Yoga: Paying Homage To Hindu Deities

Yoga: Paying Homage To Hindu Deities

yogaposeToday, I enjoyed a conversation over lunch with a some Catholics from various parishes in Glasgow, including a young woman who was thoroughly informed about the New Age Movement and its impact on Catholics in this archdiocese and beyond. Unfortunately, I had an appointment so had to leave before the end of the chat, and without, therefore, taking in all of the detail, but, from what I did hear of this young woman’s own experience of parishioners who are deeply committed to the New Age phenomenon, it seems that it warrants our attention.  The spread of New Age-ism has worried the  Vatican sufficiently, for the Pontifical Council For Culture to issue a document on the matter: “Even if it can be admitted that New Age religiosity in some way responds to the legitimate spiritual longing of human nature, it must be acknowledged that its attempts to do so run counter to Christian revelation…”

 I’ve heard plenty of people defend Yoga, saying it helps them relax and is good exercise. But it is more than simple body exercise – it is Hindu prayer using body postures – click Here

Yogaprayerpostures

 

                                                    

Comment…

 

Have you noticed the advertisements for New Age groups – under various guises, mostly Yoga classes – in church porches and in bulletins?  The fact that bookshops are filling their shelves with “New Age” material is one of the concerns found in the Vatican Document, A Christian Reflection on the New Age     

Should we be concerned? One priest in England was concerned enough to hit the headlines in 2012 – from the BBC to the Telegraph and plenty of headlines in between – click here to read the Catholic Herald report.  Will Yoga destroy the Faith of Catholics who participate in it, or is it possible to be a “New Age Catholic”?  

Comments (148)

  • crofterlady

    How frightening for the family! I’m sure a “devout Catholic” family would have the home blessed to start off with which then begs the question: how could this occur?” Over the years I have heard of such things but they were usually brought about by some “opening” or other such as a seance. I don’t see how, at this stage, a mere “blessing” would suffice; more appropriate would be an exorcism.

    I once had a new house blessed by a priest and it was quite a ceremony, not just a quickie blessing.

    August 13, 2016 at 1:53 pm
    • Petrus

      I have read Fr Gabriel Amorth’s book “An Exorcist Tells His Story”. He says that he always uses the term “blessing” when referring to an exorcism as this doesn’t alarm the family or the person being exorcised. If a person was at it, and pretending to be possessed, they would remain perfectly calm because of their belief that only an explicit exorcism works. However, the devil knows fine well what is happening and is forced to reveal himself during this “blessing” – which is, in fact, an exorcism.

      I know for a fact that there is an appointed exorcist in Scotland, so maybe that’s why the diocese is not revealing who attended or what happened.

      August 13, 2016 at 3:15 pm
      • editor

        Petrus,

        It was a blessing. There was no exorcist present.

        August 13, 2016 at 3:33 pm
      • Petrus

        Editor,

        I must have missed that bit. Admittedly, I scanned the article quickly, having heard about this a few days ago.

        That’s appalling if it definitely was only a simple blessing. It sounds quite severe to me, dogs flying around the garden??? I think the first thing a bishop should do is summon an exorcist. However, the bishop himself could perform the exorcism should be find it difficult to locate an experienced exorcist. It is part of the bishop’s ministry.

        Sadly, most of the Scottish bishops are in need of an exorcism themselves, so the chances of them performing one are quite slim!

        August 13, 2016 at 3:37 pm
      • editor

        Petrus,

        I’m not sure that was in the article but I know it from a reliable source.

        Two things…

        Firstly: could you supply the name of the exorcist for Scotland? I know it used to be the case that every diocese had its own exorcist but that is not the case now, so who is the exorcist for Scotland, to whom you refer?

        Secondly: how do you know that exorcism is part of a bishop’s ministry? I did not know that, and if so, it would seem odd that a bishop has not succeeded in doing an exorcism.

        A little later…

        I have just checked this with a priest who replied: “technically yes, but it was a minor order before Vatican II so all priests had it; now an exorcist is appointed.” End.

        By the way, I laughed at the idea (From Fr Amorth’s book) that he would use the term “blessing” in order not to frighten the family. How could they be any more frightened than living in the midst of overt diabolical activity? Priceless. I believe Fr Amorth is a Medjugorje fan so his confusion is worrying on more than one front!

        August 13, 2016 at 4:30 pm
      • Petrus

        Editor,

        I don’t know the name of the exorcist as it’s apparently not public knowledge. However, rumour has it that it is a priest from an order. Around 15 years ago there was a rumour that it was a Paisley priest. I asked a priest of the diocese about it and he burst out laughing, saying that he “knew” it was a priest from outside the west of Scotland.

        Yes, it was a minor order before Vatican II but I’m pretty sure a priest still had to obtain permission before performing an exorcism. I found that practice of giving the minor order of exorcist before ordination to the priesthood a little odd. Only an ordained priest can perform a Solemn Exorcism so I don’t see what the point was. Maybe I’m a Modernist 😉

        I laughed at your comment on the family not being scared enough, however, I’m assuming you are referring to diabolical possession? This is only one form of extraordinary diabolical activity. Diabolical oppression and obsession also require an exorcism. Therefore, a person may end up on the door step of an exorcist without looking like Linda Blair!

        I didn’t know that about Fr Gabriel Amorth – very disappointing!

        August 13, 2016 at 7:17 pm
      • editor

        Petrus,

        You lost me in your penultimate paragraph. The Rutherglen case is not about possession, as far as I can see, but about diabolical activity in the home. Made me think of someone, perhaps, practising Yoga (hence I thought of this thread) or maybe playing with a Ouija board.

        August 13, 2016 at 7:37 pm
      • Petrus

        Editor,

        I’ve retread my paragraph and I see where the confusion arises. My fault. When you said about the family being frightened I see that you were, of course, referring directly to the Rutherglen case. I thought you were commenting on Fr Amorth’s comment regarding exorcisms in general. That’s why I mentioned the other types of diabolical activity. Apologies. Maybe I should send for the Exorcist! 🙂

        Of course, the case in question would be diabolical infestation. It’s criminal that the Church merely sent a priest to bless the house.

        August 13, 2016 at 7:56 pm
      • editor

        Petrus,

        I really wasn’t only referring to the Rutherglen case but to Fr Amorth’s statement about using the term “blessing” rather than “exorcism” in order not to frighten people. I actually meant that, no matter what the type of diabolical activity, where or when (not just Rutherglen) it could hardly be more frightening to suggest exorcism rather (I would have thought, it would be comforting!) than suffering the activity.

        And I wouldn’t jump the gun by assuming “the Church merely sent a priest…”

        As I said above, more to follow, so stay tuned!

        August 13, 2016 at 8:32 pm
      • Petrus

        Editor,

        Ah, a sequel? The Exorcist Part II, directed by Ed. C Truth.

        Sent from my iPhone

        August 13, 2016 at 8:51 pm
    • Athanasius

      Crofterlady

      It would be worth while for the police to inquire if anyone at the property has been messing around recently with a Ouija board or other occult-type practice like Transendental meditation. These are extremely easy ways to get yourself and/or your property demonically possessed, though this family may be perfectly innocent victims of a previous owners activities.

      I was quite appalled by the police finding it hard to admit to supernatural activity at that house. All humanity has accepted the existence of evil spirits since the foundation of the world. The documented evidence is indisputable. Today, though, they can’t bring themselves to believe what even manifests itself before their very eyes. How pathetic is that? The blindness that comes upon those who reject God sometimes astounds me. It’s lunacy beyond words, a very high price indeed to pay for a secular, ‘do as you please and call it a human right’, society.

      August 14, 2016 at 2:07 pm
  • Michaela

    This is a terrifying case. I would love to know what has sparked this activity. There are a few different types of demonic activity. Here’s a list
    https://www.stpeterslist.com/11/6-types-of-extraordinary-demonic-activity/

    August 13, 2016 at 8:38 pm
  • Christina

    It says in the article that a ‘demonologist’ said that this might be caused by ‘teenage energy’. It is invariably the case, I believe, that there is usually a teenager, and more usually a girl around when poltergeist activity occurs. An authority on paranormal activity was Father Thurston, SJ, who wrote in the 1930s: “Although I am myself quite satisfied of the reality of many of these poltergeist phenomena, I have no thought of contesting the fact that nothing more purposeless—one might say nothing more childish—could be imagined than these incomprehensible displays of some Puck-like spook bent on every exasperating form of mischief….To attribute all poltergeist activity to “diabolical agency” is difficult, if only because we credit the enemy of mankind with a higher level of intelligence than that which seems to prompt these outbreaks”. He also says that exorcism and other rites of the Church are not generally effective in permanently ending poltergeist disturbances, but that he has come across some cases where a special novena or the saying of Mass seems definitely to have got rid of the nuisance.

    August 14, 2016 at 12:31 am
    • Josephine

      Christina,

      I can’t agree with that priest. How can he say poltergeist is not diabolical activity? If not, then what is it? I also disagree that it’s “purpose-less” – it’s purpose is to draw people further into the occult. That’s why the Church forbids us to go to fortune-tellers and use ouija boards and such like. That can all seem innocent and a bit of fun but it is drawing us further into the diabolical and that’s why it’s forbidden.

      For that priest to say in the 1930s “To attribute all poltergeist activity to “diabolical agency” is difficult, if only because we credit the enemy of mankind with a higher level of intelligence than that which seems to prompt these outbreaks” sounds very confusing, to put it mildly. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that is the sort of thing I’d expect to hear from a modernist priest or bishop.

      The fact that he admits cases where a special novena or saying Mass has got rid of “the nuisance” seems proof that the activity is actually diabolical.

      I found his reasoning difficult to follow. The bottom line is, anyone who says the poltergeist activity is not diabolical activity, has to say what it actually is. It has to be something – objects don’t rise up and travel across a room by themselves.

      August 14, 2016 at 8:35 am
      • Petrus

        I agree with you entirely. I don’t see any other explanation.

        Sent from my iPhone

        August 14, 2016 at 8:49 am
      • RCA Victor

        I think there is a difference between “vexations” and complete possession, but both of them are definitely diabolical. Here is Fr. Gruner on vexations:

        [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dij592tyUew&w=854&h=480%5D

        August 14, 2016 at 6:06 pm
      • Christina

        Josephine, without knowing far more about the subject matter on which Fr. Herbert Thurston, SJ was a prolific and authoritative Catholic writer, I would not write him off so readily. Very highly regarded in his day, he studied and wrote exhaustively, mainly on parapsychological subjects, and he studied and wrote on spiritualism from the perspective of Catholic theology at a time when it was taking society by storm. One of his recent rationalist critics says of him Thurston, as a Catholic theologian, measures everything in terms of his own subjective, personal Catholic beliefs. So he rejects any information which is inconsistent with his beliefs, which is recommendation enough for me. He was particularly interested in poltergeist activity, and Father Amorth, in his own work on the subject, has not disagreed with what Father Thurston had to say on the subject.

        For a modern take on poltergeist phenomena Imprimatur has this to say:

        Poltergeists:
        Poltergeist activity, along with so-called haunted houses are far more complex questions than simple good or evil entities. From stories we hear that poltergeists tend to be attached to a particular person, often an adolescent. These poltergeists tend to be mischievous, but mainly benign.
        According to Fr. Herbert Thurston, SJ, (Ghosts and Poltergeists, page 2)

        “A poltergeist is simply a racketing spirit, which in almost all cases remains invisible, but which manifests its presence by throwing things about, […] in the course of which the human spectators are occasionally hit by flying objects, but as a rule suffer no serious injury.”

        He says further that particular aspects of the poltergeist are,

        “the invisibility of the agents, the sporadic and temporary nature of the manifestations, and notably their dependence upon the presence of some particular individual- usually a young person and often a child- who must be assumed to possess strange, if unconscious, mediumistic powers.”

        Interestingly, Fr. Thurston seems to imply here that poltergeist activity is caused by “mediumistic” [psychic?] powers on the account of the central individual. Maybe in the case of poltergeists we are dealing with unconscious psychic powers of ‘sensitive’ individuals.
        In fact, Fr. Amorth’s treatment of the subject does not rule out this possibility. (An Exorcist, More Stories, page 160-161)
        (My emphasis)

        I became familiar with some of Father Thurston’s work (the only available Catholic work on the subject) in the 1960s, when I had had some rather nasty paranormal experiences myself, (and so later did one of my sons as a teenager), and the modernist Jesuit to whom I had turned for help sent me packing from his door! So that is the reason why this topic interested me.

        Poltergeist activity is classed as infestation, but is usually mild (except to those experiencing it!) and self-limiting. There are, of course, cases where an evil spirit is involved, and the ‘target’ of the manifestation is not always the obvious one. it may be someone connected with the obvious target – even the exorcist that the evil spirit wants to be summoned.

        So it is a complex, little-understood phenomenon, and I do not believe that the Church – even the modernist Church – will rush into a full exorcism without first trying prayer, holy water, minor blessings, etc.

        My own attitude is that there are more things in heaven and on earth………

        For those advocating immediate recourse to an exorcist, as opposed to a traditional priest, further thoughts on the problems of modern exorcisms may be found here:

        http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2002_SU_Father_X.html

        August 14, 2016 at 10:51 pm
      • Laura

        Christina,

        I can’t make sense of that at all. It means there can be loose souls travelling around making mischief for no possible reason. Is the Church’s teaching not that at death a soul goes either to Heaven or Hell, with purgation if necessary, but not left roaming around. I just can’t believe that at all.

        It doesn’t need to be a choice between a traditional blessing by a priest or an exorcism, but it has to be an evil spirit surely, whatever the degree of danger? If it’s not an evil spirit from Hell, what is it? The priest you quote seems to be saying they are sometimes evil spirits involved but that there are also just some souls just allowed to float around. That is too odd for words, IMHO. Why would God allow that?

        Maybe I’m being thick but it doesn’t square with Catholic teaching on death, hell or heaven, for me.

        August 14, 2016 at 11:04 pm
      • Christina

        Laura, if you can’t make sense of that at all, that proves the wisdom of the Church in forbidding Catholics without special training (such as you and I) from enquiring into such matters. Perhaps it is a pity that the topic came up if some find it disturbing, but once it had and some bloggers were assuming that diabolical agencies only could be at work in poltergeist activity, it seemed appropriate to point out that completely in line with Catholic tradition less drastic explanations are possible.

        You are right about dogmatic eschatological teaching as set out in CCC 1021, 1022, about the soul after death. However, in full accordance with Catholic tradition, God seems to allow souls to appear to the living for His own inscrutable purposes. There are many examples in scripture and tradition, especially in the lives of the saints. We are free to believe or disbelieve this. Nevertheless no less an authority than St. Thomas Aquinas says that “separated souls sometimes come forth from their abode and appear to men…”, and this can be both for “intimidation” (i.e., damned souls) or for “instruction” (i.e., redeemed souls). He also claims that souls may appear to others “in order to seek our suffrages” (i.e., souls in purgatory). Nobody is suggesting that souls are just left to ‘roam’ or ‘float around’. Thus, Catholics are free to believe, without a strict theological basis, that departed souls can and do appear to the living with God’s permission and to accomplish His purposes. If they do so appear, then it is certainly not ‘for no possible reason’.

        August 15, 2016 at 9:13 pm
      • Petrus

        Christina,

        I’m sure the souls God permits to return to Earth wouldn’t throw things around a room or send dogs 7ft up a tree!

        Sent from my iPhone

        August 15, 2016 at 9:20 pm
      • Christina

        “I’m sure the souls God permits to return to Earth wouldn’t throw things around a room or send dogs 7ft up a tree!”

        I don’t think anyone suggested that, and I know I certainly didn’t!

        The second paragraph of my 9.13pm post is in reply to the last paragraph of Laura’s 11.04pm one. There is no connection, as far as I know, between poltergeist activity and souls that God permits to return to earth, and nor did I intend to make one. To tediously repeat what I said in my long 10.51pm post (on 14th), the former is little understood and maybe even, ‘in the case of poltergeists we are dealing with unconscious psychic powers of ‘sensitive’ individuals’ as Father Thurston suggested and Father Amorth did not rule out’. We have yet much to learn about the powers of the human mind.

        Now wakey wakey, Petrus, and if you have wakey wakeyed then stop pulling my leg 😁.

        August 15, 2016 at 10:11 pm
      • Nicky

        Christina,

        I’ve been scratching my head following your exchanges with others, because I have never for a second doubted that poltergeist were a diabolical infestation. I’ve never heard it suggested that it could be down to “dealing with unconscious psychic powers of ‘sensitive individuals’.”

        That just sounds like a psychological theory to me, and if it is true that a human mind could cause poltergeist activity, then what would be the point of prayers and Masses?

        I know you have Fr Thurston SJ in high regard, but could it be that he was one of the first of the Jesuit modernists? After all, they didn’t suddenly appear at Vatican II from out of nowhere. When I read the quote you posted, it didn’t resonate with me at all as Catholic teaching.

        I usually agree with your posts, so I am a bit sorry to have to say that I don’t agree with you on this, but hope we remain friends – LOL!

        August 15, 2016 at 10:26 pm
      • Petrus

        I’m the same, Nicky. I think Christina is an excellent blogger, but I think she’s just wrong on this one.

        Sent from my iPhone

        August 15, 2016 at 11:22 pm
      • Petrus

        Unconscious psychic powers? Are you pulling my leg?

        Christina, I know I quoted Fr Amorth but we must remember that he is a Modernist. The Jesuit priest you quote was, I think, suspected of Modernism too, or so a very wise woman told me recently.

        Sent from my iPhone

        August 15, 2016 at 11:21 pm
      • Laura

        Christina,

        I don’t find it a “disturbing” subject – to me, the great thing about the Rutherglen story is that it proves the existence of demons and of Hell. I think it must be making those police officers think about that.

        What I find puzzling is that the priest you quote (and now yourself) seem to want to downplay the idea of the diabolical, as if there could be beings of some kind that are allowed to intimidate us like the poltergeist in the Rutherglen house, for no apparent reason.

        With due respect, I don’t think the example you quote of God allowing the souls of departed people to appear after death fits this debate. That is not the issue, because no soul is “appearing” – just throwing stuff around, switching lights off and on etc. and that seems to me to prove only one thing – that there is a devil and demons and that they do act in this way. I cannot see why that priest or anyone else, doesn’t want to allow for that fact.

        The souls of the departed “appearing to the living” does happen, as we know, from various apparitions, approved by the Church, but that is not what we are talking about here, IMHO. We are talking about souls that are not appearing but acting in a pointless way,and terrifying people.

        I can’t find anything in Catholic tradition that teaches that this is from God. We are forbidden to do anything that might encourage diabolical activity such as what has been happening in the Rutherglen house. If it was a soul that God had allowed to come to intimidate us or whatever, then there would be no need of special prayers of Masses to remove the nuisance because it wouldn’t be a nuisance if it comes from God and is part of Catholic traditional belief.

        I’m really sorry if I am being thick but short of saying this is diabolical activity at some level, I just can’t make sense of it. I’m no spring chicken and I’ve never heard of such goings on being described as anything but from the devil. As I say, death, judgment heaven or hell. That’s what I was taught – no mention of being allowed back on earth to open drawers and chuck stuff around to frighten people – LOL!

        August 15, 2016 at 9:45 pm
  • Christina

    I know you’re not thick, Laura, and I don’t think I am, but somewhere along the line I’ve failed to communicate, and, as I was a teacher, that’s got to have been my fault! Anyway, I’ve had it up to here with poltergeists for now, so I’m off to make mischief some place else.

    August 15, 2016 at 10:21 pm
    • Nicky

      Christina,

      “Anyway, I’ve had it up to here with poltergeists for now, so I’m off to make mischief some place else.”

      LOL!

      August 15, 2016 at 10:29 pm
  • RCA Victor

    I’ve just spent a little time looking for background on Fr. Thurston – nothing odd or untoward came up until I came across this article, which claims that he opposed the canonization of St. Bernadette:

    https://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2016/04/saint-gemma-scourge-of-crypto-modernists.html

    August 16, 2016 at 4:12 pm
    • Christina

      RCA Victor, I checked your link and noted the reference in it, without citation, to Fr. Thurston’s opposition to the canonisation of St. Bernadette. He did write an article in The Irish Quarterly Review, December 1933, entitled ‘Bernadette of Lourdes: A very human saint’ which I have been unable to access, but which hardly sounds too hostile.

      Fr. Thurston, who was probably previously unknown to many younger bloggers, has received some criticism on this thread, thanks to my mentioning his name. As far as his opposition to the canonisation is concerned, I know that he wrote on ‘The Physical Phenomena of Mysticism’, and that he was cautious about some of these, in accordance with the mind of the Church. Of himself he wrote, in this book, explaining his sometimes sceptical stance:

      “The role of Devil’s Advocate is a thankless one and does not make for popularity, Indeed, I may confess that, when writing somewhat in the character of a doubting Thomas, I have felt at times, in spite of good intentions, that I was even playing a mean and an unworthy part.

      “Why, I have asked myself, should a skeptical line of argument be put forward which may possibly trouble the simple faith of many good people much nearer and dearer to God than I can ever hope to be? And yet in these days of widespread education, universal questioning and free discussion, a premature and ill-grounded credulity cannot in the long run be of advantage to the Church. The Christian has to be able to justify his beliefs, and adequate equipment for an encounter with rationalists or agnostics requires some previous study both of the position, which it is intended to take up and of the form of attack to which that position may be exposed”.

      His pamphlets were very popular in the wholly orthodox pre-Vat.II piety stalls and the CTS of those days, and the breadth of his learning is revealed in the many subjects he wrote on. This link, if it pastes, will give an idea of his output.

      http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AHerbert+thurston&fq=&dblist=638&start=31&qt=next_page

      August 31, 2016 at 11:44 pm
      • Christina

        Output – over 699 listed publications!

        August 31, 2016 at 11:46 pm
      • RCA Victor

        Christina,

        Sorry, I had forgotten all about this discussion, so had to remind myself what it was about. I do remember coming across Fr. Thurston’s voluminous output whilst trying to find out about him.

        I’m sorry to say that I’ve had some very personal experiences with the “unconscious psychic powers of ‘sensitive’ individuals.” That’s because from 1975-1981 I was essentially a groupie at the New York City apartment of a woman who claimed to be “psychic,” and who made her living by giving “psychic readings” and holding various discussion and prayer groups in her house.

        As I discovered years later, the numerous “psychic readings” she gave me, which I had on tape, were worthless, and I threw them all away. However, I can verify that she was indeed one of those “sensitives” mentioned by Fr. Thurston. That is, she was physically sensitive to people’s thoughts, including mine to a startling degree, could “hear” them, and was often in considerable physical pain because of them (esp. thoughts of anger, condemnation, etc.).

        For example, I clearly remember one incident where we were sitting around her table, the conversation was straying well wide of the topic, and certain people were dominating the conversation with meaningless babbling instead of letting our hostess talk. I was getting very fidgety and eventually downright angry about this meandering, and I shouted mentally “Would everyone please shut up and listen to [hostess]? No sooner had I completed the angry thought than she looked at me quite startled, her head jerked back a bit, and then she gave me a knowing smile. She had obviously heard what I had thought!

        I can also assure you that her sensitivity had nothing to do with “poltergeists,” as there were never any physical disturbances or unusual occurrences in her apartment. I don’t know how to explain the sensitivity of people like her, but it does exist – and looking back on it, I think it is quite dangerous, as the Church tells us.

        As for souls appearing to us on earth, I recently came across a tradition that certain souls in purgatory, for whom we are praying, might appear to us during the Ember Days.

        September 1, 2016 at 3:55 pm
      • Laura

        RCA Victor,

        I would have thought that woman, the “psychic”, had powers from the devil, if she is able to read thoughts like that. Would God allow that i.e. make some people so “sensitive” in that way, that they can read our thoughts? That’s scary.

        September 1, 2016 at 5:12 pm
      • RCA Victor

        Laura,

        I honestly don’t know where her sensitivity came from, but I could tell you another story that would raise the hair on the back of your neck! I never sensed anything satanic about her though.

        Anyway, with all that storytelling, I forgot to state my main point, which was that, in my experience, these sensitivities are anything but subconscious or unconscious, and they have nothing to do with “poltergeists.”. This woman also had several friends with similar sensitivities, though not as acute.

        September 1, 2016 at 10:36 pm
      • editor

        RCA Victor,

        Well, keep her well away from me. I don’t want anything to do with these “sensitive” types. The LAST thing I want is to be around someone who can read my mind!

        September 1, 2016 at 10:56 pm
      • RCA Victor

        Editor,

        Don’t worry, she died in 1981!

        September 1, 2016 at 11:01 pm
      • editor

        RCA Victor,

        I only hope she’s not passed on her “gift” of psychic sensitivity to you! Not that I wouldn’t trust you with my every thought, but, well, just sayin’… 😀

        September 1, 2016 at 11:04 pm
      • RCA Victor

        Editor,

        I can barely read my own mail, let alone someone else’s mind….

        September 1, 2016 at 11:21 pm
      • Michaela

        RCA Victor,

        “I can barely read my own mail, let alone someone else’s mind….”

        LOL!

        September 2, 2016 at 1:18 pm
      • Christina September 1, 2016 at 11:48 pm
      • Michaela

        Christina,

        I nearly answered the same way to Laura but then I got to thinking, yes, Padre Pio and St John Vianney I believe, could read souls, but isn’t that different from what psychics claim to do? Reading someone’s thoughts, or communicating from beyond the grave, doesn’t sound good to me. The saints could read souls by a special grace for the purpose of saving that soul, but is that really what psychics are all about? I could be wrong, but psychics are every religion and none, so I don’t see them in the same way as I see the saints – but please show me where I’m wrong, as I’m no expert on the paranormal – LOL!

        September 2, 2016 at 9:52 am
      • Christina

        Michaela,

        ‘… but psychics are every religion and none, so I so I don’t see them in the same way as I see the saints’

        NEITHER DO I MICHAELA!!! Sorry for shouting, but if I’ve learned anything from getting involved in this thread, which I now regret, it is that what blogger B says in response to blogger A gets somehow conflated in the minds of bloggers C, D, etc. with what blogger A has said. The result in this case might well be that I will be accused later of seeing psychics ‘in the same way as I see the saints’ because you used those words!!! I’m not getting at you, Michaela, you’re a good blogging friend, but one of the frustrating things about blogging is that most people are busy and sometimes speed-read, so that they misinterpret literal plodders like me 😞.

        ‘Cos I have got a literal mind, and I do read things literally, trying not to ‘interpret’ what people say, but taking their words at face value. So Laura said:

        “I would have thought that woman, the “psychic”, had powers from the devil, if she is able to read thoughts like that. Would God allow that i.e. make some people so “sensitive” in that way, that they can read our thoughts?”

        So Laura is saying simply that she thinks the power to read thoughts must come from the Devil and asks if God would allow some people to read thoughts, and the answer is yes of course He can. He is omnipotent and all power comes from Him. What the Devil does, he does only because God allows it for His own inscrutable purposes, as we learn from the Book of Job, and that is the mystery of iniquity that we cannot fathom.

        Next, in your post you used the words ‘read souls’ and contrasted it with ‘reading minds’. That comes, I think’ from the headline of the link. But the article itself begins with the words ‘Padre Pio of Pietrelcina manifested the ability to read minds’, and these examples it gives resemble those of RCA’s account insofar as what was in the person’s thoughts was ‘read’. No doubt Padre Pio read ‘souls’, like Jesus read the soul of the adultress at the well, but in the confessional Padre Pio read the thoughts – things actually present in the minds of people, as these examples show, and this is what I meant in my reply to Laura.

        ‘On a May 25, a woman wanted to say happy birthday to Padre Pio, but he was too far away, so she just thought about it. A few days later, at the end of the confession: “Happy birthday. Sorry I couldn’t say it the 25th.” “But you did already.” replied Padre Pio.

        Padre Pio was at the confessional when a woman in line was just told that there will be no more confessions for the day. She had a thought: “Father, send me a blessing, I need it.” Instantly, Padre Pio turned his head from the grille of the confessional, looked at her, made a blessing sign, and then turned his face back to the grille.’

        Just one last thing, I’m not an expert on the paranormal, in case anyone picks up on your mentioning such folk. I just once had experiences that would make our good friend RCA Victor’s pale into insignificance and that made me afraid to go to bed, and so I read what Catholic theology permitted (we had the Index then), and prayed, so I know just a little bit about things that go bump in the night and don’t want to know more!

        One other last thing, that’s my last word on this pesky thread!

        September 2, 2016 at 12:52 pm
      • Michaela

        Christina,

        I think we all take things literally, what the person writes, at face value that is why we have to check out that we have understood properly. Sorry this seems to annoy you but for me I would prefer the chance to explain more fully what I meant, as you have done, than to leave people with a wrong idea.

        One last word – I don’t think this is a “pesky thread” because I have learned a lot from it, including from you.

        September 2, 2016 at 1:16 pm
      • Fidelis

        Christina,

        This is all very interesting but, on balance, I think the First Commandment forbids us to dabble in psychic powers, so whether or not some saints had the power of reading minds, I still don’t like it.

        I get your point – that you were answering Laura to show that God did allow this power to holy saints like Padre Pio, but that doesn’t mean we can approve attending psychics – however I do know that is not what you are saying! LOL! I get it! I’m just stressing that those who seem to have the power to read minds are not to be assumed that they get this power from God, except as you say in the indirect tolerance of evil which we call the permissive will of God.

        September 2, 2016 at 1:24 pm
      • Therese

        As anyone can tell you, I’m no saint, and hopefully they will also tell you that I’m not possessed of a devil, but I’ve often known, quite specifically, what someone was thinking**, and I’m sure most of us have experienced thinking about someone just before they ring you on the telephone – or is that just me? Should I call an exorcist?

        Unfortunately I’m never able to transmit my thoughts to others, but my face usually does that for me.

        **I know because I’ve checked with them.

        September 2, 2016 at 7:28 pm
      • editor

        Therese,

        I can relate to that. I remember once deciding not to pay any bills, no gas, electricity, phone, you name it and I thought “I bet they’ll start phoning me up now…”
        Guess what – they did! Unbelievable! I could read their minds. I could just tell that they were thinking: if she won’t pay her bills, we won’t let her have the services. Bang on; the calls and letters started arriving… And when I ignored them, I just knew they would call and write again! Whiz kid, or what? Me? Moi

        On the other hand, last night I had a call from someone who’d been asked for my phone number by a friend from the days of my youth. Yip, one of the few of the generation who still has a reasonably good memory! But I hadn’t a clue. It came as a total surprise to me, I hadn’t read her mind. 😀 Sorry, Therese, can’t resist the sarcy warky bit now and again!

        Well, folks, I note that this thread is now a couple of months old multiplied by two (!) so I’m going to close it down tomorrow. Last chance for those who are keen to have the last word!

        I’m still full of the cold, folks, and had one of them there days, so forgive my absence. Normal service will be resumed as soon as the Beecham’s starts to work!

        September 2, 2016 at 9:27 pm
      • Therese

        See Ed, I just knew you were going to post something sarky – your thoughts drifted over the miles from west to east and reached me just before I read your post. I think we can agree that that’s Proof Positive.

        September 3, 2016 at 6:59 pm
  • editor

    UPDATE…

    I’ve now met with one of the priests involved in the Rutherglen house situation and he has given me permission to publish the following information, although I do not have permission to publish his identity.

    There was, indeed, new age stuff going on in the house, including Yoga. The attending clergy emphasised to the woman of the house that she had to go to Confession and make sure all of this was admitted and repented, if she wanted to put an end to the infestation.

    Father – like the others in attendance – witnessed the material (clothes etc) flying around the room and it was a very frightening experience. Father said those on the blog who said an exorcism was needed immediately, were wrong. He said “you don’t use a sledge hammer to crack a nut” and there has to be an investigation firstly, to see if there is any possible explanation apart from the diabolical.

    Having established that there was no apparent trickery of any kind, and no other explanation, the priests offered the appropriate prayers of the Church, and also offered a Mass for the soul of a deceased friend of the family who had suffered a sudden death, to eliminate the possibility of a soul seeking deliverance from Purgatory.

    Nothing has worked. Despite the efforts of several priests and a bishop, the poltergeist activity continues, and the family have decided to live elsewhere until the matter is resolved.

    Father said that now, all else having failed, it will be necessary to do an exorcism. He was surprised that one of the bloggers here had said there is an exorcist in Scotland because he, Father, doesn’t think there is, and the Church authorities are going to have to find one.

    Father said that this experience has changed him forever. He is now more acutely aware of evil and of the evil in the world which, he (rightly, I think we would all agree) considers is quickly escalating to the point of something huge happening in the world. Another priest who attended, refused to return to the house.

    This was a harrowing experience for all those involved so we should pray for them all.

    August 31, 2016 at 9:57 am
    • Margaret Mary

      That’s an amazing update. I felt chilled that the priests were so affected by the experience. It must be horrendous to know you are in the presence of demons. The very thought makes me shudder!

      September 1, 2016 at 6:46 pm
  • Petrus

    ” offered a Mass for the soul of a deceased friend of the family who had suffered a sudden death, to eliminate the possibility of a soul seeking deliverance from Purgatory.”

    That’s a new one! I’ve never heard of a soul seeking deliverance from Purgatory making clothes fly around a room and sending dogs into a tree!

    I was told about 15 years ago there WAS an exorcist in Scotland. However, he could have died, moved on etc.

    August 31, 2016 at 10:46 am
    • editor

      Petrus,

      The priest(s) wanted to ELIMINATE any possibility – I thought that was clear in my update so apologies if that is not the case.

      There’s no shortage of credible stories of souls appearing to seek prayers for their deliverance from Purgatory. Google to read some of them. Some are apparitions, but others are “sense” experiences, and once there has been a Mass for that soul, or a series of Masses, the phenomenon stops. Offering Mass for the deceased friend, who was young and died a sudden accidental death, was an attempt to eliminate that possibility, and, in any case, to offer the Mass, of course, for his soul.

      Whatever you were told 15 years ago, there’s no exorcist in Scotland at the present time.

      August 31, 2016 at 11:38 am
      • Petrus

        Editor,

        Yes, I have read stories of souls appearing but not souls throwing things around. However, as this was to eliminate the possibility that makes sense.

        That’s interesting (and appalling) that there is no exorcist in Scotland. Every diocese should have one. Then again, would they find eight priests in Scotland who believed in the devil?

        Sent from my iPhone

        August 31, 2016 at 12:37 pm
  • Christina

    Thank you for that update, Editor. It is extremely interesting that ‘new age stuff’ was going on in that house. Catholics were always taught that ‘all dealing with the Devil and superstitious practices’ are forbidden under the first Commandment, and that indulging in the latter may form a gateway for the entry of evil spirits. One must pray that God will bring good and conversion out of the experience of these people and that He will give strength to all of His priests who may become involved.

    I was struck especially by Father’s reported words to the effect that:

    “…those on the blog who said an exorcism was needed immediately, were wrong….you don’t use a sledge hammer to crack a nut, and there has to be an investigation firstly, to see if there is any possible explanation apart from the diabolical”.

    I hope that those who posted on the topic can now accept that the Church has always been prudently cautious in these matters, and that there are possibilities other than diabolical activity involved in such disturbing events. Sadly this seems certain not to be the case here.

    It is really high time the Leonine Prayers were restored after NO Masses.

    August 31, 2016 at 1:39 pm
    • Petrus

      Christina

      I don’t think it’s a case of those who argued for an exorcism to “accept that this is not the case”. I think it’s just an opportunity to learn. I suppose lay people commenting on these types of things are a bit like passing comment on heart surgery. It’s a complex issue.

      Having said that, Fr Gabriel Amorth states that if there is doubt then an exorcism will certainly do no harm. Indeed, this is especially the case in a house that is infested. Perhaps it might fuel the behaviours of a psychopath but this wasn’t the case here. But then he is a follower of Medjugorje so he could be wrong.

      Sent from my iPhone

      August 31, 2016 at 2:36 pm
  • Helen

    Neither of RCA Victor’s last 2 links will come up and the reload symbol has been going round and round for ages! However, the printed word comes up okay. Any ideas anybody?

    August 31, 2016 at 4:14 pm
  • Lily

    Helen,

    I can only see one link in RCA Victor’s post and it opened for me right away. I copied it again for you
    https://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2016/04/saint-gemma-scourge-of-crypto-modernists.html

    August 31, 2016 at 5:03 pm
    • Helen

      Lily, thank you very much. The other one was about “vexations” in a YouTube video by Fr. Gruner.

      August 31, 2016 at 5:13 pm
      • Lily

        Helen,

        the only link I can see in the video of Fr Gruner is the email address which is questions@thefatimacenter.com – you just pause the video until you write out the address of the link.

        August 31, 2016 at 7:58 pm
      • editor

        Lily,

        Ask Helen what caused the death of her last servant…

        Cue for a joke…

        A man hears from a doctor that his end is near so he heads over to a lawyer to write a will.

        The secretary watches as the man walks into the lawyer’s office and as three minutes later the man walks off in a huff.

        “Can I help you?” asks the secretary, dashing after the obviously upset man.

        “HELP ME? THIS GUY IS CRAZY! I asked him to help me write a will and he says to me: ‘sure, let me just ask you a few questions and then leave it all to me.’ I’ve heard before how lawyers are dishonest but this just takes the biscuit!”

        August 31, 2016 at 8:04 pm
    • Christina

      Helen and Lily, if you’re interested I’ve put something about that link below RCA Victor’s post in which he gives it.

      August 31, 2016 at 11:57 pm
  • Helen

    I must be dim but I don’t get the joke. Sorry.

    August 31, 2016 at 8:41 pm
    • editor

      Helen

      I wouldn’t say you were dim, but I’m sending you a copy of Jokes for Dummies 😀

      The joke is that the man goes into the lawyer’s office to make his will (leaving his worldly belongings/money etc to his family etc) but when the lawyer says he’ll just ask a few questions “then you can leave it all to me” (meaning, leave the work of creating the will to me) the man interprets that as the lawyer going to take all his money for himself,… instead of “leaving [his worldly goods] to his family” the man thinks the lawyer is saying the man is leaving his money to him, the lawyer.

      Goodness, that was hard work. Remind me never to tell another joke on this blog!

      PS just dawned on me that I went to all that trouble to explain the “will/lawyer” joke, when you may mean you don’t get the joke of me telling Lily to ask you what caused the death of your last servant. Just a wee bit of fun because Lily investigated the problem of the links for you. Just kidding. Honest!

      August 31, 2016 at 8:49 pm
      • Helen

        Don’t get that bit in bold writing either.

        August 31, 2016 at 11:20 pm
      • editor

        Helen

        Let’s take this slowly. What is it that you didn’t understand…

        1) the joke about the lawyer and the will

        OR

        2) my comment about Lily’s last servant.

        August 31, 2016 at 11:51 pm
      • Helen

        It’s No. 2. Your comment about about Lily’s last servant.

        Sorry, I have to go as one of the bairns is howling.

        September 1, 2016 at 12:11 am
      • editor

        Helen,

        I was poking fun at your request to Lily to supply the links from RCA Victor’s post. I was hinting that you could have done that yourself, instead of treating her like your servant – BUT I WAS ONLY JOKING, DON’T BE MAD!

        September 1, 2016 at 10:06 am
  • Helen

    Thank you Lily for the link.

    August 31, 2016 at 8:41 pm
  • editor

    Well, I am completely at a loss. Therese posted a comment about reading people’s minds, and I submitted a reply but I cannot find either comment when I scroll. They both appear on the sidebar and when I go into “Comments” I can see both of them. I am puzzled to bits.

    If anybody else can find them, on scrolling, please let me know. Otherwise, I’ll have to put up that poster again, right above my computer – the one that reads: “Of all the things I’ve ever lost, I miss my mind the most…”

    N O T I C E

    I said in my reply to Therese, that I would be closing this thread tomorrow, so if you are one of those who likes to have the last word, you’d better get a move on, since the end draweth nigh… 😀

    September 2, 2016 at 9:48 pm
    • Helen

      WORD. LAST.

      September 2, 2016 at 11:40 pm

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: