Examining Frannie #6: An Appeal to Men of Plain Reason

Examining the Perspective of Richard Hanifen

Now that we have definitely demonstrated the false doctrines within the teachings and writings of Frannie Rose we now turn to an important question: Why is there any concern at all if her teachings are perfectly orthodox? In order words, if the teachings of One Simple Voice was completely consistent with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, then why are there members of the Catholic faithful finding errors?

Richard Hanifen would lead us to believe that Frannie's teachings are not rooted in the concepts and language of New Age spirituality. However,

1. he is not familiar with the history of the New Age movement,
2. nor is he familiar with the deceptiveness and methods of how New Age ideas infiltrate the Church,
3. nor is he familiar with the dangers of occultism and the possibility of demonic influence,
4. nor is he familiar with the concepts and language of New Age spirituality in order to properly identify it,
5. nor does he seem to be concerned at all that Frannie's history demonstrates New Age influence upon her religious formation,
6. nor does he seem concerned that Frannie has stated that the greatest influence upon her life was Deepak Chopra, a New Age guru,
7. nor does he seem concerned that Frannie consistently quotes New Age gurus and dissenters.

Therefore his attempts to lead people to accept the orthodoxy of Frannie's teaching is incredibly misguided. While he may have a clear conscience at the moment this does not make him innocent in these matters. At some level he must be aware that there is an incongruity between his perspective and the evidences that have been presented to him. As is characteristic of many adherents to cults, he does not seem willing to follow truth where it may lead him in an open and honest appraisal, even if that means he must recant his present perspective. Maintaining a position without any evidence while rejecting evidence to the contrary is entirely unreasonable. In this discussion, the burden of proof has been upon us to demonstrate that the teachings of Frannie contain content and language steeped in New Age spirituality, and this is precisely what we have proven.

“They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths” (2 Timothy 4:4).

It is the responsibility of those members of Christ who are familiar with these matters to assist the other members in the Church to understand them. For each member has their own gift and no member can say to the other 'we don't need you' (1 Corinthians 12:21).

“It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers.. so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God... Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching...” (Ephesians 4:11-14).

Instead, Hanifen has refused to engage us in public conversation and has offered a definitive statement on the matter. Originally he was willing to discuss these issues with some within the diocese but ceased those interactions once he realized that people were not going to agree with him, yet he offered none of us any substantial evidence for anything he claimed. As is characteristic of many adherents to cults, he is only willing to have a conversation with you if he can persuade you to his opinion, or if you do not confuse him with the facts.

“I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought” (1 Corinthians 1:10 ).

It may be incredibly difficult for some people to understand how someone could have served as a bishop for as long as Hanifen had and yet be incapable of shepherding the flock of Christ in his diocese away from New Age spirituality. Since he has fully embraced the teachings of Frannie Rose he has demonstrated to us that he is not capable of distinguishing between Catholic theology and New Age spirituality.

This is not difficult to consider, however, given the liberal state of the Catholic Church in America. Since Vatican II many liberal agendas have swept through the Church in the name of progress, renewal, and ecumenism. Many priests and bishops have been swept up in the wake of it. Even within the diocese of Saginaw, in Michigan, this liberalism flourishes with a ferocity where priests pride themselves as non-conformists. While seeking spiritual direction, I met with a priest who said to me during that meeting: “Many of the things that the Church teaches us is monkey-rod.” After being called a “lituri-cop” and “pharisee” in the confessional, I no longer sought any spiritual direction within that diocese.

The Sense of the Faithful

As for the teachings of Frannie, we have not found errors because we have misunderstood the teachings of One Simple Voice, but because these teachings do not pass the test of the sensus fidei. We have difficulty with the teachings of Frannie because what she is propagating within the diocese is contrary to Catholic teaching. If her teachings were consistent with Catholic teaching then those of us with Master degrees in Theology from several different respected Catholic schools would be able to confirm it. Our education is from well-known, educational institutions faithful to the Magisterium such as Franciscan University of Stuebenville, Holy Apostles College & Seminary, and the St. Augustine Institute. We have applied our intellectual acumen to this project as deeply as we would to the rigors of academia, with the same passion with which we have catechized Catholics for years, and with the same meticulous diligence as we have to defending the truths of the Catholic Church. As a result of our collective expertise in Catholic theology and New Age spirituality we have been able to identify that the teachings of Frannie Rose do in fact contain concepts and language that is deeply entrenched in New Age spirituality.

“The whole body of the faithful... cannot error in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when 'from the bishops to the last of the faithful.; they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals.”

“By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium),...receives...the faith, once for all delivered to the saints....The People unfailingly adheres to this faith, penetrates it more deeply with right judgment, and applies it more fully in daily life” (Lumen Gentium 12 quoted in CCC 92-93).

The teachings which Frannie is propagating within the diocese is contrary to the 'universal consent' of the Church. What she teaches is not just another expression of God's revelation, as is the case with the theological method and doctrinal expressions of the Christian East. Nor is it an allowed theological tradition which Catholics are free to consider, as is the case with Molinism or Thomism. Rather it contains concepts and language which are deeply rooted in New Age spirituality and therefore constitutes material heresy.

The Church teaches us the Revelation of God

One might be tempted to use the statement in 1 John 2:27 to teach that we do not need to be taught the revelation of God by the Church.

“As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit – just as it has taught you, remain in him.”

Consider the following:

1. there is a counterfeit anointing that leads people into spiritual error as we have seen with passages concerning deceptive spirits and things taught by demons (1 Timothy 4:1).
2. those whom John warns us against are those teaching Gnosticism, a kind of esoteric knowledge that is needed in order to supplement the teachings of the apostles. Importantly, part of the New Age perspective is that the Church is antiquated. That it is an old form of traditional religion that is just one of many other forms that have been conceived in the minds of men. As a mere vehicle of God we need to supplement it with a deeper spirituality and the New Age is proposed as the solution. And this perspective is often effective; a form of spiritualism that can draw in dry souls that only have a form of religion but are dissatisfied with organized structures. As we have demonstrated, Frannie's statements are fully consistent with this New Age agenda.

“Turn away from... the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith” (1 Tim 6:20b-21).

The readers to which John wrote were led by the Spirit's ministry through the apostles, which was not only adequate but the only reliable truth. It is obvious that what is said here does not negate everything that Scripture teaches us about human teachers (Mat 28:20; 1co 12:28; eph 4:11; col 3:16; 1 ti 4:11; 2 ti 2:2,24). In fact, John had expected his readers to follow his teachings through this letter in this regard. Just three verses earlier it states: “See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you” (1 John 2:24a). It was God's revelation through the Incarnation of Christ and as taught by the apostles that was taught from the beginning. “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched – this we proclaim concerning the Word of life” (1 John 1:1). We must fix our eyes upon Christ as He is taught in our Church and not follow any other spirits or wind of teaching. This is why we must use Church teaching to help guide us in the discernment process when it comes to listening to spirits or anyone attempting to teach us anything concerning God.

“Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out in to the world” (1 John 4:1).

“We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood” (1 John 4:6).

The Voice of Christ in His Church

As Catholics we are to listen to the Church and not follow after the teachings of one who has been proven to teach New Age spirituality. It is to the Church that we must cleave in these matters and turn from those attempts to improve upon the faith in the same manner as Gnosticism once taught.

“...this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things. His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known...” (Eph 3: 9b-10a).

“...the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15b).

And it is the role of the Bishop to maintain this same message which we have heard from the beginning, defend it, and address those who do otherwise. We should expect Bishop Sheridon to speak out against these errors within his diocese despite the political implications it will have concerning those who have been influenced by Richard Hanifen. It is always a sad state within the Church when a former bishop falls victim to New Age spirituality or any other form of heresy. However, despite how long Hanifen had served as a bishop, despite his popularity among Catholics, despite his continued influence within the diocese, it is the responsibility of the Bishop to silence the errors within his diocese without fear.

It is my prayer that our Bishop will be as bold as he should be in order to combat these false teachings within his diocese. I wish for him to stand before God with a clear conscience and hear those wonderful words: “Well done, good and faithful servant” (Matt 25:21, 23).

“We are not trying to please men but God, who tests our hearts” (1 Thess 2:4b).

“He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it... they must be silenced, because they are... teaching things they ought not to teach...” (Titus 1:9, 11)

Because of the false teachings which Frannie is propagating within the diocese she must be warned by the Bishop to cease her efforts in spreading these New Age errors. In Titus 3:10 Paul tells Titus to “warn a divisive person”. The Greek that underlies the term 'divisive' is hairetikos. While only used here in the entire New Testament, it has been used as a technical term within the Church: heretic. Therefore it is the responsibility of the Bishop to warn those teaching heresy and to warn those against its errors.

An Appeal to Reason

We do not make this appeal:

1. on the basis of subjective experience since such can be obtained from New Age spirituality,
2. nor on the basis of the fruit of a ministry since both growth and positive effects can be found within New Age infiltrations of the Church,
3. nor on the basis of mere assertions since anyone can state a proposition,
4. nor on the basis of trust that we may have in a particular person since they can be misguided.

Rather, we appeal to reason with substantive evidence. We have offered a detailed comparative analysis demonstrating the content and language of New Age spirituality with the teachings of Frannie Rose. 

If a person has found their spiritual life 'enriched' through One Simple Voice then it is now time for you to abandon your attachment to Frannie Rose and Richard Hanifen in order to reject the influence of the content and language of New Age spirituality. And I ask that you begin to pray for each of them since it will only be by the grace of God that either of them will recant their positions and cease teaching these heretical ideas in the diocese.