Previous William Thomas Sherman Info Page postings, quotes, observations, etc.
["The Dells "I can Sing A Rainbow / Love Is Blue" (1969)"]
My television debut from back in 1998 in E! Network's "Mysteries and Scandals" program -- here are some assorted clips from that show.
["clips from 1992 Mabel Normand documentary"]
Woo hoo!!! Just out this month -- and I can't wait to get mine!!!
(So now you know what they need a billion dollars for -- putting out a Star Wars X Box. Funny also how Microsoft, the REAL bread winner, effectively has gone under in significance; while Stars Wars, from the 1970's, is SUPPOSED to be still such a smashing hit.)
Crime fighting circa 1931 ("X Marks the Spot" (1931) with Lew Cody).
["X Marks the Spot - Lew Cody part 1/5]
For part 2, etc., see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg50CnwA6jc
As you may or (more likely) may not know, ever since 2003 when I started this website the feedback I have received from it is essentially nil. At the same time, by way of my "Appeal," including my "Narrative" (right click on the link, and "Save as..." to download), I have sought assistance in dealing with an 18 year violent crime spree, and despite letters to lawyers, police, governmental representatives, clergy, activists, and other professional people I have received absolutely no response whatsoever. And if, say, a lawyer can't or is prevented from even contacting me to impartially listen to my claims, doesn't that of itself go to convincingly demonstrate that something very wrong is going on?
I will now as before say once more therefore --
And if you or someone else doubts the gravity and weight of my charges, and which assert that the most obscene and hideous violence has taken place in the course of my 18+ year ordeal, then why don't you send me an investigator or someone to at least look into my charges? If you or they cannot, does that not in itself argue for the truth of my case? And even if granted, my own welfare is not something of compelling concern to others, the implications of what I contend undeniably do affect everyone; not least of which public health and safety.
While I would welcome mail or telephone contact, I would nonetheless prefer that someone come visit me personally at my home to offset and minimize the possibility of third party interference.
William Thomas Sherman
1604 NW 70th St.
Seattle, Washington 98117
It had been something of a custom in my childhood growing up to have dramatizations, with relatively low budget but with an occasional star (like Lee J. Cobb) perhaps showing up, of the Life of Jesus televised on Holy Week and or Easter morning on local stations. Since I don't watch television any more, I don't quite know if they still do this. In any case, a while back I went searching to see if I could find a program like that on DVD, circa 1950's and or 60's, and in the process discovered, among other titles, the multi-part (as in a film serial) "The Living Christ" (1951) series put out by the Episcopal Church based Cathedral Films. There are a number of things to like about the production, not least of which Robert Wilson's strong performance as Jesus (the latter, a not so easy to carry off dramatic role after all.) And yet especially enthralling (and yes I mean enthralling) was the script; in parts fictionalized and adding to the original Gospel text in a way that effectively brought out new associations, parallels, and meanings in the accounts of Jesus teachings and ministry and that I frankly was not aware of previously. So that it is no little remarkable to find oneself surprised by something old and familiar and which you otherwise assume you already knew so well.
You can find this film on YouTube or on DVD; though in this instance I myself prefer the latter.
You never were before the age you are right now.
Notwithstanding my having made the point several times before, it is worth mentioning again that spirit people trouble makers like the magician, or such regular persons who follow his instructions, should at some juncture be looked upon as people who are medically ill. Having now spent almost two decades directly dealing with them, what seems to be going on is that they have been made terribly sick through practicing and being involved in witchcraft and illusion making all these years; and this makes them all the more malleable in the hands of their evil master (whoever as such he might be); thus making them susceptible to behavioral conditioning. It therefore is much easier for the said master to prive and reward his given slave; so that the given minion comes to see it as a necessity to do the master's bidding. And yet were he not so sick, and were he not in the clutches of "the master," it seems more than likely that it would be possible to get him to desist from his very bad behavior, but which behavior, and under the circumstances, he sees and has come to see as necessary.
All at some point depart from the fathers. The difference, however, is that some return: some soon, some late, but some return not at all. Will then those who have not returned be blessed too?
Excerpts from Augustine's epistles continued.
[ch. 1] 1...Wherefore, even if you had yourself been visited by that angel whom he affirms to have appeared to him—a statement which we regard as a cunning fiction; and if the angel had said to you the very words which he, on the warrant of the alleged command, repeated to you—even in that case it would have been your duty to remember the words of the apostle: “Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” [Galatians 1:8] For to you it was proclaimed by the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, that His “gospel shall be preached unto all nations, and then shall the end come.” [Matthew 24:14] To you it has moreover been proclaimed by the writings of the prophets and of the apostles, that the promises were given to Abraham and to his seed, which is Christ, [Galatians 3:16] when God said unto him: “In your seed shall all nations of the earth be blessed.” Having then such promises, if an angel from heaven were to say to you, “Let go the Christianity of the whole earth, and cling to the faction of Donatus, the episcopal succession of which is set forth in a letter of their bishop in your town,” he ought to be accursed in your estimation; because he would be endeavouring to cut you off from the whole Church, and thrust you into a small party, and make you forfeit your interest in the promises of God.
2. For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: “Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it!” [Matthew 16:18] The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these:— Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found. But, reversing the natural course of things, the Donatists sent to Rome from Africa an ordained bishop, who, putting himself at the head of a few Africans in the great metropolis, gave some notoriety to the name of “mountain men,” or Cutzupits, by which they were known.
[ch. 7] 7. Wherefore, since the Apostle Paul says in another place, that even Satan transforms himself into an angel of light, and that therefore it is not strange that his servants should assume the guise of ministers of righteousness: [2 Corinthians 11:13-15] if your correspondent did indeed see an angel teaching him error, and desiring to separate Christians from the Catholic unity, he has met with an angel of Satan transforming himself into an angel of light. If, however, he has lied to you, and has seen no such vision, he is himself a servant of Satan, assuming the guise of a minister of righteousness. And yet, if he be not incorrigibly obstinate and perverse, he may, by considering all the things now stated, be delivered both from misleading others, and from being himself misled. For, embracing the opportunity which you have given, we have met him without any rancour, remembering in regard to him the words of the apostle: “The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God perhaps will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.” [2 Timothy 2:24-26] If, therefore, we have said anything severe, let him know that it arises not from the bitterness of controversy, but from love vehemently desiring his return to the right path. May you live safe in Christ, most beloved and honourable brother!
~ Letter 53
[ch. 2] 2. There are other things, however, which are different in different places and countries: e.g., some fast on Saturday, others do not; some partake daily of the body and blood of Christ, others receive it on stated days: in some places no day passes without the sacrifice being offered; in others it is only on Saturday and the Lord's day, or it may be only on the Lord's day. In regard to these and all other variable observances which may be met anywhere, one is at liberty to comply with them or not as he chooses; and there is no better rule for the wise and serious Christian in this matter, than to conform to the practice which he finds prevailing in the Church to which it may be his lot to come. For such a custom, if it is clearly not contrary to the faith nor to sound morality, is to be held as a thing indifferent, and ought to be observed for the sake of fellowship with those among whom we live.
3. I think you may have heard me relate before, what I will nevertheless now mention. When my mother [St. Monica] followed me to Milan, she found the Church there not fasting on Saturday. She began to be troubled, and to hesitate as to what she should do; upon which I, though not taking a personal interest then in such things, applied on her behalf to Ambrose, of most blessed memory, for his advice. He answered that he could not teach me anything but what he himself practised, because if he knew any better rule, he would observe it himself. When I supposed that he intended, on the ground of his authority alone, and without supporting it by any argument, to recommend us to give up fasting on Saturday, he followed me, and said: “When I visit Rome, I fast on Saturday; when I am here, I do not fast. On the same principle, do you observe the custom prevailing in whatever Church you come to, if you desire neither to give offense by your conduct, nor to find cause of offense in another's.” When I reported this to my mother, she accepted it gladly; and for myself, after frequently reconsidering his decision, I have always esteemed it as if I had received it by an oracle from heaven. For often have I perceived, with extreme sorrow, many disquietudes caused to weak brethren by the contentious pertinacity or superstitious vacillation of some who, in matters of this kind, which do not admit of final decision by the authority of Holy Scripture, or by the tradition of the universal Church or by their manifest good influence on manners raise questions, it may be, from some crotchet of their own, or from attachment to the custom followed in one's own country, or from preference for that which one has seen abroad, supposing that wisdom is increased in proportion to the distance to which men travel from home, and agitate these questions with such keenness, that they think all is wrong except what they do themselves.
~ Letter 54