Different Neo-Catholic commentators have decried this event, most notably Michael Voris of ChurchMilitant.com. Yet these same Neo-Catholics fully support the “religious freedom” championed by Vatican II, and also support the ecumenical initiatives of the post-Conciliar popes. Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae,states:

This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others within due limits.

The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.

…the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.

So why then aren’t the Neo-Catholics obeying Vatican II? Instead of protesting the Satanists, they should instead be celebrating their right to religious liberty! For Vatican II declares that Satanists have a right “to be immune from coercion on the part individuals, or of social groups, and of any human power” (including Neo-Catholic protestors) so that they are not forced to act in public a manner contrary to their own beliefs. Why instead are the Neo-Catholics trying to coerce these poor Satanists into repudiating their beliefs and shut down the public expression of their religion? As for a “just public order” being observed, the Satanists are breaking no civil laws, they are simply unveiling their satanic goat statue in private. The Satanists are not causing wars or riots. In fact, the only thing close to disrupting of the public order is the media event caused in large part by the protest of Neo-Catholics and Protestants.

Further, it was none other than Pope Benedict XVI who, in a December 2005 address given to the Roman Curia, stated:

The martyrs of the early Church died for their faith in that God who was revealed in Jesus Christ, and for this very reason they also died for freedom of conscience and the freedom to profess one's own faith - a profession that no State can impose but which, instead, can only be claimed with God's grace in freedom of conscience.

So why are the Neo-Catholics opposed to these Satanists professing their faith when the martyrs of the early Church died so that they may do so? Are they in opposition to Vatican II AND Pope Benedict? After all, seeing how zealously Neo-Catholics cite Pope Benedict’s side-note that the SSPX clergy possess “no legitimate ministry” as near infallible doctrine, you would think they would pay even more respect to this pontiff’s solemn expounding on the text of an Ecumenical Council.

Vatican II: Satanists Worship the One God?

• God wills moral as well as physical evil. In fact, Sura 37:94 says, ‘He [Allah] created you as well as what you do,’ whether good or evil
• ‘God does not love the unbelievers’ (Sura 3:32).

Yet, regarding the Muslims, Lumen Gentium states:

The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst 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.

Also regarding the Hindus, who believe in multiple gods, Nostra Aetate states (emphasis added):

Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust.

Further, in a 1985 address to the Leaders and Representatives of the Islamic and Hindu Communities in Kenya, Pope John Paul II stated:

The close bonds linking our respective religions - our worship of God and the spiritual values we hold in esteem - motivate us to become fraternal allies in service to the human family…

…We are all children of the same God, members of the great family of man. And our religions have a special role to fulfil in curbing these evils and in forging bonds of trust and fellowship. God’s will is that those who worship him, even if not united in the same worship, would nevertheless be united in brotherhood and in common service for the good of all.

Thus even the worship of the abstract Hindu notion of “God” found among multiple deities and strange pagan practices is considered by Vatican II and Pope John Paul II to be worshipping the true God.

So, couldn’t the same be said for those Satanists who consider Satan a deity? For, the Neo-Catholic argument goes, there is objectively only one true God. Therefore, all who believe in a Supreme Being and worship Him, are, objectively worshipping the one true God. Thus Satanists, even if they subjectively get a lot of things wrong about God, like the Muslims and Hindus, really worship the true God, whether they know it or not. Thus, in the words of Pope John Paul II, neo-catholics should “be united in brotherhood” with Satanists and “in common service for the good of all.”

Enviro-Ecumenism with Satanists

One path where Neo-Catholics can work together with Satanists has already been forged by Pope Francis. On June 17^th, Francis appointed Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. According to churchmilitant.com:

Schellnhuber was chosen to be one among four speakers to talk at the roll-out of the Pope's global warming encyclical Thursday, and is said to have helped draft the encyclical [Laudato Si].

He's a controversial appointee because, in addition to being a radical promoter of the theory of man-made climate change, he is an atheist and an advocate of population control. He once said the carrying capacity of the earth is less than one billion; considering the earth currently holds more than seven billion people, this would mean he favors the reduction of the vast majority of mankind.

Thus, if Francis is already working “in common service for the good of all” with an atheist calling for the extermination of six billion people, how can Neo-Catholics not follow their own pope’s example and work with Satanists for the common good? After all, the Satanists, unlike the pro-aborts, have at least publicly pledged they will not sacrifice people or animals.

In fact, as it turns out, the Church of Satan is already environmentally friendly and primed for Neo-Catholic outreach! Echoing Laudato Si’s call for a police force to punish environmental crimes and the favoring the idea that man has no right to dominate the earth, The Church of Satan’s website states:

We would be pleased to see the institution of an elite police force, of men and women in peak physical and mental condition, trained in advanced techniques of crime fighting who would be truly equipped to handle the vermin that make so many of our cities into little more than concrete jungles. Man is by nature a social creature and makes his social contract with his fellows, thus rules of conduct are established to allow maximum freedom for individuals to interact. Disobey those rules and punishment must be swift and sure, and most probably public as well. This does not mean the incarceration of individuals in institutions at the expense of the victims for so called rehabilitation. No, these criminals must be put to some use, perhaps as forced labor to even clean up the environment that has so carelessly been soiled under the dominance of Christian spiritual philosophy that sees man as superior to other living creatures with a God-given right to abuse them at will.

Further, an informational article on Satanism and the Environment concludes:

The tenets of Satanism are geared naturally towards environmentalism, although whether or not individual Satanists draw these conclusions or act on them is entirely a personal matter, the religion or philosophy of Satanism has an implicit direction towards environmental protectionism. Short-term energy usage at the expense of long-term planetary health is irresponsible, it harms our children and it is stupid. These run against the 6th Satanic Statement (responsibility to the responsible), the 11th Satanic Rule of the Earth (do not harm children), and the cardinal Satanic Sin (stupidity). It is Satan's personified will that we remain powerful and intelligent (the Prometheus mentality) and we simply can't do that on a crippled planet.

Plus, since Pope Francis addressed Laudato Si not just to Catholics, or even to Christians, but to every living human being on planet earth, he has already, in effect, started the ecumenical dialogue with Satanists. Just imagine the good that could be done if Neo-Catholics join with Satanists to bring their collective used soda cans to the recycling center. In addition to working together to save the planet, the drive (or bicycle ride) will provide Neo-Catholics and Satanists a chance for “dialogue” and “encounter” so that they may truly come to mutual understanding with each other. This in turn will surely pave the way for future peace and progress.

In addition, I think a great way for Pope Francis to start the ball rolling in this regard is to kiss a Satanic bible. After all, Francis recently kissed a heretical Waldensian bible, and Pope John Paul once famously kissed a Koran. As Neo-Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin tells us, this was completely acceptable:

1) The Quran does contain some elements of truth (as well as grave elements of falsehood) and he might have wanted to honor the elements of truth it contains.

2) Showing respect in this way could foster world peace and interreligious harmony.

Indeed, if Francis would only kiss the Satanic bible it would signal to the Satanists that the Pope is: honoring whatever truths are found in said “bible,” recognizing that the Satanists are “on a journey” with us to find truth, and fostering good will. Inevitable “world peace” and “interreligious harmony” would then quickly ensue.

On second thought, since he’s closer to the action, perhaps the Archbishop of Detroit, His Excellency Allen H. Vigneron, might want to take the lead on this dialogue. Archbishop Vigneron is a prime candidate as:

1) His archdiocesan website has no mention of the Satanic act in his archdiocese, even though it garnered national news coverage. Thus he must not see the raising of a one ton Satanic goat statue in his diocese as anything scandalous or out of line with the principles of Vatican II discussed earlier

2) The Archbishop’s website does, however, have an entire webpage devoted to Laudato Si where one can read it, download it, and buy it, as well as read the Archbishop’s “full statement” on it.

3.) The Archbishop is busy preparing his guest homily when he will be the featured speaker at the local schismatic Greek Orthodox church on Feast of the Dormition of the Theotokos in August.

Thus, one can only imagine the ecumenical progress that could be made if the Archbishop would use Laudato Si as a common starting point for Satanic dialogue. One can just picture the smiling faces of Paul VI and John Paul II looking down upon the Archbishop as he visits the Satanic goat head statue and passes out copies of Laudato Si to those of his separated brethren reveling around the demon Baphomet. Who knows what fruitful and promising dialogue will then ensue regarding greenhouse gases, the extinction of species, and the evils of unfettered capitalism between the Archbishop and the followers of Lucifer.

In addition, since the Archbishop already has no problems giving a homily at a schismatic church, why not offer to be a guest speaker in attendance at the Satanists’ next Black Mass? After all, the sin of scandal will certainly be avoided. Indeed, if this event should occur, what promethean neo-pelagian could possibly think that the Archbishop of Detroit would be praying with the Satanists? Obviously, the Archbishop would be praying to God at the Black Mass while simply standing alongside the Satanists. Of course, per Vatican II, the Satanists would also objectively be worshipping “the one God” in their own unique and incomplete way, though they would not be consciously aware of it. 

The Absurdity of Neo-Catholicism

Yes, dear readers, this is the kind of madness Neo-Catholicism logically leads us to. For “religious liberty” by its very nature, protects the public expression of error and renders the state powerless to stop it. Thus we see the state completely impotent to do anything against private and public displays of atheism and Satanism. Do we truly believe that the early Christian martyrs died for a right to commit public blasphemy? Is this in turn what Christ died for? Did Our Lord will an agnostic state completely separated in all aspects from His Church and Truth? Did He will for the state to be absolutely powerless to protect its citizens from the most outrageous sacrilege, error, and heresy? Taken to its logical end we can now see clearly why, in Quanta Cura, Pope Pius IX penned the following words:

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity,"2 viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;"3 and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."

In addition, Neo-Catholicism leads us to the madness of ecumenism. Once the principle is established that the Church should find “the good” in all religious belief and strive to work towards common earthly goals with heretics, apostates, pagans, and now even atheists, the Great Commission goes out the window. We then become nothing more than implicit condoners of error, satisfied to leave our fellow man in states of soul ranging from abject ignorance to stubbornly believing lies. It is this very madness that St. Pius X railed against inNotre Charge Apostolique. I now leave you with his words:

We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism.