in new england you could have an 80 degree day and drop down into the lower forties at night then have an eighty degree day, again. hot cold hot cold hot cold … like a woman having hot flashes. it's 5:05AM and I AM …at it, again. it's not exciting for me. I'd rather be painting or writing in the Trilogies, but I have to choose at this time. as I do almost all the yard/landscaping and this summer was especially busy, and well as this fall (not to mention the work that needed to be done in the house, an old house). I have to choose. like having children … once a child is born so many other activities cease. sometimes this is a good thing. if for the child, it is good. sometimes it's not a sleeping, crying, pooping … beautiful and delightful infant, that you just can't stop looking at in wonder, that you do have to work harder to support and care for … but a MOVEMENT. a baby. this, too, needs nourishing. 

this I will not abandon. sure, I could go out and spend a lot of time advertising Book One or … go gangbusters selling the wearable art, and LORD knows I have the material for these items, which had started to sell quite well, and received a wonderful response, but LIFE took me to another place, for teaching … then there is the SPIRREALISM ART, the Spirit Art. a lot of large canvases sitting in the front room. interesting, it was this room where I found myself in my dream at least 6 years ago … and I heard a pop like the pop of a cork and the screen of one window was removed, and a butterfly entered and floated in front of me ... and now that I see this,again, the butterfly headed for the room where I am now working … writing to you, the reader (huh, just now realizing this ;). also, I saw words in elegant font come up as if on a large screen, but there was no screen. these were instructions for the work that I am doing … now. it's called Prophesy. I was shown what would be and that choice is really something of a necessity. 

found this comment @rns:

...Father Thomas Brodie (Phd in pontifical studies at the Roman College and director of the Dominican Bible Institute), claims that Jesus Christ NEVER existed!.....".when I was in the seminary in the 1970's, I concluded that Jesus and christianity were copied from ancient pagan myths and a rip-off of the Hebrew texts!"
....Brodie was commenting on his forthcoming book...."Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus"

"IRISH CENTRAL" 23 January 2013

along with this comment was a response about that priest, questioning his honesty regarding his pontifical position. but isn't this the hypocrisy often found in the RCC? saying one thing and doing another? or would that be doing one thing and saying another? hot cold hot cold hot cold. just like the many sexually active celibates in their orders. the infallible fallible system of … teaching. and it did not escape my eye that richard rohr is now making money on an idea that elizabeth johnson brought to that table, or tried to, many years ago … but if you have read any of the vatican's responses to the nuns and johnson, you see that double standard, the hypocrisy that the vatican is so known for and … their denying of woman and female … and child. I do not agree with either catholic, but I allow them their nourishment. rohr, like almost all celibates in orders is insulated  … he isn't addressing the reality of realities. he lives in a seat so cordoned off from life, comfortable, often ignorant of the walk in following CHRIST (take up your cross and follow …) … it makes for questionable treaty. what I did find interesting was that rohr's findings were was compared to taoism by one commenter. if you read on taoism there is a sexual component of great importance to this religion, which deviled into very poor treatment of women as sex. will post the wiki link. please read it because it says a lot about how something starting out as honest, potentially for good,  ends up devilish, much like child unschooled in the temperaments of impartiality. 

and impartiality has temperament. there is sense and reason within its frame. I know nothing about the irish priest mentioned in that comment. if I ask on him, I hear: he is a part of the plan. what part … I do not yet see, but I will look him up. but I suspect he will break from the hierarchy, the law of the RCC, and move out. 

I will also share that I do not believe most of the hierarchy in the vatican (the big heads) actually believe JESUS lived and did as they SAY. they play a part for power and control, trying to keep alive the idea that they are God's Authority---the mouthpiece of supreme being. one cannot take seriously their inception and what they now pronounce thru their political puppet, george. anyone who knows the Christ in even the simplest terms knows that the Christ would never install a fascist religion as his CHURCH, using false creed and force (militancy) as his Name. and those roman catholic priests, catholic priests and orthodox … will need to make a choice because the day has come for {this}. 


that priest scholar … I am looking him up, through Spirit of the Living … I am told he has stepped into a mud puddle. he's not sure what he sees. did he really get wet? wet with … a brown, muddy water? he dirtied himself, but isn't that what children do … lively children? those sitting in a can don't step in mud puddles. they wait to be opened. hmm … ;)


in my walk I heard, "JESUS is a myth" … it did not take reading manuals and manuals of text to begin to see this Verse. but I was also shown the origin of the Word, of which I AM. the priest is incorrect on that rip off of hebrew texts. the LANGUAGE of the Writings (not all because not all are within Truth in those 'holy orders') … was taken and scripted by hebrews claiming authority, or … reenacting something with ink. I am shown where and how they strayed. the Writings were long before … the priest scholar, like most priests, missed the message inherited: IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD AND THE WORD WAS WITH GOD AND THE WORD WAS GOD. how many jews/hebrews miss this?

if they are confused on Father … who can know Mother?

where are the records of what came BEFORE the jews and his religion JUDAISM? and I am not referring to paganism. spoken is a PLACE before Man. did you not realize this in the beginning? but how could you when the story was altered from the ORIGINAL> 


but why haven't you come forward sooner on the myth? they ask. I did, but I was saying it differently, and certainly not in accord with a dominican roman catholic priest scholar. so … where does the priest go from there? his jesus was not a real man so what does he worship? what is in his Communion? WHO-WHAT is he if jesus was not his man? seems he has a rather big issue ahead of him. he must retrace all that the RCC has taught him and realize where it is in error. does this then cause him to leave his order, and the RCC? if not, he is a liar. was it 2013 that he made his announcement? but it was in the 1970s that he made a choice in his belief. but did he change his practices? seems not. so … he lived and lives a lie. why hasn't the vatican cast him out of that order? why is he still allowed to receive Communion? (if he still is). everyone else of the laity position are denied, why is priest in his false beliefs and practices, not in accord with the doctrine of that faith, allowed to continue? double standards? hypocrisy? theft? 

I do not have to concern myself with where I will go. no need for me to worry about being kicked out of an order. or choosing to leave an order. no need for me to worry about what the roman catholics and what the christians will say about me … I am neither. I am within gnosis, a learning epitaph. and we know quite well what the roman catholics/catholics … orthodox and so on have said and continue to say about one like me, while sitting in their pot of cold gold. 

PAUL was the ONE to walk in "JESUS" NAME. Jesus is the I of I am and AM is the Church of Deliverance. CHRIST IS … the Body. so … why haven't the religionists been clear about this? also, Paul is the BISHOP of bishops. Peter merely a sailor ;) 


link on taoism mentioned previously

stated as part of the ethics of taoism is "detachment from desires" 

this causes one to question if ethical being is inconsistent with desire or is ethics a separate entity in understanding the nature of practice? in catholic culture (belief and practice) … desire is often listed as a weakness, something to be shunned, denied … not permitted life within. and morality is an outward more visible conquest. more show than host. morals are a catholic dogma, having to do with the doctrinal treatise. orthodox, on the other hand, is an ethical strain … in belief, or faith within belief. to get caught between is a sniper's root. desire in gnosis is a catastrophic piece. for instance, desire for wisdom is different from desire of wisdom. one does for the hope of wisdom but the motive is to elevate or increase wisdom in life, and if life is inclusive within impartial place … two as one or two engaging as one is operative. there is no show. no need for morality. the ethic (ethos/nature) is the desired state. this helps man understand the Writings in the Language of the Spirit. now … saying to be in and of Spirit is to be in a desired state. you are loved as you engage in love. Christ is the catastrophic (BODY  as One)  Christ is the desired OF THIS(Marriage) but within Spiritual Place. Spiritual Place being Spirit of the Living God. so  when engaging sexually with female you are engaging as one. not as man desiring woman to satisfy his visible lusts  or to satisfy his male ego as male ego diminishes within Spirit ID , the catastrophic element in understanding this for trueness, honesty. he is she and she is he but as one Body. it is good to hope for a partner who is healthy and free of drugs, natural and clean in the sense of not embedded in dishonesty  or aligned with dishonest practice, enterprise.  


For Taoists, sex was not just about pleasing the man. The woman also had to be stimulated and pleased in order to benefit from the act of sex. Sex should not happen if one or the other partners desire it more. If sex were performed in this manner, the woman would create more jing, and the man could more easily absorb the jing to increase his own qi. Women were also given a prominent place in the Ishinpō, with the tutor being a woman. One of the reasons women had a great deal of strength in the act of sex was that they walked away undiminished from the act. The woman had the power to bring forth life, and did not have to worry about ejaculation or refractory period.

Women were often given a position of inferiority in sexual practice. Many of the texts discuss sex from a male point of view, and avoid discussing how sex could benefit women. Men were encouraged to not limit themselves to one woman, and were advised to have sex only with the woman who was beautiful and had not had children. While the man had to please the woman sexually, she was still just an object.[10] At numerous points during the Ishinpō, the woman is referred to as the "enemy"; this was because the woman could cause him to spill semen and lose vitality. In later sexual texts from the Ming, women had lost all semblance of being human and were referred to as the "other," "crucible", or "stove" from which to cultivate vitality. The importance of pleasing the woman was also diminished in later texts.[11] The practice was known as Caibu (採補), as a man enters many women without ejaculation.

Women were also considered to be a means for men to extend men's lives. Many of the ancient texts were dedicated explanation of how a man could use sex to extend his own life. But, his life was extended only through the absorption of the woman's vital energies (jing and qi). Some Taoists called the act of sex “The battle of stealing and strengthening.”[12] These sexual methods could be correlated with Taoist military methods. Instead of storming the gates, the battle was a series of feints and maneuvers that would sap the enemy's resistance.[13]

 THE OTHER, CRUCIBLE, STOVE … stove? you see how man manipulates the cause? where and how did it become of this belief and practice, not just in taoism but in all manner of male? of course not all males, but in all MANNER of Male viewed as a higher being? judaism? was this a chance at changing the stakes? CREATING a place of honest and virginal view, verse and practice? but failing to initiate the impartial place. roman catholicism then set the stage in what was supposed to be THE NEW … but became of the most ignorant of ignorances, regarding not only female … but SHE.  using MARY and marriage as an untouchable, a golden calf … more of a whore, really, than the dove she "was needed" for TRUTH  … of the generosity and legitimacy of the Godhood. and to deny men the normal, natural BODILY releases … with FEMALE right there as gift … is of a systemic ignorance and … in many cases, an evil doing. an evil idea. led by evil. what the RCC implanted in the minds of many is unhealthy. any person not able to see this for WHAT it is … I feel sorrow for YOUR cause. 

from that point the abuses increased and the children suffered once again under ugly, fascist … demented rule.


while the roman pontiff and his kin praise the muslim women for wearing hijab, which begs one to question WHY pick on women with such a topic---why USE one group to deny another----why point fingers in this manner to angle your way to make women look somehow suspect, those NOT wearing hijab ... are not holy or righteous or virginal or GODLY?

the clinton admin is clearly up to its usual … power-money-dominion (right, ben?)

the MEDIA for the most part, including writers for RNS, paint the pope as a picture of humility. they SELL YOU … a pope (and for RNS, as they are religious writers---bent for religion, religious product---they are paid for this). if someone stands to MAKE MONEY FROM ACTS … he will promote things that support his desires. the question here is: what exactly are his desires? his motive for/behind … this one or that one? does a man desire a woman because she LOOKS LIKE WHAT HE WANTS, desires, that this may somehow elevate his standing?  satisfying his desire based on appearances. 
in the case of the pope "showing humility" by choosing this place over that place and the journalism behind this visible show … says a lot about motive.

Castel Gandolfo is "higher up, the air is cooler and fresher, making it a destination of choice during sweltering and muggy Roman summers." ( Meaning the quarters where Pope Francis resides, built in 1996, has modern air conditioning, heating, plumbing. No one has ever described the Vatican papal apartment as "sumptuous." The bedroom is "spartan."
Like the Vatican-owned buildings now being leased to McDonald's and the Hard Rock Cafe, the men appointed by Pope Francis are profit-oriented in charging admission to Castel Gandolfo. Nothing wrong with honest commerce - it just doesn't fit the carefully-constructed PR image of the same for-profit US media that has resulted in our two presidential candidates.