Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sean O L

A Chronology On "anne" A Lay Apostle

Recommended Posts

Sean O L
[center][size=5]A CHRONOLOGY ON "ANNE" A LAY APOSTLE[/size][/center]

Real Name: [b]Kathryn Anne CLARKE[/b], nee [b]Kathryn Anne UNKNOWN[/b], nee [b]Kathryn Anne JENNINGS[/b]
[indent]Divorced at age 20, with a daughter. Name of alleged abusive husband unknown.

She claims:
In my early twenties, when I began to experience locutions, I walked on air for days after each one.
FAQ - [url="http://web.archive.org/web/20070315200920/www.directionforourtimes.com/faq.html"]http://web.archive.org/web/20070315200920/...es.com/faq.html[/url]

Re-married approx. 11 years later to Jimmy Clarke, by whom she had a further 5 children.[/indent]
1997 Bishop Frederico O. Escaler, SJ of Zamboanga del Sur, Phillipines retired!
Yet the C.E.O. of "Directions For Our Times" claimed that:
"He has given Imprimatur for all 8 volumes published and the youth booklet, all these books are being published and printed in for his people in the Philippines."
Sean O L Comment: YET, A BISHOP LOOSES JURISDICTION IN HIS DIOCESE SUBSEQUENT TO HIS RETIREMENT!
Source: [url="http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/ImprimaturFalse.htm"]http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions...imaturFalse.htm[/url]

1997 - 2007 [b]The Breakable Vow[/b], by Kathryn Anne Clarke; Copyrighted
Source: [url="http://www.teenreads.com/authors/au-clarke-kathryn-ann.asp"]http://www.teenreads.com/authors/au-clarke-kathryn-ann.asp[/url]

A Medjugorje poster comments:
Here are two pieces from the book (so far), that I find abhorrent as a Catholic:
[indent]p30 Annie and her sister are going to confessions regarding her pregnancy.

"Did you really think he was going to buy that? Was this, like, the Immaculate Conception?" She paused for a second and said with great gravity, "Just who is that baby you're carrying?"

p52 Annie's sister yelling out the window at Annie's boyfriend

"It's too bad your grandmother did not have an abortion. Tell that to your mother." [/indent]
Sean O L Comment: The above is unbelievable in view of her claim
"In my early twenties, ,,, I began to experience locutions." !
Source: [url="http://www.medjugorje-online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4118&start=120"]http://www.medjugorje-online.com/forum/vie...8&start=120[/url]

2000, Apr - Jul 2002 "e-mail exchange (excerpts from 36 of which are listed in [b]Article "F"[/b] below) with a woman who would later become her Chief Executive Officer for both her civil and religious business" Includes giving divorce advice to her C.E.O. and vulgar language, e.g.:
[indent]9/18/01 From: kathrync@eircom.net (Kathryn Clarke) To: CEO
I went in one time after a fight with Jimmy and found myself saying, "Don't YOU think he's an arse portal, God?" If you're so hard to come home to maybe he should get an apartment. tehetehe. Also, you are not a lawyer, at the moment you're a housewife so if he doesn't like the way you handled it, he should get a lawyer, not a crazy lady who lives with six people who all think she owes them her lifeblood.

Rick Salbato comments:"[I'm sorry, Bishop, but you called her a loving wife and mother?????]"

The way I see it, I take care of Jimmy's five children and he takes care of me. IF he doesn't, I have nothing for the kids. Jimmy gives to me and I take care of everyone. A real man, father of five, doesn't spend so beaver dam much time thinking about his own needs. He's more concerned that his children's needs are met and that his wife is well enough, mentally and physically, to care for them. Your husband needs real problems ----. Like we had. When his wife is bedridden for a year, or he sustains an injury that requires 18 months of rehab, he'll shut the floopy up about you not being pleasant enough to come home to. Love, Kathy

Rick Salbato comments: "[Never in my life, and I am a man, have I used this kind of language.]"[/indent]
(Source: [b]Article "F"[/b])

Sean O L Comment: Really! Can this be from someone who received [b]locutions[/b] and [b]visions[/b] from God the father, Jesus Christ, The Blessed Virgin Mary and Saints??? - and who claims to have done so from her "early twenties"???

[b]Article "A"[/b]
[b]The False Imprimatur[/b] by Richard Salbato - from correspondence provided by "Michael"
Source: [url="http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/ImprimaturFalse.htm"]http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions...imaturFalse.htm[/url]

2004, June 21 - [b]Message from Jesus[/b]:
"Here is a quote from one of her books. Tell me if this sounds right?

Jesus is addressing children here:
[indent]June 21, 2004,
"You might wonder how I can hear you if you are speaking silently. That is part of My [b]magic[/b], dear little children. When you wish to speak to Me, your Jesus, who is your very best friend, you can speak to Me at any time, in any place."[/indent]
"John-boy" noted:
[indent]"…the word 'magic' …symbolizes the occult world. God's graces are not magic. They are graces. It's totally different. 'magic' is a purely worldly word. And the only time it appears in Scripture that I am aware of is when St Paul warns us to stay far from it. So it does not make sense that Jesus would use it.'
Source: [url="http://www.medjugorje-online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4118&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15&sid=304536b8b8091a44fdaee1bf03ad92c8"]http://www.medjugorje-online.com/forum/vie...daee1bf03ad92c8[/url][/indent]
2005 Sep 17 - [b]MDS/Michael discloses results of his investigation[/b] of Direction For Our Times'
claim to have falsely claimed 501©(3) exemption as well as exemption ruling from the IRS on the Catholic Community Forum at
Source: [url="http://www.catholicforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3296&highlight=exemption"]http://www.catholicforum.com/forums/showth...light=exemption[/url]
Subsequently DFOT agrees that at that point they were NOT 501©(3) Exempt - and altered the
web page.

2006 May 1 - [b]Direction For Our Times claims[/b]:
[indent]"Direction For Our Times is a 501c(3) (non-profit) organization dedicated to
spreading the eight-book collection entitled 'The Volumes.'"
Source: WAYBACK MACHINE'S archives for 2006 May 1 at
[url="http://web.archive.org/web/20060501015338/http://www.directionforourtimes.com/"]http://web.archive.org/web/20060501015338/...orourtimes.com/[/url][/indent]

2007 Feb 13 [b]Direction For Our Times finally is able to post[/b]
[indent][b]IRS Notifies DFOT of 501©(3) Status[/b]
5/01/06 -Direction For Our Times has received notification from the Internal Revenue Service that it has been designated as a 501©(3) tax exempt organization, after a lengthy application process.
Source: : WAYBACK MACHINE'S archives for 2007 Feb 13 at [url="http://web.archive.org/web/20070213185946/http://www.directionforourtimes.com/501c3+PR.html"]http://web.archive.org/web/20070213185946/...m/501c3+PR.html[/url][/indent]

2006 Aug 29 [b]Direction For Our Time posts:[/b]
[indent]3/06/06 - [b]IRS AWARDS Non-Profit 501©(3) Status to DFOT[/b]
Designation makes donations tax deductible.
Source: : WAYBACK MACHINE'S archives for 2007 Aug 29 at [url="http://web.archive.org/web/20070829135350/http://www.directionforourtimes.com/501c3+PR.html"]http://web.archive.org/web/20070829135350/...m/501c3+PR.html[/url][/indent]

Sean O L Comment: Well! Now I we can choose to believe that the Status was granted on either March 5, 2006 or May 1, 2006 - just as we are free to believe that "Directions For Our Times" are mighty free with the truth! - as truthful, in fact, as further back than Sept 17, 2005 when MDS/Michael posted to the [b]Catholic Community Forum[/b] the results of HIS research on the matter, which disclosed that Directions For Our Times were telling "porkies" about their status then!

[b]Article "B"[/b]
2007 Feb. 6 - [b]"Anne" Another Divorced Medjugorje Lay Apostle[/b] - by Richard Salbato
[url="http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/anne.htm"]http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/anne.htm[/url]

2007 Feb 10 - [b]Interview with Anne, a lay apostle by Dr Mark Miravalle
Extract:
[indent]"I would like to spend a few moments speaking to Anne, a lay apostle, about the visions and locutions she has received from Jesus, from God the Father, from Our Blessed Mother, from the angels and saints in a call for a lay apostolate of Jesus Christ the Returning King."
Source: Direction For Our Times Newsletter #5, pp. 16-18.
[url="http://www.directionforourtimes.com/DFOTnews5.pdf"]http://www.directionforourtimes.com/DFOTnews5.pdf[/url] [/indent]
This Newsletter is described as being "the official newsletter that keeps you involved and informed."

[b]Article "C"[/b]
2007 March 5 - {b}"Anne, the Lay Apostle" Is "Kathryn Ann Clarke"[/b] - by Richard Salbato
Source: [url="http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/anna'name.htm"]http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/anna'name.htm[/url]

[b]Article "D"[/b]
2007 Mar 7 - [b]RESPONSE TO Mr Salbato - March 5, 2007 Statement Regarding Anne and the lay Apostolate of Jesus Christ the Returning King[/b] - by Dr Mark Miravalle
Source: [url="http://www.directionforourtimes.com/docs/Dr_Mark_Miravalle_Letter.pdf"]http://www.directionforourtimes.com/docs/D...alle_Letter.pdf[/url]

[b]Article "E"[/b]
2007 Mar 16 - [b]Response to Dr. Mark I. Miravalle Concerning His Reply to Unity
Publishing On "Anne" the "Lay Apostle"[/b] - by Kevin J. Symonds
Source: [url="http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/anneMiravalle.htm"]http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/anneMiravalle.htm[/url]

[b]Article "F"[/b]
2007 April 9 - [b]Dear Bishop Leo O'Reilly - Anne's Bishop[/b] - by Richard Salbato,
Source: [url="http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/Anna'sBishop.htm"]http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions...#39;sBishop.htm[/url]

[b]Article "G"[/b]
2007 Jul 4- - [b]More On Anne a Lay Apostle[/b] - Kevin Symonds' Blog
Source: [url="http://benedictkjs.blogspot.com/2007/07/more-on-anne-lay-apostle.html"]http://benedictkjs.blogspot.com/2007/07/mo...ay-apostle.html[/url]


Sean O L comment:
2007 Nov 8: As at this date, Dr Mark Miravalle has NOT made any response that has been posted to the Internet in respect of Kevin Symonds' [b]Response to Dr Mark Miravalle Concerning His Reply to Unity Publishing on "Anne" the "Lay Apostle"[/b] of March 16, 2007 - that is a time period of 216 days, that is, almost seven (7) months! Edited by Sean O L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jaime
If anyone wants to take a shot at explaining this, let me know.

All I know is that "anne" doesn't need to be in quotations. Its really her name. "lay apostle" on the other hand should probably have them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totus Tuus
[quote name='hot stuff' post='1416120' date='Nov 8 2007, 09:28 AM']If anyone wants to take a shot at explaining this, let me know.

All I know is that "anne" doesn't need to be in quotations. Its really her name. "lay apostle" on the other hand should probably have them.[/quote]

Actually, I've met her, and her name isn't Anne. "Anne" is like a pseudonym or whatchamacallit. That's why it's in quotations.

As far as explaining it, I can't really do that since I didn't read the article. I am not sure that she's a genuine mystic... Personally I did not really get good vibes from her. But my vibes are not relevant to this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totus Tuus
Hmm, the article says her middle name is Anne. But she told us that she just went by "Anne" so people wouldn't know her real name... I don't remember the details but she never mentioned Anne being her middle name from what I recall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prose
I was just thinking the same thing...

This is the weirdest thread ever. :crazy: Edited by prose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KevinSymonds
I am truly humbled that someone thought enough of my work to make it a part of their chronology.

The case is not closed on Kathryn Anne Clarke. I have written more extensively on her and am awaiting the proper time to disclose the information.

Pray that it comes soon.

-Kevin Symonds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sean O L
G'day Kevin,

Well, if you ever come to Australia, you will get a chair at the top of [b]my[/b] table!

While not suggesting that what follows necessarily applies to "'Anne' the Lay Apostle" a.k.a. Kathryn Anne Clarke, the principle of to be aware / [b]beware[/b] does:

[b]Magdalen of the Cross - false "visionary"[/b][indent]
"The mystical experiences of the great St Teresa of Avila herself were the subject of much suspicion and outright hostility on the part of many learned and holy theologians of the time, not necessarily to the concept of private revelations, or to the charismata as manifested in certain individuals, rather, at least in part, because of the fact that many members of the 'theological establishment' in Spain and throughout Europe had only recently been deceived by a false mystic, the notorious Magdalen of the Cross:...Magdalen of the Cross...at the beginning of the century of St Teresa of Avila, fooled almost the whole of Spain...on certain days she had either the stigmata or sweats of blood, and she announced the defeat and imprisonment of Francis I by the Spanish army at Pavia... Hence, the tide of enthusiasm of which he was the cause. Common people, parish priests, emperors, many venerated her, and consulted with her. However, an apostolic visitor from Rome was shocked by some detains he saw in her convent. He spoke to each of the sisters and, especially with the Mother Abbess, Magdalen of the Cross, who eventually confessed that, while a young shepherdess, she had sold her soul to the devil in return for his giving her the power of performing prodigies. Thus she deceived everybody for thirty years. (2) The footnote is from "Rev. Ludovic-Marie Barrielle, C.P. C.R. V., Rules for the Discerning of Spirits in the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola, Angelus Press, Kansas City, MO. 1992."[/indent]
Extract from [b]"Medjugorje, The Facts and Logic"[/b], by Brian Hughes"

Further information may be gleaned from Volume 1 - the collected works of St Teresa of Avila, translated by Kieran Kavanaugh, O.C.D., and Otilio Rodriguez, O.C.D., Institute of Carmelite Studies, Washington, D.C., 1976:
[indent]"Another visionary, Magdalena de la Cruz, a Poor Clare with a reputation for holiness, severe fasts, and long vigils, also bearing the stigmata, let it be known that she no longer required any food except the consecrated Host in daily Communion. In an investigation by the Inquisition she confessed to being a secret devil worshipper. Inspired by two incubuses with whom she had made a pact, she became very skillful at all sorts of legerdemain, Through her success in fooling both bishops and kings, she brought the fear of being deceived to all of Spain."[/indent]
From the Introduction to the above book, by Kieran Kavanaugh, O.C.D., p.8

and

Fr. Groeschel cites the case of the Franciscan nun, Magdalena of the Cross, who had been
[indent]..."three times abbess of her monastery at the beginning of the sixteenth century. Complete with self-inflicted stigmata and the ability to levitate above the earth, with ecstasies and the gift of prophesy, she even convinced others that she had lived without food. She enjoyed a reputation for extraordinary holiness for several decades. Bishops, clergy, great nobles, and even inquisitors flocked to her. She succeeded in deluding a large number of Spanish theologians who prided themselves on not being easily taken in. However, in danger of death, she confessed that the whole thing was a fabrication and that in fact she inflicted the stigmata on herself. By her own admission she had sold her soul to Satan in return for all of these deceptive gifts, and she actually had to be subjected to exorcism"[/indent]
([b]A Still Small Voice[/b], pp. 45-46). Rallying from her illness, the nun attempted to stage a "come-back," and spent her remaining years in the care of the Inquisition.

[b]The Catechism of the Catholic Church[/b] says this of "private revelation"
[indent]"67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called 'private' revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium, knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

"Christian faith cannot accept 'revelations' that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions, [color="#0000FF"][b]and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such 'revelations.' [/b][/color]" (Emphasis added.)[/indent]

Kind regards,


Sean O L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Laudate_Dominum
[quote name='Sean O L' post='1416919' date='Nov 10 2007, 03:24 AM'][indent]"Another visionary, Magdalena de la Cruz, a Poor Clare with a reputation for holiness, severe fasts, and long vigils, also bearing the stigmata, let it be known that she no longer required any food except the consecrated Host in daily Communion. In an investigation by the Inquisition she confessed to being a secret devil worshipper. Inspired by two incubuses with whom she had made a pact, she became very skillful at all sorts of legerdemain, Through her success in fooling both bishops and kings, she brought the fear of being deceived to all of Spain."[/indent][/quote]
That is pretty darn disturbing. If I'm not mistaken a visit from an incubus (in this case two) involves sexual intercourse with the demon (demons in this case?). I think I'm going to throw up now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sean O L
[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1416920' date='Nov 10 2007, 07:34 PM']That is pretty darn disturbing. If I'm not mistaken a visit from an incubus (in this case two) involves sexual intercourse with the demon (demons in this case?). I think I'm going to throw up now.[/quote]

:pigfly: In "those days" I think that even Saints and their contemporaries and chrononicalers might have been suceptible to a bit of exaggeration! Edited by Sean O L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Laudate_Dominum
[quote name='Sean O L' post='1416927' date='Nov 10 2007, 04:25 AM']:pigfly: In "those days" I think that even Saints and their contemporaries and chrononicalers might have been suceptible to a bit of exaggeration![/quote]
Are you suggesting that fornication with and molestation by demonic entities is not a reality? I admit that exaggerations and such are a factor in things of this sort, but I won't deny the possibility of something that is so prevalent in Catholic demonology. Whether such events are real in the physical sense, or whether they are fabrications of demons that exist only in the mind and only seem real in the physical sense is certainly up for debate, but that some people have consecrated themselves to Satan through acts of fornication seems to be a fact. Demonic apparitions that engage the senses on all levels seem to be pretty well established facts (assuming one accepts Catholic demonology as I do).
To be honest, I believe that demons fornicate with people in their dreams quite frequently. I speculate that the more vivid experiences only occur among those who are given over to Satan quite explicitly and willfully, but some texts on demonology suggest that such things can happen totally against the person's will (rape by a demon essentially). These kinds of things need not involve tangible bodily experiences either. There are plenty of saints who were afflicted with demonic visits that involved scenes of unnatural sex acts by which the saint was tormented; this can be interpreted as a kind of rape since it was not voluntary. I see full demonic fornication as being something of an evil antithesis to the ecstatic union that some souls experience with God. I have encountered descriptions of such experiences in old school demonology and they are often quite grotesque and unnatural.
But really, a person who worked so much evil, deceived so many people, and was accompanied by extraordinary phenomena may very well have fornicated with a pair of devils; I find nothing particularly surprising about this at all. Saints were visited by devils who beat them up, why wouldn’t this devoted servant of evil have been wallowing in the depths of filth with her pals? I suppose we cannot know for sure based on any critical historical methodology, but I'm not prepared to automatically discount the report simply because it is extraordinary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justin86
[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1416931' date='Nov 10 2007, 06:59 PM']Are you suggesting that fornication with and molestation by demonic entities is not a reality? I admit that exaggerations and such are a factor in things of this sort, but I won't deny the possibility of something that is so prevalent in Catholic demonology. Whether such events are real in the physical sense, or whether they are fabrications of demons that exist only in the mind and only seem real in the physical sense is certainly up for debate, but that some people have consecrated themselves to Satan through acts of fornication seems to be a fact. Demonic apparitions that engage the senses on all levels seem to be pretty well established facts (assuming one accepts Catholic demonology as I do).
To be honest, I believe that demons fornicate with people in their dreams quite frequently. I speculate that the more vivid experiences only occur among those who are given over to Satan quite explicitly and willfully, but some texts on demonology suggest that such things can happen totally against the person's will (rape by a demon essentially). These kinds of things need not involve tangible bodily experiences either. There are plenty of saints who were afflicted with demonic visits that involved scenes of unnatural sex acts by which the saint was tormented; this can be interpreted as a kind of rape since it was not voluntary. I see full demonic fornication as being something of an evil antithesis to the ecstatic union that some souls experience with God. I have encountered descriptions of such experiences in old school demonology and they are often quite grotesque and unnatural.
But really, a person who worked so much evil, deceived so many people, and was accompanied by extraordinary phenomena may very well have fornicated with a pair of devils; I find nothing particularly surprising about this at all. Saints were visited by devils who beat them up, why wouldn’t this devoted servant of evil have been wallowing in the depths of filth with her pals? I suppose we cannot know for sure based on any critical historical methodology, but I'm not prepared to automatically discount the report simply because it is extraordinary.[/quote]
Wow...and all this time I thought incubus was just a rock group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sean O L
[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1416931' date='Nov 10 2007, 08:59 PM']Are you suggesting that fornication with and molestation by demonic entities is not a reality? ...To be honest, I believe that demons fornicate with people in their dreams quite frequently...[/quote]
Greetings Laudate_Dominum.

I really do not wish to delve deeply into the subject of Incubi and Sucubi – for it and Demonology is an enormous subject. Not wishing to “re-invent the wheel” I will present short extracts from another forum on the matter:

re: [size=5][b]incubus and succubus- demons of lustful nature [/b][/size]

Sean O L wrote:

All of the above comments [cited on the thread. S.O.L.] are - simply, OPINIONS - including those of St Thomas Aquinas.

The teachings of the Church are set out in the [u]Dogmas of the Faith[/u]. And in the [u]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/u]. The bases for the Dogmatic Teachings are contained in [b]Denzigers Enchiridion Symbolorum[/b]. There is nothing there about incubi or succubi. In fact, Pope Innocent VIII's Bull "[b][i]Summis disiderantes affectibus[/i][/b]" is conspicuously absent!

IF it WAS an infallibly binding BULL - why is it missing from Denzigers?

The facts are that it unfortunately set in motion the Inquistions on untold numbers of "witches". The [b]Catholic Encyclopedia [/b](c. 1912) entry on Pope Innocent VIII says that on 5th Dec. 1484, Pope Innocent VIII issued his much-abused Bull against witchcraft."

The Catholic Encyclopedia article on [b]Witchcraft[/b] goes on to say "
[indent]Quote:
Indirectly, however, by specifying the evil practices charged against the witches — for example their intercourse with incubi and succubi, their interference with the parturition [ = act of bringing forth young, childbirth. S.O.L.) women and animals, the damage they did to cattle and the fruits of the earth, their power and malice in the infliction of pain and disease, the hindrance caused to men in their conjugal relations, and the witches' repudiation of the faith of their baptism — [u]the pope must no doubt be considered to affirm the reality of these alleged phenomena[/u]. [b]But[/b], as even Hansen points out (Zauberwahn, 468, n. 3) "[u]it is perfectly obvious that the Bull pronounces no dogmatic decision[/u]"; [u]neither does the form suggest that the pope wishes to bind anyone to believe more about the reality of witchcraft than is involved in the utterances of Holy Scripture[/u]. Probably the [u]most disastrous episode [/u]was the publication a year or two later, by the same inquisitors, of the book "[b]Malleus Maleficarum[/b]" (the hammer of witches).

[…]

The question of the reality of witchcraft is one upon which it is not easy to pass a confident judgment. In the face of Holy Scripture and the teaching of the Fathers and theologians the [u]abstract possibility of a pact with the Devil and of a diabolical interference in human affairs can hardly be denied[/u], [b]but[/b] no one can read the literature of the subject without realizing the awful cruelties to which this belief and without being convinced that [u]in 99 cases out of 100 the allegations rest upon nothing better than pure delusion. [/u][/indent]
_______

Bible Reader wrote:

I believe that these demons are quite real, and that people generate them, as poltergeist-like entities able to invade and affect our reality, when people engage in persistent illicit sexual activity. The activity which generates these things is usually habitual and persistent. If the wrongdoer is Catholic, sacrilegious abuse of the Sacraments of Reconciliation (by omitting discussion of the true level of guilt) and of the Eucharist (by knowingly receiving Communion in the state of mortal sin) also generates the demonic presence.

Demonic activity tends to be imitative. It tends to imitate Christ or Mary or the saints to poke fun at them, or it imitates the sinner whose sins generated the presence, to poke fun at the sinner.

[u]So, serious sex-related sins generate a sexual demonic presence[/u]. [Of course, a demonic presence does NOT necessarily mean fornication with a "[b]spiritual, non-corporeal being[/b]" cf. CCC 328. S.O.L.!]

In a sense, when the demonic presence appears, as a consequence, it is like a phonograph record re-playing the sins which generated it, again and again and again.

The presences are sometimes invasive -- if you don't do something about them, [u]they can get worse and worse and worse[/u].

The sinner with the demonic presence can take heart in a few things. First, I think that God permits such presences [i]because[/i] [u]the person is [b]able[/b] to be saved[/u]. The person is being warned, "Hey! Hell is a [i]reality[/i], you idiot, and that is where you are going unless you change!" It is Paul's "thorn in the flesh." See 2 Corinthians 12:7.

Second, though they are [i]subjectively[/i] difficult for the sinner to eliminate, they are [i]objectively[/i] easy to eliminate.

If we are talking about a sex sin underlying the presence -- and we undoubtedly are -- the individual must begin by "starving" the presence to death. [b]Stop sinning[/b]. This works because the thing "eats dirt" -- see Genesis 3:14 -- sin is its "nutrition." Sin energizes it. [b]Pray to God for the will to stop sinning[/b]. He will give it to you. If we are talking about sex sin, here -- and we undoubtedly are -- the sinner should [b]stop looking[/b]. Sexual coveting almost always precedes sexual sin.

[i][b]Search for and find a good confessor, who you can trust, and "let it all hang out" in a special Reconciliation session[/b][/i]. Most priests can't take something as bizarre as a sexual demonic presence beside your bed, grabbing you at night, imitating your sex sounds. It is just too outstandingly weird. You really do need to prep the priest for what he is in for, in your confession, and also get him to know you, so that he doesn't "freak-out" on you or conclude that you are insane.

[i][b]Go to Communion frequently, even daily, after the sincere confession, and pray, pray, pray, pray, pray. And when you pray, don't just roll-out incessant Hail Mary's and Our Father's -- TALK to God, and to Mary[/b].[/i]

The sacraments and pray will make you holy, and make your person intolerable to the demon. YOU will become HIS "demon," and eventually HE'LL find YOU disgusting, and leave.

[i][b]If you ask God to let you hear the demon's departure, He will do so. It feels and sounds like an explosion[/b].[/i]

I know that some of the readers here will think this material outstandingly weird. It's what I have learned, after 30 years of reading, talking, etc., etc., etc.
__________

Sean O L wrote:

I do not disagree with you anything that you have written: I totally believe in the existence and influence of the devil and his fallen angels, "who roam throughout the world seeking the destruction of souls."

However, I do NOT believe in the concept of a [b]pure NON-CORPOREAL spirit [/b]having sexual relations with human beings [u]and producing off-spring thereby[/u]. Is it possible, though, that a demon could possess a human being (with or without the consent of that human being) and that possessed human having sexual relations with another human being and thereby producing off-spring? YES! That IS possible! But the resultant child would be, simply, a human soul – possessing Original Sin - just like all human beings. The child produced would have been Redeemed, and possess the same possibilities of Salvation as any other person born into this world.
__________


The matter is well covered at the
[b]Spiritual Warfare Forum (the Occult, New Age, & Demonology)[/b] website
[url="http://www.saint-mike.org/qa/sw/default.asp"]http://www.saint-mike.org/qa/sw/default.asp[/url]

One can search for such words as: incubi incubus, sucubi, sucubbus, possession, etc. at both “OLD” and the “CURRENT” forums.

Here is a sample:
[url="http://www.saint-mike.org/qa/sw/ViewAnswer.asp?QID=261"]http://www.saint-mike.org/qa/sw/ViewAnswer.asp?QID=261[/url]
[b]Evil Spirits masquerading as humans [/b]Ramundo Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Question:

I just read a new spiritual warfare book, "Dear Heatemup". The author says that evil spirits can take on human appearances, like lusty women, to deceive man.

Is that true?
Thanks

[b]Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM [/b]

Dear Ramundo:

We know from the Bible that it is possible for angels (demons are angels, fallen angels) to appear in human form. The story of the "visitors" to Lot at Sodom reveals this possibility. (Genesis 19)

Angels, or demons, appearing in human form is, however, an extremely rare thing. The chances of seeing a demon in human form are about the same as the chances of you being run over by a bus while at the same time being stuck by lightning, while holding the winning lottery ticket in one hand and in the other hand holding a personal invitation from the Pope to have a private breakfast with him in the Papal Apartments. Oh, there is also a note that the Papal Jet will pick you up at the airport along with 25 of your closest friends, all expenses paid. :)

What is more likely is meeting an actual human being inspired by the demons to do their bidding. We may come up against that on a far more regular basis than we realize. Such a person does not have to be "possessed," merely open to demonic inspiration.

By the way, the "lusty woman" demon is called a succubi. Succubus are demons who sexually attack men usually while they are sleeping. Incubus are demons who sexually attack women.

I have actually been physically attacked by a succubi. In this case there was no physical apparition or appearance. All I saw was a black void. After invoking the prayer, "In the name of Jesus Christ, be gone" three times, the thing left. The thing attacked me in revenge for trying to help a demonized client to be free of the demon.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary
_______________

As I say, I really do not wish to go further along this line in this thread; the matter of “Anne, the Lay Apostle” is of immediate interest.

I hope this will be helpful,


Sean O L Edited by Sean O L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


It costs about $850 a year for Phatmass.com to survive–and we barely make it. If you’d like to help keep the Phorum alive, please consider a monthly gift.



×
×
  • Create New...