August–September 2026
Teilhard's Evolving Threads
Vatican II, the Mass, Synodality, & Martians
First of all they lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything
is subject to change, and must in fact be changed. In this way they pass
to what is practically their principal doctrine, namely evolution.
- Saint Pius X, Pascendi, #26
The corrosive germ that has infected doctrine, morals, law and just about every other facet of Church life was planted at the Council. There, disturbing pre-conciliar developments in theology and philosophy were facilitated and accelerated thanks to the papal rehabilitation of hitherto proscribed theologians and philosophers; champions of the Nouvelle Théologie let loose at Vatican II to substitute their restless evolutionary Modernism for the stable Scholasticism of their forebears.
Thereafter, in consequence of that revolutionary substitution we evolved from complicit neo-Modernist papacies to the ultra-Modernist pontificates (Francis/Leo XIV) rapidly consolidating a "Synodal Church"—a dead ringer for the "Counter Church" or "Church of Darkness" prophesied by Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich (an Augustinian prophetess portentously describing our current Augustinian papacy).
So, why have all the recent popes lauded and defended the Council; desperately attributing its catastrophic fallout to everyone and everything but their complicit selves and the ill-advised Council per se? To the last breath of his dying papacy Pope Benedict for one was still fingering the media as the major culprit: for pushing a false Council unrelated to ... (eyeroll) ... "the real spirit of Vatican II"!
Benedict also adopted the tortuous term "hermeneutic of continuity" to cover over the Council's break with Tradition: more or less apparent in major non-definitive documents such as those concerning "religious liberty, ecumenism, interreligious dialogue, and collegiality—whose formulations," states Bishop Schneider, "are ambiguous and difficult to reconcile with doctrines taught consistently by the Magisterium from the era of the Church Fathers through the period immediately preceding the Council." For his part, the heretical Cardinal Kasper has freely and proudly confessed that this construction of ambiguous formulations was a deliberate strategy of his Modernist clique.
The mere fact of having to dream up ways of defending Vatican II and reconciling it with the teachings of previous Councils speaks volumes. Again, Bishop Schneider is having none of it:
Since the Council, with some of the mentioned ambiguous teachings, a process has been underway to establish, with the authority of the Roman Pontiff, a so-called “Church of Vatican II” or the “Conciliar Church.” This tendency, in our day under the new name of the “Synodal Church,” basically aims to be a relativist religion adapted to the world. Attempts to disguise this new trend toward an ambiguous, relativistic, and worldly form of the Catholic Church through a hermeneutic of continuity are dishonest and unconvincing.
Teilhard & Benedict
Running through and connecting all these "dishonest and unconvincing" rationalisations are the ever evolving threads of Teilhard de Chardin's "evolutionary progressivism."
Spouting pseudo-scientific/cosmic/mystical blather while equating "change" with "progress" unto the "Omega Point"—a final event of universal unification of human consciousness—Teilhard was finally, inevitably, embraced by the pagan New Age crowd. Along the way, countless clerics like the young Joseph Ratzinger, frustrated by the stifling confines of Thomism, were seduced by Teilhard's sci-fi world of the "noosphere," "noogenesis," "Mono-molecules" and other fantasies, absorbing aspects of his utopian vision of the Faith. Thereby, tainted to a greater of lesser extent with the Modernism that took hold at the Council, their entire ecclesiastical careers were invested in promoting the success of the Council, come what may.
Among his many penetrating CO critiques of Joseph Ratzinger's problematic thought as priest, cardinal and pope, the late James Larson (RIP) thoroughly documented Pope Benedict's Teilhardian Achilles' heel in "The Quintessential Evolutionist" (Feb. 2009), and "A Living Host" (Dec. 2011/Jan. 2012). While Larson decried this tragic meeting of minds, Modernist clergy revel in it. Consider this smug piece penned by Teilhard's fellow Jesuit Andreas Lind for the 14 June 2023 edition of Civilta Cattolica (original title, bold highlights & bracketed comment added):
Joseph Ratzinger: A Reader of Teilhard de Chardin
Among Teilhard’s readers was Joseph Ratzinger. Teilhard’s name appears six times in Introduction to Christianity, a 1968 work by Ratzinger that has already become a [Modernist] classic. In fact, the Jesuit paleontologist’s name is one of the most frequently mentioned in this book, which continues to fascinate for its freshness and novelty within the Christian tradition. Like it or not, Ratzinger admired Teilhard. From his earliest writings he regarded the Jesuit as a key author for Christian aggiornamento in the modern world. In the words of the theologian-turned-pope we can accept that the “synthesis” proposed by Teilhard remains “faithful to Pauline Christology, whose profound thought is clearly perceived and restored to a new intelligibility.”
It is through Ratzinger’s writings that we can see how the reception of the Teilhardian vision was also present in Vatican II, albeit somewhat marginally. As a leading figure at the Council, Ratzinger was of the view that there was a certain evidence of Teilhard’s thought in the draft of the famous pastoral constitution Gaudium et Spes, especially with regard to “the Teilhardian theme” that “Christianity means greater progress.”
Later, Pope Benedict vaunted this "progress" in the liturgical realm. On 24 July 2009, in a homily during the celebration of vespers with the faithful of Aosta, he declared that "the world itself shall become a living host, a liturgy. This is also the great vision of Teilhard de Chardin: in the end we shall achieve a true cosmic liturgy, where the cosmos becomes a living host."
Viewed in this light, post-conciliar slogans—like "reform of the reform", "hermeneutic of continuity", "Synodal Church", etcetera ad infinitum—all appear as New Agey pieces in the Teilhardian jigsaw of evolutionary ascension to Omega Point: when the coalescence of all religions will suck the one true Church of Jesus Christ into a syncretic black hole of 'cosmic consciousness'. ... Or something. Whatever. In the end it's all demonic tripe of Darwinian stripe: naturalistic notions injected into the supernatural Body of Christ by devotees of Teilhard; a chronically deluded, egotistical apostate considered "faithful" and "profound" by his papal acolyte Benedict XVI. The same Pope who in December 2009 denounced such careless assimilation of secular errors!
Benedict bemoaned, for instance, how the uncritical adoption of Marxist methodologies" in theology had produced "rebellion, division, dissent, offence, anarchy" and "great suffering," while priests and religious had often adopted secular criteria of judgment "without sufficient reference to the Gospel." The cognitive dissonance is off the chart. Especially when set against "the extraordinary degree to which Joseph Ratzinger’s thought corresponds with that of Father Teilhard’s," as James Larson stated while proving his charge by way of
quotations in which he directly approves of the Jesuit’s "great vision," and through analysis of his writings in which he adopts the unique cosmological and evolutionary terminology of "Teilhardism."
Apparently, it did not bother Ratzinger that the "great vision" of the man he lauded found something "incomplete" in God and in Christ which can only be remedied by His evolutionary incorporation in all matter. Teilhard wrote:
It is Christ, in very truth, who saves, — but should we not immediately add that at the same time it is Christ who is saved by Evolution?
Evolution became for Teilhard a "magic word… which haunted my thoughts like a tune: which was to me like an unsatisfied hunger, like a promise held out to me, like a summons to be answered."
This devilish notion of what he termed "cosmic Stuff" emerged from a mind tormented in various ways during childhood by the same ungodly "force" that later tempted him to embrace Eastern philosophy and mysticism, before imbuing his mind and soul with evolutionism. In his autobiography, The Heart of Matter, Teilhard reveals that he would have opted for the esoteric East "had it not been that just at the appropriate moment the idea of Evolution germinated in me, like a seed: whence it came I cannot say."
His perplexity is understandable. After all, Satan was hardly wont to tell him that his seed of inspiration came from Hell! At least not until it had flowered from trendy Conciliar talk of "change" and "progress" into its toxic effect on faith and liturgy in an Evolutionary World. In this regard it is well worth revisiting at length the following segment of Larson's January 2012 essay, which deepens our understanding, not least liturgically:
In his most comprehensive work on theology, Principles of Catholic Theology, Joseph Ratzinger offers the following assessment of Teilhard de Chardin’s influence upon Vatican Council II:
“The impetus given by Teilhard de Chardin exerted a wide influence. With daring vision it incorporated the historical movement of Christianity into the great cosmic process of evolution from Alpha to Omega: since the noogenesis, since the formation of consciousness in the event by which man became man, this process of evolution has continued to unfold as the building of the noosphere above the biosphere.” (p.334)
By now the reader should not be too befuddled by Teilhard-Ratzinger newspeak. What is being said here is that the “daring” event that was Vatican II amounted to an “opening” (aggiornamento) and incorporation of the Church into the larger evolutionary movement of the entire world and all of its individual realities and forces.
In other words, Evolutionism, Teilhardism, and Vatican II are Ecumenism. “Isolationism” is a thing of the past, and it is now time for “Mono-molecules” and formation in the unity of a “Super-mind” which leads to the Omega Point of a Christic which is something more than the Christ of traditional faith. All of this, of course, is reflected in the changes that were effected in the New Mass and its “turning” towards the modern world.
The Form of Mass which we possess, as has been pointed out earlier, is intimately reflective of, and corresponds to, the Faith. Any significant changes in this Form are therefore bound to reflect changes, if not in regard to the Deposit of Faith itself, at least to current theological orientations to this Faith. One of the most interesting passages which I have encountered in the writings of Teilhard de Chardin is to be found in a letter published in the book The Heart of Matter. In speaking of dogmatic formulas and what must happen to them in light of evolutionary growth of understanding, Teilhard states that:
“[Dogmatic formulas] will necessarily assume a continually new aspect…. And yet, when thousands of years have gone by and Christ’s true countenance is a little more plainly seen, the Christians of those days will still, without any reservations recite the Apostles’ creed.” (Heart of the World, p. 117-118)
In other words, the perception and understanding of truth can be changed while words remain the same. The words of dogmatic formulations can remain the same but only be subjected to a “hermeneutics of continuity” which sees them under new “aspects.” And even the Mass, for the most part, can remain the same, but its perceived meaning and spiritual orientation can be radically altered by small changes. But underneath all this “sameness,” or what might appear as only “modest” changes, an entirely new “aspect” pervades the Church, which acts like a corrosive acid upon the faith of millions. And all this can be passed off as “in continuity with tradition.”
But not everything can remain. There are certain things that cannot subsist in the light of evolutionary and ecumenical thinking. Already, in the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, the prayer for the conversion of the Jews has been changed. As stated by Pope Benedict in Light of the World:
“But the new formulation also shifts the focus from a direct petition for the conversion of the Jews in a missionary sense to a plea that the Lord might bring about the hour of history when we may all be united.” (p. 107)
There can be no prayer for immediacy of conversion in an evolutionary milieu. There can be only prayer for final unity at the Omega Point of evolutionary history. The New Prayer devised by Benedict XVI is nothing less than an invasion of evolutionary and ecumenical “Teilhardism” into the Old Mass. Similar changes must come to any other parts of the liturgy which in any way offend evolutionary and ecumenical principles. This is especially true of the companion prayer for the conversion of heretics and schismatics which is part of the Good Friday Liturgy. Beyond this, there is little need to speculate about particulars. We can, however, be assured that the “Common Rite” of the Mass of the future, forecast by Cardina Koch, will assume, in the words of Teilhard de Chardin, “a new aspect.”
According to the agenda described by Cardinal Koch, we can also be assured of one more thing — the “Mass of all Times” will be no more. The New Common Rite will, in effect, be a “Mass on the World.” This Mass already largely exists in the form of the Novus Ordo, which Pope Benedict XVI has confirmed as the “Ordinary Form” and the basic form of the future.
Clearly, the problem, as Benedict sees it, lies not in the Form itself, but in what he perceives to be the banality and lack of reverence in its “celebration.” The “intra-Church” ecumenical role of Summorum Pontificum, and of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, is to act as a kind of catalyst to inject nobility, depth and reverence into the New Mass. It simply is not within the scope of the present Pope’s viewpoint that in so doing he is trying to restore beauty to what is aesthetically deficient, reverence to that which in fact detracts from God’s Majesty, and holiness to that which is glaringly mundane in its essential form.
Teilhardian Counterchurch
Therefore, what Teilhard de Chardin speaks of having "seen" (after he came "down from the mountain," as he grandiosely declared) is the "great vision" of the "cosmic liturgy" referenced by Benedict XVI in his homily at Aosta. Moreover, as Larson further notes, "we are not here speaking of some individual fantasy which has had little effect upon the reigning thinking within the Catholic Church. Nor are we dealing with something which is taken seriously only by 'Catholic' Modernists." For his thought not only suited the secular designs of these heretical and heterodox 'innovators' within holy Church, it was embraced just as seamlessly by their globalist counterparts busily weaving the same Catholic-corroding evolutionary narrative into their transnational institutions. It was, in other words, a meeting of neo-pagan minds.
"Teilhard had always viewed the United Nations as the progressive institutional embodiment of his philosophy," wrote occultist and well-known "channeller" Dr. Robert Muller, a former Assistant Secretary General at the UN. Similarly, Teilhard would have viewed the "Synodal Church" of Popes Francis and Leo as the progressive ecclesial embodiment of this same globalist vision of secular convergence, centralisation, and control.
In his book The Future of Man (Harper & Row, 1955, p.182), he wrote: "Although the form is not yet discernible, mankind tomorrow will awaken to a 'pan-organised' world." To a world fully evolved, that is: both politically—from national sovereignty to a world government of oligarchs and technocrats—and spiritually—from the one true Catholic religion established by the one true God to an all-"inclusive" Synodal religion that paradoxically excludes Catholic dogma—viz., the absolute claims of Jesus Christ and His Church; the perfect society, which alone, contrary to the heretical claims of Francis and Leo XIV, does hold a God-given "monopoly" on the fullness of Truth.
Within that overarching impact, Teilhard's fantastical subset of the Darwinian fairy tale has helped enslave the Church and the world with naturalistic fetters. Whether spiritual, catechetical, doctrinal, moral, liturgical, political, economic, educational, corporate, social, legal, psychiatric, medical, demographic, eugenic ... there is not a nook or cranny of modern life untouched by Darwin's animalistic presuppositions about human life and Teilhard's complementary New Age 'vision' that invests them with pseudo-spiritual 'meaning.'
Nor was Benedict alone in being papally compromised; not just by Teilhard's self-professed "cosmic Stuff" but by Darwinian evolution per se. John Paul II also revealed himself in famously and falsely asserting that "Evolution is more than a hypothesis"—a statement that echoed the once uncritical view of Joseph Ratzinger that "the evidence of natural science" pointed to "the metamorphosis from animal to human being."
At some later point, Ratzinger apparently discerned the vital distinction between micro-evolution (development within species), and macro-evolution (development from one species to another). Regardless, both pontiffs shockingly allowed themselves to be surrounded by pontifical institutions, including universities and the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS), chock full of atheistic scientists and their clerical counterparts. Articles by PAS member and Vatican astronomer Fr George Coyne, SJ, for instance, are replete with Darwinism but contain precious little Catholicism.
Again, we see in all of this the devilish tie between Evolutionism, Teilhardism, Vatican II, and the New Mass. This is why Modernist Rome did not resolve the SSPX impasse by agreeing to let their consecrations proceed while setting up a framework for further discussions without demanding acceptance of the Council in toto. A very simple solution that would have avoided all the aggravation, Leo and his curia could not possibly entertain this option because dialogue that involves bottom-line ecclesiological examination of such matters and links would open up a can of worms; exposing as never before what St. Pius X identified as "their principal doctrine, namely evolution." In which regard, imagine the Pope and pornographer-in-chief "Tucho" Fernandez face-to-face with SSPX delegates: forced to rationalise and defend their fondest errors highlighted by the 154 points in the Profession of Catholic Faith submitted to Rome by the Society, including this one:
83. I therefore reject every evolutionist conception of dogma, according to which revealed truths would change their meaning over the course of history. There can be within the Church a homogeneous progress in understanding, which perceives better, in a more distinct and explicit manner, the meaning of revealed truth, but never a mutation in the meaning of that truth. What has already been taught by the living Magisterium of the Teaching Church, and believed in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, cannot become false; what has been condemned as contrary to the Faith cannot become legitimate; what belongs to the divine constitution of the Church cannot be remodelled according to the categories of the modern world or the historico-cultural context.
Or, how about these two: which speak directly to the humanism coursing through Pope Leo's encyclical, Magnificent Humanity:
27. I reject the false religious humanism which celebrates man in himself, as though the Incarnation had revealed first and solely the image of God in the creation of man, rather than the misery of sin and the mercy of God stooping towards the sinner. Man is truly great only when he humbly receives the grace which heals and elevates him, does penance for his sins, submits to the truth, and lives as a child of God. In separating himself from God, he does not exalt himself: he destroys himself.
28. I profess that human dignity, by which God has established His creature at the summit of the material world, can never be invoked against the law of God, against the necessity of conversion, or against submission to revealed truth. This dignity is wounded by sin: it must be restored and raised to the dignity of the adoptive children of God, through grace.
Denizens of the Teilhardian Counterchurch cannot survive these kinds of refreshingly plain Catholic statements. Drawing on St. Pius X's magisterial Oath Against Modernism, they cry out for the sort of rigorous Thomistic scrutiny and re-evaluation of the Council that the Society rightly demands. Alas, raised and malformed in their liberal echo-chamber, modern popes like Francis and Leo, and certainly the likes of "Tucho" Fernandez, no longer possess the requisite faith, knowledge and intellectual formation—the stability—to engage in deep, open Catholic discussions. For, there can be no meeting of minds—no common reference points—between theologically stable Catholics and restless Modernists engaged in the never-ending synodal "journey," typically proclaimed by Pope Leo on 7 June 2025:
The word synodality speaks to us of the road ahead, for where there is the Spirit, there is movement, a journey to be made. We are a people on the move, this does not set us apart but unites us to humanity, like the yeast in the mass of dough that causes it to rise.
Et voila! Teilhard's humanistic Counterfaith; ever shifting—evolving—with the times, after the fashion of corrosive Vatican II declarations and decrees on relations with non-Christian religions (Nostra Aetate) religious freedom (Dignitatis Humanae), and ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio). The latter, of course, having now evolved into the syncretic synodal "journey" to ecumenical Armageddon (hardly hyperbolic in light of Leo's diabolic embrace of the Anglican "Archbishopess").
Thus, the superficiality and uncontested assumptions synonymous with Occupied Rome reflect its preference for 'safe and effective' liberal inoculations against precision and exactitude. However, this Modernist modus operandi is eviscerated in advance by another of the 154 precise statements tabled by the 'disobedient' Catholic 'dissidents' who will not kowtow to unjust demands to accept Vatican II unconditionally:
148. This is why it is no longer sufficient today to affirm Catholic truths in general terms, without simultaneously denouncing the errors which seek to corrupt them. Charity towards souls demands the clarity of the whole truth, without any ambiguity.
In this damning light, in order to save the Council at all costs, and thereby save face for himself, his immediate predecessors and Occupied Rome (—occupied, that is, "by people who have been completely corrupted by the world and who have been placed there in order to destroy the Catholic Church down to its very roots", as Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga recently put it), what else could Pope Leo do but evade his pastoral responsibility and abuse his authority? Which he did: shutting the door on profound ecclesiological discussions with a traditional party Thomistically equipped for debate, and casting them out.
Surely, if Leo thought he could vindicate Vatican II in fair and open dialogue he would have indulged the Society so as to show them up and put their false arguments to bed once and for all. Instead, ignoring the counsel of Bishop Schneider and other wise heads, he wouldn't even meet with them, preferring to let the intellectually and morally-challenged "Tucho" control and manufacture the desired outcome. That ill-advised delegation of authority—on a matter Leo would have reserved for himself were he truly as aggrieved by the consecrations as he claimed (at the twelfth hour!)—insulted the entire Church, discrediting the papacy still further.
At the same time, it also spoke to the shallow papal and curial treatments of modernity in recent years. For, the flight from the Society's insistence that Rome not skirt internal issues but examine them from the roots up reflects how complex secular controversies, once addressed systematically from an unapologetic Catholic perspective, now appear half-baked and compromising.
Evolving to "Disclosure"
Take Pope Leo's recent first encyclical, on the pros and cons of our technological age, especially Artificial Intelligence. If the encyclical was lauded to the skies by the worldlings it was due to its offering little more than one would expect from a secular conservative, at best; offering some nice and sensible bits, but lacking the depth and conviction to satisfy a truly Catholic mind and soul. As for his predecessor, in May 2014, speaking at the Vatican during a meeting with boarding schools, colleges and clergy of Rome, there was neither sense nor courage nor profundity in the predictable response of Francis to the question of extraterrestrials.
A propagandistic topic with hugely negative implications for Christianity, aliens and UFOs are of a piece with utopic man-machine hybrids, quantum cyber developments, AI, and the new evolutionary frontiers it all supposedly portends. The Pope's facile thumbs up to the possibility of aliens was meat and drink for the godless press. Pope Francis Says He Would Baptize Martians If They Asked, trumpeted TIME Magazine (13/5/14). "He was trying to illustrate the point that everyone has the right to receive the Holy Spirit — even aliens from faraway planets," they chuckled. What he really did, however, was to reinforce the compromising Modernist themes of the Counterchurch, as captured in this elated response:
Pope Francis recently stated that he would baptise aliens if they came to the Vatican, emphasising the universal message of acceptance and inclusion. He drew parallels to the biblical story of the first pagans converted to Christianity, asserting that "Who are we to close doors?" to anyone, even Martians. This statement reflects his commitment to embracing the evolving understanding of life beyond Earth and the Church's responsibility to adapt to contemporary challenges.
Thus, the same anti-Christian evolutionary thread runs through the alien/UFO deception, which Occupied Rome is not about to challenge for fear of unravelling the "principal doctrine" of their entire Modernist enterprise. Hence the silence and complicity before the build-up to the grand governmental "Disclosure" (of alien life) that is currently being prepped, per usual, by a "predictive programming" psyop to condition the public to accept such fearful nonsense; this time by way of Hollywood fanfare surrounding Stephen Spielberg's latest movie Disclosure Day. Spielberg himself warned that his movie would "shake the faith" of Christians because it tells a tale of eight decades of the U.S. government hiding evidence of alien visits.
Having scrutinised this movement for very many years with an open mind, following leads down innumerable rabbit holes, readers may take it from the present writer that when those highly entertaining and often perplexing burrows do not lead to advanced human technology at play (often in the nefarious hands of private oligarchic interests operating above governments), they ultimately lead to the New Age; to occult Eastern religions and their demons. Were it not so theologically and philosophically compromised, this is precisely the information that Rome would be highlighting, by regularly directing the faithful to the excellent document issued in February 2003 by the Pontifical Council for Culture and the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. Titled Jesus Christ, the Bearer of the Water of Life: A Christian Reflection on the "New Age", it serves as a provisional report and pastoral guide to explain how New Age spirituality is inimical to the Catholic faith.
Typically, Dr Stephen Greer, an articulate, high-profile, highly connected leader of the Disclosure movement for over 30 years, conducts New Age gatherings in the desert where UFOs and orbs are 'summoned' on demand. Few among the vast numbers familiar with the likes of Greer and understandably impressed by their insider knowledge and the credible testimonies they gather, not least from high-ranking military personnel, would be aware of such revelatory information: damning facts that place UFOs and alien encounters and abductions—presented more or less directly as the next evolutionary phase of human existence—in dark perspective.
Hence the 400+ 'abductees' interviewed by evangelical Protestant researchers who state that their real and violent experiences stopped the moment they vocally appealed to Jesus for help.[1] The reason being of course that demons, whether terrorising 'abductees' or tormenting the possessed, are ever subject to their Creator; to the power of His name and the authority vested in his priestly exorcists. In that diabolic vein, it is also not surprising that UFO-related cults such as the Solar Temple and Heaven's Gate have culminated in mass suicide events. Indeed, along with the evolution theme, violence is the telling leit motif of the UFO/alien milieu.
During a March 2026 podcast interview with renowned exorcist Father Chad Ripperger, former U.S. Special Forces soldier and CIA contractor Shawn Ryan, asked: "UFOs and aliens. I'm just curious, what do you think of all of that?" Fr. Ripperger replied:
"Well, obviously, some of the UFOs can be explained, some of them, by governmental experiments and things of that sort which people are not necessarily used to. However, usually when you get into stuff like the abduction cases and things like that ... I actually did a conference on this more recently, where I parsed out ten different ways in which if you actually look at abduction scenarios, that, in point of fact, in abduction scenarios if you actually look at what the aliens are supposed to be doing [it] is identical to the things that demons do to people who are possessed. So if you strip the veneer off the alien aspect, in point of fact what you're dealing with, they're just demons.”
The chief exorcist for the Archdiocese of Washington concurs, stating his belief that at least "many" of the UFO sightings are actually demons in disguise. Msgr. Stephen Rossetti, who leads the St. Michael Center for Spiritual Renewal, addressed the matter in a video published in response to a surge of interest in the topic after the Trump administration’s recent release of files documenting observations of UFOs. LifeSiteNews reported:
"There’s no question in my mind personally … it’s my personal belief that probably many, if not most of these UFO sightings are in fact demons," said Rossetti, adding that the demons can accomplish feats humans are incapable of, such as those observed in UFO sightings, like changing trajectories at seemingly impossible speeds.
He pointed out in the opening of this talk that while the existence of aliens is theoretically possible, he personally does not believe aliens exist. He stressed the “danger” of entertaining this idea is that “demons like to hide,” suggesting that disguising themselves as a UFO or alien is one way they do so.
“They don’t want us to know who they are” or what they’re doing, said Rossetti, “because they’re more effective when we don’t realise it.” Disguising themselves allows demons to “manipulate things in the world to influence us to do evil,” he pointed out. “The fight we have in this world, the spiritual battle, is with the evil one,” the exorcist emphasised.
“Demons can indeed break into the physical world and at times they can be seen,” said Rossetti, noting that documentation and photos of demonic sightings exist.
“Many people who are possessed will see indistinct dark shadows, possessed houses, globes of light, all sorts of things and more direct manifestations of evil hands … and actually images of beastlike creatures,” he continued.
“I had an incident not too long ago where someone who had a particular gift — and we’ve documented that gift— and she was shown a picture of a ‘UFO,’ and she said, ‘It’s a demon’.”
“The reason all of this is important is because they will try to manipulate us behind the scenes,” said Rossetti.
On cue, no sooner had Msgr Rossetti expressed his expert view on the matter than Cardinal Robert McElroy of Washington immediately "ended all affiliation" between the archdiocese and Msgr. Rossetti’s Saint Michael Center. Since demons clearly inform the Cardinal's renowned heterodox and pro-homo views his sensitivity to criticism of evil spirits is understandable. Even so, his attempt to suppress exposure of the "angel of light" (2Cor. 11:14) was risible.
"Cardinal McElroy said that statements made by Monsignor Rossetti linking UFOs to demonic presence and the Center’s recent use of social media gravely undermine the Church’s very precise teaching on the devil, demons and exorcism," read the press release.
Again, exorcists disagree with the dissident and disgraced McElroy. As Fr. Ripperger further explained on a recent podcast, during exorcism the faces of possessed people often morph into different shapes, resembling an animal, for example. Numerous exorcists have reported seeing possessed people’s faces morphing into alien-like shapes, with a big forehead and eyes, while the demon inhabiting the person refers to itself as a "Grey." This is significant because those who say they have encountered extraterrestrial beings often describe them as "Greys," humanoid beings with large heads who communicate telepathically. They tend to tell the witnessing exorcist that they are a being between the angels and men who is neither good nor evil, said Fr. Ripperger, who implied that this is a lie and an attempted cover for the demon.
Having drunk Teilhard's cosmic Kool-Aid, Cardinal McElroy and his fellow evolutionary Modernists have not the slightest wish to address the danger to the Faith posed by this related phenomenon. Unlike Catholic philosopher and commentator Daniel O’Connor, who rightly states that the public is gradually being acclimated to the idea of aliens, like the proverbial frog slowly boiled in a pot of water, so that we may eventually be presented with a "new gospel" from "the heavens" to replace Christ’s Gospel. To that wicked end, no aspect of the Faith is off limits to UFO/alien re-interpretation. Typically, Our Lady of Fatima and the Miracle of the Sun are now explained away as extraterrestrial happenings!
This steady corrosion of faith and belief proceeds en masse even as the papacy facilitates it: either by cowardly silence on the errors and dangers of the extraterrestrial scam, or studious acquiescence in it. Indulging 'theoretical' scenarios like baptising aliens, à la Francis, typifies the latter. As for papal silence, since the damage being done by the alien obsession still outstrips the spiritual damage being done by rapid cyber developments, Pope Leo would have served the Church and souls far better by incorporating Martians into his first encyclical, exposing the false thread of evolution and its ruinous ramifications into the bargain.
Alas, that level of counter-revolutionary faith, courage, and understanding is very far beyond a Modernist pontiff. Moreover, Occupied Rome has a vested evolutionary interest in adding zillions of intergalactic light years to Darwin's amoeba-to-man fantasy that relies on ludicrously long time spans to explain itself. For it dovetails with their own scam—viz., the Counterchurch which, as St. Pius X taught, is rooted in the evolutionary nature of Catholic Truth itself. In other words, since 'life on Mars' is good for Modernist business they're not about to burst the balloons and spoil the excitement of Disclosure Day with a blockbuster Pascendi-like exposé!
Accordingly, we find no warning whatsoever about this anti-Christian threat in Leo's lengthy treatise on technology and AI. Happy to accept worldly applause but lacking the courage to evoke the ire of popular culture and globalist technocrats pushing aliens, multiverses, transhumanism via mRNA technologies, and every kind of Teilhardian cosmic insanity (see Christopher Gawley herein), the Holy Father left his encyclical at the superficial, naturalistic level of 'better worldism', and his flock at the mercy of demonic Hollywood and New Age Lords of the earth.
The Church speaks
How different things would be if there were even a semblance of normality about the Church; if the Pope and the hierarchy were not so rotted by Liberalism and mesmerised by modernity. In that case they would readily echo the 'dissenting' voices of exorcists and others who underline the warnings of Scripture that may well portend a great Endtimes' deception involving aliens and UFOs: who recall the lawless one coming "with all power and with pretended signs and wonders … with all wicked deception," reminding us that God sends a "strong delusion" so that people "believe what is false." [2 Thess. 2:9-12]
At the same time, popes, prelates and priests in a healthy Catholic Church would also follow the lead of those like Daniel O'Connor who remind the faithful of the simple, fundamental truth of the Genesis creation account: that God created the physical universe for man and earth alone. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen. 1:1) "Everything the account describes thereafter is for man on earth, with the exception of an allusion to angelic beings, some of which fell and became demons," recounts O'Connor
As for the standard lazy rejoinder that 'the Church has never ruled on aliens one way or the other', O'Connor cites several popes who have condemned the idea that there is alien life.
For example, Pope St. Zachary, in an 8th century letter to St. Boniface regarding Virgil of Salzburg, condemned as "perverse and abominable … in opposition to God, and to his own soul’s detriment" the teaching that there is "another world and other men beneath the earth, or even the sun and moon."
In Cum sicut accepimus, Pope Pius II condemned the propositions of Zaninus de Solcia, including that "God created another world than this one, and in its time many other men and women existed, and consequently Adam was not the first man." He called these "most pernicious errors" and "a sacrilegious attempt against the dogmas of the holy Fathers."
The Catechism of the Catholic Church also affirms this, stating that "Of all visible creatures, only man is able to know and love his Creator … he alone is called to share … in God’s own life" (CCC §355–356) and that the universe is "destined for and addressed to man." (CCC §299) Amen!
"It's all a lie"
Meantime, being well aware of the cumulative power of compelling testimonies sincerely provided to UFO/alien researchers by credible witnesses and relentlessly relayed throughout several decades to the public, the present writer is in no doubt that many readers will remain firm in their belief in extraterrestrial life and all that comes with it. To these I would draw attention to the words of Wernher von Braun (1912-1977).
A former Nazi SS Major and rocket scientist guilty of crimes against humanity (including thousands who died excavating his underground rocket factory), von Braun escaped punishment through Operation Paper Clip, by which thousands of Nazi scientists were brought to the U.S. on the pretext of stealing a technological march on the Soviets. Von Braun was 'recruited' to work on space programmes and his NASA security clearance was probably above top secret. Nazi SS secret society initiates being famously immersed in the occult, we may also reasonably assume his familiarity with that darkness, practitioners of which, like occultist Jack Parsons, pioneered rocket science and the rise of NASA, where von Braun became an iconic figure.
When he met her in 1974, von Braun alerted his assistant Carol Rosin to the Enemy List to Sustain War Mode and Pentagon Budgets. These contrived or exaggerated enemies, who were to provide the rationale for building space-based weapons, which von Braun opposed, comprised, first, the Soviet Union, to be followed later by Third World terrorists, which transpired.
"The next enemy was asteroids," Rosin recounted. "Now at this point he kind of chuckled the first time he said it; against asteroids, we're going to build space-based weapons. Then, the funniest one of all was against what he called aliens, extraterrestrials, that would be the final card. And over and over during the four years I knew him and was giving his speeches for him, he would bring up that last card. 'Remember Carol, the last card is the alien card. We're going to have to build space-based weapons against aliens and all of it,' he said, 'is a lie'."
She added: "He didn't mention a timeline, but he said it was going to be speeding up faster than anybody could possibly imagine. That the effort to put weapons in space was not only based on a lie but would accelerate past the point of people even understanding him until it was already up there and too late."
FOOTNOTES:
[1] See online Evangelical documentary, Alien Intrusion: Unmasking a Deception. Also the book, Alien Intrusion: UFOs and the Evolution Connection, available at: https://creation.com/s/10-2-566