An exorcism for all mankind is near
An exorcism for all mankind is near
In defense of Father Miguel Rodrigue
Felipe Pérez Martí
February 21, 2022.
"God is supreme Truth, and to be humble is to walk in truth" Saint Therese of Jesus.
Translation from the original article in Spanish: https://www.quehacer.wiki/wiki/Un_exorcismo_para_toda_la_humanidad_esta_cerca
This is an article for Catholics and Christians who believe in a personal God and also in the existence and real action of Satan in the world. Also for non-believers who are looking for a light to understand what is happening to us in the world. In an exorcism there are several stages. The first is to detect that it is the devil and not a mental illness. Then the date for the procedure is set. When it is being carried out, the possessed persons are subjected to great convulsions and their physical and mental integrity is greatly compromised, as they are shaken against the floor and experience injuries that can be very serious. In some cases their entire skin burns or falls off. Then the demon comes out and leaves its victims. In the end, people recover their physical, mental and spiritual health. Miraculously their illnesses are completely healed, for example the skin, and a period of peace begins for them. It is clear that whoever performs the exorcism must be trained to do so, and there are demons that are very difficult to remove.
Although they do not use the name of exorcism, these stages are exactly those that have been described, in other words, by the prophets of the last times, but for the whole world. Their inspiration has come mainly from the Virgin Mary in various apparitions from La Salette and Lourdes, in France. Then in Fatima, Portugal; and in many other places such as Betania, Venezuela; Garabandal, Spain; and Medjugorje, Bosnia-Herzegovina. In this case, the exorcism is not carried out by a priest or a group of them, since they do not have that capacity for this magnitude of the respective work, but rather the one who performs it is Jesus himself. The initial operation is the announced "Warning", also called Illumination of Conscience or New Pentecost; the convulsions are the "Chastisement" (great hot wars, serious economic, monetary and financial crises, great plagues and famines); and healing is the “Era of Peace”.
Here I try to make a contribution so that we become aware, both in the church and in the world, that we are already in the first stage required before deciding to do the procedure: the detection of the widespread satanic possession that we are suffering. For this I use a representative case of internal conflict in the Catholic Church, on the one hand, and I refer to an article in which I comment on the sociopolitical case through the definitive domination of the Deep State throughout the world, on the other.
In relation to the church, as a conclusion to this article and video https://www.infocatolica.com/blog/notelacuenten.php/2112210339-un-aviso-sobre-el-padre-miche#more42086 Fr. Javier Olivera Ravasi disavows Michel Rodrigue, Canadian priest who is considered to be the most visible prophet of the "prophetic consensus" that raises the aforementioned stages that are to come. For that he uses his own authority as a priest and communicator. As arguments, he tries to use the authority of the church and its doctrine, as well as the authority of the Canadian bishops Lemay and Mourgon, that of the doctor of theology Mark Miravalle and that of the holy Carmelite fathers, Saint Theresa of Jesus and Saint John of the Cross, doctors and authorities of the church in mystical matters.
In this article I act as a lawyer for Fr. Michel and those who follow his private revelations. After analyzing the arguments against him, no reasons are found for the aforementioned disavowal. Both Fr. Michel, the Count Down to the Kingdom website, Christine Watkins, author of the book The Warning, and also his followers, come out not only acquitted, but vindicated. I also act, not as a judge to blame those who attack Fr. Michel, but as a member of the church who detects the presence of someone very important who almost always goes unnoticed, Satan. I act as a prosecuting attorney, as a fiscal or lay comptroller, against the Evil One, with the aim of alerting the church that Jesus instituted to proceed to performing the necessary exorcisms.
In relation to the entire world, I alert all humans, in particular non-believers, to prepare, because conflicts have become globalized to such an extent that the division now is not so much between nations, but between the empire of the State Deep and all the citizens of the world to whom it tries to subjugate, exploit and decimate, as I explain here: https://www.quehacer.wiki/wiki/Conspiracy_and_fraud_in_the_US Furthermore, the internal conflict that I show here among members of the church is general, as is known among believers and has been prophesied during the mentioned Marian apparitions. And not only at the level of priests and laity. But at the level of bishops and cardinals. As Jesus says, a kingdom cannot be divided against itself at these levels and last for a long time, and this is what the Evil One intends in this case against the church and against all humans (Mk, 3:24-25):
“If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot last”.
We are at a time when neither the church nor the society of the world can remain with the level and consequences of the divisions that we have before us and that are increasing even more at exponential rates. And that division comes from Satan, as I try to show here at the level of the church and have illustrated for the whole world in the cited article on conspiracy and fraud in the US. Therefore, an exorcism is necessary, and on a global level, as the same prophecies have also predicted.
The best thing about this process of defending Fr. Michel against the strong attacks to disqualify him is that it allows us to detect the Evil One and declare him the main culprit of all this and condemn him in the Judicial process, at least in theory, since in practice there should be enough force at this level never seen before to catch him effectively and put him in jail. Satan is the prince of lies and division who always vilely tries to deceive us; to sow tares and start fighting among those on the same side to succeed in his purpose against God and his creation: so that his kingdom "cannot stand", as Jesus says. We will all have one more lesson to learn and we will benefit from all this, because the Truth will gain the authority it deserves and His kingdom, His house will be able to remain, last and triumph in what is to come. That will be achieved soon, because the worldwide exorcism, the Warning, is near, with its Chastisement and its result, the Era of Peace, prophesied at Fatima as the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Because Jesus has the strength required in a case like this, Satan will be trapped and bound in hell, turned into his prison for many years, as the referred prophecies say. And humanity, the body hitherto possessed, will have a great rest, a great healing and a great peace.
Although I am a simple layman without deep knowledge of Theology, I am an economist trained in basic scientific methods. I apply them in this case in conjunction with what little I know about Christian doctrine and practice for I am interested both in spiritual matters and in the topic of the end times for all humanity. In the attempt I believe I will be able to help raise awareness, for those who still do not know it, about the first stage of the necessary exorcism, which is to detect if the devil is really present, ruling out the issues of psychological faults or strong vices of a human nature, such as pride, envy, jealousy, anger, lack of diligence, greed, etc. My verdict, which I advance as an alternative theory to be considered, is that what was observed, documented here as evidence, is inexplicable without the presence of the Evil One in the trial against Fr. Michel. We know that Satan acts in us through those vices mentioned, in addition to gluttony and lust. But in this case, the inexplicable comes from evidencing the 52 serious errors listed, not only in some of the attacks against Fr. Michel, but in all of them. They are logical, factual or theological errors that are inexplicable without the direct presence of the Evil One, given the level of intellectual and moral training, as well as the good intentions of the theologians and ecclesiastical authorities involved in the attack against Fr. Michel.
The problem for a traditional exorcism as a solution to this particular case is that this is just one of thousands and millions. We have reached a point of no return where the contradictions in the church are too great and pervasive, and where the great Deep State (or New World Order) conspiracy has led us to an intractable situation from within the planet. That is why, given the scope of the problem at hand, only direct divine intervention can resolve the situation, both in the church and in the world. The exorcism has to be general, for which sufficient force is needed, which is neither human nor human assisted by God: it must be directly carried out by Jesus. That is why we conclude that what the "prophetic consensus" of recent times says about it really makes sense, since it describes the stages of a general exorcism using different words, starting with the "Warning", in which each person will be “exorcised” and illuminated simultaneously, according to the prophecies about it. It is not about the end of the world, the Second Coming of Jesus, but an intermediate period of divine mercy towards humanity predicted by the Marian apparitions. That exorcism is very close, as I predict, not as a prophet but as an analyst based on credible prophecies and the article on the "Black Hole" in which we have been put globally. Let us prepare and pray that he will come soon, because there is no other possible solution in sight facing the abyss in which we find ourselves. If it does not come during our personal life on this earth, we gain a lot from approaching God, because our goal here is to be saints: only then can we be truly happy even in the midst of tribulation.
In my analysis I make it clear that the division hinders the attempts of the Virgin Mary, who tries to coordinate a "good equilibrium" in a "self-fulfilling prophecy" by spreading the warning to humanity about the self-destructive consequences of staying away from God and his spiritual, natural and social laws. Those who hinder the action of the Virgin Mary in the church are, in practice, not only hindering the good equilibrium from being reached, but they are also coordinating the alternative equilibrium, since there are no middle grounds in apocalyptic times: the equilibrium in which condemnation it is generalized due to the self-destruction of humanity as a consequence of the abandonment of God's laws. Thus, there are two equilibria: that of Jesus and that of Satan. In any of the scenarios, Jesus will win the apocalyptic confrontation (the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in the language of Fatima), but the bad equilibrium maximizes the number of people condemned.
In the conclusion section, apocalyptic language is used to describe what is exposed. We are facing the onslaught of the Dragon, Satan, with the help of the Beast from the Sea (the Deep State) and the Beast from the Earth (the evil part of the church, led by the Antichrist), both in close alliance. Before that, the Warrior, Christ the Lord, rises riding the white horse followed by His forces (which include the Virgin Mary, Saint Michael and his angels, the Celestial Court and us the members of the church who take our side) to defeat him. That defeat will be the exorcism we are talking about, beginning with the Warning.
Before getting into the matter of the trial, I will make five introductory points. This is an article for Catholics. Also for Christians in general, who believe in a personal God, and in the existence of Satan and his army of evil angels. Also for non-believers, who are curious and are looking for an interpretation and meaning for the complicated things we are experiencing.
The necessary discernment for this judgment and the communicational war
As Fr. Javier himself says, this case requires a lot of discernment, since there are a lot of people confused about it. And we must obey the authority of the church, as we know and on which the Virgin Mary has insisted in her revelations about the last times. That authority refers to following its doctrine, tradition and the teachings of the holy fathers. As Fr. Javier himself says, since we are dealing with spiritual issues, it will be very useful to use the doctrine of the holy fathers, experts in this matter, consecrated as Doctors, the Carmelites Saint Teresa of Ávila and Saint John of the Cross.
To this we must add that, if we start from the fact that we are in the last times, what the revelation says about God's attitude towards us applies especially. We cannot be intermediate between good and evil. Or is it one or the other (Rev. 3:15,16):
“I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either hot or cold! Thus, since you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spit you out of my mouth.”
Besides, these days the devil is on the loose, as we know from that last book of the Bible. And he is the prince of lies and manipulation. We already commented on it in a special way in my article about the main battlefield of the Deep State, which is actually Satan's platform in recent times:
There I show that the communication arena is the main battlefield of this struggle, and lies and manipulations, fake news and toxic and enslaving information are the main weapons used by the bad side against the good.
Therefore, if in these things of discernment we go for the half-truths, we will be instruments of the evil one.
The division in the church: who to follow?
A basic criterion for not falling into lukewarmness is to obey the church. But the problem that we will see here is that there are apparently two churches in conflict. In this case we are witnessing a manifestation of division of the Catholic Church. Fr. Michel and the Countdown site are both from the church. The first is a priest and Abbot of an official Fraternity of the church. The site belongs to lay people who are active in the catholic Church, in particular on the Marian revelations and the issue of the last times. The author of the book The Warning, which has the imprimatur of a Filipino bishop and the support of several priests, Christine Watkins, is the editor of the site. On the other side, there is Fr. Javier, another priest, influential and renowned, with great communication coverage, in favor of the church, who has attacked Fr. Michel, the website, the mentioned book and its author. In addition, two Canadian bishops, Monsignors Lemay and Mourgon, disavowed Fr. Michel. And a renowned theologian, professor at a Franciscan university, Dr. Mark Miravalle, who by the way also makes contributions to the questioned website, Countdown, who attacks Fr. Michel, highly valued on that same page.
Fr. Javier uses the authority of the church to disqualify Fr. Michel. According to that, we owe obedience to their side of this conflict. But in the conclusion we will see that this is not clear, but rather there are well-founded doubts about that authority. Rather, reasons are found to advance the hypothesis that the attackers seem to have been used by the devil to further divide the church and take away factual authority.
In that respect, several seers in recent times have prophesied, through messages from the Virgin Mary more than anything, that the Catholic Church is going to divide, even in the highest spheres of the hierarchy. The division is going to be, according to that, very deep and very extended. The case that we are dealing with here would be just one example of this and that is why we analyze it with great care and attention. The only way to restore the authority of the church is by reestablishing its unity around the leadership of Jesus, through the exorcism that we are talking about here.
Fr. Michel, false prophet?
Although I highly doubt it because of what I am going to argue here, it might be that Fr. Michel is a false prophet. The reason is that the things he has predicted may not be fulfilled. Some of them have already been fulfilled in their scheduled time, by the way, as we will see. But why do we close ourselves off to the possibility that he may be right, giving him the benefit of the doubt, given this seemingly coincidental background that I present in my article on the Deep State and its fraud and conspiracy to dominate the world? Shouldn't we wait to see the respective events that prove or disprove the predicted matters, instead of disqualifying him as drastically as its attackers do? As I will explain, there can be no doubt from a Christian point of view, not even an atheist one, that Fr. Michel's intentions are clearly to help prepare us, given the signs, which are unmistakable; and in that we should not have doubts or disagreements. Nor should there be any doubt about the great fruits that he has shown related to healings, exorcisms, conversions and priestly vocations.
Jesus asked us to make this preparation and warned us that if we did not do so we would be seriously missing his message and his warning, because it would lead us to hell: the door for the wedding banquet would be closed as in the case of foolish virgins (Matthew 25:10-13). If someone comes who is helping us in this task, guided by his envoy and assigned in the matter by God the Father himself, his Daughter Mary, Mother of Jesus and ours too, why do we attack him in that way, as if his objective were not the good one, but becoming famous, becoming an idol, leading the faithful off the right path, being an instrument of the devil, or even fraudulently seeking money using none other than God the Father, as some of the attackers directly imply? Why, on top of that, attack his followers, both lay and clerical, and brand them directly or indirectly as fanatics and idolaters?
Grounds for the trial against Fr. Michel and grounds for the trial of Satan
First of all, I must remember to begin with that the basic doctrine of a rule of law, even without taking faith into account, establishes very clearly the presumption of innocence of any citizen, be it Fr. Michel or those who accuse him (for a politician is the other way around, as I have explained in the document): you cannot start from the suspicion of malicious intent, but rather the opposite. The accuser, therefore, has the burden of proof: if he does not find verifiable evidence that leaves no room for reasonable doubt that there is guilt, he cannot even make public accusations, since he commits, at least, crimes of slander (in this case facing the church, the faithful), defamation and insult.
In fact, in a trial where faith is not involved, as in science, the method of hypothesis testing based on empirical evidence is the one used in legal trials too. The "null hypothesis", or status quo, which must be respected, is that the accused is innocent. During the trial, the accusers try to prove his guilt because there are evidential clues that indicate it, and that is why the trial is opened.
And here something important must be said: for there to be a trial, the court must admit that those clues are meritorious. In this case, since the trial is before the public, we citizens should give an opinion on whether there are merits to the trial. Unfortunately, Fr. Javier does not respect this procedure and proceeds to judge Fr. Michel himself. In fact, he not only judges him, but condemns him. In any case, let's continue with the exposition, given that Fr. Javier considers that the evidence is meritorious for judging himself. We will see the big mistakes he makes in the process.
Continuing with the discussion, when the judicial process begins, the jury requires that the two possible errors that occur in hypothesis testing be avoided as much as possible. The “type I error” consists in convicting an innocent person. The “type II error” consists in acquitting a guilty party. In science, as in the administration of justice, it is required that the probability of convicting an innocent person be very small by design. That is why it is required that, when examining the sample of accusatory evidence, the most conventional is that there is only a probability of 5% to 8% of the type I error for the verdict based on them. In other words, the evidence that Fr. Michel's guilt must be overwhelming in order to convict him. However, as we will see, absolutely none of the evidence put forward by Fr. Javier gives rise to a guilty verdict. Not even a clue, let alone meritorious, for the trial to have been opened at all in the first place.
If we incorporate the method of Jesus and that of the Catholic catechism into the atheist criteria of justice, the verdict is stronger against the accusations, because not only was the atheist criterion of justice not covered, but neither the christian nor the catholic ones, which are much more demanding.
Indeed, Christians must use the method that Jesus himself established for a legitimate accusation in Matthew 18:15-17:
“If your brother sins, go and tell him privately; If he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the mouth of two or three witnesses. And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he also refuses to listen to the church, let him be to you as the Gentile (the heathen) and the tax collector.”
With respect to the Catholic catechism, it indicates us in numeral 2478, in the same sense as what was said:
“To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
‘Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it, and if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved’ (St. Ignatius of Loyola, Exercitia spiritualia, 22)”.
Presence of Satan, global exorcism and the Second Coming
Jesus clearly told us that no one knows the day or the hour of his second coming and that whoever says they know is lying, which is what is foreseen in revelation, inspiration and ecclesial tradition. But he also told us that there would be clear signs about it that would allow us to prepare ourselves, as the wise virgins do in the respective parable. It is from this point of view that we must judge the case of Fr. Michel Rodrigue and the criticisms made of him, since it turns out that all these divine inspirations in this regard have to do with the Virgin Mary, who wants to help us activate ourselves in the preparation, according to the official doctrine of the church, based on the book of Revelation and the apostolic and patristic tradition. In fact, what we have seen since her appearances has to do with the pain of her second birth; the Second Coming of his Son Jesus, Who will return triumphant to do definitive justice. As Jesus said, we will forget those pains after childbirth. But we have to live them and assume them as real, necessary in gestation, due to our situation of sin, since labor pains in paradise, before original sin, did not exist, as we know from the book of Exodus. But it is good to have something clear from the revelations of the prophetic consensus: before justice comes mercy. Before the Final Judgment comes the Era of Peace. Then, before the Second Coming, the devil will be released again. But that's not what we're talking about here. Just to make it clear that this message does not fall into the heresy of Millennialism. So that the steps that conclude with the Era of Peace are part of the second birth also if we see what comes as an integrated whole.
I have no doubt that everyone involved against Fr. Michel also has good intentions. But as I will show, they make serious and inconceivable mistakes, both in form and substance. As a result, and using only the principle of presumption of innocence and the inadmissibility of argumentative fallacies, Fr. Michel is acquitted in the trial against him. That might be enough to initiate a trial against those who accuse him, but it is something discouraged not only by the Catholic catechism and Jesus himself, but by atheistic human justice. What I do is to accuse the instigator of all this, as I show, Satan, because I do not find another explanation for what happened.
The prophetic consensus has said, then, in particular Fr. Michel Rodrigue, that the direct intervention of Jesus, although they do not speak of exorcism but use other words, is coming soon. And it is through the chain of events such as The Warning, the Reprieve, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Refuges, the Three Days of Darkness, and finally, the Era of Peace. Note that the usual steps are taken in an exorcism, at the general level of humanity: the presence of the evil one is detected in the human body, in this case the whole church and humanity; there are violent convulsions as a result of the complaints of the demon who does not want to leave the body, and finally the departure of the evil one and the peace and healing of the possessed person. Indeed, during the Era of Peace, in which the Immaculate Heart of Mary would triumph according to Fatima, the devil will be taken out of this world and bound for many years, before the Second Coming of Jesus at the end of time. That exorcism is what we are talking about here. And it's coming soon, in my opinion, thanks to God and the Virgin.
Finally, to conclude on the presence of Satan in the entire church, and not only here, and therefore on the need for a global exorcism beyond human forces, I will say that I don’t want to fall into the fallacy of hasty generalization taking this case as typical of the division within the church. However, that division is already sufficiently well known. In addition, this case is very illustrative and it is worth examining it in detail, since it is an obviously observable example millions of times more; at all levels of the church and also the world in general. It shows a typical form of diabolical possession over all humanity by dividing it so that it self-destructs through its conflicts. In this case we have high-profile people in the church, both the attacked and the attackers.
Now I go into the matter, enumerating the cases of evidence of the presence of the Evil One in each element of judgment, and I will add them at the end, in the conclusion.
On the subject of whether to question the message or the messenger
To begin our analysis of the trial against Fr. Michel, Fr. Javier states that he is going to try to speak about Fr. Michel's ideas, doctrine, arguments, not his person (whom only God judges).
But it does the opposite. In addition, it commits the ad hominem fallacy. Regarding the first issue, suffice it to cite the references to his presumed personal faults: lack of humility, use of a webpage to hide and not show his true face, his status as a false prophet, his chrematistic motives using God the Father for that purpose, his irregular contacts with the devil, posing as the prophet and apostle of the last times, his lack of transparency, claim that God has benefited him with infused science, the fact that his mother had 23 children, that he was kicked out of the seminary, that his mother, being deceased, it was the one that influenced the bishop who ordained him. Number 1.
The second issue is even more problematic and Fr. Javier does so very often in this trial. The ad hominem fallacy is unacceptable in an argument that claims to lead to the truth. It is an argumentative fallacy, and it is used when, instead of disqualifying the argument that is being questioned, the person who says it is disqualified . This is intended to gain ground against the argument in question.
In this case, the aim is to question the prophetic gifts of Fr. Michel. However, issues that have to do with his character and personality are questioned. Here we demonstrate that, maintaining the principle of presumption of innocence, even in matters of character and personality Fr. Michel is not questionable. The reason is that no evidence of his faults in this regard has been given. But it is that, in addition, there is evidence, if we take the testimonies about him from people close to him, that in those aspects he is a good person. And a notable saint, too, although this is not the subject of this article.
Said fallacy is not only prohibited according to the rules of speech for an atheist. It is more serious in a Christian, because Jesus himself warned us directly against it when he spoke that if the Pharisees tell a truth, you have to follow it, even if they are bad: you don't have to do what they do, but what they say (Mathew 23:3). Even if Fr. Michel was a bad person, or even guided by Satan himself, if he tells truths, we must heed and follow them. Number 2.
Confirmation bias and begging the question fallacy
Fr. Javier makes a tight summary of the life of Fr. Michel, but the things he cites are generally very inaccurate or openly erroneous, despite affirming that he read the available story. Furthermore, what he chose to present shows a very negative bias, without mentioning the positive things. The story he intends to summarize is here: https://www.countdowntothekingdom.com/fr-michel-rodrigue-apostle-of-the-end-times
The aspects he chooses to comment on were mentioned above in the point about the ad hominem fallacy. Here we will show two things. One, that in reality the things that are taken from the sample are not negative but positive things or not enough evidence is shown to demonstrate the negativity claim (the issue of the devil in his life and his alleged lack of humility will be discussed later). The second thing is that there are several relevant things in the story that are positive and are omitted by Fr. Javier. In fact, confirmation bias occurs when the researcher chooses only the evidence that proves his or her hypothesis and is related to the begging the question fallacy, which implies that one starts from assuming what one wants to demonstrate.
When a scientist is trying to prove his alternative theory using the above presented method, and he does not have the resources to examine all the available evidence, he chooses a representative sample of it. The same is done in a lawsuit against a person. But the sample must be unbiased. There are various methods to choose the sample to guarantee that. However, if the scientific community, or the judge, finds that there is a bias in the sample, the proof is rejected as such. In this trial against Fr. Michel, we clearly observe that the argumentative fallacy of confirmation bias is used, since only evidence that presumably confirms the hypothesis is chosen and that which denies it is rejected.
Although the attitude of the prosecuting attorney is expected to be the selection of a sample that incriminates the accused, the attitude of the judge must be impartial. Fr. Javier then does not act as an impartial judge, but as a prosecuting attorney, with which there is no fair trial. A judge must be like Solomon, who used his wisdom to seek truth and justice. It is not by chance that the prosecuting attorney is called the devil's advocate. Here we show that not even what is stated by the prosecuting attorney is true. In this case it does not mean that it is intentional so as not to be fair, again, because my thesis is that the devil has his hand in it and it is his modus operandi to trap good people and use them for lies and the perdition of the children of God.
I now go on to examine the supposedly negative aspects, and then show some positives excluded from the sample.
“The last prophet and apostle of the last times”
Fr. Javier says that Fr. Michel claims to be “the last prophet”.
This is false if the evidence is examined. Not only what the Virgin told him the day his Fraternity began, but also the messages of the Archangel Saint Michael. What he has said is that he is one (not the only one, or the main one) of the apostles of the end times. And what he says about what is going to happen soon does not imply that the world is ending, which would make the alleged statement quite unbelievable, since God can produce many prophets if there are many years left for humanity. Number 3.
About the alleged lack of transparency of Fr. Michel
Fr. Javier repeatedly affirms, as a supposed argument against Fr. Michel, that several of the things commented on "he says himself." And this despite the fact that in other contexts he claims that Fr. Michel is hiding, that he himself does not say what is happening to him. Both things cannot be true at the same time: either it is true that he hides and does not express himself (although his stuff is reported by others, who post his videos and writings, that is not relevant to the point). Or is it true that he speaks for himself and is transparent. What we have seen is that he himself speaks in the virtual retreats posted and we can have direct access to the messages, in writing, that he has received from God the Father, Jesus, the Virgin, some saints, or the angels. And he certifies that they are his. So it is false that Fr. Michel hides, but he is the other way around: he is transparent. Remarkably so, as we show here.
Using the most solid theory regarding situations like this with asymmetric information, it can be easily deduced that the conclusion reached by Fr. Javier is wrong: by voluntarily revealing his private information, the messenger gives the signal that he does not intend to hide anything, but seeks to express the truth and it is convenient for him for it to be known. The reason for that conclusion is that there is a high correlation between transparency and honesty, and between hiding and lying. In fact, those models, the Principal-Agent Theory, and the Signaling Games Theory, are what I use in the cited document to demonstrate electoral fraud in the United States.
It is good to comment, having established the inadmissibility of the accusation at this point, that the transparency, spontaneity and candidness with which Fr. Michel speaks in all his conferences is proverbial. Very rarely seen. According to what is known about him from written and video testimonies, his stories about healings and exorcisms are true. One reason has to do with the fact that he knows a lot about theology and philosophy, and none of that incriminates him negatively in that sense. The arguments to the contrary by Mark Miravalle, Doctor of Theology, which we will examine later, are shown to be false. Using what we have said as a basic principle, in addition, of presumption of innocence, these testimonies must be taken as true, unless the contrary is proven.
In addition, a person exposing himself like this, saying in public great miracles, great prophecies, great exorcisms, great visions, with his level of knowledge, realizes very well (unless he is insane, and we will talk about this later) the consequences of lying. That alone is a "costly signal" in the theories cited, which establishes a "separating equilibrium" with respect to a false prophet, for the simple reason that a false prophet does not have the capacity to incur a cost of that very high level proving that he is right. For example, he cannot fabricate the evidence of so many false miracles and extraordinary things together: the cracks of the story would have already been seen, in the sense that it would already be known from his fellow friars, or those who go to his retreats, his faithful in the parishes , etc. In fact, there have been other infamies, and those who produce them end up being the ones harmed in terms of prestige. Imagine that someone has detected something false in Fr. Michel. He would become famous instantly, because the truth of him would be verifiable, and this is a very high profile case worldwide.
Therefore, the conclusion in the cited models is that what must be presumed, until there is a more detailed study of the evidence (as is done when a saint is in the process of canonization) is that the messenger in this case is saying the truth. His intention is not even to "separate" (differentiate himself) from a false prophet, but he achieves it with his attitude. The feeling that he is telling the truth is the implicit message in Fr. Michel's communicational action, facing the player who receives the signal and has no negative prejudices, which is all of us who hear, see, and read his messages.
By the way, the theories mentioned are based on the same principle that Jesus himself used so much: by his works you will know them. Because people say one thing about themselves and many times it is false and you have to do the performance test. The theory has developed a lot since Jesus, because with only the attitude of the person being judged, the conclusion can already be inferred if there is still no direct evidence of his behavior, given the asymmetry of information (a false prophet knows that he is so, but not always those who hear him speak know he is), but the principle is that of Jesus.
I end this section by saying that the virtues of transparency, spontaneity, candor, and lack of concern for what others will say when he expresses himself in public that Fr. Michel exhibits are typical of children. Some are greatly surprised and even scandalized, as I think it happens to many prejudiced listeners of Fr. Michel's messages. But of that Jesus said: “Unless you change and become like little children, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” Matthew 18:3. Number 4.
God has instructed him by infused science during the seminar
That is not what Fr. Michel says if you read what he says about it or watch his respective videos on Countdown to the Kingdom. Infused science occurs to him, according to this, from 3 to 6 years old, through God the Father, who begins to prepare him from a very young age, when he tells him that he is going to be a priest. During the seminary he studied like any other. Although he continues with the communication with God the Father, he does not mention that in his writings as theological teaching work on God's part. That misunderstanding reflects that what is written about it has not been carefully read, nor has the respective video been seen, where it is very clear. Number 5.
“They kicked him out of the seminary”
It is true that he was kicked out of the seminary. But the statement can create a negative image of Fr. Michel, if it is not clarified, since one can think that the church did not find him qualified to be a priest. According to Fr. Michel, and we have not seen evidence to the contrary, he was kicked out of the seminary due to an injustice by the rector, to whom Fr. Michel told of repeated gay sex by some seminarians in the room next to his. But the rector was an accomplice of those practices, according to what he narrates later, and instead of correcting the problem, he kicked Fr. Michel out of the seminary for having denounced the fact. That rector, by the way, was later kicked out by the Bishop of the respective Diocese of the place when he found out about the incident. Fr. Michel is vindicated with this and returns to the seminary, so it is not necessary to create a bad image of his dismissal from the seminary, but on the contrary.
So it is not true that “he gets kicked out of the seminary” with the negative connotation. Those who were kicked out because of this incident where the seminarians who practiced gay sex every day, and the rector who allowed and participated in them. Fr. Michel is reinstated in the seminary. They don't kick him out, in the end. And what happened reveals something very positive in his favor, nothing negative. An authority of the church, the rector of the seminary, was the one who did wrong, and was punished for it. Why don’t look for the positive aspects of the life of Fr. Michel in this incident, but the negative ones that don't even exist? Number 6.
Supernatural appearance of Fr. Michel's mother to the bishop who ordained him
Fr. Javier affirms that Fr. Michel narrates that “he was ordained a priest through the intermediary of his mother, who had already passed away”. "His mother, now deceased, speaks to the bishop who was in a ceremony telling him that his own son had to be ordained."
This is false, again, because of a misreading of the evidence. It wasn't her mother who spoke to Bishop of Hearst, Roger-Alfred Despatie, but Jesus. According to the story, verbatim:
The bishop... “heard a voice that told him: 'My son, the one who is singing the litany of my saints, I want you to ordain him.' The bishop shook his head, looked around and thought to himself: 'I've gone mad. I hear a voice.' Trying to ignore it, he concentrated on praying the litany of saints more deeply, but the voice came back: 'My son, listen. The one who is singing the litany of My saints, I want you to ordain him.' Bishop Despatie then realized that it was the voice of Jesus.”
On the other hand, how is a bishop going to obey a voice from someone who is not God, or not even a known saint to decide to ordain a priest? The implausible thing is to suppose that this has happened. It is clear that Fr. Javier did not read the biographical summary well, nor did he see the video, to make this statement. I read it and watched it before this incident, and it was all clear to me. Number 7.
The use of the theme of Fr. Michel's mother in this case
Fr. Javier comments that Fr. Michel's mother had 23 children and he is the last, noting that "she was pro-life, which is very good, thank God."
This is where Fr. Javier's summary begins, speaking of the matter of Fr. Michel's mother, who is not the subject of a trial in this case. Even if she were guilty of something, for example for having aborted the first 22 children before Fr. Michel, that would not have to affect her son's case. That approach not only stands within the atheist legal doctrine, but much more in the one that Jesus left us. She does not need the judgment, not even the approval of Fr. Javier for being pro-life or for having so many children. It is absolutely nothing that can be used to embarrass her or him and should not be mentioned if the intention is to go for the truth here. Quite in bad taste and disrespect, because anyone would know that Fr. Javier should not mention these things about his family, and his mother (who died in the odor of sanctity, by the way) when he is judging a person. Much less if the judge is a Catholic priest, for all we know of the doctrine of Jesus. I am sure that this insulting comment is not intentional, but I point it out because it adds to my hypothesis of the hand of Satan in this entire trial against Fr. Michel, who pursues not only slander and defamation, but also insult, as in this case of his mother. Number 8.
Positive parts excluded from the biased sample
We already talked about the supposedly negative features of Fr. Michel's resume, which are not even negative: None of them is true, at least according to the evidence provided that we analyzed. But the most serious problem is that the positive aspects of his life are not examined in the sample chosen for the biographical summary, or the facts analyzed to incriminate him. Among these are his already fulfilled prophecies.
To prove my point I will begin by mentioning the fulfilled prophecies that I myself have managed to verify (using the presumption of innocence for the information transmitted) and not those that others say in addition to these. I will number each one, because the exclusion of the good in a person in a trial comes from the devil:
1. The foundation of the Fraternity of Saint Joseph Benedict Labre, a promise from God the Father. Number 9.
2. The official approval of the statutes of the Benedicto Joseph Fabre Fraternity. Number 10.
3. The statutes were dictated directly by God and were not modified by even a comma when they were approved. This is very rare in history, because it is expected that during the discussion things are modified according to the hierarchy of the church that examines the request. Number 11.
4. The construction of his two monasteries on the site that God the Father ordained. The first in 2017, after he received the request from God the Father six years earlier. It can be found in part 3 of his virtual retreat. Number 12.
5. The second monastery was built in 2020, after God ordered him in 2017 to create it for that year. Number 13.
6. God tells him in his vision of the second monastery: “You will build it at the end of Trump's term. This means that in 2020 you will have to build it.” So he predicts the end of Trump's term. Both the end of Trump's mandate and the construction of the monastery were fulfilled. Part 3 of the Virtual Retreat. Number 14.
7. The two monasteries were made exactly on the site and with the architecture as God the Father told him in his vision. In it he visited the buildings and they were exactly as he saw them, inside and out. Number 15.
8. Predicts Trump's attitude towards the Deep State, or “World Government”, as Fr. Michel calls it. In part 3 of the Virtual Retreat the following narration appears:
I had a question in my heart: “Trump? Why?” but I didn't ask. The answer came immediately. “I have chosen this one. They can't control it." God did not say that he was a saint. He never said that. “They [the One World Government people trying to take power] can't control it. They don't know which leg he is dancing on. Because of this, they have not been able to accomplish their task.” This is what God said. And this is what has happened.
9. As Fr. Michel says about Trump's character, the prophecy was fulfilled. And that is why they gave him the new generation coup D’Etat, as I describe in my essay on the matter: https://www.quehacer.wiki/wiki/Conspiracy_and_fraud_in_the_US Number 17.
10. Of course these things about the Fraternity and the monasteries have Bishop Lemay's approval. The same bishop who later shows disagreement with his messages. That is also omitted or put as doubtful when it is impossible that it could have happened otherwise, as any priest should know. Given the personality of Fr. Michel, who tells everything, the most logical thing is to suppose that when he asked for the bishop's approval, both to officially register his Fraternity, and to build and bless his monasteries, he mentioned to him the message that God the Father gave him in the respective visions. It would be good to ask him. If he reads this analysis, Fr. Javier should publicly clarify this point, in honor of the complete truth about the case. Number 18.
11. In any case and related to this, there is another prophecy, which the Virgin told him, and the text appears in Chapter 8 of her Virtual Retreat: "No one will touch your Fraternity." Do you think that with what has happened with the bishop, he would not have ordered the closure of the fraternity, because of the "damage" he has done? He withdrew support for a teaching center related to Fr. Michel. But the Fraternity has not been touched. Therefore, the prophecy based on what the Virgin told him has been fulfilled so far. Number 19.
12. On December 31, he prophesied that the vaccine against Covid 19 would be applied (In particular, she said that it would be a poison inoculated by Satan into people's bodies; not just the matter of the date). Its effects have been seen. Here there could be controversy about whether or not it has been fulfilled in that sense. I think so, due to the high death rates when the vaccine is applied and despite that vaccination has not been suspended, as required by normal protocol. And the prophecy of the application of vaccines was fulfilled, years before even knowing about the Covid virus. Number 20.
Apart from the omission of fulfilled prophecies, I will mention another notable confirmation bias that occurs when Fr. Javier decides that the authority of some bishops is good, and that of others is bad. Christine Watkins' book, “The Warning” has the imprimatur of a bishop. It discusses the lives and visions of various visionaries, saints, and prophets. And it is included in a decisive way, both the life and the messages of Fr. Michel, closing with a flourish, the theme of The Warning with him.
However, Fr. Javier completely disavows that book with arguments such as the fact that it was endorsed by an Anglican bishop. And that narrates episodes of drastic conversion of several normal people, something far from the title of the book. About the first thing, that does not discredit the book, but rather the opposite. In addition, several Catholic priests also praise him, in addition to the approval given by the imprimatur of the mentioned bishop, who is from the Philippines.
About the Anglican bishop, he later converted to Catholicism, by the way, and it would not be strange if the book, whose reading has helped many people and it is true that it is a best seller (it is not false propaganda, as Fr. Javier says) played a factor in his conversion. The remarkable conversion, after living a life of sin, of several people is not inappropriate for the theme of the book, as Fr. Javier says when he comments that this is not related to the Warning. On the contrary. They are examples of personal illumination of conscience, which is going to happen to all humans simultaneously during The Warning. It is noted that the book, where this is explained, was not read in detail in order to make an appropriate criticism, as in the case of Fr. Michel. Number 21.
Conclusion on the confirmation bias, on the mocking tone used, and on Fr. Michel as a possible notable saint
What has been said in the two previous sections demonstrates what was promised about the use of confirmation bias in the trial against Fr. Michel. And absolves him regarding the different claims listed. The bias itself, and to that extent, is another inexplicable error: Number 22. But there is another aspect of the criticism that it is good to point out, which is in form, beyond the background that we have analyzed as incorrect, biased and tendentious. This time it is something subjective, according to my personal perception, but it is not a minor defect if it is verified. The tone used in general and in every aspect of the accusation is quite mocking, of contempt or derogatory, condemnatory, not just incredulous. Although each of these attacks is clear, as it is subjective on my part, I do not number it in the account to make a judgment against the demon as objectively as possible.
In fact, even if we focus on those allegedly negative parts of his biography, all this is not unusual for a saint; and of quite a caliber as I am convinced is the case here: the demon attacks; the miracle of resurrection of a person; the messages of the Virgin in Medjugorje (that only the seers received them, not someone from outside, who came suddenly); the Apostle of the last times. If it is true that we are in the last times, it is natural that God has prepared people in a special way to attend to those times. And from a very young age, as in this case. The same as he prepared John the Baptist, Mary and Joseph for the first coming from childhood, or even Samuel in the old testament.
Straw man fallacy and other errors of judgment
This fallacy consists in making a false man, which is attacked instead of the true man, in order to defeat an opponent who could not have been defeated if the true person were attacked.
Fr. Javier claims Countdown to the Kingdom is an "officious" site which really represents Fr. Michel. However, the site is not Fr. Michel's informal site or nothing of the sort. They simply publish his stuff, just as they think it is, as well as many other things from other seers, besides their opinions on their matters. You cannot attack Fr. Michel by attacking the site, an error that is made in this case several times in a crucial way, both by Fr. Javier and by the two bishops involved in this case. Where does Fr. Javier, or Bishop Gilles Lemay get that page represents Fr. Michel? Why do they attribute to Fr. Michel the mistakes on that page without proof? That is false if we use the principle of presumption of innocence, especially because of the clarifications that Fr. Michel has made:
But even if he hadn't cleared it up, you can't base an accusation against Fr. Michel on alleged evidence of lying or manipulation on a page where he isn't even an editor. Much less in an official letter from a Catholic Bishop. Fr. Javier even goes so far as to affirm, without proof, that Fr. Michel uses the page to hide behind it and to be able to hide possible faults, without taking responsibility for it and deceiving people. There is no evidence to make such an accusation.
If there is something to be presumed here, it is that Fr. Michel is not in the business of publishing his videos or writings himself and approves that others do so, without supervising them, since he is not an editor. In Christian doctrine it is well known that everyone has his own talents, and the hand does not claim to be the head in the body which is the church. Fr. Javier himself says, by the way, that in general “a translator is a traitor” when he criticizes the translations on the Countdown to the Kingdom page. Why doesn't he apply the same principle in which he himself believes to the relationship between Fr. Michel and the web page? Couldn't the page “betray” what Fr. Michel really mean in the cases referred to? Why don't they use the same principle of the translations to Fr. Michel? It is another confirmation bias: using double standards which is unacceptable. Number 23.
Because Fr. Michel is selfish, he lies and hides
Fr. Javier says that Fr. Michel wanted the Countdown to the Kingdom site to tell a lie about him, to hide behind it. What Fr. Michel does in this case is well known in the world of free software and free knowledge, about which I have theorized. In that world, ideas are sometimes given away and there is no charge, neither directly nor indirectly, for them, since the interest is that the people who are exposed to these ideas benefit from it. The motive is altruistic, not selfish, as in this case (the selfish case cannot be assumed, as we explained from the principle of presumption of innocence). The one who does the "forking" is responsible for the content if he does not publish it accurately, as in this case as the errors about the alleged approval of the messages by the bishop or if he was the official exorcist.
Of course, in the world of sharing ideas there is also another motivation, the selfish one, which is valid in the services market: an idea is given away with the aim of becoming known as skilled. For the record on your resume when you're hired as a good producer of such quality ideas. In this case it is very important to state who the original author was. In the world of Christian authors, that selfish (not really Christian) motive often exists: their prestige is essential when they publish. It is possible that other Christian authors believe that this is one of Fr. Michel's motives. Thief judges by his condition, as the saying goes. That motive is not detected in Fr. Michel and there is no proof of it. On the contrary: he risks his prestige by saying apparently crazy things, from the point of view of those who do not have faith.
Certainly it is illogical and wrong to believe, or make believe, that Fr. Michel wanted a lie to be told about him, knowing that it would be detected and that it would disqualify him when the lie is exposed. Why was this assumed by Fr. Javier? It doesn't make sense, because the incentives, as we study in economics (and in law too, regarding the motivation of the alleged crime), whether altruistic or even selfish, contradict it. Satan present here is a good explanation for this type of wrong judgment, baseless and even contradictory. Here were several unexplained errors of judgment that indicate the presence of Satan. Number 24.
The presumed lack of pure faith of Fr. Michel. Discernment based on the doctrine of the Holy Carmelite Fathers
Fr. Javier affirms that “One has to live by pure faith”; "That's enough for me." Related to this, he said that "A criterion for discerning this type of thing is if the alleged seer or prophet flatly rejects that (strange, supernatural things), saying that he does not want to see any of it." "True seers usually don't want to know about all this weird, supernatural stuff because it's a super burden on you."
Here I am referring to the need for discernment even for private disclosures not officially approved. The Carmelite saints, who lived in a time of many false prophets, were very careful because Satan could deceive them with false visions and prophecies. Or their own imagination. But those same saints have a defining criterion of discernment: when they are completely united with God, Satan has no place and they are sure that the revelation is true. Under the agreement (or mandate) of the confessor, for example, they can publicly reveal what they have learned.
The same criteria must be applied here. But what proof has been provided that Fr. Michel is not completely united with God? Or that he is not acting according to his confessor or spiritual director? If what he says is true, God has been very close to him since he was three years old. And he lives in that supernatural world very naturally. In fact, he believed at the time, at the age of three, that the same thing happened to everyone in receiving locutions from God. Since then Fr. Michel saw both the good and the bad in that world, including Satan himself and his evil spirits. They attacked him tremendously until he was twelve years old, the age at which his spiritual director definitively freed him from them and from his presence in his heart (the “spider” that Fr. Javier refers to). In other words: he no longer has to fear about the revelations after that. Rather, the devil has been afraid of him after that to the point that, as a priest, they called him for the most difficult and laborious exorcisms. He performs many miracles. An extraordinary living saint for extraordinary times like these beginning of the end times. It is what we must believe if we are rigorous with the principle of presumption of innocence. But there is also testimonial evidence, not just words about it. And there is no evidence whatsoever in Fr. Javier's arguments that allow us to reject those testimonies.
So, in principle, using the criterion of union with God, this case does not contradict the strictest doctrine in matters of Catholic mysticism, that of the mystical doctors par excellence, Saint Teresa of Jesus and Saint John of the Cross. On the contrary, it confirms it if we start from the principle of presumption of innocence and add the evidence testified by others. But let us go a little deeper into the doctrine of the holy Carmelite fathers to see if it denies the supernatural character of Fr. Michel's private revelations.
In Interior Castle, in the fifth, sixth and seventh mansions, Saint Teresa establishes several key criteria for spiritual discernment: love of neighbor in deeds (not only in words); not flee from the trials of life but embrace the cross of Christ; not to seek one's own will and spiritual pleasures for themselves (much less worldly), but the will of God; and stick strictly to church authority. Saint Therese's phrase quoted at the beginning of this article that “God is the highest Truth, and to be humble is to walk in Truth”, establishes an excellent element of discernment: She does not advocate false humility, for example. If God the Father has really revealed to him what Fr. Michel affirms, would it be an act of humility not to obey God, who has the Will that Fr. Michel transmits what is revealed to help us prepare for the end times? So that other priests or bishops do not imagine that he is important, for example? On the contrary. It would be an act of pride according to Saint Therese. To be humble is to walk in Truth, even if they criticize you because you are allegedly not humble.
In the case of Saint John of the Cross on his Ascent to Mount Carmel it is similar. In Book 2, Chapter 29, n 6-7, for example, the saint is very rigorous against false locutions. But with this same type of criteria of Saint Teresa, which includes the continuous and profound denial of one's own will detached from that of God (that of the ego) and the following of the Will of God, there is a good discernment to distinguish the good from the bad. bad in these matters. The believer must be sincere when he says in the Our Father "Thy Will be done on earth as it is in Heaven". May his Will be done in me and not the will of the ego with its earthly desires or spiritual tastes away from what God wants, which is the best for us even if we do not realize it, be it because of vices or because of the deception of the Devil.
Taking into account what the two Carmelite saints say as criteria for discernment and observing the selfless life of Fr. Michel, with so many hardships he has gone through, both because of the devil and because of issues in his life, points to the truth of what he and the witnesses claim and there is no reason not to believe it. Indeed, in his life he suffered notable poverty since he was a child, he has had three highly serious cancers and eight heart attacks and other illnesses; In his training, he suffered many attacks and they did not want to ordain him a priest, so he had to study psychology and found an institution in favor of young people addicted to drugs and prostitution; while he has been a priest he has had to suffer great difficulties and responsibilities, with many illnesses and continuous attention to the faithful; Regarding the foundation and administration of his Fraternity, he had difficulties with financing the construction of the monasteries (Miraculously resolved, as narrated), strong internal conflicts of power struggles, etc.; he has received many attacks for the prophecies and withdrawals of him, as in this case. All this in the midst of the aforementioned great attacks of the devil, his miracles, his exorcisms.
The holy Carmelite fathers, by the way, went through similar tasks, which was precisely what helped them to become hardened in the virtues of discernment enlightened by the mystical experience that accompanied their apprenticeship. Their great works in this matter led them to be declared doctors of the church. For example, Saint Teresa was heavily attacked when she wanted to found the Discalced Carmelite order. She was very badly advised by various priest confessors and spiritual directors and she went through a lot of work because of it. She was persecuted by the inquisition. Saint John of the Cross also suffered untold hardships and was even imprisoned by the superior friars in his own convent.
Fr. Michel is a highly seasoned priest and his messages and work reflect this. In this sense, it is worth mentioning that, by the same advice of God the Father, Fr. Michel named his Fraternity after Saint Benedict Joseph Fabre. But the two other saints who guide his life and that of his community are Saint John Mary Vianney and Saint Therese of Jesus herself. It is not surprising that they study her in a very systematic way, and they know very well her exemplary life, her doctrine and her criteria for discernment in matters of spiritual gifts, particularly prophetic ones.
In any case, we are not here to prove Fr. Michel's sainthood, nor are we capable of that, far from it. But to detect if the alleged proofs of his non-holiness, or lack of super-naturalness in his revelations are valid. We have not seen evidence in that sense, because of what has been said here. Not even one, as we shall see. Due to the superficiality of the analysis and its baseless conclusions, Satan is present in this aspect in Fr. Javier's trial. Number 25.
On the theological analysis of Dr. Mark Miravalle
Dr. Miravalle's criticisms against the person and Fr. Michel's statements have been conclusively refuted by Daniel O'Connor in an article that I translated myself, leaving his case baseless. But it is not that there are some who are wrong and others right. It is that they are all wrong, which is symptomatic in the sense of my theory about the presence of the devil, since there is no other plausible rational explanation given the prestige, well earned, of Dr. Miravalle. Here is Mr. O'Connor's article: https://www.countdowntothekingdom.com/4240-2/
But let's examine some of the points, because there are additional things that I would like to comment on to advance our hypothesis.
Monsignor Lemay's rejection of Fr. Michel's prophecies
Monsignor Lemay, bishop of the place where Fr. Michel resides with his Fraternity, published a letter addressed to him in which he states:
“I want to make it clear that I absolutely disagree with the prophecies of you on the aforementioned site (Ex. Warning, days of darkness, Era of peace, punishment, World War III, nuclear war in 2020, construction of shelters, etc.). This is what I intend to answer to the people who have asked me.”
First of all I comment that Fr. Michel never said that there would be a nuclear war in 2020. There is no evidence of it in his messages or his virtual retreat, which I reviewed. Yes, he spoke of the third world war and of nuclear war if humanity does not repent. But he never said specific dates, although he did say that the beginning of the end times would occur at the end of 2020. The construction of shelters has not been promoted by Fr. Michel either, although he has not discouraged their construction and has promoted that the homes and farms be consecrated to God the Father in case He wants to use them, if He deems it convenient in His Divine Will, as refuges when the time comes. There's nothing wrong with that, of course.
On the other hand, this disagreement with the Warning, three days of darkness, Era of Peace, Punishment, should be taken as a personal opinion of Monsignor Lemay and not as an opinion of the church. It is good to note that his claims are not made as a result of a diocesan investigation into the matter, as they should have been.
Now, are these prophecies a sign of mistakes of Fr. Michel? On the contrary. If someone is wrong in his opinion, it seems to be Monsignor Lemay, since these prophecies come from many prophets respected by the faithful people, some officially approved by the church, including canonized Saints, such as Saint Faustina. The Warning, for example, was prophesied in Betania, Venezuela, to the seer, Servant of God, María Esperanza, whose messages have the approval of supernaturality by the authorized bishop, Monsignor Pío Bello, who studied the case at length and arrived to that conclusion after seeing abundant evidence, both from the visions and messages, and from the miracles that stemmed from it. It was also prophesied in Garabandal and Medjugorje as a message from the Virgin to the respective seers. In addition, it was also an express and public request made by Pope Saint John XXIII during the Second Vatican Council, who asked God for a "Second Pentecost" for all humanity, an Illumination of Conscience, as it is also called.
The Punishment or Chastisement, which is conditional on conversion, of course, which might occur thanks to God's acts of mercy in the Warning, the Amnesty and the Miracle, has been predicted in Fatima, Garabandal, revelations to the Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta and several more. And it makes sense, due to the dynamics of self-destruction if humans insist on ignoring the spiritual dimension of reality. The three days of darkness are mentioned by Santa Faustina and Benedict Anna Maria Taigi, among others. The Era of Peace in Fatima and by Luisa Piccarreta, among others. The third world war has been predicted for a long time, beginning with La Salette (not only the first and second) and many prophets of the end times. I'm not an expert on these things, so to know all the sources of each prophecy that have ecclesiastical approval, I recommend checking out the Countdown to the Kingdom site, which has plenty of research on it. Having made a couple of mistakes on the part of that web page in the case of Fr. Michel does not disavow it above all else. The page corrected his error, and the rest is very solid, as can be seen. They are always open to criticism, and they correct themselves when there are mistakes, as in this case.
Let us now note that Fr. Michel responds in this matter of the revelations to the disapproval of Monsignor Lemay:
“In 2019, I preached a spiritual retreat in California which was featured on the Countdown to the Kingdom website. Besides personal messages, the teaching given was based on the messages of the Virgin Mary approved by the Church and in accordance with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, article 7, n. 668 to 682.”
In other words, he maintains as true his private revelations not approved by the church. Recall what I said about Saint Theresa’s saying about true humility and being faithful to God. Of course, Monsignor Lemay is the bishop of the diocese where the Monastery of Fr. Michel is located, and he owes him obedience. But Monsignor Lemay is not asking Fr. Michel not to believe in the aforementioned prophecies or in his private revelations, since his letter literally says “This is what I intend to answer the people who have asked me”. And Fr. Michel has not asked him for his opinion on this, clearly, because of what he said in his response. At this point it is good to note that, as private revelations are a matter of free interpretation by the faithful if there is no official ruling by the church on them, differences of opinion are allowed on this matter, whether between the faithful and priests or between them and the bishops. Therefore, it is lawful for Monsignor Lemay to give his opinion against the aforementioned revelations, while Fr. Michel to give his opinion in favor of them. Therefore, Fr. Michel is not disobeying Monsignor Lemay, since he does not owe him obedience in this matter. So, he is not disobeying the authority of the church in this case. In any case, it is clear that since several of the private revelations included in his letter were made by officially approved church prophets, Monsignor Lemay should have been more careful about what he said.
Similarly it applies to the letter of Monsignor Robert Mourgon. Although he is the bishop where Fr. Michel is incardinated (in order to be a priest), he is not the bishop of the diocese where Fr. Michel lives. Fr. Michel owes obedience to Monsignor Lemay and in this way to the ecclesiastical hierarchy, which is vertical in this matter, as is logical. What Monsignor Mourgon can do is remove the incardination. But he hasn't. It is good to ask Monsignor Lemay and Monsignor Mourgon to please be clearer in their pastoral decisions towards us, the lay faithful, so in need of guidance and discernment in these turbulent times. At least they should clarify that these are personal opinions, some in clear contradiction with prophets approved by the church, because that confuses us and in that the enemy of all of us wins, that we are one body and we must have antibodies against him and therefore that is why we lay people are activating to defend ourselves as part of the same body.
Meanwhile, we understand what should be done as with private revelations: it is a matter of personal faith for the faithful and no one should use their authority to disqualify them without an appropriate study in this regard, out of respect for them, whether lay or clerical.
I recommend the opinion on this subject of Christine Walkins, author of the book The Warning and editor of the Countdown to the Kingdom page, because there she also speaks of the abundant fruits of the work of Fr. Michel, which is taken into account by the church at the time of discerning the validity of private revelations: https://www.countdowntothekingdom.com/who-is-the-real-fr-michel-rodrigue-searching-for-the-truth/
Satan is present in all this, I have no doubt. Number 26.
On taking into account the attacks of the demon against Fr. Michel in the balance (to tip it negatively)
On the contrary. Many saints have suffered the same or even worse. At the age of twelve, Fr. Michel experienced a definitive healing, as I narrated above. From there he went the other way, in particular when he was ordained to be a priest: he did many official exorcisms (with the bishop's approval, even though he was never the official exorcist of the diocese). Those things happen to experienced people like Fr. Michel, similarly to what happened to Jesus: the demons got excited when they saw him, but they couldn't do anything to him, quite the opposite. In fact, Fr. Michel has developed methods to detect the actual presence of demons before performing exorcisms, according to his account, and there is no reason to doubt that.
We must remember that at the time of Jesus not all the apostles and disciples had the ability to exorcise even though they tried. Jesus then advised them to fast and pray. In Fr. Michel's case, not only could he do it, but he was called on for cases that no one else wanted or were too difficult, according to author Christine Walkins, who has spoken with him in person. Similarly for difficult miracles, like bringing someone back to life. He is a living saint like few others, if all this is true. And there is no reason to doubt, again, but the other way around, because there are testimonies in this regard, according to the same author, which are in her same article cited. Number 27.
On the presumed affirmation of Fr. Michel that He and God the Father are One
Fr. Javier affirms that Fr. Michel says that God the Father and he are One. He concludes that this is very serious in a priest who has had infused science and must have basic theological training. He also says that "I do not know if some who are fooled by these messages realize what I am saying." "Here you have to have a certain intellectual tranquility to analyze the issue." Furthermore, Fr. Javier insinuates that Fr. Michel is asking for money for his foundation with the argument that the Heavenly Father, who is One with Fr. Michel, is asking for it.
My comment is that it is true that you have to have intellectual peace of mind in order not to make mistakes here. In particular in such a serious matter, as Fr. Javier also believes. Therefore, you have to start with the basics: read well what you want to analyze, especially if you are going to attack it, above all if you are going to publish it and many people are going to believe what you say, as in the case of Fr. Javier, since you do not want to mislead them. The same in relation to listening to the talk given by Fr. Michel, whose link is on the cited web page.
If one reads it and listens to the message, as I did, one will realize that Fr. Michel never said that God the Father and he are one. What he said is that those who are one are the heavenly Father and Jesus, his Son. I saw the video and read the text before this controversy. It never crossed my mind what Fr. Javier and Dr. Miravalle are affirming. That is why they are losing authority with such serious and elemental things in their behavior as analysts. Not even a junior in high school makes those kinds of mistakes. Now, the insinuation that Fr. Michel is using the heavenly Father in this way to get money is really base and insulting. Number 28.
The Antichrist will not come from the hierarchy of the Catholic Church
Fr. Javier makes that statement based on what Dr. Miravalle argues about it. Daniel O'Connor refutes this conclusively. In addition, the second message from Garabandal and in La Salette, among many other private revelations about the conflicts within the Church in these times, make this possibility clear. Thirdly, from my analysis of the sociopolitical Black Hole, the objective of the Deep State is inferred, which is to have the control of the spiritual-religious sphere in addition to its control of the economic, political and cultural in its aim of controlling the entire human population in all its aspects. This would be achieved through the control of the highest authority of the Catholic Church in the context of the "unity of all religions", the result of the "ecumenical" movement that has now been brewing in the continuous Synods that we have seen, which will conclude in 2023. In addition to what is happening in the Episcopal Conference of Germany. Fourth, Satan is no fool, and he targets the highest levels of power in each of these areas. Those who know the theory and practice of secular political power know that an empire pursues religious rule for political reasons, particularly if the move comes directly from Satan, as in this case.
Fr. Javier argues that since the traditional authorities, among the doctrinal doctors, which include the patristics, do not contemplate that of the Antichrist in the high hierarchy of the church, then there is no foundation. Daniel O'Connor shows the opposite in matters of Patristics. On the other hand, the prophecy does not have to be always repetitive. There are new things, always based on revealed doctrine, that illustrate things about the new times, for example. It is to be noted that an Antichrist Pope does not contradict Jesus' prophecy that the devil will not prevail over his church. The reason is that the specific members of the church are one thing and the church as a body is another. This will continue, of course, unscathed, despite this. This is what Fr. Michel says, who argues that just as there was a Judas in the high hierarchy of the first church, there will be one here. And his betrayal helped the sacrifice of Jesus. Something similar would happen here. It is possible, as I personally believe, that there are two popes in the last times. One, the Antichrist, fraudulently elected by the Deep State and his tentacles in the church made up of all those prophesied clergy people in Garabandal and La Salette. The other, properly elected by the initiative of Pope Benedict before being sacrificed, according to the prophecy of Fr. Michel.
The insinuation that Fr. Michel does with this the same thing that the heretical Protestant sects do is quite low, since there is the insinuation of heresy here, in addition to being erroneous for what we have analyzed. Number 29.
Pope Benedict cannot call a papal election
Fr. Javier makes that statement based on what Dr. Miravalle argues about it. Daniel O'Connor refutes this conclusively. I will only add that this is one more example of the incredible lack of scientific-theological rigor in the analyzes and investigations, both by Dr. Miravall and Fr. Javier. That discredits them, like all of this, and points to the real culprit, who enjoys this division and discredit of some members of our church. Number 30.
It is a theological and doctrinal error that demons can be in purgatory
Untrue. Fr. Javier makes that statement based on what Dr. Miravalle argues about it. Daniel O'Connor refutes this conclusively. Fr. Javier ridicules Fr. Michel for his trips to heaven, purgatory, and other places, calling them "fantastic." I attribute it to a lack of presumption of innocence and a lack of faith in what is "natural" and normal in the supernatural world. Number 31.
Michel lied when recounting a meeting with Pope St. John Paul II that could not have happened
Untrue. Fr. Javier makes that statement based on what Dr. Miravalle argues about it. Daniel O'Connor refutes this conclusively. Again, the level of lack of rigor in the investigations is incredible, and the use of the presumption of guilt, instead of innocence, for which we see that Satan put his hand in it here. Number 32.
Fr. Michel said that the Pope uses a false Pope to deceive people sometimes
Untrue. Fr. Javier makes that statement based on what Dr. Miravalle argues about it. Daniel O'Connor refutes this conclusively. I myself read the writings and the video of Fr. Michel before the controversy and I did not conclude at all what they claim, but the correct thing: it is about the Pope's car, not the Pope. Number 33.
Fr. Michel denies free will after The Warning
Untrue. Fr. Javier makes that statement based on what Dr. Miravalle argues about it. Daniel O'Connor refutes this conclusively. They did not read the writing or the video about it well, where that is clarified without a doubt, as I understood it when I saw it before this controversy. Number 34.
Conclusion of Dr. Miravalle, supported by Fr. Javier
Quoting and approving what Dr. Miravalle says, Fr. Javier says that:
"Fr. Michel's alleged messages contain significant and repeated examples of theological and factual errors. They are not authentic. Everything points to problems of lack of emotional and psychological stability of Fr. Michel. He may have copied and integrated other messages. These messages can cause great damage to the faithful and to authentic prophecies".
On this I especially recommend reading the conclusion of Daniel O'Connor, who conclusively refuted all this. I will say that, regarding the alleged errors, it must have been clear at this point that this is completely false. It is the other way around, paraphrasing: "The alleged disqualification arguments against Fr. Michel by Dr. Miravalle and Fr. Javier contains significant and repeated examples of theological and factual errors."
On the presumed lack of authenticity of supernaturality: In this case the accusing party has not shown anything that aims to prove that. Rather, they incur in a serious lack of judgment even for atheistic standards, let alone Christians: innocence has not been assumed; biased and erroneous samples have been chosen; serious logical and theological errors have been made, no proof whatsoever of the charges of lack of authenticity in Fr. Michel's messages has been provided. What has been shown is a lack of professionalism, respect for the reader (because of the superficiality of the investigation, who did not even read the material to be criticized), of ethics, and of Christian morality. From the unbelievability of all this, it is clear that Satan had his hand here.
On the supposed lack of psychological and emotional stability, many saints have been accused of being crazy. Starting with Jesus. Mark 3:20-21 is worth quoting:
“At that time, Jesus went home with his disciples and so many people gathered again that they would not even let them eat. When his relatives found out about this, they came to take him away, because they said he was out of his mind.”
The case is very similar, and the reason is because in this case Fr. Michel is also called crazy, as in Jesus’ case, by his own family, people from the church, a person who performs many miracles, and people do not let him eat either, because of so many occupations that he has. In the case of Fr. Michel there is no proof at all of this assertion. Just an opinion, which is presented as authoritative, when it is not. On the contrary.
On the alleged copy, again they have not investigated enough. The contributions of Fr. Michel are fundamental and distinctive, and that statement does not contemplate the true theory that we must assume as Christians: the great coincidence between the different prophecies of the "prophetic consensus" has to do with the same source used by the different seers: God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, his angels and the Virgin Mary. What Fr. Michel does do is to integrate, with the aforementioned contributions, many pieces of a great puzzle, so complex that without that contribution it would not make all the sense that it has for us today. A great contribution and a great service to the church and to God's plan of salvation for humanity, particularly in these crucial times of human and salvific history. Number 35. The case of Dr. Miravalle must be included separately, since he is a different person and his mistakes are inexplicable. Number 36.
Criticisms made by Fr. Javier himself
It is wrong to say that animals go to heaven
It is false that Fr. Michel said that animals go to heaven. In the video that is clear. What he said is that in heaven he saw animals. Not that those which die go to heaven. According to biblical tradition it is perfectly possible. Like the story of Paradise, or when in future times the lion will graze with the sheep, though this refers to a sinless earth, not heaven itself. But that seems more logical than the assumption that in heaven there are only human and angelic souls. And it agrees with what Padre Pio said to Fr. Michel: It is logical that the resurrection of Jesus has general implications, on the one hand, and permanent, on the other, for all of creation. The fact that we are eternal makes it logical, especially because when we have the resurrection we will be in heaven not only with the soul, but with the body as well, as has been the case with Jesus and Mary for two thousand years. It makes more sense that when we are in heaven with our bodies and our souls, that there are animals and plants as well, although the church doesn't have a doctrine on that that I know of. So in this sense this would have to be taken as a private revelation, and subject to the personal devotion of each one of us believers. Nobody can speak on behalf of the authority of the church about a private revelation if the church has not ruled on it and has not officially rejected it.
Fr. Michel is an expert theologian, a Doctor of Theology and a faithful son of the Church, moreover, and he is not going to make statements that contradict Catholic doctrine and spread them so irresponsibly. This is what must be assumed as a starting point in a trial like this, unless there is evidence to the contrary, which has not been produced, neither in the video nor in Fr. Javier's article. Number 37.
Another supposed error of Fr. Michel: that the Katejon is Saint Joseph
For readers, the Katejon is what holds back the devil in the end times against the church, according to Saint Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians (2 Thess 2:3-15). What Fr. Michel says about St. Joseph in this regard makes a lot of sense, and does not contradict the rest of what is opposed to the evil one in the church in the last times, but complements it. In fact, Saint Joseph has been marginalized on many occasions as the protector of the Holy Family, and Pope Francis himself vindicated him in that sense in his Pastoral Letter when he declared him as the saint of the Jubilee Year from December 8, 2020 to 2021. The church is the Body of Christ, and it is natural that Saint Joseph still plays the role of its protector and defender against the evil one as when the physical body of Jesus was on earth. Everything matches. In particular the fact that we have entered the beginning of the end times and Satan is very active, like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour (in this case the whole of humanity).
Does Fr. Javier believe that it was a coincidence that Saint Joseph was appointed protector and defender of the church for a year, and between the Marian dates of December 8, in addition to that? For God there are no coincidences. Neither for Satan. And for the Virgin Mary, leader according to the official doctrine and the revelation for these times, neither. And let us remember again that it was Saint Joseph who helped her take care of Jesus on earth in very turbulent times for His safety, when the dangers were characterized by the protagonism of Satan himself. His presence was made clear with the slaughter of innocent saints, for example, which could not have been engineered by Herod alone. It was angels who warned Saint Joseph about the devices of the evil one, just as angels are used by God, and by the Virgin, in these times of the rampaging devil, in particular Saint Michael the Archangel. Logical that he continues to take care of the body of Christ again, during these very dangerous times.
Pope Francis narrates in this letter how Saint Joseph was very wise and inspired against Satan to win the war to the death that it had against the child Jesus. This is now a colossal war in the spiritual realm. You have to have faith to realize this, of course. The logical thing is to conceive that role for Saint Joseph and Fr. Michel saw it that way due to revelations from the Father and said so. After December 8, 2021, the day of the Immaculate Conception, the Virgin would begin a more direct action herself, assuming her role for the times, probably with the direct help of the Archangel Saint Michael, so it is not that Fr. Michel is claiming that Saint Joseph is the only Katejon. Everything fits together like puzzle pieces, to alert us to the end times, since Saint Joseph died before the epiphany of Jesus and Mary assumed her public role then (for example at Cana). Now something similar and logical would have happened. Number 38.
Final disavowal by Fr. Javier
Fr. Javier says verbatim at the end of his video:
1 “I believe that we must always distrust those people who call themselves visionaries, prophets. 2 Because a very good criterion of discernment is whether an alleged seer, prophet, or visionary tries to hide. Fr. Michel tries not to speak. 3 he tries not to let anyone write about his stuff. 4 He prevents others from putting things in his mouth that he doesn't dare to put. 5 Now I am remembering quickly by heart, but from the little shepherds of Fatima to Saint Bernadette. They usually ask permission even though they don't like what the bishops say, that they disavow them or that they say no, but they remain in obedience to what the ecclesiastical hierarchy... 6 I repeat, the most orthodox they have at that time, or the most heterodox, say it, because at the end of the day if God wants to give a message it will not matter. And he is going to break, to bend, to break the arm of the most incredulous or heterodox of the bishops. But not here. 7 The ecclesiastical hierarchy, as we said at the beginning, not only disavows the words of Fr. Rodrigue who started badly. 8 It was necessary to retract some things that he said, but even he does not do it on his own but uses an internet page. 9 Something similar to what Teilhard de Chardin was doing at that time, when they wouldn't let him publish his books, so he said well, when I die, publish all my books, or let's publish under a pseudonym. 10 Well, here the pseudonym is internet. It works like this here, today. 11 So at least, on my part, I strongly disavow this. Very much. I reiterate. 12 Regardless of the morality of the priest. He can be a saint. 13 But at least there are many things that make one doubt, and therefore the truth is that it is preferable that one stays away from these kinds of things. 14 I end with a text from Saint Luke 21:8 about the end of times, which no one denies that we are near at all, but here we analyze these messages, these proposals. “Take heed that they do not deceive you; for many will come in my name saying: ‘I am… [omits… the Christ (Messiah)’ and: ‘The time is near.’] Do not follow them.” Here it is better to use this criterion of discernment. 15 The things that arise are quite strange, quite murky. 16 So we hope that everyone makes their own judgment, their own discernment, always hand in hand with the church, hand in hand with the spiritual tradition of the church, the patristic, the mystical and 17 aside from this, we should not be too surprised People like Fr. Michel or his messages, better said, have always existed and will continue to exist”.
My comments on Fr. Javier's conclusions, point by point
1 “I believe that we must always distrust those people who call themselves visionaries, prophets”.
The self-assessment is false, Fr. Javier. Fr. Michel has had divine revelations, and we do not have a reason to doubt it, since it is a private revelation not condemned by the church, as we have shown. If he does not pass on what is revealed and it is true, how would he stand with God? How would we be? It is his obligation to do so, because otherwise he would seriously sin by omission, due to his consequences. Non-supernaturality has not been proven. Why does Fr. Javier came to that conclusion without evidence? It violates the principle of presumption of innocence, to begin with. All the more reason it violates the Christian prosecution criteria listed above. Number 39.
2 “Because a very good criterion of discernment is whether an alleged seer, prophet, or visionary tries to hide. He tries not to speak”.
This is false, as we explained. Error listed before.
3 “Try to ensure that no one writes about his things”.
It is contradictory with 2. Error listed before.
4 “Prevents others from putting things in his mouth that he doesn't dare to put”.
How is this conclusion reached? He has provided no evidence to prove it. Number 40.
5 “Now I am remembering quickly by heart, but from the little shepherds of Fatima to Saint Bernadette. They usually ask permission even though they don't like what the bishops say, that they disavow them or that they say no, but they remain in obedience to what the ecclesiastical hierarchy…”.
It is false. He does not have to have permission from his bishop to publish. On top of that, he is not disobeying his bishop , as I explained. Error listed before.
6 “I reiterate, the most orthodox you have at that moment, or the most heterodox, say it, because in the end if God wants to give a message he will give it the same. And he is going to break, to bend, to break the arm of the most incredulous or heterodox of the bishops. But not here”.
The 6 is not required because of what was said in the 5, but also how do you conclude that you did not mention them to your bishop? He says the opposite. What happens is that it is one thing to tell the bishop, and another thing to agree to support them. There is no evidence that he did not inform the bishop, in addition that he was not required to do so. And what must be considered true is what Fr. Michel said: yes, he told him. Error listed before.
7 “The ecclesiastical hierarchy, as we said at the beginning, not only disavowed the words of Fr. Rodrigue who started badly. 8 It was necessary to retract some things that he said, but even he does not do it on his own but uses an internet page”.
I commented before on what Monsignor Lemay said about his prophecies. It is false that he had to retract. The web page did it, which was the one that made the mistake, of which Fr. Michel was not aware, because he is not its editor, on the one hand, and it was Fr. Michel himself who asked for that correction, on the other hand, as stated in his response letter to Monsignor Lemay. Error listed before.
9 “Something similar to what Teilhard de Chardin was doing at that time, when they wouldn't let him publish his books, so he said well, when I die, publish all my books, or let's publish under a pseudonym”.
The comparison with Teilhard de Chardin has nothing to do with it. In this case the church did not deny him the right to publish. Nor has he condemned it, as in the aforementioned case of Teilhard de Chardin. Comparisons are odious, according to the proverb, with more reason here and with things of such importance for the church, God, the Virgin, the faithful. Number 41.
10 “Well, the pseudonym here is the internet. It works like this here, today.”
Here Fr. Javier insinuates that Fr. Michel is hiding fraudulently using the internet. It is a clear defamation without any foundation. It is the other way around, as I have explained. Error listed before.
11 “Then at least, on my part I greatly disavow this. Very much. I reiterate”.
Fr. Javier is within his rights to express himself in this way about Fr. Michel and his messages. But he has not shown a basis for such a conclusion, which implies a judgment, which discredits him as careless, at least, in addition to the fact that he does not follow the ethical canons of even atheist judgment, much less a Christian in general or a Catholic specifically. Below I explain those canons. Error listed before.
12 “Regardless of the morality of the priest. He can be a saint”.
He could not be a saint if Fr. Javier's accusations were true. The church would not agree to that, obviously. Things like hiding, lying, manipulating people, websites, even using God the father to get money, etc, etc, are unthinkable in a saint, who has to have a minimum, heroic virtues, not obvious vices if this were true and also public. Number 43.
13 "But at least there are many things that make one doubt, and therefore the truth is that it is preferable that one stays away from these kinds of things."
Fr. Javier is within his right to walk away. But why would he advise the faithful to do so without a foundation? He is supposed to give it in this trial undertaken by him. As I have shown here, I do not see that he has succeeded, although he did succeed in casting doubt on his ethical and moral authority. That is why I see Satan involved in this, because Fr. Javier, with his prestige and his work, could not make those mistakes if he were fully aware of the matter and its implications. Satan is in this business of advising others about something that he is not sure about or has not been well researched. Number 43.
14 “I end with a text from Saint Luke 21:8 about the end of times, which no one denies that we are near at all, but here we analyze these messages, these proposals. “Take heed that they do not deceive you; for many will come in my name saying: ‘I am… [omits… the Christ (Messiah)’ and: ‘The time is near.’] Do not follow them.” Here it is better to use this criterion of discernment”.
Using the phrase of Jesus in Saint Luke to attribute it to Fr. Michel and disqualify him to say that he is a false prophet seems incredible to me from Fr. Javier. He is putting on the lips of Jesus Himself his own disqualification. He is basing himself on the authority of Jesus, no less, to give himself authority, without having it in the slightest. Discrediting Jesus, if that could be done. Where is the proof of the claim that he is a false prophet? As I said, the evidence presented by me shows the exact opposite: the prophecies he has made have been fulfilled in their due time. The others have to wait for time to decide, and rather what is done gives it well-earned prestige, not only for prophecies, but for works in the field of miracles, conversions, exorcisms, vocations. Using the authority of Jesus to support his authority in this matter undermines him to the extreme. In this case we do see a use of Jesus for inappropriate purposes. It was not Fr. Michel who used God the Father, as authority, to collect monetary contributions, since he himself would not have been able to make that money. Discrediting Jesus is serious, in addition to the rest, like using him to support an authority that he does not have. Number 44.
15 “The things that arise are quite strange, quite murky”.
The claim about strange things is true, but for those who do not have faith. The cloudy claim has not been shown. Neither is true, as we have shown based on the lack of evidence, the presumption of innocence, and evidence directly to the contrary. What Fr. Michel has said and done makes a lot of sense, and has a strong ethical, moral, and doctrinal foundation. Error listed before.
16 “So we hope that each one makes his own judgment, his own discernment always from the hand of the church, from the hand of the spiritual betrayal of the church, of the patristic, of the mystical and…”
This is what those of us who follow Fr. Michel are doing. And we have gained knowledge about Satan, who takes authority away from those who judge and condemn him in this case. Error listed before.
17 “… and apart from this, people like Fr. Michel or his messages should not surprise us too much, rather there have always been and will continue to exist”.
I agree with Fr. Javier on this. Luckily it is so. God will never leave us helpless, and he will continue to send good prophets like Fr. Michel, and he will give us discernment to follow them or not, as Saint Paul says (1 Te 5:20):
“Do not despise the gifts of prophecies. Rather, examine everything carefully, hold fast to the good. Refrain from every form of evil.”
In particular, the Evil One and his traps must be rejected as a result of this prosecution against him. Error listed before.
Christian and Catholic criteria for the trial
So far we have shown that the supposed proof of false prophet against Fr. Michel does not hold. On the contrary, there are strong indications that he is a genuine prophet. And it should be noted that we have used the weakest method of judgment: the atheist, which uses the principle of presumption of innocence, and prohibits argumentative fallacies.
But if we use the methods of Jesus and the Catholic Church cited in the introduction, the judgment against Fr. Michel falls with even more reason. At least among Christians you have to use the method of Jesus in an accusation established by Jesus himself in Matthew 18:15-17.
Dr. Miravalle did not consult Fr. Michel before writing his article. He didn't even tell his fellow editors of the Countdown to the Kingdom website. Monsignors Lemay and Mourgon also did not speak with Fr. Michel in private before making their public pronouncements. Nor the previous step of Jesus: talking to him in the presence of witnesses. If he had been spoken to in private, Fr. Michel would have requested the correction of the errors on the page (maintaining his position on his private revelations, of which Msgr. Lemay knew, according to what he has said and maintains, and there is no reason to doubt it). Msgr. Mourgon's letter must be taken as support for Msgr. Lemay and what he said, since it does not emerge from a thorough investigation, nor from the person, nor from the prophecies of Fr. Michel, with whom he has had very little contact, as he himself has said in his letter.
I take this opportunity to say that Monsignor Lemay should have been kind enough to clarify that Fr. Michel has indeed performed not one, but many official exorcisms in his diocese. With his approval, of course. Fr. Michel did refer to those approvals. Because they were true and no one can deny them, according to the testimonies of Fr. Michel and Christine Watkins. If someone misunderstands that and says he was an official exorcist, it's a mistake of whoever interpreted it, like the web page. Not Father Michel. Why was a scandal caused by a misunderstanding by a member of the church to falsely accuse Fr. Michel? Why at this point is it insisted on that, without clarifying the truth? The devil is here.
In relation to Fr. Javier, he has relied on others for his statements. In the two bishops mentioned, and in Dr. Miravalle. But we have seen that there is no basis in them to disqualify Fr. Michel as a prophet or as a person. On the other hand, he has used wrong arguments of his own. And he has done his own research that is very questionable both because of the argumentative fallacies discussed, and because of the lack of seriousness in reading the evidence and visualizing the audiovisual evidence. He has broken the standards of an atheist trial, and much more the Christian and Catholic standards. By not using the criteria of Jesus and the catechism, Satan is doubly present. Numbers 45 and 46.
Obedience in matters of publication of private revelations
There are some details in Fr. Javier's trial that denotes an implicit accusation of lack of submission to the proper authority of the church that a priest should have. For example, the changes of Fr. Michel from being diocesan priest to member of a religious congregation, and then to founding his own order. The implication is that he sought independence to do his will, and not God's. There is no evidence of that, but rather the opposite. For example, regarding his own order, it should be noted that he did not want to do it, since it implied a lot of work and he already had too many responsibilities, with so many parishes in charge of him, his several masses a day on Sundays, etc. He asked God the Father why He didn't look for a younger priest, well educated, because he had had eight heart attacks, etc. God the Father answered him with a big “No” and took him on one of his spiritual tours of the universe, asking him if he was His servant or not.
The lack of submission to the authority of the church is also false and has been declared by Fr. Michel himself, who has made it clear that he is a faithful obedient servant of the authority of the church and there is no evidence to prove otherwise: https://www.countdowntothekingdom.com/en/fr-michel-rodrigue-breaks-his-silence-and-responds-to-bishops-and-the-faithful/ Number 48.
On the other hand, it is not true that a prophet, a visionary, must have the approval of his bishop before making his private revelations public. Contrary examples abound in Marian revelations, among others, and it is enough to cite the example of the holy Carmelite fathers, which Fr. Javier takes as the standard to follow, who published under obedience to their confessor, who was not a bishop. What evidence does Fr. Javier have that Fr. Michel did not publish or preach without the permission of his confessor, for example? But he doesn't need it either, as in many other cases of church-approved seers whose prophecies were published before his approval.
Getting more to the heart of the matter, of course we know and accept that the church is hierarchical and we owe obedience to its doctrine, tradition, discernment and tenets of faith. But we also have the teachings of Jesus and discourse theory regarding the moral authority of a Christian pastor. If a pastor transgresses those norms in his behavior or attacks another member of the church without foundation, he loses authority before the faithful and, above all, before those who want to attack the church from outside it.
Of course, even though one believes a bishop is mistaken in a matter of faith, one must obey what he commands in that matter. For example, it is likely to be the case of the Bishop of Garabandal who prohibited apparitions of the Virgin Mary from taking place in the church in the village. The Virgin herself stopped guiding the visionaries to the church premises after that prohibition, and she insisted that the children be obedient to the church. The holy Carmelite fathers have analyzed this type of situation very well: God wants in these cases to test (train) the person involved so that he grows spiritually and must carry his cross, as Jesus did.
Now, without taking into account for a moment the ecclesial authority in this matter of faith, of dogma, recourse to authority is a well-known argumentative fallacy: someone's authority is invoked to assert an argument. But what if the argument is false and can be proved, particularly to many people? Do you have to believe it? Not even in the Catholic Church would such a way of proceeding be admitted, as far as I know, since its doctrine is strictly based on faith, which is not a matter that is neither demonstrable nor refutable by material or logical laws, by definition. And faith is the eye that allows us to see the spiritual world.
Since God is the same, it is not possible for the laws of the spiritual world to contradict those of the earthly world, because then God would be contradictory, which is not possible. If we see that something is black, for example, a bishop should not tell us that he is white and that we must believe it by faith. The same if a bishop tells us that two plus two is not four but five. Or if we see that a ruler is a genocide and the Pope tells us that we must accept him, not try to depose him by force to prevent him from continuing to kill people, when the constitution mandates it and social science foresees it, but we have to believe it because of faith. The Pope knows more than a mathematician in matters of faith. But a mathematician knows more than the Pope on his subject. If he begins to contradict the other in what he does not know, he loses authority, not only in mathematics, but in matters of faith, in the face of the faithful.
By the way, when miracles occur in the natural world it does not mean that they contradict natural laws: what it means is that the miracle has no explanation based on what is known so far according to the development of knowledge in natural science at the time. When we fully develop, science will be one and we would have "the theory of everything": the natural and the social will be part of the same science, based on the spiritual. In the law of God's Love. I imagine that this will happen when Jesus reigns in body and soul, after His Second Coming: we will be, given our resurrection, in body and soul as well, after the Final Judgment, for which we will be at the same time in the natural world of the body and nature, in the social world as a community, and in the spiritual world in Heaven. At that time all laws, natural, social and spiritual, would be fully known, as well as consistent with each other. But contradicting mathematical logic and known natural laws without a miracle present, just to establish the authority of the church in matters of faith is an argumentative fallacy and using it harms the church of Jesus.
In this case it has happened that statements have been made about Fr. Michel that are not true, as can be verified. Argument fallacies of a logical type have repeatedly been incurred. To recall a complete example, why do Fr. Javier and Monsignor Lemay accuse Fr. Michel of having said that he was an official exorcist because the Countdown page says so? That is committing the straw man fallacy, discussed earlier. Fr. Michel has never affirmed this, as he himself has clarified. And there is no evidence to the contrary, so that the principle of presumption of innocence has to be used here. Fr. Michel himself asked the page to correct itself. It was the fault of the page, not of him and it is what must be assumed to be fair judges. The same happens in the case of the book The Warning, whose author, Christine Watkins, is one of the editors of the web site. The book came out with that initial error. But in later editions (I have one myself) the correction was made.
The problem that we have had in society is that it is intended to exclude the spiritual realm from the material realm. But one cannot go to the other extreme of imposing something false on the spiritual world in the material world and claiming to retain authority in matters of faith. It is like demanding the belief that one loves God and yet hates the neighbor with his works.
Since in the case of Fr. Michel there is no reason, as I conclude after analyzing all of Fr. Javier's arguments against him, to doubt the divine nature of his revelations, there is a very strong criterion of authority that we can and must use in this case: whether or not his prophecies are fulfilled, as I said in the introduction. One by one. For example, the martyrdom of the two Popes. In the meantime, let us not be distressed: we simply do what we have to do: confess, take communion, pray, fast, carry the cross, draw closer to God, love our neighbor. Prepare ourselves like the wise maidens. This is what Fr. Michel's message leads to. There is nothing wrong with that.
My conclusion on this point, then, is that it is not a requirement that a bishop give approval for a seer to disseminate his private revelation. If that were the case, the seer would really have to be considered a saint first before approving a vision, since not only the opinion of a bishop is enough, as we see in this case, but the church as such must be involved. Therefore, in many cases a good candidate (a Servant of God) could not really be canonized, since these studies take a long time, often more than the temporal life of a person, since his revelation would not be known for not being approved and would not have produced miracles as a fruit of his ministry. With that attitude one reaches absurdities, possible absurd examples that tie the hands of the Most High God, nothing less. Who are we to tie the hands of God like this? Just to prove that Fr. Michel is wrong? Again the devil is smelled in this. Number 49.
At this point we know that the authority of the church comes from Jesus, based on the great dignity that God wants to confer on all humans, as His children that we are. The church was instituted to serve His children, not to impose on them, without giving them due respect, which comes from their divine dignity, as Jesus commanded by His message and His behavior. For example when he washed the feet of his disciples (Jn 13: 14-15). Or when, having observed the competition among his disciples over who would be more important and have more authority (Mt 20:25–28):
But Jesus, calling them to Himself, said: "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and that the great ones exercise authority over them. "It must not be so among you, but whoever wishes to come among you to be great, he will be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you will be your servant; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many."
Or like when the disciples were jealous of each other, or that they believed they had more authority over others doing miracles in the name of Jesus (Lk 9:46-50):
And an argument began between them, about which of them would be the most important. So Jesus, knowing what was in their hearts, took a little child and put him by his side. "Whoever receives this child in My name," He said to them, "receives Me; and whoever receives Me receives Him who sent Me; for he who is least (humble) among you all, he is the important one."
And Juan answered: "Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we tried to stop him because he does not walk with us." But Jesus said to him, "Don't stop them, because he who is not against you is with you."
Here I will expose problems of deviations from that doctrine by some members of the church, which points to my thesis of the devil doing doing this job against the kingdom of God.
In fact, this case against Fr. Michel is not the first time that important revelations of the Virgin Mary in these last times have encountered very great obstacles in the hierarchy of the church. I know the example of Garabandal in some detail from what was published on social networks. In this regard, I recommend this documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUYuO7M4k_s
The psychiatrist in charge of the first commission threatened Conchita, one of the four visionary girls, after taking her out of her environment and taking her to the city of Santander for a few days, with sending her to an asylum and imprisoning her family if she didn’t deny her visions. They made her sign a blank piece of paper with the purpose of denying her visions. The local bishop tempted her so that instead of shepherding sheep in the fields, she would stay in the city studying “like a young lady” (not like an unimportant peasant). The girl denied her visions because of that pressure, but she preferred to return to Garabandal with her mother and her aunt Maximina, who has testified about this on social networks. There Conchita resumed her activity with the visions of the Virgin Mary, with the important messages and prophecies of Her. In particular The Warning and The Miracle, in addition to the bad behavior of many members of the clergy.
Despite the fact that psychiatrist and bishop regretted their behavior much later and the doctor revealed in a press conference that he believed that something supernatural had happened there, some six bishops of the diocese of Santander to which the town of Garabandal belongs, have failed successively to deliver a verdict on the revelations on the spot. There have been two commissions and both have done a job of debunking the apparitions rather than a genuine investigation. This despite the great positive impact that what happened has had among the faithful, and multiple testimonies from doctors and other scientists, as well as priests and faithful. And testimonies of miraculous healings. With that, these bishops and the church itself have lost moral authority before the faithful. That harms the church, clearly, and points to the hand of the evil one, again.
It should be noted in this that the revelations of Garabandal occurred simultaneously with the Second Vatican Council, and its second message is complementary to its teachings, since it says something that was not discussed there: "The priests, bishops and cardinals go many for the path of perdition and with them they carry many more souls”. I have no doubt that Satan's plans included blaming the Council for the great corruptions in the clergy that occurred later and that have so damaged the image of the church, not only before strangers, but also before the faithful themselves.
Taking this case as a representative example to return to the issue of church authority, someone could say, as Fr. Javier does in his video, that God has ways of "twisting the arm" of an ecclesial authority so that the revelation is approved if it is authentic, when that authority has refused not only to approve it, but to investigate it. The problem that I see is that with these revelations, the Virgin Mary wants to warn humans, with an increasing sense of urgency, that if they do not convert, they will go directly to self-destruction, to "Chastisement." As much as God loves humans, as does Heavenly Mother, He does not deny his free will. And this freedom, exercised against the spiritual laws, leads humans to perdition. What the Virgin Mary wants is to try to tell us that we must accept the message that God sent us with the first coming of Jesus, because we have not done it as humanity, despite the fact that many have received it throughout history until now.
She is telling us that we are going straight to perdition if we don't react, suffers a lot for that and wants to give us extra help. But what if the message doesn't get out because members of the church hierarchy obstruct it instead of facilitating and even enthusiastically promoting its spread? God is the one who judges, of course, not us, because we don't know everything behind this and it would be an unacceptable act of arrogance for us to do so. But the lay faithful are also concerned about the situation, and we are obliged to give the respective alerts, as I intend to do here, because the Evil One does not rest and this can serve as a warning: we can all help each other in this by alerting each other, and that is why I dare to mention that issue, without judging the people involved, who are untouchable because they belong to God, they are his beloved children (no father or mother tolerates messing with their children). For all this we detect the presence of Satan in Garabandal to divide the church and undermine the message of the Virgin Mary. If this had been thoroughly investigated, Bishops Lemay and Mourgon and by extension Fr. Javier would not be against the revelations of the Warning and the Miracle, which were made there, without having investigated: Number 50.
The alleged disobedience of Fr. Michel to Pope Francis. The Antichrist as an anti-Pope
According to Fr. Javier, Fr. Michel not only does not obey his bishops, and the church by extension, but he directly disobeys Pope Francis. And not only that. He attacks him. But it is seen that, again, he did not read the texts well nor did he see the related videos well. As I said above, the church is owed obedience in dogmatic, doctrinal matters. They are things of faith, which is based on revelation (Bible included) and tradition, which includes the apostolic institution that Jesus founded.
The Pope is infallible in this matter. But not in other matters, as we said in the previous section. A political analyst may know more than Pope Francis, for example in Venezuela and in the face of the attacks of the Deep State, as I myself have pointed out. Here is an article about it: https://www.quehacer.wiki/wiki/Sigue_el_debate._Ahora_interviene_el_Padre_Carlos_Ruiz
To give some context, Fr. Ugalde is a highly respected Jesuit in Venezuela who makes political analysis and recommendations. After much public debate with him in which I told him that he is very wrong in recommending cohabitation with the genocidal regime of Maduro, I told him in an article that he was being used by Satan in political matters.
For this reason, Fr. Alfredo Infante, another well-known and respected Jesuit, editor of the SIC magazine, the most important and influential in the Catholic world in our country, publicly criticized me for it and called me a fanatic.
In response to these attacks, Fr. Carlos Ruiz de Cascos, a diocesan priest of great prestige for his commitment to the poor, his high intellectual level and his great and effective evangelizing activity on social networks, defended me publicly, as is narrated there.
In summary, in my opinion, Pope Francis has been wrong politically in Venezuela and in relation to the Deep State, probably due to bad advice from his Jesuit order in the country. Of course I can be wrong. But the point is that the authority of the Pope and the church should not be used in matters that are not of the doctrine of faith. That takes away their authority.
In that order of ideas, the matters in which the church is not necessarily very expert include those related to institutional management. Especially if it is related to the aforementioned infallibility. According to Fr. Michel, Pope Francis's desire to be democratic, which is good, has allowed Satan to take advantage of the synods and national episcopal conferences to question the dogma of papal infallibility and of due obedience to the church in matters of faith. His argument is that democracy does not apply in matters of faith. It is not that strictly speaking this principle has been relaxed, since Pope Francis, after listening to the synods and episcopal conferences (such as the one in Germany), must make a decision himself, asking for the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But from the political point of view it is problematic at this time, because Satan is looking for the chair of Peter, and is promoting an internal revolution of rebellion against Pope Francis, due to moral relativism and a misunderstood ecumenism that puts in doubt the sacrament of the Eucharist (alerted by the Virgin Mary in Garabandal and other Marian visionaries and prophets). It is in this context that the martyrdom of Pope Francis prophesied by Fr. Michel would occur. Pope Benedict, faced with the attempt to undermine the foundations of the church, would try to promote a legitimate election of a new Pope, and would also be sacrificed (the third secret of Fatima). The Deep State would elect in that context, fraudulently, the false Pope, the Antichrist. All this is affirmed by Fr. Michel in his retreats, accompanied by a defense of Pope Francis, criticizing those who criticize him in matters of dogma. He literally says that we are not here to criticize or attack the Pope, but to pray for him. Number 50.
The theory of self-fulfilling prophecies
It is interesting that God and the Virgin are applying in all this of our preparation for these times the notion that faith moves mountains: if we have faith we can avoid the Chastisement. But a faith with works, of course, both spiritual and material. According to Game Theory, that notion is also true for economics and politics. It is the so-called theory of self-fulfilling prophecies: if the players (in this case the humans) agree to believe in a Pareto-superior Nash equilibrium (which is better for everyone), they act accordingly: everyone puts their grain of sand, and the result is that all those grains produce the mountain. But coordination is key: if too many people do not believe or act accordingly, the equilibrium does not occur. The mountain is not built. What the Virgin Mary is doing is trying to coordinate that equilibrium: convincing the players, the humans, to believe that this is possible.
In particular, that they believe that if it is not coordinated, the equilibrium they are going to reach is disastrous: self-destruction, Punishment. If we do not help Our Lady, but rather hinder her work, we are not on the right path. And too many members of the church hierarchy have been hindering rather than helping. Satan has won them over with his lies and has put them to work for him, many times unbeknownst to them. At this point things are so serious that Jesus himself is going to act, with the exorcism that we have predicted. It's not just a wish. It is a prediction, given the infinite love of God, and his promises about the Promised Land of the end times. At this point, what remains for us is to prepare ourselves so that we do as well as possible in The Warning and not be the object of the Punishment, but be in the Refuges while that happens, to then move on to the Promised Land. Satan undermining the balance of good coordination driven by the Virgin Mary. Number 51.
The alleged fanaticism and idolatry of the followers of Fr. Michel
Fr. Javier's statements on the point about the spiritual discernment of the revelations using the doctrine of the holy Carmelite Fathers, together with similar ones made in his judgment, also imply a strong criticism of the followers of Fr. Michel. After the discernment made about him, let us now see if it is true that those who follow his revelations are fanatics or idolaters. For that, let's analyze from that perspective what Fr. Javier said in the sense that "one has to live by pure faith"; "That's enough for me." "A criterion for discerning this type of thing is if the alleged seer or prophet flatly rejects that (strange, supernatural things), saying that he does not want to see any of it." "True seers usually don't want to know about all this weird, supernatural stuff because it's a super burden on you."
Of course the faithful must have discernment against false prophets and we have already talked about that in quite some detail. It is clear by now that the specific revelations of Fr. Michel do not have the approval of the church, but neither do they have its rejection, so that we are using the freedom of the faithful to follow an unapproved private revelation. In this case and in general too, a rejection by the faithful of private revelations, because "one has to live by pure faith" is an attitude similar to that of the Protestant brothers who only admit Jesus Christ as the exclusive mediator. They do not accept the saints or the Virgin, or the angels as such. To clarify the Catholic doctrine on the matter, I responded like this, in Spanish, to an evangelical pastor friend (some errors in the audio, since it was John the Evangelist, etc.):
In this case I also comment that just as we should not reject the ministry of the saints, the virgin, the angels, why should we reject a help that God offers us through visionaries and prophets through private revelations, in particular to prepare ourselves for the end times? Those prophecies can help us; and a lot. In fact, in these cases, it is a direct initiative of the Virgin Mary that we find out about her revelations. We know that she is the protagonist of the Apocalypse to defeat Satan, as the official doctrine of the church says. It is nothing strange, or bad, that she wants to help us prepare so that we can participate by helping her, also helping others to prepare. Of the 30 apparitions of the Virgin as private revelations officially approved by the church in all its two thousand years, 20 occurred in the last hundred (beginning with Fatima). It must be for a reason, and it is most likely related to what has been argued here about the last times. To these we must add that of Lourdes and La Salette, which also refer to the last times, when things began to go wrong worldwide, and they happened in the eighteenth century. So there are 22 Marian revelations on this topic.
So in principle, if we use good discernment, we should not have a negative attitude because we must live "by pure faith." If someone wants to dispense with that help from the Virgin and the prophets that she uses for it, it is his right. But why become an impediment for those of us who recognize this help and accept it with great gratitude, knowing that our faith is not so strong? Again, we are one body, the Body of Christ, and each of us has his talents. We must not refuse the help of a hand, if we are the heart, for example. God has decided to distribute his graces among many to help us all mutually. That of pretending to dispense with that help, for reasons of supposed purity is valid if you want to use it for yourself, but please do not impose it on others.
Practically all of us faithful Catholics have experienced the help of the revelations of the saints, from Jesus onwards. Those revelations, which have been private, have been known publicly, and thanks to this, the gifts of God have spread in his church. But many have not been approved by the church, even though they are genuine, as is the case of many saints whose canonization process has lasted many years and even centuries, such as Saint Juan Diego, the visionary of Guadalupe. They are instruments that God and the Virgin Mary use to save us. In these last hundred years mentioned, most of the private revelations have been to children or lay people, some of them “imperfect”. Are we going to go against his Will, in this case that of the Virgin, Who has given a sense of urgency to his messages and appearances in the last century? Those of us who do not have a very strong faith must be humble and recognize our shortcomings and needs.
In relation to the second point of rejecting the rare, the supernatural by the faithful. It really contradicts the true notion of faith. Faith is the eyes we have for what is not seen with physical eyes or those of reason. And that world exists. It is real, and even more important than the material world or the world of reason. It is the invisible world that God created that we speak of in the Creed. That's where those supernatural things happen, the "rare" things, like miracles of physical or spiritual healing from demonic possession. Or see the future, because there is no time there, or it is understood in another way. Or you travel great distances instantly, etc, etc. How are we going to reject that? It is to reject the faith, then.
And a seer who does not want to see that because it is a "super burden" is not assuming his vocation and his mission, to which God calls him to be his minister with that in the Body of Christ that we are. And manage the graces that are derived for others. Does Fr. Javier believe that faith can move mountains, or that we can do even greater miracles than those Jesus did, as He himself said? Whoever does not believe that does, not really have faith. Don't readers think so? They are extremely rare things, that I do grant. But to the unbelieving human eye in the supernatural and God's activity there.
On this subject of so many miracles and exorcisms together, in addition to flashy and "strange" prophecies, Fr. Javier implicitly cites the letter to Hebrews 13:9, which says that "Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings”. Of course, the prophecies we are dealing with seem strange novelties to the faith. But only for those who are not familiar with the Marian prophecies of the end times, starting with La Salette and then Fatima and Garabandal. For those who know them, they are rather natural and logical, given the diversity and strangeness of the world in which we live, very different from that of past centuries. They are not foreign doctrines to the faith, of course, as we are discussing here, but on the contrary. In other words, the fault lies with those who have fallen into the normality of modernity and do not know how extraordinary the Christian message is in these times, which goes to the root of faith, taking into account eschatological times. The question is whether Satan is present here. I think so in several commented aspects.
For all that has been said, the revelations of Fr. Michel are worthy of being believed by the faithful despite the rare, the extraordinary, the supernatural, which for now is a matter of private devotion to which they have a right while nobody can say that they are not within the obedience due to the church, its doctrine and its magisterium. This attitude on the part of the faithful who follow the revelations of Fr. Michel does not contradict their pure faith, but rather confirms it. They are not fanatics or idolaters for this, as Fr. Javier has insinuated. Number 52.
Recapitulation and conclusion
Here I will present my conclusion including an additional perspective on the two possible sides of the conflict, the good and the bad, considering that we are in apocalyptic times. Although there is a good side and a bad side in the external, it is clear that the same thing is also reproduced within each one of us, and we all need an illumination of conscience to properly educate our preferences (on the spiritual, the earthly and the social) and fully align them with the Will of God. It is from the internal realm that the devil acts to the point that his action extends to the external realm and is institutionalized in society. In particular, the conflicts described occur socially and also individually.
Today, in the social sphere there is clearly a good side, that of the citizens, and a bad side, that of the Deep State. From the quoted article on world conspiracy we know that we have reached a point where conflicts between countries have given way to conflict between the Deep World State and citizens. On the other hand, in each one of us, and in the church, the good side is that of God, and the bad side is that of Satan. The parallelism between the two worlds, the social and the spiritual, is clear. And the “alliances” that derive from it. On one side are the citizens' side and God's, and on the other the Deep State and Satan's.
To better discern in this regard and delve into alliances, let us take into account the help of divine revelation in the book of Revelation, whose language allows us to better understand what we are witnessing and starring in. In that evangelical book, the correct or good side is that of Christ the Lord, the Lamb, the Kyrios, the Warrior mounted on a white horse to defend and restore the Kingdom of God. The bad side is that of Satan, the Dragon, who has two helpers: the Beast from the Earth, the bad part in the church and in each one of us, and the Beast from the Sea, the bad part politically, economically and socially, which we already know is the Deep State. Those two auxiliaries are closely allied and are puppets of the same boss. On the good side are the Virgin Mary, Saint Joseph, Saint Michael the Archangel, the entire Heavenly Court (Angels and Saints in Heaven) as well as the Church as such, the Mystical Body of Christ, Who heads it. That is where all of us who want to take sides on the good side are located, in ourselves internally, and externally, be it in the political-social, or in the religious.
So the alliance referred to on the bad side makes sense, which more than an alliance is subordination: First, the Deep State as Satan's political, economic and social platform. In second place is the bad side of the church, both in the hierarchy and in the membership, as an instrument of Satan in the fight against Christ the Lord and his army of good. In this context, the aforementioned prophecy that the Antichrist would be a fraudulently elected Pope, at the behest of Satan and his Deep State, after the martyrdom of Pope Benedict, makes more sense. He would be the head of the Earth Beast. This Beast brings together all the bad parts of the church and the citizens and would be in close alliance with the other Beast, the Beast of the Sea, the Deep State, as well as being a puppet of Satan in the war against Christ the Lord and his army.
The good side and the bad side of the conflict in our analysis
In this article, I made a kind of merit trial against Satan. The conclusion is that there are merits for him to be judged and condemned by the church in this case and all similar ones, which extend to all of the institution and to all of humanity. I have used as a representative case the attack made against Fr. Michel Rodrigue by Fr. Javier Olivera Ravasi, who has based himself on the judgments made by Dr. Mark Miravalle and Monsignors Lemay and Mourgon. My conclusion is based on the inexplicable lack of evidence even for the most permissive criteria, the atheists, in their condemnation decision against Fr. Michel. My motivation, as a lay Catholic, has been to minimize the damage against the person of Fr. Michel and his prophetic messages, the church itself and all humanity, following the manifest wishes of the Virgin Mary. She has wanted to alert us about the abyss to which we are headed so that we avoid it with our action, both with prayer and with the correction of our lives. She has also wanted to encourage us to prepare ourselves as well as possible in the face of an act of mercy that Jesus wants to carry out to save us from that abyss in case it is inevitable that a part of humanity falls into it. That is The Warning.
In my trial, those who attack Fr. Michel are considered innocent. They are not even being judged. But examining the sample of the arguments they use against Fr. Michel, which is quite large (another requirement of a scientific proof, or a formal trial), I conclude that not only part of it is wrong to prove him guilty. Absolutely everything is, which is unthinkable for people with such theological training, prestige and official authority within the church, as in the case of those involved in the attack. There are 52 serious errors. As Satan is the prince of lies, his presence is clearly noticeable in this case because we would be facing a lie turned into truth by leaders of the Catholic Church.
But why have people who are so well-intentioned in general, and so well prepared intellectually and as formal members of the clergy and the Catholic hierarchy, with prestige, have made such clear and serious errors? Why does a priest from a very humble, innocent background, trying to do his job, acting to do so with such candor and good intentions, and generally reflecting the Marian prophetic consensus that wants to prevent us from falling into the abyss has been so fiercely attacked?
In trying to answer these questions, it is helpful to remember that the visionaries of the Virgin Mary in recent times, for example from La Salette, Lourdes and Fatima, are mostly children, or lay people without great intellectual or religious preparation, all of humble origin. They are often judged very negatively by religious intellectuals, communicators or church officials. In this case they also attack a priest, theologian, Superior of an official order of the church, licensed in Psychology and Doctor of Theology, Fr. Michel Rodrigue. As he is also considered small and contemptible in the judgment against him despite his qualification and his indications of a true prophet and saint, what Jesus said applies here for all such visionaries (Matthew 11: 25) :
"I bless you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to little ones."
The church, given so much experience accumulated in two thousand years and due to the constant teaching of our Savior through his Word and his communication with us through prayer, should be aware of what Jesus said in the Gospel of Matthew. That is why the answer to our questions about why this has happened must be found in the fact that it is very likely that the Virgin Mary has chosen these visionaries, all with a common characteristic, that of the spirit of children, to remind the authorities and experts that teaching and avoid choosing the side of Satan in this internal division of the church and in each one of us. In civil society, God has chosen the side of the poor, underprivileged, discriminated against, canceled and unfairly treated in the same way and they are precisely the ones who are being attacked as well, this time by the Deep State, as we have said.
To complement our argument, it is worth noting in a special way that in these cases of Marian revelations, the seers were not “perfect” or saints. Fr. Michel probably also has imperfections. For their part, in the case of the Garabandal visionaries, it reached the point where they were stealing apples when Saint Michael the Archangel appeared to them and then the Virgin Mary. In addition to the theme of the second message against the corrupt clergy that was later given (that priests, bishops and cardinals would go down the path of perdition and would lead many faithful there), perhaps this is why the bishops involved distrusted these apparitions so much, since they had a mental pattern very different from the one commented on in the aforementioned prayer of thanksgiving from Jesus to the Father. Perhaps they were reluctant to spread the false idea that the Virgin rewarded the theft of apples with her apparitions to the alleged female "thieves". But it is very possible, even, that God was pointing out with the choice of this type of prophets that each person needs an illumination of conscience, a change of life, as in the case of the girls of Garabandal and that it is necessary to avoid judging people as much as possible, and also keep in mind, in addition to what was said about children and the innocent, that Jesus came to heal the sick and needy, not the healthy. Therefore, in apocalyptic times, that illumination for each person is precisely the objective of The Warning for us, a general spiritual healing of humans, children and adults, all sick or needy to some degree.
In the event that this has been the criterion of choice of the Virgin Mary for the seers, it is clear that it is not correct to disqualify God's way of acting with us, keeping us with our patterns of narrow-minded judgment. I am sure that the Virgin Mary wanted to show us with this that even those of us who have a narrow mind, far from the Will of God, need the Warning. To enlighten our conscience, including our capacity for discernment. And that's why we're in this.
The Dragon and his helper in the church: the Beast of the Earth
In conclusion, in our case, given the intellectual and formal qualification, the ecclesial authority and the good intentions of all the accusers, the hand of Satan is clearly evident throughout the process, who was not successful in his attacks against the person Fr. Michel when he was young and now he messes with his prestige. The devil has plenty of reasons for this attack, as we have clearly seen, because this apostle is doing him a lot of damage. This type of satanic intervention comes from when the Virgin Mary started warning her through attackable people, such as children, lay people and a priest whose statements and actions are totally out of the ordinary. We must, therefore, put ourselves on the right side and detect once and for all the satanic presence against us, both externally and internally, to act accordingly, as I propose here.
Thus, finding no other explanation for what happened, with abundant and overwhelming evidence of inexplicable error by the most permissive standards, which do not take into account those of Jesus and the Catholic catechism, I suggest considering my alternative hypothesis that both Fr. Javier, like Dr. Miravalle and Bishops Lemay and Mourgon have been used by the Evil One to bend them to the evil side of the church, the Beast of the Earth. Of course they may be right that some of Fr. Michel's prophecies may not come true. But for that we must wait for time to tell. Meanwhile, what we do know with clarity at this moment is that there is a serious problem with the accusers due to their actions and their arguments in this case, which generate division in the church and have no true foundation but false, which clearly comes from the evil one with his snares. The good thing is that this is helping us to defeat Satan here, since the beginning of the first condition of an exorcism would have been carried out successfully, at least at a reasoning level, because, as we said, it is a requirement, in these cases of suspicion, detect that the demon is really present. It is obvious in this case that it is not a matter of ignorance, or psychological problems, or bad intentions, since all the accusers are clearly good, sane, enlightened and reputable in a good way.
It is good to point out that I am not claiming that those involved in the attack are possessed by the evil one and his demons. Implicitly, I am stating that the devil uses a group of people for his purposes without possessing them individually, but rather, in some way, possessing the very process in which each one of them is used for the evil purpose. The exorcism, if carried out, would be to remove the demon from that coordination, implicit or explicit. Since I don't know about exorcisms, I don't know if there is a figure for this type of case. But it is clear to me that it is a possession, just as the devil possesses objects, people and institutions, for it is also about the use of what is possessed for the evil purpose, as in those other cases. Perhaps the exorcism requires convincing each of the participants to stop doing the activity that allows the demon to do his thing. Perhaps this task undertaken in this article can help in that regard.
The other reason to identify the presence of the evil one in the church, in addition to the fact that the errors are inexplicable, is that Satan hates us, on the one hand, and is not a fool, on the other, and is taking advantage of the fact that the division has taken effect in his favor to intensify his work to put on his side in this apocalyptic war a part of the church divided by him. In fact, it is about a diabolical possession of the Beast from the Sea, one of the sides in the division of the church, using apocalyptic language. Against these attacks we must act as soldiers on the side of the correct contender, both within the church and in the face of all humanity, uniting us in a single common front. That is why I alert the attackers of Fr. Michel in this case and all the faithful and citizens of the world so that we can correct course.
The exorcism must be global, carried out by Jesus himself
As we said, many prophets of the last times, at least since La Salette, also predict that great division verified here, both in the church at its highest levels, and in society in general, to the point of predicting both great wars when exacerbating respective contradictions in society, such as great apostasies and schisms in the church, not only in the Catholic, but in all the Christian churches (the latter is predicted by Fr. Michel). So we have the prophecies on one side and the verification of them on the other. Now we have to act to put ourselves on the right side of the conflict, which is more than all spiritual, although it has its political-economic-social manifestations, on the one hand, and religious, on the other.
Although each of us can, and should, do something, the required action is, of course, a major exorcism in this case. Nothing less, since this is serious, on the one hand, and huge, on the other. It is clear that the church is not going to perform any exorcism in the case analyzed by me. The reason is that, even if my diagnosis were true, they would have to act everywhere, because this is happening everywhere, as the prophets have been foreseeing mainly through locutions of the Virgin Mary. As we said in the introduction, the case against Fr. Michel is just one representative example of the many conflicts that exist between priests, bishops and even cardinals, and it was necessary to analyze it carefully precisely because of that.
In fact, all this shows that the prophecies of a direct intervention of God make all the sense in the world as something not only necessary but essential. In my article on conspiracy and fraud in the United States, I show that the problem is worldwide, not just in the church, and is unstoppable by human forces, since it is a sociopolitical "Black Hole" that implies that if you approach much to it, it progressively absorbs you in such a way that you cannot get out of it endogenously, by internal forces, but only by an exogenous shock, of forces external to the system, sufficiently large. Note that we are talking about something exogenous to the world as a whole. Thus, as what is required are not specific personal exorcisms as in the time of Jesus on earth, but rather a generalized exorcism, already on a worldwide level, the only one who can perform it is Jesus himself, Christ the Lord, the head of His church, his Mystical Body. That is precisely what divine intervention consists of in the Warning, the Reprieve, the Miracle, the Chastisement and the Refuges, the Three Days of Darkness, and the Era of Peace. That is why it is about the apocalyptic conflict with the two described contenders.
According to my prediction as a sociopolitical analyst and taking into account the prophecies in this regard, this same year 2022 can begin that process with The Warning. But we don't know the date. It can also be next year, or during 2024, or even later. But we must be sure of one thing: we must be prepared, like prudent maidens. And we must alert the maximum number of people possible to do the same, as the Virgin Mary wants, both in the church and religions in general, as well as in all of humanity. I will talk about approximate dates (not of the Second Coming and the Final Judgment, because nobody knows anything about those, except the Heavenly Father) in a future article.
Finally, I apologize in advance to God and to all of you, in particular to those involved, both Fr. Javier, Dr. Miravalle, Monsignors Lemay and Mourgon, as well as Fr. Michel, for the mistakes I have made here at not adequately discerning in relation to the causes dealt with, above all because I really am ignorant in Theology and in exorcism issues and I have dared to give my opinions as a layman and to give advice and make analyzes and predictions. I do not want to fall into the hands of the evil one either, and I entrust myself to God, our Mother Mary, and the church, to whose opinion I submit in all this. The task now is practical to finish the exorcism, necessary for everyone, including myself: I know that, according to the scientific method used, I cannot be completely sure that everything said by me is true. But, above all, I know that I cannot be completely sure of what I have said if I do not have an enlightened conscience. I appreciate in advance that any of the readers, or those involved, point out the faults they detect, to learn while the direct help of Jesus comes, which I hope will be soon. Maranatha!
Appendix About Garabandal
I want to address here the issue of some detractors of the Garabandal revelations who say that there are three things that show that the apparitions were not legitimate. One, that Padre Pio was going to witness the Miracle before he died. The other, that the body of Father Luis Andreu would be incorrupt during the Miracle when it was unearthed. The third, that Joey Lomangino was supposed to regain his sight during the event. Father Pio died before the Miracle. Father Andreu was unearthed and he was not incorrupt. Lomangino died in 2014, without regaining his sight. There is a whole controversy about this. But I keep my faith, with the proper interpretation of these three events.
In the first case, eyewitnesses to the death of Fr. Pío called Conchita to inform them that he had told them that he had seen the Miracle before he died (by the way, Fr. Abreu also saw it before he died, that same day). In relation to the second case, the Virgin said that on the day of the Miracle the body would appear incorrupt. Not that it wouldn't get corrupted earlier. If we are talking about miracles, and more so if they are great as in this case, it is to be expected that this will happen. In the third case, it should be noted that Joey, as everyone affectionately knew him, died on June 18, 2014. The same day that not only the first apparition of the Virgin occurred in Garabandal, in 1961. But the exact same day that She gave the last apparition and message, in 1965. Again, speaking of miracles, and of this magnitude, it would not be inexplicable that this is a sign for us believers. And that certainly on the day of the Miracle it happens that Joey appears with healthy eyes.
God gives us tests of faith and this is one of them, I have no doubt, although everyone has their free will in this matter. In my case, I am totally convinced that this is a legitimate and supernatural revelation of our Blessed Mother, the Immaculate Virgin Mary, Queen and Lady of all creation, helped on that journey by the Archangel Saint Michael. She appeared in her invocation of the Virgin of Mount Carmel not by chance, moreover: She is in charge of the Shelters in a special way, according to other seers.
My criterion of discernment in this case is not only the evidence of supernaturality from so many witnesses, including scientists: the levitation, the mystical walks back and forth without seeing the very bumpy road, but looking up in mystical rapture (and racing of speed, at a pace that not even the young people of the town could keep up with), the exact delivery of medals, rings, rosaries, to their owners, that the girls could not be lifted or distracted or hurt during the visions. But of the messages and the fruits. Nothing that contradicts the doctrine of the church or its authority. Abundant fruits of conversions (including not only lukewarm Catholics and even priests, but also Protestants, Jews, etc.), miraculous healings, etc. By their fruits you will know them. The devil can perform false miracles (although not of this caliber and perfection), but you will know them by their fruits, as I said.
Each of the three cases of apparent prophecy failure has a perfect explanation. But it is supernatural, as we saw. And for this, the eye of faith and rigorous judgment criteria are needed: presumption of innocence and including the criteria of Jesus and those of the Catholic catechism, which by the way were not used, from what I have seen on the networks, in particular the quoted video about the "Unstoppable Waterfall" of blessings of Garabandal, by the two commissions that were made to investigate the case. That's why it's a test for us, and I accept it. Let's see if the other faithful, in particular the dubious priests, bishops and cardinals, have arguments against that. Finally, the Miracle, which is the most problematic prophecy to believe for people without faith in it, makes perfect sense in the puzzle of the prophetic consensus: it is natural that there is a last effort of mercy on the part of God, as a logical conclusion of the Illumination of Conscience (Warning) and the Reprieve, before undertaking the "Chastisement".