope (although I did once come across one who believed that Pius V was the last legitimate pope).

    He won't "bore you" with the Catholic theology regarding sedevacantism because Massey doesn't know or understand it well enough to write about it. "They" (i.e., sedevacantists) do not hold a heretic can't be pope, the Church so teaches. 

    Proof: 
    Doctor of the Church St Alphonsus Liguori: "If ever a pope, as a private person, should fall into heresy, he would at once fall from the pontificate."Oeuvres Completes 9:232.

    Theologian Iragui: "...theologians commonly concede that the Roman Pontiff, if he should fall into manifest heresy, would no longer be a member of the Church, and therefore could neither be called its visible head."
    (See Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae. Madrid: Ediciones Studium [1959], pg. 371). 

    Canonist Badii: "A publicly heretical pope would no longer be a member of the Church; for this reason, he could no longer be its head."( See Institutiones Iuris Canonici. Florence: Fiorentina [1921], pgs. 160, 165). 

    Theologian Prummer: "Through notorious and openly divulged heresy, the Roman Pontiff, should he fall into heresy, by that very fact [ipso facto] is deemed to be deprived of the power of jurisdiction even before any declaratory judgement by the Church....A pope who falls into public heresy would cease ipso facto to be a member of the Church; therefore, he would also cease to be head of the Church."(See Ius Canonicum. Rome: Gregorian [1943],  2:453). 

    There are "Vacancy Pushers" as I call them, those pseudo-Traditionalists like Mike Bizzaro (his real name) who posits Pope St. Pius X as the last pope through twisted citations and wrong application of theological principles. Then there is cult leader and Feeneyite Richard Ibranyi (a former follower of the Dimond brothers--no surprise there) who pushes the time back to Pope Honorius II in 1130 AD. I haven't heard of any who push it to Pope St. Pius V, although it could be so. More likely than not, the person probably mispoke. In any case, it is completely beside the point. Massey throws out a red herring to obfuscate the issue. Just because there are some disturbed people who claim to be sedevacantists, does not mean there are not legitimate theological principles for determining that the pope has lost his office through the profession of heresy as a private person. This is a false "guilt by association."

    Massey:
    The one error of sedevacantism is essentially pride. They raise their opinion over that of the Church when judging that the pope is a formal and manifest heretic, while we know that the Church teaches that the First See is judged by no man.

    False. The maxim "The First See is Judged by no one" is a procedural norm, asserted by the Church against the Gallican heretics who claimed that an Ecumenical Council was superior to a pope and could judge him and his decisions. According to canonist Cappello, "Immunity of the Roman Pontiff. ‘The First See is judged by no one.’ (Canon 1556). This concerns the Apostolic See or the Roman Pontiff who by the divine law itself enjoys full and absolute immunity." (See Summa Juris Canonici 3:19) Pope Innocent III informs us the sin of heresy is the one sin we are permitted to judge when it comes to the pope. 

    "To this end faith is so necessary for me that, though I have for other sins God alone as my judge, it is alone for a sin committed against faith that I may be judged by the Church. For ‘he who does not believe is already judged’.”(See Sermo 2: In Consecratione, Patrologia Latina 218:656). Moreover, "You are the salt of the earth… Still less can the Roman Pontiff boast, for he can be judged by men — or rather he can be
    shown to be judged, if he manifestly ‘loses his savor’ in heresy."
    (Sermo 4: In Consecratione,Ibid, 218:670). No council needed. A manifest heretic cannot be pope.

    Please note that Massey is writing for $kojec, a man who thinks he knows better than the approved theologians and pompously tells others not to "think with the Church" but "think for yourself," as if once you have thought for yourself and are convinced that the Catholic Church is the One True Church, you must not submit to Her authoritative decisions and approved theologians. Yet sedevacantists are prideful according to Massey.

    I will now piece together the pertinent points Massey makes throughout the remainder of the article:

    Most Catholics know of St. Athanasius’s heroic defence of orthodoxy during the crisis, but few will know of his good friend and stalwart defender of the faith, Lucifer of Cagliari....

    In his wonderful work History of the Catholic Church, Fr. Mourett described Lucifer as “an impetuous orthodox bishop.” In 360, Lucifer advocated shunning dealings with Arian heretics in De non consentiendo cum haereticis and compared Emperor Constantius with the idolatrous kings of Israel in De regibus apostaticis. At no stage throughout the crisis did Lucifer succumb to heresy; however, he certainly gave in to imprudence. Finally, after many more trials and tribulations too long to expound upon, Athanasius, Lucifer, and the orthodox prelates were restored, and a council was convened in Alexandria to finally resolve the Arian crisis...Seeing the Arians and semi-Arians he had fought against at Milan and elsewhere rehabilitated was too much for his [Bp. Lucifer] pride to swallow. How could they, who had been at enmity with Christ and His Church, be returned to their sees and positions of power above him, when he, a valiant defender of orthodoxy and veteran of the underground Church, still fought the good fight?

    Lucifer declared that heretics — even repentant heretics — could not hold ecclesiastical offices, and he proceeded to condemn Liberius, Athanasius, and all the bishops of the Church who would not support him. He abandoned the Church and retired to Sardinia with his followers, who took up the name “Luciferians.” There Lucifer would live out the remainder of his life separated from communion with the pope, Athanasius, and the Church. The once great defender of orthodoxy died in schism...

    When one is tempted to reject the pope and all the bishops of the Church due to the heresy and scandal they constantly promote, remember the example of St. Athanasius, who always fought to remain in communion even with the heretic Pope Liberius. When you recognize and resist the pope, you are in communion with St. Athanasius, but when you reject and resist him, you are in communion with Lucifer. (Emphasis mine).

    Where to begin? Three points need to be refuted for this steaming pile of jabberwocky to completely collapse; the first of which was already done, namely, a heretic can be pope. The Church teaches such is not the case, and Massey assumes that a heretic can be pope without even attempting to prove his gratuitous assertion. The other two false points will now be tackled:

    1. Pope Liberius was a heretic and
    2. Sedevacantists are "schismatics" like Bp. Lucifer

    Pope Liberius Vindicated by St. Robert Bellarmine

    That Pope Liberius was not a heretic was amply demonstrated by Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine, in his tome Papal Error? A Defense of Popes said to have Erred in Faith. First, I must comment on the whole Pope Liberius-St. Athanasius affair. Pope Liberius is one of the most calumniated popes in history. Michael Davies, the best known apologist for the R&R position of the SSPX, made as his raison d'etre the attempt to equate the Arian heresy of the fourth century with what happened in the wake of Vatican II (calling Abp. Lefebvre "the modern day St. Athanasius").  It is noteworthy that $kojec's website sells Davies' books.

    Here is a brief background from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
    Liberius, (born, Rome [Italy]—died September 24, 366, Rome), pope from 352 to 366. He was elected on May 17, 352, to succeed Pope St. Julius I.

    Liberius was pope during the turbulence caused by the rise of Arianism—a heresy teaching that Christ was not truly divine but was rather a created being. Liberius was pope under the Arian Roman emperor Constantius II, who opposed both the Council of Nicaea (which had condemned Arianism) and Bishop St. Athanasius of Alexandria (who was Arianism’s most virulent opponent). Liberius’s first act as pope was to write Constantius requesting a council at Aquileia, Italy, to discuss Athanasius, but the emperor independently effected Athanasius’s condemnation. In 355 Liberius was one of the few bishops who refused to sign the condemnation, which had been imposed at Milan by imperial command upon all the Western bishops. Consequently, Constantius exiled Liberius to Beroea (modern VĂ©roia, Greece), and the Arian archdeacon Felix (II) appropriated the papacy.

    In late 357 Liberius went to Sirmium (modern Sremska Mitrovica, Serbia). Supposedly dejected, he agreed to sign certain unorthodox formulas that served to emasculate the Nicene Creed (the Creed had implicitly disavowed Arianism). Liberius also agreed to sever relations with Athanasius and submitted to the authority of the emperor. But Constantius recalled him to Rome, where he returned in 358, joyfully received by the Roman Christians. (See https://www.britannica.com/biography/Liberius).

    Davies (and other R&R) claim that Liberius was a heretic for (a) signing the heretical Arian formulas (b) consorting with heretics, and (c) excommunicating St. Athanasius. Are these allegations accurate?

    First, here is a list of the main facts by noted Traditionalist author John Daly:

    1. Pope Liberius was in reality a staunch opponent, not only of the Arians, but also of the Semi-Arians.

    2. He was sent into exile by the Semi-Arian Emperor Constantius precisely because of the failure of the attempts of that emperor and his toady bishops to influence him to excommunicate St. Athanasius and accept as orthodox a compromised Semi-Arian statement of Catholic doctrine concerning Our Lord’s Divinity.

    3. Constantius appointed Felix to replace the absent Liberius in the See of Rome, but Felix was not at that time accepted as pope by the Romans.

    4. Felix himself did not in fact subscribe to Arianism, but he did acknowledge ecclesiastical communion with arianisers, for which reason, the fifth century historian-bishop Theodoret informs us, "none of the citizens of Rome entered into the church while he was inside." (History of the Latin Church, Bk. II, c. 17)

    5. The people of Rome remained loyal to Liberius and protested to the emperor at his detention.

    6. Eventually their peaceable protests gave way to rioting, and as a result Liberius was permitted by Constantius to return to Rome.

    7. On his return he was received as a victor there by the populace.

    8. His reign in Rome then continued for a few years more, during which time he remained entirely orthodox, refused to compromise in the slightest degree on the orthodox doctrine of the Council of Nicea, and was in full communion and friendship with St. Athanasius.

    9. Some extant historical texts apparently of that period assert that the immediate reason for his return to Rome was that he had subscribed to a Semi-Arian formula. But many others favour the contrary view.

    10. The weight of subsequent scholarship is strongly in favour of Liberius’s orthodoxy, and orthodox Catholic scholars in particular – and it is they who have studied the subject in greatest depth and are most reliable – are overwhelmingly of the view that Liberius never fell, remained orthodox throughout his exile, and always remained in full communion with St. Athanasius.

    (See Michael Davies: An Evaluation, Tradibooks, [2015], pgs. 434-435).

    I will now summarize St. Robert Bellarmine's defense of Pope Liberius in Chapter Two of his work Papal Error?, pgs. 17-30.


    • There are two things certain about Liberius, and one in doubt. It is certain that from the beginning of his pontificate even to exile, he suffered for the Catholic faith, and was a keen defender of the Catholic religion. All writers who spoke on those times witness this fact
    • It is certain that Liberius, after he returned from exile, was also truly orthodox and pious
    • It appears he did wrong when in exile
    • St. Athanasius teaches teaches that Liberius was not truly a heretic, because he was compelled against his will by the force of the rack to do what he did. Nor must it be thought to be truly his opinion, which had been twisted from him by threats and terrors 
    • As is gathered from the words of St. Athanasius as well as by the epistles of Liberius himself, Liberius committed two faults: First, that he subscribed to the condemnation of St. Athanasius, the Second, that he had communicated with heretics--but in neither did he expressly violate the Faith
    • Although heretics persecuted Athanasius for the faith, nevertheless they pretended it was not due to the faith but morals and Liberius consented to the condemnation on that basis, not on account of the faith
    • For equal reason, Liberius communicated with heretics because they feigned that they were Catholics. In his epistles, Liberius says that he communicated with Oriental Bishops because he discovered that their faith agreed with the Catholic faith, and was foreign to Arian treachery
    • The confessions Liberius signed did not have the word Homoousion, but still were entirely Catholic. It happens that Liberius not only did not subscribe to the Arian confession, but even published a Confession before he left Sirmium wherein he excommunicated those who denied that the Son is the same as the Father in substance, as well as in all other matters. This he did because the Arians spread a false rumor that Liberius began to teach the Son is not consubstantial with the Father
    • If this is so, why does Jerome say Liberius bent and subscribed to heresy? Although Liberius did not expressly consent to heresy, still he was interpreted as having done so because he permitted Athanasius to be condemned, and communicated with heretics who feigned being Catholics 
    That pretty much exonerates Pope Liberius of the charge of heresy. To those who repeat with Michael Davies the oft mentioned canard that St. Athanasius was canonized and Pope Liberius was not; this is not accurate. As John Lane explains in his work cited above (chapter 10):

    "Another fact which Davies does not mention, even if only to try to explain it away, is that Pope Liberius is honored as a saint in the ancient Latin Martyrology. Although Davies says repeatedly that Athanasius was canonized and Liberius was not, this is in fact quite false. Neither was formally canonized, as the formal procedure of canonization did not exist at the period that the Church began to revere them (which was immediately after their deaths); but both benefited from the Church’s official recognition as saints in the form which did then exist, by their inclusion in the martyrologies of West and East." (Emphasis in original).

    The Luciferian Analogy
    Other than a brief quote from an ecclesiastical history text, there are no citations to Bishop Lucifer given by Massey. According to ecclesiastical historian Fr. Charles Poulet, "...certain writers representing an unorthodox reaction against Arianism, who held firmly to the view that penitent Arians should not be directly reconciled with the Church, but made to do penance and merit that favor...Lucifer's writing were purely invective in character and their titles betray his intransigence. He held that orthodox Christians should have no social intercourse with heretics and no mercy should be shown the enemies of God. The principal followers of Lucifer of Cagliari were Gregory of Eliberus, and the Roman deacon Hilary, who even demanded that all repentant Arians be rebaptized." (See A History of the Catholic Church: for the Use of Colleges Seminaries and Universities, [1934], 1:170; Emphasis mine). 

    Let's now compare to the last paragraph of Massey:
    When one is tempted to reject the pope and all the bishops of the Church due to the heresy and scandal they constantly promote, remember the example of St. Athanasius, who always fought to remain in communion even with the heretic Pope LiberiusWhen you recognize and resist the pope, you are in communion with St. Athanasius, but when you reject and resist him, you are in communion with Lucifer

    • The Church cannot promote, even once, that which is heretical or immoral through the popes and bishops because the Church is Indefectible; a dogma. 
    Proof:
    According to theologian Herrmann:

    "The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments… If She [the Church] were able to prescribe or command or tolerate in Her discipline something against faith and morals, or something which tended to the detriment of the Church or to the harm of the faithful, She would turn away from her divine mission, which would be impossible."
    (Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1, p. 258; Emphasis mine)

    Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, Para. #9:

    "[T]he discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or be branded as contrary to certain principles of natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the rights of the Church and her ministers are embraced."

    Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, Para. #66

    "Certainly the loving Mother [the Church] is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors."

    • Pope Liberius was not a heretic, therefore there was nothing for Bishop Lucifer to "resist." When he resisted his decision on reception of repentant Arians, that is when he became schismatic and outside the Church
    • A pope cannot be a heretic without loss of ecclesiastical office, so there would be no pope to resist. Massey's statements to the contrary are not supported, nor does he even attempt to prove them with relevant citations to Church decrees or the teachings of the approved theologians
    • Bishop Lucifer did, after his break with the Church, consort with heretical rebaptizers. He was not as "theologically orthodox" as Massey would like us to believe 
    It becomes pretty apparent that there is no similarity between the followers of Bishop Lucifer and sedevacantists. An accurate final sentence for Massey should read, "When you recognize and resist the pope, you are not being Catholic, and are in union with the theologically confused (at best), or the heretical who believe in a 'Church' that can defect." 

    Conclusion
    Sedevacantism is the only theologically coherent explanation for Vatican II, and the sect it spawned, which gives its members new morals, new faith, and new sacraments antithetical to all that is true and good. The Church cannot defect from the faith--as that very same faith proclaims---but individual members of the hierarchy can so defect, as the faith likewise teaches. 

    $teve $kojec of 1P5 wants you to "think for yourself" and reject the teachings on the ordinary papal Magisterium as "ultramontanist," and disregard the teachings of the approved theologians. Instead, $kojec will do your thinking for you, as he will read over what claptrap the Modernist Vatican II sect decrees and let you know, by his own "authority," whether or not it conforms to tradition and should be accepted or "resisted." His "reason-challenged" writers, whom he publishes, will do the same, so read 1P5 and check both your brain and faith at the door. 

    By so doing, $kojec is keeping numerous people in Bergoglio's sect and endangering their eternal salvation. It doesn't seem to bother him at all that these theology-free opinion pieces don't even make sense, as long as he's making lots of cents (and dollars). "For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" (St. Mark 8:36).