Funny to see this from Osuna

General Discussion About Anything Amityville And Other Paranormal Topics
scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Tue Sep 10, 2013 6:24 pm

http://amityvilletruth.freeservers.com/index2.htm

I don't know how much of it is accurate.

Notable things include the claim the house was $80,000 though it was reported as $65,000 elsewhere. It said the downpayment was for $25,000 including the furniture. If true after the mortgage would have been at least $55,000 it depends on if $80,000 was the total cost including the furniture or that was just the house and the furniture was extra.

Also it asserts he owed money on his boat and that after paying off the boat loan he had only $2000 left from the auction sales. That is far different than the often reported he got $2000 for 3 motorcycles and the boats etc.

It is funny to see this considering what he later wrote in his book.

One thing that seems to be true discusses what I mentioned about the priest's job. That the chancery office handles annulments and the like not exorcisms. It claims they met Fr. Ray during an annulment proceeding. That actually makes sense of how they met. The method of blessing the house still seems odd as any blessings I have been to involved blessing the occupants along with the house not the priest going room to room alone.

Anyway it makes Osuna look alot like Kaplan in his turn about.

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9624
Contact:

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by sherbetbizarre » Wed Sep 11, 2013 3:16 am

scipio-USMC wrote:Anyway it makes Osuna look alot like Kaplan in his turn about.
Tell me about it!

It all started when the above book proposal was rejected, and he was politely asked to take some writing classes. He quit, and wrote Geraldine's "story" instead. She was less fussy.

Craig
Amityville Member
Posts: 13

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Craig » Wed Sep 11, 2013 9:54 pm

I've been to two house blessings and both involved the family moving with the priest, or deacon, from room to room and a special blessing for the family as well. There was also a blessing conducted at a business that followed the same formula. Room to room, bless the owner. I don't know if this is a ironclad rule as to how it must be done, however. I suppose I could ask my priest about it.

User avatar
Brendan72
Forest Giant
Posts: 2970
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Brendan72 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:57 am

Quite a colourful history that ...
- Brendan72

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
- George Carlin. Comedian. (1937-2008)

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:04 am

Craig wrote:I've been to two house blessings and both involved the family moving with the priest, or deacon, from room to room and a special blessing for the family as well. There was also a blessing conducted at a business that followed the same formula. Room to room, bless the owner. I don't know if this is a ironclad rule as to how it must be done, however. I suppose I could ask my priest about it.
Same with those blessings I attended. I never heard of just blessing empty rooms. While there is no rule against it I don't see why one would do it in that manner.

Craig
Amityville Member
Posts: 13

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Craig » Thu Sep 12, 2013 11:24 am

I hate to say this about a priest but it almost seems....lazy or insincere. Maybe it was the family that was insincere about it? I mean to say perhaps they were only half serious about having it done and thus didn't want to be active participants? Sort of just going through the motions. Which could possibly explain why it didn't work. A blessing is directly tied to the faith of the one being blessed, at least that's my understanding. If I recall George was not Catholic and Kathy was non-practicing. Perhaps they failed to understand the seriousness of what they were having done? Then one would think the priest would have explained that to them. One way or the other the whole thing seems haphazard.

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9624
Contact:

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by sherbetbizarre » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:39 pm

Are you both saying the family needs to go room-to-room with the Priest?

Craig
Amityville Member
Posts: 13

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Craig » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:23 pm

Forgive my bad typing. I'm using my phone. The only thing I can say is that I've been to 3 blessings and each involved room to room with prayer and holy water and concluded with a prayer over the family and more holy water. In each case the family was made to accompany the priest. So the blessing at 112 seems at least to not be the norm. I don't know what the code of canon law says about house blessings though. I'll see if I can find it.

Craig
Amityville Member
Posts: 13

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Craig » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:36 pm

I found this which outlines the procedure. Note a bit down the pages it says that there is to be NO blessing unless the those who live in it are present. I'm no expert but I did work in parish office as youth director for four years. Based on this I don't think the blessing on 112 would be considered valid. Again, no expert on canon law, just stating a possibility.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resou ... -new-home/

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:03 pm

sherbetbizarre wrote:Are you both saying the family needs to go room-to-room with the Priest?
I was raised Catholic and my parents had a priest visit both times we moved to a new home. The first was in NY the Second NJ so different dioceses. Both times the priests had us walk with him room to room and said a prayer. We even did it on the basement stairs. The only room not done was the attic. That is how they told us it was done.

I never heard of a blessing room to room without the family until the claim was made regarding Amityville. Interestingly enough I lived in the Rockville Centre area (which shows by the way I spell it) so in NY I did indeed live with the same Diocese. I attended Catholic grammar school and was an alter boy so am fairly up on things. We never learned in school the proper way to do a house blessing though that would require researching all can can go by is my experience and those of everyone I know who says their house blessings were the same manner.

For that matter anytime you get an object blessed be it a statue or a cross pendant they have you hold the object and they bless you with the object. I don't recall objects ever being blessed all alone.

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:29 pm

Craig wrote:I found this which outlines the procedure. Note a bit down the pages it says that there is to be NO blessing unless the those who live in it are present. I'm no expert but I did work in parish office as youth director for four years. Based on this I don't think the blessing on 112 would be considered valid. Again, no expert on canon law, just stating a possibility.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resou ... -new-home/
The blessings I attended had a different blessing for each room and also there was a reading from the Bible somewhere in the middle I don't remember anymore if it was a Gospel reading or not. At the end there was a general blessing.

In my research I have yet to find anything that talks about a blessing of the house alone everything I find seems to talk about the occupants being blessed not the house alone. Thus by implication that seems to be a requirement. I am not familar with the site you posted but it would seem to be accurate.

If the Lutzes were so religious they wanted a blessing and it was so important you would think that even if not mandatory they would want to be blessed too. It also seems rude to unpack or whatever and tell a priest to just go bless the house alone. Especially since he was a friend supposedly you would think they would keep him company.

That is one reason why I wonder if this blessing actually took place at all or was made up. Especially since either Lutz or the priest told the lawyer that the priest's only interaction regarding the matter was counseling after the fact. Who told the lawyer that is unclear and it is unlikely we will ever get an answer. The lawyer did not indicate who told it to him. In an affidavit a lawyer can only testify to something he has personal knowledge of so was asserting someone told him that. SInce he was not actually there and didn't have personal knowledge he really should have cited who told him it but he didn't.

We don't know what problems he had that made him move to Cali and quit the ministry. That sends up red flags too though. A priest who carries out the ministry till he retires (and still in retirement they often still do) would have few reason to doubt them than someone who has problems. We haven't had the best luck in that regard at my current parish. Our former Pastor was jailed for stealing money, we had multiple priests leave because they had affairs and so forth. So just the fact he used to be a priest in and of itself doesn't automatically mean he is credible.

People willing to testify under oath to a claim have more crediiblity in general. I like to poin ttha tout with Geraldine. Under oath she has a different story than she does publicly.

Craig
Amityville Member
Posts: 13

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Craig » Thu Sep 12, 2013 3:45 pm

I agree with you. I haven't found any references anywhere where a house can be blessed without the active participation of the occupants. It's like a wedding. The priest can go through the motions but if the bride and groom are not active participants it ain't gonna take.

While driving home from taking my kid to the ortho I was pondering this. I seem to recall somewhere it being referenced that Kathy was told she should have her new house blessed. If memory serves the blessing was on move in day? At this point the family had no reason to be afraid or suspect anything was wrong. If she was not practicing her faith, at the time, she may have simply been going through the motions. Get the house blessed because that's what a Catholic does. This began to raise questions of the priest credibility though. First, why didn't he refuse to do it if they were not going to do their part? Second, he left without even completing it didn't he? That's kind of cruddy. Also, I was not aware he left the priesthood, so as you stated that is a serious red flag as to his sincerity at the time.

Either way we have a blessing of a house that A: Never happened, B: Was Invalid, C: Was never completed, D: Both B and C.

Based upon this, again I'm no expert, but I think it's safe to say that in reality 112 Ocean Avenue was never blessed.

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9624
Contact:

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by sherbetbizarre » Thu Sep 12, 2013 3:54 pm

scipio-USMC wrote:If the Lutzes were so religious they wanted a blessing and it was so important you would think that even if not mandatory they would want to be blessed too.
They were not religious at the time. They had the blessing, as Craig said, on the advice of a friend.
We don't know what problems he had that made him move to Cali and quit the ministry.
Apparently the diocese moved him due his Amityville Horror connection (I guess the press kept calling). Don't think it was as far as Cali though... first I've heard it was Cali.

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:50 pm

sherbetbizarre wrote:
scipio-USMC wrote:If the Lutzes were so religious they wanted a blessing and it was so important you would think that even if not mandatory they would want to be blessed too.
They were not religious at the time. They had the blessing, as Craig said, on the advice of a friend.
That's even stranger to me for someone not religious to want a blessing because someone suggested it. Usually only people relatively devout will ask for one.

sherbetbizarre wrote:
scipio-USMC wrote:We don't know what problems he had that made him move to Cali and quit the ministry.
Apparently the diocese moved him due his Amityville Horror connection (I guess the press kept calling). Don't think it was as far as Cali though... first I've heard it was Cali.
The diocese didn't move him he left. A diocese trains its own priests in seminaries and then has such priests work at the various parishes that are in the diocese and when they retire is responsible for the health care of the retired priests. A bishop heading a diocese doesn't order a transfer priests outside of the diocese. Priests can leave but that is their own choice. They can leave the Church alltogether or go request to go to a different diocese if another will have them. Both bishops would have to agree to it though.

A chancery priest is a Church lawyer. Sometimes they will be transferred to a parish or even have to work in both a parish and the chancery office (the chancery office is the legal office of the diocese). Since no parish is mentioned he evidently was just in the chancery. He requested a leave of absence and later to move supposedly because of the Amityville Horror attention but who knows. He worked in a parish in Oakland for a while then left active ministry. He never publicly indicated why and the Oakland Diocese will never disclose something like that so we have no way of knowing what his issue was.

The fact he went to Cali shortly after the Court case was transferred to NY is one of the ironies I mentioned. Sort of explains how In Search of Could get them on their set without great travel expense though. If he moved to avoid attention as claimed one has to wonder why he would go on In Serch Of. There are obviously a lot of questions that will never be answered.

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:30 pm

I just read Lutz was a Methodist which makes it odder because Methodists do house blessings so he could have had a Methodist priest do it instead. I know a Catholic friend suggested it but being a Methodist you would think he would have had one do it instead.

The son's claim that he was into the occult directly contradicts his claim he wasn't and that he researched the occult after the problems.

I also have to wonder about the claim that the priest insisted he leave the house and possession behind.

My grandmother said she got a divorce because a priest told her to. It turns out she told him that my grandfather wanted to kill her and a load of other BS about mental torture etc which is why he told her to leave. If the priest did suggest such to Lutz who knowns what Lutz told him occurred and he could have been suggesting it because it would help their mental state.

Anyway we will never know the full story since most of those involved are dead.

Craig
Amityville Member
Posts: 13

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Craig » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:39 pm

scipio-USMC wrote:Anyway we will never know the full story since most of those involved are dead.
We could call Geraldine and ask her? She seems to have been present when ever any important conversations were being had anywhere at anytime.

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:29 pm

Craig wrote:
scipio-USMC wrote:Anyway we will never know the full story since most of those involved are dead.
We could call Geraldine and ask her? She seems to have been present when ever any important conversations were being had anywhere at anytime.

Speaking of which didn't she once claim to have been with Weber and Lutz during their discussions?

User avatar
sherbetbizarre
Administrator
Posts: 9624
Contact:

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by sherbetbizarre » Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:01 am

scipio-USMC wrote: The diocese didn't move him he left.
It's entirely possible he left on his own accord, he never publicly said - but the "official" version was he was moved - due to the ongoing controversy :P It may not have been the normal way of doing things, but the situation may have been getting out of hand, once the press found out where he worked.
The fact he went to Cali shortly after the Court case was transferred to NY is one of the ironies I mentioned.
Where did you hear he ended up in Cali?

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1597

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by scipio-USMC » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:46 am

sherbetbizarre wrote:
scipio-USMC wrote: The diocese didn't move him he left.
It's entirely possible he left on his own accord, he never publicly said - but the "official" version was he was moved - due to the ongoing controversy :P It may not have been the normal way of doing things, but the situation may have been getting out of hand, once the press found out where he worked.
A better word is uncommon. It is uncommon to transfer between dioceses but it is possible to request such a transfer and obtain it so long as both bishops agree. That procedure is normal just uncommon.

If he worked in a parish I could see constant harrassment but removed as he was you would think there would be less ability to bother him. The fact he was willing to speak to In Search Of and thus keep the controversy alive is odd. If anything that seems to dredge it up again after he supposedly ran away to escape it. We will never know why he left active ministy but I suspect there was more to it than Amityville.
sherbetbizarre wrote:
scipio-USMC wrote:The fact he went to Cali shortly after the Court case was transferred to NY is one of the ironies I mentioned.
Where did you hear he ended up in Cali?
A letter the Diocese of Rockville Centre wrote where they asserted he went to the Diocese in Oakland but stopped active ministry and that when he left the Diocese of Oakland Rockville Centre asked him back but he declined. How sincerely they wanted him back who knows but I don't think they would lie about the Oakland part.

User avatar
Shawn
Been there, Done that
Posts: 2124

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by Shawn » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:42 am

scipio-USMC wrote:
Craig wrote:
scipio-USMC wrote:Anyway we will never know the full story since most of those involved are dead.
We could call Geraldine and ask her? She seems to have been present when ever any important conversations were being had anywhere at anytime.

Speaking of which didn't she once claim to have been with Weber and Lutz during their discussions?
Apparently so....she still must be drunk on all of those many bottles of wine. ;)
Any and all comments made by the poster "Shawn" are purely his opinion and do not reflect the opinions of the board owners, administrators or moderators. Also, all postings done by the member "Shawn" are property of "Shawn" and cannot be reproduced in any way shape or form without written permission from the poster known here(@http://www.amityvillefaq.com) as "Shawn". TIA.

jimmysmokes
Amityville Addict
Posts: 661

Re: Funny to see this from Osuna

Post by jimmysmokes » Wed Jul 01, 2020 5:59 pm

scipio-USMC wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:29 pm
Craig wrote:I found this which outlines the procedure. Note a bit down the pages it says that there is to be NO blessing unless the those who live in it are present. I'm no expert but I did work in parish office as youth director for four years. Based on this I don't think the blessing on 112 would be considered valid. Again, no expert on canon law, just stating a possibility.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resou ... -new-home/
The blessings I attended had a different blessing for each room and also there was a reading from the Bible somewhere in the middle I don't remember anymore if it was a Gospel reading or not. At the end there was a general blessing.

In my research I have yet to find anything that talks about a blessing of the house alone everything I find seems to talk about the occupants being blessed not the house alone. Thus by implication that seems to be a requirement. I am not familar with the site you posted but it would seem to be accurate.

If the Lutzes were so religious they wanted a blessing and it was so important you would think that even if not mandatory they would want to be blessed too. It also seems rude to unpack or whatever and tell a priest to just go bless the house alone. Especially since he was a friend supposedly you would think they would keep him company.

That is one reason why I wonder if this blessing actually took place at all or was made up. Especially since either Lutz or the priest told the lawyer that the priest's only interaction regarding the matter was counseling after the fact. Who told the lawyer that is unclear and it is unlikely we will ever get an answer. The lawyer did not indicate who told it to him. In an affidavit a lawyer can only testify to something he has personal knowledge of so was asserting someone told him that. SInce he was not actually there and didn't have personal knowledge he really should have cited who told him it but he didn't.

We don't know what problems he had that made him move to Cali and quit the ministry. That sends up red flags too though. A priest who carries out the ministry till he retires (and still in retirement they often still do) would have few reason to doubt them than someone who has problems. We haven't had the best luck in that regard at my current parish. Our former Pastor was jailed for stealing money, we had multiple priests leave because they had affairs and so forth. So just the fact he used to be a priest in and of itself doesn't automatically mean he is credible.

People willing to testify under oath to a claim have more crediiblity in general. I like to poin ttha tout with Geraldine. Under oath she has a different story than she does publicly.
Thank you Mr. Scip for clearing up the matter on the so-called blessing. You address many points & raise questions that I have asked too. Having been witness myself to a catholic house blessing, the Fr. Ray blessing of the house could not have taken place the way it's been described by George & his family members. In short, it would have constituted nothing short of a great sacrilege!

Post Reply