Author Topic: Picture of David Bawden (Antipope Michael) Drunk (Read 7546 times)

justinm · « **on:** May 08, 2015, 05:09:19 PM »

Those who know or have known David Bawden, Antipope Michael in Kansas, only know too well his longtime "love for the liquor". All individuals should stay away from him, especially confused young males who somehow ! could think it God's will they travel to meet him alone in Kansas.

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** May 08, 2015, 05:20:07 PM »

Have we really reached the point that we have to focus on his person?

I don't know him, but what I do know (that he had himself elected pope, by his mother among others) is all I need to know!

I don't think he deserves this much attention.

"A tempest in a teapot" comes to mind.

justinm · « **Reply #2 on:** May 08, 2015, 05:53:05 PM »

Well Thuc apologist Mario Derksen should back him, because Bawden, like a thousand others, claims to be a Thuc bishop. Can anyone be a Thuc bishop?

Matto · « **Reply #3 on:** May 08, 2015, 06:26:27 PM »

I find Bishop (antipope) Bawden interesting. Especially since he found a Thuc Bishop to ordain and consecrate him. So I guess he says Mass now. Every once in a while I go to his youtube page and watch his videos. Strange things happen during a crisis in the Church.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #4 on:** May 08, 2015, 08:04:38 PM »

No, he was allegedly consecrated by an Old Catholic.

Malleus · « **Reply #5 on:** May 08, 2015, 08:28:07 PM »

What's the date of that picture? How did you get it?

Matto · « **Reply #6 on:** May 08, 2015, 09:22:54 PM »

I wonder what kind of alcoholic beverages Bawden likes to drink. Since has a mug in the picture I would guess he was drinking beer.

Quasimodo · « **Reply #7 on:** May 09, 2015, 03:15:25 AM »

I don't see anything in the picture that indicates he is intoxicated or drinking alcohol. I see a picture of a deluded man who could be tired or about to blink drinking what could be water or beer or anything.
There are plenty of reasons to stay away from David Bawden. We don't need to risk making false accusations.

justinm · « **Reply #8 on:** May 09, 2015, 06:22:32 AM »

Quote from: Malleus

What's the date of that picture? How did you get it?

The specific picture of Antipope Michael intoxicated and other photos, were published in 2007-2008 in conjunction with a 50+ page PDF called, "David Bawden as WE Knew Him," which was written and posted to the internet by Bawden's former followers after they left him.

The PDF contained detailed information from their eyewitness testimony, of more than 15 years of his erratic behavior. The piece includes a history of he and his families alcohol abuse, his craving for a "money stream", his watching "cable TV movies" all day, his sitting by public swimming pools whenever the opportunity afforded itself, etc.

BTNYC · « **Reply #9 on:** May 09, 2015, 10:05:43 AM »

Letting 62myer onto a forum is like cooking cabbage - even when the meal is over, the stink remains long after...

As Matthew said, the fact that Bawden claims to have been "elected pope" by his parents and himself is all the reason anyone needs to stay away from him. Publishing deleterious facts in order to smear him personally is not doing a public service; it's more like indulging in petty revenge.

Bawden's illegitimacy speaks for itself. As does the highly un-edifying gossip and scandal mongering of those who were stupid and / or mentally unhinged enough to have fallen for Bawden's "papal" claims in the first place.

justinm · « **Reply #10 on:** May 09, 2015, 10:10:16 AM »

"David Bawden as WE Knew Him" [/i]published by former members of Antipope Michael sect in Kansas:

"Anyone who really knows Bawden understands that he always drank on a daily basis, for as long as we have known him and that drinking was an important part of his parents’ life as well. Bawden spent most of his time when visiting (his "flock") playing cards, drinking wine and hard liquor, eating sumptuous meals prepared in his honor, eating at restaurants on everyone else’s dime, visiting public swimming pools, shopping and watching movies and television."

"His (Bawden's) mortally sinful, salacious and unfounded attacks on others, his falsification of Catholic truth, his outright lies for no reason other than to avoid embarrassing truths — all are red flags. Bawden wanted only to promote himself; he craved publicity and a money stream."

"In late 2005, I began noticing actual lies and dishonesties in Bawden’s conversations.About that time he suffered from what he described as one of his “nervous exhaustion” episodes, and whatever it was, I do not believe he has ever recovered from it. He visited in early 2006 and acted very strangely; others noticed his odd behavior as well. After that visit, things gradually fell apart because I began finding out that things were not as he said all these years. As I consistently challenged him on several different doctrinal and moral issues, he became more and more antagonistic and hateful. Over the past few years, as the lies have predictably multiplied, so has his cunning and manipulation.

Bawden’s egoistic self-promotion and self-aggrandizement is pride at its most revolting. His mortally sinful, salacious and unfounded attacks on others, his falsification of Catholic truth, his outright lies for no reason other than to avoid embarrassing truths — all are red flags that this man has crossed a dangerous line and has no intention of returning. Satan is the father of lies, and lies are one of the first things that distinguish the leaders of cults from others.

Cult leaders will do anything to protect their image and will do all in their power to destroy those who dare to tell the truth about them. They will lie, distort the truth, manipulate the truth and prostitute the truth, but they will not TELL the truth.
Bawden has proved this statement true over and over again.

Internet 'converts' will never understand the importance of personal contact; how different things appear up close. Had all of us lived within close proximity to Bawden all these years, it would never have taken this long to figure things out. As one magazine article states, 'Lies told on the printed page or on a TV screen [also a computer screen...] may be the hardest to detect. When a journalist at a respected publication tells a tall tale…those of us without reams of time on our hands aren’t likely to uncover it on our own, (Forbes Magazine, November 2006).

So beware of Bawden’s truncated and false presentation of Catholic truth, also his printed tales of others’ personal lives. Demand positive proofs, verification of personal information and check out facts on the other side. Omission is as much a sin as commission."

BTNYC · « **Reply #11 on:** May 09, 2015, 10:24:17 AM »

Quote from: justinm

"David Bawden as WE Knew Him" [/i]published by former members of Antipope Michael sect in Kansas:

"Anyone who really knows Bawden understands that he always drank on a daily basis, for as long as we have known him and that drinking was an important part of his parents’ life as well. Bawden spent most of his time when visiting (his "flock") playing cards, drinking wine and hard liquor, eating sumptuous meals prepared in his honor, eating at restaurants on everyone else’s dime, visiting public swimming pools, shopping and watching movies and television."

"His (Bawden's) mortally sinful, salacious and unfounded attacks on others, his falsification of Catholic truth, his outright lies for no reason other than to avoid embarrassing truths — all are red flags. Bawden wanted only to promote himself; he craved publicity and a money stream."

"In late 2005, I began noticing actual lies and dishonesties in Bawden’s conversations.About that time he suffered from what he described as one of his “nervous exhaustion” episodes, and whatever it was, I do not believe he has ever recovered from it. He visited in early 2006 and acted very strangely; others noticed his odd behavior as well. After that visit, things gradually fell apart because I began finding out that things were not as he said all these years. As I consistently challenged him on several different doctrinal and moral issues, he became more and more antagonistic and hateful. Over the past few years, as the lies have predictably multiplied, so has his cunning and manipulation.

Bawden’s egoistic self-promotion and self-aggrandizement is pride at its most revolting. His mortally sinful, salacious and unfounded attacks on others, his falsification of Catholic truth, his outright lies for no reason other than to avoid embarrassing truths — all are red flags that this man has crossed a dangerous line and has no intention of returning. Satan is the father of lies, and lies are one of the first things that distinguish the leaders of cults from others.

Cult leaders will do anything to protect their image and will do all in their power to destroy those who dare to tell the truth about them. They will lie, distort the truth, manipulate the truth and prostitute the truth, but they will not TELL the truth.
Bawden has proved this statement true over and over again.

Internet 'converts' will never understand the importance of personal contact; how different things appear up close. Had all of us lived within close proximity to Bawden all these years, it would never have taken this long to figure things out. As one magazine article states, 'Lies told on the printed page or on a TV screen [also a computer screen...] may be the hardest to detect. When a journalist at a respected publication tells a tall tale…those of us without reams of time on our hands aren’t likely to uncover it on our own, (Forbes Magazine, November 2006).

So beware of Bawden’s truncated and false presentation of Catholic truth, also his printed tales of others’ personal lives. Demand positive proofs, verification of personal information and check out facts on the other side. Omission is as much a sin as commission."

Or, to put it another way: Don't accept a claim to the papacy that is manifestly false and absurd on its very face.

This isn't some obscure or difficult to comprehend theological point. My own six year old son could grasp why Bawden is not the pope. That's not something that requires one to live with him in order to be understood. All of those personal failings and sins you mention are completely irrelevant anyway, as they would not be sufficient grounds from separating oneself from a true pontiff. Alexander VI might indeed have been a lecherous, worldly pig, but anyone separating himself from the pope for that reason would have placed himself in schism, depriving himself of any hope of Salvation.

All anyone needs to know about David Bawden is that he claims to have been elected to the papacy by his parents and himself.

Malleus · « **Reply #12 on:** May 09, 2015, 12:19:02 PM »

Quote from: BTNYC

...sufficient grounds from separating oneself from a true pontiff. Alexander VI might indeed have been a lecherous, worldly pig, but anyone separating himself from the pope for that reason would have placed himself in schism, depriving himself of any hope of Salvation.

The Church teaches there are "sufficient grounds for separating oneself from the Pope"?

Prayerful · « **Reply #13 on:** May 09, 2015, 01:17:00 PM »

A man usually looks slovenly when drunk. I have surely looked worse. Bp Williamson, I think, advised him or his family that he get treatment rather than the priesthood, which triggered this act of, well, self promotion. I don't think I need to read the pdf to know he genuinely needs the help of a doctor. A certain Feeneyite with deep dislike of the baptism of desire wrote an essay on why he is not Pope, but as well mentioned above, it's just too patently absurd a claim.

BTNYC · « **Reply #14 on:** May 09, 2015, 04:55:23 PM »

Quote from: Malleus

Quote from: BTNYC
...sufficient grounds from separating oneself from a true pontiff. Alexander VI might indeed have been a lecherous, worldly pig, but anyone separating himself from the pope for that reason would have placed himself in schism, depriving himself of any hope of Salvation.

The Church teaches there are "sufficient grounds for separating oneself from the Pope"?

Formal heresy is sufficient grounds to separate oneself from any cleric - including the pope.

And let me beat you to the punch (or hammer as the case may be) - I know that a pope who declares formal heresy is no longer the pope. The point I'm making to the OP is that nothing short of formal heresy is sufficient grounds for separating oneself from a validly elected pope (Which David Bawden objectively is not anyway), and not his personal sinfulness (as per my example of Alexander VI).

If you're looking to fire up the SV vs R&R debate, however, take it up elsewhere.