Phoenix Goddess Temple

Phoenix Goddess Temple

PHOENIX GODDESS TEMPLE TIMELINE

1961:  Tracy Elise was born.

1995:  Elise divorced her husband, left her family, and moved to Seattle to pursue her spiritual interests.

2000:  Elise began to develop the spiritual path that subsequently led to the establishment of the Phoenix Goddess Temple.

2002-2005 (June 21):  Elise developed relationships with and credentials in a series of spiritually oriented groups.

2005:  Elise established the Sedona Temple School of International Arts in 2005.

2008:  Elise founded the Phoenix Goddess Temple in a residence in Scottsdale, Arizona.

2011:  The Phoenix Goddess Temple received a conditional use permit from the Sedona city officials.

2011:  Local police in Phoenix raided the temple based on allegations that the church was a brothel. Numerous arrests of Temple affiliates were made; the Temple was shut down.

2015:  Elise received an honorary doctoral degree from the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality.

2016 (March): Elise was found guilty on a series of prostitution-related charges and sentenced to prison.

2019 (March):  Elise was released from prison and continued her efforts to protest and overturn her conviction.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

Tracy Elise [Image at right] founded the Phoenix Goddess Temple of Phoenix, Arizona in 2008. Fifty-year-old Elise, who serves as the church’s Mother Priestess, is a former housewife who previously resided with her devout Catholic husband and their three children in Fairbanks, Alaska. There Elise won Miss Harvest Queen at the State Fair and attended the local Pentecostal church, “where she says she spoke in tongues and served as precinct captain for Pat Robertson’s 1988 presidential bid” (Best 2010). Largely as a result of her intense spiritual discontent, Elise reports, she divorced her husband and left her family in 1995. She has identified a particular moment that impelled her to relinquish her conventional lifestyle: “‘I remember I was in my little tract home, folding laundry, watching this A&E documentary about Simone de Beauvoir, about all the lovers she had, and thinking, “I’m never going to have that kind of life, that kind of excitement,” she says’” (Best 2010). According to her brief biographical statement, she

…began her temple healing work on the High Holy Day Imbolc, Feb. 2, 2000, entering a covenant to serve the Celtic Goddess of Healing Brigid. In 2002 she was ordained Healer & Guide by Spiritual Healers & Earth Stewards. The Venusian Church offered a charter & ordination to her Light Body Temple in 2003. She led a group practice in Seattle as the School of One, and founded the Mystic Sisters Priestess Path in 2005, which trains and ordains women to embody the sacred feminine in Whole Body Healing Magnetic Touch (Elise n.d.)

Elise established the Sedona Temple School of International Arts in 2005 and then opened the Phoenix Goddess Temple in Scottscale and subsequently in Phoenix, a Neo Tantra, non-denominational and multi-faith “life force energy temple” created “to teach people about the sacred feminine aspect of the creator” (McMahon n.d.). In 2011, the Phoenix Goddess Temple received a conditional use permit from the Sedona city officials (“Sedona Use Permit Upheld” 2011). The organization had already received IRS  501c3 non-profit status. It appears that the Goddess Temple operated openly and with limited opposition for several years. However, in March 2011 the New Times carried a cover story describing the Phoenix Goddess Temple as “nothing more than a New Age brothel” (Stern 2016), A police investigation of the Temple was then launched that led to the arrest of Elise [Image at right] and other Temple staff members and a shutdown of the temple in September 2011

The case dragged on for about five years before a trial was actually conducted. In 2016, after a trial that lasted over forty days, Elise was convicted on nineteen counts of criminal conduct. Sentences for the various offenses were allowed to run concurrently, which meant that Elise was sentenced to four and a half years. Since she had already served 305 days of jail time, her additional prison sentence was three and a half years. She was also ordered to serve four years of probation following release from prison. Elise was released after serving her sentence in March 2019.

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

Elise identifies her religion as Tantra and states that the church offers lessons in “whole body healing,” available through a variety of class offerings and with the aid of various practitioners or touch healers. The Phoenix Goddess Temple website describes the temple’s mission in the following way: “Our temple is an open source for all who wish to better know the Great Mother and her unique gifts for healing body, mind and soul. We seek to help women, men and couples discover their own divine connection between soul, light body and sacred vessel…. Our teachings are body centric, emanating from the resonating vessel, which is your own Sacred Self” ( Phoenix Goddess Temple n.d.).

In the Temple’s November, 2008 “Mother Sez” newsletter, Elise enumerated the church’s core beliefs and objectives as follows:

“We help people recognize, sense, play with, direct and finally master their life force energy.”

“We work with many energy systems, the primary model being the Chakra Ladder of Light, which is recognized for over 5000 years by the Hindu, the Egyptians and Tibetan Buddhists.”

“We revere the human body as our gift from the Mother Goddess, which gives the soul all opportunity to play and learn on planet Earth.”

“We believe in the power of Now and in the power of authentic witness, one soul to another.”

“Orgasm is a Holy moment, when Heaven and Earth merge in the body as ‘ Paradise right now’, before, during and after orgasm we feel connected to God/Goddess and all of Creation.”

The Tantric emphasis of the feminine as well as the masculine aspect of God features prominently in Elise’s discourse. She notes that little is taught “about the feminine face of God” and avows that “we believe that sacred sexuality and wholesomeness in sexual energy emanates from the woman” (McMahon). She also maintains that the temple and its healing ceremonies empower women.

Elise emphasizes the centrality of Tantra to Phoenix Goddess Temple (Sitchin 2019):

Tantra practice is fully aware that the universe flows from 1 Source. The Divine One expresses through 2 types of energies as Yin, which magnetically attracts and receives and Yang, which actively sends forth creation power. Modern science and ancient mystery schools agree that duality/polarity is the foundational process through which all existence comes into form. In Magnetic Tantra, we bring these polarized energies into balance, within ourselves and in our relations with the outer world. This delivers the bliss of orgasmic connection to even the ‘ordinary’ events in our lives.

Magnetic Tantra is a kind of ‘instant bliss’ in which the chakra centers in your hands create immediate sensations of peace, unity and eternity.

In some cases, but infrequently, individual healers have claimed more extraordinary powers. One of the temple’s touch healers, Wayne Clayton, has laid claim to divine or miraculous powers: “He says one of his clients in Chicago lost a breast to cancer, and after several healing sessions with him, she grew her breast back. He says another woman in Chicago, this one suffering from cervical cancer and a subsequent hysterectomy, grew her female organs back through energy work” (D’Andrea 2011).

RITUALS/PRACTICES

The Temple describes its rituals as follows: “As a Neo Tantra Temple, we bring together many traditions which guide us into right and loving use of the life force within our bodies. As Priests & Priestesses, we conduct this heavenly light into the physical plane, likewise, we lift form into higher frequencies of heaven! This up-down pillar of light exchanges continuously between heaven and earth, body, soul and Source ( Phoenix Goddess Temple n.d.)

The temple’s central rituals consist of the various Tantra classes or healing ceremonies offered to “seekers.” These are organized into introductory, intermediate and advanced levels and involve instruction from or interaction with a practitioner. Female practitioners are referred to as “goddesses” [Image at right] and generally assume goddess identities such as Shakti, Isis and Aphrodite. Male practitioners are commonly called “touch healers.” According to the Temple website, the church healers “seek to help women, men and couples discover their own divine connection between soul, light body and sacred vessel” and “offer group classes and one-on-one teachings and training, play shops and internships,” all meant to “make use of the gifts of the Goddess” and allow seekers to, among other things, “feel the light of your own soul” and “feel the chakra wheels spinning your self into physical existence.”

The ten thousand square foot temple houses a reception area, a Transformation Chamber which seekers enter to remove their clothing prior to instruction from one of the temple’s goddesses or male practitioners, and healing chambers, which contain “high altars” and “altars of light.” These sessions typically feature a lengthy massage with oils, sacred herbs and crystals, to stimulate the chakras, and frequently culminate in sexual stimulation and orgasm.

The centrality of sexual stimulation to Temple therapy is evident on its website. For example, the website listed (prior to its being taken down) a number of specific Tantra-based therapies:

Tantric Temple Dance:
The dancer channels her movements based on the energy you need, so it’s very healing as well. Once she raises your energy, she works with you one-on-one using massage, breath & undulation techniques to move the heightened sexual energy through your entire body. You may feel tingling sensations, or waves of orgasmic energy flowing from your head to your toes.

Double Goddess Sessions:
Almost all of the sessions can be ‘doubled’. But we don’t recommend starting off with a Double Goddess session if you are a novice in the area of Tantra. These sessions can be quite intensive, possibly dangerous if you are not used to running high levels of Tantric energy.

The Art of Divine Touch:
Level Three will teach you how to give your woman the 3000 year old Tantric Sacred Spot Healing Massage, (G-spot), opening her up to her full orgasmic potential. You will also have an opportunity to review the Yoni Massage as well if you have taken that session.

The specific form of Tantra practiced at the Temple is Magnetic Tantra, which incorporates elements from a number of tantric and other spiritual traditions. Elise highlights features of Magnetic Tantra as follows (Elise 2019) :

Feel the light of your soul in your solar plexus

Discover your light body & your chakra energy centers

Play with the magnificent polarity between 2 beings

Learn to deliberately create closed conduits for the flow of life force between yourself and your lover

Discern how the electric polarity between men & women affects everything that happens in our relating to one another.

Tantra practice is fully aware that the universe comes from 1 Source.

The Divine One expresses through 2 types of energies: Yin, which magnetically attracts and receives and Yang, which actively sends forth power.

Magnetic Tantra goes beyond philosophy and delves into creating energy awareness by opening the 3rd eye.

Elise considers her calling to be of a holy nature and regards sex as intrinsically connected to spirituality. She conceives of these whole body healing sessions as beneficial to the spiritual and physical welfare of the temple’s seekers. She has repeatedly extolled the healing power of the temple’s ceremonies, especially the sacredness of the orgasm. Furthermore, “she herself seems to believe most fervently in what she calls ‘direct downloads from God,’ immediate communication from the divine that can take the form of signs, omens and physical sensations” (Best 2010). Elise understands herself to be receptive to such downloads.

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Elise serves as the Mother Priestess and Mystic Mother of the temple. She oversees the goddesses and touch healers, leads sessions and classes, and organizes events. [Image at right] Temple participants include guests (who seek information about the Temples activities), seekers (“who have a spiritual practice or have had in the past, and are now feeling led to find new sources of energy, direction and connection to the Higher Power”), initiates (“who have found genuine soul-food in our temple”), brothers and sisters (“who have decided to really support the Goddess Temples”), priests and priestesses (“who have a gift for channeling light into matter”), and healers and guides (who have “gifts to give as well as receive”) (Phoenix Goddess Temple n.d. “In Temple”).

The goddesses total about fourteen in number and “come from diverse backgrounds: They include a former accountant, paralegal, nurse, even a bank CEO, along with what Elise describes as at least three ‘runaway housewives’” (Best 2010). The goddesses typically work with male seekers, and the male touch healers provide instruction or healing for female seekers. In addition to the healing ceremonies, the church also holds a weekly Sunday brunch and worship service and offers Friday night sex education classes, Yoga Pain relief classes, Naked Life coaching and a monthly Healing Abuse/Trauma Circle. At the conclusion of the session, participants are instructed to leave a temple offering or donation. They are advised to “look for the lotus candle on an altar in your transformation chamber. Your love offering is an active way for you to help restore the balance of Yin / Yang energies here on planet earth as every Temple of the Mother provides much needed Yin to the Universal Web of Life” (Phoenix Goddess Temple n.d. “Offerings of Support”). The donation schedule stipulates amounts between two hundred and eight hundred dollars, depending on the number of participants and guides and the length of the sessions.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Phoenix Goddess Temple has encountered opposition from a variety of sources, including local residents, investigative journalists, therapists, and law enforcement agencies. Police visited the Phoenix Goddess Temple at its Scottsdale location in 2009 after residents complained. They charged the temple with city code violations, which resulted in the church’s relocation. Journalists have expressed skepticism about the Temple’s actual purpose. Journalist Jason Best interviewed Elise extensively for Phoenix Magazine and visited the temple in 2010. He wrote that while Elise asserts that she draws from the Indian philosophy of Tantra, “there is no single sacred text, no structured theology. In one conversation, Elise can toss off references to Buddhist philosophy, Biblical scripture and Celtic legend, throwing in a Taoist aphorism for good measure” (Best 2010). Another journalist dubbed it, “nothing more than a New Age brothel practicing jack psychology techniques” (D’Andrea 2011). The Temple seems to have anticipated some of this skepticism. For example, before engaging in services at the temple, seekers are required to sign a waiver stating, “‘I acknowledge I will not receive any type of sexual gratification in exchange for money during my session’” (D’Andrea 2011).

Professional therapists have expressed concern regarding the Goddess Temple’s healing techniques, especially the sessions for those who have suffered sexual abuse. The Phoenix New Times quoted licensed Arizona therapist Diane Genco: “If these non-traditional healers are not qualified or credentialed in understanding post-traumatic stress disorder and all the things that go with that — the ripple effects of trauma — it could be harmful” (D’Andrea 2011).

Certainly, law enforcement was the most consequential source of opposition that the Temple faced and the source that ultimately led to its dissolution. Law enforcement agencies consistently treated the Temple as a brothel masquerading as a church. In 2009, three of the Seattle Tantra temples that Elise had been affiliated with were raided by police. Elise’s former associate Rainbow Love was charged with promoting prostitution. Following a six-month investigation, police raided the Phoenix Goddess Temple in September 2011, “having obtained a search warrant after initiating several undercover deals and determining that the Temple Goddess employees had been trained to use evasive vocabulary,” including terms such as “seekers” and “sacred union” (Caron 2011). Maricopa county attorney Bill Montgomery stated that, “We’re not viewing this in any way as somehow protected by the first amendment. This is not religious expression. This is a criminal activity and those responsible thought they were being too clever by half by coming up with different terms” (Caron 2011).

Initially at least, the Temple did not seem to have great concern about potential legal liability. Elise established the group located in Arizona rather than neighboring New Mexico where it was potentially possible to legally practice activities that authorities in Arizona subsequently labeled prostitution, openly advertised the temple in local news media, granted an on-the-record interview with a journalist, presented money received as “donations” and participants as “seekers, required participants to sign a waiver, and rejected a pre-trial plea agreement to serve only three months of incarceration.

The Phoenix Goddess Temple also vigorously defended its legitimacy. The Temple goddesses did not deny the existence of the Temple’s sexual practices; they simply asserted that “at the core, what distinguishes their ‘practice’ from common sex work is the matter of their intention” (Best 2010). Elise argued for the holiness of the orgasm: “You have absolute peace, you do not fear death, and you have no experience of lack or separation. The point of religion is peace of mind, returning the physical body to what is eternal, so I have to ask, how is what we’re doing not religion?” (Best 2010). As for her personal legitimacy, Elise has responded that she is “under the jurisdiction of the most high” (D’Andrea 2011).

The Temple’s defense notwithstanding, ultimately eighteen people were arrested; charges of prostitution, pandering and conspiracy were levied against over thirty members of the temple. Elise then was incarcerated in Maricopa County, with bail bond set at $1,000,000. She rejected an early plea offer from the prosecutor of three months in prison. Instead, she refused to admit that she was guilty of any crimes and chose instead to assert a First Amendment right to freedom to practice her religion. All of the other defendants agreed to plead guilty to reduced charges, leaving her as the sole defendant at trial.

When the trial began, however, Elise was not allowed to mount a religious liberty defense, which subsequently led to her decision to appeal the trial verdict. As a result, she presented a defense based on prejudice on the part of the prosecutor (who she depicted as holding extremely conservative Catholic views on legitimate sexual expression), a contention that the prosecution sought to prevent the teaching of Tantra, and the allegation that her conviction would lead to the eradication of goddess temples across the country.

Her defense also was unorthodox. She served as her own attorney. In preparation for her final argument to the jury, she set up a small alter on the defense table”with pine cones and goddess figurines, then told the court that she was “letting the holy spirit guide me today through this trial” (Brinkman 2016). (Image at right) Finally, she sang the Star Spangled Banner just prior to being sentenced (Walsh 2016).

At the conclusion of the forty-eight day trial, the jury found Elise guilty of twenty-two counts of prostitution, illegal control of an enterprise, money laundering, conspiracy, and related charges. County Superior Court Judge Sherry Stephens sentenced Elise to four and one half years in prison at ADC Perryville women’s prison, with sentences to run concurrently (Stern 2016). With credit for 305 days in jail, Elise ultimately served three and one half years in prison and was ordered to serve an additional four years of probation (Stern 2016).

At the end of the day, the case against the Temple turned on several issues: whether Elise was a “spiritual leader” or a “brothel madam,” whether the Temple “goddesses” were “priestesses” or “prostitutes,” whether “orgasm” was part of  path to a transcendent “spiritual/healing experience” or “sex for hire” masquerading as religion, whether the money that was exchanged between “goddesses” and their “seekers” was a “fee for sexual service” or a “donation” to the Temple and its spiritual “healing” and “therapy,” and whether the Phoenix Goddess Temple was a legitimate religious “temple” or a “brothel.”

While the state won the day at the initial trial, Tracy Elise and her allies continued their quest for exoneration. Upon her release from prison they pursued their goals online through postings on The 8th House Productions and Patreon.com that contain testimonials, legal documents, video of trial proceedings. These resources are being gathered in support of appellate court appeals based on constitutional rights and, according to Elise with the blessing of Justicia, the Goddess of Law (Duncan 2019).

‘To win in court, you must refuse a plea bargain, and I did. To win, you must endure running at the Superior Court level, and I did. Upholding constitutional protection for our religious freedom can only be accomplished through our current appellate process. To establish our healing Temple in all 50 states requires us to take this case all the way to the Supreme Court, and I stand ready to accomplish this.

IMAGES
Image #1: Tracy Elise.
Image #2: The 2011 arrest of Tracy Elise.
Image #3: The “goddesses” in Phoenix Goddess Temple.
Image #4: Phoenix Goddess Temple logo.
Image #5: Tracy Elise presenting her defense at trial.

REFERENCES

Best, Jason. 2010. “Oh, Goddess: Tracy Elise is Preaching Her Gospel of Transcendence Through Pleasure to the Valley, Which Raises One Big Question: Can Sex Be a Religion?” Phoenix Magazine. March 2010. Accessed from http://www.phoenixmag.com/lifestyle/valley-news/201003/oh–goddess/2/ on 21 October 2011.

Brinkman, Susan. 2016. “Priestess Blames Catholics for Goddess Temple Woes.” Women of Grace Blog, March 7. Accessed from https://www.womenofgrace.com/blog/?p=48051 on 15 May 2020.

Caron, Christina. 2011. “ Phoenix Goddess Temple Raided as Alleged Brothel.” ABC News. 9 September 2011. Accessed from http://abcnews.go.com/US/phoenix-goddess-temple- raided-alleged-brothel/story?id=14481945 on 21 October 2011.

D’Andrea, Niki. 2011. “ Phoenix Goddess Temple’s ‘Sacred Sexuality’ Is More Like New Age Prostitution.” Phoenix New Times. 17 February 2011. Accessed from http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2011-02-17/news/feature/4/ on 21 October 2011.

Duncan, Fiona Alison. 2019. “Phoenix Goddess Temple.” Mal Journal, January. Accessed from https://maljournal.com on 15 May 2020.

Elise, Tracy. 2019. “Tracy Elise & Her Covenant to Serve the Mother.” Patreon.com. Accessed from https://www.patreon.com/user?u=20488979 on 15 May 2020.

Greene, Nick. 2011. “Phoenix Temple Has Great Website, Allegedly is a Brothel.” Village Voice, September 10. Accessed from https://www.villagevoice.com/2011/09/10/phoenix-temple-has-great-website-allegedly-is-a-brothel-update/

McMahon, Pat. n.d. The Pat McMahon Show. Accessed from http://www.phoenixgoddesstemple.org/index.php/home/temple-in-the-news/603-mother-priestess-tracy-elise-wpat-mcmahaon-hard-questions on 21 October 2011.

Oklevueha Native American Church. 2016. “Sexual Healing or New Age Brothel? Sword And Scale. Accessed from https://www.swordandscale.com/sexual-healing-or-new-age-brothel/ on 15 May 2020.

Phoenix Goddess Temple. n.d. “In Temple.” Accessed at http://www.phoenixgoddesstemple.org/index.php/in-temple on 28 October 2011.

Phoenix Goddess Temple. n.d. “Offerings of Support.” Accesses at http://www.phoenixgoddesstemple.org/index.php/in-temple/offerings-of-support on 28 October 2011.

Phoenix Goddess Temple. n.d. “You are Well-Come.” Accessed at http://www.phoenixgoddesstemple.org/ on 28 October 2011.

“Sedona Temple Use Permit Upheld: Sex Therapy to Remain in West Sedona. 2011. Sedona.biz, July 18. Accessed from https://www.sedona.biz/news-from-sedona/sedona-temple-use-permit-upheld/ on 15 May 2020.

Sitchin, Zecharia. 2019.”TANTRA* TEMPLES AS LEGAL CHURCHES?” Accessed from https://enkispeaks.com/tantra-temples-as-legal-churches/ on 15 May 2020.

Stern, Ray. 2016. “Phoenix Goddess Temple Priestess Tracy Elise Heads to Prison.” Phoenix New Times, May 20. Accessed from https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/phoenix-goddess-temple-priestess-tracy-elise-heads-to-prison-8306220 on 17 May 2020.

Walsh, Jim. 2016. “‘I Am a Priestess. I Am Not a Prostitute’: Sex Priestess Sentenced to Four Years.” Vice, May 20. Accessed from https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mgm8zp/i-am-a-priestess-i-am-not-a-prostitute-sex-priestess-sentenced-to-four-years on 15 May 2020.

Publication Date:
22 November 2011
Update:
20 May 2020

 

 

 

Share

Ramtha School of Enlightenment

Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment

Founder: JZ Knight

Date of Birth: 1946

Birth Place: New Mexico , USA

Year Founded: 1988

Sacred or Revered Texts: The White Book

Size of Group: As of October, 2000, JZ Knight has around 3000 devotees. 1

History

JZ Knight, founder of Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, was born in Roswell, New Mexico where she experienced psychic and paranormal phenomenon from an early age. An elderly Yacqui Indian woman held JZ in her arms when she was a mere infant and declared that she was destined to “see what no one else sees.” Then, when JZ was older, she and some friends saw “blinding red flashes of light” while at a sleepover. The light abruptly stopped, and the girls apparently forgot the bizarre incident. Years later, JZ recalled the strange flashing lights. She was intrigued by their cause and why she had forgotten about them. JZ believed UFO’s or some higher power may have been responsible, beginning her interest in the paranormal. 2

Despite a turbulent childhood caused by an alcoholic father, she graduated high school and went on to a small business college. Financial difficulties forced her to quit school, but she managed to get a decent job with a cable company. In 1973, she started her own communications company. Her coworkers quickly found that JZ had an uncanny ability to determine when (and to whom) to sell. In fact, some of them believed she could predict the future. 3

Whatever psychic influence JZ had might have been inherited from her mother, who claimed she could foresee the future in her dreams. JZ’s mother knew about a family member’s death or even whether JZ made the school majorette team before the event occurred. 4

JZ’s psychic experiences continued, helping her to realize that she was indeed special. One psychic saw a great force within JZ, a force nearly as powerful as Jesus Christ. This force would help bring peace to the world. Later, an event occurred that can only be described as a miracle. A friend had forced JZ to see an evangelical healer due to her faltering health. JZ, who had become disillusioned with the hypocritical church long ago, openly denounced the minister’s healing powers. In that instant, a flash of blue light knocked the minister down. The congregation was stunned. JZ was cured of her ills. She believed she had seen the hand of God. 5

One of the most important events in her life occurred when she accompanied her friend to a psychic reading one afternoon. The psychic took a strong interest in JZ. She predicted that JZ would move to a place with “great mountains” and “tall pines.” This was where she would meet The One. This entity, the psychic foresaw, would give JZ “great influence” and destiny. Sure enough, JZ received a job offer in the mountain country of Tacoma, Washington. She took the job with the psychic’s powerful words echoing in the back of her mind. 6

The next few years were uneventful in terms of paranormal phenomenon, but JZ and her second husband Jeremy dabbled in psychic communication and mysticism. Jeremy , in particular, became interested in the properties of pyramids, which were believed to harness psychic energy. One day in February, 1977, while JZ and Jeremy were playing with some pyramids in their home, The One appeared before her. 7

Standing in her kitchen a mere ten feet from JZ was an enormous figure, dressed in flowing robes and surrounded by purple light. He proclaimed, “I am Ramtha, the Enlightened One. I have come to help you over the ditch.” He went on to say to a bewildered JZ: “It is the ditch of limitation and fear I will help you over. For you will, indeed, beloved woman become a light unto the world.” Ramtha then warned JZ that she was in danger and she must leave the house immediately, at which point he disappeared. JZ heeded this warning, moving her family into a new home. Days later, the house was ransacked by thugs. The trusting relationship between JZ and Ramtha was thus cemented. 8

The Beginning of RSE

With the help of experts in the field of psychic communication and channeling, JZ was able to turn her body over to Ramtha so that he could spread his teachings. Ramtha first spoke to the public in 1978, when he made an impact with his vast knowledge and insight. The local media soon picked up on this story helping Ramtha’s (and JZ’s) popularity to spread. The fact that Ramtha emerged in the heart of the New Age movement considerably helped his cause; people were lining up to hear him speak. JZ became a full time channel and began charging money for admittance (an idea brought to her by Ramtha himself). Even Actresses Shirley McLean and Joan Hackett became disciples of Ramtha (The Enlightened One predicted McLean would win the “highest award” for her role in Terms of Endearment). Knight’s popularity among the stars lead to her appearance on the Merv Griffin Show in 1985. 9

The RSE Today

JZ’s school has earned her millions of dollars and lots of adoration. She is among the leading New Age channelers with 3000 followers. Disciples come to her ranch in Yelm, Washington to learn the Great Work (see Beliefs and Practices). Ramtha offers courses for beginners and advanced students which are designed to let the disciples harness their divine powers. Aside from lectures by Ramtha, the students participate in “field work” which is designed to focus their concentration and energy (C&E). Field work usually involves searching a vast field for index cards while blindfolded. JZ also built a massive maze known as the Tank in her ranch which she uses for various lessons. Although the lessons seem strange to the students and outsiders, each one has a specific purpose that progresses them on the path to enlightenment. 10

Ramtha’s School tends to attract an older audience than most New Age Movements. The average age for a beginning student is mid-thirties, with some starting as young as age 6, however. According to a study of the advanced students, the typical students “are in midlife, have high levels of education and occupational prestige, and are now choosing to orient themselves in a new direction.” 11

The RSE has become more commercial in the late 1990’s. Students must purchase and watch an introductory video before attending classes. The sale of Ramtha books, video’s, and audio cassettes has become a profitable business. 12

JZ’s success, however, is not without a price. Critics claim that JZ is a fraud, and that she uses mind control techniques. Lawsuits have hurt her in recent years, including a case brought by her ex-husband who says she used Ramtha’s influence to coerce him out of a fair divorce settlement (see controversies).

Beliefs

Ramtha’s teachings are encompassed in a work known as the White Book, and these ideas are based on ancient Gnosticism of the Mediterranean. The core principles of Ramtha’s School are 1) a supreme deity is a part of every man, and 2) the key to reaching the God within us is through Gnosis or knowledge. 13 Ramtha himself does not wished to be revered as a God, but rather as an equal. He says in one of his channeling sessions, “I am but a teacher, servant, brother unto you.” 14

Who Is Ramtha?

Ramtha is a 35,000 year old warrior from the ancient city of Lemuria. The Lemurians were oppressed by highly advanced citizens of Atlantis because they believed the Lemurians were “soulless.” At age 14, Ramtha led a small army against the Atlantians and defeated them. More people joined his army, and he soon became a great warrior. He was stabbed severely during one battle, but miraculously he did not die. His enemies began to believe he was immortal. Ramtha “learned the mysteries of the unknown god and became enlightened” during the seven years he was recovering from his wound. He rose through higher levels of consciousness and eventually transformed into a being of light. He ascended as a God, but vowed to return. 15

Indeed, 35,000 years later, Ramtha returned to meet JZ Knight. Ramtha chose to channel through JZ rather than present himself in human form for several reasons. First, he did not want to be worshipped as a deity, but rather an equal. He felt that if he presented himself, he would be idolized by his students. Second, his human form limited him to a male entity. Channeling himself through a woman presented the dual male/female nature of God. Third, for reasons of his own, he believed JZ Knight was especially suited to the task at hand. 16

Ramtha’s Worldview

Ramtha’s goal with beginner students is to break them away from the traditional Western worldview. This worldview limits the individual and suppresses his power as a divine being. Ramtha aims to make the student not only believe in his divine power, but to manifest it. 17 Ramtha’s Creation myth and the philosophies stemming from it are complex and abstract, but they are essential to understanding his teachings.

The universe started as a Void of nothingness. This Void “turned in upon itself” creating consciousness and energy. Consciousness and Energy fused together causing the Void to become aware of itself. This awareness was represented in the Void as single- dimensional entity called Point Zero. Other dots of awareness formed, and the high energy reactions between the various dots created time and space. As these dot entities interacted, seven energy levels developed. The entities of awareness left Point Zero to “explore” other levels of the Void in order to “make known the unknown.” As the entities progressed from Point Zero (the highest level) to level 1, energy and time slowed. At the lower levels, the entities took on form and substance. When the entities reached the first level, they “coagulated” into human form. It was at this level that life as we know it began. 18

This theory of Creation is difficult to grasp. The main point, however, is that consciousness exists on multiple levels, with human form being the lowest. The higher the level, the greater the level of consciousness. The entities (Gods) used consciousness to create objects at their whim. In other words, they manifested their dreams to create all the objects in the world. The Gods came down to the lowest levels to experience life in its material form, but they still had their divine powers. The early humans could easily move between levels and manifest their dreams or desires. Over time, however, this ability was lost. Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment allows students to regain these powers, and carry on the task of Gods: to make known the unknown. 19

Humans often move to other consciousness levels without realizing it. The most common occurrence is moving up to the second level while dreaming. Near-death experiences, psychic visions and other phenomenon can be attributed to moving to another plane of consciousness. 20

When humans lost the power of the Gods, they fell into the “ditch of limitation,” the same ditch that Ramtha mentioned during his first encounter with JZ. Ramtha holds the Church partly responsible for this limitation when it “took God outside of Man, [and] put him far, far away.” The Church “unenlightened” man by claiming that God is far superior to humans. Ramtha’s teachings indicate that the Church “created” God to keep men in line. He even goes so far as to say Hell and the devil were “created through religious dogma for the purpose of intimidating the masses into a controllable organization.” 21

The Great Work

The Great Work of Ramtha’s teaching is literally manifesting dreams and desires. In essence, the Great Work requires reaching maximum potential of the mind. The key to manifestations lies in the cerebrum, which, according to Ramtha, has the power to make dreams a reality. In the past, humans would hold a dream or desire in their mind, and it would manifest. Today, humans play a passive role to manifestations. They absorb the world around them in their mind, and this then becomes reality. In a sense, they are trapped in the present reality. Ramtha desires to teach students the power to manifest any desire and make known the unknown. 22

Issues and Challenges

Any new religion has its share of controversy, and the RSE is no exception. The public generally perceives New Age Religions, groups in a negative light, usually without any evidence. Ramtha’s messages are certainly not mainstream, and the way in which JZ presents them is also subject to controversy. Some critics claim JZ is a fraud whose only goal is to make money. Others say that she uses brainwashing techniques to keep her students from leaving. There are a number of opinions on the matter and no clear answers.

Is JZ a Channeler?

JZ has undergone a lot of scrutiny as one of the most prominent American channelers. Her overall performance as Ramtha is seamless. While she is channeling, her posture, walk, voice and the color of her eyes changes. Actress Linda Evans, a student of Ramtha’s, argued that if JZ is a fraud then “she is the greatest actress in the world.” 23 A skeptical psychologist became uncertain of JZ’s legitimacy when JZ put her hand on his head revealing such power that he “could hardly take it.” 24 Even if Ramtha was not real, he said, there was definitely a power within her that science could not explain. Later, a team of scientists did tests on JZ during channeling episodes over the course of a year. The results of the test categorically ruled out fraud or multiple personality disorders. 25 “We know something’s going on here,” said one of the researchers, “we just can’t say, at this point, specifically what it is.” 26 Her students swear that JZ and Ramtha have entirely different personas leading them to believe that Ramtha is indeed channeling through JZ.

Other evidence points to the contrary. One of JZ’s business managers saw her “practicing” the Ramtha personality. Her husband Jeff Knight also noticed her slip in and out of the trance to take cigarette breaks (JZ, unlike Ramtha, was a smoker). 27 And then there is the common sense argument, according to the Skeptics Dictionary Website: “…it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the likelihood of a 35,000 year old Cro-Magnon ghost suddenly appearing in a Tacoma kitchen to a homemaker to reveal profundities about centers and voids, self-love and guilt-free living, or love and peace, is close to zero.” 28 It takes a great leap of faith to believe that JZ is a channeler, although scientific evidence may not be enough to discredit Ramtha.

Criticism of the RSE

Publicity surrounding Ramtha’s School has been negative for the most part in recent years. A 20/20 segment portrayed JZ as a fraud who was exploiting peoples’ beliefs in Ramtha for money. The show also claimed that Ramtha was teaching people that they are above morality due to their divine status. These beliefs, they surmised, could only lead to amoral behavior. The 20/20 exposure led to more attacks from the press on JZ and the School. 29

J. Gordon Melton, a leading scholar on new religious movements, thoroughly investigated the RSE and found that these criticisms were unfounded. Melton attributes most of the bad press to sensationalist journalism that critiques unconventional beliefs for a good story. Furthermore, anti-cult and counter-cult sentiments are popular with Americans, which intensifies the controversy. 30 . Melton’s book gave important facts rather than insinuations and smear campaigns

Anti-cultists respond that Melton’s book is biased because (1) Melton was hired to testify for JZ in a court case against her in 1992, (2) JZ provided funding for the book and (3) Melton established close ties with JZ and the school during the research thus damaging his credibility as an objective researcher. Melton also neglected to mention several incidents where people were injured during blindfolded field activities. 31 Although this omission does not make JZ a dangerous cult leader, it makes one wonder what else Melton left out of his book.

Criticism from the public caused JZ to withdraw from the public in the early 1990’s. During this period she devoted her time to her school and to Ramtha. Under Ramtha’s guidance, she reappeared to the public in the late 1990’s. As Ramtha’s school continues to succeed, it is receiving “signs of a certain legitimacy among the religious community.” 32 Today, JZ has an unprecedented number of students, and her books and tapes are selling well.

Scandals

Several scandals have marred JZ’s reputation among the religious community. The first involves a student of Ramtha’s who was hired to run stress management programs for the Federal Aviation Administration in 1984. This student, Gregory May, a psychologist from California, used techniques that were “far beyond routine.” Some of the training activities involved tying employees together for long periods of time, forcing women to shower together, sleep deprivation and verbal abuse. Several employees brought charges against the FAA for trauma occasioned by May. 33 These unorthodox techniques cannot be directly linked to Ramtha’s teachings. Nevertheless, the media was quick to point out the connection between bizarre training techniques and (what they perceived to be) a destructive cult.

Another scandal occurred because of JZ’s fondness for horses. Overstepping her boundaries as a religious leader, she advised some of her students to invest in Arabian horses. These students followed her advice as if advised by Ramtha himself. Many of them lost money in this venture and bitterly left the school. Later, JZ compensated them for their losses, but the damage had been done. She had given the critics ammunition to use against her. 34

In addition to these scandals, JZ had a turbulent personal life. She was married five times, and at least once she was caught in an affair with a young student. She divorced her fifth husband, Jeffrey Knight, in 1989. Jeffrey claimed that JZ used Ramtha’s influence to coerce him out of a fair divorce settlement. He took the case to court, embroiling JZ in an intense legal battle. 35 Meanwhile, JZ faced serious financial burdens from bill collectors and taxes. She kept these problems from the public, but eventually the media picked up on them.

Conclusion

Although Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment is surrounded by controversy, there is no clear evidence that JZ is a fraud or that the school is a danger to anyone. Sociologists and psychologists do not believe that students are “brainwashed” to follow this movement, nor are they held against their will. Ramtha’s students are searching for answers to life’s most important questions, and the School is helping them resolve these issues. Until undisputable evidence arises that JZ is harming people, the media and anti-cultists should be careful with their criticisms.

Bibliography

Brown, Michael. “The Channeling Zone.” Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. 1977.

Carrol, Robert Todd. “Ramtha aka J.Z. Knight.” The Skeptics Dictionary. http://skepdic.com/channel.html

Diamond, Steve. “Into the Mystic: Ramtha Meets the Scholars.” The New Times. Accessed at http://www.newtimes.org/issue/9705/97-05-jz.html

McDonald, Sally. “J.Z. Knight Channeling New Support.” Seattle Times May 9, 1998. Accessed at http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com

McDonald, Sally. “Christianity vs. New Age.” Seattle Times May 9, 1998. Accessed at http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com

Melton, J. Gordon. Finding Enlightenment. Hillsboro, OR: Beyond Words Publishing, Inc. 1998.

Neill, Michael. “Sure, blame the caveman: channeler J.Z. Knight’s troubles put 35,000 year old Ramtha on trial”. People Weekly Oct. 12, 1992 p. 123.

“Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment – The American Gnostic School.” http://www.ramtha.com

“The Guru and the FAA.” Newsweek , March 6 1995 p. 32.

References

  • “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, The School of Ancient Wisdom: FAQ’s.” http://www.ramtha.com/html/aboutus/faqs/students/how-many.stm
  • Melton, J. Gordon. Finding Enlightenment. p. 3-4
  • Ibid. 9
  • Ibid. 4
  • Ibid. 9-12
  • Ibid. 7-9
  • Ibid. 14-15
  • Ibid. 14-15
  • Ibid. 46-52
  • Ibid. 108-109
  • Ibid. 126-127
  • “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, The School of Ancient Wisdom:RSE Store.” http://ramtha.com/html/rse-store/product-details/v1.42.stm
  • “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, The School of Ancient Wisdom:About US.” http://ramtha.com/html/aboutus/faqs/school/gnostic-beliefs.stm
  • Melton, J. Gordon. Finding Enlightenment. p. 58
  • “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, The School of Ancient Wisdom:About US.” http://ramtha.com/html/aboutus/faqs/teacher/who.stm
  • “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, The School of Ancient Wisdom:About US.” http://ramtha.com/html/aboutus/faqs/teacher/why-jz.stm
  • Melton, J. Gordon. Finding Enlightenment. p. 58
  • Ibid. 78-80.
  • Ibid. 81-84
  • Ibid. 85
  • Ibid. 59- 61.
  • Ibid. 85
  • Ibid. 146
  • Brown, Michael. The Channeling Zone. p. 12
  • “Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, The School of Ancient Wisdom:About US.” http://ramtha.com/html/aboutus/faqs/jz/proof.stm
  • Diamond, Steve. “Into the Mystic: Ramtha Meets the Scholars.” http://www.newtimes.org/issue/9705/97-05-jz.html
  • Szimhart, Joe. “Book Review/Essay on Melton’s Study.” http://www.kelebekler.com/cesnur/txt/ram2.htm
  • Carrol, Robert Todd. “Ramtha aka J.Z. Knight.”
  • Melton, J. Gordon. Finding Enlightenment. 137-139
  • Ibid. 144-145
  • Szimhart, Joe. “Book Review/Essay on Melton’s Study.” http://www.kelebekler.com/cesnur/txt/ram2.htm
  • McDonald, Sally. “J.Z. Knight Channeling New Support.”
  • “The Guru and the FAA.” Newsweek March6, 1995.
  • Melton, J. Gordon. Finding Enlightenment. p. 147-148
  • “Sure, blame the caveman.” People Weekly October 12, 1992

Created by Joseph M. Khattab
For Soc 257: New Religious Movements
Fall term, 2000
University of Virginia
Last modified: 07/23/01

 

 

 

Share

Our Lady of Aparecida

OUR LADY OF APARECIDA TIMELINE

c.1650: Frei Agnostino de Jesus, sculptor and carioca monk from Sao Paolo, made a small statue of the Virgin.

1717 (October 12): Joao Alves, a fisherman of Guarantinqueta, Brazil, cast his net in the Paraiba River near the Port of Itaguago and snared the body of a statue. He and his companions, Domingos Garcia and Felipe Pedroso, cast their net again, this time pulling up the statue’s head. They named the statue Our Lady Aparecida (Our Lady Who Appeared).

1732: The statue was taken to its first shrine.

1745: A larger church was built on a hilltop near Porto Itaguassu to house the statue.

1822: Pedro I declared Brazil’s independence from Portugal and elevated Our Lady Aparecida’s title to Patroness of Brazil.

1888: A larger basilica was built to replace smaller chapel that could accommodate 150,000 pilgrims a year.

1904 (September 8): St. Pius X declared Our Lady Aparecida to be Queen of Brazil. The Cardinal of Rio de Janeiro crowned her.

1930: Pope Pius XI proclaimed her as the principal patroness of Brazil.

1931 (May 31): Brazil was officially consecrated to Our Lady Aparecida.

1931: After a near-bloodless military coup d’etat, Getulio Vargas became dictator of Brazil. As a symbol of a united Brazil, he promoted a semi-official Catholic Church with Our Lady Aparecida as its symbol.

1945: Vargas’ ruled as dictator ended; plans already were underway for a new basilica.

1946-1955: Construction began on a large modern-style basilica.

1959: Masses, and the statue, were moved to the new basilica, still under construction.

1964: Another military takeover occurred in Brazil. Many socialists, including intellectuals and artists, were imprisoned or exiled. “President” Castello Branco named Our Lady Aparecida to be the highest general of the Brazilian Army in an attempt to restrict how public spaces could be used.

1978 (May 16): The statue was desecrated by a member of a Protestant sect.

1980: In anticipation of Pope John Paul II’s visit, the likely date of Our Lady’s discovery, October 12, was enacted into law as an official national Brazilian holiday.

1980 (October 12): Pope John Paul II blessed Our Lady’s shrine.

1995 (October 12): A televangelist pastor, Sergio Von Helder, publicly ridiculed an Aparecida icon during a televised religious service.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

Before Brazil fell under Spanish control in 1580, Joao III of Portugal controlled a vast territory but had few resources with which to settle and develop it. He therefore divided Brazil into fifteen captaincies and appointed a governor for each. The governors could levy taxes and rule as they saw fit but were required to populate the area, sustain the population, and defend their territories with their own resources. Gold was discovered in south-central Brazil in 1695 in what was to become the captaincies of Sao Paulo and Minas Gerais, and a mining boom ensued. A new governor for Sao Paulo and Minas Gerais, Pedro Miguel de Almeida Portugal e Vasconcellos, the Portuguese Count of Assumar, was due to arrive in his new captaincies, in a town later to be known as Aparaceda, in October, 1717 and was on his way to an important mining site (Johnson 1997).

The local residents wanted to provide a fitting reception for the new governor, and so three fishermen were sent out into the nearby Paraiba River to bring in food for a celebration. The discovery of the statue that came to be called Our Lady of Aparecida on that fishing expedition is “part history, part hagiography” (Johnson 1997:125). In the Roman Catholic Church, saints typically are consecrated after reportedly experiencing a vision or some other manifestation of God (hierophany). However, Our Lady of Aparecida’s path to becoming the Patroness of Brazil was quite distinctive.

Fish catches had not been plentiful immediately prior to the new governor’s visit, and the weather was especially bad when the men set out on their fishing trip. Despite their prayers to Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception (the Virgin Mary), for many hours Domingos Garcia, Joao Alves, and Felipe Pedroso caught nothing. Finally, casting his net once more, Alves hauled in not fish, but the body of a small statue. The statue had been in the river for a long time (and may have been a Spanish statue of the Virgin of Guadalupe from the period of Spanish control of Brazil between 1580 to 1640), and, as a result, the wood from which the statue was carved had been stained and discolored by the mud and water (Johnson 1997:126).

The men cast their net once more and brought in the statue’s head. They cleaned their catch and decided their statue was one ofOur Lady of the Immaculate Conception, the Virgin Mary. They named her Our Lady of the Conception Who Appeared from the Waters, which was subsequently shortened to Our Lady Aparecida. The men wrapped her in cloth, continued fishing, and soon had enough fish to provide a sumptuous feast. The appearance of Our Lady of Aparecida came to be regarded as a double miracle. To the faithful, it was miraculous, first, that the fishermen found both the body and the head of the statue simultaneously and, second, that finding the statue was followed by a bountiful harvest of fish. This miracle resonates with a biblical narrative in which Jesus appears to unsuccessful fishermen, telling them to cast their nets again, which leads them to an abundant catch.

From the moment of its discovery, the statue was venerated by the fisherman and their families and neighbors. Felipe Pedroso took the statue to his house where others came to see her. When he moved to Porto Itaguassu, he took the statue with him. In 1732, his son Atanasio built its first shrine. Thirteen years after the first shrine was built, a larger church was erected on a hilltop near Porto Itaguassu for Our Lady of Aparecido. This remained her home for over a hundred years.

Pedro I declared Brazil’s independence from Portugal in 1822 and elevated Our Lady of Aparecida’s title to Patroness of Brazil, the constitutional separation of church and state notwithstanding. Our Lady of Aparecida became an increasingly more important destination for religious pilgrims in Brazil. By 1888, approximately 150,000 pilgrims were arriving every year. In response, a larger basilica was built to replace the smaller chapel. A succession of elevations of sacred status followed. On September 8, 1904, St. Pius X declared Our Lady of Aparecida to be the Queen of Brazil, and she was crowned by the Cardinal of Rio. Just twenty-six years later, in 1930, Pope Pius XI proclaimed her to be the principal patroness of Brazil, and Brazil was officially consecrated to Our Ladyof Aparecida on May 31 of the next year. In 1931, Getulio Vargas seized power in Brazil after a military coup d’etat. While in power he sought to create a unified Brazil and so promoted a semi-official Catholic Church with Our Lady of Aparecida as its sign. Vargas’s reign as dictator ended in 1945, but by then the plans were already underway for a new basilica. In 1959, Our Lady of Aparecida was moved to the unfinished building. In the meantime, after a period of civilian government, military rule returned in 1964. Catello Branco, who was designated as president, symbolically named Our Lady of Aparecida to be the highest general of the Brazilian Army in an attempt to restrict how public spaces could be used. When the new basilica was finally completed in 1980, Pope John Paul II visited and blessed her shrine. His visit led to the creation of a law which named October 12, her likely date of discovery, an official national Brazilian holiday. The mixing of religious and political legitimation for Our Lady of Aparecida has been controversial but has also meant that Our Lady has been not only a symbol of the Catholic Church but also of Brazil as a nation (Johnson 1997:129).

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

Since her appearance in the river, Our Lady of Aparecida has always been associated with miracles. For example, after the statue was first moved into its prayer chapel near the river, miraculous events were reported: candles that blew out in the chapel would relight, a slave running from a cruel master prayed to the idol for freedom and his chains were released, a blind girl received sight, and a man who wished to harm the statue found his horse’s feet “locked fast to the ground at the entrance of the building” when he tried to enter the chapel (“Our Lady Aparecida” n.d.). Further, while the new basilica was being constructed, it was reported that the every evening the statue was moved to reside in the in progressing Basilica, but every morning, she would appear back in the old Basilica. This went on for several years. Eventually, it is believed, the statue gave up and realized that no member of the clergy was going to heed her desire to remain at her old resting place.

RITUALS/PRACTICES

The date dedicated to Our Lady of Aparecida has changed many times over the years. The original date in her honor was set as December 8 from as early as the eighteenth century. However, soon after the Vatican declared May to be the Month of Mary, the episcopate decided to make a special date devoted to Our Lady, the fifth Sunday after Easter, which would always fall in May. Just nine years later, in 1904, “the date was officially changed to the first Sunday of May” (Fernandes 1985:805). However, this date was not recognized by all of the churches, and some chose to use September 7, Independence Day, instead. Years later, in 1939, September 7 was officially established as the new day of Aparecida. Unfortunately, this led to a drastic drop in support from pilgrims at festivals in her honor, apparently as a result of both celebrations occurring on the same day. Thus, in 1955, the National Conference of Bishops moved the date for a final time to its current day, October 12. In 1980, this date became a national holiday.

There are several ritual themes that pilgrims to the Our Lady of Aparecida site express: dependence, territorial bond, and inclusion. The first is Dependence, in which pilgrims worship in order to get protection. This may also be accompanied by a vow, wherein the pilgrims may promise to accomplish something in the name of Our Lady of Aparecida if she will grant them something. The second is a Territorial Bond, wherein pilgrims bring items to be blessed by the statue to improve their relationship with Aparecida. Finally, there is Inclusion, which connotes that, while there are many rituals associated with Catholic Saints, all of them are related and equally important. This is directly contrasted, though, by the attitudes of pilgrims who come to see the idol. They generally arrive to visit the statue and nothing more. They do not confess their sins or hold much stock in the other aspects of Catholicism. In their minds, the statue of Our Lady of Aparecida is the only reality they need.

Pilgrims report extraordinary and miraculous experiences at the basilica. Dawsey (2006:7) writes that “They described the suffering of the pagadores de promessas (payers of promises) who carried crosses and climbed the stairways of the cathedral on their knees. They recalled the people stretched out on the floor of the basilica; they spoke of the people in rags, the sick and lame, and unemployed. At the end of the corridor, in the recesses of the church, they had seen the piles of crutches – allegories of the extraordinary healing powers of the saint. In the sala dos milagres (room of miracles), amid a stunning collection of enchanted objects, they saw up close the signs of the wonderful grace of the Mother of God.

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

While any organizational aspects of the lady, including where she resides, how she is dressed (a richly decorated robe is wrappedaround her shoulders and a large crown adorns her head), what honors and special titles she has been given, and the official date for her celebration are controlled by various units of the Catholic church, one might say that actual leadership resides with the pilgrims. When Pope John Paul II visited Brazil in 1980 and great preparation was made to receive the expected increase in pilgrims to Aparecida to coincide with his visit, officials were surprised when no more than the normal 300,000 appeared, as opposed to the 2,000,000 who were expected. It seems that the pilgrims intended to follow their traditional schedules with regard to the Lady and to wait until the Pope visited their own locales to pay tribute to him.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Our Lady of Aparecida has faced a series of challenges through her history. Despite her lofty status as Patroness of Brazil and the annual holiday in her honor, she has not been accepted by everyone in Brazil. Many Brazilians of different religions have expressed resentment toward her. Even some within the Catholic tradition believe that she is more of a hindrance than a help to believers.

In the earliest incident, Our Lady of Aparecida was also caught in the midst of a major power struggle. In 1889, the episcopate took over the sanctuaries and called in priests from Europe to assist in restructuring the belief system. This led to massive conflict, both “between the episcopate and local notables over administrative control” and also “between Tridentine-minded missionaries and the native pilgrims” over devotion (Fernandes 1985:804). The priests wanted to reconvert the pilgrims to Catholicism, yet they found that the pilgrims still practiced some Pagan rituals that had been part of their belief system for centuries and were resistant to change. As already noted, pilgrims regularly traveled to worship Our Lady of Aparecida, but one priest found that “90% of those 30,000 people [who visited the statue] had never confessed, or only once, in their entire lives” (Fernandes 1985:804). The Catholic Church has had a continuing struggle with the facts on the ground; while Our Lady of Aparecida is formally a Catholic icon, many of those who worship her do not closely follow Catholic doctrines.

As second incident occurred in 1978. A member of a Protestant sect took Our Lady of Aparecida from her pedestal and attempted to escape with the statue. He was chased and captured, but just before being apprehended, he smashed the statue to the ground. The statue was repaired, but it proved impossible to restore exactly the original features of the statue’s face.

Finally, on October 12, 1995 (which was a festival day), televangelist Segio Von Helder appeared on the 25 th Hour Program on the Record Television Network. In this segment, Helder criticized the prominence of the idol in Brazil’s culture, stating that “God is changed from principal actor to mere helper” (Johnson 1997:131). He then began to kick and beat the statue he had brought on the show with him. While this was a replica statue, his actions still caused an outrage among viewers. Both the network owner and the televangelist faced immediate and severe backlash from citizens. In the weeks that followed, there was an enormous spike in support for and devotion to the Lady, which coincided with extreme prejudice and anger toward the Igreja Universal, the parent network. Igreja Universal subsequently silenced him and sent him to the United States.

While Our Lady of Aparecida has been at the center of a number of conflicts through Brazil’s history, as the Patroness of Brazil she remains both a powerful symbol of the Roman Catholic tradition in the world’s most Catholic nation and of Brazilian national identity. Legions of pilgrims, both Catholic and non-Catholic, continue to trek to the basilica where the statue resides. Festivals honoring Our Lady of Aparecida are also held by diasporic populations in the United States (Arenson 1998).

REFERENCES

Arenson, Adam. 1998. “The Role of the Nossa Senhora Aparecida Festival in Creating Brazilian American Community.” New York Folklore 24:1-4.

Dawsey, John. 2006. “Joana Dark and the Werewolf Woman: The Rite of Passage of Our Lady.” Religião & Sociedade 2:1-13.

Fernandes, Rubem César. 1985. “Aparecida, Our Queen, Lady and Mother, Sarava!” Social Science Information. Accessed from http://ssi.sagepub.com/content/24/4/799 on 2 May 2014

Johnson, Paul C. 1997. “Kicking, Stripping, and Re-Dressing a Saint in Black: Visions of Public Space in Brazil’s Recent Holy War.” History of Religions 37:122-40.

Leon, Luis D. 2010. Teaching Language in Context.” Church History 79:504-06.

Oliveira, Plinio Correa de. “Our Lady of Aparecida – October 12.” n.d. Tradition In Action. Accessed from http://www.traditioninaction.org/SOD/j227sd_OLAparecida_10-12.html on 2 May 2014

“Our Lady of Aparecida” (Nossa Senhora Aparecida). n.d. Mary Pages. Accessed from http://www.marypages.com/LadyAparecida.htm on 2 May 2014.

Yeh, Allen and Gabriela Olaguibel. 2011. “The Virgin of Guadalupe: A Study of Socio-Religious Identity” International Journal of Frontier Missiology. 28:169-77.

Authors:
David G. Bromley
Caitlin St. Clair

Share

Our Lady of Bayside

OUR LADY OF BAYSIDE TIMELINE

1923 (July 12):  Veronica Lueken was born.

1968 (June 5):  Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy. This event was tied to the onset of Lueken’s first mystical experiences.

1970 (June 18):  The Virgin Mary appeared to Lueken for the first time at St. Robert Bellarmine’s Church.

1971-1975:  “The Battle of Bayside” occurred. This period saw escalating tensions between Lueken’s followers and the Bayside Hills Civic Association. Vigils would draw thousands of people. At the height of the controversy, up to 100 police officers were needed during vigils to keep the peace.

1971 (March 31):  Monsignor Emmet McDonald of St. Robert Bellarmine’s Church wrote Bishop Francis J. Mugavero, asking for his help in removing Lueken’s movement.

1973:  A Canadian group called the Pilgrims of Saint Michael began supporting Lueken. They brought busloads of pilgrims from Canada to attend vigils and published Lueken’s messages in their newsletters, Vers Demain and Michael Fighting .

1973 (March 7):  A new comet was sighted by Czech astronomer Lubos Kohoutek. Baysiders briefly interpreted the comet Kohoutek as the “Ball of Redemption” described in Lueken’s visions.

1973 (June 29):  Under pressure from the Bayside Hills Civic Association and St. Robert Bellarmine’s parish council, Chancellor James P. King formed a commission to investigate Lueken’s visions. The commission read transcripts of Lueken’s messages from heaven and concluded that her visions “lack complete authenticity.”

1973 (November 27):  The diocese removed the statue of Mary from St. Robert Bellarmine’s in an attempt to stop the vigils. Pilgrims responded by bringing their own statue made of fiberglass.

1974 (January 29):  Lueken’s youngest son, Raymond, was shot and killed in a hunting accident while camping with friends in upstate New York near Callicoon. Lueken became reclusive following his death.

1974 (June 15):  Seventeen year-old Daniel Slane engaged a pilgrim in a heated argument. While walking back to his car, he was stabbed twice in the back. Church authorities claimed his assailant was a Pilgrim of Saint Michael who boarded a bus and successfully escaped to Canada.

1975 (May 22):  Lueken and her followers agreed to a settlement to relocate the vigils to Flushing Meadows Park. On May 26, the first vigil was held in Flushing Meadows Park.

1975 (June 14):  The Bayside Hills Civic Association organized a “Day of Jubilation” to celebrate the removal of the pilgrims.

1975 (September 27):  Lueken delivered a message announcing an “imposter pope,” a communist agent whose appearance had been modified using plastic surgery to resemble Paul VI.

1977:  The Pilgrims of Saint Michael withdrew their support. Their official reason for leaving had to do with whether female pilgrims should wear blue berets or white berets. However, their actual motivation appears to have been that Lueken’s celebrity had come to overshadow their movement. Lueken’s movement became incorporated as “Our Lady of the Roses Shrine” and began producing its own newsletter. It continued to grow.

1983 (June 18):  An estimated 15,000 pilgrims from around the world gathered at Flushing Meadows Park for the thirteenth anniversary of the first apparition of Mary at Bayside.

1986:  Bishop Mugavero promulgated a strongly worded declaration, stating that Lueken’s visions are false. It was sent to dioceses throughout the United States and to conferences of bishops around the world.

1995 (August 3):  Veronica Lueken died.

1997 (November):  A schism between Veronica’s widower Arthur Lueken and shrine director Michael Mangan split the Baysider movement. Both factions began scrambling for resources, followers, and access to the vigil site at Flushing Meadows Park.

1997 (December 24):  A judge awarded Arthur Luken the name “Our Lady of the Roses Shrine” as well as all assets and facilities. Mangan’s group founded its own organization called “Saint Michael’s World Apostolate.”

1998:  The New York Parks Department brokered a deal allowing both groups to share access to the park.

2002 (August 28):  Arthur Lueken died. Vivian Hanratty became the new leader of “Our Lady of the Roses Shrine.” Our Lady of the Roses Shrine and Saint Michael’s World Apostolate continued to hold rival vigils in Flushing Meadows Park.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

The apparitions at Bayside began with Veronica Lueken, a Roman Catholic housewife from Bayside, New York, who became a
Marian seer. Lueken’s first mystical experiences followed the assassination of Senator Robert Kennedy on June 5, 1968. The next day, as Kennedy lay in the hospital, Lueken was praying for his recovery when she felt herself surrounded by an overwhelming fragrance of roses. Although the senator died late that night, the inexplicable smell of roses continued to haunt her. Soon she would wake up to find she had written poetry that she could not remember writing. She had prayed to St. Therese of Lisieux to save senator Kennedy and suspected that Therese was somehow the true author of these poems. She discussed these experiences with the priests at her parish church, St. Robert Bellarmine’s, but she felt they did not take her seriously. Her husband, Arthur, also discouraged any discussion of miracles.

That summer her visions grew darker. In the sky over Bayside, she saw a vision of a black eagle screaming “Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth!” She became convinced that these frightening visions signaled an impending disaster. She wrote Cardinal Richard Cushing in Boston and warned him that something terrible was going to happen. She also felt that her growing sense of danger was somehow connected to the Second Vatican Council that had concluded in 1965. Lueken felt that the Church had turned its back on the Catholic traditions she had practiced since she was a girl. In 1969, she wrote a letter to Pope Paul VI and asked him to oppose the reforms the Council.

In April, 1970, the Virgin Mary appeared to Lueken in her apartment. She announced that she would appear at St. Robert
Bellarmine’s church in Bayside “when the roses are in bloom.” On the night of June 18, 1970, Lueken knelt alone in the rain praying the rosary before a statue of the Immaculate Conception outside her church. Here, Mary appeared to Lueken and instructed her that she was a bride of Christ, that she wept for the sins of the world, and that everyone must return to saying the rosary. Lueken announced that a national shrine should be built on the church grounds and that Mary would henceforth appear there on every Catholic feast day. Over the next two years, a small body of followers joined Lueken in her vigils in front of the statue. At each appearance, Lueken would deliver a “message from heaven,” spoken through her by Mary as well as a growing cast of saints and angels. These messages typically included jeremiads about the weight of America’s sins and warnings of a coming chastisement (Lueken 1998: vol. 1).

In 1973, Lueken’s visions attracted the attention of The Pilgrims of Saint Michael, a conservative Catholic movement from Quebec. The Pilgrims were also known as “the White Berets” for the hats they wore. Like Lueken, they were disturbed by the reforms of Vatican II. The White Berets declared Lueken to be “the seer of the age” and printed her messages from heaven in their newsletter. They also began organizing buses that transported hundreds of pilgrims to attend vigils in front of Lueken’s parish church. Lueken’s messages began to hint at global conspiracies, a coming nuclear war, and a celestial body called “The Fiery Ball of Redemption” that would soon strike the Earth, causing planet-wide destruction.

Church authorities had tolerated Lueken’s activities for three years, but her growing movement was creating a crisis. St. Robert Bellarmine’s church was surrounded by private homes on all sides and The Bayside Hills Civic Association (BHCA) was horrified by the crowds of pilgrims that had descended on their quiet neighborhood. The residents objected to the vigils that often lasted until midnight. Pilgrims, they claimed, were trampling their manicured lawns and driving down the property values of their homes. The BHCA put immense pressure on the parish and the Diocese of Brooklyn to bring Lueken and her followers to heel (Caulfield 1974).

When a hurried investigation by the diocese reported that her experiences were not supernatural, Lueken was asked to cease holding her vigils at St. Robert Bellarmine’s. When she refused, diocesan officials began interrupting her vigils with a bullhorn, reading a letter from the bishop and ordering all loyal Catholics not to participate. Lueken and her followers responded that such tactics only proved how far a Satanic conspiracy had spread through the Church since Vatican II. The BHCA began holding counter vigils and heckling pilgrims. The situation became dangerous and growing numbers of police were dispatched to keep the peace. Several residents were arrested for disorderly conduct and assaulting police officers. A few were even hospitalized after violent confrontations with police or pilgrims. These events came to be called “The Battle of Bayside” (Cowley 1975). The situation was finally resolved in 1975 when the Supreme Court of New York issued an injunction barring Lueken from holding her vigils near St. Robert Bellarmine’s (Thomas 1975; Everett 1975). The night before agreeing to the injunction, Lueken received a message from Mary and Jesus to relocate the vigils to Flushing Meadows Corona Park (Lueken 1998 vol. 3, pp. 106-07).

The new vigil site was a monument marking where the Vatican Pavilion had stood during the World’s Fair. Followers had

purchased a fiberglass statue of the Virgin Mary that was brought to the park for vigils. The crowds only continued to grow. The Pilgrims of Saint Michael eventually withdrew their support and returned to Canada. But by this time Lueken’s followers had created their own organized mission. The movement created the corporation “Our Lady of the Roses Shrine,” which managed an international mailing list of thousands. A group called the Order of St. Michael led the movement’s missionary efforts. Members of the Order, which included former members of the Pilgrims of Saint Michael, lived in community and devoted all of their time to the shrine. On June 18, 1983, fifteen thousand pilgrims from around the world gathered in Flushing Meadows Park for the thirteenth anniversary of the apparition at Bayside.

Catholics who believed in Lueken’s messages came to call themselves “Baysiders” after the original location of the apparition. Ironically, the residents of Bayside, New York, also referred to themselves as “Baysiders.” They regarded the pilgrims as an invading and foreign force and were confused that they would claim this title for themselves. During the 1980s, independent Baysider chapters were established across the United States and in Canada. Lueken’s messages were translated into many languages and disseminated to Catholic communities on every continent.

The Baysiders professed to be traditional Catholics loyal to canon law and the Holy See. However, their defiance of the Brooklyn diocese caused many Catholics to regard them as an insubordinate and schismatic movement. Shortly after arriving in Flushing Meadows, Lueken delivered a revelation that resolved this paradox, at least for her followers. Pope Paul VI, who had endorsed the reforms of Vatican II, was an imposter. The true pope was kept heavily sedated by the conspirators, and the man now claiming to be Paul VI was actually a communist doppelganger created with plastic surgery. The Baysiders were not in rebellion against their Church, they were only questioning the orders of conspirators and imposters who had infiltrated the Church hierarchy (Lueken 1998 vol. 3, p. 241).

In 1986, Francis J. Mugavero, bishop of Brooklyn, made an announcement reiterating that Lueken’s visions were false andcontradicted Catholic doctrine (Goldman 1987). Mugavero’s findings were sent to three hundred bishops throughout the United States and one hundred conferences of bishops around the world. Despite this censure from Church authorities, Lueken’s followers still identify as Catholics in good standing and they defend their views citing canon law. They contend that Lueken’s visions never received a proper investigation led by a bishop, and that the diocese’s dismissal of Lueken is therefore not legitimate. If anyone has violated Church law, they argue, it is the modernists whom Lueken condemned for receiving communion in the hand and other ritual transgressions that go against long-established Catholic tradition.

Lueken continued to give regular messages from heaven until her death in 1995. In total, Mary, Jesus, and a variety of other heavenly beings spoke to her over 300 times. These messages were consolidated into a canon known as the Bayside Prophecies. Although the crowds are nowhere near the size they were before Lueken’s death, Baysiders still travel to Flushing Meadows from as far away as India and Malaysia. On the Internet, Lueken’s messages have become part of a larger milieu of conspiracy theories and millennial speculation. Baysiders still await “The Chastisement” described in Lueken’s messages. Many Baysiders believe that when God punishes mankind for its sins, the chastisement will take two forms, World War III (which will include a large-scale nuclear exchange) and a fiery comet that will collide with Earth and devastate the planet.

After Lueken’s death, Our Lady of the Roses Shrine continued to hold vigils, promote the Bayside Prophecies, and coordinate
pilgrimages to Flushing Meadows with followers from around the world. But in 1997, a schism occurred between the shrine’s director, Michael Mangan, and Lueken’s widower, Arthur Lueken. A judge ruled in favor of Arthur Lueken, declaring him president of Our Lady of the Roses Shrine (OLR) and awarding him all of the organization’s assets and facilities. Undaunted, Mangan formed his own group, Saint Michael’s World Apostolate (SMWA). Both groups continued to arrive at the movement’s sacred site in Flushing Meadows where they held rival vigils. Once again, police were sent out to keep the peace (Kilgannon 2003). Today, this conflict has thawed into a detente. Their celebrations of Catholic feast days are sometimes timed such that only one group will be present in the park on a given day. For events where both groups must be present, such as Sunday morning holy hour, they alternate which group will have access to the monument. One group may set its statue of the Virgin Mary on the Vatican Monument, the other must use a nearby traffic island. The rival groups have decided it is in everyone’s interests to appear professional while in the park.

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

The Bayside Prophecies fill six volumes and contain hundreds of messages. Critics have noted that some of this material seems quite fantastic, containing apparent references to such topics as UFOs, Soviet death rays, and vampires. However, like any religious movement with a sacred text, most Baysiders do not interpret all of the prophecies literally or place equal emphasis on every message. Instead, the prophecies are a resource that Baysiders draw upon to make sense of the world. Many Baysiders interpret current events as an unfolding of predictions described in the Bayside prophecies.

The most important belief for Baysiders is that Veronica Lueken was a special woman and that the monument in Flushing Meadows Park is a holy place where vigils should be held. Baysiders also believe that the reforms of Vatican II was either a grave mistake or a deliberate attempt to undermine the Church, and that America is in a state of moral decline. Additionally, most believe that their freedoms as Americans and Catholics are threatened by a Satanic global conspiracy (Martin 2011). While Lueken stated that a communist agent successfully impersonated Paul VI, this belief is not essential to the Baysider worldview (Laycock 2014).

The Bayside Prophecies also describe an apocalyptic scenario described as “the Chastisement.” Warnings of imminent disasters have been a trope in Marian apparitions since the nineteenth century. Lueken’s visions repeatedly described a fiery celestial object called “The Ball of Redemption” (possibly a comet, although this is not clear), that will collide with the Earth, killing much of the population. Her visions also describe World War III, which will include a full nuclear exchange. Horrifying descriptions of nuclear war have also been common in Marian Apparitions since the start of the Cold War. Unlike Protestant dispensationalism, Baysiders believe that the Chastisement can be postponed through prayer. When prophecies do not come to pass, Baysiders often take credit for earning the world a reprieve from judgment.

Some of Lueken’s messages also allude to a “Rapture” in which the faithful will be taken up to heaven and spared the Chastisement (Lueken 1998 vol. 4:458). Representatives from Saint Michael’s World Apostolate have explained that this idea is not the same as Protestant notions of the Rapture derived from John Nelson Darby. While most Baysiders believe that the Chastisement will eventually happen as prophesied, they do not build bomb shelters or stockpile supplies. Some have even suggested that the Chastisement may not happen in their own lifetimes (Laycock 2014).

RITUALS/PRACTICES

The Baysiders continue to hold vigils in Flushing Meadows Park on all Catholic feast days. They also hold a “Sunday Morning HolyHour” every Sunday that is dedicated to prayer for the priesthood. These events are held around a monument built in Flushing Meadows Park as part of the Vatican Pavilion during the 1964 World’s Fair. The monument, known as The Excedra, is a simple curved bench resembling an unrolling scroll. During vigils, the monument is transformed into a shrine. A fiberglass statue of Mary is ensconced on top of the bench and surrounded with by candles, flags representing the United States and the Vatican, and other ritual objects. The grounds are also consecrated with holy water.

During these meetings, pilgrims pray a special version of the rosary that includes the Prayer to Saint Michael and the Fatima Prayer. They also recite Catholic litanies. As they pray, pilgrims are encouraged to kneel but may stand, sit, or pace. Many pilgrims bring their own chairs to the park or soft objects such as carpet samples to use as kneelers.

Vigils culminate in a ritual during which rosaries are held up to be blessed by Mary and Jesus. During this part of the ritual, Jesus and Mary are regarded as being physically present in the park. As such, everyone who is capable of kneeling is encouraged to do so. There is an awed silence as Baysiders hold out their rosaries to be blessed.

After this, everyone is given a candle and a long-stemmed rose. (Roses are donated by Baysiders before each vigil). The pilgrims raise their candle at arm’s length above their head and say, “Mary, light of the world, pray for us.” The candles are lowered until they are even with the face and the group says, “Our Lady of the Roses, pray for us.” Then the candles are lowered again until they are level with the heart and the group says, “Mary, Help of Mothers, pray for us.” This pattern is repeated several times. This ritual has continued since vigils were held at St. Robert Bellarmine’s (Laycock 2014).

After the vigils, the rosaries and roses are regarded as blessed. Blessed rose petals are often pressed and used for healing. Many Baysiders give them to friends who are sick or spiritually troubled. A few Baysiders have even eaten the rose petals following the ritual, which is regarded as a respectful way to dispose of a blessed object.

Typical attendance for a vigil may be only a dozen to three dozen people. However, some vigils, especially the anniversary vigil held every June 18, still attract hundreds of pilgrims, some of whom come from around the world. Priests are often present during larger vigils. These priests usually are traditionalists who have travelled to Flushing Meadows Park from another diocese. They will often set up folding chairs behind The Exedra where they take confession during the vigil.

In addition to vigils, another important aspect of Baysider culture concerns “miraculous photographs.” The formation of Lueken’s movement coincided with the development of Polaroid cameras. Many pilgrims took Polaroids during the vigils and found anomalies in the film. Most of these effects are easily attributable to user error or to ambient light sources like candles or car lights. Some, however, are more spectacular and difficult to explain. These anomalies were regarded as messages from heaven (Wojcik 1996, 2009). While Lueken was alive, people could bring her their “miraculous Polaroids” and she would interpret the streaks and blurs that appeared on the film, finding their symbolic significance (Chute and Simpson 1976). Today, ordinary Baysiders have developed codes to interpret the anomalies. During vigils, pilgrims take many photos and continue to find anomalies. While digital cameras are used, some Pilgrims prefer to use vintage Polaroid cameras like those used during the original vigils. Discovering a “message from heaven” in a photograph can be a source of great personal meaning for some Baysiders.

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Since the schism of 1997, the Baysiders have been split between two rival factions who must share access to Flushing Meadows Park. Saint Michael’s World Apostolate is the larger group, which is led by Michael Mangan. Although a court awarded the name “Our Lady of the Roses Shrine” to Veronica Lueken’s widower, Mangan’s group had more support from pilgrims and acquired more infrastructure. When Our Lady of the Roses Shrine was unable to maintain their printing presses, Mangan’s group arranged to buy them. Saint Michael’s World Apostolate is headed by a group of men called the Lay Order of Saint Michael, who live together in a religious community. They are supported by numerous shrine workers who help to raise funds, disseminate the messages, and organize vigils.

The smaller group is run by Vivian Hanratty, who originally supported Lueken’s movement by producing videos for the New York UHF television channel. She became the leader of the group after Arthur Lueken’s death. Her leadership is somewhat surprising as most Baysiders advocate traditional gender roles and strongly oppose women leading religious services. Our Lady of the Roses Shrine believes that one day church authorities will realize they were mistaken about Lueken’s prophecies. At that point, the shrine will be handed over to the church and lay leadership will no longer be necessary (Laycock 2014).

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Baysiders are politically active and join other conservative Catholics in such causes as picketing abortion clinics, picketing films that they regard as sacrilegious, and protesting the Affordable Care Act. They also continue to adapt a conspiratorial worldview. Recently, Saint Michael’s World Apostolate has organized a series of talks on the United Nations, which they regard as tool for creating a Satanic one world government.

The Baysiders still hope that one day they will be taken seriously by church authorities. They hope that a more detailed inquiry will be done into Veronica Lueken and her visions, as well as the conversions and miraculous healings that have allegedly occurred in connection to the apparitions at Bayside and in Flushing Meadows Park.

REFERENCES

Caulfield, William. 1974. “The Vigils.” Bayside Hills Beacon, September, p. 3.

Chute, Suzann Weekly and Ellen Simpson. 1976. “Pilgrimage to Bayside: ‘Our Lady of the Roses’ Comes to Flushing Meadow.” Paper presented at the American Folklore Society Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, November 11.

Cowley, Susan Cheever. 1975. “Our Lady of Bayside Hills.” Newsweek, June 2, p. 46.

Cuneo, Michael. 1997. The Smoke of Satan: Conservative and Traditionalist Dissent in Contemporary American Catholicism. New York: Oxford University Press.

Everett, Arthur. 1975. “Religious Street Vigils in N.Y. Ended.” St. Petersburg Times, May 24, p. 4-A.

Garvey, Mark. 2003. Waiting for Mary: America in Search of a Miracle. Cincinnati, OH: Emis Books.

Goldman, Ari L. 1987. “Bishop Rejects Apparition Claims.” New York Times, February 15. Accessed from http://www.nytimes.com/1987/02/15/nyregion/religion-notes-for-cardinal-wiesel-visit-proved-a-calm-in-storm-over-trip.html on 11 April 2014.

Laycock, Joseph. 2014. The Seer of Bayside: Veronica Lueken and the Struggle for Catholicism. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kilgannon, Corey. 2003. “Visions of Doom Endure in Queens; Prophecy, and a Rift, at a Shrine.” New York Times , October 9. Accessed from http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/09/nyregion/visions-of-doom-endure-in-queens-prophecy-and-a-rift-at-a-shrine.html on 11 April 2014.

Lueken, Veronica. 1998. Virgin Mary’s Bayside Prophecies: A Gift of Love, Volumes 1-6. Lowell, MI: These Last Days Ministries.

Martin, Daniel. 2011. Vatican II: A Historic Turning Point. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse.

Price, Jo-Anne. 1973. “Church Removes Statue in Dispute Over Visions.” The New York Times, December 2, p. 158.

Thomas, Robert McG Jr. 1975. “Woman Agrees to Change Site of Virgin Mary Vigils.” The New York Times, May 23, p. 41.

Wojcik, Daniel. 1996. The End of the World as We Know It: Faith, Fatalism, and Apocalypse in America. New York: New York University Press.

Wojcik, Daniel. 1996. “Polaroids from Heaven: Photography, Folk Religion, and the Miraculous Image Tradition at a Marian Apparition Site.” Journal of American Folklore , 109:129-48.

Wojcik, Daniel. 2000. “Bayside (Our Lady of the Roses).” Pp. 85-93 in Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millennial Movements , edited by Richard A. Landes. New York: Routledge.

Wojcik, Daniel. 2009. “Spirits, Apparitions, and Traditions of Supernatural Photography.” Visual Resources: An International Journal of Documentation 25:109-36.

Author:
Joseph Laycock

Post Date:
4 April 2014

 

 

Share

Our Lady of Clearwater

OUR LADY OF CLEARWATER TIMELINE

1929 (January 15) Father Edward J. Carter, S.J was born.

1991 Rita Ring began receiving “private messages from Jesus and Mary.

1991 (September 1) Mary appeared to five women in a field in Indiana, identifying herself as “The Lady of Light. One of the women was the anonymous visionary who came to be known as “The Batavia ( Ohio) Visionary”

1992 The Batavia Vissionary predicted that the Virgin Mary would appear at the St. Joseph Church in Cold Spring, Kentucky.

1992 (May) Mary announced that she would select three priests as “special ambassadors.”

1992 (August 31) Carter saw what he described as an image of the Virgin Mary in the trees at St. Joseph Church.

1993 Carter began receiving locutions from Jesus.

1994 Carter founded the Shepherds of Christ Ministry after the Batavia Vissionary was instructed to include him with the other priests who were to receive messages through her and to carry out the special mission of establishing the Shepherds of Christ.

1996 (May 31) Carter and the Batavia visionary saw Mary in a field and then began receiving messages until September 13, 1997

1996 (December 17) A customer at the Seminole Finance Company in Clearwater, Florida noticed an iridescent outline resembling the Virgin Mary on the glass paneling comprising the south wall of the building.

1996 (December 19) Two days after the image was first reported, Rita Ring, an active member of the Shepherds for Christ Ministry, received a message from Mary authenticating the image.

1997 (January) Clearwater police estimated a total of nearly 500,000 visitors since the initial sighting.

1997 (May) An unidentified vandal defaced the image by spraying the window with corrosive chemicals.

1998 (July 15) Ring reported a message from the Virgin Mary requesting a crucifix be built and placed beside her image.

1998 (Fall) Ugly Duckling Corporation leased the 22,000 square-foot building to the Shepherds of Christ Ministries, who subsequently purchased and renamed it “Our Lady of Clearwater.”

1998 (December 17) The Shepherds of Christ Ministries unveiled 18-foot crucifix, sculpted by Felix Avalos at the site.

2000 (December 18) Father Carter died.

2000 (February) The Shepherds of Christ opened a factory manufacturing rosaries on the second floor of the building.

2003 (December) The rosary factory closed due to a lack of funding and labor.

2004 (March 1) An assailant shattered the three topmost window panes which had revealed the head of the image.

FOUNDER/ GROUP HISTORY

On December 17, 1996, a customer at the Seminole Finance Company in Clearwater, Florida noticed an image bearing striking
resemblance to the Virgin Mary on the window paneling comprising the south wall of the building. The image occupied about a dozen glass panels on the building and was approximately 50 feet in height and 35 feet in width (Trull 1997). The customer who first noticed the image contacted local media, and within hours a crowd had gathered outside the building to witness the “Christmas miracle.” Devotees, skeptics, and otherwise interested tourists began to flood the city. The Clearwater city council was forced to take immediate action to accommodate an influx of visitors, estimated at 80,000 per day during December, to which the city was not accustomed. Within two months of the original sighting, Clearwater police estimated that “almost a half-million people” had visited the location and established a “Miracle Management Team” to handle the crowds of pilgrims (Tisch 2004:2). By the spring of 1997, the city had already “spent over $40,000… for crowd control” and later installed a traffic signal at the intersection of U.S. 19 and Drew Street, where the building is located (Posner 1997:3).

After the initial outpouring of public interest, the number of pilgrims gradually waned. Declining public interest in the image was reversed when, in May of 1997, the image was defaced by an unidentified vandal who sprayed corrosive chemicals onto the window, temporarily obscuring the image. However, the following month “two days of heavy thunderstorms washed away the blemishes; some pilgrims referred to this event as the image “healing itself” (Trull 1997; Tisch 2004:3). Despite the suddenly rekindled interest, in the years following the initial sighting and consequential fervor, the numbers of visitors to the site had decreased to about two hundred per day. Nonetheless, the Clearwater apparition underwent “a series of developments…that led to its institutionalization as a devotional center” and thus relative longevity compared to many other apparition sites (Swatos 2002:182). Among these factors were the relative permanence and resilience of the image until its final destruction in 2004, the emergence of a visionary who provided messages associated with the image, and a connection to the Shepherds of Christ Ministries.

At the time of the sighting, the building as well as the Seminole Finance Company was owned by Michael Krizmanich, a devout Catholic who subsequently sold the business to Ugly Duckling Car Sales Inc. The extremely large number of pilgrims to the site had a negative impact on the Ugly Duckling’s sales, and the company ultimately decided to lease the building to the Shepherds of Christ Ministries. The Shepherds renamed the building the “ Mary Image Building” and converted the interior into a shrine. Some members of the Ohio-based Shepherds of Christ Ministries relocated to Florida. Among them was Rita Ring who received a message authenticating the image in Clearwater on December 19, 1996, just two days after the initial image sighting.

In a later message received by Ring on July 15, 1998, the Virgin requested that a large crucifix be built and placed next to her image on the window panels. Funded by the Shepherds of Christ Ministries, the eighteen-foot crucifix sculpted by Felix Avalos, was unveiled on December 17, 1998, two years after the first sighting.

On March 1, 2004, the image was irreparably damaged when an assailant shattered the three topmost window panes. It has been

theorized that the vandal used a slingshot to propel several small metal balls through the panels containing the image’s head. Despite the damage to the image, the Shepherds of Christ Ministries retained the Mary Image Building, and Rita Ring continued to receive messages from the Virgin and Jesus However, the permanent destruction of the apparition has greatly diminished visitation to the Clearwater site.

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

Rita Ring has been the central visionary at Our Lady of Clearwater. Although Ring had reported receiving messages from Jesus and Mary since 1991, the messages following the appearance of the image on the Seminole Finance Company were closely linked to the Clearwater image. Ring’s first message following the discovery of the image on December 19, 1996 authenticated the image and connected the image to its location: “…I appear to you, my children, on a [former] bank in Florida. You have made money your god! Do you know how cold are your hearts? You turn away from my Son, Jesus, for your money. Your money is your god… ” (“News” n.d.)

Ring reported that Mary requested a widespread dissemination of the present messages, of those which would follow, and of the “Mary Message,” a tape recorded message received seven days prior at the annual feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe. A similar message was received on January 23, 1997, in which Ring reported Mary’s request for the distribution of not only “Mary’s Message,” but also several other books published by the Shepherds of Christ Ministries, including God’s Blue Book and Rosaries from the Hearts of Jesus and Mary. Further, many of the messages conveyed God’s wrath with human sinfulness and the failure to listen to previous messages, threatening humanity with fire, even citing religious negligence and divine wrath as the source of contemporary wildfires across Florida. There have also been prophecies of an imminent Endtime. All of Ring’s messages have been discerned by Father Carter.

The religious activity associated with Clearwater is clearly largely rooted in Catholicism and parallels the belief of many similar apparition groups for a need to return to the teachings of Christ. The Shepherds of Christ Ministries also has sought a degree of ecumenism. When the Shepherds decided to acquire the bank building in 1998, the group stated its intention to “make [the] site available to people of all faiths for quiet prayer and refection,” and questioned religious divisions, asking “Do we not all pray to the same Heavenly Father?” (Swatos 2002).

RITUALS

Shortly after the initial sighting of the Clearwater image, a provisional shrine was constructed at the apparition site containing benches, a donations box, candles, rosaries, photographs, flowers, candles, and prayer requests. Visitors to the site commonly leave offerings to the Virgin, such as “candles, flowers, fruit, [and] beads, and participate in individual acts of piety (Posner 1997:2). Mary’s requests for pilgrims, as reported by Ring, include prayer, a daily recitation of the Ten Commandments at the site, recitation of the rosary, and an observance of the First Saturday devotion. In order to fulfill the Virgin’s requests to distribute her messages and lead others into prayer, audiotapes of “Mary’s Message” are played and rosaries, pamphlets, and brochures are provided by site staff (Swatos 2002:192). The focus on individual worship, rather than “the communal sense of the Mass,” is one of the primary factors setting the Clearwater group’s organization apart from traditional Catholic configuration (Swatos 2002).

Pilgrims to the site also contribute to the perception of a sacred presence and the potential for miraculous events. For example, among some pilgrims from the Latino community there was a sense that Mary might assist a young refugee from Cuba who sought asylum in the U.S.: “Tessy Lopez, 62, of Miami Beach beamed with joy as she regarded the apparition. Like many others gathered at the site, Lopez said she considered it to be a sign of an impending miracle for Elian, the 6-year-old Cuban rafter who
survived a voyage that killed his mother and 10 others….I think that boy is blessed. Many people gave their lives for that boy, and he lives  blocks from here,” Lopez said. “We must realize this is an important sign” (Garcia 2000). Barbara Harrison (1999) visited the site on Christmas, 1996 and reported a message from Mary in which she was told “I have selected you as a vehicle through which my message will be spread….You must tell of this day and of our previous meetings in a book….You must tell of the miracles of birth and adoption.”

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Little is known about the life of one of the two central figures in Clearwater apparition. Rita Ring is simply described as a married woman with four children, a mathematics professor at the University of Cincinnati, and a devout Catholic and active member of the Shepherds of Christ Ministry. She reportedly began receiving “private revelations” from Jesus and Mary in 1991, several years prior to reporting messages associated with the image at Our Lady of Clearwater. More is known about Father Edward Carter. He was brought up I Cincinnati, attended Xavier University, was ordained in the Jesuit Order when he was 33 years-old, and taught theology at Xavier University for nearly three decades. Carter reports having begun receiving messages from Jesus during the summer, 1993, and on the day before Easter in 1994 was told that he would now begin to receive messages for others (Carter 2010). He founded the Shepherds of Christ Ministry in 1994 after the Batavia Vissionary was instructed to include him with the other priests who were to receive messages through her and to carry out the special mission of establishing the Shepherds of Christ. Carter also received a message from Jesus in which he was told to undertake this mission and to include Rita Ring: ” I am requesting that a new prayer movement be started under the direction of Shepherds of Christ Ministries…. I will use this new prayer movement within My Shepherds of Christ Ministries in a powerful way to help in the renewal of My Church and the world. I will give great graces to those who join this movement…. I am inviting My beloved Rita Ring to be coordinator for this activity” (“About” 2006).
On December 19, 1996, two days after the image on the Seminole Finance Company Building was reported, Mary authenticated the Clearwater apparition to Rita and instructed Rita to begin the work in Florida. Ring began serving as the locutionist, and Cartervalidated (“discerned) her messages. For a time she received messages daily that were made available in the Message Room along with video tapes. Ring visited what became the ” Mary Image Building” on the fifth of each month. Beginning in 2000, the year of Jubilee, the image has appeared to turn completely gold on that day.

The Shepherds of Christ Ministries describes itself as “a multi-faceted, international movement, made up of a number of ministries all dedicated to “bringing the Catholic Church’s faithful to deeper love and respect for the Hearts of Jesus and Mary.” Open to priests, religious and the laity, the ministry currently has over 150 prayer chapters in its worldwide network devoted especially to the spiritual welfare of priests” (Shepherds of Christ Ministries n.d.). The organization devotes itself to promoting the welfare of priests and encouraging those interested in a spiritual life to recite the rosary and participate in the Eucharist. A major objective is to encourage priests to “become more holy, hence traditional, and abandon modernist tendencies” (Swatos 2002:182). The Shepherds of Christ Movement lists its ministries as including the Apostles of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus, which pledges members to praying in front of the Blessed Sacrament for two hours each week; a “24 hour Adoration” located in China, Indiana, support for a nursing home; a “Consecration of Homes” for individuals and families; and a program to supply hand-made rosaries free-of-charge to Catholic schools (“Ministries n.d.)

 The Shepherds of Christ Ministries began leasing the bank building in 1998 and eventually purchased the 22,000-square-foot
center for more than two million dollars. The group began to refer to the building as “Our Lady of Clearwater.” On July 15, 1998 the daily message from Mary stated that “i wish a crucifix to be placed at the site near the main window beside my image. My eyes are always on my son Jesus crucified and my heart knows his resurrection from my dead“ (Desrochers 2007). The 18-foot crucifix was sculpted by Felix Avalos, was unveiled on December 18, 1998. The Shepherds subsequently opened a rosary factory in the building in 2000 and constructed a chapel for worship.

By 2002, however, public interest in the site had dramatically declined; the crucifix was covered due to weather-precipitated deterioration; the parking lot where pilgrims gathered was largely empty; the rosary factory was unable to support itself and closed; the group was not successful in supporting the site by selling tiles inscribed with the donor’s name. The partial destruction of the apparitional image in 2004 furthered weakened an already struggling apparitional site.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

One notable controversy surrounding the image at Clearwater is the source of the image itself. While Ring reported that the Virgin Mary authenticated her appearance two days after the initial sighting on December 17, 1996, a photograph taken in the building in 1994 reveals that the image had been present for some time and was only noticed when palm trees partially covering the window, were removed. Further, according to Posner, “any religious pilgrim, reporter, or casual visitor need only to walk around the building to note that the ‘Mary apparition’ is hardly the only such colorful image present. Indeed, iridescent staining of a similar nature is apparent around its circumference wherever exposed reflective glass was used, and is particularly vivid where vegetation and sprinkler heads are in close proximity to the glass. Along the low hedges, the stains appear to hover just above their tops; where the palms grow high, the stains follow” (1997:1). A local chemist examined the windows and suggested the stain was produced by water deposits combined with weathering, yielding a chemical reaction like that often seen on old bottles, perhaps due to the action of the water sprinkler. However, adherents to the divine nature of the image argue that what is miraculous about the image is not its origin, but the fact that “this combination of elements formed itself into this image, rather than, for example, an amorphous series of waves” (Swatos 2002).

The image has also drawn mixed reviews from visitors. For example, “I see the reflections, but I don’t see it,” said Carmen Rodriguez, 50, with a tinge of disappointment. “I think some people can see it and others not. Perhaps it’s based on necessity.” And, Eulalia Asencio, 29, expressed skepticism. She said she had carefully touched the window pane to see if air conditioning might have caused the image to appear. “It looks like when you get Windex and then you have that rainbow action going on,” Asencio said. “I really think it is the reflection of the light” (Garcia 2000). On the other hand, for most pilgrims the image provided a dramatic experience of divine presence, as evidenced by the enormous crowds, the gifts and prayer requests left at the shrine, and the testimonies of miracles. Barbara Harrison (1999:20), who was not Catholic, reported that when she arrived at the site “Awestruck crowds were staring up at the rainbow image of the Blessed Mother Mary. I was unprepared for the rush of emotions I experienced…. I was astonished, and the sanctity of the moment took my breath away.

There has been a modest level of tension between the Roman Catholic Church and Our Lady of Clearwater leaders. The Shepherdsof Christ Ministries presents itself as a lay Catholic organization but has no formal relationship to the church. Site representatives have taken care not to challenge Roman Catholic Church authority. For example, the group indicated that it would seek permission from the local diocese before constructing a chapel at the site. Father Carter has repeatedly stated that “I recognize and accept that the final authority regarding private revelations rests with the Holy See of Rome, to whose judgment I willingly submit” (“News” n.d.). The Catholic diocese of St. Petersburg has disavowed any connection to Shepherds of Christ and has called the image a “naturally explained phenomenon.” However, the diocese has not launched an investigation of the site and has not condemned it (“Clearwater Madonna Changes Hands” 1998; Tisch 2004:4). There have other criticisms from within the Catholic community that conclude the apparitions are not authentic (Conte 2006).

It is estimated that there have been 1,500,000 visitors to the Our Lady of Clearwater apparition site since 1996. Despite the sharp decline in both pilgrims and tourists to the Mary Image Building following the 2004 destruction of the image, the Shepherds of Christ Ministries has continued to hold recitations of Mary’s daily messages at the building. Transcripts of the messages have been posted on the Shepherds of Christ website as well as printed in the books published by the organization.”

REFERENCES

“About.” 2006. Shepherds of Christ Ministries. Accessed from http://www.sofc.org/ABOUT/abouthom.htm on 10 March 2013.

Carter, Edward. 2010. Tell My People: by Fr. Edward Carter, S.J. Accessed from http://deaconjohn1987.blogspot.com/2010/10/tell-my-people-by-fr-edward-carter-sj.html

” Clearwater Madonna Changes Hands.” 1998, July 11. Accessed from http://www.witchvox.com/media/mary_shrine.html on 10 March 2013.

Conte, Ronald. 2006. “Claims of Private Revelation: True or False? An Evaluation of the Messages of Rita Ring.” Catholic Planet. Accessed from http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/false45.htm on 10 March 2013.

Desrochers, Claude. 2007. “Jesus and Mary in Clearwater, Florida.” JPG, 30 November. Accessed from http://jpgmag.com/stories/2033 on 10 March 2013.

Garcia Sandra Marquez. 2000. Mary `Appears’ Near Elian.” The Miami Herald, 26 March. Accessed from http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/elian/mary.htm on 10 March 2013.

Harris, Barbara. 1999. Conversations with Mary: Modern Miracles in an Everyday Life. Osprey, FL: Heron House Publishers.

“Ministries.” n.d. Shepherds of Christ Ministires. Accessed from http://www.sofc.org/ministries2.htm on 10 March 2013.

“News.” n.d. Shepherds of Christ Ministries. Accessed from http://www.sofc.org/news_1.htm on 8 March 2013.

O’Neil, Barbara. 2000. “Believers Hear: Make Rosaries,” St. Petersburg Times, 15 October. Accessed from http://www.sptimes.com/News/101500/NorthPinellas/Believers_hear__Make_.shtml on 5 March 2013.

Posner, Gary P. 1997. “ Tampa Bay’s Christmas 1996 ‘Virgin Mary Apparition’,” Tampa Bay Skeptics Report. Accessed from http://www.tampabayskeptics.org/v9n4rpt.html on 3 March 2013.

Shepherds of Christ Ministries. n.d. “Virgin Mary Tells Cincinnati Visionary Why Her Image Appears on FL Office Building.” Accessed from http://www.sofc.org/news_1.htm on 10 March 2013.

Swatos, William H., Jr. 2002 “Our Lady of Clearwater: Postmodern Traditionalism.” Pp. 181-92 in From Medieval Pilgrimage to Religious Tourism: The Social and Cultural Economics of Piety, edited by William H. Swatos, Jr. and Luigi Tomasi. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Tisch, Chris. 2004. “For Mary’s Faithful, A Shattering Loss.” St. Petersburg Times, 2 March. Accessed from http://www.sptimes.com/2004/03/02/Tampabay/For_Mary_s_faithful__.shtml on 3 March 2013.

Trull, D. 1997. “The Virgin May Does Windows?” Accessed from http://dagmar.lunarpages.com/~parasc2/articles/0797/mary.htm on 3 March 2013.

Authors:
David G. Bromley
Leah Hott

Post Date:
11 March 2013

 

 

 

Share

Our Lady of Emmitsburg

OUR LADY OF EMMITSBURG

OUR LADY OF EMMITSBURG TIMELINE

1957 (March 12):  Gianna Talone was born in Phoenix, Arizona.

1987 (September):  Gianna dreamed of Our Lady three nights in a row, prompting her to pray the rosary and attend Mass daily.

1988 (June):  While making a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, Gianna received her first locution from Our Lady and had a vision of the Child Jesus.

1988 (July):  Gianna and eight other young adults at St. Maria Goretti Catholic Church in Scottsdale, Arizona began receiving locutions and visions of Our Lady and Jesus.

1989:  A priestly commission in Phoenix investigated the apparitions at St. Maria Goretti. Phoenix Bishop Thomas O’Brien allowed the prayer group to continue.

1989 (December 19):  Gianna began receiving daily apparitions of Our Lady, except on Fridays.

1993 (January):  Gianna Talone and then-fiancé Michael Sullivan made a pilgrimage to the Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes in Emmitsburg, Maryland. Gianna received a vision during which Our Lady invited the couple to relocate to Emmitsburg.

1993 (November 1):  Gianna and Michael moved to the Emmitsburg area and began attending the Marian Prayer Group on Thursday nights. This was when she typically received an apparition with a public message. Attendance at the Thursday Marian Prayer Group swelled as news of the visionary spread.

1994 (August):  Mission of Mercy, a mobile health care organization serving poor, underinsured, and underserved patients, was launched by Drs. Gianna and Michael Sullivan in Pennsylvania and Maryland.

1995 (March 9):  In a message to Gianna, Our Lady designated Emmitsburg as the Center of her Immaculate Heart.

1995 (August 30):  Monsignor Jeremiah Kenney, Vice Chancellor of the Baltimore archdiocese, announced that since the Phoenix diocese had taken a neutral stance toward Gianna’s visions in 1989, Baltimore would follow suit.

1999:  Gianna began compiling The Hidden Life of Our Lord , the autobiography of the Child Jesus, narrated to her through interior locutions.

2000 (September 8):  The Baltimore archdiocese suspended the Thursday prayer meetings because it “finds no basis for [the apparitions]” (“Statement” 2000).

2001 (May):  Baltimore Archbishop Cardinal Keeler arranged a priestly commission to investigate the apparitions.

2002 (September):  The commission concluded that it could neither verify nor condemn the apparitions.

2003:  Cardinal Ratzinger, then-head of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, corresponded with Cardinal Keeler, supporting the Keeler Commission’s authority.

2004:  The Marian prayer group was reconstituted and began meeting monthly, first at a nearby farm, then at the Lynfield Event Complex, a conference center outside Frederick, Maryland.

2005:  The Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary was founded, in response to an Our Lady request, to provide information about the Emmitsburg apparitions and messages.

2005 (May):  Gianna began receiving interior locutions from God the Father.

2008 (Spring):  Fr. Edwin O’Brien was appointed Archbishop in Baltimore. Gianna wrote a letter to him informing him of the history of the apparitions in Emmitsburg and assuring him that she would comply with his wishes regarding the monthly prayer meetings held at the Lynfield Event Complex.

2008 (October 8):  Archbishop O’Brien released a Pastoral Advisory explaining the Church’s position on the Emmitsburg apparitions and requesting that Gianna and her supporters stop disseminating information about the apparitions and messages in the diocese of Baltimore.

2008 (October 13):  Gianna and her supporters discontinued the monthly prayer group at Lynfield.

2008-present:  Gianna has continued to report daily apparitions and locutions in her home.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

Gianna’s miraculous interactions with Our Lady began in 1987, when she dreamed of Our Lady three nights in a row. These dreamscame at a low point in Gianna’s life. She had received her Doctor of Pharmacology degree, worked at a major hospital in a high-paying position, and married her first husband. Within a few years, however, she had lost her job, her marriage was annulled by the Church, and she was struggling with the direction of her life. Following her dreams of Our Lady, Gianna began praying the rosary, going to Confession, and attending Mass daily. In 1988, she made a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, where she had a vision of the Child Jesus. Our Lady also spoke to her during her trip through an interior locution, telling her, “I am coming home with you in a special way. Once you were a lost lamb but now you have been found.”

Once she returned home (at that time, she lived in Scottsdale, Arizona), she continued attending youth prayer group meetings at St. Maria Goretti Catholic Church. There, several young people as well as Father Jack Spaulding reported apparitions or locutions of Jesus and of Our Lady, appearing as Our Lady of Joy. These messages from Jesus have been published in six volumes of I Am Your Jesus of Mercy. In 1989, the diocese of Phoenix investigated the Scottsdale apparitions and took a neutral position on the matter.

In a November, 1992 vision, Our Lady pointed out Michael Sullivan to Gianna at a prayer meeting. Michael Sullivan, a medical doctor who had also struggled with his faith, had made a pilgrimage to Scottsdale and attended the same prayer meeting as Gianna. Like Gianna, Michael had had a successful career before experiencing spiritual and personal struggles including divorce and the abduction of a son. Though he was not a practicing Catholic at that time, he found himself praying the rosary and even making a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, where he volunteered as a doctor during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. By the time he visited Scottsdale in 1992, he had become a much more committed Catholic. In a vision, Our Lady informed Gianna that Michael would be her future husband. Gianna gamely introduced herself to him following her apparition. They dated for about two months before becoming engaged.

In January, 1993, Gianna and then-fiancé Michael Sullivan made a pilgrimage to Emmitsburg, Maryland to visit the National ShrineGrotto of Our Lady of Lourdes. Now run by Mt. St. Mary’s University, the site centers upon a replica of the 1858 apparition site in Lourdes, France, and also features a Glass Chapel and visitor’s center. A walkway winds through Stations of the Cross and a Rosary Walk, ending at the foot of a large metal Crucifix atop a wooded hill. This is where Gianna received her first apparition in Emmitsburg. Our Lady, clothed in a blue dress and white veil, invited Gianna and Michael to move to the small town, if they were willing. They were given three days to make the decision, and returned home to Arizona to consider the invitation.

On June 19, 1993, Gianna and Michael married in Arizona, at St. Maria Goretti Church. At the time of their wedding ceremony, there was a severe thunderstorm in Emmitsburg, and lightning struck St. Joseph Catholic Church. The church lost electricity for three days, but the light illuminating the statue of Our Lady at the front of the church remained lit. Some Emmitsburg parishioners, upon learning that Gianna’s wedding ceremony coincided with this event, deemed it miraculous.

In November, 1993, Gianna and Michael moved to the Emmitsburg area and began attending Masses and a weekly Marian PrayerGroup at St. Joseph Catholic Church in Emmitsburg. Gianna received a vision at her first prayer meeting, surprising fellow devotees when she fell to her knees and began conversing with Our Lady. Father Alfred Pehrsson, C.M., the parish pastor she had met during her January visit to Emmitsburg, explained to parishioners what had happened and implored them to keep quiet about what they had seen so as not to call undue attention to Gianna or the prayer group. Nevertheless, attendance at the Thursday Marian Prayer Group grew as news of the visionary spread. As many as 1,000 visitors attended weekly (Gaul 2002), including several priests, bishops from other countries, and even non-Catholic visitors. Close to 700,000 people attended between 1994 and 2008 (G. Sullivan 2008). Church groups throughout the region organized bus trips to Emmitsburg, and many families drove several hours to spend the day visiting the town. The numbers of conversions and confessions increased, and Fr. Pehrsson even heard confessions from Jewish and Protestant attendees (Pehrsson n.d.). Many attendees reported miracles during the service: a spinning sun or two suns, healings, and once, the lights of heaven visible in Gianna’s eyes during ecstasy. Every week, several rows of pews were reserved at the church for parishioners, but others had to arrive before noon (for the 7 PM service) in order to find a seat. Overflow crowds were directed to the church rectory across the street, where a television screen was set up so that all could see Gianna. Problematically, crowds set up blankets and chairs on the lawn and cemetery surrounding the church, and parked illegally throughout the small town. In response, some Protestant churches in the area opened their parking lots to pilgrims.

Throughout the 1990s, there was little controversy between apparition believers and Church leaders. The Baltimore Archdiocese at this time took a neutral stance, supporting the outcome of the 1989 Phoenix investigations. Gianna continued to have daily apparitions of Our Lady, and even began receiving interior locutions from God the Father and from Jesus.

In September, 2000, however, the Archdiocese suspended the Thursday prayer meetings at St. Joseph Catholic Church, releasing a statement indicating that it “finds no basis for [the apparitions]” (“Statement” 2000). This move may have been prompted by an apparent shift in the tone of the messages; in the late 1990s, they began featuring warnings and predictions of chastisement. That Thursday in September, 2000, supporters found a sign taped to the door of St. Joseph Church indicating that the prayer meeting would not be held that day (Clarke 2008). Many attendees, including a bus of pilgrims who had just arrived from Ireland, were understandably disappointed. In the months that followed, many supporters wrote letters to Baltimore’s Cardinal Keeler and to local newspapers expressing their disappointment and confusion.

Cardinal Keeler arranged a priestly commission in Baltimore to investigate the apparitions in 2001. Supporters maintain that the
Commission was unfair to Gianna, spending very little time with her and prohibiting her supporters (including theologians) from speaking on her behalf. Gianna was permitted to answer only the questions posed to her by the Commission, rather than tell her whole story.

The Keeler Commission issued a decision in September, 2002, concluding that “it did not believe in the claim” that Gianna was receiving authentic visions of Our Lady because it “did not find the evidence it needed to verify or condemn the visions” (Lobianco 2002). The Commission expressed concern over the “apocalyptic” content of the messages, arguing that “we should not encourage apocalyptic predictions or cater to a miracle-mania mentality” (as quoted in Keeler 2002). The Commission was also concerned that it saw “no perceptible development or progression” of the messages; over time, it argued, they did not become more complex as believers presumably matured in faith, nor did they follow the liturgical cycle (as quoted in Keeler 2002). Further, the Commission concluded that some messages were contrary to Church teachings; for example, Gianna’s messages predict an intermediate and non-corporeal, spiritual return of Jesus to earth as a child prior to the actual final coming of Jesus as an adult and “Just Judge.” Church authorities seem to reject the notion of this intermediate coming. Finally, the Commission was skeptical of both the conversions reported as a result of Our Lady’s messages in Emmitsburg, as well as what it termed the “growing addiction to the spectacular” that it believed was happening in connection with the apparitions (as quoted in Keeler 2002). As a result of the Commission Report, Monsignor Kenney in Baltimore released a statement saying that the Archdiocese had concluded the apparitions were not supernatural. In addition, Cardinal Ratzinger, then-head of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, corresponded with Cardinal Keeler (though his letter was not released to the public at the time) supporting the Keeler Commission’s authority to “conclude the matter with a decree of ‘constat de non supernaturalitate’” (Ratzinger 2003).

Gianna and Michael Sullivan, in addition to several of their supporters, wrote letters to diocesan authorities questioning the validity of the Keeler Commission’s conclusions and asserting that the apparitions were indeed valid. Michael Sullivan published online a letter he had written to Cardinal Keeler, copying dozens of U.S. bishops, asking why the prayer group had been suspended in 2000 and expressing concern that the Keeler Commission had been misinformed about the content of the messages (M. Sullivan 2003). In a 2006 vision, Our Lady told Gianna that the Church’s decision about the apparitions came from the local level (Cardinal Keeler), not from Vatican authorities, so the decision therefore carried less weight than it would if it had come from higher authorities. As Gianna later pointed out, “Cardinal Ratzinger does not himself conclude [that the apparitions are not supernatural] and … allows the authority to rest at a local level, that being with Cardinal Keeler and not the Holy See” (2006). Cardinal Keeler, in response, released Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter and reiterated his stance that the apparitions were not supernatural.

Meanwhile, in 2004, supporters resurrected the Marian Prayer Group. Since 2000, they had not been permitted to hold these meetings on Church property, but they reasoned that they could hold meetings on private property, particularly if they did not hold Mass or offer Sacraments. The prayer group met at a nearby farm monthly, participants sometimes huddling in a barn during inclement weather. Later, the group moved to the Lynfield Event Complex, a conference center outside Frederick, Maryland thatcould hold larger crowds. As many as 1,000 people attended this prayer meeting some months, despite the absence of Mass and Sacraments. The prayer group became more formally organized during this time period, as a core group of volunteers video recorded Gianna during ecstasy and audio recorded the message, posted public messages to a website, handled donations for the conference center rental fees, compiled messages into book series, and handled the production of Our Lady of Emmitsburg statues, prayer cards, and pins. Two websites (Foundation for the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary and Private Revelations 12:1) were created to provide factual information and transcripts of messages.

During this time period, opposition to the apparitions from some local Catholics and diocesan leaders also grew. Another website, Cult Watch , took a negative view of the apparitions, supporters, and visionary. Father Kieran Kavanaugh, O.C.D., Gianna’s spiritual advisor, was silenced when Cardinal Keeler ordered Fr. Kavanaugh’s superior to temporarily restrict the priest from attending the monthly prayer meetings. Father Alfred Pehrsson, the parish priest at St. Joseph who had since been relocated to another parish, was also asked by his superiors not to speak about the Emmitsburg apparitions. Both men have remained reticent to speak about the Emmitsburg events.

In 2007, Fr. Edwin O’Brien was appointed Archbishop in Baltimore upon Cardinal Keeler’s resignation. With the change in leadership, Gianna wrote a letter to Archbishop O’Brien informing him of the history of the apparitions in Emmitsburg and assuring him that she would comply with his wishes regarding the monthly prayer meetings held at Lynfield. Archbishop O’Brien did not respond to Gianna’s letter directly, but instead released a Pastoral Advisory in 2008 repeating the Church’s position that the messages were not supernatural. While he admitted in the Pastoral Advisory that there is nothing necessarily sacrilegious about the messages, he asserted his view that the “alleged apparitions are not supernatural in origin” (O’Brien 2008). He further “strongly” cautioned Mrs. Gianna Talone-Sullivan not to communicate in any manner whatsoever, written or spoken, electronic or printed, personally or through another in any church, public oratory, chapel or any other place or locale, public or private, within the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of Baltimore any information of any type related to or containing messages or locutions allegedly received from the Virgin Mother of God.

The Pastoral Advisory further warned Catholics against “participat[ing] in any activity surrounding these alleged apparitions or who seek to disseminate information and promote them here in the Archdiocese.” Archbishop O’Brien closed his letter by saying he wanted to “resolve the divisions created by this situation.”

Local supporters were outraged, many of them questioning whether Archbishop O’Brien overstepped his authority by attempting to regulate the activities of Catholics even off church property. Gianna, however, wrote to Archbishop O’Brien thanking him for “clarifying the many unresolved questions his predecessor [Cardinal Keeler] left unaddressed” (2003). She declared in her letter that she would no longer attend monthly prayer meetings at Lynfield and that she was neither affiliated with nor responsible for the activities of The Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary . In her letter, which she also published online, she urged her supporters to “heed the Bishop’s cautions.”

Gianna has continued to report daily apparitions and locutions in her home. The Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary and Private Revelations 12:1 still operate, compiling and interpreting previous Emmitsburg messages for online newsletters. In 2013, the newsletter of the Foundation was received by people in 54 U.S. states and territories and 145 nations. As of February, 2014, internet users from 188 countries have made over 9 million visits to the website of the Foundation.

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

Those who believe in the Emmitsburg apparitions have discerned by various means that the apparitions are legitimate. In interviews that I conducted with supporters in 2011 and 2012, many pointed out that Gianna was a “yuppie” with some wealth, an advanced degree in Pharmacology, and a job—in other words, with much to lose by claiming to receive apparitions. These individuals did not believe that Gianna would report seeing Our Lady and risk public scrutiny if it weren’t true. Gianna has even undergone testing twice while in ecstasy: once at the University of California, San Francisco Medical Center in 1993 under the supervision of Marian theologian Fr. René Laurentin, and again at Johns Hopkins University in 2003 by Dr. Ricardo Castañón. Both times, doctors determined that her brain scans were consistent with those of other visionaries in ecstasy. Detractors have accused Gianna of heading a “cult” or reveling in her fame. Some supporters, however, have been quick to point out that Gianna is merely a conduit of the divine.

Supporters can easily access several years’ worth of messages from Our Lady of Emmitsburg through the websites of The Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary and Private Revelations 12:1, and many individuals re-read those messages, finding new meanings each time. Some messages have garnered more attention than others. During my fieldwork in Emmitsburg from 2010 to 2013, I witnessed occasional conversations about those messages bearing warning of catastrophe. Two important examples are the June 1, 2008 message warning of “another body in orbit around your solar system” and destroying “60-70% of the world’s population,” and the December 31, 2004 message warning of the “earth being spun off its axis.” A few individuals in Emmitsburg speculated that the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, which NASA reports shifted the earth on its axis by four inches, fulfilled this prophecy.

Another common theme in the messages is that people should pray for priests and apostates. The September 15, 2003 message cautions: “The Church will always stand because of my Son, but what is in jeopardy are the souls of many of my priest s, my Bishops and my Cardinals who will have to atone and who will be held accountable for misleading the flock.” A common refrain for priests and lay Catholics, however, is to pray for them. The August 31, 1995 message is typical: “Pray for Mercy, little children, and desire Love and forgiveness for all people.”

Given the opposition from certain local priests to the Emmitsburg apparitions, supporters have also been heartened by Our Lady’smany messages assuring them that she is not leaving Emmitsburg. The February 5, 2006 message, for instance, assures listeners that Emmitsburg is the Center of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart despite opposition from some Church leaders, then continues, “Know that I am not leaving and that I intercede for all good things for you before the Throne of God.” The October 5, 2008 message (just before the Pastoral Advisory was released) repeats this theme: “know that I am here with you. I am not leaving , even if you think I am far away.”

Supporters hold a variety of opinions about the Archdiocesan stance on the apparitions. While most all supporters have obeyed the spirit of the Pastoral Advisory by not holding prayer meetings and not speaking about the apparitions unless asked, many have continued to question the authority of Archbishop O’Brien to prohibit prayer meetings that convene on property not belonging to the Catholic Church. Further, many supporters adhere to the Church teaching on private revelation, that believers may “ welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church” (“Catechism” 1.1.2.67). In Emmitsburg, many individuals reason that nothing in the messages conflicts with Church teaching, scripture, or tradition, and thus they are free to believe in them. They believe that the Keeler Commission, which concluded that apocalyptic teachings were troubling and that the messages about the return of the Child Jesus in an intermediate spiritual reign prior to the actual Final Coming contradicted Church teaching, was misinformed.

RITUALS/PRACTICES

Due to prohibitions, practices relating to the Emmitsburg apparitions have changed greatly over time. Prior to September 2000, St. Joseph Catholic Church in Emmitsburg hosted a Marian Prayer Group in the church every Thursday. Pilgrims from around the world would attend the 8:30 AM weekday Mass, followed by private prayer and afternoon Confession. Many would visit the National Shrine Grotto of Lourdes, National Shrine of Elizabeth Ann Seton, and other sites in town. The prayer service was held in the evening, featuring Mass, Rosary prayers, and a healing service. Devotees often stayed until late in the evening.

From 2004-2008, the prayer group met monthly to pray the Rosary. These services did not occur on Church property, did not feature Mass, and did not offer Sacraments. Nevertheless, they attracted hundreds of pilgrims.

Now that the prayer group has been disbanded, the Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary is encouraging supporters to hold monthly Marian Days of Prayer in their own homes. There is no way to measure how many people are involved in this endeavor, but in my time in Emmitsburg, I have never heard of anyone organizing a prayer group specifically for the Marian Day of Prayer. I have, however, spoken to several people who incorporate Our Lady of Emmitsburg into their daily devotions. They may mention her name during a Litany (“Our Lady of Emmitsburg, Pray for Us”), carry prayer cards with her image, or keep statues of her in their homes. Many people continue to read Our Lady of Emmitsburg messages, since many of them are accessible via websites and printed books. The Foundation and Private Revelations 12:1 compile messages and interpretations in electronic newsletters that are distributed worldwide. The newsletter of the Foundation was distributed in 54 U.S. states and territories and 145 nations in 2013.

Additionally, many supporters were and continue to be active in their local parishes, attending Mass frequently, visiting the Grotto regularly, praying the Rosary and other prayers, and reading books about the lives of the saints. In general, Emmitsburg believers in the apparitions tend to fall in line with other conservative Catholics in terms of their attitudes toward social and political issues and Church authority. Like many “highly committed” Catholics, many individuals support their Church’s opposition to birth control, abortion, and same sex marriage (D’Antonio 2011; D’Antonio, Dillon & Gautier 2013; Dillon 2011a, 2011b); to be sure, many of the Emmitsburg messages take a conservative stance on these issues.

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Prior to the 2008 Pastoral Advisory, a network of volunteers organized the prayer group and the dissemination of messages. Tasks included videotaping Gianna during her vision, transcribing the messages, maintaining websites, collecting donations for the conference center rental (from 2004 to 2008), managing crowds of attendees, and leading Rosary prayers during services.

The Foundation was established to be, and remains, an important depository of information about the apparitions. Private Revelations 12:1 is another helpful source of historical information. Both organizations maintain websites easily accessible by any internet search engine, the Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary and Private Revelations of Our Lady of Emmitsburg . Both organizations officially are located in Pennsylvania and are thus outside the jurisdiction of the Baltimore Archdiocese and its prohibitions. Notably, Gianna disavowed any involvement with The Foundation in her 2008 response to the Pastoral Advisory.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

The major challenge in Emmitsburg is the Church’s position on the apparitions. Some parish priests remain adamantly opposed to them, and there is some anecdotal evidence of animosity between certain parish priests and apparition supporters in Emmitsburg. Some local lay Catholics also oppose the apparitions, so much so that supporters frequently censor themselves in the presence of certain individuals. Cult Watch occasionally posts new articles deriding the apparitions and visionary.

Following the termination of the monthly prayer meeting at Lynfield, the unofficial hub for apparition supporters was St. Peter’s Bookstore, an Emmitsburg bookstore and coffee house that had been founded as a service to Our Lady of Emmitsburg to serve as a repository of information about the apparitions. St. Peter’s offered book compilations of messages, knowledgeable employees and owners willing to share information about the apparitions, an inviting seating area conducive to discussing the apparitions, and other Catholic items. The business had been quite successful while the prayer group still met near Emmitsburg, even organizing a major lecture series, and was a favorite hangout for local Catholics and Catholic pilgrims visiting the Grotto. Many supporters, therefore, were disappointed when St. Peter’s went out of business in 2012.

With the appointment of Archbishop Lori in Baltimore in 2012, some individuals hoped that the Archdiocese would ease its prohibition on a Marian Prayer Group in Emmitsburg. No formal restrictions have been placed on Gianna in the Archdiocese since Archbishop O’Brien left Baltimore. There has been some interest in organizing a Marian prayer group that would not include Gianna’s visions and messages, and some of the Daughters of Charity at the Basilica have organized a few such meetings. As for the apparitions, there is currently no way to measure how many people continue to believe and to support them, since the prayer group has not been permitted to convene since 2008. While supporters are hopeful that Church leaders will reverse their decision about the Emmitsburg apparitions, many speculate that the apparitions will be approved only when Gianna’s visions and locutions cease, or through divine intervention.

REFERENCES

Catechism of the Catholic Church. 1993. Accessed from www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM on 13 February 2014.

Clarke, Paul A. 2008. The last word? Frederick News Post , December 14, Local News section. Accessed from www.fredericknewspost.com on 13 March 2010.

D’Antonio, William V., Michele Dillon, and Mary Gautier. 2013. American Catholics in Transition. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

D’Antonio, William V. 2011. “New Survey Offers Portrait of U.S. Catholics.” National Catholic Reporter , October 24. Accessed from http://ncronline.org/AmericanCatholics on 14 January 2012.

Dillon, Michele. 2011a. “Trends in Catholic Commitment Stable over Time.” National Catholic Reporter . October 24. Accessed from http://ncronline.org/AmericanCatholics on 14 January 2012.

Dillon, Michele. 2011b. “What is Core to American Catholics in 2011.” National Catholic Reporter , October 24. Accessed from http://ncronline.org/AmericanCatholics on 14 January 2012.

Eck, Larry and Mary Sue. 1992. “Jesus, I Trust in Thee: An Interview with Michael Sullivan, MD.” Medjugorje Magazine, July-August-September, 17-27.

Faricy, Robert, SJ and Rooney, Lucy, SND de N. 1991. Our Lady Comes to Scottsdale: Is It Authentic? Milford, OH: The Riehle Foundation.

Fortney, Sarah. 2007. “The Voices of Faith.” Frederick News Post , January 8, Local News section. Accessed from www.fredericknewspost.com on 13 March 2010.

Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. n.d. “Messages of Our Lady of Emmitsburg.” Accessed from www.centeroftheimmaculateheart.org on 13 February 2014.

Gaul, Christopher. 2003. “Vatican Supports Action to Suppress Visionary. Accessed from www.archbalt.org/news/crsullivan.cfm on 13 March 2010.

Gaul, Christopher. 2002. “We Do Not Believe in the Apparitions.” Accessed from www.emmitsburg.net/cult_watch/news_reports/we_do_not_believe.htm on 13 March 2010.

Gaul, Christopher. 1995. “Brief History of St. Joseph’s Church.” The Catholic Review , November 1.

Keeler, William Cardinal. 2002. “Letter to Fr. O’Connor,” December 5. Accessed from www.emmitsburg.net/cult_watch/commission_report.htm on 12 June 2012.

Keeler, William Cardinal. 2003. “Decree,” June 7. Accessed from archbalt.org/news.upload/SullivanDecree.pdf on 19 March 2010.

Kenney, Rev. Msgr. Jeremiah F. 2002. “Letter to Gianna Talone-Sullivan,” September 24.

Lobianco, Tom. 2002. “Church Takes Neutral Stance on Apparitions. Frederick News Post , December 8, Local News section. Accessed from www.fredericknewspost.com on 13 March 2010.

Moving Heart Foundation. n.d. “Background.” Accessed from http://www.movingheartfoundation.com/Background.htm on 3 February 2014.

O’Brien, Archbishop Edwin. 2008. “Pastoral Advisory,” October 8. Accessed from www.archbalt.org/news/upload/Pastoral_Advisory.pdf on 21 May 2010.

O’Brien, Archbishop Edwin. 2002. “Letter to Father O’Connor,” December 5. Accessed from www.emmitsburg.net/cult_watch/commission_report.htm on 13 March 2010.

Pehrsson, Fr. Al C.M. n.d. “Our Lady of Emmitsburg: Testimony 1993-2006.” Audio CD distributed by Foundation of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Ratzinger, Cardinal Joseph. 2003. “Letter to Cardinal Keeler,” February 15. Accessed from www.archbalt.org/news/upload/decreeRatzinger.pdf on 21 May 2010.

“Statement Concerning the Alleged Apparitions to Gianna Talone-Sullivan in Emmitsburg.” 2000. Accessed from http://www.tfsih.com/Misc/Unsigned%20Decree_09-08-00.pdf on 30 January 2014.

Sullivan, Gianna. 2008. “Letter.” Accessed from www.emmitsburg.net/cult_watch/rm/GiannaPastoralAdvisoryResponse.pdf on 21 May 2010.

Sullivan, Gianna. 2006. “Letter.” Accessed from www.pdtsigns.com/giannaupdate.html on 21 May 2010.

Sullivan, Michael. 2003. “Letter.” Accessed from www.emmitsburg.net/cult_watch/rm/Sullivan_rebuttal.pdf on 21 May, 2010.

Author:
Jill Krebs

Post Date:
23 February 2014

 

Share

Our Lady of Good Help

OUR LADY OF GOOD HELP


OUR LADY OF GOOD HELP TIMELINE

1831 (January 30):  Marie Adele Joseph Brise was born in Dion-le-Val, Brabant, Belgium.

1855:  Brise and her family emigrated from Belgium to Wisconsin.

1859 (October):  Brise had three visions of the Virgin Mary in which she was told to teach
children about God.

1859:  Brise’s father built the first shrine chapel on the apparition site.

1867:  The first school, St. Mary’s Academy, was built at the chapel site; the school formally opened in 1869.

1871 (October 8):  Brise led a prayer vigil around the chapel during the Peshtigo fire. All five acres of the chapel grounds were unharmed while the surrounding land was destroyed.

1896 (July 5):  Adele Brise died.

1933:  The School was remodeled into the Home for Crippled Children.

1941:  The current chapel building was constructed.

1953:  The Home for Crippled Children was closed and Pre-Novitiate High School was established.

1968:  The high school was closed. Franciscan Sisters continued to manage the shrine

1970:  The grounds became a House of Prayer.

1992-2002:  The Carmelite Sisters from Grand Rapids, Michigan assumed responsibility for the shrine.

2002:  The local diocese reassumed control of the shrine.

2009 (January 9):  Bishop David Ricken appointed a commission to study Brise’s original apparition claims.

2010 (December 8):  The site was authenticated and was the first to be recognized by the Roman Catholic Church in the United States.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

Marie Adele Joseph Brise was born to Lambert and Marie Brise in Dion-le-Val, Brabant, Belgium on January 30, 1831. As a child she
and several friends pledged to join a religious order. However, Brise continued to live with her parents in what was a relatively poor family until 1855 when the family emigrated to America. The family purchased a 240 acre tract of land to support itself. It was four years later, in October, 1859, just a short time after the Marian apparitions at Lourdes, that Brise had the first of three apparitional experiences. She was carrying grain to a mill in Champion, Wisconsin when the Virgin Mary appeared to her: “She saw a lady clothed in dazzling white, with a yellow sash around her waist and a crown of stars around her head standing between two trees, one a maple, the other a hemlock” (Shrine 2010). Brise found the experience frightening. On Sunday, October 9, the second apparitional event occurred when Brise was walking to Mass in Bay Settlement, a neighboring area, with two companions. Only Brise directly experienced the apparition. Finally, when walking home from church, Brise experienced an apparitional figure in the same place for a third and final time. Mary identified herself as the “Queen of Heaven” and told Brise that she must teach the children how to live their lives for God. From that day forward, Brise devoted her life to the teachings of the Catholic faith to young
children. The chapel was soon accompanied by a school, St. Mary’s Academy, in 1867 (Mann 2011). Brise had gathered many pupils by this time and began teaching them at Our Lady of Good Help.

Several years after the school was built a destructive fire swept through the surrounding area. On October 8, 1871, many of the citizens and land owners in the surrounding areas sought shelter at the chapel grounds from what became known as the Peshtigo fire. These people joined Brise in a procession around the grounds of the chapel to protect them. By morning, the flames had been quenched by the rain and Our Lady of Good Help remained untouched. This was considered a miracle by many, especially considering the fact that the neighboring areas had been scorched by the flames and over 2,000 were found dead (Kasten 2010).

After Brises’ death in 1896, she was buried near the original apparition site. At that time the fate of the prayer site and school seemed uncertain. The school suffered without her presence and was passed into the hands of Sr. Pauline LaPlante, an original member of the Sisters of St. Francis of the Holy Cross of Bay Settlement (Kasten 2010). She worked to continue the school until her death in 1926 (Mann 2011). In the following years the school changed hands and faces several times. In 1933, it was remodeled as the Home for Crippled Children, and then in 1953, Bishop Paul Rhode discontinued the home and turned it into a pre-noviate high school for the Bay Settlement Sisters. In 1990, it became a House of Prayer for the Bay Settlement Sisters until 1990 when the diocese gained control of the grounds. The diocese converted the property into a shrine and welcomed in a group of Carmelite Sisters who founded the Carmel of the Holy Name of Jesus in 1992 (Kasten 2010). Ten years later the Carmel moved on to rural Denmark.

At that point in time, the Our Lady of Good Help was still important in the local community, but there was very little national or international attention. The Bishops of Green Bay supported the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help as a place of prayer, but there had never been any formal recognition or declaration regarding the apparitions. This changed on January 9, 2009 when Bishop David Ricken opened a formal investigation into the apparitions. Less than two years later he declared that the apparitions given to Adele Brise were in fact worthy of belief and showed substance of supernatural character (Sly 2010).


DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

Adele Brise was the only visionary at Our Lady of Good Help. She reported no other visions or apparitions before or after those three at the site that would come to be known as Our Lady of Good Help. It was at the third apparitional event, which occurred while Brise was returning home from church that she received her spiritual mission (Shrine 2010; Kasten 2010). Brise reported that she asked the figure “In God’s name who are you and what do you want of me?” Mary reportedly then told Brise that she was the Queen of Heaven and assigned Brise a mission: “I am the Queen of Heaven who prays for the conversion of sinners, and I wish you to do the same. You received Holy Communion this morning and that is well. But you must do more. Make a general confession and offer Communion for the conversion of sinners. If they do not convert and do penance, my Son will be obliged to punish them.” Mary then offer more specific instructions: “Gather the children in this wild country and teach them what they should know for salvation.” When Brise inquired how she might accomplish this mission with little knowledge, Mary responded: “Teach them their catechism, how to sign themselves with the sign of the Cross, and how to approach the sacraments; that is what I wish you to do. Go and fear nothing. I will help you.”

The religious activity at Our Lady of Good Help is rooted in Catholic doctrine. As is common with many apparition groups, the goal of this prayer site is to return to what are understood to be God’s teachings. Brise was instructed to teach children how to love and worship God. Those were her only instructions, and she followed them and sought to expand them to incorporate the entire community.

The site has come to be regarded as a place of miracles, and a steady stream of believers daily come to worship and petition the Virgin Mary. Many who have visited the site have testified that they have been cured them of their infirmities or have solved problems they felt unable to address previously (“Marian Apparitions” 2010). The best-known miracle of Our Lady of Good Help is the survival of the Peshtigo fire of October 8, 1871. Even though all the land surrounding the prayer site and school was destroyed in this devastating fire, the grounds of the chapel and everyone on them were spared any harm.

After validating the site in 2010, Bishop Ricken stated that “Sister Adele’s own life was among the most convincing testimonies to the validity of the apparition” (Mann 2011). Indeed, hers was a lifelong devotion to the messages sent to her by Mary. He also believed in these apparitions in part because Brise never tried to capitalize on them. She sought no attention or compensation. Instead, she tried to live as she was instructed and went above and beyond the call of duty. Finally, the validity of the site was confirmed in part due to the actual message. Bishop Ricken stated that the messages’ simplicity and clarity spoke of their truth. The instructions were “simple, but very much loaded with the main message of the Gospel and with the teachings of the Church” (Mann 2011). These messages coupled with the great number of people who testified to being healed or helped at the site led to the validation of Our Lady of Good Help.


RITUALS/PRACTICES

People from different walks of life and parts of the country gather at Our Lady of Good Help daily to pray and worship. Mass is held four times a day in the chapel for those who wish for more than just individual reflection on site. Pilgrims testify to the extraordinary qualities of the site: “’It’s incredible — she’s here, you just feel it’, Ms. Banda said after praying in the crypt chapel, said to be on the spot of the apparitions. As they passed a statue of Mary in white, just as described by Ms. Brise, Ms. Banda was overcome with emotion, weeping and hugging her mother. The two of them went back to pray some more” (Eckholm 2010). Another pilgrim stated that “There’s a lot of power here….You can feel the presence of Mary, and it feels like she’s listening to you” (Eckholm 2010). Many crutches and canes are left behind at the shrine’s crypt. The owners of these items leave them saying that they no longer need their assistance.

Every year, there are different events to honor the site and the Virgin Mary. On October 8, pilgrims gather to repeat the procession of the grounds that began during the Peshtigo fire. In May, there is an annual outdoor Mass that includes another procession to the chapel grounds. This tradition was founded by Norbertine Fr. Bernard Pennings in 1895 (Kasten 2010). Finally, an extremely popular tradition is the annual Mass on the feast of Assumption. This event takes place on August 15 and, from morning until night, cars can be seen lining up at the shrine.


ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

Within days of Brise’s final vision in 1859, her father, Lambert Brise, built a small ten by twelve foot chapel at the apparition site. The chapel was enlarged to twenty four by forty feet in 1861; a third chapel of brick construction was erected in 1880.

Following the instructions she received from Mary in 1859, Brise, at age twenty eight, began teaching the Catholic faith to all the children that she could reach. Several young women joined her to form “a community of Third Order (secular) Franciscans” and found St. Mary’s Academy in 1869 (Shrine 2010). The small group of children eventually grew to be the ninety-five children. Brise received no formal funding for this school, instead relying on donations. At times she even had to beg for supplies and funds for the school. Brise remained resolute in her mission until her death in 1896.

Unfortunately, without the Brise’s presence, the leadership at the school faltered. For a time the school was placed in the care of Sr. Pauline LaPlante. LaPlante was one of the community’s original members, and she ran the school with nearly the same devotion as Brise had from 1902 until her death in 1926. At that time the school was altered on several occasions. It became a home for crippled children in 1933, a pre-noviate high school for the Bay Settlement Sisters in 1953, and, finally, a site for the Carmel of the Holy Name of Jesus in 1992. After the Carmelite sisters moved on in 2002, the site was restored to a chapel and shrine dedicated to the apparitions that Brise had encountered over 150 years earlier (Kasten 2010). Although the site had received informal support from local bishops through its history as a pilgrimage and prayer site, it was not formally validated until 2009 when Bishop David Ricken commissioned an investigation into the authenticity of the original apparitions. Over the next two years theologians examined the available historical documents: “We had written testimonies, some oral testimonies – written down later, plus a lot of documentation – letters between Sister Adele and the bishop, etc,
Bishop Ricken realls” (Kim 2011).

Less than two years later, Ricken stated with certainty that the site could indeed be validated as a supernatural and religious site(“Wisconsin Site” 2011). He stated that “I declare with moral certainty and in accord with the norms of the Church that the events, apparitions and locutions given to Adele Brise in October of 1859 do exhibit the substance of supernatural character, and I do hereby approve these apparitions as worthy of belief (although not obligatory) by the Christian faithful” (“Marian Apparitions” 2010).

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

From the beginning, Brise received little help or recognition. Her father built the original shrine on the spot of the apparitions himself. Brise also was alone in starting her school and helping the local children. St. Mary’s academy, a boarding school, was built in 1867. Within five years there were almost a hundred students enrolled. She relied heavily on her faith and the few donations she received. At times, when the school was low on funding and in need of supplies, Brise would go beg to get the money they needed. After Brise died, the meager support that was once there dwindled and faded.

The school and grounds passed from hand to hand until finally, in 2009, Bishop David Ricken launched an investigation into the authenticity of the apparition site. Before the site was investigated, thirty to fifty people a day would make the journey to Our Lady of Good Help (Keen 2011). However, once Bishop Ricken announced that the site was “approved” and “worthy of belief by the Christian faithful,” that number skyrocketed to around 500 people a day (Mann 2010). With the increased visitation, two priests were assigned full time to the shrine (Keen 2011).

There have been suspicions expressed in the press that the diocese’s investigation was timed to redirect attention away from the priest sex abuse cases that were then plaguing the Catholic Church. Bishop Ricken responded to these allegations: “People have a hunger for the spiritual, and right here in our backyard was a source to meet that need.” He went on to express an expectation that the shrine would become a source of hope and healing (Eckholm 2010). Whatever the merits of the suspicions and allegations, Bishop Ricken’s declaration of “moral certainty” has brought new life and recognition to Our Lady of Good Help (“Wisconsin Site” 2011).

REFERENCES

Eckholm, Erik. 2010. “ Wisconsin on the Map to Pray With Mary.” New York Times , December 23. Accessed from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/24/us/24mary.html?_r=0 on 22 November 2013.

Kasten, Patricia. 2010. “Guided by Mary, Adele Brise Taught Children about Catholic Faith.”   The Compass , December 9. Accessed from http://www.thecompassnews.org/news/local/1794-guided-by-mary-adele-brise-taught-children-about-catholic-faith.html on 31 October 2013.

Keen, Judy. 2011. “Faithful Trek to Wisconsin Shrine.”   USA Today , September 22. Accessed from http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-22/wisconsin-virgin-mary-shrine/50519566/1 on 20 November 2013 .

Kim, Susan. 2011. “Official Holy Site Near Green Bay.” Accessed from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.620wtmj.com%2Fnews%2Flocal%2F115996504.html&ei=yLeSUp6YI4uikQeCqoGICg&usg=AFQjCNET9GWym9VHvgT10dawcHCxTLnUIg&sig2=STdBrHBGxoAfK1eyI4km1w&bvm=bv.56988011,d.eW0 on 22 November 2013.

Mann, Benjamin. 2010. “Wisconsin Chapel Approved as First U.S. Marian Apparition Site.”   Catholic News Agency ., December 9. . Web. 01 Nov 2013.

“Marian Apparitions at Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help Approved by Bishop Ricken.” 2010.  DA MIHI ANIMAS , December 8. Accessed from http://salesianity.blogspot.com/2010/12/marian-apparitions-at-shrine-of-our.html on 20 November 2013.

Shrine of Our Lady of Good Hope. 2010. “A Brief Historical Account.” Accessed from http://www.gbdioc.org/images/stories/Evangelization_Worship/Shrine/Documents/Shrine-History-Brief.pdf on 28 November 2013.

Sly, Randy. 2010. “The Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help Receives the Decree from Bishop of Green Bay.” Catholic Online . December 11. Accessed from http://www.catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=39511 on 01 November 2013.

“Wisconsin Site Deemed ‘Holy’ by Catholic Leaders.” 2011.  Seattle Times , February 14. Accessed from http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2014222320_apusholysitegreenbay.html on 20 November 2013.

Authors:
David G. Bromley
Caitlin St. Clair

Post Date:
1 December 2013

 

Share

Our Lady of Yankalilla

OUR LADY OF YANKALILLA


OUR LADY OF YANKALILLA TIMELINE

1857:  The Christ Church was established at Yankalilla, South Australia.

1994:  The image of the Virgin Mary appeared through plaster at the front of the church.

1995:  The image was framed.

1996:  The shrine was blessed by the Bishop of The Murray [South Australia], Bishop Graham Walden; a pump was installed to access holy water.

1996:  The first shrine Mass held.

1997:  Changes to the image were noted; Christ Church was listed as a heritage building.

2000:  A vision of Mary was seen at the Church.

2000:  The Retreat Centre opened.

2001:  The first Assumptiontide Pilgrimage was held.

2002:  A rose was named after the shrine called Our Lady of Yankalilla Rose.

2003:  An icon was painted of the pieta.

2005:  Christ Church became a pastoral district; the position of parish priest became redundant.

c2010:  Healing masses ceased and instead were held on the fourth Sunday of the month following regular services.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

Yankalilla is a small country town south of Adelaide [South Australia]. The foundation stone for Christ Church, an Anglican Church at Yankalilla, was laid on November 8, 1856. In 1857, the church opened and became a heritage listed building in 1997. The church is significant as it reflects religious traditions brought to South Australia by early colonists (South Australian Heritage Places Database 2015).

In August 1994, an image of the Virgin Mary, holding the baby Jesus, seemed to appear through plasterwork on a wall at the front of the church to the right of the altar. A parishioner first noticed the image and eventually commented on it to the rector at that time, Father Andrew Notere (originally Nutter), a native of Canada whose father was an Anglican archbishop (Lloyd 1996a:3). There was a waiting period to see if the image remained, and when it did, it was discussed at a church council. The Australian media took up an article that had been prepared for the local diocesan paper by Father Notere (Morgan 2007:32).

It has been suggested that the image is a result of either salt damp or bad plastering; “although an apparition need not be judged authentic in order to deepen the faith and devotion of individuals” (Jelly 1993:50). Changes to the image have been reported since it first appeared. For example, some viewers could discern a rose appearing at the bottom, which others linked to local indigenous events or the possibility that an “image of a third person, possibly Mary Magdalene or Mary MacKillop was emerging” (Pengelley 1996:3). Saint Mary MacKillop [1842-1909], the first Australian saint [cannonised 2010], was a member of the Josephite order that established a school at Yankalilla.

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

Contemporary Anglicanism in Australia has its roots in the Church of England, commencing with early settlers from England in the late eighteenth century.  The Anglican Church in Australia follows the Old and New Testaments, the Articles of Religion and the Book of Common Prayer, which has since been supplemented by An Australian Prayer Book and later A Prayer Book for Australia (Frame 2007: 128-29). The Church organisation is made up of Bishops, Priests and Deacons (Anglican Church of Australia n.d.). There are twenty-three Anglican dioceses in Australia that have developed in a state-based fashion under a national umbrella. Unlike some other parts of Australia, the South Australian colony was based on the ideal of religious equality, without state financial contribution, and each religion establishing itself (Hilliard 1986b:3).  This was later changed, and in 1847 the Adelaide Diocese was formed (Anglican Church of Australia General Synod:4). The Church of England was established with the view being that “if provision for religion was left to the will of the people, nothing at all would be done” (Hilliard 1986b:5). Indeed, South Australia has a history of settlement by non-conformists, in particular Methodism, and this may have contributed to Anglicanism in South Australia being more ritual-based to make it more distinctive (Hilliard 1994:11).

The Province of South Australia has three dioceses and The Diocese of The Murray, which has oversight of Yankalilla, has particularly had a history of Anglo-Catholicism since the mid-nineteenth century (Hilliard 1986a:38; Frame 2007:12, 57; Anglican Diocese of Adelaide n.d.).  Clergy, after the establishment of the South Australian colony, were sourced from England (Frame 2007:207) and operated under the auspices of the Bishop of London then later the Bishop of Calcutta (Anglican Church of Australia General Synod n.d.:4). In 1962, the Church of England in Australia was established, thus creating a self-governing body separate from the legal ties with England (Anglican Church of Australia General Synod n.d:5), and in 1981 it became The Anglican Church of Australia (Anglican Church of Australia General Synod n.d:6).

Thus the early years of Christ Church Yankalilla were heavily influenced through the English clergy by Anglo-Catholicism and the Oxford Movement. This was seen in the type of services, the frequency of communion, and the church interiors (Morgan 2007:13). In addition, there was a greater use of ritual, the wearing of vestments, and stress on the importance of fasting prior to communion (Hilliard:44-46). Anglicanism in Australia has been labelled with “High, Broad or Low Church affiliations, or Anglo-Catholic, Liberal or Evangelical parties” (Frame 2007:213). South Australian country areas in particular were conservative (Hilliard 1994:12), and in this respect, Christ Church Yankalilla could be best described as being of a high church orientation (Morgan 2015).
The 1844 census found that country areas in South Australia, such as Yankalilla, had a large number of Anglicans (Hilliard 1986b:11, 25).  However, more currently Anglicanism in Australia has suffered a decrease in attendances with the population perhaps less interested in church settings (Frame 2007:132).  It could be argued then that the type of services that incorporated a mixture of worship styles, used when pilgrimage services were started at Yankalilla following the emergence of the image, might bring both Anglicans and non-Anglicans to the church and encourage them to engage with Anglicanism and the parish.  While in the early twentieth century there have been instances of promotion of the Virgin Mary, this activity was considered to be un-Anglican (Hilliard 1994:14). Frame notes that criticism of pluralism or diversity in Australian Anglicanism would be solved by “a renewed embrace of the Reformed Catholicism” (Frame 2007:229).
RITUALS/PRACTICES

Christian pilgrimage shrines can be viewed in terms of local history and current social trends as well as previous religious culture. When the images first appeared links were suggested to an Aboriginal corroboree (dance ceremony) site where Aboriginal massacres occurred, although there does not appear to be any evidence to confirm this. In respect of Saint Mary MacKillop, this may be attributed to a reconciliation of “the colonial past and colonial present” (McPhillips 2006:149). McPhillip’s view is that this link could be attributed to the fervour that surrounded the saint commencing with her beatification, while the indigenous link is of a pilgrimage centre to pre-Christian sacredness and connected to Aboriginal reconciliation (McPhillips 2006:149).

This site has become known as The Shrine of Our Lady of Yankalilla. This pilgrimage centre developed spontaneously and has continued to the present day. Many common Marian pilgrimage motifs are present such as miraculous events, healing and messages. This traditional, high Anglican church has accepted the image in its Church despite the general “Protestant view [which] tends to limit the communion of saints to the living and does not look favourably on the possibility of supernatural intervention by deceased saints” (Turner and Turner 1982:145). At the Shrine of Our Lady of Yankalilla visitors have the chance to observe, and to have experiences, that they do not have in their home parishes. Interestingly, the initial rituals at the shrine were drawn from Charismatic, Catholic, Anglican and Buddhist practices (Jones 1998). These rather New Age practices could attract visitors who may not necessarily be drawn to an Anglican church (Cusack 2003:119). McPhillips considers such a mix “in effect releases Mary into new realms of enchantment” (McPhillips 2006:149). It did however cause conflict at a parish level (Jones 1998).

Pilgrim masses to Anoint the Sick were held for a number of years at Yankalilla on Sundays at 2:00 PM, and it was estimated that “1000 pilgrims have gone to Yankalilla” ( Lloyd 1996b:4). In approximately 2010, these dedicated services were discontinued, and the practice was incorporated as part of the normal church service every fourth Sunday. This occurred as a result of Christ Church ceasing to be a parish and becoming a pastoral district and because there was not a priest who lived in accommodations adjacent to the Church as had occurred previously (Gardiner 2015).

Holy water became available at the Shrine for purchase after a pump was installed during 1996. Streams were reported to run “under the apparition wall, and a number of streams converge under the altar to form three crosses” (Chryssides 1997: 16). There have been reports of the curative powers of the holy water; however, the water now available is for anointing purposes only and is labelled “Not for human consumption.”

A number of other common Marian motifs have been present at Yankalilla, such as moving statues, photographs of Jesus, photographs of mysterious figures only seen on a photograph but not by church visitors, and figures in the Church surrounds. In addition, messages were reportedly received from Mary; some of those messages referencing Diana, Princess of Wales, indicative of a combination of ideas both traditional and New Age ( McPhillips, 2015). A sculpture has been placed in the rose garden near the church celebrating the “site of Our Lady’s Apparition, Easter Monday, April 24, 2000 at 6.40 pm.” More recently, no messages or images have been reported by current members of the local congregation.

A statue of the Virgin Mary was set up within the Church grounds, and in recent years this statue has been tended by a number of visitors originating from India, most notably from Kerala and Goa, while others are from the South Australian Indian community (Gardiner 2015). The visitors’ book indicates pilgrims are local, interstate as well as from Europe, South America and Asia. These visits may just be curiosity; however, “a tourist is half a pilgrim, if a pilgrim is half a tourist” (Turner 1978;20)

Imagery within the Church initially emphasized the Virgin Mary. The reorganization at the front of the church was a stumbling block for parishioners (Jones 1998). Banners were placed near the altar, a white banner draped over the cross above the altar forming an “M,” and the priest wore vestments that reflected the apparition of the Virgin Mary at Medjugorje. The altar area has now been simplified and is plainer. There remains a holder for votive candles and a book in which pilgrims can write prayers.

At the inauguration of the site as a shrine, a large section of an interior wall of the church was set aside for pilgrims to place notes asking for the Virgin Mary’s assistance. This area has since been reduced to a small board. Pilgrims may also write messages in a book placed adjacent to the message board. These notes are revealing of Mary’s curative powers, and it has been reported that “around 100 people have been healed” (Connolly 1997: 29). The messages are also related to help and assistance with everyday issues, such as examinations and requests for attaining permanent residency.

Initially, many items were available to pilgrims such as postcards, medals, holy water and a pilgrim newsletter. These materials have currently been reduced to holy candles and water.

LEADERSHIP/ORGANIZATION

On December 15, 1996, the Bishop of The Murray, Bishop Graham Walden, blessed the shrine “with holy water from an Anglican international shrine” (Smart 1996:6 Innes 1996:4). This blessing would appear to indicate that at the time of the emergence of the image there was official Anglican support and acceptance. It is important for miraculous events to fall within the boundaries of the traditional religion with which it is associated. T he Virgin Mary can be found in Anglican shrines, such as at Walsingham [United Kingdom], a site visited by many pilgrims each year, and Christ Church Yankalilla is high Anglican, which accepts veneration of the Virgin Mary (Kahl 1998:257). To link these shrines, an icon dedicated to Walsingham hangs on the Church wall. Such an icon, a pieta (a statue depicting the Virgin Mary cradling the dead body of Jesus) image, may assist visitors in seeing the apparent image on the wall (Morgan 2007:31).

During his incumbency, Father Notere embraced the shrine enthusiastically, despite local opposition (Mullen 1999; Jones 1998). In 2005, the position of priest at Yankalilla ended and Father Notere left the parish (Allison 2005:3). Following his departure, media attention has waned considerably; however, local parishioners have maintained the shrine and ensure that the church is open daily for those who wish to see the image or to meditate and pray.

A religious community initially to be known as the Oasis of Peace but later named the Servants of the Humility of Jesus and Marywas formed but since disbanded. The aims of the community were to work with pilgrims and foster a healing spirit at the shrine (Kahl 1998:50). A Retreat Centre next to the church was established in 2000, but the space is now utilized for general parish purposes (Morgan 2007:33). A Maori group of singers was reportedly considering moving to the area, drawn by the image. The group joined a local choir to make a CD dedicated to the Virgin Mary appearing at Yankalilla (“Choirs Combine” 2002:14).

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Christ Church Yankalilla lost the services of Father Notere in 2005, and, having become a pastoral district (Morgan 2007:1), it has been served by part-time and locum priests who are challenged by the travel distances required (Gardiner 2015). There have been other challenges within the Diocese relating to the position of Bishop of the Diocese of The Murray. One of those issues was a three-year vacancy until 2013 when a Bishop was appointed (Strathearn2013:6). In addition, like many other mainstream churches, Yankalilla has experienced a decline in attendance.

The image has assisted the parish financially through visitors, donations and purchases of candles and holy water (Morgan 2007:33). However, a major challenge for the local church members has been the time spent in dealing with the shrine. The emergence of the image meant the parish council had to attend to a number of issues, such as access, visitors, security and attention of the press (Morgan 2007:32). Many local parishioners considered this time was being taken from the parish generally and the local community, and, as a result, there was a division within the parish.The local parishioners are not intensely involved in the shrine, and those who do not agree with the shrine attend other parishes (Jones 1998).

The shrine has experienced fluctuating numbers at the pilgrim services. At present, pilgrims attend of their own accord at pilgrim services held in conjunction with regular services or at the annual pilgrim service held annually in September. This service held in September is popular with pilgrims and attracts many members of the Adelaide Indian Catholic community (Gardiner 2015). Despite Father Notere’s 2005 prediction that the church would be closed (Notere 2005:5), it is open every day for reflection and prayer and attended by enthusiastic local volunteers.

REFERENCES

“21st Birthday Ball for Christian Singles:  Articles of Faith.” 2002. The Advertiser, August 12, p.12.

Allison, Lisa. 2005. “Priest Demands Unpaid Wages.” The Advertiser, March 30:3.

Anglican Church of Australia. n.d. “Who We Are.”  Accessed from http://www.anglican.org.au/home/about/Pages/who_we_are.aspx on 6 November 2015.

Anglican Church of Australia General Synod. n.d. “Outline of the Structure of the Anglican Church of Australia.” Accessed fromhttp://www.anglican.org.au/home/about/Documents/1391%20Outline%20%20of%20the%20Structure%20of%20the%20Anglican%20Church%20of%20Australia%20-%20Website%20Version%20020713.pdf/ on 6 November 2015.

Anglican Diocese of Adelaide. n.d. “About Us.”  Accessed from http://www.adelaide.anglican.com.au/about-us/ on 6 November 2015.

“Choirs Combine to Make Religious CD.” 2002. The Advertiser, August 12, p. 14.

Chryssides, Helen. “Visions of Mary.” 1997. The Bulletin , September 2, p. 16.

Connolly, Paul. “Mary, Mary, On the Wall.” 1997. Who Weekly, August 4, p. 29.

Cusack, Carole M. 2003. “The Virgin Mary at Coogee: A Preliminary Investigation.” Australian Religion Studies Review 16:116-29.

Frame, Tom. 2007. Anglicans in Australia. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press Ltd.

Hilliard, David. 1994. “The Anglo-Catholic Tradition in Australian Anglicanism.” St Mark’s Review 158:1-17.

Hilliard, David. 1986a. “The Transformation of South Australian Anglicanism, c. 1880-1930.” Journal of Religious History 14:38-56.

Hilliard, David. 1986b. Godliness and Good Order: A History of the Anglican Church in South Australia. Netley: Wakefield Press.

Innes, Stuart. 1996. “Interest Grows in Church’s ‘Healing’ Water.” 1996. The Advertiser, December 10, p. 4.

Jelly, Frederick M. 1993. “Discerning the Miraculous: Norms for Judging Apparitions and Private Revelations.” Marian Studies 44:41-55. Accessed from http://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies/vol44/iss1/8 on 29 October 2014.

Jones, R. 1998. Yankalilla (television documentary), SBS Independent.

Kahl, Janet. 2012. “Some Recent Trends in the Study of Pilgrimage and Tourism.” Literature & Aesthetics 22:257-70.

Kahl, Janet. 1999. “Miracle Image of Mary at Yankalilla.” Australiam Religion Studies Review 12:32-39.

Kahl, Janet. 1998. Virgin Territory: Mariology in Australia. Unpublished Honours IV Theses, Studies in Religion, University of Sydney.

Lloyd, Paul. 1996a. “Holy or Hooey?” Advertiser, December 14, p. 3.

Lloyd, Paul 1996b. “The Puzzle of the Bubbling Patterns?” The Advertiser, December 14, p. 4.

Maguire, Shane. 2005. “A Miracle or Myth in Sleepy Town Church.” The Advertiser, March 7, p. 28.

McPhillips, Kathleen. 2006. “Believing in Post-modernity: Technologies of Enchantment in Contemporary Marian Devotion.” Pp. 147-58 in Popular Spiritualities: The Politics of Contemporary Enchantment, edited by Lynne Hume and Kathleen McPhillips. Aldershot: Ashgate.

McPhillips, Kathleen with Rachel Kohn. n.d. Virgins, Vampires and Superheroes. Accessed from http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/spiritofthings/virgins-vampires–superheroes/3341180 on 31 July 2015.

Morgan, Margaret. 2007. Christ Church Yankalilla: 1857 to 2007: A Story of Change and Continuity. Yankalilla: Pastoral District of Yankalilla.

Mullen, Mike. 1999. “Once upon a time …” Times Globe, October 1. Accessed from http://search.proquest.com/docview/423078804?accountid=32873 on 31 July 2015.

Notere, Andrew. 2005. “Closure of People’s Shrine Another Anglican Failure.” The Advertiser, April 27, p. 20.

Our Lady of Yankalilla Rose. n.d. Accessed from http://corporateroses.com.au/recent_release_roses/ourl_lady_of_yankalilla_rose.htm on 30 July 2015.

Pengelley, Jill. 1996, “Divine Help Finds ‘Holy Water’ Under Church.” The Advertiser, August 21, p. 3.

Personal Communication with Ann Gardiner on July 31, 2015.

Personal Communication with Margaret Morgan on July 1, 2015 and September 28, 2015.

Smart, Nick. 1996. “Mass Marks Blessing of Yankalilla Shrine.” The Advertiser, December 16, p. 6.

South Australian Heritage Places Database. 2015. Accessed from http://apps.planning.sa.gov.au/HeritageSearch/HeritageItem.aspx?p_heritageno=13211 on 14 August 2015.

Strathearn, Peri. 2013. “ Three Years Later, Anglicans Get New Bishop.” The Murray Valley Standard , July 4, p. 6.

Turner, Victor and Edith Turner. 1978. Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Culture. New York: Columbia University Press.

Turner, Victor and Edith Turner. 1982. “Postindustrial Marian Pilgrimage.” Pp. 145-73 in Mother Worship: Theme and Variations, edited by James J. Preston. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Author:
Janet Kahl

Post Date:
4 October 2015

 

Share

Holy Apostolic Catholic Palmarian Church

HOLY APOSTOLIC CATHOLIC PALMARIAN CHURCH TIMELINE

1946 (April 23):  Clemente Domínguez Gómez was born in Seville.

1968 (March 30):  Four girls reported to have seen the Virgin Mary at the Alcaparrosa. field, just outside Palmar de Troya, a town in Spanish Andalusia.

1968 (April onwards):  Several other people, most of them women, claimed to receive apparitions at the site. The stories attracted large groups of people from the region, other parts of Spain, and from abroad.

1968 (October 15).  Clemente Domínguez Gómez and his friend Manuel Alonso Corral from Seville visited the apparition site for the first time.

1969 (September 30).  Clemente had his first vision (of Christ and Padre Pio).

1969 (December 15).  Clemente had his first vision of the Virgin Mary.

1970 (May 18):  The archbishop of Seville, Cardinal José María Bueno Monreal issued a formal denunciation of the apparitions.

1972 (18 March).  The archbishop of Seville reiterated his denunciation of the apparitions and forbade all kinds of Catholic cult at the Alcaparrosa field.

1972 (May 9):  Clemente proclaimed that Paul VI would be succeeded by both a true pope and an antipope.

1972:  Clemente and his closest followers began to refer to themselves as Marian apostles or Apostles of the Cross.

1974:  Clemente and Manuel acquired the Alcaparrosa field. A more elaborate shrine and a surrounding wall was constructed.

1975 (December 22):  A Palmarian religious order, the Carmelites of the Holy Face, was founded.

1976 (January 1):  Archbishop Pierre-Martin Ngô-Dinh-Thuc Thuc ordained four priests at Palmar de Troya, including Clemente and Manuel.

1976 (January 11):  Thuc consecrated five bishops at Palmar de Troya, including Clemente and Manuel.

1976 (January 14):  Archbishop Bueno declared the consecrations irregular and the newly consecrated bishops suspended.

1976 (January 15):  All involved in the consecrations were excommunicated by the papal nuncio to Spain.

1976-1978:  The Palmarian bishops consecrated more than ninety bishops.

1976 (May 29):  Palmarian bishops were involved in a car accident in the Basque country. Clemente was seriously wounded, and he lost his sight.

1976 (August 4):  Clemente received a message that he would become pope after the death of Paul VI.

1978 (August 6):  Pope Paul VI died.

1978 (August 6):  While in Bogotá, Colombia, Clemente claimed to have been crowned pope by Christ and that he had taken the name Gregory XVII.

1978 (August 9):  Clemente was back in Spain and the Holy See was formally moved from Rome to Palmar de Troya. The Holy Apostolic Catholic Palmarian Church was founded.

1978 (August 15):  Gregory XVII was crowned pope by four newly appointed cardinals.

1980 (March 30):  The Palmarian Council was inaugurated. After its opening session, the Palmarian Credo was published.

1983 (October 9):  The much briefer Latin-Tridentine-Palmarian Mass order replaced the traditional Tridentine rite.

1987 (November 2):  The Spanish Supreme Court gave the Palmarian church official status as a religious organization.

1992 (October 12):  The Palmarian council was concluded. The Treatise on the Mass was its main result.

1997-2001:  The First Palmarian synod was held. Sacred History or Holy Palmarian Bible was its main result.

2000 (November 5):  Gregory XVII excommunicated eighteen bishops and seven nuns. Some of them found an independent Palmarian group in Archidona, Andalusia.

2005 (March 21):  Pope Gregory XVII died.

2005 (March 24):  Father Isidoro María (Manuel Alonso) was crowned pope and took Peter II as his papal name.

2011 (July 15):  Peter II died.

2011 (July 17):  Father Sergio María, Ginés Jesús Hernández Martínez, was crowned as the third Palmarian pope. He took Gregory XVIII as his papal name.

2012 (January 6):  The second Palmarian council was inaugurated.

2016 (April 22):  Gregory XVIII left the papacy and the Palmarian Church.

2016 (April 23):  The Secretary of State, Bishop Eliseo María‒Markus Josef Odermatt‒became the new Palmarian pope‒Peter III.

2016 (April 27):  The ex-pope, now using his civil name Ginés Jesús Hernández, gave his first interview with the Spanish media and declared that he left the Palmarian church after realizing that it was a hoax and that he now lived together with a woman, Nieves Triviño.

2016 (May 2):  In his first apostolic letter, Pope Peter III informed the Palmarian faithful that the ex-pope was an “apostate” and a ”cursed beast” and accused him of stealing money and valuable items from the church before leaving.

2016 (June 29):  Peter III declared the decisions of the Third Palmarian Council devoid of any value, due to the ex-pope’s influence over it.

2016 (July 16): Peter III was crowned pope in the basilica in Palmar de Troya.

2016 (September 11):  Ginés Hernández and Nieves Triviño were married.

2018 (June 10):  Hernández and Triviño climbed over the walls of the church compound at Palmar de Troya, masked and armed. A bishop discovered them. In a subsequent fight, Hernández was severely injured, while the bishop and Triviño received less serious physical injuries.

2018 (June 13):  Hernández and Triviño were arrested for “armed robbery with aggravating circumstances.” After initial court proceedings, both were sent to prison awaiting trial.

GROUP/FOUNDER HISTORY

Palmar de Troya, located about forty kilometers south of Seville was settled in the 1930s. By the late 1960s, the town had about 2,000 inhabitants. It had electricity but still lacked a medical doctor and running water. It was ecclesiastically marginal as well, having neither resident priest nor permanent church building. When the curate from a neighboring town did arrive, religious services were held in a private home or at an industrial compound. Few townspeople went to mass regularly, and Palmar de Troya was considered something of a mission field.

On March 30, 1968, four school girls (Ana, Josefa, Rafaela and Ana) between the ages of eleven and thirteen reported seeing a “very beautiful lady” when picking flowers by a mastic tree (lentisco) on the Alcaparrosa field, less than a kilometer from the town center. [See the comprehensive history of the Palmarian Churchand the book manuscript A Pope of Their Own] The woman was identified as the Virgin Mary. From April 1968 onwards, other people asserted to have mystical experiences close to the mastic tree. Several women and men fell into trances, claiming that the Virgin Mary appeared and spoke to them. Most of the ecstatic were not natives of Palmar de Troya, but rather came from other locations in the nearby area. The heavenly messages received at Palmar de Troya at this early stage were often very brief and general. The Virgin told the seers that all people should frequently pray Our Father and the rosary and convert to traditional Catholic faith. These were the only ways to placate divine ire and save humanity. The stories about the apparitions rapidly spread to other parts of the country, and even abroad. Growing crowds of people visited the place. On certain days, particularly on the fifteenth of each month when the Virgin usually made important statements, they numbered in the thousands.

By the end of 1969, Clemente Domínguez y Gómez (1946-2005) had become one of the most influential seers at Palmar de Troya. Later, many would look upon him as the seer par excellence, while others would consider him a fake or something in between. After failing to enter priest seminary, he became an office clerk. He worked for a Catholic company in Seville for a time but subsequently was fired. Clemente was not one of the pioneer seers, but beginning in the summer of 1969, and on an almost daily basis, he went to Palmar de Troya together with his friend, the lawyer Manuel Alonso Corral (1934-2011).

According to official Palmarian hagiography, Clemente had an ecstatic experience at the Alcaparrosa field on August 15, 1969, and one and a half months later, on September 30, he received his first vision, of Christ and the recently deceased Italian Capuchin Padre Pio. On December 8, he began receiving visions of Virgin Mary. Even if Clemente was the recipient of the heavenly communications, it was his friend Manuel Alonso, who recorded them on tape, transcribed them, and distributed them to pilgrims. It is clear that Clemente was the charismatic figure and the recipient of the heavenly messages, while Manuel was the organizer.

In various apparitions, the Virgin and Christ let him know that there was only one true mass, the Tridentine Latin rite. The novus ordo mass promulgated in 1969 was nothing less than blasphemy. The Tridentine Latin rite must therefore be reinstated. Other salient themes were that freemasons and communists had infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church at all levels. Nevertheless, according to Clemente, Pope Paul VI was free of guilt as he was drugged and held hostage.

During the early 1970s, Clemente Dominguez continued to receive new heavenly messages. They were recorded by Manuel Alonso, written down, copied and distributed. Some of them were translated into English, French and German as part of the diffusion of the news beyond Spain’s borders. To be able to make mission journeys and institutionalize the movement, funding was needed. According to testimonies, Manuel Alonso was a very good fund-raiser who convinced some very wealthy people to contribute large sums. The capital influx meant that Clemente and Manuel could travel widely on both sides of the Atlantic. Beginning in 1971, they went through Western Europe, to the United States and to various countries in Latin America to win people for the Palmarian cause.

Palmar de Troya belonged to the archdiocese of Seville and it soon became clear that the Palmarians could not count on any support from the archbishop, Cardinal José María Bueno Monreal, who wholeheartedly embraced the reforms of Vatican II and systematically implemented them. Thus, he was certainly no ideal partner for a group of traditionalists, who saw the Council as the main root of evil. For two years, however, Archbishop Bueno made no official statements about the events, buta steady stream of pilgrims kept coming to Palmar de Troya. It was reported that as many as 40,000 people were present on May 15, 1970. Three days after this all-time-high, Bueno published a document, where he briefly commented on the events. He did not mince matters when stating that they were signs of “collective and superstitious hysteria.” The gist of the archbishop Bueno’s statement on Palmar de Troya was reiterated in 1972. In a decree, he explicitly forbade all kinds of public worship at the Alcaparrosa field, ordering Roman Catholic priests not to be present, let alone celebrate any religious services there.

There is, however, clear evidence that individual Catholic priests were present at Palmar de Troya, both before and after the archbishop’s denunciations, and that Tridentine masses were celebrated regularly at the site from 1969 onwards. The clerical support group included both Spaniards and foreigners, who were critical of the post-conciliar developments. Still, the seers and leaders of the growing movement were laypeople in the early 1970s. Being successful in their fund raising endeavors, in 1974, Clemente and Manuel could acquire the apparition site and thus control the movement. After the purchase, they built a somewhat more elaborate shrine, initially a hangar-like construction.

In a vision to Clemente on November 30, 1975, the Virgin Mary and Christ announced the forthcoming foundation of a new religious order that would replace all the existing ones. The new Palmarian order, the Carmelites of the Holy Face, was indeed founded on December 22, 1975. It included four classes of members: priests, brothers, sisters and tertiaries. The Palmarians still lacked priests of their own, of course, and Archbishop Bueno of Seville would not ordain any for them. Nonetheless, it was imperative for the group to be able to claim apostolic succession.

The solution to the ordination problem came with Vietnamese Archbishop Pierre-Martin Ngô-dinh-Thuc (1897-1984). After one of the Vatican II sessions, he had been unable to return to his home country and therefore lived in Italy. Thuc was consecrated bishop in 1938 and became archbishop of Hue in 1960. While living in Europe, he was replaced in Hue and instead made titular archbishop of Bulla Regia. However, he actually served as an assistant pastor in a small Italian town, upset and bewildered by the changes in the post-conciliar church. Archbishop Thuc came to Palmar de Troya through the mediation of Maurice Revaz, who taught canon law at the traditionalist Society of Pius X’s seminary in Ecône. Revaz convinced Thuc that he was elected by the Virgin to save the Catholic Church from perdition. With short notice, the Vietnamese prelate therefore travelled to Seville and Palmar de Troya. On New Year’s night in 1976, he ordained Clemente Dominguez, Manuel Alonso, and two other men to the priesthood. The priestly ordinations, however, were just the prelude. Less than two weeks later, on January 11, 1976, Thuc consecrated five of the Palmarians, once again including Clemente and Manuel. With the episcopal consecrations, the Palmarians had secured their much sought-after apostolic succession and could start making bishops of their own.

While the local hierarchy had been slow to comment on the apparitions, their reaction to the ordinations and consecrations was immediate. Following the episcopal consecrations, Archbishop Bueno declared them irregular and all those involved to be suspended a divinis and thus barred from performing any clerical acts, while again denouncing the purported apparitions at Palmar de Troya. On January 15, the papal nuncio, Luigi Dadaglio, went to Seville where he declared the Palmarian bishops and Archbishop Thuc excommunicated from the time of the consecrations ( ipso facto ) in the absence of necessary licenses from the Holy See and the ordinary. In September 1976, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome declared the clerics suspended ipso iure (according to Canon Law), but made no clear statement about whether the consecrations were invalid or substantially valid though illicit.

By 1976, the Palmarians had already developed a quickly growing ecclesiastical hierarchy, and in less than two years they consecrated ninety-one bishops. Most of them were from Ireland and Spain, while others came from a number of countries in the Americas and Europe. The normal procedure in this period was that Clemente claimed to have received a private apparition from the Virgin or Christ, asking him to consecrate more bishops. In the messages, it was also clearly pointed out who should be made bishops. An effect of this modus operandi was that males who entered as friars in the Carmelites of the Holy Face could become bishops within months, weeks, or even days. A small minority of the consecrated Palmarian bishops were or had been Roman Catholic priests, others had attended seminary, while most were young laymen. At this time, the Palmarians did not consider themselves a separate church but as among the few true adherents of the Roman Catholic Church.

By the beginning of the 1970s, Clemente Domínguez already claimed that Pope Paul VI would be succeeded by both a true pope and an antipope. In 1976, the messages became even more concrete, and it was implied that there would be a time when the Catholic Church would not be Roman anymore. As for the status of Pope Paul VI, the Palmarian stories changed over time. Some claimed that he was drugged or held a prisoner and was replaced by an actor. At the same time, it was claimed that Paul VI would soon arrive there in person to lead his faithful episcopal college, thus escaping the curia of Rome.

Pope Paul VI died on August 6, 1978. At that time, Clemente was in Bogotá together with a group of bishops. Just hours after thedemise of Paul VI, Clemente claimed to have become pope by direct divine intervention, taking the name Gregory XVII. Having returned to Seville, on August 9, he proclaimed that the Holy See had moved from Rome to Palmar de Troya. The Roman era of the church was over and the Holy Catholic Apostolic Palmarian Church was established.

Palmarian church activities were in no way restricted to Spain. In the early 1980s, there were missionary bishops in France, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Ireland, Great Britain, Nigeria but also in the United States, Canada and in various countries in the Caribbean and Latin America, particularly Argentina, Mexico, Costa Rica, Peru, Chile and Colombia. In Oceania, there were communities in Australia and New Zealand. Some of these places had separate chapels and resident clergy. In most locations, however, Palmarians formed so-called cenacles in private homes, and were visited by clergy on an infrequent basis. It is hard to estimate the membership in the late 1970s and early 1980s, but it must have amounted to a few thousand.

No official documents show the overall member changes in the Palmarian Church. Still, for bishops, there are internal data that give a clear indication. Overall, 192 men were consecrated Palmarian bishops between 1976 and the death of Gregory XVII in 2005. During these three decades, no less than 133 have either left the order or been expelled, twenty-seven died in office, and only thirty-two bishops remained as of 2005. The female branch of the order, which at its height included more than a hundred nuns, was probably down to thirty or forty by 2005, and the decline has continued. During the Palmarian church’s existence, many bishops, priests, nuns and lay people have left the church voluntarily or been excommunicated, while new people have entered. Still, except for at the very beginning, most new members were children of Palmarian couples and not people coming from outside.

The late 1990s and early 2000s was a very turbulent time in the church, filled with secessions and expulsions. The crisis had to do not only with the new teachings of the church, but also with the behavior of the pope and other leaders. The pope’s morals became an apple of discord. In 1997, Gregory XVII apparently made a public statement, confessing that he had had sinned against the vow of chastity during his time as the leader of the order. On the same occasion, he also confessed to immoderate drinking and eating habits. In a sermon three years later, the pope made clear reference to his earlier aberrant behavior, but claimed that he had mended his ways.

The five-volume Sacred History or the Palmarian Bible, printed in 2001, became another very serious point of discord. It was a thorough and very detailed reworking of the biblical books based on the continuous private revelations to Gregory XVII. The goal of the revision was to establish the true meaning of the texts, exactly as the divine author had conceived them. When the new Bible was made public, the faithful were ordered to destroy their traditional Bibles and only read the Palmarian version. Criticism against this development led to further secessions and excommunications.

Interestingly enough, at the time of the secessions and expulsions, by the turn of the millennium there was one feature of papal religious behavior that changed. Not since the Palmarian Council was inaugurated in 1980, when teaching had become more formalized and institutionalized, had Gregory XVII fallen into public ecstasy, receiving heavenly messages before the eyes of the faithful. Still, it happened again after 2000.

These public ecstasies were certainly a way to present evidence for that Christ and the Virgin was on Gregory’s side, thus defending his papal authority. According to the pope, the faithful members of the visible church under his absolute rule were about to enter the Ark of salvation, whose doors soon would be closed. In his view, the church militant is minuscule, but it consists of the only people that obey the divine (and papal) will.

Holy Week in 2005 was a crucial time in the history of the Palmarian Church, as Gregory XVII died on March 21. At his death, there was no conclave as he had already named Father Isidoro María (Manuel Alonso) his successor. The latter was crowned on March 24, taking Peter II as his papal name. In his first apostolic letters, the new pope defended his position as the true successor of Gregory XVII the Very Great, who was immediately canonized. Peter II never claimed to receive any private apparitions and mainly looked upon himself as the defender of the Palmarian teachings.

Under Peter II, the Palmarian church became more closed and exclusive than ever before, even if it was a matter of degree and not of kind. Messages about the necessity to break with the surrounding world and live according to strict Palmarian norms have been present in every apostolic letter. On a number of occasions, Peter II reiterated the idea that the Palmarian Church is the only hope in a world totally dominated by Satan. Not only the “apostates,” but also lukewarm members were accused of destroying the church from within. During the papacy of Peter II, the number of detailed regulations increased considerably, and many of the older ones have become even stricter. Many have to do with clothing. There are many other rules that distinguish Palmarians from what they see as the total moral depravity of the surrounding world. Church members are not allowed to vote in general elections or enter the church buildings of other denominations. They are also forbidden to attend baptisms, weddings or funerals of non-Palmarians, including close relatives. Even more far-reaching is the general ban against talking to people not dressed in the Palmarian way, or non-Palmarians at large. Members must destroy their television sets, videos, mobile telephones and computers in order not to be infected by the “repugnant moral leprosy rampant in the world,” as the pope phrased it.

It has always been difficult to know exactly how the Palmarians have been able to assemble such substantial funds despite being arather small organization. During the 1970s, 1980s and to some extent into the 1990s, the Palmarian church was very wealthy due to substantial, more or less voluntary, donations from members and benefactors. People paid part of their salary to the church, and it became the beneficiary in last wills and testaments. With the money, the leaders acquired about ten buildings in the city- center of Seville, which served as headquarters and convents. They also were able to build the enormous church at the apparition site, the Cathedral-Basilica of Our Crowned Virgin of El Palmar, which is one of the largest temples constructed in twentieth-century Spain. Together the sumptuous religious paraphernalia kept within the Basilica, its cost is at least 100,000,000 Euros, and probably much more. Due to decreasing incomes in the late 1990s, the Palmarians sold their remaining buildings in Seville in 2003. At that time, the clergy left for Palmar de Troya, where the order had bought some twenty houses in the 1970s. New buildings were constructed on the cathedral compound. Palmar de Troya thus became the residential center of the church, not only the spiritual.

After six years in office, Peter II died on July 15, 2011. His successor was Bishop Sergio María, the former military officer Ginés Jesús Hernández Martínez (b. 1959). He was publically named Peter II’s successor on March 3, 2011. The new Palmarian pope was crowned on July 17, taking the name Gregory XVIII. Shortly after the coronation, the new pope convened a new Palmarian Council to begin in January 2012. During the pontificate of Gregory XVIII , the Palmarian economy seems to have improved considerably. After a decade-long long standstill, the work on the cathedral speeded up, and by 2014, the construction work that began in 1978 was finished.

On April 22, 2016, Gregory XVIII suddenly left the papacy and the Palmarian church. He did not make any statement to the community or the church members at large but just left a note, stating that he had lost faith. He went to live with a woman, Nieves Triviño, a former Palmarian nun, with whom he had had an affair for some time. On April 23, 2016, Gregory’s Secretary of State, Swiss Bishop Eliseo María‒Markus Josef Odermatt‒became pope under the name Peter III. In his first pastoral letters to the Palmarian faithful, Peter III declared the ex-pope an “apostate” and a “cursed beast,” who had tried to destroy the entire church. He described Gregory’s pontificate as tyranny. Peter III also accused Hernández of stealing money, jewelry, and a luxurious BMW (the “pope-mobile”).

Between April and June 2016, Ginés Hernández gave several interviews with Spanish media, in which he declared that the Palmarian Church was an elaborate hoax, built on lies, but that he had only recently realized it. However, he gave no indications about what kind of information he had encountered. In September 2016, Hernández and Triviño married. Just before the wedding, the posed semi-nude for a Spanish men’s magazine.

On June 10, 2018, Ginés Hernández and Nieves Triviño climbed over the high wall that surrounds the church compound at Palmar de Troya. Their faces were covered, and they were armed with at least one knife. They also carried equipment that could be used to open doors and locks. It was the Mass hour, and the friars, nuns and lay people were inside the cathedral. However, they were discovered by a Palmarian bishop. Then Hernández attacked, or at least threatened, the bishop with a knife, and in the subsequent tumult, all three were injured. While the bishop and Triviño received minor damages, Hernández was stabbed in the chest. For some time his condition was critical. However, a few days later both Hernández and Triviño were arrested for “armed robbery with aggravating circumstances,” and after court hearings both were brought to prison, awaiting trial.

Today (2018), the number of Palmarian church members remains low, probably somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500. Most of them live in Spain, Ireland, and Nigeria, but there are small Palmarian communities in many other places too, including the United States, Germany, Switzerland, Austria and several countries in Latin America. By mid-2016, Pope Peter III informed the faithful that the Palmarian religious community included thirty-two friars (bishops), of whom just seven had taken their vows in the last two decades. The nuns counted forty, but only a tenth of them had joined in the last twenty years and that their average age was almost sixty years. Though no exact data are available, by 2018 the number of friars and nuns had decreased somewhat, mainly due to deaths and lack of new vocations. In short, the Palmarian Church experiences a membership crisis.

RITUALS/PRACTICES

Just as the Roman Catholic Church, the Palmarians hold that Christ instituted seven sacraments. Nevertheless, they also teach that in this end-time the election to the papacy is an eighth, invisible sacrament, directly conferred by Christ. One original aspect of that Palmarian sacramental theology is that the Virgin “enthrones” a drop of her blood into the faithful at baptism or conversion. This drop can be strengthened, diminished or disappear altogether according to the moral status of the individual. The sacraments also “enthrone” and strengthen a piece of Christ’s heart in the faithful.

Baptism is the door to the church and the other sacraments, and children should preferably be baptized within eight days of their birth. Through baptism, the child (or adult) receives Mary’s blood drop, which takes away original sin. The Palmarian baptism has an undeletable character, but the strength of the blood drop can be weakened. The sacrament of confirmation should ideally be administered very shortly after baptism. It strengthens the blood drop and makes the individual stronger in his or her fight against Satan. If a person commits a cardinal sin, the blood drop of Mary disappears. Confession is the way to re-enter the state of grace.

The eucharist is arguably the most important sacrament for the Palmarians. In his first papal decrees in 1978, Pope Gregory XVII declared that the only rite that should be used was the Tridentine mass of Pius V, promulgated in 1570. Shortly thereafter, however, he introduced several new elements, and on October 9, 1983, the pope instituted a new, much briefer Palmarian mass order, which is concentrated to offertory, consecration and sacrificial communion taken by the priest. Briefly, every cleric should read several masses a day; in fact, they read turns of masses and not individual masses. According to Palmarian doctrine, the body, soul and blood of Christ and Mary are present in the consecrated bread and wine. Communion should only be taken on the tongue and the recipient must be kneeling when receiving the sacrament.

The fifth sacrament of the church, the last unction, strengthens the faithful’s relationship with Christ and Mary, and increases the Virgin’s blood drop. In the Palmarian church, there are three degrees of clerical ordination: deacon, priest and bishop. At ordination, the priest becomes inhabited by the soul of Christ, seen in the form of a radiant cross. The seventh Palmarian sacrament is marriage. Its main reason is to give children, new members, to the church. Still, virginity is the preferred state.

Through the years, the Palmarian church has canonized a very large number of people. Just in the period between 1978 and 1980, some 1,400 named individuals were declared saints by Gregory XVII. The saints are of many kinds. They came from many different parts of the world and died between the eleventh century and the mid-1970s. Still, the large majority were Spanish. One important category of Palmarian saints is bishops, priests and nuns killed during the Spanish Civil War. Among the saints canonized in 1978 was also the recently deceased Spanish leader Francisco Franco, but other twentieth-century right-wing politicians such as the Fascist leader José Antonio Primo de Rivera also were elevated to the altars. English martyrs, killed during the sixteenth and seventeenth-century persecutions of Catholics, constitutes another sizeable group, as do missionaries who died as martyrs in China and Indochina. Gregory XVII also canonized an “innumerable” group of Irish martyrs, killed because of their Catholic faith.

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

At its foundation in 1978, the Palmarian church, officially known as Santa Iglesia Católica Apostólica y Palmariana and Orden Religiosa de los Carmelitas de la Santa Faz en Compañía de Jesús y María, already had a developed, top-heavy organizational structure, headed by the pope. The pope has absolute power in the church. He is the High Priest, the Vicar of Christ and the Successor of St. Peter. He is infallible when proclaiming doctrine and has the supreme spiritual and temporal authority in the universe. Still, it is evident that the first Palmarian pope, Gregory XVII and Manuel Alonso (Father Isidoro María) were close collaborators. Clemente/Gregory was the “voice-box” of heaven and charismatic leader, while Manuel/Isidoro María was the eminent grise through whom all messages passed.

From 1976 onwards, the Palmarians consecrated a large number of bishops. Palmarian priests existed, but they were clearly outnumbered by bishops. At the foundation of the church in 1978, most of the bishops were made cardinals, who were members of a curia, led by Secretary of State, Father Isidoro María. Number three in the hierarchy was the Vice-secretary of State Father Elias María , who would remain so until his death in 1997. A fourth influential leader was Father Leandro, Camilo Estévez Puga, who died in 1999. In 1987, Pope Gregory announced that since 1978 he had elevated ninety-eight bishops to the cardinalate. Of the bishop-cardinals, some were vicars generally in charge of liturgy, cult, vocations, missions, propagation of faith and the Inquisition, and some were elected archbishops, patriarchs or archpatriarchs. Nevertheless, in 1995, Gregory XVII suppressed the cardinalate, and in the year 2000 he appointed Father Isidoro María as his successor. After Gregory’s death in 2005, he became pope, taking the name Peter II. During Peter II’s pontificate, Father Sergio María was the Secretary of State and was chosen as his successor. At Peter’s death in 2011, he succeeded him as pope and took Gregory XVIII as his papal name. In April 2016, Gregory XVII left the papacy and the Palmarian Church. He was then succeeded by his Secretary of State, Bishop Eliseo María, who became Pope Peter III.

In the early years, there were about a hundred nuns in the Carmelite Order of the Holy Face, who lived a life in strict enclosure. They were led by a mother superior, seen as the co-General of the Order. The available sources say little about their role.

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Spanish newspapers published a series of testimonies by former bishops of the Palmarian church. Being able to provide an inside perspective, ex-members told about a very strict life based on blind obedience to superiors. Of course, the pope and his closest men were on the top, followed by other cardinals. The highest leaders led quite a luxurious life, eating and living well. The ordinary bishops, priests and, in particular the non-ordained brothers, lived in frugal circumstances. The days followed a strict and repetitive plan, and the members of the order were constantly controlled, deprived of sleep and were given too little to eat. Psychological and physical abuse was common.

Though clerics did not wake until 8:30 in the morning, their activities often continued until very late at night. After attending mass and having a light breakfast, the friars went in line from their convent to the headquarters in Seville, where there was a roll call and where public criticism against individual friar also had a part. Thereafter, classes of liturgy and Spanish began as most of the members were foreigners. In the late afternoon, all nuns and clerics, but generally not the pope, left for Palmar de Troya. There were new masses and pious practices, such as praying the penitential rosary and meditating over the Stations of the Cross. They generally returned to Seville after midnight, but they often continued their prayers in the city for several hours. Thereafter the friars got a few hours’ sleep until the next day begun.

Although the Palmarian edifices in Seville looked quite elegant from the outside and were centrally located, the ordinary clerics and nuns lived in rundown rooms. Different kinds of illness, both of a physical and psychological nature, were common. On a frequent basis, the friars had to move from one building to another in the middle of the night, according to the contents of the pope’s visions. In 1981, however, these kinds of apparitions disappeared, and their living quarters became more stable.

In later years, there are many testimonies from ex-Palmarians who have left the church, often as teenagers. As “apostates,” they are not allowed to have any contact with any family members who remain in the church. Total shunning is the norm.

Despite its general condemnation of the outside world, the Palmarian church wanted to become and officially recognized religious group. Following the promulgation of the 1980 Spanish law on religious freedom, in 1981 and several times later, the Palmarians applied for inscription into the official Spanish register of religious associations. However, they were repeatedly denied inscription by the Ministry of Justice, among other reasons because the term “Catholic” was controlled by the Roman Catholic Church. In later applications, they therefore introduced a new official name, Iglesia Cristiana Palmariana de los Carmelitas de la Santa Faz. In the official context, then, the church did not use the label “Catholic” but rather “Christian”.

In 1985, the Palmarians appealed against the Ministry’s decisions to the Spanish Supreme Court. At first, the Court ruled against them. However, on November 2, 1987, the Court decided that the Palmarian church could indeed be included in the register, as they met all the formal requirements for a religious association. This decision was followed by much criticism in the Spanish media and from some researchers, who looked upon the Palmarians as a dangerous sect and a suspect business organization, most of all interested in the collecting riches.

Though Clemente Domínguez and the group around him physically took over the apparition site in 1974 and dominated the rapid development from a movement into a church of its own, most other seers clearly distanced themselves from them, not wanting another pope and a new church. Today, one can see a white cross with a picture of Pope Francis just outside the high walls of the Palmarian church compound. It is the Cruz Blanca: the gathering site for the seers who do not belong to the Palmarian church and their supporters. According to the group’s own data, about a dozen people meet there every weekday to pray the rosary. On weekends, there can by forty persons present. At Easter, however, as many as a couple of hundred gather at the site, including pilgrims from abroad.

According to the group’s website, the number of apparitions at the Cruz Blanca and in their chapel, Santuario del Corazón de María, through the decades are estimated at about 10,000 to date. At the beginning, several of the old seers claimed to receive heavenly communications by the Cruz Blanca, including Pepe Cayetano and Manuel Fernández, but in later years, only Rosario Arenillas claims to receive messages. Until his death in 2005, the group was led by Félix Arana, a former Roman Catholic priest, who in 1976 was consecrated a Palmarian bishop. However, he only maintained membership for a few months and then opposed the movement as it had developed. Arana served as the Cruz Blanca’s spiritual leader. He recorded the messages of the seers, and transcribed, published and interpreted them. He also celebrated the Tridentine mass in the chapel on a daily basis.

Christ and the Virgin are those who most frequently have appeared to the seers by the Cruz Blanca, followed by St. Joseph and Padre Pio. The messages often have a clear apocalyptic component. They are very critical of the modern Roman Catholic Church, claiming that it has been almost destroyed after Vatican II and that most priests and bishops are heretics. However, the pope is not to be blamed, as his messages are falsified by the curia. The Cruz Blanca thus claims that Pope John Paul II and his successors are true popes, but that they suffer immensely because of their fidelity. They assert that the Holy See will be overtaken by Antichrist, and that great wars and catastrophes will precede the Second Coming of Christ. In this situation, the faithful’s role is to pray for the pontiff and the church, so that the end of the world is averted. The Cruz Blanca group’s only relation to the Palmarian church, referred to by them, as “the sect of Clemente” is that they pray for their return to the Roman Catholic Church. Still, as can be seen, the contents of the messages at the Cruz Blanca are similar to the ones that Clemente received during the first half of the 1970s.

An important step in the history of the Palmarian church was taken on November 7, 2000, when Gregory XVII expelled no fewer than eighteen bishops and seven nuns, accusing them of heresy and of planning to overthrow the pope. Some of the excommunicated started an independent Palmarian community in Archidona, Andalusia, and others would follow them later. Although, they still regarded early apparitions to Clemente as verified and believed that Gregory XVII indeed had been the true pope, with the publication of the Palmarian Bible, or even from the mid-1990s, they had come to regard him as an insane heretic who had lost his papal authority. The dissenter group was very critical of the fact that Pope Gregory had suppressed the cardinalate in 1995. Further dissenters opposed his decision in 2000 to choose Father Isidoro María as his successor, taking away the possibility of a conclave. As Gregory (and Isidoro María) were regarded as manifest heretics, the group in Archidona believed the Holy See to be vacant.

*A comprehensive profile of the Holy Apostolic Catholic Palmarian Church, which contains in-line references and a complete set of references, is available in the Articles/Papers section of WRSP along with the book manuscript, A Pope of Their Own: El Palmar de Troya and the Palmarian Church.

Post Date:
28 September 2015

 

 

Share

Peoples Temple


PEOPLES TEMPLE TIMELINE

1931 (May 13):  James (Jim) Warren Jones was born in Crete, Indiana.

1949 (June 12):  Marceline Mae Baldwin married James (Jim) Warren Jones.

1954:  Jim and Marceline Jones founded Community Unity Church in Indianapolis, Indiana.

1956:  Peoples Temple, the renamed Wings of Deliverance (first incorporated 1955), opened in Indianapolis.

1960:  People Temple officially became a member of The Disciples of Christ (Christian Church) denomination.

1962:  Jim Jones and family lived in Brazil.

1965 (July):  Jones, his family, and 140 members of his interracial congregation moved to Redwood Valley, California.

1972:  Peoples Temple purchased church buildings in Los Angeles (September) and San Francisco (December).

1974 (Summer):  Peoples Temple pioneers began clearing land in the Northwest District of Guyana, South America to develop the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project.

1975 (December):  Al and Jeannie Mills, Peoples Temple apostates, founded the Human Freedom Center.

1976 (February):  Peoples Temple signed a lease with the Government of Guyana “to cultivate and beneficially occupy at least one-fifth” of 3,852 acres located in the Northwest District of Guyana.

1977 (Summer):  Approximately 600 Peoples Temple members moved to Jonestown in a three-month period.

1977 (August):  New West Magazine published an exposé of life inside Peoples Temple based upon apostate accounts.

1977 (Summer):  Tim Stoen founded the “Concerned Relatives,” an activist group of apostates and family members that urged government agencies and media outlets to investigate Peoples Temple.

1977 (September):  A “six-day-siege” staged by Jim Jones occurred in Jonestown in which residents believe they are under attack.

1978 (November 17):  California Congressman Leo J. Ryan, members of the Concerned Relatives, and members of the media visited Jonestown.

1978 (November 18):  Ryan, three journalists (Robert Brown, Don Harris, and Greg Robinson) and one Peoples Temple member (Patricia Parks) were killed in an ambush of gunfire at the Port Kaituma airstrip, six miles from Jonestown. After the assault at the airstrip more than 900 residents, following the orders of Jones, ingested poison in the Jonestown pavilion. Jones died of a gunshot wound to the head.

1979 (March):  The Guyana Emergency Relief Committee obtained funding to transport more than 400 unidentified and unclaimed bodies from Dover, Delaware to be interred at Evergreen Cemetery in Oakland, California. A small monument was erected.

2011 (May 29):  A dedication service occurred observing the installation of four memorial plaques at Evergreen Cemetery listing the names of all who died in Jonestown.

2018 (November 18):  A memorial service marked the renovation of the burial site, along with the installation of a small monument noting the 2011 dedication.

FOUNDER/GROUP HISTORY

James Warren Jones [Image at right] was born May 13, 1931 to a working class family at the height of the Great Depression in Crete, Indiana (Hall 1987:4). His father, James Thurman Jones, was a disabled veteran, while his mother, Lynetta Putnam Jones, was the principal breadwinner and responsible parent in the family. She greatly influenced her son’s interests in social justice and equality. She was skeptical of organized religion, but did believe in spirits—a belief she communicated to her son (Hall 1987:6). A neighbor took him to Pentecostal church services as a child, and this undoubtedly shaped his understanding of worship as an intensely emotional experience. What emerged from these influences was a self-styled theology that combined aspects of Pentecostalism with social idealism. Jones met Marceline Baldwin in Richmond, Indiana, and the 18-year-old Jones married the 22-year-old on June 12, 1949. The couple moved to Indianapolis in 1951 to attend school.

By 1954, Jones had established his own church, called Community Unity, in Indianapolis (Moore 2009:12). That same year, he preached as a guest minister at the Laurel Street Tabernacle in Indianapolis, Indiana, an Assemblies of God church within the Pentecostal tradition (Hall 1987:42). While the church administrative board lamented Jones’ inclusion of African Americans from his Community Unity Church, his charismatic style attracted a number of working class white members away from the Laurel Street congregation.  Jim and Marceline incorporated the Wings of Deliverance on April 4, 1955; a year later, they re-incorporated, moved, and renamed their organization Peoples Temple (Hall 1987:43). By 1957 the Peoples Temple Apostolic Church had gained a reputation in Indianapolis for practicing a social gospel ministry. The congregation voted in 1959 to affiliate with the Disciples of Christ (Christian Church), and in 1960 the Peoples Temple Christian Church Full Gospel [Image at right] became an official member of the denomination (Moore 2009:13).

Throughout the 1950s, Jim and Marceline visited Father Divine’s Peace Mission in Philadelphia. Jones was impressed with Father Divine’s interracial vision, his charismatic abilities, and his successful business cooperatives. He also adopted Divine’s practice of having parishioners call him “Father,” and calling Marceline “Mother.” After Father Divine died, Jones attempted to take over the Peace Mission, but Mother Divine rejected his advances. Nevertheless, a number of elderly African American members were attracted to the Temple’s message and moved westward (Moore 2009:16-17).

Jones’ commitment to racial equality led him briefly to chair the Indianapolis Human Rights Commission in 1961. But a vision of nuclear holocaust, coupled with an article in the January 1962 issue of Esquire Magazine identifying the safest places in case of nuclear attack, prompted him to take his family to Belo Horizonte, Brazil, one of the places listed. The Temple continued in Indianapolis without Jones, but faltered without his leadership. Upon his return in 1965, he persuaded about 140 people, half of them African Americans and half Caucasians, to move to Redwood Valley in the California wine country, another safe venue identified by Esquire (Hall 1987:62). There they constructed a new church building and several administrative offices, and began operating a number of care homes for senior citizens and mentally challenged youth.

The progressive political scene in California was yet another reason for Jones’ move west (Harris and Waterman 2004). In Redwood Valley Jones began to recruit young, college-educated whites to complement the large number of working class families who already belonged to Peoples Temple. This cadre of relatively affluent members—most of whom had developed a commitment to peace and justice as part of the Civil Rights movement and anti-Vietnam War protests—assisted poorer members in navigating the social welfare system. They provided a number of services that enabled the poor to receive the benefits to which they were entitled, especially senior citizens who had trouble collecting the Social Security payments they had earned. When the Temple opened a church in the Fillmore District of San Francisco, it attracted thousands of African Americans as well as city officials and political figures. In the heart of the ghetto, the group offered free blood pressure testing for senior citizens, free sickle-cell anemia testing for African Americans, and free child care for working parents. It also hosted a variety of progressive political speakers, from Angela Davis to Dennis Banks.

Hundreds of Temple members lived communally in Redwood Valley, San Francisco, and, less so, in Los Angeles. Older members signed life-care contracts, contributing their Social Security checks in return for room and board, health care, and the goods and services needed for their retirement. In Redwood Valley, Temple members established and operated several care homes for the elderly, the mentally ill, and the mentally challenged, and these enterprises raised money for the group. Those who “went communal,” as Temple members describe it, donated their paychecks to the group and received minimal life support: cramped quarters, a small allowance for necessities, communal meals. Traditional fundraising appeals through mass mailings supported some of the Temple’s many social programs (Levi 1982:xii). A Planning Commission, comprised of about 100 Temple leaders, discussed major organizational decisions, with Jones retaining final decision-making authority.

In 1974, the Temple leadership negotiated with the South American nation of Guyana to develop nearly 4,000 acres in the Northwest District of the country on the Venezuelan border. By the time the Temple signed an official lease for the land in 1976, pioneers from the group had already spent two years of back-breaking labor [Image at right] to clear jungle in Guyana in order to establish what they called the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project. Guyana, a multiracial state and the only English-speaking country in South America, declared itself to be a cooperative socialist republic. Its black minority government welcomed the prospect of serving as a refuge for Americans fleeing a racist and oppressive society. Moreover, having a large group of ex-patriate Americans so close to the border with Venezuela assured U.S. interest in the area under dispute (Moore 2009:42). The Peoples Temple Agricultural Project grew slowly at first, housing only about 50 people as late as the first months of 1977, but it expanded to more than 400 residents by April, and to 1,000 by the end of the year (Moore 2009:44).

Various pressures led to the relatively speedy immigration from California to Guyana. One impetus was the U.S. Internal Revenue Service’s examination of the Temple’s business-related income. This threatened the church’s tax-exempt status, and raised the potential of shutting down the organization (Hall 1987:197-98). Another incentive derived from the activities of a group of disaffected former members and relatives of current members of Peoples Temple. Known as The Concerned Relatives, the group lobbied various government agencies to investigate the Temple, alleging a number of abuses as well as criminal activity. The Concerned Relatives also brought these same allegations to news media outlets. A highly critical article published in New West Magazine featuring criticism from former members who publicly blasted the Temple and its leadership, was apparently the precipitating factor to drive Jones immediately to Guyana, which he never left (Moore 2009:38-39).

At some point in 1977, the agricultural project became known as Jonestown. [Image at right] Conditions were difficult, but hope was high for life in the “Promised Land,” as Temple members back in the U.S. called it. The work needed to maintain a community of a thousand souls was immense. Members worked in agriculture, construction, maintenance (such as cooking and laundry), childcare for the 304 minors under the age of 18 living there, education, healthcare, and fundraising (making items to sell in Georgetown, which was not easily accessible from Jonestown). Everyone contributed to the community, at times working eleven hours a day, six days a week. Evenings were filled with meetings, educational programs, Russian language lessons (for what people believed was an imminent move to the Soviet Union) and other duties. Residents lived in dormitories, and frequently children were raised apart from their biological parents.

At first the diet was adequate, but as more people arrived, portions became relatively smaller, consisting mainly of beans and rice, with meat or green vegetables reserved for meals when outsiders visited the community. When people such as U.S. Embassy officials, Guyana government representatives, and supportive family members and friends did visit, residents of Jonestown received lengthy briefings to ensure that the image portrayed of Jonestown was positive and convincing.

Although the Temple boasted 20,000 members, it is more likely that California membership peaked at 5,000, with regular attendees totaling between 2,000 and 3,000 (Moore 2009:58). A number of those who left over the years had been members of the upper echelon of Temple leadership, including those responsible for key decision-making, financial and legal planning, and oversight of the organization. They became apostates, that is, public opponents of Peoples Temple (as distinct from individuals who simply abandoned the organization). Among these “defectors” was Tim Stoen, the Temple attorney and Jim Jones’ right-hand man. Stoen gave the fledgling Concerned Relatives group both its star power and organizational acumen, and was key to the success of a public relations campaign designed both to rescue relatives living in Jonestown, and to bring down Jim Jones and Peoples Temple. The Concerned Relatives alleged that Jonestown operated as a concentration camp, and claimed that Jones brainwashed individuals who went to Guyana and held them there against their will (Moore 2009:64-65; see their “Accusation of Human Rights Violations“ published 11 April 1978).

The poster child for the Concerned Relatives (and, coincidentally, for Peoples Temple) was a young boy named John Victor Stoen, [Image at right] the son of Grace Stoen, another apostate. Although Tim Stoen was the putative father, he had signed an affidavit which said that he had encouraged a sexual encounter between his wife and Jim Jones, and that John Victor had been the product of that liaison (Moore 2009:60-61). Tim and Grace joined forces to fight for custody of the boy, and Jones’ vow to hold onto John Victor, even unto death, galvanized the two factions.

As the Stoen custody battled festered, former Temple members Deborah Layton and Yolanda Crawford defected from Jonestown and signed affidavits detailing what they experienced while living there. Family members began contacting the State Department, which in turn directed U.S. Embassy officials in Guyana to visit Jonestown and check on various relatives. In addition to being a party to the John Victor custody case, Tim Stoen filed a number of nuisance lawsuits against the Temple in order to recover money and property for other former members.

The pressure exerted by the Concerned Relatives served to demoralize Jones and the people in Jonestown, and it is clear that Jones’ health and leadership deteriorated significantly. As a result, a leadership corps comprised principally of women ran day-to-day operations in the community (Maaga 1998). At times, Jones became incapacitated through using prescription drugs such as Phenobarbital (Moore 2009:74-75). He would fly into rages, only to calm down moments later. He also had trouble speaking at times, although he also would ramble on for hours well into the night on the community’s public address system, reading news reports from Soviet and Eastern Bloc sources, which presented anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist perspectives highly critical of America. He frequently “portrayed the United States as beset by racial and economic problems” that his followers had escaped by coming to Jonestown (Hall 1987:237). As a result of their long hours in the fields during the day, and their nights punctuated by meetings and harangues over the P.A. system, Jonestown residents became increasingly exhausted and sleep-deprived.

The Concerned Relatives’ letter-writing campaigns to members of Congress finally paid off, and they found an ally in California Congressman Leo J. Ryan. [Image at right] A constituent, Sammy Houston, claimed that his son Robert had been murdered by Temple members. (There is no evidence to substantiate his claim, which was investigated by the police at the time of Robert’s death, and was re-examined after events in Jonestown.)

Ryan announced his plans to travel to Jonestown in November 1978. The congressman claimed he was conducting a neutral fact-finding mission, but the people of Jonestown did not see it this way. No other members of Congress accompanied Ryan to Guyana, but several members of the Concerned Relatives, along with news reporters who had written critical articles about the Temple did. The party left for Guyana on November 14, 1978 and spent two days in Georgetown, Guyana’s capital (Moore 2009:91). After lengthy negotiations with Jonestown leadership, Ryan, several of the Concerned Relatives, and most of the journalists were allowed to enter the community on November 17 to interview residents, as well as to seek out people allegedly being held against their will. Jones told Ryan that anyone who wished to leave Jonestown was welcome to do so. The day ended with a rousing performance by the Jonestown Express, the community’s band, and with Ryan announcing that Jonestown looked like it was the best thing that had happened to many people. The crowd cheered. That night, however, a disaffected resident slipped a note to both the U.S. Embassy Deputy Chief of Mission and to an NBC News reporter who were present. The note asked for help to get out of Jonestown (Stephenson 2005:118-19).

Ryan and his entourage continued to interview Jonestown residents the next day, but the upbeat mood of the night before had dissipated. As the day progressed, sixteen residents—including members of two long-time Temple families—asked to leave with the Ryan party. The congressman gathered his group together amid considerable strife. As Ryan attempted to leave Jonestown, a resident named Don Sly, the former husband of a Concerned Relative, attacked Ryan with a knife, inflicting superficial cuts on himself but not the congressman (Moore 2009:94). The congressional party made its way in a truck to the airstrip, located six miles from Jonestown in Port Kaituma, the nearest settlement. As they began to board two small planes to take them to Georgetown, a handful of Jonestown residents who had followed the congressman and his party to the airstrip opened fire. Killed in the ambush were Congressman Leo Ryan, three journalists—Robert Brown, Don Harris, and Greg Robinson—and one Peoples Temple member—Patricia Parks, who had wished to leave Jonestown. A dozen members of the media, defecting members, and staff from Ryan’s office were seriously wounded. Two defectors were shot by Larry Layton, who had posed as a defector, and was already aboard one plane when the shooting began outside (Stephenson 2005:120-27).

Back in Jonestown, the residents congregated in the central pavilion. The mood was grim after the defections. Jones proclaimed that the end had come for the people of Jonestown. He said the outside world had forced them to this extreme situation, and that “revolutionary suicide” was their only option. One resident, Christine Miller, dissented, and asked about going to Russia, saying she thought the children should have a chance to live. Other residents shouted her down, however, and the deaths began (Moore 2009:95-96). Parents were the first to give the drink to infants and children; many mothers poured the poison down their children’s throats before they took the poison themselves (Hall 1987:285). Adults then took the poison from a large vat of purple Flav-R-Aid, a British version of Kool-Aid, mixed with potassium cyanide and a variety of sedatives and tranquilizers (including Valium, Penegram, and chloral hydrate) (Hall 1987:282). Some were injected, some drank from a cup, and some had it squirted into their mouths. Although armed guards stood by to prevent anyone from leaving, in the end they also took the poison. Jones, however, died of a gunshot wound to the head: an autopsy could not determine whether his death had been murder or suicide. Despite early reports to the contrary, only one other person died of a gunshot wound, Annie Moore. Sharon Amos, living in the Temple’s house at Lamaha Gardens, in Georgetown, received the order from Jonestown to commit suicide. She killed her three children and herself in the bathroom of the Georgetown headquarters. The final death toll in Guyana that day was 918: 909 in Jonestown; five at the Port Kaituma airstrip, and four at the Temple’s house in Georgetown. [Image at right]

There were about one hundred survivors. Two families and some young adults left early on the morning of the 18th and hiked up the railroad tracks that led to the community of Matthews Ridge, thirty miles away from Jonestown. Three young men were sent out of the area with suitcases full of cash destined for the Soviet Embassy. Two other young men fled as the deaths were occurring, and two elderly people hid in plain sight. Another half dozen were on procurement missions in Venezuela and on boats in the Caribbean. Finally, about eighty Temple members who had been staying in Lamaha Gardens (including members of the Jonestown basketball team) escaped the deaths by virtue of being 150 miles away.

The government of Guyana denied the request of the U.S. State Department to bury the bodies in Jonestown. A U.S. Army Graves Registration team bagged the remains, which the U.S. Air Force then transported to Dover Air Force Base for identification by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. [Image at right] (Interviews with participants in the bodylift are available at “Military Response to Jonestown” 2020). Routine embalming of all bodies began almost immediately, but one result was that vital forensic evidence was destroyed, which prevented accurate determination of death for seven individuals autopsied by the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. Relatives claimed approximately one half of the number of bodies, while about 400 bodies remained unidentified or unclaimed. The majority of the unidentified were children. An interfaith group in San Francisco found a cemetery in Oakland, California willing to bury these bodies, after facing rejection by a number of other cemeteries afraid of criticism. In May, 2011 four memorial plaques were placed at the burial site in Evergreen Cemetery, listing the names of all those who died on November 18, 1978.

Temple lawyers in San Francisco filed for bankruptcy of the corporation in December 1978, and the San Francisco Superior Court agreed to the dissolution the next month. Judge Ira Brown appointed Robert Fabian to serve as Receiver of the assets, and the local attorney was able to track down more than $8.5 million in banks around the world, in addition to assets traced to San Francisco. Judge Brown ordered all claimants against the Temple to petition the court within four months: 709 claims were made (Moore 1985:344). In May 1980, Fabian proposed a plan to settle the $1.8 billion in claims against the group, by issuing “Receiver’s Certificates” for prorated shares of Temple funds to 403 plaintiffs who had filed wrongful death claims (Moore 1985:351). In November, 1983, a few days before the fifth anniversary of the deaths, Judge Brown signed the order which formally terminated Peoples Temple as a nonprofit corporation. The court had paid out more than $13 million (Moore 1985:354-55).

DOCTRINES/BELIEFS

The belief system of Peoples Temple combined a number of different religious and social ideas, including Pentecostalism, the Christian Social Gospel, socialism, communism, and utopianism. The charisma of Jim Jones and the idealism of Temple members who believed that their vision would create a better world held together this wide-ranging mix of beliefs and practices. Hall calls Peoples Temple an “apocalyptic sect,” which expected the imminent end of the capitalistic world (Hall 1987:40). Wessinger classifies Peoples Temple as a catastrophic millennial group, characterized by a radical dualism that pitted the “Babylon” of the United States against the New Eden of Jonestown (Wessinger 2000:39). All of these views describe the Temple in part.

Jones initially practiced a lively form of Christianity borrowed largely from Pentecostalism. He relied upon the prophetic texts of the Bible to exhort his congregation to work for social justice. An analysis of audiotaped worship services from Peoples Temple in Indiana and California indicates Jones’ debt to Black Church traditions (Harrison 2004). Services followed a free-form style in which music played a key role, the organ emphasizing Jones’ call-and-response style of preaching. His sermons bore themes important to the Black Church: liberation, freedom, justice, and judgment.

The theology of the Temple changed, however, as the role and person of Jim Jones became more exalted. Chidester argues that a coherent theology emerges from Jones’ sermons (Chidester 1988:52). In this theology, Jones asserted that the “Sky God” of traditional Christianity did not exist, but a genuine God, referred to as Principle or Divine Socialism, did exist in the person of Jim Jones. [Image at right] If God is Love, and Love is Socialism, then humans must live socialistically to participate in God. Moreover, this allowed for personal deification, as Jones quoted John 10:34: “ye all are gods” (Chidester 1988:53). Thus, members of Peoples Temple practiced what they called “apostolic socialism,” that is, the socialism of the early Christian community described in Acts 2:45 and 4:34-35. “No one can privately own the land. No one can privately own the air. It must be held in common. So then, that is love, that is God, Socialism” (Chidester 1988:57, quoting Jones on Tape Q 967).

As Jones felt more secure in his California base, he exchanged religious rhetoric for political rhetoric more and more. He denounced traditional Christianity and excoriated the Bible, which he referred to as the “Black Book” that had enslaved so many of their forebears. In the early 1970s, he published a twenty-four page booklet titled “The Letter Killeth,” in which he listed all of the contradictions and atrocities contained in the Old and New Testaments. Once the group moved to Guyana, Jones dropped all religious references, except when visitors came (Moore 2009:55). No worship services were conducted in Jonestown. Community planning meetings, news readings, and public events replaced worship. It seems likely, though, that older members retained traditional Christian beliefs (Sawyer 2004).

Although Jones claimed to be a communist, the Communist Party USA had no records of his membership, and disavowed any connection with him after the deaths in Jonestown. Jones made up his communism as he went along, creating an eclectic blend of class consciousness, anti-colonial struggle, selected Marxist ideas, and his perceptions of the community’s needs at the moment. Whatever radical politics he and the group may have shared were somewhat muted, given the fact that they openly supported a variety of Democratic candidates in local, state, and national politics once they relocated to San Francisco. A number of writers have asserted that the Temple helped to elect George Moscone as San Francisco mayor, perhaps even committing fraud to do so, “but the voting clout of actual Temple members in San Francisco seems to have been grossly misperceived” (Hall 1987:166).

Rather than doctrinaire communism, the ideology of Peoples Temple focused on commitment to the community, and to elevating the group above the individual. Members deemed self-sacrifice the highest form of nobility, and selfishness as the lowest of human behavior. In addition, commitment to Jim Jones was required. Loyalty tests ensured commitment to the cause as well as to the leader. No one looked askance at various practices because they made sense within a worldview that anticipated an imminent apocalypse, either through nuclear war or genocide against people of color. By fleeing the United States and attempting to create an alternative society, Temple members believed they might survive this harsh inevitability, perhaps even serving as a new model for humanity. At the same time, though, Jones’ pervasive rhetoric concerning the coming Armageddon undermined any sort of hopeful outlook.

RITUALS/PRACTICES

To promote the shift from the self-centered, elitist individualism promoted by capitalism, Jones encouraged re-training, or indoctrination, in the selfless, populist communalism promoted by socialism through a practice known as “catharsis.” Even in Indianapolis, “corrective fellowship” meetings were held in which church members offered self-criticism. But catharsis as a regular part of Temple practice took root in Redwood Valley. [Image at right] Catharsis sessions required public confession and communal punishment for transgressions against the community and its members (Moore 2009:32-33). For example, if a teenager was accused of being rude to a senior citizen, the congregation would hear the evidence and vote on the teenager’s innocence or guilt, and on the punishment to be received. The penalty could be a severe spanking administered by one of the seniors. When Jones introduced the “Board of Education,” a one-by-four inch board two and a half feet long, he assigned a large woman to administer the beatings: “She was strong and knew how to whip hard,” according to Mills (1979). Adults who transgressed were punished by being forced to box with other Temple members. A diary kept by Temple member Edith Roller, for example, reported a boxing match between a young man accused of sexism, and a young woman. The woman knocked out the man, to the delight of the crowd in attendance (Moore 2009:32-33).

Transgressions revealed in catharsis ranged from selfishness, sexism, and discourtesy to drug or alcohol abuse, and petty crimes for which members could be arrested and convicted by law enforcement. Temple members considered catharsis sessions as a way to improve individual behavior without resorting to authorities like the police or public welfare officials. Mills (1979) claims that members said what they thought Jones wanted to hear, though others apparently believed in the efficacy of catharsis to solve personal and family problems (Moore 1986).

While ritualized catharsis sessions seemed to end with the move to Jonestown, self-criticism and collective condemnation of transgressors continued during Peoples Rallies. These meetings transpired quite frequently in the evenings after the work day. Individuals responsible for various departments, such as the health clinic or the livestock, reported on progress and problems. In addition, individuals would be criticized for decisions that went awry and behavior that seemed self-serving. Family members and partners had a special responsibility to chastise their own.

Peoples Rallies faced inward, addressing the conditions existing in Jonestown. White Nights, on the other hand, looked outward, responding to the threats, real and imagined, that beset the community. A White Night, so-named to counter racist stereotypes (blackmail, blacklist, blackball, etc.), was an emergency drill called by Jones to prepare community members to defend themselves again imminent attack. Some precedent for these drills may have been set when Jones faked an attack upon his person in Redwood Valley (Reiterman and Jacobs 1982:201-02). White Nights “signified a severe crisis within Jonestown and the possibility of mass death during, or as a result of, an invasion” (Moore 2009:75). The first one in Jonestown probably occurred in September, 1977, when the lawyer for Tim and Grace Stoen traveled to Guyana to serve court papers upon Jones. Men, women, and children armed themselves with machetes and other farm implements, and stood along the perimeter of the settlement for days, sleeping and eating in shifts. Usually White Nights corresponded to perceived threats, such as when allies in the Guyana government were out of the country. As audiotapes recovered from Jonestown indicate, White Nights usually included discussions of suicide, during which individuals declared their willingness to kill their children, their relatives, and themselves rather than submit to the attackers.

Suicide drills have been conflated with White Nights, but were quite different in that people actually practiced taking what was supposedly poison. These drills, which served as tests of loyalty to the cause, were discussed as early as 1973 when eight young high profile Temple members defected (Mills 1979:231). In 1976 Jones staged a test for members of the Planning Commission, telling them that the wine they had drunk was actually poison to see how they would react (Reiterman and Jacobs 1982:294-96). Piecing together documents from Deborah Layton, Edith Roller, and other accounts, it appears that there were at least six suicide rehearsals in Jonestown in 1978 (Layton 1998; Roller Journal, Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple). Even when suicide was not being rehearsed, it progressively became part of the general conversation more and more, especially during Peoples Rallies (Moore 2006). Individuals also wrote notes to Jones describing assassination and martyrdom plans, such as blowing up the Pentagon or other buildings in Washington, D.C. (Moore 2009:80). Thus, when they were not re-enacting suicide, Temple members were thinking and talking about it.

ORGANIZATION/LEADERSHIP

The Temple had a pyramidal organizational structure, with Jim Jones and a few select leaders at the very tip; a Planning Commission comprising about 100 members near the top; members who lived communally at the next level; and the general rank and file at the base (Moore 2009:35-36). Individuals close to the base of the pyramid did not experience the same levels of coercion, or commitment, as those who had “gone communal” or were further up the pyramid. Even within the Planning Commission, there were a number of inner circles. These included those who helped Jones to fake miraculous healings; those who arranged questionable property transfers; those who practiced dirty tricks (like going through people’s garbage); and those who carried cash to foreign banks.

Despite the rhetoric of racial equality, race and class distinctions continued to exist. According to Maaga, “It was almost impossible for black persons to make their way into positions of influence in the Temple” (Maaga 1998:65). An interracial group of eight young adults defected in 1973, leaving behind a note excoriating the advancement of unproven new white members over time-tested black members:

You said that the revolutionary focal point at present is in the black people. There is no potential in the
white population, according to you. Yet, where is the black leadership, where is the black staff and black attitude? (“Revolutionaries Letter,” Alternative Considerations of Jonestown).

Although some African Americans held leadership positions in Jonestown, the major decision-making power (including planning for mass suicide) remained with whites.

Jones used sex to control Temple members. He arranged marriages, broke up partnerships, and separated families, all in order to make himself the principal object of people’s sexual desire. Encouraging infidelity to one’s partner, Jones demanded fidelity to himself alone, even from the men and women he forced to have sex with him. At the same time, in an effort to create a new, multi-racial society, Jones promoted bi-racial partnerships and the adoption or birth of bi-racial children. A Relationship Committee run by the Planning Commission was established to approve and monitor partnerships between couples.

Jones also accused everyone of being gay; he frequently proclaimed himself to be the only true heterosexual (Hall 1987:112). Harvey Milk, the first openly-gay San Francisco County Supervisor, frequently visited the Temple and was a strong supporter, especially after he received dozens of condolence messages from members following his partner’s suicide. While embracing Milk’s support, Jones also suggested that homosexuality was a problem that did not exist in a true communist society. The Bellefountaines’ examination of the way gays and lesbians were treated within the Temple reveals a contradictory environment of anti-gay rhetoric coupled with an acceptance of gay relationships (Bellefountaine and Bellefountaine 2011).

ISSUES/CHALLENGES

Given the tragic demise of hundreds of Americans, a number of issues of controversy have arisen. Five major questions seem to recur in popular and scholarly literature: 1) What was the level of violence throughout the course of the Temple’s existence? 2) Was Jonestown a concentration camp? 3) What was the status of Jim Jones’ mental health from earliest childhood until his death? 4) Is it accurate to call the deaths in Jonestown suicide, or was it murder? 5) Did the CIA stage the deaths in Jonestown? Two additional controversies have emerged more recently; 6) the first concerns the debate over whether or not to include Jones’ name on a memorial plaque that listed all those who died on November 18,1978; 7) the other concerns the significance of Jonestown in American life and culture.

1. What was the level of violence in Peoples Temple? It is clear that violence existed inside Peoples Temple at certain moments in its history, ranging from verbal abuse, to corporal punishment, to mental torture, to physical torture. Moore (2011) identified four types of violence that occurred, noting increasingly brutal mistreatment in the final year at Jonestown. The most socially acceptable form of violence consisted of discipline, by which individuals were punished for moral infractions such as lying, stealing, cheating, or social infractions such as smoking or using drugs. The punishment tended to fit the crime: a child who had bitten another, was bitten himself; children who stole cookies from the store were spanked with twenty-five whacks. The next level comprised behavior modification in order to change bourgeois patterns of behavior (racism, sexism, classism, elitism, ageism, and so on). Corporal punishment, such as boxing, or nonviolent penance such as housecleaning or paying fines, tended to be used to deal with these crimes against the group. One of the most extreme forms of behavior modification was the time a pedophilic member was beaten on the penis until it bled (Mills 1979:269).

“While discipline and behavior modification might be considered more or less socially accepted (at least in theory if not in practice), two additional forms of violence existed within the Temple that did not mirror the larger society: behavior control and terror” (Moore 2011:100). Behavior control included separating families, informing on other members (and on one’s own thoughts), regulating sexual activity, and, once in Jonestown, governing all aspects of individual life and thought to the extent possible. Jones inculcated a sense of generalized terror beginning in the 1960s with predictions of nuclear war, and continuing in the 1970s with prophecies of racial genocide, fascist takeover, and terrible torture. Terror became more personal in Jonestown, with people fearing for their lives during White Nights, and with actual incidents of torture, such as punishing a woman by having a snake crawl over her; or, tying two young boys up in the jungle and telling them tigers would get them (Moore 2011:103). Residents believed that enemies were intent upon their destruction, and although this is somewhat true (the Concerned Relatives did indeed intend the annihilation of Jonestown), they were convinced their foes planned kidnappings, torture, and murder. When Leo Ryan announced his visit to Jonestown, the widespread sense of terror only intensified.

2. Was Jonestown a concentration camp? There is broad agreement that conditions in Jonestown, though difficult by middle-class standards, were acceptable, and even agreeable, until late 1977. Reports by U.S. Embassy visitors were generally favorable. U.S. Ambassador Maxwell Krebs described the atmosphere in the small jungle community as “quite relaxed and informal” in 1975. “My impression was of a highly motivated, mainly self-disciplined group, and of an operation which had a good chance of at least initial success” (U.S. Committee on Foreign Affairs 1979:135). By mid-1977, however, an influx of more immigrants than the community could handle created a number of serious problems, especially in the areas of food and housing. Deterioration in living and working conditions, coupled with an intensification in terror, began in 1978, and serious decline occurred in the summer months of that year.

It is true, as the Concerned Relatives charged in their declaration of “Human Rights Violations,” that incoming and outgoing mail was censored; that travel was restricted; that family members could not visit relatives in Jonestown; and that residents put their best face forward for visitors. [Image at right] Situated in the middle of dense jungle, with only two villages accessible by road (Port Kaituma six miles away and Matthews Ridge 30 miles distant) and connected only by air or river travel to the rest of the world, Jonestown was an encapsulated community, almost completely isolated from contact with outsiders. At the same time, Jonestown did not acquire its totalistic profile apart from the agitation of its “cultural opponents” (Hall 1995). As Hall observes, anticult activists played a role in the outcomes in Jonestown and at Mt. Carmel. In their article that analyzes the endogenous (internal) factors leading to violence in new religious movements and the exogenous (external) factors, Anthony, Robbins, and Barrie-Anthony (2011) describe a “toxic interdependence” of “anticult and cult violence,” and suggest that “some groups may be so highly totalistic that they are very vulnerable to [a] triggering effect,” that is, acting out totalistic projections from the outside world (2011:82). In other words, conditions in Jonestown may have declined in response to the level of threat residents believed to exist.

3. What was the status of Jim Jones’ mental health? The introduction to Rosenbaum’s Explaining Hitler (1998) presents an overview of his analysis of the many attempts to understand how Adolf Hitler came to be who and what he was. The subtitle, The Search for the Origins of His Evil, could equally describe a number of popular and scholarly works about Jim Jones. Rosenbaum’s catalog of explanations (mountebank, true believer, mesmeric occult messiah, scapegoat, criminal, abused child, “Great Man,” and victim, among others) can be and have been applied to Jones. Accounts range from Jones being crazy and evil from his youth (Reiterman and Jacobs 1982, Scheeres 2011); that his “herculean conscience” to do good ultimately overwhelmed him (Rose 1979); that “audience corruption” deluded him into believing his own rhetoric (Smith 2004); and other evaluations.

It is clear that Jones was charismatic, manipulative, sensitive, and egocentric. Not as clear is the extent of his abilities as a faith healer. One thing that many Jonestown survivors and former Temple members agree on is that Jones had paranormal abilities. Although sham faith healings occurred in the San Francisco Temple, even some critics of those healings admit that on occasion the healings were genuine (compare Beck 2005 and Cartmell 2006).

Equally clear is that Jones began using barbiturates in San Francisco, and possibly earlier, to manage his schedule. His long-term drug abuse became apparent in Jonestown. U.S. Embassy officials visiting 7 November 1978 noted that his speech was “markedly slurred” and that he seemed mentally impaired (U.S. Committee on Foreign Affairs 1979:143). Audiotapes made in Jonestown confirm Jones’ mental and speech deficiencies. His autopsy revealed toxic levels of pentobarbital in his liver and kidneys, thus indicating a drug addiction (“Autopsies” 1979).

4. Were the deaths in Jonestown suicide or murder? The question of whether or not residents of Jonestown voluntarily committed suicide, or whether they were coerced, and therefore murdered, continues in lively online debates (“Was It Murder or Suicide?” 2006). Evidence from the audiotape made 18 November (Q 042) as well as eyewitness accounts indicate that parents killed their children; even if youngsters voluntarily drank the poison, the 304 children and minors under age eighteen are considered murder victims. Some senior citizens were found dead in their beds, evidently injected, and these individuals were also murdered. Debate centers on the able-bodied adults, and if they actually chose to die or if they were physically coerced by members of the Jonestown security team. After a brief inspection of the scene, Dr. Leslie Mootoo, the chief pathologist for the government of Guyana, reported seeing syringes without needles, presumably to insert poison into the mouths of children or unwilling adults. He also stated that he saw needle puncture marks on the backs of eighty-three out of 100 individuals he examined (Moore 2018a). Yet according to Odell Rhodes, an eyewitness, most people died “more or less willingly” and Grover Davis, who watched the suicides before deciding to hide himself in a ditch, said “I didn’t hear nobody say they wasn’t willing to take suicide shots… They were willing to do it” (Moore 1985:331). No one rushed the vat, according to Skip Roberts, the Assistant Police Commissioner for Crime in Guyana investigating the deaths, “because they wanted to die. The guards weren’t even necessary at the end” (Moore 1985:333).

Members of Peoples Temple had long been conditioned to accept the necessity of giving their lives for the cause of justice and freedom. African Americans living in the 1960s and 1970s saw the ranks of political activists decimated in the violent deaths of Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr., and the leaders of the Black Panther Party. The Panthers’ Huey Newton had observed that activism required a commitment to “revolutionary suicide,” that is, a willingness to put one’s life on the line because radical politics in the 1970s were suicidal. Although Jones appropriated Newton’s language, he altered the concept in a significant way. Newton argued that revolutionary activism, by definition, leads to conflict with the state, and that the state eventually kills its opponents in defense of itself and its institutions. Jones interpreted “revolutionary suicide” more literally, meaning that one must kill oneself in order to advance the revolution (Harris and Waterman 2004).

The rhetoric of suicide is evident in many Temple documents. Programs at the Temple in San Francisco and issues of the group’s newspaper, Peoples Forum, focused on the ever-present reality of torture and death. Letters and notes written to Jones and to family members expressed a willingness to die for their beliefs. Audiotapes affirm these revolutionary vows to commit suicide. The Concerned Relatives pointed out that one Jonestown resident wrote in April 1978 that the group would rather die than be hounded from one continent to the next (Moton 1978). Further reports of suicide drills came from Yolanda Crawford that April and from Deborah Layton in June.

Although residents of Jonestown took the rhetoric of suicide seriously, it would be a mistake to conclude that, on the last day, they believed they were participating in simply another drill. The defections of long-time members had sobered the community, and with the news of the deaths at the airstrip, they understood that the end of their communal experiment was in sight. The vehemence with which Christine Miller argued against suicide indicates that she took the plan seriously. And when the first persons taking the poison died, it was immediately clear that this was the real thing. If parents did indeed poison their own children first, it seems likely that they intended to poison themselves as well. They had believed that their children would be tortured by government forces in the wake of Ryan’s assassination; they saw the end of the Promised Land with the invasion of Ryan and their enemies; they had practiced taking the poison; and they believed that loyalty to each other and to their cause required death. Nevertheless, questions remain, and, as Bellefountaine writes, “When confronted with the question of whether the deaths in Jonestown should be classified as murders or suicides, most people feel comfortable joining the two words into a phrase that covers both options [murders-suicides]. But it doesn’t quite fit” (Bellefountaine 2006).

5. Was Jonestown the result of a government conspiracy? A number of conspiracy theories have arisen concerning the deaths in Jonestown because of conflicting accounts of the deaths, inconsistencies in news accounts, and the demise of other groups that shared the Temple’s radical politics. The earliest report of the deaths came from the Central Intelligence Agency, in a message communicated over an intelligence communications network (“The NOIWON Notation” 1978). This, coupled with the fact that Richard Dwyer, the Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Georgetown, was probably working for the CIA, as was U.S. Ambassador John Burke, has served as fuel for a large number of conspiracy theories in both print and electronic forms (Moore 2005). Some claim that Jim Jones was a rogue CIA agent who was involved in a mind control experiment. Others assert that the United States government killed all of the inhabitants of Jonestown because it feared the propaganda victory for the Soviet Union if it did indeed become the new home for Peoples Temple. Still others argue that Jonestown represented a right wing conspiracy to execute genocide on black Americans (Helander 2020). None of these theories are considered here because, to date, no evidence beyond conjecture and speculation has been presented. Psychological analyses that rely on assumptions of brainwashing or coercive persuasion also fail to adequately address what happened and why. Theories of the all-powerful cult leader, able to turn sensible people into mindless zombies, collapse when we listen to the community’s conversations captured on Jonestown’s audiotapes and to the discussions that former members of Peoples Temple still have about their experiences within the movement.

6. Should Jim Jones’ name be on a Jonestown memorial? The Rev. Jynona Norwood, an African American pastor from Los Angeles,whose mother, aunt, and cousins died in Jonestown, has conducted a memorial service at Evergreen Cemetery in Oakland, California [Image at right] every November 18 since 1979. Norwood raised money to construct a memorial on the site, and in 2008 unveiled two enormous granite blocks with the names of some, but not all, adults who had died in Jonestown. According to Ron Haulman, manager of the cemetery, however, the fragile hillside could not support the size or weight of the monuments (Haulman 2011). In 2010, frustrated with the slow pace of the memorialization process, three relatives of Jonestown victims (Jim Jones Jr., John Cobb, and Fielding McGehee) created the Jonestown Memorial Fund and signed a contract with Evergreen Cemetery, agreeing to create a monument consistent with environmental constraints at the hillside (McGehee 2011). In 2011 the three raised $20,000 in three weeks from 120 former Temple members, relatives, scholars, and others. In May 2011, Norwood sued to halt installation of the memorial, claiming that she had a prior claim with the cemetery. The court ruled against her, given that by the time of her suit, the new memorial (four granite plaques that list the names of all who died) was already in place.

In addition to the claims of priority, Norwood objected to the inclusion of Jim Jones in the listing of names. Though aware of opposition and concern about including Jones’ name on the monument, the organizers of the Jonestown Memorial Fund nevertheless argued that the four-by-eight stones serve as an historical marker of the deaths of all who died on November 18, 1978. For this reason, Jim Jones’ name appears, listed alphabetically among all of the other persons named “Jones” who died that day.

7. What are the lessons of Jonestown? Jonestown and Jim Jones have entered American discourse as code for the perils of cults and cult leaders (Moore 2018b). In the conflict between anticultists and members of new religions in the 1980s, parents, deprogrammers, exit counselors, and psychiatrists pointed to Jonestown as the paradigm for all that could go wrong with unconventional religions (Shupe, Bromley, and Breschel 1989). As these authors wrote, “There was inestimable symbolic value for a countermovement in an event such as Jonestown” (1989:163-66). More than thirty years after the event, Jonestown and Jim Jones continue to symbolize evil, danger, and madness. Those who survived, however, consider it a failed experiment that had its strength in members’ commitment to racial equality and social justice.

In addition, the expression “drinking the Kool-Aid” has found a permanent place in American lexicon (Moore 2003). It is paradoxically used to mean either blindly jumping on the bandwagon, or being a team player, and finds its most frequent usage in the contexts of sports, business, and politics. As is the case with many idiomatic phrases, most of the people who now use the expression are too young to remember its origins in the events of Jonestown. Surviving members of Peoples Temple are horrified and offended by the expression, and the way it trivializes those who died (Carter 2003).

Debate about these and other issues continues, and will undoubtedly continue given the shocking nature of the deaths. [Image at right] Moreover, the fact that hundreds, if not thousands, of government documents still remain classified, suggests that the final story is yet to be written. These files may lend credence to conspiracy theories by exposing the extent of government foreknowledge of the deaths in Jonestown. Alternatively, the information they provide may not do much more than add details to parts of the story that remain vague. Whatever these documents reveal, the story will always remain incomplete and contested, and researchers present and future will continue to wrestle with the enigma that remains Jonestown.

IMAGES

Image #1: Jim Jones speaking from the pulpit of sanctuary in San Francisco, 1976. Photo courtesy The Jonestown Institute.
Image # 2: Peoples Temple Full Gospel Church in Indianapolis, Indiana. Photo courtesy Duane M. Green, 2012, The Jonestown Institute..
Image # 3: Jonestown pioneers visited by Jim Jones, 1974. Photo courtesy Doxsee Phares Collection, The Jonestown Institute.
Image #4: Aerial shot of Jonestown, 1978. Photo courtesy The Jonestown Institute.
Image # 5: John Victor Stoen, the object of a custody battle between Jim Jones and  Grace and Timothy Stoen. Photo courtesy California Historical Society.
Image #6: Congressman Leo J. Ryan, who was assassinated on 18 November 1978 by residents of Jonestown. Four other people died in the attack. Photo courtesy California Historical Society.
Image #7: Aerial view of Jonestown with bodies somewhat visible. Photo courtesy The Jonestown Institute.
Image #8: U.S. military personnel engaged in gathering remains in Jonestown. Photo courtesy Preston Jones, John Brown University.
Image # 9: Idealized portrait of Jim Jones standing with children of different races. This was considered the “Rainbow Family,” a goal of Peoples Temple members. Photo courtesy The Jonestown Institute.
Image #10: Children and teenagers enter the sanctuary of San Francisco church, 1974. Photo courtesy The Jonestown Institute.
Image # 11: Agricultural worker in Jonestown. Photo courtesy California Historical Society.
Image #12: Four granite plaques installed at Evergreen Cemetery in Oakland, California, in 2011. There was controversy about including the name of Jim Jones on the plaques. Photo courtesy John Cobb and Regina Hamilton.
Image #13: The road to Jonestown in 2018. Photo courtesy Rikke Wettendorf.

REFERENCES

Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu on 4 June 2012.

Anthony, Dick, Thomas Robbins, and Steven Barrie-Anthony. 2011. “Reciprocal Totalism: The Toxic Interdependence of Anticult and Cult Violence.” Pp. 63-92 in Violence and New Religious Movements, edited by James R. Lewis. New York: Oxford University Press.

“Autopsies.” 1979. Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/JimJones.pdf on 4 June 2012.

Beck, Don. 2005. “The Healings of Jim Jones.” The Jonestown Report 7. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=32369 on 7 November 2014.

Bellefountaine, Michael. 2006. “The Limits of Language.” The Jonestown Report 8. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=31975 on 7 November 2014.

Bellefountaine, Michael, with Dora Bellefountaine. 2011. A Lavender Look at the Temple: A Gay Perspective of the Peoples Temple. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Carter, Mike. 2003. “Drinking the Kool-Aid.” The Jonestown Report, August 5. Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=16987 on 7 May 2021.

Cartmell, Mike. 2006. “ Temple Healings; Magical Thinking.” Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=31911 on 4 June 2012.

Chidester, David. 1988 (reissued 2004). Salvation and Suicide: An Interpretation of Jim Jones, the Peoples Temple, and Jonestown. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Concerned Relatives. 1978. “Accusation of Human Rights Violations made by Concerned Relatives, 11 April 1978. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13080 on 7 November 2014.

Hall, John R. 1995. “Public Narratives and the Apocalyptic Sect: From Jonestown to Mt. Carmel.” Pp. 205-35 in Armageddon in Waco: Critical Perspectives on the Branch Davidian Conflict, edited by Stuart A. Wright. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hall, John R. 1987 (reissued 2004). Gone From the Promised Land: Jonestown in American Cultural History. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

Harrison, F. Milmon. 2004. “Jim Jones and Black Worship Traditions.” Pp. 123-38 in Peoples Temple and Black Religion in America, edited by Rebecca Moore, Anthony B. Pinn, and Mary Sawyer. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Haulman, Ronald. 2011. “Declaration of Ronald Haulman in Opposition to Application for a Temporary Restraining Order.” Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Norwood5a.pdf on 4 June 2012.

Helander, Henri. 2020. “Alternative History (Conspiracy) Theory Index.” Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=95357 on 12 March 2020.

Layton, Deborah. 1998. Seductive Poison: A Jonestown Survivor’s Story of Life and Death in the Peoples Temple. New York: Anchor Books.

Levi, Ken. 1982. Violence and Religious Commitment: Implications of Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple Movement. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Maaga, McCormick Mary. 1998. Hearing the Voices of Jonestown. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

McGehee, Fielding M. III. 2011. “The Campaign for a New Memorial: A Brief History.” The Jonestown Report 11. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=34364 on 7 November 2014.

“Military Response to Jonestown.” 2020. Siloam Springs, AR: John Brown University, at https://www.militaryresponsetojonestown.com/ on 20 March 2020.

Mills, Jeannie. 1979. Six Years With God: Life Inside Rev. Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple. New York: A & W Publishers.

Moore, Rebecca. 2018a. “Examinations by Dr. Leslie Mootoo.” Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=83848 on 12 March 2020.

Moore, Rebecca. 2018b. “Godwin’s Law and Jones’ Corollary: The Problem of Using Extremes to Make Predictions.” Nova Religio 22:145–54.

Moore, Rebecca. 2011. “Narratives of Persecution, Suffering, and Martyrdom: Violence in Peoples Temple and Jonestown.” Pp. 95-11 in Violence and New Religious Movements, edited by James R. Lewis. New York: Oxford University Press.

Moore, Rebecca. 2009 [2018]. Understanding Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Moore, Rebecca. 2006. “The Sacrament of Suicide.” The Jonestown Report 8. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=31985 on 7 November 2014.

Moore, Rebecca. 2005. “Reconstructing Reality: Conspiracy Theories About Jonestown.” Pp. 61-78 in Controversial New Religions, edited by James R. Lewis and Jesper Aagaard Petersen. New York: Oxford University Press. Also available at http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=16582.

Moore, Rebecca. 2003. “Drinking the Kool-Aid: The Cultural Transformation of a Tragedy.” Nova Religio 7: 92-100. Also available at http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=16584.

Moore, Rebecca. 1986. The Jonestown Letters: Correspondence of the Moore Family 1970-1985. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.

Moore, Rebecca. 1985. A Sympathetic History of Jonestown: The Moore Family Involvement in Peoples Temple. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.

Moton, Pam. 1978. “Exhibit A to Concerned Relatives Accusation of 11 April 1978, Letter to Members of Congress, 14 March 1978.“ Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13084 on 4 June 2012.

“The NOIWON Notation.” 1978. Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13678 on 4 June 2012.

Reiterman, Tim, with John Jacobs. 1982. Raven: The Untold Story of The Rev. Jim Jones and His People. New York: E.P. Dutton.

Roller, Edith. “Journals.” Alternative Consideration of Jonestown and Peoples Temple. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=35667 on 4 June 2012.

Rose, Steve. 1979. Jesus and Jim Jones: Behind Jonestown. New York: Pilgrim Press.

Rosenbaum, Ron. 1998. Explaining Hitler: The Search for the Origins of His Evil. New York: Random House.

Sawyer, R. Mary. 2004. “The Church in Peoples Temple.” Pp. 166-93 in Peoples Temple and Black Religion in America, edited by Rebecca Moore, Anthony B. Pinn, and Mary Sawyer. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Scheeres, Julia. 2011. A Thousand Lives: The Untold Story of Hope, Deception, and Survival at Jonestown. New York: Free Press.

Shupe, Anson, David Bromley, and Edward Breschel. 1989. “The Peoples Temple, the Apocalypse at Jonestown, and the Anti-Cult Movement.” Pp. 153-71 in New Religious Movements, Mass Suicide, and Peoples Temple: Scholarly Perspectives on a Tragedy, edited by Rebecca Moore and Fielding McGehee III. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.

Smith, Archie Jr. 2004. “An Interpretation of Peoples Temple and Jonestown: Implications for the Black Church.” Pp. 47-56 in Peoples Temple and Black Religion in America, edited by Rebecca Moore, Anthony B. Pinn, and Mary Sawyer. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Stephenson, Denice, ed. 2005. Dear People: Remembering Jonestown. San Francisco and Berkeley: California Historical Society Press and Heyday Books.

U.S. Committee on Foreign Affairs. 1979. “The Assassination of Representative Leo J. Ryan and the Jonestown, Guyana Tragedy.” U.S. House of Representatives, 96th Congress, First Session. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

“Was It Murder or Suicide?” 2006. The Jonestown Report 8. Accessed from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=31981 on 7 November 2014.

Wessinger, Catherine. 2000. How the Millennium Comes Violently. New York: Seven Bridges Press.

SUPPLEMENTARY RESOURCES

Alternative Considerations of Jonestown and Peoples Temple is a comprehensive digital library of primary source literature, first-person accounts, and scholarly analyses. It currently provides live streaming of more than 925 audiotapes made by the group during its twenty-five year existence, as well as photographs taken by group members. Approximately 500 tapes are currently available online, along with transcripts and summaries. Founded in 1998 at the University of North Dakota to coincide with the twentieth anniversary of the deaths in Jonestown, the website moved to San Diego State University in 1999, where it has been housed ever since at. The SDSU Library and Special Collections currently manages Alternative Considerations, one of the largest digital archives of a new religion in existence. The site memorializes those who died in the tragedy; documents the numerous government investigations into Peoples Temple and Jonestown (such as more than 70,000 pages from the FBI, including records from its investigation as well as its collection of Temple documents, and 5,000 from the U.S. State Department); and presents Peoples Temple and its members in their own words through articles, tapes, letters, photographs and other items. The site also conveys ongoing news regarding research and events relating to the group.

Bibliography and Audiotape Resources:

A comprehensive bibliography of resources on Peoples Temple and Jonestown can be found here.

Audiotapes recovered in Jonestown, 300 of which are streaming live, can be found here: http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=27280

Items Referenced in the profile:  The following items, referenced in the above article, can be found on the Alternative Considerations website.

Lease signed between Government of Guyana and Peoples Temple, February 25, 1976. http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13131.

Affidavit signed by Tim Stoen stating that Jim Jones was the father of John Victor Stoen, February 6, 1972. http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13836

Transcript and audiostreaming of Tape Q 042 (the so-called Death Tape), made November 18, 1978. http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=29084.

Text of “The Letter Killeth.” http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=14111

Text of the “Gang of Eight Letter.” http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=14075.

Publication Date:
22 June 2012
Update: 9 May 2021

 

Share