It's NOT a "millenial theory", I do not anticipate the lion lying down with the lamb and an end to physical or mental, or even spiritual sickness, etc. I anticipate a period in which most of mankind accepts Christianity and lives (in varying degrees) according to the faith. Lucia directly quotes Our Lady and I don't need anyone to tell me what it means, I know what it means - it means what it says. Medjugorje is irrelevant to this discussion. I believed in this long before Medjugorje ever appeared on my spiritual 'radar'. I have made my points, you have made yours. We are not going to agree and so further discussion seems to be redundant.
I asked about Medjugorje because the commission or the CDF will determine its truthfulness on whether it conforms to catholic doctrine rather than our own private theories. This is why the Pope is important. He decides!
IS THIS THE ERA OF PEACE IN WHICH IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION? This tells us the illumination of conscience happens at the same time of His coming in mercy. Jesus says "St Faustina is preparing the world for His final coming." To me, the only question that is not clear is... when those leave this life to the new life where there is no suffering, how soon after the door of mercy is closed before Jesus opens His door of Justice? I plan not to be here to find out. (I pray) 378.............................That God is infinitely merciful, no one can deny. He desires everyone to know this before He comes again as Judge. He wants souls to come to know Him first as King of Mercy. When this triumph comes, we shall already have entered the new life in which there is no suffering. But before this, your soul [of the spiritual director] will be surfeited with bitterness at the sight of the destruction of your efforts. However, this will only appear to be so, because what God has once decided upon, He does not change. But although this destruction will be such only in outward appearance, the suffering will be real. When will this happen? I do not know. How long will it last? I do not know. Is this making any sense to anyone???? please.
I can only speak for myself with regards to fear. I feel as if I should be afraid, yet I am not. I can't say that I'm looking forward to a Warning, should one take place, but fear is not the right answer. With what's coming in the chastisement, I should feel nothing but terror, but there's an odd calm. What I do fret over is following Christ properly. You could say that this is a form of fear of satanic deception, but that's the opposite of what I feel...fear of not following Christ. One is a positive, one a negative, if you take my meaning. Yes, St. Faustina did mention the illumination of conscience in paragraph 83. She saw her own soul, then said, "All light in the heavens will be extinguished, and there will be great darkness over the whole earth. Then the sign of the cross will be seen in the sky, and from the openings wehre the hands and feet of the Savior were nailed will come forth great lights which will light up the earth for a period of time. This will take place shortly before the last day." So, yes, you can extrapolate the light over all the earth as being a global illumination of conscience, given that it immediately follows her own illumination. However, it's in conjunction with the, "this will take place shortly before the last day." One interesting question occurs to me - how would we define "shortly before the last day"?
So perhaps we rephrase the question a bit. Is it possible to look at the era of peace mentioned at Fatima in an extra-millennial way? Or perhaps, can the era of peace mentioned at Fatima be outside the idea of millennialism?
Love it. I ask a simple question, and I get a simple answer. But I can't understand how I can see something others can't seem to see. Many would say I must be wrong. I can go with being wrong, but I have to be shown how I'm wrong. Until then, I'll walk along side Jesus, as He too was trying to say things that people didn't understand. But Mark thanks for your answer. I am still giggling inside.
I don't intend to work against anyone. I am where you are: trying to find the truth, and hoping we can assist each other. I might hold certain ideas, but I am no authority of Truth. I like to hear what you and the others here are discerning, and I like when people can back up their ideas with something trustable.
I and every other orthodox Christian feel certain that there will be a resurrection of the flesh followed by a thousand years in a rebuilt, embellished, and enlarged city of Jerusalem, as was announced by the Prophets Ezekiel, Isaias and others… A man among us named John, one of Christ’s Apostles, received and foretold that the followers of Christ would dwell in Jerusalem for a thousand years, and that afterwards the universal and, in short, everlasting resurrection and judgment would take place. —St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Ch. 81, The Fathers of the Church, Christian Heritage …we understand that a period of one thousand years is indicated in symbolic language… A man among us named John, one of Christ’s Apostles, received and foretold that the followers of Christ would dwell in Jerusalem for a thousand years, and that afterwards the universal and, in short, everlasting resurrection and judgment would take place. —St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, The Fathers of the Church, Christian Heritage ...the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.—Tertullian, Apologeticus, Chapter 50
Mark, No, I didn't think you meant that aspect of fear toward the Warning idea. When I summarized the two polar opposite reasons for apparent Garabandal rejection I was thinking yours=number 1, and Jane's=number 2, on the other end of the spectrum: The Warning (according to Mark, and maybe some Stephen): Because it is possibly a heretical idea of Jesus coming in some form other than in Judgement. A potential deception because it is too merciful (<-my words), and is an attempt that can be categorized right along with this, from the Catechism: "The Antichrist's deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment." The Warning (according to Jane): Because it is potentially one masterful deception of Satan to be the ultimate "accuser", and point out our sins, so we Fear the face of God (i.e not merciful enough), and run from His Mercy, our Lord Jesus Christ....Thus subjecting ourselves to the Door of His Justice, because we chose (out of fear) to reject His Mercy.
Yes, that is my point. A PERIOD of peace as promised at Fatima (nothing to do with millenialism) in which the vast majority of people believe in Christ and behave better than in any previous period of history, followed by a gradual falling away again ushering the real end times of the Anti-Christ. (I do not believe in a literal thousand year reign of Christ on earth but the two things are not connected anyway.)
I believe the era of peace is not just about the Eucharisitic regin of Jesus on earth for 1000, but the indweling of the Holy Spirit in those alive, not unlike the believers shared after Pentecost. Millenialism is completely out of the question.
His Eminence Bernardino Cardinal Echeverria Ruiz, O.F.M., now deceased, went beyond just giving the Imprimatur to the book of messages by Fr. Gobbi. He recognized the great spiritual benefits which would be derived from them. He writes: The Coming of Jesus and The Millennium The subject matter in question being too complicated for me to venture into without the expertise of the masters in this field of theology, I have availed myself of the excellent research done by Fr. Joseph Iannuzzi, O.S.J., S.T.D. In his book, "The Triumph of God's Kingdom in the Millennium and End Times", which we have found to be the foremost authoritative work on the study of the Millennium, Fr. Iannuzzi gives a comprehensive treatise on this subject as contained in the public revelation of the Church: Sacred Scripture and Tradition (the Fathers and Doctors of the Church); and the Magisterium. It is important to note that he does not make reference in any way to private revelation to support his claims. A few things I would like to emphasize: 1.1. Fr. Iannuzzi's work is so extensive and thorough, that I could not possibly treat all of the subject matter. For those who wish to further their study of these topics, the information needed to obtain his books is provided in the footnotes. 2. Although he makes no reference to private revelation, in an email to M.T.M., a copy of which Fr. Iannuzzi sent to me also, he confirmed his belief in the messages given by Our Lady to Fr. Gobbi. I find it significant to note that Fr. Iannuzzi, who has a doctorate in spiritual-mystical theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University and who has studied eschatology in such depth, "has no doubt as to the veracity of Don Gobbi's locutions." Dear M.T.M. "I am almost finished with a new book, with the bishop's imprimatur and my diocesan nihil obstat, on the millennium and its circumstantial heresies. It is, in my estimation, infinitely better than my last book. It holds no contradictions to the former, rather elaborates on the numerous inconsistencies in terminology among the burgeoning private revelations. I have no doubt as to the veracity of Don Gobbi's locutions; however, I have several serious concerns as to their interpretation by laity and prelates alike. I pursued my doctorate in spiritual-mystical theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University, magna cum laude. I say this solely to emphasize the credibility of my view in this matter. I often hear the 'coming of the Lord' taken totally out of context from thousands of mystics who have interpreted it in a different light altogether. This is but one of the issues I bring out in my book. If laity and prelates knew this bit of information alone, it would have avoided droves of persons disavowing their belief in Fr. Gobbi's messages and other authentic locutionists…" (emphasis mine) In Christ, Rev. Joseph Iannuzzi, O.S.J., S.T.D. I have used many of the excellent references from Fr. Iannuzzi's first book, some of which I have juxtaposed with Our Lady's messages to Fr. Gobbi and also excerpts from a talk which Fr. Gobbi gave at an international MMP retreat in San Marino in 1996. These prove that Fr. Gobbi is not teaching Millenarianism, but rather the acceptable belief in "The Millennium" to come. "The Millennium" vs. "Millenarianism" Let us begin by defining our terms and seeking their appropriate applications: http://www.mmp-usa.net/arc_defense.html Church Fathers on the "Intermediate Coming" and "the Millennium" http://www.mmp-usa.net/arc_defense.html St. Bernard, Abbot and Doctor: St. Justin Martyr, Church Father What does the Magisterium of the Church say about this "Intermediate Coming"? Fr. Gobbi's Teaching on this "Intermediate" or "Second" Coming? Fr. Gobbi's Teaching on "The Millennium" One Thousand Years - Literal or Symbolic? Scripture says: What will this "Return of Christ" consist of? Fr. Iannuzzi on this "spiritual"coming of Christ- It is important to note that the Magisterium has not yet made a definitive pronouncement about the "millennium" or "temporal kingdom." "In these latter days on the threshold of the third millennium, disputes inevitably arise in spite of the Church's authoritative voice. Although she possesses the power to either close the matter or allow for further doctrinal development in its clarification, Holy Mother Church has nonetheless opted for the latter. She has assumed a cautious position with regard to the concept of a millennium, due primarily to the resurgent tendencies of the past that have most commonly led to a slippery slope quest for "millenarianism." However, under-stood in a spiritual sense, the question of a millennium or temporal kingdom as promoted through the "spiritual" writings of the Church Fathers remains open to a definitive pro-nouncement by the Magisterium." (The Triumph of God's Kingdom…, Fr. Iannuzzi, p. 166) Especially significant are the words of Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in this regard. Theologian Martino Penasa, presented him with this question of Christ's spiritual millenary reign (not millenarianism), and the Cardinal reassured him that the matter is still open to discussion and that "the Holy See has not yet made any definite pronouncement in this regard." ("È imminente una nuova era di vita cristiana?" Il Segno del Soprannaturale, Udine, Italia, n. 30, p. 10, Oct. 1990; The Triumph of God's Kingdom…, Fr. Iannuzzi, p. 43) Having thus proven that Our Lady's messages to Fr. Gobbi and his own teachings in this regard are in no way contradictory to that which is taught by Holy Scripture, the Magisterium, the Fathers of the Church, and contemporary Doctors in Sacred Theology, we have the assurance that we are allowed to believe in a spiritual and temporal earthly kingdom.
There are problems with this statement, MS7. 1. Fr. Ianuzzi is the only one I've ever seen quoting it. (Surely someone else would have seen it at some point. The Italian press would have loved to quote this.) 2. We don't know anything about the journal it's supposedly published in. (The Italian means "The Signs of the Supernatural". We can't tell if this is a publication loyal to the teachings of the Church any more than we can tell if it's a publication loyal to the conspiracy theories of The Lone Gunmen from the X-Files. It could be anything.) 3. We can't find the original. (It doesn't look like this is still published. I can't find anything that will allow us to order back copies from 1990. And it's all in Italian.) 4. We cannot, therefore, judge the context of the answer. (How do we know what the question might have been specifically?) In history, we're trained to be critical of sources when you can't see detail, and this is one such source. It might be good, but we can't tell. There is only one way to verify this quote. So, when the mail goes out today, I will attempt to verify... I'm sending a letter to Castel Gandolfo. I'll simply ask the man that made the original statement. I'll let you know what I find out...in maybe six months.
Mail goes out at 2:00 central time. If anyone has anything to suggest, let me know. March 15, 2013 His Holiness Benedict XVI Apostolic Palace 00040 Castel Gondolfo, Italy Your Holiness: Bonum est confiteri Domino! I would like to take this opportunity to thank you, both for your ministry and your writings. My wife has, I believe, every book you’ve written that's been translated into English. I am currently reading Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week, and look forward to someday passing your written work to my children. Would you mind terribly if I ask a rather long series of questions? Several friends were discussing Fatima and the apparitions of Our Lady. The Second Secret of Fatima mentions, “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.” We were trying to reconcile this “period of peace” with other elements of private revelation and paragraph 676 of the Catechism, which speaks against millennialism. On the one hand, we have the Second Secret. This we take in the light of other private revelation. Akita mentions a chastisement. Blessed Anna Maria Taigi mentions a chastisement, after which, “whole nations will come back to the Church and the face of the earth will be renewed.” On the other hand, the Catechism section 676 states, “The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism.” We take this in the light of other private revelation as well; such as Our Lady’s statement to St. Faustina, “…as for you, you have to speak to the world about His great mercy and prepare the world for the Second Coming..." (635). This mention of the Second Coming seems rather final, and restricts the continuation of history rather completely. To these, someone added this statement, “Especially significant are the words of Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in this regard. Theologian Martino Penasa, presented him with this question of Christ's spiritual millenary reign (not millenarianism), and the Cardinal reassured him that the matter is still open to discussion and that "the Holy See has not yet made any definite pronouncement in this regard." ("È imminente una nuova era di vita cristiana?" Il Segno del Soprannaturale, Udine, Italia, n. 30, p. 10, Oct. 1990; The Triumph of God's Kingdom…, Fr. Iannuzzi, p. 43)” We are not able to find the copy of Il Segno del Sprannaturale, so we are unable to see any context to the answer you gave in 1990. (And none of us has any Italian, which complicates matters should we find a copy.) We remain, therefore, somewhat skeptical of the source, and thought it expedient to simply ask directly. May I be so bold, your Holiness, as to ask for a clarification? Some of us see these various statements as being very nearly in opposition to one another; the period of peace and the Catechism’s statement against millenarianism. We seek only to be faithful to the Church and the Magisterium, and hope that you might shed some light upon this subject. We do not accept an intermediate coming of Christ. We want to rightly reconcile the Marian “period of Peace” with the statements against millennialism. Is it possible, your Holiness, that a period of peace within history and without an intermediate coming of Christ, can be seen as an idea that is outside millennialism, and thereby not condemned by Holy Mother Church? “Angelis suis Deus mandavit de te. Ut Custodiant te in omnibus viis tuis.” Pax Christi sit semper vobiscum,
I posted this on another thread. It got me thinking... OK, so here we have the same JPII that made the comment about St. Faustina and the Divine Mercy message leading toward the Second Coming. But in this statement, JPII is saying that there would be a chastisement that would renew the Church. We don't know what exactly is in the 3rd Secret, but does this change any of our perceptions here? He's not strictly speaking of a "period of peace", nor does he mention any sort of return of Christ relative to the millenneal ideas, but he clearly seems to indicate that history continues after the chastisement. Am I missing something...again?
