Saturday, August 14, 2021

Catholic Iconography/Statues are NOT Idolatry

 


Contrary to the invalid accusations and lies of the protestant heretics, the Catholic Church does not worship and has never worshipped statues or icons. They typically quote Exodus 20:4-5 which they believe condemns Catholic statues and icons.

Exodus 20:4-5- "Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them...".

This commandment is echoed in Deuteronomy 5.

Deuteronomy 5:8-9- "Thou shall not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any things, that are in heaven above, or that are in the earth beneath, or that abide in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them.…”

Those who quote these passages in condemnation of the Catholic position on statues/icons are blatantly misinterpreting what Sacred Scripture actually says, and serves to prove that their religion is not of God.

When God condemned the adoration of statues, He is condemning the adoration of the icons themselves, and the making of icons of false gods and idols (i.e. the golden calf, buddha, etc).

Notice in the passage, it clearly says "you shall not adore THEM, nor serve THEM". He is clearly forbidding the adoration of icons themselves, i.e. treating the icon as if it is a diety and worshipping the substance of the icon as if divine.

What God does not forbid, however, is the fashioning of icons for use in His One True Faith. Throughout the Old Testament, we find many examples of God explicitly commanding statues to be made for His purposes. In Exodus 25 for example, He commands Moses to make multiple statues for the temple.

Exodus 25:18-19- "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold, on the two sides of the oracle. Let one cherub be on the one side, and the other on the other."

Here we see God Himself directly commanding Moses to fashion two statues of cherubim, the highest rank in the three Angelic Choirs. Very clearly, God does not forbid statues if they are to be used for worship in the confines of His Church.

There are numerous other examples of statues being made by God's command for religious purposes.

1 Kings 6:5- "According to the number of the provinces of the Philistines you shall make five golden emerods, and five golden mice: for the same plague hath been upon you all, and upon your lords. And you shall make the likeness of your emerods, and the likeness of the mice that have destroyed the land, and you shall give glory to the God of Israel: to see if He will take of His hand from you, and from your gods, and from your land."

3 Kings 6:23-28- "And he made in the oracle two cherubims of olive tree, of ten cubits of height...And he set the cherubims in the midst of the inner temple...And he overlaid the cherubims with gold."

3 Kings 7:25-36- "And it stood upon twelve oxen, of which three lookes towards the north, and three towards to west, and three towards the south, and three towards to east, and the sea was above upon them, and their hinder parts were all hid within...And between the little crowns and the ledges were lions, and oxen, and cherubims: and in the joinings likewise above: and under the lions and oxen, as it were bands of brass hanging down...He engraved also in those plates, which were of brass, and in the corners, cherubims, and lions, and palm trees, in the likeness of man standing, so that they seemed not to be engraven, but added round about."

God also commanded the creation of a statue for healing purposes. God commanded Moses to make a statue of a serpent, that whoever looked at it would be healed in Numbers 21.

Numbers 21:8- "And the Lord said to him: Make a brazen serpent, and set it up for a sign: whosoever being struck shall look it, shall live."

The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that trust is not to be put into the image itself, rather in whom the statue is a representation of, by means of the image.

Council of Trent, Sess. XXV: “Moreover, that the images of Christ, of the Virgin Mother of God, and of the other saints are to be placed and retained especially in the churches, and that due honor and veneration is to be given them; not, however, that any divinity or virtue is believed to be in them by reason of which they are to be venerated, or that something is to be asked of them, or that trust is to be placed in images, as was done of old by the Gentiles who placed their hope in idols; but because the honor which is shown them is referred to the prototypes which they represent, so that by means of the images which we kiss and before which we uncover the head and prostrate ourselves, we adore Christ and venerate the saints whose likeness they bear. That is what was defined by the decrees of the councils, especially of the Second Council of Nicaea, against the opponents of images.”

It is also taught by Scripture that the relics of saints should be venerated and are miraculous (i.e St. Paul's handkerchiefs and Elijah's cloak).

Acts 19:11-12- "And God wrought by the hands of Paul more than common miracles. So that even there were brought from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the wicked spirits went out of them."

4 Kings 2:13-14- "And he took up the mantle of Elias, that fell from him: and going back, he stood upon the bank of the Jordan, and he struck the waters wit the mantle of Elias, that had fallen from him, and they were not divided. And he said: Where is now the God of Elias? And he struck the waters, and they were divided, hither and thither, and Eliseus passed over."

As we can clearly see, the Catholic position regarding statues/icons/images is completely biblical, and the true biblical interpretation of the issue.

The protestant aversion to sacred images is rooted in the Iconoclast heresy, which rejects the use and veneration of sacred images. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines it as rooted in dualism (the heresy that all matter is evil). Iconoclasm was the last breach with Rome during the Great Schism of Photius (the schism with the eastern "orthodox"). 

Pope Gregory II wrote a letter to Emporer Leo III, an iconoclast, condeming his iconoclasm and teaching the true position on sacred images.

Pope Gregory II, Letter to Emporer Leo III, 737AD- “For what are our churches? Are they not made by hand of stones, timbers, straw, plaster, and lime? But they are also adorned with pictures and representations of the miracles of the saints, of the sufferings of Christ, of the holy mother herself, and of the saints and apostles; and men expend their wealth on such images. Moreover, men and women make use of these pictures to instruct in the faith their little children and young men and maidens in bloom of youth and those from heathen nations; by means of these pictures the hearts and minds of men are directed to God. But you have ordered the people to abstain from the pictures, and have attempted to satisfy them with idle sermons, trivialities, music of pipe and zither, rattles and toys, turning them from the giving of thanks to the hearing of idle tales. You shall have your part with them, and with those who invent useless fables and babble of their ignorance... You ask: “How was it that was said about images in six councils?” What then? Nothing was said about bread and water, whether that should be eaten or not; yet these things have been accepted from the beginning for the presence of human life. So also have images been accepted; the popes themselves brought them to councils, and no Christian would set out on a journey without images, because they were possessed of virtue and approved of God.”

The Second Council of Nicaea was called to condemn this very heresy.

Second Council of Nicaea, 787AD-  “We decree with full precision and care that, like the figure of the honored and life-giving cross, the revered and holy images, whether painted or made of mosaic or of other suitable material, are to be exposed in the holy churches of God, on sacred instruments and vestments, on walls and panels, in houses and by public ways, these are the images of our Lord, God and savior, Jesus Christ, and of our Lady without blemish, the holy God-bearer, and of the revered angels and of any of the saintly holy men...Indeed, the honor paid to an image traverses it, reaching the model, and he who venerates the image, venerates the person represented in that image.”





Tuesday, August 3, 2021

Ouija Boards Condemned


 A Ouija board, also known as a spirit board or talking board, is board and pointer used for divination and by some as a means to contact spirits or entities. The name comes from the French and German words for "yes," oui and ja (ja is mispronounced with a hard "j"). Critics of the Ouija, who include authorities in most denominations and sects of Western Religion, say it is dangerous and a tool of the Devil. Advocates say that it, like other forms of divination, is a legitimate means to discover insight, wisdom, and self-truths and to communicate with discarnate beings.

History of Ouija Boards

One of the first mentions of the automatic writing method used in the Ouija board is found in China around 1100 AD, in historical documents of the Song Dynasty. The method was known as fuji, "planchette writing". The use of planchette writing as an ostensible means of contacting the dead and the spirit-world continued, and, albeit under special rituals and supervisions, was a central practice of the Quanzhen School of Mystic Taoism, until it was forbidden by the Qing Dynasty. Several entire scriptures of the Daozang, the teachings of Taoism and their masters, are supposedly works of automatic planchette writing. Similar methods of mediumistic spirit writing have been widely practiced in ancient India, Greece, Rome, and medieval Europe.

Heightened interest in the world of spiritualism during the 19th century ultimately led to the creation of the Ouija board, a commercialized form of "talking board" often used by spiritualists and psychic mediums. Two business partners named Elijah Bond and Charles Kennard developed their own version of a spirit board, combining the French and German words for "yes". Thus, the Ouija board was born.

Although Bond and Kennard are credited with inventing the modern Ouija board, it was an employee named William Fuld who took over the commercial production of the official Ouija board. Fuld could not completely prevent competitors from marketing similar spirit boards, although the name Ouija was a recognized trademark. Fuld died in 1927, but his estate did not sell the manufacturing and trademark rights to the game company Parker Brothers until 1966. Although dozens of talking or spirit board games still exist, only Parker Brothers can, in legal terms, call their product a true Ouija board.

Precursors to the Ouija date back to ancient times. In China before the birth of Confucius (c. 551 BC), similar instruments were used to communicate with the dead. In Greece during the time of Pythagoras (c. 540 BC) divination was done with a table that moved on wheels to point to signs, which were interpreted as revelations from the "unseen world." The rolling table was used through the nineteenth century. Other such devices were used by the ancient Romans as early as the third century AD, and in the thirteenth century by the Mongols. Some Native Americans used "squdilatc boards" to find missing objects and persons, and obtain spiritual information. In 1853 the planchette came into use in Europe. It consisted of a triangular or heart-shaped platform on three legs, one of which was a pencil. The medium or user moved the device over paper to draw pictures and spell out messages.

Following its commercial introduction by businessman Elijah Bond on July 1, 1890, the Ouija board was regarded as a harmless parlor game unrelated to the occult until American Spiritualist Pearl Curran popularized its use as a divining tool during World War I.

How Does a Ouija Board Work?

A Ouija board contains letters, numbers and common words such as "yes," "no," and "goodbye." Users hold a device known as a planchette and allow the spirit to move it around the board. Ouija boards are believed to allow spirits of the dead, usually a condemned soul or a demon, to communicate with the living. They are often considered to be communication gateways to those who have "passed over."

The board includes letters of the alphabet, numerals 0 through 9, the words "yes" and "no," and a heart-shaped pointer on three felt-tipped legs. One or two people place their fingertips on the pointer, which moves to answer questions. In some cases answers probably rise up from the subconsciousness of the users, even when "spirits" identify themselves and give messages. However, Ouija pointers have been known to fly off the board and spin out of control, as though being directed by unseen forces, and some users claim to be harassed by external agents contacted through the board.

The acquisition and use of a Ouija board has always been controversial, to say the least. Proponents of the Ouija board believe that the participants hands are guided by "benevolent" or "good" spirits. The Ouija board itself is only a medium between the spirit world and the players. Some Ouija board enthusiasts claim the board itself cannot be destroyed and should never be burned. The Bible, however, tells us to destroy and burn all occult material (Acts 19:18-19). After contacting a willing spirit, players make light contact with the planchette and allow it to move across the Ouija board. Individual letters and numbers are often dictated to a non-participant for later deciphering. Simple yes or no questions can be answered directly.

There is a strong religious objection to the Ouija board phenomenon. According to mainstream Christian thought, Satan disguise malevolent spirits as the supposed "harmless" spirit guides sought out by Ouija board users. In reality, there are no "harmless" spirit guides involved in the occult. Demons are spirit guides in disguise. Demons are liars and they often pretend to be good harmless spirits or ghosts in order to trick people into thinking they are friendly and harmless but they are not. In this way the demons get control over their lives. These evil spirits use the Ouija board as a means of possessing the user's thoughts or to cause personal harm. Prominent Ouija board critics have documented evidence of lives permanently altered following malevolent Ouija board sessions. One Ouija board legend warns against playing the game alone, while another suggests that the spirits must be approached in a specific way to avoid encountering evil imposters. Don't believe any of these legends that may encourage you to play the Ouija Board. Never touch the Ouija Board by your own or with others! Whether they be called "harmless" or "malevolent", Ouija Board is a portal inviting demons into your home, body and soul (See Ouija Board Stories or Testimonials below).

The Dangers of Ouija Boards

Although Ouija boards are marketed as a "toy", there are people, even occult practitioners themselves, who believe they can be harmful. Some critics include Edgar Cayce, who called them "dangerous." Some warn that "evil demons" pretend to be cooperative ghosts in order to trick users into becoming spiritually possessed.

What the Top Experts Say on the Ouija Board Phenomenon

Some practitioners believe to have had bad experiences related to the use of talking boards by being haunted by demons, seeing apparitions of spirits, and hearing voices after using them. A few paranormal researchers, such as John Zaffis, testifies that the majority of the worst cases of demon harassment and possession are caused by the use of Ouija boards. The American demonologists Ed and Lorraine Warren, stated that "Ouija boards are just as dangerous as drugs." They further state that "séances and Ouija boards and other occult paraphernalia are dangerous because 'evil spirits' often disguise themselves as your loved ones—and take over your life."

In 1944, occultist and top ranking Freemason Manly P. Hall, the founder of the Philosophical Research Society and an early authority on the occult in the 20th century, stated in Horizon Magazine that, "during the last 20-25 years I have had considerable personal experience with persons who have complicated their lives through dabbling with the Ouija board. Out of every hundred such cases, at least 95 are worse off for the experience." He went on to say that, "I know of broken homes, estranged families, and even suicides that can be traced directly to this source."

As early as 1924, Harry Houdini wrote that five people from Carrito, California were driven insane by using a board. That same year, Dr. Carl Wickland in his book stated that "the serious problem of alienation and mental derangement attending ignorant psychic experiments was first brought to my attention by cases of several persons whose seemingly harmless experiences with automatic writing and the Ouija board resulted in such wild insanity that commitment to asylums was necessitated."

The former medical director of the State Insane Asylum of New Jersey, Dr. Curry, stated that the Ouija board was a "dangerous factor" in unbalancing the mind and believed that if their popularity persisted insane asylums would be filled with people who used them.

Decades later, in 1965, parapsychologist Martin Ebon in his book Satan Trap: Dangers of the Occult, states that "it all may start harmlessly enough, perhaps with a Ouija board," which will, "bring startling information... establishing credibility or identifying itself as someone who is dead. It is common that people... as having been 'chosen' for a special task." He continues, "Quite often the Ouija turns vulgar, abusive or threatening. It grows demanding and hostile, and sitters may find themselves using the board compulsively, as if 'possessed' by a spirit, or hearing voices that control or command them."

In her 1971 autobiography, the psychic Susy Smith said, "Warn people away from Ouija and automatic writing. I experienced many of the worst problems of such involvement. Had I been forewarned by reading that such efforts might cause one to run the risk of being mentally disturbed, I might have been more wary."

The late Vatican II sect priest Malachi Martin, SJ believed talking boards are dangerous and claimed that by using these devices a person opens themselves to demonic oppression or possession, topics upon which Martin spoke and wrote extensively for many years.

The Famous Roland Doe Case

In a famous case, in January of 1949, a thirteen-year-old Lutheran boy, Roland Doe (also known as Robbie Mannheim), living in Cottage City, Maryland became involved in satanic possession after trying to contact his deceased aunt (with whom he had been very close) via an Ouija board. Shortly afterwards, his home became the scene of many alarming events, including sound of squeaky and marching feet as well as other unexplained noises, rearranged furniture, and flying objects. Nine priests and thirty-nine other witnesses attested to these paranormal phenomenon and signed the final ecclesiastical papers documenting Mannheim's experience. The boy was examined by both medical and psychiatric doctors, who could offer no explanation for these disturbing events taking place. The frightened family turned to their Lutheran "clergyman", "Rev." Luther Miles Schulze, for help.

Schulze arranged for the boy to spend the night of February 17 in his home in order to observe him. The boy slept near the minister in a twin bed and the minister reported that in the dark he heard vibrating sounds from the bed and scratching sounds on the wall. During the rest of the night he witnessed some strange events, a heavy armchair in which the boy sat seemingly tilted on its own and tipped over and a pallet of blankets on which the sleeping boy lay inexplicably moved around the room and slapped people in the face.

Schulze concluded that there was evil at work in the teen and he referred the case to Rev. Edward Hughes, a Catholic priest, who conducted an exorcism on the boy. During the exorcism, the boy inflicted a wound upon the pastor that required stitches. In subsequent exorcisms on the boy performed by Rev. William Bowdern, assisted by Rev. Walter Halloran and Rev. William Van Roo, his aversion to anything sacred, a shaking bed, flying objects, and Roland speaking in a guttural voice was observed. They eventually succeeded in driving out the demon from the child when the child finally uttered "Christus, Domini [Christ, the Lord]."

The exorcism ritual was performed thirty times overall during several weeks. Fr. Halloran stated that during this scene words such as "evil" and "hell", along with other various marks, appeared on the teenager's body. Moreover, Roland broke Fr. Halloran's nose during the process. When the final exorcism was complete witnesses reported loud noise going off throughout the hospital (the exorcism was performed in the psychiatric wing).

The events reported in the media of the time and the subsequent supernatural events surrounding those events went on to inspire the 1971 novel The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty and the famous 1973 film adaptation with the same name, as well as Thomas B. Allen's 1993 historical account Possessed, a second edition of it in 1999, and the 2000 film by the same name, based on Allen's book.

Ouija Board Stories

Often times, many violent, negative and potentially dangerous conditions are present to those using the Ouija board. Several spirits will attempt to come through at the same time but the real danger lies when you ask for physical proof of their existence. You might say, "Well, if you're really a spirit, then put out this light or move that object!" What you have just done is simple, you have "opened a doorway" and allowed them to enter into the physical world and future problems can and often do arise.

I believe the following cases are true examples of what could happen to those who continue to use the Ouija board!

Ouija Board's Evil Spell Still Lives in Our House

(National Examiner, 31-7-87 by Robert Stamper)

I invited a foul horror into my house with a Ouija board. My brother and I got no results when we started to use the psychic device, but suddenly the message indicator mysteriously began to move. The first thing the board told us was that the message was being sent by Seth. Then I made the tragic mistake of telling the board to prove it was real by doing something supernatural. The results were startling and scary. The board told us that the grandfather of one of my best friends would die in a week. The chandelier in the room began to shake violently and the chimes rang like pieces of metal being smashed together. The room became as cold as ice and we were shivering, though the thermometer read 70 degrees. The horrible stench of death filled the room and we couldn't stop gagging and coughing.

Suddenly, the noises stopped and the room was as quiet as a cemetery in the middle of the night. My brother and I looked at each other in terror. We opened the windows to get rid of the stink or rotting flesh and told each other we'd forget the whole thing. But a week later the grandfather of one of my best friends died just as the board has predicted! And from time to time the chandelier would rattle, the room freeze and that awful smell return. I couldn't take it any more. I threw the board away and told my mother about the experience. She told me that once you tamper with a Ouija board, its evil spell will remain forever. And to this day, those terrifying tremors shake the house and the stench of death fills the room.

Ouija Board Summons Demons

(The Sun, 12-9-86)

A simple Ouija board became a passport to Hell for a family that accidentally summoned a demon into their living room. [Editors note: There are no "accidents" when playing with the occult; all spirits are demons, some might be more violent than others though.] "I thought it might have been the Devil himself," says John Ravens, father of the tormented family. "When it was over, we were all bleeding and had severe burn marks. Our living room was a disaster area."

"It was supposed to be a joke," says Gloria, the girl's mother. "We were going to make believe we were talking with the spirit world."

Little Lynda, her nine-year-old brother Ronald, and their parents gathered around the board for what they thought was going to be an evening of fun at their home in a Toronto, Canada suburb. "We were just playing around with it when suddenly the planchette that spells out answers began moving by itself," says John. "We were all scared, but then I thought maybe one of the kids was up to tricks. We started asking questions, and this spirit began speaking to us. "Then it asked if it could visit with us. By this time, I was sure someone was playing a joke, and I said yes," he adds.

That's when the nightmare began. "The demon appeared within seconds," says John. "It spun around the room overhead, laughing and cursing at us. "It was surrounded by a ring of fire and the room became so hot, it was like an inferno from Hell." The family describes the demon as red and black with scaly skin and horns. It also had giant bat wings. "Then it suddenly swooped down and attacked us," recalls John, horror flickering over his features. "It started biting each of us on the face and arms. "We tried getting up and running for the door, but every time we did, the creature started clawing us. It was so fast, we couldn't escape from it."

Lynda and brother Ronald were picked up repeatedly and hurled across the room. As they lay helplessly on the floor, the creature pounded on their chests and heads. "It had hooves that dug into my children's faces and skin, marking them badly," says Gloria. The attack lasted for more than an hour before the horrifying demon vanished as quickly as it first appeared. The children were screaming and crying as John pulled them out of the house and drove to a nearby hospital, where they were treated for cuts and burns.

Demons Use Ouija Board As Gateway To Take Over Soul

(The Sun, 22-8-84 by Lewis Clifford)

Terrifying demons freed from other dimensions are preying on helpless human victims. And the gateway used by the grotesque monsters is being kept open by innocent toying with Ouija boards and other tools of the occult, top medical and religious experts caution.

"They are vile creatures of the night," warned Dr. Alberto Gonzalez, of the Pan American Institute of Health. "They exist. They can possess the bodies of their victims and cause normally gentle, nonviolent people to commit outrageous crimes. They can assume other forms some quite ghastly.

"And they are among us in many instances solely because of these sinister toys called Ouija boards." Gonzalez, a psychiatrist and parapsychologist, claims he has found demonic links to several cases of cattle mutilation and human vampirism in Central America.

Says the Rev. Morris Cerullo, president of World Evangelism and author of The Black Side Of Satan, Creation House, Carol Stream, Illinois, 1973. "Many people have related to me weird tales of answers given by the Ouija board. This and other occult games may seem intriguing, but the implications are serious and not to be tampered with. They can lead to dangerous waters indeed.

"Use of a Ouija has even led to violence and even to murder..." Dr. Marta Prohazka of Fairfax, Virginia, is also convinced that spirits can play terrifying destructive games with human behavior. During her practice as psychotherapist and psychoanalyst, she realized that many patients she had considered "hallucinating paranoid schizophrenics" might instead merely be in touch with something invisible to her but visible to them." I came to understand that another plane, or dimension or existence interrelated with our plane or visible manifestation," she said. "By training and expanding consciousness, some individuals gain entrance into that invisible dimension. It seems to some like a window into heaven.

"I also learned that contact with the other dimension can be dangerous, especially if a psychically sensitive person loses his emotional harmony. The window into heaven can then become a window into Hell." [Editors note: There are only windows to Hell when playing with the occult; and that is true even if the experience appears "benign" and "good" because demons often feign themselves as angels of light (2 Corinthians 11:14) in order to deceive those who have no love for the truth, and who unlawfully make use of evil ends when, according to them, they are searching for (what they believe is) "God" or "good". However, in reality, "God" and "good" can only be found through prayer and good desire/will alone. Not through the occult or false apparitions.]

Millions of the plastic oracles are in use in American households, nevertheless. And the eerie messages from beyond they have spelled out have been credited or blamed for marriages, divorces, sickness, misery, mystery or murder. Psychic and medium Anne Rose told the Sun: "Horrible demons have definitely been released by the Ouija board.

"The Ouija board is a vehicle which makes it easy for negative spirits and demonic forces to enter this plane of existence." The Merrillville, Indiana clairvoyant cautioned that evil spirits or demonic forces often gain the trust of people experimenting with Ouija boards by answering several questions truthfully and providing predictions. "Once they have gained the trust of their victims, it is easy for the entity to move in and take over either by strongly influencing that person, or by outright possession," she said.

The Ouija Board Spelled 'Join Me in Hell'

(A true testimony, Saturday, July 23, 2011)

The night of terror began with a few drinks.

"It was just another night out with our group of friends," Toni said. "We had all been drinking so we decided to go to our friend Brittny's house."

The idea of using a Ouija board had picked at Toni's mind for the past three days so, as the group of friends sat at Brittny's house, she brought it up.

"I had been wanting to play around with a Ouija board just for the hell of it," she said. "Since we were all drunk[1] and my older brother knew how to make a pretty nifty homemade Ouija board, we all thought it was a great idea."

The friends soon discovered it was not.

After an opening prayer, the friends began their Ouija session.

"We started off with me and my brother's hands on the triangle (planchette) we had cut out," Toni said. "We warmed it up by spinning it in a circle for about 40 seconds."

Once they stopped spinning the planchette, Toni's brother asked the first question.

"Is there any spirit with us now?"

Tense moments past and nothing happened. Toni's friend Taylor shouted something sarcastic and the planchette shot to the word "yes" on the top corner of the board.

"At first, I truly believed it was my older brother," Toni said. "I was wrong."

Very wrong.

Toni and her brother took turns with others in the room, and eventually the messages grew dark.

"We switched people maybe about eight times before it really started getting frightening," she said. "All together, we had let nine spirits into the room."

Messages from the board claimed the spirits of six women and three men were in the room. Then the questions began to flow, like, "Did any of you kill yourselves?"

They did.

"It answered with a 'three,'" Toni said. "We then asked them how. G for gunshot, H for hanging."

For the first answer, the planchette moved to X, but the next rested on H. Then something happened that pulled a blanket of fear over the group.

"We heard soft banging as if someone had just hung themselves and their feet were gently hitting the wall," Toni said. "We asked the spirit who had made the banging noise to speak. We asked him why he killed himself and he spelled out 'wife.'"

Had his wife been murdered?

"No."

How did she die?

"Devil."

"We asked if the devil made him do it and the triangle moved to 'Yes,'" Toni said. "We asked if he hated women and he spelt out 'all of them.'"

The room grew silently tense as the planchette skittered across the homemade board, broken only by heavy breaths and the occasional brave question.

"We asked if he wanted to harm any of the girls in the room and the triangle moved to 'yes,'" Toni said. "We asked how and he spelt out 'fire.'"

Then the planchette quickly moved from letter to letter, repeatedly spelling "maim."

"Then one of the candles we had fell to the floor and hot wax got on my leg," Toni said. "Or at least I thought it was hot wax. It turned out to be a pretty deep cut. I don't know where it came from."

Despite the injury, the friends kept playing.

"There were a few people in the room who were scared," Toni said. When asked, the Ouija board identified each one.

The last people to use the board were Toni's brother and Brittny. Facing each other, the two spun the planchette and began asking questions.

"I wasn't scared until the last session with the board," Toni said. "This time, we were dealing with a demonic spirit; an angry demonic spirit."

Toni's brother asked, "are you evil or good?"[2]

The board signified evil.

"We all laughed and my brother began asking more questions," Toni said.

Taylor screamed, "We needed to put it away and stop (messing) around with it."

The group, focused on the spinning planchette, ignored him.

"We asked the demonic spirit if it wanted to hurt anyone in the room," Toni said, and the planchette spelled "HAT." Taylor was the only one wearing a hat.

"My brother asked him to point the triangle at who he wanted to hurt and it went straight to Taylor," Toni said.

Taylor shot from his seat and screamed an expletive; then he moved to another part of the room. The point of the planchette followed him. The board spelled that Taylor was cursed.[3]

"We asked more questions but the answers were too confusing for us to understand," Toni said.

The next few answers weren't.

"The Ouija board spelt out my father's name," Toni said. "This part made my heart stop because my dad truly is a (messed) up being."

Toni's brother asked why the board was interested in their father.

"It slowly spelt out 'deal with devil,'" Toni said. "My brother asked to be more specific and it spelt out 'no work.'"

Their father is technically disabled and "gets free meds and money from the government."[4]

Then the planchette started spinning, resting briefly on the board's roughly written letters.

J. O. I. N. M. E. I. N. H. E. L. L. P. A. D. …

"My brother flipped the board before it could finish spelling our last name," Toni said.

Toni's brother and Brittny released the board, and destroyed it, along with the paper they used to write the messages. Then they burned the remains.

"After that night, I will not touch a Ouija board," Toni said. "I now know how serious the Ouija board is."

[Editors notes:]

[1] [Drunkenness is of course unlawful to do and a mortal sin (1 Corinthians 6:10). Not many people know this, but demons always have easier access to possess and influence people committing (and living in) mortal sin.]

[2] [All spirits involved in the occult are always evil. No exceptions. There are no such thing an a "good" spirit involved with the occult. Even if the apparition appears "good" or as an "angel of light" you can know for a certainty that it is demonic in nature (2 Corinthians 11:14) and that it has as intention to harm you and murder your soul in Hell for all eternity.]

[3] [A person can only be cursed through living in mortal sin. A demon may also lie or accuse holy and good people of being cursed by them, but in reality, such curses have no effect. The only real curse is mortal sin. For when a person lives in mortal sin, he or she opens up his soul to demonic infestations and realities.

[4] [There is no sin in living on welfare or being disabled and unable to work[5] as long as one has a just cause for doing so. But if one has lied or made false claims, or made a deal with the devil (literally), however, to achieve this end, that is another story. Drug abuse also invites demons into one's soul.]

[5] [One always have an obligation to work out one's own and other peoples salvation, of course. If one doesn't do this (work out one's salvation) one is already in the control of the devil.]

A Letter From a Reader

Just was doing some work on your site and I wanted to share something with you and maybe you can help me. I am very sensitive about this. I went through your site and you had a warning about the Ouija board and I have had a bad experience when I was 19 years old and I am still haunted by this. I am 49 now.

My Mom, got involved with the board when I went away for about a month. You see I was the fourth child and kind of the loner. I was the one that went to church and had a strong belief in God. When I got back from being away everyone but my mom greeted me outside and all were very upset and hurt. They tried to tell me before I greeted my mom, but when I saw how she looked and how she came up to me, this was not my mom. This woman was a stranger to me.

I went up to my room, and very tired from the trip, I laid on my bed and fell to sleep. When I got this feeling that I was being watched, I opened my eyes and staring down at me was my mom. She was smoking in my room which she never done before and she just gave me this look, that frightened me...

That night I heard a party going on downstairs. I looked at the clock and it was one in the morning so I got up and went downstairs, peaked around the corner and the plastic piece on the board was going by itself and several different voices of men and women were coming out of my mom. My mom could not get by a minute without asking this board what to do first.

I think what bothered me the most is my dad would not do anything about it, or my older sister and brothers. One afternoon I came home and it was so bad that I fought with her and I went out and burned it...

My mom bought another board and lived with it until she died in 1996. My dad went to the place that she had stored it, but it was not there.

My mom and I worked things out and she seemed to get better, but she would not give up the board. She left me this haunting and I have to live with this. I have lived all my life with spirits and ghosts and they don't bother me. But the board I don't like it. I know first-hand how it can take over people's lives and you are right to say it is a door-way for things to come through. I am still working through this and if any of your readers want to know first-hand, you can share this with them.

Thank you! Pam Frost

What Does the Bible Say About Ouija Board?

The Bible has a few things to say about engaging in activities of this nature:

Leviticus 19:31: "Do not turn to mediums or seek out spiritists, for you will be defiled by them. I am the LORD your God."

Deuteronomy 18:10-12: "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD."

Isaiah 8:19: "When men tell you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living?"

Galatians 5:19-20: "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

"Playing" with a Ouija board is engaging in occultism. Such activity is clearly forbidden by God. No matter how innocent it may seem, playing with Ouija boards will open up a portal for demons to invade our hearts and minds. All demonic activity is under the control of Satan, whom St. Peter describes in no uncertain terms: "Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour" (2 Peter 5:8). The scriptural example for dealing with items that pertain to the occult (books, music, jewelry, occult games, and other occult objects) is to confess involvement with them as sin and burn the items—safely, of course (Acts 19:18-19).

Many people find some truth in the predictions of the occult, while others assert that it simply doesn't work. Sometimes, the occult can truly seem to be speaking right to you, exactly pertaining to your life. You must realize however that it is just one of many tools used by Satan to keep you from relying on God and the things of God.

God is a jealous God. He wants our affection and trust to be placed only in Him. He will reveal His plans for us in His timing. He is greatly offended when we turn to things like the Ouija boards, séances, or signs rather than to Him. Proverbs 3:5-8 perfectly explains what the Lord wants from us. "Trust the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord and shun evil. This will bring health to your body and nourishment to your bones."

Conclusion

We strongly warn all people against using Ouija boards or any means of spirit communication including, séances, automatic writing, tarot cards, astrology etc. This is not a parlor game nor is it something for anyone to experiment with as there are many dangers involved, including demonic possession, death, and Hell!


Mary is Mother of God


Those who would relegate the Blessed Virgin to an incidental role in salvation history would do well to pay special attention to God's Holy Word, the Bible. St. Luke, the Evangelist who took the greatest pains to research the pertinent events of Our Lord's early life, records the following words of St. Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, to the Blessed Virgin: “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (St. Luke Chap. 1 vs 43)


A brief footnote in the Haydock Bible makes this simple point: "The Mother of my Lord. A proof that Christ was truly God, and the Blessed Virgin Mary truly the Mother of God". It is this same Divine Son, born of Mary, who will later astound His countrymen by declaring that He came not to abolish the Law, but to FULFILL the Law. Note the wording of the Fourth Commandment as set down in the Book of Deuteronomy:

“Honor thy father and mother, as the Lord they God hath commanded thee, that thou mayest live a long time, and it may be well with the in the land, which the Lord thy God will give thee.” (Deuteronomy Chap.. 5 vs. 16).

This is the only Commandment which offers a blessing as a reward. Other Commandments offer curses as the inevitable fruits of non-compliance. The Israelites were not to serve idols, lest God visit the iniquity of the fathers upon their children. They were not to take the name of the Lord in vain, for he shall not be unpunished that taketh His name upon a vain thing. But look at the tenderness with which the Almighty respects Fatherhood and Motherhood. It is plain throughout Scripture that Jesus honored His Father as only a Perfect Son could have. Every one of His actions, every one of His sorrows and glories were directed towards the glory of His heavenly Father. But, would the God-Man leave the Fourth Commandment only half observed? If He were to fulfill the Law perfectly, would He forget that the Fourth Commandment enjoined the honor of both Father and Mother? Could the Son of God be so forgetful?

Some Protestants are fond of describing Our Lady as a glorified "incubator", a creature used by God and then shoved unceremoniously aside. In this strange view, God become the ultimate "consumer", picking humans at random for certain tasks, using them up and tossing them into the rubbish when their usefulness is over. One wonders how the proponents of this view would react if you were to inform them that their own mothers were mere "vessels", meant only to be "used" by their fathers as a means of generating offspring. Sacred Scripture tells us something different. It tells us that the unique spiritual bond between mother, father and child is so beloved and cherished by the Almighty that He went so far as to COMMAND that it be honored. This is a simple matter of Scriptural record. Anyone wishing to denigrate the place of the Blessed Virgin in the life of her Son does so in defiance of both Sacred Scripture and the Commandments of the Holy Trinity. One would be hard pressed to find in the entire Bible any occurrences where mothers are viewed as mere "incubators".

Our Lady's Divine Maternity therefore, isn't a mere "aspect" of the Gospels, and unimportant element that one can safely ignore at will, but a critical part of them. Obviously, if GOD thinks the bond between Mother and Child is important, then WE are bound to view it likewise.

Many Protestants seem to take a peculiar delight in snubbing the Blessed Virgin. In a twist of logic which manages in one swoop to deny both the Fourth Commandment and Our Lord's claim to be the fulfilled of the Law, they posit themselves as the exponents of a "pure" form of Christian worship, a worship which is free of the Holy Virgin, Saints, and Sacraments. They conveniently forget St. James' teaching that "the prayer of a just man availeth much", a clear Biblical endorsement for the Catholic belief in intercession. They also believe that, somehow, Jesus Christ, True God and True MAN, takes pleasure in seeing His holy Mother despised. It's no wonder that Cardinal Newman wrote these word about their misconceptions: “. . . few Protestants have any real perception of the doctrine of God and man in, one Person. They speak in a dreamy, shadowy way of Christ's divinity . . .They cannot bear to have it said, except as a figure or mode of speaking, that God had a human body, or that God suffered.”

Perhaps this is why one finds no "Stations of the Cross" or "Sacred Heart" devotions in Protestantism. What Catholics understand as they hear the Gospels read each Sunday is that Christ was like unto us in every way except in sin; He was and is the God-Man. If someone ignorant of the Gospels could go back in time with a camcorder and tape a series of days in the life of the Holy Family prior to Our Lord's public ministry, he would little suspect that he was watching a god, let alone the One and Only God. He would find a pious family, obviously loving and at peace. He would find the Son obedient and prayerful, but otherwise engaging in very mundane activities: working, conversing with family and acquaintances, eating, praying. This is the life that GOD lived for thirty years on earth! There is a reason for this. GOD does not waste time. If the hierarchical structure of the human family, with it's sacred bonds and implicit obedience to authority, as reflected in the Fourth Commandment, were of no value to the Christian understanding of Faith, God would not have bequested the legacy to us. Therefore, any time the Mother of God appears in Scripture or is the subject of doctrinal teachings, it is for a very good and important reason.

Mary is Sinless

 


Many volumes can and have been written about the pivotal Christian dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin in the womb of Her mother, St. Anne. The early Church Fathers understood it as a matter of course that Our Lady was sinless. In the early centuries of the Church, as they battled the various heresies arising to confuse the faithful, these pious and learned scholars didn't engage in a detailed scrutiny of the Virgin's sinlessness. They understood that She was free from actual sin, and they knew that she had somehow been sanctified in the womb of Her own mother. As far back as the 4th Century, we find the following thought expressed in a poem by St. Ephrem of Syria, addressed to Our Savior, which echoes the Canticle of Canticles:


“Thou and Thy Mother are alone in this: you are wholly beautiful in every respect. There is in Thee, Lord, no stain, nor any spot in Thy Mother.” Such expressions are far from rare in the early Church. In the 5th Century, Theodotus, Bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, described Mary as: “A Virgin innocent; immaculate; free from all guilt; spotless; undefiled; holy in spirit and body; a lily among thorns.”

We must remember that there was no ill will in the intentions of the later writers . . . such as St. Bernard, St. Bonaventure, St. Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas. . . who questioned the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Since dogma hadn't as yet been formulated and defined, a "pre-natal sanctification" of Our Lady seemed to them a safer course to steer in order to safeguard the Scriptural teaching of Our Lord's unique Mediatorship. It was never a question of doubting our Lady's sanctity, but of placing Her sinlessness into the larger context of the Redemption. Of course, being a human woman, the Virgin Mary was redeemed by Jesus Christ, but how was this accomplished? St. Paul wrote these words to the Catholics in Rome: "And we know that to them that love God, all things work together unto good, to such as according to His purpose, are called to be saints" (Romans Chap.. 8 vs 28) This sublime teaching found abundant justification in the history of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, for it was the very opposition to this Dogma, an opposition sparked by no less an authority than St. Bernard of Clairvaux, that caused scholars from the 12th Century on to begin studying this unique privilege of the Blessed Virgin in detail. The debate would ultimately manifest itself along definite lines, with the Dominicans opposing the Dogma, and the Franciscans defending it with vigor. Two of these Franciscans scholars in particular are credited with solving the "riddle" of the Immaculate Conception, a solution which would bear fruit 600 years later when the Dogma was solemnly defined by Pope Pius IX in the Bull Ineffabilis Deus.

These men, to whom the Church owes a solid debt of gratitude, were William of Ware ( died c.1308), lecturer at Oxford and Paris, and his student, John Duns Scotus (died 1308). These great scholars exemplified the common sense approach to the study of the Mother of God. William of Ware, one of the first university instructors to teach the Immaculate Conception, offered this observation on Our Blessed Mother: There is another opinion, that She did not contract original sin, which I wish to hold, because, if I am to be mistaken, since I am not certain of either side, I prefer to mistaken by excess, giving Mary some prerogative, than by defect, lessening or taking from Her some prerogative which She had.

To Duns Scotus is given the honor of clarifying the Dogma in terms which defend Our Lady's sanctity, while also raising the Redemptive work of Our Lord to a new degree. He pointed out that there was restorative Redemption, whereby tainted Mankind was cleansed from the stain of Original Sin, and a preservative Redemption, by which Our Lady, through the merits of Christ, was preserved from the stain of Original Sin.

A simple analogy could be presented from this teaching. To prevent someone from falling into a mud puddle would be better than to lift that person out of the puddle once they have already falling in and are smeared with filth. Reason in defense of the Immaculate Conception: Either God was able to do this, and did do it, or, He willed to preserve Her and did do so. If able to it for Her, God was merciful towards Her. For no one who is able to honor his mother would fail to do so.

Again we are reminded of the Fourth Commandment and the perfect manner in which the God-Man fulfills it, with a generosity and elegance that seem to have no place in non-Catholic "theology". This would be a good time to speak of intent. Mankind, endowed by its Creator with the gift of Reason, desired to know, to explore, to investigate matters in detail. If the study of Mariology is NOT ultimately undertaken for the greater glory of the Holy Trinity, then it becomes little more than an academic exercise. The anti-Catholic "scholars" who claim to study the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception do so with a degree of contempt for it, with suspicion, seeing in it a threat to the majesty of Christ. The traditional Catholic view, in contrast sees in this Dogma the depths which Our Lord's salvific power will plumb in the work of restoring a fallen world. Notice the antithesis. The anti Catholic position sees the Immaculate Conception a threat to the unique Mediatorship of Jesus Christ. The Catholic view sees in it an exaltation of and thanksgiving for Divine mercy, a reason not to scorn Our Lord's Mediatorship, but to rejoice in it even further. Which view, according to everyday common sense would be more pleasing to God?

Mary is a Perpetual Virgin


The Protestant objection to Our Lady's perpetual virginity provides any observer of history with a perfect test case on the nature of "contrariness". While rejection of this perpetual virginity isn't a Protestant "tenet," many sects teach as a matter of course that Mary gave birth to other children after our Lord was born. When the common sense arguments are laid out and examined, it becomes clear that Protestant objection to this doctrine is based not on Scriptural or philosophical ground, but on "contrariness . . . i.e., these sects teach that Our Lady bore other children simply because this idea is the direct opposite of what the Catholic Church teaches. Are there examples in the Bible of places or objects that are considered "holy", that are set apart, intended to be treated with a measure of respect and deference beyond that accorded to other places or objects? In the Second Book of Kings (Chap. 6) it is related how, after the defeat of the Philistines, King David retrieves the Ark of God and carries it away in procession, in the accompaniment of rejoicing and music. One of David's men, Oza, seeing the Ark leaning in its cart, put up a hand to steady it, so that it wouldn't fall. The moment Oza grabbed the Ark, he was struck dead by God "for his rashness".


Again, in the Book of Genesis (Chap.. 3) Moses, going to the spot where he spied the burning bush, is warned by God: "Come not nigh hither, put off the shoes from thy feet, for the place hereon thou standest is holy ground". Is it possible that a construction made of earthly metals and wood or a clump of rocky earth could be more holy that the womb wherein the Second Person of the Holy Trinity dwelt for nine months? If the womb that housed God Himself were not a sacred and sanctified object, than what would fit that definition? The mentality that imagines "business as usual " for Joseph and Mary after the Incarnation of the Savior fails to recognize that God often calls people to consecrate themselves to His service in unique ways. We see Him set certain people apart, whether it be the Prophet Elias, St. John the Baptist or St. Paul. Surely if the Incarnation of the Word was in the Divine Plan from the "beginning", so was the Mother to whom this Son would be born.

The Scriptural arguments in favor of Our Lady's perpetual virginity have been well documented. Any reliable book on the Blessed Virgin will spell them out clearly, in the very same arguments used from the first centuries of our Faith. Writing in the 4th Century, St. Jerome pointed out, in practical fashion, that: "We believe that God was born of a Virgin because we read it; because we read it we don't believe that Mary wedded again after the birth of Her Child". In a letter to a certain Helvidius, who denied Mary's perpetual virginity, St. Jerome didn't mince words in Our Lady's defense:

“You have set on fire the temple of the Lord's body, you have defiled the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit from which you are determined to make a team of four brethren and a heap of sisters come forth. In a word, joining in the chorus of the Jews you say, "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His Mother called Mary? And His brethren James and Simon and Judas? and His sisters, are they not all with us? The word 'all' would not be used if there were not a crowd of them". Pray tell me who, before you appeared was acquainted with this blasphemy?”

Most Protestants of our day reject the perpetual virginity of Mary; they think it contradicts the Bible. Many of them will be shocked to find out that the first Protestants, including Martin Luther, John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli and others all believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. The idea that Mary ceased to be a virgin and had other children besides Jesus was invented many generations after the original Protestant “reformation.” Thus, the Protestant position on this matter not only contradicts ancient Catholic tradition and the Bible (as we will see), but their own Protestant “tradition.”

The first thing that Protestants usually quote against Mary’s perpetual virginity is Matthew 1:25.

Matthew 1:24-25- “Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.”

According to Protestants, this proves that Mary ceased to be a virgin after the birth of Jesus. This is quite wrong. The Greek word for "until" or “till” (heos) does not imply that Joseph had marital relations with Mary after the birth of Jesus Christ. It simply means that they had no relations up to that point, without saying anything about what happened after that point. This is proven below by many passages. We should also bear in mind that the Bible was written several thousand years ago. It was written at a time and in languages which don’t express and imply things the same way that they would be expressed and implied in modern English.

For instance, in 2 Samuel 6:23 (2 Kings 6:23 in the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible), we read that God cursed Michal, David’s wife. He cursed her because she mocked David for the manner in which he rejoiced before the Ark of the Covenant. As a result, Michal had no children “until” the day of her death.

2 Samuel 6:23- “Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.”

Does this mean that Michal started having children after her death? Obviously it does not. This verse demonstrates that when Scripture describes something as being true “until” or “before” a certain point, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it ceased to be true after that point.

EVIDENCE FROM MATTHEW 27:56 SHOWS THAT THE “BROTHERS” OF JESUS WERE NOT HIS SIBLINGS

Matthew 13:55- “Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?”

James and Joses are two of the names given as “brothers” of Jesus. It can be shown, by the following points, that these were children of another woman and not siblings of Jesus. Please follow this carefully.

There were three women at the foot of the Cross: 1) the Blessed Virgin Mary (the mother of Jesus); 2) Mary the wife of Cleophas (who is said to be the Blessed Virgin Mary’s sister); and 3) Mary Magdalene.

John 19:25- “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus [1] his mother, and [2] his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and [3] Mary Magdalene.”

Mary, the wife of Cleophas, is also described as “the other Mary” in Matthew 28:1. The Bible tells us that James and Joses are the children of this Mary:

Matthew 27:56- “Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children.”

Thus, James and Joses (who are called the “brothers” of Jesus) are not His siblings, but at least His cousins. However, they are probably not even first cousins. This is because Mary of Cleophas (the mother of James and Joses), who is said to be the “sister” of Jesus’ mother (John 19:25), is also named Mary. It’s extremely unlikely that two siblings in a Hebrew family would be given the same name. Most likely they were not sisters, but members of the same clan who were called “sisters” in the same way that James, Joses, Simon and Judas were called “brothers” of Jesus. All of this shows that none of the statements in the Bible about the brothers and sisters of Jesus disproves, in any way, the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Now we must look at the proof that Mary had no other children and that she was perpetually a virgin.

Writing to the Bishop of Thessalonica and the end of the 4th Century, Pope Siricius called the denial of Mary's perpetual virginity "that Jewish falsehood which holds that He (Jesus Christ) could not have been born of a virgin".

Recall Cardinal Newman writing of the Protestants' lack of insight into the two natures (Divine and human) found in one Person of Christ. Just look at the manner in which the body of a normal mother is honored by her son. It is made sacred by motherhood, set apart and meant to be protected. Imagine then the womb of the Mother of GOD, the first Tabernacle upon which all other tabernacles are modeled, espoused to the Holy Ghost, chosen by God the Father and inhabited by God the Son. It is an amazing fact that the sanctity of Our Lady's body should even have to be defended. Cannot even the densest intellect understand, via simple intuition, that Mary's perpetual virginity is the only rational condition for the Mother of GOD, after She gives birth to the Incarnate GOD-MAN? Is the denial of Our Lady's perpetual virginity the conclusion of careful Biblical study, or a mere projection, an attempt by sinful men to justify their own inability to observe Chastity?

After the seventy-two disciples returned to Jesus, flushed with excitement of their first missionary forays, Our Lord offered this prayer to his Father: I confess to Thee O Father, Lord of Heaven and earth, because Thou hast hidden these the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones, (St. Luke Chap., 10 vs.21)

There are "scholars" who spend their days and nights try to disparage the Marian dogmas taught by the One True Church Armed with Greek and Hebrew dictionaries, alternate translations and volumes of dubious commentaries, they spend valuable hours trying to drag the Holy Mother of God down to their own level. This is sin at work. What else could drive someone to devote himself not to the honor of the Blessed Virgin, but to the task of placing Her in carnal scenarios?

The Catholic Church has never even toyed with the idea that Our Lady bore other children. The Lateran Council of 649 A.D. anathematized anyone who refused to confess that the virginity of Mary remained "inviolate also after parturition". The Sixth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (680 A.D.) decreed that "The virginity of Mary . . . remained before, during and after parturition." Ultimately, the Catholic understanding of Mary as "Ever-Virgin" rests on a combination of revealed Truth and common sense on man's ability to observe relationships in the natural sphere and translate his findings into the supernatural one, an ability described by St. Paul as a coming to a knowledge of God through His works. When all the treatises and essays are put aside, it's the power of old fashioned Reason, illumined by Faith and a sincere good will, that touches the heart with certainty and conviction. The best defense for any Catholic doctrines is ultimately the most simple and straightforward one. This is clearly seen in the following works of St. Ambrose (339-397) in defense of the Blessed Virgin's perpetual virginity:

“And Joseph, the just man, assuredly did not so completely loose his mind as to seek carnal intercourse with the Mother of God.”

The renowned Bishop of Milan obviously understood that, sometimes, a good one two punch hits the mark better than a dozen learned commentaries could. Our Lord Himself, when He evicted the money-changers from the Temple, taught us that Truth isn't always best served by being "nice" in the face of sacrilege. Following this divine example, St. Hilary of Poitiers angrily called those who rejected Mary's perpetual virginity "irreligious, perverted, knowing absolutely nothing of spiritual truth."

Sedevacantism

  What is Sedevacantism? Sedevacantism comes from the Latin  sede vacante , which means “seat vacant.” It is the position held by traditiona...