The Presidential prophecy- An update on Charlie Johnston

A triumphant Trump inaugurated amidst some bold predictions
Update Jan 1, 2018: Concerning Mr. Johnston's alleged prophecies and private revelations, from early on this writer often commented that time and events (or lack of events) will clearly reveal whether Charlie's prophecies are authentic, or not.  In other words, time will tell. 

Well, as of today (January 1, 2018) time has clearly revealed that Mr. Johnston's numerous prophecies have ALL been shown to be completely false, most notably his predictions concerning the Presidential election, the great worldwide "Storm" which he foretold would bring global economic collapse and civil strife, toppling governments throughout the globe, war with political Islam resulting with the mass conversion of most Muslims, then a war with China, and generalized  global chaos resulting in 26 million dead, all culminating with the miraculous "Rescue" apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to all of humanity, all of which was prophesied by Charlie to occur by the end of 2017. 

In conclusion, since Charlie's prophecies have now all been shown to be completely false, he joins the list of recent failed visionaries whose stories have been highlighted on this site, such as "Locutions to the World" and "Maria Divine Mercy", and together they provide a strong cautionary warning for all of us in regards to purported visionaries and mystics of past and present, urging us to be very cautious and prudent in our discernment concerning such persons,  reaffirming the statement and warning of St Paul of the Cross, the founder of the Passionists and great mystic himself, who once stated that 9 out of 10 purported visionaries are false.  Perhaps this estimation from St Paul of the Cross is a bit high, but then again perhaps not.  -Glenn Dallaire
-------------------------------
UPDATE, January 20, 2017: 
With the successful inauguration of President Donald Trump comes the unfulfilled conclusion to both parts of the alleged angelic “Presidential prophecy” of Charlie Johnston, namely that Obama will not finish his term and the next leader will not come from the political system (ie.-not elected), as detailed in the article below. It was a bold two-part prophecy that has now ended in a double fail.

When one claims to be a prophet of God, one’s life and most especially one’s prophecies are automatically held for scrutiny before the court of public opinion. In this court of public opinion, the preponderance of the evidence is what often initially sways one’s opinion, yet there eventually comes to pass certain very important matters for discernment, such as key prophecies, which depending on their eventual turnout, will considerably authenticate, or invalidate, the purported mission and message of such persons.  And when one compares the alleged angelic ‘Presidential prophecy’ against today’s successful inauguration, the conclusions to be drawn are self-evident.  

With the above being said, one would strongly suspect that today’s inauguration, which by all appearances completely invalidates the first formal public prophecy of Charlie Johnston, will likely be one of these aforementioned key matters for discernment that will have a decisive impact in judging his purported prophetic mission and message for a good many people.  For if a prophet is judged by his prophecies as the saying goes, then today’s failure of the purported angelic ‘Presidential prophecy’,  as detailed in the article below,  will for many persons surely bring with it an unfavorable judgment in what concerns the prophetic mission of Charlie Johnston. 

For in his blog post "The Election...and Other Potential Triggers" Charlie writes:
"...If, next January, Barack Obama peacefully hands over the reins of power to Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, I will declare myself unreliable and go away. But it will not happen that way, for God has appointed that this be a sign to you to fortify you to trust Him and choose the ordinary way to follow Him through the most frightening year for the globe in history."

And again, concerning today’s inauguration, for his part Charlie has also declared in his post entitled “Election day” on November 7th that:
 “…If, on January 20, Obama peacefully transfers power to either Trump or Clinton, I will declare myself unreliable and retire into silence.”  

With this pledge, one finds that today’s inauguration will bring with it not only the end of Obama’s term, but also the end of Charlie Johnston’s public blogging, speaking engagements, and future predictions, at least for a time, though the loss of credibility from today’s events will likely be permanent. 

And I say "for a time" simply because of Charlie's recent comments on his blog concerning the possibility of today's failure of his "Presidential prophecy", wherein he recently speaks about the possibility of being "recalled" by God into a silent, private period for some sort of remedial prophetic discernment re-training "for a time".

Nevertheless, for those who in good faith spread amongst their family, friends and coworkers Charlie's prediction concerning "Obama not finishing his term/next leader not coming from the political process", and who are now left feeling much like "the boy who cried wolf", one can only presume that any possible future prophetic predictions from Charlie will be given little or no credence, if not outright opposition by many who have followed his work and message, as is perhaps justifiably merited by today's developments. In the end, it is up to Archbishop Aquila of Denver to make any formal judgments concerning Charlie Johnston's private revelations.

As for this writer, I can say that while I have always been reluctant to highlight purported LIVING mystics and visionaries, I am even more so now after these recent events.

May God bless the United States of America, and all of humanity.
-Glenn Dallaire, January 20, 2017


Charlie Johnston during a recent FOCUS TV interview
The final days for the possible fulfillment of a purported Angelic prophecy 

By: Glenn Dallaire

Jan. 7, 2017 -Vigil of the Epiphany
Many readers of this website are familiar with the original article that I wrote back in January 2015 entitled  "Charlie Johnston -An alleged prophet with a critically important message for humanity".  In it I discussed at length Charlie's purported prophetic mission and message, along with a short biography of his life. And for the past two years it has been one of the most popular articles on this website.

Additionally, when the Archdiocese of Denver came out with a Statement in March 2016 concerning Mr. Johnston I published an article here discussing it.

The Presidential prophecy
In the past week, the comments beneath that original article have exploded (there are now currently a total of 770 comments), as has my email inbox, with most everyone commenting specifically on the angelic prophecy allegedly given to Charlie, which I have named "The Presidential prophecy":

"What I was told in the Spring of 2008 was that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."

The obvious reason for all of the recent attention to this specific alleged angelic prophecy is the upcoming scheduled Presidential Inauguration scheduled for this January 20th--just 2 weeks away from this writing. For his part, just yesterday Charlie published an article entitled "A Decisive Conundrum" which addresses this matter, in part.

This particular prophecy is the first of a series of alleged angelic prophesies concerning the world that are to occur mostly this year (2017). And since we are delving into this subject of alleged "Angelic" messages given to Charlie, it should be pointed out that the Angel whom has purportedly visited Charlie from childhood is the Archangel Gabriel, as was specifically revealed to Charlie during one of the "visitations". The other predictions that Charlie insists upon are highlighted in his article entitled "Go Forth". In it Charlie reveals eight worldwide events that are said to occur::

"I only have eight public prophecies that I insist on. Only the visible, miraculous Rescue by Our Lady, the Immaculate Conception in late 2017, is time sensitive. Five things must happen between now and the Rescue, but can happen at any time during that period. They are:

– The continued toppling of governments throughout the world, including that of the U.S. The toppling of a government does not mean the nation shall fall.

– The confrontation with and fall of political Islam.

– The mass conversion of most Muslims

– The confrontation between the Judeo-Christian world and the current government of China.

– The alliance between Russia and the U.S. to lead the Judeo-Christian world to endure the confrontation with China.

-Then, after the 5 things above comes the miraculous "Rescue" through the Immaculate Heart of Mary sometime in late 2017.

Then there are two prophecies that happen shortly after the Rescue. They are the unification of the faithful into one flock under one shepherd and the building and location of the Shrine of thanksgiving for the Rescue on Mount Meeker in Colorado.

Together these predicted events constitute for humanity what Charlie calls "The Storm"--a series of events which he states is already well underway. As of today (January 7, 2017), the most obvious observation concerning the prophesies above is that time is really running out for them to all happen before the miraculous Rescue in late 2017. Thus, from an intellectually reasoned perspective, it is probably readily apparent to many that such predictions are already a failure, given the time-frames involved for such things to occur in "real" time. But then, who really knows just yet? For God is not limited by our human constraints and He is always full of surprises.

It should be noted that the "Presidential prophecy" is NOT part of the eight public prophesies that Charlie insists upon. I don't know what bearing that may have, if any, in the upcoming days and weeks.

"God has appointed that this be a sign to you"
In his article "The Election...and Other Potential Triggers" Charlie writes:
"If, next January, Barack Obama peacefully hands over the reins of power to Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, I will declare myself unreliable and go away. But it will not happen that way, for God has appointed that this be a sign to you to fortify you to trust Him and choose the ordinary way to follow Him through the most frightening year for the globe in history."

Of course for now the big question at this point is whether or not the purported angelic prophecy concerning Obama not finishing his term/next leader not coming from the election process will come to pass as foretold in the remaining two weeks before the scheduled Presidential inauguration on January 20th. And the obvious implication in the opinion of many people is that this prophecy is key in determining whether Charlie is truly an authentic prophet, or not. For as the saying goes "A prophet is judged by his prophecies", or as Scripture tells us:

"And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not fear him." (Deuteronomy 18:21-22).

For his part, Charlie has stated numerous times that if this particular prophecy concerning Obama not finishing his term were to fail, with the presidency successfully transitioned to Donald Trump, that he will post one last post on his blog, then go away:
Charlie Johnston during a presentation in July 2016
charliej373 says:
"If there is a peaceful transition of power from Obama to Trump, I will go away. If there is not, be not afraid, God has a plan."

or again:
 charliej373 says:
December 17, 2016 at 2:54 pm
"Now, as I have said, if the inauguration goes on without incident, I will go away. "

or again:
charliej373 says:
"Certainly, if we have a normal inauguration a month from now, I will retire from the field, for that prophecy will have been objectively wrong. I take full responsibility for that. But it won’t change what you are called to do.

Noting that I do and will take responsibility, your standard would require you to dismiss St. Joan of Arc as a false prophet for the times she erred on saying how the battle would go – and many of the Old Testament prophets who were often off on their timing, sometimes by years. I do not say this to try to justify any error on my part. I strongly urge you to examine yourself and consider what God calls you to. But yep, a month from now if we have a normal inauguration, you can give me a big old thumbs down."

charliej373 says:
January 8, 2017 at 9:21 pm
"If the inauguration comes off, I will leave the public scene, because that is what it means to honorably take full responsibility. "

And so, even though this "Presidential prophecy" is not one of the eight public prophecies that Charlie insists upon, according to several statements he has made he does believe that if it fails to come to pass as foretold, this would be significant enough to merit and declare himself "unreliable" and "leaving the scene". Time will soon tell how things turn out. For his part, Charlie has "laid it on the line", so to speak. We need only wait, watch and pray. Events, or the lack thereof, will reveal the truth concerning Charlie's purported private revelations.

Given all of the recent interest in this particular prophecy as of late, along with the popularity of the original article here on this website concerning Charlie Johnston, I thought I would publish this new article so that those interested can comment on this matter freely and directly here. As always, all comments are published immediately on this website, without moderation. I only ask that commentators be charitable and considerate in their comments.

***UPDATE: FEBRUARY 16, 2017: Archdiocese of Denver: "Statement on false claim regarding Charlie Johnston’s messages"

3,140 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1201 – 1400 of 3140   Newer›   Newest»
Jackisback said...

To Charlie's defenders who claim that he never frightened people into over spending on prepping or getting deep into the "refuge movement," a few counterpoints from Charlie's own hand are below, in no particular order:

Collapse and Crash
Posted on March 8, 2014 by charliej373

"If you recognize the signs of the times for what they are and are willing to help others endure this great trial that is ALREADY upon us, then I have things to say that are useful. The rain is falling ever harder, the systems that safeguard us have already collapsed. If you are disappointed that it has not yet all crashed, you will be edified before more than a few months have passed. But if you wait that long to take it seriously, you squander time you could be using. I am going vigorously about the business of helping people prepare in a variety of ways."

Preparation Help
Posted on March 16, 2014 by charliej373

"My dear friend, John McConnell, who often comments here, is putting together a website which incorporates all sorts of practical instructionals on how to become self-sufficient in times of trouble and strife...Please bookmark the link below or add it to your favorites, as you will see it offers a wealth of practical help, from how to get the most crops from a small amount of land to how to effectively set up a solar storage system that can end your dependence on the power company. He has a lot of these and you can expect many additions.
As you go there, you will see in a much shorter time he is way ahead of where I am on my website. But I will be with my son later this week – and he will help me add links and refine mine so you have one-stop shopping."

Anne says:
August 1, 2014 at 2:24 pm
I am going vigorously about the business of helping people to prepare in all ways”…….would you please briefly expand on this. Just to help us to help others.all hands on deck. Thank you Charlie.

charliej373 says:
August 4, 2014 at 5:09 pm
Well, gosh, Anne, that is exactly what this website is about. I link to the Peppy Prepper to help people get some good temporal tips for self-sufficient living. This while website is about the spiritual preparation. I know folks sometimes want a step-by-step on what to do to avoid chaos. Well, no matter how well people prepare, they may have to flee.

charliej373 says:
August 6, 2014 at 1:04 am
Well, Anne, you know, I suspect those areas most heavily dependent on technology will have the most difficult time adjusting. America, in particular, has a great fall coming before it can get off its knees. You have some lovely cities in Australia, but in your rural regions, they already know a great deal on how to make do with limited resources – and to depend on each other. Or at least that is the favorable impression I get from everyone who has spent much time in the back country. So in a way, I suspect your country is already ahead of the game and has abundant refuges already up and running. All that is needed is the practical Christian character added to them to make them complete.

Approaching the Border
Posted on January 14, 2014 by charliej373

“People ask how to prepare. I mix some facts with soothing words because people just can’t get their mind around how radically different things are about to be. Faith, family, a defensible shelter and food are the only real assets you can bring to bear. For a short time, it will be primarily a barter economy – and if your handshake and your word are not good, you will perish. Those who have enriched themselves through double-talk and cleverness are going to have a real shock coming as they are shut out."

Jackisback said...

continued from prior post:

Charlie's long history of refuge advocacy...

My Purpose
Posted on September 4, 2014 by charliej373

"There will be a time when I spend much time visiting and offering hope to many refugees who have been forced to flee their homes and are homeless."

Form Ranks
Posted on June 14, 2014 by charliej373

"I am profoundly thankful for those who are dedicating themselves even now to preparing shelter, food and hope for the refugees of the Storm. These are heroes and saints in the making."

The Time to Prepare is Now
Posted on June 23, 2014 by charliej373

"So much for the preliminaries. The time has come for you to make certain preparations so that you may stand with your family. When I speak of my family, I speak both of my biological family and all those I am close to and rely upon, regardless of any genetic commonality. If you have not done so yet, you are well-advised to establish an area as a rallying point with those you love. Do not take a mere address or overly specific location. You do not know if it will be there or what dangers may lurk there. Establish an area – or areas where you may find each other. I have done so. Almost everyone who knows me knows that if things get terribly hinky, if communications are disrupted for a time, I will be somewhere around Mt. Meeker, so it is not as if I am giving away any state secrets. Family that wants to find and rally with me may take months to get there. And I won’t be waiting with baited breath for people to show up. I will get about my business once I know what it is – and will rejoice when anyone I love shows up. But mainly I will just get on with it. If you have not envisioned such a thing, it is time to do so."

The World Enters its Passion
Posted on July 15, 2014 by charliej373

"Things are NOT going to get better in a temporal way. If you have lost your money, you are not going to get it back for any length of time – you have only beaten the rush before all money is worthless. If your doctor or medicines have been taken from you because of changes in health care, it is NOT going to get better."

What The Next Right Step Really Means
Posted on October 3, 2014 by charliej373

"As you know, I have been an advocate for refuges, for people preparing to help others, to live simple solidarity, one with another."

Be Not Afraid: God Has a Plan
Posted on October 17, 2014 by charliej373

"When final crash comes (and as I said, it is imminent. Do not be deceived even if things smooth out for a month. It is here), there will be a period of utter chaos for, I believe, about four to six months. I know very little of the detail of what happens in this period. Just that it is entirely chaotic, all the props are pulled out from under us. This will be a very dangerous period. But the truth is, after the initial convulsions and during the state of disorientation, the greatest killer will be panic. Be deliberate about the decisions you make. You may need to hunker down, you may need to flee. But be deliberate in what you choose. You won’t be able to drive events, but don’t let them drive you. Your goal during this time is to endure. Devote yourself to helping those around you then. It is not just for their good: it will protect you from panic and may save your life."

Jackisback said...

continued from prior post:

Charlie's long history of refuge advocacy - yes it is a long list...

Musings – China Rising, Refuges and More
Posted on November 15, 2014 by charliej373

"I have had a few people who have large tracts of land mention they would be willing to sell it off in 50-acre parcels for use as refuges. The idea kind of flummoxed me. But what the heck, there is a couple with property in New Hampshire wanting to sell. If anyone is interested, drop me an email and I will put you directly in contact with them. I will have nothing else to do with it. But if you want to be put in touch with sellers, I will do that much. After that, you’re on your own. (And for what it’s worth, I will receive no commission, or finder’s fee or any other sort of recompense.)"

Musings – Despair, Prophecy and the Ruler of This World
Posted on December 23, 2014 by charliej373

"The Storm comes for all. It is good that many people are working on refuges to be a profound sign of hope as things grow starker. But some have convinced themselves these will be oases that will protect the righteous from the fury of the Storm while everyone else gets blasted. We all get blasted."

Musings – The Second Day of Christmas
Posted on December 26, 2014 by charliej373

"I have a faithful reader in Garabandal, Spain, who has been in communication with me since last summer. She has been kind enough to offer prayers up on my behalf in that wonderful, blessed little town. She and her husband, to prepare for the times, are moving all to a spot able to act as refuge (also in Garabandal). She mentioned to me that they want to sell three flats and a little plot of land in the town to help finance stocking up their refuge. So if you have ever had a hankering to get a place in Garabandal, drop me an email at chrljhnstn@gmail.com and I will forward it on to her. After I forward your message, I will have no further involvement. I have no interest, financial or otherwise in it, but I figured I would pass it on at her request."

Anonymous said...

Thank you for this research, Jack. It certainly establishes that Charlie did in fact promote refuges and prepping.

Anonymous said...

Trying to dialogue with you people is like dialoguing with the devil or Jehova's witness. Never a good think with the devil rarely a good thing with the other. It seems to me that,as ever, have no concern either for charity or the truth but only your own agenda. There is a difference between prepping and preparation. A difference between a refuge - a place to hide and avoid trouble - and a refuge, a place where you can find and offer support and help to others. I stand 100% by what I have said. You can pervert that all you like. I leave you all in God's capable and loving hands. You insult my good name that is borne proudly throughout the history of the world and of Holy Church church and even by a saintly stigmatic. God has given us an angel to defend our right and assured us that all things will be brought into the light of his mercy and justice. God has assured us that vengeance is His and he will repay. God have mercy on your souls.
Good bye
Joe Crozier
PS Pope Paul VI over-stepped the local authority of Garabandal as he is entitled to do.

Anonymous said...

Jack you scared Joe Crozier away. Jack how dare you convolute the argument with facts, especially quotes from Charlie himself!

Anonymous said...

Scared - I think not. Who are the online warriors hiding behind their anonymity and the protection of Glenn's skirts.. Your sophistry and salacious gossip mongering hold no fear for me. You're commentary is mostly a waste of time and space. It needs to be dealt with from time to time just so you don't get off Scot free.
Joe Crozier

Jackisback said...

Dialogue? What dialogue can be had with an interlocutor whose only contribution (to a blog thread devoted to discernment as to the authenticity of the alleged private revelation known as the "Presidential Prophecy") is "tu quoque" logical fallacy? Tu quoque is defined as "avoiding having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - answering criticism with criticism."

As to the assertions "God has assured us that vengeance is His and he will repay. God have mercy on your souls," well, there is certainly one person who would agree with you on that:

--begin quoted text--
From the Father
Posted on September 1, 2014 by charliej373

"Know this, though. I allow your disorder to strike with terrible, prolonged fury so that you will remember the consequences of relying on yourselves without acknowledging Me or seeking My blessing and guidance...I sent my Archangel Gabriel to My servant, Charlie, 13 years ago with instructions that he must ‘…tell you true and you must choose or perish.’ Though he, too, is a vain and foolish child, he has been faithful in this and has told you true. Now the time of harvest has arrived and you must choose or perish.”
--end quoted text--

Note, this particular quote is Charlie "channeling God" - where Charlie is clearly claiming the mantle of one to whom God communicates directly, even though "God" in this particular sentence, is making a reference to an indirect communication to Charlie through the "Archangel Gabriel."

Of course, this is problematic when the very first test of the "Charie has told you true" assertion, the Presidential Prophecy (not the "Presidential Interpretation" - as Charlie now has attempted to amend it after the fact), as having come from God, results in a double-fail. It is also problematic from this fairly astute perspective:

--begin quoted text--
Prepare the Way
Posted on May 16, 2014 by charliej373

"We all have a desire to appeal to authority – and what better authority to appeal to than God, Himself? Yet when we attribute to God what we merely want to believe ourselves, it is the worst form of bearing false witness – bearing false witness against God, which is a form of blasphemy."
--end quoted text--

Ergo, as someone from the UK might say, "there it is." Charlie's defenders can cast aspersions upon those of us on this thread who actually contribute substantive argument in the discernment debate, but it turns out it isn't just us who are holding Charlie to account for bearing false witness and blasphemy, it's Charlie himself. In this case, Charlie provided his own self-critique just a little more than three years in advance (which sounds almost, dare I say, prophetic - who knew?). To repeat, what an alleged prophet says about his own prophecies, matters.

I have held the position, from the very beginning of my contributions to Glenn's threads on Charlie Johnston's message discernment, that I have no personal dog in this hunt, and, I do not condemn Charlie. That is still the case, because, though my rhetoric may strike Charlie's defenders as harsh, it is actually Charlie's own words that are used as the bases for my arguments, and those words haven't been taken out of context. If you are a Charlie defender and you doubt this, then go back and read the entire blog posts from Charlie's website from which I have sourced my quotations. If you think you have a case to make that I have taken Charlie's words out of context, then make it. I'm happy to "dialogue" with you. But I do ask that you consider being polite when making your arguments, and further consider not getting bogged down in logical fallacies.

Fred Keyes said...

I'm genuinely curious about this: Has the Church ever approved mystical experiences of one who has had these experiences for a long period of time before converting to Catholicism? Glenn?

Fred Keyes said...

Jack, this goes without saying perhaps, but rest assured—your arguments make good sense. Unfortunately to those who have become true believers in Charlie's claims and spin on the future, no amount of reason is likely to convince them that they have a blind spot. Blind leading the blind (ibid.).

Anonymous said...

Beckita takes on Kevin Symonds over the seventh Fatima apparition, in defense of Charlie. She fails to mention the testimony of the Carmelite sisters, of course.

Anne says:
May 25, 2017 at 10:40 am


Charlie…… The 7th apparition HAS occurred already. Read article on today’s Spirit daily.

No one has a clue when the Rescue will happen….. Only God!!


Beckita says:
May 25, 2017 at 11:35 am


Thanks for bringing this to light, Anne. Of course, I speak for what I discern. Charlie has already spoken clearly. I don’t believe there’s a coincidence that the author of this piece featured on Spirit Daily chose to write it the very day AFTER Charlie highlighted that Our Lady promised a seventh apparition. Hmmm… Contemplating this timing in light of additional writings by this author.

As the author mentioned Rick Salbato, he said, “Rick was of the opinion…” We all have opinions. The author also concluded, “We now know with *greater certitude* that Our Lady’s promise to appear in the Cova da Iria a seventh time was indeed fulfilled.” That phrase, “greater certitude” makes me take pause as well. I applaud the author for being so honest in his choice of words concerning his opinion. The fact is, there is, to date, no complete certitude about the fulfillment of the 7th Apparition promised by Our Lady of Fatima. You see, the author has not been commissioned in any official Church sense with giving the final word on any apparition. He is merely stating his opinions based on his sources.

Obviously, I’m ALL IN with Charlie’s message and mission. I wouldn’t have accepted the role of managing editor here if I wasn’t. The facts are: Charlie continues to be spiritually directed by three priests who communicate and continue to guide him and discern with him in the light of the Holy Spirit. The Archdiocese of Denver stands by their released statements just as Charlie has named in this recent piece. As this country continues to experience events many have reported as never before seen in its history – particularly in the scope and fierceness of political events which challenge the very foundation of our governance – the whole world is burning with chaos, confusion and division. These are the very events Charlie was shown and had conveyed, in obedience, to his spiritual directors more than twenty years ago. I certainly could never have imagined, twenty years ago, that we would be living what we are now.

All of this leads me to this conclusion: it’s time to allow events to unfold as they will in God’s Perfect Plan and Timing. I’ll bet I could literally find hundreds, if not thousands, of times Charlie has urged us all to not get caught up in details. They belong to God. The full understanding of all that is and will evolve will best be reached by following Our Lady’s example: But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart. (Luke 2:19) As we follow our Mother’s example, we focus on the core message of TNRS which Our Lady also conveyed when she walked the earth and which is timeless: “His mother said to the servants, ‘Do whatever he tells you.'” (Luke 2:5) God bless us, one and all.


L Spinelli said...

Ah yes, Beckita puts more trust in Charlie's word than those of the Carmelite nuns who actually lived with Sister Lucia.

I also discovered that the Chinese priest who lives with her is the same one who was a promoter and defender of OLO Emmitsburg.

http://www.prourladyofemmitsburg.org/churchresponses/themarianapparitionsatemmitsburgrevjohnbwang.html

Denver needs to bring down the hammer on both her and Charlie at this point. I won't mince words. Her blind willingness to defend these false seers is a clear danger to souls.

Jackisback said...

You may be right Fred, that for some folks, reason cannot prevail against other motivations when it comes to defending Charlie.

Anonymous (at 3:25 p.m. yesterday) makes the point better than me - the irony that it is Charlie's defenders making the case not to listen to Charlie. While that was a brilliant use of sarcasm to make a point, I find it instructive to simply take whatever assertions the defenders make at face value and in good faith.

We hear a lot about how we shouldn't be placing our faith in the man, Charlie, but rather in the message. Well, that is what we've been doing here, discerning, testing one very specific message - the Presidential Prophecy. When Charlie's supporters find that this puts them in the position of defending the indefensible, a second counterpoint emerges: the idea that "Charlie was just wrong" about one message. But Charlie can't have been "wrong" about a message that wasn't Charlie's - either he was "told specifically" the message by God/Archangel Gabriel - or he wasn't.

Now comes Charlie himself, saying he "badly misinterpreted" that, which, since 2008, he had claimed he was "told specifically" as a "first principle." When called to account for this false witness moment, another defense is raised: that the Presidential Prophecy is not, and has never been the focus of Charlie's "mission or purpose."

To counter this, one only need look, once again to Charlie's on statements about his perceived duties comprising his mission/purpose:

--begin quoted text--
My Purpose
Posted on September 4, 2014 by charliej373

HEARTEN THE FAITHFUL

This website is one of the first public steps in that particular duty. I do not write it to give you prophecy, theology, or reports of visitations, though all are incorporated into the purpose.
--end quoted text--

This I also take at face value. Charlie is entitled to his opinion on what is his central message ("Be not afraid, God calls all men to salvation"). But even Charlie admits, that in this very context, prophecy and reports of visitations are all incorporated into such purpose. His prophecies are bound up in, and cannot be separated from, the stated purpose/mission/message/duties. One cannot be "all in" for Charlie's purpose/mission/message/duties and at the same time disavow any one of his prophecies (of the "I was told" category). That dog won't hunt. Or to quote a great line from the movie "The Outlaw Josey Wales" - "Don't piss on my head and tell me it's rainin'."

Here we stand at the end of May, with just a little more than seven months to go. I see no evidence of any of Charlie's "five fundamentals" coming to fruition. Time is not on the side of those prophecies. When we get to January 1, 2018 with none of them fulfilled, and no "rescue," I won't condemn Charlie. If he attempts goal post moving or otherwise attempts reinterpretation, he will be self-condemned.

Anonymous said...

Three things really annoy me about the current TNRS website.

First, Beckita's defiance in insisting Charlie's messages really did come from heaven -- repeatedly, against the wishes of the Denver authorities.

Second, Beckita's false insinuation that Charlie has been "vetted" and that he -- and by implication his writings -- are under continuing direction of three Opus Dei priests. Glenn made it clear after talking with Charlie's spiritual director that these priests have no connection to Charlie's alleged ministry or alleged mission; they do not read the messages beforehand, they do not certify the contents, they take no control or responsibility for the messages -- and unfortunately, for the outcome.

Third, now that Beckita officially owns the site and the "ministry," who is keeping her in line? Is she under the guidance of her local bishop -- does he even know who she is and that's she running an international website out of her home? Is it canonically rooted in the church as a Private Association of the Christian Faithful? Wanna take bets?

Beckita's track record in backing discredited mystics has been documented by others on MOTC. Why believe her? Why believe Charlie? Have they ever offered any proof of ... anything?

Steve said...

Anyone find it curious that after 4 months in "watchful retirement" Charlie makes his first post on 5/23. And then on 5/24 and 5/25 Beckita makes two additional posts (David Daleiden – Breaking News on 5/24 and Invoking the Holy Face of Jesus and the Holy Spirit on 5/25)?

Usually new posts on the TNRS blog are left front and center for several days. But it's almost as if they want to "bury" Charlie's comeback post.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but the whole thing is strange.

Jackisback said...

A commentator from another blog also pointed out to me this exchange back in January, just prior to the inauguration. I am not certain which TNRS post this comes from. I have searched but cannot find it.

--begin quoted text--
Mauro says:
January 15, 2017 at 2:09 pm
Charlie,
A few months ago you said that if Donald Trump was inaugurated you would declare yourself unreliable and leave the scene. Does that mean this blog be taken down and no longer maintained? What about the community that has been built up here over the past few years? How will we stay in touch?

charliej373 says:
January 15, 2017 at 2:38 pm
The website will continue, though without the prophetic element. Beckita Hesse would act as its managing editor, publishing pieces that support the main theme of acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope. This community, itself, has become a sign of hope to many – and I would not dismantle it. But I will neither write for it nor clear comments. The archives would be left untouched, so that all can look back to them, either to ponder or to mock. The one proviso as far as writing is that I have said I would then spend time working on the fictional stories which are actually meditations on each mystery of the Rosary. I would submit those as I finish them for Beckita’s consideration for publication.
--end quoted text--

So this is at least one moment that Charlie claimed he would not write the kind of blogpost that he just wrote on May 24, 2017. There are no circumstances that warrant a re-entry in terms of "coup" and the most recent post is not related to his proposed ficitional stories about the Rosary.

Anonymous said...

Jack, Hmmm. Can't find the post where Charlie pledges not to write or comment on his Next Right step blog. Wonder if it was "scrubbed" so Charlie could keep his options open. After all, he still has his walking boots ready for that big Jericho march!!

Fred Keyes said...

FWIW, I remember that post by Charlie.

Something that I wonder about is Charlie's prediction that the Russians would join with the U.S. to defeat China. All of which is supposed to come about in less than seven months now. Then we have all of these contacts and (in the last couple of hours) Jerrod Kushner's attempt to set up a back channel communication connection with the Russians--without reporting it as required.

I've mentioned this before, but I wonder if Charlie's prediction ("prophecy" gives it far too much religious significance now that we know there was none) came about after being sucked in by Russia's long-term seeding of information that has turned the right toward trusting the Russians. I read stories last year that I now find suspicious about how family values were so much more sacred in the East than in the West. Really? Since when? Where on earth did this trust of Russia come from, and at least in Trump's case, to the extent of attempting to establish covert communications with a known hostile government?

Trump and Kushner may have just had a financial motive, but what was Charlie's reason for deciding to trust the Russians?

Jackisback said...

Anon at 7:41p.m., I'm going to keep looking for the exchange that says Charlie will stop writing. It is difficult because there were so many comments in January that they chose to kind of bury the earliest comments in pages hidden from view when first reading the main blog entry; then one must click on the link "older comments."

Fred, good question. I don't know the answer. It might be necessary to go back through Charlie's earliest blog posts. The five "fundamentals" have been around a while, maybe even before Trump had any success in the Republican primaries. I'll try to research.

Anonymous said...

For Memorial Day, Beckita posts her newest column, which contains this gem, once again ignoring the wishes of Denver's archbishop. She insists Charlie's visions are real, which THEY ARE NOT.

Charlie introduced Mother Ellen’s piece by recounting this event, bearing gospel wisdom:

Late in the 90’s, in one of my little visions – a stylized type that always ends with a pithy angelic comment – I was told, “Betrayal comes from one you love and trust. Begin to offer reparation for him now.” It was striking to me I was not told to defend myself against it, but to pray for the one from whom it would come.


L Spinelli said...

How ironic that I clicked on, out of curiosity, Glenn's old commentary on LttW. I think this passage is pretty timely in light of what happened last week.

https://charliej373.wordpress.com/2015/10/03/grab-a-helmet/

It is time to get serious, friends.

When LttW imploded, I thought the Lord was giving many the chance to see what I had been taught mostly privately over decades. There is no shame in being deceived – particularly if the deceiver is likely sincere but errant rather than malicious. There IS shame in not stepping back and learning from the error rather than just continuing on the same path that led you to be deceived in the first place. LttW was perfect for this lesson. Though I may be wrong, I saw no intent to deceive – just someone who was deceived promulgating messages to people eager to hear them. This gave those outside the inner circle of the failed locutionist an opportunity to be both magnanimous and learn to adjust their own expectations so as to discern better.

Astonishingly, some people continued, after the deception was revealed, to relentlessly try to explain why that square peg really did fit in that round hole. Don’t you know that God allowed this both so the locutionist would learn and repent – and so that many would see how deeply flawed their own expectations are? If you continue with the same expectations, you will get the same results. Judge righteous judgment. Some, disappointed in LttW, are already restlessly trying to find a replacement to give them the regular play-by-play and color commentary, instead of examining their own flawed expectations. I have heard from several this week, hoping I will pick up the mantle of error so they can get their weekly fix, asking me about Russia, the hurricanes, and the Oregon shootings.


Anonymous said...

L. Spinelli, You are not actually expecting Charlie or his followers to show any self-awareness, are you?

Jackisback said...

Good catch L.

There is also this graph from near the very end of the same blog post:

--begin quoted text--
I was grateful to see that Padraig Caughey, who runs the marvelous Mother of God Forum out of Ireland, and Glenn Dallaire, who runs the Mystics of the Church website, covered the controversy over the LttW failure. I was even gladder to see that both of them have forbidden debate on whether Pope Francis is legitimate and have closed off further commenters from trying to tortuously square the circle of the LttW failure. For any of us who now run religious sites with wide audiences that take comments, it becomes important to make people aware of such controversies without allowing your site to be hijacked by those who would try to lead people into the shoals.
--end quoted text--

Fred Keyes said...

I've always thought that there was a way that clever Christians can turn Scripture on its head and make themselves appear to be good Christians, like this:

If someone disagrees with you on some spiritual matter, telling them "I will pray that you see the light" has an appearance of saying, "I am right and you are wrong." It is as though the person is speaking infallibly; they KNOW the truth regardless of what you say, even though they have no proof of their position nor the expert authority to take such a position.

Another way a person can make themselves appear to be right about what they are doing is to claim that they are being persecuted about what they believe. That they are "persecuted" must mean that they are right is what they imply. Didn't our Savior say we were blessed when we are persecuted? Trouble is, they can be persecuted (in their view) when they are in fact wrong. St.Paul emphasizes the point : "But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer." (Rom 13:4) In other words, you are not protected if you are wrong. Implying that being persecuted is proof of being right is a clever fallacy.

IMO, keep these points in mind when reading or conversing with someone who does not have the credentials to back up their statements. Also be skeptical when someone does not reveal who it is that is vetting their statements. Like three unnamed priests.

Come on now Charlie, who are they so we can assess their discernment methods?

L Spinelli said...

Anon @6:15, no, I don't expect anything like that from Charlie & Co. Delusion rules the kingdom over there.

One thing that always troubled me about this whole thing, and Fred brought it up, was how Charlie oh-so-subtly hinted that God would support the alt-right. Many, if not most, of the positions they take directly conflict with the Gospels and the Catechism, but try explaining that to Charlie or any of his hard core keyboard warriors. You can easily see this in his May 23 rant.

His "Jericho March" happened already, in fact. This was failed attempt by the Tea Party and other alt-right movements to take over the government back in 2014. They expected 10 million men to march and got maybe a thousand?

Since Charlie's politics line up with those of his remaining keyboard warriors, trying to tell them that supporting the alt-right isn't very Catholic would not go over well.

Jackisback said...

Fred and L.,

Your points are well taken. This is why, despite the fact that I am as far to the right - or farther to the right - than Charlie, on the American political spectrum, the simple act of testing (via detection of logical fallacies) of his "I-was-told"-type alleged revelations, his own "predictions," his ranting attempts at prose, his responses to both fans and opponents in the comments section of his blog (or any blog), and especially his own characterizations/recharacterizations of his previously announced alleged revelations, is paramount.

What is a bit bizarre is that Charlie is aware of this - witness his analysis/rebuke of LTTW that L. cited recently. I quoted Charlie a few days back showing that he is keenly aware of the danger of the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy. That he can apply such critical thinking vis-a-vis LTTW, but yet, is apparently unable to stop himself from committing the exact same offenses against reason in his own written work product, is at a minimum, eyebrow raising.

Just because someone is on the same page with you politically, doesn't make their arguments valid.

In a similar vein, just because someone is on the same page with you vis-a-vis the Church's magisterium, doesn't make their arguments valid.

It seems clear to me that many otherwise rational people have been sucked into the Charlie Johnston vortex by conflation of these two aspects of Charlie's personality; which, in my opinion only, has unwittingly led them to dispense with, or simply fail to follow, the ancient (well grounded and indeed Saintly) advice to fully test what this particular would-be prophet says.

Anonymous said...

Do you think he's a con artist, Jack?

Jackisback said...

Anon (at 3:27 PM),

First, "con artist" is a pejorative term. Glenn asks that we discern vigorously, yet charitably. Calling Charlie a "con artist," absent sufficient evidence, is an "ad hominem attack" - a logical fallacy in which I refuse to engage.

I always try to focus on scrutinizing the "messages" Charlie passes along (as well as his assertions about those "messages") by first taking everything Charlie says at face value, assuming no ill-will on his part, until proven otherwise.

If there's any evidence that Charlie has gained financially at the expense of others, no one has yet demonstrated it. "Con artist" is a "term of art" with the specific meaning of one who swindles victims of their money by means of running a "confidence game." I don't see that in Charlie's case.

I have boldly asserted that Charlie has at times told falsehoods, and have accused him of intent to deceive (the most recent example being Charlie's "comeback" post where I also used the term "blasphemy"). But where I have done that, it has not been to make an ad hominem attack, but rather to hold Charlie accountable to his own words, using his own words.

In the most recent case, I also described a particular standard used to determine whether or not his words constituted "blasphemy" - a standard established by Charlie in a previous blog post when he was, in the same context, discussing the problem of appealing to God's authority in cases where "we attribute to God what we merely want to believe ourselves" - which Charlie described as "the worst form of bearing false witness – bearing false witness against God, which is a form of blasphemy."

This is certainly hitting the nail on the head in terms of the Presidential Prophecy, where Charlie (in presumed good faith) attributed to God a message known as the "sign" (of Obama not finishing his term and the next national leader not coming from the election process). Charlie exacerbated this bearing of false witness/blasphemy when he attempted to recharacterize it as something that perhaps he had not actually attributed to God in the first place (in his May 23, 2107 blog post "Lord Save Us; We Perish"):

--begin quoted text--
Whether I was deceived or I badly misinterpreted, I made a terrible blunder in how I interpreted that Obama would not finish his full term.
--end quoted text--

I asserted that there was intent to deceive in this quote. This statement sounds as though it is an humble admission against interest, but it is not. It is an attempt to dupe the reader, by suggesting that maybe Charlie hadn't previously attributed the first part of the "sign" to God after all, from the beginning. It implies, rather, that it was something Charlie had merely "misinterpreted," derived from "something else" that he "had been told." Charlie's compounding of a presumably unwitting blasphemous falsehood (the "sign" as having come from God) with a new falsehood (the "sign" as having possibly come from a mere misinterpretation) after the "sign's" failure, makes matters worse rather than better. Oh the tangled web Charlie weaves, indeed.

Even looking charitably at this latest quote from Charlie, it can only be intentional deception (because it is a "special pleading" logical fallacy - moving the goal posts) if one grants him the charitable view that his original propagation of the "sign" prophecy was not intentional deception by him.

So, is he a "con artist?" No. Is he now engaging in deception to cover up the original unintended blasphemy (according to his own definition of that term)? Yes. And it is not I, attacking Charlie, the man. It is Charlie being held to account, by Charlie's standards, Charlie's words.

Anonymous said...

Jack,

From Google:

con art·ist
noun: con artist; plural noun: con artists

a person who cheats or tricks others by persuading them to believe something that is not true.


I define con artist as someone who seeks to obtain something of value from another through trickery. If you use this broader definition, you might then look around and see how Charlie benefited from spreading his messages:

free travel around the country with free food and lodging;
tickets to expensive events (L. Spinelli discovered this);
broadcast interviews (Focus TV, Patrick Madrid);
an adoring audience (apparently very motivating to him);
the possibility (in his mind) of future political relevance.

There was also some discussion of Charlie's living with a supporter and being given use of a truck. This was posted a while back.

Charlie had a pattern of cultivating important people and trading on the acquaintance (his "good friend" Fr. Pacwa) to bolster his image. He implicitly threatened those who critiqued him with lawsuits (various bloggers). He displayed anger and malice toward perceived enemies.

Con artist is certainly a plausible characterization. It fits the facts. It is my theory of the case.

L Spinelli said...

Anon @9:12, Charlie isn't a con artist. My theory, unchanged since 2015, is this whole Charlie business was a years-long con perpetrated by none other than the Father of Lies.

I don't like how Charlie handled his critics, or how he re-emerged after his "mission" imploded in January, or how he makes excuses for himself while criticizing other visionaries/locutionists, or presenting himself as the solution to what was ailing the world (one saw a LOT of this on his blog)...but none of that changes the fact that Satan was behind this. Here's a solution. Quit going to his blog and say some prayers for him and his misguided followers. They might be puffed up and refusing to admit that they were wrong, but that's all the more reason to pray for them.

Jackisback said...

Anon (at 9:12 PM),

This is why CS Lewis said it is important in any discussion to define one's terms. I cannot see into the heart of another. While your suspicions may ultimately turn out to be valid, I cannot draw a conclusion yet (and I'm not sure I need to). Your points of evidence speak more to "why" Charlie may have, in your view, made up everything out of whole cloth - assuming that is what he did. But have you any evidence to prove that is what he did?

My discernment process focuses on one step farther back: on "whether" or not the purported revelations were real, or at least genuinely perceived by Charlie to be real. As the purveyor of the "messages," only Charlie actually knows whether or not he truly perceived that he was hearing supernatural voices, seeing images/apparitions, or experiencing communications from supernatural sources without the use of words (his concept of being not in a movie, but rather being metaphysically taken into an experience of future events).

Is it possible that all the benefits you describe Charlie as receiving were consequent to a good faith belief on his part that his perceived voices, visions and experiences were real and not figments of his imagination or the result of any mental incapacity - even if those perceptions were not, in fact, actual reality?

An insistence that Charlie never actually had any mystical experiences at all, that he is fully cognizant of this, and that the only question remaining is to determine the unhealthy motive behind his "marketing" of dark and strange tales to gullible Catholics, preying upon their spiritual vanity, is, to me, a rabbit hole, which, when traveled down, leads only to an endless series of tunnels, none of which rise to the surface again.

It is enough for me to engage in debate on whether or not his perceptions of the mystical are real (making him an authentic "mystic" who may have been fooled/tricked by Satan) or not real (making him neither a mystsic, nor a mystic-fooled-by-Satan, but rather literally an unwitting false prophet on a per se basis, someone suffering from illusions and delusions - the source of which is above my pay grade).

--cont'd on next page

Jackisback said...

--cont'd from prior page

Should I refuse to initially take Charlie's word at face value when examining the written record (i.e., if I take the position that he has, with malice aforethought, set out to fool people) it is doubtful that any follower of his will be persuaded by me to consider ceasing their current habit of hanging on his every word. It's a fairly safe bet that they'll just get defensive.

Instead, I find it more instructive to discern and draw attention to the times when Charlie's purported revelations fail, and then especially when he engages in goal post moving when he discusses the failures. The fact that he did that in the "Focus" video interview in the immediate aftermath of the inauguration could be written off as an emotional moment of human exhaustion or the notion that he was swayed by the leading nature of the questions by the interviewer. But, fast foward four months to May 23rd, and consider that Charlie has had loads of time to prepare what he is going to write - and he yet again engages in goal post moving. That is telling. It is, in my opinion, an unwitting admission by Charlie that the "revelation of the sign" was not real.

A true prophet would have no need to try to dumb down or water down his original retellings of purported revelations solely due to the failure of the revelation to come to pass. Either he would assume the information came from Satan (as Charlie initially did) and if he were of sound mind would then question all the information he had ever been given as potentially coming from Satan; or, he would have faith that, since God cannot lie, that information came neither from God nor Satan in this instance. As we have noted, there are other alternatives to consider, if he were open minded enough (e.g., one possibility is that he had a simple, human, dream while asleep, the kind of dream we have all experienced, which he mistook for an actual supernatural encounter).

The one thing a person convinced he is a true prophet most certainly would not do, would be to recast the original definitive, specific revelation as somehow more vague or cryptic than he originally led everyone to believe, after saying he was "all in." He would not have any motivation to convert that which he had claimed he "was told" into a "blunder" of his own making, his own "interpretation." He would not have any reason at all to alter, after the fact of failure, that which his "angel" assurred him that God had told him true, that it was his job to tell us about the "sign" and the "storm," and that it was our job to "choose or perish." If he truly believed in what he claimed he was told about the "sign," and now, seeing clearly that it did not come to pass as he was told, he would pray for humility so as to avoid future humiliation; he would not make excuses. He would not claim the error was his own error, when the entire point to all of this drama for the past three years was his assertion that the "sign" came not from Charlie, but from God.

Anonymous said...

Jack,

Even before Charlie's emergence onto the national scene, specific prophecies of his had failed. Michael Brown of Spirit Daily interviewed one of Charlie's spiritual directors, who said sometimes Charlie's predictions came true and other times they didn't. A prediction Charlie made to Brown himself was a washout.

Charlie hid material facts: He insisted he had been "vetted" by three Opus Dei priests when he knew they had did not control any of his messages or his alleged mission. He did not respond to questions about his past, and attacked those who questioned him. He made up stories about stopping a bank robbery and rescuing a family from a burning car -- surely, from whole cloth and not from his "angel." And then, there is the goal-post moving you describe.

I can't read souls, either. But I believe there is enough here to support a verdict of
deliberate deception.

Anonymous said...

To the person who posted above.

You have NO PROOF that Charlie lied when he said he stopped a bank robbery and rescued a family from a burning car. So don't libel him. Also, by vetting by the 3 priests what I took that to mean was these priests have been monitoring his messages and have NOT told him to stop publishing them.

Anonymous said...

There's no proof he ever did any of the strange things he claimed he did, certainly no proof he ever had any visits from heaven -- in fact, the archdiocese of Denver has taken the position his visions are false. Wouldn't Charlie Johnston have mentioned his exploits in stopping a bank robbery or saving a family from a burning car during his newspaper career or in his political days? Yet these were throwaway statements in a comment on an obscure internet forum. Try finding them elsewhere. What is bizarre is that people swallow such tall tales whole.

As for the priests, they have said they have nothing to do with the messages or Charlie's mission. They are only concerned with Charlie's own personal state. Everything they say to him is privileged. You cannot know they have not advised him to stop.

Glenn Dallaire said...


I would just like to once again thank everyone for their very interesting comments here, most especially L. Spinelli and Jack. In my opinion, thanks to all who have commented here there has been quite a few interesting viewpoints brought forth here lately, revealing a variety of different perspectives and considerations.

-Glenn Dallaire

Anonymous said...

To the anonymous above,

You say: 'in fact, the archdiocese of Denver has taken the position his visions are false.'

That is not correct. Show me WHERE the Archdiocese said Charlie's messages are false. They simply exercised caution. They did NOT stop Charlie from public speaking and he just needs to get permission to speak within the Archdiocese. Also they did NOT tell him to stop publishing messages or to take down the blog with his messages.

Anonymous said...

The events of 2016/17 have shown that Mr. Johnston’s alleged visions were not accurate and the Archdiocese urges the faithful not to condone or support further attempts to reinterpret them as valid.

Important bits:

Alleged visions
Do not condone these visions
Do not attempt to reinterpret them as valid.

L Spinelli said...

Anon @1:21

How much clearer do you want the Archdiocese to be?

The visions weren't accurate. Don't condone them. Don't try to reinterpret these failed prophecies.

Definition of condone

to regard or treat (something bad or blameworthy) as acceptable, forgivable, or harmless


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/condone

Anonymous said...

From dictionary.com

inaccurate

adjective
1.
not accurate; incorrect or untrue.

Fred Keyes said...

To Anonymous at 11:08 AM: Asking someone to prove a negative is a fool's errand. A negative cannot be proven—that's an axiom of logic.

The burden of proof always falls on the affirmative. So in this case it is up to Charlie to prove by testimony or physical evidence that he foiled a bank robbery or rescued a family from a burning car. Unfortunately, Charlie rarely gives such proof.

Unknown said...

Dear Glenn, in regard to Pres. Trump. Early in the primaries, the Lord told me that Donald Trump was His man. The Lord also told me that He rejected Ted Cruise. I told these things to my Spiritual Director

Jackisback said...

Fred,

Yes. There's that pesky burden of proof standard. Why Charlie ignores the basics with this aspect of his prophecies is truly a curious thing.

He ignores it again vis-a-vis his new attempt at casting his "sign" prophecy as a "misinterpretation." If the alleged private revelation of the "sign" was, actually, misinterpreted by Charlie, then Charlie owed it to his readers to explain what he was "actually told" which he then interpreted as meaning "Obama would not finish his term." And, he owed that explanation PRIOR TO inauguration day.

Charlie owed it to his readers to explain, prior to January 20, 2017, what precisely his angel said to him (I say this despite the fact that Charlie always said "I was told" in reference to the "sign" and "I have told you true"). Had he done this, he would now have at least a shred of credibility in making the claim that he misinterpreted his private revelation.

Charlie often rebukes his skeptics when they ask for the precise wording of his "angel's" communications. But in this case, everyone is emntitled to answers, because Charlie claimed to "have told us true."

Of course, any "clarification" that he asserts now will be not worth much (in terms of discernment), because it will have been offered after the fact.

And to Bill Brown, tou che!

Unknown said...

On the evening of the election, when at first Hilary looked like she was going to win. Mr Trump was thinking he was going to loose. Mr Trump had a visitation from two Angles and someone else. They reassured Mr Trump that God is with him. Immediately after that, everything changed.

Unknown said...

On the evening of the election, when at first Hilary looked like she was going to win. Mr Trump was thinking he was going to loose. Mr Trump had a visitation from two Angles and someone else. They reassured Mr Trump that God is with him. Immediately after that, everything changed.

Unknown said...

Medjugorje is real. I know of many miracles that have happened because of it.

Anonymous said...

Bill Brown I'm glad it was angles as we ll know of the angles politicians can take. Apparently is wasn't angels from heaven so we know it wasn't a heavenly message.

L Spinelli said...

There's nothing new on Charlie's site today except more blatant disregard for Denver's statements.

We have been in a process of being prepared for the Storm, in particular ways, since the inception of this site and each time I review the archives, something new captures my attention. For the last 6 weeks, I’ve been rereading again and with purpose: to gather the timeless golden oldies and bring them to our community to reconsider and ponder, for Charlie has prepared us well with great care and love.

And in looking out on the greater world from inside our own national problems, we see waves slapping and crashing, everywhere, with increasing furor. So let us begin our review, Friends, with God and His Plan as our focus and the Head Sherpa as our guide, once again, that we may hone our mental readiness as we continue to acknowledge God, take our next right steps and allow Him to shine in us as His Hope in a dark and weary world.


I can't figure out why no one is doing anything about this woman.

Anonymous said...

As far as the diocesan advice about Charlie is concerned the only events of 2016-17 to which they can refer and that have been shown conclusively to be inaccurate were his presidential forecasts. It is these and only these which relate to the diocesan directive. Not once has Charlie or Beckita or any other post attempted to re-interpret their outcome. On the contrary Charlie has asked specifically that no-one try to do this. He has taken full responsibility for their inaccuracy. He could not have been more clear on this. No censure, stricture or request either implied or specified other than that relating to reinterpretation of the failed predictions about the election has been ordered or requested by the diocese. You do not use Charlie's own words against him. You abuse his words. More than that, you abuse the words of the Church against Charlie. The only activity of the father of lies here is in your unholy alliance, Dallaire and Co. Rarely have I seen such a lack of integrity and malicious disregard for the truth. Your sophistry is laughably limited in its vocabulary but unlimited in its evil intent which is to destroy the good name of a good man. Fallacious indeed but not me or Charlie.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 10:12 PM, thanks for bringing theses points up because now we should look back in time to when Charlie said prior to Obama finishing his 1st term that Obama would not finish his term, so was Charlie referring to term 1 or was he referring to term 1 plus term 2. This is actually paramount to discussing anything because if he was referring to term 1 then everything else Charlie said is really a moot point.
Again, Anon thanks for pointing out that we have abused Charlie's own words against him, that's why I believe it is imperative that we analyze the statement he made about Obama prior to term 1 ending, we really shouldn't be on Charlie's case until this issue is fully resolved because if it turns out that he was talking about term 1 - then case closed and Charlie would forever be a forgotten "Charlie" for lack of a better word.

Jackisback said...

Anonymous (at 10:12 PM),

Do we really need to go through this again? Perhaps so. You said:

--begin quoted text--
As far as the diocesan advice about Charlie is concerned the only events of 2016-17 to which they can refer and that have been shown conclusively to be inaccurate were his presidential forecasts. It is these and only these which relate to the diocesan directive.
--end quoted text--

The first point to make is that, in this quote, you bear false witness when you use the phrase "his presidential forecasts." These were not, at any time, professed by Charlie to be his forecasts, but rather, were at all times professed by Charlie to be repetitions of private revelations from God via his angel Gabriel - things he was specifically told, and to which he affirmed as a duty to repeat to any who would listen with an exclamatory "I have told you true."

Second, quoting from the Archdiocese in its entirety:

--begin quoted text--
Mrs. Beckie Hesse, using the online profile “Beckita,” stated in a Feb. 7, 2017 blog post titled “The RESCUE Has Begun” that the messages of the alleged visionary Mr. Charlie Johnston, who resides in the Archdiocese of Denver, “have been fully approved by the Church.” In order to ensure that the faithful are correctly informed, it is necessary to publicly state that Mrs. Hesse’s claim is false.
In fact, Mr. Johnston’s alleged messages were reviewed by an archdiocesan theological commission and Archbishop Samuel J. Aquila determined that the faithful should be warned to be prudent and cautious about Mr. Johnston’s predictions. In addition, Mr. Johnston is not permitted to speak in Church-owned venues in the Archdiocese of Denver. Read Archbishop Aquila’s message here.
The events of 2016/17 have shown that Mr. Johnston’s alleged visions were not accurate and the Archdiocese urges the faithful not to condone or support further attempts to reinterpret them as valid.
--end quoted text--

Note that the reference to messages in the first two paragraphs is not limited to the alleged private revelation of Obama not finishing his term. The Archdiocese, in part, is responding to Beckita's references to Charlie's messages having to do with the alleged private revelation concerning the "rescue" (because the title of her post was "The Rescue Has Begun."

Paragraph three references Aquila's March 2016 statement - which also does not restrict the subject matter to Charlie's presidential prophecy.

In paragraph four, the Archdiocese references events in both 2016 and 2017. Since the inauguration took place in 2017 (and was the event that precisely invalidated the presidential prophecy) there would be no need to reference events in 2016 if the Archdiocese were limiting its rebuke to the presidential prophecy. The Archdiocese could be referencing a lack of cataclysmic events in 2016/2017 to the effect that Charlie's alleged private revelations concerning the nature of the storm were inaccurate. The most we can say is that it's uncertain. But because they do not specify precisely what they meant, the burden of proof rests upon you to prove your asertion that they meant to precisely limit their rebuke of "not accurate" with respect to "visions" (in the plural) only to the single revelation Charlie heard about the presidential prophecy. Why mention "messages" or "visions" in the plural if only referring to the presidential prophecy alleged revelation? You have not come close to meeting the burden of proof here.

Jackisback said...

Again to Anonymous (at 10:12 PM),

The archdiocese may be rebuking as "not accurate" all of Charlie's alleged "visions" including, especially, the alleged vision concerning the "rescue," because they took Charlie at his word that the presidential prophecy was a major revelation - "a sign" - as Charlie put it, the purpose of which was to hearten Charlie's followers so as to have faith in the coming rescue. It would be understandable, given Charlie's words in his post "The Election...and Other Potential Triggers" (dated August 28,2016):

--begin quoted text--
I have told you two things that are definitive: that after Barack Obama failed to finish his full term the next stable national leader would not come from the political system and that the Rescue will come late in 2017 after all have lost hope. Hope WILL be an act of the will then, so you must gird your loins for the time when there is no cause for hope other than your faith – and your faith must be much more than a fluffy, comforting emotion when that time comes. I did NOT tell you about the fractured transfer of power coming so you would know the mind of God and confidently espouse details of His secret plan. I told you almost solely so that when it happens, whether in the way you expect or in a different way that matches the specific message I have conveyed, it will give you confidence that I have told you true concerning the Rescue. As society crumbles ever more frantically, you are really going to need that assurance then to fortify yourself for the rest of the Storm.
--end quoted text--

It's clear that Charlie is connecting his alleged private revelation about Obama not finishing his term to three things: the alleged "crash" (as society crumbles) the "rest of the storm" (likely referring to the "five fundamentals") and the "rescue."

Charlie, in that same post, then doubles down:

--begin quoted text--
If, next January, Barack Obama peacefully hands over the reins of power to Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, I will declare myself unreliable and go away. But it will not happen that way, for God has appointed that this be a sign to you to fortify you to trust Him and choose the ordinary way to follow Him through the most frightening year for the globe in history. I appeal to you to quit trying to flatter yourself that you have figured out how God is going to accomplish this, for that way leads to destruction. Trust Him and follow Him whatever happens.

I have told you true.
--end quoted text--

The archdiocese could be referring to "visions" (and maybe all eight) - Charlie's "eight things that he insists on" - by virtue of Charlie's connection of the presidential prophecy as a "sign" to "fortify" his followers during the "rest of the storm" and to give "confidence" to his followers that Charlie had told them true "concerning the rescue." There is no limit in the statement's reference to "messages" or "visions" in the plural. The burden of proof remains on you to show otherwise. You have met no such burden. You have merely assert it must be so, because you say so (classic "ipse dixit" logical fallacy - which is very boring at this point).

The failure on January 20, 2017 means that Charlie bore false witness about the alleged private revelation which he had attributed to God. He either succumbed to deception, committing a blasphemy by his own standards, or, he never truly had a private revelation (still a blasphemy committed for reasons we cannot yet know). Either way, the archdiocese could have concluded, by natural extension, that all other alleged messages or visions to which Charlie connected his "sign" must also be inaccurate by default. The archdiocese does not say for certain, but your claim of limiting the meaning of their statement is not on solid ground.

L Spinelli said...

Anon @10:12

This is how I and most people interpreted the Feb 15 statement:

The events of 2016/17 have shown that Mr. Johnston’s alleged visions were not accurate and the Archdiocese urges the faithful not to condone or support further attempts to reinterpret them as valid.

Everything that happened in 2016 and 2017 showed that none of Charlie Johnston's visions about the future were accurate. Don't condone (the definition of which I helpfully provided above from Webster's Dictionary), reinterpret or revisit any of them.

How much clearer can one get than that?

Anonymous said...

Hello Jackisback,

I want to sincerely thank you for your very comprehensive posts. I was one of those people who got caught up into Charlie Johnston's prophecies. I caused my wife and kids much grief with the prepping for the internment camps and world wide economic collapse. Every time I feel myself drawn back to Charlie's nonsense I read one of your analyses gives me a shot of common sense and reality.

God bless you.

Glenn Dallaire said...

To Anon at 10:12pm 6/4/2017:

Well, to be very frank, firstly there is no "alliance" here. Those who have read through the 1255 comments on this article will find that there is a wide variety of viewpoints and perspectives here, though the majority of comments as of late are obviously not in support of Charlie's alleged "prophecies"--and this is quite understandable given the total failure rate in this regard up to this point.

Secondly, in your comment you are obviously attempting to setup some sort of straw-man collusion of people here supposedly all against Charlie. Well, I think its obvious to most folks who visit and read the comments here that such is not the case. What one does find here is a number of folks bringing forward statements with pertaining facts to support them. So, my suggestion to you therefore if you choose to comment any further, would be to provide documented facts to support the point(s) that you wish to convey.

Finally, one thing that you seem to want to strongly convey in your comment is that the only prophecy that Charlie has been conclusively wrong about is the "Presidential prophecy" (which it should be pointed out was actually two separate predictions, both of which completely failed).

And so, setting aside the failure of the "Presidential prophecy" for now, moving forward maybe you can kindly list for the various prophecies that have come true that Charlie has successfully predicted in advance? I think that this would be a great starting point for further discussion.

After all, now that we are in June 2017, time is really getting quite short for us to undergo the five public prophecies that Charlie insists upon prior to the alleged "Rescue" in late 2017, that being:
"The continued toppling of governments throughout the world, including that of the U.S, The confrontation with and fall of political Islam with the mass conversion of most Muslims, The confrontation between the Judeo-Christian world and the current government of China, and the alliance between Russia and the U.S. to lead the Judeo-Christian world to endure the confrontation with China."

So, with time so short for all these predicted things to happen in the next few months, I think it would be great if you could provide a few of Charlie's successful prophecies, to help authenticate him having "told us true".

Thank you in advance.
Glenn Dallaire

L Spinelli said...

Hi Glenn. Anonymous won't be able to provide any such list. It doesn't exist. Also, any TNRS henchman that came here wasn't able to answer that question. Here's the supporting commentary:

I do remember Charlie telling you that he didn't have time to do your homework (to find them (whatever Charlie got "right") on his site). Charlie and everyone from TNRS have been quizzed on this to no avail. Now the new mantra is that they are with his spiritual directors and locked up somewhere at the diocese - I believe, not to be released until Charlie's work has been completed and his documents reviewed - this may be wishful thinking on their part - quite frankly I don't think there's a need. I think there is a cover-up on this issue by them but it is a core pillar of his messages or whatever you call them.

February 8, 2017 at 10:27 PM

Jackisback said...

To Anonymous (at 11:49 AM),

You are most welcome. Don't beat yourself up over the past.

It's ironic that Charlie has been on record many times saying "the end is not nigh," and yet, he and his supporters cling to the notion that something very much closer to armageddon-but-not-quite (in contrast with the fairly standard level of worldwide chaos that we are accustomed to) is nigh - examples: collapse of technology, financial collapse (complete currency devaluation, inability to use an ATM, being forced into a barter system, etc.) "global" civil war, things getting so bad that one "may have to flee," etc.

All of these, though they are "only," or "merely," stated as "interpretations" derived from his alleged visions, Charlie has defended vigorously - he stands by them even though he makes no claim of being specifically told that these interpretations would come to pass in a precise way or precise time (but definitely before the end of 2017). From a "salesmanship" point of view, it always made sense to me that he would stand by these ideas, along with the "five fundamentals" (which are purported to be actual specific revelations that "he was told about") because it is much more convenient to believe in these things in order to justify a need for a "rescue." Without those things occurring, without it becoming so bad that all would lose hope (even Charlie) what exactly would the Blessed Virgin Mary be rescuing us from?

The purveying of such self-reinforcing ideas, while they always struck me as too clever by half, have an appeal to them because in the end we would all theoretically get to eyewitness dramatic real action, in real time, by Mary herself (with the added benefit of this being undeniable by non-believers around the globe) in our lifetimes, in our own temporal world.

There is cleverness too in the lecturing (or hectoring?) from Charlie that the purpose of letting you know about these storm & rescue revelations is to appeal to your natural duty as a Catholic to love your neighbor - encouraging you to "prep" with the "Peppy Prepper" -
not to save yourself, but rather so as to help others who are unprepared.

But notice that the alleged Marian rescue, in our lifetimes, in our temporal world, bringing a long period of unity and peace in this world, is conflated with other Marian appearances and the "messages" ascribed to her (as in Fatima). It is easy to miss the fact that what Charlie has described is something very much new and very much in addition to actual, historic Catholic Church revelation of Jesus found in the Scriptures, in addition to the Sacraments, and in addition to Tradition (especially concerning the Book of Revelation, as written by the early Church fathers). It is also different from most other mystics' chronologies (according to Mark Mallett, of whom I have no opinion, but of whom Charlie had been a huge fan, who pointed this out as far back as May 6, 2016 on his own website (www.markmallett.com) in the blog entry "Fear, Fire and a Rescue?"). As they say, read the whole thing.

That it is something extra, something added, is what ought to raise one's antennae, but it is understandable why that wouldn't happen with everyone who listened to Charlie, because the end result sounds so beautiful - or dare I say "tickling to the ear?" Because the end result sounds so wonderful, it seems to naturally lend credibility, however unwarranted, to Charlie's dire alledged private revelations concerning the so-called "storm."

Anonymous said...

What a load of rubbish and like most rubbish that lies around it stinks and is toxic. I repeat that the only events prophesied by Charlie that covered the years 2016 and 2017 and were shown to be conclusively wrong in their content were the two that said Obama would not complete his term of office and that Donald Trump would not serve as President. In quoting these years the church was very specific. Nobody has tried to reinterpret these failures and the Church has not even tried to silence Charlie or advised anyone to ignore him. As with all such claims to private revelation the Church has, as always, advised caution and Charlie has advised his friends to trust only in God unlike the three stooges, Freddy Krueger, Jack Ass and A nonentity who it seems would like everyone to trust in their erroneous and harmful word that breaks all the laws of charity. I, for one, prefer to take Charlie's word on this one and trust in God. You Glenn, own this site and as such are complicit in the offense of your posters despite your denial of any responsibility for the false witness and injurious accusations promoted by your axis.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous above,

Can you tell us a SINGLE prophecy that Charlie got correct? And don't give us the crap that he's right about "the grand sweep of things."

Anonymous said...

Try doing something useful. Desist from this mindless vendetta against Charlie and look at the latest article from Charlie that defends life and liberty. Wipe the film from your eyes and flush out your ears and try to grasp what it means to be a soldier of Christ....willing to admit his mistake and to move on in service of the Lord. Like Peter. While you are at it look at the marvellous articles that Beckita has published in her short time at the helm. Give peace a chance. Give truth a turn. I do not have much faith that you will try to change for the better and suspect you will once again turn on Charlie perverting his wisdom and using his words against him. That is the nature of evil : relentless malice. Once again I reiterate I follow Christ, not Charlie but I believe that much of Charlie's wisdom comes from his prayer and meditation and fasting and all the aids of the Roman Catholic Faith. The best of us gets it wrong from time to time but only the very best get back in the saddle and try again and again and again.

Anonymous said...

The point is A nonentity that Charlie is right in far more than he is wrong. I do not refer to prophesy but to understanding and perception and witness. You would love me to say that I cannot tell you of a prophesy that Charlie has got correct and then you will say "Aha I told you so". The very nature of prophesies about the future, however, requires the future to confirm their validity. Be patient - and shut up until you have something worthwhile to say.

L Spinelli said...

Mindless vendetta

So according to Anonymous, facts and the documentation to back them up are vendettas. Well, of course they are when no one at TNRS can answer simple questions and deflect at every turn...

...the three stooges, Freddy Krueger, Jack Ass and A nonentity who it seems would like everyone to trust in their erroneous and harmful word that breaks all the laws of charity.

I'm honored to be in their company. They make sense, unlike you!

But where's my cool-sounding name?

Can you tell us a SINGLE prophecy that Charlie got correct? And don't give us the crap that he's right about "the grand sweep of things.

June 5, 2017 at 10:58 PM

The point is A nonentity that Charlie is right in far more than he is wrong. I do not refer to prophesy but to understanding and perception and witness.


There's you go, folks! He's right on everything except the very thing we've been debating and the Archdiocese doesn't want anyone revisiting: prophecy!

Be patient - and shut up until you have something worthwhile to say.

No.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous above:
I would agree with you that Charlie is just an ordinary "Joe". Charlie by your own admission is simply someone prodding through life like the rest of us - He makes mistakes and gets up and keeps trying to get it right - I can relate to that. It seems that Charlie doesn't have any more special abilities than anyone else. In fact, I'm beginning to realize that it's not about Charlie - even you and your followers acknowledge that, even Charlie himself, so where do we turn? I guess you and your group the TNRSers like the comradery with each other and that is your group, I've moved on from Charlie as I prefer other groups and so have many other ex-TNRSers. I think you are right we should "shut up" about Charlie - Charlie is nothing special, Charlie has been overblown. In time we can compare him to say Gerald Celente or Peter Schiff or even some of my gifted friends and apply " the very nature of prophesies about the future, however, requires the future to confirm their validity" At this point in time I've shifted away from Charlie and follow Mr. Celente who has a better track record as does Mr. Schiff - in fact I've seen Mr. Schiff go into a hostile crowd and take abuse and not once throw an insult back at anyone despite the abuse - now there's a man to admire!

Anonymous said...

"Charlie is right in far more than he is wrong. I do not refer to prophesy but to understanding and perception and witness."
If its not about prophecy, but understanding, perception and witness then I can say that we should be looking locally, as our Priest said, "do the little things in your own world don't worry about changing the entire world, do what you can do in your own world" - we have people in our own communities that can provide understanding, perception and witness - use them and realize we have people at hand.

Anonymous said...

Even satan knew how to quote scripture against Christ. It takes guts to admit before the whole world of the world that you were wrong and then to advance in integrity and altruism like Charlie has done. There can be a huge difference between fact and truth - perhaps that is where your coo name comes in Spin Doctor - one who put a spin on the facts to make them look like truth. It makes an L of a difference. L Spin Helli or becaue it appears you do not have the guts to face the truth about the Church directive and the good work that TNRS has done it should be Little Spine.

Anonymous said...

once again I say the archdiocese has requested that no spin should be put on only the the presidential prophesies. No spin has been spun and no spin is needed on anything else that has been prophesied because their time has not yet come but I am sure you will put an L of Spin on it anyway Elli. You can't help yourself.

Anonymous said...

How did you make some comments disappear - with a little help from your ally perhaps.

Jackisback said...

To Anonymous (6/4/17 at 10:12 PM),

--begin quoted text--
Not once has Charlie or Beckita or any other post attempted to re-interpret their outcome.
--end quoted text--

Not so. First is the FOCUSTV interview. Charlie nodded his head in agreement when the interviewer stated that it was possible that the revelation had been somehow incorrectly interpreted by Charlie, that this mystical communication business was "harder than it looks." The attempt was made to cast the alleged revelation as not being invalid at all, ab initio; but rather, as a misunderstanding of the revelation on Charlie's part.

The clear design of this exchange was to reinterpret that the source of his alleged revelation was yet of God. This insulted the intelligence of the discerners, as if they hadn't noticed every prior instance when Charlie described this revelation in terms of "I was told" and/or as a "sign from God" that Charlie had "told us true."

If the video isn't proof enough, we have Charlie's blog entry "Lord Save Us; We Perish"
Posted on May 23, 2017 by charliej373

--begin quoted text--
Whether I was deceived or I badly misinterpreted, I made a terrible blunder in how I interpreted that Obama would not finish his full term.
--end quoted text--

Yet, Charlie didn't interpret that Obama would not finish his full term; Charlie was told that Obama would not finish his full term. This is a reinterpretation, written by Charlie.

In the comments of the "Ave Maria, Stella Maris" blog, we witness the following gems of reinterpretation:

--begin quoted text--
Kris says:
January 22, 2017 at 2:46 pm
Dear Charlie,these thoughts are exactly mine and my families. My message to my sister right after the inauguration ceremony was that ‘this was a message that we MUST truly rely on our relationship with the Holy Spirit to guide us. This is the way it was always meant to be’ So Charlie, I always said, ‘we will see’ to everything while taking to heart the center of your message. I do not feel this was a failure. Simply that we do not know God’s plan in its fullness. I know exactly what you mean by your reference to being run out of town. I am sorry that you will have this bitter leaf in your mouth for a while, but I know full well God will give you the sweetness in your taste buds once again. You have told us true and God’s grace has changed many hearts to be at peace and trust Him. You did well. My family and I looked forward to your posts from week to week and now we will grieve them. But we also have gained so much. Please take care, and go in peace.
--end quoted text--

--begin quoted text--
Laura says:
January 21, 2017 at 10:17 am
This has been anything but a peaceful transfer of power. The rejection and rioting in the streets and heart of man is proof. Just because there was no big disaster yesterday in Washington, there are Groups in Washington D.C. causing disruoption, and to undermind the New President. We need to continue to Acknowledge God. Do the right next thing, and be a sign of hope to all people! Thank You Charlie
Liked by 9 people
--end quoted text--

Note, no corrections from Charlie.

Jackisback said...

Here are a few more examples:

--begin quoted text--
Deacon Joe Murphy. Murf says:
January 21, 2017 at 10:19 am
Charlie,
This Sunday’s Gospel Jesus begins his public ministry with the words. REpent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
What if………. Charlie,……. your warnings and those of many others caused a great many in this GReat Country to put on sack cloth and ashes ……and began to beg God for a stay. Would He not respond? Maybe, just maybe, we have become a Godly nation again through the Immaculat Heart of Mary. Maybe just maybe our nation has risen up and said enough. What if our new president appoints judges that will finally overturn the evil slaughter. What if we all begin to live the commandments. I would like to know what God reveals to you about why you (seem) to be wrong. Maybe the Unfathomable Mercy of God has poured out once again on this great Country. GOd Bless you Charlie
Liked by 6 people
--end quoted text—

This one may be my personal favorite: the Trump inauguration is the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary? Perfect. No need for a visible rescue after all!

Then this beauty, where Michael quotes Charlie asking his friends to avoid reinterpretation, followed by Michael's reinterpretation:

--begin quoted text--
Michael says:
January 21, 2017 at 10:54 am
“I ask my friends to avoid trying to find scenarios in which I was somehow right on this.”

This is the right way to go and I admire you for it. But I am reminded of a prediction I recall from another apparition. I lived near the Jersey Shore in the early 90s. It was not far from an alleged apparition of Our Lady shortly before and for some time after the First Gulf War. I was very moved by the place. I went once with a skeptical friend. We each felt the softest breeze and smelled the most sublime and wonderful scent at the time the apparition began. I felt a peace that is indescribable. It was a glorious personal spiritual experience.

Anyway, before the war with Iraq, Our Lady was said to have told the visionary that “The war will last a very long time.” Between my experience there and the apparent short duration of the war (100 hours) I felt a sort of cognitive dissonance. In hindsight, that ground campaign was followed by Operations Northern and Southern Watch and then by Operation Iraqi Freedom. My son, who was about two when we lived in New Jersey, just returned home from another iteration of the war in Iraq. I now believe that prediction, that seemed so false, was more accurate than anything else said about the subject.
Liked by 9 people
--end quoted text--

Again, no correction from Charlie.

And another:

--begin quoted text--
Vivi says:
January 21, 2017 at 11:11 am
Dear Charlie,

Thank you for all you have done. But this is my two cents. I dont do it quiet often. I agree we all expected external signs. Truly, after meditating what your Angel said No rebuke yet, and after watching the inaguration yesterday. That was not peaceful at all. Did you really listen ( readers) to what Trump said? All against the evil establishment. I dont see any any peaceful transfer. Look at the world today news comments all against trump. Is this peaceful? Truly it is not. I have no doubt the Angel of God was wrong because God is never wrong. Therefore, we are just reading between the lines n expected obama to declare martial law. Well, God never said that. Thats for sure.

Our Lord was born in silence. His moves are not ours. I respect what you will do and pray for more discernment but not just you but all of us. This has passed only in a different way that we were expecting. Trump is not going to have it easy he has the world against him except Russia.

This is a lesson for us not just Charlie. We need to pray more and be that sign to the world.

Charlie please pray for me and my family.
Liked by 6 people
--end quoted text--

And you guessed it, no correction from Charlie.

Jackisback said...

But wait, there's more...

Here's an interesting one that, while not a literal reinterpretation of the prophecy as valid, attempts to make the absurd case that Charlie's humility in pledging to "go away" at the failure of the prophecy is actually selfish behaviour on Charlie's part, and that he should, in the name of God, bear false witness to his own pledge and continue on as before. That is bizarre fruit indeed:

--begin quoted text--
Randy131 says:
January 21, 2017 at 11:42 am
“Some have worried that by withdrawing from the public scene, I am abandoning them. I could not, in honor, have done other than I have done here these last few years … But I also promised that I would take full responsibility for the things I said and did. That promise obligates me, in honor, to withdraw from the public scene.”

So many will believe that when humbled by GOD, that their “honor” becomes more important than the task they were assigned by GOD, and the promise to accomplish that task, and quit, as Jonah originally tried to do. Of all that I have read about Saints and Prophets, I come to believe, whether right or wrong, that GOD does not allow direct actions and times to be prophesized, do to the fact that then His people would turn to the one who has successfully prophesized, instead of to GOD who makes everything happen according to His will. GOD wants us to come to Him, not Charlie Johnston, but apparently GOD also wants Charlie Johnston to help lead His peoplke during the time of the “Storm” back to Him, and to do this you must be humble and overcome obstacles, which your prophetic version of what has just happened to our government, is that obstacle of humility, whether you believe that you need it or not. Is now really the time to quit, at the threshold of all that GOD has shown you, and asked you to help us get through, and return to Him?
Like
--end quoted text--

Here is a more blatant one, again uncorrected by Charlie:

--begin quoted text--
weathertop says:
January 21, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Charlie I appreciate your humility and integrity. I don’t believe there’s been a peaceful transfer of power. I know you said you wouldn’t entertain comments such as this, but I feel compelled to express my opinion anyway. You’re a smart guy and experienced in politics. I have no doubt that the sexual left will continue to attempt to undermine derail or violently oppose Trump’s agenda. The community organizer and his globalist cabal of backers are not going away. The fake news media and their minions in the streets are going to push this until it becomes violent. The soft coup that was being attempted prior to the inauguration continues. I believe that there has been no peaceful transition of power and that two sides are coming interview much more clearly now. I hope you reconsider your decision two step back from active Ministry. Thank you for your efforts so far. I look forward to hearing from you again shortly. God bless.
Liked by 6 people
--end quoted text--

I could go on, but there are the remaining assertions of your comment from June 4 (at 10:12 PM) to test in the spirit of discernment.

Anonymous said...

Jack, Have you ever sent a collection of your posts on Charlie to the archdiocese of Denver? It would be good to have them have the benefit of your hard work and discernment. Many thanks for your clear and unflinching analysis!!

L Spinelli said...

There can be a huge difference between fact and truth

My brain just broke.

BTW, I'm glad to know that presenting facts without putting my own "spin" on them isn't the same thing as the truth. I'm enlightened!

Fred Keyes said...

Ah, yes L.

"Fact and truth"—the infamous "alternative truth." A lot has been written lately about the post-truth era we are living in.

Good article on the topic here by conservative writer Charlie Sykes from America Media (by the editors of America Magazine): https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/#inbox/15c7a11720da320c

Fred Keyes said...

So sorry. Wrong URL. Here it is:

http://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/06/05/charlie-sykes-its-time-put-truth-political-tribe?utm_source=Newsletters&utm_campaign=8dfa0e9772-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_06_05&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0fe8ed70be-8dfa0e9772-57325585

Fred Keyes said...

One can look at The TNRSers as one of Sykes' "tribes." They certainly stick together despite all logic and reality. I suppose we all do that to a certain extent. Serls awareness and reason are key in overcoming such bias.

[Glenn--any way to add an "edit" or "delete" feature for comments?]

Anonymous said...

Charlie has authored yet another new post today on "Beckita's" website, NRS. In it he urges his followers to take action on the Daleiden case, soliciting donations for legal defense. Apparently he wants to become a political player of some kind. Will he ever be published outside of his own blog, though? Should all this be mixed with the blog containing his failed prophecies?

Glenn Dallaire said...


To Anonymous @10:37pm:
You wrote:
"...As with all such claims to private revelation the Church has, as always, advised caution and Charlie has advised his friends to trust only in God unlike the three stooges, Freddy Krueger, Jack Ass and A nonentity who it seems would like everyone to trust in their erroneous and harmful word that breaks all the laws of charity."
-----------

Firstly, do you honestly think that such name calling is helping to defend Charlie or his cause?

Secondly, Fred and Jack have consistently provided facts and quotes to document their perspectives and positions, and have done so in a respectful and charitable manner, yet somehow you accuse them of "breaking the laws of charity"?
I think those who read through these comments here will easily see the truth regarding your false accusations.

In the future, I suggest that instead of limiting yourself to name calling and erroneous accusations, perhaps you could bring forth some worthwhile facts and subject matter for discussion?

May God bless you and your loved ones,
Glenn Dallaire

Glenn Dallaire said...

Fred,
When you post a comment, beneath your post next to the date/time you will see a garbage can---with this you can delete your comment, if you choose to do so. Unfortunately there is no way to edit a comment once it has been posted, so what you can do however is copy your comment, then edit it the way you would like, then post a new edited comment, then delete the old comment.
-Hope this helps!
Thanks for all of your comments here.
Glenn

L Spinelli said...

I just read Charlie's latest piece. My feeling is the truth about this whole Daeliden/Merritt/PP matter lies somewhere in between what was reported in the MSM and Charlie's colored by the far right take.

I wouldn't look to Charlie to get an objective read on the situation. Then again, his readers referenced news aggregates like Spirit Daily or LifeSiteNews...again, not unbiased news sources.

Fred Keyes said...

Thanks Glenn. Maybe it's just my computer but no garbage can shows up on the messages I post. The date and time stamp are there in blue, but that's all.

Anonymous said...

Hi Glenn
Nothing that you or supporters have said provides one shred of evidence that Charlie or Beckita have disobeyed the Church either in letter or spirit. As for our resident spin doctor(s) if you cannot see that facts and truth can be different then you are beyond help. It is a favourite tool of the great deceiver. Quite frankly I don't believe that you cannot see this. The way that facts are presented can readily give a false impression as you well know. From 101 philosophy: 1+1=2 is a fact but 2=1+1 is true but not fact. What 2 equals can be represented in any number of ways. Just so it is a fact that Charlie's words have been published but how they add up depends on an infinite number of factors eg, the observer, context, motivation etc. As for name calling it seem that you support your gang of four in their right to do this either directly or indirectly. Pot and black come to mind. It seems you can dish it out but not take it. Your vile attempts to discredit Charlie and destroy his good name is is not a debate, it is a debacle. I have had a laugh at your expense but you really should try the truth. There is also a difference between mistake and lies. There is too much evidence that contributions here from the enemies of Charlie are a deliberate attempt to discredit him by presenting facts as truth. There is nothing funny about that. It has been said that truth without love is cruelty. We have all been guilty of that. Such cruelty has no place in Christianity. In fact I would say that Truth cannot exist without love - only the cold hard facts.

Fred Keyes said...

I side with David Delaiden, certainly, but on balance Charlie's latest blast is not helpful. His hair-on-fire, hyperbolic statements, filled with left/right dialectic are too easily dismissed by pro-abortion proponents and especially by those who are unsure about therapeutic abortion.

We live in a wheat and tare world (Mt 13:24 ff). California is not all evil as Charlie would have it, and yes, there are deep flaws as well. It serves his purpose though to paint the state (and the judiciary in general) with a black brush because it enhances the TNRS vision of The Storm. I'd love to see Charlie carry out his pro-birth stance to a true pro-life position which works to support and enhance life in all its stages from cradle to death.

Fred Keyes said...

Anon: Would you please cite your source from Philosophy 101 that makes your 1+1=2 a fact but not 2=1+1?

Wait, you said "101 philosophy." Philosophy 101 is probably a different course.

Anonymous said...

The directive of the church was given on February 15 2017. The enemies of Charlie here quote comments made before that date to support their propaganda. That is a prime example of their obfuscation. And now you sink to a new low - compromising Charlie's pro-life work and casting doubts on its efficacy and integrity. It seems that anything goes in your vile campaign - even the protection of life in the womb is fair game. Thanks God that not many read this site. May the mystics in heaven whose lives are recorded here destroy its lies and bring its perpetrators of death and destruction to account especially now that the destruction potentially extends to the lives of unborn children....and all for the sake of making a point, all for the sake of bringing Charlie down. Shame on you. I will not cheapen Charlies great work by contributing here to this farce any longer. "Your own words have said it."

L Spinelli said...

It serves his purpose though to paint the state (and the judiciary in general) with a black brush because it enhances the TNRS vision of The Storm. I'd love to see Charlie carry out his pro-birth stance to a true pro-life position which works to support and enhance life in all its stages from cradle to death.

Very well said, Fred, especially the last sentence.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 5:04 and 5:37

You sound an awful lot like Joe Crozier. He, too, periodically appears here, rants, and then says he is leaving, only to come return.

If you are Joe, doesn't Charlie's acknowledged-but-untreated bipolar disorder give you pause? Mental illness is a big red flag according to the Vatican in its guidelines on discerning purported apparitions.

Perhaps you could ask him how his illness might interact with his messages.

L Spinelli said...

Hello and goodbye Joe. This member of the Gang of Four (and Glenn as well, I'm sure) is on to you.

Who's putting Charlie down for his pro-life work? Besides what he posted yesterday, no one knows what he's doing behind the scenes. That's his business and a completely separate issue from his false prophecies.

Charlie may be a "tireless pro-life warrior", but he's a flawed one. Threatening critics with lawsuits and putting people's posts up to gaslight them because they had the nerve to disagree with him aren't things that Jesus and the saintly Mystics ever did.

That doesn't change the fact that Charlie isn't the best source to go to if one is looking for the story without any political slant.

Anonymous said...


Setting aside the differences in opinion for a moment, the question now really is whether Charlie's message and website is really even relevant to people anymore, given the current statistics shown here:
https://www.similarweb.com/website/charliej373.wordpress.com#overview

As the link above shows, his website visitors have dropped quite dramatically since the failure of the Presidential prophecy this past January (which is of course very understandable). In Dec 2016 his website had approx 120,000 visitors, and in recent months it is down to roughly 10,000 for an entire month, or approx 330 visits per day. Apparently no one really cares what Beckita has to say?

One can only imagine that this visitors will continue to plummet, as the remaining prophecies continue to fail by the end of the year.

With interest dwindling down to almost nothing, who then really cares at this point? With the prophecy failure most have apparently learned their lesson and walked away.

Anonymous said...

What are you all really about? What really is your heart's desire, your goal in life? People have been murdered by terrorists in London and Australia in recent days. And you are here spending precious God given life and time fighting over a apparent fraud, a proven pseudo prophet. You are still duped! Go pray for the dead and their families, peace on Earth, get away from your device and go out and help someone in need. The effects of any storm are mitigated by peaceful resistance. Time to put this to bed, go out and do what Jesus and his apostles would do. Resist the life limiting drain of the disproved prophet, pray unceasingly and be His hands and feet in this broken world.

L Spinelli said...

To both Anonymous posters above:

I naively (because I underestimated the fanaticism of the TNRS people) thought this would be put to bed on January 20 and February 15.

Charlie broke his pledge to stay away, as Jack noted, and posted twice in the last two weeks. This isn't much different than his glory days of 2015 and 2016.

As long as Charlie and his "core nutters" are still around and ignoring the Archdiocese directive, they should be held to account.

L Spinelli said...

Oh, and don't be concerned about me not doing anything for God. (I'm sure Jack, Fred and the others do what they can - but they can speak for themselves.) I'm active in my parish and an active Legion of Mary member. It might not look like much, but it's my own little way.

Fred Keyes said...

Anon @ 6:35— how much time do you think keeping up with this thread takes? A few minutes a day at most. Don't worry, our lives go on.

We serve a purpose here--something like the microscopic blood cells that attack an infection to the body. We all have a role to play. And we keep at it until healing happens.

Your assignment: See 1Cor 12:12 ff.

Anonymous said...

We all struggle with moods. We would hardly be human if we did not. Without this struggle we would not have saints. Have you read about the struggles of Mother Theresa. Think of the dark night of the soul. Teenagers are especially prone to mood swings. There is a saying going back to 400BC "Those whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad." This is what you are doing in trying to present Charlie's mood struggles as a form of clinical insanity. If you make people think he is insane then they will give no credence to his commentary.

Are Charlie's struggles with mood a stumbling block for God to use him? Not in the least. There are countless examples of God's strength and purpose reigning over and through the weaknesses of His chosen instruments... and He chooses to use each of us in ways only His Perfect Plan and Perfect Love deems best.

St Paul talks about the thorn in his side - something about himself that he absolutely hated. He begged God to remove it but God said "My grace is sufficient." He said "My power is made perfect in weakness." After that Paul was content to live with his weakness.

All that said, Charlie did reveal once that he has struggled with mood shifts and was offered medication WHEN HE WAS A TEENAGER but he NEVER said he was diagnosed with bi-polar disorder. To say otherwise is not true. My undergraduate study included clinical psychology. There are more than a few medical conditions which present with similar symptoms as bipolar. In the old days the term bipolar was not even used but the condition was referred to as manic/depression. Charlie was never diagnosed with this either.

Here is the exchange from TNRS which contains Charlies's revelation: the first part is from a reader identified as Amolynick.

August 18, 2014 at 8:31 pm

"I’ve just found your website and enjoy reading it very much. I have been in a dark place for a few years now and am feeling very apathetic regarding what will happen next. I just struggle with how not to be a burden to my family (when having battled depression all my life is quite the battle). Hard to know – other then praying – how to be hope to anyone when I struggle daily with this and many days can’t manage to utter even a few words to those around me. I have tried everything I know short of medication and have had times of success only then to be taken back to deep sadness. I will pray for your continue hope and your readers and of course that God can put value on all this sadness."

to be continued

Joe Crozier

Anonymous said...

This is Charlie's response:

charliej373 says:
August 20, 2014 at 12:40 pm

"Thank you for joining us, Amolynick. I have people close to me who have suffered extended periods of depression. I, myself, have mild manic symptoms – sometimes up and a ball of fire and others struggling to get through the day. When still a teen, a therapist suggested certain medications to blunt the valleys. I pondered it – then asked him if it would take away the peaks, as well. He said it would. So I declined. I can be amazingly productive, insightful and inspirational during my peak periods. I did not want to lose that…and figured I could discipline myself to do the basics during the bad periods even if I didn’t feel it until I would pull out of the downsides naturally. I knew a man who had been in multiple hopeless situations and I admired how steadfastly he lived his faith through those periods. I told him once that I knew there had been several times I knew of when he had to have been hopeless – and yet performed magnificently – and asked how he got through those. In one of the wisest things anyone ever said to me, he said, “Well, when things around me are completely hopeless, I pretend to have hope. And if I do it for enough days, eventually that pretend hope becomes real hope again.” God bless you…and may you be able to “fake it until you make it” as they say in AA circles."

I had a brother who was a sober member of AA from the age of 19 until he died at the age of 50. There were over 1500 people at his funeral most of whom he had helped through their addiction. He often resorted to the tactic "Fake it to make it" and it worked for him" He lived with his weakness but it never weakened the message he could carry to sustain others. He was their sign of hope. He introduced me to some who had not been able to stay on the wagon. They made mistakes but they climbed back on board and continued the good fight just as Charlie is doing. At this time his good fight is the fight to preserve and protect life in the womb. There is nothing flawed in this endeavour. By presenting Charlie as mentally incompetent or flawed, you increase the vulnerability of the unborn child to abortion. Of course this is where lies always lead - death.

"Love your neighbor as yourself" is well demonstrated in this wonderful example of Charlie's solicitude and empathy and you have used it as a weapon to destroy truth. No matter what atrocities are going on in the world it is never a waste of time to defend the truth. Without the truth we are truly lost. Without truth Life has no meaning or purpose and leads nowhere. Our Christian martyrs died for the truth. They did not kill for it. You have tried repeatedly to kill the truth about Charlie with your warped and malicious perspective.

Without truth there is no freedom. - "Know the Truth and the Truth will set you free." As Fr Mike says "Freedom is not the power to do what I want but the power to do what I aught."

To this end God wants our hearts more than our healing - with all their weaknesses so that His Power may be perfected in us. Sorry for sounding preachy but thank you for giving me this contemplation.

Joe Crozier

Anonymous said...

It will take a huge effort on my part not to say "I told you so" to the destroyers and detractors here, if one day soon Charlie is called forth for all to see what God may have chosen him yet to do, after literally, a lifetime of preparation. Nope. Instead I hope I will find the grace to extend a warm welcome to all who wish to be fed with the faith, hope and encouragement of those of us who choose to move forward in solidarity to face the living hell phase of the Storm as Charlie calls it, as we cling to Our Lord and Our Lady while lifting one another in Their Love and Care. I am sure that Beckita and Charlie are thinking along the same lines.

I always have Garabandal in which my faith has never faltered. I say with 100% confidence - the events prophesied at Garabandal will come to pass. All we have to do meantime is live the messages.

Joe Crozier

Anonymous said...

Joe Crozier,

By presenting Charlie as mentally incompetent or flawed, you increase the vulnerability of the unborn child to abortion.

Charlie presented himself as mentally flawed. This is not an illness that goes away, but rather progresses. I do Charlie the courtesy of taking him at his word as to the manic diagnosis.

Fred Keyes has written on this quote from Charlie and his own experience. You would do well to go back through the comments here and read them.

In no way does this increase abortion -- what a crazy leap to make.

Cuckoo for cocoa puffs said...


"...It will take a huge effort on my part not to say "I told you so" to the destroyers and detractors here, if one day soon Charlie is called forth for all to see what God may have chosen him yet to do, after literally, a lifetime of preparation."

Ahhhhh yes, the soon to be forthcoming "I told you so" moment...just like Charlie's "I have told you true"...but then how did all that go with the presidential prophecy? Well, never mind that now! For any moment we will have the war with "political Islam", the mass conversion of all Muslims, the war with China etc. all happening BEFORE the end of the year! Never ind we are already in June?!?!

That's right folks! Wait for it...wait for it...wait for it...the "I told you so moment" is coming any moment for sure! There is only 190 days left in the year so any day now! Surely we will be fighting "political Islam" any moment, and all those faint-hearted Muslims will surely roll over right fast and surrender, for the battle with them will be "a cub of a challenge" just as Charlie said. So get ready to roll over right quick my Muslim friends! And then next Charlie says we will war with China---yes! The Chinese must be preppping for war with us as we speak!

So all of the "Charlie deniers" here better get ready to eat some humble pie...that's right! ...wait for it...wait for it...wait for it...for the "I told you so" moment is coming!

Jackisback said...

To Anonymous (June 4, 2017 at 10:12 PM)
--begin quoted text--
He has taken full responsibility for their inaccuracy. He could not have been more clear on this.
--end quoted text--

Your second sentence is an area of common ground. We agree. Charlie could not have been more clear on pledging to take full responsibility for the innacuracy of his alleged private revelation. He even described the form this would take:

--begin quoted text--
charliej373 says:
January 15, 2017 at 2:38 pm
The website will continue, though without the prophetic element. Beckita Hesse would act as its managing editor, publishing pieces that support the main theme of acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope. This community, itself, has become a sign of hope to many – and I would not dismantle it. But I will neither write for it nor clear comments. The archives would be left untouched, so that all can look back to them, either to ponder or to mock. The one proviso as far as writing is that I have said I would then spend time working on the fictional stories which are actually meditations on each mystery of the Rosary. I would submit those as I finish them for Beckita’s consideration for publication.
--end quoted text--

--begin quoted text--
Ave Maria, Stella Maris!
Posted on January 21, 2017 by charliej373
...Some have worried that by withdrawing from the public scene, I am abandoning them. I could not, in honor, have done other than I have done here these last few years. I promised God that, if the things I had been shown all my life became visible on the horizon, I would speak in His name to give comfort to His people – and so I did. But I also promised that I would take full responsibility for the things I said and did. That promise obligates me, in honor, to withdraw from the public scene.

... I have not been released from service, just from public service. I will be watchful as I retire into prayer and direction. I would not return to the public square because of ordinary convulsions, even were they intense. I would not return except for something as compelling as a coup.

I will clear comments through this weekend. Then on Monday, Beckita will take over as managing editor of this site, putting up what she will and clearing the comments. I promised Focus TV that I would do an interview with them after the inauguration, whatever the outcome. I will fulfill that obligation on Monday and that will be my last public appearance. I will no longer make decisions concerning this site.

...I have endeavored to be God’s good servant. I will continue to do so in obedient submission to Holy Mother Church. But now, chastened, like Job, I put my hand over my mouth.
--end quoted text--

This self-prescription is clear in language/intent. Yet, Charlie has posted twice, on May 23rd & June 5th. He makes no case that his own standard of a "coup" has been met as a condition for returning to the "public square." He makes no assertion that his website is not part of the "public square." His posts are not fictional stories of the Rosary. Charlie is not like Job. He does not have his hand over his mouth. He does not remain steadfast in resolve like Job. The "honor" vis-a-vis the "obligation" of a "promise" did not last.

Ergo, your first sentence is false - Charlie has most definitely not taken full responsibility. He will not abide by his own terms of self-discipline. I do not condemn him for this; instead, if you feel he is condemned, then that feeling is derived from self-condemnation. It is self-inflicted. No one forced Charlie to begin blogging again. He did this on his own. Now he must own it. Accusing us here of being "malicious" for taking notice - again, as a point of discernment about the lack of authenticity of the presidential prophecy and how that bears on Charlie's lack of authenticity as a prophet - is a non sequitur.

Glenn Dallaire said...

Personally, I'm still waiting for some verifiable examples of successful specific prophecies that Charlie has made. In fact, even one authentic one would be helpful, which might help to support his 'I have told you true' statements. I suppose however I will have to "wait for it" for this one too?

-Glenn Dallaire

Unknown said...

Charlie did not present himself as mentally flawed - you did.
JC

Anonymous said...

I hope that others, whose time is abused by the vacuous witness on this site and the irresponsible lack of monitoring therein with regard to Charlie Johnston, do not succumb to the plausible sophistry of the singular legion of multiple personalities who post as if they were independent. Their signature is of a one fits all type derived from the father of lies and even if it is from different hands their darkness is the same.

Anonymous said...

Joe Crozier (11:17 and 2:05)

You have not attempted to answer Glenn's very good question: When has Charlie ever been right in a prediction? Since you've chosen to smear the efforts of those provide research and analysis to back up their claims, please give us a pointer to the evidence.

L Spinelli said...

@Anon above

Just before the Presidential Prophecy imploded, Charlie told a questioner that "he didn't have time to do his bloody homework for him. It's all on the site."

Not long after, the story changed to "they're all in the archives and were handed over to Denver."

So...where are they? What's the real story? And how is it possible that no one - not Joe Crozier or any of the other hit and runs from TNRS - is able to provide Glenn with a simple answer?

People have been asking this question since January. Here we are in June - still with no answer.

Glenn Dallaire said...


Just so folks here don't think that I have not tried "to do my bloody homework" in regards to the question at hand, I did ask one of Charlie spiritual director priests if he could share with me any successful specific prophecies that Charlie has made, and he essentially replied that there was nothing specific or noteworthy that comes to mind, other than some very general "sweeping" predictions (and keeping in mind here that this is a priest who has known Charlie for some 20 years). He did however cite one very specific prediction that was very noteworthy that turned out to be a definite fail (for confidentiality reasons I won't go into the details here, though he did provide them to me). In addition, Michael Brown of Spirit Daily has publicly mentioned one specific prediction from Charlie that also did not come to pass (at least as far as he was concerned).

So, combining these various facts together, including the two documented failed predictions surrounding the "Presidential prophecy", we have at this point apparently four failed predictions, with no actual successful prophecies (at least to my knowledge and research).

Therefore, with a 0/4 record as best as I can gather, I'm thinking personally that the odds of the future predictions for the upcoming days/months ahead is not looking very promising. So, personally I'm not holding my breath at this point for the "I told you so" moment, as the preponderance of the evidence obviously points otherwise.

At the very least, God, it seems, is apparently not at all interested in confidence building in what concerns Charlie and his purported prophecies and message that's for sure, given the presidential prophecy double fail and other surrounding matters. And so it is that the "I told you true" has rung quite hollow thus far with most folks, it seems.

May God bless all who visit here.
Glenn Dallaire

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Glenn.

Apparently Charlie went into the public part of his "campaign" -- doing national tours, doing media, popping up on Catholic websites to promote his insider knowledge and political commentary and advocacy -- knowing he had at least two specific, failed prophecies. But he didn't ever think of himself or call himself "unreliable" until the presidential prophecy failed. And when followers later said he had mislead them and caused them financial and psychological harm as a result of taking his warnings seriously, he refused to acknowledge any responsibility.

And, of course, he threatened people who doubted him with libel suits.

L Spinelli said...

http://www.spiritdaily.com/speciareportprophecyfebruary.htm

"What I was told was that President Obama would not finish his term and that our next stable national leader will not come from the election process," he said. "You could have an explosion of events after an election and before an inauguration. You could have Obama declare a national emergency, cancel elections, extend his term and then depart before the extension was up. The most likely scenario is that everything will be up in the air before election, but there are narrow circumstances where that may not be."

We all know what happened, and now Johnston is out of favor. I interviewed him a couple times years ago, and found what he claimed interesting, though as always I held it at a bit of a distance and warned about discernment.

Is he now totally discredited? Perhaps. Time is the best means of discernment, along with fruits. Might Charlie be mixing up deceptive messages with one that were real (especially when he was young)? I see this occur: that those who receive an inspiration then yearn for more and a deceptive spirit provides it. I have no idea if this is true of Charlie. I stopped discerning him five or six years ago when a prediction he made privately and sent to me did not pan out. I had my questions even before that, of course. And to be truthful: through the years I have received both disturbing e-mails about him as well as ones praising the work he has done.

We are all a "mix." We're all human. Was his prophecy totally off, or were there nuggets of authentic message?

Was Charlie picking this up -- then filtering it through his own speculation?

I don't pretend to know. As I recall, a major event he foresaw for 2012 also fell through.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, L. Spinelli. More than two reported failed prophecies previous to his 15 minutes of fame.

Still remains it was only after he was publicly busted that he decided to withdraw from the public eye--for a very short time, as it happened--to lick his wounds and let deluded followers handle the backlash from BOVOCs and the archdiocese. As they did, with a whole bunch of them demanding Denver's spokeswoman apologize or sued for libel. And now he's tanned, rested and ready to resume the game.

It's great that concerned Catholics keep an eye on this recidivist.

Anonymous said...

Beckita NEVER GIVES UP reinterpreting Charlie to make him valid, as per her experience with OTHER CHOSEN PROPHETS of the Lord.

The link Beckita includes goes to "Through a Glass Darkly" in which Charlie describes how he experiences his (false) "glimpses into eternity."

Gilbert says:
June 8, 2017 at 9:58 am

What about Charlie’s prophecy that Russia would side with us against China? Or isn’t that to be believed anymore?

Like
Reply

Beckita says:
June 8, 2017 at 10:27 am

Gilbert, I would safely say we’re *all* wondering just who, what, how, where and when God will unfold His Plan. In my experiences with other chosen prophets of the Lord, each and every one has conveyed what needed to be said. Each one has added, just as Charlie has stressed: God Alone knows exactly how we are and will respond to Him, what will be mitigated, what God might change in the process of prophecies unfolding and what surprises God will interject – unbeknowst to *anyone* on planet earth at this time. God IS the Author of prophecy and God is never subject to it. The Plan is His. Its purpose is to call *all* His children back to Him. To this day, the best way to consider all that Charlie has given us can be found in this article.

“For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known.” (I Cor 13:12)

L Spinelli said...

"Ready to resume service"

Don't forget that his supposed "time of service" isn't up until July 2018. Is anyone surprised that he very well might be itching to get back in the spotlight?

Anonymous said...

Did the same angel who told Charlie that Obama wouldn't finish his term also give Charlie his other prophecies, e.g., war with China, economic collapse, and a rescue followed by Mayberry RFD?

If that angel gave Charlie false information regarding Obama finishing his term, or if that angel gave Charlie true information but then Charlie misinterpreted it, what's to say the same thing won't happen with his other predictions?

I thought that when Charlie would end his prophecy with "I have told you true" it was sort of the Holy Spirit's imprimatur or guarantee that what he said was in fact true.

L Spinelli said...

@Anon above

Point by point:

Is the same angel who told Charlie that Obama wouldn't finish his term also give Charlie his other prophecies, e.g., war with China, economic collapse, and a rescue followed by Mayberry RFD?

Yes.

If that angel gave Charlie false information regarding Obama finishing his term, or if that angel gave Charlie true information but then Charlie misinterpreted it, what's to say the same thing won't happen with his other predictions?

There was NO "misrepresentation". Charlie claimed he was given this directly, without any interpretation, by the "angel" and told to present it as such.

We still haven't figured out whether a fallen angel or Screwtape himself was "visiting" Charlie, if this was a delusion on Charlie's part, or if he made the whole thing up. I lean towards the first option, but only God and Charlie know the real story.

I thought that when Charlie would end his prophecy with "I have told you true" it was sort of the Holy Spirit's imprimatur or guarantee that what he said was in fact true.

This was his way of telling people of a prophecy given to him directly by his angel or the Father himself.

L Spinelli said...

I forgot to add this in my last comment: Angels don't relay false prophecies that they know are going to fail years later. Angels can't lie! So that clearly wasn't an angel that "visited" Charlie.

Again, who or what that angel was is still up for debate.

Anonymous said...

This is addressed to those who have been misled by derogatory comments on Mystics of the Church with regard to Charlie Johnston and his response to directives of his bishop and also to those who have been misled by commentary on Mystics of the Church with regard to Beckita and the other good souls on TNRS whose only concern is for the well being of their fellow Christians and those who seek God with a sincere heart. I really am more than a little slow on the uptake sometimes. I now see that by continuing in dialogue with Mystics of the Church I am simply providing more space for this site to unload its effluent and to continue its flood of such material as insults, detraction, calumny, half truths, incomplete quotations, quotations out of context and misrepresentation. All of this seems to be driven solely by the intention - sometimes hidden and sometimes in plain view - to destroy the good work that Charlie and his friends have done and continue to do, extending even to the destruction of his excellent work in the defense of the rights to life of the unborn child. Charlie and his friends have been true to the faith and been obedient to the Church in both the letter and the spirit of its directives. Their service to the life of The Church is exemplary and in those matters that seem to stray from the fields of spirituality into those of politics Charlie's humility is plain for all to see in his ready admission of any mistakes he has made and his willingness to make amends. May God forgive me if any of my own responses have been driven by ego more then altruism but at least I now see the necessity to close the sluice gate that has inadvertently been kept open and allowed the voiding of filth by Charlie's enemies. Charlie avoids sites like this as he sees no point in attending his own flogging and now I will follow his example in this regard.

L Spinelli said...

Hello again Joe. There really isn't any point in engaging in any further discussion with you, but I have to say this: another Catholic seer, Dr. Gianna Talone Sullivan, ran a free medical clinic in Baltimore for a long time. I think it still exists, but her good works for Our Lord have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Archdiocese of Baltimore shut her down in 2008 - ergo the same conclusion with Charlie and TNRS.

Anonymous said...

L.Spinelli (or should it be L-SPIN?),

Just to add to what you said, Beckita of TNRS was a fervent advocate of Sullivan's prior to and after she was "shut down." Charlie Johnston is not Beckita's first rodeo. In fact, I'd bet many who have stuck with Charlie are people who have gone through a series of "seers," likely to the dismay of family and friends. This may speak more to psychological needs than to a driving passion of living the Christian life to the full.

I do question Joe on Charlie's -- or Beckita's-- "willingness to make amends" given the tendency to scream for apologies and legal action, but who knows? I've mentioned the libel thing before, but it still strikes as somehow a wrong thing for a Catholic "visionary" to focus on. And Charlie did devote at least two posts to his alleged libel victory in court (we only have his word for that) after some critical articles appeared.




Jackisback said...

To Anonymous at 5:41 PM,

Tu quoque, tu quoque, tu quoque. I plan to go through the rest of your June 4, 2017 post and the others (prior to today) to set the record straight and to demonstrate, again, that this thread is about discernment, not about your inferences of "attempts to 'destroy' the 'good name' of Charlie Johnston."

But this most recent post of yours requires an immediate response. First, regarding tu quoque logical fallacy: If you could, even for one sentence, grapple with the substance of what is said here and present a counter argument based upon specific facts (citations with quotes would be helpful in this regard) then that would show good faith in dialogue. At this point, almost all of your input here is either tu quoque fallacy or ad hominem fallacy. Those aren't arguments. But here is the crux of the problem of your latest post:

--begin quoted text--
All of this seems to be driven solely by the intention - sometimes hidden and sometimes in plain view - to destroy the good work that Charlie and his friends have done and continue to do, extending even to the destruction of his excellent work in the defense of the rights to life of the unborn child.
--end quoted text--

Let me ask you two questions, with the proviso that your answer include citations of specific examples/quotations, as opposed to paraphrasing your interpretation of what commentators here on this thread have said in the past: (1) Can you name even one example where a commentator on this thread has denigrated Charlie's "good work" insofar as that is defined as his advice to "acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope to others?" (2) Can you name even one example where a commentator on this thread has denigrated the content of Charlie's "good work" insofar as that is defined as his words in defense of the unborn?

No one that I can recall on this thread has taken issue with the idea that the former is objectionable in its content. Our point is that we've been doing these things already in the course of our lives as more-or-less well formed Catholics - and well before we ever heard the name Charlie Johnston. Our point is that Charlie teaches us nothing we didn't already know and already live out.

No one that I can recall on this thread has taken issue with the latter - when Charlie defends the unborn. I can't speak for others here, but my impression is that if Charlie were to devote all of his time, effort and resources to volunteering for National Right to Life, nary a word of critique would be found here.

But in regard to pursing these two memes, there is no need for prophecy or claims of private revelation by Charlie. There need not be a website, the centerpiece of which is a claim of a visible Marian temporal rescue, for which there is no support in the book of Revelation (which speaks of Mary crushing the head of the serpent, but that is metaphorical, and Charlie has made no attempt to link his "rescue" prophecy to it). Rather, Charlie is prophesying something new to "add something" to scripture. I've asked Charlie's followers to defend this, to argue with me on this, but so far, no takers. Care to take a crack at it?

Laurence D said...

to Jackisback June 9 at 12:22AM. Your response to Anon 5:41PM is well taken, except that you proceed at the end to bring up the additional subject of whether the Rescue prophecy is trying to add something to the Deposit of Faith. You say, "I've asked Charlie's followers to defend this ... but so far no takers." Well, on Feb. 1, 2017 here, I did take a crack at it and saw no comeback from you. It is a general enough question that it might deserve a thread of its own (not specifically targeting Charlie's Rescue) rather than bogging this one down. In my mind it is enough that the Presidential prophecies had a poor showing. To question the NATURE of the Rescue is unnecessary and might not be a good additional support of your overall cautions about Charlie.

L Spinelli said...

Charlie avoids sites like this as he sees no point in attending his own flogging...

I couldn't pass up the opportunity to take apart this comment.

It's a well-documented fact that Charlie showed up on numerous blogs in the early days after going public/viral. He was cultivating people who would be helpful for his cause.

So why does Charlie avoid MOTC now? He showed up on Glenn's initial post covering Charlie sometime in 2015 (and debated with Jack). Commentary here, always on the discerning/critical side, took a sharper turn in that direction after the election and the inauguration. It was also established that Charlie only cleared critical comments on TNRS to put those people up for ridicule and gaslighting. Charlie was long done with his cultivating period by then; he clearly preferred praise over well thought out criticism.

Someone who likes praise and adulation isn't going to come to a place that debunked every last one of his attempts to keep his "mission" going.

Whether you (Joe C) like it or not, Charlie's mission failed. I still believe he was given his marching orders by Wormwood or Screwtape himself. There's no other explanation (IMHO) for 50+ years of "training" bottoming out at the most critical point in his mission. There's no reason to listen to him or follow him or read TNRS after an implosion like that, but delusion is keeping the show at TNRS up and running.

Delusion is in short supply here. Bottom line, what you call "flogging" is MOTC saying "this doesn't make any sense. Why should we listen to you?"

Do you get it now?

Anonymous said...

Logic, reason, truth. All good things to embrace, Spinelli. To be fruitful, we obviously need to endeavor to be as consistent as possible on those fronts, especially when we want to put it out there, or to "take apart" something. Facts are facts. Without taking the time to research, I'll still take your word for it that Charlie participated on some blogs in the early days. I'm not widely read on that front, but you appear to have decent experience with it. Then you follow it up with this: "he was cultivating people who would be helpful for his cause. Sorry, without knowing his heart, I'll just take that as conjecture on your part. You follow that up with more opinion/conjecture as to why he avoids MOTC now.

Then you proceed to hang this out there: "Someone who likes praise and adulation isn't going to come to a place that debunked every last one of his attempts to keep his "mission" going."

Now, if Jackisback wanted to consistently apply his typically sound reasoning/methods to your comment too, with the same vigor he applies it to other commenters... well, I'm surmising that probably won't happen (and yes, Jackisblack, that's both a bit of a healthy challenge and minor –– but charitable –– rebuke as well).

With regard to "Wormwood or Screwtape himself," kudos for making it clear that that's your belief (opinion).

I keep what's good and ditch the rest. With regard to CJ, there's the alleged experiences involving clearly stated prophecies that by my measure, failed to come to pass. Done. Moving on to a small group of connected faithful who consistently encourage, support, pray for one another, share the Faith, etc. –– that's good fruit. That's a keeper.

There's stuff going on here too... faith based discussion, discernment, etc. Good stuff. As for the uncharitable stuff (and let's get real... there are ample examples of that here too), occasional snarky comments, sarcasm, etc., I'm tossing that too.

Just to be clear, I think we should all discern as we are exhorted to do by Sacred Scripture. Mostly, I'm not one of those folks always demanding answers from other folks. Yes, we discuss and share, but at some point I take it to God, and God alone... lest my discernment process degenerate into a lack of charity... at which point I would be clearly missing the bigger picture... maybe better to say "the heart of the picture." I'm human, so sometimes don't get it right either.

Just my opinion. Keep what's good (if anything), toss the rest.

Fred Keyes said...

Anon at 11:31, you said "Moving on to a small group of connected faithful who consistently encourage, support, pray for one another, share the Faith, etc. –– that's good fruit. That's a keeper."

What you're ignoring is that the TNRS group continues to stand by a man whose claims are being proven false. That is decidedly not good fruit. We have the gospel image of what happens to a house built on sand.

Just so.

Anonymous said...

I found a cool list of philosophical axioms. These are the first principles on which rational philosophical discourse is built (and truth be known, the empirical sciences as well). Ignoring these self-evident principles gets you in a lot of trouble when you debate subjects like we do here.

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/catholicteaching/philosophy/axiomata.htm

Anonymous said...

No, Fred, I'm not ignoring anything. Rather, you apparently presume too much to make that leap.

It might be nice and neat if you could throw everyone that comments on the TNRS blog into one bucket and label them supporters, followers, deceived, cult members, nut jobs... whatever other labels can be found here. Tell me, what's wrong with two (or more) gathering anywhere in Jesus' name for the sake of connecting, sharing the Faith, encouraging, supporting, praying, building up... etc.? I've seen plenty of fruitful conversation over there having nothing to do with alleged mystical experiences, prophecy and the like. Who says all folks over there are in concordance with everything CJ shares?

An authentic Catholic aught to be an authentic Catholic wherever they're at. Church, home, work, shopping, on the street, online... wherever. If we're not, we had better identify those areas where we've failed... and start cleaning up our mess.

And just so you don't think I'm one of those folks who seeks something comforting all the time, I'm often to be found in the most uncomfortable surroundings... amongst the tragic deniers, dissectors, disablers, and destructive. Hey, probably like you, i take my Catholic calling to evangelize seriously.

Again, wherever I'm at.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link, Anon (06/09 5:11 PM).

Here's one from the blog over at St. Joseph's Abbey: "Love. The first and greatest commandment is love. Thanks to love, the spirit sees the original Love, namely God. For by our love we see God's love for us, as the psalm says, 'He teaches his ways to those who are gentle.'"

Thought you might enjoy that too.

Anonymous said...

Yes, the greatest commandment is love. Charlie did show a lot of anti-love to a lot of the people who used to be on his blog and that's probably why a lot of people here have strong anti-Charlie feelings, don't forget " you reap what you sow".

Anonymous said...

Anonymous above sounds a lot like "Michael Patrick" from the TNRS site - the guy who claimed he wasn't a Charlie supporter and said a lot of passive aggressive things about people here and was discovered to be a regular on the TNRS, in fact they knew him by his real name. And then he disappeared when he was discovered.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 5:59 PM - "No, Fred, I'm not ignoring anything. Rather, you apparently presume too much to make that leap." Fred is making a rather valid assumption, if the site was started by Charlie, based on Charlie's experiences or whatever they are now called, you are there as are most people because of Charlie and his predictions, if he didn't mention these predictions he wouldn't have the net presence he has, he was sent around the Catholic community and that's how he got his following, if all that didn't happen probably 99.9% of the people here and on his site wouldn't know who Charlie was/is, including yourself and you wouldn't be on his site.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 11:31 AM "Then you follow it up with this: "he was cultivating people who would be helpful for his cause. Sorry, without knowing his heart, I'll just take that as conjecture on your part."
I think you're naive to think that Charlie wasn't "cultivating people", you even admit you missed the early years so you do not have the full grasp of Charlie. You are right we do not know Charlie's heart, but his actions say a different story, anyone who disagreed with Charlie was either sanctioned, deleted, ridiculed or other such tactics, so if Charlie had such a good heart why did he delete comments that challenged him and why did he allow his followers to chastise other people he was putting down? He was creating a loyal following or "cult". If he was not doing this why did he put down dissent?

As you've admitted, you weren't around for the early years so you do not have the full Charlie experience.

I predicted a long time ago that Charlie's site would dwindle to a small core of followers and his site would turn into a "catholic feel-good site" for his core group and that is what has happened.

Fred Keyes said...

Anon @ 5:59:
You are correct that there is very little if anything wrong with the discussions at TNRS. It's typical of the conversations that Catholics (myself included) and Christians have all the time. It's reassuring small talk. In and of itself it is perfectly innocent and a comfort to many.

But think about this: How many sermons in Protestant churches are similarly perfectly Christian and biblically correct? And in fact, it is based on such positions that dialogue with those Christians is based. Still, the original principles on which these separated groups are based are erroneous and schismatic. And so for example, the RCC does not recognize a Catholic's marriage or confirmation in one of those churches.

That's what I mean by bad fruit; i.e., not the things that remain that are OK but the lack of complete adherence to the kyrygma of the RCC. Beckita's unwillingness to follow the direction of the Denver diocese has a very strong whiff of such separatism. The faithful have been warned about the basis of TNRS--the predictions that are now highly questionable. And yet they leave up blog entries that are highly questionable, at the very least.

You really can't take what you call the good fruit at TNRS without knowing that accepting the good things there may lead you into serious error.

Anonymous said...

Well said, Fred. At TNRS it's gone beyond unwillingness to submit to the church's admonition to outright defiance at times, as shown with the spate of posts by Dan Lynch threatening legal action (always the go-to for Charlie and his crowd) and the nastiness dished out to Karna Swanson, Denver's spokeswoman. Despite paying lip service to the Feb. 15 archdiocese statement, Beckita posted these remarks, and now blithely post AS FACT Charlie's talks with his "angel" and places him among other "chosen."

The Devil must be glad to see the disobedience fostered at that website as his goal always is to separate us from the church.

L Spinelli said...

Beckita and others are still blathering on about those prophecies. One of the comments from Charlie's June 5 lecture is a woman asking about North Korea and China. Steve BC chines in about the "old system dying" and "to be hopeful Rescue is coming" and "Charlie has always said God has a plan".

Then this from our friend Joe Crozier: "I feel N. Korea will be annihilated after its EMP attack on the USA."

They'll call it something else, but to me, that's clearly revisiting Charlie's prophecies about North Korea and the Rescue itself.

Once more folks...that's what Denver asked these people not to do!

I forget who noted this about false prophecy - I think it was Jack - but it's 99 percent good. The devil's snare is in that one percent. IMHO...there it is.

Anonymous said...

Speaking about N. Korea and how they will be annihilated, most people didn't notice it especially the Charlie crowd, all the ships, but 1 that were supposed to be involved in the Korean attack are now returning to their bases, the war against Korea appears to be off - this was not covered by main stream news in the USA. This is and has always been the problem with the TNRS crowd, they ebb and flow with main stream news - there is no divine guidance otherwise they would have known Korea is off the table and Iran looks like it is back on.

Anonymous said...

From Steel Magnificat on Patheos...


Charlie Johnston • 2 days ago

What an unexpectedly lovely column! Originally in America, we all were expected to help each other, with an emphasis on the poor, through private associations. That Amazon is choosing to exercise such grace as a private initiative makes me think much more of them - not less. Most corporations express their "charity" by demanding the government do it...or by supporting hefty taxes. Amazon is putting its money where its mouth is. Good


Chris MacKay to Charlie Johnston • 10 hours ago

Charlie Johnston, you look like the "seer" the archbishop of Denver sent out a warning against. Have you returned to the public arena? Thought you decided to go into a period of quiet and reflection. Nothing wrong with the comment of course, just surprised you are online as you said you would retire.


Charlie Johnston to Chris MacKay • 9 hours ago

Yes, it is me. In the past month, I have put up two pieces on the regular site - neither prophetic. The Archbishop warned that people should exercise prudence and caution when considering my prophetic statements, but did not restrict me from speaking or writing publicly, except that I may not give a formal presentation on Church property in Denver. He added no new restrictions after I made my errant interpretation. I said at the time I left running the site full-time that I would occasionally speak, but except in drastic circumstances, only in a non-prophetic way. I never suggested I would never speak again on anything. I have been working on two big projects since the withdrawal, including working on a book, a simple tome on why Christianity is the practical way to find lasting peace and happiness in daily life, happiness that for all the pursuit these days, is eluding so terribly many people. I, of course, am fully obedient to my Archbishop, and my relations with the Archdiocese remain cordial and friendly (contrary to what some sites perniciously suggest).


Chris MacKay to Charlie Johnston • 8 hours ago

Charlie, the archbishop's warning goes beyond prudence, it mentions the visions weren't accurate and the faithful should not condone them or try to spin them to make them valid. If you are fully obedient and have some influence with Beckita, you should insist she stop saying you actually were told things by the Angel Gabriel and stop saying your predicted "Rescue" is coming.

"...The events of 2016/17 have shown that Mr. Johnston’s alleged visions
were not accurate and the Archdiocese urges the faithful not to condone
or support further attempts to reinterpret them as valid."

https://archden.org/stateme...


Charlie Johnston to Chris MacKay • 8 hours ago

Chris, I answered your legitimate question...and I will answer one more. Beckita HAS been in touch with the Archdiocese and IS in compliance with their guidelines since that statement. We take our direction directly from the Archdiocese, not from individuals' often mistaken interpretation of what an Archdiocesan statement should mean.

Now, this is about Ms. Pezzulo's marvelous article and her elegant way of having stated it, so I will respond to no more questions here, for this article and this comment line are not about me.


Chris MacKay to Charlie Johnston • 8 hours ago

If you have the courage of your convictions, you should go over to the Mystics of the Church website and answer the questions posed by many after your failed "Presidential Prophecy."


http://www.patheos.com/blogs/steelmagnificat/2017/06/envious-barbara-amazon-prime-ebt-discount/

Laurence D said...

It has always struck me as odd that Denver said, "The events of 2016/2017 have shown that Mr. Johnston's alleged visions were not accurate..." This was said as 2017 was barely underway. Are there no events that could still happen this year that would exonerate the Storm, say, or the Rescue? It's true that Charlie said the Presidential prophecies (call them "A") coming true should make the Rescue (call it "B") virtually certain for people. That is, IF A THEN B. If we now know that A is not true, it does not follow, however, that B will not be true. You logicians can verify this, I think. So either Denver made this logical error, or else by "alleged visions" they meant specifically the Presidential ones (and others only by implication because of Charlie's demonstrated unreliability).

Anonymous said...

Good point. As TRNS people have admitted, Charlie's works are stored in Denver for safe keeping until the appropriate time so they do have information that we don't. Glenn has also stated in the lines above that he does know one of the priest confessors and that another of Charlie's predictions ( not available to us ) has not materialized. Don't forget Charlie told us that he was telling us "true" or something similar.
I don't know if you can call it "by implication" or that they know he's just plain wrong on his prophecies and they don't want to lead people in the wrong direction. Besides, they can always change their tune down the road if everything turns out to be correct, but as Charlie's own followers admit all his information is stored at Denver to be opened up at a later date since the information is too much to review, so Denver's statement is definitive.

Anonymous said...

Laurence, Why don't you look over the past posts of Jack and L. Spinelli for the answer to your question? This objection has been dealt with before, and debunked. Good angels don't lie.

Anon. @ 11 pm: The collected masterworks of Charlie are as valuable as the content of Al Capone's vault. At no time in the future will anyone go back to poor through the "archives" since Denver has already concluded the VISIONS are false.

Mary H said...

Far more interesting thing about the exchange between Charlie and Chris above is the sight of Charlie popping up on a small Catholic blog to lavish praise on the blog owner. Reminds me of his early days when he was trying to establish himself as a prophet and made the online tour of blogs to butter-up those who could help him. And no, I give him no credit for good motives, having seen the way Charlie mistreated those who crossed him online. He's putting his toe in the water for a comeback.

L Spinelli said...

Oh my.

Errant interpretation

So that's the new mantra. This was debunked many times already ("T told you true") that there's no point in going over it again.

I said at the time I left running the site full-time that I would occasionally speak, but except in drastic circumstances, only in a non-prophetic way.

Drastic circumstances? Why would he even attempt this again when his "sign from God to fortify you all for the most challenging year in history" wasn't from God after all?

Also note that he dodged Chris MacKay's perfectly legitimate challenge that he stop saying the Angel Gabriel was talking to him.

I, of course, am fully obedient to my Archbishop, and my relations with the Archdiocese remain cordial and friendly (contrary to what some sites perniciously suggest).

Some sites being this one, of course.

Here's the issue I have when Charlie puts up these kinds of articles: his June 5 piece on David Daeliden and PP didn't have a shred of prophetic commentary in it, but Beckita allowed people to make totally unrelated comments on Charlie's North Korea "prophecy". Why allow that at all unless you're still doing, once more, what Denver asked you not to???

Anonymous said...

More from Steel Magnificat. Another poster tries to question Charlie. One gets the feeling he is delighted at the attention.


Lioness70 to Charlie Johnston • 6 hours ago

Charlie, if Beckita in in full compliance, why is discussion about your prophecies allowed in the comments?


Charlie Johnston to Lioness70 • 6 hours ago

Lioness, even now I am not restricted from speaking or writing prophecy. That I break no new ground is a matter of prudent discretion on my part, not a directive from the Archdiocese. And I left open the possibility of it in an extraordinary situation. The Archdiocese specifically directed that people not seek to re-interpret my failed interpretation regarding the inauguration, a position I had taken firmly with all before the Archdiocese ever spoke on it. There is no general ban on reviewing or discussing other prophetic comments.

Lisa, forgive me for this hijacking of your thread. I looked at Lioness other comments on disqus and she seemed a sincere person, with a genuine question. But so this does not continue, any other questions pertaining to me rather than the subject of this column should be directed to the site I founded.

Anonymous said...

Relax everyone, TRNSers are talking about the "Korea" prophecy - the war is off, all the battleships have gone, except one, the TNRSers think the ships are still near Korea - that's what happens when you follow main stream news and portray your knowledge as heaven inspired when there is none, you get burnt every time - this is no exception.

Fred Keyes said...

I'd love to see Charlie defend the idea that he is mixing his religiously-oriented predictions with his decidedly ultra-conservative political positions. Why was one of his recent long entries well over 80% related to politics, including his threat of a "Jericho March" should Trump be impeached? Or the words he used, a "coup" or "putsch" take place?

His insistence that all aid to the poor be done privately and not by the government is similarly contrary to the teachings of our bishops. There is a role for both private action as well as government action, in proper proportion. Charlie's position on this is a political one. And it is on those things that he is most passionate about, using religion as a vehicle to spread his anti-tax agenda.

Fred Keyes said...

I wouldn't get hung up on parsing Charlie's (or his "Amen Choir's") interpretation of the Archbishop of Denver's warnings. It's enough that a warning is in place. Anyone who does not view Charlie's religious statements with extreme skepticism is in the wrong pew with respect to their faith.

Jackisback said...

To Laurence D. (June 9, 2017 at 8:50 AM; and February 1, 2017 at 3:13 PM)

With respect to the debate challenge from February 1st, Laurence, you may well be right that it is a diversion from this particular thread discerning the presidential prophecy. Taking just one of your New Testament references from Acts 3:20-21, you said:

--begin quoted text--
Ahead of "the times of universal restoration" Peter speaks of "times of refreshment."
--end quoted text--

At least one dive into the research already done by theologians reveals a claim that the times of refreshment refer to a designation of the messianic age. But of course, even if that is accepted as correct, the question would be how early in the messianic age (which speaks to your point that the quote in Acts implies that the times of refreshment would come before the second coming). I know only enough to be dangerous here. That said, I note that Peter says this to the crowd of Jews who have just witnessed him (and John) curing the man who had been a cripple from birth. And in rebuking them (for having just recently put Jesus to death) Peter says:

19 "Repent, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be wiped away,20 and that the Lord may grant you times of refreshment and send you the Messiah already appointed for you, Jesus,21 whom heaven must receive until the times of universal restoration of which God spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old.22 For Moses said:
‘A prophet like me will the Lord, your God, raise up for you
from among your own kinsmen; to him you shall listen in all that he may say to you.23 Everyone who does not listen to that prophet will be cut off from the people.’24 Moreover, all the prophets who spoke, from Samuel and those afterwards, also announced these days."

Times of refreshment (in reward for repenting and converting) more likely refers to similarly miraculous moments of complete rehabilitation (like that just experienced by the cripple) from whatever evils they might encounter (as opposed to any particular "storm") prior to the second coming. This is why Peter quotes Moses to describe the ultimate alternative should they refuse to repent and convert - they will be cut off from the flock - no times of refreshment is the implication and no universal restoration if they are "cut off." Peter makes no reference to Mary being involved - and why would he?

I make no claim of expertise here. This requires research and a significant devotion of time to consider several different opinions of those who have already spent copious hours of scholarly study.

I note how difficult it is to analyze this one citation that you raised. That you would somehow try to parlay the reference by Peter as "fitting in" with Charlie's rescue prophecy seems to me a gigantic leap.

I'd actually enjoy arguing about this and the other citations you brought up on February 1st - because my first impressions from initial research puts me even more strongly on the opposite side from you: I think the citations confirm that Charlie's rescue prophecy absolutely is something being added to the public revelation of the Christ, rather than being in line with the original revelation.

We should do this on a separate thread, or take our dispute offline entirely and do it by email. I'll give Glenn permission to share with you my email address for that purpose if you wish to pursue.

Jackisback said...

To Laurence D (June 9, 2017 at 8:50 AM),

I wanted to separately address the last part of your comment, where you said:

--begin quoted text--
To question the NATURE of the Rescue is unnecessary and might not be a good additional support of your overall cautions about Charlie.
--end quoted text--

You could be correct here. I agree that questioning the nature of an alleged rescue is unnecessary, but for a different reason. The problematic thing with anyone defending Charlie is that phrases are used haphazardly (e.g., "NATURE of the Rescue") which presumes that the "rescue" is already a real thing, or even a likely thing to occur between now and Christmas. It is unnecessary to question the nature of the alleged rescue because the burden of proof hasn't been met by anyone claiming that an alleged rescue is coming between now and Christmas. And of course, they can dance around each day between now and Christmas eve admonishing all who will listen that, just because it hasn't happened yet, and just because we didn't get the promised "sign," it doesn't mean that it won't yet happen, just in a more compressed time frame.

But in terms of "tickling of the ears," it would behoove those paying attention that this is precisely the line that was taken by Charlie himself regarding the presidential prophecy - the line was that the presidential prophecy was valid and believeable, worthy of belief, and the failure of a valid election in Novembber and then a failure of a valid inauguration (and transfer of power) in January were the "most likely" manifestations of the prophecy, all the way up until the day before the election in November 2016 and then again, until the day before January 20, 2017.

I'll deal with the logical response to your other post (regarding if A then B) separately.

But the fact remains, as it stands today, there is no reason to believe that any alleged rescue is at all likely - and this was also true back in January of 2014. Skeptics such as me are under no burden to prove, as of today's date, that an alleged rescue is definitively not going to occur later this year. Charlie's defenders have no good ground to stand on when they imply that, because we skeptics haven't yet proven that Charlie's rescue prophecy is definitely not going to be fulfilled, then it is worthy of belief as a thing likely to occur, or even as a thing that is possible to occur.

I have said this before. It is axiomatic that nothing is impossible for God. But there are things that are impossible for mankind. I assert that the five fundamentals coming to fruition between now and Christmas eve are impossible for men to achieve. It is asking way too much.

If those five things don't happen (for the same reason that the presidential prophecy failed - because it asked too much of the capabilities of men to act against their perceived self-interests) before Christmas, why would an alleged rescue be necessary? And when the alleged rescue fails to materialize by the morning of Christmas eve, why would it be worthy of belief for yet one more day, solely on the notion that "nothing is impossible for God?"

Fred Keyes said...

There are now a mere 170 days left until December 8 or 195 days until Christmas. Jack makes a good point vis a vis what men would be capable of accomplishing in such a short period of time with respect to, say, converting "most" of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims.

On this issue it appears to me that major difference exists between Old Testament times and the Messianic era. Since Christ's Resurrection there have not been miraculous events of the type Charlie predicts. Instead, for example, Christianity has grown much more organically, or using Jesus's images, like dough rising, or a mustard seed growing over many years into a large tree. Even in Mexico where conversion of indigenous peoples occurred, especially after the apparitions at Guadalupe, it took years and even centuries for such conversions to materialize.....more reason for extreme skepticism of Charlie's predictions.

L Spinelli said...

@Laurence D

This is how I winnowed down the likelihood of any of Charlie's "prophecies" happening.

As Glenn pointed out, Charlie is 0 for 4 with specific, detailed "prophecies" that were directly given to him from God. One of the four was given privately to Michael Brown. That one imploded. Another one that was given to one of Charlie's director priests met with the same fate.

And we still don't know who or what gave Charlie the "Presidential Prophecy". All we know definitively is it wasn't from God.

What would any logical person deduce from these facts?

It's very likely that the above two failed prophecies and the "five fundamentals" themselves came from the same not-of-God source as the Presidential Prophecy. So...if something is messing with Charlie - and the source may well be demonic - why is there any reason to believe any of these other prophecies will happen?

Laurence D said...

@ L Spinelli 10:18 am. Fair enough. I guess I just felt the need to point out that the logic involved is inductive, not deductive. While I don't hold the hope in a late-2017 rescue that I once did, I do happen to feel we have entered some kind of unprecedented storm, the only solution to which will be divine, whenever He decides. Maybe that's why I paid attention to Charlie in the first place.

Anonymous said...

DO NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THOSE PESKY DETAILS, BECKITA WARNS:


David McCracken says:
June 12, 2017 at 10:40 pm


Hi Beckita.wonderful homily.if I may ask you a couple of questions.do you concur with Charlie’s prophecy re the number of deaths which will occur in the storm.i think he said the number that will be killed will be one third of the number of deaths in world war 2.also do you reckon that we will be rescued by the end of 2017? Blessings! Dave

Beckita says:

Dave, some of the prophecies give to Charlie we see unfolding before us. At the same time, Charlie gave us a powerful look into prophecy unfolding in his piece, Through a Glass Darkly. Further, Charlie always said he didn’t know exactly what will unfold after Rescue as his mission at this time is to carry us through to the shores of Rescue in whatever ways he discerns, with his spiritual directors, the Lord is calling him *and* that his prophetic input was mainly for him, to guide his work *and* that we should not get hung up on the details for God Alone knows the details, such as what will be mitigated or not mitigated, and what He will interject that will surprise each and every one of us. As I continue in contemplation, I see Rescue, and what follows this intervention by Our Lady, as a great mystery for us to enter before we comprehend its full magnitude and meaning. For now, I choose to keep my focus ever on Our Lord and Our Lady, living TNRS Way, and striving – while asking for graces – to grow in loving well with the intent of participating as co-creator with Abba in His precious gift of life as we move through these chaotic, confusing and divisive days of the Storm. God bless you, Dave, and all who are part of this community.

https://charliej373.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/7749/#comments


Glenn Dallaire said...


"...While I don't hold the hope in a late-2017 rescue that I once did, I do happen to feel we have entered some kind of unprecedented storm, the only solution to which will be divine, whenever He decides. Maybe that's why I paid attention to Charlie in the first place."
-------

You took the words right out of my mouth with this statement Laurence! While I no longer hold out much hope as far as Charlie's predictions go, nevertheless I do very strongly feel that a "purification"/"warning"/"storm" (or whatever term one would like to use) is forthcoming at some point in the near future, as has been forewarned for decades by various mystics. The $50,000 question of course is "when". God alone knows! But I personally think this purification will be soon--within the next few years, I think. The fact is, I actually have thought we would have experienced by now, but God is infinitely patient and merciful...
-Glenn

L Spinelli said...

Oh yes indeed, "some of Charlie's prophecies are unfolding before us" - NO specifics, and not taking his 0 for 4 track record into consideration.

This is a lost cause. Someone said a few pages back that TNRS is going rogue. They're long past that stage...

Fred Keyes said...

Glennn, I do have to wonder about the Garabandal prophecies. It's now over 50 years since those apparitions. Nearly all of those over, say 45 yo, are now dead. It makes me wonder--who were those messages meant for? And as the years go by, those numbers increase and the warning has less and and less meaning for those who followed the messages there and believed they would have an impact on their lives. It's not to say something like those predictions might still be in the offing, just something to think about. In a way it's something like the time issue with Charlie's predictions.

Glenn Dallaire said...

Hi Fred!
What about Garabandal, you ask?--Now that is a question that most everyone who follows such things have been asking for quite a long time! One key point of course is that unlike Fatima, Lourdes etc, Garabandal on the other hand has never been approved by the Church, as you well know, though its never been officially outright condemned either. It definitely falls into the "questionable" category, and should be met with a very healthy caution.

My own personal take on Garabandal is that I would not be at all surprised if it was authentic, though I leave it for the Church to officially pass judgement on it. Time will tell if the purported "Warning" and "Miracle" announced at Garabandal will actually come to pass. For sure many folks, myself included, thought it would happen by now. But then again, I personally have found that trying to set a time/date frame to such things is surely just a human folly.

Interestingly though, in this case as you well know, Conchita allegedly knows the date of the "Miracle" and is said to announce it 8 days before hand--so, this ought to be interesting if/when the time comes! She's alive and well, and living in New York, so with the internet such news will surely spread like wildfire, I'm sure!

Thanks for your comments on this website Fred and may God bless you and your loved ones.
Glenn Dallaire

Anonymous said...

Didn't Charlie predict that some sort of "Regent" would be running the United States? What that prediction given to him by the same angel who told him that we would be skipping the presidential election?

Anonymous said...

Who would have thought that Denis Rodman was instrumental in helping stop the attack on N Korea and thus saving us from a nuclear war. I guess God sent Denis Rodman to block Charlie's angel from fulfilling the Charlie N Korea prophesy. See God can change prophecy and out of the blue he chose Denis Rodman!

L Spinelli said...

Anon @ 11:06

The "angel" that gave Charlie the "Presidential Prophecy" is indeed the same one that gave him the "blueprints" for this so-called Regency.

As I noted a few times, I put "angel" in quotes because we don't know what this "angel" really was - a fallen angel (who flattered Charlie by insinuating that he would spearhead "saving" the United States) or a figment of Charlie's imagination.

L Spinelli said...

Logically deducing, if the "Presidential Prophecy" came from a tainted source (and Charlie acknowledged this), so did the plans for the Regency - i. e. it's not going to happen.

Fred Keyes said...

So today Charlie gives us the great sweep of history which predictably is spun in a way that ultimately is self-serving. He continues to say that he is receiving instruction but will not discuss it....which itself opens the door to discussion. I don't question Charlie's intentions in writing what he does, but what he writes comes off as a pseudo-intellectual exercise. I wonder how well this treatise would survive the challenges of a committee of historical experts such as a PhD candidate endures in defending a thesis?

I can't help noticing that he gives a summary of the founding of this country that practically canonizes the founding fathers and makes the Constitution a sterling example of what good government was to be. Never mind that the Constitution has been amended numerous times and remains an imperfect document. The best in history certainly, but if you read Ron Chernow's "Alexander Hamilton" you won't come away with the same evaluation of how terrific the founding fathers were in their deliberations and conclusions. The mishandling of slavery alone proves how imperfect the founding fathers were.

I also can't help but notice that Charlie's judging of the bad guys of history is a not-so-subtle way of attacking his own current critics. The awful people of history are in his mind those of us who critique his message now. We are the 'atheist left."

Sorry Charlie, I'm not buying it.

L Spinelli said...

I don't buy it either, Fred. He's receiving more instruction? He's not open to the possibility that a fallen angel or his imagination is once again "instructing" him?

Why hasn't he been put out to pasture yet?

Cuckoo for cocoa puffs said...


With his latest post he is still apparently insisting that we are in the storm and that all is going along just as foretold to him. With this being the case, then in just a few months the upcoming explanation concerning his predicted miraculous worldwide rescue ought to be a real interesting one. Surely the promised miraculous worldwide rescue will take place (in his mind, that is) so the explanation for all of us who will surely have "missed" it is really going to be interesting and will be a real stretch of the imagination I'm sure, even for his diehard followers.

L Spinelli said...

This piece from Mark Shea (5/17/16, so not that old) sums up Charlie's audience, Charlie's own political stance, and the appeal of his latest screed to his audience.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2016/05/the-party-that-cries-wolf-and-benghazi.html

Time was when Conservatism had some ideas. That time is long gone. Now it is the empty-headed Party of Panic. It does not lead a free citizenry. It stampedes cattle. It gins up panics. (Note: The items in bold were mentioned by Charlie.)

birtherism panics
Harry Potter panics
"Francis the Modernist Evolutionist” panics
vaccination panics
FEMA concentration camp panics

panics about such dangerous films as “The Lego Movie” and “The Muppet Movie“
fraudulent James O’Keefe panics
Saul Alinsky-the-Satan-worshipper panics

Anonymous said...

To L. Spinelli (above),

Your point is well taken. I suppose that's why Charlie named his group the Next Right Step.

L Spinelli said...

Jack, if you caught wind of Charlie's latest...

I remember you saying last year that you would lose all respect for Charlie if he attempted to reinterpret his prophecies after they failed.

Well, here we are.

This "I'm still receiving instruction" is really bothering me. Why?

After all those years of prior "instruction" and "training" - Glenn brought this point up a while back - he was still deceived by Old Scratch?

We also know that he got not two but FOUR prior prophecies wrong. That lends even more credibility to the assumption that Charlie was deceived all along.

He's asking his readers to set all that aside after his credibility took a what would be a permanent blow (LttW) for most seers/locutionists/prophets?

The only reason I can think of to explain why he's still around and writing nonsense is his "time of service" isn't up for another year - July 5, 2018. Kind of fitting for him, since he expected to play a large role in reclaiming the United States for God, that he picked the day after Independence Day.

The chutzpah this guy has...

Anonymous said...

I never quite understood Charlie's claim of "years of instruction" by angels. The Blessed Mother appeared at Fatima and Lourdes and was able to give the children messages without the prerequisite of years of instruction. Her messages there were clear and unambiguous. Charlie, on the other hand, says he has been a "student" of the angels pretty much his entire life and at best his messages are only correct in the grand sweep of things.

Anonymous said...

And although I don't have his exact quotes, what about this business where Charlie says he would ask his angel something and the if his angel didn't admonish him he would assume it was true. Do angels really play mind games on their "students" like this? The whole thing sounds hokey.

L Spinelli said...

I can only think the left believes ordinary people will turn out to be as flaccid as defending themselves as conservative and Christian leaders have been in defending them. The people's restraint thus far does not mean they will submit to be ruled and bullied by progressive whim. The restraint has held in the forlorn hope that that the leadership class would defend both them and American traditions (Charlie provides no examples of them). And so, a great battle will come. Though the left has been agitating for it, the right will prevail (though it will be bloodier than it ever had to be had leaders simply done the job of insisting that equal standards of justice apply to all). Under normal circumstances, a right-wing dictatorship would prevail, at least for a time.

There's the most concrete example yet of Charlie's insisting that God fully supports right wing causes. If you're not for them or hold an opinion that's in the middle, the hint that you're against God and "not being guardians of the faith and defenders of the faithful" is very much there. Another whiff of gaslighting? I think so.

What I would fear in those circumstances is the bitterness and anger would so reign for a time that the right might mount similar or worse depredations to what the left has mounted. Yet for all the historical reality and imperatives, I remain an optimist. It is because I know and trust in God, the God who, for the sake of ten righteous people, would have saved Sodom.

Jackisback said...

L. (from June 22, 2017 at 9:57 AM),

I am not really all that interested in trying the answer the "why" question vis-a-vis Charlie having convinced himself that he was only deceived about the Presidential Prophecy and about nothing else (remember, since he insists his visions were real, this ought to be his only explanation for what went wrong; but that is not so - for Charlie also has written of the possiblility that he is "Jeremiah part deux," ergo "duped by God" Himself). I am interested in the fact that the first explanation - only deceived by "the satan" that one time - is the height of irrationality for many reasons, some of which you have pointed out (the most obvious of which is that any rational person, realizing he had been so deceived, would question the validity of all prior "visions" as to whether or not they may have come from "the satan" as well as his newest -and as yet unrevealed - "visions"). That ought to give him a healthy fear of ever speaking/blogging publicly again about any subject other than fictional stories of the rosary, lest he be doing "the satan's" bidding. I am also interested in Charlie's "Jeremiah part deux" red herring explanation - because that is point blank use of the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy.

I am not really all that interested in the "why" Charlie has violated his pledge to go silent (i.e. not write at all on his blog except for fictional stories regarding the rosary). I am only interested in "that" he has done so. It is left up to us to call him out on this "bearing false witness moment." That at least has a small chance to persuade a would-be follower of Charlie to think twice, once they see for themselves that Charlie is not a man of his word. To that end, it is high time to review Charlie's own words about the Presidential Prophecy and his earnest pledge (now broken) to go silent if that alleged message he claimed to have received failed to come true.

Sorry but this will require multiple posts... beginning with his posts prior to the election, going all the way back to January 2016. I think it is instructive to see all the interrelated posts strung together in chronological order, such that you can see how they morphed over time, how they were point blank "definitive" in the early going and then how they began to be surrounded with qualifiers and rhetorical "escape hatches" as the time grew close to the inauguration. Due to the character limit of a single post, I will have at least six posts and maybe more. I need time to set them in MS Word first so that I can do a character count. Then I will post them in the wee hours of the night in the near future so that they can be adjacent to each other and read in succession from start to finish.

By the way, I have noticed that you are successful in formatting text that you input to this thread in bold or italics, whereas I don't seem to have that capability. How are you accomplishing this? My detailed posts will be more effective if I can do both bold and italicized text entries.

L Spinelli said...

http://www.wikihow.com/Sample/HTML-Cheat-Sheet

Steve said...

Hi Jack,

I look forward to your upcoming posts. BTW, after checking out the HTML Cheat Sheet that L.Spinelli pointed you to, you can type in your text (with the HTML markup language) into a online HTML editor such as the following and you can see what your post will look like:

http://htmledit.squarefree.com

Steve said...

As a HTML newbie, you might limit yourself to using tags for bold and italicize.

For example, this sentence with with bold and italicize html markup language:

After the &ltb&gt&lti&gtrescue&lt/i&gt&lt/b&gt, the world will resemble living in &ltb&gtMarberry RFD&lt/b&gt.

Will produce this on Glenn's blog:

After the rescue, the world will resemble living in Marberry RFD.

(BTW, the HTML editor above requires that you insert paragraph tags for new lines, i.e., &ltp&gt, however this is not needed for Glenn's blog. Just use the bold and italicize tags to create emphasis.

Steve said...

Glenn, I goofed in my post above...the examples for the Italic and Bold tags didn't do what I thought they would.

Jack - Just use the cheat sheet and you should be fine.

Glenn Dallaire said...


Thanks Steve!

Anonymous said...

Charlie has broken his silence because he is writing a book which he wants to make money from. In order to build a potential audience/market he is stirring the pot again. People debate: is he see, mad, bad, sad or all of the above? Charlie loves this because he was becoming forgotten but now he is building a fresh market for his new product/services. And all are falling into his trap and doing exactly as he wishes. They spend hours analyzing, blogging, debating building attention towards him again until the market is ripe and ready for when he publishes. A ready made, free advertising, marketing team.

Ignore him. It will do him and his questionable messages far, far more damage and be a much more effective preventative.

L Spinelli said...

@Anon above

The only reason I'm still writing here (and I really thought all this was done on January 20. Being naive at its finest) is because Charlie very likely has been dumped by the devil for all these years and is leading trusting souls down the wrong path.

Yes, he lost a good chunk of followers in January, but he's gaining new ones since he emerged from his trapdoor in May.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAb5iLFZ12E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kInXNsBdB7s

Anonymous said...

Interesting exchange. I'm not sure if the Archbishop would agree that Charlie has told us true:

Mark B. says:
June 25, 2017 at 2:14 pm
Beckita,
Are you saying that the rescue might not come by the end of the year? If it doesn’t come this year are Charlie’s predictions still true in the grand sweep of things? I thought that Charlie has told us true?

Beckita says:
June 25, 2017 at 10:55 pm
Yes, Mark. Charlie has told us true. I see you’re newly commenting so welcome. Please do read the entire thread here with comments on this topic. As well, you’ll want to read this post and this one. Our focus remains on God, as He unfolds His Plan, and on the core message of acknowledging God, taking next right steps and being a sign of hope.

L Spinelli said...

Guess she forgot about or is ignoring the last time Charlie "told us true".

Fred Keyes said...

As this whole Russia interfering with the U.S. election thing roils on, I still wonder whether Charlie--an experienced political hack, wasn't part of a "Deep State" that was working against Obama during his years in office. Republicans after all vowed to support nothing that Obama proposed and to oppose him at every turn. And so here comes Charlie, someone wise in the ways of politics and all the tricks political operatives can muster. Knowing enough religion to be dangerous, he demagogues his way toward convincing gullible apparition-chasers that The Russians are our friends.

My theory is as good as Charlie's anyway.

Anonymous said...

You give Charlie Johnston far too much credit by suggesting he is part of a "Deep State" plot. Charlie has always been a small-time operator. I read at another website he never won a congressional race, but mostly ran losing candidates in primaries. He was an editor at the Lakeland Newspapers -- for a short time -- before he left under a cloud. In fact, soon after he left he sued his old employers for libel, a story he tells frequently to threaten others but there is no record of a settlement -- and you know Charlie would brag if he'd made a big score! He fails to mention he worked as a used car salesman for much of his "political career." Years ago, Michael Brown described him as a "salesman" in an early Spirit Daily post.

The recent mystic gig was Charlie's biggest success. Now he can't let go of the spotlight. But don't believe the friends in high places stories, it's all a bluff.

Anonymous said...

It's July 1 - over the next 180 days the world's economic system will collapse, there will be worldwide civil war, we will have war with China, 26 million will die, we will have a Regent runnng the USA, Menses will rise, the Muslims will be converted, we will have a rescue, and finally by January 1 we will be living in Mayberry RFD. At that point we can start building a shrine on Mount Meeker.

Anonymous said...


Since you put all the predictions together I am beginning now to think that it might not all happen.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Anon, this time next year we'll be chasing Squirrels while singing The Song of Thanksgiving.

Fred Keyes said...

Anon @ June 29, 2017 at 1:11 PM:

If (big if; I'm a bit tongue-in-cheek about this) Charlie was part of a Deep State, it was a very small part.

The only thing Charlie has going in his favor is that prophets have always been treated badly.
St. Paul of course famously advises that we not "despise prophecies." But he also says we should test them...and we are doing that here. A true prophet, therefore, should take criticism gracefully. Oh, wait.... :)

Fred Keyes said...

And so North Korea, China and Russia are all in news again today—predictably, given circumstances that have been with us for quite a while now,long enough to concoct a plausible doomsday scenario. I can imagine though that one guy and a small group of his believers are privately hoping for things to blow up so that they can say, "See? He was right!"

Anonymous said...

Here's an example of a comment posted on the CJ Blog:

CrewDog says:
July 5, 2017 at 11:33 am
The below is a catastrophic “SIGN” of a Nation/Culture in it’s death throes … and I think Satanic… really!!… aided by/with the Liberal godless Welfare State Media and their puppet corrupt politicians. Oh!! Not to Worry!!! We have plenty of Illegal Aliens to do the work these lazy, ignorant and rudderless slugs won’t do. I Know! I just be a heartless Ol’ Meanie who worked his way through High School, College and three days after graduation signed in to my first Air Force Base.
Is our Church “Leadership” any better? The Vatican II hijacking Lavender Lefties have managed to empty countless churches, schools and missions but … Hey!!! … No Problem! ….. We just fill them with Illegal Aliens .. Right!?? ….. It ain’t gonna end well!!!:(

“The Number Of Young Men Not Working Has DOUBLED In 15 Years”
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/the-number-of-young-men-not-working-has-doubled-in-15-years/

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!


I thought Charlie's message is for his followers to be a "sign of hope."

I am not sure how the above post is designed to give anyone hope. It seems to be a post by an angry right-wing white man.

Anonymous said...

CrewDog is one of those characters, like Joe Crozier, who inhabits the dark corners of the Catholic blogosphere. He also posts on the "Mother of God" forum with the same stuff. MoG is a pretty unmoderated blog, so anyone can ask and answer questions. There was back-and-forth on Charlie Johnston over there for a few years, it may still be going on.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Anon (Jul 5, 7:06), it's not only useless fixating and ranting on evils, it's harmful with the politicizing, sarcasm, insults, etc. Sadly there's some of that here to, as well as all over the net. To "be a sign of hope" is a worthy thing, but I've grown weary of a faith in people that amounts to little more than comforting cliquishness, sentimentality, a constant pining for worldly things and the way we imagined things to be, etc. There's simply none of that in the Gospels, other than as examples –– opportunities –– with a clear invitation to mature in the Faith. May God work the miracle in all people and "save all souls" as CrewDog likes to say.

Fred Keyes said...

I've wondered if Crew Dog might be Charlie himself, baring his true feelings about things like the welfare state and undocumented immigrants (most of whom by the way are baptized members of the Body of Christ). If it' not Charlie, Crew Dog certainly expresses thinking that Charlie sympathizes with.

Anonymous said...

Well, Fred, I mentioned just a few things that can impede us from maturing in the faith. Even the distant periphery of the "fever swamps" is a dangerous place as well. From there you're already moving away from the breathable air to the dangerous stuff swirling around.... fog, phantasms, conspiracies to suck us down in the muck... too much thinking. Good, bad or indifferent, I just try to look at a thing and get past appearance to facts. Normally, that doesn't require much fuss, and there's always more important things to attend to.

Anonymous said...

Yes Anon @ 3:15 pm - I see your point - "useless fixating and ranting on evils, it's harmful with the politicizing, sarcasm, insults, etc" - that in itself is one of the downfalls of Charlie, he became so obsessed with keeping things in check that the opinions of others were considered evil and this passed to his followers, so by not allowing free thought the site became a den of sarcasm and insults - yes, it was very traumatic to the people on the receiving end, but in the end justice prevailed and Charlie was forced to leave the stage. I saw no pleasure in seeing a creature of God being taken down, but sometimes that's what God does to bring them back on-line.

Anonymous said...

But the problem, Anon 7:36, is that he hasn't quite left yet. He's kept the door open, just in case. He posts. He hangs onto his followers. I'll bet he emails them, nudges them if they appear to stray now -- didn't one of his former followers talk about getting a Christmas card and solicitous email from him? I don't know what combination of garlic/silver bullet/stake through the heart it might take to get Charlie to really leave the stage. Even dead and buried, I'd half expect a hand suddenly reaching out from the grave -- sorry to get all Stephen King there.

He has not acknowledged he was wrong on anything else beside the presidential prophecy. He has not taken responsibility for the hurt he inflicted on others. His followers follow in his footsteps, in the latest post turning on someone who questioned Trump. Justice hasn't triumphed yet.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, Anon (July 6, 9:02 PM), I don't see the "problem." Where would you have him go? He's a person with a life and relationships like you and me, and a Catholic to boot. Even if he wasn't Catholic, he's still a brother. Oh, all this fuss about the Presidential Prophecy here. Very well. He got it wrong and acknowledged as much. There's a whole body of work there. Can anyone here honestly say that it doesn't contain plenty of worthy stuff? Why fixate on this thing or that thing? To be right? Very well, you're right insofar as appearances. How many times have you been wrong in your life? Did he get cranky and have some ego bubble up? Let him without sin cast the first stone. I've got an ego the size of Dallas if I don't keep it in check. Anyone here any different? Are we all so certain that if Jesus chose to show up to chat with us that He would pat us on the back for helping out... so sure that we're His little darlings? What if He showed up to reprimand us? Consider all the possibilities. You may think you've scratched the surface and penetrated to the heart of the matter... but, oh, how tiny your little finger and how large the surface... and how difficult to truly get to the heart of the matter, as God truly sees it. Just say'in.

Jackisback said...

"...as God truly sees it."
I thought it was clear that appeals to authority will get you nowhere on this thread.
Charlie "was wrong?" No he wasn't. The alleged revelation that he repeated in public was wrong - i.e., false, i.e., not of God. I have read older posts that he considered LTTW false solely by the fact that the locutionist had claimed to be repeating a direct revelation. Yet, Charlie has done this in both the presidential prophecy and the rescue prophecy. "What I was told..." indeed.
Stop it with the: "Charlie made a mistake." If you take him at face value (given his "years of training, etc.") then you can only conclude that Charlie was deceived by some agent who is not of God because the alleged revelation that he passed on was a lie, a bald-faced lie. Charlie has said that this is "not about him." Thank goodness! For Charlie is not Job. He is not Jeremiah, no matter how much he'd like to paint himself to be.
Pointing this out is not uncharitable; it is observable fact, followed by logical conclusion. There is no call for you to pull the "let him without sin cast the first stone" appeal to authority/straw man fallacy canard. No stones are being thrown at Charlie - he threw the stones, at his own glass house and shattered it, the shards of which flew back in his face. That's not our fault.
We hold Charlie to his own standards: he professed early on that making an appeal to authority in an attempt to confirm one's own beliefs is "the worst kind of bearing false witness" - because it is about something attribued to God - a form of blasphemy. Charlie said this. Now he must own it. And yet, he does not own it, by virtue of the fact that he has violated his pledge to go silent.
"Where would you have him go?" - ahh...into silence as he pledged.
"...plenty of worthy stuff?" - ahh...no. There is only a repetition of that which we already knew as Catholics in his "TDL" mantra and "TNRS" mantra. We didn't need Charlie to tell us that. The rescue? That is an attempt to add something new to already established revelation. Jesus rescued us 2,000 or so years ago. Mary may come in 2017, but it is highly, highly, highly, highly unlikely that it will be to perform some concrete action in our temporal world to "rescue" us from ourselves. Mary is not an angel, she was 100% human, however immaculate. It is not for her to "do" something "new" as Charlie has alleged was revealed to him. That is God's role - He "did something" 2,000 years ago to fulfill the prophecies of the old testament. Nothing more need be "done." He who says something more need be done is speaking presumptuously.
"To be right?"...ahh no. That was always and still is Charlie's issue.
"How many times have you been wrong in your life?"...ahh, irrelevant and another straw man fallacy. No one here claims to be a prophet.
"Did he get cranky and have some ego bubble up?...ahh yeah! in spades! Not the stuff of a prophet that.
"Anyone here different?...ahh yes. We just happen to be able to sniff out a bull-shitter from a mile away.
"...so certain that we're [Jesus'] little darlings?"...ahh, no one made such a claim; shame on you for making yet another straw man assertion.
"What if He showed up to reprimand us?"...ahh for what? - attempting to protect the faithful from a false prophet, who may turn out to be an unwitting "Mr. Menses?" Just sayin'.

Anonymous said...

Yes, no other opinions, viewpoints, appeals to authority, quoting scripture, etc., because this thread has to conform to your legalistic standards, accepting your own presumptions about what others share... presumptions that you wouldn't dare subject to the same scalpel, cotton balls and antiseptic that you so vigorously apply to only select commenters. Hypocrite.

L Spinelli said...

Have any of the rest of us here claimed that we were messengers of God?

That is THE reason Charlie's words were put under a microscope.

You should take a good long look at your hero before you throw loaded words like "hypocrite" around.

Anonymous said...

Presumption again, Spinelli. Who says that Charlie is my hero? For the record, I didn't just "throw loaded words like hypocrite around." Rather I clearly stated it and meant it. Sorry if I find this thread one dimensional and tiresome at this point. Some here had/have things to say that are at least interesting (in my opinion), when they're not endlessly prosecuting this topic to death, or spitting petty sarcasm, venom and the like. I don't have all the answers, but I do know that people are going to get what they're looking for... be that illumination, peace, judgment, or whatever. Good luck with that.

Jackisback said...

"...no other opinions, viewpoints, appeals to authority, quoting scripture, etc., because this thread has to conform to your legalistic standards..."

Ahh, no. This accusation is a tu quoque/straw man argument. This thread's purpose, as stated by its author, is discernment with respect to the "presidential prophecy." All opinions, viewpoints, scripture quotes are welcome here, as Glenn has repeatedly made clear. It just so happens that some of us hold other commentators to account when they employ logical fallacies when making their assertions. There's a good reason for that: because, when logical fallacies are employed in making one's case, it derogates the discernment process. Holding an argument accountable for its logical flaws at least has the virtue of not engaging in the "appeal to emotion" fallacy that is so prevalent at TNRS. Glenn has made clear that my viewpoints (no less and no more than yours) are also welcome here in this goal of discernment.

"...accepting your own presumptions about what others share... presumptions that you wouldn't dare subject to the same scalpel, cotton balls and antiseptic that you so vigorously apply to only select commenters. Hypocrite."

By all means, feel free to make the case (and a detailed one, please) for one or more presumptions you think I've made that would form the basis for calling me a hypocrite. I have no reason to shy away from critique. Absent you making such a case, your name calling is yet another logical fallacy - ad hominem attack.

What say you? Are you up for real discernment or not?

Anonymous said...

Fred, You said you wondered if Charlie was commenting under the alias of "Crew Dog." Crew Dog identifies online as an aging veteran from Arkansas. His style -- unless it's a long-running parody -- is that of an uneducated belligerent. Just based on my "read" of Charlie Johnston, posing as that would hit way too close to home for him to adopt.

Charlie, after all, started as a poor kid from Alabama. Charlie seems driven to identify himself as an intellectual -- lack of college degree and genuine accomplishments notwithstanding -- with his quotes from Victor David Hanson and other prominent conservatives. He also furiously name-drops when he can, for example, David Daleiden, and his spiritual advisor, Father "Towering Intellect."

Anonymous said...

Gee, Jack, I thought it was already abundantly clear that I was intent on "real" discernment, so by all means... Yes, I'd be delighted, especially if it produces good fruit.

Are we limiting it to the Presidential Prophecy? I ask, because I think it should also be clear that although you've prosecuted the Presidential (and other 'failed') Prophecies to a definitive, negative judgment (and the statement from the Denver Diocese indicates that they were unreliable), it should also be clear that I think the larger issue encompasses the process/thoughts expressed here which have frequently been at the expense of Charity, and sometimes hypocritical (i.e. - one step forward, two steps back). To be fair, that process/those thoughts have not been so limited.

I'll make a case for that and provide supporting examples/evidence extracted from this thread.

I won't make a case for or against what Charlie believes his mission to be. Unless the Church says otherwise, I consider those mystical experiences to be alleged.

At the heart of it, I hope for what Jesus hoped for –– that we all become as one. Clearly, we've got our work cut out for us.

Additionally, I don't think it's prudent to have this conversation here, so we can connect via email through Glen. Bring your legal tomes if you want. I'm just bringing boots and looking forward to some exertion and fresh air.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:23,

I'm not Jack (who can most certainly speak for himself), but I wonder why you believe it is not prudent to have a discussion in this forum? I am sure posters here will provide a space for you two that does not include insults. Indeed, many here are vested in the subject and would enjoy hearing the points you plan to make.

Anonymous said...

I think it prudent based on a number of passages from Holy Scripture. All should strive to ensure that discussions are edifying, but one between two brothers who disagree may very well take a circuitous route before they get there. Certainly not everything should be served up for public consumption. Just look at where we're at.

Anonymous said...

You almost sound like Charlie there, Anon... Personally I am always wary of giving out real life information to unknown anons online, but again, it's not my call.

Jackisback said...

I'm happy to engage in a conversation either way. This thread has been devoted to the "presidential prophecy," and so, if we go down a road that encompasses other issues vis-a-vis Charlie that involve other aspects, and yet desire to give others a chance to contribute their thoughts, we probably ought to consider going back to the original thread "Charlie Johnston - An alleged prophet with a critically important message for humanity." But I can do personal emails as well.

Either way, I agree that Glenn would likely appreciate us not bogging down this thread with us going down any number of other non-presidential prophecy rabbit holes.

I have just emailed Glenn to give him permission to share with you my email address.

Your call on how you'd like to proceed.

«Oldest ‹Older   1201 – 1400 of 3140   Newer› Newest»

ShareThis