(Continued from)   

 

(The reality is that the ‘white rat’ spread so many of Charles and Zeena’s lies at church, and caused so much trouble for Anna by blurring truth and malicious fiction, Anna found it impossible to stay in that church, so she willingly resigned her membership.  The pastor was actually astounded to hear that Anna was leaving his parish.) 

¨ Most unspeakably, Zeena and Charles spread the horrific lie that Anna “called her own mother a whore!”

(In contrast to Peter’s drunken, unfaithful mother, Anna’s mother was the most decent, hardworking, and honest wife and mother alive.  She loved her husband deeply for 54 years and died from sorrow only three months after she had buried him.  She never even flirted with another man, or gave Anna’s father or anyone else any cause to doubt her fidelity.  Anna, however, when she was trying to bond with Peter’s mother in the beginning, made the terrible blunder to entrust the knowledge to Zeena that her father had been married once before.  Through causes unknown to anyone else, he had divorced his first wife and battled to support his three children with her, while providing for his second family as well.  As Anna’s mother was an exceptionally beautiful woman when she was young, everyone, including Anna, assumed Anna’s mother came between him and his first wife.  There was never any evidence to support such a notion.  Yet, in a most grievous violation of Anna’s trust, Zeena turned on Anna.  She twisted and misinterpreted everything she could find or fabricate to rape and raze the name, character, personal relationships, and life of her only daughter-in-law.) 

¨ Allegedly, “without reason,” Anna called Zeena at work “and shouted so loudly at her the whole office heard her.” 

(Anna called Zeena to confront the shocking slander they were spreading about her and Peter.  Provoked beyond reason by Zeena’s gleeful denial, humiliating sarcasm, and constant provocation, Anna got very upset.  She shouted at Zeena that they did not steal the house and Zeena knows they are lying!  Peter did not steal their money for three businesses!  It was horrible to make Peter an illegitimate child in everyone’s eyes, as they are actually two drunken, illegitimate parents!  And most unspeakably, it is a most detesting lie that she would ever call her own mother a whore!  Instead, she, Zeena, is the worst mother who ever lived!  Then, Anna slammed the phone down in the older woman’s hypocritical face.) 

BRINGING PETER AND ANNA IN DISREPUTE CAUSED HAVOC EVERYWHERE 

The parents’ constant attacks quickly resulted in Peter and his family’s complete separation from most of the family, even from Anna’s family, and from their community.  The long-term consequences for the boys especially, would be extremely disorientating. In the end, Charles, Zeena, and their active helpers sadistically tore two entire families and a whole neighborhood apart, robbing the boys of their family support system, and everyone else dear and familiar to them.  

Moreover, the parents actually deceived and drew into sin, all those who chose to believe their lies; all those who supported and harbored them through the years, and who stood in partiality and prejudice against Peter, Anna, and their two sons.  Every single one of the parents’ brainwashed victims became an accomplice to their psychological murder on this young family, and they all stand guilty before God for these horrendous crimes against them.  God stated in Proverbs 17:13-15, “Whoever rewards evil for good, evil will not depart from his house…  He who justifies the wicked and condemns the just is an abomination to the Lord!”

And Paul warned in Rom. 1:32, “As they did not retain God in their knowledge [of what is right,] God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting, being filled with all unrighteousness… wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, strife, deceit… They are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters… undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of [eternal] death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them!” 

WHY THE SATANIC SLANDER CAMPAIGN – WHAT WERE THEY DOING? 

Knowing very well what they were doing, and what the consequences of their abandonment of their right of habitatio, (the servitude on the cottage,) Peter, and his family would be, Charles and Zeena unrelentingly and most deviously embossed their most deceitful but well-planned strategy to destroy their one and only family. 

If only all those who sided with Charles and Zeena knew how they were being deceived and controlled by the lies and deception of those two cunning people!  This was not merely ‘careless’ or spiteful slander.  It was well planned, premeditated, emotional murder on an innocent family! 

Knowing the shrew Charles, it would be logic to assume he had already consulted a lawyer when he at long last got sober - or maybe some time before that.  Subconsciously, Peter and Anna knew he was planning revenge since they took Zeena on holiday with them when he threw her out the cottage.  Charles had always lived by his own gospel song, “I did it my way!” 

Any lawyer would have been able to tell Charles and Zeena, in defining the right of habitatio, that the high court of South Africa ruled, “The limited real right of habitatio lives and dies with the beneficiaries and cannot be transferred.  [I.e., contrary to the right of usufruct, [Afrikaans ‘vruggebruik,’] the holders of habitatio cannot lease the dwelling to someone else; cannot sell their right to someone else, or bequeath their right to someone in a last will and testament.]  However, the right of habitatio can be abandoned by them but is otherwise inalienable.  When the person who has the right of habitatio abandons the right, it lapses.”

Contrary to what the parents made Peter, Anna, and the whole world believe, their “right” could be abandoned, and as a result, it would lapse.  However, they could not abandon the dwelling itself, as neither the dwelling nor a square meter of land surrounding it, nor any of the outbuildings “belonged” to them.  Therefore, they had absolutely no say over it.  The only thing they ‘possessed’ was an abstract ‘right’ to live in the cottage.  Charles and Zeena’s nine-year rule and abuse over the whole property was illegal, not just inhumane! 

In practice, this meant: 

1) “When the person who has the right of habitatio abandons the right, it lapses” as nothing concrete, just that abstract legal right, belonged to him. The right to live there only ‘belongs’ to him as long as he remains there.  

2)  As a personal servitude, his right also lapses on the death of the holder of the habitatio.

3)  Before abandonment or death, the holder of the right may reach an agreement with the owner of the burdened property to accept as a ‘quid pro quo’ some compensation for this waiving of his limited real right… returning the property to its original unburdened position, thanks to the elasticity of the real right of ownership.” 

Why did they Choose to Abandon Their Right as they Could have Gone for Compensation? 

From Charles’ uncontrollable outburst that day when Zeena chased the boys from the lawn, it later became clear that the parents decided to supposedly abandon “the cottage” but not their habitatio right.  They knew that legally this was impossible, but they had a plan to make it work just the way they wanted it!  They knew Peter and Anna believed they ‘owned’ the cottage, not merely the right to live in it.   As Zeena often said, “I have my ways and means… [to do whatever I like — and to get away with it!]” 

As the catalyst that would put their plan in motion, Charles and Zeena deliberately provoked Anna to confront their abuse against the playing children.  This was planned ahead of time, and Charles knew exactly what he was saying when he shouted, “If I had my way, I would be out of here tomorrow before I murdered someone!  But she doesn’t want to!”

For years, Anna believed Zeena “didn’t want to” because she had some love for Peter and her grandsons hidden somewhere in a far-off corner of her black heart, and did not want to move away from them.  How Zeena would have laughed if she knew how unsuspecting Anna really was!  Many years later, when Peter and Anna understood what truly happened when his parents abandoned their habitatio right (and not the cottage, which belonged to her and Peter all along,) they realized Zeena’s hesitance in leaving was not about Peter or anyone else. 

It was about Zeena’s own greed and sick, egotistical hold on Peter. 

She would never allow Peter to elude her smothering siege.  She would never permit him to be what God intended him to be – husband to the wife he chose so many years ago, and father to the children, whom the woman he called his wife had borne for him.    

Although Zeena was undecided at first, when she finally decided to follow Manson in his murderous crusade against Peter, Anna, and the boys, there was no turning back. 

 

That day, when Anna confronted Zeena’s assault on the playing children, she stepped right into their trap! 

Anna did not realize it at first, but when they told the whole world the lie that she was swearing and screaming abuse at them — and chased them away, (supposedly, even Peter “chased them away and broke Charles’ toes” although he wasn’t even there,) they were cleverly covering their deliberate abandonment of their habitatio right! 

They did not want anyone to know that their right to live in the cottage lapsed at abandonment.  So, if they could ‘prove’ that Peter and Anna “chased them away,” their habitatio right ‘could not lapse’ and they could move back any time!  They were making certain that, while isolating the young family completely, they had countless supporters who could testify they were “chased away,” although none of them were present at any time during this unceasing war.  Not that the parents ever wanted to move back, but it was a major part of their plan to deceive Peter and Anna into believing they still had complete control over the whole property, and as a result, they could act as if they had ultimate power over Peter, Anna, and the boys! 

What better way for Charles to get his revenge because they went on holiday without telling him! 

What better way to make them ‘pay’ for the so-called ‘gift of the house’ for the rest of their natural lives! 

 

If Peter and Anna knew beforehand that the parents’ deliberate abandonment of their habitatio right had caused their right to lapse, Charles and Zeena would have lost their domineering hold on them.  Consequently, they had been bluffing Peter, Anna, the children, and every one of their many supporters all along. 

That’s why Charles invaded Peter and Anna’s home after they moved from the country, searching for, and stealing their copy of the habitatio right!  Manson and Zeena were preventing Peter and Anna to study, research, and understand the terms of the servitude. 

However, when they came to the couple’s home in the country to incarcerate Peter and Anna in their scheme of “the house,” they were actually ‘cutting their own noses to spite their faces.’

When they chose to ignore the lawyer’s warning that “they were signing their lives away,” their evil scheme to use Peter for the rest of his life, already began to fail.  They were oblivious to the fact that God was turning all their evil works, undermining, and malicious plans around. 

¨ They actually ‘sold’ everything to Peter, not for the cottage, but for their legal right of habitatio in Peter’s cottage! 

The entire property and everything on it would always immovably belong to Peter and Anna until they decide otherwise! 

 

Their habitatio rights could have meant a great deal for his parents in their old age. 

However, they realized that ‘a right’ is not a tangible thing, and they wanted power and control over everyone. 

In fact, those two demoniacs only pretended to wield a mighty sword over Peter and his family while in reality, they had  nothing except their spiteful, childish hatred to guide them.  

Sadly, and to the detriment of the unsuspecting and trusting Peter and Anna, Charles and Zeena hated them and the children so much they chose unending torturing unto death, instead of telling everyone the truth, showing some honesty, mercy, humaneness, or a desire for reconciliation.  No wonder Jesus said we shall know people by their “fruit.”  This means, by their constant, unrepentant behavior and deeds, we will know exactly who we are dealing with. 

Long ago, when Charles said to Anna, “...It’s really bad when you get sober, just to realize you have nothing left...”  Charles was not regretting any of his revolting abuse, as Anna naively believed.  Charles was profoundly sorry that their clandestine plan failed to “give Peter ‘the house,’” so that he would be their “mindless mule” to provide for them once Charles’ alcoholism had depleted everything they owned.   [Since Peter was a little boy, Charles scolded him for “a mule’s c**t, (prostitute genitals,) no good to man or beast.”  He also frequently said Peter “should not try to think for himself,” because he, Charles, “is the brain and Peter is the brawn.”] 

Charles was dissatisfied because their evil plan boomeranged on them.  Eventually, they understood they had really ‘given’ everything to Peter, and Charles hated the very idea of giving him anything, illegitimate child that he is! 

WHAT REAL, REASONABLE PARENTS WOULD HAVE DONE 

In later years, the truth slowly began to emerge in the mind of the deceived Anna.  She told Peter that any sane parent would have approached his or her grown children in an adult manner to confront all those problems with an attitude or reconciliation.  Reasonable, normal parents, as far as possible, would have valued their children and grandchildren enough to request a sensible settlement of some kind, which could have saved the family relationship. 

Peter looked at her with a familiar emptiness on his face and said nothing.  She took that as refusing to understand what she was saying.  As a result, she continued her monologue as if he were incapable of figure it out for himself. 

If it were true that the parents were unable to speak to the so-called “unreasonable” son and his so-called “demonic” wife, sensible and caring parents would have sought a fair, rational solution through the mediation of the police, (if they were really evicted and assaulted,) a lawyer, (if their legal right of habitatio, or any other legal right was violated,) or through a friend or family member, as the parents had the whole family and all their friends and acquaintances on their side.  Instead, they used outright lies, half truths, and malicious manipulation to separate Peter and his family from every single person they could find. 

In addition, the parents could have suggested that Peter take another bond to set them up on a property of their own, effectively releasing the burden of habitatio from that place and resolving the dreadful situation in a way that could lead to lasting peace between them. 

Peter still remained quiet, so she gave up the effort to bring home to him, her great desire for peace between them all. 

PETER OPENED THE COTTAGE AFTER A FULL YEAR HAD PASSED 

Without understanding what was happening and why, Peter and Anna tolerated the “flying slandering monkeys” that his parents sent against them and the situation of the abandoned habitatio right for an entire year after his parents had moved.  Charles and Zeena had locked the empty cottage, switched on the alarm system which Peter had installed, took the keys and never said a word about ever returning, or seeking compensation for the cottage in order to resolve this tragedy they were causing.  They clearly intended to burden them with the abandoned cottage in an attempt to load them with shame and guilt because of everything they, the parents, have done.  What malignant blame shifting! 

Nevertheless, at night, the empty, dark cottage upset Anna more than in the daytime, although she said nothing to the quiet Peter.  Despite all his parents’ deliberate destruction, they were used to having them around. 

To Anna’s great surprise, one morning, Peter got up early. 

Without a word, he forced open the door lock on the cottage and disabled the alarm. 

The place was eerily empty.  His parents had even taken the good stove with them, which Peter and Anna had provided, and which was not theirs to take.  It was then that the truth broke through the mist of hope they still entertained.  There was no hope to reconcile with Charles and Zeena.  It was time to let them go.  Charles and Zeena would never return. 

It was Jesus Who always Had, and Who always Will Have the Last Say 

The servitude of habitatio, as described by the High Court, merely echoed the Ever-living Law of the Most High God. 

Sometime after Peter had opened the cottage after exactly one year, Anna discovered the following commandment from God’s protective Moral Law of Love in Lev. 25:29-31, “If a man sells a house in a walled city, [in modern context, ‘a walled city’ can be compared to a townhouse complex or any other kind of communal dwelling,] then he may redeem it within a whole year after it is sold [or abandoned;] within a full year he may redeem it.  But if it is not redeemed within the space of a full year, then the house in the walled city shall belong permanently to him who bought it, through his generations.  It will not be released in the Jubilee…  However, the houses of villages which have no wall around them… may be redeemed, and they will be released in the Jubilee.” 

No matter how loveless, sly, and merciless they acted, in His impartial righteousness, God gave Charles and Zeena a full year’s grace to resolve this matter peaceably by telling Peter and Anna what they intended to do with their habitatio right.  According to the Word of God, they had a whole year in which to insist on “compensation” for their right. 

The Matthew Henry’s Commentary explains, “Buying houses in a walled city was convenient for those how lived BY TRADE…  If a man sells [or trades,] and then abandons a house in a walled city, but did not return to settle the matter within a year, it was confirmed to be the house of the purchaser forever.  The seller was not allowed to return ever.  This provision was made to encourage [traders, buyers, and sellers of houses in ‘walled cities’] to come and settle among them.” 

God wanted Peter and Anna, and Charles and Zeena to settle this dreadful discontent among them within that first year after the parents left.  He forbade them in His Word to involve the whole world by committing tongue-murder in public and by wielding false accusations, for which they had no ground in either the Law of God, the law of the land, or in the practical truth and context of the circumstances, (Jam. 5:16-18.) 

Sadly, the parents repeatedly refused to speak to them and thus to reconcile with Peter and Anna, who fought and pleaded with them in vain to tell them why they were doing all those terrible deeds, and what they could do to rectify the situation.  Both Charles and Zeena flatly refused to bring the matter into the light with them. 

Sadly, when Charles and Zeena abandoned their children and their habitatio right, they did not realize something extremely serious was happening in the spiritual realm. 

If they did not return during the first year to settle the matter, God would never allow them to return. 

More than thirty years later, this still proved to be true. 

God is merciful to everyone.  Nevertheless, God does not change His Word for anyone.  No matter how hard Anna, (Peter chose to remain ‘passive,’) would keep on trying in the years to come, nothing could remedy this satanic malady anymore. 

ANNA’S PARENTS DIED AND ZEENA CAME TO GLOAT AND SEPARATE THEM FROM ANNA’S FAMILY AS WELL 

Anna’s parents could not accept that Charles and Zeena had abandoned Peter, his family, and ‘the cottage’ in this way.  Such heartlessness went beyond their ‘old fashioned’ comprehension.  In fact, they too, were under the Mansons’ spell.  No matter what those two did, Anna’s parents never spoke ill of them, or openly condemned their immoral actions. 

Later, Anna had to forgive her parents for “not knowing what they did” by passively allowing those two evil people to mess with their daughter, their grandchildren, and the son-in-law, whom they had loved so dearly for so long. 

Her parents were religious but without a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ and the contextual truth of His Word.  When Anna came to the Lord, she began to declare the Scriptural Gospel of Christ to her in-laws, her parents, sister and two brothers, and all her other friends and family.  A few accepted the Lord, (this was how Charles’ White Rat came to share church membership with Anna,) and were even baptized in water after stating they were also Biblically born again as Jesus had commanded, (Jn. 1:11-13; 3:3-5; Mt. 28:19-20.) 

Anna’s mother was one of those who decided to follow Jesus.  One day, Anna’s mother said to her, “The Lord has spoken to me through His Word.  I want to be baptized [like Jesus was baptized.]” 

Anna stood in awe at the greatness of God.  God Himself had spoken; how could her mother refuse? 

However, Anna’s father chose to keep on relying on his inherited church sacraments and manmade church doctrines. 

Anna’s mother chose not to be baptized in church, but on her seventy-third birthday in her home on the farm.  As was the custom with family gatherings, she invited the entire family and all their friends, but told them this was not a usual birthday party. 

She was going to be baptized that night.  She had surrendered herself and her whole life to Jesus!  She was born again! 

The only ones missing from the usual crowd were Charles and Zeena. 

 

Strangely, when Peter, Anna and the boys arrived at the farm, her sister’s husband, adult sons and middle daughter, (who was the miniature bride at their wedding and who cried because ‘her shoes were hurting her,’) waited for them at the door.  Without any explanation, they attacked Peter like a bunch of ravenous wolves, shouting abuse at him.  Stark-eyed and clearly full of booze, one them pushed his face into Peter’s, daring him to touch him by pointing to his own chin, shouting, “Put it here, Pal!  Just put it here!” 

Peter didn’t move.  Dumbfounded, Anna waited passively until their frenzy subsided. 

The atmosphere was tense and hatred could be felt from all quarters.

No one could doubt that another massive smear campaign was raging all around Anna in her family as well. 

Her father was terribly upset, but Anna’s mother just said, “In all the years we had parties here, nothing like this has ever happened.  I don’t care what they do, I am going to be baptized tonight.” 

As Anna’s mother stepped out of the baptism bath, Peter suddenly stepped in. 

Peter had ‘secretly given his life to the Lord’ and surprised Anna by asking the pastor to baptize him that night.  Anna was overwhelmed with joy!  She believed with all her heart that God had answered her prayers.  He was putting the broken puzzle of their life together!  Now, at long last, she would be able to have a Godly, peaceful life with Peter! 

 

However, two weeks later, her father had a heart attack and landed in the intensive care ward of the local hospital.  At his deathbed a week later, with all the children and grandchildren present, the atmosphere of hatred became too much for Anna.  They were all in the passage of the hospital waiting together, (just Peter was doing whatever he always did somewhere else, as he hardly ever participated in anything where Anna was involved,) when Anna asked them not to allow their father to die under such terrible circumstances, but to make peace... 

She was still speaking, when her sister’s middle daughter, (the mini bride at her wedding,) attacked her from the crowd

(Continue)

Home