Monday, July 14, 2025

The First Jesuits

 


To My Readers: This week's guest post from Lee is about the Jesuit Order as founded by the great St. Ignatius Loyola. He relates how the Jesuits were before the much deserved contempt that many hold for them. I learned from reading his post, and I'm sure you will too! Lee wrote this post for July, as the Feast of St. Ignatius is kept on July 31st. Please feel free to comment as usual. If you have a specific comment or question for me, I will respond as always, but it may take me a bit longer to do so this week. 

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

The First Jesuits
By Lee
Something noticeable over the past few years is how some on social media will on occasion discuss their disdain for the Jesuits as if there is a need to "expose" them. The main reason is because of Francis I (Jorge Bergoglio) becoming the first Jesuit so called "pope" ascending to the throne. The other reason is the liberation theology promoted by them in 20th century Latin America where Bergoglio happened to be from.  

There is no doubt that the Jesuits of modern times deserve severe criticism. They are now taken over by the worst of men trained in the most liberal environment. Ultra Modernists (synthesis of all heretics), Marxists, and Sodomites make up most of what is now left with some exceptions. They are also responsible for "updating" the Church since Vatican II with those like Karl Rahner and Henri de Lubac playing a key role in those changes. The changes of Vatican II and those involved were certainly influenced by those who came before them or else there wouldn't have been a Vatican II.

The excommunicated Alfred Loisy and George Tyrell of the early 1900's come to mind. They were relativists, critics of the historical accounts of the Scriptures, and had a warped understanding of the nature of the Church (Ecclesiology). Then came Teilhard De Chardin who was so popular in the 30's and 40's that later on we see John Paul II and Benedict XVI quote him favorably. For those who may not know who he was or what he taught, this website has already covered him under the title of "The Doctor of the Vatican II Sect" found here: https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/search?q=de+chardin  

Their attractive personalities and condemned ideas crept in the seminaries in those days affecting many of the clergy. While we can certainly blame the Jesuits for much of the down hill spiral which happened in the Church, it wasn't just they who drifted away. All religious Orders of the Church ended up submitting themselves to the disciplines and beliefs of Modernism summing up why it is now a totally new religion with a different perspective on everything compared to what it once was. 

Despite these terrible truths the Jesuit Order was not at all like this from its foundation. In fact, it was one of the greatest missionary Orders in the Catholic Church. This is where I would like to defend them. There are those out there with either a misguided understanding, likely swayed by a Protestant viewpoint, or an intentional loathing for the Catholic Church who believe the Jesuits were insidious from the beginning. They invent this idea that St. Ignatius was somehow a man who wanted to help keep "corruption" in the Church on going by showing his allegiance to it and that he and his companions concentrated on dogma to distract from the internal sins and abuses of the Church.

Others claim the Council of Trent was dominated by Jesuits not for the sake countering the Reformation, meant to blot out heresy and restore integrity in the Church, but used to seek after world power by incorporating their missionary tactics to sell Christianity on what the locals needed so that way they would convert not to true Christianity but to a "secularized" Order in the name of Christ.

Another assertion that some run with is the Jesuit's connection with Adam Weishaupt who founded the Illuminati in 1776. These accusers think that because he incorporated principles from his former Jesuit training into his secret organization that he must have had help or possibly was working alongside the Jesuits. Such claims are absurd and just as the founder of the Jesuits, St. Ignatius, was falsely accused of sorcery and heresy multiple times by his enemies and found innocent from the inquisitions, so too has his Order been maligned by those who will not see the truth.   

I would like to know what the naysayers honest opinion (if they have one) is when looking into the lives of the martyrs of North America who happened to be Jesuits. They who risked their lives with the daily threat of having one of their body parts either being chewed off or ripped out along with being boiled in water as a mock baptism all for the sake of instructing and baptizing the poor Indians lost in the darkness of their culture and idolatry. 

Or what about St. Francis Xavier, friend of St. Ignatius, who went as far as Japan preaching the faith? Thanks to his efforts that country became a strong Catholic oriental country, where more martyrs were born and where the faith was kept alive nearly 300 years without priests owing to the great educational means of the Jesuits (more on him below). These men alongside many others of the Jesuit Order were true heroes and I certainly don't see the Kyle Seraphins, Leo Zagamis, or Mark Dices of the world (naysayers) accomplishing the sacrifices that these Jesuits once faced. They did as Christ commanded by baptizing and teaching all nations for the salvation of souls.  

Its True Foundation

"Every one therefore that hearth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, And the rains came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock. And every one that hearth these my words and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and the beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof." (Matt 7:24-26) 

The intent of laying a firm foundation was the desire of St. Ignatius of Loyola who was the heart and soul of the Jesuit Order. A man who was first enlightened not by the Knights Templar or secret societies or some unknown mysticism, but rather the lives of the saints whom he first read while passing the time in his bed healing from severe battle wounds he sustained when fighting in a previous battle. The saints pursuit for the things of God and heavenly things are what inspired him to put away the fantasies of attracting women and receiving worldly honors as a staunch knight. As he got better, he at once paid those he owed, distributing much of what he had to the poor, and informed his brother Martin where he was going with his new path in life. 

Starting out making pilgrimages, visiting the poor, and imitating the saints through his austere penance and good works were what gave him deeper insights into the meaning of life. He was also met with many trails during this period where he suffered scruples that nearly led him to despair. Cooperating with grace and with the help of his confessor he was not only able to fight it off but experience actual visions in ecstasy which he was careful not to reveal even though witnesses saw them. He was to be a soldier of Christ who as he once put it to "set the world on fire" as in the love of God and His Church. He knew reason and logic had to be well maintained in order that faith be firm and not carried off by emotion. To fulfill his goals, he went to study to become a priest.

While at Paris he met six men who were to be his close associates. They were Alfonso Salmeron, Diego Laynez, Francis Xavier (later became a saint) Nicholas Bobadilla, Simao Rodrigues, and Peter Faber. On August 15th 1534 they met at Montmartre in a crypt beneath the church of St. Denis and pronounced their promise of living the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. This is where they came up with the name Company of Jesus because they believed that the Lord had brought them together to live out the Gospel. The seven traveled from France to Rome to receive approval of their Order by Pope Paul III. After some time and consideration he did so through his Papal Bull Regimini Militantis Ecclesiae in the year 1540. Although humbling protesting to his companions Ignatius was chosen to lead them as the Superior General, which he reluctantly accepted.

A few years after their approval another apologetic giant of the future, St. Peter Canisius, joins them in 1543. It was he who later was most instrumental in bringing back many nations of Europe to the Catholic Church through his well reasoned argumentation. Ann Carrol wrote this about him in her book Christ the King- Lord of History:

"Protestants had made much headway in Germany because of many intellectuals had adopted it, making Catholicism appear to be the religion of the ignorant. By his debates, his writing and his teachings, Peter showed that Catholicism was thoroughly rational, that the Protestant arguments were not convincing. 

By his efforts, Peter won Bavaria (Southern Germany) and the Rhineland (Central Germany) back to the Catholic Church. He also won converts in Austria, Hungary, Bohemia and Poland. Poland had become largely Protestant, but thanks to the efforts of Peter and other Jesuits, it returned to the Church and is still Catholic today despite Communist persecution."

The above two paragraphs about St. Peter Canisius shows how he as well as others had a remarkable ability to convince fallen away Catholics (Protestants) through faith and reason. 

St. Ignatius also carefully laid out for the Order rules in place for the purpose of what they were to achieve. Approved in 1550 by Pope Julius III, Exposcit Debitum states this: 

"Whoever desires to serve as a soldier of God beneath the banner of the cross in our Society, which we desire to be designated by the name of Jesus, and to serve the Lord alone and the Church, His spouse, under the Roman pontiff, the vicar of Christ on earth, should, after a solemn vow of perpetual chastity, poverty, and obedience, keep what follows in mind. He is a member of a Society founded chiefly for this purpose: to strive especially for the defense and propagation of the faith and for the progress of souls in Christian life and doctrine, by means of public preaching, lectures, and any other ministration whatsoever of the word of God, and further by means of the Spiritual Exercises, the education of children and unlettered persons and the spiritual consolation of Christ’s faithful through hearing confessions and administering the other sacraments. 

Moreover, he should show himself ready to reconcile the estranged, compassionately assist and serve those in prisons or hospitals, and indeed to perform any other works of charity, according to what will seem expedient for the glory of God and the common good. Furthermore, all these works should be carried out altogether free of charge and without accepting any remuneration for the labor expended in all the aforementioned activities. Still further, let any such person take care, as long as he lives, first of all to keep before his eyes God and then the nature of this Institute which is, so to speak, a pathway to God; and then let him strive with all his effort to achieve this end set before him by God—each one, however, according to the grace which the Holy Spirit has given to him and according to the particular grade of his own vocation...


The Gospel does indeed teach us, and we know from orthodox faith and firmly hold, that all of Christ’s faithful are subject to the Roman pontiff as their head and as the vicar of Christ. Yet for the sake of greater devotion in obedience to the Apostolic See, of greater abnegation of our own wills, and of surer direction from the Holy Spirit, we have judged it to be extremely profitable if each one of us and all those who may make the same profession in the future would, in addition to the ordinary bond of the three vows, be bound by a special vow to carry out, without subterfuge or excuse and at once (as far as in us lies), whatever the present and future Roman pontiffs may order pertaining to the progress of souls and the propagation of the faith, and to go to whatsoever provinces they may choose to send us, whether they decide to send us among the Turks or any other infidels, even those who live in the regions called the Indies, or among any heretics or schismatics or any of the faithful. 

Therefore before those who will come to us take this burden upon their shoulders, they should ponder long and seriously, as the Lord has counseled, whether they possess among their resources enough spiritual capital to complete this tower; that is, whether the Holy Spirit who moves them is offering them so much grace that with His aid they have hope of bearing the weight of this vocation. Then, after they have enlisted through the inspiration of the Lord in this militia of Christ, they ought to be prompt in carrying out this obligation which is so great, being clad for battle day and night...

From experience we have learned that a life removed as far as possible from all contagion of avarice and as like as possible to evangelical poverty is more gratifying, more undefiled, and more suitable for the edification of our fellowmen. We likewise know that our Lord Jesus Christ will supply to His servants who are seeking only the kingdom of God what is necessary for food and clothing. Therefore our members, one and all, should vow perpetual poverty in such a manner that neither the professed, either individually or in common, nor any house or church of theirs can acquire any civil right to any produce, fixed revenues, or possessions or to the retention of any stable goods (except those which are proper for their own use and habitation); but they should instead be content with whatever is given them out of charity for the necessities of life...

These are the matters which we were able to explain about our profession in a kind of sketch, through the good pleasure of our previously mentioned sovereign pontiff Paul and of the Apostolic See. We have now completed this explanation, in order to give brief information both to those who ask us about our plan of life and also to those who will later follow us if, God willing, we shall ever have imitators along this path. By experience we have learned that the path has many and great difficulties connected with it. Consequently we have judged it opportune to decree that no one should be permitted to pronounce his profession in this Society unless his life and doctrine have been probed by long and exacting tests (as will be explained in the Constitutions). For in all truth this Institute requires men who are thoroughly humble and prudent in Christ as well as conspicuous in the integrity of Christian life and learning." 

St. Ignatius stressed an absolute self denial and a special vow of obedience towards the pope with the motto Ad Majoriem Dei Gloriam (For the Greater Glory of God). Before his death in 1554 St. Ignatius also bequeathed to his Order and the whole Church his Spiritual Exercises which particularly focused on man's last end. It is also excellent reading material on the discernment of spirits, whether something be of God or of the devil.  

A great son of St. Ignatius and of God 

One of the greatest missionaries was St. Francis Xavier. Pope Pius XI declared him Patron of Catholic Missions in 1927. He who once was an athletic high jumper at the University of Paris put away his worldly glory in exchange for a spiritual athleticism to travel for eleven years into foreign territories on behalf of the king Portugal as well as the King of Heaven. His first mission was the city of Goa India, the main Portuguese colony in the East, where colonists were scandalizing the natives, engaged in lucrative commerce and allowed themselves to be wiped away by the sins of the pagan world. 

In a few weeks, the beneficial effects of the new missionary’s presence, preaching, and determination were understood: “So many people came to confession that if I were divided into ten parts, all of them would have to hear confessions” – he wrote to the Jesuits in Rome in September 1542. “Such is the multitude of those who are converted to the faith of Christ in this land where I walk, that it often happens to me that my arms are tired from so much baptizing, there are days when I baptize a whole town.”

A year later, he tells us how God worked in those parts: “News from these parts of India: I let you know that God our Lord has moved many, in a kingdom where I am going, to become Christians, so that in one month I baptized more than ten thousand people. (…) After baptizing them, I commanded them to tear down the houses where they had their idols, and I ordered them to break the idol images into small pieces. When I finish doing this in one place, I go to another, and in this way I go from place to place making Christians.”

Using a small catechism he had translated into the native Tamil language with the help of interpreters, he traveled across villages confirming many in the faith. His goodness overcame trials and shortcomings. From this point he was informed of a tribe called the Macuans located on the southwest coast their desire for baptism and after getting in contact with them through more travels he briefly instructed them and baptized 10,000 towards the end of 1544.

In the fall of 1545 he went to the Malay Archipelago and found missions in the Spice islands. In 1548 he returned to his mission in Goa where more Jesuits arrived to join him. Together they took over the only college located in Goa and developed it into the center of education for native priests and catechists.

Not satisfied with exploring this vast region for new converts, he was still determined to go further. A Japanese man named Anjiro who had fled his country was deeply interested in converting to the Catholic faith ended up doing so and went with Francis Xavier to his native home of Japan with several companions. They landed in 1549 on the port of Kagoshima. His letters reveal that the Japanese are a polite society but suspicious of foreigners. That they are a warlike people who took great pride in their weaponry. That their religion consists of Bonzes and Bonzesses who have a great rivalry between them, the grey monks being set against the black monks accusing each other of ignorance and bad morals. He goes on to state how they don't believe anybody is condemned to hell and...

"The Japanese doctrines teach absolutely nothing concerning the creation of the world, of the sun, the moon, the stars, the heavens, the earth, sea, and the rest, and do not believe that they have any origin but themselves. The people were greatly astonished on hearing it said that there is one sole Author and common Father of souls, by whom they were created. This astonishment was caused by the fact that in their religious traditions there is nowhere any mention of a Creator of the universe. If there existed one single First Cause of all things, surely, they said, the Chinese, from whom they derive their religion, must have known it….In the end, by God’s favor, we succeeded in solving all their questions, so as to leave no doubt remaining in their minds. 

The Japanese are led by reason in everything more than any other people, and in general they are all so insatiable of information and so importunate in their questions that there is no end either to their arguments with us, or to their talking over our answers among themselves. They did not know that the world is round, they knew nothing of the course of the sun and stars, so that when they asked us and we explained to them these and other like things, such as the causes of comets, of the lightning and of rain, they listened to us most eagerly, and appeared delighted to hear us, regarding us with profound respect as extremely learned persons.

This idea of our great knowledge opened the way to us for sowing the seed of religion in their minds. …The university of Bandou, situated in an island of Japan, which has given its name to its country, is the most famous of all; and a great number of bonzes are constantly going thither to study their own laws. These precepts are derived from China and are written in Chinese characters, which are different from the Japanese. There are two kinds of writing in Japan, one used by men and the other by women; and for the most part both men and women, especially of the nobility and the commercial class, have a literary education. The bonzes, or bonzesses, in their monasteries teach letters to the girls and boys, though rich and noble persons entrust the education of their children to private tutors."

With a difficult task ahead of him St. Francis Xavier figured out that the Japanese would not listen to a person who looked poor but one who was dressed in fine clothes. His tactics would work. He later writes,

"The Japanese are very curious by nature, and as desirous of learning as any people ever were. So they go on perpetually telling other people about their questions and our answers. They desire very much to hear novelties, especially about religion. Even before our arrival, as we are told, they were perpetually disputing among themselves, each one contending that his own sect was the best. But after they had heard what we had to say, they left off their disputes about their own rules of life and religion, and all began to contend about the Christian faith. It is really very wonderful that in so large a city as Yamaguchi in every house and in every place men should be talking constantly about the law of God.

 …For those who have become Christians used to belong, one to one sect, another to another; the most learned of each of them explained to us the institutions and rules of his own way of belief. If I had not had the work of these converts to help me, I should not have been able to become sufficiently acquainted with, and so attack, these abominable religions of Japan. It is quite incredible how much the Christians love us…May God in His mercy repay them with His favor, and give us all His heavenly bliss! Amen."

After his stay for just a few years it is disputed as to how many he converted but at the very least it was 2,000 with many more thousands to follow until Toyotomi Hideyoshi banned Catholicism in 1587 and put many to death with the rest going underground for 250 years until priests came back only to find many who had kept the Faith.

Still yet determined to preach the Gospel to all nations, he set his eyes towards China in 1552 and while in exile on an island just off the main land he developed a fever which ended up taking his life after much suffering mostly alone around December 3rd of 1552.

One might wonder how a foreign man could convert so many to a foreign religion other than through his social skills and enthusiasm? The answer is the fact that he performed extraordinary wonders and miracles with the Vatican approving up to 1,200 of them.

Fr. John Hardon S.J. explains the mind of the Church towards St. Francis Xavier's as follows:

"To answer non-Catholic criticism of Xavier's miracles, it is enough to appeal to the evidence of contemporary history. But Catholics have also another norm by which to pass judgment in the matter-the declarations of ecclesiastical authority. Here the evidence is most conclusive. For every official statement of the Church on the subject credits the Apostle of the Indies with thaumaturgic powers that are not only considered real, but so extraordinary that, with the possible exception of Francis of Assisi and Anthony of Padua, they are unique in the history of Christian hagiography.


Thus in the Brief of Beatification, issued in 1619 by Pope Paul V, he declares that “Francis Xavier, during his life as a priest, was endowed by the Lord with many and outstanding (multis et eximiis) gifts of virtue, of grace and of miracles.” 

In the Allocution of 1622, when Gregory XV in a private Consistory proposed to the Cardinals that Francis Xavier should be canonized, he said: “In as much as holiness of life, a reputation for miracles (claritudo miraculorum) and the desires of the people concur in their judgment on this remarkable man, the true Apostle of the Indies, it is expedient that he should be raised to the honors of sainthood." The Cardinals who assisted, individually, gave their judgment, in writing, on whether Xavier should be canonized. Their votes are only a paragraph each, some less than fifty words, yet all of them, and mostly in explicit terms, refer to his claritudo miraculorum as a sure sign that the Holy Spirit desires His servant to be honored as a saint.

According to Cardinal a Monte, “He shone with the splendor of many miracles.” And Bandini, “He drew the hardened hearts of men to the true faith by innumerable miracles.” Cardinal Ginnasii, “By the power of God, he healed the sick, raised the dead, spoke with the gift of tongues.” Cardinal Millini, “He was resplendent with so many and such great miracles that I believe he may without hesitation be entered by Your Holiness in the catalog of the saints.” 

In the Bull of Canonization issued by Urban VIII on August 6, 1623, the miracles of St. Francis make up the bulk of the nineteen pages, in folio, of the papal document. Regarding the phenomena which happened during the saint's life, the Pope says, in general, that “He was found worthy to be richly endowed with apostolic charismata; the evidence of his apostolate being manifested... in signs and prodigies and powers.” Then follows a careful description of eighteen miracles in the life of St. Francis which the Church accepted as authentic:

Omitting those already mentioned, the first phenomenon noted in the document was the gift of rapture. While celebrating Mass, Xavier was often so rapt in ecstasy that those in attendance could with difficulty rouse him back to normal consciousness. 

At other times during the Holy Sacrifice, he was seen raised from the ground a cubit and more so that “while seeing the greatness of the miracle, the people might acknowledge the sanctity of the servant of God.” 

After his arrival in the Indies, one of the "more outstanding prodigies which he wrought for the edification of the faithful," occurred when a mob of pagan Badages made a surprise attack on a Christian village, intending to kill the inhabitants. But the mob was put to flight when Francis went out to meet them, accompanied by a mysterious figure whose majesty and splendor terrified the assailants. 

At Comorin, when the pagans were not moved by his words, Xavier asked that a tomb which had been sealed the day before should be opened. Then indicating that this would be a sign of God's approval of Christianity, he called to the body to rise. The dead man came to life, with hundreds of natives embracing the faith as a consequence. 

In the same city on another occasion, Francis healed a beggar with ulcerous legs when in a burst of heroism he drank the putrid water in which the running sores had been washed. 

Also in east India, Xavier brought back to life a young man who had died of a pestilential fever, and was being carried to the cemetery. 

In the city of Combutura, a boy had fallen into a deep well and drowned. His body was later brought up to the surface. Francis prayed over the dead child and then, “taking it by the hand, ordered it in the name of Jesus Christ to rise. Immediately the boy returned to life.” 

In Japan, a merchant, blind for years, was given back his sight when Francis recited the Gospels and made the sign of the cross over his head. 

On one occasion, a small crucifix which the missionary had lost in the ocean was restored to him by a sea crab when he reached the shore. 

Again out at sea during a storm, the landing boat of the ship on which he was sailing was torn from its mooring and lost in the waves. Three days later, in answer to Xavier's prayers, the boat floated back to the ship and rested alongside the hulk, ready for landing, as though nothing had happened. 

As examples of his prophetic powers, Francis predicted the fate of two ships sailing out of port-that one would be destroyed in a storm and the other, a smaller and older vessel, would reach its destination in safety. At another time, as he arrived at the altar for Mass, he suddenly turned to the people and asked them to pray for the soul of a wine merchant who had just died, at a distance of twelve days' journey away. He also promised a generous benefactor that God would reward him by telling him the time of his death. Years later, in apparent good health, the man was suddenly forewarned and died in the peace of God. 

Since his canonization in 1623, a series of new honors has been conferred on Francis Xavier by the Holy See, culminating in his declaration in 1922 as the heavenly patron of all Catholic Missions. And consistently the Roman Pontiffs, in their letters and decrees, have emphasized in a singular way his extraordinary gift of miracles and prophecies.

Thus Alexander VII, shortly after Xavier's canonization, authorized the following insertion to be made in the Roman Martyrology for the third of December: “. . . the Apostle of the Indies was conspicuous in the number of infidels he converted to Christ, and in the greatness of his miracles, especially in raising the dead to life and in the spirit of prophecy.” 

And more recently, Pope Pius XI, on the third centenary of St. Francis' canonization, described the “Heavenly Patron of the Propagation of the Faith” as one who, “in the interest of souls, many times traversed vast expanses of land and sea, was the first to bring the name of Christ to the nation of Japan, suffered many dangers and underwent incredible trials, administered the saving waters of Baptism to countless souls, and performed innumerable miracles of every kind (infinita omne genus portenta).” 

Conclusion
Sts. Ignatius and Francis Xavier were the first models of their Order. What flowed from them was true Christian charity through the ages. Volumes upon volumes fill the wonderful contributions the Jesuits have made from the 16th-19th centuries. Even during their suppression from 1773-1814 the world was not the same without them because it was during this time that three Revolutions broke out (America, France, Haiti). It makes one wonder if that was planned. Nevertheless, it wasn't the Jesuits who were the enemies of humanity during this time, nor any time before that but rather the work of bad Monarchs, Jansenists, Encyclopedists, and so many others. All they tried to do was convert the world to Christ and His Church and nothing more.

The prayer of St. Ignatius below sums up the spirit of the Jesuit Order:

"Teach us, good Lord, to serve Thee as Thou deserve; to give, and not to count the cost, to fight, and not to heed the wounds, to toil, and not to seek for rest, to labor, and not to ask for reward, except that of knowing that we are doing Thy will."

Monday, July 7, 2025

Contending For The Faith---Part 41

 

In St. Jude 1:3, we read, "Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." [Emphasis mine]. Contending For The Faith is a series of posts dedicated to apologetics (i.e.,  the intellectual defense of the truth of the Traditional Catholic Faith) to be published the first Monday of each month.  This is the next installment.

Sadly, in this time of Great Apostasy, the faith is under attack like never before, and many Traditionalists don't know their faith well enough to defend it. Remember the words of our first pope, "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." (1Peter 3:16). There are five (5) categories of attacks that will be dealt with in these posts. Attacks against:
  • The existence and attributes of God
  • The truth of the One True Church established by Christ for the salvation of all 
  • The truth of a particular dogma or doctrine of the Church
  • The truth of Catholic moral teaching
  • The truth of the sedevacantist position as the only Catholic solution to what has happened since Vatican II 
In addition, controversial topics touching on the Faith will sometimes be featured, so that the problem and possible solutions may be better understood. If anyone had suggestions for topics that would fall into any of these categories, you may post them in the comments. I cannot guarantee a post on each one, but each will be carefully considered.

A Fine-Tuned Universe

I wish to acknowledge the various sources I used in compiling this post, from hardcopy and online apologetics resources. I take no credit for the material herein. All I did was condense the information into a terse and readable post.---Introibo

The Vatican II sect has ceased to teach apologetics; and why should they? If all religions lead to God there's no reason to prove one right and another wrong. Moreover, Bergoglio even claimed atheists can go to Heaven, so why the need to prove to them God exists? For those of us who keep the One True Faith, we realize that we must make converts and spread the truth. The Vatican Council of 1870 defined: The same Holy Mother Church holds and teaches that God, the beginning and end of all things, may be certainly known by the natural light of human reason, by means of created things; "for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made" (Romans 1:20)... (Emphasis mine). 

One of the proofs of God's existence, that may be used against atheists and agnostics is the argument from the fine-tuning of the universe. If we consider some of the standard beliefs about the nature of God, for instance, that God is omnipotent and supremely good, then it is not at all surprising that if God exists, he would create a world that is highly complex, ordered, intelligible, and well suited for the existence of life, including intelligent life that enjoys the possibility of knowing about the universe and its creator. It is at least less surprising than that such an orderly world would exist purely by chance. Unless the existence of God is inherently more improbable than fine-tuning by chance, it would seem that fine-tuning is evidence--indeed proof of God's existence. 

Let me clarify that the fine-tuning argument is not "Intelligent Design" as advocated by Philip Johnson and others beginning in the mid-1990s. That the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent life is a pretty solidly established fact and ought not to be a subject of controversy. By “fine-tuning” one does not mean “designed” but simply that the fundamental constants and quantities of nature fall into an exquisitely narrow range of values which render our universe life-permitting. Were these constants and quantities to be altered by even a hair’s breadth, the delicate balance would be upset and life could not exist. 

What could account for this fine-tuning? It could be necessity, chance, or by purpose. The first possible explanation for fine-tuning is physical necessity. This means that either the constants are necessary, brute facts of reality or that they deterministically derive from a deeper necessary law of physics. As physical necessity is not a very good theory to begin with (it doesn’t seem plausible that physicists will be able to derive the precise values from a deeper theory) and, more importantly, it doesn’t explain why the constants are fine-tuned (this just remains an immense coincidence), it’s reasonable to discard physical necessity as an explanation of fine-tuning.

The second possible explanation for fine tuning is chance. If there is only one universe, physicists calculate that it would be incredibly unlikely that the values of the constants would be in the small range that would allow our complex universe to exist. Chance only becomes plausible if there are a tremendous number of alternate universes with different values of the constants — a multiverse. However, the multiverse fails to be a good solution for numerous reasons. The multiple universe hypothesis is essentially an effort on the part of partisans of chance to multiply their probabilistic resources in order to reduce the improbability of the occurrence of fine-tuning. The fact that positing an untestable speculative theory of an infinite number of observable universes is a clear deviation from the tried-and-true scientific method is reason enough to discard chance.

With the elimination of two of the three possible explanations of fine-tuning, we are left with the only remaining explanation: the values of the constants are the result of intentional design by an intelligent agent, Whom we call God. 

Below is a list of different parameters which the universe must have values falling within narrowly defined ranges for physical life of any conceivable kind to exist. None of the information is mine; it comes from many sources, and I take no credit---Introibo

I would like to credit the following sources as indispensable (but not an exhaustive list):

Bernard J. Carr and Martin J. Rees, “The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical World,” Nature, 278 (1979), pgs. 605-612.

John M. Templeton “God Reveals Himself in the Astronomical and in the Infinitesimal,” Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, December 1984 (1984), pgs. 194-200.

Jim W. Neidhardt, “The Anthropic Principle: A Religious Response,” Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, December 1984 (1984), pgs. 201-207.

Richard Swinburne, “Argument from the Fine-Tuning of the Universe,” in Physical Cosmology and Philosophy, edited by John Leslie (1990), pgs. 154-173.

For a Life-Permitting Universe, There Must be A:

strong nuclear force constant: if larger: no hydrogen; nuclei essential for life would be unstable; if smaller: no elements other than hydrogen

weak nuclear force constant: if larger:  too much hydrogen converted to helium in Big Bang, hence too much heavy-element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy elements from stars; if smaller: too little helium produced from big bang, hence too little heavy-element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy elements from stars

gravitational force constant: if larger:  stars would be too hot and would burn up too quickly and too unevenly if smaller: stars would remain so cool that nuclear fusion would never ignite, hence no heavy-element production

ratio of electron to proton mass: if larger: insufficient chemical bonding for stable molecules to be possible, if smaller: insufficient chemical bonding for stable molecules to be possible

polarity of the water molecule: if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too great for life to exist; if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too small for life’s existence; liquid water would become too inferior a solvent for life chemistry to proceed; ice would not float, leading to a runaway freeze-up

ratio of proton to electron charge: if larger: inadequate chemical bonding; if smaller: inadequate chemical bonding

axial tilt of Earth: if greater: latitudinal surface temperature differences would be too great; if less: latitudinal surface temperature differences would be too great

Getting things "just right" in any singular category above would be astronomical; for all of them combined--all but impossible absent an Intelligence.

Scientists now know that any of these constants, if they were changed even a small amount (sometimes a few percent bigger or smaller), the complex universe as we know it wouldn’t exist. In other words, without the constants being precisely fine-tuned, there would only be fundamental particles — they wouldn’t come together to form atoms, molecules, planets, stars, galaxies, or life.

Conclusion

The argument from fine-tuning is a great refutation to use against atheists and agnostics. When atheists object "that's not evidence," ask them what they mean by "evidence." If they mean God cannot be the result of a scientific demonstration, they are correct. Yet we know many things with real evidence outside of a scientific demonstration; to say otherwise is scientism not science. If they persist that only scientific demonstrations give truth, ask them how that very contention ("only scientific demonstrations give truth/produce evidence") was scientifically demonstrated. Second, ask if they believe his/her mother loves (loved) him/her. If they say "yes," ask them how it was scientifically demonstrated. Yet, they have evidence and are totally justified to say their mother loved them.

Finally, I'd like to quote the great St. Athanasius who mention fine-tuning so many centuries ago. Not far into On the Incarnation, St. Athanasius celebrates the evident beauty and design of the cosmos. Here is a paragraph worth quoting in full:

[Some] say that all things are self-originated and, so to speak, haphazard. The Epicureans are among these; they deny that there is any Mind behind the universe at all. This view is contrary to all the facts of experience, their own existence included. For if all things had come into being in this automatic fashion, instead of being the outcome of Mind, though they existed, they would be all uniform and without distinction. In the universe everything would be hand or eye or foot. But in point of fact the sun and the moon and the earth are all different things, and even within the human body there are different members, such as foot and hand and head. This distinctness of things argues not a spontaneous generation but a prevenient Cause and from that Cause we can apprehend God, the Designer and Maker of all. (p. 27)

Monday, June 30, 2025

Sharia Law: Coming To A City Near You?

 

Here in New York City (aka "Sodom on the Hudson" or the "Big Mohammedan Apple") the people are on the verge of electing Zohran Mamdani, a 33 year old NYS Assemblyman, as the first Moslem mayor. This would have been unthinkable only 15 years ago. Mamdani has the support of the wave of Moslem immigrants, who have a multitude of children, while members of the Vatican II sect contracept and barely replace themselves. The candidate of the infidels is also an avowed Socialist who wants all government services to be "free," by taxing the "rich." (Therefore, the harder I work, the less money I make, so I can subsidize others who don't work to have a better lifestyle). 

Islam poses an ever-growing threat to our world. Of course most people don't see it, and label anyone who exposes this evil sect as "Islamophobic," another made-up word (like "homophobic") that implies a mental illness ("phobia") for those who dare to disagree. I have sounded the warning against Islam here on this blog since its inception.  The rehabilitation of Islam began (where else?) with Vatican II. In its heretical document Nostra Aetate:

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.

Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom. (para. #3; Emphasis mine). 

In the document Lumen Gentium, it is heretically taught:

But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place among whom are the Muslims: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day. (para #16; Emphasis mine).

Two falsehoods are presented: (1) Moslems worship the same God as Catholics, and (2) it is more important to forget the murder and torture of Christians and to stop trying to convert Mohammedans to the One True Church; what matters is purely naturalistic "social justice" in "mutual understanding" with these barbarians. It is also presented as acceptable to view Christ as a mere "prophet" and to put the Satanic Mohammed on the same level with Our Lord. Sheer blasphemy. 

The first subtle brainwashing came in the form of changing the name by which followers of Islam were called. In the time of my Patron Saint, the great King St. Louis IX, the word Saracen was used. Its meaning is aptly "thief, marauder, plunderer." 

 (See books.google.com/books?id=W4H97SA6pMAC&pg=PA125#v=onepage&q&f=false).

The term Moor was used loosely as "infidel," and Mohammedan designated them as followers of the fake prophet they served.

Until I graduated high school in the early 1980s, all textbooks referred to the followers of Islam as Moslems--one of the terms I still use. Since the mid-1990s, the term was replaced by Muslim. The following explains why the change was made:

According to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, "Moslem and Muslim are basically two different spellings for the same word." But the seemingly arbitrary choice of spellings is a sensitive subject for many followers of Islam. Whereas for most English speakers, the two words are synonymous in meaning, the Arabic roots of the two words are very different. A Muslim in Arabic means "one who gives himself to God," and is by definition, someone who adheres to Islam. By contrast, a Moslem in Arabic means "one who is evil and unjust" when the word is pronounced, as it is in English, Mozlem with a z...Journalists switched to Muslim from Moslem in recent years under pressure from Islamic groups.

(See historynewsnetwork.org/article/524; Emphasis in original). 

This post will center on two matters: (1) the totally false idea from Vatican II (and ubiquitous on social media) that Moslems worship "the same God" as Christianity; (2) the danger of Sharia law. Throughout this post, the false book of Islam will be spelled "Koran" or "Qur'an" depending on the spelling used by my source at that juncture. I wish to credit my numerous sources I read regarding Islam (in addition to the ones specifically cited), both print and online. I take no credit except for the compilation of the information into a terse and readable post.---Introibo

Asking the Right Questions

Some apologists for the Vatican II sect teaching on Islam have asserted (without citation to be read in context) that some approved theologians and Church historians pre-Vatican II claimed Moslems worship the True God in a false manner. I cannot attest to the veracity of this but what might have been meant (if it was really written) is that Moslems may intend to worship the True God. The question should not be "Do the Moslems worship the True God," rather, it should be asked, "Does Islam profess the True God?" It will be made obvious it does not. Since they worship what they profess, Islam does not objectively worship the True God. 

Islam has always been placed in the same category as the Jews--"infidels"--aka non-baptized monotheists. Mohammed combined the beliefs of pagans (hence the Koran speaks of a "Pegasus"), Jews (they do not eat the flesh of "unclean" animals like pigs), and Catholics (veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary). For both Moslems and Traditionalist Catholics, God is not just an additional fact about reality; rather, God is the foundation underpinning the whole of reality. There is nothing commendable about merely believing that God exists: "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that – and shudder." (St. James 2:19). The question we need to answer is not "Is there a God?" but "Who is God?" What is God’s character, nature and identity? What are his attributes? The answer to these questions will make it clear that Moslems do not profess the True God of Catholicism.

A Morally Defective "God" That Produces Evil Followers

It is my contention that Allah is morally defective, is lacking in omniscience, and gives commands that are contrary to basic ethical principles. All this is easily explained because the Koran is a book written by Mohammed under the guidance of a demon he thought to be the angel Gabriel. Islam relies on a multitude of revelations. But only one, the Koran, (also spelled Qur'an) is considered to be the eternally existent word of Allah, channeled through his chosen prophet six centuries after the crucifixion of Christ. It is considered to be uncreated and unalterableinerrant, having ethics beyond question, and eloquent above anything the world has ever experienced.

The evidence proves this wrong. The Koran comprises 114 suras (chapters), some revealed in Mecca, others in Medina. Meccan suras feature Mohammad as God’s final prophet—a prophet greater than all the prophets who came before him. Far from being divine, the Koran is clearly written by a human and has its origin from the Father of Lies. If Allah is God, he would be omniscient. If the Koran was dictated by angel Gabriel from Allah himself, the Koran must be inerrant. Using the Koran (The Holy Qur'an Arabic Text with English Translation [2013]) it will be shown that Allah cannot be omniscient and therefore is not "God." 

Allah Doesn't Understand the Theology He Condemns

  • Allah thinks since Christ was begotten, it means there was sexual reproduction. In Koran 6:101, the book asks rhetorically, "How can He [Allah] have a Son when He has no consort?" 
  • Allah thinks Christianity teaches that the Blessed Virgin Mary is part of the Most Holy Trinity. "And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden?" (Koran 5:116) 
  • Allah tells an historical falsehood; Christ was not crucified by the Jews. "And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain." (Koran 4:157-158). 

Far worse than the above is the immorality that is openly commanded by Allah. That will be examined next.

God is Necessarily Morally Perfect

 God is the greatest conceivable Being. (I'm not using St. Anselm's ontological argument. It is what both the Church and Islam teach). If a being is in some way morally imperfect, then it is not a perfect being and therefore not the greatest conceivable being (i.e., not God).  Moral perfection entails being all-loving; wanting what is best for others. This, to me, is axiomatic. Every good parent knows this fact. A rebellious teenage son or daughter will break a parent's heart precisely because they love him or her despite his or her defiant and wicked behavior. If a parent didn't love their child, it wouldn't hurt so bad. The fact is that parents do love their children, despite their waywardness.

Allah has a different character than the True God. It is significant that of the "99 beautiful names for Allah," which Moslems memorize and use for worship, not one is "love" or "loving." The Koran stresses that Allah loves only those who do good, and that he does not love those who do evil. Here are the suras and verses:

"Allah loves not transgressors" (2:190)

"He loves not creatures ungrateful or wicked" (2:276)

"Say: 'Obey Allah and His Apostle;' but if they turn back Allah loveth not those who reject Faith." (3:32)

"Allah loves not those who do wrong" (3:57, 140)

"Allah loveth not the arrogant the vainglorious" (4:36)

Compare to Jesus Christ:

"Christ died for the ungodly... God demonstrates His own love for us in this: while we were still sinners, Christ died for us...If when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to Him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through His life? (Romans 5:6,8,10). Christ loves all humans, hates all sin, and Wills their salvation contingent upon them coming freely into the Church and dying in the state of grace. No one is lost except through their own fault.

Allah hates sinners which is why he:

Commands the murder of non-Moslems: "Koran 2:191: "And kill them (non-Moslems) wherever you find them … kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers (non-Moslems)."

Koran 9:5: "Then kill the disbelievers (non-Moslems) wherever you find them, capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush …"

Allows Moslems to commit adultery with slave girls: Koran 4:24, "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess."

Commands Moslems to steal from Non-Moslems and enjoy doing it: “Enjoy what ye took, for it is lawful and good” (Koran 8:69).

Allows Moslems to lie, for Allah is himself a deceiver: The Koran overtly teaches that Allah is the master of deception. As Koran 3:54 and 8:30 put it, “Allah (is the) best (of) the deceivers” (literal translation)

Commands Moslems to fight, kill, or violently subjugate non-Moslems simply for being non-Moslems: "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." (Koran 9:123)

"Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah’s way, so they slay and are slain." (Koran 9:111)

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection." (Koran 9:29)

A False and Morally Bankrupt Prophet

Mohammed behaved wickedly, just as the false moon god he served taught. There is an excellent circular I read compiled by Mr. Stanley Robertson. Although not a Traditionalist, Mr. Robertson has done an excellent job of exposing Islam as a false and wicked sect. Below, I set forth some of his pertinent points. The author's citations are retained as he wrote them.

Mohammed:

  • Said Allah hates those who don't accept Islam. (Qur'an 30:4, 3:32, 22:38)
  • Permitted stealing from unbelievers. (Bukhari 44:668, Ibn Ishaq 764)
  • Permitted lying. (Sahih Muslim 6303, Bukhari 49:857)
  • Murdered those who insulted him. (Bukhari 56:369, 4:241)
  • "If then anyone transgresses the prohibition against you, Transgress ye likewise against him" (Qur'an 2:194)
  • Jihad [War] in the way of Allah elevates one's position in Paradise by a hundred fold. (Muslim 4645)
  • Married 13 wives and kept sex slaves. (Bukhari 5:268, Qur'an 33:50)
  • Slept with a 9-year-old child. (Sahih Muslim 3309, Bukhari 58:236)
  • Ordered the murder of women. (Ibn Ishaq 819, 995)
  • "O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." (Qur'an 9:123)
  • Encouraged his men to rape enslaved women. (Abu Dawood 2150, Qur'an 4:24)
  • Demanded captured slaves and a fifth of all other loot taken in war. (Qur'an 8:41)
  • Was never tortured, but tortured others. (Muslim 4131, Ibn Ishaq 436, 595, 734, 764)
  • "And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah" (Qur'an 8:39)
  • Blessed the brutal murder of a half-blind man (al-Tabari 1440)
  • What are the Greatest Commandments? "Belief in Allah and Jihad [War] in His cause" (Muslim 1:149)
  • Died fat and wealthy from what was taken from others in war or demanded from others in tribute
  • Advocated crucifying others. (Qur'an 5:33, Muslim 16:4131)
  • According to his followers: Had others give their lives for him. (Sahih Muslim 4413)

The True Triune God worshipped by the One True Church of Jesus Christ is not the object of worship professed by Islam. Therefore they do not worship the same God. Allah has been shown to be (a) non-Trinitarian, an essential attribute God revealed; (b) culpably ignorant of theology he opposes; (c) morally defective and commands evil of his so-called prophet and followers. 

Speaking of Evil: Sharia Law

Moslems derive the term sharia from the Qur'an, where Allah declares, “Then We put thee on the (right) way of religion: so follow thou that (way), and follow not the desires of those who know not” (45:18, Ali). The Arabic for “way” here is sharia, which in this context refers to the commands Allah delivered to Mohammad. Since the Qur’an (4:65) also orders Moslems to obey Mohammad’s decisions, the body of laws that came to be called “sharia” includes the commands of both Allah and Mohammad

The Evil of Sharia Law

Sharia Law involves the following:

Jihad: Jihad is holy war against the infidels of the world. All Muslims are obliged to kill the infidel. An infidel (or kafir) is a non-Moslem. Many Moslems think that killing an infidel guarantees going straight to paradise.

Apostasy: All apostates are to be killed. An apostate is any person who renounces Islam and changes his religion. Christians are not allowed to convert Moslems to Christianity. Conversion is perceived as blasphemy and carries the death penalty. Distributing Christian literature can result in a five-year prison sentence under Sharia Law.

Criticism of Islam: The death penalty applies to Moslems who criticize Mohammad, the Qur’an or Sharia Law. Severe penalties also apply to Christians who speak out against Islam.

Freedom of Worship: Although Islam pays lip service to “people of the book” (other "Abrahamic religions"), the reality is that most all Islamic countries are persecuting Christians, targeting their places of worship, and killing and imprisoning believers. Persecution is intense in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Maldives, and other countries with a strong Islamic influence.

Female victims of rape: Sharia Law protects rapists. A woman making an accusation of rape has to provide four male witnesses. If she is unable to do so, she will be charged with zina, for which the prescribed punishment is flogging or stoning. Thousands of women are imprisoned as a result of unsuccessful charges of rape. Some are even stoned to death. On October 27, 2008, Aisha, a 13-year-old girl in Kisayu, Somalia, was stoned to death for adultery; later, her aunt told the British Broadcasting Corporation that Aisha had been raped by three armed men. Rapists are seldom brought to trial, let alone punished.

Miscellaneous crimes: Fornication and adultery: Fornicators are to be whipped, and adulterers are to be stoned to death. Theft: Any person found stealing is to have a hand cut off. Battery and assault: An injured plaintiff can extract legal revenge; lex talionis (“an eye for an eye”) is in effect.

The strongest evidence that Sharia makes Islam more oppressive than other religions is the 1990 Cairo Declaration of Human Rights (CDHRI). 45 Islamic nations have signed the Cairo Declaration that proclaims a number of human rights only to renege on them if they contradict Islamic Sharia. It is a devious way to give the appearance of caring about human rights when in reality it guts the historic 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by declaring Sharia the only source for Muslim 'human rights'. It was revised in 2020 to not specifically invoke sharia law, but it does not renounce it. A good PR job and nothing more. 

Doesn't The United States Constitution protect us from Sharia?

For now it does. In November 2011 the MacDonald-Laurier Institute poll of Canadian Moslems found that 75 percent of respondents want Sharia Law. In December 2012 the Sydney Morning Herald reported that the imam at Australia’s largest mosque had issued a fatwa (legal ruling) against Christmas. In July 2011 Moslems called upon England to establish three independent states within the U.K. There are also Moslem groups in the United States calling for the implementation of Sharia Law in America. For a terrifying expose on Sharia Law and the threat it poses to America, see:

https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1495&context=honors

Conclusion

As America and other Western (formerly Catholic) countries become "Islamified" the infidels who worship a false moon god will have greater representation and influence to change laws, and perhaps even amend the Constitution itself. Think it farfetched? In the wake of 9-11 (just 24 years ago) If I had said there would probably be a Moslem mayor in the near future, I would have been laughed to scorn. Now, it is Zohran Mamdani who is laughing as Christian dupes (like AOC) join Islam in seeking his election as mayor of New York City. 

Consider how Vatican II has paved the way for Mohammedans:

"Pope" "Saint" John Paul II kissed the Koran and prayed, "May Saint John the Baptist protect Islam." Maybe he should be given the title "John Paul the Great Mohammedan."

"Pope" Benedict XVI  called for Christians "to open their arms and hearts" to Moslem immigrants and "to dialogue" with them on religious issues. Ratzinger told participants that the Catholic (sic) Church is "increasingly aware" that "inter-religious dialogue is a part of its commitment to the service of humanity in the modern world."

"Pope" Francis prayed towards Mecca and said, "Islam is a religion of peace, one which is compatible with respect for human rights and peaceful coexistence."

Do not be fooled. Any Traditionalist who behaves immorally does so in spite of Church teaching. Any Moslem who behaves immorally does so because of the teachings of Islam. As the population of Moslems nears the one million mark in NYC, and continues to swell unabated in once-Catholic Europe, remember well the words of Pope St. Pius V, "[Moslems] are the enemy of the Catholic Faith." (See Salvatoris Domini, March 5, 1571).

Let us pray from The Litany of St. Louis IX, King of France (for private use only):

St. Louis, victor over the Saracens, pray for us!

Monday, June 23, 2025

The Heresy That Keeps Coming Back: Reincarnation

 


I was having dinner recently with an old friend of mine from law school. He is a "conservative" member of the Vatican II sect, and it is my hope to see him convert one day. He was upset about a recent exchange between himself and a paralegal. He had asked the paralegal to do some extra work for him (he was in a bind) and he would make sure she got some extra time off when she wanted it. The lady (in her mid 30s) agreed. When she handed him the completed work, he said jokingly, "I'll give you some more tough work soon!" She responded, "That's fine. In my next life, I'll be your boss and get even!" My friend replied, "You only get one life." "No," she retorted, "reincarnation was taught even among early Christians." She later gave him a pamphlet, which my friend took out of his pocket and gave to me. "Is there any truth to this?" my friend asked. I assured him there was not. 

There is a movement afoot that is trying to convince people that you can believe in reincarnation and be Catholic. This post will expose and refute such claims, showing reincarnation to be both a heretical and evil teaching. N.B. I have complied this information from many sources in addition to the ones cited, which includes many online articles and books I have acquired. I take no credit for the information, only for condensing it into a terse and readable post---Introibo

What is Reincarnation?
According to a 2018 Pew Research Poll, 36% of Vatican II sect members believe in the pagan teaching of reincarnation; up from 28% just eight years earlier. Reincarnation is the belief that people's souls go through cycles of birth, death, and re-birth until they achieve Nirvana (which means to be "blown out" like a candle) so as to escape the cycle and achieve "oneness" with the universe (a type of pantheism). The idea that people keep "coming back" as other people after death continues to grow in popularity  while the notion of returning as another life form, e.g., a dog, is by and large  rejected by "modern reincarnationists."
(See pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/01/new-age-beliefs-common-among-both-religious-and-nonreligious-americans).

 Before 1965, almost all who believed in reincarnation were either Hindus or Buddhists. Since then, there are those who have converted to those pagan religions because of that doctrine. Now, there's the new development (especially in the wake of Vatican II) of "mixing and matching" beliefs to fit personal desires about what people want to be true rather than seeking truth itself--even to the point where chosen ideas are mutually exclusive.  There are three major reasons for this continuing rise and acceptance of reincarnation: 

1. Ecumenism fostered by Vatican II. 
The Vatican II Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate,  states in paragraph #2:
Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an unspent fruitfulness of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek release from the anguish of our human condition through ascetical practices or deep meditation or a loving, trusting flight toward God... Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination...The Catholic (sic) Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.

There is no condemnation of these pagan religions both of which teach reincarnation, instead they are lauded. Reincarnation was explicitly condemned in the schema of the Dogmatic Constitution De Deposito Fide Pure Custodiendo, which was drawn up by thoroughly orthodox theologians and canonists under the direction of Cardinal Ottaviani during the preparatory phrase of the Council. Roncalli saw to it that it was rejected and replaced by the Council because of its paucity of "ecumenical character." The heretical ecclesiology of Vatican II makes it clear that even pagan religions have "elements of truth," and that "all paths lead to God." If so, why not choose "the path of least resistance"? 

Accepting reincarnation erodes morals because you can live like a heathen and there is no Hell, just another life to try and "get it right" and achieve nirvana, which is basically extinction--so no one suffers in the end. This wicked idea would mean that there is no real difference between being Joseph Stalin or St Francis of Assisi; Stalin would only need to be reincarnated more times than St. Francis. If the Church (sic) "regards with sincere reverence...those precepts and teachings...differing in many aspects from the ones she (sic) holds and sets forth..." why not be a "reincarnation-believing Catholic (sic)"? 

2. Occultism.
 As I've warned many times, we are experiencing an occult revival unseen since before the birth of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Reincarnation is integral to the occult both philosophically and experimentally. All that I've researched indicates the following: (1) people who have reincarnation experiences are usually occult practitioners, or have occult activity in their family history. Again, reincarnation experiences usually occur within an occult environment—culturally or individually; (2) Almost all occultists teach reincarnation and most committed reincarnationists hold to at least some beliefs common to occult philosophy or practice. Books authored by reincarnationists typically encourage occult activity or teach occult doctrines—e.g., books by Jeane Dixon, Edgar Cayce, etc.; (3) Conversely, numerous occult disciplines depend upon reincarnation as a major component—Astrology, Tarot, parapsychology, spiritism, etc. For example, although it might not be initially evident in general, reincarnation is a principal pillar undergirding both mediumistic and spiritistic philosophy and practice. 

If reincarnation is true, there are millions of spirits who exist in the postmortem spiritual world. Contrary to popular opinion, “the great majority of reincarnationists believe that death is not immediately followed by reincarnation in the new body. In the Bhagavad Gita the interval is spoken of as a “immensity of years,” and in the Republic Plato speaks of a thousand-year cycle.​ Other cultures vary from several months to several years; the point is that because of a belief in reincarnation, endless numbers of human spirits are believed to exist in the spirit world. As humans, they have an interest in human affairs. They are learning and/or otheby those with proper mediumistic “gifts” and gleaned for their postmortem “wisdom.” 

Reincarnation thus supports the specifically mediumistic hypothesis of discarnate humans in the spirit world who may be contacted for human welfare. Spiritism, in general, believes that the spirits contacted are the human dead existing in the postmortem state prior to their next incarnation. The underlying premise of the concept of a spirit guide is that because it has lived life already, it has gleaned new wisdom from its postmortem experience and may convey that wisdom to humans; it is indeed a qualified spiritual guide who can more successfully lead and direct one’s life. In this view, since unrepentant humans do not go to judgment at death but are floating around in the spirit world, the Church must be in error when it teaches otherwise. 

Personal contact (as in mediumism) with what are actually demonic entities is reinterpreted as contact with deceased, but now more spiritually advanced humans—something much more acceptable and desirable. After all, if humanity naturally progresses into the next life, why should we not contact them? Indeed, what a fascinating, hopeful endeavor—such is the drawing power of mediumism and the reason demons support the practice. After all, social and personal relationships exist here; why should we prohibit the joy of fellowship with our friends, family—even noble strangers—from the other side, when it is to our benefit? They are, after all, just people. Why not contact them for comfort, spiritual insight, (they do live in the spiritual world), wisdom, help, secret information, etc.? How are we to engage in such contact? By means of the local occultist—guru, medium, spiritist, etc. A belief in reincarnation provides demons with the opportunity to act out their own natures, especially in poltergeist and related phenomena. If some spirits were evil humans, fulfilling their karma in this life, and have not repented in the afterlife, they can be expected to be brutish, deceiving and cruel. In any case, they believe they are still dealing with the spirits of humans, not the spirits of demons.

 In the field of parapsychology, reincarnation research is a common theme, and it further “endorses” the above conclusions with a “scientific” acceptance. Reincarnation “evidence” is almost universally derived from occultism—certain altered altered states of consciousness (trance, hypnosis, meditation, yogic consciousness), mediumism and other forms of possession. In the millions of pages of published revelations from the spirit world, reincarnation is one teaching that is stressed by them as having pivotal importance—i.e., it is a major doctrine or revelation from the spirit world, regardless of the variety of spiritism it occurs in. It is, in fact, so common to spiritistic revelations, so integral to occultism, and so consequential spiritually and culturally, that I suspect the origin of the doctrine was from the spirit world at the outset. 

3. Pantheism. 
Pantheism, either asserts that the universe and God are identical (which is basically atheism with reverence for nature), or nature is an integral part of God (for example, my heart is not me, but an essential part without which I cannot survive). Allegedly, the true nature of everything, including humanity, is impersonal divinity. Our true nature has nothing to do with material or personal existence. The only problem is that we do not yet realize it. Everything is "god" including "you." The message, "You are God" makes you feel important and powerful. Pantheism was condemned as heresy by the Vatican Council of 1870. 

Infallibly taught by the Vatican Council of 1870:
1. If anyone shall deny One true God, Creator and Lord of things visible and invisible; let him be anathema. 

2. If anyone shall not be ashamed to affirm that, except matter, nothing exists; let him be anathema. 

3. If anyone shall say that the substance and essence of God and of all things is one and the same; let him be anathema. 

4. If anyone shall say that finite things, both corporeal and spiritual, or at least spiritual, have emanated from the Divine substance; or that the Divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself, becomes all things; or, lastly, that God is a universal or indefinite being, which by determining itself constitutes the universality of things, distinct according to genera, species and individuals; let him be anathema. 

Vatican II "Theologians" and Reincarnation
Even despite an increasing phenomenon of both secularization and paganization, to say something is “biblical” makes it sound profound or tends to legitimize it spiritually. Likewise, to say something was a teaching of Jesus means it must be good and wise and godly. Thus, as is true in parapsychology, yoga and other occult disciplines, there exists in the area of reincarnation many books defending the idea that Christianity and reincarnation are indeed compatible. One hears of Christian reincarnation in the exact same way one hears of "Christian parapsychology," "Christian yoga," "Christian Zen," and "Christian Marxism." The result is the promotion of the latter half of the equation with at best a normal or weak Christian veneer.

A leading proponent of "Christian Reincarnation" is Vatican II sect "theologian"  John J. Heaney (1925-2017) who received his doctorate in theology from the Institut Catholique in Paris. He taught theology at Fordham University where he specialized in fundamental theology and Christian revelation. One of his major texts is entitled, The Sacred and the Psychic: Parapsychology and Christian Theology, [1984]. This is an integrative text seeking to incorporate/integrate the findings of the present-day scientific study of the occult with Christian revelation. For example, he accepts the parapsychological investigation of mediumism and seeks to apply its findings to "Catholic" faith. In his chapter on reincarnation, Heany stated: Should a Christian theologian deny outright that reincarnation might be a reality? Must he reject reincarnation because of Christian doctrine? This would seem to me to be most inappropriate. (pg. 192)

Heaney continues:
Notice that after New Testament times, the Catholic tradition, basing itself merely a few hints in Scripture, developed the doctrine of purgatory. The ethical idea behind this evolution seems to have been that since life is so short, we do not all reach the goal at the end. Think, for example, of infants who die. We need a slow process of maturation. Whether this would be on this earth or in the next world would not seem to be the major point. Later, as the doctrine of evolution moved into religion, as with Teilhard de Chardin, the slow processes of the universe are seen by many, even by Protestant thinkers today, to continue after death. Why should this law of slow maturing in the evolutionary process operate everywhere in the universe but end suddenly with a person’s death? (pgs. 216-217). 

Gone are the days of the approved theologians using razor-sharp Neo-Scholastic reasoning under the direction of the Magisterium in compiling theology manuals. The comparison of reincarnation to Purgatory is a blasphemous joke. Moreover, Heaney goes on to refute that reincarnation is compatible with Catholicism, and yet affirms if anyway (!):

The most formidable theological objection to reincarnation is that Jesus did not teach it and it is not proposed in the New Testament (nor in the Old Testament). This is a strong objection.... It would be inconceivable that Jesus implicitly accepted a doctrine of reincarnation. In the New Testament we have the parable of the last judgment (Matthew 25:31) where no second chance is implied, and the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19) where the rich man is unable to return to earth to warn his five brothers about the way they are living. Furthermore, texts in the New Testament which seem to imply individual preexistence do not teach reincarnation. Apart from Christ, in the case of ordinary people, they imply existence as ideas in the mind or plan of God. No other explanation is allowed by the context. We seem to have met the great obstacle to the doctrine of reincarnation: neither Jesus nor Scripture teaches this doctrine. (pgs. 213-214; Emphasis mine). 

He then declares that reincarnation is incorporated into the Christian faith “only with great difficulty,” but suggest this incorporation is not impossible, although it's not clear why. He also wishes Catholics to remain open to the idea. One can only wonder why. Were the disciples “open” to Gnosticism? Heaney, ordained a Jesuit in 1955, became a disciple of Modernist Fredrich von Hugel in the wake of Vatican II and studied the occult. He asked for (and received) laicization from Montini to get married. 

Stafford Betty, a professor at Cal State has commented on why so many "Catholics" believe in reincarnation. He presents two reasons:

1. "Many Catholics think that a single life of anywhere from a few seconds' duration to 110 years is not enough time to determine the destiny of a soul for all eternity. They feel that God would be unloving if He (excuse the conventional pronoun) were to condemn a sinner to hell, but irrational if He rewarded a baby born dead with heaven. Some of these Catholics see the wheel of rebirth as a more plausible form of purgatory. "

2. "The other main reason that Catholics -- and other Americans -- adopt a reincarnational worldview turns on evidence. Much, perhaps most, of what passes as evidence comes from the popular media. Stories about people who have seeming memories of a previous life or mysterious phobias or obsessions or talents that cannot be explained by events in this life abound, and they often set people to wondering. The History channel serves up occasional stories of apparent rebirth, and these are based on research by paranormal investigators. 

There is also some reputable academic research being done on reincarnation that trickles down into public awareness. This is the work of Ian Stevenson, the famous reincarnation researcher affiliated with the University of Virginia who died in 2007. Stevenson and his associates traveled over the world tracking down little children, usually aged between 3 and 5, who claim to have memories of past lives. In hundreds of cases from all over the world their memories would match actual events that happened to the adult they remembered being." (See http://www.hinduismtoday.com/blogs-news/hindu-press-international/-why-do-so-many-catholics-believe-in-reincarnation-/10313.html)

The Case Against "Catholic" Reincarnation
It's obvious that reincarnation is incompatible with Church teaching. However, I wish to respond to the reasons most commonly given above by Professor Stafford Betty for belief in this false doctrine. It is based on feelings and sensation more than anything else, which is why an appeal to the teaching of the Church or quoting the Bible will usually hold no sway over such believers. Deja vu (from the French for "already seen") is the sensation that something you are experiencing (usually for the first time) has been experienced by you in the past. This is then attributed to having done the particular experience "in a past life."   There are sound arguments to reject the reincarnationists' reasons in addition to Church teaching; these I offer below.

1. One lifetime is enough to decide your eternal fate. What difference does it make if a person lives 7,000 years in various incarnations or 70 years in one lifetime when compared to eternity? Are not both infinitesimal when compared to eternity? Everyone is given ample opportunity to get to Heaven, and no one goes there unless they choose it! Not all experiences admit of second chances. Reincarnationists are fond of comparing life to a test that a kind teacher lets you retake if you fail. I could just as easily analogize to someone committing suicide by shooting himself in the head. There is no "do over," and the result is permanent. Provided that the person was of sound mind, the choice was freely made. Purgatory is for getting rid of imperfections; the person has already decided to choose God within their lifetime, so reincarnation is nothing like the dogma of Purgatory.

2. Reincarnation does nothing to explain evil and is unjust unlike Hell. Children can be baptized because they did nothing wrong in contracting Original Sin. It is simply the deprivation of sanctifying grace caused by the Fall of the first man. In a similar way, if a wealthy couple squanders millions of dollars, their children will be born into a poor state through no fault of their own but those children can work their way to wealth. Children who die without baptism are generally thought to enjoy some natural happiness (Limbo) because of no personal fault. Contrast this with reincarnation. In what sense does your self continue? If you have no memory of what you did in a past life (and you may not even exist as the same gender or on the same planet/dimension), in what sense do you survive death? If there is no bodily continuity, memory, or intellectual awareness, it seems like you're suffering for what someone else did, which is unjust. 

Reincarnation also offers no solution to the problem of evil. For example, if someone is born with no arms because they assaulted people in a prior life, and they assaulted people in a prior life because before that life they couldn't control their temper, whence did evil originate? It's an infinite regress of past lives with no explanation. How did suffering begin in the first place if each life of suffering was caused by past bad karma? Moreover, there would be no free will in the view of reincarnation. Eventually, everyone will come to some "Nirvana." So it doesn't matter if you're Hitler or St. Francis of Assisi, you both get to the same place regardless of what you do. On the other hand, Heaven and Hell are freely chosen with the wicked punished and the good rewarded.

3. Deja vu, hypnotic recall of past lives, and "spontaneous recall" are easily explained without reincarnation. 

According to a 2012 study in the peer reviewed journal Consciousness and Cognition 21 (2) 969-975, it was suggested recognition based on familiarity can cause a sensation of deja vu. Using virtual reality technology, it was found that similarity between a scene's spacial layout and the layout of a scene previously experienced (but not recalled) can lead to a subjective feeling of "having been there before despite knowing otherwise." This is also known as "cryptoamnesia." In simple terms it means that the subconscious relates a present event with a previous one that the conscious mind does not remember. One event is similar to another and the mind fuses them together, giving the sensation that this "happened before." 

So-called "past lives" brought out under hypnosis are fraught with difficulties. According to hypnosis expert James E. Parejko in an article published in the Journal of the American Institute of Hypnosis (Jan. 1975), he listed four factors of subconscious intervention during hypnosis: (a) Expectations of the hypnotist, (b)  diminished critical thoughts in the mind that accompany deep trance states, (c) a triggering idea by the hypnotist, and (d) the ability of the mind to hallucinate.

A case in point of inherent unreliability was that of Bridey Murphy. Through hypnosis, a woman allegedly regressed to 18th century Ireland. She suddenly spoke Gaelic, described the coastline where she lived, discussed the customs and spoke like a life-long Irish native. Upon further investigation, "Bridey Murphy" (the name of the person she allegedly was in this "past life") never existed but was a figment of the woman's imagination. She was raised by her grandmother who spoke Gaelic and kept history books on Ireland which she related to her granddaughter. The hypnotic subject had forgotten the language and history as she got older, but it was brought back under hypnosis with the mind giving life to the memories by manufacturing a name. (Let's not forget that some of these subjects, who dabble in the occult, could be under demonic control).

In the famous cases of Dr. Ian Stevenson, who investigated children claiming to have "spontaneously recalled" a past life, the doctor himself admits of bias in his study due to cultural conditioning. He wrote, "...the principal sites of abundant reported cases are: northern India; Sri Lanka; Burma; Thailand; Vietnam; western Asia, especially south central Turkey, Lebanon, and Syria; and northwest North America, among the natives of that region. The peoples of these areas (of the groups among whom the cases occur) believe in reincarnation." (See Stevenson, Ian, "The Explanatory Value of the Idea of Reincarnation," Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease Sept. 1977, 308).  He further admits, "Neither any single case nor all the investigated cases together offer anything like a proof of reincarnation." (Ibid, 325). So much for  the most reputable research they have to date.  

The Evil Consequences of Belief in Reincarnation
On December 7, 1977, Eldon McCorkhill (age 33) and Linda Cummings (age 28) were having drinks at a bar in Redlands, California. Their conversation eventually came to the subject of life after death. Cummings said she was firmly convinced that reincarnation was true. A spirited debate ensued, as McCorkhill was not a believer in cycles of birth, death, and rebirth. They argued all the way back to McCorkhill's apartment; once there, he took out a loaded gun and handed it to Cummings, saying, "If you believe in this, let's see what you'll come back as." Linda Cummings took the gun, pointed it at her head, and without hesitation, pulled the trigger. (See San Francisco Examiner, December 8, 1977). Ideas have consequences. 

 The True Church of Christ has always taught--along with the Apostle St. Paul---"(Just as)people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment" (See Hebrews 9:27). I have read much occult literature over the years in my study of the subject to better expose it. Reincarnation, as I explained above, comes hand in glove with many other occult beliefs and practices.  Here are some logical consequences of belief in reincarnation:

1. Promotion of Abortion.
In occult literature one discovers that the idea of reincarnation is utilized to justify abortion. Allegedly, the fetus does not become “living” until the spirit enters it, usually at delivery, sometimes months later, but rarely at conception or during the first six to nine months. In fact, spiritistic communications often encourage abortion because the baby is merely a vegetable or “dead flesh” until the soul enters it. The parents must not be burdened with unwanted baggage we are told. Only “wanted” babies should be allowed to live; only mature parents, etc., should have children: so the message is clear; go ahead and abort.

2. Promotion of Divorce and Adultery.
So-called "psychics, "spiritual advisors," and "therapists" who believe in reincarnation, often tell their clients that their adultery and divorce are permissible, because they did not marry their proper “soulmate,” that is, the one they allegedly lived with in a previous life. If they wish to advance spiritually, they must now join with this new partner or “suffer” the karmic consequences of being spiritually mismatched.

3. Promotion of LGBTQIA++ Evils.
If a male seems feminine, that may well be the effect of having been a woman in one or more "past lives." Maybe a sex change is in order; or perhaps that's why he feels attracted to men. If you can be both male and female in past "incarnations" then gender really is "fluid" and sex acts can be good with either gender--or both.

Conclusion
 The Church makes clear that this life is the only one we will ever have, so get things right the first and only time you're here. Don't talk about "karma" and "your next life," as these are false, pagan ideas completely incompatible with Catholicism.