Animals Are People Too

 

I remember as a young boy crying while watching Bambi. When the protagonist fawn, after whom the Disney movie is named, lost his mother when she got shot by a hunter, the tears came rolling down my cheeks. We, in (what used to be) the Christian West, have a high enough standard of living that we love animals to excess. Cars drive around with Save The Baby Seals bumper stickers, almost every home (mine included) has one or more pets (usually dogs and cats), and they are treated as family. Some married couples forego having children to become "mommy" and "daddy" to house pets which are given saints names (I know a doctor who named his cat "Richard"). There have been pets that have received large sums of money when their owner died, and they continue to live in the house; there is a special administrator set up to disburse the money for the upkeep of both the house and animal until the pet dies, and then the house may be sold. There are pets who get lavish toys and gifts in the hundreds or even thousands of dollars.

Let me state right from the outset that I am an animal lover who owns pets. I love and care for them, as any decent person should do. Loving and caring for animals is a great testament to human empathy and kindness, and people can be rightly proud of having such traits. However, there are people who sin by excess or deficiency in regard to the status of animals. They claim that animals and humans are moral equals. This absurd proposition is maintained in one of two ways. First, there are those who exalt animals to the status of human beings.  They claim animals have souls even as we do. There are even two movies, All Dogs Go To Heaven (1989), and All Dogs Go To Heaven 2 (1996), that give popular appeal to the idea for children. This idea is also featured in the adult movie, What Dreams May Come (1998) starring the late Robin Williams (d. 2014). 

Second, there are those who lower human beings to the status of being "just another animal." Human beings are no more than another primate, more highly evolved perhaps, but not exceptional or entitled to more consideration than dogs, cats, pigs and fish. Humans, like all other animals, have no rational soul that survives death (so they claim) and have no right to dominate other animals. This view is that of the lunatic fringe PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and ALF (Animal Liberation Front) who have no problem with using violent terrorist tactics to "liberate" animals from medical experimentation, etc. 

Both views of animals are contrary to the teaching of the One True Church, and the consequences for humanity are staggering. If humans are just another animal, not created in the image and likeness of God, or if animals also possess a rational soul in the image and likeness of God, it will impact the morality of:

• eating meat
• hunting
• zoos
• medical research
• abortion and euthanasia

In this post the wrong views regarding animals will be explored, and the teaching of the Church explained.

All Animals Are Equal

In June of 2007, University of California research ophthalmologist, Dr. Arthur Rosenbaum discovered a firebomb that had been planted under his car. Luckily, it failed to work and the doctor was fine. His colleague, neuropharmacologist Dr. Edythe London, was less fortunate. A garden hose was shoved into a broken window of her Beverly Hills home, flooding it, and causing thousands of dollars in damage. Four months later, a Molotov cocktail (i.e., explosive device) detonated on her doorstep, scorching her entryway but failing to burn down the house. Why would two academics be targeted as if they were guilty of war crimes? What did thy do? Drs. Rosenbaum and London were researching a cure for blindness and drug addiction, respectively. What made these laudatory endeavors "evil," and the doctors "worthy of  death" was that they were experimenting on monkeys.

They were targeted by three groups: Animal Liberation Front (ALF), the Animal Liberation Brigade (ALB), and the UCLA Primate Freedom Project (UCLA-PFP). (See newsweek.com/animal-activists-vs-ucla-94047).  These terrorists use violence (and the threat thereof) to try and scare the best and brightest researchers away from their profession in order to "liberate" the animals on which they experiment. Dr. Rosenbaum's wife actually received a package containing animal fur and razor blades and promising "what he does to the animals we will do to you." It was sent by ALF. These groups are mostly atheists and agnostics who deny that humans occupy a special position in creation. As George Orwell wrote in his famous book Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." So-called animal liberators deny the second part of that; to them "all animals are equal," and humans are just another animal. 

Animal Welfare v. Animal Liberation

How did we get to the point of thinking that people are not only equal to primates but even to fish and birds? The answer lies in Vatican II and the evil sect it created. They do nothing to counteract Neo-Darwinian evolution, and Bergoglio states, "Atheists can go to Heaven." When people are seen as "just another animal," thugs like ALF can justify killing a medical researcher to "liberate" some monkeys. The noble goal of animal welfare degenerated into animal rights. Animal welfare is the term given to those people who run animal shelters so animals can be treated humanely and given homes with caring owners. They also have free neutering services and do all then can to prevent (and raise awareness of) animal cruelty. All of this is good and serves to benefit society.

Animal rights activists think animals are entitled to the same rights as humans, and deny that people have the right to use animals to further any human purpose, no matter how beneficial. There is even an invented word to add to the list of discriminatory actions: besides sexism, racism, and ageism, we now have "speciesism," which is a form of alleged discrimination, wherein people treat animals as having less worth and is just as morally odious as racism. The term was coined in 1970 by a British psychologist, Dr. Richard Ryder. He recalls how he came up with the term 35 years after the event:

The word speciesism came to me while I was lying in a bath in Oxford some 35 years ago. It was like racism or sexism - a prejudice based upon morally irrelevant physical differences. Since Darwin we have known we are human animals related to all the other animals through evolution; how, then, can we justify our almost total oppression of all the other species? All animal species can suffer pain and distress. Animals scream and writhe like us; their nervous systems are similar and contain the same biochemicals that we know are associated with the experience of pain in ourselves.

Our concern for the pain and distress of others should be extended to any "painient" - pain-feeling - being regardless of his or her sex, class, race, religion, nationality or species. Indeed, if aliens from outer space turn out to be painient, or if we ever manufacture machines who are painient, then we must widen the moral circle to include them. Painience is the only convincing basis for attributing rights or, indeed, interests to others...Pain is the one and only true evil. What, then, about the masochist? The answer is that pain gives him pleasure that is greater than his pain! (See https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/aug/06/animalwelfare). 

Meet the Maniacal "Father of Animal Rights"

Peter Singer (b.1946), is a philosopher and currently a Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University. In 1975, his book Animal Liberation, was groundbreaking. The "animal rights movement" was virtually non-existent. Within 25 years of his book's publication, animal rights/liberation had taken off and reached tremendous size, visibility, and influence. They now "rescue" farm animals, hamper medical research, declare vegetarianism as a moral imperative, sue to have animals granted legal standing as litigants in lawsuits, and have engaged in illegal acts of criminal terrorism "for the animals." 

Singer's short bio runs thus:

Peter Singer was born in 1946, Melbourne, Australia, to an Austrian Jewish family that emigrated from Austria to escape persecution by the Nazis. He studied law, history and philosophy at the University of Melbourne, and majored in philosophy. He later did a B.Phil at Oxford University, where he associated with a vegetarian student group and became a vegetarian himself. Around this time he wrote Animal Liberation (1975), which has been called the “bible” of the animal liberation movement. ..Singer is best known for his views on animal ethics. In his book Animal Liberation he popularized the term speciesism, which he defines as “a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species."  He argues for the equal consideration of human and non-human animal interests because animals have the capacity for suffering and enjoyment. (See utilitarianism.net/utilitarian-thinker/peter-singer). 

His philosophy is anti-Christian and perverse. Singer writes, "Once we admit that Darwin was right when he argued that human ethics evolved from the social instincts that we inherited from our non-human ancestors, we can put aside the hypothesis of a divine origin for ethics." (See Ethics, [1994], pg. 6; Emphasis mine). His principle reason for rejecting the Christian God is the existence of suffering in the world. In particular, he dismisses the idea that mankind is distinct from other animals by being made in the image and likeness of God. This leads him to the utilitarian principle of  "The greatest happiness for the greatest number," which undergirds so much modern political thought. Pleasure becomes the greatest good; suffering and pain the only evils. 

Singer distinguishes human beings in the biological sense from persons, who are rational and self conscious beings. He has no basis for seeing human beings in a different category from other animals. In general, humans have more intelligence and greater self-awareness, but some humans lack these faculties. In the newborn they are undeveloped; in the severely brain damaged they are lost; and in the dementia patients they are fading day by day. They are humans, but not persons. Some adult animals, however, are remarkably intelligent. They are persons, though not human.(See Singer, How are We to Live?, [1993], pg. 191). 

Speciesism asserts that humans are superior to other animals. Such discrimination, in Singer's view, is indefensible. His philosophy not only rules out all cruelty to self-conscious, sentient beings, which includes adult mammals, but also rules out their killing. Fur coats and leather shoes cannot then be justified, and neither, in general, can eating meat. If animal experimentation can ever be justified, then it must be equally justifiable to perform such experiments on severely mentally-retarded human adults, or normal infants who are not aware of what is being done to them. (See Singer, Practical Ethics,[1993] pgs. 59ff). 

Singer also teaches the following:

•  Infanticide within the first month of  a child's life can be morally justified. Here Singer introduces his ethic of replaceability. A child may not be wanted for various reasons, such as timing, gender or congenital disease. The decision-making process can be profoundly influenced if the death of an unwanted child subsequently allows the parents the freedom to have a wanted child who would replace it.

• Without consciousness, life has no value. In cases of brain damage making it impossible for the patient to express a preference, involuntary euthanasia should be practiced

• An individual's desire to die should be respected. Hence, it is ethical for a doctor to assist a suicide in fulfilling the patient's considered preference.

• Sex between animals and people (beastiality) should be regarded as healthy and normal. 

(See Singer, Rethinking Life and Death, [1994], pgs. 190-198; See also Singer, Heavy Petting, prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/heavypetting; WARNING! THIS ARTICLE BY SINGER IS SO VILE, SICK, AND FULL OF VULGARITY, I CAUTION AGAINST READING IT; HIGHLY DISTURBING). 

Animal Rights Activists in Their Own Words

"Owning animals is the equivalent of slavery." Hope Bohanec, In Defense of Animals.

"I'm not only uninterested in having children. I am opposed to having children. Having a purebred human baby is like having a purebred dog; it is nothing but vanity, human vanity." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA's founder and president, New Yorker magazine, April 23, 2003.

"Our goal is to make [the public think of] breeding [dogs and cats] like drunk driving and smoking." Kim Sturla, former director of the Peninsula Humane Society and Western Director of Fund for Animals, stated during Kill the Crisis, not the Animals campaign and workshops, 1991. 

"Six million people died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughterhouses." Ingrid Newkirk, founder, president and former national director, PETA, as quoted in Chip Brown, "She's A Portrait of Zealotry in Plastic Shoes," Washington Post, November 13, 1983, p. B10.

"Sometimes I think the only effective method of destroying speciesism would be for each uncaring human to be forced to live the life of a cow on a feedlot, or a monkey in a laboratory, or an elephant in the circus, or a bull in a rodeo, or a mink on a fur farm. Then people would be awakened from their soporific states and finally understand the horror that is inflicted on the animal kingdom by the vilest species to ever roam this planet: the human animal! Deep down, I truly hope that oppression, torture and murder return to each uncaring human tenfold! I hope that fathers accidentally shoot their sons on hunting excursions, while carnivores suffer heart attacks that kill them slowly.

"Every woman ensconced in fur should endure a rape so vicious that it scars them forever. While every man entrenched in fur should suffer an anal raping so horrific that they become disemboweled. Every rodeo cowboy and matador should be gored to death, while circus abusers are trampled by elephants and mauled by tigers. And, lastly, may irony shine its esoteric head in the form of animal researchers catching debilitating diseases and painfully withering away because research dollars that could have been used to treat them was wasted on the barbaric, unscientific practice vivisection." Gary Yourofsky, PETA Humane (sic) Education Lecturer, quoted in the University of Southern Indiana Student Newspaper, The Shield, January 24, 2008; Emphasis mine. 

Interestingly, Yourofsky and his ilk, while condemning the "human animal" for eating meat and being "murderers," do not apply the same standard to lions who kill and eat antelopes. Why aren't lions executed for the "murder" of the antelope? Perhaps Orwell was right--in a way he never conceived---"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." For those so concerned with "all life," you'll never see one of these buffoons protesting at an abortion clinic either. 

The Opposite Error: Animals Have Rational Souls

There are those who also reach false conclusions by ascribing to brute beasts (animals) a rational soul. It is true that animals have souls; but not rational souls that are immortal. It is Catholic dogma (defined at the Council of Vienne) that human beings have a rational soul:

Furthermore, with the approval of the above mentioned sacred council we reprove as erroneous and inimical to the Catholic faith every doctrine or position rashly asserting or turning to doubt that the substance of the rational or intellective soul truly and in itself is not a form of the human body, defining, so that the truth of sincere faith may be known to all, and the approach to all errors may be cut off, lest they steal in upon us, that whoever shall obstinately presume in turn to assert, define, or hold that the rational or intellective soul is not the form of the human body in itself and essentially must be regarded as a heretic.

The Universal and Ordinary Magisterium has always denied rational souls to plants and animals. The three "types" of souls were given their classic formulation by the Angelic Doctor:

St. Thomas Aquinas’s anthropology of the soul accounts for three divisions of the soul: the Vegetative, the Sensitive (or sentient), and the Rational. Plants have only a vegetative soul---the power that allows for vital basics such as nourishment, growth, and reproduction. The sentient soul is inherent in all animals, it encompasses sensation, perception, and movement. The rational soul is specific to human beings only, and is the soul which is responsible for reason and thinking. Human beings possess all three kinds of souls, animals possess both the sentient and vegetative souls, and plants only have the vegetative. 

The lowest of the operations of the soul is that which is performed by a corporeal organ, and by virtue of a corporeal quality. Yet this transcends the operation of the corporeal nature; because the movements of bodies are caused by an extrinsic principle, while these operations are from an intrinsic principle; for this is common to all the operations of the soul, since very animate thing, in some way, moves itself. Such is the operation of the ‘vegetative soul.'” (Summa Theologica, Q. 78, Art. 1).

There is another operation of the soul, which is indeed performed through a corporeal organ, but not through a corporeal quality, and this is the operation of the "sentient soul." (Ibid, Q. 78, Art. 1).

There exists, therefore, an operation of the soul which so far exceeds the corporeal nature that it is not even performed by any corporeal organ; and such is the operation of the "rational soul." (Ibid, Q. 78, Art. 1). 

Ironically, the same false pope, whose sect gives rise to animal rights, simultaneously gives rise to the heresy of animals with rational souls. While doing nothing to combat Neo-Darwinian evolution, the sect also idolizes nature--including animals--giving them undue importance. Bergoglio, is a naturalist with some occasional Catholic terminology thrown in. It's not surprising in his so-called encyclical, he teaches animals can go to Heaven (he wouldn't want anything, let alone anybody left out):

Eternal life will be a shared experience of awe, in which each creature, resplendently transfigured, will take its rightful place and have something to give those poor men and women who will have been liberated once and for all...(Laudato Si--2015). 

Montini (Paul VI) had this to say to a boy who had lost his pet dog:  “One day we will again see our animals in the eternity of Christ." (See https://www.cnn.com/2014/12/12/world/pope-francis-animals-heaven/index.html). Both false popes give the impression of "animals sharing in the Beatific Vision." If animals received the Beatific Vision, they would be moral equivalents of humans, and all the things that animal rights activists want prohibited would be correct. Yet animals do not possess a rational soul and they are not moral creatures capable of sin; they have sentient souls and are amoral. Hence, such a position is both absurd and heretical.

The Teaching of the Church

The correct teaching on the position of animals and their relationship to humans is well-stated by theologian Cronin, The Science of Ethics, [1939], 2:86-92):

• Animals are not possessed of rights, and, therefore in killing them no injustice is done to them

• Animals are incapable, by their very nature, of claiming anything of their own. Reason is the faculty that allows one to claim something as their own. Animals do not possess the faculty of reason to claim anything, therefore they do not come within the scope of having rights 

• Animals exist for humanity. They never would have been brought into existence had humans not been created. They may be used for the betterment of people

• Even though humans have no duties towards animals, they are part of God's creation, and as such cruelty to animals is sinful. To make animals suffer needlessly, or to take pleasure in animal suffering, is seriously sinful 

Nevertheless, don't think there's no hope of ever seeing your beloved pet again; the Church actually leaves this possibility open! According to theologian Sagues, "The world will not be annihilated, but it will be renewed...What will the renewed world be like? In general, such as is suitable for the status of the blessed. Hence, since the blessed, being now incorruptible, do not need vegetables and animals, many [theologians] have thought that all of these things will be lacking in that future world. But what others [theologians] hold seems to be more probable, namely, that the organic kingdom of plants and animals agrees with that world, as its complement and for the greater delight of the blessed." (See Sacrae Theologiae Summa IVB, [1956], pgs. 494-495; Emphasis mine).  Is it therefore possible that Almighty God could bring back those pets whom the blessed enjoyed while on Earth, working out their salvation? I see no theological reason against it! 

Conclusion

Animals are part of God's creation and here for us to use, but not to abuse. Having a pet is a blessing. By bringing humans down to the level of animals, or exalting animals to the status of humans, both errors result in a world unintended by God where humans--who alone have a supernatural destiny--will be harmed. George Orwell was correct in a way he couldn't understand in 1948 when he penned the closing line of Animal Farm:

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Differences That Admit Of No Reconciliation

 

This past Friday, July 16, 2021, the Argentinian Apostate pretending to be pope, Jorge Bergoglio, gave a lesson to the world in tolerance: it's OK to be intolerant towards the very "self-absorbed, Promethean, neo-Pelagians" (i.e., anyone even slightly against Modernism) whom he ironically deems "intolerant." With the publication of his motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, the so-called "Latin Mass" in the Vatican II sect was de facto abolished. With a stroke of his pen, Bergoglio eviscerated Ratzinger's 2007 decree Summorum Pontificum which gave wide liberty for the "Latin Mass." Under the new legislation, even when the local "bishop" permits such a "Latin Mass" it will be completely disconnected from the pre-Vatican II Holy Sacrifice. In addition to having to follow the Vatican II calendar with feasts for "St." Wojtyla and "St." Montini which already exists, the Epistle and Gospel must now be read in the vernacular. 

However, who really cares about the ersatz "Latin Mass" which in most cases is offered by invalidly ordained "priests" anyway? These clergy are in actual union with Bergoglio and promote Vatican II as well, and their services should never be attended. The reason I bring this up is because I always said that what is Modernist and what is (even remotely) Catholic cannot coexist. "For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?" (2 Corinthians 6:14). 

Bergoglio is a "Modernist's Modernist," who makes Alfred Loisy and George Tyrell seem like pillars of orthodoxy by comparison. In his letter that accompanied Traditionis Custodes, Bergoglio made the following admission:

I take the firm decision to abrogate all the norms, instructions, permissions and customs that precede the present Motu proprio, and declare that the liturgical books promulgated by the saintly Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, constitute the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite. 

The lex orandi is roughly translated as "the law of prayer." The Catholic axiom of old states, "Lex orandi, lex credendi"---"the law of what is prayed [is] the law of what is believed." The Novus Bogus bread and wine service perfectly expresses the Modernism of Vatican II. Even the part-Traditional, part-Modernized "Latin Mass" had vestiges of anti-Modernism, and as such could not be tolerated.  It could not be treated as "equal" to or an "alternative" to the Novus Bogus. It could not remain as the "Extraordinary Rite" while the Vatican II service is the "Ordinary Rite," because they do not express the same faith. Even the very idea that both express the same faith is insane.

 According to Ratzinger's own document, Summorum Pontificum, the "Latin Mass" (in which he first deemed it the "Extraordinary Form"), and the Novus Bogus ("Ordinary Form") are "two uses of the one Roman Rite" (SP, para. #1). This means that members of the Vatican II sect are schizophrenic. The anthropomorphic Novus Bogus with it's focus on the Assembly ("People of God") and Words of Consecration recited in an "Institution Narrative" is just another use of the God-centered Traditional Mass. Bergoglio realizes that it's time for all to "fall in line" and purge any vestiges of the Roman Catholic Faith from his man-made sect. 

The same stark differences hold true for everything pre- and post-Vatican II; or most accurately, between the True Catholic Church and the counterfeit "Catholicism" of the Vatican II sect. This post will focus on the Sacrament of Penance, replaced by "Reconciliation" in the sect. I will demonstrate yet another area where the Rites and their accompanying theologies are mutually exclusive.

Sin v. Mutual Problems To Resolve

(N.B. Information regarding Penance taken from theologian Pohle, Dogmatic Theology [1943], Vol. III---Introibo). 

Catholic Penance

The very name Penance is significant. It implies voluntary self-punishment taken upon oneself as a sign of repentance for having done one or more bad things in thought, word, or deed. The person accepts the fact that he/she alone has done wrong against an All-Good, All-Just God. We are all sinners to one degree or another, and the penitent realizes they are nothing in the sight of God (in this statement I do not include Christ or His Blessed Mother). Being frail and sinful, the penitent will implore the forgiveness of the All-Merciful God. However, the penitents keep in mind that God's mercy must not be presumed. If God's Mercy kept everyone from Hell, God's Justice would keep everyone out of Heaven, since no one deserves eternity with God. 

The Rite. The penitent enters the confessional where he cannot be seen. The priest is bound by the seal of the confessional; he can never tell anyone what someone said in confession. The penitent says, "Bless me father, for I have sinned. The time since my last Confession was (say the amount of time lapsed). Since that time..." The penitent will now recite the number and kinds of sins committed since he last confessed. The priest may give guidance on how to avoid sins in the future, and then imposes a penance, i.e., some prayers and/or good works the penitent must perform in order to show sorrow for his sins and make some minute reparation for said sins.

The penitent then recites the Act of Contrition, the Traditional Form of which reads as follows:

O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, but most of all because they offend Thee, my God, who art all good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to confess my sins, to do penance, amend my life. Amen.

 

Then the priest extends his right hand and says:

Misereatur tui ominipotens Deus, et dimissis peccatis tuis, perducat te ad vitam aeternam. Amen.

Indulgentiam, absolutionem, et remissionem peccatorum tuorum tribuat tibi omnipotens, et misericors Dominus. Amen.

Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat; et ego auctoritate ipsius te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunicationis, sespensionis, et interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges.  Deinde ego te abslovo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, (+) et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

English: 

May the almighty God have mercy on thee, forgive thee thy sins, and lead thee unto life everlasting. Amen. May the almighty and merciful Lord grant thee pardon, absolution, and remission of thy sins. Amen.

May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve thee; and by His very authority do I absolve thee from every bond of excommunication, suspension, and interdict, in so far as lies within my power and thou hast need of it.  Furthermore, I absolve thee from thy sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, (+) and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Traditional Catholic Theology.

The penitent must supply the matter of the Sacrament which consists in three components: Contrition, Confession, and Satisfaction.

1. CONTRITION. 

Contrition is sorrow of the soul and aversion for past sins with the firm resolution not to sin again. Contrition is further divided into Perfect Contrition, which occurs when the penitent is motivated by the love of God and for His Own sake to repent; and imperfect contrition (aka attrition) which occurs when the penitent has the Fear of God and His just punishments both in this world and in Hell hereafter. Perfect Contrition justifies the sinner apart from the Sacrament of Penance as long as the desire to receive Confession is at least implicitly present. Attrition can only suffice for justification within the Sacrament of Penance. 

The Contrition or Attrition must be (a) true, and not pretended, (b)supernatural, i.e. inspired by Grace and have a supernatural motive, (c) supreme, i.e., the penitent must regard sin as the greatest evil, and (d) universal, i.e., it must extend to at least all mortal sins. There must be also present a purpose of amendment. This intent must be firm (at least when made), efficacious (i.e., the penitent must avoid the occasions of sin through both caution and prayer), and universal (i.e., resolving to avoid all mortal sins). 

2.  CONFESSION.

You must go and confess to a priest as described above.

3. SATISFACTION.

You must carry out the priest's penance in a reasonable time. Even though anything we can do is not enough to make up for a mortal sin which offends an infinitely Good God, He nevertheless accepts our meager penance to regain sanctifying grace.

Vatican II Sect Reconciliation

The name reconciliation implies a mutual restoration of friendly relationships after the persons come to a resolution over a problem. Therefore, there is a "problem" between you and God which requires a mutual resolution. The responsibility for the "problem" is on both parties, so the very name carries a heretical notion that God causes sin. This is a form of Calvinism, in which God positively Wills people to eternal damnation. There is no personal responsibility. Montini (Paul VI) introduced this novel idea with his new Rite "promulgated" on December 2, 1973 (See Reconciliationem inter Deum et Homines). 

The alleged "best way" to "celebrate the Sacrament" is by a "communal celebration" whereby everyone in the Assembly will make a sort of general admission of having done wrong, followed by individual reconciliation. (I won't even discuss the so-called "general absolution" nonsense that passes for a "Sacrament"). Sin is negative theology in the Vatican II sect. All wrongs are somehow connected, not to God, but to others first and foremost. This heretical Modernist idea permeates the sect.

The Rite.

The judicial and private confessional is replaced with a "face-to-face" Reconciliation Room.  (Some churches kept the confessionals, but that is changing). The "priest" is told to greet the person (only rarely called a penitent) with warm and welcoming words. There is then a Bible reading by the Vatican II sect minister. The person recites their sins as best they can along with difficulties in leading a Christian life.

The "priest" will impose a penance, and ask the person to recite an Act of Contrition (now called The Prayer of the Penitent) which admits of no less than eleven (11) options which include:

Wash me from my guilt and cleanse me from my sin. I acknowledge my offense; my sin is before me always.

Lord Jesus, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

Remember, Lord, Your compassion and mercy which You showed long ago. Do not recall the sins and failings of my youth. In Your mercy remember me, Lord, because of Your Goodness. 

The priest then extends his right hand and says:

God the Father of mercies, through the death and resurrection of His Son has reconciled the world to Himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church, may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins, in the name of the Father, (+) and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. 

Modernist Theology.

The differences are stark between Catholic Penance and Vatican II sect Reconciliation:

• Personal responsibility in a judicial context; accusing yourself before the priest as a sinner wanting to be forgiven, is abolished. It is a "mending of fences" between the person and God. It carries with it the implicit and blasphemous idea that God is in some way to blame for sin.

• The seriousness of sin is downplayed with "warm and welcoming words," reading Scripture, and discussing "difficulties" in leading a Christian life. The priest is no longer in persona Christi as Judge, but some ersatz social worker. Sin is "communal" and we all "make mistakes." Let's have a communal "I'm sorry" for being human and failing. 

• Montini's Rite replaces mortal sin with the term "grave sin." For those not well-versed in theology, they may not recognize it as being a "mortal injury" (i.e., causing the death of the soul through the loss of sanctifying grace and thereby making one deserving of Hell)

• The Rite of Reconciliation has changed the name Act of Contrition to Prayer of the Penitent having no less than eleven different forms. The problem should be manifest. A penitent (one of the few times the old word is used) can pray many prayers, but need not have either Contrition or Attrition. Most of the options leave out any reference to a supernatural motive for sorrow, such as the love of God, "the loss of Heaven and the pains of Hell." Thus, showing the evil of sin is avoided

• The mercy of God is stressed, while His Justice is omitted

• The words, "May the almighty God have mercy on thee, forgive thee thy sins, and lead thee unto life everlasting. Amen. May the almighty and merciful Lord grant thee pardon, absolution, and remission of thy sins. Amen." are taken directly from the Mass pre-Vatican II. There is a definite link between being in the state of Grace and receiving Communion in Penance. Reconciliation severs this reminder

• The form of the Sacrament is substantially unchanged. The immediate wording around it is troubling. Saying that God "reconciled the world to Himself" through Christ is used by Protestants to preach their "once saved, always saved" heresy. God reconciled the world, so now just believe in Christ and be "saved."  Also, by adding "through the ministry of the Church," the priest's role as an alter Christus is lessened when granting absolution

Conclusion

I have had many people ask me if Confessions to an old priest (validly ordained pre-1968) in the Vatican II sect would be valid also since there would be a proper administer of the Sacrament, using the correct form, and having a correct intention. While so far that's true, the false theology around the Rite of Reconciliation is not without devastating consequences. All the Modernist claptrap about mercy and love, while ignoring justice and the supernatural motives of repentence, can lead members of the Vatican II sect to believe sin is "no big deal." Indeed, this is what has happened as almost no one goes to Reconciliation, yet everyone receives "communion" (Deo gratias, it's invalid). If someone confesses and adheres to the Modernist theology, they most likely will fail to have even Attrition for sin and lack a firm resolve to amend their lives. In this case, the confession is null and void even with a valid priest because the penitent lacks the necessary matter of the sacrament.  

Just as Penance and Reconciliation cannot both express Catholic theology, so too, the Mass and the Novus Bogus cannot both be Catholic. Bergoglio is better than Ratzinger. You read that last sentence correctly. In Summorum Pontificum, Ratzinger lied that the Mass and the Novus Bogus are "two uses of the one Roman Rite." They are mutually exclusive. Bergoglio realizes that "two Rites make a wrong," and Traditionis Custodes is intellectually honest in declaring that only the Masonic, Bugnini-created, and Montini-approved bread and wine service "constitute[s] the unique expression of the lex orandi of the [Vatican II sect] Rite." And with that "law of prayer" comes the "law of Modernist belief" which is pushing the world to the brink of Hell. 

Flunking Education

 

I miss the days I spent with Father DePauw. It's hard to believe he went to Judgment just over 16 years ago already. One of the most important things he stressed with me as young teenager was to obtain a good education. "Good" for him didn't mean how many years you study or the number of degrees you get, but rather everything which is learned helps a person to make their way as a True Catholic in a chosen occupation amidst a corrupt and evil world. He was amazed that I found the Faith while attending a Vatican II sect high school--one that was (literally) pagan. "After you graduate next year, avoid so-called 'Catholic' education, and public or private education will be only slightly better. Stay close to the Mass and sacraments and keep studying the One True Faith." 

I was interested in science and how Faith and science can never be in opposition, since both come to us from God. Hence, I chose to become a science teacher. I graduated with my Bachelors Degree having a double major in Philosophy and Science Education and my temporary NY State teaching license. I wanted to teach middle school, where I thought I could have the most impact in developing the character of students that age. I was hired for a middle school here in the NYC public school system. The bureaucracy was incredible and the students were mostly disrespectful and didn't care about their grades. I tried my hardest, and my students did better than most on their science test scores. Most importantly, I think I set a good example and reached some to think about "the Author of Science," probably the most exposure to faith any would receive.

At the same time, I was attending night school at a local university to obtain my Masters Degree, and with it my permanent license (at the time, teachers were required to get their Masters Degree within five years; otherwise your license would expire and you could no longer teach). At the beginning of my third year (when I would be up for receiving tenure at the end of that year) I submitted a paper to be published by one of the NY State science teacher associations. The topic was on how the "fine-tuning" of the universe points to an intelligent Creator--this was a few years prior to the jump-start of the Intelligent Design Movement with the 1996 publication of Dr. Michael Behe's book Darwin's Black Box. The organization went ballistic. I received a personal phone call from the president of that organization (holding an earned PhD in biology) telling me that what I wrote wasn't science but religion. I offered to debate him on it in front of other assembled teachers with doctorates who belonged to the association, and he promptly hung up on me. My paper was refused publication.

The local nine-member school board was aware, and my tenure vote was no loner guaranteed to go my way. If I resigned, I could look for a teaching job elsewhere. If I fought and defended myself to the board, a successful vote from 5 members would give me tenure. If I lost, no one will hire a teacher denied tenure. My career would be over. I decided to stay and fight. At the end of that fateful day in late March, I fought and received exactly five votes, thereby being granted tenure effective September 1st at the start of my fourth year teaching. One board member told me afterwards, "You spoke so passionately and convincingly, I thought I was listening to a lawyer in court." I had grown weary of the condition education was in, and the idea of my becoming a lawyer was born.

Fr. DePauw thought I'd make a great lawyer (his own father had been both an educator and lawyer in Belgium), and with his prayers and blessings, I studied for the LSAT the whole year. I did well and applied to several law schools at the beginning of my fifth year of teaching. In March, I received the acceptance to the law school I really wanted, and tendered my voluntary resignation from teaching effective July 1st. I would start law school that fall after having completed my Masters Degree and making my teaching license permanent.   

Things were bad in public schools in the late 1980s/early 1990s when I taught. They were even worse (both morally and academically) in so-called "Catholic" (Vatican II sect) schools; I attended one. The decay has gotten so bad, if you can homeschool your children, do it. The only school that you should send them to is a Traditionalist school, such as the ones operated by the SSPV. If you have no choice, it is better for the kids to attend public school, where you have some rights as a taxpaying citizen, than a Vatican II sect school where you have no say at all and expose them to a false sect claiming to be "Catholic." 

In this post, I will give the Church's principles on education, and the horrors you can expect from Vatican II sect schools and public schools in 2021. Fr. DePauw was an approved pre-Vatican II canonist, having received his Doctorate in Canon Law (JCD) in 1955 from the Catholic University of America. His doctoral thesis, published with Magisterial approval in 1953, was entitled The Educational Rights of the Church and Elementary Schools in Belgium. I will be stating the Church principles on education as contained in his scholarly tome, and show how they are violated today.  Canonist DePauw's work will be written in red font and my writing shall be in black font unless indicated otherwise.

The Basis of a Good Education--and Where Theories Go Wrong

But even an education aimed exclusively at making the child a good citizen still supposes true character-training and some moral formation. On the one hand the traditional Catholic doctrine is very simple, namely that religion and morality go together and cannot be successfully separated in education. On the other hand, the non-Catholic theories are complicated and inconsistent when trying to determine the character and the morality that go to make the good citizen. If there are no absolute moral standards, and if both the Church and the family are to be excluded from determining the character-formation of the child, who then shall say what sort of moral code the young citizen is to be given?

Some writers contend that "experts" should lay down some general norms in accordance with the traditional mores of the country; others call upon the State for the setting up of a code of morals; still others open the door for a veritable educational anarchy by making the children the final authority in their own education, permitting them to "adapt" the accepted mores to their own personal and social needs. (pgs. 24-25)

Here we see three false theories advocated by Masonic "separation of Church and State" public school theorists: That education should not include the family and the Catholic Church and character/moral formation must stem from (a) "experts" in education/pedagogy; (b) the State itself (think e.g., Nazi Germany and Communist China); and from the students themselves. Here's what happens when "experts" make curriculum apart from the Church, and when children are allowed to "make their own values." Let me be clear that this is not just the case with public schools, but it applies equally to the Vatican II sect schools, which have replaced the True Religion with false teaching, seeking to conform to the world. 

Here are but two examples of warped morals in school:

1. Death Education. According to one "deathspert,"  Ethel King-McKenzie:

"Teachers and parents need to find ways to expose children to the reality of death, as it will be better for them. I understand that children should not be robbed of their innocence but telling them about death will empower them. A curriculum that fails to address a topic as important as death and dying is in itself dead. Society changes and our schools and curriculum must adapt to these changes." (See "Death and Dying In the Curriculum of the Public Schools: Is There a Place," Journal of Emerging Knowledge on Emerging Markets, Vol. 3 [2011], Art. 29. Emphasis mine). 

According to one source going as far back as 1999:

"Death education has been a part of the progressive curriculum in virtually every public school in America for at least the last fifteen years. Yet no one in the establishment, let alone the U.S. Department of Education, has sought to find out what death education is doing to the minds and souls of the

millions of children who are subjected to it. But we do have plenty of anecdotal information on hand.

For example, back in 1985, Tara Becker, a student from Columbine High [where the infamous school shootings of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris took place 4/20/99---Introibo], went to a pro-family conference in Colorado to tell the attendees about death education at the school and the effect it had on her. Jayne Schindler, who heard Tara's testimony, reported:

Tara brought with her a booklet she had helped to compile for one of her school classes. This booklet was called "Masquerade" and was full of subliminal pictures and prose. Tara explained how she had been taught to use the hidden, double meaning, subliminals and how she had focused so much of her time and attention on death that she, herself, had tried to commit suicide." (See https://www.wnd.com/1999/05/2771/)

To read more on the subject of "Death Education," (which I experienced in my Vatican II sect high school), I wrote a whole post about it last November and mentioned Tara's story there as well.

See https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2020/11/dead-serious.html.

2. Values Clarification

 I don't know how many people are aware of the insidious simulation called "Lifeboat." In this (and similar scenarios) there are more people on the boat than food to survive. You're given a list of people with "pros" (a scientist) and "cons" (the scientist is also a paraplegic). You must then decide (individually or as a class) who will live and who gets thrown into the ocean to drown. What's the purpose of doing something so hideous? It has nothing to do with critical thinking and everything to do with the evil idea that some people have a fundamental right to choose life or death for others.

 The values clarification movement was developed primarily by philosopher John Dewey, an atheist. Accordingly, behavior should be the result of free, uninfluenced, autonomous choice, based on personal analysis of a given situation coupled with the moment's emotions and desires. Rather than adherence to an external moral code, Dewey pushed something he called "valuation" in which a given situation is explored and various "solutions" discussed. This directly contradicts Church teaching on making choices based on a rightly formed conscience.

 Hence, choices are good or foolish, never right and wrong. Sin and repentance are never mentioned.

Human sexuality programs attempt to inculcate an appreciation for "waiting for marriage" by cultivating fear of bad consequences: pregnancy, disease, and heartbreak. They never state that premarital sex is sinful and they do not urge sinners to repent. Therefore, the dilemma posed to youth by their teachers is no longer a question of morality--- it is a health issue.

Canonist DePauw tells us the correct way to form character and morals in the young:

These views [discussed in his citation above---Introibo] as entertained by non-Catholic educators, are diametrically opposed to the Catholic conception of education. Though directed primarily to the supernatural end of forming "Christ Himself in those regenerated by baptism," Catholic education has never renounced the natural goal of human education, namely the formation of useful citizens. As Pope Pius XI  again stated it: "This fact is proved by the whole history of Christianity and its institutions, which is nothing else but the history of true civilization and progress up to the present day." (pg. 25). Only Traditional Catholic morality and faith can impart good character in the young for a truly great civilization. 

Prohibition of Schools

Canonist DePauw teaches that there are three types of forbidden schools:

• the non-Catholic school
• the neutral school
• the mixed school

Non-Catholic schools include all denominational institutions aimed at educating their pupils on the basis of what, according to Catholic teaching, is a heretical, a schismatical, or a pagan religion...[it] is but a logical conclusion deriving from the fact that Christ founded only One Church, and that only the Catholic Church has within Herself irrefutable evidences of this divine origin. 

Neutral schools are those which out of human respect make religion an optional part, or no part at all, of the curriculum. Originated and positively intended by Freemasonry to be a weapon against any organized religion, and conducted by teachers whose "neutrality" is an educational impossibility, these theoretical neutral schools are bound to become centers of at least religious indifferentism.

Mixed schools are those where religious instruction (of whatever religion) is provided separately (usually with "release time" from the school day) and all other lessons are taught in common. Here, the danger to the faith of Catholics lies in the spirit of indifferentism, which logically flows from recognition of all faiths as being of equal worth and relative value. Besides, if religion is divorced from the rest of the program and taught as something optional, the young mind most logically will think very little of the practical value of religious doctrine. 

(All quotations in red above from canonist DePauw, pgs. 24-30).

It is noted that the Church forbids Her members to attend non-Catholic institutions unless some very special circumstances would justify an exception (See 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 1374). The fact that we live in such exceptional times, where Traditionalist schools are a rare gem, and not everyone can afford to be a stay at home mom, makes public school a necessity for many.  Fr. DePauw did not hesitate to say that public schools were superior to Vatican II sect schools. They are non-Catholic by teaching heresy; like neutral and mixed schools they promote indifferentism under the guise of religion--ecumenism.

Teaching Error as "Catholicism"

Infested with Indifferentism.

Here is how an middle school Vatican II sect teacher described her religion class:

"A few weeks into our study of the Church, my eighth-grade students encountered the vocabulary word ecumenism for the first time. After learning how to pronounce it properly, we broke down its meaning. Ecumenism refers to “the promotion of cooperation and unity among Christians” (USCCB, Ecumenical & Interreligious Affairs). In other words, ecumenism is the effort for Christians to come together in faith, as we are founded to be one Church by Jesus Christ, who offers all life and salvation. 

Ecumenism is the responsibility of Christians, who are called to work and pray in hope for unity. During the Second Vatican Council, Pope St. John XXIII called for a focus on ecumenism. He saw that, in today’s world of division, Christians must come together through sharing prayer and knowledge, while upholding the diversity existing in the Church. Unitatis Redintegratio, the Council’s decree on ecumenism, calls for “the attainment of union” to be the concern of the whole Church—for the “faithful and shepherds alike” (§2)  ...Inviting students to share about their faith traditions is key for ecumenical conversations, whether it be describing their denomination’s Advent traditions or articulating its teachings around the Eucharist. By inviting students to share, the conversation becomes fuller as students feel comfortable speaking up." [Will the students be told their sect's teachings are false and lead to Hell?---Introibo]

"Ecumenical living promotes the seeking of truth and the formation of community in prayer. If you are looking for examples of ecumenical living, look no further than a religion classroom in a modern Catholic school, which often includes students of Catholic and Christian denominations learning, praying, and sharing the faith together." [What faith can a Catholic "share together" with heretics and/or schismatics? This is clearly the sin of communicatio in sacris---Introibo]. (See https://mcgrathblog.nd.edu/cultivating-christian-unity-and-ecumenism-in-the-classroom).

Affirming perversity. 

“Announcing yourself to the world is pretty terrifying,” said Finn Stannard, a gay Australian Catholic high school student, adding that it’s nerve-racking to think, “What if the world doesn’t like you?”

Finn Stannard delivering his coming out speech at school.

Stannard,  then a 17-year-old student at St. Ignatius College, an all-male Jesuit Catholic high school in Sydney, was giving a speech to 1,500 of his classmates, and in it announced that he was gay. 

In what could have been a moment of rejection, Stannard was instead greeted with a standing ovation from students and staff, and the school community has since responded positively. (See https://www.newwaysministry.org/2019/01/18/coming-out-at-an-all-boys-catholic-high-school-and-getting-a-standing-ovation/).

Promoting pagan religions. Here's what some Vatican II sect educators suggest doing in their high schools:

Beyond this, field trips, speakers, weekend programs, or structured retreats with young people of other traditions are invaluable practices for students. Interfaith prayer services or participation in the spiritual paths of other traditions provide deep possibilities for encounter and transformation. Yoga, meditation, and the celebration of non-Christian cultural and religious holidays are all ways in which students can see first-hand how it is that religious traditions are living, adaptable, vibrant communal realities. Through actual interfaith experiences, students learn about other persons, but they also learn more deeply about themselves and their own faith...To teach Hindu spirituality in Catholic schools, we must be prepared to challenge students to encounter themselves in a very different way. Hindu faith is not based on the divine revelation of one male founder. The way Hindus view religious texts and mystical experience is very different. There is not a divinely revealed, institutionally sanctioned legal system that places a universal standard of conduct on all its adherents. Hindus have no particularly recognized spokesperson with an official view on almost any subject. In some schools of Hinduism, sacred self is conceived in terms of a relationship with God (one’s real identity is that of a child of the Divine Mother, or the servant of God, or the friend of God), while other schools conceive sacred self as nondifferential union with Brahman, the all-pervading Divine Reality. Nevertheless, experiential realization is central for Hindu traditions, however differently that may be envisioned and practiced. Such an experiential emphasis is a powerful place to begin teaching Hinduism in Catholic high schools; for it offers a starting point for exploring Hinduism that can both highlight the similarities and differences with Christianity, as well as ground that exploration in a spiritual journey.

(See Viewpoint: Teaching Hinduism in Catholic High Schools;

 https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1487&context=jhcs: Emphasis mine; No comment necessary). 

Conclusion

If you care for the welfare of your child's one and only immortal soul, please homeschool if at all possible. The only exception is if you are blessed to be near a Traditionalist Catholic school, like the ones run by the SSPV; make whatever sacrifice necessary to send your children there if at all possible. If your child must attend public school, please be an active parent and demand to know what is taught in the curriculum. Don't allow the acceptance of sodomites and sexual perversion in the name of "anti-bullying education." Being opposed to a certain lifestyle is not being hateful or bigoted. It is bigoted to teach them acceptance is necessary thereby making your faith false. Get a lawyer to write to the school board about religious discrimination. Be prepared to counter every bit of the "woke" curriculum as it creeps in. Keep your kids close to the Mass and sacraments.

Vatican II sect schools are spiritual suicide; they do the same (or worse) than public schools in the name of "Catholicism." Don't allow your child to be so exposed and confused like that. This is a battle for your child's soul. If you think I'm overstating my case, here's what canonist DePauw wrote in 1953:

Suffice it to say that there will always be a chasm dividing those who believe in God as the ultimate norm of morality for man created for a supernatural end, and those who look upon man as another temporary worker experimenting on this globe in order to get the best and the most out of this short existence. 

When Strangers Come Knocking---Part 23

 

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

UFO Religions

He called himself "Do" [pronounced "dough"] and was the son of a Protestant minister. Born in 1931, he obtained a Bachelors Degree in philosophy in 1952 after which he was drafted and spent a couple of years serving in the United States Army. Upon his honorable discharge, he married and had two children; during that time he entered a Protestant seminary, hoping to become a minister like his father. He dropped out and obtained a Masters Degree in music, landing a professorship teaching music at the University of Alabama. While teaching there, he attempted to seduce a male student, and was promptly fired in 1965. That should have been the end of his career; instead he was then hired as Chairman of the Music Department at the (formerly) Catholic University of St. Thomas in Houston. He came out as an open sodomite and divorced his wife. In 1970, he resigned his position citing depression and emotional problems.

Surviving a near-death experience in 1972, Do was asked by one of his attending nurses, Bonnie Lu Nettles, to join her religion which taught human bodies were merely containers that could be abandoned in favor of a higher physical existence. This would be achieved when an alien spacecraft would arrive in Earth's orbit and take them to "the Kingdom of Heaven." Fascinated, he joined and became a "true believer," with "Ti" (Nettles name given by the aliens, just as he would be dubbed "Do"). Ti died in 1985, and the long awaited spaceship still had not arrived. According to the sect, Unidentified Flying Objects or UFOs, were alien spaceships that had come to Earth but did not want to publicly reveal themselves except to a chosen few who would be taken to "the Kingdom" in a higher evolved state of existence. 

There were a number of strict rules that were imposed on followers: sex was prohibited, members had to cut their ties with the outside world, they were not permitted to watch television or read newspapers, and friendships or any kind of socializing were to be given up. Personal adornment was disallowed; women could not wear jewelry and men were required to shave off beards. Several of the sect's male members had themselves castrated so they wouldn't break the rule against sex and anger the aliens. Soon after the 1995 discovery of the comet Hale-Bopp, the sect members became convinced that an alien spacecraft was on its way to Earth, hidden from human detection behind the comet. On March 26, 1997, as Hale-Bopp reached its closest distance to Earth, Do and 38 of his followers drank a lethal mixture of phenobarbital and vodka and then lay down to die, hoping to leave their "bodily containers," enter the alien spacecraft, and pass through to a higher plane.

Do's birthname was Marshall Applewhite, and the sect, originally called the Anonymous Sexaholics Celibate Church, had changed its name to Heaven's Gate, and the mass suicide was one of the most publicized stories of the 1990s. (See  Balch, Robert; Taylor, David [2002]. "Making Sense of the Heaven's Gate Suicides" in David G. Bromley and J. Gordon Melton [ed.]. Cults, Religion, and Violence. See also, Heaven's Gate, Charles Rivers Editors, [2020]). 

Admittedly, there are many so-called "UFO religions" (some call them cults) and not all (or even most) advocate for suicide or murder. However, after reading up on them, I hesitate to call them "cults." A cult (in my way of considering a sect as a cult) uses coercion of some kind to get people in the group or prevent people from getting out. Heaven's Gate could pass for a cult given all the wacky rules that are oppressive. Yet consider that the group was not subject to any external threat, and there is no evidence that Applewhite’s supporters were mentally ill, vulnerable, or unduly credulous.

 As for brainwashing, it becomes less plausible to believe when one considers that only a very small percentage of members felt constrained to give up worldly ties to follow Nettles and Applewhite, and the majority of those who did, subsequently left the group prior to the suicides. Fascination with UFOs is nothing new. First called "Foo Fighters" during WWII, and then called UFOs, the term was coined in 1953 by the U.S. Airforce to describe any "perceived aerial phenomenon that cannot immediately be identified or explained." Recently, on June 25, 2021, the Pentagon released a report, nine pages in length, on UFOs to Congress. The military has renamed UFOs as unidentified aerial phenomena –UAPs. This was done purposely, at least in part, to avoid the claim associated with the term UFO, namely, that aliens from another planet/dimension have visited Earth. (See  astronomy.com/news/2021/07/pentagon-ufo-report-no-confirmed-aliens-but-the-government-wants-to-learn-more). 

I've always found those with an unhealthy interest regarding UFOs to be disturbed to one degree or another. (Case in point--- all the UFO material on Fred and Bobby Dimond's "Most Holy Family Monastery" website!). This post will discuss the UFO phenomena, the associated UFO sects/cults seeking members, and how to try and convert someone who belongs to any such sect. 

The Enigma of UFOs

(The following sources were used for this post in addition to those cited within the post itself: Gulyas, Aaron John  Extraterrestrials and the American Zeitgeist: Alien Contact Tales Since the 1950’s [2013]; Palmer, Susan J. “The Raelian Movement” in The Gods Have Landed, [1995]edited by James R. Lewis; Keane, Leslie UFOs,[2010]; Hynek, J. Allen, The Hynek UFO Report [1977]---Introibo)

From 1947 to 1969, the U.S. Air Force investigated UFOs in a top secret operation known as Project Blue Book ("PBB"). PBB investigated 12,618 reported UFO sightings. Each sighting was placed in one of several categories; psychological meant the origin was the result of an hallucination by one or more persons not of sound mind; substance induced meant the person was under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol and hallucinated it; hoax meant the person lied, made up photos, etc.; scientifically explained meant the sighting had a rational explanation (e.g., the person(s) saw a weather balloon that flew off course, etc.); and unidentified meant they did not fall into any of the other categories, they were real, yet the scientists working for PBB could not explain what they were. Of those 12,618 investigations, 701 or approximately 5.5% were in the unidentified category. 

PBB ended with three conclusions: (a) UFOs are not a threat to national security, (b) there is no evidence that the unidentified category sightings are examples of superior technology, and (c) there is no evidence that the unidentified category sightings are extraterrestrial space vehicles. The finding were eventually challenged by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, PhD (d. 1986)--an astrophysicist who was a complete skeptic, believing UFOs to be either the result of natural phenomena, hoaxes, or hallucinations from unstable witnesses.  He was hired by the Air Force to debunk any/all case sightings. Hynek is quoted as saying UFOs were nonsense and "the whole subject seems utterly ridiculous." 

By the end of PBB, Hynek had changed his mind. The hardened skeptic and agnostic believed there was sufficient evidence that UFOs were extraterrestrial or extradimensional crafts. In 1985, Hynek explained why he changed his mind:

 Two things, really. One was the completely negative and unyielding attitude of the Air Force. They wouldn't give UFOs the chance of existing, even if they were flying up and down the street in broad daylight. Everything had to have an explanation. I began to resent that, even though I basically felt the same way, because I still thought they weren't going about it in the right way. You can't assume that everything is black no matter what. Secondly, the caliber of the witnesses began to trouble me. Quite a few instances were reported by military pilots, for example, and I knew them to be fairly well-trained, so this is when I first began to think that, well, maybe there was something to all this. (See Hynek, pg. 132). 

Hynek developed the famous "Close Encounters Scale" which he published in his 1972 book The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry. The scale has "Close Encounters" of the First, Second, and Third Kind. A Close Encounter of the First Kind is alleged visual sightings of a UFO at a range of about 500 feet away. A Close Encounter of the Second Kind is a UFO event in which a physical effect is alleged, such as pets acting wildly and machines failing to function properly. A Close Encounter of the Third Kind is contact with UFO in which a non-human entity is present. There was a blockbuster 1977 movie entitled Close Encounters of the Third Kind based on Hynek's scale and in which Hynek himself is given a cameo appearance at the end of the film. 

So What Are They?

Of the 5.5% true "unidentifieds"--what could they be? There are three (3) theories:

1. They are natural phenomena science has yet to explain. This is the position of most government agencies around the world (many of which have also investigated UFOs) and the majority of scientists, atheists and agnostics. Just as they attempt to do away with religion as an "explanation for things primitive people did not understand," so too, they claim that there must be a logical, scientific explanation not involving the paranormal or supernatural. They deny, a priori, the very possibility of anything outside what science can explain. For thousands of years, scientists thought autotrophs needed light to produce their own food. Then, in the 1970s, with the discovery of autotrophic bacteria deep under the ocean where there is no light, they came to understand the process of chemosynthesis. Hence, they argue, there are somethings science cannot explain yet.

Problems: This theory begs the question as to the inability of having anything except naturalistic explanations. The naturalistic explanation of UFOs lacks conclusive explanatory power and scope, which would seem to necessitate being open to non-naturalistic ideas.  

2. They are extraterrestrials with advanced technology that have come to Earth for a reason. This theory states UFOs are real, empirical, objective realities. They are advanced life forms come to Earth with advanced technology to study humans, but try and avoid detection. Many conspiracy theories arise from this idea, such as Area 51, a U.S. government facility alleged to hold the remains of a crashed UFO and the bodies of the aliens who died in that crash. 

Problems: There are several questions that need to be answered regarding this proposed solution in order for it to make sense:

• How are the alien crafts able to traverse vast distances through interstellar space given the physical limits on speed? Travelling at light speed, it would take intelligent life 2.5 million years to reach Earth from the Andromeda Galaxy; the place most scientists believe would be the closest area in which intelligent life could live.
• Why do most of the crafts differ in size, shape, and color?
• How do physical objects move in such a way as to seemingly violate the known laws of physics?
• How can they maintain such a long-standing mission to Earth, and why conceal themselves for decades or longer?

3. They are interdimensional beings beyond the time-space continuum. This is subdivided into meaning (a) they are non-physical beings from a place unknown or (b) they are spiritual manifestations; either angels or fallen angels (demons). 

Problems: How does this explain those unidentifieds that appear on radar? Why would God send angels in this fashion? Why would Satan and his demons present themselves as such?

All the theories have pluses and drawbacks. I will venture an opinion later on.

The Kind of People Who Take Serious Interest in UFOs

The following types of people are those with deep interest in UFOs:

Scientists, particularly "exobiologists" who consider the possibility of life developing and existing on different planets. Many scientists are interested in debunking UFOs.

Government officials, who have investigated UFOs, exist in a majority of countries worldwide and want to know more.

People in professional organizations, such as the British UFO Research Organization (See https://www.bufora.org.uk/) which try and explain UFOs.

Social scientists, who study people who claim to have a UFO sighting or alien contact. They then propose naturalistic explanations for their perceptions of the experience.

UFO enthusiasts, who enjoy movies, books and discussions on UFOs--it's more of a hobby or curiosity than anything "official." Many times this leads to wacky beliefs, and an obsessive, unhealthy fascination.

New Agers, who find religious significance in UFOs. They often claim to be contacted by "aliens" during their occult practices.

UFO Sect members, who believe they are special and the UFOs are using them to bring an important message to humanity. Like New Agers, and those who claim "close encounters," I have found ALL of those I researched to have engaged in the occult.

Meet the UFO Sects

The exact number of UFO sects is unknown. Some are "fly by night" groups that dissolve their association after a few years, while others last a very long time. While each group is unique and needs to be evaluated on an individual basis, there are several themes that run through all of them:

1. They believe UFOs are real and they are in touch with aliens/interdimensional beings.

2. Messages are being given to them (or their leader[s]) which have the utmost importance for humanity.

3. The leaders (or everyone in the group) uses the occult method of "Channeling" to contact the aliens. 

Heaven's Gate is a good example of the above. Applewhite claimed to be able to "channel messages" from aliens that blasphemously incorporated Christian terminology. He claimed there were two groups of aliens, called The Evolutionary Level Above Human ("TELAH"), and their evil adversaries called Luciferians. Before 1997, the last visit was two thousand years ago, when one of the Older Members of TELAH sent a representative to Earth. This was his son, Jesus, also referred to as “the Captain,” who brought an “away team”[Apostles] with him with the task of preaching the message of how the kingdom of God might be entered. However, the Luciferians incited the human race to kill the Captain and his crew, and encouraged them to propagate false teachings. The Captain was brought back to life by the TELAH ("resurrection'), and then Jesus assumed a new Next Level body and was taken up to heaven by a UFO at his ascension. The TELAH would try to rescue the human race one last time through Applewhite.

Here are two of the current larger sects:

International Raelian Movement. 

Claude Vorilhon was born in 1946 and would be renamed Rael after an encounter with a UFO in 1973.It was then he reported his first encountered the Elohim (“those who came from the sky”). He described an emotional encounter with an alien blasphemously named “Yahweh” at an inactive volcano in the area, Le Puy de Lassalas, who revealed himself to be Rael’s biological father and gave Vorilhon the name Rael. He was then invited on board the spacecraft for a series of Bible lessons in which the true meaning of the "Creation myth" in the Bible was revealed. Another meeting with the Elohim occurred in 1975 when Rael, was taken to the alien planet where he described a joyous meeting with his half-brothers, Jesus, Muhammad and Buddha. Rael was given the mission of spreading the Elohim message. Over the next three decades Rael built The Raelian Movement, which claims over 50,000 members in over 80 nations, and a variety of organizations that further the Raelian and Elohim missions. They are atheists, claiming that the intelligent design of the universe is from aliens. They even tried to scientifically disprove Transubstantiation (See my post https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-real-change-you-can-believe-in.html). 

Astar Command

Much of the ritual practice associated with the Ashtar Command focuses on channeling extraterrestrial messages. George Van Tassel (d. 1978) claimed to encounter four aliens from a UFO who told him of  Ashtar, which is viewed as a liberating physical force in conflict with negative space beings that are influencing the Earth and its inhabitants. Van Tassel originally promoted a form of mediation and "telepathy." Initially, with another group called The Brotherhood of the Cosmic Christ, weekly channeling sessions were held in a room near where the alien encounter allegedly took place. 

During these events, members were thought to be able to go into a meditative/trance state where they “resonated” with the frequency of the beings transmitting the messages. This activity was presented as a scientific process that allowed the “receiver” the ability to tune in and receive messages that were being broadcast. They claimed they were never taken over or possessed by ETs or Ashtar, rather they were seen as being able to operate as special transmitters of the message, nothing more.

The belief system associated with the Ashtar Command has been centered upon several charismatic figures that claimed they had the ability to channel messages from Ashtar. Although these key individuals would be recognized as authorities, they would not necessarily be seen of leaders of any particular group. The Astar Command has been dwindling due to mixed messages and failed predictions without a unified leader who can do damage control. 

Understanding the UFO Sects

What are we to make of UFOs, in light of the foregoing? I don't believe that "science will eventually explain ALL of them"--it's a "science of the gaps" cop out. If science can't explain everything it does not logically follow that it must do so of necessity unless you presuppose an anti-supernatural worldview in the first place. I must rule out extradimensional entities that are "unknown non-physical beings" as this definition is overbroad and there is no evidence or basis for belief in such entities from any discipline, including theology.

Could they be aliens? There is nothing contrary to the Faith if there were other life-forms created by God and passed their test. They would be superior, as they would be in a state of Original Justice, in no need of Redemption. However, this is mere speculation, and without more proof, I believe the likelihood is low. The more I write this blog, the more aware I become of the occult explosion in our world. In the case of the UFO sects and "Close Encounter" claimants, they are involved in occult practices like channeling and automatic handwriting, which is an invitation to possession and deception by demons. That's not to say everyone who claims to see a UFO is in contact with demons; but the UFO sects are different. I base my conclusion on three major factors; the mode of contact, the content of the messages received, and the motive demons would have to pretend to be aliens. 

Mode of Contact: It's not just coincidental that every method of contact is occult. None of these alleged aliens appears to have spoken conversations (except on the initial contact which usually has no witnesses), or gives something already written; the contact is made through a human medium/channeler, inviting an unearthly presence to take over. As I've written many times before, mediums are condemned by both the Bible and Church teaching. "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." (See Deuteronomy 18:10-12; Emphasis mine.) 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 séance or to act as a medium." (See Moral Theology, [1961], pg. 100; Emphasis mine). 

Content of the Messages: As seen above, these UFO sects/cults denigrate Jesus Christ and deny His Divinity. Some deny God Himself, preaching atheism, and many are pervaded with New Age beliefs antithetical to Christianity. 

The Possible Motive of Demons: Why would demons pretend to be other-worldly creatures? I'll respond with another question; why would demons pretend to be the souls of deceased people during seances or while speaking through mediums? All of the mediums will tell the grieving person who has lost someone that the deceased are "fine and happy." Of course, this is what we would all like to hear, but how is it possible that all people died within the True Church in the state of sanctifying grace? Hell and damnation are never even considered as possibilities. On the rare occasion when it is mentioned in popular culture, false ideas are still thrown in. For example, in the 1990 blockbuster movie Ghost, starring Demi Moore and the late Patrick Swayze, the souls of the villains are seen being taken by demons to Hell at the moment of death. "They didn't repent," laments Swayze's character, Sam Wheat. The problem is, neither did Sam Wheat repent of living in mortal sin with his girlfriend Molly Jensen (played by Moore). Furthermore, Jensen is aided by a (you guessed it) medium named Oda Mae Brown (played by Whoopi Goldberg). The film clearly teaches that fornication and the use of mediums are morally permissible. 

In the case of impersonating the souls of the dead, demons prey on the fear of death and the unknown. People want to hear "you will be happy when you die" no matter how they live. They want to hear that their father, grandmother, aunt, etc., are in Heaven no matter what they believed or did. In the case of aliens, demons would prey on humanity's hopes, rather than fears. Humans have always been fascinated by space (astrology has always been popular) and space exploration (astronomy has also held a high popularity). Millions of people want an end to disease, hunger, war, poverty, etc., and what better way to appeal to them than to pervert these hopes and tell them you can have paradise in this life and apart from God?

Proselytizing UFO Sect Members

If the person is merely fascinated by UFOs, tell them of the dangers of deceit. Even the Dimond brothers use UFOs to get people to accept the Feeneyite heresy. If the person is involved with one of these groups, it will be hard to reach them. Tell them of the historical example of Heaven's Gate; what makes you think you are correct when so many claiming UFO contact are wrong? If they counter, "How do you know your beliefs are correct and everyone else is wrong?" this gives you the perfect opportunity to show the Truth of God and the Traditionalist Catholic faith.

Make sure to learn one of the proofs for the existence of God (e.g., the cosmological argument) and if you can't remember or use it by speaking, write it down and give it to them (I personally think everyone should have some apologetic materials on them at all times; you never know when it will come in handy). See also my post https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2020/05/stay-tuned.html. Tell them about the real Jesus Christ and how He is God Risen from the dead. Lastly, ask them if they would be willing to pray with you to Jesus and Mary and/or accept a blessed Green Scapular from you. If what they say is true, there's no harm in praying, so would they accommodate you? If they happen to be wrong, God could help them. Don't forget to pray for them afterwards, and have a Mass offered for their conversion if possible.

Conclusion

The UFO craze has been around a long time and it is getting a renewed interest in the wake of the Pentagon report. The people who get involved with unidentified flying objects, even as a passing interest, usually wind up with involvement in other topics (like Darwinian evolution) which does nothing to help the soul. It is often a doorway to occult practices and heresy. Focus on learning and living the One True Faith. If you persevere until the end in sanctifying grace, your reward will then really be "out of this world."