Examining Frannie #9: On Biblical Interpretation

“Sometimes with the people I work with especially those trained in theology I ask them to take the interpretations which they were taught and put it on a shelf and let God teach them the way the scriptures read. And so when they hear God's voice and their doing, you know, doing a sermon or homily or just doing a talk on theology then they are able to use what God told them... And then they take their books back and the message then has great depth their able to put the two together.”

Mind Conditioning in the New Age

In this blog post I wish to convey to you the importance of biblical interpretation and the subtitles that are often involved in discerning differences between interpretations presented by the New Age movement and those of historic orthodox Christianity.

The most problematic aspect of Frannie's entire body of teaching is that she speaks to us in a manner that assumes at the offset that what we think in the matters of God are erroneous. This method is very effective with those who may feel uncertain about what they think about God, be dissatisfied with inadequate answers they have received so far concerning difficult aspects to the Christian faith, or have labored under false understandings due to poor catechesis that opens them to want a better alternative.

Marcia Montenegro, an expert in the New Age and how they attempt to influence Christians, explains it this way: “To keep dismissing our previous beliefs or knowledge is a way to undermine any Christian teaching or concepts we've had previously. This is really a form of mind conditioning and is common in the New Age.”

In other words, the concepts and rhetoric that she uses is specifically designed to lead us away from what we have known to be revealed by God in order that we will be much more receptive to her teachings about how we relate to Him. In all the language that she uses about the egoic mind and the complete dismissal of what we know about God is meant to prepare our mind for a new set of teachings. We are to put aside what we have known to be true through the Church as revealed through Scripture and Tradition so that we will more readily accept an alternative view, presumably based upon a higher authority, which surprisingly will be consistent with what she will teach us.

This method is employed to condition our minds for better receptivity to accepting a New Age paradigm. A more direct route would be to reason with us concerning the details of her teaching. However, this would most likely be ineffective because we know better, which is why she does not engage in public responses to our concerns within the diocese, or publicly admit certain aspects of her teaching such as when she declined to respond to whether she maintained reincarnation on one of the Rocky Mountain Views interviews. However, if she can get us to set our presuppositions aside in order to accept a “voice within” with little to no discernment, then she can undercut the entire Christian revelation, and increase the possibility that a spirit which teaches differently than what we have already received through the Church will begin to influence us.

The Task of Exegesis

The academic process of being mindful of one's presuppositions and being honest about one's certainty concerning the meaning of a passage is an extremely important aspect of allowing Scripture and the teachings of the Church to assist us in growing in our understanding. We most certainly are to have an openness to learning more about Scripture and the theology of the Catholic Church otherwise we will not be able to discern New Age deceptions, nor know the difference between the way that New Age gurus quote Scripture and the meaning of them which is retained within the Church, the difference between this meaning and one proposed by “the wisdom from within”.

The task of exegesis is to draw out the original intent of the passage within its own historic context and literary genre. A discipline that requires openness to where the evidence leads over against interpretations we may have picked up at some point in time, such as when Frannie says “Jesus teaches this as well”.

If however in doing this a spirit proposes a meaning that is not consistent with the Christian faith then to put the two together would lead one into error and end up accepting a New Age interpretation which is contrary to historic orthodox Christianity. The more uncertain a person is about the meaning of a particular passage the more impressionable they will be towards proposed interpretations.

A friend of mine who had been involved in the New Age movement while attending an evangelical denomination said that he would receive biblical inspiration from a spirit that made the Scriptures come alive. Excited concerning his insights he wanted to share these wonderful interpretations with everyone. When he was delivered from demonic possession and began to learn Scripture through the Church he found that the sense in which he once understood certain passages from a New Age perspective were found to mean the complete opposite now that he understood the text according to the Church.

The New Age has more of an esoteric approach to biblical interpretation which would be more driven by a spirit speaking to us and we come to know that it is true in more of an intuitive manner.

Scripture is to be read within its broader apostolic, communal, and ecclesiastical contexts; that is, within the heart of the Church. Concerning our reading of Scripture Vincent of Lerins, in his A Commonitory, gives us a clear and succinct explanation of the necessity of this approach:

“With great zeal and closest attention, therefore, I frequently inquired of many men, eminent for their holiness and doctrine, how I might, in a concise and, so to speak, general and ordinary way, distinguish the truth of the Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical depravity. I received almost always the same answer from all of them—that if I or anyone else wanted to expose the frauds and escape the snares of the heretics who rise up, and to remain intact and in sound faith, it would be necessary, with the help of the Lord, to fortify that faith in a twofold manner: first, of course, by the authority of divine law [Scripture] and then by the tradition of the Catholic Church.

“Here, perhaps, someone may ask: ‘If the canon of the scriptures be perfect and in itself more than suffices for everything, why is it necessary that the authority of ecclesiastical interpretation be joined to it?’ Because, quite plainly, sacred Scripture, by reason of its own depth, is not accepted by everyone as having one and the same meaning… Thus, because of so many distortions of such various errors, it is highly necessary that the line of prophetic and apostolic interpretation be directed in accord with the norm of the ecclesiastical and Catholic meaning.”

A New Age Interpretation

Here is a case in point: In John 8:56-59 it states “Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad” “You are no yet fifty years old,” the Jews said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!” “I tell you the truth.” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stone to stone him...”

New Agers Mark and Elizabeth Clare Prophet interpret this passage in a way different than historic orthodox Christianity:

“...Jesus knows his True Self to be the Light-emanation of this Christ that always was, is, and ever shall be. And he wants you to know that your Real Self is also that selfsame Light.”ⁱ

“Jesus' I AM Presence looks just like yours. This is the common denominator. This is the co-equality of the sons and daughters of God. He created you equal in the sense that he gave you an I AM Presence – he gave you a Divine Self”ⁱⁱ

Likewise, Jesus states that “I and the Father are One” (John 10:30). New Agers will take this to mean that just as Jesus came to identify himself as one with God then we too need to come to this same realization that our heart and God are together as One. Through this enlightenment, this God-consciousness, we come to realize that we are not sinful creatures but are unlimited and perfect in our True Self. We're not going to be saved from our sins by the blood of Jesus, the only God-man, but we're going to be God, unlimited mind.

And why not? Doesn't Jesus tell us that “I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one...” (John 17:22).

New Agers often quote Jesus more than any other spiritual teacher and by doing so add credence to their own teachings. Ideas which would otherwise seem absurd to us can become much more acceptable if couched in the words of Jesus. Perhaps Frannie would tell us that the Jews picked up stones because they were following a religion which was the product of the egoic mind, and as a result the Jews were prone to violence for this reason. And that they rejected the enlightenment that we can have God-consciousness, an awareness that our heart and God are together as One. Franne tells us that “God-consciousness is infinite, it’s eternal, unlimited by thought and perception – ‘I AM,’ unrefined by the ego.”

Therefore, once we set aside our understanding of this passage that 1) Jesus claims the divine name “I AM” exclusively for himself, and 2) the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus because they saw this as blasphemy, then we are open to accepting other interpretations, especially those proposed by the New Age.

Worldview Confusion

Everyone has a worldview built upon a set of presuppositions. We do this as an attempt to create coherence out of everything that we come to know. When someone with a New Age worldview approaches Scripture they tend to take the words from text and bring them into the context of their New Age teachings. They see the words used by Jesus and endow them with a meaning which is foreign to the original context.

One of the best examples of worldview confusion was brought to my attention by James Sire in his book Scripture Twisting: 20 Ways the Cults Misread the Bible. If you have not read this book, then you owe it to yourself to familiarize yourself with all the different ways that one can use Scripture to come to alternative interpretations which are not consistent with historic orthodox Christianity.

After Paul healed a man who had been lame from birth we shall see the crowd witnessing the miracle exemplify worldview confusion.

“When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, 'The gods have come down to us in human form!' Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker. The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought bulls and wreaths to the city gates because he and the crowd wanted to offer sacrifices to them” (Acts 14:11-13).

The crowd continued to misunderstand what they were seeing and continued to offer sacrifices to the apostles even after Paul and Barnabas spoke further about who they were and who God was. This is what happens when a New Age guru misinterprets the words of Jesus. They come to the text of Scripture with their presuppositions and come away understanding them in a manner different than their original intent in the same manner as the crowd misunderstood Paul and Barnabas by bringing their own religious perspective into the situation which was foreign to the actual context. If a spirit gives us an interpretation of Scripture which is contrary to the results of exegesis and to the teachings of the Church then it is to be rejected, and never put together with what we have already known.

The False Dilemma and the Voice of God

The method Frannie presents of setting aside interpretations which we have been taught opens us up to the possibility of being influenced by New Age interpretations of Scripture such as the entire God-consciousness paradigm. We know that Frannie has stated that Deepak Chopra has been her greatest influence and we know that he maintains this New Age perspective as seen in his book, The Third Jesus. And Frannie attempts to support this method by using an axiom: “God can't teach you what you think you already know”.

Why can't God teach me something if I think I already know it? If I already know God's revelation through Jesus Christ, then there is nothing different that God will need to teach me about it. People who may not know the rational content of revelation or how God has revealed himself to us may not feel very certain that they understand it in all its aspects. The idea that God can't teach them unless they let go of what they think they know is what opens people up to New Age teachings and makes them more vulnerable to suggestion. We want to take what we know and bring it with us so that we can do a comparative analysis between what we think and the objective evidence that we find through the exegetical method, and the teachings of the Catholic Church. While doing this there certainly has been times when an idea or two that we have thought has been inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church, but this does not require the method that Frannie is proposing. There is a difference between being actively aware of our ideas, maintaining some of them in a more tentative manner than others, and being honest with oneself concerning our presuppositions, and completely allowing ourselves to be brainwashed through New Age conditioning techniques!

• Saul on the Road to Damascus

Frannie states: “Be as empty as you can be, because God requires the space, if we don't give space to God He has no way for us to have an awareness of Him...”

God does not require the space at all. God can and will speak to us when he determines to do so. Consider the way that God approached Saul while he was on the road to Damascus. “As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heave flashed around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?'” (Acts 9:3-4).

With Frannie it is usually the inverse of what she is trying to teach you. To be sure, sometimes God uses a still, small voice while we are reflecting upon nature, engaged in prayer, or through our reading of Scripture, and sometimes he will knock you off your horse. God does have a way for us to have an awareness of Him which does not involve us being empty.

• Deny Ourselves

Matthew 16:24-25 “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.” Matthew 10:39: “Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

Frannie uses this latter verse in her presentation to convey that we must be empty, and that we must let go of our way. Certainly our sinful hearts could keep us from confessing our sins and pridefully rejecting the blood of Christ for the cleansing of our sins but this is not the manner in which Frannie uses this verse. We are not to deny our nature as distinct creatures of God in order to find the True Self, which is One with God. We are not to deny the Christian revelation which has been preserved within the Church in order to listen to another “voice of wisdom”. The denial which Christ is talking about is a call to live a life of holiness and to be set apart for God's exclusive use for works of service and sharing the gospel that Christ died for our sins. It would be far better for a Christian to give his life to the mouths of lions than to live a life dedicated to the pursuit of lustful pleasures, or worst, abandon our minds by dragging them through the empty space of New Age spirituality.

• The Gentle Voice of God

Frannie states: “It will be God that answers... And how do you know if it is God or not? As I said before if what is said to you is different than the critical messages we give to ourselves...”

“ if you are really hearing the voice of God, God speaks in gentle, kind, and loving ways”

Jesus tells us that when he sends us the Holy Spirit, “he will expose the guilt of the world...” (John 16:5). However, Frannie thinks that guilt is useless and is the mere product of the egoic mind lying to us about who we are. However, it is the opposite of what Frannie teaches. The prideful person says that they have not sinned and therefore guilt has no place, while it is the humble person with the contrite heart who seeks forgiveness from the Father who truly knows how corrupt their heart has been.

Hearing from God will not always be pleasant, in fact, if you spend any amount of time reading through Scripture you will find plenty of moments when God disciplines his children, rebukes them, and punishes them for their sins (Hebrews 12:5-11). Jesus in a fit of righteous indignation flipped tables in the temple courts and often called the pharisees white-washed tombs, among other things, and he was God incarnate. How are we supposed to be convicted of our sins if we just categorize those thoughts as the egoic mind lying to us in order to keep us living in the past, keeping us from our perfect True Self? It is a dangerous teaching that leads one to interpret the acts of the Holy Spirit as if it were the acts of the egoic mind. This is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit!

• The Extent of Frannie's Discernment

Frannie states: “Even when people begin to hear God's voice the first thing they do is they question whether or not its God, because they allow their mind to analyze what their hearing, if they let go of the analyzing of what their hearing and allow their hearts to come into the situation, they know its God.”

As I demonstrated in a previous blog post, the mind and the heart are both unified as core aspects of our inner person. Why shouldn't we bring all of ourselves in order to relate with God? Did God not design us in such a manner? Does he not now restore us to the image and likeness of God?

Besides, why shouldn't we question a voice that comes to us? Do you deny the existence of deceiving spirits? Analyzing the message we are receiving is exactly how we test the spirits! We have to have a way in order to determine whether they are from God or not. And this test can not be subject to feelings or mere personal experience. It must be consistent with Scripture as it is understood by the Catholic Church.

“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).

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons" (1 Timothy 4:1).

Frannie states: “When we hear the voice of God we know it because there is this peace that envelopes you... its not a question of what you are thinking about it, it is a question of what you are feeling when you hear it.”

A friend of mine who was once in the New Age movement recounts a time when he was lying in his bed and a voice called out his name. At the time he thought that it was the Lord speaking to him and so he responded with openness. In the next moment the spirit swirled over him and then landed on top of him. At this point he experienced a state of peace envelope him which was beyond words to describe. Despite all that seemed right with the experience it turned out to be a deceptive spirit that led him further into the New Age.

On one of the Rocky Mountain Views interviews Martha Thompson asked Frannie: "How do you know you are talking to God, how do you know you are not talking to the devil?” After an ambiguous answer she says that "somehow in your heart you know it is right". To the contrary, this is not sufficient.

In the Book of Mormon it states: “And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true, and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things” (Moroni 10:4-5).

No matter the content that is involved in this subjective method of seeking a 'burning in the bosom' experience it can not safely be used to determine the truthfulness of a teaching. Certainly the Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16:13a) and the two men on the road to Emmaus certainly felt their hearts burning within them (Luke 24:32). But in the first instance it was to the apostles that these words were spoken, the foundation of the Church. It is to the Church that we look for that truth to be preserved and expressed in its fullness. In the second instance Jesus himself was interpreting the Old Testament in a manner which revealed who He was to them, which was consistent with what the apostles taught. This story would not have been included in the text if it were not an authentic case, consistent with the teaching of the Church.

Conclusion

Be wise in your discernment. Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings. There are deceiving spirits who wish to teach you things which are contrary to the Church, and use Scripture in order to do it. We must be on guard and defend that faith which was once and for all given unto the saints. Do not be afraid to stand up for the truth or be ashamed of the gospel of Christ. “If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally anathema” (Galatians 1:9). Pray that the false teachings within the Diocese of Colorado Springs will no longer been seen as compatible with Christianity, and especially for those who have been involved with One Simple Voice, such as Richard Hanifen, Frannie Rose, and all those who refer to themselves as her students. May God enlighten the eyes of their hearts.

i Prophet/Prophet, The Lost Teachings of Jesus 1: Missing Texts, Karma and Reincarnation, pp. 115-16.

ii Prophet/Prophet, The Lost Teachings of Jesus 2: Mysteries of the Higher Self, p.62.