Catholic and Loving it!

Laurence England said...

Hi James

Thanks for the h/t and elaboration of the worrying trend. Clicked the link to Middlesborough Diocese but it didn't work. Maybe url has a typo. Sadly, I know this stuff is very common. Went on a retreat to Turvey Abbey, Bedfordshire about 5 years ago and courses on this were everywhere. Tablet advertise it every week.

+-

James said...

Oops.. Typo in link = fixed.

+-

Dr. S. Petersen said...

I wonder if the Parish involved in this foolishness didn't get started by developing a charismatic group. Some of Gnosticism's appeal lies in the simplifying alignment of human pride with an overvaluation of the experiential. Charismaticism also overvalues experience.

+-

paul green said...

It 'overvalues experience'?

Ah, how I life it when people come up with stupid reasons to knock things.

Oh no, how can I possibly get away from the fact that lots and lots of people really like this? Er... I know... I'll make out that 'overvaluing experience' (or as it's also known, enjoying something and feeling close to God) is wrong!

Prove to me that 'Charismaticism' isn't mentioned all over scripture, and prove to me that it isn't getting massive massive results (in both numbers and effects) and I'll stop doing it.

Okay?

+-

berenike said...

I wouldn't worry too much about the gnostic tendencies of the Charismatic movement! :-)

+-

+1

Fr John Abberton said...

Well done James. I am a diocesan exorcist (Leeds) and am having some difficulty bringing this sort of thing to people's attention. I think a much bigger problem nowadays is Reiki, but you are right to speak up about the Enneagram, which is nothing else but New Age infiltrating the Church.

+-

paul green said...

Hang on a minute... I thought you werent meant to tell people you were the diocesan exorcist.

I thought it was meant to be something you had to exercise a bit of discretion over rather posting the fact on the internet along with your name and a link to your blog.

I agree with you about Reiki though.

+-

Fr. John Abberton said...

Dear Paul,

These days "things" are so serious that we often need to say who we are and what we do - and take the risk. Fr. Jeremy Davies is well-known because he wrote a pamphlet on the subject, and there are others who are well-known throughout Europe (e.g. Fr Amorth). We often say who we are now because we have a point to make and often people listen if you let them know you are speaking from experience. In the past this was kept under wraps, but we are now living in more "serious" times with regard to certain spiritual matters, and sometimes we have to stand up and be counted. That is just the way it is now.

Fr. John Abberton

+-

+1

paul green said...

Fr. John

That is a fair answer. Point well made. My apologies.

Paul

+-

Fr Rabit said...

Oh dear, Father Abberton! You forgot to mention, once again, that you are the Leeds diocesan heretic. How forgetful of you.

Fr John Abberton is the Catholic apologist for the occult seer Vassula Ryden. His own church tells Catholics to keep their distance from this sect. It seems extraordinary that he does not tell us about his association with TLIG (just Google Fr John Abberton and you will see), while on this thread he says it's important that people know where you are coming from!

+-

Fr. John Abberton said...

I have just seen this comment from "Fr. Rabit". Well, leaving aside the matter of the gross insult ("heretic"), I have put on my blog - which is accessable to all, and on which I openly admit to being a reader of "true Life in God", information which may settle his mind, but will he read it?

Anyway, there are posts from last year - which can be accessed - which make the following points:
1. The Notification against Vassula in 1996 (and repeated after this) is NOT a condemnation but a "warning". This point was made by Cardinal Ratzinger in an interview with the journal "30 Days"
2. A Brazilian archbishop (we have this on video - on my blog) was in Rome at the time of the Notification. It upset him. He personally asked the Cardinal (who was out of Rome when it was issued) what he should do. He was told to be at peace and to carry on as before. This is a matter of record as anyone can see.
3. Since these events, Vassula, with the help of Fr. Propspero Grech (who has worked for the CDF) prepared a set of answers to the questions raised by the Notification. These answers were described by Cardinal Ratzinger as "useful clarifications" but he then signalled his personal approval of these answers by insisting that they be printed in Vassula's books, thus making them accessable in that way. At NO TIME has he (now the Pope) or anyone else at the Vatican told Catholics not to read the books.
4. Vassula, with the help of theologians and a Bishop, is now in communication with the Vatican. The dialogue continues.
5. As you will see from my blog, numerous Catholic bishops have accepted Vassula and her writings. The most recent is the Cardinal of Durban who posted a message about her on his Diocesan blog.
I will be more than happy to deal with any other enquiries about this matter. Please do not call me a "heretic".

+-

Fr Rabit said...

Vassula Ryden whose heretical sect you are promoting, has been excommunicated by her own church, the Greek Orthodox. If you wish to know more about this have a look at the details:

http://catechumens-tale.blogspot.com

Meanwhile, Father Abberton, you will see that people are going to be pursuing this question with greater vigour now, across the churches, acting together.

+-

Fr John Abberton said...

Dear Fr. Rabit,

Vassula has been accepted by the Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa. In fact I was there when he welcomed her "home". She was born in Egypt and has lived in many different countries since then. At the moment she has a house in Rhodos, but it would seem that her Patriarch is not the Greek one, so I am not sure how this works in the Orthodox Communion. Excommunicated by who, by the way?

Vassula has gained the acceptance of many Orthodox clergy, including the Archimandrite of Jerusalem, the Abbott of the monastery on Patmos, and others - as you can see from the TLIG website (see my blog: http://yorkshireshepherd.blogspot.com)

Also, please stop using the word "heretical" (or please provide evidence for this charge). TLIG is NOT a sect. It has been categorised in many different ways by different people - usually because they do not know very much about it. The best way to judge it is to read some of the messages. I can assure you, they are quite orthodox.

God bless you Father.

+-

Fr Rabit said...

Fr Abberton, you ask me not to call you a 'heretic' but I deliberately use the word 'heretic' and have no hesitation in doing so, as the Orthodox Church has called he occult woman you promote a heretic. I use the word in its full technical sense. The Church Fathers did not hesitate to point out error. These days people are more squeamish, and 'heretic' is a word we shy away from. Rightly so, for it is rare to see full-blown heresy on the march, but it is wrong to be shy when you see it so obviously present in the Church, so the devil gets in through the back door.

Read the following from "Dialogos" the Greek Orthodox journal.++

In 2001, the Commission on Heresies of the Greek Orthodox Holy Synod issued the following decision on Vassula Ryden :

"After reviewing all the evidence, the Commission concluded that Vassula Ryden has excluded herself [*] from the Orthodox Church, although she continues to present herself as one of its members."

Moreover, it is necessary to note that the periodical of the Church "Dialogos" published in its numbers 14 and 17 (...) detailed reports on the organization of Vassula Ryden."

"Vassula asked the Greek Minister of Justice to prosecute for libel and slander against the Secretary of the Synodal Commission on heresies of the Greek-Orthodox Church, Father Kyriakos Tsouros, and periodicals of the Church. The trial was set for June 30, 2000. However, Ms. Ryden withdrew charges two days before the hearing. " (Dialogos, No. 25, page 32, 2001.)

[*] The Greek text uses the word ekpései, which is difficult to translate but can be translated "excommunicated". According to an Orthodox source, the literal translation would be: "She threw herself from the Church." Another source suggested: "Vassula Ryden has been cut off from the Orthodox Church". The Commission is clearly saying in this text that Ms. Ryden has excommunicated herself from her church. It seems that this conclusion is confirmed by the fact that she does not behave as a faithful Orthodox, because she does not respect the discipline of her Church: she regularly receives the sacraments of the Catholic Church, which is regarded by the Orthodox as a sign that someone has opted out of Orthodoxy.

(++ translated from the original Greek which can be found on www.ecclesia.gr/greek/press/dialogos/Dialogos25.pdf the website of the official Greek Orthodox church journal)

+-

+1

James said...

Fr Rabit,

I know very little about this but I do know that as soon as somebody starts accusing a Catholic of heresey on the basis of what the Greek Orthodox Church has to say then I start wondering what's going on. It's like me saying "my Catholic priest is a bit dodgy, the Archbishop of Canterbury said so"...

Rather than getting drawn in to a great big debate about which ecclesiastical authority said what can you please cut to the chase and say what it is about Vassula's writings you find objectionable. Give us a couple of direct quotes and tell us what you think is heretical about them.

Otherwise this is going to become the most tedious thread in the history of the world.

+-

Fr Rabit said...

Yes, I do understand your point entirely. Take a look at www.infovassula.ch and make your own judgement. We are soon putting a UK website together which will be a bit more user friendly.

I'm sorry this is new to you and probably seems confusing, and I have probably jumped the gun because a full-scale ecumenical assault on this heresy is being prepared, and it is because many Anglicans, Orthodox and Catholics are unaware of the barbarians within the gates that we need to start educating. If you have not yet encountered them, you are fortunate.

Fr John Abberton knows exactly what we are talking about, however. Our first concern is to confront those who are propagating serious error and in the UK he is one of the key apologists for the Vassula Ryden sect.

+-

Fr John Abberton said...

Evidently there is disagreement amongst Orthodox bishops, theologians and priests about Vassula Ryden. There are different websites to consult. The official TLIG site is TLIG.org. There is sometimes an assumption on the part of those who are against Vassula that her supporters are not being honest. This can only be tested by looking at all sides of the argument.
I do know that Vassula has had problems with the Greek Church, but she is still accepted by the Patriarch of Alexandria, and he is Greek Orthodox.

Vassula is promoting ecumenism, and there are problems in this because some authorities are stricter than others. As far as the Roman Catholic rules are concerned, she is allowed to receive Holy Communion when present at a Catholic Mass. Since Catholics and Orthodox accept the validity of each others' sacraments, and we are trying to come closer together, I cannot see the problem about this. Some other Orthodox bishops seem to be quite happy with her. This is the truth.

If Vassula is regarded as a "heretic" because she has not obeyed the rules according to the Greek authorities, then this is a strange way to use that word. I am certainly not a heretic, unless in Fr. Rabit's terms I am a heretic purely because I am a Roman Catholic.

There is NOTHING in Vassula's writings that are against Catholic Faith. Some Orthodox Christians will have problems because there is mention of Purgatory and much emphasis is given to the position of the Pope. But I have been told that some Orthodox theologians are open to different views regarding Purgatory. The messages are directed to all Christians that they might come closer together. Much respect is given to the Orthodox (but you can only see that if you read the messages).
Intemperate language such as "barbarians" has done much damage in the past, and if we are going to make progress we must stop using words like that. They prove nothing and suggest outbursts of anger. Is this the proper way to deal with such matters?

I am glad to have the complete reference to the position of the Greek church regarding Vassula. I do not know why she removed her complaint before it was heard. I will ask her.

As for the threat of another website, I have to say that this does not impress me. There are already two or three websites against her - usually dealing in half-truth and prejudices, and one in particular is conducting a vigorous campaign against her. But people are free to read the messages for themselves, as I did. I was against her at one time - quite vigorously - and I was persuaded to actually read what I was trying to condemn. I then met the lady. So, I have both read the messages and know Vassula. I find no fault in her and her writings are perfectly in line with Catholic teaching. She has many readers in the Greek Orthodox Church and some in the Russian Church as well as Armenians, Copts etc. These messages are challenging and so there are bound to be problems here and there. Personally I have no problem with them, and it is up to each one of us to decide for him or her self whilst remaining charitable. The messages say that "Charity and humility are the keys to Christian unity". This message alone is worth the risk of being persecuted.

+-

Fr Rabit said...

Again, a very ambiguously worded and ill-informed reply, typical of your apologia on other blogs.

Let's just take the point about the Coptic Church and look at what the British Coptic website says about your sect: if the Orthodox don't want her heresies anywhere near them, why should they be foisted on Catholics, through priests in error like yourself? What does Bishop Roche think?

MRS. VASSULA RYDÉN & ‘TRUE LIFE IN CHRIST’ GENERAL MEMORANDUM from: His Eminence Abba Seraphim, Metropolitan of Glastonbury, New Series: 21, 5 August 2005:

"She has found enthusiastic supporters among numbers of Anglican, Catholic and Orthodox clergy and has often utilised the opportunities offered by ‘Inter-religious Pilgrimages’ (such as her ones to the Holy Land in March 2000 and to Egypt in October 2002) to cultivate members of the local hierarchy, who are not always fully aware of all her activities.

Having studied published statements by Mrs. Rydén I feel it is appropriate to offer the following guidance to the clergy and faithful:

1. In receiving the sacraments at altars other than those of the Orthodox Church, Mrs Rydén is disregarding Orthodox canonical discipline which forbids this.

2. Mrs. Rydén should seek the canonical permission and blessing of the local Orthodox hierarch having jurisdiction in each place, prior to addressing public meetings, rather than act in the face of their sometimes expressed opposition and criticism.

3. Until such time as a canonical Orthodox hierarchy is able to make a detailed and full examination of the messages received by Mrs. Rydén, they should be regarded with grave caution and their authority attributed solely to the views and aspirations of Mrs. Rydén herself, rather than any angelic, saintly or divine source.

+ Seraphim

Metropolitan of Glastonbury

SOURCE: www.britishorthodox.org/113b.php

+-

Fr John Abberton said...

Dear Father,

You may be right about my being "ill-informed" to some extent because I do not know everything, and I am learning a few things from you. I did not know about this statement from the Metropolitan of Glastonbury. However, I do not accept that Orthodox authorities elsewhere do not know about Vassula. It may be true in some cases, but not all. it is clear that some of them are reading her writings, and in any case, there is a close rapport between Vassula and some places - such as the Monastery of St. Macarious in Egypt which is very dedicated to ecumenism and Christian Unity.

You seem to want to belittle me all the time. Why do you say my "ambiguous" comment is "typical" of what I say in other blogs? This is not the language of Christian dialogue. And since you are clearly not open to anything I say, it seem pointless to continue. You think me a heretic. I do not call you one, nor would I, in any way, try to belittle you. As a fellow priest I wish you well and hope that we can continue this discussion in another way at some other time.

+-

Dunstan Thompson said...

My sympathies,Fr Abberton, as you seem to be having a rough time. Notwithstanding his orthodox manners (!) Fr Rabit, who is known for his forthright approach, does have a point. Unfortunately he failed to make it, which is why we counsel the religious of other traditions to go carefully when they see things on blogs of other denominations!

Here is your answer to the question about heresy. The Vassula sect, currently under very close examination by a certain dicastery in Rome, is guilty of propagating the modalist writings of the unorthodox Vassula Ryden (these are now bound in a pseudo-Bible laid out to look like 'scripture'). As she does not disinguish between the three distinct persons of the Holy Trinity, and sometimes the 'Son' is speaking to her and calling himself the 'Father' etc., there is a clear parallel with the monarchian heresies of the second and third centuries. (Do please read Justin and Hippolytus on this, as they were refuting it with a very clear analysis which anyone with a basic Catechetical knowledge of the Trinity would understand.) It is also referred to as patripassionism in some writings. Cardinal Levada's statement of 2005 on Vassula Ryden clarifies the position: the 1990s statements still hold and Catholics should keep well clear. New evidence presented is very damning and a further statement would be welcome, but I can say no more about that here.

I hope this helps. And James, my sympathies. It is not easy when theologians from other traditions break in unexpectedly! Sorry to add to this complicated thread. A friend in Rome sent me a link to amuse me. I think our weather is better here than with you. (Lovely photo on the homepage.)

Dom Dunstan

+-

Fr Rabit said...

Father Abberton, I think you have a strange idea that major error can be discussed as a friendly fireside chat! I'm sorry if you find the confronting of heresy in a strong manner hard to take.

I think you are ill-informed indeed. Our website will help you be better informed: I'll send you a link when we have it properly ready. Meanwhile, you haven't answered my simple question: what does Bishop Roche say about all this? You must know his view! And why not take a look at the Dominican François-Marie Dermine O.P. and what he says about Vassula. This is what he says, in his role as Consultant on Sects to the Italian Bishops' Conference:

http://www.infovassula.ch/dermine.pdf

It is a detailed document, so I warn you it is thorough, and devastating. He will not be so hard to convince as some of the half-catechised people you can hoodwink elsewhere. We've seen you at work before! But not just you: there are Anglican and Orthodox apologists, always on the margins and the loony fringe, but within the mainstream churches, and it has gone on for too long now.

+-

-1

James said...

Father Abberton, I think you have a strange idea that major error can be discussed as a friendly fireside chat!

Fr Rabit, I think you have a strange idea that your perception of major error gives you the right to be nasty to people.

You have had ample opportunity to express yourself and I will delete any further comments from you on this subject.

+-

Fr Rabit said...

James, you seem to be involved in quite a heated argument yourself on this thread, or is that another James? Applying a double standard to kill a discussion that you've already said bores you is pretty shabby. If the insidious activity of an 'entryist' cult in your Church is enough to send you to sleep, sleep well! We have work to do. Goodbye.

+-

James said...

Goodbye.

+-

paul green said...

James I respect your right to express an opinion, but there is a very important question to ask:
Have you made your concerns clear to the diocese before posting them on the internet? I sincerely hope so.
In a post a few weeks ago you said that you often don't complain when you are at an event, but yet will 'blog' about it later because you are not able to formulate arguments quickly. Okay. That's fair enough I guess. But... Once you have organised your thoughts into something you can express and you find that not all is well, I really sincerely hope that you have the guts to tell the people concerned about them (preferably face-to-face, but at least by E-mail) before sharing them with the world. You would ask nothing less if somebody had a problem with you.
So, can I ask you, James, did you tell the diocese of your concerns BEFORE blogging?

+-

James said...

Hi Paul,

Did you contact me privately before leaving your comment? Of course you didn't, because my blog post was in the public domain and you replied publicly. If you had overheard a private conversation you would probably have acted differently.

I quoted a public page on the diocesan website and gave my views publiclyjust as you did.

The fact is that I have contacted the diocese privately in the past and have been mostly ignored. The diocese are perfectly aware of this blog and are very welcome to respond publically as you have or privately if they prefer.

James

+-

paul green said...

I take it then, that in future you will not respond on the internet to things which are not on the internet themselves without first exploring other routes more appropriate to what you have encountered.

If you go to a workshop, Mass, presentation, talk, meeting or other event with a limited audience, and you have a problem with something, then go up to somebody and TELL THEM. Human contact can be a little scary, but it worked for thousands of years before computers and printing presses came along and I'm fairly sure it still works.

If you can't quite find the words before you leave a place, then pick up the phone (or at least E-mail) before you 'blog' it. If you are ignored and your conscience still troubles you, then by all means turn on the computer and get typing. I am sure there are a few people who will read it. And who knows, maybe a few of them wont be other fundamentalist bloggers?

+-

+1

James said...

Hi Paul,

Blogs exist. Get over it.

James

+-

paul green said...

'get over it'??

Have I just gone back to the playground? or to straight-to-video movies of the 1980s?

+-

James said...

Dude!

+-

kate said...

Re 'telling the people concerned', Paul, have you ever done this?

+-

paul green said...

Hi Kate. If I have a concern about something which I feel I should respond to then I make my thoughts known to the person or people directly. I believe that's the best way.

+-

James said...

So when Tony Blair criticises the Pope would you recommend I respond by picking up the phone, writing a letter or calling around at his house?

+-

-1

paul green said...

Letter. Definitely.

Unless you have significant media influence (which you don't, James) a letter is the most powerful option open to you. Even more than petitions or blog posts.

+-

James said...

We were not discussing what is the most "powerful" option. Power had nothing to do with it.

You were suggesting that I was doing something morally wrong by responding publicly before discussing things in private. That the right thing to do was to always speak in private first.

It seems to me that there are two options. Either you think it would be morally wrong to publicly disagree with Tony Blair before communicating with him in private or you are saying that it is morally acceptable to make a public response to a public statement without talking to them in private first.

Which is it?

+-

John Smith said...

James, your dismissal of the discussion is interesting and you seem to be favouring one side of it. Is there a reason for that?

I find some of the issues raised by Fr Rabit and Fr Abberton very pertinent. I have come across these 'Vasulla' people in the Catholic Church: they seem to have an alternative Bible. It looks just like a Bible and they say the revelations of the Trinity are suppored by bishops, just as Fr Abberton said. You have raised a discussion about new age mysticism here, and this thread was just becoming interesting, so it's a pity you have to go and close it down. Your own coments in your argument are at times just as rude as Fr Rabit, who - for all his directness - seemed to be making a very effective point about heresy.

+-

James said...

Both of them make good points, but only one of them is accusing the other of hoodwinking people. Fr Rabit not only accuses Fr Abberton of being incorrect, he accuses him of deliberately misleading people (that's what 'hoodwink' means).

I asked Fr Rabid to provide an example of Vassula's writing that he finds objectionable. He has not done so. He continues to play the tedious game of listing which Bishops have warned against Vassula while Fr Abberton points out that other Bishops don't seem to have a problem. Okay - the Bishops are divided. We get the point.

My personal view is this: It's a private relevation that people are free to accept or reject until the Church says otherwise. I know nothing about it.

What I don't understand is how you people can get so worked up over this but there's suddenly a deadly silence when the subject of Catholic Education Services comes up.

+-

John Smith said...

That's an interesting interpretation James, and of course you're entitled to find this uninteresting. But having created a blog where people will be interested in different angles, you should be more open. You see, when you say you asked for some objections to this Vassulla character, FR provided a link to a Jesuit priest who has written down all the objections most clearly. http://www.infovassula.ch/dermine.pdfI

I think that it was very interesting to read them, and that was I think a direct response to your request for examples. So it is a pity if you judge the thing before your readers have had time to catch up with an argument and say what they think. You seem to express your views quite vigorously as well!

+-

James said...

Hi John,

I haven't "judged the thing before my readers have had time to catch up" because it is highly unlikely that many of my readers will ever get this far.

You need to understand that this lady is a tiny blip on my radar and I am not about to go and read every single fifty page PDF somebody tells me about on the off chance that there might be something interesting buried in it.

I am interested in seeing a direct quote from Vassula about which I can say "gee, that's dodgy" but so far none of you experts on the subject are willing to do anything more than say "read this huge document".

If you want me (and my readers) to care about this enough to start putting some effort in then you need to stop getting bogged down in the history of who said what about who and give us a few simple objections.

In the meantime, please stop using my blog as a platform to attack Fr Abberton who I know to be a good man even if he does turn out to be mistaken in this matter.

+-

John Smith said...

Dear me, James! As someone who has followed your blog and only now been moved to contribute something, I find this very rude. This whole page starts off: "John Paul II warns with regard to the return of ancient gnostic ideas under the guise of the so-called New Age". A broad canvas indeed, and it would be bound to get quite diverse. Maybe you should call your blog 'Catholic education Services' - as that is something you say interests you more - but I certainly didn't come here to get lectures from you! I was simply saying I found the subject interesting before you closed it down. Is that not permissible? It seems a very odd way to conduct a public forum and hardly reasonable. Especially when you call other people's manners poor, then demonstrate equal rudeness.

+-

James said...

"I certainly didn't come here to get lectures from you!"

"It seems a very odd way to conduct a public forum"

Now I understand your confusion...

I should explain John that blogs are not public forums. They are primarily a broadcast medium in which the blogger writes and others read - like a newspaper column or a radio show. In other words, you did come here to get lectures from me.

I have comments on my blog (many don't) as a courtesy to my readers so that they can comment on my blog entries. This is the equivalent of a radio phone in or a speaker asking if anybody has any questions.

Fr Rabit seemed to think it appropriate to wander on to my platform and start raving about Fr Abberton being a heretic - I gave him a fair chance to express himself and then shoved him off when he proved himself a monomaniacle bore.

No doubt I can be rude at times as well, but generally I'm not rude to people who have just given me the privilege of writing something on their website.

Does Fr Rabit have a website? May I come and write someting on it?

Thought not.

+-

John Smith said...

...oh and one last thing.

My good friend Fr Rabit is a bit of a bore, but at least he can spell. It's 'monomaniacal'.

Take care. :-)

+-

John Smith said...

Gosh! Thank you James, you really have cleared up my confusion. I was confused into thinking this was a reasonable Catholic blog like some others I read regularly. Now I see it's just a place where you like to make people look foolish for making any comment. Childish. What a waste of time.

+-

James said...

John, It wasn't my intention to make you look foolish (I didn't think I had made you look foolish). I simply mean't to set the record straight about why I asked Fr Rabit to stop.

+-