Divine Will revisited.

JOHN 16:12-14 “I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.”

Many today still cannot bear "more".

 

JOHN 16:32-33
32Listen; the time will come -- indeed it has come already -- when you are going to be scattered, each going his own way and leaving me alone. And yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

33I have told you all this so that you may find peace in me. In the world you will have hardship, but be courageous: I have conquered the world.

Yes be courageous for Jesus has already conquered the world!

 

Yes Brother Al. But there is one little problem in your reply. You mention "Once we see all our sins, all the sins we caused and all the world sins." I doubt we will see all the sins of the world. Our own sins will be a burden that will cause at least some to die of fright.

We can only speculate on how everyone will respond to, or reject the experience as you say. Lord have Mercy.

 

Sadly, many today mistakenly claim to speak in God's name or to know His mind. This confuses the faithful, misleads the vulnerable, and causes anxiety in the pious. There is only one safe port in this storm, the Catholic faith as taught by the bishops in union with the pope.

I have always taken that quote to refer to the development of doctrine in the centuries after the Apostles. At the time of John the disciples were not ready perhaps to understand the Immaculate Conception (for example) but knowledge of that came about as the Holy Spirit guided the Church through time.

 

This is from St. John Paul II's Papal Address on Nov. 6, 2002:
"This is our great hope and our invocation: 'Your Kingdom come!"- a Kingdom of peace, justice and serenity, which will re-establish the original harmony of creation." Something to ponder...

 

And from Luisa: "Each Word of Jesus, if we receive It, assimilate It, and meditate It, forms in our hearts a fountain of living water that gushes up for eternal life to quench our thirst and that of others. Who does not want the sea of the Divine Will at least makes use of the canals of the other truths." Oct. 13, 1921

 

Our Lady has promised us a period of peace.It ties in with Devotion to Her Immaculate Heart. Our Lord tells us .



1936

• 
  (Lucy) “Intimately I have spoken to Our Lord about the subject, and not too long ago I asked Him why He would not convert Russia without the Holy Father making that Consecration?
  
  (Jesus) ‘Because I want My whole Church to acknowledge that Consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so that it may extend its cult later on, and put the Devotion to My Mother’s Immaculate Heart beside the Devotion to My Sacred Heart.’
  

“But My God, the Holy Father probably won’t believe me, unless You Yourself move him with a special inspiration.”

‘The Holy Father. Pray very much for the Holy Father. He will do it, but it will be late!... Nevertheless the Immaculate Heart of Mary will save Russia. It has been entrusted to Her.’"



The period of peace will likely be short.
Forget any millennium nonsense.http://unveilingtheapocalypse.blogspot.co.nz/2013/04/the-millennium-in-catholic-tradition.html

 

And this from Pope Benedict XVI:
"All our hopes find their culmination in the one hope: Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done on earth as It is in Heaven. The earth will become Heaven. In His Will is to be found all our hope."

 

Then leave it alone, by all means.

I've never claimed anyone is "lacking" by not studying Luisa. All I do is defend her when others choose to "spend their time" publicly claiming her writings have error. That's the only reason I'm here.

As for your first sentence; my question was rhetorical. The answer is "no." God does not desire that we ignore everything that happens to not be in the Deposit of Faith. If that's what you want to do, then fine; the dust is off my sandals, that's for sure. But why insist that others follow this self-imposed limitation of yours that the Church no where insists upon? You seem to have erroneously conflated "not required by the Church" with "in and of itself a bad idea."

 

Daniel,

How do we know what God desires, if it is something more than the Church tells us? Is everyone to pay attention to all private revelation? Some private revelation? How do we choose? What do we know? How do we know if we are following the Truth or getting played by the Evil One if we forge ahead of the judgment of the Church?

It is not that I don't follow private revelation: I do. I am interested in some "prophets," and have heard some prophetic words that pierced my heart. But it is presumptuous to judge others and to set out standards that the Church itself does not.

"The dust is off my sandals..." I doubt it will go worse for me at Judgement Day because of this, since you have not been sent to proclaim the Good News by Jesus or his successors but are instead self-appointed.

 

Jesus made it easy for us to understand clearly what God desires .

"Love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, with thy whole soul and with thy whole mind; and love thy neighbour as thyself."

The whole of the Law and the Prophets is contained in that one sentence, according to Jesus. And everything we hear, see, think or do can be measured and discerned there in.

 

Thank you, Julia!

Sorry, Daniel, I find myself tempted to snark on occasion.

 

Thanks Maryrose, I was wondering was it better to be absent and missed or to be present and not noticed!

 

For the umpteenth time, this is how http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...cfaith_doc_19780225_norme-apparizioni_en.html

And again, I am only defending private revelations that I believe are unjustly publicly attacked (or I am simply answering concerns that people present to me). I am not judging anyone for choosing not to follow any given private revelation. I am not standing on a soap box denouncing those who do not follow the private revelations that I do. I even made it clear in my book (bottom right of page 61/top left of page 62) that, even when it comes to what I believe is the greatest private revelation (Luisa's), one should not follow it if he does not have peace in doing so.

 

And that truth will be completely fulfilled in the Era of the Divine Will and with no effort any longer necessary! It cannot be perfectly lived until one lives in the Divine Will. That is when the whole of the law and the prophets will no longer even be necessary.

 

For those of you who take spiritual advice from Fr Iannuzzi ,

Regrettably, there are several other instances in this book where the author seems to be drawing false conclusions from his sources. He does this, deliberately it would seem, by selectively quoting from the writings of ancient authors, in order to make them appear to support his postmillennial ‘era of peace’, even though they do not. In some cases this means hiding dissonant features and, in other cases, inventing consonant features.... (Read the full article here).http://unveilingtheapocalypse.blogspot.co.nz/2013/04/the-millennium-in-catholic-tradition.html


Drawing false conclusions deliberately!
That would make him a deceiver.

 

Emmett O'Reagan (the author of that blog) is a well known opponent of the notion of an Era of Peace. He tends to reiterate the same tired objections to it; answers to which I briefly touch on in pages 65-69.

P.S. Mr. O'Reagan thinking someone is a deceiver does not make said person a deceiver.

 

Could you actually point out an error in Emmetts thinking?

 

Could you actually point out where Fr. Iannuzzi "drew false conclusions deliberately"? You are the one who decided to call someone a "deceiver," not me.

(And yes, I did so -- in my own words -- in the above linked pages)

 

Fr Iannuzzi promotes Vassula ,so I aready know he is deceived.