In order to watch the video you need the Adobe Flash Player 9.0.16.
You can download it free at the following address:
http://www.adobe.com/go/getflash

Rating

31 rating(s)
Please type your posting here
Send a private message
Bookmark medium
Add to album
Recommend to a friend
Make changes to media
Report to editors
Click statistics (81)
Links to this medium (48)
31/01/2010 | 05:59:10F. John Loughnan:
31/01/2010 | 05:58:48F. John Loughnan:
Now here is another example of apparitionischik logic - I write and put propositions in English, and douzle replys in "Double-Dutch". Figurers! but does NOT address any points raised!

F. John Loughnan
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
31/01/2010 | 01:36:01dozule:
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
31/01/2010 | 00:23:17F. John Loughnan:
31/01/2010 | 00:23:09F. John Loughnan:
Well! Talk about giving a response with a non-response!!!

Douzle was simply asked to explain how she (?) was able to post the whole “Passion” film without being concerned with the repercussions of possible Copyright infringements – which could amount to tens of thousands of dollars! Perhaps she (?) could have obtained permission from the Copyright holder? Perhaps,not! For, if she (?) had, then she would have displayed the licence, no?

But, what did she come up with for an answer? She accused me of looking at her film twice. But, that is illogical – for, she can have had NO idea at all if I HAD viewed her film. What I was responding to was put in WRITING; there was no need for me to view the film at all. (Actually, I purchased a DVD when it first came out and still possess it.)

Here is a badly Google translation of Christophe’s post in response to douzle:

“It seems that you turn back the words of Christ. The purpose of Christ is for those who make judgments (criticism or condemnation) against sinners, but there is no consent to commit a sin. You are Christ say that He did not say."

But, ought I be surprised at the outcome? Not at all, when after looking at the material at the site she (?) referenced, I discovered that dozule, would appear, to be an ardent apparitionistchik!!! She (?) promotes, http://parousie.over-blog.fr/(see the detail on the right hand side of the Passion film.)

http://parousie.over-blog.fr/promotes all sorts of queer and unapproved phenomena – such as the condemned Douzle phenomena and Holy Love Ministries, as well of the compulsory Medjugorje delusion! And, then we also see the supporting like-minded stuff at –wait for it - http://www.conchiglia.netIn English -http://www.conchiglia.us/UK/UK_index.htm) See evaluations by Ron Conte’s of Catholic Planet at For “Dozule”
http://www.dozule.org/ - falsely claims that Mary is divine; many false claims about Adam and Eve

and For “Holy Love”: http://catholicplanet.com/apparitions-03
Maureen Sweeney Kyle and the missionary servants of Holy Love (www.holylove.org) [Evaluation | Evaulation, part 2 | Letter of the Bishop | Decree of the Bishop against "Holy Love Ministries"

Now, please inspect the List of False Apparitions from:

http://www.cafarus.ch/falseapparitions.html

From which the following Episcopal evaluation is a small part.

An extract from http://www.cafarus.ch/dozule.html

Here follow the declarations of the two latest bishops of Bayeux and Lisieux (free translation):

OFICIAL REGARDING THE DOZULE "EVENTS" Ordonnance of the Bishop of Bayeux For several years now, some Cristians assemble at Dozulé, in a place called "La Haute Butte", to celebrate Jesus Christ´s glorious Cross and pray for the world´s redemption. After having created on April 27th, 1984, a Diocesan Commission to investigate the motives of these assemblies at Dozulé and to bear a judgement on the books and cassettes spread across the world, recounting the Dozulé "events", After having studied those conclusions, which I comunicate to the Holy See, Having as sole concern the enlightening of Cristians, helping them to remain faithfull to the Church and to "safeguard the integrity of faith and morals" (can. 823 § 1), I promulgate the following Ordonnance, Art. I - Under canons 823 and 824 of the Code of Canon Law, I formally reprobate the publication of books, brochures, prayers, cassettes, which do not have the aproval of an Ordinary. Art. II - I do not recognize as "sanctuary", that is as a "sacred place which, with the approval of the local Ordinary, is by reason of special devotion frequented by the faithful as pilgrims" (can. 1230), the domain of "La Haute Butte" of Dozulé. Art. III - As a consequence, I prohibit any propaganda and especially any funds raising in order to build a sanctuary or a gigantic cross on those premises (can. 1265 § 1). As well, I prohibit the construction of any sanctuary (church, chapel), Calvary, on the territory of the Dozulé parish (can. 1215, 1223, 1224). Art. IV - Saving the parish priest´s rights on the territory of the Dozulé parish, I prohibit any priest to: - Organise or preside over any meeting related to the Dozulé "message". - Celebrate the Eucharist in the same circumstances. Any priest who would stubbornly disobey the prohibitions contained in this article IV, exposes himself to be deprived in the Bayeux Diocese, of the necessary jurisdiction to listen to confessions and, eventually, to be suspended. Some faithful will feel confused by these decisions. They will suffer and have difficulties to accept them. I invite them, as well as all those who read this Ordonnance, to refocus always more their piety, the witnessing of their faith and their apostolic zeal, on the mystery of the Saviour´s glorious Cross. The Church invites us to do it, especially during the Holy Week. To the same effect, the Holy Father has asked us to rediscover the benefits of the Reconciliation and Eucharist Sacraments. It is in them and by them, that we must seak the source of our conversion and of that of the world; it is in them and by them, in the Church, that we must strengthen our hope in the awaiting of our Lord´s Return. The present Ordonnance will be published once the Apostolic See will have made known its opinion on the Dozulé "events", upon presentation of the Diocesan Commission´s investigation, which was integrally transmitted to it.
At Bayeux, June 24th, 1985 Jean Badré, Bishop of Bayeux and Lisieux By mandate: E. Belin, Chancellor
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOZULÉ 1991: NOTHING NEW... "THE GULL TRAP" NO TO PRESSURES - NO TO AMALGAMS - NO TO THE PSEUDO-MESSAGE

A number of good will Christians, full of common sense and well disposed, are rightly worried about the pressure exerted by the messengers of the Dozulé cause. They write and ask for clarifications. Nobody has a diffusion mandate, nor can anyone prevail of having received one from the Bishop of Bayeux & Lisieux. Bishop BADRE has established a document in the form of an Ordonnance in 1985, followed by his December 8th, 1985, Declaration. I ask you to refer to it and comply with it. Those documents are the Church's answer and establish its position. The terms stated in 1985 are valid for 1991 and for the years to come. Those misplaced, extravagant and fanatic pressures develop a sectarian attitude absolutely incompatible with the one the Catholic faithful should lay claim to. The supporters for the Dozulé thesis and its diffusers are not in communion with the Church. Concerned about enlightening Christians, I appeal to the Catholic Church's faithful not to let themselves be intoxicated by this phenomena´s unfunded propaganda. Moreover, the territory of La Haute Butte must not be considered in any way as a sacred place approved by this Diocese´s Ordinary. I maintain the June 24th Ordonnance´s dispositions, established by Bishop Jean BADRE, my predecessor, as well as the terms of his December 8th, 1985, Declaration. Therefore, I prohibit any priest to organize, accompany and a fortiori preside any meeting related to this pseudo Dozulé message, as well as participate in assemblies at La Haute Butte. I also prohibit any priest to celebrate the Eucharist at La Haute Butte, particularly on March 28th, 1991, as well as to celebrate in the explicit frame of a pilgrimage on that day, as on any other day, to the intention of Dozulé. Let us not divert the Eucharist for partisan means, especially on the day Christian communities, rassembled in the communion, remember the Sacrament of Love by solemnizing Maundy Thursday and the sign of unity. That pseudo-message, of which its extravaganza and imperious character do not deserve our dwelling on it, is cleverly marketed in the form of flyers, media supports, various calls regularly relaunched and dissemination works. This surabundance gives the impression of seriousness: it is illusory and assembles gulls. It even achieves to oppose the associations against each other, which avail themselves to diffuse the real and authentic message and its multiple reference versions. Let us not be abused by this commercial and false outbidding. Let us keep the reason, celebrate the faith, develop charity, renew our concern for the little and the humble. May the unleashed fanatism, cultivated and cleverly developped by a handful of exalted people, not worry us. The Church has fixed the position to hold and to communicate. Let us hold it. Let us make it known.

Pierre Pican Bishop of Bayeux & Lisieux March 15th, 1991

The actual followers of this cult believe in the revelations of a lady called Je ne suis rien J.N.S.R. (I am nothing). Their main objective is the construction of an illuminated glorious cross, white and/or sky-blue, 7.38 meters high (scale 1/100 as requested at Dozulé), because they believe that by this means they will save the territory from its destruction by the evil one. Unfortunately, they manage to delude bishops and priests, by omitting to mention the origine of their "donation", when they ask for permission to build the cross. In fact, if these followers asked for permission to build de Dozulé cross, the bishop of the Diocese would not disobey the condemnation made by the bishop of Bayeux and Lisieux. If someone sees one of these crosses, he should send the bishop a copy of the condemnation I have reproduced above, which I received directly from the Diocese of Bayeux.

Well, what a lot of rabbits these apparitionistchiks are!!!

I rest my case, but, I certainly hope that the powers that be in respect of Copyright infringements are asleep. F. John Loughnan
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
30/01/2010 | 09:10:58Christophe:
30/01/2010 | 07:52:54dozule:
30/01/2010 | 04:01:56F. John Loughnan:
Can anyone tell me how a full film that is Copyrighted and be uploaded to Gloria TV?

To the best of my knowledge, this is prohibited by Law - carrying very heavy penalties. If done so, without the Copywriter's consent, this is called "stealing" - at least in Australia.

Is the position here any different?

F. John Loughnan
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
25/01/2010 | 20:47:51F. John Loughnan:
dozule,

How can this be done without breaching copyright?

F. John Loughnan
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
19/08/2009 | 13:12:37Barbórka:
It is great that you put the whole film on gloria tv
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
24/07/2009 | 13:56:08EJGCatholic:
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
26/02/2009 | 09:18:18dozule:
Même réponse que le post sur le film les Choristes :

"Que celui qui n'a jamais péché me jette la première pierre".
Savez-vous que ce qui compte, c'est la Gloire de Dieu et le salut de nos frères, et le nôtre bien sûr, par des vecteurs sains, et saints si c'est possible.
Les personnes qui envoient des vidéos sur ce site ou ailleurs sont-elles les détentrices des droits, en particulier pour les liens profonds Youtube, Dailymotion ou autre ? (Téléchargements download et upload).
Ceux qui téléchargent des médias sur du peer to peer, style Emule, même en tout bien tout honneur, sont-ils dans l'illégalité ? Quel est leur intention avec ces téléchargements ? Où est la police internationale du net qui peut contrôler ceux qui envoient des vidéos appelant à la débauche, voire au crime ou au meurtre ? Cela se fait-il avec la complicité des distributeurs ou des intermédiaires ?
Sinon, ont-ils seulement demandé l'autorisation à leurs auteurs, même à titre gracieux ?
Sont-ils passés à la caisse de la SACEM ou des ayants droit des films et vidéos ?
Après toutes ces étapes, il est intéressant de commenter, ou de faire les redresseurs de torts.
Chacun est-il blanc comme neige ?
C'est la pureté d'intention qui compte, et le bien commun.
"Errare humanum est... " (Je connais la suite).
Alors Mea Culpa et que Dieu nous bénisse et nous pardonne !
Edit comment »
Report to editors »
26/02/2009 | 05:16:26willyfr:
MEME CHOSE. Vous avez les droits pour diffuser le film en entier sur ce site ???

JE vous conseille plutot d'acheter le DVD et sa "special Edition", avec les interviews.
Edit comment »
Report to editors »