*QUICK HITS* Two Falsely Accused Priests Fight Back and Win!

Rev. William Nolan : Rev. William Graham

Vindicated! Rev. William Nolan of the Diocese of Madison (WI) (left)
and Rev. William Graham of the Diocese of Duluth (MN) (right)

We are happy to report two new developments in cases of falsely accused priests:

1. A jury in Wisconsin swiftly acquitted Rev. William Nolan after a 26-year-old accuser made the astonishing claim that Nolan had abused him well over a 100 times as recently as a decade ago.

"I'm a Catholic priest. I'm supposed to forgive. I think I can do that, but I will never forget the way [the accuser] has ruined my life," Nolan told local news media.

To say the least, there was a multitude of glaring inconsistencies in the accuser's crazy story, including that the accuser had purportedly seen Nolan naked over 100 times but had failed to mention the large scars over Nolan's chest and legs from heart surgery. The accuser had obviously not been abused.

2. Follow-up: We are pleased to report that a Minnesota appeals court recently upheld a $13,500 jury award to Rev. William C. Graham after the jury found that an accuser had falsely accused him.

As we reported last year, the accuser was represented by the notorious law firm of Jeff Anderson, and Anderson's sleazy lawyer, Mike Finnegan, lied to the media that there was somehow a "split verdict" in the jury's decision.

But a woman on the jury wrote a letter blasting Finnegan's characterization of the verdict and added that there was "no proof" that any abuse occurred. Good for her.

Hopefully, this is the beginning of a new trend. When folks lie to courts claiming they were abused by priests, the priests should countersue, naming names. Justice demands it.

Yet the question remains: In an age where dioceses far too often put accused priests out to pasture never to be seen again, will bishops do the right thing and immediately restore these two men to full communion with their priesthoods? So far, we don't know. Stay tuned.

Comments

  1. Oimou says:

    They should sue sue sue anyone who falsely acccuses them.  Meet fire with fire.  What do they have to lose.  Their reputtation is shot already.  

  2. Dan says:

    Has any of you given thought to the fact that the very people you're accusing of being liars and falsely accusing your clergy are fellow catholics. If they grew up believing in the lies of catholicism, heard the slew of stories of clergy molesting children, lying and keeping secrets and shuffling guilty priests or bishops to other unknowing churches, wouldn't it follow that they might become as big a liars as they witnessed from their leaders? After all, "A bad tree produces bad fruit and a good tree produces good fruit." Also, "The nuts don't fall far from the tree." Food for thought?

    • Frank says:

      Dan, everyone lies from time to time even Protestants and atheists.  But most dont liie about sex abuse and committ perjury.

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “Has any of you given thought to the fact that the very people you're accusing of being liars and falsely accusing your clergy are fellow catholics” = The same way Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Apostles for money. Catholics are not perfect, and some of us fall short of their duties more than others. Sometimes that includes our clergy, but not in this case.

      “…wouldn't it follow that they might become as big a liars as they witnessed from their leaders?” = not at all; the overwhelming majority of Catholics, at every level, are good and decent people, interested in promoting Jesus’ kingdom on Earth. It is sad that some have decided to jump on the blame wagon at the prospective of getting some money for nothing, not realizing the damage they are causing to the actual victims and the falsely accused priests. But, alas, they would be perfect candidates to join your church.

      You are correct in one thing: a tree is recognized by its fruits. Yours, as demonstrated by your posts, are rotten. Apparently, it’s not only your signature that has gotten sloppier with the years.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

  3. peoples clown says:

    Dan, more food for thought : strange fruit hanging from the greedy tree! These fruits are like invasive weeds, that takeover whenever they can! All for money! They ruin innocent lives! As far as nuts falling from trees, publions Napolean hat thread was never resolved!

    PAX brother Dan!

  4. peoples clown says:

    Jim, looks like the bolsheviki liars lost big time on this one!! However, their constricted media hasn't really reported this anywhere!! That's the commies for you! They trumpet lies, while burying the truth!

    PAX!

  5. Julie says:

    Does anyone know what happened to Publion? I loved his comments. He is obviously a very intelligent, well educated professional, and he brought some gentility and thoughtfulness to the otherwise pervasive practice on here of wrestling with pigs.

    • peoples clown says:

      Julie – yes, I miss him too. Always erudite and looking at the gist of others comments! Maybe someday he'll be back, to inspire us all!

    • peoples clown says:

      No one could wrestle pigs like publion, no one!

    • Dan says:

      Why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Matthew 7:3

      Why do you notice the speck in your opponent's eye, but do not consider the plank in your Church's eye?

      Publyin' was a good catholic. Deceiver, denier and defender of evil. Let's not forget Accuser and mocker.

      For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 1 Cor 1:19

      Julie, What will it take for you to listen and understand the Lord's Word?

    • Dan says:

      I'm glad to see you catholics so impressed with those versed in this world's knowledge*, while so lacking in the Lord's Spiritual knowledge. Keep flattering each others ignorance.

      *1 Cor 1:19

    • LLC says:

      Julie,

      “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town”. Publion was perhaps frustrated by the ineffectiveness of conversing with individuals like Dan or JR, and decided to use his inspiring talents for a more receiving and open audience. Regardless, his comments are still available in this blog, so in a way he’s still fighting the good fight. Likewise, Dan’s hateful comments and incorrect Scriptures interpretations will be always there, in the open for everyone to see.

    • peoples clown says:

      Julie – I think publion was fighting the pervasive practices, when a line was crossed by some posters. Perhaps publion felt it was satanic, and didn't want to be involved anymore.

    • Dan says:

      One has to love how you deceiving catholics find the truth "hateful". And likewise, you probably believe that all your lies and deception somehow equates to some form of love? You clowns are absolutely unbelievable, in every way. I love how you birds of a feather flock together. Can't wait until the Lord clips those wings. 

      Isaiah 44:6-23 Idolatry  Baruch 6:9 "And taking gold, as if it were for a virgin that loveth to go gay, they make crowns for the heads of their gods."

      Jeremiah 44 – Israel's worship, burning incense to the "Queen of Heaven" – Their hardened hearts and stubborness wouldn't allow them to listen to the Lord's warning through His servants.

      Revelations 17:4 "The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication." 

      Catholics – Read Revelations chapter 17-18, describing the downfall and end to the riches of your pagan apostate Church. Don't allow heathen idolaters to deceive you into believing I don't know Scripture. Read it for yourselves and flee from their lies.

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “Can't wait until the Lord clips those wings” = in this case, you’ll wait for an eternity…

      Baruch 6 (also known as the Letter of Jeremiah) is an interesting book, as it’s not considered canonical by Protestants and Evangelicals. It is a continuous argument against idols and idolatry and consists of ten proofs that since idols are human creations, they can do nothing for themselves or anyone else. In a way, Dan is making a very good case against his own argument. By comparing Baruch’s maiden to Mary, he ignores the fact that Mary a) is not an idol, and b) pleads for us with Jesus, as demonstrated in the account of the Wedding at Canaan.

      The prophet Jeremiah is condemning the adoration of Astarte, a Mesopotamian goddess. Specifically, he condemns offering sacrifice to the “queen of heaven”, which is against Scriptures and equally condemned by the Catholic Church. Instead, Scriptures and the Church tell us that we ought to honor and revere the great saints of God’s family who have gone before us. The Church does not teach, nor has ever taught, that we should adore Mary (CCC 2110-2114); Catholics offer sacrifice exclusively to God. As for the actual title, the fact that Jeremiah condemns worshipping something called “queen of heaven” does not automatically infer that there can’t be one. In other words, the existence of a “counterfeit” queen does not mean there can’t be an authentic one.

      Have a blessed day, brother Dan.

    • peoples clown says:

      LLC – thanks for filling the Publion vacuum here, and bringing sane Catholic thought to this blog! – PC

    • LLC says:

      PC,

      thank you very much for the kind words. As for filling the void left by Publion, ubi deficiunt equi, trottant aselli…

    • Dan says:

      If there is a possibility that there exists "sane Catholic thought", as the clown wishes to believe, then I have something for any catholics out there with an ounce of common sense to ponder this; 

      The Church denies wholeheartedly any worship or adoration of Mary "Queen of Heaven". The 1st Commandment – Make no graven images … do not bow to them or serve them; … visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children … but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments. All of this commandment is further broken down in Isaiah 44, Baruch 6 and Jeremiah 44 (Q of H).

      Are you still following me? So the Church promotes statue making. Sells statues of Mary by the tons. Popes bow down to Her. Sheep as children are taught to bow down to Her. Popes, bishops and priests burn incense to Her. Many kiss Her feet until the toes are worn off. You pray before Her statue. Pray repetitive heathen prayers (Rosary) to Her. Burn candles to Her statue. Crown Her statue with gold crowns, sometimes so huge it looks like Her head could fall off. Parade her statue on pedastals and kings litters. Followers claim to have visions of Her (against bible teachings – Col. 2:18 ESV). Have special gardens even outside your churches devoted to Her.

      Have you ever heard the saying – If it looks like a fish, swims like a fish and stinks like a fish, well then it probably is a fish. Catholic excusers and deniers can lie and twist the truth all they like. This is plain and simple IDOLATRY in the highest degree. Don't allow them to make a fool of you, while laughing behind your back.

    • Dan says:

      Correction – Wrong catholic idol. That was the bronze statue of Peter that they wore the toes off by rubbing and kissing his feet. 

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      "Are you still following me?" = no, we have passed you, long time ago, on our way to Jesus' heavenly house (Matthew 21:31).

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      Apparently "passed" by the Lord's teachings also a "long time ago" and dreamed up your own ways of making it to Heaven. Sorry, wrong way. "There's a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 14:12

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      Correct; "apparently", and only to your personal interpretation of Scriptures. In reality the Catholic Church is still the only true one founded by Jesus, unlike yours, founded by men, and therefore destined to fail.

      Since you like paraphrasing Scriptures: "There's a way that seemeth right unto Dan, but the end thereof are the ways of death."

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      LLC, I would bet that you'd deny that these quotes perfectly describe you and your Church -

      "See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human traditions and the spiritual forces of the world, rather than on Christ." Col 2:8

      "Blackest darkness is reserved for them. For they mouth empty, boastful words, and by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. They promise them freedom while they are slaves to depravity ……." 2 Peter 2:17-19

       

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “I would bet…” = for once, you are correct (even a broken clock is right twice a day):

      In Colossians 2:8 we can see a reference to the scriptural corruption derived from the so-called reformation (a man-made tradition), from which your church also spawns.

      2 Peter 2:17-19 foretold how some modern Protestant, Evangelical and non-denominational churches (including yours, perhaps), have embraced the dark message of moral decadence in the name of non-judgmental forgiveness and acceptance.

      Incidentally, I don’t think betting and gambling are Scripturally sanctioned, but, alas, it’s the least of your problems.

      Now, let’s go back to the essence of this post. According to your anecdotical narrative, you claim to have been on the receiving end of false accusations. Wouldn’t you then agree that justice should be equally applied to perpetrators, when proven guilty, and accusers, when proven fraudulent?

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      I find it hard to understand how Church members from a religion steeped in "scriptural corruption" and the ultimate in "moral" decay, can accuse everyone else of what they are so guilty of. LLC, I BELONG TO NO CHURCH. Why do you find that so hard to comprehend?

      "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Matthew 18:20

      Tell me what church organization did the Apostles and Christ's disciples belong to? None! Go ahead. Convince me how they were catholics so I could get a good laugh! Never called themselves popes, catholics, jesuits, monks, let alone marianites. Wake up lost sheep.

      P.S. I don't gamble, but sure know many catholics who do.

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      You seem to “find hard to understand” many things… but nothing new here.

      “…religion steeped in "scriptural corruption" and the ultimate in "moral" decay, can accuse everyone else of what they are so guilty of” = correct; and yet, you and your church, with its man-made traditions and un-biblical theology, keep accusing others of your own sins.

      “I BELONG TO NO CHURCH” = factually incorrect. Church: place of assembly for Christian worship (from old English “cirice, circe”). Therefore, if, as you are claiming, “two or three are gathered together”, you have a church. Not too difficult to comprehend, n’est-ce pas?

      “Tell me what church organization did the Apostles and Christ's disciples belong to?” = easy, the Catholic Church, founded by Jesus and entrusted to Peter and his successors (Mt. 16:18; Lk. 22:32; Jn. 21:17). Incidentally, in this blog you quoted the Letter of Jeremiah, which is a book only the Catholic Church considers canonical.

      “Convince me how they were catholics so I could get a good laugh!” = are Jesus’ teachings universal? Yes, they are, therefore they are catholic (all-inclusive) in nature.

      As for the actual terms not being in Scriptures, nor is the word “Trinity”. Go ahead, look it up. The term “catholic” was introduced well before it.

      “I don't gamble…” = actually, every day you are not Catholic is another day you are gambling your eternal salvation.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      LLC, You think if you throw enough mud at the wall, something might stick? Good try, Accuser. 

      My church and "its man-made traditions"? You're the one with the fake Church based on traditions. We "keep accusing others of [our] own sins"? And what proof do you have of that ignorant false accusation"?

      By your definition of "Church: place of assembly for Christian worship", we have no specific place, so it must be to difficult for you to comprehend.

      I'm laughing that you think your Church of pedophile creeps that pervert God's Word are anything close to Christian. If your Church of perverts accepts the Letter of Jeremiah as canonical, then why do they go against it instead of following it. We accept the Apocrypha and Deuterocanonical books as canonical, so I guess you're not the only ones. Only difference is we live by most of it's wisdom, rather than go against it.

      We also don't believe in the "Trinity". Why? Because it is not in the Bible, just like all your catholic words are not Biblical. We believe in God the Father, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit as the power of God. Came down as fire or a dove, and never a third person.

      I don't gamble with my "eternal salvation", so I would never want to join your heathen church of idolaters. No thanks.   servant of the One and Only True God and His Son

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “mud at the wall” = I’ll leave the mud to you, an expert in the matter, as PC has reminded us earlier in this blog.

      “My church and "its man-made traditions"? = correct; glad you see it, too.

      “We "keep accusing others of [our] own sins"? = correct; as Julie has noted, “accusation is a form of confession”

      “And what proof do you have…” = your own words; according to your narrative, you’ve been arrested because of some alleged inappropriate contacts with schoolchildren. You claim innocence, but without concrete proof, you word is just as good as your accusers’.

      “we have no specific place, so it must be to difficult for you to comprehend” = non sequitur, meaning the second part doesn’t follow the premises. Regardless, if you get together with others to worship, you have, by definition, a church.

      “We accept the Apocrypha and Deuterocanonical books as canonical” = can you please define what do you mean by Apocrypha? And do you accept all of them? Furthermore, if you accept the Deuterocanonical books, do you believe in Purgatory and the prayers for the dead, according to II Maccabees, 12:40-46?

      “Only difference is we live by most of it's wisdom, rather than go against it” = most of its wisdom? Which part? Who decides? You?

      “We also don't believe in the "Trinity" = now, this is an interesting development. Therefore, you are somehow of a Oneness. I think I’ve read about it from another delusional fellow, Raggio, I believe. So, it would be interesting to hear your interpretation of Matthew 28:19.

      “servant of the One and Only True God and His Son” = therefore, do you serve two gods?

      Now, I have asked you a direct question about the topic of this post. Do you mind answering it?

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      In response to "alledged inappropriate contacts with schoolchildren", yes, I have damn good proof. My catholic sister who doubted my innocence called the Msgr. the next day and this was his statement. "Dan never said anything inappropriate to the children." The four catholic lying cowardly thugs who beat me from behind were still claiming I said dirty things two weeks later. Is that good enough for you stupid catholics to stop rehashing this false accusation? Do you wish to call the Msgr. a liar?

      Don't believe in Purgatory. Not in the Bible. Believe in praying for the dead, but never that the dead can pray or help me. They are dead and waiting for Judgment Day. I do pray much to the living Christ. Never pray in public to be seen by others. Because that's Biblical. And surely never pray to statues of dead people. That;s just plain ignorance.

      Matthew 28:19 – God's magnificent power has a name, doesn't mean it's a person. Dogs and cats have names, does that make them people?

      Serve one God. Believe the two are one. Don't even try your little trickery.

      There, are you happy now? I answered to all your questions.

       

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “I have damn good proof” = actually, no, you don’t. You have your sister’s word, which, by your own description, is a Catholic, therefore untrustworthy.

      “…this was his statement. "Dan never said anything inappropriate to the children” = very interesting. A Monsignor must be trusted when proclaiming your innocence, but not when proclaiming the same about an accused priest.

      “Do you wish to call the Msgr. a liar?” = technically, Monsignor (by the way, who is this Monsignor?) did not prove your innocence; he simply took your sister’s word as true.

      Incidentally, Dan, I do believe in your innocence. I am simply showing how hypocritical your reasoning is. Catholics are not to be trusted except when their words save your bacon.

      “Don't believe in Purgatory” = while the word “Purgatory” is not in the Bible, the concept is. II Maccabees 12:40-46 shows how we can pray for the dead and offer sacrifices to remediate some of their sins, even after they have passed.

      “but never that the dead can pray or help me” = interesting, because the parable of the rich man and Lazarus says the contrary. The fact that Abraham refuses to answer the prayer does not prove that he shouldn’t have been prayed in the first place. The reason why the rich man’s prayer is ineffective is because of where the rich man is and because of the stubbornness of his relatives, not because he cannot pray for them.

      “Never pray in public to be seen by others” = interesting; Jesus sometimes did, and so did the Apostles and disciples.

      “And surely never pray to statues of dead people” = correct; nor do Catholics. We pray to the living Saints.

      “God's magnificent power has a name, doesn't mean it's a person” = except that John 1:1 contradicts your interpretation. And your “Serve one God. Believe the two are one” explains nothing.

      “I answered to all your questions” = not even close…

      And yes, I am always happy.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      I prefer not to "Cast my pearls before swine."

    • Dan says:

      Get this straight. The Msgr. didn't save my bacon. I spent 4 days in a psyche ward based on the false accusations of four cowardly lying catholic thugs. My "untrustworthy", as you said it, catholic sister never told me what transpired that next day. Another sister told me about her conversation with the Msgr. two weeks later. It would be nice if you didn't claim that you believe in my innocence after you've tried your damnest to dispute my explanation. Talk about being a damn hypocrite.

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “I prefer not to "Cast my pearls before swine” = except that you have no pearls to cast, so it’s a non-issue.

      “Get this straight” = it is kind of difficult, when you keep ranting incoherently.

      “The Msgr. didn't save my bacon” = never said he did. Your sister (or one of them) vouched for your innocence.

      “I spent 4 days in a psyche ward…” = and there are priests, falsely accused, who have spent years in jail because they do not want to agree to a plea bargain; so, what’s your point?

      The fact that your sister never told you she had talked to Monsignor (again, a name would be nice), is irrelevant.

      “It would be nice if you didn't claim that you believe in my innocence after you've tried your damnest to dispute my explanation” = never said I claim anything; I do believe in your innocence, which is a huge difference. As for your explanation, well, that didn’t actually explain anything.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      LLC,

      No one would expect "swine" to understand or recognize the pearls and wisdom of the Lord. That's why they are considered swine.

      Seeing that you have a serious problem with reading comprehension, let me repeat this slowly for you with shorter sentences.. The Msgr. "vouched for my innocence". My sister "doubted my innocence". If the Msgr. was a decent person, he would have notified the authorities that I was wrongly accused and I could have been released from the hospital. His name is irrelevant, just like you are.

      As far as the priests you claim are falsely accused, maybe they're just reaping what the Church sows, for all the evil lying accusations and horrible harm they've caused others, especially the rape of innocent children. Like mother angelica says, "They can all offer their suffering up to the Lord", or whatever idols their worshiping at that moment. servant

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “No one would expect "swine" to understand or recognize the pearls and wisdom of the Lord” = actually, I disagree. There’s still hope, even for you.

      Regarding your anecdotical story, my apologies; I misinterpreted your original post, where you said, “My catholic sister who doubted my innocence called the Msgr. the next day and this was his statement. "Dan never said anything inappropriate to the children”. I read it that your catholic sister had changed her mind regarding the accusation against you, had called the Monsignor and convinced him of your innocence.

      “If the Msgr. was a decent person, he would have notified the authorities that I was wrongly accused and I could have been released from the hospital” = you said that the Monsignor released a statement, correct? And how do we know he didn’t contact the authorities? Regardless, the authorities had to perform their own investigation. Furthermore, his name is important. There is still no objective proof that anything like this has ever happened, aside of your own recollection.

      No matter. The point remains, that you are treating your own story the opposite of how you expect accused (not even guilty) priests to be treated, and that, Dan, is hypocrisy.

      In one thing you are correct. The unjustly incarcerated priests are offering their suffering for His Church, as Jesus instructed all of us to do.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      As a Christian I am unable to answer to your ignorance in the form I would prefer, if you're capable of comprehending what that means.  servant of Christ

  6. Julie says:

    Dan Corner, So, we are supposed to read the crap you post on here and believe that you are a Christian man? Sorry, brother. 

    • Dan says:

      Half of the crap, pertaining to your Church, that you're referring to are Biblical quotes from God's Word. Would you also like to question whether Paul, Peter or John were really "Christian"? Wouldn't surprise me coming from egotistical catholic pagan heathens. brother Dan Corner

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      I think Julie is referring to the half of the crap that's not Biblical, and it's a product of your own mind, mouth and keyboard.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

    • Dan says:

      I'm glad to have my own mouth, rather than you speaking for me, as you feel you must speak and answer for all your catholic cohorts. You'd make a good ventriloquist, though only dummies would want to listen to your nonsense and ignorance.

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      it's your own, for sure, but crap remains.

      Regarding my speaking for other fellow Catholics, I'd be honored, but they do not need it. Julie and PC and the others in this blog have enough actual Biblical knowledge to run circles around you.

      Have a blessed day, brother dummy.

    • Dan says:

      Have no comment to ridiculously stupid statements from any dummies, but I thought you're blessing was so sincere? I'd be pretty dumb if I was to believe a lying catholic!

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      my blessings are sincere, the same way I sincerely believe you are a dummy.

      Have a blessed day, brother.

  7. Julie says:

    I thought LLC nailed it, and said it very well. Once again, "brother Dan," you sound like a truly true and not at all fake Christian. 

  8. peoples clown says:

    Brother Dan corner – so I can refer you as that now, as you have referee yourself as that? I think that JR uses you as a mouthpiece, now and then. Yes, you may have a "spat" now and then, but I think you 2 are solid. Julie and LLC are right in commenting about your "crap", and its a long history of it on this blog. I cringe every time you talk about Mary but I always pray for you so that someday at mass, during the handshake of peace I turn around, and there you are!!! And I say to you: " peace be with you, brother Dan!" – PC

    • Dan says:

      Likewise, I "cringe" everytime I see catholics bow to Mary or pray their repetitive heathen prayers to their false goddess. I pray that someday catholics will awaken and turn away  from their idolatry, greed, sexual immorality and deceiving hypocrisy and I'll be there to shake their hand in Heaven.  servant of the Almighty

    • peoples clown says:

      Dan – sounds like pompous vacuity to me!  

      Pax bother Dan!

    • Dan says:

      I'm beginning to agree with Julie and LLC that "accusation is a form of confession". Only problem is that it defines you clowns and your false Church.

  9. Julie says:

    Dan Corner, I am sure Jesus loves it when you refer to His mother as a "false goddess." You sound like a truly true andnot at all fake Christian. 

    • Dan says:

      I have no problem with the humble Mary I recognize from the Worrd. I do have a problem with the idol your Church has made of her. Immaculate, sinless, ever-virgin, assumed into heaven lies.

      If you think Jesus has a problem with me calling your Queen of Heaven the "false goddess" you catholics have made of her, then just think how annoyed he is with your fake pope. The clown was impressed with the fertility goddess idol, our lady of the Amazon, and actually blessed the perverted image. Man, "People in glass houses ought to stop casting their worthless stones."  servant of the Truth

    • LLC says:

      Dan,

      “I have no problem with the humble Mary I recognize from the Word” = actually, brother Dan, Mary had all reason to boast; after all, she was hailed by the angel as “Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you”, and by her cousin as “Blessed are you among women”, and bearer of the Lord. And yet, all she said about herself was “I am the servant of the Lord”.

      You, on the other hand, can only brag self-assigned titles. You should learn a thing or two from her.

      Regarding our Lady of the Amazon, Dan, every culture has produced images of Mary and Jesus according to their native sensitivity. Given your moronic remarks in previous posts about other cultures clothing styles, I do not expect you to understand, but I can see that you would’ve made a perfect secular Inquisitor.

      Have a blessed day, brother iconoclast.

Leave a Reply to peoples clown Cancel reply

*