Discussion in 'The Signs of the Times' started by Mario, Jun 14, 2016.
I was going to say something but I've only been back 24 hours.
Who am I to judge
I have increasing concerns about Charlie this summer as events begin to overtake us. I have no problems with "take the next right step" and his related teachings. However, many others have predicted the storm we seem to be entering. Do we accept Charlie as the God-appointed “Sherpa” he claims to be?
I Googled Charlie yesterday and found a link to his profile on Disqus: https://disqus.com/by/charliejohnston/
At the link is a collection of Charlie's comments over six years on secular websites (National Review, Breitbart) as well as some Catholic ones. For anyone interested in discerning whether or not Charlie is the "real thing," it is helpful.
For example, Charlie posted three years ago on Breitbart News Network, on a story “#IStandWithPhil Organizer Unsure if A&E Includes Christians in ‘Rainbow of Diversity.’ This is in response to a comment by “Scratch89:”
“I thought you lefties respected other cultures. My Dad was 16 and my Mom 13 when they started dating in rural Alabama. They were married a week after her 14th birthday and two weeks before his 17th - and were married 58 years until she died on Mother's Day last year. Get your cutesie, obnoxious, sophomorically clever comments out of here. Or perhaps you would like me to tell you about some of your historical heroes who were 'pedophiles' according to your definition (at least when you are smearing conservatives). Dumbass.
Later on in the same comments section, Charlie responded to Pete Miesel:
How about you just let us live our lives and shut up about your sex life, jerk?
Also three years ago, Charlie was part of a discussion at National Review Online on “Common Core: A Slippery Slope.” Charlie claimed in the comments that he held a prestigious position in a large Chicago-area school district, which I had not heard before. (I remember him listing newspaper editor, radio show host and political consultant – a full career in itself.)
Funny, some 30 years ago I was a school president of a large Chicago suburban district. I spoke often at the time that many of the ostensibly good programs we were adopting or that were being pushed on us by the state and various interest groups were defensibly idealistic, but that I feared we were losing our focus, which was to educate children. I thought then that making the schools the catch-all for every do-good program imaginable would end by destroying the concept of education. I was more prophetic than I realized at the time.
In the comments section of another National Review Online article, “The New Blacklist,” Charlie added these qualifications to his resume, in a response to “Guest:”
I can argue for your point better than any of you trolls do. I am intimately familiar with Marx, Engels, the execrable Rousseau, Marcuse...the whole lousy lot of you. Tell you what, I will be glad to debate just about any subject with any of you Google Intellectuals provided that it is limited to facts, data and evidence. First one that substitutes an insult for an argument forfeits and the debate is over. You Google Intellectuals are like a pretentious fellow with a French-English dictionary. You think you can speak the language because you bought the book - but as soon as you open your mouths those who have put the time in for real depth of study know you for the pompous frauds you are. Choose the subject, stick to the facts, and I will cheerfully annihilate you.
In response to other posts by “Guest,” Charlie added this:
Dimwit...there was not much in the way of government involvement in McCarthyism either. God, it just wears me out how ill-informed the left is without being the least bit deterred from making it up as they go along. And yes, I well know about HUAC - it was a more toothless version of Title IX and Hate Crime Laws.
Ha, you would not know science if it bit you on the butt. An economy is not static, it is dynamic...so if you do something that triggers growth, it fuels increased tax revenue. That is why under both Reagan's and Kennedy's tax cuts, tax revenues grew dramatically. But you'd have to actually know something other than the voices in your head. As for ID, I don't want to alarm you, but many paleontologists and physicists have long since quietly abandoned Darwin because not one - not a single one - of the predictions he made that would prove the veracity of his theory of evolution has proved out. Not one. You think Christians are contra evolution because they fear it would disprove God...but Christians know that is one of the many ways God could have formed creation. Christians generally oppose it because the evidence has trashed it. You loony lefties hold to the fairy story because YOU think it disproves God - and you won't let go of your fairy tale regardless of how profound the evidence. What an irony...the only defenders of reason in this unreasonable time are the advocates of faith.
Charlie was a frequent poster to NRO. In the comments section of an article “On Civility,” he had this to say of the author:
Holy cow...I went to the archives to read up some Jason Lee Steorts stuff as I really was not familiar with his point of view until this spat. The guy is unreadable...pretentious, vain, vacuous, rarely coherent, much less insightful...it is like reading philosophy papers from high school sophomores. How the devil did this guy ever get hired to be an intern at NR, much less an editor? Doubt me, go read the archives yourself...this guy is a total embarrassment. Does he have a picture of some NR honcho in a compromising position with a goat? WTF?!
And to a fellow poster, “Guest,” Charlie replied:
He DID do it on his own time, dimwit. If you are not going to pay attention to the facts of the case, don't comment.
I’m sure you all get my drift now. Is this the talk you would expect of a man close to God, who has frequent visits from angels and three spiritual directors? I wouldn't want to sit next to Charlie at a dinner party. But let me add a few more:
From NRO’s article “The IRS and the Tea Party,” three years ago, Charlie to “Guest:”
No he did not. You keep making it up as you go along...I suppose I should expect that. That is exactly how your Messiah does Obamacare…
Joe, it's not a persecution complex when you are actually being persecuted. Your fascist sensibility is showing…
You guys just re-write history to suit what you want it to say, don't you? What do you think you will accomplish? Do you think the mindless, voracious beast that is big government won't come for you later just because you were a good little toadie?
I’m running out of time. But here’s one more comment from a Breitbart article, “Hundreds of Relatives to Kim Jong Un’s Uncle Imprisioned or Executed:”
Oh, why don't we just bill them to all the Obama cronies like GE and Solyndra that the Prez is rewarding from that credit card? Asshat.
Sherpa or thin-skinned crank?
Maybe both. God writes straight with crooked lines.
Charlie certainly does not need me to defend him and probably would not want me to spend time doing it. But, if being occasionally gruff or sometimes having a rough edge disqualifies one from being a reliable prophet or guide, there are plenty of folks that fulfilled that role in the past that should have been ignored. Think of some of the Old Testament prophets like Amos or Jonah. Consider some of the Apostles. Look at the saints - St. Jerome and St. Padre Pio come to mind.
Charlie's mission will stand on its own. Whether he called someone an "asshat" three years ago or not ultimately won't make much of a difference.
I would not like someone to dig up some of the stuff I posted over the years on the net. Or off the net either.
I haven't studied up on Charlies exact prophecies as much as I maybe should have, though I have spoeken to him over the phoone. My impression has always been that he is genuine.
But there were and are a coupel of questions. I think reading his last post , he seems to be implying that we are going through the , 'storm ' , at the moment? My thoughts would be that when we are going through the Chastisemnt there would be wars all over the world, society break down, no power, no food and so one, for instance that the supermarkets would be closed.
Aslo that this would be going on forf decades really. Whereas Charlie speaks of a , 'Rescue ', next year.
The only thing is I tend to think in a Global context Charlie seems to be honing in especailly on the USA.. so maybe that would explain it.
But I am always glad to see precise predictions, they give you something to hold onto and judge by.
The trouble now though is that if one is just slightly in disagreement w/ (being neutral or quite respectful in doing so) or questions things for more specifics Charlie (and not even including his now well trained faithful follower/commenters and their own attacks against such) tends to use this same type of superior attitude.....calling people vain if they continue to question after his "correction" of their "thinking", but since it reflects his "spiritual" attitude and is not within a secular venue it's not as visceral but with the same underlying attitude. Troubled me from the beginning when I was quite open to hearing what he had to offer. This attitude sent red flags up in front of my open mind. But notice that the faithful followers, even over that proverbial cliff, would probably defend even if there had been ax murders in his history. And he tells THIS forum that it involves "bitterness"? Could "chutzpah" be the fitting description? Almost an "Obamanesque" kind of "switcheroo"!! So just who are his "dimwits" these days.... the naive and convenient "sheep" that serve whatever real purpose exists underneath? And oh how they work so hard, taking care of all the details for everything themselves for his various lectures. What a country!!
A guy who has heard from angels(?) for decades and has 3 spiritual directors would publicly state, "Does he have a picture of some NR honcho in a compromising position with a goat? WTF?!"
Really? Such a person would display an incredible level of long suffering and humility, not engaging in com box combatics. This doesn't look good at all, regardless of the recent past in which it occurred.
The Net Blogosphere is full of InterNet Trolls. I'm sure that Padraig has run into more than his share and so has Charlie. Some are just benign Know-it-Alls and some are of a more sinister nature .... and all regular bloggers have a bit of Troll in us. As The Storm Deepens, I would expect a noticeable up-tic of the more Sinister Troll Species as a sinister trolls main purpose is to distract, confuse, anger and misguide others ...... I'm sure we have never seen any of that here ... Right!?? ..... Hello!! .... RIGHT!!??
Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/,/ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional responseor of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,often for their own amusement."
GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!
I'm sure quoting someone accurately doesn't qualify as trolling. Charlie presents himself as a media and political professional. He knows or should have known his comments -- in a very public forum -- were on the record. That he uses coarse language and has a hair-trigger temper is an important thing to consider on a thread devoted to Charlie's predictions of the near future. That he has contempt for others and expresses it often is worrisome, if not disqualifying.
When I first heard of Charlie I hoped he was right. I would dearly love a resolution of the mess we are in, the quicker the better. I have family and friends who worry me sick; I want my children to live their lives in a better world. But his blog seemed more than a bit Charlie-centric. I firmly believe a man with knowledge of a horrific catastrophe ahead and a duty to shepherd others would be totally God-focused, and free of most of the current political commentary.
Padre Pio may have had a temper, but he was angry at people who tried to game him in confession or thought they could pull one over on God. He took his bishop's unfair treatment of him humbly, chastised a friend who sought to blackmail the bishop, and suffered in obedience. He was a serious man.
Jerome, Jonah, Amos, St. Paul ... they were all serious men. Not men who made off-color jokes about goats, who boasted of their deep philosophical knowledge, who would tell someone they could "cheerfully annihilate you."
What did St. John say about people who claim to love the Lord but hate their brother?
Isn't that the truth (for me)!
He claims to be a mystic, in communication with heavenly beings since his youth.
Can anyone seriously imagine Bernadette Soubirous, Sister Lucia or Maria Esperanza speaking this way, decades after first hearing from heaven?
Maybe(?) in the freshness and zeal of youth or early conversion, but not after decades of prayerful and humble communication with heaven.
I figure God is trying to get our attention and has been using, and will use, all manner of people, events and happenings to get us to wake up.
He is trying in lots of different ways to persuade us to take our eyes off the crumbling world around us and place our trust in him. I figure there will be many others to guide and support us who might also not quite fit the picture we were expecting.
We need to be very careful who we dismiss. They might just be part of the rescue party.
I am trying to keep a very open mind.
I would be careful of what I write here. we have a duty of Charity to everyone, even visionaries.
If you take St Bernadette for instance. I think there was enough substance for discernment in the appparitions themselves without digging too heavily into her personal life. You know looking back on it they could have dug up a few things surrounding her family and its circumstances.
It might be better to stick to the substance of the messages themselves for discernment. I would kind of leave personal things to the persons themselves.
With all due respect, are public comments on public affairs posted on major media forums using one's own name and photo "personal?" Not in any legal sense (absolutely not!) and not in any moral sense. Quoting a person who clearly is seeking to influence public opinion is neither calumny nor detraction, nor does it demonstrate rash judgment. Assessing temperament is part of the discernment process.
Charlie Johnston's comments were posted three years ago. Charlie certainly had his marching orders for his mission at that point. He made himself a public figure by pursuing the limelight. Online, he addressed many posts to authors directly, seeking to inject himself into political/social issues debates. In the real world, he has traveled the country, and asked people to arrange and publicize speaking engagements.
I can see a problem if someone quotes personal communications, FB posts from a friends-only page, or private conversations. But Disqus? I believe the comments sections of big blogs are similar to letters to the editor.
Maybe.... maybe not. He has a huge body of writings now on whch to discern. Why not base discernment on that?
It's the same thing with anyone really, even politicians . You could go into their personal lives, yes, in a way the're good for it being Public Figures, but it is better all round to stick to their policies. If we can do discernment simply through someones writings why get personal anyway? Its unecessary.
I seem to recall Our Lady telling St Bernadette at Lourdes that she was picked because our Lady could not think of anyone worse to appear to in the entire town. Looking at the family background I could see what the Blessed Virgin meant. Nor was Bernadette at all a saint when she saw Mary first. All that came later.
Personally if Jesus at the Judgement Seat asked me to justify digging up such stuff ..and in public too....I would have a red face. I could just picture Jesus asking, 'By right did you...' and from then on I would be looking down at my boots....
As I say, there is more than enough in his writings.
Just finished my novena to The Holy Spirit. This is my first public post on the forum since my return.
Charlie Johnston is my friend.
Many years ago I stood between another friend and his attackers outside a pub in Scotland. Luckily I was spared major injury. But it felt good that I had come to my friends rescue.
Charlie has specifically asked that we, his friends, do not waste time coming to his defence. Unlike my friend in Scotland he is perfectly capable of defending himself.
There is the old story of the sinner confessing the sin of destroying another's good name. For penance the sinner was told to tear open a feather pillow and scatter its contents to the wind. Then the contents were to be gathered and pillow restored to its original state.
Firstly, may God forgive me if I have offended Him in the past with this type of sin.
As for my friend Charlie. His writings, including those in which he feels it was necessary to defend himself, are open to public scrutiny. Thay have undergone examination by the church for many years. They have never been condemned.
Just as Charlie's understanding of his angel, (no less than The Archangel Gabriel,) has evolved over the years, so my understanding of his writings has evolved. As with many mystics not everything has been revealed to the general public. It is privy to him. But enough information has been given to date. We are free to take it or leave it. It is not Charlie's job to make us believe. It will not be long before the timeline on several of his prophesies is met. Then we shall know for sure.
For those who accuse him of failed prophesy I suggest you read what he actually wrote and how he explained himself when falsely accused. He only defends himself for the sake of the neassage with which he has been entrusted and commissioned.
Charlie is a good man who does good work and who carries his cross with good grace. I trust Charlie. Once his mission is complete he will give his attention to his grandchildren. They will defend his good name and be proud of their grandfather.
For those of you who are sowing seeds of doubt on Charlie's pedigree and integrity and reliability please remember he is not the only one who may suffer. You too may suffer if you have sinned against not only the letter but also the spirit of the commandment "Thou shalt not bear false witness agsinst thy neighbour."
Charlie has explained many times that we are not entering the Storm but that the Storm has in fact been active for many years. It is simply intensifying. His main job is to proclaim the Rescue which he explains may consist of a number of parts. But he is quite sure that it will be visible to all and will happen towards the end of 2017. And we will all have our part to play in the rescue if we wish to participate.
He is also quite sure in his prophesy that Obama will not complete this term of office. There are other prophesies on which he will rise or fall but I suggest for those who are interested in the truth that you read his writings on the role of prophesy in authentic witness.
So there you have my first post. I doubt I will get too involved in any heated debates here again. Most of the old die hards have already made up their minds about Pope Francis. Again, time will tell. It has already told me enough. Charlie is a faithful Catholic and loyal as I am to Francis our Holy Father. God bless the Pope.
I was wondering how you finished the Novena beofre we did? But of course..New Zealand. Beaten to it.
I noticed that many often tend to forget about an essential fact: we're currently living in a time of grace. It has been so for years, even during these chaotic times. This in my opinion could be compared with being inside the eye of a hurricane (storm). When the time of grace will end, the storm will break bringing the full chaos. According to Medjugorje, the period of grace we're currently living, will expire with the realization of the third secret, consisting in the permanent sign. After that sign, it will be already late for many, since there will be very little time left for conversion.
I think of the good thief. Last minute conversion. Last minute rescue. All things are possible with God but there's the rub. Are we really with God? The good thief proclaimed his faith. Death bed witness is given the status of oath even by civil law. Can we risk leaving as late as the good thief? I think not but he was saved.
Harper, thank you for a thoughtful post. It should come as no surprise if I were to state that I do not believe in Charlie's alleged visions. He and I had quite a direct phone conversation a couple of months ago for about 50 minutes. A few weeks later he wrote about it on his blog, and, to the best of my recollection, spoke well of our conversation. I appreciated that. If memory serves, he stated that while we do not agree with one another, at least the door of communication is open. I have been quite busy myself and have not utilized that open door but am happy it is there nevertheless.
Did you read his comments about me, Harper, on Disqus?
Separate names with a comma.