42. Letter to Monsignor John Kennedy
In the following, slightly-edited copy of my email of May 19, 2017, other than relating the series of revelations about the Immaculate Heart, some reference is made to the preexistent, bizarre item of business for which we had been emailing each other: a posthumous, supernatural message that I had received from the soul of former U.S. First Lady, Jacqueline Kennedy, RIP!
[Orthodox-Jewish belief relates that it is both permissible (and thereby, possible) to receive a communication from the dead, such as one may receive in a dream about a departed loved one. However, one may not send a message; and, doing so would be Biblically-prohibited necromancy. Therefore, due to being a man of God, I merely receive dispatches from those in the next world but do not try to contact the dead.]
I mention this other topic briefly (“briefly” because, despite the historic importance of having received such a posthumous message from one of modern history’s most influential figures, in this book about communications from the Virgin Mary and the Holy Spirit, I do not wish to go off base with a long, involved story that, partly involving my personal interactions with close family members of the late First Lady, is so complex that I myself am not yet caught up with the tale):
After rather dramatically bumping into, at a Manhattan club, the late Mrs. Kennedy’s sister, Princess Lee Radziwill, I perceived a series of otherworldly communications from the spirit of the dear, departed Mrs. Kennedy-Onassis. [I am a very sensitive soul; and, beginning some years ago, it became not uncommon for me to perceive ethereal transmissions from those in the afterlife. While I realize that some may find my perception of messages from the spirits of excessively famous individuals to be preposterous, I have discovered, due to experience, that it is, in fact, easier to discern messages from the souls of persons of fame. This is because, seemingly, some share of a departed’s spirit intermingles at any location whereat such a person is remembered, say, on a memorial or in a photo).]
Because there existed a great deal of paranormal evidence (as “evidence” goes in the paranormal world) that these messages from Jackie Kennedy, who was a Roman Catholic, were genuine, I eventually went to Manhattan’s Saint Patrick’s Cathedral to report the matter. There, a priest found enough credibility to my account to forward the case up to a director in the NYC Archdiocese, Reverend Lorenzo Ato. Then, after meeting with Reverend Ato, the matter was pushed up to an Archdiocese Vice-Chancellor, Monsignor Douglas Mathers, who, after our long meeting on the subject, directed me higher: to the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in Rome. Then, at the Vatican, before the matter was eventually sent back to NYC (to the attention of Cardinal Timothy Dolan), the request for a CDF investigation wound up on the desk of Monsignor John Kennedy—who was the first person at the CDF to sign off on the case!
After being sent by Vice-Chancellor Mathers to the CDF, I was the one, about Jackie Kennedy’s messages, to first get in touch with this Monsignor that I knew from Rome. Nonetheless, that there even existed a John Kennedy at the CDF says something eerie. Moreover, I received the messages from the late First Lady before both first meeting Monsignor John Kennedy and even knowing that he worked at the CDF.
May 19, 2017
Dear Mons. Kennedy: Our continued dialogue is much appreciated! Two issues, and the second—which has suddenly presented itself and is of crucial importance—is unrelated to our earlier topic. Also, please, forgive the written length of this second point; however, as you should understand when into it delving, your time and energy spent reading will have been well worth it:
(1) By myself and others, including by Vice Chancellor Mathers, the phenomena that I perceived, discussed in my former email, was surrounded by enough seemingly paranormal activity to be considered, by traditional religious standards, worthy of investigation as an event of potentially genuine supernaturalism. For this reason, the Vice Chancellor directed me to the Doctrine of the Faith [he did so because, as the late Mrs. Kennedy was not up for sainthood, he was, he said, powerless to investigate]. . . .
Now, consider the following: this traditional standard was achieved prior to the account of these phenomena reaching your desk; and, the phenomena were perceived messages from the spirit of Jacqueline Kennedy. Therefore, that the first, official CDF position on this matter—specifically, that it be directed back to a bishop [in this case, His Grace, Cardinal Dolan, Bishop and Archbishop of NYC]—comes signed from a priest named “John Kennedy,” such adds considerably more supernatural weight to this account!
With that in mind, I am, at this stage, contemplating media attention. After all, the messages are of great value to the world for various reasons, including for strengthening belief in an afterlife, which is a principle of faith. However, before I contact the media, because you are involved, I gracefully request your guidance in terms of the light in which you would like to be best mentioned. Thank you.
(2) Some days ago, I, a Jew, saw, for the first time perhaps, an image of the Miraculous Medal’s backside. As I certainly recollect, for both a very limited number of times and very short periods, I had before seen the Medal’s front. Due to that, I knew that an image of Mary was thereon contained. However, the back of this Medal, to me, was a mystery. How it was that, a few days ago, I came to view the Medal’s other side, was due to my online investigation about Mary’s Immaculate Heart. Via this investigation, I read about the Immaculate Heart’s appearance on the Medal’s reverse. So, I searched for an image and discovered, to my surprise, that this flaming heart’s foremost aspect was not, as I thought, a ring of surrounding roses. Rather, its primary quality was its being pierced by a sword.
To better understand my limited knowledge about the Immaculate Heart, had someone, before this online search, asked me to describe this Heart’s visual appearance, I would have said that it was a heart surrounded by roses. I would not have even known to describe the sword (even if, now, after observing the image, I vaguely remember having seen, when having viewed Immaculate Heart iconography in the past, the sword).
I was interested in the image of Mary’s Immaculate Heart because a part of my ongoing theological work regards the overlap between the Biblical understanding of the “circumcised heart” and the Catholic concept of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (with this latter image, I am familiar). In fact, I am convinced that the vision of Jesus’ Sacred Heart is a visual depiction of a primary aspect of the linguistically-described “circumcised heart” [the reverse of the Miraculous Medal depicts, alongside the Immaculate Heart, the Sacred Heart]:
As you likely know, all Hebrew letters have a meaning; and, Hebrew words are derived from the combined meanings of a word’s letters. Therefore, “circumcised,” in the original Hebrew, has a particular understanding based on its constituent letters. [Roughly, “circumcised” means “graduated to a higher level.”]
Knowing that, as the Bible states, those with circumcised hearts have hearts of flesh and not of stone, one can actually see how the Sacred Heart, in visual form, depicts a “circumcised heart” as it is linguistically described by the Bible’s original, Hebraic language. For instance, visually, a ring of thorns surrounds the Sacred Heart for protection against humanity’s sins. This is logical because if one wears one’s heart on one’s sleeve, one naturally gets burned to the degree that one becomes coldhearted—a condition antithetical to the fiery, fleshy, loving nature of the Sacred Heart. As such concepts overlap with Hebraic linguistics, a “circumcised” heart, defined by its Hebrew letters, is a heart similarly protected to prevent an onslaught of stone-heartedness.
Returning to the Immaculate Heart, after viewing its image on the Medal’s back, I wondered about the symbolism: why was Mary’s heart pierced by a sword?
Then, over the next days, I thought of the following:
· The originally-Hebrew name “Mary” [“Miriam”] which can be understood to mean “bitter (in the plural).”
· As a name is one’s destiny, the multiple, bitter life experiences of Mary, mother of Jesus, and of Moses and Aaron’s sister Mary [usually called “Miriam,” although, again, in the original Hebrew texts, “Mary” and “Miriam” are the same word].
· Mary, mother of Jesus, accepting her bitter life circumstances.
· Mary, sister of Moses, not accepting certain of her life circumstances to the degree that she was divinely struck with leprosy [Num. 12:10].
· The Bible’s declaration that we are meant to remember that this first Mary was struck with leprosy [Deut. 24:9].
· God’s desire for us to resist the devil [Jam. 4:7], which means, in one aspect, that we are not to be obsequious to wicked people.
· The Immaculate Heart’s secondary symbolism being a ring of roses.
At last, these ideas and images coalesced in my mind yesterday (the previous word, “yesterday,” was written on Thursday, even if this letter is being sent on Friday), days after seeing the image and only shortly after reading your last email of earlier that morning. At that time, I experienced, over several hours, epiphanies of such an awesome nature that I was left sobbing repeatedly! These revelations—which add to but do NOT contradict traditional understandings of the symbolism of the Immaculate Heart—began with a comprehension of one meaning of the image’s sword:
As is already known, the sword, in one aspect, symbolizes the bitterness piercing Mary’s heart. To grasp this bitterness, only consider Mary, a loving mother, witnessing her innocent son unjustly sentenced to death and cruelly murdered: hung up on a cross and seen by the masses, some of whom were gloating and laughing at this terrible sight! And, that was on top of Mary’s other bitter life experiences: being falsely thought sexually immoral; being forced to travel heavily pregnant; giving birth in a barn because no one was kind enough to offer temporary lodgings; having to flee with one’s child to a foreign country to escape corrupt and bloodthirsty authorities; being wrongly accused, by some, of having a son who was a false messiah; etc.
The Immaculate Heart of Mary is fleshy and not of stone. So, how could Mary have navigated such extreme trials while remaining soft-hearted? Her so remaining was and is unlike so many who, suffering life’s hard knocks, have become uncaring and hardhearted. The answer must be that the Blessed Virgin remained warm-hearted because she accepted her tragic life circumstances in humility, faithfully knowing that these trials were from the omnipotent and merciful God Who knows our best, ultimate interests better than we do ourselves.
With that in mind, and coming to a secondary symbol of the flaming and fleshy Immaculate Heart, one can understand a meaning of the surrounding ring of roses (or lilies): in the manner of reaping in joy what one has sown in tears, when accepting difficult tests from God in humility, thereafter and eventually, God’s best purposes come to light, which, to use a cliché, is a way of saying that everything comes up roses!
In contrast to the previous, “Mary”—a name that, also, means “rebel”—did not accept all of her life circumstances. For instance, she, along with her husband Joseph, rebelled against the murderous King Herod and fled to Egypt with baby Jesus.
How to explain this paradox of Mary being both submissive and a rebel? As the Bible declares, a sword symbolizes the Word of God. Hence, it was revealed to me in these epiphanies, that the sword in the image of the Immaculate Heart reflects the very depth of Mary’s heart being circumcised by God’s Word so that she precisely knew the difference between right and wrong so to remain free of sin. (The Bible states that a heart being circumcised removes a person from the desire to sin.)
Therefore, because Mary was Spirit-filled, Mary knew which life circumstances of hers were of God and which were of the devil; that is, she knew to what she was to submit [“Submit yourselves therefore to God,” Jam. 4:7] and to what she was to resist [“Resist the devil,” ibid.]. (Regarding what to resist, on the Medal’s front, Mary is crushing underfoot a serpent, a symbol of the devil.)
When all of this was, to me, revealed, I immediately recognized that there could be no other way to remain immaculately hearted except by knowing the true difference between right and wrong! After all, if not knowing this difference, one cannot know to what to submit and to what to resist. And, if making an error due to not knowing this difference, one necessarily sins: sometimes one would mistakenly not accept God’s will and lose out on one’s benefit, and at other times, mistakenly give in to the devil to one’s own demise.
And, this was revealed to me on the day that I received your email that contained this following word: “Unfortunately.” You wrote this word in reference to your not being related to the Kennedy clan of American political fame. As I understand God, I was told by Him that day (which is, now, two-days ago, for this letter’s section is being written on Friday, today), to reply to your email as follows:
One way to know the difference between what is of God and what is of the devil is by knowing what cannot be changed and what can. As God’s will can never be altered, something unchangeable is of God. In contrast, as the Bible relates, the devil, when resisted, flees. Therefore, as the family into which you were born is something unchangeable, such is from God and not, as you write, unfortunate. As God knows best, you should be humbly grateful for the great “fortune” of your family. . . . Only consider Jesus, who came into this world in a place wherein animals chewed slop—and for such a lowly place, Mary was grateful!
Please, forgive my strong tone. However, it is both meant in the deepest of love and relayed with divine instruction to do so. Therefore, and since only a little leavening can affect the whole loaf, consider your underlying thought and heart processes that caused you to write “unfortunately.” Thereafter, with enough change so that you recognize how fortunate it is to be exactly who you are, you may become, as Isaiah writes, “Hephzibah,” that is, “My desire is in her”:
“Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate: but thou shalt be called Hephzibah [“My (God’s) desire is in her”], and thy land Beulah [“Married”]: for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married.”
Over the past two days, I realized a greater significance of this simple, logical, and commonsensical revelation of Mary’s Immaculate Heart being shown to me, via epiphanies, after having read an email from you: the recently promoted, Head of the Discipline Department of the Doctrine of the Faith—in charge of investigating sexual misconduct among Church clergy. The meaning is that you will not be able to remove sexual sin from the priesthood except by this understanding of the Immaculate Heart! After all, you must know the difference between what is a human being’s immutable sexual nature (from God) and what is sexually mutable. You must know this difference because any clergy policy overriding immutability would, in fact, lead to perversion because immutability cannot be overridden! (And, surely, that sad circumstance of rules attempting to override unalterable, sexual behavior is what first caused this whole mess in the Church that you have been given the responsibility to clean up!)
Miraculously, YOU are the very first person in the world to whom these epiphanies, revealed to me, are being transmitted! I find this amazing because it may be that, of all the other people on the earth, it is the most crucial that you, in particular, understand this simple meaning of Mary’s Immaculate Heart. After all, if you do not, you will never be able to purify the clergy wholly; and, neither will you be able to lift the great cloud of shame currently looming over the Church.