The Public Forum
Letters/Questions - Addressed on October 2007
Letters/Questions - Addressed on October 2007
Please Note: There will be no further updates to this page. The last letters
answered in this Forum are listed below. All previous letters addressed in this Forum may be
accessed through the Links provided at the bottom of this page.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Public Forum is to publicly respond to and/or comment upon correspondence that
we may receive from time to time and which is of Universal interest in these very unsettling
times.
We reserve the right to choose what questions to address and how to transcribe the question and/or
statement from the correspondence received. The identity of the correspondent will be kept
confidential except in the case of abusive correspondence which will then be referred to the
appropriate responsible entities.From KT @ USA - Published on October 17th, 2007
One question.........
I have always believed that the end never justifies the means. Yet, you proposed that the exception be made for the people of Africa for the use of condoms to help prevent AIDS... just for a certain length of time!
This confuses me, however, I totally agree with you on this matter as people are killing each other.
They do not have "Eyes to See or Ears to Hear". How can one justify bad behavior by saying someone is sick?
How can we forgive those who accept bad money for a good cause, in love?
How do you explain to a non-Christian that God allows bad things to happen? Accidents, victims of crime?
I know well of free choice but it does not convince a non-believer.
Forgive me for all of the questions, but you are my family and I trust all of you as I know you are doing God's Will and I believe in you.
I wish I had 3 months just to sit and listen to you.
God Bless you for all of your patience, love and understanding..... especially of the weak ones like me.
In His Name and Grace,
KT
A. Thank your for writing and sharing your concerns with us.
We also believe, and have frequently said, that the "End does not justify the means", however, we must evaluate each individual situation with the Light of the Holy Spirit to see how we should get from point "A" (living outside the Law of God) to point "B" (living within the Law of God).
The first step is to determine the "Why" of the point "A" and its consequences - short term and long term.
We shall take first the killing of another human being as a point "A" - this is extremely grave under any circumstances : There is no just war; there is no just killing. Logically, point "B" is the stopping of the killing of human beings.
Say that we have an individual who is prone to kill other humans due to X,Y and Z reasons and does so on a regular basis. Maybe he does not know that "Thou shalt not kill" is a real and absolute Divine Law. Obviously, he needs to be instructed in Divine Law and needs to be assisted in his conversion - however, in the meantime, he cannot be allowed to go around killing people until "the Evangelization" takes a hold of his soul. He must be stopped for the benefit of others and himself.
Now, let us take up birth control as another point "A" situation. What is the root problem of artificial birth control? Sexual interaction without responsibility becomes just another sport - where one may even switch partners just as we may do for a tennis match. The more uneducated the individual is and the less means of entertainment he/she may have, the more he/she will turn to sex and/or drugs as an "entertaining sport". The more bored a rich and well educated individual gets, the more he/she will also turn to sex and/or drugs as an "entertaining sport".
Promiscuous sex and the use of drugs are the two societal maladies which can harm a soul the most. Thus, logically God has allowed AIDS. He is more interested in our soul within the overall Eternal picture, than just the brief time it resides in a body on Earth. If some activity is going to gravely harm the soul - He rather take them Home soon. (1)
In the birth control situation - We could then take two positions: (a) Let them destroy themselves and thus "help God"; or (b) Intervene and help them find the way to God in a more natural way.
If we take position (a), it would logically follow, to the derange mind, that all sick and poor people should be exterminated.... and "...by doing this we are doing them a favor and serving God along." Believe it or not, that thinking is "on the table" of the Future Masters of the world.
If we take position (b), we assist them in not killing each other, through unprotected sexual intercourse, by providing them with the appropriate protection WHILE simultaneously Evangelizing them so that they will abandon the "Outside the Laws of God" lifestyle, i.e. "Sexual activity is a sport."
In certain countries of Europe they established a "Clean Syringe Program" wherein the drug addicts would turn in their used syringes and get clean ones in order to arrest the spread of AIDS through sharing infected syringes. This was done WITHOUT any Evangelization, therefore, what on the surface looked like a very charitable act was indeed contributing to the further degradation of their souls.
This would be the same if we just pass out condoms and do nothing else.
In conclusion:
(a) Passing out condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS via sexual intercourse - and do
nothing else - to save lives cannot be considered as a "means justified by the end" - because
we are working against God by helping in the destruction of souls.
(b) Passing out condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS via sexual intercourse - and implement a solid Evangelization program to change the mentality of the individuals through Light and Grace - is a method of "buying time" while the leaven of the kingdom of heaven works its wonders in their souls - thus we are cooperating with God' plan for His children. [The kingdom of heaven is like to leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened. [Matthew 13:33]]
(b) Passing out condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS via sexual intercourse - and implement a solid Evangelization program to change the mentality of the individuals through Light and Grace - is a method of "buying time" while the leaven of the kingdom of heaven works its wonders in their souls - thus we are cooperating with God' plan for His children. [The kingdom of heaven is like to leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened. [Matthew 13:33]]
Of course, this thinking could degenerate into a philosophical discussion about the difference or
equivalence of murdering/killing with a gun, for example, and killing with an AIDS contaminated
sexual liaison. However, we must keep in mind that: Death by gunshot is quick and little can be
done to draw the soul to God before separation of soul and body. Death through AIDS is slow and
much can be done to draw that soul to God before its separation. Therefore - we cannot
compare, nor treat alike, both methods of killing a body.
Your other questions have been answered in different documents in our pages (2).
Regarding what "does not convince a non-believer" is completely outside the responsibility of the Elect. We are to take a horse to water, drink of it so that the horse sees that it quenches our thirst with no ill effects; then, if the horse still refuses to drink, we must allow the horse to die of thirst or at least go thirsty for a while until it realizes its error. The Elect never were, nor will ever be, part of the Inquisition crowd. Their technique would have been "choking the horse to death" while force feeding him water to "keep him alive".
Yes, that is how ridiculous and pathetic the alleged Evangelization has been in the last ca. 1600 years.... and stay tuned, as we have already explained, it will be tried again. (3)
_____________________________
(1) The near Apocalyptic Climatic and Geological Events Worldwide
(2) Pain is the megaphone.... , Divine Mercy in Action - Part I and Part II
(3) The striking similarity of the French Revolution with the activities "scheduled" for End of These Times
Your other questions have been answered in different documents in our pages (2).
Regarding what "does not convince a non-believer" is completely outside the responsibility of the Elect. We are to take a horse to water, drink of it so that the horse sees that it quenches our thirst with no ill effects; then, if the horse still refuses to drink, we must allow the horse to die of thirst or at least go thirsty for a while until it realizes its error. The Elect never were, nor will ever be, part of the Inquisition crowd. Their technique would have been "choking the horse to death" while force feeding him water to "keep him alive".
Yes, that is how ridiculous and pathetic the alleged Evangelization has been in the last ca. 1600 years.... and stay tuned, as we have already explained, it will be tried again. (3)
_____________________________
(1) The near Apocalyptic Climatic and Geological Events Worldwide
(2) Pain is the megaphone.... , Divine Mercy in Action - Part I and Part II
(3) The striking similarity of the French Revolution with the activities "scheduled" for End of These Times
From EMcK @ USA - Published on October 15th, 2007 [Memorial of St. Teresa de Jesus aka St. Teresa de Avila]
May God continue to bless you. Thank you for all of your assistance and clarification
of issues that have a tendency to become cloudy.
This is not terribly urgent, it is just that I know you'll have an answer to a question I
always have had.
How and why are the Archangels Gabriel, Michael and Raphael referred to also as
saints? I really understood saints to be human beings who submitted to God's will and were
taken to heaven after their physical lives were ended. Angels, and I say this with the
utmost love and respect for them, were never human beings, although they have appeared to various
individuals to be human. (I'm pretty certain I've had at least one of those experiences
myself!) Haven't the angels always been part of the spiritual plain?
Since God has moved me to finally ask this question after having wondered about it for
years … some clarification would be received with great enthusiasm.
Thanks very much and again, may God continue to bless you … and us through
you.
EMcK
A. In the Roman Catholic Catechism as published on-line by the Vatican we
read:
946 After confessing "the holy catholic Church," the Apostles' Creed adds "the communion of
saints." In a certain sense this article is a further explanation of the preceding: "What is the
Church if not the assembly of all the saints?" The communion of saints is the Church.
and948 The term "communion of saints" therefore has two closely linked meanings: communion in holy things (sancta)" and "among holy persons (sancti).
956 The intercession of the saints. "Being more closely united to Christ, those who dwell in heaven fix the whole Church more firmly in holiness.... They do not cease to intercede with the Father for us, as they proffer the merits which they acquired on earth through the one mediator between God and men, Christ Jesus.... So by their fraternal concern is our weakness greatly helped."
Now, with the "Party Line" quoted word by word, let us clear the smoke with some light.
What is read above is true except that is not limited to "Members Only" - the communion of saints encompasses all of those who on Earth are members of Jesus' family as defined by Jesus Himself - the Ultimate Authority:
For whosoever shall do the will of my Father, that is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister,
and mother. [Matthew 12:50]
as well as those who are in Purgatory and those who are already in Heaven (both of which are obviously Family Members).
Now, "Saints", like Teresa de Jesus, is a "saint" whom the Roman Catholic Administration has officially designated as an exemplar figure. Therefore "all Saints are saints" but "not all saints are Saints".... then again, there are some Saints which are a mockery to God. (1)
Therefore, generally speaking, pure spiritual creatures, as angels are, fall in the category of "the Family of Jesus", thus, we can joyfully refer to them as "saint" or "Saint".
As a matter of confirmation - angels do appear frequently in a rather "average" looking human countenance... although one has "a feeling" that he is just not "the guy next door".
___________________
(1) Opus Dei's Escriva although he is not the only one to fit such category.
From HW @ USA - Published on October 13th, 2007 [90th Anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun in Fatima]
In reference to your latest mailing and the following Biblical quotation which is part of it.
3 No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish. 4 Or those
eighteen upon whom the tower fell in Siloe, and slew them: think you, that they also were debtors
above all the men that dwelt in Jerusalem? 5 No, I say to you; but except you do penance, you
shall all likewise perish. [Luke 13]
Its interesting the choice of the Biblical translations of some passages.
I read from the Douay-Rheims (d-r) and the 1611 King James (kjv) version. kjv uses "repentance" or "repent" and the (d-r) uses "penance" in the same passage. Different meanings. I have found this discrepancy in other publications when biblical passages are quoted. Catholics use "penance" and kjv uses "repentance" in the same verse. I wonder which is right?
HW
A. Thank you for writing, thus allowing to address this issue once again.
First of all, a thorough review of our documents Biblical Literalism Parts I (1) and II (2) will help clarify the "why" of so many different "Words of God" (when there is really one!). We recommend the review of those documents since they will serve to fortify the Faith in the Word of God. However, for those who hang their whole faith or bigotry on one out of context ill translated verse, those documents have the same effect as the proverbial showing of a cross to a vampire....
We do not think neither you nor most of our readers fall in that category. Thanks be to God!
Now, the direct answer to your question: "I wonder which is right?" The correct word is indeed "repentance".
Your inquisitive mind Glorifies God.
__________________________________
(1) Biblical Literalism Part I
(2) Biblical Literalism Part II
From SB @ USA - Published on October 11th, 2007 [Feast of the Motherhood of Mary]
May the Lord's Peace be ever with you!
I hope that you will recall me. In times past you have been both guide and almost confessor to me.
I am writing in regard to a recent posting regarding psychiatric drugs.
I am sure you don't recall the many times of euphoria and then desperate depression, in which I have contacted you. In short, I finally found some assistance in that I was diagnosed as bi-polar, and am no much more ready to cope. I have, as I mentioned before, joined the Orthodox Church, and find my life to be "leveling out".
In your recent mailing (1), an author who wrote "Talking Back to Prozac" discussed Tom Cruise's remarks.
I got the impression that you do not approve such drugs. Now I find myself in a spiritual quandary, wondering if I have done wrong and will jeopardize my soul in the long run.
I know you are busy, and I know I may have to wait for your response, but as you promised in the past, I know you will respond now.
Yours in Christ Jesus
SB
A. Of course we remember you and rejoice at the progress you have made through the Grace of God.
As we mentioned to you right after we received your communication - you have nothing to be concerned about nor any changes need to be made in the medication you take. We will use a very "well known face" since m de P's is not (and most need to have a face to believe) to illustrate a very important point.
Padre Pio of Pietrelcina was one of the greatest miracle worker on the 20th Century and the healing through his hands were, and are, legendary. What most people are not aware of is that, many times, some of those who came to him to be healed would be sent by Padre Pio to see a physician instead of working a miraculous cure.
Why? Because there are some physical illness which are 100 % organic and need to be treated accordingly. We have learned through the Grace of God and the experiences with which He has Graced us, that most illnesses are due to spiritual dysfunction (2); however, the ones which are not, need to be treated through traditional or alternative medicine.
When there is an actual organic illness that requires medical attention, a "miraculous" cure can be secured through the same method St. Joseph statues sell houses; unfortunately, the illness, after a while, reappears with a vengeance. [We are not referring here about true miraculous cures which God dispenses at His pleasure because in those cases, He not only removes the problem but He also corrects whatever organic problem caused it.]
A good and honest (MD) diagnostician can help the patient determine which is the best route to follow [always secure a second opinion.]
Our mailing reflects our concern about the "Pill Dispensing Happy" physicians and the "Desirous For A Quick Fix Happy" patients. As we often say - the brain is not stuffing to keep the cranium from collapsing due to a vacuum; the brain is to be used with the Illumination of the Holy Spirit of God to safely navigate through life.
__________________________________
(1) The mailing in question follows:
Peace!
As a result of our postings on Scientology we came across the following article. Please, do note who is its author:
As a result of our postings on Scientology we came across the following article. Please, do note who is its author:
On June 25, 2005 Tom Cruise did the unthinkable on TV. Actually, he did several
"unthinkables" in a filmed interview with NBC's Matt Lauer for the Today Show.
First, Tom stopped smiling. He deprived us of that multi-million dollar grin and got serious. For a star to do this to the American public was unthinkable.
Second, Tom pointed out that Matt Lauer actually was very "glib" (shallow) and didn't know what he was talking about. He also urged Matt to be "more responsible" and to learn something about psychiatry before touting it. For a star to do this to a media personality was unthinkable. Since nearly all of them are shallow, this was a threat of potentially epidemic proportions. Suppose other guests began pointing out that media hosts don't know what they are talking about and are shallow?
Third, he got serious about one of the most important issues in our personal lives, in this case our widespread use of psychiatric drugs to solve our personal distress and anguish. Tom concluded, "I'm passionate about life." For anyone to speak this way on television, except perhaps on the Catholic channel, is truly beyond the TV pale; and even the Catholic channel doesn't criticize psychiatry.
Fourth, he criticized psychiatry and drew attention to its genuine flaws and failings. I suspect he's actually read my book, Toxic Psychiatry. Tom said that psychiatry had a long history of abusing people, including electroshock. He said, "There is no such thing as a chemical imbalance." He said that antidepressants can only "mask the problem" and that "these drugs are very dangerous." He called psychiatry a "pseudoscience" and suggested that there are better approaches. He was right about all of this.
A few days later NBC invited me to New York City as a psychiatric expert to discuss the Tom Cruise affair on the Today Show, and when I began by saying it sounded like Tom had been doing some serious reading about psychiatry, I got cut off, again and again, throughout the show.
Why was the media both drawn into the story and shocked by it? It was too good a story to simply ignore: "Tom Cruise Gone Wild" was the theme. It should have been, "Tom Cruise gets serious."
The media would have liked to attack Tom on the grounds that he's a Scientologist. Scientologists seem to share a number of views about psychiatry with me, including everything Tom said. In fact, I'd go further. Modern biological psychiatry is a materialistic religion masquerading as a science.
How can I say that my profession of psychiatry is a materialistic religion? Because modern psychiatry makes believe that psychological and spiritual problems, such as anxiety and depression, are caused by mechanical failures in the physical brain, and because psychiatry then attempts to correct these psychological and spiritual problems with physical interventions such as drugs and electroshock. Modern biological psychiatry takes these views and implements these interventions on faith and it has won a lot of converts with the help of billion-dollar marketing campaigns. If you want more detailed analyses of the faith and fake science behind the claims of modern psychiatry, you'll find them in my books such as Toxic Psychiatry (1991), Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (1997), Talking Back to Ritalin (Revised, 2001), the Antidepressant Fact Book (2001) and the Ritalin Fact Book (2002). You can find my scientific papers on my website. In my books and on the web site you'll also find discussions of the many drug-free alternatives that are available for helping people with problems such as anxiety and depression.
The media kept hinting that the problem was Tom's Scientology beliefs but they didn't want to say it. To some extent it's not politically correct to criticize someone's religion, especially when people like Tom and John Travolta are members. But that was really not the issue. The media is afraid of Scientology because the religion has been extremely aggressive toward media critics, often charging them or threatening to charge them with libel and slander.
I was also invited on to CNBC's the Donny Deutche talk show. This time I remained in Ithaca, New York only a few blocks from my office in a high tech TV studio. I was kept waiting in front of the live camera for almost an hour and a half to get a word in as I watched Tom get excoriated. Although I could see the show on the uplink for this entire time as I sat waiting at any moment to be called upon, they decided not to link me into the show at all and I never got to say a thing in Tom's defense or in criticism of biological psychiatry, drugs and electroshock. Sitting upright that long without twitching in anticipation of momentarily appearing on millions of televisions was hard enough, but listening to Donny was worse.
While I sat listening to the CNBC show that I was never brought onto, I felt a mixture of outrage and sadness. Outrage that the show host Donny Deutche bragged up his work in advertising where he helped to produce the Zoloft TV ads with their clever little bouncing faces that made the antidepressant so much more "accessible," in his words, to millions of Americans. Donny was bragging about an actual fraud ads that falsely suggest that Zoloft corrects biochemical imbalances and that leave out the warning that the drug causes mania, not to mention psychosis, violence and suicide.
What was tragic? Donny's guest was Jane Pauley who was flogging her new book, Out of the Blue. Jane is the epitome of a media personality, having anchored the Today Show with Tom Brokaw and Bryant Gumbel, and having earned many broadcast awards. Jane is also a promoter of psychiatry. She admitted to having developed "hypomanic" (milder than full-blown mania) symptoms on an antidepressant. At the time, she explained, her mind and thoughts were racing and she couldn't control them. But then she added that of course the drug didn't make her become manic; the drug just "brought out" her underlying or pre-existing bipolar disorder.
Of course, I don't know anything about Jane Pauley except what she's told us and she's not really the issue. Celebrities are actively recruited by marketing departments to promote medical and psychiatric treatments. I do know that psychiatrists often lie to patients to protect themselves and their drugs. My colleagues lie by saying the antidepressant merely "brought out" their mania, psychosis, violence or depression, rather than the drug caused it in the otherwise innocent victim. Jane Pauley thinks she is a victim of bipolar disorder when she sounds to me like a victim of psychiatry.
It's no small matter to falsely inform a person that their drug-induced mania shows they have bipolar disorder. It results in a false diagnosis and a stigmatizing label (bipolar or manic-depressive disorder) that follows people for the rest of their lives. It leads to additional medications, often including anti psychotic drugs like Zyprexa and Risperdal that can cause lethal diabetes and pancreatitis, and tardive dyskinesia, a potentially disfiguring and disabling neurological disorder characterized by bizarre-looking abnormal movements.
So the media personalities had a feast promoting their religion, psychiatry, while Tom Cruise got hammered for criticizing psychiatry, and indirectly promoting his religion, Scientology.
No, I'm not a Scientologist. Except when they occasionally say hello to me at conferences, I have hardly spoken to a Scientologist in more than thirty years. But when I saw Tom's bravery come out from behind his marvelous smile, I wanted to help, and I made clear I wanted to defend him.
Well, Tom, you said on TV things I've been saying in the media and in my books and scientific articles for three decades but boy did you generate a lot more attention to the issues. Thanks!
First, Tom stopped smiling. He deprived us of that multi-million dollar grin and got serious. For a star to do this to the American public was unthinkable.
Second, Tom pointed out that Matt Lauer actually was very "glib" (shallow) and didn't know what he was talking about. He also urged Matt to be "more responsible" and to learn something about psychiatry before touting it. For a star to do this to a media personality was unthinkable. Since nearly all of them are shallow, this was a threat of potentially epidemic proportions. Suppose other guests began pointing out that media hosts don't know what they are talking about and are shallow?
Third, he got serious about one of the most important issues in our personal lives, in this case our widespread use of psychiatric drugs to solve our personal distress and anguish. Tom concluded, "I'm passionate about life." For anyone to speak this way on television, except perhaps on the Catholic channel, is truly beyond the TV pale; and even the Catholic channel doesn't criticize psychiatry.
Fourth, he criticized psychiatry and drew attention to its genuine flaws and failings. I suspect he's actually read my book, Toxic Psychiatry. Tom said that psychiatry had a long history of abusing people, including electroshock. He said, "There is no such thing as a chemical imbalance." He said that antidepressants can only "mask the problem" and that "these drugs are very dangerous." He called psychiatry a "pseudoscience" and suggested that there are better approaches. He was right about all of this.
A few days later NBC invited me to New York City as a psychiatric expert to discuss the Tom Cruise affair on the Today Show, and when I began by saying it sounded like Tom had been doing some serious reading about psychiatry, I got cut off, again and again, throughout the show.
Why was the media both drawn into the story and shocked by it? It was too good a story to simply ignore: "Tom Cruise Gone Wild" was the theme. It should have been, "Tom Cruise gets serious."
The media would have liked to attack Tom on the grounds that he's a Scientologist. Scientologists seem to share a number of views about psychiatry with me, including everything Tom said. In fact, I'd go further. Modern biological psychiatry is a materialistic religion masquerading as a science.
How can I say that my profession of psychiatry is a materialistic religion? Because modern psychiatry makes believe that psychological and spiritual problems, such as anxiety and depression, are caused by mechanical failures in the physical brain, and because psychiatry then attempts to correct these psychological and spiritual problems with physical interventions such as drugs and electroshock. Modern biological psychiatry takes these views and implements these interventions on faith and it has won a lot of converts with the help of billion-dollar marketing campaigns. If you want more detailed analyses of the faith and fake science behind the claims of modern psychiatry, you'll find them in my books such as Toxic Psychiatry (1991), Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (1997), Talking Back to Ritalin (Revised, 2001), the Antidepressant Fact Book (2001) and the Ritalin Fact Book (2002). You can find my scientific papers on my website. In my books and on the web site you'll also find discussions of the many drug-free alternatives that are available for helping people with problems such as anxiety and depression.
The media kept hinting that the problem was Tom's Scientology beliefs but they didn't want to say it. To some extent it's not politically correct to criticize someone's religion, especially when people like Tom and John Travolta are members. But that was really not the issue. The media is afraid of Scientology because the religion has been extremely aggressive toward media critics, often charging them or threatening to charge them with libel and slander.
I was also invited on to CNBC's the Donny Deutche talk show. This time I remained in Ithaca, New York only a few blocks from my office in a high tech TV studio. I was kept waiting in front of the live camera for almost an hour and a half to get a word in as I watched Tom get excoriated. Although I could see the show on the uplink for this entire time as I sat waiting at any moment to be called upon, they decided not to link me into the show at all and I never got to say a thing in Tom's defense or in criticism of biological psychiatry, drugs and electroshock. Sitting upright that long without twitching in anticipation of momentarily appearing on millions of televisions was hard enough, but listening to Donny was worse.
While I sat listening to the CNBC show that I was never brought onto, I felt a mixture of outrage and sadness. Outrage that the show host Donny Deutche bragged up his work in advertising where he helped to produce the Zoloft TV ads with their clever little bouncing faces that made the antidepressant so much more "accessible," in his words, to millions of Americans. Donny was bragging about an actual fraud ads that falsely suggest that Zoloft corrects biochemical imbalances and that leave out the warning that the drug causes mania, not to mention psychosis, violence and suicide.
What was tragic? Donny's guest was Jane Pauley who was flogging her new book, Out of the Blue. Jane is the epitome of a media personality, having anchored the Today Show with Tom Brokaw and Bryant Gumbel, and having earned many broadcast awards. Jane is also a promoter of psychiatry. She admitted to having developed "hypomanic" (milder than full-blown mania) symptoms on an antidepressant. At the time, she explained, her mind and thoughts were racing and she couldn't control them. But then she added that of course the drug didn't make her become manic; the drug just "brought out" her underlying or pre-existing bipolar disorder.
Of course, I don't know anything about Jane Pauley except what she's told us and she's not really the issue. Celebrities are actively recruited by marketing departments to promote medical and psychiatric treatments. I do know that psychiatrists often lie to patients to protect themselves and their drugs. My colleagues lie by saying the antidepressant merely "brought out" their mania, psychosis, violence or depression, rather than the drug caused it in the otherwise innocent victim. Jane Pauley thinks she is a victim of bipolar disorder when she sounds to me like a victim of psychiatry.
It's no small matter to falsely inform a person that their drug-induced mania shows they have bipolar disorder. It results in a false diagnosis and a stigmatizing label (bipolar or manic-depressive disorder) that follows people for the rest of their lives. It leads to additional medications, often including anti psychotic drugs like Zyprexa and Risperdal that can cause lethal diabetes and pancreatitis, and tardive dyskinesia, a potentially disfiguring and disabling neurological disorder characterized by bizarre-looking abnormal movements.
So the media personalities had a feast promoting their religion, psychiatry, while Tom Cruise got hammered for criticizing psychiatry, and indirectly promoting his religion, Scientology.
No, I'm not a Scientologist. Except when they occasionally say hello to me at conferences, I have hardly spoken to a Scientologist in more than thirty years. But when I saw Tom's bravery come out from behind his marvelous smile, I wanted to help, and I made clear I wanted to defend him.
Well, Tom, you said on TV things I've been saying in the media and in my books and scientific articles for three decades but boy did you generate a lot more attention to the issues. Thanks!
First published on www.Huffingtonpost.com
(2) Spiritual Dysfunction - Its Identification, Treatment and Cure
From YDM @ USA - Published on October 7th, 2007 [Our Lady of the Rosary]
[For the convenience of the Faithful we will place our answers and comments within the text itself indicating them with an "A." and in italic letters.]
Again, please forgive my ignorance, but although I have read very many of your articles, my mind just can't understand the political intrigues and maneuvers of people in power. It is so confusing to me, that I just pray and leave to God what must happen to correct the people He wishes to save.
A. Confusing is not the word - it is worse than following a chess game in three
dimensions plus one - time. We publish that information (1) for two
reasons: (a) Those who can follow it will have a 'ring side seat' to the Apocalypse
and will see how it all unfolds; (b) To clearly indicate the ties between men of "Faith", so to
speak, and the political maneuvering in the world which has nothing to do with
God and which will be used to spring the False Christ upon an unsuspecting
humanity.
Understanding certainly IS NOT a condition for Salvation but it will affect the level (2) of future suffering if one is moved to increase one's prayer life. Each one of you will understand it when and how God determines it is time for it to be understood, not when miguel wants.
What we exhort people to do, indeed, is to Pray and allow the Will of God to guide their every step (3). There can be no failure with that.
Understanding certainly IS NOT a condition for Salvation but it will affect the level (2) of future suffering if one is moved to increase one's prayer life. Each one of you will understand it when and how God determines it is time for it to be understood, not when miguel wants.
What we exhort people to do, indeed, is to Pray and allow the Will of God to guide their every step (3). There can be no failure with that.
I still talk to my adult children and grandchildren about the importance of living in the state of grace, being thankful to God and the Blessed Mother for every single thing (including blue skies, food on the table, being together) and trying to be loving persons. I am in horrific darkness, but I am surprised how none of this really bothers me. Am I in denial?
A. No, you are not in denial. (4)
Although you are indeed surrounded by a horrific darkness you are not really bothered by it.
Why should you be? Explaining it in material terms: You find yourself in the darkness of nights, a
night without a moon BUT wearing night vision goggles. In spiritual terms the "night vision
goggles" are nothing else that Having the Holy Spirit of God in residence in your heart and
guiding your every step. When the Holy Spirit of God guides our every step - why should we
worry? Why else would you "...talk to my adult children and grandchildren about the
importance of living in the state of grace, being thankful to God and the Blessed Mother for every
single thing and trying to be loving persons." unless you had internal illumination?
This is why we keep calling for a single minded effort develop a real, working and intimate relation with the Holy Spirit of God. (5)
This is why we keep calling for a single minded effort develop a real, working and intimate relation with the Holy Spirit of God. (5)
I do as many of the things you suggest in the way of prayer, and listen to God as best I can, and although I tremble (spiritually) I lead as normal a life as I can.
A. And that IS precisely why, even though you recognize that you are
submerged in total darkness, you are are to lead a normal life. But we are called arrogant and
evil by those whose control of other human beings, through codependency,
(6) is threatened by what we recommend in the Name of God.
Please forgive me for telling you all of these things, but I need to know if there is anything other I should be doing? Sometimes I need someone to tell me I am on the right track. Sorry to say I don't trust many priests or anyone else for that matter.
A. That is one of the reasons for which we exist. The only things that
you need to keep doing.... is what you are doing - always striving to draw closer to God and
fulfill His Will (not what we want His Will to be (7)) at every
turn.
My family tolerates my beliefs, but think I make too much of everything. I tolerate them with much love, because the warning will enlighten them.
A. Through your actions you are Evangelizing those around you by example. The moment the
expected major global events and catastrophes take place most of those seeds of Evangelization you
are planting "here and there" will sprout to full bloom so fast that it will surprise you. Those
which will not - were never intended to bloom regardless of what you or anyone else would have
done.
Even this letter is an act of Evangelization. As we answer your questions, questions which are shared by many, many who may not even be aware that they have the same questions and concerns or are unable to express them, you are causing their illumination because, if we did not have your letter to answer, we would not be writing this now in the Name of God.
Even this letter is an act of Evangelization. As we answer your questions, questions which are shared by many, many who may not even be aware that they have the same questions and concerns or are unable to express them, you are causing their illumination because, if we did not have your letter to answer, we would not be writing this now in the Name of God.
Another side note- when Sept.11th happened I was surprised to find myself so calm, when I usually am not so calm when I think of the possible damnation of so many poor unfortunate people.
A. God gave you a concrete confirmation of what we explained to you above.
Thank you for listening to me.
YDM
A. And we praise God for your progress and the opportunity He gave us to help thousands
upon thousands through the answering of your letter.
________________________________________
(1) Our Function
(2) Reducing the future suffering
(3) The Will of God
(4) The dangers of denial
(5) What Can We Do? Part I and Part II
(6) satan's secret weapon - Codependency
(7) When the "will of God" is not the Will of God
From Jesus Christ @ Heaven - Published on October 5th, 2007 [Catholic Day of Thanksgiving plus Simchat Torah - Rejoicing of the Law]
Remember, give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. [Matthew 7:6]
JC
A. Yes, Lord, I remember but I do not trust myself - I only trust You. What if I judge someone to be a "swine" or a "dog" and I am wrong?
Knowing the reality of Gamaliel's advice:
Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do, as touching these men. 36 For
before these days rose up Gamaliel, affirming himself to be somebody, to whom a number of men,
about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all that believed him were scattered,
and brought to nothing. 37 After this man, rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the enrolling,
and drew away the people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as consented to him,
were dispersed. 38 And now, therefore, I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone;
for if this council or this work be of men, it will come to nought; 39 But if it be of God, you
cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God. [Acts
5]
I rather give them a chance just in case I erred in judgment for, if that someone is indeed a "swine" or a "dog", I take refuge in the truth of Gamaliel's advise and in the fact that You promised:
....He will save me from the fowler's snare and from the deadly pestilence. He will cover me
with His feathers, and under His wings I will find refuge; His faithfulness will be my shield and
rampart....
....A thousand may fall at my side, ten thousand at my right hand, but it will not come near me. [Psalm 91]
....A thousand may fall at my side, ten thousand at my right hand, but it will not come near me. [Psalm 91]
However, Lord, I do not wish to "...observe with my eyes and see the punishment of the wicked." [Psalm 91] What I prefer is that those who may be deceived by said "swine" or "dog" see it in time so that they may break lose from their evil spell before is too late.
From KH @ USA - Published on October 4th, 2007
God Bless LL in your Public Forum 2 dated October 4th, (1) in reference to the utilization of a statue of St. Joseph to sell homes. (2)
That is the most wonderful faith story I have heard in a long time! And it prompted me to remove a similar type of "charm" that I had placed at the "advice" of a priest.
You and LL are right, there are no results that are worth compromising and trying to shortcut God's Path for us!!!
Thanks to your readers for being the voice of reason and a glimmer of light in the darkness.
KH
A. Thank you for providing this feedback for LL and all the LL's in the world.
Unfortunately, not everyone feels that way when faced with the truth. Two days ago, responding in private to a lady who has been reading the documents inhere published and who we know in person, we stated:
We are quite familiar with "the aura scene" and probably 20 years ago stopped paying
attention to it. This does not deny their reality, the problem is that when we "feed" our ability
of seeing anything in the supernatural domain we are falling back to reliance on our physical
senses.
Our objective should be to "fly by instruments only" - the guidance of the Holy Spirit of God and see, with our physical eyes, nothing of the supernatural - unless, of course, God Wills that we do see This or That.
Our objective should be to "fly by instruments only" - the guidance of the Holy Spirit of God and see, with our physical eyes, nothing of the supernatural - unless, of course, God Wills that we do see This or That.
and, to avoid a misunderstanding, we followed the above with the following communication:
While in prayer I realized that we had not explained why we stated: "... the problem is that
when we "feed" our ability of seeing anything in the supernatural domain we are falling back to
reliance on our physical senses. Our objective should be to "fly by instruments only"
-..."
satan can mimic any information coming through our physical senses. he cannot, however, mimic the "readings" of the Holy Spirit of God when It has become our Guiding Light.
That is - the most convincing visual rendition staged by satan - auras included - can be "seen" as false through our "flight by instruments only" mechanism. This is precisely why most will fall in the False Christ snare since the Faith of most is intellectual and not spiritual.
This is exactly what He meant when He said: Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed. John 20:29
satan can mimic any information coming through our physical senses. he cannot, however, mimic the "readings" of the Holy Spirit of God when It has become our Guiding Light.
That is - the most convincing visual rendition staged by satan - auras included - can be "seen" as false through our "flight by instruments only" mechanism. This is precisely why most will fall in the False Christ snare since the Faith of most is intellectual and not spiritual.
This is exactly what He meant when He said: Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed. John 20:29
The above, under the guise of another reason, seems to have resulted in what has to be the most
vitriolic letter we have ever received - bar none.
The silver lining of such vitriolic attack was that she confirmed what we originally knew about the state of her soul from almost the beginning, yet we had not physical proof of it, thus she had been given a second chance.
_______________________________________________
(1) Public Forum No. 2
(2) See letter dated October 3rd (below)
The silver lining of such vitriolic attack was that she confirmed what we originally knew about the state of her soul from almost the beginning, yet we had not physical proof of it, thus she had been given a second chance.
_______________________________________________
(1) Public Forum No. 2
(2) See letter dated October 3rd (below)
In reference to your mailing about the seemingly common practice of burying a statue of St. Joseph
in the yard to sell one's house...
IW
A. First of all, we value your sincerity in sharing this with us since you well know that we "talk straight" just as our Lord and Master did (1).
Secondly, when in our mailing, one read: Today's Mass reading warns us that you cannot serve God and mammon. it referred to the Blue Army promoting such concept and not about the users who are just victims of what the Church, which was originally founded by Jesus Christ, turned into (2). We are not surprised - Aaron set the pace - we can read about it in Exodus 32. Somewhere along the line the Church Administrators and those who follow what is not of God did not get to the end of that chapter wherein we read: And I, in the day of revenge, will visit this sin also of theirs. The Lord therefore struck the people for the guilt on occasion of the calf which Aaron had made.
We listed our home for sale on 7/4/04 and for 2 1/2 months didn't receive an offer. My wife heard
of this concept regarding St. Joseph and after complying with the the protocol, the house was sold
in four days.
The statue that we buried for 3-4 days, now occupies a prominent spot in our home. Trying to sell the house
was not an attempt to serve mammon, but not to have to pay costs on two homes. We were extremely glad for the help that St. Joseph gave us, if indeed that's what it was.
Sincerely,
The statue that we buried for 3-4 days, now occupies a prominent spot in our home. Trying to sell the house
was not an attempt to serve mammon, but not to have to pay costs on two homes. We were extremely glad for the help that St. Joseph gave us, if indeed that's what it was.
Sincerely,
IW
A. First of all, we value your sincerity in sharing this with us since you well know that we "talk straight" just as our Lord and Master did (1).
Secondly, when in our mailing, one read: Today's Mass reading warns us that you cannot serve God and mammon. it referred to the Blue Army promoting such concept and not about the users who are just victims of what the Church, which was originally founded by Jesus Christ, turned into (2). We are not surprised - Aaron set the pace - we can read about it in Exodus 32. Somewhere along the line the Church Administrators and those who follow what is not of God did not get to the end of that chapter wherein we read: And I, in the day of revenge, will visit this sin also of theirs. The Lord therefore struck the people for the guilt on occasion of the calf which Aaron had made.
We do not doubt that it works, just like necromancy and fortune tellers are realities (3), just like Pharaoh's magicians [Exodus 7:11] caused their rods to turn into serpents, just like Simon, Elymas and Bar-jesu the magicians mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles existed, just like the properly made "spells" of santeria, witchcraft, voodoo, etc. work.
They work because, as we have explained elsewhere, there are ways of getting things done resorting to methods which are known to the initiates of the occult, however, just because they work that does not mean that they are from God.
When we resort to what is explicitly forbidden by God to secure anything we are, in effect, attempting to by pass God. He may allow that transgression to teach us a lesson - for whatever is obtained through supernatural means bypassing God has a price. Whatever God willingly and lovingly grants to those who appeal to Him in accordance to His Laws carries no price - it is freely given by an infinitely Loving God.
Not only we are fully aware about all of this through Divine Revelation, we also have enough concrete examples to fill a large book.
Therefore - when we have an institution/organization that people still respect (out of ignorance) -like the Blue Army (4), promoting what is tantamount to idolatry and advanced santeria -we have a major problem.... but then again, those who have Eyes and Ears know that and, blessedly, it will be taken care of soon.
To tell you otherwise, we would be lying to you and we do not even do that to the very few individuals who have been moved by God to financially assist in this work. To alter the truth for money is called: Prostitution [Revelations chapters 17 and 18]
______________________________________
(1) Jesus Speaks Clearly
(2) Jesus Christ condemns the Roman Church Administration
(3) About fortunetellers and necromancy
(4) The rise and fall of the Blue Army
Public Forum - September 2007 - Edition Files
© Copyright 2007 - 2023 by The M+G+R Foundation. All rights reserved. However, you
may freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as
to its source; (2) No changes are made in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No
charge is made for it.
Online since 1998
Introduction for First Visit |
Frequently Asked Questions
Home Page | English | Español | Portugues
Search Page | Index of Documents
Disclaimer | About Us | Contact
Back Up Home Page (Mirror Site)
Home Page | English | Español | Portugues
Search Page | Index of Documents
Disclaimer | About Us | Contact
Back Up Home Page (Mirror Site)