18 Dec 1996
Re: Deliverance

Dear Trudy

I think you will find Dr. Baldwin's book interesting and worthwhile.

In a Roman Catholic exorcism, the exorcist tries to send the possessing entities to Hell. That's why entities who don't want to go to Hell fight the exorcist so hard, and why entities who don't mind going back to Hell scorn the exorcist. I have the Roman Ritual -- it is medieval in every sense of the term. There is no love or good-will in it.

Why is this new approach safer and more successful? God's angels support efforts to send spirits to Heaven (salvation), but they do not support efforts to send spirits to Hell (damnation). And we provide demons with an alternative, a means of escape from the torments they know they will experience if they go back into darkness.

>The exorcist works under the authority of the church, which I am told is for protection.

Protection from lawsuits, perhaps, where the state recognizes the right of a church to license exorcists. Authority exists only in the minds of those who accept it and allow themselves to be governed by it. Attempts to exercise authority have no effect on anyone else. And neither angels nor demons accept the authority of the church.

>My friend Fran also recommended belonging to a church so that I am "covered" by the prayers of the priest/minister. Do you think this is necessary, and if so, why?

This comes from the idea that clergy are closer to God than laity. It is an ancient assertion of the church. In some cases, it may be true. But of all the people I know, clergy are among the least likely to be effective in this work. For sure, they don't learn about it in seminary, and most don't want to hear about it, because it is outside or goes against what they were taught. However, there are some notable exceptions.

>When you do spirit releasement, you ask for warrior angels. I'm assuming their weapon is light?

This subject is very interesting to me personally. I have a lot of warrior in me -- but these warrior angels are a different kind of warrior. They do not damage or destroy living things. They use light in various forms, not as a weapon, but only as a means of restraint. I have been watching what they do -- and don't do -- so as to learn from them a better way of being a warrior.

>have you ever asked your as-angels why they (and others in God's Kingdom) don't come up with a better means of communication?

Yes. They say the problem isn't in the *means* of communication. It is in the attitudes, purposes, desires, ends, of those who use any means of communication.

>God isn't omnipotent??? Next you'll tell me God isn't omniscient, omnificent, or omnipresent!

Men attribute omniscience to God for the same reason they attribute omniscience to Santa Claus -- they want people to believe it: "He sees you when you're sleeping. He knows when you're awake. He knows if you've been bad or good. So be good for goodness sake!" The purpose of this doctrine is political. It is a type of crowd-control by mind-control, intended to instill enough superstitious fear to make people be good. As someone put it: "Without this doctrine, there will never be enough gendarmes!" And as it does with little children, it often works to some degree -- at least for awhile -- among those who believe it.

>Seems to make for a fairly helpless God. Except that my experience has been that God does some miraculous things.

So? Purpose is more important than power. Yes, God does miraculous things, but the fact that something is miraculous does not prove that God did it. Deceivers often lead people astray (away from God) by doing "great signs and wonders" (miracles).

>I still have a hard time understanding why God *can't* help at times.

The main reason is because free will is a fact. And as Jesus said, the fields are ripe for harvest, but the workers are few.

>Why aren't the "good guys" more aggressive in helping out over here? Why not more direct involvement? What's Jesus doing?

Basically, I don't believe God *can't* help. I believe God and those who work for him *do* help all they can. I have seen what they do -- but often no one else on earth saw what God's workers did or recognized it for what it was.

>I frequently get interference when I attempt to pray, enough to cause quite a bit of frustration.

I don't think the problem is your lack of experience, or inability to stay focused, or confidence level. I think various spirits are deliberately causing the interference.

That experience when you were a teenager is interesting. Yes, it is incredibly easy to induce a trance. Spiritualist doctrine does not prepare people to encounter evil or invasive spirits, or even warn them such spirits exist. Do you recall specifically what you did to fight it off?

>Over the years things continued to happen because I was able to turn the faucet enough to slow down the flow, but I could never turn it completely off.

Let's take a closer look at the seals and gaskets in that leaky faucet. Psychic opening is usually something like sympathy, empathy, or curiosity. Specifically what types of openings do you have? Which type of opening has become habitual?
>I've prayed for blessings for all those connected to me in any way.

This may be an indication of why you are susceptible to spirits. Prayer for blessing is not the same as the act of blessing. And blessing all those connected to you is not the same as detaching those who should not be connected to you. Some entities will not leave unless they are evicted; and for that, one needs to ask God to send a team of warrior angels.

>I do the "spiritual shower" exercise, (and frequently feel blocked there also.)

Spiritual shower is for cleansing away (non-living) residue, not entities.

>So, it's the same old story. I do not know if the block is me, or other.

For sure, spirits who don't want to leave will tell you the block is you, not them.

>You said, "enough pressure or flow in the line to keep the other's stuff from flowing to you (very much like plumbing)." I obviously don't know how to do that.

Yeah, I haven't explained it. The best example is the act of blessing, in which you send the energy yourself, from yourself, with no outside assistance. It is active, not passive; transmission, not reception; and therefore assertive, not receptive.

>And then suddenly I was looking up from way down in the front passenger seat of a car and I was suffocating. A voice said, "A baby died. Left in the heat." I was breathing in short gasps and my heart was pounding. Well, I did a lot more praying, got myself out of that front seat and back "home." By home, I mean that I broke all connections and "came back" to my bedroom. I have no inkling if it was me. It was as if I was in the infant's body, experiencing what the infant was experiencing. I was not aware of any pain, just my hammering heart and labored breathing.

Okay, this sounds more like out-of-body travel along a caring-connection than it does like a reactivated past-life memory -- but why that particular connection? There must have been some sort of sympathy or empathy for that child, as a person or as a reminder of a situation similar to some personal experience.

>I had a severe allergic reaction to penicillin when I was 3 years old, and my throat closed up so that I nearly suffocated. I have never been able to swallow large pills because my throat closes. Something causes my throat to swell. I can't swim under water because it gives me an overwhelming feeling of suffocation. And I've got a gag reflex that ought to be in the Guinness Book of World Records.

Hmm. The origin of this set of reactions could be this-life or past-life trauma.

>I suppose it could have been a past-life regression. But that doesn't fit with the situation -- I had been praying for a woman who seemed to have definite darkness surrounding her. It seems incongruous that I would slip into a past-life regression at that particular time. What do you think?

Yes, the starting point was in praying for that specific woman. Perhaps the dark ones in her attacked you by stimulating your memory of a situation or relationship in which you were choking.

>We could use your advice on a situation with a man who seems to have picked up something from Japan or China. He is a professor of oriental languages. He visited several Asian countries and came back very ill.

From the information given, I agree with Fran: he probably has an "ancient one" attached to him -- and the spirit is probably an ancient oriental. A lot of the problems experienced by Vietnam veterans turn out to be caused by the ghosts of ancient Chinese that attached to them while they were in Vietnam. In fact, people in the villages used to go up to GI's and touch them in order to transfer their evil spirits to the GI's. It's exactly the same mechanism as the transfer of a holy spirit by the laying on of hands -- see Acts 8:14-24.

Your experience of being blocked (but not attacked) is typical of the way old ghosts defend their turf.

This man is probably holding on to the entity, so the question is: "Why is he holding on to it? What does the attachee do for him, or promise to do for him, or threaten to remove from him if it is removed?" (Usually a skill or ability, or protection, or guidance, or something like that.) Did he experience the sudden, almost miraculous, perhaps overnight acquisition of a language or dialect?

Yes, the attachee is no doubt trying to keep him away from the exorcist -- Baldwin reports exactly that type of spirit interference, even when a client was enroute to an appointment with him. I have also seen it several times.

Angels may decide not to remove an entity lest one more evil take its place, but we don't have enough information, so that is the angels' decision to make, not ours.

At this point, I suggest that you continue: 1. making the two connections, so God can send His angels to this man; 2. helping the man see there is something he deems good that he needs to let go of; 3. encouraging him to see an exorcist more qualified in this kind of work.

Peace and blessings


Home | Listing | Next