An important theme for this blog is the scene in the New Testament where Jesus can be found FLOGGING the money-changers out of the temple. My header above depicts a priest FLOGGING the devils that distort the faith and assault believers. The faith that gives us consolation can and should also make us very uncomfortable. Both Divine Mercy and Divine Justice meet in Jesus. Priests are ministers of reconciliation, but never at the cost of truth. In or out of season, we must be courageous in preaching and living out the Gospel of Life. The title of my blog is a play on words, not Flogger Priest but Blogger Priest.
Pope Sergius III obtained the papal office by murder. He lived openly with a woman who bore him several illegitimate children. His reign began a period known as “the rule of the harlots.”
My response:
The allegation here goes beyond the certain facts. Consecrated in 904 and died in 911, most of what we know comes from the bias reports of his adversaries. Put forward for the papacy in 898, he failed to get elected and went into retirement. Unhappy that Christopher had taken the papacy by violence; the Romans imprisoned him and asked Sergius to take his place. He declared the ordinations by Formosus as null. Allegations that Sergius placed his two predecessors (Leo V and Christopher) to death or that he had relations with Marozia resulting in an illegitimate son (Pope John XI) are very dubious. The last charge was not made until fifty years after the death of the Pope. Such lies were told to damage his legacy and stand in conflict with what his trusted contemporaries said of him. He expanded the Church in England, defended the Filioque clause against errors of the Eastern churches and restored the Lateran Basilica. The so-called “rule of the harlots” had to do with the emergence of strong or influential women upon the world scene (Theodora, and her daughter Marozia, the mother of Pope John XI). This was viewed by a chauvinistic world as a reversal of the natural order.
QUESTION: The reading 1 John 5:14-21 has come up again in the liturgical readings (January 11, 2014) and it confuses me. What does it mean not to pray for the sin that leads to death?
ANSWER:
What we ask should be in conformity with the divine will. Divine providence cannot be circumvented.
We can intervene for the venial sins of our brothers and sisters. That is a basic component of intercessory prayer. If the person is disposed to mercy, then God hears and answers such prayers.
Mortal sin is more serious and requires the immediate contrition of the sinner. The Church also employs the mediation of priestly absolution in the sacrament of Penance.
The one who belongs to God is in genuine friendship with him. Mortal sin signifies a breech. It forfeits the life of grace.
We are commissioned to abide in God and to spread the Good News.
Medallion from 1787 Wedgwood Anti-slavery Campaign
We often think that dissent from the Holy See and the teaching Church is a new phenomenon. However, just as the land of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” silences any reference to God in her schools and promotes the mass murder of the unborn in the womb, so too did our land, and even her Catholic citizens, dissent from papal admonitions against slavery. Catholic churchmen held large parcels of land and like their Protestant fellows, maintained the institution of slavery. The Maryland colony first founded as a haven for Catholics would later facilitate in Baltimore Harbor a central commercial trade in slaves. People were bartered as nothing more than animals or property. Personhood was denied. Human rights were trampled upon. The rights of landowners and the “choice” of European stock immigrants were made preferential over the needs and wants of people kidnapped from the African shores.
Slavery as practiced by the Jews or later by Christians in the ancient world did not compare to it. Slaves were taken from conquered peoples and indentured servants would be used well into the colonial period of America. After a period of service, and even restitution, such slaves were freed. However, we are the ones (European colonialism) who invented perpetual racial slavery– a foul business that could be passed on from generation to generation. Families could be separated. Torture and death could be implemented without any care or worry about censure. Great Britain would renounce slavery many years prior to the Civil War (ended 1865) when the issue would be forced in the United States. Here is the irony. If the Revolutionary War had gone the other way, blacks would have known freedom many generations earlier.
1778 – Slavery outlawed in Scotland.
1807 – British slave trade outlawed.
1833 – All British slaves freed.
Reserving ourselves to the Catholic community, it must be admitted that Catholics often catechized and had their slaves baptized. However, the churches would be segregated and later their schools. It is interesting that Cardinal O’Boyle in Washington, DC would order the desegregation of parochial schools in the 1950′s prior to similar efforts by the federal government. But, past injustice must not be excused because of later enlightenment.
Today many of our people and liberal Catholic theologians and bishops argue for abortion, artificial contraception and active homosexuality. They are the spiritual heirs to the Catholic dissenters on the matter of slavery.
Pope Eugene IV ordered that black slaves be freed in the Canary Islands back in 1435. Columbus was not even born yet! He demanded that “these peoples are to be totally and perpetually free” (Sicut Dudum). Slaveholders who refused the order were excommunicated.
Indians from the New World would be brought to the Pope with the absurd question as to whether or not they were human beings. It was hoped that if the Holy Father deemed them subhuman or animals, that this would legitimate the slave trade and the confiscation of their lands.
Pope Paul III (1537) condemned slavery in the New World, saying, “The Indians and all other peoples … who shall hereafter come to the attention of Christians … are not to be deprived of their liberty and their possessions” (Sublimis Deus). While in regard to the mistreatment of Native Americans, this condemnation of slavery was absolute. Slavers were rebuked as minions of the devil and rationalizations for slavery denounced as without any value. Pastorale Officium imposed automatic excommunication for any who tried to enslave the Indians or take their possessions.
The Holy Office of the Inquisition responded to a question on March 20, 1686 about the practice of enslaving innocent blacks. The Church rejected such actions and argued that they had to be freed and restitution made for the injustice against them.
The later popes spoke with one voice. Pope Gregory XVI (1839) stipulated that no one should “dare to bother unjustly, despoil of their possessions, or enslave Indians, Blacks, or other such peoples” (In Supremo). He decried the traders for their “sordid gain” and the slave trade as an “inhuman traffic.” Even the defending of such slave trade was ordered forbidden.
Nevertheless, the Catholic bishops met in Baltimore in 1840 and contended that the Pope was only condemning the slave trade, not domestic slavery in the U.S. Is there a similarity between the position of the bishops (for which Bishop John England was a major spokesman) in 1840 and the position of certain Churchmen today in excusing U.S. military intervention around the world or pampering pro-abortion Catholic politicians here at home?
Toward the end of the nineteen century, Pope Leo XIII, the great pope who wrote about the dignity and rights of workers, also deplored the remnants of slavery in Africa and parts of South America.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (a Catholic and former seminarian) argues from natural law that the situation of slavery in America and abortion today are analogous– both strip human beings of personhood, liberty and life.
Where is the prophetic voice? What will future generations, if a culture of life should supplant one of death, think of this generation and her leaders– civil and religious?
This topic is revisited in many ways. It would also regard how we treat the immigrants. Some would invite them to work here but deprive them of the benefits given our citizens. The rise of labor unions and Catholic social teaching responded to the needs and rights of American laborers. Further, what about the sweat shops where workers are exploited so that we might buy cheaper goods? Many of the identical concerns attached to slavery are encountered here.
I would direct readers to Fr. Joel Panzer’s excellent book, The Popes and Slavery. Those who would fault the Church on this question would have to further impugn the apostles and Christ. However, Christianity, while it did not eradicate this social institution, did create a new mindset in its regard. One had to share the faith with servants and treat them in a manner that would recognize them as brothers and sisters in the Lord. There are numerous documents from Popes and churchmen, and even in the journal of the much maligned Christopher Columbus, that spoke of a temporary bondage so that civilization and faith might be shared with the pagans. This is not to make excuses for what we know today as repugnant; but the Church and faith is given to us in human history and culture, not purely as something from outside. Those well-versed in historiography would appreciate what I am trying to say. The Bible and the Church were not privy to an immediate, complete and definitive Christian Anthropology. The truth required time and reflection.
It is untrue that the Church was silent on the evils of certain forms of slavery until after the Civil War. As I said before, American “chattel” or “traditional” slavery would not pass the moral litmus test of the Church. However, there were other forms of servitude. Our country also saw the employment of indentured servants. After the debt was paid or the contract satisfied, the servant was given his freedom. Such would be a form of “slavery,” would find a parallel with prison chain gangs and prisoners of war.
Slavery under pagan Roman law was brutal and stripped the person of basic rights. While Christianity did not eradicate the institution, believers were rightfully conflicted and challenged as to how the institution might be maintained. The treatment of individual slaves necessarily changed and the seed which was the spirit of the Gospel would work toward its eventual abolition. All men were reckoned children of God and brothers and sisters to one another, regardless of social standing or class. Given St. Paul’s command that slaves should obey their masters, it was argued by many authorities that certain forms of slavery or servitude were in accordance with natural law. Distinctions were made about voluntary and involuntary servitude. Immoral acts could not be required of anyone, even a slave. Temporary versus perpetual slavery was debated and delineated. Chattel slavery was condemned for treating the human being as an animal and not respecting personhood. The master was also morally obligated. He had to clothe, shelter, and feed the slave. He had to give him a Christian upbringing. The servant could not be tortured, killed or given inhuman working conditions. The master could not separate families. I am not saying that everyone followed the rules; but there were rules. Indeed, given that the rules for Christians were so often broken, later moralists rejected the whole notion of slavery as justifiable, either with natural law or with the spirit of the Gospel. Slavery had to be abolished if people were to have genuine freedom and a sense of self-respect.
When speaking about celibacy, St. Paul often becomes the point man in the argument. Nevertheless, the Gospels also give us much food for spiritual reflection.
Matthew 19:9-12 – “I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” [His] disciples said to him, “If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” He answered, “Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it.”
Jesus explains that many misunderstand the true meaning of marriage. Next he talks about those who were born eunuchs, those made so by men, and those who embraced such a life for “the kingdom of heaven.” We hear angry debates these days about homosexuals and whether they were born with the disorientation or it was inflicted by others through trauma or seduction. At least for the so-called eunuch, both scenarios are true. Jesus is acknowledging that some men are naturally inclined to a negligible sexual drive. Some critics contend that he actually includes homosexuals in this category of eunuch since by nature or intervention, they can only live a moral or holy life if they abstain from improper sexual relations. Slaves who watched over harems were sometimes made into physical eunuchs by the removal of their testicles. A similar practice existed in the Western world where young boys were castrated to preserve their high pitched singing voices. Such a practice would rightfully be condemned today as a form of mutilation. Jesus did not approve of such procedures; he merely acknowledged that these interventions happened. His real emphasis was upon the spiritual eunuch or virgin or celibate. The celibate is a living and visible sign of what we shall become when this world passes away and sacramental signs make way for the beatific vision and divine unity.
Matthew 22:30 – “At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.”
While we shall rise from the dead, like the angels, we will find our completion and union directly in God. There will be no more marriage or giving in marriage. We see this teaching also in Mark and Luke.
Mark 12:25 – “When they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but they are like the angels in heaven.”
Luke 20:34-36 – Jesus said to them, “The children of this age marry and are given in marriage; but those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and to the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. They can no longer die, for they are like angels; and they are the children of God because they are the ones who will rise.”
Right now, in the mortal world, we must have children to insure the survival of the race. However, in the world to come there will be no more death. Like the angels, the number of men and women will be fixed. There will be no more propagation and thus no need for marriage. The celibate priest seeks a spiritual propagation through the conversion of souls. He finds his joy in the regeneration of new sons and daughters to the heavenly Father through spiritual adoption. Men and women will not become a homogeneous humanity in the risen life of the kingdom and neither shall we be strictly angels or ghosts. We shall share characteristics with angelic beings, no more suffering or death, friendship with God, etc. But we shall be restored in body and soul. Angels, properly speaking, were never born and have no physical bodies. Just as not all angels are the same and they are ranked; it is my thought that maleness and femaleness will be ingredients in our demarcation. Of course, our matter has also been informed by our earthly life, our experiences, choices and perception. In other words, we will still have gender and our real selves will be resurrected; but it will be apart from marriage, the sexual drive and the generation of children. That plainly makes it all very different from how we currently understand, employ and struggle as physical-sexual ensouled beings. We count it as true because Christ has revealed it to us. Nevertheless, how it can be true and what it shall make of gender currently remains a puzzle to us. This is a far cry from the graphic and carnal afterlife imagined by many Moslem men in light of promises from the Koran. This makes the Catholic view one that is “in media res,” between a purely spiritual existence and one that merely mirrors, with some amplification, what we currently experience in the body.
Kids can be vulgar in their attitudes toward virginity. But adults and professionals can also be condescending regarding this great sacrificial gift of self. I mention it for several reasons. First, it is a personal witness that I later incorporated into my promise of celibacy made to the Archbishop. Second, while the critique becomes more sophisticated, there remains a prejudice or bigotry against the virgin as if he or she has forfeited a certain essential human experience. Employing the modern and heavily manipulated science of psychology, that will insist that there can be no satisfied maturity without experience of the full gamut of corporeal achievements and sensations. In opposition, I vigorously object to the idea that unless a man or woman has sexual intercourse, he or she is not a full adult or that development becomes precarious. It is precisely this devaluing of virginity that undermines consecrated celibacy in the popular mind. Especially with the acceptance of older candidates, it is probable that many of them have had various romantic relationships and sexual encounters. Sex outside of marriage is neither neutral nor spiritually advantageous. It is a sin and a serious one at that. Of course, the Church is all about forgiveness. Such a man might receive absolution, and once reforming his life, find acceptance as a candidate for holy orders. He will have particular struggles, notably with habit (vice) and with memory. Many men caught up in fornication are later haunted by the bodies and faces of their liaisons…something that plagues their thoughts in marriage and pursues, even tormenting, them into the priesthood. Many psychologists are quiet about this and instead attack the virgin who comes to priestly celibacy. They argue that he is prone to all sorts of neuroses and likely suffers from a distorted or even a mutilated personality. Instead of appreciating virginity as a gift given to God and assumed into priestly celibacy; they categorize it as a perversion. I find this all very dubious and outright dishonest, especially for those mental experts who are Christian. Given that the American Psychiatric Association no longer considers homosexuality as mental illness, these clinicians would judge homosexual acts as preferable to perpetual virginity. Such a claim undermines the professionalism and objective value of the psychological profession. When bishops use psychologists to evaluate candidates; they should first interview the researchers so that they can root out those who are not sympathetic toward celibacy or who do not have the mind of the Church.
This discussion was posted back in 2008. The word was out that the followers of Miranda were planning to disrupt the Masses and visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the United States. They did not even make a blip on the news radar. Back in 2012, Miranda predicted that his followers would be transformed with the ability to walk through walls and to go through fire unscathed. The day came and went with no change. Other cults were predicting the end of the world and the final judgment. But we are still here. While he claims to be Jesus (qualified as “the man”), in 2007, he also claimed to be the Antichrist. He defines this in terms of a demarcation between the Jesus of Scripture and his authority in this new manifestation. His followers mark their bodies with a 666 tattoo. It is all very peculiar.
FATHER JOE:
He says the lie begins in Rome, but he attacks all religions. It is almost unbelievable to me that people would worship this man and mark themselves with the sign of the beast. Their tactics are aggression and screaming. He is now setting his eyes on the growing Hispanic population in the U.S. He denies the name “Jesus of Nazareth” and yet it is this is the saving name. He denies great signs and wonders, as well as miracles: such would cater to a strange occult version of atheism and impugn the efficacy of the sacraments. He claims to be the fulfillment of all prophecies, making him the final term of all human history; this usurps the true Lord of his place as the eternal Word through whom all things came to be and by whom all will be consummated and judged. He denies exorcism by asserting that the devil was destroyed and demons do not exist; such a ploy would allow the devils to remain active in hiding with no saving name of Jesus to cast them out. Arguing that there is no sin, his teachings are absolutely sinister. This collapse of any notion of sin, leaving souls powerless and in bondage would make for a brilliant demonic battle plan. He redefines the number of the beast, 666, as the number for himself, a false Christ, and condemns traditional Christians as apostates. He contends that the number 666 means wisdom and prosperity. He associates it with worldly treasure. There is certainly nothing in his teachings about building up treasure for us in the kingdom to come.
Followers mark themselves with 666 / SSS:
The self-proclaimed Son of God:
The cult is spreading around the United States:
ALENA:
¡Jose Luis de Jesús Miranda es dios! Los sacerdotes son rapists. ¡El papa es un mentiroso! Usted no tiene ninguna derecha de hablar contra él. Protestaremos a papa y proclamaremos la verdad. ¡No hay diablo! ¡No hay pecado! Jesús mató al diablo y ha vencido pecado. Hay infierno no a pagar. Podemos tener placer y hacer lo que deseamos. Predestined a la vida eterna. El resto de las religiones deben ser destruidas. ¡Quémese sus catechisms! ¡Siga a Jesús el hombre!
FATHER JOE:
You are very mistaken. He is not God. The devil is defeated but still spiteful. Priests are good and bad, but mostly good. They bring us God’s mercy and the Eucharist. The commandments are still in force. How we live out our discipleship matters. We should avoid sin and do what is right. There is a hell for those who are God’s enemies. You should live in peace with others, despite differences. The Pope is Christ’s vicar, but unlike your Mister Miranda, he does not claim to be God. How can people be so foolish to join the cults? Here it is [the modern world] and people are worshipping a man like the Romans did the emperor in the time of Christ. Your religious leader is not Jesus. You have all been fooled.
PADRE STEVE:
Wow that man needs a lot of prayers… and so do all those who follow him. So many false saviors… very sad! You do a great job with the blog; keep up the good work! God bless!
MISTER 666:
Well, unlike you, MY GOD HAS BLESSED ME WITH EVERY BLESSING (Ephesians 1:3), and also TOOK sin away at the cross (Hebrews 9:26) and is back now with NO RELATION TO SIN (Hebrews 9:28)… He came, to you, LIKE A THEIF IN THE NIGHT because He´s back and you, like Pharisees, don´t see it (or maybe don´t want for it to be seen… since He´s uncovering all the hidden intentions of your heart!).
IT´S A FACT… Not subject to discussion: JOSE LUIS DE JESUS MIRANDA IS THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST!!!! And, no matter whether you like it or not, WILL destroy your religious system with the SPIRIT OF HIS MOUTH aka with His preaching!!! (2 Thessalonians 2:8) is the gospel of Paul now… “too dangerous” for you? Well… to bad!
FATHER JOE:
You call yourself by the number of the beast, 666? You are the one who is judging good priests with a false verdict. You are the hypocritical Pharisee. Now I see that you are a follower of the cult leader Jesús Miranda? Well, that explains it. He and all his disciples have made the sign of the beast their own. You have been very much deceived. Your soul is in great peril.
CORINNE:
Anyone who feels they have to submit to anyone outside of themselves to gain access to God is fooling themselves unknowingly and standing on shaky ground.
God lives within the heart of man. They will not find God by looking for him in the hearts of others, nor will they find God by looking for him in religions. The heart is the True Church, there is no other.
The only way people are going to realize their mistakes however are by first making them….
Why others feel they have to seek their own divinity in God outside of themselves through others I will never be able to grasp, but they are being taken advantage of unknowingly and will soon find this out on their own. They will soon learn that this too is yet another detour leading them away from God. God talks with all his children, not just some….
FATHER JOE:
The notion that divinity can only be found within the individual person is a heretical teaching. We possess the divine spark but such does not exhaust the reality of God. Further, while there are false messiahs, Catholicism has no problem with mediation: in terms of a teaching authority and in worship. None of us come to God alone. As for the Church, the Catholic Church is the community of faith and the great sacrament of salvation established by Christ.
CORINNE:
Also, anytime someone looks to someone over and above God and worships them, it is a cult and its idolatry.
TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC:
As far as this man, God have mercy on his souls and convert him from his evil ways because he is just paving a path directly to Hell for millions of people. How can you be so blind? I don’t get it.
Pius XII claimed that “the sin of the century is the loss of the sense of sin.” And he is correct as of yet.
CORINNE:
I see the comments here are being taken out of context so I will be moving on and will comment no further. Regarding individual divinity, you’ve twisted my words. We are each a unique individual in God and divine. Take care.
UNKNOWN:
Hey poor idiots— this guy is merely a joke. He gives a disgrace to the name of the Anti-Christ. The Anti-Christ is someone who is powerful and a man full of wisdom. This guy is a filthy scum. It is nice knowing he will burn in hell.
FATHER JOE:
If the title anti-Christ belongs to men other than Nero, then it is a label for any who oppose Christ. If it should also belong to a singular person at the end of human history, then I suspect that…
He, himself, will emerge from a contradictory religious background where selective toleration is preached, applauding one’s own but castigating others and deriding the noble values of our founding fathers;
He will be brilliant and applauded as an orator able to excite and inspire the masses to accept his mission of change;
He will be a person who has forfeited saving grace, redefining sin, not as a violation of God’s will but of one’s own principles;
He will seemingly come out of nowhere;
His rise to power will happen as if overnight;
His fame will far surpass any genuine acts of heroism or virtue;
He will not so much have supporters as worshippers who will chant his name;
Weak people generally regarded as nominally moral will support him even though he will espouse a narcissistic faith and will be explicitly tagged with a 100% pro-abortion and pro-gay rating;
He will be hailed as an icon for a people who were oppressed and will exert a mesmerizing power over the minds and judgments of others;
He will be hailed directly by infidels as the Messiah and indirectly so by fallen-away Christians;
He will come at a time of national unrest and global financial crisis;
He will come at a time when the children of Israel are militarily engaged with those around them and the blood of many innocent people will be spilt;
The whole world will rejoice at his coming and readily accept his authority over them;
He will suffer a grave wound from which he will miraculously recover, albeit through demonic power;
And then, things really get bad!
PEDRO:
If the people of this con-man actually knew the Bible, they would not be so easily brainwashed.
1. For one, in the Bible it states that the numbers 666 will be the mark IN their head or IN their right forehand not the arm. So why does Jose have it on his arm and not encouraging his followers to do what it says in the Bible… maybe because he doesn’t know the Bible? (Revelation 13:16)
2. The Bible also says that the anti-Christ will have a blow to the head. So where is the blow to the head that this man has— nowhere? (Revelation 13:3)
3. The anti-Christ is able to perform miracles. What ones has Jose done— none? (Revelation 13:13-14)
4. And finally, what happens if this con-man dies, what will his followers think?
In the Bible, Jesus states not to follow those who claim to be Christ and that he has said it ahead of time to know not to be deceived (Luke 21:8). Jose first claimed to be Jesus, and now the anti-Christ. Well, this guy is clearly mental. How sad for those who are brainwashed by him. It reminds me of a multi-level marketing company. All I can do is pray for his salvation and to repent before the King comes back.
BOB:
All this talk about Anti-Christ! Doesn’t anybody care about Uncle Apocalypse?
JOLENE:
This man is very dangerous and needs to be stopped! How pathetic that he thinks he’s Jesus Christ? What he needs is to be hospitalized in a mental institution! He could possibly be the Anti-Christ! Being Hispanic, I am very disappointed in the thousands of Hispanic Communities that have chosen to listen to his CR-P! Stop being so ignorant and weak, because that is what you are doing… being WEAK and IGNORANT! Every Christian out there needs to start praying very hard to God and asking him to rid of this insane man! No sin? C’mon now? I cannot be too sure of it… but I am almost positive that this man’s mother did not raise him like this! I am sure she is very, very, disappointed! He has brainwashed thousands of people and has ruined families, marriages, and even spoken bad about our Pope? Anybody that has to say follow me because I’m Jesus is Crazy, Insane, and Ignorant. The people who follow him are just as ignorant as he is!
DALIA:
I REALY WISH THAT THIS GUY CAN PROVE TO ME ABOUT EVERYTHING HE SAYS AND I REALY HOPE THAT HE AND HIS READERS READ THIS AND I HOPE THAT ONE DAY I CAN MEET THIS MAN AND TELL HIM ABOUT THE REAL JESUS CHRIST AND PROVE TO HIM THAT WHAT HE SAID IS WRONG AND TELL HIM ABOUT THE REAL GOD AND THE REAL TURTH AND ABOUT HIS LOVE AND WHO HE REALLY IS.
THIS IS REALY SAD CUZ ITS PEOPLE LIKE THIS THAT MAKES US REAL CHRISTAINS LOOK LIKE A JOKE!
I JUST HOPE THAT HE CAN BE STOPPED BUT NO ONE CAN. ONLY GOD WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT AND ONE DAY WILL REVEAL EVEYTHING HE THINKS HE’S HIDING AND EVERY LIE HE’S BEEN SAYING TO PEOPLE.
I JUST HOPE HE FINDS THAT REAL GOD AND REPENTS FOR EVEYTHING HE’S BEEN SAYING AND DOING CUZ WHEN HE GETS JUDGED BY THE REAL GOD IN HEAVEN HE WILL GO STRAIT TO HELL AND BE BURNED FOR ETERNATY… AND THE PEOPLE THAT FOLLOWED HIM AND KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING IS WRONG!
I WILL PRAY FOR U GUYS AND I TELL U THERE IS NO ONE OUT THERE OR GREATER AND MORE POWERFUL THEN THE GOD IN HEAVEN. THANK U AND GOD BLESS U.
DAN:
I suspect that the guy attracts followers because they want an excuse for continuing in their sins. I doubt if he will attract too much attention & followers.
YASMIN:
To start with, if God would come to earth none of us would be here. And I believe his followers are so blind because they don’t read or understand the bible, this man is putting the bible in his own words and the people that don’t read or understand falls in his lies. If they only knew that all this that’s happening is written in the true word of God! And what’s sad about it is that all of them would be joining him in hell because of their ignorance. This man is just living off of people’s money, if he was the true God he would not need people to offer him cars, companies and their money, because God is the owner of all there is on earth because he made it and he also has the power to rule it whenever he feels like it.
LEEROY:
I’m a shamed to be a human being, knowing that I live in a time that people still believe in idiots like this guy. If you belong to this cult you are the dumbest of the dumb, the weakest of the weak minded and you are slowing down the intellectual evolution of the world. I hope the end is soon so all of these morons can be killed. Maybe the next race will get it right and abolish religion all together. No one represents God, not the pope, or any preacher and especially not this sick man.
FATHER JOE:
Sounds like there is plenty of sickness to go around. You have a very strange hope, indeed. Apart from the rejection of faith, in your anger is there not a terminal hatred of humanity itself? Further, if the race of man should run its course on this planet, why should we think that the intelligent termites (if evolution should dictate) that follow us will fare any better?
DON:
Besides, the number is 616, not 666. It is the number for Nero, and original scrolls have been found at Oxyrinchus showing the number as 6 1 6.
FATHER JOE:
Actually, the number is debated. Certain manuscripts read 616 (3rd century) in reference to the Book of Revelation. It is possible that this is original although most texts give 666. I believe the Latin Vulgate, which is the official Bible of the Catholic Church, gives 666. Some researchers think that the numerology differs because 666 is a code for the Emperor Nero while 616 points to Caligula. Both were certainly anti-Christs in their own right.
JORDYS:
I totally agree with what you guys are saying. This is man is insane, and he uses reverse psychology, and plays around with the Bible’s words to mess with people’s minds. Unfortunately, some people are actually fooled by his clear tricks. However, there must be some action taken soon. This issue will continue to increase, and people will continue following him, leading to the Apocalypse, thus, Armageddon. This man is insane, and it is almost as if he would do exactly anything and everything possible to get what he wants.
BILL:
I would give more credibility to someone who displayed a fraction of the humility set by the example of someone ….say ….like St. Francis. Maybe if we let God deal with this man… he will go away?
MOO:
“The Pope is Christ’s vicar, but unlike your Mister Miranda, he does not claim to be God.” The Catholic Church is claiming that the Pope is unmistaken though, isn’t it?
BRITTANY:
Let us remember the tragedy at Jones Town. 30 years later those images still haunt me. Those people then and these people now are victims. These people are vulnerable and brainwashed; it is only a matter of time before something really bad happens. It is already evident that these people will do anything for their “God” Jose Luis De Jesus Miranda. Let us not forget the horrendous power of an organized cult.
JOSE ARTURO:
Alena….la que escribió el 1er mensaje en este foro. Maldita loca…. Tu si que esta pérdida. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda, es un loco con inteligencia que se esta aprovechando de la situación, ya que en la política no se puede por que es bastante cerrada, pero el tipo es un loco y se aprovecha de las mentes débiles como la de Alena. Que pendejada esta, un tipo que te dice a ti que no hay pecado, que te drogues y hagas orgías con tu tía y abuela. Que pendejada. Todavía hay Indios en America.
FATHER JOE:
Certainly she is deceived about Miranda. He is as you say, a smart fellow who is deliberately taking advantage of others, particularly the gullible. As to the sexual immorality, I do not know much about this element; what troubles me is that Catholics could be so easily led astray.
ALEX RIVERA:
The “Holy Spirit” which we all know is basically the presence of “God” himself which is everywhere at the same time 2 or 3 people congregate in his name to worship “Him” to better explain it; would have left the earth so would death, according to the bible people would suffer such agony and terror that they will seek death and not find it, if he were the “Jesus” or “Anti-Christ” he claims to be then according to “Jose Luis De Jesus Miranda” “God is a liar…My opinion is he has committed Blasphemy against the “Holy Spirit” in which according to the “Bible” is a sin without forgiveness. So with this being Blogged let’s let these things come to pass so that the word of “God” is fulfilled and keep this man and his followers in our prayers so that “God” may have mercy on their souls. May God bless us all, Amen!
FATHER JOE:
Father Joe: I will try to parse what you wrote. (1) The divine presence is indeed omnipresent. That is true, not simply about the Holy Spirit, but about the Triune God. (2) It is Jesus who tells us that he is present when we gather with others to pray. (3) This passage you write makes no sense: “…would have left the earth so would death, according to the bible people would suffer such agony and terror that they will seek death and not find it…” The clauses do not link up in a coherent manner. I have no idea what you are trying to say. (4) You are right that Miranda is not the Christ although he may be a minor antichrist. God is not a liar; about this your insight is also correct. Miranda’s claims are blasphemous and erroneous. (5) There has been much conjecture about the unforgivable sin. Many churchmen have regarded it as suicide. But if one condemns the works of the Holy Spirit as demonic it would logically be very difficult, if not impossible, to embrace the mercy from that same Spirit. (6) We can pray for the repentance and conversion to true faith of this man and his followers.
ALEX RIVERA:
Just wanted to add the fact that the “Anti-Christ” comes after the second coming of “Jesus” so he has the order in which they happen correctly but that’s all he has.
FATHER JOE:
Throughout history there have been many antichrists. It refers to any and all who reject and oppose Christ and his Church. The term also signifies a false Christ or counterfeit messiah. This is not to deny the possibility of a singular apocalyptic antichrist; however, many authorities suggest that this pointed to the Emperor Nero or possibly another tyrant of pagan Rome who persecuted the early Church.
ALEX RIVERA:
Pentecostal Christian church is how I congregate and I’ve seen the “Holy Spirit” in action so he must be fibbing, how do I know it’s the “Holy Spirit” and not some person looking silly jumping up & down screaming gibberish? Come to a Spanish speaking Pentecostal Christian Church and find out for yourself.
FATHER JOE:
While I have known Pentecostals in love with the Lord, it is traditionally regarded as a cult itself. As a Catholic priest I could never encourage others to join its ranks, but at least they do not worship a contemporary man as Jesus Christ. However, there is the Catholic Charismatic Renewal which expresses many of the lesser gifts without neglecting the greater gifts of the Spirit in our Christian faith and in the sacraments.
ALEX RIVERA:
No I’m not saying it’s the real religion or the best church or the only way to feel the “Holy Spirit” but it’s the only place I’ve experienced it many times so I can guarantee it. Definition for Church: The body of all Christians. May God bless us all, Amen!
FATHER JOE:
God bless you!
MATTHEW RANGEL:
As many of you know Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda is not Christ. The time for the real one draws near. This will happen in our life time. The earth is getting ready for a new beginning. In the near future, horrible things are to come. Always remember who you serve and that there is a plan of action that must happen. So whatever happens— DO NOT lose your faith. Remember, if you lose someone close to you that individual will be in a better place, so don’t get mad at God. The path will soon be set for the second coming, so you all should be ready now. Go fourth and teach the Lord’s teachings to others so that they too will be saved. Be strong with the Lord and do what he asks. In the coming years great events will soon unfold. Always do what is right; that is if it will please God, do it, if it won’t, then don’t. Never lose hope for God will ALWAYS be there.
The headline I read back in 2007 asserted, “Hong Kong Reports Mainland Chinese Eating Infants.” Say what? Can this be real? It sounded like a sick joke or maybe a slur to belittle the Chinese. But it supposedly came from a reliable news source.
Below is a portion of an article posted online at EPOCH TIMES and taken from a Hong Kong weekly, THE NEXT MAGAZINE.
Can it be true? If you have a strong stomach you can follow the link. It is monstrous! Of course, there was scandal a number of years ago when certain shampoos were using aborted fetuses for the animal protein ingredient. Further, while used for research, catalogues with baby body parts circulate even in the United States, with hefty price-tags attached. I learned about these from friends who work at NIH.
China’s stringent, dare I say “mandatory” abortion measures and population control, once praised by Mrs. Clinton, may have precipitated such a callous view of the child as seen in the article:
The Next Magazine, a weekly publication from Hong Kong, reported that infant corpses and fetuses have become the newest supplements for health and beauty in China. Not only is the placenta considered a beauty remedy, but also aborted fetuses are much sought after delicacies. In Guangdong, gourmet body parts are in high demand and can even be purchased through hospitals. The magazine’s investigations into this form of cannibalism took them to Liaoning province.
According to The Next Magazine, during a banquet hosted by a Taiwanese businessman, a servant Ms. Liu from Liaoning province on the mainland inadvertently revealed the habit of eating infants/fetuses in Liaoning province and her intention to return for the supplement due to health concerns. The Taiwanese women present were horrified.
No further comment, I have to go throw up.
DISCUSSION
PETER: How, precisely, does one spring that on one’s dinner guests? “This looks interesting – what is it?” “Roast baby with a raspberry coulis.” *Barf* the depth of depravity is positively unfathomable. And there are those who want to follow down this road… *boggle.*
AMBER: Absolutely horrifying! What in the world is wrong with people? How could it have gotten this bad? This completely sickens me…
JAMES: This is one of the worst things of which I have ever heard! God help us! It makes me think that the wrath of God cannot be far away. Of course, given the apathy and ignorance today, it makes me think that this ignorance of God IS part of the wrath of God. Oh God, please give these miserable people the grace to find you!
KAMASULLAH: I wouldn’t be surprised if they are eating babies in China!! Because, as I have seen their food, I think they will eat anything on the earth… insects, cats, dogs, monkeys, snakes, rats, and finally dead human babies.. OMG, who knows what else they eat and we don’t know!
ASDF: Ha-ha, at least it’s organic. The cr-p we eat causes cancer.
SIEWEN: OMG! Are you serious?! I’d rather get cancer then eat that. It’s sick and disgusting. It is bad enough to be a cannibal, but to go so far as to eat A BABY?! It is sickening, completely uncalled for and ridiculous. However, I think that this evolved from stem cell research and abortion, so we are all kind of guilty. Nasty people in the world!
FATHER JOE: Jonathan Swift gave us his Modest Proposal for the Irish. Such things are not new but they make us pause to think about the real nightmares around us. Both Scotland Yard and the FBI purportedly looked into this allegation. Zhu Yu did an exhibit called, “Eating People,” at the Shanghai Arts Festival in 2000. Here is the frightful photo faked with a duck carcass and a baby doll head. Unfortunately stories about forced abortions and even that of a new-born drowned among the rice paddies are true. Who needs hoaxes while we already have real horror stories?
I regularly follow the wisdom on Msgr. Charlie Pope’s blog for the Archdiocese of Washington. Recently, he posted on the following question: “In the wake of the Supreme Court decisions of this week, are we coming to a point where we should consider dropping our use of the word “marriage?” A number of Catholic voices are arguing that we should disengage ourselves both with the word “marriage” and from allowing clergy to function as civil magistrates in witnessing them for the state. Certainly I am sympathetic with what they hope to accomplish. However, I am already on the record, from past discussions, as opposed to such a retreat. Both sides can play word-games. Towards the end, he poses a second question, “Should the Catholic Bishops disassociate Catholic clergy from civil ‘marriage’ licenses?” Again, I appreciate the underlying reasoning; we want to avoid guilt by association and giving apparent approbation. My fear is that any such move would be contrary to a well-ordered or structured society (which is a good in itself). It would also constitute a retreat that opponents in the public forum would exploit. It seems to me that our laity would bear the blunt of the suffering and challenge that would come from such a move.
I am not blind to the dire crisis we face. It is true that marriage as an institution has been largely redefined by our society. The movement on behalf of same-sex unions is a case in point; of course, if left unchecked it will not stop there. Next we will see the return of polygamy. Despite the many scandals faced by the Church, there are even depraved people pushing for pedophilia and pederasty. There is already a bizarre effort in Australia for a man to marry his pet goat, the degradation of bestiality. The U.S. bishops reminded us in their failed initiative that marriage is in trouble. While I am hesitant to criticize our holy shepherds; the fact is that marriage has been in trouble for some time now and we were largely silent. Contraception nullifies the consummation of the marital act. Millions of abortions seek to erase through murder the fruit of marital love. No-fault divorce allows for quick separations and remarriages. Prenuptial Agreements insert doubt against the vows and a lack of trust from the very beginning, thus making those marriages null-and–void. Couples fornicate and cohabitate, essentially saying that you do not have to be married to have sex. Well, when you separate sex and marriage, you also set the stage for infidelity and adultery. Once sex is disconnected from marriage it is very hard to reattach it with any kind of necessity. Our society is saturated by an erotic and pornographic media that destroys courtship and sexualizes relationships. This dilemma is so pervasive that the inner person has lost any sense of propriety or decency. Viagra gives the old stamina to neglect their coming judgment and condoms give the young license under the illusion of protection. Wedding dresses that once expressed modesty and femininity are increasing replaced with skimpy gowns akin to those on television dance contests. Ours is the generation where all rights, even the right to life, are supplanted by the emerging and absolute right to have sex with anyone regardless of promises and unions. The children are caught up in the middle of this whirlwind. This is so much so that we even dress our little girls like the prostitutes that walk the street.
Much Ado about a Word
Msgr. Pope makes the accurate observation that the Church and society-at-large mean very different things by the word, “marriage.” Of course, this is also the situation with many other terms as well. While language is fluid and hard to control; it can certainly be manipulated. Look at the word GAY. This expression for joy or happiness has become the source for giggling when used in old songs. It has now been exclusively usurped by the homosexual community. Another word in peril is RELATIONSHIP. When we hear teens or young adults use it these days, they generally mean a sexual friendship with a certain degree of exclusivity. The word that most troubles and saddens me today is LOVE. What precisely does it mean anymore? We do not want to cast it off and so the dictionary definition gets longer and longer. Look at how we use it. “I love my car. I love my dog. I love my job. I love my house. I love donuts. I love strippers. I love my wife. I love my children. I love God.” Then we have expressions like, “Let’s make love,” a euphemism for sex. We give it so many meanings that the word begins to mean nothing.
What does the word MARRIAGE mean? Is it just a civil contract to make having sex easier or more convenient? If that is all it is, it is no wonder that couples are cohabitating without it. Some states have argued for different types of marriage contracts, one more easily dissolved than the other. There was even an effort to impose marriage licenses with term limits. If after five years, if the spouses were unhappy, they could opt not to renew. The marriages would then automatically expire. The divorce epidemic, something which Protestant churches pamper by their failure to enforce Christ’s command in Matthew against divorce, has given us what is essentially serial or progressive polygamy, one spouse after another. Proponents of “open” marriages suggest that couples should still be able to have sex with others outside their bond. I know one instance where a man lives with both his wife and his mistress in the same house. The girls share him. Largely gone is the Catholic-Christian equation that marriage is an exclusive relationship between one man and one woman who are called to be faithful to each other until the death of one of the spouses. Marriages are rightly directed toward the good of the spouses and the generation of new human beings, children. Stripping marriage of its propagative element is to make marriage wholly something else. Even infertile couples must express their union in that act which by nature is directed to the generation of new human life. That is why something like condomistic intercourse is intrinsically evil, even in marriage, yes, even among older infertile couples. Too many couples feign the marital act and live in relationships that are not true marriages. The large cases of annulments are cases in point. People can share their bodies like cats and dogs but they are ignorant of the true parameters of marital love and union. Although a natural right, they have made themselves ill-disposed to the sacrament. Required six-month waiting periods and marriage preparation are attempts to remedy the dark situation. However, couples frequently go through the motions and tell the moderators and clergy what they want to hear. I recall one priest praising a couple he was working with for doing all the right things before marriage. On the way out one evening, I overheard the prospective groom tell his girl, “What a jerk!” Later I found out from parishioners that they had been cohabitating the whole time and only went to the priest’s Masses once-in-a-while to fool him about their religiosity. They spent a fortune on the wedding and we never saw them again. I heard a few years later they divorced because “they grew apart.” When Catholics marry outside the Church, in the eyes of God they do not get married at all. However, Catholics who marry in the Church might also start their unions with deception. Planting lies today often leads to weeds tomorrow.
I will echo Msgr. Pope in giving the definition of MARRIAGE from the universal catechism:
[CCC 1601] The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.
What are we to do when the definition given to marriage in no way parallel’s the understanding of the Church?
Msgr. Pope proposes that we stop using the word “marriage” and substitute instead, “holy matrimony.” He explains:
“The word ‘matrimony’ also emphasizes two aspects of marriage: procreation and heterosexual complementarity. The word comes from Latin and old French roots. Matri = ‘mother’ and ‘mony,’ a suffix indicating ‘action, state, or condition.’ Hence Holy Matrimony refers to that that holy Sacrament wherein a woman enters the state that inaugurates an openness to motherhood. Hence the Biblical and Ecclesial definition of Holy Matrimony as heterosexual and procreative is reaffirmed by the term itself. Calling it HOLY Matrimony distinguishes it from secular muddle that has ‘marriage’ for its nomen.”
He readily admits that there are problems with trying to regulate language in such ways. If I recall correctly, I was among those unconvinced and “perturbed that we were handing over our vocabulary to the libertines.”
We can play word games but our opponents are not fools. They were not happy with the notion of “civil unions” and wanted “marriage.” Don’t be surprised that they will also be speaking of their bonds in terms of “holy matrimony.”
Marriage is a natural right. Opting to use another word is not going to change this fact. Homosexuals and lesbians can feign marriage and the state might recognize it; but, in truth such unions are a violation of the natural law. The debate or argument is best sustained by retention of the vocabulary. We must insist that same-sex marriage is a fiction. Surrendering the word would only grant them the false sense that they had succeeded in making their argument.
If we cannot even defend a word like “marriage,” then how can we defend all the ideas behind it? This conflict is not just about marriage; it is a fight over the hearts and minds of people. So-called same sex-marriage is just one weapon in the enemy’s arsenal. The goal of our critics is to redefine the Church out of existence. The government administration wants to become the sole arbiter of marriage; but more than this— it views Catholic Charities, Catholic schools, and Catholic hospitals as standing in its way. Threats to close would only make them nationalize these institutions and they would argue that such is a “necessity” for “the public good.” This is the goal of our antagonists. If American society is to be remade then the Church must either change to insignificance or be destroyed. This is the fight we face.
Ministers of the State or of the Church
My initial sentiments emerged as an aside to the courageous crusade of Bai Macfarlane against No-Fault Divorce. The question arose as to whether clergy compromised themselves by acting as witnesses for the state, signing the marriage licenses and returning them to the courts. Msgr. Pope continues to sign them, he says, out of holy obedience to the Archbishop. Speaking for myself, I think we would forfeit too much by surrendering this privilege to the state. I suspect that problems might escalate instead of get better. Further, if the Church should opt out, would not our couples still have to get their civil licenses before Church weddings? He seems to think not, arguing that they should “in no way consider themselves as wed, due to a (meaningless) piece of paper from a secular state that reflects only confusion and darkness rather than clarity and Christian light.” I recall arguing with a hippie years ago who regarded the marriage license as just a piece of paper. In response, I cited that it came along with the Church sacrament and that it also respected the state’s right to regulate marriages as an integral building block to society. The state is taking a wrong turn with these same sex unions but we should still take advantage of our rights as citizens. That piece of paper says that as a member of society, I still have a voice and that marriage is an institution that must be acknowledged, regardless as to whether others are given such acknowledgment wrongly (in the past because of divorce and today also because of same-sex unions). Opting out will undermine a structured society, its institutions, and the protections and rights we take for granted.
I have immigrants in my parish from Asia and Africa. Their home nations do not give the privilege that our clergy enjoy in being able to witness marriages. Some of them have only known tribal weddings. Others have licenses from a judge or notary public. While they should have immediately had their marriages solemnized by a priest, they put the process off. Children were conceived. Time went by, maybe years, and now they all need Church convalidations. Would we reduce all marriages in the Church to convalidations?
If we attempt to marry people in Church who are not legally married; we will be facing all sorts of headaches. We would be opening the door to rampant bigamy where people would be civilly married to one person and married in the Church to another— without the recourse to the legal fiction of divorce. At present the state recognizes all Church unions even though the Church does not acknowledge every civil union. The last thing we should want is to segregate the Church into her own private ghetto where there are “us” and “them.” We have every right to a place in the public forum and should fight for it. Our married couples have every right to the protections insured by law (tax incentives, inheriting property, healthcare and insurance, custodial issues with offspring, hospital visitation and the right to make medical decisions for a sick spouse, and sharing a name). Marrying couples without civil licenses would once have opened our couples to prosecution for cohabitation. Even if this is a bygone concern, there is still the prospect of scandal. Some will view “married in the Church” but “not in the state” as NOT being married at all. The children from such unions could be labeled as “bastards” by our critics.
The Church has a responsibility to be fully integrated into civil society as a constitutive part. There will be conflicts but accommodations will have to be made that will not compromise our message and mission. Maybe there is a need for different types of licenses from the state for religious weddings, distinguishing them from civil ones? Indeed, there are different theologies between the churches. Some view the clergy person as the one who performs the marriage. Catholics view the spouses as the ministers of the sacrament to which the priest witnesses. Episcopalians and others will probably even allow and celebrate same-sex unions. We may become a minority voice in this society but we should not allow that voice to be silenced. Taking our toys and going home angry will not fix the situation. The retreat of the Church would be precisely what our enemies want. I fear that it would further erode the foundations of our civilization. Caesar’s empire might be pagan, but the Christian and the Church still have obligations to maintain a society that would protect our rights and freedoms.
I would maintain the status-quo with priests witnessing marriages for the state. However, there may come a day when that is taken away from us. We can cope with that when it comes. Civil disobedience might then take many forms, some of which could be extremely bizarre. One priest suggested that all our religious houses claim same-sex unions so as to get the marriage benefits and healthcare. I know one case already where a married couple got divorced but still live together so as to have better retirement benefits. I suspect that laws will be passed to force couples and the Church to behave. How far do we want to press it? Speaking for myself, I really hate retreating.
The Larger Challenge
It is my hope that we will have courageous shepherds and a supportive flock. I foresee priests facing fines and jail time for hate-speech in regard to teaching and preaching against homosexuality. After all, the Church’s language about marriage in the recent Supreme Court case was appraised as bigotry. Hum, we might have to take priests entirely out of the marriage scenario if all our clergy are locked up. Already, while the Church is currently protected, and we cannot be forced to marry homosexuals, organizations like the Knights of Columbus are not safeguarded. At this writing the free-standing Knights of Columbus halls in Maryland have been notified that due to their state charters they must rent for the wedding receptions of homosexuals and lesbians. The pressure is already on.
Our public schools are teaching that any reservation about homosexuality is discrimination. What will our children then think of their churches? Must we extract all our children from the public schools? Who will pay to place them into Catholic institutions? Homeschooling is an option for some but not for all. Where are we going from here? If the government and the media are more successful than the Church in forming consciences and teaching values; then what avenues are left? The issue is far more complex than any nomenclature of marriage or whether priests are authorized as civil magistrates. The question is how does the Church function and survive in a non-Christian society?
Catholics did not unanimously support the U.S. bishops in the Marriage Matters campaign. Indeed, large numbers were vocal in opposition. We hesitate to name names and are always fearful of our tax-exemption status. But if we are going to be shunned in a matter similar to racists over the issue of homosexual acceptance; then we will no doubt forfeit such benefits in the days ahead. I know I sound pessimistic and cynical. But that is what I see coming. The Church waited too long to find her teeth. She is an old dog grown weak from inactivity and abandoned by her pups. There are wolves coming. They want the Church out of the way. Look at the various initiatives of the current administration. Starting with appointments in religious churches and schools, then forcing churches to violate their basic principles and next pressing upon us what was once an unthinkable depravity— all these are attempts to redefine the Church out of existence. The president’s view of religion is seen through the prism of secular humanism. Anything else is judged as extraneous and must go.
There are some who are pawns to those who hate the Church. Others actually think that they are catalysts for positive change in the Church and society. Look at all the Catholic politicians who oppose the U.S. bishops and who dissent on Church teaching. The chief advocates in Maryland and in Washington are baptized Catholics. Like Msgr. Pope, I have my opinions; and like him, in obedience we both defer to the Archbishop and the national shepherds of our Church. We share our ideas, pray for courage and know that God will not abandon his children.
This is a postcard picture entitled IN CONCERT c. 1942. Father Franz Wasner was a young priest in Salzburg in 1935, when on a visit to the von Trapp household, he heard the family sing. An excellent musician himself, he began to help the family with their music. When the von Trapps left Austria, he left with them and remained with the family as their conductor, composer and arranger until 1958.
The patriarch for this family, George Johannes von Trapp died soon after World War II in 1947.
The card identifies: Baroness Maria, Rosemarie, Eleonore, Johanna, Martina, Agathe and Hedwig. Conductor Father Wasner is playing the spinet. The daughter Maria is also in the photo.
Not pictured are Rupert, Werner and Johannes. All but Rosemarie, Eleonore and Johannes were children of the Baron’s first wife, Agathe.
The card is from the famous TRAPP FAMILY LODGE, 42 Trapp Hill Road, Stowe, Vermont 05672.
A few of the newest generation of von Trapp musicians were in the Washington area for a small charity concert in 2006.
This is the home of the AWALT PAPERS, the posting of various pieces of wisdom salvaged from the writings, teachings and sermons of the late Msgr. William J. Awalt.
Blogger Priest 