7. The Gospel of Life: Joshua & Abortion

INFERNAL INTERNET

Hobnob,

I have just gotten the news. I cannot begin to tell you how disappointed I am in you. You should have seen this flaw in your subject's character that would propel him back to Mommy Church. But, you didn't, and you will pay. Console yourself with the possibility that you might be given a second chance, after I have gnawed upon your agonized spirit for a millennium or two.

Your client, despite all the deceits and half-truths he accepted, with the help of Girzone's fabulous book, was almost ours— now he is firmly back in the embrace of the enemy. Did you not investigate his daughter's marriage at all? Did you not see it fragmenting and her subsequent abortion? You failed to do your homework. Your client was pro-life and his daughter's murder of her child troubled him deeply. He still believed in the underlining foundation of Christianity and the Catholic faith— the Gospel of Life. He could join no group or church which denied this overriding conviction. Girzone said not a word about it in his book. It should have been safe sailing. He admired and trusted the author. He had allowed the author's words to become his own. And then it happened.

I have a great fondness for television, especially cable and videos with their dirty movies. But oh, if only there had been a power failure that Sunday morning when he turned on the news. Ah, it is too late— too late.

Girzone writes carefully, but he evidently talks to freely. The anchor interviewed him and he quite willingly admitted his personal convictions. The providence of the enemy is indeed frustrating. Your subject was thrilled to see his spiritual guru. He ran to the tube and then he heard what turned him inside out and made him reject all the propaganda from the false Jeezus. I can still hear the author-priest in my mind, his words personally electrified me and yet made me fearful for you and your intended victim. He admitted that his goal was not so much spiritual enrichment, but to FORCE the Church to change. He listed his issues, and among them was a demand for the Church to change its teaching regarding abortion. If only he had kept to capital punishment, what do we care if a few thousand lives are temporarily restrained from our grasp; but abortion, that wonderful harvest of 4,000 babies a day, one-and-a-half million in the U.S. annually— this dessert to our tastes was repugnant to your client's.

Oh, well, the grim harvest will continue, no matter how your client feels about it, and I will have the opportunity to savor you instead.

See you for supper,
Slubgob

Webmaster Note: The said television program was on CBS in 1991.

6. Christian Ministry: Joshua & the Priesthood

INFERNAL INTERNET

My Dear Hobnob,

You have your subject almost convinced that the Catholic Church is seriously flawed. Discovering his impotence to change things, he will assuredly walk. Wonderful job. A little nudge here, a whisper there, and presto— another ex-Catholic. Most Catholics who leave the Church do not join other churches— a useful bit of trivia for those in our business. He may feel an attraction elsewhere, but often such subjects fail to follow it through. In any case, he would be deprived of the sacraments of life. Once his soul is completely dead, we can make ready the fire and the wonderful meal he shall make. I know you will invite your favorite uncle.

Girzone's book has fueled every resentment your client has ever felt for the Church and its clergy. Nice! In his latter book, The Shepherd, Girzone presents a bishop of the Church who is urged to realize the author's vision in opposition to the universal Church. Poor fools! People read the book as fiction and yet there are already such shepherds and a schism, albeit a secret one, between the so-called "American" Church and that of Rome.

Prevalent in the latter book, but also present in Joshua, he only speaks of conscience and freedom as it stands in opposition to the authority of the bishop to rule. His main character ridicules the local bishop as nothing more than a bureaucrat, someone more involved with the business of religion than the saving of souls. This image plays into the conception of the Church as cold and detached from its people.

Note the bombardment of delightful abuse upon the clergy:

• In chapter three he applauds the "sola scriptura" ministers while portraying the Presbyterian as "very proper," the Episcopalian as "a born actor," the Lutheran as "rigid and pompous," and the Catholic as "aloof and inflexible." People are often characterized as "inflexible" when they disagree with another's equally stubborn suppositions. Fr. Al Morris is noted in the text as conservative, and then, in the next breath, this is called his shortcoming. Great! Never let it be admitted that being liberal may also be a deficit.
• He contends that "As usual, people were more willing to make changes than were the clergy." Nothing is said, nor should it be, of the new clericalism wherein churches have been desecrated, oops, I mean remodeled by experts and clergy against the will of the faithful. Let us forget about the fact that the opposite is often true.
• Undermining the authority of Christ's shepherds, he even ridicules in his dialectic, the necessity of referral of decisions to the clergy. Who needs priests anyway? Haha.
• He implies that one cannot be "open to the inspirations of the Spirit" and still on good terms with the Church's priests (p. 74). Later he writes: "There are some priests who give their whole hearts and souls to the genuine work of God but there are not too many" (pp. 246-247). This may not be the experience of most people, but it makes for a good lie. Those wicked and self-seeking priests— bad boys, bad boys! Haha. Destroy the priesthood and you destroy the Eucharist. Destroy the Eucharist and you destroy the Church!
• If he would only throw a little sexual perversion into his book and we could make it akin to the movie, Priest, one of my favorite flicks from good ol' Disney. The priest-author, himself, must know a terrible anguish about the priesthood— good. Look at his assertions. He indicates that most priests are selfish. He poses the caricature of a poor suffering associate versus a sadistic pastor. And, he engages in a tirade against mandatory celibacy. Interesting— while he left active ministry for "health reasons"; the priest-author has enough strength to parade the country giving conferences and signing books.
• By arguing against mandatory celibacy for priests (p. 100), he denies that it comes as a gift with the call to a vocation. He accentuates the suffering that celibacy causes; however, luckily for us, he makes no note of the fact that three-fourths of all priests who have left ministry to get married, have since divorced. Your colleague demon Hillary has done an excellent job on the priests. You would not believe how low morale is currently. Psycho-sexual problems are not resolved by sharing a bed. Keep this under your hat, I mean, ah, under a horn. Nevertheless, Girzone denies the Church's right, as do we, to impose discipline. Along with the pseudo-Jeezus, we reply, "What Jeezus has made optional, the Church should not make mandatory." Haha. Never let them know that the real Jeezus speaks to them through the Church.

I have digressed a little bit in this note because I don't suspect you will need much more advice to settle the case. The pitiable man under your charge has swallowed the whole book and soon we shall swallow him. The fictional stories have resonated with his own for a delightful dialogue in anger, frustration, and rebellion. I can taste him now.

Your ever expectant uncle,
Slubgob

5. Christian Mysteries: Joshua & the Sacraments

INFERNAL INTERNET

My Dear Hobnob,

I am definitely going to suggest that we use this book for all our sentimental types who consider themselves learned. Most impressive! From what you tell me, your subject was quite receptive to Girzone's views about rituals and sacraments. For future reference, let me direct you to the pertinent passages:

• The Christian inheritance is viewed outwardly as "crusty customs and traditions that have shackled them for generations" (p. 14).
• Disavowing that the sacraments were instituted by Khrist and that the H.S. has nurtured the Church through her evolution, he states: "God never intended that religion become what it is today. Jesus came to earth to try to free people from that kind of regimented religion where people are threatened if they don't obey the rules and rituals invented by the clergy" (p. 73).
• Continuing in his repudiation of orthodox ecclesiology, he writes: "Customs and practices and traditions then replace true service of God and these become a serious obstacle to real growth and love of God" (p. 74). He does not let on that they can also be a means of this growth. I will have to check to see if he is one of us— as a Catholic priest, it is peculiar that he seems to think that Khrist would have abandoned his Church.
• He plays masterfully into the hand of human weakness in his rejection of the sacramental laws, especially regarding Mass attendance: "The Church should "not intimidate [a loaded word if ever there was one] people into sterile [another wonderful one-sided assumption] external observance" (p. 75). This helps the argument of those who want Sunday Mass attendance dropped from a precept of the Church to an optional affair. Delicious! At the core of this reasoning is the presupposition that the Mass has no power to soften even the hardest of hearts.
• On pages 123 to 124, Girzone refutes the law requiring Catholics to necessarily be married before a priest. Ah, there goes the good order of the Church! Without the law, this weak sacrament would be absolutely vulnerable to our machinations. Between you and me, as a public sacrament, the ecclesial community has a right to celebrate this new reality in its midst. We must make them lose sight of this right and treat the whole business as worthless ritual. Girzone pivots his pseudo-Jeezus against the Church authorities as a condemnation of them. Tasty! We are the people! We are the Church! Naughty institutional Church! Haha! When Girzone's Joshua is scrutinized by Vatican officials, he again brings up the issue of marriage legislation. If people are unsure about their faith, as the author suggests on page 253, then Christian marriage may not be what they want anyway; but, let them fight it out. The results are exciting. Who says marriages are made in heaven? More than half of them ultimately think it is hell. On page 254, regarding annulments, Joshua illustrates a devilish fixation on sex. Good! Let the human beasts think that sex and consummation are the same thing and that physical needs are primary. Sweet! This book is too entertaining for me. Who says that hell can't be its own kind of heaven? Haha! Keep from your pathetic subject's mind the truth that there might be something more. Remember the Church teaches that for a marriage to be truly consummated by intercourse, it must be "a human act." There is a total and mutual self-donation of the whole person to the beloved. Gross! Hide this truth, especially since the tension with his wife might provide us with other promising openings. Let them see themselves as animals in heat.
• Following up on the last point, beware of the matter of Church compassion toward marriages. You know as well as I do that their annulment procedures get flack from every angle; let's keep it that way. On one hand some marriages may be null-and-void due to a whole host of reasons, including a general ignorance about true Christian marriage altogether. On the other, few people get married not thinking that it will last until "death do us part." Let us beguile couples into thinking there was no meaningful relationship initially (p. 254) regardless of the truth. Try to dull the reader's mind in the latter pages of the book; otherwise logic might be our undoing. This Joshua, if he were the real Jeezus, would have all the symptoms of amnesia. He forbad divorce (and remarriage) except in cases of incest (no real marriage) and yet Joshua says it is only the Church leadership which acknowledges that those who marry again "commit adultery" (p. 254).
• I loved Joshua's negative comments about the sacrament of reconciliation. This will appeal to your client's fear of confessing certain sins. All this works in our favor. Any grace from the sacrament could shatter the good work you have done. Let him feel happy about himself and presume a good standing before God. May his sins become Legion.
• Joe Engman, the Methodist minister portrayed in the book, freely receives communion from the confused Fr. Pat and no issue is made. The author says that the people found this wonderful. More often than not, Catholics knowing the official guidelines get upset at such violations. Maybe this book can recondition them to think otherwise? After all, such an inter-communion short-circuits the hunger for true reunion. The real Jeezus is not the onlooker Joshua but the consecrated communion. This so-called "real" presence has already been forgotten by a majority of the Catholic membership. The war goes well. Revisionists are blind to the hypocrisy of a non-Catholic making the faith profession "Amen" prior to receiving holy communion. He says yes— that he believes, while he means no— believing in something else. This confusion they have largely brought upon themselves. Sometimes they hardly need devils to lead them astray and to manipulate them.

You are showing wonderful promise, my infernal regards,
Slubgob

4. Reality & Role of the Church: Joshua & Affluence & Hypocrisy

INFERNAL INTERNET

My Dear Hobnob,

Please, please, you've got a point, but watch how you express yourself. I agree that many ministers have made religion into a big business, but to call it their personal "piggy" bank— oh my, ever since that episode with Jeezus when he drove us into the swine— oh, to this day I hate water. What nerve those creatures had, too. The animals considered most unclean by the Jews, drowning themselves rather than to be contaminated by us— the nerve! Whenever there is the appearance of affluence, the Church is vulnerable to the charge of hypocrisy. We can use Girzone's observation about the Church, if he will accept it at face value. Most people are lazy about finding out the facts for themselves; it is easier just to believe what we are told. If we can disguise this laziness in thinking as its opposite, a special enlightenment, then we have it made. Let me see, yes, this is quite good. The Joshua character (really Girzone) looks around at the magnificence of St. Peter's, a treasure belonging to the entire human race, and says: "They have missed the whole point of the gospel. Even when they preach poverty and detachment, coming from this setting it negates the sincerity of the message" (p. 241). Great! He chastises the Pope for pomp; don't let the reader find out that the Holy Father's quarters are fairly modest, maybe even more so than the author's.

Your affectionate uncle,
Slubgob

3. Reality & Role of the Church: Joshua & Comparison to Jews

INFERNAL INTERNET

My Dear Hobnob,

Great news! He really loves Girzone's book. What he read on page 178 was particularly consoling to him after the conversion of his daughter to her husband's Judaism. The author postulates that the Jews have, ironically, discovered the true spirit of Jesus while Christians have tended to return to the old law. Considering the high numbers of atheists in the reformed Jewish community, this holds out all sorts of possibilities— his daughter's husband is of this non- believing stripe. These words say less about the author's views of Jews as it does about the Church. He hates the institution of the Church and wishes it had developed along the lines of the Synagogue with "no institution, no structures." If he explores this matter further, steer him clear of certain roadblocks planted by the enemy. The divine covenant established with the Hebrew people is still in effect. They remain his first chosen people. The tragedy we have to mask in regard to converts from Christianity is their renunciation of baptism and faith in Khrist, ouch. The true spirit Girzone is talking about is literally a social atmosphere— a tendency for toleration of even the most serious divergences in faith and lifestyle. This is the stereotype that he embraces and puts into the mouth of Joshua. Not only does he belittle the Synagogue as no more than a culture club with no set structures or beliefs, he suggests this is what we want to become. As for your client, keep his mind off the H. S. and the Trinity. But, as I have said before, be careful. Many Hebrews see their faith and culture as inseparably bonded and meaningful. True believers from any faith can make trouble for us. Jeezus was a Jew. No equivocation can hide this fact. Let your subject think that he was the more liberal variety, like his character, Joshua. Oh, and by the way, the analysis offered in the book is fairly simplistic. Don't let him get a hold of anything or anyone that might burst the bubble— especially keep him away from disgruntled Palestinians!

Your ever affectionate uncle,
Slubgob

P.S. The pseudo-Jeezus character in the book says almost too much, for our clandestine purposes, on page 202: "The Church would function better if it were closed." The statement warms my heart, well if I had one it would, but it might also let the cat out of the bag.

2. Reality & Role of the Church: Joshua & Personal Interpretation

INFERNAL INTERNET

My dear Hobnob,

Yes, yes, you are very astute in saying that Girzone's Joshua sometimes sounds like a Fundamentalist Protestant. But, again, what is one man's gravy may be another's poison. The Bible may be the enemy's book, but we have often made as much or even more use of it. Without the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, the Scriptures can end up interpreted any which way— and hopefully, our way. Girzone's book does indeed disregard the need for a teaching Church to properly interpret the Scriptures. He writes: "The Scriptures are quite clear to anyone who is willing to read with an open mind, and history speaks for itself . . ." (P. 137). Note that he lumps history itself into the same category of "personal" interpretation. This is very funny. Professional historians themselves fight over the meaning of things displaced in time by only a few years, let alone centuries. This will undermine the second font of Catholic truth, tradition. Ah, this is so sweet! Returning to the matter of the Bible, there are some reputable Scripture scholars (among whom we have more than a few allies) who admit that it is often difficult to cross the chasm of time, language, and culture to properly understand the Scriptures. The Protestant ecclesiastical fracturing is a delicious historical testament to the failed notion of personal, i.e. independent, interpretation. Separated from the Church, the inspiration of the H.S. is less dependable and available. Do not allow him to appreciate the fact that there must be a final interpreting authority (safeguarded by the enemy). As an aside, in Girzone's book, The Shepherd, he actually insists that Scriptural passages making moral demands, as in the Pauline epistles, represent only personal opinion and is not divine revelation at all. Oh, I love the revisionist agenda! If you can't make the Bible say what you want it to say, you empty it of any and all binding force. Ha ha! Keep nudging him in our direction.

Your ever affectionate uncle,
Slubgob

1. Reality & Role of the Church: Joshua & Religious Relativism

Devious Devil

My dear Hobnob,

I was very pleased to hear that you got that fellow of yours into reading Fr. Joseph Girzone's book, Joshua. You are quite right that it was the best you could do. He has a real religious bent and actually avoids certain scientific and humanistic works that might challenge his faith. Closed minds are sometimes the most vulnerable, although such avoidance can also work into our enemy's hands. The book he has chosen presents a Jeezus, oh even to misspell that name hurts, that is compassionate, kind, and tolerant-- to a fault-- and toward those most needing a Jeezus of challenge and objective truth. I cannot tell you how many readers felt that this bestseller changed their lives-- that for the first time they really knew Jeezus. It makes me chuckle. If they only knew that he was an imposter, really Girzone in disguise. Don't let on.

The book does our work for us. He dismisses the teaching of Khrist's Church, ouch, "subsisting" fully in the Catholic community. He writes: "But when members of their congregations attended another church, they were highly indignant and, indeed, personally offended that someone would think another church might have more to offer than theirs" (p. 15). He sandwiches this remark of religious relativism with another on page 102. This is great stuff. The first weed has been planted. Of course, if he were not a Catholic, we could find this viewpoint a real bother; but, as it is, the blandness of the Mass and the impoverished preaching of his pastor feeds right into our hands. He knows already that some of the non-Catholic churches nearby have more things going in the community and have more dynamic leadership than his own. But, be careful. The ministers of these groups actually help their people and are friends of the enemy. However, what constitutes nourishment for their own will form spiritual privation for the Catholic. Let us see if we can't get your client thinking that all churches are alike or that the Lord's Supper as celebrated in the other mainline traditions and sects is just the same as his Catholic Eucharist. Confidentially, the sacramental life and the Eucharist is the one "offer" that many of these other churches would be hard-pressed to match. Once on the slippery slope, who knows how far he might fall. Happy hunting.

Your ever affectionate uncle,
Slubgob

Webmaster Note: JOSHUA is written by Joseph F. Girzone. The book is published from Simon & Schuster (PB). The reprint date is April 1, 1995. ISBN: 0684813467.