Satan's Ways

Satan delights in ruining souls.  The way Satan ruins a soul is to convince man to exercise his Free Will to extinguish eternal light and proceed toward eternal darkness.  Not even the angel seer, having published books and conducted interviews will ever be able to insist that Hell does not exist unless she is already damned and working for Satan by opening the door for people so they could take the path of decent toward Hell.

The blogger's imagination continues.  This metaphoric door that is opened does not reveal the true darkness of Hell but is a false hope of eternal light placed into the minds of those willing to believe it.  This false hope is similar to false advertising.  What is promised is too good to be true and is not true.

Everything Satan touches is replete with deception.  Likewise, anything that is false and misleading has Satan behind it.  So,what are Satan's ways?   Impersonation of God and camouflaging deceit against the background of truth.  This is what an article said about the Antichrist which could very well apply equally to the forerunners of the Antichrist [1]:

The name of Antichrist has been synonymous with evil down through the ages, but the truth is that when he [/she, both and neither] is finally revealed, the majority of people will not recognize him [/her, both and neither] as the Antichrist. He [/She, both and neither] will not appear repellent; on the contrary, he [/she, both and neither] will be someone who is talented, and ambitious to solve the world’s problems.

How does Satan impersonate God?   It mocks Christ by showing its diabolical powers, healing those who need it.  In the book this blogger is reading [2], the author(s) [3] implied that by her intervention, as directed by the angels she saw, had turned certain people's lives around, making them better.  It was so heart-warming to read these stories, believing them to be real and truthful.  Whether such healings came from God or Satan this blogger cannot be absolutely sure.

However, on two occasions so far (into the book), having been lulled into a false sense of comfort and security, that sense was shattered. [*]  The first occasion was when he read about a dog that had died had been taken to Heaven to wait for the owner, even though the author(s) said that animals do not have souls, in order that the dog could comfort the owner.  It is unclear to this blogger whether the comforting of the owner would take place after the owner had died or while the owner was still alive or both.  This is the first time that this blogger is aware of that a dead dog could comfort a person, seemingly replacing God, the Son, the Holy Spirit and the Blessed Virgin, the true Consolers of souls from Heaven.  To say that a dead dog can console a person, this cannot be from God.  Does the owner of the dog then pray to the dog?  Satan would be happy if the dog owner did or if the dog owner had begun to do so after the author and the dog owner had a conversation as directed by the angels she saw.

The second occasion was when the author(s) was (were) on the topic of suicide.  She, supported by the angels she saw, had the audacity to state that everyone has the potential to reach a point of desperation, insinuating that everyone has the potential to take one's own life.  This is false: those who love and follow God faithfully will never think of committing suicide no matter how depressed.  Then immediately, the author(s) stated God's truth, that nobody is supposed to end one's own life.  She and the angels must be really scared to say the opposite because God would be very angry since every life is a gift from God and nobody should end it by choice.  A few paragraphs later, the author(s) again said that nobody is supposed to take one's own life but then she added that the angels told her that if a person did commit suicide, the person's soul would be enveloped in God's love and taken to Heaven.  This statement has the potential to encourage people who are on the verge of committing suicide who are reading these words to actually kill themselves, thus rejecting God's gift of life, God's love for them, thus their souls may not go to Heaven.  This blogger prays for those who had killed and would kill themselves from reading the book cited below would be forgiven because of the strong evil forces that could not be overcome.

In summary, Satan's ways are mockery of Christ, pretending to have powers of healing, and camouflaging lies by inserting them against the background of truth.  Here is a video of various kinds of camouflages in the animal kingdom, the pigmy seahorse, the reef stonefish, the dead leaf butterfly are this blogger's favorite on this You Tube video [4]

One more speculation: the author of the book cited here had mentioned an angel that has no name and that she could not see but had from time to time instructed her.  She could not see it because she was physically immobilized in such a way that she would be unable to turn around to look at it.  This does not sound heavenly to this blogger since there is no need for any Heavenly entity to hide in the shadow.  If he were to guess the name of this angel, it would be Lucifer.  Had the human author been permitted to turn around and see the face of Satan, it would be so frightful that the human author would turn around immediately, face God and pray incessantly for pardon and mercy.

Those deceived by Satan need to be prayed for in order that they see the light, reject Satan and follow God.



[1] https://activechristianity.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-the-antichrist
[2] Byrne, Lorna. Love From Heaven. Simon & Shuster, Inc. 2014.
[3] The word author has "s" in parenthesis because the blogger is not sure whether there is just the one author who is human or the book is collaborative work between the human author and certain angels.
[*] At this moment, this blogger's plugged-in and fully-charged laptop screen suddenly went dark.  What happened?  It had to be shut down and re-booted.  Is there some energy that does not wish for this blogger to continue?  This entry was started last night.  After the computer was turned off, a drinking glass broke unexpectedly in the sink while it was being washed, causing a small cut in the little finger.  Is this blogger entering into unforbidden territory?  He is a bit scared but with prayer, he will continue.
[4] https://youtu.be/q5pQg7e_sac?t=47 (pigmy seahorse),  https://youtu.be/q5pQg7e_sac?t=125 (reef stonefish), https://youtu.be/q5pQg7e_sac?t=146 (dead leaf butterfly).  Pigmy seahorse photos on google: https://www.google.com/search?q=pygmy+seahorse&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwim9eux25PfAhXIIjQIHZ60ArwQ_AUIDigB&biw=1366&bih=657#imgrc=_

Learning About The Soul

"Your soul has made no mistake.  It's only the human self, the human part of you that makes mistakes" were words spoken by Lorna Byrne, the angel seer [1].  Before receiving Holy Communion, the Catholics say this: "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed." [2]

If the soul does not make mistakes, then why does it need to be healed?  Lorna Bryne who had said that she was Catholic had not commented on this, so this blogger would have to come up with something to make sense of it.

This blogger thinks that both positions are correct, and he reconciles this seeming contradiction by means of an analogy.  He thinks of the human immune system.  It always does something to try and heal the body when it is sick.  Sometimes, it is successful, sometimes not.  When it is successful, the body returns to its healthy state.  When it fails, whatever disease takes over and the body dies.

The fact that the body can no longer stay alive does not mean that the immune system had made a mistake.  The immune system, perfect in all of its functions and working tirelessly until the body's last breath, simply gives out because whatever that is attacking the body is too powerful for it to overcome.

The immune system can therefore be compared to the soul that is never wrong, and the disease attacking the body can be compared to the human part that makes mistakes, causing sickness.  This is not to say that every incurable disease is caused by human mistakes even though an argument can be made that it is.  This contention is beyond the scope of this entry.

When a person makes mistakes by sinning, the soul suffers and needs healing.  When the immune system has been weakened, it too, needs healing.  In either case, neither the soul nor the immune system had made a mistake even though they both need healing from time to time.

Thus, there is no contradiction between Lorna Byrne's position that the soul does not make a mistake and the Catholic Church's position that the soul needs healing.  The soul needs healing after it is infected by sin and the only One Who can heal the soul so infected is the Lord.  Likewise, the body needs healing after it is exposed to a disease and only the immune system provided by God can bring the body back to health.



[1] https://youtu.be/gRfJR_p3rlg?list=PLlZR1Ck-Cr0wwxA1WzZebqRaLcIp68t-e&t=4694
[2] https://litpress.org/Products/GetSample/3437/9780814634370

UPDATED: Disturbing Thoughts: Lorna Byrne - Who Is She?

"Does Purgatory Exist?" was a post published yesterday, December 7, 2018.  These were the concluding words: "... the Truth is for God to know and not this blogger to conclude."  They may prove to be somewhat prophetic since Lorna Byrne could very well be a false prophetess, according to a blog post entitled "Lorna Byrne - False Prophetess?" [1]  If she is a false prophetess, then this blogger was misled, for he had written these words that began the first part of the conclusion: "...this blogger prefers to believe Lorna Byrne than the saints in the article cited who spoke of Purgatory..."

The more this blogger thinks about what Lorna Byrne had said, the more his interior peace is being troubled, despite the many things she had said were comforting, as well as some that were consistent with this blogger's own knowledge and experience.  Her statement on reincarnation was disturbing [2] and so was her blessing of members of the audience seen on a You Tube video.  Before the blessing she said this [3]:  "And after my death, you will know all about the blessing 'cause the letter has already been written (then the translation, then she continued) it's all good (and she laughed)..."  When this blogger heard this, it sacred him.  Before saying this, she said that God had said that it was your free will to come (forward for a blessing) or not.  By including this statement which is true since it is always a person's choice to choose to remain with God or go with Satan.  This blogger would never let her bless him because he would be afraid what kind of words she was reciting in silence which could be some kind of demonic incantation.

Perhaps Purgatory does exist after all!  It does not matter if one knows for sure so long as one tries his/her best to do good in accordance with the teachings of Christ.

If Lorna Byrne's is being used by the dark side, does that mean that the end is beginning, when the world begins to see forerunners of the Antichrist?  There was another interesting exchange.  Lorna Byrne was asked if she had recently met the Queen of Angels [4] together with a second question.  She avoided answering the first question directly which was disturbing since the Queen of Angels is the Mother of God, the Woman that crushes the Serpent's head and by not answering the question, Lorna Byrne seemed to be afraid of Her as Satan is afraid of Her.

Miraculously, another person from the audience asked if she had met the Virgin Mary [5] to which she referred to one of her books, and she said in her book she had written that she had seen Her but had to ask who She was since she was a child on a swing.  Most visionaries who had seen the Blessed Mother would comment on Her beauty but Lorna Byrne did not seem to care to elaborate further which is uncharateristic of her, and unlike her answers to some questions to which she was happy to spend a long time answering including describing in detail what some of the angels were wearing and how they had appeared to her but not the Queen of Angels Who did not seem to interest Lorna Byrne in the least.  There appeared to be some distance between her and the Blessed Virgin Mary which could mean that Lorna Byrne is afraid of Her.

Who is Lorna Byrne?  Is she a messenger from Heaven or from Hell?


[1] http://lornabyrne.blogspot.com/p/lorna-byrne-false-prophetess.html
[2] Ibid.
[3] https://youtu.be/gRfJR_p3rlg?list=PLlZR1Ck-Cr0wwxA1WzZebqRaLcIp68t-e&t=6342
[4] https://youtu.be/SdNEUPlSdpA?list=PLlZR1Ck-Cr0wwxA1WzZebqRaLcIp68t-e&t=5870
[5] https://youtu.be/SdNEUPlSdpA?list=PLlZR1Ck-Cr0wwxA1WzZebqRaLcIp68t-e&t=6306

"Love Yourself"

"Love yourself" is a concept that is somewhat foreign to this blogger, but he is now trying to teach himself how it is done.  He has a long ways to go to know what loving oneself means and how love of oneself is supposed to feel like.

He had heard people talk about it before but rejected it because he knew better due to pride.  He believed that one does not exist to love oneself in this world but to give of oneself, otherwise it would be selfishness, that God does not like selfish people and that one needs to be like the self-sacrificial Christ.

Of course, he had never been able to be like Christ.  In that sense, he might know what self-love is due to his unwillingness to make sacrifices.  On second thought, one can make sacrifices without any love when sacrifices become routine obligations that need to be fulfilled, when consecrations of bread and wine are done without putting one's heart and faith into it because it has become repetitive and mechanical (not that this ever happens -- just a random thought).

Many a times posts in this blog included the two most important commandments, quoted again below in part without references [1]:

“Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?”
He said to him, “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.
This is the greatest and the first commandment.
The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Speaking subjectively, the first commandment above is easier to follow relative to the second, not that it alone by itself is easy to follow at all.  It is the second that is so hard to follow that makes the first one look easy.  This blogger had never truly understood the second greatest commandment until now, realizing that its operative words are not just to "love your neighbor" but to "love your neighbor as  yourself."  Thus, if one does not love or know how to love oneself, how is one able to love one's neighbor as oneself?

To read "self-sacrifice" into the second most important commandment is to re-write it this way: You shall sacrifice yourself for your neighbor.  If this is what Christ wants, He would have used the word "sacrifice" but He chose to use the word "love" instead.

While this is being composed, these thoughts came to mind: Christ had sacrificed Himself on the cross for the remission of sins.  This had to take place for God to show how much God loves man even though man had sinned and continues to sin.  Love therefore precedes sacrifice.

If love had been reciprocated in the Garden of Eden by Eve and Adam, then there would not have been the need for a sacrifice.   This is contradicted by a certain school of thought that Christ's sacrifice was not a plan B, but rather a plan A from the very beginning.  This blogger disagrees because plan A was perfect, with God giving man his Free Will.

With Free Will comes a risk, the risk of disobedience by refusing to resist temptation, by not choosing to love God but rather to be like God.  It was the perfect Plan A with Free Will formed out of love that had given rise to Plan B, also formed out of love, in order than man's sins can be be wiped clean.  Plan B was not a fix for Plan A that went awry: it was man who had gone astray, not God's mistake in Plan A, that Plan B had to come into existence.

Man's refusal to love God so pained God that God had to heal that pain through love, a love like no other, by incarnating His only Son so that God can be loved perfectly, and it is only this perfect love, through perfect obedience, tested by temptations and endured with sufferings, that can heal.

Love, therefore cannot be equated with sacrifice.  Love is greater than that.  Self-sacrifice is a part of love, not love in its entirety.  Love also embodies compassion, forgiveness and everything that is pure and good that comes from God.  Every person has the ability to love another but in order to give the gift of love, one has to know how to love and what it is like to be loved.

Loving purely is innate.  Some have been hurt when they were children, some even as adults.  Ironically, the withholding of love is not the antidote to pain; it is by loving purely (again) that reduces the hurt.

Therefore, this blogger thinks that this is what Christ wants all to do: to love God first, then love yourself, and then love your neighbor as yourself, in that order.



[1] http://www.usccb.org/bible/matthew/22, 36-39.

Does Purgatory Exist?

Quoted below is The Council of Trent's first decree concerning purgatory [1]:

CONCERNING PURGATORY

FIRST DECREE

Began on the third, and terminated on the fourth, day of December, MDLXIII., being the ninth and last under the Sovereign Pontiff, Pius IV.

Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, from the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught, in sacred councils, and very recently in this oecumenical Synod, that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls there detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar; the holy Synod enjoins on bishops that they diligently endeavour that the sound doctrine concerning Purgatory, transmitted by the holy Fathers and sacred councils, be believed, maintained, taught, and every where proclaimed by the faithful of Christ. But let the more difficult and subtle questions, and which tend not to edification, and from which for the most part there is no increase of piety, be excluded from popular discourses before the uneducated multitude. In like manner, such things as are uncertain, or which labour under an appearance of error, let them not allow to be made public and treated of. While those things which tend to a certain kind of curiosity or superstition, or which savour of filthy lucre, let them prohibit as scandals and stumbling-blocks of the faithful. But let the bishops take care, that the suffrages of the faithful who are living, to wit the sacrifices of masses, prayers, alms, and other works of piety, which have been wont to be performed by the faithful for the other faithful departed, be piously and devoutly performed, in accordance with the institutes of the church; and that whatsoever is due on their behalf, from the endowments of testators, or in other way, be discharged, not in a perfunctory manner, but diligently and accurately, by the priests and ministers of the church, and others who are bound to render this (service).

If Purgatory is truly a place God created, then there should be no fear that people talk about it and question it.  Yet, the Catholic Church wants to silence this discussion by these words from the passage quoted above [2]:

But let the more difficult and subtle questions, and which tend not to edification, and from which for the most part there is no increase of piety, be excluded from popular discourses before the uneducated multitude. In like manner, such things as are uncertain, or which labour under an appearance of error, let them not allow to be made public and treated of. 

That is just the first decree.  It goes on and on.  Scrolling further down one reads this, quoted in part [3]:

ON REFORMATION

EIGHTH DECREE

CHAPTER I.

Cardinals and all Prelates of the churches shall be content with modest furniture and a frugal table: they shall not enrich their relatives or domestics out of the property of the Church.

One can easily doubt that every single Cardinal and all the Prelates (including the ancient "holy fathers") are (were) honestly and truly satisfied with "modest furniture and a frugal table" with no desire whatsoever and resisting all temptations to have nicer furnishings and better tables.

There is a strong likelihood that clerical modesty and frugality are mere theoretical constructs with little basis in reality.  One only needs to look at the opulence displayed at the palazzo in Castel Gandolfo [4] for confirmation.

Perhaps the Holy Spirit did instruct the Catholic Church to decree the existence of Purgatory, in order to cleanse the sins of the clerics, because their hypocrisies cannot be washed clean by the Blood of Christ even though priests say something like this at every Mass: "...This is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for many so that sins may be forgiven..."  Apparently, the Blood of Christ not enough to cleanse sins in this life.  There has to be a backup called Purgatory in the next, according to the Catholic Church.

If one still has questions about the existence of Purgatory, there is an article on it entitled "3 Sobering Visions of Purgatory from the Saints" that one can read. [5]  Of these three alleged visions, this comment by Maria Faustyna Kowalska is most astonishing [6]:

“I saw Our Lady visiting the souls in purgatory. The souls call her ‘The Star of the Sea.’ She brings them refreshment. I wanted to talk with them some more, but my guardian angel beckoned me to leave. We went out of that prison of suffering. [I heard an interior voice, which said] ‘My mercy does not want this, but justice demands it. Since that time I am in closer communion with the suffering souls.’” (Diary of St. Faustina 20)

Maria Faustyna Kowalska stated that the Mother of God brought "refreshment" to souls in Purgatory.  She did not say what kind of "refreshment" the Blessed Virgin Mary brought.  Do souls which are spirits need refreshment?  Can they consume refreshment like those who are still living?  Are souls in Purgatory not supposed to suffer in order that "justice" be served?  If so, why would the Blessed Mother bring "refreshment" to alleviate the suffering of souls in Purgatory?  Would that not be considered as an obstruction of Divine Justice?  If not, then that would mean that Divine Love can overcome Divine Justice which would eliminate the need for Purgatory.  Incidentally, is it not St. Faustina who spoke of Divine Mercy?  Why then did it occur to her that during her purgatorial vision she heard "justice demands it"?  Which is true: Divine Mercy or Divine Justice?

Both Maria Faustyna Kowalska and Lidwina of Schiedam mentioned in the article cited above heard from their respective guardian angel.  Fast forward to today, to the angel seer of the present, Lorna Byrne who, on a You Tube video that took place in the Czech Republic, said that God had never shown her Purgatory and that perhaps it did not exist.  She also filled in a lot more detail which is better watched and listened to [7] than reading about them here.

In conclusion, this blogger prefers to believe Lorna Byrne than the saints in the article cited who spoke of Purgatory, but then the Truth is for God to know and not this blogger to conclude.



[1] http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch25.htm
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3859590/See-Pope-lives-just-not-one-Luxurious-Papal-apartments-opened-public-time-Francis-refused-stay-plush.html
[5] https://aleteia.org/2013/11/01/3-sobering-visions-of-purgatory-from-the-saints/
[6] Ibid.
[7] https://youtu.be/gRfJR_p3rlg?list=PLlZR1Ck-Cr0wwxA1WzZebqRaLcIp68t-e&t=4659

Is It Possible To Talk About God Without Defining, Confining And Playing God?

This is the most difficult question this blogger has asked and the most difficult one to answer so far.  Before starting this entry, this blogger admits that he had in many instances been self-righteous in thinking that the conclusions he had drawn were at least reasonable.  He could not have been more wrong, particularly with respect to conclusions about God, the Son of God, the Holy Spirit and the Blessed Virgin Mary.  For his errors, he asks for understanding and pardon.

Yet, if he were truly repentant, he would delete the blog.  For some reason, he is reluctant to do so, regardless of the errors he had made and will continue to make.  Such conduct, one can assume, showcases pride, Satan's favorite sin.

To answer the question posed by the title of this entry, the answer is no: it is not possible to talk about God without defining, confining and playing God.  If God is not being talked about, would God be then moved from the forefront of one's mind to parts that are reserved for things that are irrelevant and that one would rather forget?

So which is the lesser of two evils: to not talk about God or to speak on behalf of God and thus playing God?  Is this question ever asked and answered by the Apostles, the saints (exempting those whom had been chosen specifically to have actual visions of the Blessed Virgin Mary and/or Her Son, Jesus to convey messages to the world), the popes and the clerics?  What about the preachers of other religions who talk about God?  Are all of them not putting words in God's mouth and playing God?

Is God so predictable that God cannot act beyond those words that are written by man?  Does God not have Free Will, and can God not change His mind?  God chose the Jews in the beginning, then when the Son of God came, did He not heal a Samaritan along with the Jews [1], did He not speak with a Samaritan woman [2] and did he not heal a Cannanite's woman's daughter [3]?

If God cannot be defined or confined, then who and what religion can speak definitively for God?

On what grounds can the Catholic Church claim that every single one of its doctrines is inspired by the Holy Spirit and is therefore from God?  Even something as basic as the Mass, there are differences between the Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo [4].  Without uniformity, how can the Catholic Church consider itself universal?

Perhaps it does not make any difference whether there is uniformity within the Catholic Church or if the church is even Catholic, so long as one has absolute faith in God and has in the forefront of one's mind God, and strives to be holy always and love purely without ulterior motives, and examines one's conscience often, calling to mind one's failures and asking God for pardon.

On the other hand, maybe one is permitted to play God, unless these words were not really the words of Christ but put together by power-seeking sinners: “'The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.'” [5]  And these too: "'Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.'" [6]

With so many conflicting positions within the Catholic hierarchy today, whose words are correct and heard and bound in Heaven?  To separate the words that are bound in Heaven from the actions taken on earth in contradiction to those words comes under the heading of hypocrisy, a topic Christ Himself addressed [7].

Perhaps the answer to the question who can speak for God asked earlier is this: "You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers." [8]



[1] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+17%3A11-19&version=NIV
[2] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+4%3A1-42&version=NIV
[3] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+15%3A21-28&version=NIV
[4] https://www.thoughtco.com/traditional-latin-mass-vs-novus-ordo-542961
[5] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A16&version=ESV
[6] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+18%3A18&version=DRA
[7] http://www.usccb.org/bible/matthew23:6, also https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+23&version=NIV
[8] http://www.usccb.org/bible/matthew23:6, at 8.

Conference Of Bishops In Baltimore 2018

Quoted from Catholic News Agency  in an article entitled Cupich and Wuerl collaborated on alternative sex abuse proposal  dated November 16, 2018 [1]:

The conference’s proposed plan would have established an independent lay-led commission to investigate allegations against bishops. The Cupich-Wuerl plan would instead send allegations against bishops to be investigated by their metropolitan archbishops, along with archdiocesan review boards. Metropolitans themselves would be investigated by their senior suffragan bishops.

It has become clear that the Catholic Church prefers to do its own dirty laundry, assuming that it gets around to doing it in the first place, rather than sending it out to the cleaners for fear that they will uncover so much dirt that cannot be removed easily.

That Catholic Church has shown that it is no different from any other non-religious institution that has for its primary objective which is the need for self-preservation in order to continue to operate as an on-going concern without regard to those for whom it exists to serve.

The Church for which God sacrificed His only Son is not this Catholic Church which is mired in scandals and politics and run by hypocrites and unholy men who show no signs of humility and poverty and no interest in spending time to "lead the souls entrusted to their care toward an intimate relationship with the Lord." [2]  If their souls are not already dammed, may they waste no time in seeking forgiveness and mercy through repentence and supplication before God while restoring the Catholic Church that Christ by His crucifixion, death and resurrection had raised in three days. [3]


[1] https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/cupich-and-wuerl-collaborated-on-alternative-sex-abuse-proposal-10934
[2] https://docplayer.net/23867774-The-rosary-of-the-seven-sorrows-of-our-lady.html, section 9; also at https://www.companionscross.org/sites/default/files/file-attachments/The%20Rosary%20of%20the%20Seven%20Sorrows%20of%20Our%20lady_edited.pdf, 9th page
[3] http://www.usccb.org/bible/john/2, paragraph 19.