True Life in God discussion list

[Stephen]

Dear friends in Christ,
does anyone know what the "modification" of the CDF's position actually is?
God Bless,
Stephen

[David]

[Stephen]

Dear David,
thanks for your reply. Do I take it that Cardinal Ratzinger in his new letter does not mention the lifting of the notification-therefore we presume that it is still in force?
God Bless,
Stephen

[David]

Dear Stephen,

For me, Cardinal Ratzinger's new letter effectively removes all the force of the Notification. However, those with a more legalistic 'bent' will no doubt choose to disagree with this view, stating that the Notification has not been cancelled..

The following words from the Messages seem an appropiate response to them:

Do you know why you do not believe and do you know why you are so indifferent and determined to close your heart? Do you know why you do not seek anything beyond it?" It is because you have not the Holy Spirit who could have risen you from darkness into His Light enlightening your soul to see the Son together with the Father manifesting Themselves to you; the Holy Spirit would have breathed in you a resurrection breath invigorating you, giving you life in Me. http://www.tlig.org/msg/vasb1072.html


God bless,
David

[Guest]

David

I have always thought, perhaps in error, that when Jesus speaks in various places in the messages of "the ban being lifted . . ." it had to do with the Notification even though some of the mentioned messages occurred prior to the Notification. Does the ban being lifted mean something else like the spirit of Rationalism, Naturalism and doubt will be overpowered by the Holy Spirit and all will accept our Lord Jesus Christ and unite? Is the "correction" to the Notification part of the ban being lifted?

I realize that things do not normally happen from one day to the next and that Vassula has said that the New Pentecost has already begun (paraphrasing). Things may take time to unfold. In the Message date May 15, 1992 our Lord says:

yes, this is what I say, I, the Creator of the heavens and the earth; and know that soon, My whole purpose will be fulfilled, city 1 after city will be inhabited by Me and rebuilt; 2 I will raise your ruins and reconstruct My altars 3 one after the other; the ban once lifted, then all mankind will be consecrated to My Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of your Mother;

In the same message he says:

MY LOVE HYMN WILL GROW INTO A RIVER
AND THIS RIVER WILL GROW INTO A SEA OF LOVE

This reminded me of Ezekiel ch. 47 in which the prophet is given a vision of a River flowing out from the Temple that starts as a trickle, becomes ankle deep, then waist deep and then becomes quite large flowing out to the sea. All those who are fed by this water grow heathy and live.

Your comments are appreciated.

God Bless

Robert

[David]

Yes, Robert, I believe your alternative understanding is nearer to the truth. I don't believe the word 'ban' is referring to the Notification at all (apart from the latter being an example of it).

The phrase, 'the ban', which appears quite often throughout the Messages is referring to Scripture, for example Revelation (Apocalypse) 22.3 The ban will be lifted. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in its place in the city; his servants will worship him, they will see him face to face, and his name will be written on their foreheads. It will never be night again and they will not need lamplight or sunlight, because the Lord God will be shining on them. They will reign for ever and ever.

However, the above is from the original version of the Jerusalem Bible. The New Jerusalem Bible uses 'curse' instead of 'ban' as do most other translations. My own view is that the phrase is actually referring to the general loss of belief in the full Truth of God's Revelation.

God bless,
David

[guest]

Hi,

Thank you all for your input, I was wondering David, you said, that the CDF does not spell out its position, probably for the same reason it does not spell out its position on Medjugorje, do you know why they do not spell out their position? Is there a particualr reason?

Thanks and God Bless,
Angela

[David]

Dear Angela,

The Church cannot be specific about these cases because they are 'ongoing'. It will only be when everything finishes that the Church may make a judgement.

God bless,
David

[MGONZA05]

Dear All,
It occurred to me that if the Warning or Notification is removed; then these inspirations will be treated as any other personal revelation and not yet enjoy the full blessing of the church. Am I right? If it is God's will, then so be it. I will be patient. Throughout history these things have seemed to have taken a painstakingly long time. All in God's good time, though.
Let us pray also for his Holiness who is asking for prayers on his behalf, specifically the Lord's prayer.
God Bless You!
YSIC,
Dolores

[David]

Once again, I've had to remove a posting to this list and I need to explain why. The posting was of a web page address which is now publishing Cardinal Ratzinger's letter which was sent, last year, to a small number of Bishop's conferences who had been negative to Vassula and True Life in God.

It has been Vassula's wish to avoid the passing on of innaccurate or incomplete information about the CDFs investigation of TLIG. It is for this reason that the Cardinal's final letter on the subject has not been published on the TLIG website but, instead, published in booklet form, along with all the relevant correspondence.

I repeat what I wrote above that, in my opinion, the letter effectively indicates that the CDF has no further problem with Vassula or TLIG. Others (and they already have!) will no doubt see things differently.

God bless,
David

[guest]

I'm visiting a friend who just showed me the July 2004 letter from Cardinal Ratzinger. It is funny that this post just came about during my visit.

I have to tell you of my great dissapointment in that the letter does not lift the notification and in essence leaves it entirely to each Diocesan Bishop to dispose of the matter. Therefore, this binds each Catholic to obey their Bishop.

Since my local Bishop is not supportive of such revelations, I must follow the examples of the true Saints of the Church over the centuries and totally obey. No matter how unjust something seemed when imposed on them, they obeyed their spiritual directors, or Bishops, or those who had authority over them. Years later, it turned out that those who had true revelations from God were seen to have been totally obedient to the "bans", or "gag orders" imposed on them. In some of their writings it was also evident that Jesus had taught them to toally obey those who had authority over them. It was those who rebelled that were proven to be full of pride, and therefore children of Satan. We must always fight against the temptation given to Adam and Eve, that we have a certain knowledge or revelation that surpases that given by Scripture and the Church. We must always guard against the temptation to disobey because we know better this time or have a prophet who -we determine is true- and are unwilling to wait for legitimate authority to determine this.

I think it is very important that we not distort what the letter truly says with our own wishful thinking of what we wanted it to say. A sign that someone is truly living a True Life in God life is to be submissive and obedient and TRUTHFUL, to God and not to people (including the prophet). Deceipt is not of the Lord. St. Ignatius taught that anything (including revelations) must be judged in the beginning, middle and end. It would be totally wrong for the Church to violate its own teachings and those of Saints such as St. Ignatius.

In Christ
Rita

[David]

Dear Rita,

[guest]

David, thank you for correcting my post. I re-read the letter and what you say is accurate. This has made me reflect a bit further and notice that Cardinal Ratzinger's letter was addressed only to the Presidents of the Episcopal Conferences of France, Switzerland, Uruguay, Philippines, Canada. To them he simply tells them to read her answers to the questions. A dispasionate look at the letter does not allow one to interpret either pleasure, nor displeasure, satisfaction, nor lack of on his part relative to Vassula's answers. The letter seems to be totally neutral. He simply tells them that since they had made inquiries because the messages are followed, that he wanted to make them aware that she had provided some answers.

As much as I try, I fail to see how one can conclude that the force of the notification is reduced as long as the document persists and as long as this letter was not addressed to the bishops in the other countries of the world. As far as participation in ecumenical groups organized by VAssula, that is left to the diocesan bishops. Does this "ecumenical prayer group" include conferences?

I do not want to read too much into things, but I think the letter is extremely neutral and neither shows satisfaction, nor disatisfaction with her answers. It actually does not invite all the doubter (as you say) to read the answers to the questions, it only notifies those bishops from those countries who had made formal inquiries. Where do the South and North American Bishops stand in this matter? In Church language, how are the other bishops supposed to interpret this communication?

in the Lord
Rita

[David]

Dear Rita,

Thank you for this response. Yes, let me agree with you and say straight away that the letter from Cardinal Ratzinger does indeed, on the surface, present itself as 'neutral'. But this is why the letter needs to be taken in the context of the entire investigation. This is why Vassula is so concerned to make the letter available alongside all the other correspondence.

The CDF had presented Vassula with a series of 'concerns' which were at the heart of the Notification. Vassula's answers satisfied the CDF. Now it is true that Cardinal Ratzinger does not respond with effusive language such as, "well done, Vassula, splendid responses!". No, of course not, this is the Vatican speaking, but do you really think that the Cardinal would invite those Bishops who had been negative to Vassula to read Vassula's answers if he didn't believe that they answered the concerns of theCDF? As I explained in an earlier posting, the CDF is not in a position to say whether Vassula's messages are from God or not. The Cardinal had already stated that, "the Notification is a warning, not a condemnation....... What we say is that there are many things which are not clear". Vassula's answers provide the required clarifications. It would certainly have been nice if the Cardinal had 'spelled out' that Vassula's clarifications did indeed satisfy him but you can be certain that if they had not, he would never have written the letter he has.

I need to correct one thing in your letter above. You refer to the Cardinal writing his letter to just those Bishops who had made formal enquiries. This is not the case. The Cardinal's letter is addressed only to the Bishops Episcopal Conferences who had responded negatively to the CDF when the latter had enquired of the views of all the Bishops Conferences about the impact of Vassula and True Life in God in their countries.

God bless,
David

[Guest]

I would just like to reply and say that this CDF booklet has had some positive impacts in our diocese. Our local Bishop, who was pretty much against these has now said after reading the CDF booklet that Vassula has been cleared. Another man brought this to his priest and his priest now says, I will tell whoever asks me to go ahead and read TLIG, if asked about it. So there are definately positive aspects occurring from this clarification.

When I first read it, I too took it as being neutral, and so did our whole prayer group. Someone really needs someone to explain it to them to understand that is more than that, yes I wish it were a bit clearer also. I wish they would say, yes these are wonderful and the whole world should read them, that would be nice. But that is not the case. But someone in our prayer group pointed out, about the ecumenical prayer groups and that this will be left to the Bishop, he read that as something very positive, it sounded as if Cardinal Rat. was encouraging ecumenical prayer groups. And what Bishop would be against an ecumenical prayer group? I hope most would not, since the Pope is encouraging ecumenical gatherings very strongly. To have the Vatican write something at all is something I think:0)

So, hopefully it will at least make some impact with the priests and if the priests see it as something positive the layman will be more open also. Overall who knows?? Does anyone know yet if Father Pacwa has received this and his reaction?

In the end the Two Hearts shall Triumph!
God Bless you All,
Angela

[Stephen]

Dear David,
I have read the letter and I do not understand how you can claim that the notification has been lifted. Cardinal Ratzinger describes Vassula's clarifications as "useful". If he had intended to lift the notification, then it would have appeared in the Vatican newspaper L'osservatore Romano. I think you need to be extremely careful because you attitude implies a fact which is clearly not there.
God Bless,
Stephen