Yes, I grow more concerned. Thousands and thousands, tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of the Faithful are affected by this. Much prayer needed.
Charlie has long boasted about his three spiritual directors, and how they are keeping archives to be used after events occur. He certainly has used the word "vetted" when talking about his messages. "Vetted" turns up in descriptions of his messages elsewhere. Yet if his priests don't read his posts ahead of time, and they claim no responsibility, hasn't Charlie been lying to everyone? From the Billings, MT newspaper: Speaker to share visions given to him by God Gazette Staff Aug 31, 2016 Charlie Johnston, a Denver man who says he has received prophetic visitations all his life, will speak Friday in Billings. Johnston's free talk will begin at 6 p.m. at the Elks Club, 934 Lewis Ave. Johnston is a former newspaper editor, radio talk show host and political consultant. The converted Catholic says he has received prophetic visitations, which he has vetted through a trio of Catholic priests over the past 20 years. Over 18 months in 2011 and 2012, he walked 3,200 miles across the United States, sleeping in the woods, meeting people and praying as he went. He will speak about his ministry during his talk in Billings.
Just my take on Charlie. I don't think he is a 'false prophet', whether or not the Obama's ordeal comes to fruition. I have no doubt Charlie has had visitation/messages from heaven as he has said. I simply feel he has not necessarily been given the gift of discernment as it pertains to his alleged messages. He see's outcomes and events, which may or may not be exactly as he formulates them in his own mind. If this makes him a "false prophet", then many would be the same boat, because many have anticipated prophecies and events to have already taken place, based only on what we read and discern. Putting specific dates/time tables on any prophecy can be an achilles heel and most messengers have not done as much. Most prophecies have indicated we are in the season of historical changes within the Church and the world. Charlie simply likes attention and dialog and this may have not fare well in the end for his legacy.
Interesting comment yesterday at Mystics of the Church. Glenn Dellaire asked his readers to discern this past statement (below) Charlie claims he was told directly by his visitors that this was the case -- that his interpretation would be cherished in ages to come. There's no wiggle room in that claim, no grey area of interpretation. Charlie's followers apparently had no issue with the claim at the time. What makes people accept statements like this at face value? And how will those who blithely accept whatever Charlie tells them deal with the aftermath when (I'm not in the "if" category) he is proven false? Glenn Dallaire said... Here is another matter for discernment that has not been mentioned in the comments thus far: From Charlie's post entitled "The Third Secret of Fatima" of a letter he wrote to his priest spiritual director concerning his own interpretation of the 3rd Fatima Secret: "...In that letter, I gave him my interpretation of the secret, written on June 28, 2000.....I was told by my heavenly visitors that in future ages, it would become one of the most cherished and important documents in Church history. (That caused me to write an additional copy for each of the priests in my own hand.) Th article itself is located here: https://charliej373.wordpress.com/2014/08/06/the-third-secret-of-fatima/ January 16, 2017 at 6:27 PM
This is getting seriously creepy. Add this very troubling statement about his interpretation of the 3rd secret to the fact that he is not in fact "vetted" by the three priests of Opus Dei and you get some disturbing off notes sounding. I feel sorry for the very sincere and devout people who have followed this with such devotion. I followed his blog for a few years sort of in and out off and on trying to keep a perspective on it, uneasy about some of his statements but not wanting to wholly write him off. The Archbishop's letter sort of sealed it for me. I know there was a great hue and cry about it not being a condemnation and it wasn't as such, but it was a warning and I take the Archbishop's warnings very seriously. We are warned in scripture about "angels of light" and that is not an idle warning.
I'm still on the fence about Charlie Johnston (whoever started the thread forgot the t ). Sometimes I think he might be right, others I think he's probably a narcissist. At any rate, we'll know soon enough. My brother is going to the inauguration so I'm requesting prayers for his safety. That spirit of foreboding is everywhere.
I just keep thinking of St Joan of Arc. Charlie has never gone against the magisterium. He is a devoted Catholic. It's very different from the rest of the bogus seers. His interpretation may have gone haywire, but I'm just happy he was right about Clinton and Bernie.
If you were on the fence, you didn't fall for it. If you did, you can't claim to have been on the fence.
*sigh* "I can't believe that I considered objectively for an extended period of time whether the truth value of this man's prognostications may or may not have been false as opposed to an immediate condemnatory reaction. All parties involved should disengage from superciliousness towards those who were credulent of the aforementioned's website and proceed with respect." Was that better?
I think a number of us were initially convinced by Charlie, or took him seriously anyway. I agree that I feel a bit of a chump now and will exercise more caution in future.
I'd bet a few quid that many of us on this forum at one time or another were open to the possibility of Charlie's authenticity. He positioned himself well. Getting the initial nod from Mark Mallett way back in August 2014 was the catalyst for Charlie's rise to fame. For this past 12 months at least Mark has distanced himself from Charlie and for those reading Marks stuff for years that was a wake up call that all is not right with the "new abraham" over in TNRS.
Maybe it's just me. Maybe it's my tendency to believe people or maybe I'm holding on too tight, but I'm just not ready to give up on Charlie yet. Oh yes I agree it's bottom of the ninth and the other team is up by double digits, a lot of the stadium is emptying out but I'd like to see the last inning play out. Who knows, I sure don't, but I'm not ready to call the game until the last out. Regardless, we will see how this plays out on Friday. Until then it is all speculation, though some of it very valid, no man knows the future unless it be revealed to him by God and then only what the Lord has given him to know!
Nobody should feel embarrassed for believing Charlie. His predictions, although now looking very likely, but not certainly, untenable, were always plausible and certainly represented a possible future. The following are the current possibilities, in my opinion: 1). He is right. Increasingly looks unlikely. 2). He received a malevolent vision which he innocently mistook for truth. 3). He misinterpreted a valid vision. 4). He is a charlatan. I think this also unlikely. I consider that Charlie is well-intentioned, whatever the outcome, thus I'm discounting possibility number four. While I was never convinced enough of his prophesies to change my lifestyle, I always found them intriguing and plausible. I also found those of his writings that I encountered acceptably orthodox and often quite edifying. I am glad I came across him. Indeed, his website led me here.
Yes, and Mark made an effort to have people become clear about his own interpretations of the shared topics about which he and Charlie were each offering commentary and where they differ. After Mark's column about those differences Charlie reacted in a way that I interpreted as an attempt that would prevent anyone from thinking such clarifications were of much importance. That reaction added unnecessarily to what was an objective review and made him look rather defensive. And I think Mark's only regrets are that he didn't make those differing interpretations earlier so that those following him might not have possibly been led the wrong way due to his original mention of Charlie. People were also led to Charlie's site by Spirit Daily and their covering of him as well. Now Spirit Daily is offering more links about just what will this Charlie person who was originally covered rather openly by them do next? What will be interesting to see will be the reaction of all the loyal followers/commenters on Charlie's site who backed his opinion so anxiously when it came to the messages of LTTW when one basic portion did not come to pass. Charlie has labeled such "followers" of LTTW and other contemporary "messengers" whom he deems in error as "vain" and proud for continuing in their defenses of such due to their former attachment!!
Charlie lacks humility. He has already conveyed many prophetic statements that have been 100% false. He has never offered an explanation or offered a sorry ever. (seriously, I searched) This is what is conveyed to me when reading.......When I was a news editor I was right about this, when I was a political adviser I was right about that....now I am called by God, and surely I'm going to be right about this too. I don't think he is malicious at all. Admitting he was wrong would instantly call into question who or what the source of these voices is/are. He pride is allowing the building up of this house of cards he is creating. And pride comes before the fall. Promptings of the holy spirit are one thing but actual messages should go through a priest or even a bishop before being released to anyone and only if approved by the church. Charlie doesn't do this. In this day of instant communication it's a crackpots haven so you have to raise the caution flag when you see other people being influenced. Some highly intelligent people do hear voices and often they aren't good or bad spirits, simply mental illness. I'm not saying CJ has anything like this but I know people very similar that do.
I just watched the video 365 names of God....................................in awe! And...................................................................................................I cryed! And..............................................................................I gained strength! And ...........................................................................I was humbled! Thank you! I'm going to listen again and write all these names down! Hopefully, I'll be able to Love and offer a special worship to God, by especially venerating a different one of His names each day throughout the year! This should be offered for a special intention, I think! Does anyone have any ideas? I will pray about this! I know....... St Rose of Lima used to venerate God, by offering and acclaiming (privately) a different name attributed to God (in Holy Scripture) each time she applied the needle to her embroidery! Just a little thing but so beautiful! I think !
That reminds me of an old joke: Two sociologists were walking down a road. They came upon a man beaten and bleeding in a ditch. The first sociologist turned to his friend and said, "Oh! The poor man who did this!" If only some of Charlie's followers had been more skeptical at the start, they might not have poured their money and time into his false messages. How easy will it be for these people to recover from their disappointment? Will it affect their relationship with the church? What about ridicule from friends and family members? Some refuse to read the writing on the wall even now. From the Mystics of the Church website, this comment (not by me) about Joe Crozier. I didn't really know Joe on MOG, but I know he has friends here: Anonymous said... Joe Crozier one of Charlie's staunchest supporters is all in for Charlie on the 20th: "Friday January 20 will be one small step for us but a giant leap of faith confirmed for the world. This will be the start of something big, How privileged we are to be present at the start of this stage in the Salvation Plan of The Trinity, this stage in the process of restoration of billions of human beings to a position and condition from which they can be saved: the final frontier of our Destiny." I wonder what Joe Crozier will say and do if the 20th doesn't pan out the way he expects it to? I wonder what he will think of Charlie then or just let it go? January 18, 2017 at 10:31 PM
