Cult vs. Community

Many years ago, I was fortunate to be a member of a solid, lay community. For almost seven years, I got up and prayed with my companions, a house of fourteen in a community of two-thousand, worked at various jobs, and even worked full-time for a while for the community. I learned discipline, order, virtue training, and servanthood.

The community was outward looking, involved in many "ministries" which reached out to the very pagan community in which it was located. We had street ministry, coffee house ministry, youth and children catechesis, members working in parishes in RCIA and other ministries, and homosexual rescue ministry.

This community had one huge focus which brought us all together. We all loved Jesus Christ, and He was (and still is) the center of our lives.

Communities bring life to other people, evangelize, grow.

Cults are inward looking, centering on the members themselves, and become stagnant spiritually. Frequently, Catholic cults, and, yes, there are some, care more about the group than the people outside the group.

Yes, commitment was an important and necessary part of the community to which I belonged. We met daily in our small groups, weekly in groups of one-hundred, based on the Mosaic organization, and weekly in larger groupings, monthly with the entire community. One met with one's spiritual director once a week, or once every two weeks.

Ministries met to organize, plan, go out into the world to spread the love of Christ to all.

Cults just exist to feed themselves. And, cults usually believe things which are not Catholic, and even against Church teaching.

The sign that a person is in a cult rather than a community can be isolationism, or paranoia. Indeed, the cult defends its own position by turning the wagons inward, or by digging a moat and throwing alligators in the moat.

Not good.

Not healthy.

As people come together for protection and common support, one can follow two simple rules to "take the temperature" of the group and determine whether the group has fallen into the sickness of a cult, or is a healthy community.

Rule One, are the members orthodox and following the teachings of the Catholic Church, loyal to Rome and to the Magisterium?

Rule Two, are the members reaching out to others, spreading the Gospel, doing works of mercy both spiritual and material?

If one can answer "yes" to both questions, one has encountered a healthy community.

If one of the answers is "no", run the other way.

Years ago, I encountered a Catholic community which had one goal-to sustain itself and keep the community going. This community had become cultic, focusing inwardly on itself and its members and not reaching out. Not surprisingly, many of the members had deviated in their beliefs so that they no longer followed Church Teaching.

Cults can seem orthodox, until one speaks with members who begin to exhibit paranoia, exclusivity, pride. Orthodoxy means following the Church in teaching and in practice. Sadly, cults may be found at either extreme spectrum of schismatic ideas, both traditional and liberal.

A healthy community does not have members who are hiding from the world, but members who are trying to save souls.

Preaching the Gospel and saving souls is the call of every Catholic.

Christ gave us a command, not a suggestion when He said this:

Matthew 28:19 Douay-Rheims

19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Each lay person is called to teach, to evangelize, to bring others to Christ. We are not called merely to protect ourselves from spiritual danger. 

A strong community does protect its members, but those members also must respond to the love of God for all people.

Learn the difference. To become a member of a cult will endanger your immortal soul.

Another sign of cultic behavior is liturgical rigorism. Those trads who do not believe the NO is valid have departed from Church teaching and have fallen into a cultic mindset. Rigorism is not the same as obedience to liturgical norms. Obedience to the Church's rules on liturgy, on ritual, is a virtue. Only attending a TLM on Sunday,and not attending Mass if only a NO is available is a mortal sin, and those who join together holding such a false idea have formed a cult.

Be careful, be honest, be open to others, be truly orthodox. love Christ above all, and be obedient.

Then, you will be in the loving arms of the Church and not in a cult.

See also

http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2015/08/paranoia-vs-prep-and-ouroboros.html

A Warning Long Overdue

Arthur Conan Doyle, famous spiritualist, thanks to wiki

Time for an honest appraisal of the roots of a popular pseudo-scientific method. I shall give the occult backgrounds first.

The founder was involved in spiritualism, one of the most serious of mortal sins. Coming from a Protestant background, he became involved in the movement which believed that spirits of the dead could and should be contacted for advice and comfort.

This is the heinous sin of necromancy. Sadly, in the States and in England, Anglican and other Protestants, including Quakers, became interested in this occult tool. The founder of the pseudo-science was one of these men who experimented with contacting the dead. He attended regular meetings of the local spiritualist society.

He also wrote a book stating that he received his method of healing from a dead person. Here is his statement.

"The knowledge and philosophy given me by Dr. Jim Atkinson, an intelligent spiritual being, together with explanations of phenomena, principles resolved from causes, effects, powers, laws and utility, appealed to my reason. The method by which I obtained an explanation of certain physical phenomena, from an intelligence in the spiritual world, is known in biblical language as inspiration. In a great measure The Chiropractor's Adjuster was written under such spiritual promptings." (p. 5)"

In a May 4th 1911 letter, D. D. wrote this:

"... we must have a religious head, one who is the founder, as did Christ, Mohamed, Jo. Smith, Mrs. Eddy, Martin Luther and other who have founded religions. I am the fountain head. I am the founder of chiropractic in its science, in its art, in its philosophy and in its religious phase."^[8]

In his 1914 book, the first chapter expanded on his religious views of chiropractic: "The Moral and Religious Duty of a Chiropractor".^[11] In it he dealt with religious liberty and stated:

"... nor interfere with the religious duty of chiropractors, a privilege already conferred upon them. It now becomes us as chiropractors to assert our religious rights." (p. 1)

"The practice of chiropractic involves a moral obligation and a religious duty." (p. 2) 

wiki references and footnotes to original texts...........

He also believed in the false idea of "innate intelligence" in the body, and that this was connected to an impersonal God of innate intelligence in the universe. One can see how far D. D. moved away from Christianity.

http://www.letusreason.org/NAM33.htm

Now you know of whom I speak, D.D. Palmer, the founder of chiropractic methods. His son, B.J. Palmer was also heavily involved in the occult, which I found out as a very young child. From early on, I refused to go to one, and would try to talk others out of this method. Roots run deep and Catholics have deceived themselves as to the evil of this method.

When I was very young, the college had an exhibit and a garden of items collected by B. J. These items included statues of Buddha, bodishattvas, which are Buddhist "saints" but really incarnated images of demons, talismans from every possible Eastern religion, and the worst thing, a Shinto Gateway. This gateway is a door to the spirit world which I sensed at the age of nine. My dad asked us all one day if we wanted to go into the gardens at the college, as we were out visiting something in the area. I said no, I did not want to go there, as even across the street, I knew something was wrong with the gateway.

My father honored my concerns and we did not go into the gardens, which are now gone. It was called a Little Bit O'Heaven and here is a description of it, and the ideals behind it which should make one's skin crawl..

For many years A Little Bit O' Heaven was the most popular tourist attraction in Davenport. A guidebook produced by the Palmer School claims that the garden directly inspired numerous home hobbyist to take up the trowel and build their own rock gardens, but one wonders if part of its popularity was also the esoteric drama of its world-spanning exotica. With B.J. scouring the globe for the ripest fruits of wisdom and artistic endeavor, the visitor could understand how chiropractic medicine tapped into deeper beliefs than the simplistic notions of mechanistic modern medicine. Was a man simply a pile of disconnected bones and tissue? Or was he an outpouring of innate and inborn emotion and desires from some central core? Here at A Little Bit O' Heaven the visitor could contemplate the strange and perhaps a bit frightening from around the world while in an informal and stimulating garden setting. Here live alligators, grimacing idols and taboo icons of fertility cults relaxed among the foliage with classical statuary and uplifting inspirational aphorisms painted on the walls. In this small recreation of Heaven on Earth, the Dionysian and Apollonian were united in a vision of health and happiness for all pilgrims to see in practice.

The Shinto Gateway is not merely a gateway to a shrine, but a door to the spirit world. One of my university professors years ago explained that on one side of the gate were the living and on the other side, the dead.

Of course, the Palmers would be interested in such a gate, and even as a child, baptized and in sanctifying grace, I could sense the demon spirits on the other side. That this type of thing was treated so cavalierly by too many Catholics has puzzled me over the years. And idolatry was practiced on the spot for years.

Though it is impossible to see from outside the gate, the ancient Wishing Buddha is still there today. Inside the shelter is a 1100-yr old Japanese bronze buddha, at 10 feet high and 3-tons one of the largest buddhas in the U.S. One story about its purchase says that when B.J. purchased the statue in 1927 the Japanese government attempted to block its removal. B.J. persuaded the officials by assuring them that the statue would be given proper respect, and indeed for many years incense was burned 24 hours a day in its honor, perhaps up until the garden was dismantled. http://www.mnmuseumofthems.org/Grotto/Heaven3.html

I cannot show you the torii gate but it is seen on this link,  on this copyrighted site, for skeptics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torii

Remember, there is no neutral territory. The torii gate is not neutral and the so-called deities of the Shinto religion are not gods but demons, which is rather ironic, as some followers believe that one must exorcise demons. That would be impossible, as only Catholic exorcists can do this and demons cannot cast out demons. However, they can and do lie. 

I write this just a few miles from the college which has trained thousands of so-called doctors, whose own method is based on occultist beliefs which have no bearing to real science. I write this as I have known this for 56 years, and have been waiting for any Catholic to write against this cult. None have. None will. There is too much money and corruption in the system. Pray for those who cannot see that the roots of something indicate that the philosophy of the entire scheme is spiritually flawed. Some things just cannot be "baptized."

Sadly, some people see spiritualism as a hoax, which is can be. But, it can and is mostly one of the deadliest mortal sins of all. Check this site out for someone who does not understand the real evil but a person who discovered more on D.D. real involvement with the occult..

http://spinalcolumnradio.com/2013/01/25/chiro-pickers-fresh-pick-the-story-of-the-vanishing-spirit-book-and-the-appearance-of-another/

Here is the CCC on divination:

Divination and magic
2115 God can reveal the future to his prophets or to other saints. Still, a sound Christian attitude consists in putting oneself confidently into the hands of Providence for whatever concerns the future, and giving up all unhealthy curiosity about it. Improvidence, however, can constitute a lack of responsibility.

2116 All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to "unveil" the future.⁴⁸ Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone.

2117 All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another's credulity.

Saint Michael the Archangel,
defend us in battle.
Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray;
and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host -
by the Divine Power of God -
cast into hell, satan and all the evil spirits,
who roam throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls.

Amen.

Again, on the cult of personality

Several times in the past five years, I have written on the cult of personality. After reading Paul C. Vitz, Faith of the Fatherless, it is clear to me that the substitution of tyrants could very well be because people have an inflated view of leaders as fathers. I make this extrapolation looking at the growing cult of personality, which revealed itself to me in 2007 in the States.

During the media crisis of the first few months of the current papacy, this was true. People wanted a perfect man to be pope. Well, he is not perfect. Neither am I. But, those most distressed are those who fall into the cult of personality.

Also, the huge over-idolization of movies stars, political leaders and even CEOs, has led more and more to the worship of persons, rather than the worship of God.

For a man to come into the world, claim to be the savior of all economic and political problems, and then be given the power to do so, a man usually called the Anti-Christ, would be easier and easier coup to "pull-off" in this climate of hero-worship.

The lack of fathers provides an entire club of people who are looking for someone to take care of them, to guide them, to mold them.

The popularity of super-hero movies may be part of this sensibility to the cult of personality.

See how easy it would be for one superman, one extremely talented leader to take over, using the emotional needs of an entire world of fatherless creatures.

Vitz noted that most atheists are highly intelligent, are ambitious, are arrogant and vain. This sounds like many of our so-called leaders today.

Envy and personal resentment cause arrogance, and even atheism. I see this close at hand. That many Americans now hate the good, the true and the beautiful, as Vitz notes atheist so, is a sad declaration of the attitudes of arrogance and hatred coming out of the world of the atheists.

Hatred leads to envy and envy leads to the politics of envy, which we now see in America. How easy it would be for one tyrant to stir up this envy to a frenzied state, and take control after the chaos of civil war.

We need to pray, reflect, study, act....or we shall be swept away in that chaos.

Confusion between two groups named Magnificat

A faithful reader has alerted me to the group Magnificat Meals. There is great confusion here, and obviously, New Age and occult influence. But, just to complicate matters, there are two groups with almost identical name and not the same at all.

There is another group which uses the same name and that is here. Do not confuse these groups.

Here is the first one.

http://www.magnificat-ministry.net/

 http://www.magnificat-ministry.net/about-us/history/

The Maltese group is part of this worldwide group, and I had warned them myself about reiki and enneagrams, which a Jesuit was telling them were ok. Not ok! They belong to the American group.

Two groups, same name.... Here is the second website and it is obviously NOT orthodox.

http://www.magnificatmealmovement.com/

In the States, the first group allows the Magnificat monthly booklet to use the name and get funds for the copyright. I read the entire book of rules of the American group and it is charismatic, but I found no written New Age influence, which is clearly seen here in the other group highlighted immediately above.

The group from Australia is cultic and in deep error.

Satan is alive and well and his minions, "roaming the world seeking the ruin of souls." St. Michael, pray for us.

Father Hayden in Malta  is the spiritual director of Magnificat Malta. I have good friends in that group, which is connected to the America group of the first link above.

I have met Fr. Hayden.

http://www.youtube.com/user/FrHaydenOFMCap

Of course, I am in disagreement with him about some Marian apparitions, not approved by Rome. He is also too charismatic for me. But, he gave solid direction to a talk I attended.

What a mess....two groups, two different founders, two different bases.

Here we go again....

Well, yet another Gramsci post; without the Spirit, the intellect stagnates and dies

Did philosophers and revolutionaries honestly believe that humans can be intellectuals without the life of the Spirit? Did and do they honestly want a better life while denying the soul?

Some critics of the Church since the Enlightenment state that the teachers and Popes did not address the modern issues of politics, science and modernism. This is a misunderstanding of the times and the teachings. Since the publication of Marx and Engels, the Church has been on the offensive, not the defensive regarding teaching concerning the effects of tyrannies, the materialists dialectic and the supposed war between the classes. All the popes since 1848 have addressed these ideologies. The problem has been in the implementation at the local levels of the clarity of the Teaching Magisterium.

Why? Many priests fell into error and carried those errors into the pulpit for the last two-hundred years. Many priests and even bishops themselves were and are communists and push for that version of a world-view, based on materialism, rather the the spiritual message of the Kingdom of God.

As laity, it is our duty to take care of our brothers and sisters in poverty or troubles.

Gramsci was clear that the Church was the only institution to understand what he and other revolutionaries wanted in the culture wars and the destruction of Western civilization, itself created largely by Christendom.

Here is one of  his quotations. Gramsci understood that both Faith and Reason were held together in the Catholic Church, that Revelation and the Teaching Magisterium provided a cohesive block against the fragmentation of society.

The strength of religions, and of the Catholic Church in particular, has lain, and still lies, in the fact that they feel very strongly the need for the doctrinal unity of the whole mass of the faithful and strive to ensure that the higher intellectual stratum does not get separated from the lower. The Roman church has always been the most vigorous in the struggle to prevent the “official” formation of two religions, one for the “intellectuals” and the other for the “simple souls” … That the Church has to face up to a problem of the “simple” means precisely that there has been a split in the community of the faithful. This split cannot be healed by raising the simple to the level of the intellectuals  .... but only by imposing an iron discipline on the intellectuals so that they do not exceed certain limits of differentiation and so render the split catastrophic and irreparable. 

Catholic intellectuals, including the laity, have a duty to combat the lies of the ideologies which have almost overcome the concepts of freedom and individualism. Our definition of the individual is not that of the socialist.  We are unique creatures, each one having a purpose, not to be subsumed by the bloated government. 

Those who are the enemy delight in the fragmentation of society, and society is built on natural, moral law and not the laws of men. This is the key to the strength of the Church...that we have recognized that man-made structures are doomed to tyranny and/or chaos.

Tyranny will come to America and chaos to Europe for the purposeful loss of the culture wars has occurred. 

That Gramsci only saw the discipline of the Church as evil, rather than a guideline of the Holy Spirit intended to persevere Truth mirrors his own lack of Faith and Reason. 

The man or woman who will not bend to God, will not bend to the Church. Humility in scholarship is key.

We are on the edge, as most people will choose material comfort over truth. This is the sad decline of the human spirit. The remnant Church holds the real intellectual unity of a society, which Gramsci wanted through his groups of intellectuals at all levels.

Of course, this burgeoning of intellectual life has not happen, and in fact, societies are less intellectual now than in the recent past. Atheism makes one closed to the entire spiritual world, and therefore, the world of creativity and newness.

There has been a split in the Church, but not the one mentioned in the above quotation. The real split is between those who see the Spirit working in the Church and those who want to make the Church into their own image and likeness, into their own ideological institution. Hence, the liberal intellectuals have sold out to the Gramscian ideal of "intellectualism" but separated from the soul.

This state in a person or government is suicide. The intellectual gifts are connected to the spirit of man and woman, to the soul, to prayer and illumination.

Gramsci's material mind-set could not imagine an institution which is actually empowered by  GOD HIMSELF.  That the Trinity dwells in each baptized Catholic and that there is insight and intellectual freedom partly defines us as made in the image and likeness of God.

Gramsci wanted men and women to be made in his image and likeness--and that is the primal sin of the angels; I will not serve.

Without the Holy Spirit and the individual free spirit of men and women, the intellect dies.

We are in that stage of Western Civilization. At the end of the year, we can only look forward to making ourselves and our families strong against the Gale of Stupidity and Barbarism which will engulf some reading this in their lifetime.

The pursuit of the virtual replaces the pursuit of virtue

I know that I am going to make a lot of people angry or at least, irritated, with this post. However, with a following membership of 10 million people worldwide, it is time to look at World of Warcraft as a cult and not merely an online game. I have read the manual and looked at the game in order to understand the attraction it holds for many people and not merely the young. I am not going to emphasize lurid stories of marriage breakups, deaths, etc. regarding WoW, but only look at some of the characteristics of a cult with regard to this game.

First, I am admitting that I am changing the accepted definition of cult from the outset, as a cult usually is started by one charismatic figure, as already noted on this blog. However, the charism of the originators can be seen in the eclectic appeal and the use of many threads of myth and the occult, as well as violence and intrigue. Those inventors of the game obviously used popular modes of entertainment and popular literature in the genre of fantasy to create a complicated and appealing game.

Like a good German philosopher, I am provoking new definitions of cult.

I do not doubt the genius of the writers and artists, the logicians and who else were involved in the creation of WoW. I am questioning the power of the appeal and how it falls into the category of a cult.

Second, having thrown out the initial part of the definition, I move to the second part, which indicates that a cult has a religious basis. Reading the manual, it was clear to me that such things as spells were to be used and taken seriously in the game. Much of the game involves characters who are wizards or even necromancers. Already, a Catholic would have a "huh?" moment of enlightenment knowing that some of the characters fall in to the tried and true characterizations of damned behavior. Parallels are made with LOTR or even The Hobbit, but in those books and subsequent games, the powers of evil and good are clearly defined, and there is no such thing as good being confused with bad. No relativism in those books, movies, games and soon to be legos....:). Some people who state the opposite, that the spells are not taken seriously and are arbitrary, that is, not connected to an obvious evil source, such as Sauron in LOTR. Relativism is the secular idea that there is no good or bad except what one decides, and this modernist heresy is part of the ethos of WoW. If it were clearly defined what was necessary evil, and that, for example necromancy was always evil and never good, this problem would be solved. This is not the case. Some activities are always objectively evil according the Catholic teaching AND natural law philosophy.

Third, I have been puzzled by the use of unnecessary and extreme violence in the game. Those who are familiar with the game know these uses of violence. Some young people disagree with me on this point, stating that the ratings of teen was based not on violence but on drunkenness in the game. Some twenty-somethings say the cartoon and out-dated graphics make it less violent. But, as one NOT immune to violence, I find it disturbing.

Fourth, a cult changes peoples personalities and takes them into another realm of false reality. That is the entire point of this game. In cults, people get a new identity to the point where family members state that they do not even know the brother, sister, son, etc. any more after cult involvement. One of the signs of an occult is the addictive or compulsive behavior it causes in its members. One cannot live outside the cult, one defends the cult, one loses one's rational ability to critique the cult, all one's friends are in the cult and so on. WoW with shrinking membership is still a group of 10 Million. These people must play the game. To me, this is a sign of cultic brainwashing and addiction.

Fifth, ritual is a huge part of the game. Players get involved personally in these rituals in order to be the characters, etc. These rules and rituals create a vocabulary which is bizarre and particular to WoW. This fact alone is a sign of a cult. The topic will form a part of another posting in the near future.

Sixth, the game is a community just as a cult is a community, of closed membership, demanding certain commitments, to the point of becoming the most important interactive group of friends, relationships, in a person's life. The fact that it is virtual does not mean that this is less real than the Moonies or Heaven's Gate. The WoW community can become and does become the arena where people are accepted unconditionally without moral or any other type of outside input. The VIRTUAL has taken over the pursuit of VIRTUE. For example, in the days of chivalry and knighthood, the knight had to go through certain rituals in order to become a man capable of being knight. The same is still true for pursuing a career or a vocation. It takes six years to become a doctor, for example, after undergraduate school, and the same for becoming a priest. The preparation can be longer. The purification of the intellect necessary for forming a good conscience and the purification of the emotions necessary for becoming a man or woman who is mature takes time and energy wasted in the virtual world. What is truly based on a life of virtue has been lost in the game.

WoW which is from the manipulation of the community or rules of the game. Manipulation is only efficacious if; one, the person agrees to it; and two, if it is coherent. One of my young friends noted that all sport is manipulative to a certain extent. He wrote:

Shane Warne manipulated cricket for two decades by bowling a ball that no batsman could handle. As long as he was physically and mentally fit, he was unbeatable. That's not a problem with the game - merely an exceptional man with exceptional ability.

I may disagree with him on this point, but I say that cults attract people who are manipulable. That is the success of a cult. Those heavily independent minded people are not attracted to cults. However, some extremely intelligent and good people are, by the very fact that they are idealists and have a need for a community who agrees with their ideals. I think the point is that the cult is self-selecting.

WoW has or had people in the game who “policed it” and this in itself indicates to me it is a cult. Those who were policing it were still “in reality”. The fact that some left the real world is scary.

Part Three: Cults and Post-Modernist Christians

As some of you know, this blog is a continuation of my previous blog of several years. At that time, 2007, 2008, 2009, I was taken up with the intrusion of Post-Modernist thinking in the politics of America. To most, that is now obvious and painful. Now, I am more aware of Post-Modernist thinking and ergo, acting, among faith-groups in America, notably, our Protestant brethren and liberal Catholics. Post-Modernism is a term which covers a multitude of ideas, but the main ones I track are narcissism, individualism, self and group delusion and manipulation. Attached to these characteristics are the hatred of the class structure, leading to a hatred of the lower and working classes, with a consciousness encircled by a false elitism (see blog below).

Post-Modernism in religion has become Post-Modernist Christianity, which, because relativistic, is anti-moral, or at best, amoral, anti-dogmatic, anti-authoritarian, anti-communal, anti-rational, and self-destructive. The Post-Modernist Christian looks like a Post-Modern atheist, with a difference. They deny the Transcendent. The Post-Modernist atheist makes himself into the Transcendent, while the Post-Modernist Christian denies the Transcendent. The Protestant denominations are imploding with the pressure of the denial of the Transcendent. The Old Covenant Law and the order of Love of the New Covenant become merely deniable transcendence, undermined by the rules of literary deconstruction, or the cynicism of the capabilities of the human mind and soul, the latter which does not exist.

As a trained Phenomenologist, who came to her senses and reverted back to Thomism, I can say that the Post-Modernist, Deconstructionist in religion and philosophy differed (no pun) on the role of the mind, reflection, memory, understanding, will, experience, and perception. (With hats off to the great St Ignatius, who taught us discernment with regard to memory, understanding and the will, one can only be grateful in being given the grace to be a Catholic).

Point: the Post-Modernist Christian is about to enter the age of power, as the Post-Modernist atheists give up and retreat back into their comfortable, usually academic positions, and leave the political arena to those who think they are idealists, but are really Post-Modernist Christians.

These men and women have taken over the imaginations of Western European politics and the movement is being sucked into the abyss which is American politics, with a few, definite exceptions.

The Post-Modernist Christian may claim Christianity as his or her faith, but in reality, this person has abandoned all ideas of the Transcendent. Just as Phenomenology falls into literary criticism, Post-Modernist Christianity falls into self-deception, which is, simply, hypocrisy.

These PMCs may or may not be pragmatists, which I think, to a point, the Post-Moderns Atheists are.

This lack of pragmatism, especially in politics, leads to "waffling", "flipping", "indecisiveness" and "superficiality", all in quotations as these have been applied to certain political and governmental figures in Europe and in America. Dare I say that the Post-Modernist is prone to cultism and irrational, contradictory religious beliefs? Can I say that the Post-Modernist Christian believes in the true absence?

The difference between the PMC and the PMA is in the subconsciousness, or in the soul. The PMA is a deceived idealist liberal who has freely chosen his stance against hierarchies, creeds, etc. with a disdain for those who believe in such. The PMC still thinks he is a Christian, but has lost all semblance acting like a PMA while thinking he is a Christian. Hypocrisy.

You see, hypocrites do not know they are hypocrites, at least on the conscious level, which is why they hated Christ so much. He was forcing them to look at themselves and their lack of faith. They were PMCs. The only difference was that they believed in their own hierarchy, their own power structures. But, unlike the PMAs. the PMCs have lost belief in the very vocabulary they use daily. They repeat words, as in the Mass, but the words are not efficacious for them. However, if such PMCs are priests, they are committing sacrilege, by saying the words of Consecration without belief. This is why there are liturgical abuses, as these men may change the form in order not to commit sacrilege. To be continued...

Part Two on Cults and Catholics...on Modernist Heresies and Why Evangelicals Voted for Santorum

This post will set the cat among the pigeons. But, as a Catholic, one must state certain truths and throw them out into the marketplace at least for discussion. My question is this: What is the Catholic Church's stand on Mormonism as a cult and do Catholics as well as Evangelicals have a duty to consider politicians who follow cults rather than religions?

Now, in a secular society, an atheist, or a practical atheist, that is one who acts like an atheist, gets voted in without any discussion. In addition, we in the States have had at least fourteen provable presidents who were Masons, the arch-enemies of the Roman Catholic Church and the advocates of the heresy of indifferentism, which states that one can get to heaven without religion or God, that all religions are the same and that morality is the only judge of salvation and which states that religion has no voice in the public square. The other heresy which the Evangelicals in Iowa were voting against when they voted for Santorum is and I quote Pope Pius XII in Humanae Generis--Another danger is perceived which is all the more serious because it is more concealed beneath the mask of virtue. There are many who, deploring disagreement among men and intellectual confusion, through an imprudent zeal for souls, are urged by a great and ardent desire to do away with the barrier that divides good and honest men; these advocate an "eirenism" according to which, by setting aside the questions which divide men, they aim not only at joining forces to repel the attacks of atheism, but also at reconciling things opposed to one another in the field of dogma.

Try and Google eirenism. It is the forgotten heresy here condemned, and interestingly enough, the reason why Evangelicals voted for Santorum rather than for Romney. Look at this, Catholic voters, please.

Nine popes have condemned indifferentism and this is the great doctrine of the Post-Modernist. At least two condemned eirensim.  Masons also hold these views, and were partly condemned by the Church  accordingly. Later, I shall outline the overlaps between Masonic beliefs and rituals and Mormonism.

Now, where does the idea of "cult" come into all of this? In August of 2001, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith clarified that Mormon baptism was not valid as the Mormons do not believe in the Trinity as Christians do; that is, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are Three Divine Persons in One God. The statement, written by then Cardinal Ratzinger and then Archbishop Bertone clarified the fact that Mormons were not Christians. As an RCIA coordinator, this was an important point I had to share with converts from Mormonism. The document noted that this was not a heresy, but so different from mainline Christianity as not to be Christian.

This leaves us with one choice in the matter, that the Mormon Church, not being Christian, is a cult. This not a statement of prejudice, but one of fact. Religions, by the way, are carefully defined in Domininus Iesus, the bugbear document of the liberal Catholics. However, I digress.

We as Catholics, and the Evangelicals have four choices if Mormonism is not Christian. It is a false "religion" that is, not revealed by God, it is paganism, it is secular humanism mixed with atheism, or it is a cult. Judging by the common definition of a cult, that is, and I like wiki's definition here, The word cult in current popular usage usually refers to a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre, we do not have much choice.


Normally, a cult is begun by a charismatic leader, who can manipulate others into following him-  Charles Manson, Aum Shinrikyo, Claude Vorilhon, Joseph Di Mambro, David Koresh, Joseph Smith Jr., Pope Michael, or Brigham Young. As the Catholic Church was founded by Christ Himself, who is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the RCC is not a cult.


Where does that leave us as conservative Catholics trying to make sense out of voting? Pray for discernment and follow the teachings of the Catholic Church always and everywhere. If Romney can distance himself from some of the more weird aspects of Mormonism, the better, as he seems a good man.

Part One: On cults among Catholics...relativism and Gnosticism again

I am getting more concerned about the existence and prevalence of cults, and, importantly, the appearance of a new acceptance of cults. Cults were big news in the 1980s and 1990s, when some people rushed off to the Moonies, or when international groups waiting for comets and the alien space ships committed suicide. I do not have to go into detail, as there were several infamous situations. I lost a friend to the Moonies and I have another friend who was rescued from a cult years ago. Another friend of mine had to help the children of a woman who got so involved in Scientology that she neglected to feed her children. That group broke up her marriage. My heart has been broken by the friends of mine who have suffered manipulation at the hands of cult-leaders. I have tried to help by love, praying for the healing of the scars of abuse, in some cases.

My concern is that cults are proliferating with prophecies of the end times, with the problems in established religions, and with the popularity of New Age ideals. Cults are usually defined as religious worship or a community surrounding a charismatic leader with bizarre teachings. This covers many groups today which have not been labeled as cults. In Ireland, there seems to be more than enough self-professed seers who are not "real" visionaries, as the Church would define, and there are groups which pander to wealthy, religious families in order to sustain certain hidden, sometimes, extravagant lifestyles. One thinks of Christina Gallagher.

My concern is that Catholics are not immune to cultic thinking. I have good friends who follow private visionaries to the point of not reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church, or the encyclicals, or even the Bible in some cases. Now, these people are intelligent and good, but lacking in discernment, chasing yet the next elocutionary or visionary on the scene. I have warned friends in America about this. This is not to say that many people are not in tune with the signs of the times, and have some discernment over an above common sense. What I am concerned about is that these private revelations are becoming more important than the teachings of the Church,

I had a long discussion with an excellent priest from New York on this point last year, as I was trying to steer some friends away from certain private revelations and from being so caught up in the phenomenon. He said that something was missing in their spirituality, some type of understanding of the deep and long history of mysticism in the Church -- that their search for experiential Faith indicated a lack of catechesis. I could not agree more. The problem is that these people are frequently on their way to holiness, but get side-tracked by private revelations, some, even most of these revelations or visions, not affirmed by the Catholic Church. In fact, I think that some of these experiences tend to divert attention from the affirmed messages, such as at Fatima, and lead people into confusion.

My rule is this. If the Church approves something, I shall look into the revelations, maybe. If the Church has not approved something, I can use my time in better ways, such as studying the teachings of the Church and reading the greats such as SS. John of the Cross, or Teresa of Avila. I can wait and maybe some current visions will not be approved in my lifetime. It does not matter. My second rule is that if there is a whiff of disobedience to either bishops or priests, or even the Tradition and Revelation of the Church, the seers are wrong. Obedience and meekness mark a holy man or holy woman.

My concern centers on why intelligent people seem to need these things. My answer is that it is a form of the oldest heresy in the Church, Gnosticism. For centuries, some have wanted special, private knowledge to affirm their Faith. They have needed to identify with certain groups, or to pursue holiness in a way outside the ordinariness of the lay life. Gnosticism is a form of pride. Gnosticism is also connected to the great Modernist heresy of our age, relativism. One can just accept one's own opinion of what is real religion, or approved visions, or philosophy, whatever. Gnosticism and relativism have entered the Church again.

I can admit freely that I am an ordinary Catholic, albeit traditional, trying to work with grace and the Sacramental Life of the Church to get to heaven. Simple really; prayer, rosary, daily Mass, frequent Confession, spiritual director if I can find a trad one, and so on. If I just read, outside the encyclicals and catechisms, Aquinas and Benedict XVI for the rest of my life, that would be sufficient. Of course, the Divine Office and the Bible are essential. By the way, I highly recommend the Navarre Bible. Fantastic.

When Padre Pio was declared  St. Pio of Pietrelcina, I read more about him than I did before he was declared a saint. He provides an example of approved and obvious holiness as well as spiritual gifts and elocutions. I am concerned at the number of good Catholics straining after private revelations, as there is simply no need with the wealth of saints and the Tradition, the Teaching Magisterium of the Church given to us, not to mention the Traditional Latin Mass, the greatest gift to the Church for our growth in holiness.