Michael,
It is now time for me to give you my evidence, my reasoning, behind
why I believe aliens exist. As it is my reasoning here, I have decided for this letter not
to necessarily offer proof, as much as to provide some of the steps which have taken place
inside my mind which have allowed me to believe in there existence. I hope that these same
steps can help provide others the same conclusion, but I realize that because I am
following the steps within my own mind, there are many areas which I might neglect in this
exposition which I see as a given which others will not see. Thus, I provide here as
promised: an exposition of my reasoning. Take it as you will for what it is. I do believe
there is good material to be had here, and indeed, good material which will help allow one
to understand more about creation and God. However, do not take it as the only way this
discussion can be done: I have provided this letter as an opening statement, so to speak.
Now it is for you to examine and to provide the areas which need to be filled in, so that
I can better communicate to you and others the reasons for my belief, reasons which I
believe come to one conclusion. For others to see that conclusion, I believe it might take
more than what I have provided below. Nonetheless, as I have dealt with your side of the
argument, now I think it is time for us to look to the other side, and to deal with why I
believe they exist. It is only fair to you that I offer some explanation, since I have
first dealt with your explanation for why you believe their existence is not probable.
There are a two ways I would like to go about this discussion. I would
like to portray the answer in two different forms, so that through the probability which
can be surmised for each of them, their combination will be superior than each one said
individually. I will then end my discussion with observations from literature written by
Saints. I have chosen for this letter to use two different examples, one of contact with a
non-human intelligence, and the other with a phenomena which is quite similar to the UFO
phenomena as we see in the modern world.
I
Evolutionary Reasoning
Science offers its own understanding of the universe. It is often
prone to change, but nonetheless the most current understanding that science offers of the
universe is always an important starting point in discussing what exists within the
universe. Science offers several ways in understanding the universe around us. The primary
way of concern for this letter is evolutionary; for indeed, evolution is a science which
discusses the development of life, and that is precisely what is of concern in this
discussion: the development of life in the universe. Evolution teaches us that there is a
method, a way for life to develop from simple uni-celled creatures to multi-celled,
intelligent creatures (of which man is one). The process, though we do not know everything
about it as we would like, is natural, and as such should be something which could be
repeated. It is not necessarily an easy process, nor is it necessarily a process that
would be repeated often, but nonetheless, given the natural side to the process, it is
conceivable to see that other planets, once life has begun, can and will develop some form
of intelligent species.
Life itself must begin in some sort of natural, predictable, repeatable
process. What makes up the physical aspects of life, the simple proteins which are found
in all life forms, are themselves very easily made in nature. From the point of simple
proteins to the point of a living life-form might be a process which, humanly speaking,
would take too long to notice, but on the cosmic scale of time would be a very short,
quick process. "On our planet, it has taken at least several hundreds of millions of
years for the evolution of simple one-celled organisms from the materials of the primitive
atmosphere and oceans. "(Intelligent Life In The Universe, Carl Sagan and I.S.
Shklowvskii. Holden-Day, Inc., 1966: p. 343). Though this sounds like a tremendous amount
of time, nonetheless it is rather small in comparison to the age of the earth itself. Thus
if on the earth the process was rather quick, then it helps demonstrate that life is not
too difficult to develop; the process of developing the first form of life to more complex
forms, small multi-celled creatures, would be a much easier and quicker process than the
development of life. This would require much less time (the process of developing a single
celled creature is much more difficult than the process of that entity from creating more
and varied life and from that the creation and production of variation, mutation which
would lead to multi-cellular life); from the small multi-celled life-forms the diversity
of life would develop along several chains of speciation which would itself be a quicker
process than its predecessor (the more complex something is, there more capability there
is for variation, and the more variation, the quicker the change).
Carl Sagan notes that natural selection, which helps produce variation
and change in the world, would help establish and develop intelligence. "Natural
selection has served as a kind of intellectual sieve, producing brains and intelligences
increasingly competent to deal with the laws of nature." (Dragons of Eden.
Ballantine Books: 1977: p.242-3). What this means is that as species develop, one of the
properties which would allow for success in the development and continuation of its kind
would be one which would allow for more insight and instinctive adaptability to a changing
environment. As the environment changed, either the strongest and more adapted to the new
conditions, or the ones who were able to produce some adaptations for themselves survived.
This encourages the growth of more intelligent life-forms; on the earth, this production
of ever-increasing intelligent species would include, but not be limited to: chimpanzees,
apes, Neanderthals, Homo Sapiens, dolphins, and mice. It is true that of the species on
the earth, man alone is the one who has developed the greatest intellectual capability,
but nonetheless, it has developed through a long process of evolutionary activity: the
kind of activity which would occur in other environments where life had begun. Thus what
occurred here, could and would occur wherever life begins. And since the development of
life itself, seen within the realm of science, is something which is natural and would
thus be predictable, it would be within the realm of probability that in the expanse of
the universe, the same laws which developed life on earth would develop life on other
planets; life, once it began, would then develop into several multiple chains of being,
just like on earth, and some of them would slowly develop more intelligent species until
one dominated the world, and preserved itself with the development of culture.
It is within this framework that several modern scientists believe that
intelligent life must exist in the universe: the universe is too vast for the processes
not to occur in other localities. Understanding the development of life on earth is key
for final analysis in this evolutionary theory. It would make perfect sense that life on
earth would not be a unique exception in the universe, but rather that life is easily
produced given the same kind of chemical reactions, given the same kind of general
conditions and time. Since life on earth is considered to have developed within a
reasonably short amount of time, it helps provide evidence that life, in its initial
stages, is not as complicated to develop as some might believe; since the development of
the initial stages of life would be more complicated than producing variations, it would
seem that if life is easy then complex life forms and intelligent life would be the
necessary end. It would seem rather strange to think that, for some reason, that the
production of planets in our solar system underwent a unique experience so that it
produced the most unique and important event in the universe; it would indeed be sheer
nonsense to view our solar system as such, and can only be based upon false
anthropomorphic ideologies. So, within the framework of evolution, studying the initial
stages and creation of life it would seem more probable than not that life flourishes in
the universe; this is not proof, but just probability on the most empirical fashion
available. However, this itself will be quite useful in the next stage of this discussion,
as will become evident.
II
From Empirical to Philosophical
The next way to address this question is philosophically. Since philosophical inquiries often require several steps into addressing an issue, I shall proceed in this side one step at a time. I hope each step of the way will be clear, and when everything is brought together, it will produce why I believe alien life exists.
A) It is possible for God to make multiple worlds and to make multiple life forms which have intelligence. We must fully recognize this ability of God before going any further. This was indeed an important question in the scholastic era. Aristotelian thought led to the belief that there was only one world, and it was necessary that the one world itself is all that existed. Now there are several ways one can interpret the meaning of such a statement, but for several it brought the idea that the earth was the only world, and it was all that there could be. This idea must be objected to; it would limit God's ability. St. Bonaventure, for example, wrote specifically on this topic in his Commentary on the Sentences, and he believed it was an unquestioned truth that God could indeed create a multitude of worlds. The scholastic principle of God's omnipotence allowed God the ability to do anything which was not self-contradictory; the question would thus be, is the multiplication of worlds a self-contradictory problem in power? Obviously, as we can now see, that this is indeed not the case; Aristotelian logic did create some problems on this topic which did lead many astray, but nonetheless, I think we must both agree on that God has the ability to do so.
B) The next step requires the examination and use of a principle which St. Augustine discusses in his work, On Free Choice of the Will. "If, therefore, it [the human soul] knows by right reason that God ought to have made something, let it believe that God has in fact done so, even if it does not see the thing among those that God has made." (On Free Choice of the Will. Trans. by Thomas Williams, Hackett: 1993: Book III: 5.). The principle which establishes this fact is one based upon our idea of God. It rests in His infinite goodness so that if there is something needful, He would create it: within creation, anything which reason can establish as that it should exist, would itself be something which God in His intellect would see would be needed and in His goodness would create it. The reasoning behind this principle is multifold. One aspect of it is the simple establishment and belief that God, who is all good, would create all that which would be proper in the universe because of His goodness; He would create, as Leibniz has said, "The best of all possible worlds." If there is some reason for us to believe something should exist: that it would be proper for it to exist, then there is thus every reason, if our reasoning is true, that it indeed exists, even if it is something which we have not seen with our senses. St. Augustine in discussing this principle, while establishing it, has given us the reason why he believes we should hold onto it:
For you cannot conceive anything better in creation that has slipped the mind of the Creator. Indeed, the human soul is naturally connected with the divine reasons on which it depends. When it says 'It would be better to make this than that,' if what it says is true, and it sees what it is saying, then it sees that truth in the reasons to which it is connected" (ibid).
In other words, our minds participate and learn of truth and the reasons behind the
truth through its interaction with and joining with the mind of God. If it finds some
hidden secret of the universe, something which should be true, it is because it has
received a grasp of truth, a grasp of the reasons or thoughts of God. Through
contemplation, through reasoning, a mind can be illumined and at least partially
experience the divine reasons or logoi of creation; if in its participation of
these thoughts of God, it finds something which is necessary in creation and the person
with his senses has not been seen, the person can rest assured that God has conceived of
such a thing, and has brought forth what He conceived into existence.
This principle, by itself, can be said to bring forth an answer to the
question: I have been given a grasp of creation, and in having had such a grasp, have seen
the wonder and greatness of God's ability. God has created the earth as a microcosm of the
universe; we can see how life has established itself throughout all of the earth, and has
found itself spreading even to the most remote parts of the planet: if we can see that God
has provided this example of the earth, we must but concede that the universe is not empty
and barren, but rather filled with life: a life which God has established not just on
earth, but throughout the cosmos. This indeed leads to the next and most valuable point:
C) The principle of creation, the establishment of life, is an expression of the
goodness of God. Because the goodness of God is infinite, the ability and desire to create
would be, by God, a representation of that infinite side of God. For indeed, why did God
create the universe and the life within it? It was to establish and allow others to share
in His existence, and there is no reason to think God would bring a limit to this. This
can be seen as Arthur O. Lovejoy calls it in The Great Chain of Being as the
principle of plenitude. It is a principle which has been firmly accepted and believed by
theists of all kinds. It is the principle which states that God's goodness is the reason
behind creation and life, and that creation is an expression of His goodness, so that if
creation itself were limited, and if life were limited to a small sphere of creation,
there would be something wrong with the universe in relation to God: for creation is, as I
have said, the establishment, sharing and expression of at God's goodness and love. To
limit life in the universe would thus show that God's goodness and love are limited; if
the universe is not the habitation of life, but instead, found to be composed of a harsh,
lifeless cosmos, it would seem to indicate something is wrong with theism's understanding
of creation; it would also seem to indicate, instead of being a principle behind creation,
life would only be the exception to the rule behind creation. The universe would be made
so that it is hostile to the production of life. Is that what we would want to believe?
Surely, as I will show, this is not the belief of the Church's Saints and philosophers.
They believe that God created out of goodness to allow a multitude to share in Himself.
Life is indeed a principle of creation. This two-fold side of the issue of plentitude will
be examined below, first with an eye to the Saints discussion on the goodness of good, and
then with it, a discussion of God's desire to create in plentitude. For creation is an
expression of His love, and if that is so, we can only logically conclude that the vast
universe must contain other places where life exists, where indeed, God has shown forth
more of himself.
St. Augustine, in his City of God states, "Neither is there
any author more excellent than God, nor any skill more efficacious than the word of God,
nor any cause better than that good might be created by the good God. This also Plato has
assigned as the most sufficient reason for the creation of the world, that good works
might be made by a good God (cf. Timaeus 29D)." (City of God. Nicene-Post
Nicene Fathers, First Series, Vol 2, Trans. Rev. Marcus Dods, D.D., ed. Schaff: Book XI,
Chapter 21). The creation of the universe has for its principle: goodness. Indeed, as St.
Augustine reminds us, Plato has also indicated that God created so that good works can be
made by a good God; should we find a limit to those works, shall we find a limit to God?
He also tells us that God is in fact the best artist, best author. However, if we could
conceive of something better, a more grand story than offered by God, would that still be
the case? If the universe is the story made by God, we must thus imagine that, as the best
author, best story-teller, God has allowed for the universe the grandest story that could
ever be told. Pseudo-Dionysius next follows and agrees with this fact that God, who is The
Good, by this alone seeks to extend its goodness into all things. "This essential
Good, by the very fact of its existence, extends goodness into all things."
("Divine Names," Pseudo-Dionysius the Complete Works. Classics of Western
Spirituality, trans. Colm Luibheid. Paulist Press: 1987: Chapter IV.1). God's creation is
an establishment of God's goodness; here we find that it is by God's very existence that
He extends this goodness about so that it fills all things.
It is the expression of God's essence, His goodness, that we find all
things being moved into and participating in God's goodness, and this act is first
established through the good act of creation. Thus St. John of Damascus states,
"Since, then, God, Who is good and more than good, did not find satisfaction in
self-contemplation, but in His exceeding goodness wished certain things to come into
existence which would enjoy His benefits and share in His goodness, He brought all things
out of nothing into being and created them, both what is invisible and what is
visible." (On the Orthodox Faith, Book II: Chapter II, Trans S.D.F. Salmond, D.D.,
ed. Schaff, Nicene-Post Nicene Fathers Series II Vol 9).
St. Thomas Aquinas follows up on this principle, that is, God created
the universe out of the principle of goodness, with his own understanding of creation and
God's being. He believes that creation is not the perfecting of the divine essence, which
is perfect in itself, but the perfecting of the divine image, that is, God's image is
perfected by the participation of a multitude in His image; the greater the participation,
the greater His image; since God desires to perfect His image, creation enfolds with a
multitude of those who can participate in it :
Again, everyone desires the perfection of that which is willed and loved by him for its own sake. For the things that we love for their own sake we want to be most perfect and always to become better and multiplied as much as possible. But God wills and loves His essence for its own sake. Now, the divine essence cannot be increased or multiplied in itself, as is manifest from what has been said; it can be multiplied solely according to its likeness, which is participated by many. God, therefore, wills the multitude of things in willing and loving His own essence and perfection. (Summa Contra Gentiles, Trans. Anton C. Pegis, Image Books: 1955: Book I, C. 75: 3,).
St. Thomas Aquinas does not neglect the goodness of God in the act of creation. In the
same chapter he states, "But the divine essence is most perfect as goodness and as
end. It will, therefore, supremely diffuse its causality to many, so that many things may
be willed for its sake..." (ibid, 6). So we have in St. Thomas Aquinas, the principle
of plenitude established as an expression of God's self-love. This self-love of God seeks
its greatest fulfillment, and combined with God's goodness, it creates the multitude found
in the universe.
In his own way, Marsilio Ficino is following this principle of St.
Thomas Aquinas in his commentary on Plato's Symposium. He also puts it within the
framework of God's love. "The desire to propagate one's own perfection is a certain
type of love. Absolute perfection is the supreme power of God. This perfection the divine
Intellect contemplates. And from there the divine Will desires to propagate the same
perfection outside itself. Out of this love of propagation, all things are created by
Him." (Commentary on Plato's Symposium on Love, Trans. by Sears Jayne. Spring
Publications, 1985: p. 64). Thus, we can see, that through love, God has formed and
created the abundance which is found in creation. Ficino, I think, has hit properly on the
establishment of creation: the desire to propagate His own existence led to God's own
internal contemplation, through which He brought forth in His love the free-willed
creation of all His divine ideas, that is, of all that is found within God's intellect as
having a mode of existence already, was brought into temporal existence. God thus in
creation, establishes what is within Himself, and provides to it, out of His divine Love,
the ability of free-existence as a gift.
I have provided all these examples, from the multitude which exists on
this topic, to help establish I think the most fundamental aspect of creation, that is,
that God in creation willed to create the multitude which exists in the universe as being
capable of responding to and interacting with Him; that is, in participating in His
existence as a means of sharing Himself, His goodness, and His love. The principle of
plenitude rests on the concept that creation is the establishing of the infinite love and
goodness and power of God into the cosmos by forming a cosmos that is a reflection of this
love. Indeed, it is in the act of creation that we first begin to see another principle
inside God, a principle that Hans von Balthasar saw established through the Incarnation:
"God is Life." (cf. Presence and Thought, An Essay on the Religious
Philosophy of Gregory of Nyssa, trans. Mark Sebanc. Communio Books, Ignatius Press,
1995, p. 153). Since Balthasar also understood that the relationship of creation and the
Incarnation are linked together (cf. A Theology of History, Communio Books,
Ignatius Press 1994, p. 60-70), I think his reflection on the revelation of the
Incarnation is also properly a reflection on what we can gain out of the act of creation
of God. For indeed, if we can see in the Incarnation a reflection of the act of creation,
and the act of the Incarnation establishes that God is life, we must also see that in the
act of creation. For in creation God established through love the multiplication of His
Divine image, and through that multiplication, His image, which is an image of life, must
itself be a reflection of life. We should be expecting to see, through creation, the
multiplication and greatness of life, that principle which Balthasar believed is
established as a revelation of what God is.
D) The Universe is immense. I do not know what the current estimates of its size is,
but the immensity of the universe is a magnitude, even at its lowest estimates, which
could boggle the mind of man. A pondering of what is out there, what God has produced,
must be something which would create awe in any man. However, are we to limit that awe;
should we believe that, alone in the universe is this small dwelling place, earth, where
God has provided life? I do not think that is an attainable result, following what we know
of the act of creation: if creation is the establishment and representation of God's
image, I would think the universe should be filled with life. We must look out into space
and wonder with amazement, not at the emptiness of the universe, for this would produce
despair (a despair, for example, which Pascal felt when contemplating an empty universe as
can be seen in some reflections in his Pensees), but instead, the awe of a universe
filled with life. Knowing God's principle of creation: the establishment of His love, the
establishment of His life, we should be well aware and ready to believe that God has
created life abundantly in the universe (whatever the size of the universe is; when the
universe is only believed to be the earth, it was believed all over the earth there is
life; now that we know it is beyond the earth, we must also extend this belief to all the
cosmos). It is the probable end of what we know evolutionary; it is also the probable end
we must believe would be of God's own purpose in creating a universe so large. Indeed, if
the universe is this immense and barren, it is a representation not of life, but of death;
the universe which is an act of love out of God, an act of representing himself, an act
which is tied to the revelation of the Incarnation, can not be an act representing death.
I can only believe that God would create a universe this immense, this grand of scale,
only because it is God's great love which we see expressed; a love which, though we do not
know all of its manifold ways, we can be assured is founded upon the love of life, a love
of God's own being. Indeed, as having followed what St. Augustine said above, I think we
can then come to a conclusion beyond probability into knowing that indeed, out in the
universe, God has indeed created life, because it is more fitting that such life exists
than if it does not exist. It is more fitting to believe the representation of God in
creation is a representation of love and life, than a representation of despair and death.
Thus, I think I have established a reason, a major reason, why we should believe life
exists elsewhere in the universe, even if we have not had any other evidence than of its
existence other than what we know of God and God's ways. However, I am sure you could
bring up this reply, "Yes, I can believe that life exists in the universe, but this
does not make me believe that intelligent life, life which we can interact with, must
exist. I have already said that I believe non-rational life is possible, and perhaps with
this you have shown me why it is more probable than not, but I still desire to see why you
would believe rational, intelligent life exists in the universe, outside of what we know:
man."
I will quickly answer this question. I think in one aspect, it should
be obvious: not only is God life, but God is Wisdom, and in Wisdom God has made the
universe. We should thus expect that creation should also have within it a multifold
representation of this Wisdom. Since rationality is a higher form of participation in God,
we can believe that the number of creatures which possess an intellect near to, equal
with, or greater than man's own would be far fewer than those which just participate in
life, but nonetheless, far greater than just one. Why should we believe more than one? I
will answer first in analogy: man is the highest form of creation on the earth, and has
been established as the steward of his realm, the earth. I would find it reasonable that
all planets which have developed life will possess its own intelligent form created for
that same purpose; hence, the earth is in that respect something which can be seen to be
the norm, not the exception of creation. I think it is the only reasonable assumption we
can make giving what we know: anything else is speculation which would follow, I think, a
limitation on what God could and would do.
Is this the only reason? No. I think I will next examine, briefly, what
St. Thomas Aquinas has said on the creation of creatures with intellect. This will require
a two-fold extraction from Book II of the Summa Contra Gentiles. First, St. Thomas
explains several reasons why there is a plurality of entities within creation: I shall
here give one of his explanations:
Furthermore, a plurality of goods is better than a single finite good, since they contain the latter and more beside. But all goodness possessed by creatures is finite, falling short of the infinite goodness of God. Hence, the universe of creatures is more perfect if there are many grades of things than if there were but one. Now, it befits the supreme good to make what is best. It was therefore fitting that God should make many grades of creatures. (Trans. James F. Anderson. University of Notre Dame Press, 1975: Chapter 45: 5).
St. Thomas establishes for us that in the universe, we should expect a multitude of
beings, each one finding itself within a hierarchy of being, finding its perfect seat and
allowing for its place in the unity of creation, allowing for each aspect of the hierarchy
to have its place in creation. Using this alone, since we can see there is a gulf between
man and angel, we can expect there are beings in-between man and angel in rationality, and
having not found them on the earth, we should be willing to expect them on other worlds;
in similar respect, we can expect beings which as a species contain less intellectual
capabilities of man, but greater than any other animal we find on the earth, and here
again, if we have not found it on earth, its place must thus be somewhere else in the
universe.
The next question which I would like to address, which also St. Thomas
Aquinas offers with many solutions, is why there would be the need of entities with
intellects to be created in the universe. He provides several important answers to this
topic, and each have their own merit, but I would like, for sake of a concise answer,
address this question with one of his answers:
Likewise, the only thing that moves God to produce creatures is His own goodness, which He wished to communicate to other things by likening to Himself, as was shown in Book I of this work. Now, the likeness of one thing is found in another thing in two ways: first, as regards natural being [...] second, cognitively, as the likeness of fire is in sight or touch. Hence, that the likeness of God might exist in things perfectly, in the ways possible, it was necessary that the divine goodness be communicated to things by likeness not only in existing, but also in knowing. But only an intellect is capable of knowing the divine goodness. Accordingly, it was necessary that there should be intellectual creatures. (ibid, chapter 46:6).
Hence, according to St. Thomas, there is the need in the creation, not only the creation of beings which participate in God's life, but also those which would participate in his intellectual life. Thus, we see it is indeed another aspect of creation which needs to be addressed: God's creation is a manifold manifestation of his love: first, in providing existence to all that which is within, but also the creation of entities which can participate in the ability of intellection. In similar fashion to the production of life in the universe, and why it should be spread throughout, I believe we have found the reason why intellectual life should also be spread about in the universe. It is in some proportion which is probably expressed through what we find on the earth itself. Because each world of creation which contains life would be incomplete in itself without some sort of being which would allow for the world to experience the higher experiences of God, it is to be considered proper of God, as it was for the earth, to produce intelligent life throughout the universe. As St. Thomas shows us, the creation of intellectual creatures is a part of God's infinite goodness; I think we would be limiting God's own ability of creation, limiting his goodness by positing the idea that God would only produce one world in the universe where intelligence has been provided for. Indeed, since man can be said to be a microcosm of the cosmos, it seems that the cosmos itself is based upon the principles of both life and intellection; if life is abundant, then we must also believe that, as God is life, God is also Wisdom, in the creation of the cosmos we would see that God has provided for a multitude of intelligent creatures: each showing forth and providing a deeper understanding of God's own nature to the universe by the special gifts given to it.
III
Two Examples From History Written by Doctors of the Church Which Indicate Other Intelligent Life Forms
For my last section, I want to end with a note of two observations
of events written in histories by Doctors of the Church. Though there are many examples I
can bring forth, these two represent two odd and interesting events. One of them, from St.
Jerome, is an account St. Jerome recorded of an intelligent creature encountered by St.
Antony in the Desert. The other, from St. Bede, is from his History of the English
Church and People, where he relates a phenomenon which strike me as quite similar to
the modern UFO phenomena. The reason I bring the first forward is that it is a witness to
the belief and acceptance by a Doctor of the Church of the existence of other intelligent
species existing in the cosmos; the second, as a representation showing that, whatever the
UFO phenomena represents in the modern world, it is something which has haunted man
throughout the centuries. I myself remain uncertain and even skeptical about many UFO
reports in the modern world, but I do believe there is something odd going on, even if the
majority discussed are hoaxes. I do not necessarily think the stories told about alien
encounters are true, but I do believe that even if we have not encountered alien life
before, it exists in the universe; but I also believe, at least once (as related by St.
Jerome), such life has been encountered (though there are other records written by other
Saints which indicate at least some encounters with non-human intelligent creatures which
I might bring forth in my next letter).
The story I want to relate from St. Jerome is from his Life of
Paulus the First Hermit. St. Antony the Great, having been told that there lived in
the desert a man (St. Paul) who had entered its domains before St. Antony's own exodus
into the desert, wanted to meet the man himself. He set out into the desert in search for
St. Paul. In his adventure, he encountered a creature which showed signs of intelligence
and wit, while nonetheless was certainly not human:
Before long in a small rocky valley shut in on all sides he sees a mannikin with hooked snout, horned forehead, and extremities like a goats' feet. When he saw this, Antony like a good soldier seized the shield of faith and the helmet of hope: the creature none the less began to offer him the fruit of the palm-trees to support him on his journey as it were pledges of peace. Antony perceiving this stopped and asked who it was: "I am a mortal being and one of the inhabitants of the desert whom the Gentiles deluded by various forms of error worship under the names of Fauns, Satyrs, and Incubi. I am sent to represent my tribe. We pray you in our behalf to entreat the favour of your Lord and ours, who, we have learnt, came once to save the world, and 'whose sound has gone forth into all the earth.'" [St. Anthony was in awe of this event and of his ability to understand the speech of the creature] ...He [St. Antony] had not finished speaking when, as if on wings, the wild creature fled away. Let no one scruple to believe this incident; its truth is supported by what took place when Constantine was on the throne, a matter of which the whole world was witness. For a man of that kind was brought alive to Alexandria and shewn as a wonderful sight to the people. Afterwards his lifeless body, to prevent its decay through the summer heat, was preserved in salt and brought to Antioch that the Emperor might see it. (St. Jerome, The Life of Paulus the First Hermit, Trans. W.H. Freemantle, ed. Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series II Vol 6).
Here we have recorded in the writings of St. Jerome the belief that an entity was seen
by not only St. Antony the Great, but by those who lived in Alexandria and by Constantine.
This creature was recorded to have the ability of speech and said of itself that he was a
representative of his tribe or people. It is interesting to note that this is precisely
one kind of encounter I would expect between humanity and aliens, and it is indeed this
one small work of St. Jerome which first enlightened my mind into thinking beyond the
modern human-centered notion of the cosmos. For if a Doctor and historian of the Church
believed that non-human intelligent creatures existed, and believed that there were at
least two different encounters with creatures from this species, then I saw that both the
difficulty of the Church with other creatures had long ago been dismissed, but also that
there seemed to be within the annals of Church history witnesses to other entities in the
cosmos. Some have told me that it would only be through an encounter with an alien that
they would believe in their existence; though this record will not suffice for them, it
would nonetheless indicate that it should suffice to some who view St. Jerome as an
authority of note to believe that they can exist, and that at least within the framework
of history events have unfolded which seem to indicate that humanity has already
encountered such entities. Indeed, in thinking about what St. Jerome has said here, I can
not but think what kind of spectacle the creature would have been in Alexandria, who,
alive, must have explained to the people more about himself and his people, a record which
has sorrowfully been lost if one ever was made; after its death (how it was achieved, St.
Jerome does not relate), that the body was preserved in salt to be shown to others
indicates that others took an interest in this otherwise unusual entity in creation. I
believe, thus, we have here within the works of St. Jerome an example of actual human
contact with alien life though I admit it is for now unproven the accuracy of this
historical document. I accept it in light of no better evidence to the contrary. It should
suffice at least to demonstrate that their existence was at least accepted as being
compatible with the Catholic faith.
Secondly, as I have said, I want to briefly show forth from the
writings of St. Bede, another Doctor of the Church, an indication which seems to show that
the phenomena of UFOs in the modern world have been recorded within the annals of Church
history and should hint to us, at least, that something more is going on than we know.
Indeed, with the relation of what we now know of technology and of the immense size of the
universe, I do think a possible explanation of these phenomena is indeed brief encounters
with alien life (though as a side note this is not an apology for the UFO phenomena, but
rather an observation which I made when I read Bede, and since the UFO phenomena is
connected with the discussion of alien life, I think this is fitting for this letter).
Of a heavenly light near a convent:
For one night when they had finished singing the morning psalms of praise to the God, these servants of Christ left the oratory to visit the graves of the brothers who had departed this life before them. And as they were singing their customary praises to the Lord, a light from heaven like a great sheet suddenly appeared and shone over them all, so alarming them that they even broke off their singing in consternation. After a short while, this brilliant light, compared to which the noonday sun would appear dark, rose and traveled to the south of the convent westward of the oratory and, having remained over that area for a time, withdrew heavenwards in the sight of them all. (Bede, A History of the English People and Church, trans. Leo Sherley-Price, revised R.E. Latham, Penguin Books: 1968: Book IV: 7).
I have provided this one example out of a few odd occurrences in St. Bede's work because it is the best representation in work from which I can make an ample observation. There are a couple other incidents recorded in his history which indicate an odd light around the graves of the dead, or even taking up with it the souls of the dead. However, here we have an indication, not only of a light, but a mobile one which St. Bede said was witnessed first by a group of nuns visiting the graves of the deceased, and then moving around the monastery a bit, it entered into the sky and vanished. I do not know fully what is described here, but one possible (and indeed, as I say, possible) explanation is that this is indeed an example of the same phenomena being reported in this day and age of unusual mobile lights, which are often connected with the discussions of alien life. It is this reason alone I bring this into the discussion: I think no full representation from history on this topic can be complete without at least one UFO mentioned, because of the connection in the modern mythos of aliens with UFO phenomena; the two might be connected, they might not, I do not know. But it does indicate a possibility, a thought, something to examine and ponder, in relation to what we know of God, of the universe, that would we not expect that if other species exist, we will one day encounter them in one fashion or another. If indeed we have, and these UFO phenomena are such an encounter, there is surely much on the topic which is confusing and perplexing, and can only be answered when full dialogue has been established; if it is not, then it is an indication of another and unidentified phenomena which I think needs to be explored, investigated, and possible solutions brought forth.
IV
Some Concluding Remarks
I believe that this here should provide insight into why I believe the universe is inhabited by a multitude of intelligent species. I do think there are many questions in this brief exploration of the topic which have not been answered, but instead, only initially addressed. I offer here for your examination the outline of my thought. I await your exploration of the topic and the response it produces so that I can have some format within which to enrich this outline, to find those areas which someone else would find to be the weakest and most important points to address, so that whatever holes I have left with this outline can be fixed and the work polished and shaped so that it can produce a more elaborate and detailed explanation of the existence of alien life. Thus, I pose this as only an introductory analysis, and to be treated as such: those areas where I have neglected, I will desire to go further into; those areas which I might have gone astray or askew, to remove. Either way, I send it and await your response. Let me know what you think, and how you would respond. Let me know so that I can move forward: the bones have been placed, let us bring flesh to this thesis.
In Christ,
Henry