Author Topic: The Letter from Beyond -- written by a woman whose life was lost... (Read 2805 times)

Neil Obstat · « **on:** July 17, 2012, 08:22:22 PM »

Read the story here.

Some notes:

The woman condemned to hell, speaks briefly to her friend, Claire:

For us (in hell), everything is a torment. Everything we come to understand at death, every recollection of life and of what we know, becomes a burning flame.
Are you listening? Here we drink hatred as if it were water. We all hate one another.

More than anything else, we hate God.

Although I hate the devil, I like him because he and his helpers, the angels that fell with him at the beginning of time, strive to cause the loss of the people on earth. In truth, I would like to see you here, where I will remain forever. There are myriad demons. Uncountable numbers of them wander through the world, like a swarm of flies, without their presence even being suspected.

God takes everything much more seriously than any priest does.

Only one thing would have been able to bring me to my senses: a profound and prolonged suffering. But this suffering never came. Do you now understand that “Whom God loves, God chastises”?

Above all, I always scoffed at the fire of Hell.
The fire of which the Bible speaks is not the torment of conscience. Fire means fire. One must understand Our Lord’s declaration in its literal sense: “Depart from Me, ye accursed, into everlasting fire.” Literally!

Being spiritually enchained, we reprobates gaze in terror at our misspent lives, howling and gnashing our teeth, tormented and filled with hatred.

Claire, while Hell might be poorly drawn, it can never be exaggerated.

(end of message from hell)

That afternoon in the garden, I encountered a kindly, nearsighted lady from Budapest...
She added kindly: “Let nothing distress you — you know the advice of Saint Teresa — let nothing alarm you. Everything passes. He who possesses God lacks nothing. God alone suffices.”

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 17, 2012, 09:44:54 PM »

Please Post a duplicate of this in the Library section for quick future reference.

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 17, 2012, 09:58:24 PM »

I remember a story from last week news that a young boy wondered in a
19th century cemetery in Utah, and the boy walked up to the base of
a tombstone. The tombstone broke from the mount and fell on the boy
and killed him instantly.
The lesson here is do not allow your children, and yourselves wonder
into unconsecrated grounds.

Thanks for posting the longer version of the above in the Library.

theology101 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:50:28 AM »

Thats pretty frightening stuff. Ive always heard it said that the worst part of hell is knowing that you are eternally separated from God's love.

s2srea · « **Reply #4 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:47:45 PM »

Wow- beautiful. I love the last words of St. Theresa: "He who possesses God lacks nothing. God alone suffices.”"

I just read it, and forwarded to my mother-in-law, whose return to the Faith I have been praying for. Please, say a quick Ave for her if you see this message.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #5 on:** July 18, 2012, 02:13:06 PM »

Quote from: RomanCatholic1953

Please Post a duplicate of this in the Library section for quick future reference.

I just tried to add this post to the Library thread I opened yesterday but I can't
do that because someone LOCKED the thread. So if anyone reads the Library
thread they won't know this discussion exists, since I forgot to put a link there
to this thread in the first place.

I guess you ought to do that, whenever you make a Library thread you should
include a link to the discussion thread, wherever it is. Maybe next time!

Quote

Some notes:

The woman condemned to hell, speaks briefly to her friend, Claire:

For us (in hell), everything is a torment. Everything we come to understand at death, every recollection of life and of what we know, becomes a burning flame.
Are you listening? Here we drink hatred as if it were water. We all hate one another.

More than anything else, we hate God.

Although I hate the devil, I like him because he and his helpers, the angels that fell with him at the beginning of time, strive to cause the loss of the people on earth. In truth, I would like to see you here, where I will remain forever. There are myriad demons. Uncountable numbers of them wander through the world, like a swarm of flies, without their presence even being suspected.

God takes everything much more seriously than any priest does.

Only one thing would have been able to bring me to my senses: a profound and prolonged suffering. But this suffering never came. Do you now understand that “Whom God loves, God chastises”?

Above all, I always scoffed at the fire of Hell.
The fire of which the Bible speaks is not the torment of conscience. Fire means fire. One must understand Our Lord’s declaration in its literal sense: “Depart from Me, ye accursed, into everlasting fire.” Literally!

Being spiritually enchained, we reprobates gaze in terror at our misspent lives, howling and gnashing our teeth, tormented and filled with hatred.

Claire, while Hell might be poorly drawn, it can never be exaggerated.

(end of message from hell)

That afternoon in the garden, I encountered a kindly, nearsighted lady from Budapest...
She added kindly: “Let nothing distress you — you know the advice of Saint Teresa — let nothing alarm you. Everything passes. He who possesses God lacks nothing. God alone suffices.”

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #6 on:** July 18, 2012, 03:06:37 PM »

Quote from: theology101

Thats pretty frightening stuff. Ive always heard it said that the worst part of hell is knowing that you are eternally separated from God's love.

I'm glad you brought that up, Theo.

I've heard this on several occasions, and I've read that it's based in the Summa,
as well. But I've never heard it put into context very well. After reading this story,
which was sent to me from a friend, now I think I understand a bit better how it
fits into God's reality.

Before, I had thought, well, the sense of loss must be really bad if it's the worst
part about hell. But what to compare it to, was not very clear to me. "The worst
part" infers there is another part, but what is that?

There is a dream of St. John Bosco where he saw some of his students falling into
hell, by sliding down a road that got steeper and steeper, until they slid without
any ability to slow down or stop. When they fell through the barrier that separates
hell from what is outside of hell, the physical posture that they had at that
moment was fixed, such that they were unable to move any part of their body.
Don Bosco asked why that is, and he received the answer that hell is eternal, and
there can be no change in one's being for eternity. There is no way out, and there
is no way to reduce the sufferings that one endures, nor is there any way to move
one's body into a position less miserable, for the body cannot move at all. The
devils will attack it and it will have no recourse to aid. Don Bosco was able to put
his hand on the wall that is the outermost part of hell, and it burned his hand,
because the wall was so hot. He was given to understand that this wall is the one
that is the least hot, and that there are more walls inside, each one of which is
hotter than the one outside of it. Those who fall into the deepest places in hell are
stuck forever in the most intense fire.

So, if the sense of loss is worse than the fire itself, this helps us to know how
much that loss is. We have a sense of loss when we lose a game, or when we
make a bet and see our money disappear, or when we work really hard for
some material prize and end up losing it for whatever reason, or when someone
steals something of value from us, when a loved one dies, or for a captain, who
is forced to watch his ship founder and he would prefer to be on board himself, but
he cannot. Or when our nation loses a war: that's a big sense of loss. But to have
a sense of loss that is worse than the fire of hell -- a fire that does not consume, a
fire that does not diminish, but can only get worse, a fire from which we would
be unable to protect ourselves by moving our body to a shielded place because
we cannot move our body -- such a sense of loss is rather beyond our
comprehension. We have no such similar thing in this world.

When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired; as Our Lord says, "Let those with
eyes to see, see."

***
Question: How do Modernists fight against this "faculty" of spiritual vision?

...

Answer: To fight against this faculty of spiritual vision, the Modernists deny its
effect by denying its very existence; for they sneer and scoff at the word,
"faculty," and claim that there is no such thing, and they do this at the very
foundation of thought itself, in their pompous and erroneous philosophy.
***

Note: Any Sede who wants to chime in and accuse me of being remiss for not
including a reference so they can check to see if I got words wrong, can know that
you don't need any authority or source for this. What you need to do is to study
philosophy under the guidance of a reliable teacher, one that does not begin with
modern philosophers, but begins rather with love of the perennial wisdom of the
Traditional Catholic Faith of our Fathers.

Lighthouse · « **Reply #7 on:** July 18, 2012, 03:46:54 PM »

Chime, chime. You are remiss.

Quote

When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired; as Our Lord says, "Let those with
eyes to see, see."

A very clear statement of how the Protestants proceed. Do you rely on the teachings of the Church at all?

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #8 on:** July 18, 2012, 04:22:04 PM »

Quote from: Lighthouse

Chime, chime. You are remiss...

A very clear statement of how the Protestants proceed.

That's not a sentence.

Quote

Do you rely on the teachings of the Church at all?

Do you have something substantive to contribute, or are you smug with your
satisfaction of hurling ungrammatical and unsubstantiated epithets?

theology101 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 18, 2012, 05:59:32 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: theology101
Thats pretty frightening stuff. Ive always heard it said that the worst part of hell is knowing that you are eternally separated from God's love.

I'm glad you brought that up, Theo.

I've heard this on several occasions, and I've read that it's based in the Summa,
as well. But I've never heard it put into context very well. After reading this story,
which was sent to me from a friend, now I think I understand a bit better how it
fits into God's reality.

Before, I had thought, well, the sense of loss must be really bad if it's the worst
part about hell. But what to compare it to, was not very clear to me. "The worst
part" infers there is another part, but what is that?

There is a dream of St. John Bosco where he saw some of his students falling into
hell, by sliding down a road that got steeper and steeper, until they slid without
any ability to slow down or stop. When they fell through the barrier that separates
hell from what is outside of hell, the physical posture that they had at that
moment was fixed, such that they were unable to move any part of their body.
Don Bosco asked why that is, and he received the answer that hell is eternal, and
there can be no change in one's being for eternity. There is no way out, and there
is no way to reduce the sufferings that one endures, nor is there any way to move
one's body into a position less miserable, for the body cannot move at all. The
devils will attack it and it will have no recourse to aid. Don Bosco was able to put
his hand on the wall that is the outermost part of hell, and it burned his hand,
because the wall was so hot. He was given to understand that this wall is the one
that is the least hot, and that there are more walls inside, each one of which is
hotter than the one outside of it. Those who fall into the deepest places in hell are
stuck forever in the most intense fire.

So, if the sense of loss is worse than the fire itself, this helps us to know how
much that loss is. We have a sense of loss when we lose a game, or when we
make a bet and see our money disappear, or when we work really hard for
some material prize and end up losing it for whatever reason, or when someone
steals something of value from us, when a loved one dies, or for a captain, who
is forced to watch his ship founder and he would prefer to be on board himself, but
he cannot. Or when our nation loses a war: that's a big sense of loss. But to have
a sense of loss that is worse than the fire of hell -- a fire that does not consume, a
fire that does not diminish, but can only get worse, a fire from which we would
be unable to protect ourselves by moving our body to a shielded place because
we cannot move our body -- such a sense of loss is rather beyond our
comprehension. We have no such similar thing in this world.

When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired; as Our Lord says, "Let those with
eyes to see, see."

***
Question: How do Modernists fight against this "faculty" of spiritual vision?

...

Answer: To fight against this faculty of spiritual vision, the Modernists deny its
effect by denying its very existence; for they sneer and scoff at the word,
"faculty," and claim that there is no such thing, and they do this at the very
foundation of thought itself, in their pompous and erroneous philosophy.
***

Note: Any Sede who wants to chime in and accuse me of being remiss for not
including a reference so they can check to see if I got words wrong, can know that
you don't need any authority or source for this. What you need to do is to study
philosophy under the guidance of a reliable teacher, one that does not begin with
modern philosophers, but begins rather with love of the perennial wisdom of the
Traditional Catholic Faith of our Fathers.

Very well said.

Lighthouse · « **Reply #10 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:20:23 PM »

Quote

That's not a sentence.

So what? I can provide examples, but I'm not going to now, of well respected writers who put in such shortened declarations to add punch to their writing.
In any case this is an internet forum, not an invitation to dinner with royalty.

Fowler gives many examples of "verbless or otherwise incomplete sentences" and comments that they are "stylistically acceptable in context".

So, if I were to add a verb would you smugly deign to deal with the allegation?

I thought from your comments that you rather abhorred "substantiated" arguments.

Maybe I just misunderstand you. Are your saying that the proper way to apprehend truth is to enter into some sort of gnostic trance and then take that experience to use when you are doing your own interpretation of the Bible?

Quote

Quote:
Do you rely on the teachings of the Church at all?

It seems to me to be a simple question.

:smile:

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #11 on:** July 19, 2012, 07:07:36 AM »

Quote from: Lighthouse

Chime, chime. You are remiss.

Quote
When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired; as Our Lord says, "Let those with
eyes to see, see."

A very clear statement of how the Protestants proceed. Do you rely on the teachings of the Church at all?

You have hurled an unsubstantiated accusation, that I am "remiss," apparently
that I proceed like Protestants (I can't be sure because your incomplete sentence
has no subject), and the indirect insinuation that I do not rely on the teachings of
the Church. Are you having fun, or are you just miserable in general all the time?

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: Lighthouse
Chime, chime. You are remiss...

A very clear statement of how the Protestants proceed.

That's not a sentence.

Quote
Do you rely on the teachings of the Church at all?

Do you have something substantive to contribute, or are you smug with your
satisfaction of hurling ungrammatical and unsubstantiated epithets?

Notice: I am inviting substantive contributions, not ad hominem accusations.

Quote from: Lighthouse

Quote
That's not a sentence.

So what? I can provide examples, but I'm not going to now, of well respected writers who put in such shortened declarations to add punch to their writing.

It's not a "declaration" if it's not a sentence. It's just a fragment that could mean
all kinds of things, depending on how the sentence is completed. You are
apparently attempting to change the subject by leaving out the subject, in other
words.

Quote

In any case this is an internet forum, not an invitation to dinner with royalty.

Fowler gives many examples of "verbless or otherwise incomplete sentences" and comments that they are "stylistically acceptable in context".

This is not a thread about writing styles, in case you forgot to notice -- unless you
would like to discuss the writing style of the nun whose dream is described in the
OP. I challenge you to find any such fragment in that story.

First, you have made ambiguous charges against what I have written, and then you're contemplating your own navel -- oh, while you accuse me of having
"gnostic trances." Are you Jєωιѕн??

Quote

So, if I were to add a verb would you smugly deign to deal with the allegation?

The verb wasn't the major problem. There was no identifiable subject, which is a
consequence of the verb missing, therefore, the effect of the missing verb is that
the would-be sentence has a vast number of meanings, some of which could be
contradictory to others. This is the kind of problem that Vatican II introduced by its
ambiguous language. Are you a fan of Vatican II-speak?

The linked article has none of that. It is written in a very standard, clear, and
lucid style, but perhaps that isn't exciting enough for you?

Maybe that's why you didn't bother to read it before you came on here criticizing
my comments and my attempt to briefly summarize the story, and to offer some
constructive points to ponder over the usefulness of the linked story itself.

If you don't like the message, why then obsess with attacking the messenger?

Quote

I thought from your comments that you rather abhorred "substantiated" arguments.

Did you even bother to notice that the linked story has plenty of footnotes?

Maybe it would be a good idea to read what is posted instead of reading only
the most recent post and from that point leaping to conclusions about what the
poster intended after having divorced your thinking from the subject at hand?

Quote

Maybe I just misunderstand you. Are your saying that the proper way to apprehend truth is to enter into some sort of gnostic trance and then take that experience to use when you are doing your own interpretation of the Bible?

I'm sorry, I have no idea where you got that. You must have me confused with
another member.

I do not so think now, nor have I ever in my life thought, that a gnostic trance is
a means by which anyone can know truth. And I don't plan on adopting that
method in the future. And no, I am not a fan of Medjugorje (where they do that
kind of thing).

I was talking about the linked story.
What are you talking about? --certainly not the linked story!

Quote

Quote
Quote:
Do you rely on the teachings of the Church at all?

It seems to me to be a simple question.

:smile:

In case you didn't notice, the topic of this thread is the linked story, which
describes something. Maybe you didn't read the story, so you don't know what's
being described therein, because none of what you have posted here touches on
the content of the story.

Are you a troll? Are you attempting to hijack the thread?

If you're not a troll, and you're not attempting to derail this thread, perhaps you
are dissatisfied with the way I presented the story, and the manner by which I
summarized it for those who may not be willing to devote 15 minutes of their time
to reading the original when they don't know if it's going to be worth the effort?

If that is the case, you are more than welcome to provide for everyone reading
this, your own summary of the linked story, and your own commentary on the
virtues of its content, if any, or alternatively, your own criticism of how reading it
was indeed a waste of time for you, for whatever reason.

By the way, that's what I mean by "substantive contributions."

For if you have nothing constructive to say, then you must in fact be a troll,
which your other posts on this forum would not refute.

Lighthouse · « **Reply #12 on:** July 19, 2012, 01:55:03 PM »

Oh my, you are hopeless.

Just to give you some clues:

Quote

When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired..

This is the statement I have been referring to. You are very confusing because you refer to the skimpy little sentencette as lacking a subject when on a grammatical level, it lacks a verb. So by "subject" you mean what is it referring to? Ok, well match it up with your statement above. Apparently my statement appearing right after the quote from you was not clear enough.

I did not make any evaluation of your person, but only your argumentation, so please help me by pointing out my perceived ad hominems. You on the other hand have called me: Jєωιѕн, having motivations from a generally malignant disposition, a troll and a thread hijacker!

Quote

You have hurled an unsubstantiated accusation, that I am "remiss,"...

Well, no the "remiss" part was just having a little fun with your statement. What? Not allowed to have fun?

Quote

Are you having fun, or are you just miserable in general all the time?

Again with the personal invective, but yes, I am having fun.

Quote

When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired; as Our Lord says, "Let those with
eyes to see, see."

Quote

This is not a thread about writing styles...

Yes, I am aware. Do you understand that you were the one who derailed in that direction when you claimed to not understand based on the writing style.

Quote

I'm sorry, I have no idea where you got that. You must have me confused with
another member.

I do not so think now, nor have I ever in my life thought, that a gnostic trance is
a means by which anyone can know truth

Quote

When it comes to spiritual matters, we only have temporal reality to give us some
inkling of the unseen spiritual reality. In this state, it helps us to open our eyes of
faith and see that which is otherwise invisible, by reading this kind of story, and by
then going back to Scripture and reading it again with the added faculty of a
new sense of vision that we have acquired..

This confuses me and thence my questions.

Quote

I was talking about the linked story.
What are you talking about? --certainly not the linked story!

No, I was talking about YOUR comments on the linked story. If they are irrelevant to the story, why did you post them?

Quote

For if you have nothing constructive to say, then you must in fact be a troll,
which your other posts on this forum would not refute.

Good one. One final personal attack at the end. Nice work. Goodbye. Have a nice day!

(Sorry, I seem to have messed up the quote function).

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #13 on:** July 20, 2012, 01:15:56 PM »

Your Nimbleness has rendered Your Message meaningless.

Sorry, no comprendo.

Hint: next time, use the Preview feature!

Lighthouse · « **Reply #14 on:** July 20, 2012, 03:18:30 PM »

Not too hard. Everything I quoted from you was between the quote,/quote
marks. Just treat them as quotation marks. You must multi-task a bit.

I don't see how that would render the message meaningless. As a matter of fact I did use the "Preview" feature. I simple don't have the time to keep messing with it.

Quote

Sorry, no comprendo.

That seems to be your tactic of choice with this thing. You won't deal with anything you said, you just claim to "no comprendo" what I said. So apparently you have a comprehension problem.

It happens. I vote we all retire with a Friday beer, and let it go.

:cheers: