Anyone else think this latest offering by C. Johnston a bit weird and convoluted? https://charliej373.wordpress.com/2016/08/25/all-in/
Yes. Absolutely. Charlie Johnston seems preoccupied with his critics and loves to trumpet his alleged "successes," all the while excusing failed predictions. What struck me as most strange in his latest post was the discussion of why he refused to obey his spiritual director and ask a question of his "angel." I cannot remember reading about an approved mystic rejecting the suggestion of a spiritual director--especially when the director apparently wished to "test the spirits" by proposing a question. All the talk about "personal responsibility" seems to me a way of evading answering questions. Since Charlie scans the internet and this forum, I hope he answers directly!
I have been having some reservations regarding his postings also. One word should cover it: Pride. He has much to offer in terms of rallying a disheartened flock,where confusion and fear can't help but seep into our lives. With Eucharistic devotions and a huge nod to Divine Mercy, he directs his readers to God. But this tallying of successes and attacks on those who strongly challenge him is unlike anything I have witnessed from a seer or prophet or someone given a task from God. I'm not waiting so much for Charlie to be right or wrong, I'm waiting for God to reveal Himself to all of us in the perfection of His timing, His truth, and His love. One very positive side to his website is to provide a forum for all of his readers to be in contact with one another. They truly care about one another.
One other point about Charlie: He's posted a word cloud on his website home page composed of tags. But where is "Jesus"? And where is his focus? Go to his website to see the relative ranking of tags. Tags abortion Adolf Hitler Alabama America Anthony Mullen Anti-Christ Archbishop Blase Cupich Archbishop Samuel Aquila Barack Obama Bishop Rene Gracida Bishop Robert Finn Cardinal Raymond Burke Cardinal Timothy Dolan China Climate Change culture Daniel O'Connor Dan Lynch David Daleiden discernment Elizabeth Scalia Europe EWTN family Fatima Fr. Regis Scanlon France Francis Cardinal George gay "marriage" George Weigel Germany Glenn Dallaire hope Houston Immaculate Conception Ireland ISIS Islam Joe Cronin Kevin Williamson Kitty Cleveland Lourdes Mark Mallett Medjugorje Michael Brown National Review North Korea Our Lady of Lourdes Our Lady of Tepeyac Pelianito penance pilgrimage Planned Parenthood Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis I Pope John Paul the Great Pope Paul VI prayer preparation Rev. Billy Graham Russia Satan solidarity Spirit Daily St. Augustine St. Paul St. Peter St. Therese of Lisieux Synod on the Family terrorism The Shrine The Storm The Virgin Mary Victor Davis Hanson Visitations
I have never heard of a mystic who speaks so much about himself.Must be a hundred 'I's in that article.
Harper, if you wish to summon CJ it may be best to write on his 'thread' and reply to one of his posts there. Here is a link hopefully http://motheofgod.com/threads/charlie-johnston.6342/page-16#post-70988
I found this video to be very good. Father is an exorcist and has experience in discerning spirits. Also he is trained in psychology. Starting at the 3:35 mark Father says the discernment of revelations can never be based upon your emotions. Why? because demons have access to your imagination, your memory, and your cognitive powers. The Church has objective criteria to decide whether or not an apparition/locution is authentic. Medjugorje is a rare case where the Vatican has taken on the case of determining authenticity of the apparitions after the local Bishop(s) made a negative judgment. Then Father goes on to give criteria that the Church looks at to determine authenticity of apparitions or locutions. Is what is said contrary to Church teaching? theologians? Father says at the 9:57 mark that if a detail of a revelation is false, the remainder may still be authentic due to the seer's miscommunication of the revelation. Father does seem to be wary of Medjugorje because of the length of the messages and rejection by the local bishop, however he says at the 33 minute mark, people should try to learn what Our Lady is trying to say and get the general idea of why she may be communicating. We are not obligated to believe. At the 15 min. mark Father says that the person who receives visions/locutions needs to be examined for their temperament and character, are they humble? well-balanced? discrete? advanced in virtue? Someone who seems exhausted, depressed, or too eager to divulge a revelation probably didn't receive an authentic revelation and gives cause for doubt. Demons can be the cause of bodily or imaginary visions, they have the ability to produce rays of light on the body or sensible heat, they can falsify ecstasy. Demons cannot heal in a way that creates say a new limb, or eye or something that is missing or cut off. Regarding speaking in tongues, if the person speaking in tongues understands what he/she is saying, then it is true....if he/she doesn't know what they are saying, it is from a demon. Father instructs us to be prudent, keep a healthy detachment from apparitions until the Church decides, but take a reasonable means to get to know what Our Lady is saying, but don't do it just for the sake of curiosity, but for the purpose of spiritual betterment. Father says not to take too much stock in dreams that we have. It is very rare for a dream to be a direct call to action. He says to ignore dreams that are very vivid and leave us exhausted when we wake up. Questions and answers start at 44:32 Father suggests praying a novena to Our Lady of Sorrows to reveal what spiritual defects that we have and then to work on them one at a time. Common pitfalls of wives are to try to control husbands Common pitfalls of men are effeminacy and being unchaste Wait for the Church on Medjugorje. Primary American vice is greed. It was a good video. Good spirit instruction is always appreciated.
I have not watched the video; but note in one post this good Priest says the Consecration requested at Fatima has not been done. So does that make the Pope Saint John Paul a Liar and Sister Lucy a liar but this good Priest is the only one who we have to believe. It all seems odd to me.
I watched the video yesterday and so it is fairly fresh in my mind. He said that the Consecration of Russia requested at Fatima has not been done. He said that the political climate hindered the ability to 'consecrate Russia' and so Pope Saint John Paul II entrusted the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Father in no way shape or form said anything against John Paul II or Sister Lucia.
Mary Ann, sorry my pc refused to copy your post! But it is interesting that he says if one doesn't understand one's own tongues then they are demonic! I know lots people who pray in tongues but not one I think knows what they are saying.
Sister Lucy is reported many times to have been asked and was reported to have confirmed the Consecration made in 1984 was accepted by Heaven. Some of the Fatima experts will be able to post/paste copies of her statements. It was discussed ad infinitum on this Forum in the past. I am sure this good Priest speaks with good sincere intentions. It is just a bit heavy when he is held up as the final judge in so many matters, and the Consecration topic is well and truly debated, and I don't think everyone would be in agreement with his views. I say this with great respect for him, while disagreeing with him on the Consecration part of the debate.
Not only that Bc; but how many Catholics for how long attended Latin Mass and did not have a clue what it meant in their own native language. Were they all demonised until after the Second Vatican Council when native language was introduced. I think this Priest is a lovely holy man; but he may be stepping out of his brief a bit. And nowadays there are so many people who will not just believe everything they hear without thinking. Hang on a minute. That is a bit odd. Look at the bashing poor old Charlie J gets.
Father says that there are three types of speaking in tongues. The first type is like from Pentecost where you speak in your language and the other person can understand it in theirs. The second type is where God infuses knowledge in the individual to speak in tongues and understand what they are saying. A third type is where a person speaks and has no idea what they are saying. This has long been known to be suspected as diabolical. As an aside, I am not totally onboard with everything Father says like his opinion that storing a huge amount of food is the way to go at this time, however, I am in such need of making some semblance of how to combat the barrage of unholy things that my family is exposed to, I welcome his instruction. Also I have been duped in the past by false prophets and it makes me want to yell from the rooftops to be careful with discernment. I feel Medjugorje is authentic, but understand how traditional Catholics may take issue with it. At Medjugorje, Our Lady is calls for all to return to God ...much like the prodigal child. For the devoted older brother (if you will) Medjugorje is a bit irritating and sometimes I find myself wavering about its authenticity. Deep down I think it is authentic and will prove itself in time.
Try a bit of Marino Restreppo. One of the best speakers on all sorts of topics including the evil one. Bishops get him to give talks to Priests and he gets asked to help with exorcisms.
Thanks for this Mary Ann, one of my friends has a church approved worldwide healing ministry and I will be spending a weekend with him soon . He prays in tongues almost constantly when praying with people. I will ask him if he understands what they mean. It would be interesting to know, I never thought of asking him previously.
Then why don't you contact Fr. Ripperger with questions? I'd bet he answer. Seriously, the consecration was not made exactly corresponding to the Fatima request (consecration of Russia). That's true, isn't it, since JPII consecrated the world? But Sister Lucia said it was accepted. Couldn't that mean all involved were speaking truthfully and in good faith?
I have to agree with Harper on one point here, namely that because Sister Lucia confirmed that the Fatima Consecration had been made as requested by Our Lady, this doesn't make Fr Ripperger a liar. But I am afraid that the good priest is seriously out of his depth on many of the topics he speaks about. Initially, I had only listened to the first part of the video because his comments on Medjugorje showed sufficient lack of knowledge on his part that it didn't seem worth listening to the rest. But before responding here now I thought I should listen to some more of the video but his advice on apparitions more generally is so mistaken I haven't been able to finish it. Fr Ripperger speaks with a profound confidence as if he is reading from a book but his advice would seriously mislead anyone taking it to heart. It is not surprising that he rejects Medjugorje, listening to the 'rules of discernment' that he is preaching but Medjugorje really is a safe test in discernment. 35 years of evidence. That Fr Ripperger cannot discern the presence of Our Lady in these apparitions is the ultimate display of his mistaken approach.
