

“God loves the ordinary. So do I, and so should you. That’s just a simple fact.”
That’s how Charlie Johnston began a presentation in Birmingham, Ala., last summer. Then he went on to recount conversations he has allegedly had since he was a young boy with his guardian angel about a grave crisis that will happen in his lifetime — a crisis he says has already begun.
“We are given these things as sort of mileposts, so that when they come to pass, we see the hand of God in them — and that, really, is what I do. I’m not trying to convince anybody of anything except to acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope to those around them,” said Johnston of his unusual message.
“I am here to inform people because they’ll remember it. It is kind of memorable, when somebody tells you, ‘An angel told me this.’ … When those things happen, they’ll see the hand of God behind it; and instead of panicking, instead of becoming part of the chaos, they’ll be part of helping other people.”
According to his blog, The Next Right Step, Johnston is a political consultant and a former radio host and newspaper editor. Through his blog and speaking engagements, he has garnered a considerable audience around the United States — so much so that Denver Archbishop Samuel Aquila, the bishop who oversees the archdiocese where Johnston lives, received enough inquiries that he decided to launch a preliminary investigation into the content of Johnston’s writings and presentations.
The Archdiocese of Denver released a statement on March 7 concerning the alleged visionary. It contained a warning from Archbishop Aquila for Catholics “to exercise prudence and caution in regards to Mr. Charlie Johnston’s alleged divine visions and messages.” The statement also announced that Johnston would not be approved as a speaker in the Archdiocese of Denver.
“Mr. Johnston claims to have received both visions and messages from the Blessed Mother, the archangel Gabriel and other saints since he was young,” the report explained. “According to Mr. Johnston, the purpose of these visits was to train him to serve as a messenger for God and strengthen the faithful, particularly during a time of economic and moral upheaval, which he refers to as ‘The Storm.’
“Johnston insists in writing and during his talks that the ‘prophetic’ parts of his message are not essential and should not be the focus of those who follow him. However, it appears that those same predictions are what attract new followers to his message and give them a sense of urgency and zeal.”
Archbishop Aquila noted in the report that there is a danger for people in terms of putting “greater faith in a prediction than in Christ’s words and promises.”
Reaction to Archdiocese’s Report
On the day the report was released, Johnston interpreted it on his blog as “permission” to continue, claiming the archbishop simply was exercising prudence.
To those who took the statement as an instruction to “turn off the lights,” Johnston responded, “I am enjoying letting the sourpusses expose themselves for lacking the most basic knowledge of ‘Churchspeak.’” He pointed to Bishop René Gracida of Corpus Christi, Texas, as publicly congratulating him for a positive outcome. When contacted by the Register, the 92-year-old bishop, who retired in 1997, said that his support is for Johnston’s “zealous witness to the Catholic faith” but “not with regard to his private revelations.”
David Uebbing, chancellor for the Archdiocese of Denver, told the Register, “The official statement of the archbishop stands on its own, apart from Mr. Johnston’s interpretation, and should be considered in its entirety.” He explained, “The archdiocese does not allow the propagation of messages or visions without certitude that they are from God, which requires a much longer process involving analysis by experts from outside the archdiocese.”
Johnston continues to write extensively on his blog. His repeated theme — “acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope” — is mixed with prophecy and personal reflections. Johnston’s predictions include warnings of civil war worldwide, cancellation of the U.S. presidential election in November 2016 and a claim that President Barack Obama will not finish his second term. Last year, he also wrote a two-part series on his blog detailing survival instruction on how to respond if the U.S. government were to begin rounding up conservative Christians and other citizens into detention camps. According to Johnston, God has appointed him to guide Americans through this turmoil to a rescue that will come in late 2017, when the Immaculate Heart of Mary visibly saves the world.
Having an Effect
Although Johnston continues to generate speaking events, the ban in his own archdiocese is having an effect. In March, Relevant Radio canceled an interview with Johnston. A spokesperson for the station explained, “Relevant Radio supports and abides by the prudent decision of the Archdiocese of Denver.”
Last fall, former EWTN radio host and current Immaculate Heart Radio host Patrick Madrid interviewed Johnston in response to his popularity, but stated in an interview with the Register that he would not do so again. “As Archbishop Aquila has so wisely advised, the danger is that people can get off course,” he said, referring to any of the faithful who, by following unapproved, alleged apparitions, seers, etc., can veer off course spiritually and theologically.
The report has also influenced bishops across the country. Bishop David Kagan of the Diocese of Bismarck, N.D., commented that bishops pay attention to one another. “I would not allow this person to speak on any religious subject in the Diocese of Bismarck, since it is clear that his activities in Denver and elsewhere have caused confusion among the Catholic faithful,” he told the Register.
In the Diocese of Springfield, Ill., Bishop Thomas Paprocki told the Register, “Since Mr. Johnston will not be approved as a speaker in the Archdiocese of Denver, neither will he be approved as a speaker in the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois. The faithful should seek their security in Jesus Christ, the sacraments and the Scriptures.”
Caution to the Faithful
Michael O’Neill, author and creator of MiracleHunter.com, who often talks about visionaries on his radio program, pointed out that the Archdiocese of Denver statement is not a condemnation and does not prohibit the faithful from following Johnston.
“It does not assess whether or not it is a supernatural event, but instead urges caution, in order that the faithful might keep their focus on an authentic practice of the faith, keeping the words and works of Jesus Christ, as given to us by sacred Scripture and Tradition, as the center of our faith,” he told the Register.
Nonetheless, O’Neill acknowledged that, given the plethora of beautiful devotions already present in the Catholic faith, it seems sensible to treat such claims with an appropriate level of cautious skepticism. He added, “Such prophecy does, however, provide a good backdrop for being ready and keeping our souls in the state of grace, for ‘you know neither the day nor the hour’ (Matthew 25:13).”
Kevin O’Brien, blogger and founder of Theater of the World Inc., has warned Catholics against following Johnston, calling his predictions “patent nonsense” that give him “a cult status among gullible Catholics.”
Last summer, after “hearing about Johnston from all corners of Catholicism,” O’Brien investigated and wrote about his findings. He pointed out several failed prophecies and gave evidence, using Johnston’s Facebook posts, that his claim to have walked 3,200 miles across the country was false. O’Brien said in his blog that his concern is that Johnston’s followers are falling prey to a morbid curiosity and a desire for more than what we have, “which is the presence of Jesus Christ himself and his Spirit and access to his Father as adopted children.”
Father Pacwa
EWTN host Father Mitch Pacwa was present at a 2015 talk by Johnston that was widely circulated on the Internet. Some viewers have taken Father Pacwa’s presence at the talk as an implicit endorsement of Johnston. But Father Pacwa explained to the Register that he had attended the talk only out of curiosity and has never endorsed Johnston.
Father Pacwa said that he too has great concern for the state of the world, but stressed, “Our goal must be to be faithful to our blessed Lord and to call our people to be faithful to Our Lord, his Gospel and his Church, no matter what a visionary might say or not.”
Patti Armstrong writes from North Dakota.
Editors' note: The Header and Subhead were changed to reflect more accurately the Archdiocese of Denver's position on Charlie Johnston.
Also a clarification has been made on the nature of Johnston's writings about Christians and other citizens being rounded up in detention camps.
Readers have pointed out that those two blog posts were not related to a prediction but were Johnston's personal reflections.
For anyone who might still be discerning Charlie and his messages, here is some information that showed up on the Mother of God forum yesterday.
http://motheofgod.com/threads/charlies-perceptive-take.9310/page-6#post-138843
I read the comments re Charlie on Mystics of the Church site and saw some of the slanderous remarks that were posted there. Even Glenn Dallaire, who is always patient and kind was upset by some of the comments.
Anyway I’ve realised that I should do as my Lord and Master did when insulted..turn the other cheek. So no more defending myself and no more discussing with trolls, when it’s absolutely pointless.
God Bless You One And All
David you posted….“Ok Benedict, I guess I have to prove Im not maliciously slandering Miss Walton, but only proving she does indeed follow many, not just Charlie, alleged prophets…
Pelianito Blog, Blog post dated May 4, 2016, To those who are meek….
I trust you will visit that site and see the proof that Miss Walton is there too. I prefer not to put the link or her comment on this site.”
Tell me David…. do you also use frequent that site or were you stalking me? You have posted one blog site. Your accusation was that I “...chase every single prophet/apparition and thats suspect of your character ” Not that it’s any concern of yours but I have visited that site only a few times. My goodness why am I needing to defend myself here?
You posted…“My point to her was, she might need to use a bit more discernment before blatantly defending an alleged prophet. And to know she is a known, visitor at various alleged prophets/seers sites gives cause for concern.”
How many times do I have to spell it out..I AM NOT DEFENDING CHARLIE’S MISSION! And why are you concerned with what I do with my time? You really need to look at your motives. Why you are desperate to besmirch my character!
You posted…“The comments on this article were up for a healthy, discerning and charitable debate…..I have no more to say about Miss Walton… “
Yes.. and it’s a pity you forgot to be charitable. You have tried to blacken my character for no reason whatsoever.
David…. why are you posting comments from others, instead of a direct quote from Charlie? Also the issue you keep bringing up has nothing to do with my original post.
David you posted…“No one is blackmailing you Miss Walton, if my comment to you came off that way I apologize. The fact is that you chase every single prophet/apparition and thats suspect of your character and if you dispute that, well, there is plenty of your comments on every other site to suggest otherwise.
Are you following me around? I am not on every other site chasing apparitions… but even if I was what business is it of yours? I am and remain a faithful member of the Catholic Church.
You posted….” and thats suspect of your character”
Do you get some kind of pleasure from insulting me!
You posted….“To exit politely would be advised because you are the one stirring the pot here.”
I am sure anyone who is reading these comments can see that I have been polite and I am not stirring any pot. You on the other hand are doing everything to besmirch my character.
You posted…“Let it rest. Or rather, Let Go and Let God?”
Take your own advice David. I’d rather not be answering your uncharitable posts.
Ok Benedict, I guess I have to prove Im not maliciously slandering Miss Walton, but only proving she does indeed follow many, not just Charlie, alleged prophets…
Pelianito Blog, Blog post dated May 4, 2016, To those who are meek….
I trust you will visit that site and see the proof that Miss Walton is there too. I prefer not to put the link or her comment on this site.
My point to her was, she might need to use a bit more discernment before blatantly defending an alleged prophet. And to know she is a known, visitor at various alleged prophets/seers sites gives cause for concern.
There is quite a few more, but I need to get back to work.
I rest my case. The comments on this article were up for a healthy, discerning and charitable debate. We are to be prudently cautious and WISE, not foolishly silly and trusting of every single message that comes along. I have no more to say about Miss Walton or Charlies followers.
We all need to take our blinders off and trust Jesus Christ and His One, True, Holy Apostolic Catholic Church, not man.
For you Miss Walton, you can also visit Mystics of the Church and pull up all comments on Charlie Johnston. This is also a very good, solid orthodox site. The owner of this site, Glenn Dallaire was even shocked at Charlies comments to this man that was scared and anxious…
Steve said…
Hi anonymous above,
The prayer cards are being sold by a third party religious goods company not by Charlie. There are plenty of things I find concerning in regards to Charlie’s messages, but I’d have to say the sale of a $1 prayer card by a third party is not one of them.
I did read Charlie’s post this morning, and took note of these comments:
“Things are speeding up throughout the world as things break down.”
“Right now, many things are collapsing before our very eyes.”
“But soon (and it is happening far more rapidly than I expected) availability of normal services will be spotty…”
It seems like he’s trying to work us all up into a frenzy again similar to what happened over this past summer where many of us were living hour-to-hour during the months of September and October waiting for the complete economic collapse where money would be worthless, worldwide civil wars, millions dead, and tanks rolling down the streets. And to be honest I was taking Xanax on pretty much a daily basis during the months of September and October waiting for the crash. During that period I took time off work to get my license to carry, stockpile water, food and medical supplies to the point that my house even today is filled to the ceilings with boxes of supplies. You can’t walk 5 feet in my house without tripping over boxes. We don’t have company over the house anymore and my kids can’t have friends over because the inside of my house looks like we’re hoarders. My kids have asked me if the world is ending because they knew something is wrong with all the stockpiling. I even contemplated having my 11 year old daughter’s braces removed last fall because I was so fearful that during the collapse her Orthodontist would be unavailable. Thank God I didn’t do that.
So either this guy is telling the truth and we are about to experience a period of hell on earth worse that any previous time in human history or he’s a crackpot.
And Glenns response,
Glenn Dallaire said…
That “laughable and annoying” statement that Charlie made struck me also. I personally did not think it was appropriate and seems to me to be lacking in charity. I understand Charlie may have been ruffled a bit and wanted to reply to Steve comments, but in my opinion he could have left this particular statement out.
And Steve, I wanted to thank you for your sincere comment and for sharing your perspective and experiences here. I sincerely appreciate hearing everyone’s thoughts and perspectives.
May God bless all who visit here,
Glenn Dallaire
david, you are going to have to prove your assertion that Mrs. Walton is going around on other sites to discuss various apparitions.
No one is blackmailing you Miss Walton, if my comment to you came off that way I apologize. The fact is that you chase every single prophet/apparition and thats suspect of your character and if you dispute that, well, there is plenty of your comments on every other site to suggest otherwise. You ardently defended MDM at one time. We are to be sober and alert!
To exit politely would be advised because you are the one stirring the pot here. This is what happened with Kevin O’Briens blog. You sound like a politcally correct liberal calling anyone that disagrees with him/her a “hater”. You are getting way too personal and emotional with most here now.
Let it rest. Or rather, Let Go and Let God?
“No Janet, that was written by Kevin O’Brien himself. HE was getting hate
mail from posters/readers of TNRS after he posted about Charlie lying about
him.”
Spinelli….It’s the same thing. I haven’t seen any hate mail. But anyway twice I have told you that if anyone did that then they were out of order. I hope I have now made this clear for you?
You posted…“Do you forget when he threw the comment about him and LTTW up on his site and ridiculed the poster’s anxiety, calling it “laughable and annoying”.
You need to post a link or copy the piece because I have searched and could not find anything like what you are claiming. I did find this….“Thanks Brother Gilbert – but here is a significant difference in quality: whatever her issues, this locutionist took some pains, I think, to keep people to the faith and to the Church. She may have been deceived or even deluded, but I think one should credit her sincerity. MDM was actively fraudulent and tried to pull people away from the Barque of Peter. That is the devil’s work. So I would not insult the locutionist by putting her in the same category as MDM.”
His other replies to the posters were similar. I’m wondering what the reason is for these posts that make unsubstantiated claims.
God Bless You
No Janet, that was written by Kevin O’Brien himself. HE was getting hate mail from posters/readers of TNRS after he posted about Charlie lying about him.
Those people were absolutely out of order, and you fail to see that it’s subtly encouraged by your leader! Do you forget when he threw the comment about him and LTTW up on his site and ridiculed the poster’s anxiety, calling it “laughable and annoying”.
Once again, where is the humility and charity that supposed messengers of God are supposed to have in abundance?
Hi Benedict,
You posted….“I think there is a failure to understand what I am doing, Mrs. Walton. I question Charlie’s motive (and/or the effect of) as to why he allows “nasty” comments. You say posters sometime “insist” that Charlie oblige them and he does nothing more than oblige. Well, last time I checked my moral theology, giving a crack-addict their fix is hardly charitable, or merciful.”
So he’s damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t! Lets get this straight, shall we? Charlie, for the most part deletes nasty posts. He sometimes gets told, by argumentative souls, that he isn’t allowing their words to be read on the blog because he is scared of the members seeing the truth. So he lets them come in and rattle off their grievances. Here is part of one such post….”.....You sir are not humble. It is the prideful man who retaliates to defend his earthly pride, which is Satan’s favorite sin since that’s the sin that was his downfall. Pride is the opposite of Our Lord’s humbleness. Did He rebuke those who accused Him? Why do you do this then? I don’t know, maybe you actually think you’re doing good and giving hope to people, but I really don’t care. You’re a fraud. Pride cometh before the fall.”
Charlie ...“As always, I am open to serious and courteous comments, but I will not open the board up to a mere food fight.”
And quite rightly so Benedict.
Your argument that Charlie is making them look like fools by allowing the posts doesn’t make any sense whatsoever! He is accused by you….”...even when they ask to look like fools. Whatever happened to letting people save face? Is there no decency among men?” And if he doesn’t allow them their say he is accused by them of being afraid to post their comments!
“.. Now you claimed earlier that you would not be hanging around Charlie’s place if you saw nastiness taking place from posters.”
I said if the members were nasty I wouldn’t be in there.
You posted..“Strange that you don’t seem to see Charlie’s apparent “eye for an eye” as being nasty. It certainly is contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but apparently not so in Charlie’s gospel (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:4).”
We are not talking of “an eye for an eye” Benedict, but whether Charlie should sit back and take the insults. Charlie sometimes does and sometimes he doesn’t.
You posted…“Mrs. Walton, you HAVE endured abusive comments by the very fact that Charlie sometimes allows them… “
Not the really abusive ones Benedict, but ones similar to the one I posted above.
So I will leave you to your opinion and will remain prudent, as the good Archbishop has advised..”
You posted….“Make sure to remain prudent on Archdiocesan property.”
Oh we really do have some judgemental people in here don’t we? I don’t even live in the USA.
Hi Spinelli,
You posted the following in order to show me that some members of Charlie’s blog were sending Kevin hate mail..but the following isn’t from them. It’s from someone criticising the members of Charlie’s site!
“Seeing this Charlie thing up close has really shaken my faith in human
nature. Messed up Catholics is one thing; but this goes deeper than that.
People are actually more hateful and malicious than I had suspected - and
I’m rather cynical to begin with.
Again, this is not about people being stupid or gullible. No one really
believes Charlie. They support him for other reasons, and the whole thing is
less innocent than I had suspected.”
In my last post I did say that if Kevin had received any nasty mail then the poster was totally out of order.
God Bless You
Hello David,
You posted…..“Miss Walton, I am speaking with all charity, but maybe you need to look more into the signs and warnings of a false prophet. You I believe to be Janet333, on Mr Johnstons site, stated that your were duped by Maria of Divine Mercy, you started a revenge blog after the fact because you were scorned.”
First of all David this is not about whether I believe in any alleged prophet. If you read my previous posts you will see that I said I was NOT defending Charlie’s mission. It was the headline in the article I had a problem with. So you deciding to have a go at me for that reason is totally out of order. I asked Patti if we could agree to disagree on the headlines issue and as far as I was concerned that was an end to it. I am here because posters are still addressing me and wanting me to reply to their comments, like yourself.
I started my own blog in order to help those who were still involved with MDM..and not for any “revenge.” as you put it. My testimony, on my own blog, states that….“I was a cautious reader of the messages of Maria Divine Mercy (MDM). I therefore did exercise prudence and caution. This was at the very beginning of her ‘mission’ and yes, it is true that at that time I just wasn’t sure either way, but soon it became evident that she was was in fact false and becoming very dangerous..hence the reason for my blog.
You posted….“Red flags everywhere, but you continued. The problems seems to lie in your emotional need of someone telling you about the future”
For someone who says they are “speaking with all charity” I think it is very uncharitable of you to judge me, as you are doing. My initial post had nothing to do with whether a seer was genuine or false. The problem was with a misleading headline.
You also posted….” You also, I believe said that you were lured into LTTW. “
No, I was never “lured” I was not a follower as I had my suspicians about them..and again exercised prudence and caution. Going back to MDM It was myself and a few others who actually contacted the Archbishop of Dublin asking him to look into her writings, as the faithful were being led astray and the Pope accused of being an anti-pope.
...”.. You are onto Charlie now. Maybe he is true, maybe not, but your constant defending, your known following of other prophets tells me, you need to focus on Christ and his Church. Not on a human being. “
“Constant defending?” I am defending no one, except myself at the moment from your wrongful judgement of me! As for you telling me to focus on Christ and the Church..you really have no idea about my faith. I obey the Church above all else. But I don’t really need to explain to you about my relationship with God as that is between Him and me..and you are in error for judging me the way you are doing in here.
You posted…...“In all fairness, I suggest you exit politely because I can show proof of your comments, website etc. “
My goodness…..you are even trying to blackmail me! Are you for real? I am not anonymous. My blog is available for all to see. You need to weigh up your motives David.
Thank you for clarifying the identity of the “false seer,” Mrs. Walton. We certainly agree there.
Janet, this comes straight from Kevin O’Brien’s blog:
Seeing this Charlie thing up close has really shaken my faith in human nature. Messed up Catholics is one thing; but this goes deeper than that. People are actually more hateful and malicious than I had suspected - and I’m rather cynical to begin with.
Again, this is not about people being stupid or gullible. No one really believes Charlie. They support him for other reasons, and the whole thing is less innocent than I had suspected.
Miss Walton, I am speaking with all charity, but maybe you need to look more into the signs and warnings of a false prophet. You I believe to be Janet333, on Mr Johnstons site, stated that your were duped by Maria of Divine Mercy, you started a revenge blog after the fact because you were scorned. You also, I believe said that you were lured into LTTW. Both were false. Red flags everywhere, but you continued. The problems seems to lie in your emotional need of someone telling you about the future. Your emotional need for fellowship of like minds. You are onto Charlie now. Maybe he is true, maybe not, but your constant defending, your known following of other prophets tells me, you need to focus on Christ and his Church. Not on a human being. You are scandalizing Mr Johnston if he be true.
In all fairness, I suggest you exit politely because I can show proof of your comments, website etc.
Miss McGuire is a fine catholic woman, author, mother, wife and has an extraordinary reputation. You have done nothing but scold, “complain” like you said on Charlies site, and just accuse. Im am just stating facts about you and your goingson because you broadcast it all over the internet.
Like i have said before, I am really weary of the so called do gooders and insiders…
Forgive me Patti. I enjoy the NCR and have for years, this is really upsetting.
“Can you reveal the identity of this false seer to whom you refer?”
Yes… she is known as Maria Divine Mercy.
Mrs. Walton, can you reveal the identity of this false seer to whom you refer?
“I’ll let Charlie speak for himself”
[...]
“Charlie does have to delete the really nasty posts. And yes of course he
allows some in order to explain why they are getting their posts deleted.”
Why does Charlie have to explain to the public comments that were made privately and about which no one would have known?
I think there is a failure to understand what I am doing, Mrs. Walton. I question Charlie’s motive (and/or the effect of) as to why he allows “nasty” comments.
You say posters sometime “insist” that Charlie oblige them and he does nothing more than oblige. Well, last time I checked my moral theology, giving a crack-addict their fix is hardly charitable, or merciful.
While addiction to crack is not the same as a nasty comment, the fundamental premise is still the same, namely charity and doing right by our neighbor—even when they ask to look like fools. Whatever happened to letting people save face? Is there no decency among men? When the Son of Man returns, will he find faith on earth?
Now, to your point about insisting and privacy: if someone insists to Charlie that he/she wants his/her moderated comment to be made public, that’s a private request. Obliging the request makes public something that was private. He is under no obligation to approve nasty comments, contrary to some of his stated ideals for his web site.
Charlie has already admitted his willingness to kick people in the groin who kick him. Now you claimed earlier that you would not be hanging around Charlie’s place if you saw nastiness taking place from posters. Strange that you don’t seem to see Charlie’s apparent “eye for an eye” as being nasty. It certainly is contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but apparently not so in Charlie’s gospel (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:4).
“If you had claimed the above..then why are you complaining?”
I do not understand you. Please clarify.
“Better to delete than we the readers endure the abusive comments….”
Mrs. Walton, you HAVE endured abusive comments by the very fact that Charlie sometimes allows them. Again, I reiterate: Charlie need not oblige such requests. It’s uncharitable and comes across more as an attempt to keep the rest of you in line and not question him.
“Exactly Benedict! So I will leave you to your opinion and will remain prudent, as the good Archbishop has advised..”
Make sure to remain prudent on Archdiocesan property.
Hi Spinelli,
.”. what you failed to notice was the poor behavior of people who wrote privately to Kevin O’Brien and Patti.”
If they wrote privately then I obviously wouldn’t see their emails. If someone did write nasty emails to Patti and Kevin then they were totally out of order.
“Maybe they comment regularly at Charlie’s blog. Maybe they only read it. We have no way of knowing. “
This is true so it is pointless bringing it up.
“But the point is, they were so nasty and uncharitable that Kevin stopped blogging.”
But we can’t see these emails?
“What is it about Charlie and other questionable visionaries that generates this kind of behavior from the “apparition circuit”? “
Maybe you have noticed that I am defending the person..not the message? I am unable to defend it because only Charlie hears what he says he does. Now why am I defending Charlie? Because I like the truth, and also because I saw the misleading title and was shocked that NCR would do this. I have to smile at your question though because up until recently I was trying, with the help of some others, to unmask a false seer, who was causing much damage to the Church and the faithful. By the grace of God we managed to do just that. So in a way I agree with you. False seers can attract some strange kind of people, as well as the vulnerable and unstable. But so can genuine seers. I have been at the mercy of many a Fatima devotee for supporting the popes.
“People who follow people that believe they are messengers from God are not exempt from commenting charitably to skeptics. Acting poorly doesn’t reflect well on them or their “leaders”.”
I agree again Spinelli..They should comment in a charitable way.
God Bless You
Janet, what you failed to notice was the poor behavior of people who wrote privately to Kevin O’Brien and Patti. Maybe they comment regularly at Charlie’s blog. Maybe they only read it. We have no way of knowing. But the point is, they were so nasty and uncharitable that Kevin stopped blogging.
What is it about Charlie and other questionable visionaries that generates this kind of behavior from the “apparition circuit”? That remains a mystery to me. People who follow people that believe they are messengers from God are not exempt from commenting charitably to skeptics. Acting poorly doesn’t reflect well on them or their “leaders”.
Don’t Judge lest you be judged. The greatest call is to go forth and teach, to spread the Gospel. Show us where Archbishop Samuel Aquilaere recognizes defiance to Gospel that Charlie exhibits?
Today the United States makes Yemen a living hell of misery and discontent, by denial of food and water, yet a continual arms and military murder and imposed blockade to prevent food to Yemen.
Can we point to the Archbishops grave sin of failing to stand against the worlds worst atrocity in history, in his failure to recognize the Issue of Yemen, murder of 20 million humans
Show us where this Archbishop stands against the atrocity of US arms production that destroys family.
I’ll let Charlie speak for himself
“To new readers, here are a couple of things to be aware of if you want to comment here:
“No vulgarities or simple ugly name-calling. Period.
“I am Catholic, so this website has a decidedly Catholic flavor. ....”
“We do not engage in the “Jane, you ignorant slut” style of debate so popular on so many blogs today. If you look back at the archives (and if it is a particular subject or person in the news that interests you, just enter the name in the search feature and it will pull up all articles related to that person or subject) you will see from comments – and even a guest column – that I both encourage and welcome people to offer serious, clearly stated opinions that are different than mine. Properly understood, debate should lead us closer to truth. A sneer is not a substitute for an argument here, so if that is all you can muster, please go somewhere else.”
Charlie does have to delete the really nasty posts. And yes of course he
allows some in order to explain why they are getting their posts deleted.
“Thank you for verifying that Charlie does what I have claimed”
If you had claimed the above..then why are you complaining?
Better to delete than we the readers endure the abusive comments. Now when a particular poster insists his posts need to go on the site to be read by all, Charlie obliges. That poster has then ‘set himself up,’ as you like to describe it, and will obviously have members, either agreeing or disagreeing with him…rather like we are doing in here Benedict.
“... Charlie has their personal E-mail address (they must in order
to post, presumably) and he can correspond privately if he sees fit.”
As I have explained this is what he does.
“Charlie, however, does not do this as he makes what was private into a
public matter.”
Not so Benedict, the poster insists on his posts being published.
..”....since the Archdiocese of Denver has not decided on the merits of Charlie’s claims, we are free to form, express and defend our opinion of the matter. “
Exactly Benedict! So I will leave you to your opinion and will remain prudent, as the good Archbishop has advised..
God Bless You
To Janet Walton:
“If there was any bad behaviour in the site..I for one would not be there!”
Your assertion depends upon whether or not you have noticed it.
I was speaking about some of the finer and subtle nuances going on of which you seem not to have taken notice, but yet now seem to wish to challenge.
“Charlie does have to delete the really nasty posts. And yes of course he allows some in order to explain why they are getting their posts deleted. He explains that they are quite welcome to post if they drop the nastiness. Nothing wrong with that. We, the members are not always in agreement in the site, but we do not turn nasty and call one another names. By the way I have seen some of those nasty posts and Charlie handled them very well….even so far as saying…drop the attitude and you’re welcome to join us. Maybe you are one of the posters?”
Thank you for verifying that Charlie does what I have claimed, but you have not answered my question and attempted to bypass my characterization.
Charlie sets people up with the comments. Whether you choose to accept it or not, the fact of the matter is that by doing so he has set an example to his readership. It’s an objective fact, Mrs. Walton, even if you choose not to view it this way.
Bottom line: delete the “nasty” comments and be done with it. There’s no need for an explanation. No one is going to know about the existence of these comments (other than the one who commented), much less that Charlie deleted them. Charlie has their personal E-mail address (they must in order to post, presumably) and he can correspond privately if he sees fit. Charlie, however, does not do this as he makes what was private into a public matter.
“Don’t be so ridiculous!”
Prove wrong my above assertion.
“They are more like someone who is trying to keep order in the site. I have had to ban certain people on my own sites when they are just there to cause problems.”
Of COURSE he is trying to “keep order” on his site! His actions have demonstrated that such “order” includes keeping all of you in line by setting examples!! Charlie has publicly admitted that he will kick people in the groin if they kick him! Egads Mrs. Walton, do you know see what is going on here?
“That is your opinion Mr Benedict John. I prefer to abide by the Churches decisions..not yours. Charlie is perfectly free to promote his writings in secular sites.”
Your point would be valid if:
1) I had questioned Charlie’s ability under obedience to promote his claims.
2) There was an actual Archdiocesan statement to the “res” of Charlie’s claims.
To the first note, you are a woman of theological training and Vatican-savvy, so you ought to know that since the Archdiocese of Denver has not decided on the merits of Charlie’s claims, we are free to form, express and defend our opinion of the matter.
To the second note, in the absence of an Archdiocesan statement, you are effectively abiding by nothing.
“...reprehensible behavior has been well-demonstrated over on Charlie’s site alone….”
If there was any bad behaviour in the site..I for one would not be there!
“If the comment is clearly in error, and Charlie has comment-moderation on his site, why does he not just delete it?” No, he cannot always do that as apparently he needs to give a demonstration, to assert himself.”
Charlie does have to delete the really nasty posts. And yes of course he allows some in order to explain why they are getting their posts deleted. He explains that they are quite welcome to post if they drop the nastiness. Nothing wrong with that. We, the members are not always in agreement in the site, but we do not turn nasty and call one another names. By the way I have seen some of those nasty posts and Charlie handled them very well….even so far as saying…drop the attitude and you’re welcome to join us. Maybe you are one of the posters?
“He’s setting an example to the rest of you, the devoted. It comes across dangerously close as an attempt at keeping you all in line so that you do not dare to challenge him.”
Don’t be so ridiculous!
“Are such actions those of an authentic visionary or are they more like those of a cult-leader?”
They are more like someone who is trying to keep order in the site. I have had to ban certain people on my own sites when they are just there to cause problems.
“All respect Mrs. Walton, you all are deluded, hoodwinked by yet another charlatan…”
That is your opinion Mr Benedict John. I prefer to abide by the Churches decisions..not yours. Charlie is perfectly free to promote his writings in secular sites.
God Bless You
“Mrs. Armstrong did not say “negative judgment.” She said that she understood the action of the Archbishop to be a “negative.”
As I stated previously it is a wait and see approach It was a preliminary investigation and the commission’s mandate did not include determining whether Charlie’s messages are divine in origin or not.
God Bless You.
“A negative ruling would be if Charlie was told not to promote his messages because of doctrinal errors..that is not the case.”
Janet, you have slightly mixed apples and oranges. Mrs. Armstrong did not say “negative judgment.” She said that she understood the action of the Archbishop to be a “negative.” This is not a matter of semantics, but rather being faithful to what was said and its proper interpretation.
Also, I await your response to my earlier comment.
Free speech is a defining right. When we look at the issue of bigotry and hate toward the Islamic that spews forth from Catholic information distribution, which is defiant to the Catholic teachings, we have to wonder. Calumny and Detraction are both sins we cannot really expect to be for given for, for they are sins we cannot ever make right again. When we gossip or spread bigotry, hate we set in motion a sin that is unforgivable. As “spreading feathers to the wind, we cannot ever gather back up” to make right, just is gone forever. Todays action by the United States government to murder by starvation the people of Yemen, 20 million humans by military actions of bombing and blockades is murder. Founded on a bigotry and hate toward the Islamic. This action defies “just” actions, our government is being unjust in the most despicable degree of action, mass murder. More Defiling Horrific is the United States atrocity today than the German Holocaust. Where is our Catholic leadership to speak out against our unjust government? That, is a defining ethical and moral obligation, to demand of ourselves to be just, and to hold our leaders to be just. Yet they speak against Charlie? We are witnessing an insanity, our contribution verse standing against unjust, evil is our judgement. What you do to the least of our brothers and sisters, you do to Jesus Christ.
Why is bigotry and hate to the Islamic accepted in Catholic programs, but we don’t see, to forgive them, and to pray for Gods mercy and justice? Never is it accepted in a Catholic mind to murder others, but that is exactly what people call for in murder to the Islamic, total defiance to the Gospel.
The United States is “Unjust” in its supplying, directive, and support of murder of 20 million humans today in Yemen, but nobody speaks out as leaders against the Unjust actions of the United States government. That is a major obligation of Religious is to denounce the evils of governments, being unjust, most directly ones own.
what sin has Charlie committed? None. What sin have the United States Catholic bishops committed in failing to stand against the unjust actions of the United States government, a big one. Murder of our Islamic Brothers and Sisters by our own government. In a just world, our leaders would be tried in court for murder, but we don’t live in a just world today.
Hi Patti,
“If I was denied permission to speak in my diocese, and my bishop issued a warning about me to people, I would see that as a negative.”
A negative ruling would be if Charlie was told not to promote his messages because of doctrinal errors..that is not the case. The Church did exactly what they are supposed to do.. warn the faithful to be prudent, because at this time there has been no judgement against him. I for one would have been shocked if he had been allowed to speak on church property.
Anyway Patti thank you for your replies…We will just have to agree to disagree on that headline. :-)
God Bless You
Janet, again, there is a difference of opinion. If I was denied permission to speak in my diocese, and my bishop issued a warning about me to people, I would see that as a negative. If that caused Catholic radio stations not to allow me on as a guest—I would take that as a negative. I would say St. Bernadette of Lourdes continued “despite” her parish priest’s initial negative opinion. At any rate, neither you nor I was in charge of the headline so it is what it is. God bless you.
Hi Patti,
“Since the story was about 2 negatives—Archbioshop Aquila’s report and the effects of the report—as Charlie continues to promote his messages, “despite” is an accurate word. What would you think of a title for a parade that was not cancelled “despite” tornado warnings?
First of all the Archbishop’s report does not contain a negative judgement. Its essentially a wait and see approach. He hasn’t asked Charlie to stop promoting his message in public venues so the headline is misleading. “Despite” is therefore not an accurate word…It leads one to believe that he is acting without regard of the Archbishop’s words, which is not the case at all.
God Bless You
One need only to look at the very tragic circumstances of Fr. John Corapi. He was a magnificent orator and drew many people to his talks. His “fall” taught me to never give a human being so much “adoration”. Let’s follow the Lord and be faithful to his message in Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church and,if so inclined, the approved apparitions.
Fine tuning, If you want some fine tuning, Let us be honest. Lets recognize the Arms building industry runs the US government. Recognizes fear, greed and stupidity is the force that drives far too many. If we can be soo bold as to recognize Catholic leaders and assumed leaders are not immune from these facts. Facts that recognize bigotry and hate of the Islamic is an necessity to sustain the insanity of the US war machine in the United States. War is murder, and the United States is spending near $666 billion on arms production in 2016, murder.The US is spending 50% of all world-wide spending on arms, murder. If we pick out the single issue of the United States actions of assistance and providing the arms to Saudi Arabia that pound Yemen into the stone age, an action combined with a US blockade of Yemen. The United States is murdering 20 millioin humans by starvation, the poorest of the poor, in the country of Yemen. Not Charity are we showing the poor in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, or Africa, , Mexico, Guatemala , El Salvador ,Nicaragua ,Haiti, Brazilian, Chilea ,Argentina, Nicaragua but rather they are outlets for 80% of the world arms production, made in the U.S.A. The fine tuning comes from. What Catholic “organizations” are more loyal to the Arms building industry in the USA, than they are to Charity to the Poor? No charity can we see to the poor, but lots of bigotry , asks why?
Janet, I know what you are saying about the word “despite” The opinion of whether it’s an appropriate word to use in this headline no doubt varies depending on one’s opinion on Charlie and his messages. Since the story was about 2 negatives—Archbioshop Aquila’s report and the effects of the report—as Charlie continues to promote his messages, “despite” is an accurate word. What would you think of a title for a parade that was not cancelled “despite” tornado warnings? Or a housing market that remains robust “despite” high unemployment? Even if we said “but he continues” it would have the same effect. Anything that explained Charlie continuing his messages after the negative report and it’s effects, would give the same impression.
I appreciate you expressing your thoughts on this. I also appreciate that the Register allows for commenting so that regardless of where people stand, they have the opportunity to be heard. I don’t even mind all the negative comments—not that I enjoy them. I would rather let people voice their feelings than to close that venue off to them. Be assured of my prayers for Charlie and all his followers. It’s a beautiful part of our faith. Catholics living our faith sincerely are immune from disagreements and hurts. But if we truly follow Jesus’ directives to love one another, then we will certainly pray for one another. I have family and friends also praying for this same intention. In a matter of months, we will all know if the messages were true or not, but if we are all praying for one another “despite” disagreement, much good will come from that. God bless you!
lyle, what post from Mark Mallett are you talking about?
Hi Patti,
“Headlines have only a few words to summarize. The article is about
the withholding of permission by the Archbishop to speak on Church property
and his warning while Charlie continues promoting his messages. “
I understand there is little space when placing the headlines. I also know it’s written in a way to draw people.. but the truth is most don’t get past the headlines. It sometimes only takes one word ...
” Alleged Visionary Charlie Johnston Continues Ministry, DESPITE Denver Archdiocese’s Warning!
Can you see what I am saying here? That word “despite.” leads one to believe he is acting against the Churches authority…when he is not.
” when anyone reports visits from Jesus, Mary and Angels, they should expect scrutiny and skepticism .. “
Yes, you’re so right…I’ve spent three years of my time trying to uncover a certain false prophet, who was leading the faithful astray.
“lashing out at unbelievers does nothing to build confidence that the
messages come from Heaven. “
Again I agree…I wouldn’t think anyone lashed out because they faced scepticism regarding the messages..it was most probably because of the misleading headlines. But anyway I sincerely don’t know anyone on the blog who would be nasty because Charlie would be the first one to put them straight.
God Bless You
Benedict, yeah i was being nonsensical..sorry about that and i saw my error. thank you for pointing that out.
im writing charlie johnston off as of late, i hoped he was true, but with mark mallets post…umm, something is really off with charlie. he is not in agreement with not one catholic visionary….not one. this is nonsense. his followers rage on and on and on, i want no part of them. they try and see who can get the most “likes” with their insightful and christian comments, which they themselves dont believe. this beckita person rubs me the wrong way. sorry, im irritated again. i want the truth which is Jesus Christ and his true church. i want people to stand up for the truth instead of pretending they are all good catholics and boast of themselves. i want Jesus and his Blessed Mother to stop this insanity. Its from within folks. the damage is done from within..Judas was in Jesus Christ inner circle, do we think we as christians, that are to imitate his suffering are exempt? this site is scandal. im done.
Janet, Headlines have only a few words to summarize. The article is about the withholding of permission by the Archbishop to speak on Church property and his warning while Charlie continues promoting his messages. There is no need for Register editors to apologize for a headline that was considered carefully and which I think accurately explains the topic. People have been nitpicking words but everything is explained clearly in the article.
Also, some in the comments and Charlie on his blog, have suggested that this article comes close to libel. I’ve even had emails and someone writing on my FB wall telling me the article was libelous. I would stake my career on it being nothing of the sort. Presenting inconvenient facts has nothing to do with libel. If people want to follow Charlie, they can do so and remain a Catholic in good standing. However, when anyone reports visits from Jesus, Mary and Angels, they should expect scrutiny and skepticism and lashing out at unbelievers does nothing to build confidence that the messages come from Heaven.
To Janet Walton:
While I think the point made by “lyle” needs some fine tuning, neither do I believe it wise to dismiss his point entirely. I speak of how Charlie’s devotees have treated Kevin O’Brien and you can see a demonstration of this in the simple example pointed out previously in the exchange between Christene Barthels, Kevin O’Brien, and my observations on this exchange.
Moreover, I wish to express disagreement over your characterization of said devotees’ behavior with respect to Charlie. I shall not mince my words: reprehensible behavior has been well-demonstrated over on Charlie’s site alone, even by Charlie himself! He does not take very well to “critics.” I will point out two specific concerns.
1) Charlie has publicly admitted that he sets people up over on his site. This setting up is when he “allows” a comment to be posted and then Charlie skewers it. Where’s the charity in that? If the comment is clearly in error, and Charlie has comment-moderation on his site, why does he not just delete it? No, he cannot always do that as apparently he needs to give a demonstration, to assert himself. He’s setting an example to the rest of you, the devoted. It comes across dangerously close as an attempt at keeping you all in line so that you do not dare to challenge him.
Are such actions those of an authentic visionary or are they more like those of a cult-leader?
2) It is quite disturbing to find comments from an alleged visionary about kicking people back who “kick” him. This “kicking back” theme is all in the name of Charlie having allegedly received “training” from God to prepare him for this alleged mission. Also noted are his recent comments on his interpreting the trial of Saint Joan of Arc.
You, the ones who appear to hang on Charlie’s every word as an oracle from the Almighty, are enabling him. Hardly to no one offers one word of challenge (see point 1 above). I have duly noted in my reading of comments how people have supported and encouraged Charlie’s “kicking back” defense. You all ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
All respect Mrs. Walton, you all are deluded, hoodwinked by yet another charlatan, the question of Charlie’s obedience notwithstanding as there is more to discernment than this one criterion.
If truth be known, Calamities in the world today exceed any current predictions, in the United States itself. Slavery in the United States numbers worst in US history. Trading of children in sex slavery, a horrific murder of the spirit of humans. Debt slavery, wage slavery, drug abuse, all epidemics of the once thought free world, pornography, computer addictions enslave even the assumed religious . The Arms Manufactures run the US government today, building and exporting billions of dollars of Arms to murder the poor. Not food or humanitarian aid to poor do we send, but arms, weapons, murder is the US major export and profit industry. Obama sets a puppet leader, our military is not accountable to our elected, or to our president. The United States blockade of Yemen will murder 20 million human by starvation, Obama as leader should be tried in world court for mass extermination of life, recognizing the people should call for his end of president existence for corruption and murder.
“Thank you for letting others know of what is happening in the
Archdiocese of Denver.”
It’s just a shame the headline was misleading “Alleged Visionary Charlie Johnston Continues Ministry, Despite Denver Archdiocese’s Warning”
Charlie was obeying the Bishop and not speaking on Church property. An apology would be good but I don’t think it will be forthcoming.
Patti, Thank you for letting others know of what is happening in the Archdiocese of Denver. Most brother bishops defer to the desires and discernment of the bishop responsible for the soul. As a faithful christian I would desire to follow the Bishop’s discernment and avoid a potential temptation to sin. In this case Bishop Aquila has discerned that Charlie is not to discuss his visions on property the Bishop is responsible. The Saint Paul/Minneapolis archdiocese has a similar policy on speakers, i.e.speakers at all parish events must be approved by the archdiocesan office, and the parish priest must approve the speaker before the request is sent to the archdiocesan office. This is prudent management when tending a flock, so that as St Paul explains in Corinthians, the newer believer doesn’t become confused and sin.
“Do you realize Kevin Obrien, a very well known and well liked author, blogger, writer shut down his blog ONLY because of hate mail ONLY from Charlies commentators?? Not good sir.”
I wasn’t going to bother commenting on the above but now feel I have to. I am a member of Charlie’s blog and not one person who posts regularly would send hate mail.
I was discussing with my wife the other night and I was thinking that probably none of the Old Testament prophets would have been listed as approved speakers in their Jewish congregations with the possible exception of Haggai as he was issuing a more positive exhortation to get busy and rebuild the temple. I do think the prophetic task has a bit of lonliness in it as a prophet, if he or she predicts regarding future events, must be read with caution until history shows him to be true or false. As for Charlie, “we will see” but he does give us much to think about while we await the outcome.
Bless you David, stay in there and seek Truth, and that is found in the Imitation of Christ. We need to remind ourselves of who can avoid the snares of the Devil, and that is the humble man. Pray constantly to the Holy Spirit for guidance and understanding, remembering we are not born with wisdom, but humility teaches wisdom. We are thankful for people that show us humility, for they teach us wisdom. Religion without charity is superstition, is another way of saying what you are against, the holy than thou that is soo common, that so many flee from religion over. You will make a great bishop (of Truth), or what ever vocation you chose.
Mr Ryder below,
Sir, I am a 24 year old young man, I have been to every single World Youth Day since I can remember. Sorry you thought my comments were offensive, but you see…you are well up in age…probably a baby boomer, I am not. I come across as offensive because I am so tired of my parents generation and yours etc hypocrisy. You know pretending to be pious and holy and behind the scenes they are not. I am what I am. Can you say that sir? Charlie, hisself said, we are going to be surprised, and I am paraphrasing…the holy and pious people that think they are do gooders are actually going to be the ones to disappoint in the storm, the ones that we have condemned and considered “bad” just might rise up and be heroes for our Lord Jesus Christ. He needs warriors, not boasters etc. Maybe I am one of them….I dunno. I would rather that and be condemned by people, than pretend and convince myself I am oh so holy and blessed. These people are doing this and it is OFFENSIVE to many.
Charlies posts are nice, but I do have a problem with the commentators as do very many other people. Do you realize Kevin Obrien, a very well known and well liked author, blogger, writer shut down his blog ONLY because of hate mail ONLY from Charlies commentators?? Not good sir.
Good conversation is an art, to be the change in the world you want to see, yet at the moment the development of self restraint is a priority. Charlie is not predicting, he is spot on facts of the demise of our society, and we are to focus in front of ourselves to fear God, not the terror of man. Yet that is the exact opposite of what is happening, even by the deemed Catholic leadership. Shame on our leadership that position themselves next to the power, yet are indifferent to the millions of poor, downtrodden and forsaken in a lawlessness and barbaric civilization that America now is. Shame on the power the Catholic leadership “sets next to” that by barbarism murders the people of Yemen by starvation. Today United States military actions and the indifference of the Catholic leadership to denounce and call for an all cease of US military actions on the poor, leaves the Catholic leadership and government devoid of any reason to the people themselves. A demand of cease of military actions is imminent, no to murder, no to war.
“Charlies commentators are his downfall. They truly believe they are the remnant and will be spared.”
You have to be joking. Just because we are aware that something could be about to happen doesn’t mean we think we are saved. The remnant are those who persevere to the end.
..”.maybe they are just a few of the same people—posting under different names…”
No Specter…we are all different. Its like one big happy family in there :-)
Let me just say whilst I’m here. I applaud the Archbishop for his warning. With the many false prophets we have in the world today we need to know the Church is actually keeping an eye out. No need to worry that Charlie will be disobedient though. He is in total obedience to the Church….now that makes a nice change nowadays.
God Bless You
It looks like some of the offensive comments posted by “david” were edited out. But the rest of his comment is still offensive—
“Beckita, she has placed herself in the position of the Blessed Mother on this site. she is full of wisdom and advice…it makes me..back off. what the heck? again, i do not disagree or condemn charlie, but these crazy commentators, which are mostly older women, other than a “claimed bishop” ...well they are all off the chain. charlie is not. it is quoted in scripture that women are prone to take over..well this infact [sic] is going on.”
What criteria do you use to judge that Beckita “has placed herself in the position of the Blessed Mother”? What is wrong with “older women”. Sounds sexist and ageist to me (and I’m not a liberal). Where in scripture does it say that “women are prone to take over”? Would you say that about Patti Maguire Armstrong?
Well, apparently, this is the hill that I have chosen to die upon, so this will be my last comment on this very sad, sordid comment thread.
The Power of the Tongue
James 3:5b-8 “How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell. For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God.”
Words can Condemn or Justify Us
Matthew 12:36-27 “I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
The Power of Life and Death
Proverbs 18:21 “Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits.”
Our Words Reveal What’s in our Hearts
Matthew 12:33-35 “Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad, for the tree is known by its fruit. You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil.”
Distance Yourself from All Corrupt Communication
Ephesians 4:29 “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.”
Words can Deadly
Proverbs 12:18 “There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.”
James 1:26 - If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion [is] vain.
John 13:34-35 34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
Peace
re: Emily >> “....There are only a handful that comment 24 hours a day, which is strange. deereverywhere, jlynnbyrd, beckita, who are these people? oh, i forgot, YD, a bishop incognito.”
maybe they are just a few of the same people—posting under different names… heck maybe the Charlie who you see on the videos is not even the same Charlie that makes up the written posts ?
I have to agree with David, even though he comes off as gruff. Charlies commentators are his downfall. They truly believe they are the remnant and will be spared. I believe I read on Mark Mallett or maybe even Charlies site..these types of holier than thou will be surprised. I really cannot stand to read the comments on his site. There are only a handful that comment 24 hours a day, which is strange. deereverywhere, jlynnbyrd, beckita, who are these people? oh, i forgot, YD, a bishop incognito.
i refuse to got to his site, not because of him, because of the crazies that support him.
Patti,
Thank you for clarifying that Charlie is NOT in disobedience with his archbishop. The headline unintentially suggests otherwise by using the phrase “despite Denver Archdiocese warning.” “Despite” and “warns” imply something is wrong. The archdiocese used the phrase “prudence and caution” concerning Charlie.
Suggested headline: “Alleged Visionary Charlie Johnston Continues Ministry” with sub title ” Denver Archdiocese recommends the faithful use “prudence and caution”
God bless!
I really do not understand your comment about Beckita, david. It comes across as a bit irrelevant and non-sensical.
Christene, you answered not one logical point that I made and instead listed your alleged virtues. Doing so is not sanctity, it borderlines being sanctimonious. That’s the simple truth of the matter, and far from that pat on the head from Charlie. If you do not like me or don’t “feel” loved because I told you the truth, then don’t read the Gospels. They are full of such terrifying moments of truth delivered straight-up.
Since you wish to accuse me, indirectly, of bearing false witness against you, and yet offer no refutation of a single point made, then you have only demonstrated that you have nothing substantial to offer. One can reasonably ponder whether or not you only expected our pity and sympathy for your situation to disarm us from arguing with you about your [apparent] emotional need for Charlie.
You have my sympathy for your medical situation, and my prayers. Your situation, however, is irrelevant when you voluntarily log onto the Internet and defend Charlie. You were correct in that your alleged virtues are indeed none of our business, so please leave them out of your defense.
I suppose openness to what Charlie has to say is perhaps greater as many of us see the signs of decay around us. With our current political situation, and the protests over Trump one doesn’t need to be a prophet to foresee increasing turmoil in our political system. I myself work with alcoholics and drug addicts and I often feel like I am watching the “canaries in the coal mine” as most of our addicts begin in High School and where else can the effects of an increasingly Godless public school system and the effects of broken families on our people and our youth be more clearly seen? Some of us with the best of families were pretty stupid ourselves but the slide of our culture makes it worse. And Charlie’s predictions of a soon collapse and miraculous Divine rescue will soon be seen as true or not. That said, may we all heed Charlie’s exhortation to Trust God, take the next right steps and be signs of hope to ourselves and to others whatever may come. And may we all maintain hope that God has not forgotten us in the midst of any storms which may come.
RE: david’s post on Beckita
Did this Beckita post on this site ? I know she posts on Charlie’s site—I did not make the connection for why you posted what you posted on this site relative to the discussion here—
guys, im weary of this. look and observe this commentator, Beckita, she has placed herself in the position of the Blessed Mother on this site. she is full of wisdom and advice…it makes me..back off. what the heck? again, i do not disagree or condemn charlie, but these crazy commentators, which are mostly older women, other than a “claimed bishop” ...well they are all off the chain. charlie is not. it is quoted in scripture that women are prone to take over..well this infact is going on.
God is omnipotent, beyond our comprehension, reason or thought, so how a human can come and judge another human in these matters is absurdity in itself. How the United States has came to elevate itself as all knowing and supreme over the world, devoid of a government that recognizes all Truth and Power comes from God, and God alone. This recognizes we have the worst boondoggle government ever contrived, and religious leadership joins in the failure of. A government bent on hate, revenge, murder to a people, poorest on Earth, to murder them. An cattiff insanity now thrives by the United States itself, a war machine of evil spreading misery, discontent, murder to the world. A war machine that generates enemies, in the murder of Gods children, our own brothers and sisters. Chastising of this human, Charlie, and calling oneself Catholic, makes one a liar, and liars go to Hell. Face Truth is what Charlie should be pointing out. Jesus stood up against the pit of vipers, and so should you.
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my inquiries, Ms. Armstrong. Peace.
As for the other commenters who have disparaged my motives, impugned my spirituality, and questioned the quality of my faith life, thank you. You have brilliantly exemplified the major point of my original comment which was, by the way, an extensive quote of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on bearing false witness. Not that it is anyone’s business, but I will share with you that as a home bound quadriplegic (C5/C6) my daily faith life consists of daily Mass with spiritual communion first and foremost, followed by my rosaries, Divine Mercy chaplets, various devotions and an inordinate amount of spiritual reading all made possible by the incredible gift of time that was afforded me the moment I was thrown from horse and broke my neck. I spend every waking moment thanking God for that, for it is more precious than anything this material world can offer.
As for my association with Charlie Johnston and the Take the Next Right Step community, I happened to stumble across his blog a few years ago and stuck around because I just happen to like him and I like the people who hang out with him. I guess I like hope. I guess I like people who lift one another up. I like people who struggle,as I do, to be a light in this ever darkening world, who aren’t afraid to be vulnerable with that struggle, and who are ever ready with a prayer and a funny squirrel story for those having truly bad days.
Do I believe his prophecies are true?? Don’t know. Don’t care. I’m there for the online fellowship and the fruits that it brings to my life. Peace
Mike, you asked me to immediately respond to Christine’s question:
“Is it the position of the Archdiocese of Denver that Mr. Johnston is in a state of disobedience in regard to the the preliminary ruling they issued about him in March?” - Christine
I wonder if you and Christine read the entire article. If he was in disobedience the article would have stated that. (You know that but are trying to make a point.) I specifically said in the article that there is no condemnation on Charlie or prohibition against following him. The article is about the effect Archbishop’s ruling against him speaking on Church property is having.
Ellen: Good to see your name here. No clue about comments. I see several from Charlie. You said, “I again have to observe that just the headline of this story wrongly insinuates that Charlie Johnston is disobeying Church authority. This is absolutely not the case and NCR has to be honest and correct this disinformation. Dan Burke, where are you?” Ellen, as it reads now, the headline is factually true but I can see how those who are supportive of Charlie could still read it in a negative way. Headlines can be a challenge sometimes. It is a tough situation to have someone you revere to not be approved to speak in parishes in such a prominent diocese.
I don’t have much to add to the discussion at this point but a few observations. Charlie states he is under spiritual direction for the last 20 years and while his directors, he has several one to direct him personally and one to monitor his blog for doctrinal accuracy, cannot say his predictions are true they are directing him on what he can do under obedience and what he should not do and he states he is in obedience to them. Unless proven otherwise I believe we should give him the benefit of the doubt there.
Secondly, while we are all wise to focus on the public and unchanging revelation of our faith, I do believe there is a place for the prayerful discernment of private revelations as God can use them to shed light on aspects of the faith we could use more light on. In my life for example, as a charismatic Catholic there were several private revelations which assured me that God loves me and has a purpose for my life and these private prompts by God’s grace were helpful in moving me from a state of spiritual blindness to being restored to God’s good graces quite literally.
Patty,
Christine’s question below deserves a prompt answer that many of us are asking. Please respond on this blog so we can move on.
“Is it the position of the Archdiocese of Denver that Mr. Johnston is in a state of disobedience in regard to the the preliminary ruling they issued about him in March?” - Christine
Thank you in advance for clarifying this matter.
I have to say that from re-reading the article there is no doubt in my mind that it was written in order to show Charlie in a bad light. But why? What has he done to cause you to act this way Ms. Armstrong?
Charlie Johnston has a number of Priest Spiritual Directors, who have kept all of his writings for such times as when they would be needed, either as in this case for the Archdiocese’s investigations, or to check back and see if any of his prophecies have come true. As we can see from this quote….. “The statement, released March 7, reveals that the archdiocese has conducted a preliminary investigation into the writings and speeches of Johnston that date back to 1998.” Charlie certainly has kept things in order! Also note that this was a preliminary investigation.
“Should Archbishop Aquila later decide to launch a full-fledged investigation, the question of whether or not Mr. Johnston’s alleged visits from saints and angels are divine would be addressed….” So meanwhile Charlie certainly can speak about the mission he has allegedly been entrusted with….but not…and he knows this full well….not on Church property. You see Charlie is very obedient to the Church as you can see in the writing below, which I copied from his site
“I am getting a lot of letters from people who think they have a prophetic message they are called to share with the world and wanting my advice or blessing. Well, first, whatever I am, I am definitely not the Church or a priest – and I am not the person to guide you on this. The Church is. Most times, a person is mistaken on the matter. The way to discern is to get a solid priest spiritual director and obey him as he discerns. If you are Protestant, you had best get a sound minister to guide you. If you will not take direction and be obedient, you are deceiving yourself; you do not have such a call”
There are not many alleged seers today that are obedient to the Church..but you probably know this Ms. Armstrong? Maybe this was why you decided to do a piece on Charlie. Aren’t we all sick and tired of false seers. I certainly am. Well I will leave that to you and your conscience as to what your real motive was. That is between you and God.
God Bless You
Charles Johnston is a Catholic convert. He is orthodox. He loves God and His Bride
the Church, and never once has said anything contrary to church teaching.
Archbishop Samuel Aquila said Charles Johnston is not to speak on any church
property as he has not been approved by the Church. But, he has not been disapproved and may speak anywhere, including the Diocese of Denver, just not on any Church property which would give the impression of approval.
War is a disease, bigotry is a disease of the United States, Einstein noted and is proven right today. Einstein recognized science proves God is. Yet he noted, if he ever met a Christian who truly lived the faith, he would be one. If Einstein met you, would that convert, bring him to the Catholic faith? Do you see the face of Jesus in all others, do they see the face of Jesus in you? To attack others for their faith, is all wrong, for God has reveled himself in many ways, multiple. The native Americans told of the story of the great flood, and they recognized God as the Great Spirit. They also thought it “crazy” as it is, that Christians argue over who has the correct God. and they are right, their is only one. For the test is, religion without charity, is superstition. the attack on Mr Johnston, proves the superstition of mind on the part of many.
One who cuts off family ties does not enter the garden of paradise. Blessed are you when they shall revile you and persecute you. And speak all that is evil against you. For my sake, be glad and rejoice. For your reward is very great in Heaven ,all that live Godly in Jesus Christ,Shall suffer persecution. Pray that you are not put to the test, as Mr. Johnston, or Jesus, we know what happened to him. The inner key to healthy relationships is loyalty, faithful to another, a devoted attachment and affection. A natural part of loyalty is being willing to forgive family, friends, all, for we all make mistakes. Mistakes, as sin, cannot be reasoned away, it must be healed in sincerity. The greater of sin, is to hate others, rejection of others; a grave sin we teach others by our action of,the killing, the murder of others souls, murder of our very own soul. Stop the bigotry and hate, a disease, a disease of the United States.
I think the comments from “david” (May 3 @ 7:50 PM EDT) are very fitting.
Christene, you said (May 3 @ 6:45 PM EDT) that your quoting the CCC “has absolutely nothing to do with defending Mr. Johnston.” This is incredibly disingenuous as it is clear that you are a cheerleader for Charlie and are seeking his approval/“pat on the head” (see david’s comment). Moreover, dare I say, by these actions you are running dangerously close to the sin of idolatry (cf CCC 2113) by making Johnston your oracle.
I suspect that you have deluded yourself, Christene. If your quotation had nothing to do with defending Johnston, why are you even here questioning Armstrong and then running over to Johnston’s for that “pat on the head?” I think that you need to read and pray over what “L Spinelli” (May 3 @ 12:28 PM EDT) said about charity and calumny. Your guru has admitted that he allows (some) critical comments on his web site precisely with the mind to set them up and ridicule them. Where’s the charity in that? Are not authentic prophets bound to that same fundamental virtue, especially those who believe themselves to be sent on a mission to help people take “the next right step?”
You are correct that there are allegations from Kevin O’Brien. What you do not, however, seem to acknowledge are the challenges in the com-box to you by “A Reader.” True, O’Brien later closed his com-box and thus you were unable to respond. However, now is your chance to do so. You are here essentially asking the same question here (#3) from O’Brien’s site.
Remember that when you point a finger at someone else there’s three more pointing back at you. “A Reader” asked YOU if YOU looked up the sources that O’Brien cited and did the math. The com-box was closed, so herein answer that question for all to see: have YOU done the math?
Moreover, on a related note, your argument against O’Brien and Armstrong is rooted in your blind faith in Johnston’s word. In this, you have committed an error. First, Kevin O’Brien clearly cited his source (Johnston’s Facebook page) and stated that he documented the information. Now, Johnston is claiming that O’Brien “edited” his article.
Here is where your blind faith has come in: you have not asked Johnston to provide the proof of this “editing” assertion. When someone did push the button on this to Charlie, he simply responded that he was not going to engage O’Brien. Christene, think about that for a minute. Your guru made a statement that could adversely (dare I say it already has) affect someone’s livelihood and good name and Johnston will not provide evidence to back up the assertion? What example is he setting for you and his other followers on who to take “the next right step?” It’s wrong, Christene, and you know it.
O’Brien has rather vehemently denied Johnston’s “edit-job” allegation and gone out on a limb to accuse Johnston of being a liar. Do you really think O’Brien would be willing to jeopardize his name and livelihood by lying? Ma’am, seriously…think about this for a moment. As “A Reader” clearly pointed out to you, Johnston is the one who looks bad on this point as he has already clearly had to walk back his initial assertion of correspondence with O’Brien. In a court of law, that looks really bad. I’m not sure if it’s the “doctrine of clean hands,” but I would not be surprised if it was.
That’s all I have to say, except to say “kudos” to Patti Armstrong for having the stuffing to question Johnston openly for all the world to see. She’s being crucified for it, but in the end you all are only contributing to her sanctification. This fact is regardless of whether Johnston’s claims on the future come true and I cite Acts 16 as my authority for this statement on prophecy.
(1) Christene Bartels, you said: “your article has been revised several times for accuracy…”
Yes, we listened to the concerns of commenters then noted two minor changes at the bottom of the article so no one should be confused.
The title took out the word “ban” so as not to mislead people that it was a total ban, but just on Church property. The other change involved the 2 long posts “Watcha Gonna Do When They Come for You?” Johnston gave extensive advice on how to get away, what do to if captured and the explanation that the government might fabricate an emergency to trick everyone into rounding them up for their own good. It’s confusing why someone claiming to be a visionary would write imaginary stuff. Five months later, under the comment section, Charlie stated the government had squandered their moral authority and now there would be too much resistance throughout the country. We changed the wording to state Johnston was giving advice if the scenario happened and not predicting it.
(2) You asked: “Is it the position of the Archdiocese of Denver that Mr. Johnston is in a state of disobedience in regard to the the preliminary ruling they issued about him in March. You have left your readers with the impression that he is. If he is in good standing, that needs to be clarified”.
Charlie declared the archbishop has given him “permission” to keep doing what he is doing, just not on Church property. I asked the chancellor if that was an accurate explanation of the report. He said: “The official statement of the archbishop stands on its own, apart from Mr. Johnston’s interpretation.” The report explained the reason Johnston was not given permission to speak on Church property was because of the alleged prophecies. That can hardly be accurately described as being given “permission.” Who is doing the misleading? The article NEVER addressed his standing as a Catholic—that was never at issue—so your inferences have nothing to do with what was reported.
(3) You then asked: “You have intimated that Mr. Johnston is under obligation, by virtue of the diocesan ruling, to cease writing his blog and criticized him for not doing so. What is your source and basis for this?”
Again, your inferences have nothing to do with what was written. A very big part of what Johnston does is blog extensively. That was reported.
(4) Your last question: “You included some questionable allegations against Mr. Johnston by Mr. Kevin O’Brien. Did you thoroughly investigate and substantiate his allegations before including them in your article? If not, they are hearsay and gossip.”
Yes. He has screen shots of Johnston’s FB page to prove his statements. But does that matter to you? Are you really concerned with getting to the truth or are you so immersed in this that your only goal is to be angry at me for writing this article?
I had several Church officials and a secretary tell me off the record that people are putting their lives on hold—not having babies, not going back to school, not buying houses, etc. because of the prophecies. They told me they were glad I was writing this article. People are building refuges that Johnston says he has visited. Anyone skimming over his blog and all the comments can see this is taking up a huge amount of people’s time. I personally would like to be done with this and put my time to better use. I expect this will be my last response to questions because I have become a part of all the time wasting that is going into the Johnston messages.
Many are upset that this article does not promote Johnston. I am devoted to many Church approved apparitions and I have never seen approved visionaries lash back against those who don’t believe. If it turns out that Johnston’s predictions do take place, I’ll shout it from the rooftop that I had misjudged the situation. And if, like his prophecy that 2013 would be the last normal Christmas, the predictions that Obama will not finish office and there will be no elections do not come to pass, what effect will that have on all his followers? If you want to follow Johnston, that is your choice, but why get angry over an article on the effects of the Archbishop Aquila’s report?
Well, if the message is that I need to pray the Rosary more often, then it’s true, but no real special message is needed for that. Likewise, there is no need for divine intervention to tell me that hard times are ahead. We have had extraordinarily easy times for the past 70 years, and those don’t last forever; also, we are burning the candle not just at both ends, but basically along its whole length. I would need miracles to convince me that a disaster is NOT looming.
REPENT, FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS AT HAND. That seems to be the substance of pretty much every legitimate message.
Christine, I admire your tenacity and your vigor defense of someone/something you believe in. You are a correct on insisting on charity, quoting scripture for such. However, herein lies the problem with Charlie Johnston. You, yes you, made a few comments on different sites, ran back to Charlies site to tell him all the good you did, got a pat on the head for your accomplishments and you are at it again full force. The focus is not on Jesus Christ, it is on seeking Charlie Johnstons approval. I really enjoy Charlies writings, but I refuse to read the insane, cult-like comments.
I believe he needs to close his comments section because it attracts certain kinds of vulnerable people seeking a Christ here on earth that they can email, call…etc.
Come Lord Jesus. I do hope your predictions are true Charlie, because we all need correction, including your followers.
It appears the author has selected sources or comments to support her impression. Was the subject of this writing contacted for an interview? With the many visionaries it is always important to be prudent and to look at the core message. I prefer Mr. Johnston’s message because what he recommends is first looking to God and serving others. It’s always the fruit that shows the health of the tree. His messages are not desperate, but hopeful. Anyone with any knowledge of happenings in this world must be able to see the signs of the times. We will need hope if what the visionaries say is true - that we are in for a needed cleansing. Sometimes we want to help, but we can hurt if we turn others away from hope. If what he says is false, it will fade away. If it is true, then it is from God. Be careful that we don’t find ourselves fighting God. I put my faith not in a man, but in the promise of our Savior. Nothing is impossible with God. I believe in the Passover, I believe many miracles in many generations of faith history found in our Bible or traditions. I don’t ever want to put limits on God or to try to make Him in my image. It’s better to remain open and speak when you have evidence of harm, especially when you hold influence whether personally or by vocation. It is not harm to acknowledge God, to try to take the next right step or to be a light for others. My prayers for the author and all those discerning the many visionaries, including Mr. Johnston.
The reason for my comment, Ms. Armstrong, and my quoting of the section of the Catechism has absolutely nothing to do with defending Mr. Johnston. Had you simply written an article about the letter issued by Archbishop Aquila regarding Mr. Johnston in a straight forward manner, I would have absolutely no issue. But as it stands, your article has been revised several times for accuracy and to be honest, I’m more confused than ever. So I am requesting some clarification;
1. Is it the position of the Archdiocese of Denver that Mr. Johnston is in a state of disobedience in regard to the the preliminary ruling they issued about him in March. You have left your readers with the impression that he is. If he is in good standing, that needs to be clarified.
2. You have intimated that Mr. Johnston is under obligation, by virtue of the diocesan ruling, to cease writing his blog and criticized him for not doing so. What is your source and basis for this?
3. You included some questionable allegations against Mr. Johnston by Mr. Kevin O’Brien. Did you thoroughly investigate and substantiate his allegations before including them in your article? If not, they are hearsay and gossip.
Thank you in advance for your clarifications. God bless and peace.
Charlie’s primary message is prudent in good times and bad: acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope to others.
In a few short months we will know if the Charlie’s predictions (which he claims were given to him by God and his messengers) about the election, the current president, and the economy come true.
If he is correct on these points, which most people find to be far-fetched, then it is also likely he will be correct about the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart (the Rescue) at the end of 2017. We will desperately need to hold on to hope for the Rescue if the upheaval around the world is as great as Charlie, as well as others in many religious and economic sectors, predict..
Even though I don’t agree with the approach of this article, I think it’s good that the message of hope has now been delivered to a much wider audience via NCR.
Thanks, Patti, for drawing attention to The Next Right Step.
Peace to all,
Marie
I spent several hours watching a few of Charlie’s presentations and reading his words and responses. I had never heard of him before but the strongly expressed support for him here compelled me to change that.
In person, Charlie is extraordinarily likeable. What I liked most about his message is that it empowers listeners/followers. There are golden opportunities surrounding us every day in our own little worlds that we can take advantage of. This is great stuff. I couldn’t help but like this friendly, humble guy too.
The first talk that I listened to was almost 2 hours long, given last July in North Adams, MA. I am 60 years old and in pretty good physical shape and was impressed by the fact that Charlie would walk 3,200 miles across the country. However, seeing how the warm temperatures were effecting him and his clearly stated need to be sitting during a good portion of this time made it obvious to me, that Charlie would have had a hard time walking just a few miles on this particular day(and he was not sick).
Maybe that does not matter to his followers, who are drawn to him because of his message and can overlook facts like this. I am perfectly ok with that and not judging them but there are inconvenient facts like this that trouble me, personally.
I am a active Catholic and let our faith guide me in most realms. However, I am also a scientist(atmospheric) by profession. My training often requires that I observe many facts in order to properly analyze a great deal of information to provide an interpretation.
In the case of Charlie Johnston, his compelling message and my heart/faith draw me in the direction of wanting to be a believer. However, there are some impossible to ignore facts that tell me to be cautious….his impossible claim to have walked 3,200 miles is just one huge one that, to be frank, I think could not have happened.
Again, this may not matter to his followers but clearly, it does matter to others, including the sources sited by Patti. I think condemnation of her for siting these sources(accurately from what it looks like), seems hypocritical.
Just know that when somebody is truly authentic, they encourage scrutiny and welcome a closer look at all the legit facts surrounding them or their positions.
This is what’s the most concerning to me. The response to Patti’s article(which is factual) has been to attack Patti and the NCR for stating facts…........because they don’t line up with what believers in Charlie believe about him.
We are all Catholics that believe in the same faith. Charlie is an aberration/exception, whether authentic or not. It’s understandable that some would advise the use of caution and one would think that believers of Charlie would be ok with facts relevant to that…......even if they personally disagree.
I am a skeptic at this time. Please don’t judge me either.
And here we have another speaking a bit prophetically:
http://www.markmallett.com/blog/on-the-eve-of-revolution/
of a coming storm, and with our politics it sure seems that things could fragment quickly, but in this as in Charlie’s thoughts, “We will see”, but it is wise in these unsettled times to as Jesus said “Watch and pray”, and as others have counseled here and elsewhere to hold fast to the foundation of our faith and to the sacraments.
I have been a long-time reader of the NCR. This article is truly disappointing. Mr Johnston is very humble and not seeking in any way, shape, or form to divide our Church. Quite the opposite. Do I believe in his predictions? I do not know. I call myself an attentive listener.And I definitely like Charlie, the man. How could you not?! If he does turn out to be legitimate, do I expect every vision to be accurately played out? - absolutely not. Father Groeschel wrote about visionaries and said it is common for them to get some things wrong. Even St Joan of Arc did! She was sure God told her she would be saved! Even as she was waiting to be burned alive. As for there always having been many good Catholics who vehemently have distrusted legitimate visionaries(think Bernadette, Faustina, Pio, etc ) - well, that is also not surprising to me.It comes wtih the territory. But how you are handling your choice to not believe , Ms Armstrong, is , well, pretty ugly.
I am most curious as to why Mr Johnston bothers you so much since he is the cause of no hysteria or division. ( He bothers Mr Shea because everything seems to bother him these days . ) This piece needs to be pulled or at least corrections made. Shame on you, Ms Armstrong. And shame even more on the Register. Mother Angelica would be rolling over in her grave to see such a lack of justice and , therefore, charity.
Christene, you’re forgetting that Charlie did the same thing to people he didn’t agree with. He put their posts up for ridicule and derision. So he’s allowed to skip over the very SAME CCC guidelines because “he has a mission”? Are you kidding? If none of us are excuse from charity, then neither is Charlie.
I have been reading the Register for years and we are subscribers so I have “A dog in this fight” so to speak. That said Ms. Armstrong’s quoting of Kevin O Brien shows poor journalistic vetting. He initially alleged that Charlie has a “donation button” which she could have checked out by reviewing Charlie’s websites. He questioned the length of Charlie’s walk but the information was posted and followed by many on his websites. Ms. Armstrong is free as any Catholic to not believe his private revelations, as no Catholic is obliged to believe any private revelation, even the approved ones. But Journalistic integrity and Christian charity are issues here and I hope she does better work in the future.
Thank You Christene Bartels. The Catholic leadership needs to “get off its high horse” and lead to a Catholic mind, of charity of heart to all, to forgive others, and to never revenge or hate others. Calumny and Detraction is the devils greatest force of driving our children out of the Catholic and Christian faith in the US today. The repeated story of some “idiot” spreading calumny and detraction is featured in ever story of , Why people have left. The US hate and bigotry to the Islamic is an outrage, but Catholic leaders themselves follow the money and in failure keep on..Todays murder of 20 million in Yemen by the US government calls for end to murder, or war as people call it. War IS Murder. God have mercy on us, we have failed big time in the USA..
Christene, because the article was not favorable to Charlie is not a reason to accuse me of not upholding standards of journalism. The article was about negative report from the Archbishop Aquila. Thus there were also negative statements from other bishops. I went directly to a source Charlie reported as favorable to him: Bishop Gracida, and included his reply. Through Michael O’Neil’s quote, I made it clear that it was not against the Church for people to continue following. A public figure who makes predictions is going to be scrutinized. That is not against the ethics of journalism or Catholicism. God bless you.
To National Catholic Register/Ms. Pattie Armstrong,
Misleading information has been written about Charlie Johnston, I simply ask that the confusion this article on the National Catholic Register has created to be set to right.
Pattie, I hope you see and hear and right a wrong.
May the Peace of Christ be with You
Some of Charles’s predictions may come true, but the Church consistently is very cautious toward visionaries. For many years St. Faustina’s diary was banned. Even the three children of Fatima’s revelations weren’t approved for awhile and Padre Pios stigmata was for a time deemed a hoax. I think that Charles seems like a good man, but sometimes imagination and images can be wrongly interpreted. Even now, the third secret of Fatima has many people giving a different interpretation than the Church. Remember, Even Fatima and Lourdes are considered “private revelations” and do not have to be believed, so is it truly wrong of the archdiocese of Denver to be cautioning Catholics about these? I also think that Charles should be obedient to these advisories just as many of the others were. Both St.Faustina and !ucia were ordered by their confessors to write these down, and more telling weren’t released until their death. Right now the Archbishop is right. We do know that Jesus will return one day and we know as Catholics how we are to live. If we want to read prophecies approved by the Church, the Book of Revelations would be a good place to begin.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is quite clear;
2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:
- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;279
- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.280
2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one’s neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.
2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.
Our world is awash in gossip, hearsay, innuendo, and every form of vicious, snarky, slanderous garbage, and it is also rife in Church these days. Just read the comments directed at the Holy Father in any given article, in any “Catholic” article, regarding every syllable he utters.
Ms. Armstrong, in light of the above paragraphs, do you think you upheld the standards of Catholic journalism??
Our Lord Jesus said the world would know we are his disciple by how we loved one another. Given the way we treat one another, is it any wonder the world regards us as nothing but a circus sideshow?
Agree with Ellen Lopez., Catholic register insinuates with no reason, on too many issues, its not right. What does it matter what Charlie Johnston says, we are not to judge what is in his heart. The current issue Catholic register insinuates to the Islamic of bigotry is all wrong. Every one needs to recognize we are not told the truth in media today to the Middle East. The people of Yemen are starved to death, by the United States blockade preventing food to enter the country, the worst atrocity and murder in world history, but Catholic Register works to deny the Truth to the issue. Pray for the people of Yemen who face being murdered,, and for the people of national Catholic register that deny truth.
To steal ones good name, or commit Calumny and Detraction are serious sins, for they are sins we really cannot expect God to forgive us for. Murder, raping, ruining of others, is epidemic in America. The “educated” recognize going to certain cities in the US and across America is far more dangerous, than the Middle East. The hot spots in the world are recognized as the places the United States has intervened in the last years, that has been a fact for decades.. That is proven by the US over throw of Syria in 1948, and Iran in 1953 of the democratic government of..
I can certainly understand the difficulty of supposed visionaries like Charlie Johnston to the Archdiocese. However an indication of these claims by Johnston can evolve in the close time as the election cycle is coming quite quickly. If the presidential election is cancelled or President Obama does not complete his term (ends in January 2017) (and these proposed events seem possible but not probable to me) we can say that Charlie Johnston is on to something. We do not have to wait a generation. Of course some predictions are contingent on the action of others, which can generate an alternative result.
The negative tone of this article makes me immediately suspicious of your other writings, Ms. Armstrong. The Bible is clear that we are not to despise prophecy, but take what is good and leave the rest. Archbishop Aquila made the decision everyone expected and Mr. Johnston has been faithful. Why insinuate that he has not been faithful? Some of your sources are poor fact checkers.
With respect to Mr. Johnston’s comments about concentration camps, it’s intersting to consider Cardinal George’s speculation about the future and his famous quote:
“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.”
Then the Cardinal’s own words explaining his words in this very publication. It seems to track well with Johnston’s themes.
While reading through the comments of Charlie’s supporters and then seeing comments by Charlie attempting to defend himself, this quote comes to mind:
“Whenever anything disagreeable or displeasing happens to you, remember Christ crucified and be silent.” —St. John of the Cross
I do not recall any saints like St. Pio who protested when censured for a time. *True* prophets gave their messages and did not spend time trying to defend them when others mocked and ridiculed them.
Thank you again, Patti, for your article and for the Register publishing the comments, especially of Charlie and his followers, which are very telling in and of themselves.
After reviewing the commission’s findings and in keeping with his pastoral office, Archbishop Samuel J. Aquila of Denver has decided to strongly advise the faithful to exercise prudence and caution in regards to Mr. Charlie Johnston’s alleged divine visions and messages. As has been demonstrated with other alleged apparitions, the danger exists of people placing greater faith in a prediction than in Christ’s words and promises.
For these reasons, Mr. Johnston will also not be approved as a speaker in the Archdiocese of Denver.
For those who are disappointed by this finding, the archdiocese encourages them to seek their security in Jesus Christ, the sacraments, and the Scriptures. The faithful should also remember Christ’s words: “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mt. 24:36).
I submitted a comment a day or so ago, and when I did so, I believe there were more comments including one from Charlie Johnston. Where is my comment and the others?
I again have to observe that just the headline of this story wrongly insinuates that Charlie Johnston is disobeying Church authority. This is absolutely not the case and NCR has to be honest and correct this disinformation. Dan Burke, where are you?
A few thoughts as I have been reading Charlie’s blog for some time and have met the man when he spoke in the St Louis area last year. First as I have commented on his Blog several times regarding his specific prophecies of Obama not completing his Presidency, the rescue in late 2017,etc. “We will see” and we can never be certain of the reliability of any alleged seer until things develop but I believe he is a faithful Catholic and not doing this for personal gain. Other impressions, He calls the “spirit of Antichrist” the belief our societies have developed that we can create a happy society without reference to God and that cannot happen per John ch 15. Branches cannot long have life apart from the vine, and this applies to societies too. And he has said that as our society continues to fragment apart from God, people will lose hope in our worldly system and will be more opened to hope in God. And I believe this is true whether the collapse of our increasingly Godless society happens sooner or later, unless, of course we have a major societal conversion to God, which seems unlikely without some disruption to bring our world and it’s leaders to their knees, ourselves included.
I have been involved in trying to get pro life speakers approved for forums at churches in our diocese. It is common to have very solid Catholic speakers barred from speaking on church property. The Archdiocese has a procedure for approval and the smallest deviation from it will result in “not allowed to speak on church property.” For example, you cannot ask the potential speaker if they will speak at your conference before getting approval from the archbishop. Kind of a catch 22.
Charlie’s obedience to his priests and bishops is commendable and this article is a great disappointment to the credibility of the National Catholic Register’s mission of bringing people closer to our Catholic faith.
Ms Armstrong referred to a specific post on Johnston’s website: “What’cha Gonna Do When They Come For You?” using that article as a jumping-off place for her criticisms of him as a fraud who changes his “predictions” when they don’t come to pass. But it seems Ms Armstrong either did not read the article carefully or is being deliberately misleading.
The article is divided into two posts on his website. In the first post, he writes about various political strategies and how they’ve played out, then he writes, “So what I am going to do is posit a scenario for establishing emergency authority in a traditionally free society that would be most effective, that would get the job done.” He is *positing* a *scenario* ... he’s not making a prediction, and he says so before the “scenario” starts. It is incorrect to use that article as an example of where “Mr. Johnston has changed his story.”
As to his authenticity ... I’m reserving an opinion. I simply don’t know enough—and one of the issues I have is that much of the predicting seems to be based on Mr. Johnston’s interpretation; we don’t get a lot of direct quotes, as far as I have been able to see. Having a background that includes conducting investigations, I am uncomfortable with paraphrasing and interpretation of messages; I’d rather see the actual message.
I really am surprised at NCR for posting this article. Charlie isn’t hidden away, so why was he not consulted or even asked to state his case? Instead we are linked to someone who obviously has an act to grind. Did you even bother to read the statement from the Archbishop? Charlie has NOT been banned from speaking. He cannot speak in churches, but this is nothing unusual. All alleged seers are prohibited from doing this, so as not to give the impression that the Church has come to a decision. The Church at this time have not pronounced a judgement.. therefore Charlie is free to speak and to carry on doing his work with the aid of his spiritual directors.
Are we going to see a new unbiased article..maybe even get Charlie to speak for himself? I sincerely hope so.
Although I agree with the Bishops position and statement, I find it strange in these circumstances how the Church takes a heavy handed approach with folks like this, but allows rampant dissent on college campuses, parishes and chanceries.
There is No wait and see, get on your knees and beg God for his Mercy, for the US is following the devil, in denial of God.. Pray for the People of Yemen, the poorest nation on Earth. Yes, “follow the money”, for Yemen is out of food and water, and is now facing murder by starvation of 20 MILION humans right now. The United States is imposing a blockade on Yemen preventing food and water to them, to murder the people by starvation. Logic points out, to feed the people to save them, recognizes the US is dependent on food imports, others to feed the US today itself. The United States has squandered its once bountiful resources, and cannot feed itself today, yet has turned into a nation of building weapons to murder people as a main profit industry. Hate to the Islamic the greatest sin of the US, defiant to the Catholic teaching, the Gospel itself. Human slavery is greater than ever in the US, of our children as sex slaves. The people in the US are in denial of the murder, carnage, rape, and horrific acts of misery across America, the US has imposed on the people of across America. The United States is morally bankrupt civilization.
I think this is a fair and balanced analysis of the situation. We must proceed with caution with any visions that are not church approved. Thanks for the in depth report Patti!
Glenn Dallaire above is correct. Charlie Johnston in no way has been condemned and any Bishop would urge caution and prudence for any claimed visionary no matter how authentic until it has been fully investigated. However it is a worry about the increasing clericalism, quenching of the spirit, marginalization of the laity, freedom of speech and autocratic control that is getting worse in the English speaking Catholic world despite the teachings of Pope Francis to the contrary. Whether a Bishop is socalled liberal or conservative is not the problem but whether they are rigid and controlling (lording it over the flock rather than serving) is the problem.
Here’s my two cents: Follow JESUS. Read the scriptures, pray the rosary, frequent the sacrament of onfession, and receive the Eucharist, which is Christ’s own body and blood. Read the Holy Father’s encyclicals and exhortations. That should keep you plenty occupied and you won’t waste time being seduced by charlatans.
Mark Shea said…..I agree with Kevin O’Brien’s assessment.
Me too. While I believe liberals have done much damage to the Catholic Church I also think these ‘messages’ are politically motivated to take advantage of the divide in the Church.
Someone contacted me saying that my comment concerning Mr Johnston not receiving any restrictions or sanctions is incorrect, pointing to the part of the Archdiocesan Statement that declares “Mr. Johnston will also not be approved as a speaker in the Archdiocese of Denver.”
One must recognize that the statement “...not be approved as a speaker for the Archdiocese” is not in any way a negative judgment. What the statement means is that Charlie has not received official approval and permission to speak within the Archdiocese, because in Dioceses across the country, one must apply, and receive, official approval as a speaker before one is permitted to give speaking engagements or conferences in any of the Catholic churches within the Diocese, particularly if one is to be speaking on matters of faith or morals. This prior approval measure is to protect the faithful from unqualified or disingenuous speakers. If the Archbishop was to grant approval for Charlie to speak within the Archdiocese, it would be interpreted as a implicit approval of his private revelations, and such is not in keeping with the cautionary approach of the Statement from the Archdiocese.
And so, like everyone else in the Archdiocese who has not received special approval as a speaker, Mr Johnston like 99% of other Catholics in Denver are “not approved as speakers within the Archdiocese”. So, obviously it would be incorrect to refer to this part of the Statement as a condemnation, when the same thing pertains to all other Catholics within the Archdiocese.
-Glenn Dallaire
Host of MysticsOfTheChurch.com
I’ve been subscribing to National Catholic Register for many decades and I’ve always found your journalistic standards to be high, in keeping with your unswerving fidelity to the Magisterium. So it is very disappointing for you to publish a poorly researched, slanted and inaccurate article on someone who is in good standing with his bishop.
Fraud messages….calling people sourpusses is a great lack of charity for people who do not wish to be a follower..sorry we are called to follow only Jesus and not any mortal
Another whackjob or intentional liar so called prophet to mislead the gullible
A point of clarification on the post by “David on Saturday, Apr 30, 2016 1:55 PM (EDT):” Regarding O’Brien’s posts and the Internet Wayback Machine. David said in part:
“You’ll see that this particular blog post of Kevin was backed up exactly three times between September 7, 2015 and March 3, 2016:”
Out of curiosity I followed the links and looked around, and at the bottom of the Internet Archive Wayback Machine site is says:
“NOTE:
This calendar view maps the number of times http://thwordinc.blogspot.com/2015/09/is-sasquatch-antichrist-or-temptation.html was crawled by the Wayback Machine, not how many times the site was actually updated. More info in the FAQ.”
I don’t know if it makes any difference, but the disclaimer says the dates don’t show how many times a site was updated, but only how many times it was captured by the Internet Wayback Machine.
Just thought I’d point that out.
Ms. Armstrong cites Bishop Rene Gracida as one who formerly treated me as a friend but now has backed away from me. You may enjoy reading the reprint he did of my column toady on his site and that he entitled “Libel is Libel Even When it Appears in a Catholic Periodical.”: https://abyssum.org/2016/05/01/libel-is-libel-even-when-it-appears-in-a-catholic-periodical/
I have spoken to a few I consider friends who were quoted here. They understood from Ms. Armstrong’s tone that if they said anything too nice, they might well become targets, too. It’s pretty simple - read the statements that are ambiguous - non-committal - cited here and you can be pretty sure that they remain friends, even as Ms. Armstrong tries to spin them as disillusioned former friends.
As the host of the “Mystics of the Church” website, I have been obligated over the years to read literally dozens of Archdiocesan decisions in regards to various alleged visionaries throughout the world, not to mention the various declarations over the years issued by the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith.
As I have written on my website, the Archdiocese of Denver’s statement on Charlie Johnston is strictly cautionary in nature. It is NOT a condemnation, as it contains no restrictions or limitations whatsoever against Mr Johnston, and those commentators who try to frame it as a condemnation are incorrect to do so.
Some examples of a negative decisions in official statements from a Bishop/Archdiocese would be the decisions concerning Veronica Lueken and the Bayside apparitions, or Maureen Sweeney-Kyle of “Holy Love ministries”, or the “Army of Mary” in Quebec, or Gianna Talone-Sullivan in Baltimore to name four examples here in North America.
Simply put, an official condemnation would contain one or more sanctions or restrictions, and this statement from the Denver Archdiocese concerning Charlie Johnston contains none.
Time will very soon tell as to whether Charlie Johnston’s prophesies are authentic or not, and I personally think that the cautious yet neutral approach of the Denver Archdiocese is a very wise approach indeed, for the predicted events themselves or the complete lack thereof, will effectively authenticate or condemn Charlie of their own accord.
Glenn Dallaire
Host of MysticsOfTheChurch.com
“Let those who have ears, hear; let those who have eyes, see” One does not have to be a rocket scientist to recognize that what is happening all over the world has allot in common with Charlie’s warnings. It is imperative to also know that “prayer changes things”...and so…take it for what it is worth. ANYONE who does NOT believe in the “end times” is living outside of reality. The end times are real - for you - and for me. We’re NOT going to live forever and if Charlie’s writings can give us the “spark” that we need to ‘at least’ fear the Lord a bit…than I think it’s great!!! “Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom”...and upon ‘growing’ to know the Lord that we ALL should at least ‘respect’...there is no need to fear…because God is in fact - LOVE!!!
Patti Armstrong - You are completely wrong when you accuse Charlie Johnston of predicting that the government was about to throw all conservative Christians in concentration camps. He never said any such thing. If you read his piece on this, it is clear that he is just doing some thinking about how such a thing could happen, if the governemnt were to decide to do such a thing - which it is clear from his piece that he does not think any such thing would happen. Apparently some far, far out people were talking about such things, and he points out they were pretty far out there. He then thinks about how such a thing could happen, if at all. It was NOT a prediction at all.
By the way, I don’t know what to think about Charlie Johnston. He may be a complete fraud for all I know. But I think you owe him an apology on that one point.
This is the way I see it at this point. Obrien says Charlie is lying or stretching the truth on several topics and Charlie says no.
1) Charlie says that Obrien stated in a post ( but then removed) that Charlie was raising money and there was a donation button… Obrien says no statements like that were ever made in his post…
Can the Register determine if Obrien’s “original” post ever contained those statements ?
2) Charlie says that Obrien stated in a post that Charlie only walked a few hundred miles and later changed it to 1700 miles… again Obrien says he never did such a thing—write the he is willing to give Charlie credit for around 1700 miles estimation.. can the register investigate this ?
Would you say the same thing about Mother Angelica’s locutions? How about her concern for the immanent chastisement where she stockpiled goods? Hmmm.
Not sure how anyone could be “confused” by what Carlie Johnston has said or written. The ones who are running away from him seem to be more concerned for a loss of their “reputation” (and therefore a loss of revenue…always follow the money) by even listening to what he has to say. His prophecies are nothing more than what has bee prophesied before You know, visions like FATIMA, AKITA, etc. All approved. Yet his are “time stamped” with an urgency. Weren’t Our Lady’s urgent as well?
So, this is a Chicken Little approach to a good man who is following the promptings of Our Lord, Our Lady and the angels. He wasn’t condemned, he wasn’t accused of error, Abp Aquila simply urges caution. Sounds like common sense to me.
For any interested faithful in the Central Florida area, I am coordinating a talk by Charlie Johnston on May 20, 2016, in Sebring, Florida. Please email me for information. This is one sure way to hear with your own ears (and hearts) what Charlie is saying. Make a decision based on fact and first-hand knowledge. There is absolutely no cost to anyone and nobody passes a hat for a donation. It is FREE. Please make a decision about Charlie after hearing his words. To acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope to the world: what exactly could be wrong with that? If we all lived our lives that way, God would not be taking us to task right now. Please come and listen and learn. There is nothing to be added to the deposit of faith but sometimes a little reminder of Who is in charge can relieve the burden of fear. Thanks, Charlie, for the message of hope!
We’ll find out soon enough if he’s a fake or authentic, right? I’ve read where he said the current President will not finish his term as president, and that the next leader of the USA will not be elected, i.e., he will not come through the normal political process.
Here in Minnesota some years back, we had a supposed locutionist named “Little Mary” who offered messages she was allegedly receiving from the Blessed Mother at Epiphany Church in Coon Rapids. When John Neinstedt became Archbishop, he asked he to stop this, and he also requested she stop publishing the messages on the simply website others maintained for her. She did so instantly out of obedience and retreated.
This was a straightforward ban.
Charlie’s bishop has simply asked him to avoid speaking on church property. After investigating him, reading and studying everything he has written and said since 1998—as well as interviewing him personally—he simply asserted a stance of neutrality. Had he found anything worrisome or contrary to Church teaching, he would have silenced him, but Charlie remains free to speak and write and fight for our beloved and suffering Church.
This article should be amended, and the negative tilt quieted down. It remains to be seen whether the Holy Spirit has indeed breathed on Charlie Johnston, and I think it is reasonable to hope that the Register assume the same “wait and see” neutrality Charlie’s bishop has taken.
A man who urges prayer, acknowledging God, and being a light to others can’t be harmful, nor can a man who fights for Eucharistic processions and public causes like Dan Daleiden. Charlie to me evokes G.K. Chesterton, and both writers were hardly secretive about their human weaknesses and failings.
May 1, 2016, Perhaps his ‘revelations/predictions’ may be on target; we’ll see if the November elections are canceled. However, this “I am enjoying letting the sourpusses expose themselves for lacking the most basic knowledge of ‘Churchspeak.’” ...makes him seem pretty arrogant “sourpusses and Churchspeak”...that alone would make me cautious.
“For the Lord God doth nothing without revealing His secret to His servants to prophets.” Amos 3:7 Pray for the Gift of discernment. Mine tells me that Charlie is a prophet of God. God’s Will be done.
Perhaps, Ms. Armstrong and Mr. O’Brien would do well to visit the Catechism of the Catholic Church and its section on the Eighth Commandment.
2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.280
2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.
The questionable overall tone of this article and some of the sources it utilizes would not surprise me if this were a secular publication, but it’s not. And I expect higher standards from one that purports to be Catholic.
As someone who has never heard of Charlie Johnston until this article, I
found it to be fair. Praise God that we have a Faith that challenges and
seeks truth in all private revelations. These are pretty intense times to
be living in. But in all matters spiritual seek Christ first. Place the
Sacaraments and the Holy Mass first. Spend an hour in front of the Holy
Eucharist first. Our Lord has made Himself so accessible to us in this life yet we are like children drawn to every outside attraction or word
waiting for our marching orders. As with St. Faustina or the children of
Fatima every soul who is given a private revelation has had to endure
many trials while in this life. What revealed their authenticity was their
willingness to submit to Church Officials even when treated unfairly. In
God’s time truth always shines. Let us all trust in our Lord’s goodness
to lead us during these difficult times.
I have known Charlie Johnston for over fifteen years, way before he said anything about his visitations. I met him while he was a political consultant who had a name for being an excellent speaker, tactician, and while tough…fair. I will always remember the day he related to me his visitations, I was shocked as the Charlie I know has his feet firmly planted on the ground. As he spoke, I realized a couple of things. First and foremost, Charlie is very sincere in his story. He is not making this up, he truly believes it. Second, Charlie has great courage and while he suffers greatly with his task of relating what he firmly believes is being led to say, he does so without shame.
I read what the Archbishop of the Denver Diocese wrote, it is a legalistic, public relations type document. The Archbishop can no more say that Charlie has not had these visitations than he can say Jesus Christ will return tomorrow. So, he couched his language in a way that brings doubt to Mr. Johnston without any evidence to support that doubt.
One cannot help but wonder what the good Archbishop would say to Jesus if he walked into his Parish in jeans and sweatshirt…
I understand prudence is necessary and important, but Acquila has to know that then there would be articles like this one which are not much more than misguided attacks on a good man.
My comfort zone regarding Charlie’s visitations is to understand that he sincerely believes they have occurred, that all he has told me and that I have read do not conflict with the Bible, indeed if they had the Archbishop would have called him out on it. Charlie is clear about the difficulty in interpretation sometimes and has had a couple of mistakes, but not in theological matters.
Finally, I am truly surprised to see an article so poorly researched and written being published in The Catholic Register. I had thought of this publication as a high standard Catholic journalistic publication. We all make mistakes, and I believe publishing this article is a mistake and a disservice to your readers.
I do understand the need for discernment when reading or following alledged visionaries or prophecy. That is why approved apparitions at Fatima, Lourdes and other places proceeded with caution. But God is still acting today. Prophecy has not ceased. It is a charism given to the church and her people. We are told to judge by their fruits.
I would encourage the faithful to think about the main message of Mr. Johnston, “Acknowledge God, Do the Next right step, and be a sign of hope to those around you.” If we do those things, can any serious Catholic believe that these actions are harmful for anyone? Yes, some of the statements made by Charlie Johnston about what is coming are upsetting, but can we all not see the utter chaos and disfunction around us? Can anyone spell Target?
Be careful not to toss out the baby with the bath water. May the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary come, and may our world be renewed so that once again God will be the center of our lives.
Kevin O’Brien is correct that I did not contact him directly. Rather, I wrote this comment: https://charliej373.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/live-it/comment-page-2/#comment-28879 on September 3, 2015, the day after his toxic article appeared, correcting him on his assertion that I was raising millions through my “donation” button that does not and never has existed - and correcting him on his assertion that I walked, at most, a few hundred miles. That comment was attached to this post, entitled “Live it.”: https://charliej373.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/live-it/ Shortly after this comment appeared, O’Brien edited out the “raising millions” part and started upping his estimate of how many miles I walked, probably after realizing that the archive still remained up on Facebook and anyone with a little enterprise could check and see that he was dead wrong.
I know research is hard, but the Register in this article just took this critic at face value, didn’t check his work, nor contact me so I could have provided this stuff to begin with so you would not make such flagrant errors.
Several people who told me Ms. Armstrong was calling told me she candidly told them she intended to do a negative piece. Mission accomplished. Too bad your goal was not to get an accurate piece.
I know research is hard, but you had about a mon
What happened ts32to my previous post???just made!!!
Thank you Patty for this article. Thank you Archbishop Aquila, you are a wonderful Shepherd. We need your clear guidance on people that scare us with so called ‘prophecy’ Remember this gem of Charlie’s…Christmas of 2013 will be the LAST NORMAL CHRISTMAS.
For those who asked why I did not interview Charlie, it is because he had publicly and extensively expressed his reaction to Archbishop Aquila’s report. I quoted that. This article was about the report and what has followed. Many of his followers are displeased because there are negative reactions in this story.
Consider: I encountered several ex-followers with very negative opinions which I did NOT include. Thus, I also did not include current followers. I went to Radio stations where Charlie had been invited previously. They explained he is no longer welcomed there due to Archbishop Aquila’s report. I contacted bishops who either said no comment at this time or made a statement (both were negative) which I included. I called a Church where Charlie spoke and recorded a video last summer, and a Church employee gave me a negative reaction and said the pastor would unlikely have him back now due to the report, but I did not include that. I went to the Miracle Hunter who specializes in the topic of apparitions and gave his reaction. I followed up with the bishop Charlie publicly said supported him and discovered the retired bishop had nothing to do with his messages but supported him for his enthusiasm for the faith—which I reported. I contacted people that had been friendly to Charlie previously, and included ONE person who had already come out against him. Kevin O’Brien is the only previous critic that I contacted—one critic compared to several past supporters is hardly slanted against Charlie. Kevin has screen shots of Charlie’s FB posts to support what he has said regarding Charlie’s claim to have walked 3,200 miles across the country so I included him as a credible source. Charlie claimed in the comments under this article, that he had sent Kevin many corrections to errors in Kevin’s blog. Kevin has said he never received them and asked Charlie to produce the proof of those contacts.
The opening paragraph expressed some positive thoughts from Charlie. Later in the article, I reported that last year, he wrote a 2-part post “Watcha Gonna Do When They Come for You?” of the federal government coming to round people up into camps. Five months later he said the danger had passed. Someone in the comments said that wasn’t true so I supplied the exact quotes.
I realize that Charlie and his followers would want something not critical and even promoting him, but the story centers around the Archdiocese of Denver denying him permission to speak on Church property and the results. I expected that this article would not be well received by supporters. Since Charlie has predicted Obama will not finish his term and there will be no elections, we will know soon enough if those prophecies were correct. In the meantime, we should be living our lives as if today could be our last day regardless of where we stand on Charlie.
The article sites 3 Bishops who will not have Charlie present in church owned properties and provided their quotes. The article also quotes Bishop Gracida,Patrick Madrid, Father Mitch Pacwa, and the Chancelor of Denver. All of these esteemed individuals encourage caution with alleged visions.
Yet Charlie’s loyal followers attack the article and it’s author as unfairly negative. Their comments focus on a blogger named OBrien with no mention of the individuals noted above. Why?
Personally, having read him for 2 months, I think he is a egotistical fraud who deceives gullible Catholics. If one believes Charlie, Gabriel speaks more to him than the Blessed Mother.
Very disappointed in National Catholic Register and Ms. Armstrong’s ragged journalism. This article had a negative tone with several inaccuracies. It didn’t read like an unbiased article on Mr. Johnston, but seemed to use the National Catholic Register as a platform to express Ms. Armstrong’s own personal qualms with Charlie Johnston. We read and hear this happening all the time in the secular media where journalists will take comments made by people and twist them around to fit their own agenda. I’m only sorry to see this happen, with this article, in the National Catholic Register.
Today’s reading at today’s Mass from the holy Gospel according to John 15:18-21,
Jesus said to his disciples: “If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you. ‘No slave is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you’.
It’s difficult to take this post seriously when it contains links to another blogger whose piece is filled with vitriol and carries such a spiteful edge to it. Very hard to take a post like that with anything more than a grain of salt. I quickly found myself doubting Mr. Obrien’s supposed concern for the “ton of Devout Catholics who, for whatever sick reason, ARE ACTUALLY BELIEVING HIM!” Perhaps I could share with you and Mr. Obrien a few of the “sick” reasons why many Catholics, including this one, ARE listening to what Charlie Johnston has to say:
The picture posts like these paint of a “prideful man unwilling to submit to the Archdiocese of Denver” is false and extremely biased. If Charlie Johnston should remove his website since the archdiocese DID NOT ask him to then it goes without saying that every other blogger in the Archdiocese of Denver should also remove their sites. You know, because the archdiocese DID NOT ask them to.
We should, at the very minimum, acknowledge that Charlie Johnston is a good man and I think a lot of people see this goodness. That he spearheaded the effort to prevent a young boy from becoming the next Terri Schiavo gives us a clearer picture of who he is than what I’ve read here. While this certainly doesn’t “prove” that Charlie’s messages are true, it tells us that there is more to the man than meets the eye and gives us a bit of a glimpse into his heart. He is a strong proponent of putting “words into action” and doing the right thing, rather than simply talking about doing the right thing and melting in our own private puddles of hypocrisy. There’s a lot to be commended in both his words AND his actions. There is also something quite profound (and beautiful in its simplicity) in his words explaining “the next right step”. He writes a lot about this and I have a feeling this resonates in the hearts of many of his readers.
I’m not sure why Mr. Obrien finds it necessary to be the arbitrator of every word that Charlie Johnston speaks, nor do I understand why he feels it is his job to make sure others abide by his personal “opinion” of the situation, which is an “opinion” only until the Church says otherwise. He also might want to put aside his animosity and have a dialogue with his fellow Catholics rather than continue these monologues that have no substance and discount all opinions except for his own. He may surprised, we just may be “saner” than he thinks.
But wait, I forgot that Mr. Obrien has appointed himself as the arbitrator of “all things sane” as well and his is a one man soapbox. I don’t quibble with your or Mr. Obrien’s thoughts on Charlie Johnston - you have the right to come to your own conclusions. My concern is that there is a misrepresentation of the facts that led to these conclusions. Charity obliges us to check our facts before we malign another person. I don’t think you have done this here.
I want to thank Charlie Johnston for all his service to our Lord. I take heart in his message during this time of social unraveling, and I am grateful for the peace and courage I’ve gained from his insights.
I work in the software field.
Charlie says that Kevin O’Brien’s blog post initially claimed that TheNextRightStep website had a donations button, but that after Charlie contacted Kevin the reference to the donations button was removed.
I believe that the blog post in question is titled: “Is Sasquatch the Antichrist? -or- The Temptation to Believe Nonsense.” If so, the URL for that post is:
http://thwordinc.blogspot.com/2015/09/is-sasquatch-antichrist-or-temptation.html
Folks who don’t work in the computer business may not be aware of something called “The Wayback Machine” found at:
This is a BIG database that crawls the Internet and periodically archives pretty much every webpage that exists. This allows you to contrast a webpage at different points in time and see whether content has changed, i.e., been added or removed.
Anyone who might be interested can perform the following exercise…
Go to https://archive.org/web/
Next, paste in the following URL:
http://thwordinc.blogspot.com/2015/09/is-sasquatch-antichrist-or-temptation.html
You’ll see that this particular blog post of Kevin was backed up exactly three times between September 7, 2015 and March 3, 2016:
9/7/2015
9/18/2015
3/3/2016
You’ll have to look around a bit but you should eventually find the link (in the calendar) to the backup that was taken on 9/7/2015. For your convenience, I’ll provide that link here:
As you’ll see, the word ‘button’ does not appear in the backup that was taken on 9/7/2015.
Does that prove that Charlie is not correct about the donations button? Not really. Remember, this blog post was published on 9/2/2015. So it’s certainly possible that the post on 9/2/2015 referenced a donation button. However if it did it would had to have been almost immediately removed because the archive (snapshot) just 4 days later on 9/7/2015 references no such donation button.
Visions of GOD? HIS holy Queen Mother? Angels? Tee, hee, hee.
Who needs blind human visions and messages when the TRINITY dwells within the body, soul and heart of HIS Chosen Ones. Is there anything greater or more glorious than KNOWING this simple eternal truth? Yes. The Cross.
I have been following Charlie for about 6 months now. I’ve been reading his website and have viewed just about all of his videos. I find him to be down to earth. His message is serious for sure and upsetting, which has prompted a lot of vocal support and condemnation. I think this is normal. I neither endorse or condemn him. I don’t believe anyone can dictate how God should or would intervene in human affairs. When we do that, we put God in a box. I’ve done that in the past and have always been proven wrong.
I take what Charlie says seriously, because it is a serious matter of what he speaks about, but with caution. I’m not stockpiling weapons or food, both of which Charlie speaks out against. I trust in God, to the best of my ability, and will take one day at a time. If his prophecies come to pass and we are miraculously saved by Our Lady in late 2017 we’ll know for sure that what he speaks of is true. If it doesn’t, then we know that he is a false prophet. It is pretty black and white to me on that count.
Jesus, the greatest social scientist of all time, the Promised King to many, stood up against the evil leaders, both religious and government, and was nailed to the cross to shut him up. Jesus stood up against the pit of vipers, he turned over the money changers tables, and called them out..
For we are to see the face of Jesus in all,, but the bigger question, do they see the face of Jesus in US?
Being a thought provoking individual, challenging people to think, is a great gift. Thanks Mr. Johnson, you as Jesus Christ make US think, Einstein said, Imagination is more important than Knowledge, for from Imagination comes all Knowledge. Being indifferent to others though, is a grave sin, as is judging others,,
I took a journalism course and ended up being a page editor of a small newspaper . One thing we were ALWAYS told to do when writing an article about someone was, NEVER do an article on hearsay only, ALWAYS get information from the horses mouth! Back in the day,you could listen to the news or read the newspaper and feel that you were getting the truth. Today, it is as one EWTN radio personality said, “You are getting the Media’s agenda.”
I have come to expect more from The Catholic Register. As Jesus once said, “To whom much is given, much will be required”. (Luke 12:48)
I like NCR, but I am very disappointed in this article. It has a negative, rather than objective tone, and has several inaccuracies. I’m wondering why Armstrong did not take the time to interview Mr. Johnston and present a more balanced article about what he says and does? Is she interested in presenting the truth or is she more interested in expressing her own opinion?
The Catechism:
2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.
I am very disappointed in you Ms Armstrong. I usually love your writing. I was with you and understood your caution until the middle of the piece where you start talking about reaction and concentration camps. What garbage. It is completely shameful.
Why would you stoop so low. Obviously, in a few clicks people can simply go to his website and read what he actually said as opposed to this. I think the National Catholic Register needs to reprimand you.
It is one thing to not believe and we are not required and I can respect that. But to lie and defame when the truth can easily be read at the source. Shameful. Why would you do that?
Charlie Johnston is lying about having contacted me, which he never did. I go into detail here - http://thwordinc.blogspot.com/2016/04/charlie-johnston-lies-about-me-and-i.html
Humility is a hallmark of visionaries The Church has approved. To my knowledge none were prone to defending
tthemselves agInst sceptics, following the example of our Lord, who “opened not His mouth.” The Register is to be commended for cautioning its readers, so as to help them avoid that which could possibly prove to be a delusion, as with so many others. Thank you Patti Armstrong and The Register.
Patti, why didn’t you interview Charlie for this article?
We all know the world has been in chaos and it is only getting worse. We know that in our own experiences, and from approved Marian apparitions. I’m not sure what Charlie Johnson’s “visions” add to it. But to me when a bishop, actually three and maybe more bishops, refuse to let him speak in their dioceses - and they caution us about him, then that should tell us that this is something to not really pay attention to. Maybe in the future that could change, but why waste your time now? I would rather learn more about Fatima, Akita, etc.
Another big red flag for me is the obedience issue. Authentic visionaries and saints accept what the Church proclaims and obey it. They don’t go off and pretend the bishop was complementing them and persist in doing what they want.
Charlie,keeping up on this and responding appropriately is admirable.To be quite honest here I was surprised to see this story is still circulating.Peace
This is a well-researched and thought out piece. I read Charlie’s blog for a short time beginning in late 2014. I started to question what was going on after his Christmas prophecy didn’t pan out and the two part article about Jade Helm that didn’t match up with his next right step (Trust Do Love) slogan. He caused a lot of fear and anxiety, even though he claims his message doesn’t. I think it’s far better to stick with messages and devotions (like the Divine Mercy) that are already Church approved. You really don’t know who (or what) you’re following if it isn’t.
Thank-you Patrick for your response here on this subject.I had heard some of your interview on the radio with Charlie ,then came ,the article and Bishop Aquilas decision to be cautious and prudent.Your comment here seems. To be the same that you gave to a concerned caller.God Bless
Dear Anne,
I know there are a ton of people out there who claim to receive messages from Heaven and understand why we should all be cautious and stick to the barque of Peter.
However, I’m wondering:
1. Why would you use an unknown like Kevin O’Brien (Theater of the World blogger) as a source, especially since he’s now made corrections in his claims.
2. Why didn’t you interview Mr. Johnston?
3. Are there any American dioceses that allow visionaries to speak publicly on church property before they’ve been thoroughly investigated over a long period of time?
4. Why didn’t you clarify the distinctions Mr. Johnston makes between
a. what he claims he has been told by heavenly messengers to proclaim publicly as true (only 1 or 2 things, I think) and
b.his own private speculations and comments based on his knowledge of the history, current events and politics?
I think it would be great if you could follow-up this article with an interview with Mr. Johnston, not only addressing the points he has brought up in his comment here, but also the criticisms others have of him.
Many thanks,
Michaela
It’s unfortunate that a solid publication like the Register would print a piece in which the author did not interview, correction, even attempt to interview Mr. Johnston. It seems a bit dishonest as a journalist to claim that by interviewing him it would give him credence (I’m presuming from the flavor of this article that would be the excuse), but be glad to write a piece that discredits him. Either way, it doesn’t take a Charlie Johnston to see where our world is heading and I think it better that the faithful stick together at a time like this. Acknowledging God, taking the next write step, and being a sign of hope sounds like a good idea to me.
Charlie Johnston is a faithful son of the Church and a good man. I heard him speak in person. He doesn’t sell books or CDs and doesn’t take up a collection. He has a very simple message: acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a source of hope to others around you. If his predictions do not materialize, no one is hurt by following Charlie’s advice. In fact, it’s excellent spiritual counsel. I don’t know why people are on a mission to discredit him. I suggest that Patti Maguire Armstrong contact Charlie and dialogue with him.
I wish a reputed site like yours would get your facts before posting an article. Your allegations are false and it would have been better if you had contacted Charlie before making such false statements.
I wonder if you got a chance to read his article—-
http://hsiweb.org/index.php/sermons/videos/aneel-aranha/item/2767-faith-power
Why did you not contact Charlie personally and ask him the questions you brought up about him? Did you contact the diocese to see if he is banned as you implied? I am not defending Charlie one way or the other but I feel your article is false journalism especially since the person you are defaming was never contacted.I feel you owe him an interview and then publish exactly what he says and not twist facts.
I’m very glad to see that other bishops are supporting the decision of Archbishop Aquila and the clarification by Bishop Garcia that he does not support any of Mr. Johnston’s private revelations.
I’m also glad to see Relevant Radio pulling the interview and the statement by Fr. Pacwa that he was not endorsing Mr. Johnston.
Mr. Johnston has identified himself as a “sherpa” to guide us through these times; however, the Church is our guide and has always been, not Mr. Johnston.
Thank you for the updated report. It is important that the faithful to obey the directives of the Archbishop of Denver and support his decision.
Talk about a click-bait, quasi-calumnious headline; phrased to imply that Charlie is contradicting the directives of the Arichbishop, whereas in reality he is exercising absolute obedience to them.
Calumny, Ms. Armstrong, even of the subtle kind that this headline promotes, makes its issuer guilty of the same sin that the falsely accused did not commit.
Great article Patti. I thought you were very fair. We have plenty in our own churches through our priests and faithful to guide us where we need to be. We also have the Bible which God, himself speaks to all of us. Charlie is getting to be known as a prophet who changes what he says as he needs to, to stay relevant. The Catholics who follow him need to go back to their churches and follow the priests and bishops who are always there to lead the faithful with correct information. Charlie’s diosese has spoken loud and clear for all to hear and we don’t need Charlie’s take on it. It was what they didn’t say that was the most important. I have a feeling that the more he says, the more he will make mistakes and people will be able to judge for themselves. To those who think he is a harmless older gentleman, be very careful. Even though he shows himself to be a devoted Catholic, that is great, but a man who lies about such things can actually be a pawn of the devil. The Bible says there will be many false prophets. Satan is very sneaky and clever and can lead anyone astray if they stray away from the church and follow a man instead. All I ask is careful consideration. For me, I don’t go to his site anymore on the advice of my parish priest. He has warned me away from Charlie and his followers. I go to church, take sacraments and pray with the faithful there as it should be. All of Charlie’s followers should do the same.
Patti,
Whats the point of this article? So we have “prudence and caution regarding Johnston’s unsubstantiated claims and prophecies.”
Charlie Johnston has never written to me asking me to correct errors in my article that demonstrated the inconsistencies in his claim to have walked across the country. I have never heard from him, and if he sent an email that I never got, he is welcome to resend it. I will be happy to correct any errors in the article to which Charlie is referring - http://thwordinc.blogspot.com/2015/09/is-sasquatch-antichrist-or-temptation.html .
But there are no errors, and Charlie never contacted me.
I’ve been reading Charlie’s blog for almost two years and I find many good things for spiritual reflection. Though he has made some predictions he does not emphasize those. Instead he often says it’s not important to know what’s going to happen, but to know how to act no matter what happens. Reading his blog leaves me with a sense of peace, not of fear or worry. The message is to trust in Jesus no matter what happens.
I agree with Kevin O’Brien’s assessment.
While the article may be overly negative, quite frankly Charlie Johnson’s comment above doesn’t sound much like something the holy visionaries of the Church would have said. Saints are not defenders of themselves; they bore criticisms meekly, even accepting it as God’s will when their visions WERE suppressed and banned (St Faustina’s circumstances come to mind), which, apparently, Mr. Johnson’s were not. God will vindicate those whom He chooses. Mr. Johnson said God loves the ordinary. Visionaries themselves are not “ordinary”. God seldom speaks openly to anyone, and when He does, He chooses those in the most lowly social positions - which Mr. Johnson, as a political consultant, former radio host and newspaper editor, is not. And even if the article should turn out to be overly negative, I don’t see how it could be “promoting fear”. Many people like to follow the sensational. They need correction: it’s one of the spiritual works of mercy.
Thanks, Patrick, we will make that clarification.
Matthew: You said: “Your allegation that Charlie Johnston prophesied that Christians would be rounded up into concentration camps is ABSOLUTELY FALSE.” I disagree.
April 2015 Charlie wrote a 2-part on what to do when “they” come for us. He went into great detail explaining the federal government would create a false emergency as an excuse to round us up—first, the obvious troublemakers and then including conservative Christians. He advised people to escape right away and not fall for the ruse that the government was just putting us into protective custody. Advice also included how to lay low until we could escape.
Five months later, a commenter asked who would be rounded up? Charlie responded: “When I wrote that piece, it was in response to a lot of cock-eyed thinking on some survival sites that had seeped into some Christian sites. Serious Christians would be a primary target, but not the only target. In any case, that danger is largely over. The powers that be have already squandered their moral authority even as their egos continue to inflate. If they tried something like this now they would immediately be met with large-scale resistance in nearly every corner of the country.”
The article does seem a little overly negative; it reads like a hit piece. I imagine one could express one’s difference of opinion without seeming to endorse a witch hunt censorship. The Register must do its best to refrain from promoting fear among Catholics.
As it stands there was nothing in the article that cited specific calls for action on the part of Johnston that would drag the faithful away from their Catholic life. I hope his recognition of Obama as a very dark and sinister presence in our White House was not sufficient reason for censure.
Angels supposedly talked to Muhammed and Joseph Smith.
Ms. Armstrong:
Your allegation that Charlie Johnston prophesied that Christians would be rounded up into concentration camps is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. If you read his blog carefully, he did discuss this as a possible future but regarded it as unlikely. Even when discussing this he was clear that this was his personal speculation and NOT a prophecy. Whatever you think of Charlie Johnston and his message I think it should be based on facts and not on misunderstandings and falsehoods regarding what he wrote.
Matthew
I have NOT been banned in the Archdiocese of Denver. I have been directed not to use Church property for a venue for a presentation. I was assured by committee that I am free to give presentations in the Archdiocese of Denver so long as it is not on Church property. This wrongly insinuates I am disobedient to my Archbishop, which I am not. I had people ready to edit my site to comply with any content restrictions, but there are none.
I am surprised that Ms. Armstrong used Kevin O’Brien’s smear regarding my pilgrimage. There were literally thousands of contemporaneous witnesses to that pilgrimage, following me online…both people I met along my way and people I already knew. O’Brien wrote a ton of errors in his first piece, including that I was raising millions of dollars through the “donation” button at my site. The first few days, I sent him several corrections and proof - including that I have NEVER had a donation button at my site. He kept adjusting the article, without noting that he had corrected the previous smear.
In any case, this article is not nearly as bad as I had originally been warned it would be. I do wish you would correct it to show I am absolutely obedient to my Archbishop, for that is the fact.
One quick clarification and a small correction:
1) My comment, “As Archbishop Aquila has so wisely advised, the danger is that people can get off course,” refers to any of the faithful who, by following unapproved, alleged apparitions, seers, etc., can veer off course spiritually and theologically. I was not passing judgment on or making a theological evaluation of Charlie Johnson’s message. That, of course, is matter for Archbishop Aquila to decide.
2) Also, I was an EWTN radio host for several years, but have been a host on Immaculate Heart Radio since late 2012.
The bishop is saying to exercise prudence and caution, which is good advice. He didn’t say Charlie’s claims are false. I think the author of this article is putting a negative spin on this. Kevin O’Brien’s claims fail to take into account the details about his pilgrimage that Charlie fully explained on his blog.
The bishop didn’t forbid Charlie to speak, only restricted it to not speaking on Church property. That’s prudent, but doesn’t mean Charlie is a fraud. I think he’s right on target with his message.