Brendan Triffett Brendan Triffett

On Father Iannuzzi’s bizarre claim that there are fallen aliens.

Late last year I scoured all 36 volumes of Luisa Piccarreta’s Book of Heaven again and found 22 excerpts which demonstrate, beyond all possible doubt, that Luisa’s clear and consistent position is that man is the only fallen intelligent being in the physical universe. More precisely, the excerpts demonstrate that this — the statement in bold — is the clear and consistent position of Jesus as narrated to Luisa over the course of at least 19 years (Volume 12 to Volume 36). In this article I show that Father Joseph Iannuzzi contradicts Luisa when he claims that there are fallen aliens.

aliens falling from heaven and good angels casting them out

An AI-generated image reflecting Fr Iannuzzi’s belief in fallen aliens. A heretical and disturbing image, for sure.

Introduction

Some Catholics believe that aliens exist. Others are inclined to believe it. They may even want to believe it, but concede that the existence of aliens has not been demonstrated. Catholics who are agnostic on the question are at least open to the possibility that God has created other embodied intelligent beings and situated them light years away from us. Rightly or wrongly, these Catholics—alien-believers, alien-agnostics, and everyone in between—do not recognise any fundamental incompatibility between the Catholic faith and belief in aliens, nor between salvation history and the existence of aliens (should they exist).

In my first post I defined exclusivism as "the claim that the Catholic faith understood correctly (including everything we know about God’s revealed will for man and creation) excludes the possibility of ETIs (extraterrestrial intelligences, aliens) existing in our universe. I wrote that there are three possibilities regarding the writings of Luisa Piccarretta and the question of whether ETIs exist:

  1. Luisa’s writings support exclusivism and therefore the view that ETIs do not exist.

  2. Luisa’s writings neither support nor contradict exclusivism.

  3. Luisa’s writings contradict exclusivism and support the view that ETIs exist or might exist.

What does Luisa have to do with anything? you might ask. Let me provide the necessary context by quoting myself extensively (from my first post):

I re-read all 36 volumes of Luisa’s Book of Heaven … along with The Hours of the Passion, The Virgin Mary in the Kingdom of the Divine Will and Luisa’s letters. Finally I re-read Fr [Joseph] Iannuzzi’s dissertation. I looked through all of this material carefully and always in light of my research question: which of the three scenarios is true?

I came to the conclusion that the first scenario is true. Luisa’s writings support exclusivism. In fact, there are several lines of argument beginning from different passages and themes in the writings and converging on the same conclusion.

My contention is (1) that Iannuzzi is wrong to claim that the writings support the (possible) existence of ETIs and (2) that to make such a claim is to place an unnecessary obstacle in the way between the writings and Luisa’s potential readers.

I voiced my concern as follows:

It even appears that Fr Iannuzzi took certain passages of Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta out of context, and falsely interpreted a couple of sentences by St Annibale di Francia, in support of his belief in the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence … If that is what Iannuzzi has done, then this is a serious matter.

… [I]t is bizarre that Fr Iannuzzi of all people would have gotten things wrong in this area, his area of expertise (the writings and spirituality of Luisa)! And it is both ironic and concerning that the same scholar priest who (rightly) warns about the dangers of taking passages of Luisa’s writing out of context and spreading erroneous interpretations would do precisely that. (Again, these claims of mine are yet to be substantiated. I don’t want anyone to simply take my word for it …)

We are all human [pun not intended!]. In this case, I think, Father got over-excited about the (possible) existence of ETIs. And in his enthusiasm he left behind sound reasoning and sound principles of interpretation. Not to mention pastoral prudence. For (1) he was speaking authoritatively to a wide audience. And (2) he didn’t consider the fact that using (or misusing) passages from Luisa Piccarreta’s writings to support his view that ETIs exist will inevitably create obstacles for people who might otherwise have been open to the writings.

No doubt Fr Iannuzzi’s public speculations have had a number of negative effects, and will continue to do so unless counteracted. I return to this point in the conclusion of the article. For more about Fr Iannuzzi, read my first post.

For this research article I narrowed my focus to the question of whether man is the only fallen intelligent being in the physical universe. I relate the question to the belief-system of Fr Iannuzzi, and compare that belief-system to the writings of Luisa Piccarreta.

The reason for my narrower focus is that demonstrating the difference between Iannuzzi’s claims on this particular point, and Luisa’s own position on the same point, is quite straightforward. By contrast, for the broader question — whether man is the only intelligent being in the physical universe, and how does Iannuzzi’s belief-system compare to the writings of Luisa on his point — there will be more evidence to consider, and more arguments to work through. On top of that, one of the demonstrated conclusions in this article, will become a premise in one of the arguments in a future article. The latter argument will go as follows:

  • If there are no fallen aliens and no unfallen aliens, then there are no aliens.

  • If Luisa’s worldview excludes (i) the notion that there are fallen aliens and (ii) the notion that there are unfallen aliens, then it excludes (iii) the notion that there are aliens.

  • Luisa’s worldview excludes the notion that there are are fallen aliens

  • Luisa’s worldview excludes the notion that there are unfallen aliens.

  • Therefore, Luisa’s worldview excludes the notion that there are aliens.

The underlined premise is a main conclusion of this article.

*

Late last year I scoured all 36 volumes of Luisa Piccarreta’s Book of Heaven again and found 22 excerpts which demonstrate, beyond all possible doubt, that Luisa’s clear and consistent position is that man is the only fallen intelligent being in the physical universe. More precisely, the excerpts demonstrate that this — the statement in bold — is the clear and consistent position of Jesus as narrated to Luisa over the course of at least 19 years (Volume 12 to Volume 36). The excerpts are provided toward the end of this article. The statement in bold can be expressed more precisely as follows:

Thesis A:

Human beings are the only creatures who are both (i) embodied and intelligent by nature (logos) and (ii) inwardly corrupted by sin in respect to their factual condition or circumstance (tropos).

Let EIC stand for embodied intelligent creature. This acronym is used a lot in this article, so try and memorise it now! Following Aquinas we understand “intelligence” as an intellectual power inseparable from freedom, personhood, and spiritual being (chimpanzees do not have intelligence, properly speaking). Thesis A is more simply expressed as the claim that man is the only fallen EIC. The negation of Thesis A is the claim that man is not the only fallen EIC. Thesis A is false if and only if there are fallen non-human EICs.

I differentiate between two categories of non-human EIC.* The first category is the ETI or alien. The second is the “non-human earthling”. By definition, non-human earthlings are non-human EICs that inhabit the terrestrial realm, living on the Earth, in the Earth, or in the surrounding atmosphere. Some examples of (supposed) non-human earthlings are gnomes, fairies, leprechauns, the Nephilim (on certain interpretations) and alien-human hybrids that are said to roam the Earth (in the past, if not also in the present).**

*Our distinction between aliens and non-human earthlings is a purely logical statement. With this distinction we are not making a cosmological statement or an ontological commitment. We are not saying that aliens exist (nor are we denying it) and we are not saying that non-human earthlings exist (nor again are we dening it). Here we remain in the ideal realm—we are concerned only with the inner workings of the mind in relation to (a) its concepts and (b) the realm of intelligible possibilities. We are simply categorising different types of possible entities whose real existence someone may or may not affirm.

**Sometimes the distinction between the two categories is blurred. Many UFO enthusiasts and fringe theorists claim that the Earth is inhabited by one or more races of non-human earthlings that migrated here from outer space.

Now Father Iannuzzi claims that aliens exist and that some of them are fallen. This implies that man is not the only fallen EIC. But to imply that man is not the only fallen EIC is to contradict Thesis A, which states that man is the only fallen EIC.

In the following I demonstrate that

  1. Luisa Piccarretta’s clear and consistent position throughout the Book of Heaven is that man is the only fallen EIC (as per Thesis A)

  2. Fr Iannuzzi’s position is that aliens exist and that some of them are fallen

  3. Fr Iannuzzi therefore (i) contradicts Thesis A and (ii) in this respect departs from the cosmology outlined in the Book of Heaven.

By “cosmology” I mean: the theory of the nature of the universe, what sorts of things exist in the universe, how the universe exists in relation to God, and what is man’s place in the universe relative to God and other creatures. The underlined part is the most relevant in this article.

I begin with a preliminary analysis of key propositions and their connections. Next I turn to relevant excerpts from video interviews with Fr Iannuzzi, and then the 22 passages from the Book of Heaven.

Conceptual Analysis

Thesis A (man is the only fallen EIC) is compatible with

(1) There are non-human creatures who are embodied and intelligent by nature (logos).

It is also compatible with

(2) There are non-human intelligent creatures who are fallen.

Proposition (1) is just the claim that there are non-human EICs. There are three options available for someone who affirms proposition (1):

(i) Claim that existing EICs are divided into two classes: human beings and aliens.

(ii) Claim that existing EICs are divided into two classes: human beings and non-human earthlings.

(iii) Claim that existing EICs are divided into three classes: human beings, aliens and non-human earthlings.*

*The three claims written in italics are cosmological statements. For they are assertions about what sorts of creatures exist. They are not merely logical statements about the intelligible categories by which we might organise our thought.

It is possible to affirm Proposition (1) (there are non-human EICs) without contradicting Thesis A, as long as no fallen creatures are included in the set of non-human EICs. Indeed, options (i), (ii) and (iii) are all compatible with Thesis A. For in none of these cases is it said that some non-human EIC exists in a fallen state.

Let’s turn now to Proposition (2): there are non-human intelligent creatures who are fallen.

Logically speaking, a non-human intelligent creature is either embodied (it is a non-human EIC) or it is non-embodied (it is an angel). (With this purely logical statement, we are not committing ourselves to the view that non-human EICs exist, or even to the view that angels exist). This gives us three ways of affirming (2) (in each case it is understood that there are fallen men also):

(i) There are fallen angels. There are no fallen non-human EICs.

(ii) There are fallen non-human EICs. There are no fallen angels.

(iii) There are fallen angels and fallen non-human EICs.

(These are cosmological statements). Under option (i) one might deny that non-human EICs exist (there are no aliens and no non-human earthlings). This is the traditional view of things. Alternatively, one might say that non-human EICs exist and that all of them are unfallen.

Under option (ii) one might deny that angels exist. Alternatively, one might say that angels exist and that all of them are unfallen (there are no demons).

Option (i) does not contradict Thesis A. Option (ii) contradicts Thesis A, as does option (iii). The only way to reconcile Thesis A with Proposition (2) is to take option (i).

Fallen creatures: Iannuzzi versus Catholic tradition

Fr Iannuzzi affirms Proposition (1) there are non-human EICs. He also affirms Proposition (2) there are non-human intelligent creatures who are fallen. Under Proposition (2) he takes option (iii), there are fallen angels and fallen non-human EICs. By affirming (iii) he contradicts Thesis A and therefore the cosmology of Luisa Piccarretta, as I demonstrate later on.

Returning to what we said about Proposition (1), one might ask if Fr Iannuzzi divides existing EICs into two classes (humans and aliens) or into three classes (humans, aliens and non-human earthlings). In one video interview Iannuzzi speculates that there are (or at least have been) alien-human hybrids existing on Earth (link provided at the end of this section). On this basis I attribute to Iannuzzi the cosmological view that existing* EICs are divided into three classes. In any case, the important take away for this discussion is simply that Iannuzzi includes ETIs (aliens) in the class of EICs (embodied intellectual creatures).

*Here “existing” should be interpreted as “existing at some time in the history of the universe”.

Iannuzzi’s claim that aliens exist does not in itself contradict Thesis A. But his claim that some aliens are evil/fallen does.

*

Luisa’s writings are consistent with the traditional Catholic view concerning fallen creatures, which is as follows:

(T1) man is the only embodied intelligent creature,

(T2) there are intelligent creatures other than man,

(T3) the only intelligent creatures other than man are the angels, who are non-embodied intelligent beings,

(T4) man fell in Adam,

(T5) some of the angels fell (these are the demons),

(T6) the Virgin Mary was preserved from original sin, and never actually sinned,

(T7) with the exception of Jesus and Mary, every descendent of Adam and Eve has inherited original sin, and members of the human race who do not yet exist will inherit original sin upon their conception.*

*This is hardly an exhaustive summary covering all aspects of the traditional Catholic view on fallen creatures, and it is not meant to be. For example, I have not mentioned the doctrine that sinful man is offered redemption, whereas the fallen angels are not.

In the 36 Volumes of the Book of Heaven one can find statements affirming each of these seven points. And there are no statements which, correctly interpreted, contradict any of the seven points, either directly or by implication.

On the traditional view of fallen creatures, which is also Luisa’s view, the set of fallen creatures is the union (sum total) of two mutually exclusive sets:*

(i) all human creatures other than the Virgin Mary (note that Jesus is not a creature).

and

(ii) the fallen angels.

*Of course Luisa never articulates ideas or doctrines in terms of sets! Nor does the Catholic tradition, at least not usually. But that is beside the point. It is the inner logic or substance of the belief that matters here.

On the traditional/Luisian view, “man is the only fallen intelligent being” is false, yet “man is the only fallen intelligent being in the physical universe” (i.e., Thesis A) is true.*

*As already indicated, I define a creature that exists “in the physical universe” as a creature whose metaphysical consitution includes a physical body (still, it might be said that angels exist “in” the physical universe in some other sense—as having an influence on physical creatures, for example).

Now an alternative, non-traditional view is that the set of fallen creatures is actually the union of three mutually exclusive sets:

(i) all human creatures other than the Virgin Mary

and

(ii) the fallen angels

and

(iii) the fallen ETIs (fallen aliens).

To repeat, this view is promoted by Fr Iannuzzi. On his view, man is not the only fallen intelligent creature in the physical universe. Recall the traditional seven points:

(T1) man is the only embodied intelligent creature,

(T2) there are intelligent creatures other than man,

(T3) the only intelligent creatures other than man are the angels (fallen or unfallen), who are non-embodied intelligent beings,

(T4) man fell in Adam,

(T5) some of the angels fell (these are the demons),

(T6) the Virgin Mary was preserved from original sin, and never actually sinned,

(T7) every descendent of Adam and Eve has inherited original sin, and members of the human race who do not yet exist will inherit original sin upon their conception.

I am confident that Fr Iannuzzi affirms (T2), (T4), (T5), (T6) and (T7), based on my positive recollections of things he has said and written in the past. Still, he departs from the traditional view by denying the two underlined points: both (T1) that man is the only embodied intelligent creature and (T3) that the only intelligent creatures other than man are the angels.

Some Catholic theologians might count this “departure” as an instance of material heresy (if not also formal heresy). However, in this study I leave aside the question of whether Iannuzzi’s non-traditional view is in any way heretical. I will even concede this: departing from a certain belief or opinion to which Catholics have traditionally adhered, does not necessarily amount to heresy (material or formal). It depends on how central to the Faith the traditional proposition is (the one which is being departed from).

In respect to the seven points, Iannuzzi’s “departure” actually boils down to his denial of (T1)—that man is the only EIC. This denial is equivalent to an affirmation: non-human EICs exist. But if non-human EICs exist, it already follows that (T3)—the only intelligent creatures other than man are the angels—is false.

However, Iannuzzi adds a further twist. He does not merely claim that aliens exist—this is his departure from the traditional view that man is the only EIC.* He also claims that some of these aliens are evil/fallen—this is the twist added to his depature. On top of that, he conjectures that a third of the aliens fell.

*If I am not mistaken, Iannuzzi also claims that human/alien hybrids exist on Earth, or that they used to exist on Earth—see Part 2 in the “Vatican and Aliens” YouTube series. This too is a departure from the traditional view that man is the only EIC. However, in this discussion our focus is on Iannuzzi’s beliefs about aliens.

Fr Joseph Iannuzzi and the meme text: I'm not saying it was aliens ... it was FALLEN aliens

Quotations from Fr Iannuzzi on “fallen aliens”

Excerpts 1c and 1d below are copied from my previous post. They are part of Iannuzzi’s response to a question from the interviewer, Dr Michael James. This is from Video 1 from the “Vatican and Aliens” series on YouTube. I refer to this video simply as “Video 1”. Text in blue is Fr Iannuzzi speaking.

Video 1: 15:08 – 15:27

Watch from here until 15:27.

[Dr Michael James] If one-third of beings fell with the angels, are there hostile anti-Christian alien beings that are at war with friendly alien beings? What would you speculate?

Excerpt 1c

Video 1: 15:36 – 15:51

See the 14 second clip here or watch from here until 15:51.

Well you mentioned that one-third of the beings fell and this goes all the way back to Revelation chapter 12 verses 4 through 9 that one third of the stars fell. It does not mention a third of the angels fell […]

Excerpt 1d

Video 1: 16:11 – 17:29

See the 46 second clip here and the 31 second clip here.

Alternatively watch from here until 17:29.

But in scripture “stars” also refers to all rational beings including those throughout the cosmos. This is alluded to in Daniel chapter 12 verse 3, Philippians 2:15. The point is, one must avoid theological reductionism which takes “stars” and applies it to only one group of individuals like the angels. And in Christian circles this has been the case. They interpret this passage of Revelation referring to a third of the stars as meaning only … only the third of the angels. The Church does not teach that it refers only to the angels. Yes, it includes the angels. Because stars is referred to as angels, as is Jesus Christ, as are believers. But it doesn’t limit it to just the angels.

[16:58] So it is theologically sound to propose that one third of all rational beings fell with Lucifer. Therefore this may explain in part the difference between the good beings throughout the cosmos that are supported by many eyewitness testimonies as well as the bad ones throughout the cosmos. Well, considering that only one third fell, the good outnumber the bad.

More excerpts from Iannuzzi

Video 1: 24:59 – 25:30

Watch from here until 25:30

I have personally witnessed exorcisms with people who had been physically abducted. There are millions of testimonies throughout the world and the exorcists will tell you that they have cast out demons that were neither human nor angelic, they were other entities. And I'm not saying this on my own behalf, other exorcists have told me this as well.

Video 1: 28:08 – 28:32

Watch from here until 28:32

Basically in 1956 a group of ETS appeared to him [Bruno Sammaciccia] according to his memoirs and they were good. And they shared to him things about how to be better in the world improve the society in which we live and things like that. But on the flip side as I mentioned you have the bad ones and that in my opinion refers to that one-third that fell with Lucifer.

There is also a video entitled “Fr. Iannuzzi Radio Program: Ep 198- Luisa vs. Demons - Learning to Live Divine Will (3-25-23)”

Luisa vs Demons Video: 20:31 - 21:18

Watch from here until 21:18

As one who has performed many exorcisms and who has shared my experiences with other exorcists, I can attest to you on their behalf and mine, that during exorcisms there have been expelled from people demonic entities that were neither angelic nor human. Let me repeat that. Several exorcists can attest to the fact that they have expelled from people that were diabolically afflicted, entities that were neither angelic nor human …

Luisa vs Demons Video: 24:40 - 25:54

Watch from here until 25:54

[24:40] But I mention this in passing because when these individuals I know claim to have been abducted invoke the name of Jesus, the abduction stops on the spot, every single time.

From 25:00 - 25:26 Fr Iannuzzi mentions MUFON (Mutual UFO Network, see https://mufon.com/)

[25:26] Over 1000 documented cases where when an individual was being abducted and they called upon the name of Jesus, the abduction stopped. Which means these are not good beings.

[25:39] Now I know what you're thinking: they're fallen angels. No they're not. And I know people have claimed that but that's not true because they have physical bodies and angels don't have physical bodies that die and then go on to an eternal place like these do.

Luisa vs Demons Video: 26:41 - 27:40

Watch from here until 27:40

Now to conclude this theme on exotheology I'll say this. It is from my studies from the Eastern and Western Church Fathers and Doctors and saints and mystics, I've come to the conclusion based on their writings not my own theories, that when Lucifer fell as the Book of Revelation reports, he took a third of the stars with him. And that's what the Book of Revelation states. It does not state ‘a third of the angels’, but ‘a third of the stars’. And the star is the center of a galaxy that has life. [NASA says otherwise! “A galaxy is a huge collection of gas, dust, and billions of stars and their solar systems”]. A solar system that has life. Our star is the sun. So according to them … and I believe this very much – that a third of all rational beings in the cosmos fell. And this may explain … the evil abductions, who knows?

Finally there’s this longer excerpt from Video 3 in the “Vatican and Aliens” YouTube series.

Video 3: 30:11 - 32:05

Watch from here until 32:05

[30:11] I referred to in Parts Two and Three to the Biblical meaning of stars comprising one third of not just the angels but all rational sentient beings of the cosmos that fell with Lucifer, and this may explain the millions of reported traumatic events of alien abductions many of which are also published by Dr David Jacobs. He's studied over a thousand cases of people that have claimed to have been abducted. And this phenomenon of alien abduction I've come to understand after having spoken myself with abductees is not a myth or a theory, it's a reality. And we have to come to accept it. Millions of people will not be lying throughout the world over decades and centuries. This has been going on for a long time.

[31:07] And one person I will share that I have spoken to briefly is a woman from British Columbia, Canada. And she shared with me how her mother, she, her daughter were all abducted and I did send her in the mail some holy water, holy exorcised water … and things like that because these things do stop these abductions.

[31:31] There's another report of Dr John Edward Mack. He died recently, he was a Harvard PhD Professor who interviewed and clinically studied individuals who were abducted and published two books in 1994, 1999 on the trauma that accompanies these abductions. Now these are related on my opinion to this one third that fell. And then you have of course the two thirds that are good, the majority. And these are the ones of whom Clifford Stone speaks and Philip Corso writes about and so forth.

Summary of Iannuzzi’s claims in these excerpts

  • One third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos/universe fell with Lucifer

  • This may explain why there are testimonies of encounters with good ETIs and also testimonies of encounters with bad ETIs.

  • It is theologically sound to propose that one third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos fell, and to read Revelation 12:4 in this way.

  • The good ETIs outnumber the bad 2:1.

  • Exorcists including Fr Iannuzzi testify to the fact that they have cast out evil entities that were neither human nor angelic. These have physical bodies. So they must be fallen ETIs.

  • Millions of people have testified to being abducted by aliens. Fr Iannuzzi has interviewed some of them. In all cases the experience stops when the name of Jesus is invoked. Exorcised holy water and other sacramentals also prevent the abductions. But these entities are not demons (fallen angels) as many have concluded. They are fallen ETIs.

Comment

Are there any passages in Luisa’s Book of Heaven that support Iannuzzi’s view that there are fallen aliens? Or even the view there is at least one fallen alien in the universe? I am certain that no such passage exists anywhere in the 36 Volumes, and that no sound argument for Iannuzzi’s unusual view can be constructed on the basis of that text. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong.

The position narrated consistently throughout the Book of Heaven is that man is the only fallen being in the physical universe, as I demonstrate next. It would be odd if Luisa had also written something that blatantly contradicts these 22 passages, all of which speak directly against Iannuzzi’s view. I’m sure Fr Iannuzzi does not want to attribute that level of inconsistency to a mystic of whose cause he is a champion.

The 22 excerpts from the Book of Heaven

Currently (January 2, 2025) there is no official English translation of the 36 volumes of Luisa Piccarreta’s Book of Heaven. A critical edition with theological commentary should be released in the future (hopefully soon). Here I use the translation by Marina d'Ariano — the “Marina translation” or “MT” for short.

In the Volumes, Luisa speaks in the first person. Text inside inverted commas are the words of Jesus, as reported by Luisa. I have highlighted certain words and passages by putting them in bold.

I briefly comment on some of the passages below. For the rest, I let the quotations speak for themselves.

1. Volume 12, March 22, 1919

As I was in my usual state, I found myself outside of myself, and I could see all the order of created things. And my sweet Jesus told me: “My daughter, see what harmony, what order in all created things, and how all of them came out to life from the Eternal Fiat …” Then He added in a more afflicted tone: “It was not so in creating man. It is true that his origin is my Fiat, but this was not enough for Me. Taken by excess of love, I breathed on him, wanting to infuse in him my very Life; I endowed him with reason; I made him free, and I constituted him king of all Creation. But man, ungrateful - how did he correspond to Me? Amid all Creation, he alone has become the sorrow of my Heart, the clashing note.” [Marina translation]

2. Volume 14, August 6, 1922

“My Will contains perfect balance. Balance brings order, regimen, utility, harmony. All things harmonize together as if they were one single thing. Order brings equality; equality brings likeness. This is why there is so much harmony, order and likeness in the Three Divine Persons, and all created things are in perfect harmony - one is the support, the strength and the life of the other. If just one created thing disharmonized, all the others would tumble and end up in ruin.

Only man moved away from Us, from the balance of Our Will. Oh! how man tumbled, and from the highest place he fell into the deepest abyss!” [MT]

3. Volume 17, May 4, 1925

“Therefore, be attentive, because this is about placing in safety that Eternal Will which, with so much love, wants to dwell in the creatures [i.e., in human beings]. But It wants to be known, It does not want to be like a stranger, but wants to give Its goods and become Life of each one. However, It wants Its rights, Its place of honor; It [the Divine Will] wants the human will to be put aside – the only enemy for Itself and for man. The mission of my Will was the purpose of the creation of man. My Divinity did not depart from Heaven - from Its throne, while my Will not only departed, but descended into all created things and formed Its Life in them. But while all things recognized Me, and I dwell in them with majesty and decorum, man alone drove Me away.” [MT]

4. Volume 18, January 28, 1926

“[T]he whole Creation, including man, came out of the Eternal Creator as their source of Life, in which they were to be preserved only with the Life of the Divine Will. Everything was to be founded upon It, and this foundation of the Divine Will was to preserve all things as beautiful and noble, just as they had come out of God. And, in fact, all created things are just as they were created – none of them has lost anything of its origin; only man lost the life, the foundation, and therefore he lost his nobility, the strength, and the likeness to his Creator.” [MT]

5. Volume 19, May 27, 1926

“[T]he purpose of Creation was that, all things having come out from within the unity of this light of the Supreme Fiat, all should have remained in the unity of It. Only the creature [i.e., man] did not want to recognize this purpose; he went out of the unity of the light of the sun of my Will, and reduced himself to begging for the effects of this light, almost as the earth begs its vegetation and the development of the seeds it hides in its womb, from the sun. What sorrow, my daughter – to reduce oneself from king to beggar, and to beg from those which were to be at his service.”

...

And Jesus, sighing, added: “My daughter, feeling your nothingness more does not oppose the living in my Will; on the contrary, it is a duty of yours. All of my works are formed over nothing, and this is why the All can do what He wants. If the sun had reason, and someone asked it: ‘What good do you do? What are your effects? How much light and heat do you contain?’; it would answer: ‘I do nothing, I just know that the light given to me by God is invested with the Supreme Will, and I do whatever It wants. I extend wherever It wants, and I produce the effects It wants; and while I do so much, I remain always nothing and the Divine Will does everything in me.’ The same for all my other works - all their glory is to remain in their nothingness in order to give the whole field to my Will, to let It operate. Only man wanted to do without the Will of his Creator, he wanted to make his nothingness operate, believing himself to be good at something; and the All, feeling Himself placed after the nothing, went out of man, who reduced himself from superior to all, to inferior to all.” [MT]

Anyone who has read a substantial amount of the 36 Volumes knows that “creatures” always signifies human beings.

6. Volume 19, May 31, 1926

“Before sinning, since he [Adam] possessed the source of the unity of light with his Creator, each little act of his was a ray of light which, invading the whole Creation, went to fix itself in the center of his Creator, bringing Him the love and the return for all that had been made for him in the whole Creation. He was the one who harmonized everything and formed the note of accord between Heaven and earth. But as soon as he withdrew from my Will, his acts no longer invaded Heaven and earth like rays, but they shrank, almost like plants and flowers, within the little circle of his field. So, losing the harmony with all Creation, he became the clashing note of all Creation. Oh! how low he descended, and cried bitterly over the lost unity of light, which, raising him above all created things, made of Adam the little god of the earth.” [MT]

Jesus says that man (in Adam) became “the” clashing note, not “a” clashing note of all Creation.

7. Volume 19, August 27, 1926

“My daughter, how beautiful are Our works – they are Our honor and Our perennial glory. All of them remain at their place, and each created thing fulfills its office perfectly. Man alone is Our dishonor in Our creative work, because by withdrawing from Our Will, he walks upside down, with his head down on the earth and his feet up in the air. What disorder! What disorder! It is disgusting to see him. By walking with his head upside down, he crawls on the earth, he becomes all upset, he transforms himself.” [MT]

8. Volume 20, September 17, 1926

“So, all things, even the smallest ones, have their place. It can be said that they are in their home, secure, and no one can touch them. They possess abundance of goods, because that Will which flows in them possesses the source of all goods; they are all in the order, the harmony, and the peace of all. On the other hand, by withdrawing from Our Will, man lost his place; he remained without Our home, exposed to dangers. All can touch him to harm him; the very elements are superior to him because they possess a Supreme Will, while he possesses a degraded human will, which can give him nothing but miseries, weaknesses and passions. And because he lost his origin, his place, he remained without order, disharmonized from all, and he enjoys no peace, not even within himself. So, it can be said that he is the only being wandering in the whole Creation, to whom nothing is due by right, because We give everything to one who lives in Our Will, for he is in Our home – he is one from Our family. The relations, the bonds of sonship which he possesses by living in It, give him the right to all Our goods.” [MT]

9. Volume 20, October 24, 1926

“Now, you must know that all Creation and all my works done in Redemption are as though tired of waiting, and find themselves in the condition of a noble and rich family, whose children are all of proper stature, good looking, of uncommon intelligence, always well dressed, and with marvelous neatness. They are the ones who make always the best impression among all others. Now, after such great fortune, this family has had a misfortune: one of these children, degrading himself, descends from his nobility and goes around always dirty; he does unworthy and vile acts which dishonor the nobility of the family, and as much as they do so that he may appear together with the other brothers, they do not succeed; on the contrary, he keeps getting worse and worse, to the point of becoming the mockery and the laughingstock of all. The whole family has a constant sorrow; and as much as they feel the dishonor of this son, they cannot destroy him and say that he does not belong to them, and that he did not come from that same father to whom they belong. Such is the condition in which all Creation and all the works of my Redemption find themselves. They are all a celestial family, their origin is divine nobility; all of them have the Will of their Celestial Father as their insignia, dominion and life, and therefore they all maintain themselves in their nobility – beautiful, decorous, pure, of enchanting beauty, and worthy of that Will which possesses them. After so much glory and honor for this celestial family, they have had the misfortune that one alone – man – who came from their same Father, has degraded himself; and in the midst of such great glory and beauty of theirs, he is always dirty, he does foolish actions - unworthy and vile. They cannot deny that he belongs to them, but they do not want him in their midst so dirty and foolish.” [MT]

Jesus says that the whole family has “a” constant sorrow, which is the dishonour of “this” son (singular).

10. Volume 20, December 25, 1926

Note that whenever Luisa writes “creatures”, she means human beings.

“There was a contest between Mother and Son – I in giving, She in receiving. As this little Humanity of Mine made Its first entrance upon earth, my Divinity wanted to shine forth from It, in order to go around everywhere and make the first sensible visit to all Creation. Heaven and earth – all received this visit of their Creator, except for man. They had never received so much honor and glory as when they saw their King, their Maker, within their midst; all felt honored, for they were to serve the One from whom they had received their existence, therefore all made feast. So, my birth was of great joy and glory for Me on the part of my Mama and of all Creation; but it was for Me of great sorrow on the part of creatures.” [MT]

11. Volume 25, December 8, 1928

“So, all Creation – Heaven and earth, and even hell – felt in the immaculate conception of this Virgin little girl, just newly born in the womb of Her mama, the strength of the order which She was placing in all Creation. With my Will, She associated Herself with all as their sister, She embraced all, She loved everything and everyone; and all longed for Her, loved Her, and felt honored to adore the Divine Will in this privileged creature.

How could all Creation not celebrate? In fact, up until then, man had been the disorder among all created things; no one had had the courage, the heroism, to say to his Creator: ‘I do not want to know my will – I give it to You as gift; I want your Divine Will alone as life.’ But this Holy Virgin gave Her will in order to live of the Divine, and therefore all Creation felt the happiness of the order which, through Her, was given back to It …” [MT]

Jesus says that man has been “the” disorder, not merely “a” disorder among all created things.

12. Volume 25, March 22, 1929

“The Fiat Voluntas Tua on earth as It is in Heaven is precisely this: that man return into my Divine Will; and only when It sees again Its child happy, living in Its house, with the opulence of Its goods - then will It calm Itself. And so It will be able to say: ‘My child has come back, he is clothed with his royal garments, he wears the crown of king, he lives together with Me, and I have given back to him the rights which I gave him in creating him. So, the disorder in Creation is ended, because man has come back into my Divine Will’.” [MT]

Jesus speaks of “My child” in the singular. He also says that man coming back into the Divine Will is a sufficient condition for the disorder in Creation ending. This entails that there are no fallen intelligent creatures in the physical universe besides man.

13. Volume 26, May 16, 1929

“[N]othing is lacking to Our work of Creation – heavens, suns, works and magnificence of every kind; but one point is missing – yet a point which disfigures a work so beautiful. This point is the most important; it is the most beautiful shade, it is the most vivid color that is missing in the Creation: everyone and everything lives in my Fiat, but one point of It – that is, the human family – is outside of It, outside of my Kingdom, and it lives unhappy.” [MT]

14. Volume 26, June 27, 1929

Then my sweet Jesus continued, saying: “My daughter, the sea of Our Divinity always murmurs, without ever ceasing. But do you know what it says in its murmuring? ‘Love! Love toward the creature!’ And the ardor of Our Love is so great, that in Our continuous murmuring We overflow with Love, and We form such gigantic waves as to be able to drown Heaven and earth, and all creatures [i.e., human beings], all with Love. And seeing that they do not let themselves be filled completely with Our Love, with the desire to see creatures overflow with Our Love, the delirious Love forms within Us; and in Our delirium, putting the human ingratitude aside, and murmuring, We repeat more loudly: ‘Love! Always love to the one who denies and does not take Our Love to let herself be loved and give Us love.’“ [MT]

There is only one who does not freely receive God’s love. Not one individual, but one species. “The creature” signifies a human being, taken either individually or collectively as a species (“man”).

15. Volume 26, August 12, 1929

I was doing my round in the Divine Volition, and my sweet Jesus, drawing me outside of myself, made me see the whole Creation in the act of coming out of His creative hands. Each thing carried the mark of the creative hand of its Maker, therefore everything was perfect, of an enchanting beauty. Each created thing was animated by vivid light, either as property of nature given to it by God, or indirectly, communicated by one who possessed it. Everything was light and beauty. But amid so much light and enchantment of beauty, one could see a black speck, which appeared so ugly, especially being in the midst of so many works, so beautiful, majestic and refulgent. This black speck aroused terror and compassion, because it seemed that, in its own nature, God had not created it black, but beautiful; even more, it once was a work of the most beautiful created by the Supreme Being.

…

“We are inseparable from Our works, and We like them so much that We delight in doing them continuously, and this is why they maintain themselves majestic, beautiful, fresh, as if, there and then, they were receiving the beginning of their life. Look at them – how beautiful they are; they are the narrators of Our Divine Being and Our perennial glory. But amid so much glory of Ours, look – there is the black speck of the human will. Loving man with greater love, We endowed him with a free will, but, abusing, he wanted to breathe and palpitate in his human will, not with Ours, and therefore it changes continuously to the extent of blackening, losing its beauty and freshness, and it reaches the point of losing the Divine Life in its human nature.

So, who will put to flight the thick darkening of the human will? Who will give back to it the freshness, the beauty of its creation? The acts done in Our Divine Will. They will be light which will dispel the darkness, and heat which, molding it with its heat, will destroy in it all the bad humors that have rendered it ugly. The acts done in my Will will be the rebound to all the human acts done with the human will. This rebound will restore the freshness, the beauty, the order, as the human will was created. Therefore, many acts are needed, done by the creature in Our Divine Volition, in order to prepare the counterpoison, the beauty, the freshness, the act opposite to everything evil that the human will has done. Then will Our works in Creation appear all beautiful; the black speck will disappear, and it will convert into a point, the most luminous one, in the midst of the magnificence of Our created works; and Our Divine Will will take the dominion of all, and will reign on earth as It does in Heaven.” [MT]

Again, man’s returning to the Divine Will is a sufficient condition for the Divine Will taking “the dominion of all.” This means that there are no fallen intelligent creatures in the physical universe other than man.

16. Volume 27, November 14, 1929

“The first rights of how all things were created, including man, are sacred, are holy and just; and, with justice, all should stick to the first act, as they were created. Only man was unable to maintain for himself the great honor of the way he was created by God; but this cost him so much, and therefore all evils swooped down upon him.” [MT]

17. Volume 28, November 20, 1930

“And since my Will fills heavens, sun, sea and everything, even though they do not have reason, they are dominated freely by the powerful Strength and Reason of my Fiat, from which they never moved away.

Therefore, in the name of the heavens, sun and everything, you can, by right, ask for Its Kingdom, because the smallest thing as well as the greatest, animated and dominated by my Divine Will, is always superior to man. In fact, without It [the Divine Will], man occupies the last place; he is the degraded one and the most humiliated in the midst of all created things; he is the neediest, the poorest who, in order to live, has to stretch out his hand to all created things to receive the charity of their beneficial effects.” [MT]

If there were other fallen beings in the physical universe besides man, he would not occupy the “last place”, nor would he be the “neediest” or “most humilitated” or “poorest” in the universe.

18. Volume 29, May 31, 1931

“The sea, as it murmurs, the water, as it gives itself to creatures, the earth, as it becomes green and produces plants and flowers – so many multiple acts of my Will do they perform. My Will is the motor of everything and keeps all Creation in act of doing Its Will; and this is why they are all happy, they never lose their place of honor, nor are they subject to dying – because my Will operating in created things gives them perennial life. Only the creature, the one who was to make the greatest display in doing a continued act of my Will, is the only one that goes out of the motor of It, and reaches the point of placing herself against a Will so holy.” [MT]

To repeat: “the creature” is man.

19. Volume 30, April 2, 1932

“My daughter, all the works of Our Supreme Being are perfect and complete – none of Our works is by half. The Creation is all complete and perfect; even more, there are many things which are not of absolute necessity, but like luxury and pomp of Our power, love and magnificence. Should man alone, for whom all things were created, remain like an incomplete and imperfect work of Our own, without the purpose for which he was created – which is for Our Fiat to have Its Kingdom in each creature? And this, because he sinned and remained stained and degraded, which rendered him like a collapsing house, exposed to his thieves and enemies – as if Our Power were limited and did not have all the power to do what It wants, the way It wants it, and when It wants it? Whoever thinks that the Kingdom of Our Will cannot come puts Our very Supreme Power in doubt. We can do anything; We might lack the willingness, but when We want it Our Power is so great, that whatever We want We do – there is nothing that can resist before Our Power.” [MT]

20. Volume 31, September 8, 1932

“My daughter, created things were made by Us in order to form many ways, so that man might make use of them in order to come to Us. In fact, We left them all open, so that, whenever he wanted to come, he would have no need to knock, or to open in order to come to Us. He was Our son – it was right and reasonable that he would have all the ways open to go to His Celestial Father and spend time with Him, to love Him and be loved, and, as son, to ask Him for graces and favors. But do you know what the ungrateful son did? He himself shut the ways closed, formed the bars and, by sin, formed the doors, closing the correspondences with the One who had given him life. Now, do you want to know who returns to open the doors, to burn up the bars? One who loves Me and lives in my Divine Will. The love and my Fiat are the powerful forces that burn and empty everything, and open all the ways, so as to place the distant child once again in the arms of his Celestial Father.

21. Volume 33, May 12, 1934

“[A]ll things, and the very human nature, draw from the eternal motion of God, in such a way that everything revolves around Him. The whole of Creation, the breath, the heartbeat, the blood circulation, are under the empire of the eternal motion; and since everyone and everything receives life from this motion, they are inseparable from God; and as they have life, so do they revolve around the Supreme Being with a unanimous race. So, the breath, the heartbeat, the human motion – it is not in their power to breathe, to palpitate, to move; whether they want it or not, given the incessant motion of the Eternal One, they too feel the incessant act of breathing, of palpitating and of moving. It can be said that they live life together with God and with all created things, which revolve around Him without ever stopping.

Only the human will, as We had created it with the great gift of the free willing, that it might tell Us, freely, that it loved Us – not because it was forced, as the breath is forced to breathing, or the heart to beating and to receiving the motion of its Creator; but out of its wanted will, not forced, it might love Us and remain together with Us, to receive the operating life in Our Volition… [ellipsis in original] It [The Divine Volition] was the greatest honor and gift We gave to the creature, and she, ungrateful, moves away from Our union and inseparability, and therefore from the union of all and of everything, and therefore she gets lost, she degrades herself, becomes debilitated, loses the one strength, and is the only one in the whole Creation to lose her race, her place of honor, her beauty, her glory, and goes wandering, shifted from her place that she has in Our Will, which calls her, longs for her to be at her place of honor. So, all have a place, even the human breath and heartbeat; and since everyone and everything has a place, they never lose life and their incessant motion – none of them feels poor, weak, but rich in the eternal motion of their Creator. Only the human will, because it does not want to be in the royal place of the Divine Volition is the lost one and the poorest of all …” [MT]

22. Volume 36, April 25, 1938

“This is why I call the creature [i.e., the human being] to live in Our Will – so that she may be sustained and strengthened by It, and so give honor to Our creative work. In fact, only man is voluble, while all Our other works never change: the heavens are always fixed, nor do they tire of remaining stretched out; the sun always runs its course, nor does it ever change the action of giving its light for the good of all the earth; the air is always in act of letting itself be breathed. All things remain just as they were created by Us, and they keep doing the same action. Only man, by not wanting to live in Our Divine Will, descends from the manners of his Creator and is incapable of bringing his works to completion, therefore he can’t love them or appreciate them, nor can he receive the merit of his works.” [MT]

Conclusion

My stated objective was to demonstrate that

  • Luisa Piccarretta’s clear and consistent position throughout the Book of Heaven is that man is the only fallen EIC (as per Thesis A)

    • This was acheived in the previous section. An overabundance of evidence was given in support of this point. There is no room for doubt.

  • Fr Iannuzzi’s position is that ETIs exist and that some of them are fallen

    • This was acheived in the section just before that, entitled “Quotations from Fr Iannuzzi on fallen aliens”. An overabundance of evidence was given in support of this point also. There is no room for doubt.

  • Fr Iannuzzi therefore (i) contradicts Thesis A and (ii) in this respect departs from the cosmology outlined in the Book of Heaven.

    1. This has been acheived. The conclusion follows from the previous two points, both of which have been demonstrated.

How far does Iannuzzi depart from the cosmology outlined in the Book of Heaven in general? That is another question, which we have not addressed here. To begin to answer it, we would have to ask whether Iannuzzi’s belief in ETIs (not just fallen ETIs) contradicts Luisa’s cosmology. Toward the beginning of this article I indicated in passing that there is no room in Luisa’s cosmology for the existence of embodied intelligent creatures other than man. However, I didn’t provide any evidence for this. This will be the objective of a future research article.

In a follow-up article I will

  • discuss the significance of Iannuzzi’s (very obvious and very public) departure from the cosmology outlined in the Book of Heaven, in light of the fact that Iannuzzi is an internationally renowned scholar, expert, teacher and champion of the spirituality of Luisa Piccarreta, and

  • draw attention to some of the negative aspects of this bizarre and unfortunate situation.

Final Comments

Respectful comments are welcome either through this website (there are two methods: the “Contact” page or the comments section) or by email directly: brendan.philosophy [at] gmail.com

If you’d like to support my work — a lot of work has gone into this project, and I mean a lot— you might

  • share this article

  • write to me

  • subscribe and/or

  • pray for me, for my family and for this work.

At this stage I have not set up the right platform(s) for donations. If you’d like to do that in the future (for the price of a coffee, for example), you might express your interest/pledge through email or the Contact page.

I’d be very grateful for any form of support.

God bless you.

Dr Brendan Triffett




























Read More
Brendan Triffett Brendan Triffett

Father Iannuzzi’s Flights of Fancy: Transcripts of Video 1.

Bottom Centre: The so-called “Abydos Helicopter” in the Temple of Seti I at Abydos. These hieroglyphic marks are taken as “evidence” by pseudo-archeologists for their belief in ancient aliens. The claim that these marks are evidence of ancient advanced technology was debunked decades ago. This is just one example of the sort of pseudo-scientific BS that Fr Joseph Iannuzzi (Bottom Right) has swallowed uncritically and then regurgitated to an audience of well over 15,000 on a platform provided by Dr Michael James (Bottom Left). Top Centre: Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, producer and presenter for the History Channel series Ancient Aliens. Known in popular culture for his outrageous beliefs, outrageous hair, and for the “I’m not saying it was aliens … but it was aliens” meme. While Tsoukalos and Fr Iannuzzi are both ancient astronaut theorists, Iannuzzi attempts to “baptise” the theory, filtering parts of Zechariah Sitchen’s first book (Top Left) through to a Catholic audience.

Introduction

In this post I provide some excerpts from the first video in the three part series called "The Vatican, Christianity and Aliens.” The three videos appear on a YouTube Channel called Divine Will Era. Fr Joseph Iannuzzi is the presenter and the host is a certain Dr Michael James. The description under this first video is as follows:

Citing from Christian and official sources, Fr. J.L. Iannuzzi, STL, S.Th.D. demonstrates the existence of intelligent alien life.

Part 1: Fr. JL Iannuzzi introduces the Church’s position on extraterrestrial life, and a brief overview of its overwhelming evidence in Sacred Scripture, tradition, hagiography, anthropology, historical archives, declassified and military documents and more.

The title of the video is Fr. Dr. Iannuzzi: Vatican & Aliens PART 1: Intelligent Life throughout Cosmos - Padre Pio - Prophecy. That is quite a mouthful and has too many colons and dashes, so I will be calling it simply, “Video 1”. It is found here.

In my critical analysis of Video 1, I will debunk many of the claims made by Fr Iannnuzzi and point out numerous logical errors. The purpose of the post you are reading is to prepare the ground for my critical analysis in a future post.

Here you will find resources (“the evidence”): transcripts for a number of excerpts from Video 1, links to the corresponding video footage along with time stamps, relevant images from the video footage, and a summary list of the claims that I will be evaluating. I will be referring back to this evidence in my critical analysis.

The context and motivation for this project is explained in my first post here.

*

Both Fr Iannuzzi and Dr James are known for promoting the writings and spirituality of Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta (1865—1947). So let me be clear: my intention is not to cast doubt on the authenticity of Luisa’s writings nor on the spirituality that is called “living in the Divine Will.”

In fact, one of the concerns motivating this project is that Fr Iannuzzi has drawn upon the writings of Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta in his arguments for the existence of aliens (extraterrestrial intelligence, ETI). I firmly believe that Fr Iannuzzi is causing confusion by appropriating Luisa’s writings (and the commentary of St Annibale de Francia) in this way for his own personal speculations on ETI. In this case—I do not say “in general” or “as a rule” but simply “in this case”—he has taken passages out of context and mangled their meaning.

In a future post I will highlight the sections in Video 2 where Fr Iannuzzi brings the writings of Luisa and St Annibale into his argument for the existence of ETIs (see here until the end of the video).

This way of presenting Luisa’s writings may or may not be dishonest. For it’s possible that Father genuinely believes that the cited passages mean what he wants them to mean. If that’s the case, that is a great concern in itself! There are two possibilities here, as I see it: either Iannuzzi was careless and incompetent when it came to interpreting a certain portion of Luisa’s writings, or he has acted dishonestly. But in any case it is highly irresponsible of him to be so careless in his interpretation and presentation of these passages.

I understand that I haven’t yet made my case for these claims about Iannuzzi’s reading of Luisa—I have only directed the reader to the evidence (two paragraphs above). And we must presume that a person is “innocent” until proven “guilty”. May nobody violate this principle of justice when it comes to their judgements about Fr Iannuzzi.

The difficulty I face is that this has expanded into a larger project with many parts and I want to start at the beginning. But at the same time it’s necessary to provide the context of the project, and to communicate my motivation, my intentions, the reasons for my concern, and the direction in which the project is going. I have confessed my concerns; I have not yet made my case.

*

So let’s look at the evidence! Links to the excerpts of video are provided in case the reader would like to check the content or accuracy of the transcript. Watching the excerpts is not strictly necessary, however. My comments are in square brackets. Italics indicate emphasis given by the speaker. I draw attention to parts of the text by using bold.

The reader who wants to “cut to the chase” might prefer to skip to the final section, the summary.

Excerpts of Video 1

Excerpt 1a

Video 1: 5:40 – 6:05

See the 25 second clip here or watch from here until 6:05.

They [i.e., different types of Church documents cited in the Catechism] do not all enjoy the same level of authoritative teaching. So when we are speaking you know the teaching of the Church on extraterrestrials which is not definitive, you're open to believe it. Actually the Church encourages to … encourages you to believe it. Even the Vatican priest in charge of the [Vatican] Observatory has said we should believe because there's a lot of reason to.

According to Iannuzzi, then:

  • The Church encourages you to believe in ETIs.

Excerpt 1b

Video 1: 9:14 – 10:04

See the 50 second clip here or watch from here until 10:04.

And as I mentioned the Vatican chief astronomer Father José Funes [Director of the Vatican Observatory from 2006 to 2015] said that – and I'm going to quote you from him – “In my opinion the possibility of life on other planets exists.” The possibility of life on other planets exists. This is a statement from the Vatican chief astronomer and he says there’s no conflict between believing in God and then the possibility of extraterrestrial brothers. He uses that word “brothers”. So they're not all evil as some of these cracker barrel theologians who have no degree in theology are claiming on the internet [context: Iannuzzi is taking a shot at Daniel O’Connor without naming him], saying oh they're all evil, they're fallen angels, they're possessing. No. They're not angels. They're not humans. They are entities as Saint Padre Pio stated, that are visible, that are physical but that are not on Earth. They may visit the Earth but they're not from here.

Iannuzzi’s claims:

  • Some theologians claim that all encounters with aliens are actually encounters with demons, but this is incorrect.

  • ETIs exist, but not all ETIs are evil.

  • At least some of them are our “brothers”.

  • ETIs may visit the Earth but they are not from here.

Excerpt 1c

Video 1: 15:36 – 15:51

See the 14 second clip here or watch from here until 15:51.

Well you mentioned that one-third of the beings fell and this goes all the way back to Revelation chapter 12 verses 4 through 9 that one third of the stars fell. It does not mention a third of the angels fell […]

 Iannuzzi claims that

  • One third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos/universe fell with Lucifer.

 The same theme will appear again multiple times, more clearly expressed.

Excerpt 1d

Video 1: 16:11 – 17:29

See the 46 second clip here and the 31 second clip here.

Alternatively watch from here until 17:29.

But in scripture “stars” also refers to all rational beings including those throughout the cosmos. This is alluded to in Daniel chapter 12 verse 3, Philippians 2:15. The point is, one must avoid theological reductionism which takes “stars” and applies it to only one group of individuals like the angels. And in Christian circles this has been the case. They interpret this passage of Revelation referring to a third of the stars as meaning only … only the third of the angels. The Church does not teach that it refers only to the angels. Yes, it includes the angels. Because stars is referred to as angels, as is Jesus Christ, as are believers. But it doesn’t limit it to just the angels.

[16:58] So it is theologically sound to propose that one third of all rational beings fell with Lucifer. Therefore this may explain in part the difference between the good beings throughout the cosmos that are supported by many eyewitness testimonies as well as the bad ones throughout the cosmos. Well, considering that only one third fell, the good outnumber the bad.

Iannuzzi claims: 

  • One third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos/universe fell with Lucifer [as above]

  • This may explain why there are testimonies of encounters with good ETIs and also testimonies of encounters with bad ETIs.

  • It is theologically sound to propose that one third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos fell, and to read Revelation 12:4 in this way.

  • The good ETIs outnumber the bad 2:1.

Excerpt 1e

Video 1: 17:37 – 17:53 …

See the 16 second clip here or watch from here until 17:53.

Iannuzzi claims that

  • His view on ETIs is “founded theological speculation grounded upon eyewitness reports, traditional teachings, apparition, revelations approved by the Church. And Scripture itself.”

Excerpt 1f

Video 1: … 17:53 – 18:25 …

See the 32 second clip here or watch from here until 18:25.

Let’s go to Scripture, the Book of Genesis. When Adam and Eve were created, according to biblical genealogies 4000 BC, six thousand years ago … after he committed original sin, Cain and Abel … Cain just walked up and killed Abel because God preferred Abel’s sacrifice. Then God puts a mark on Cain, why? So that nobody would harm him. Well if Adam and Eve were the only two people there why would he have to put on a mark unless others were there that could harm him?

The rhetorical question, seen in context, is a claim:

  • Since God had to put a mark on Cain to protect him, there must have been other rational beings on Earth at that time outside the human race (Adam and Eve and their descendants).

Excerpt 1g

Video 1: … 18:26 – 20:00 …

See the 55 second clip here and the 39 second clip here.

Alternatively watch from here until 20:00.

We also find in the same Book of Genesis, Deuteronomy, there were these beings that fell from above they called the Nephilim. Now what are these beings that fell from above? The word “Nephilim” in Hebrew doesn't mean “angels”. It means beings that didn't come but fell from above. And this is found in Genesis 6:4, it's found in Numbers 13:31. But these Nephilim are just one of several unexplained beings in the Old Testament that were here.

But what's interesting about these Nephilim is that they had relations with the daughters of men. Who were these beings? The Church does not teach definitively on this. It only gives us suggestions or opinions or theories in footnotes. But we do know that as soon as these Nephilim that fell from above were having relations with the daughters of men, the inhabitants were so evil, God sent the flood.

The Anakites, these were another unknown civilization of beings in Canaan around the time, shortly after Adam. Or … it was actually, they were probably there before Adam.

But we know that they're described in a way that suggests that they were very large beings, almost giants. For example, Deuteronomy 2:10, 21, Deuteronomy 9:2, Numbers 13 32-33. And then you have these other beings called the Emites that were very strong people and as tall as the Anakites. This is found in Deuteronomy 2:10. And the list goes on.

Here Iannuzzi claims:

  • The Nephilim are not fallen angels.

  • “Nephilim” means a being that didn’t come but fell from above.

  • There were several unexplained groups of beings in the OT that existed on Earth, including the Nephilim.

  • The Nephilim had relations with the daughters of men.

  • The Flood was God’s response to widespread evil.

  • The book of Genesis associates the widespread evil that immediately preceded the Flood with the Nephilim having relations with the daughters of men.

  • There were a number of civilizations of unknown beings in Canaan in OT times (from Adam to Joshua), including the Anakites.

  • The Anakites probably existed before Adam.

  • The Anakites and Emites were very large beings: giants or almost giants.

Excerpt 1h

Video 1: … 20:00 – 21:05 …

See the 36 second clip here and the 28 second clip here.

Alternatively watch from here until 21:05.

We also have evidence of archaeological findings that revealed that there were civilizations buried underground for millennia that pre-date 4000 BC. For example there's a place called Çatalhöyük, it's a funny word […] it was apparently founded, has been dated to 9000 BC [official sites say around 7500 BC, others say 9000 BC]. That was discovered by archaeologists. And then we have these pictographs, etchings in caves throughout the world that go so far as almost 39 000 BC.

 

And the oldest known pictograph is in the upper Paleolithic area of Mount Castillo. Point is, it's very likely and it's proven archaeologically and historically that there are images and writings in stone, cuneiform, hieroglyphics that pre-date the 4000 BC creation of Adam and Eve. These were not humans. These were very likely beings but from where we don't know.

Iannuzzi claims:

  • Archeological findings tell us that there were civilizations of (embodied) rational beings on Earth millennia before 4000 BC.

  • But Adam and Eve were created around 4000 BC.

  • Therefore these more ancient rational beings were not human.

Excerpt 1i

Video 1: … 21:05 – 22:10

See the 23 second clip here and the 41 second clip here.

Alternatively watch from here until 22:10.

The Sumeran texts [he must mean “Sumerian” because “Sumeran” means something else entirely!], they are witness to this and the scholar [sic!] that recently died, Zecharia Stitchen [he must mean “Sitchin”] who interpreted Sanskrit and Sumeran [i.e., Sumerian] which only like four people on Earth can read, he was very clear that and he can show the actual cuneiforms, they knew the solar system thousands of years before we discovered it. [At 21:10 an image is shown of Sitchin with a Sumerian artefact, the VA 243 Cylinder Seal. A section of the seal shows a star-like image with eleven smaller circles surrounding it.] You could see nine planets.

Relevant images that appear in this excerpt:

This is a zoomed-in version (shown at 21:23 — the lower circle or “planet” has been cropped out) of a close-up of the VA 243 cylinder seal that has added markings. The close-up with added markings can be found on pseudo-scientific websites — and on sites devoted to debunking Sitchin’s claims. I don’t know who added the markings originally.

This image doesn’t appear in the excerpt; it appears on this site. Note that in this version the lower circle (the so-called “planet”) has not been cropped out.

In Excerpt 1i Iannuzi claims that:

  • There are Sumerian texts which support the existence of pre-Adamic rational beings on Earth.

  • Zecharia Sitchin is a reliable scholar and translator of these Sumerian texts.

  • Only about four people on Earth can read Sumerian texts.

  • Reading the cuneiform script on Sumerian artefacts, Sitchin was able to demonstrate that the Sumerians knew about the solar system (Sun and nine planets) thousands of years before we knew about it.

  • There is a Sumerian artefact (the VA 243 cylinder seal) where you can see our solar system depicted with nine planets.

  • Scientists have confirmed that a ninth planet (after Neptune, but not Pluto) may well exist with a long orbit around the Sun of between ten thousand and twenty thousand Earth years.

Excerpt 1j

Video 1: 22:21 – 22:45

See the 23 second clip here or watch from here until 22:45.

So you say to yourself, how could these Sumerans [i.e., Sumerians] know this, have this knowledge? And how can Cain receive this Mark if there was no one but Adam and Eve? Who were these Nephilim, these Emites etc? [at 22:38 an image of the “flying aircraft” hieroglyphics is shown] And the Egyptian hieroglyphics you look at some of them, you find flying aircraft engraved in them. Things that look like helicopters, discs.

In Excerpt 1j a number of questions are raised by Fr Iannuzzi:

  • How could the ancient Sumerians have such detailed knowledge of our solar system?

  • From which rational beings on Earth did God protect Cain, given that there were no other humans on Earth that might harm him at that time?

  • Who were the Nephilim, the Anakites and the Emites?

He claims that

  • There are flying aircraft engraved in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs; these look like helicopters and flying discs.

From Iannuzzi’s perspective, this raises another question:

  • How do we explain archaeological artefacts that suggest the existence of advanced technology (e.g., flying aircraft, electricity [edit 03/05/2025: see excerpt 3d, watch from here until 16:30]) in ancient times?

It is clear that Iannuzzi raises these questions in order to lead us to a conclusion:

  • There were embodied rational beings on Earth prior to Adam and Eve with advanced scientific knowledge and technology.

Iannuzzi’s argument would be as follows (I’ve added steps of the argument that are clearly implied):

  • That such beings existed on Earth is the most probable explanation of the four mysteries mentioned.

  • 1. How could the ancient Sumerians have such detailed knowledge of our solar system?

    • It was given to them by another race of embodied rational beings.

  • 2. From which rational beings on Earth did God protect Cain, given that there were no other humans on Earth that might harm him at that time?

    • A non-human race or races existed on the Earth at that time.

  • 3. Who were the Nephilim, the Anakites and the Emites?

    • A non-human race or races existed on the Earth at that time.

  • 4. How do we explain archaeological artefacts that suggest the existence of advanced technology in ancient times?

    • Some non-human civilization (or civilizations) shared some of their technologies with ancient humans, or some of these technologies were witnessed by ancient humans, or both.

Excerpt 1k

Video 1: 28:00 – 28:32

See the 32 second clip here or watch from here until 28:32.

But Bruno Sammaciccia again is a reputable individual, he's an academic. He published over a hundred books. He was a distinguished figure in academic circles. Basically in 1956 a group of ETs appeared to him according to his memoirs and they were good. And they shared to him things about how to be better in the world, improve the society in which we live and things like that. But on the flip side as I mentioned you have the bad ones and that in my opinion refers to that one third that fell with Lucifer.

Relevant images shown:

In Excerpt 1k Iannuzzi claims:

  • Bruno Sammaciccia is a reputable individual and a distinguished academic, and has published over 100 books.

  • According to Sammaciccia’s memoirs, good ETIs appeared to him in the 1950s and they spoke with him about how to be better and how to improve the world.

  • Sammaciccia’s descriptions of these “good ETIs” are credible.

  • Nonetheless some ETIs are bad; again these are the “one third of the stars” that fell with Lucifer.

Excerpt 1l

Video 1: 31:07 – 31:30

See the clip here or watch from here until 31:30.

So there is ample evidence and I'm not even going into other reputable exemplars of the Church that have testified to this reality that these extraterrestrials are neither angels nor they're [sic] humans but they are sentient beings, rational beings with an intellect, with a volition … that are like we do [sic].

Iannuzzi claims that

  • Several reputable exemplars of the Church have testified that

    • ETIs exist

    • ETIs are neither angels nor humans

    • ETIs are sentient, rational beings with intellect and will like us.

Summary

Fr Iannuzzi makes a number of claims in Video 1. The claims uncovered above are gathered together and listed below. Note that it was not my intention to uncover all of the claims that Iannuzzi makes in the excerpts, let alone in Video 1 as a whole. Nor do the excerpts cover the whole of the video.

I round off the list of claims with a summary statement made by Iannuzzi at the start of Video 2 in the series, about the (supposed) evidence he provided in Video 1 for the existence of ETIs. This summary statement gives us further evidence that some or all of the non-human rational beings that Iannuzzi mentions in Excerpt 1j are understood by him to be ETIs. In Excerpts 1f through 1j, then, Iannuzzi sometimes argues indirectly for the existence of ancient ETIs on Earth — the ancient astronaut theory — by arguing for the existence of ancient non-human rational beings on Earth. But he also argues directly for the ancient astronaut hypothesis by describing the Nephilim as corporal, non-angelic beings (i.e., not demons) who fell from above.

Given everything that Iannuzzi says previously in Video 1, and given where his argument is headed, it is safe to assume that Iannuzzi here means “above” as a reference to outer space (“the heavens”) and thus to other planets. There is certainly precedence for this. Sitchin and other ancient astronaut theorists claim that the original meaning (or one of the original meanings) of “Nephilim” in Genesis and 1 Enoch is “those who came down from above” (see The Twelfth Planet, pp. vii, 128ff) where “above” means outer space. The late Dr Michael Heiser critiques Sitchin’s etymology here.

Excerpt 1a

1a1: The Church encourages you to believe in ETIs.

Excerpt 1b

1b1: Some theologians claim that all encounters with aliens are actually encounters with demons, but this is incorrect.

1b2: ETIs exist, but not all ETIs are evil.

1b3: At least some of them are our “brothers”.

1b4: ETIs may visit the Earth but they are not from here.

Excerpt 1c

1c1: One third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos/universe fell with Lucifer [see 1d1].

Excerpt 1d

1d1: One third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos/universe fell with Lucifer [same as 1c1].

1d2: This may explain why there are testimonies of encounters with good ETIs and also testimonies of encounters with bad ETIs.

1d3: It is theologically sound to propose that one third of all rational beings throughout the cosmos fell, and to read Revelation 12:4 in this way.

1d4: The good ETIs outnumber the bad 2:1.

Excerpt 1e

1e1: Fr Iannuzzi’s view on ETIs is “founded theological speculation grounded upon eyewitness reports, traditional teachings, apparition, revelations approved by the Church. And Scripture itself.”

Excerpt 1f

1f1: Since God had to put a mark on Cain to protect him, there must have been other rational beings on Earth at that time outside the human race (Adam and Eve and their descendants).

Excerpt 1g

1g1: The Nephilim described in Genesis are not fallen angels.

1g2: “Nephilim” means a being that didn’t come but fell from above.

1g3: There were several unexplained groups of beings in the OT that existed on Earth, including the Nephilim.

1g3: The Nephilim had relations with the daughters of men.

1g4: The Flood was God’s response to widespread evil.

1g5: The book of Genesis associates the widespread evil that immediately preceded the Flood with the Nephilim having relations with the daughters of men.

1g6: There were a number of civilizations of unknown beings in Canaan in OT times (from Adam to Joshua), including the Anakites.

1g7: The Anakites probably existed before Adam.

1g8: The Anakites and Emites were very large beings: giants or almost giants.

Excerpt 1h

1h1: Archeological findings tell us that there were civilizations of (embodied) rational beings on Earth millennia before 4000 BC.

1h2: But Adam and Eve were created around 4000 BC.

1h3: Therefore these more ancient rational beings were not human.

Excerpt 1i

1i1: There are Sumerian texts which support the existence of pre-Adamic rational beings on Earth.

1i2: Zecharia Sitchin is a reliable scholar and translator of these Sumerian texts.

1i3: Only about four people on Earth can read Sumerian texts.

1i4: Reading the cuneiform script on Sumerian artefacts, Sitchin was able to demonstrate that the Sumerians knew about the solar system (Sun and nine planets) thousands of years before we knew about it.

1i5: There is a Sumerian artefact (the VA 243 cylinder seal) where you can see our solar system depicted with nine planets.

1i6: Scientists have confirmed that a ninth planet (after Neptune, but not Pluto) may well exist with a long orbit around the Sun of between ten thousand and twenty thousand Earth years.

Excerpt 1j

1j1: There are flying aircraft engraved in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs; these look like helicopters and flying discs.

1j2: There were embodied rational beings on Earth prior to Adam and Eve with advanced scientific knowledge and technology.

1j3: That such beings existed on Earth is the most probable explanation of four mysteries:

  • How could the ancient Sumerians have such detailed knowledge of our solar system?

    • 1j4: It was given to them by another race of embodied rational beings.

  • From which rational beings on Earth did God protect Cain, given that there were no other humans on Earth that might harm him at that time?

    • 1j5: A non-human race or races existed on the Earth at that time (same as 1f1).

  • Who were the Nephilim, the Anakites and the Emites?

    • 1j6: A non-human race or races existed on the Earth at that time.

  • How do we explain archaeological artefacts that suggest the existence of advanced technology in ancient times?

    • 1j7: Some non-human civilization (or civilizations) shared some of their technologies with ancient humans, or some of these technologies were witnessed by ancient humans, or both.

Excerpt 1k

1k1: Bruno Sammaciccia is a reputable individual and a distinguished academic, and has published over 100 books.

1k2: According to Sammaciccia’s memoirs, good ETIs appeared to him in the 1950s and they spoke with him about how to be better and how to improve the world.

1k3: Sammaciccia’s descriptions of these “good ETIs” are credible.

1k4: Nonetheless some ETIs are bad; these are the “one third of the stars” that fell with Lucifer [see 1d1 - 1d4].

Excerpt 1l

1l1:  Several reputable exemplars of the Church have testified that ETIs exist, that they are neither angels nor humans, and that they are ETIs are sentient, rational beings with intellect and will like us.

*

Excerpt 2A

Video 2: 1:49 – 2:05

See the 16 second clip here or watch from here until 2:05.

The first part addressed the scientific and anthropological data as well as the military and eye-witness reports in support of extra-terrestrial life or the possibility thereof on other planets.

2a1: There is scientific and anthropological evidence, and military and eye-witness reports, in support of the existence of ETIs.

Read More