Divine Will revisited.

So interesting...even-though it seems we are debating 20 different issues.

1. Peter said a few things that are so important. If i am wrong Peter please correct me. The vision he is referring to...has partial approval. That is important. That means that even great mystics might have writings or vision that might not be approved. It doesn't mean the vision is wrong, it is just the Vatican might not understand the writings (at the time)...or they might be so radical, that many would be led astray by bad interpretations. The second is more profound...that we are all at different stages of our spirituality with different life experiences. We shouldn't try to create concrete time lines but accept the ambiguity of the messages. Using the messages to uplift our souls. Good stuff

2. Mac...we can never compare prayers of saints. And we are all saints. My prayer will be completely different then you're prayer, crewdogs prayer, Padraigs prayer, kathy K Prayer and the rest of the forum family. We all have a unique experience in our spirituality therefore we all pray differently. Great saints have always prayed to both extremes. For and against consolations. They have reached a place where they beg for one more touch of God or except the loss as a sacrafice to Him. Prayers are a very personal action, we should not use them as a tools for arguements.

3. Know for my opinion of final days. Heres my ambiguity...it might be in our lifetime or 100 years from now. I believe "the created one" was given 100 years to try to destroy the church and create havoc in the world. In my opinion that time is coming to a end. But when God allows the natural order to be touched supernaturally (by evil forces) there has to be a balance. So as "the created one" is working furiously trying to destroy the church and take as many souls with him...God is scattering His own seeds to counterbalance the supernatural. As we get closer to the end...the only thing we know, as a fact, is that in the second coming...God will come back from the clouds as King of Kings. In my opinion, before the second coming, God will send His final gift to all of humanity. I pray this comes to pass...because it will convert many souls back to God. Many saints have described personal illumination of sins. Even those non-believers, when having near death experiences, have seen their life flash before their eyes. My opinion is, that before the second coming, we will be illuminated of our sinfulness. Once that takes place... it will be the last great evangelization age. After the illumination, it might be withen a year or 1000 years...before the second coming. We just don't know or understand Gods timeline.

Here is the big question.

What happens when God comes back to earth as King Of Kings. From all my readings, studies and meditations, i have one theory. But that is just what it is a theory. No one actually knows. God will set up His Kingdom on earth for 1000 years. But Gods 1000 years might be different then mine. And at the end of that age souls will be allowed to make choices. And the choice will be simple... be with God for eternity or denounce Him. It won't be the same as our spiritual experiences but it will be illuminated souls having a final choice. And maybe "the created one" will be let out one last time. Then once that is completed...order has triumphed and all of Gods creatures will be with or in God.

May Gods Will be Done

 

In case people should be mislead by some of these comments, I need to point out that yes, there are sections of the Greek Orthodox community opposed to Vassula as there are sections in the Catholic community but I will mention two prominent members of the Greek Orthodox hierarchy:

Archbishop Theodosius Hanna from the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem joined pilgrims at the 2013 TLIG pilgrimage in Jerusalem. The Archbishop has supported Vassula since the year 2000.

In 2008, Patriarch Theodore II, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria and all Africa invited Vassula and a large group of TLIG readers to celebrate Easter with him and his Greek Orthodox community.

Here are 2 videos of those two events. The first is of the 2013 pilgimage in the Holy Land and the second is of the gathering in Alexandria in 2008

 

"remiss" in the execution of his official duties?

Please, you are free to offer your own stance upon the history of the person in question, but don't add words to my own offerings which seem to purposely twist my intention. I would say that in the execution of his duties, not to include that which was given by his own authority within this history, as a clarifying instruction to the Bishops, unless he was ignorant of either that or how the Bishops were living out that clarification, demonstrates an incomplete inclusion within that history that has involved both the Bishops and the Faithful, and those in great number. And, again, even for Levada, his own statement wasn't something as fraught with as much rigidity as perhaps you are making it out to be, but basically his opinion as was asked of him. For myself, in such questions, if I know of an action taken by a superior authority, prior to this year, I would give that its due. Again, IOW, no one is disobeying the Church as such permissions for such gatherings have for a decade or so now been realized.

We should be "sharing" in such a forum, not "comparing"!

I believe that you also offered these adjuncts as well to your original comment above, at least in the one that found my email box....wisely now removed:

I hope to God you are never on a jury.

And now I am done with Vassula.

Actually, I think that my inclusion of all of the available and allowable evidence in a case's history might just make me valuable to any jury!

 

Thank you David for pointing that out. I was "remiss" in leaving out those important facts.

 

In an earlier post, I cited an excerpt from The Teachings of the Catholic Church written by Abbot Vonier that makes it explicit that a "period, more or less prolonged" of "Triumphant Christianity" is certainly within the realm of possibilities and is not in any way related to Millenarianism. I find it extremely telling that Our Lady of Fatima used almost the exact terminology as Abbot Vonier: the "Triumph" of Her Immaculate Heart and a "period of peace."

View attachment 4940
View attachment 4941
View attachment 4942
View attachment 4943
View attachment 4944

 

Since you feel like quoting that edited part, let me say I stand by my earlier words regarding a jury.

 

He has not called Mark anything. Stephen is saying Fr Iannuzzi has his own methods..

View attachment 4945

 

It is possible I have misinterpreted what's been said (that wouldn't be the first time!).

Mark these are massive issues of trust in research and beg the question: Do you have to make things up in order to try and prove a theory. I think everyone here who rationally analyses the evidence will come to only one conclusion.
Stephen Walford

 

Garabandal,
No I am not calling Mark a liar. Certainly not. It was a rhetorical question, but of course Fr Iannuzzi has some serious explaining to do. If these questions were posed in a court of law, what would the reaction be?

 

Mark also said:". The Theological Commission of 1952 was summarized in this document: The Teaching of the Catholic Church: A Summary of Catholic Doctrine, London Burns Oates & Washbourne. I believe this is not in print anymore. Inasmuch as the cited work bears the Church’s seals of approval, i.e., the imprimatur and the nihil obstat, it is an exercise of the Magisterium. When an individual bishop grants the Church’s official imprimatur, and neither the Pope nor the body of bishops oppose the conferral of this seal, it is an exercise of the ordinary Magisterium.
Based on this idea, my book Heralds of the Second Coming is also part of the Church's magisterium because it has the imprimatur? Somehow i really dont think so.

 

Peter B. wrote: "I would invite all participants (and readers) to meditate not only with their intellect but with the eyes of their heart illuminated by imploring the Holy Spirit's assistance. It is Pentecost, after all!!"

Thank you for proposing a different approach to the important questions raised in this thread; it can be quite fruitful, if we all follow your wise advice, and most of all, implore the Holy Spirit's assistance. "He is the great unifier; or rather he is unity because he is Love, for as we know the Father and the Son embrace lovingly in the unity of the Holy Spirit."

As Archbishop Martinez proceeds to explain in one of the most formidable books on the Holy Spirit even written, The Sanctifier, "the blessed souls who let themselves be possessed and moved by eternal Love share in this divine unity, according to the prayer of Jesus to the Father: ' That they may be one, even as we are'; (Jn 17:22). Jesus laid bare the fundamental longing of his soul when he taught us to say: 'Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.' But that desire of Jesus is not fulfilled until the Holy Spirit takes possession of souls and by revealing the Father to them, lovingly unifies them in his divine will".

 

Civil courts leave such ecclesiastical disputes to be worked out within the church....unless one wishes to push more of the progressive agenda upon the Church. Sad.

 

Can we compare the words that we know are true of Our Lady....“ I cannot promise you happiness in this life; only in the next”

With those that claim to be true.''..your Mama will keep you sweet company, and with Her every Maternal Care She will take on the commitment of making you Happy''

 

Yes there is definitely a contradiction here, between the approved words of Our Blessed Mother at Fatima and then the unapproved words of the writings of Lusia.

 

But speaking of two different eras. The era of the Divine Will is beyond how things are treated or expected in the current era. When you live in the Divine Will in which Luisa did you have everything including She who since she possessed the Divine Will, immense happiness was inseparable from her.

 

There is only contradiction when words are interpreted in ones own limited understanding. We are embarking upon a new era (a new life), which is in the beginnings of our understanding. Even though this new earth will not be the beatific vision of heaven our Lady does promise it to be an era of peace. Again, those who have ears to hear recognize this era of peace is not only the absence of war and conflict, but a era of happiness, just short of the beatific vision. A period of rest on the 7th day, where God's will shall be done on earth as it is done in heaven by his angels and saints. Bottom line, one concludes in ones own mind what 'happiness in the next life" means. One could conclude then the next age, after the purification, will be a life of happiness for those who persevere the tribulation until the end of the world.

 

I for one could 'square a future millennial reign of blissful peace on earth' along with Pope Benedict's words "the Church would constantly be suffering in different way's until the end of the world", as our heart will continue to long for the beatific vision, which one could conclude is suffering in a 'different way' until the end of the world. Again, ones own limited interpretations can put road blocks to heaven's ways. Be open to the Holy Spirit to teach what is not yet fully understood, as is LITDW.

 

I was alive and well since 1984. Did I blink somewhere and missed the era of peace? 1 million Catholics in Rwanda, in 90 days, lost their lives in their 1994 war, did they miss the era of peace? How many millions of abortions have taken place in your era of peace? It would be laughable if not for a serious prophecy, for anyone to think the era that no one in the world could identify, is the era of peace that our Lady of Fatima spoke of. Do you really think whatever we have had since 1984 is what God had in mind for the era of peace, to which he was to give full credit to the mother of God, which no one in the world would has even acknowledged?

As Mark Mallett posted: By the way, Iannuzzi is not the only theologian to espouse an Era of Peace. No less than the papal theologian for Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II said, "Yes, a miracle was promised at Fatima, the greatest miracle in the history of the world, second only to the Resurrection. And that miracle will be an era of peace which has never really been granted before to the world. —Mario Luigi Cardinal Ciappi, , October 9th, 1994, The Apostolate’s Family Catechism, p. 35

 

Hello Stephen! Warm greetings on this beautiful Pentecost Sunday. I pray that you and your family are all well across the pond.

Someone else questioned me on the reference to the Commission last year. Because the book is out of print, I asked Fr. Joseph for more background. He confirmed that the reference was "Published in 1952 by a theological commission of qualified experts. The Teachings of the Catholic Church states that it is not contrary to Catholic teaching to believe or profess “a hope in some mighty triumph of Christ here on earth before the final consummation of all things”.

Now, like the Vatican II documents, was the commission findings compiled by an individual, in this case, Abbot Anscar? I don't know Stephen. I encourage you to contact Fr. Joseph who, despite his travels, is pretty generous in answering questions.

All this said, the theological development of an Era of Peace does not rise or fall on this magisterial statement in the least. It simply reaffirms what is already expressed in the early Church. And unlike your book, it is magisterial in nature because of those who were on the commission, ie. bishops. At least, this is my understanding. Again, please feel free to contact Fr. Joseph.

 

Hello Harper,

Please note that my comments are confined to her answer to the questions posed by the CDF on the Era of Peace, and four other subjects. Her answer was consistent with the proper theology and possibility of a "triumph" of the Church. The fact that she is allowed to speak in dioceses on a case by case basis with the local ordinary, speaks for itself.