Messages 2001

Warning of danger and the choices we face

August 22nd, 2001

Received by H.

Cuenca, Ecuador


Hello H___! You called me, but I see that our connection is not very good. You can feel this, too, because you cannot see me clearly. You are sleepy; maybe this is not the right moment.

Well, if you insist, we may try. But we have to choose an easy topic.

[H.: As you know perhaps, some time ago, I asked about self-defense. I received two answers, through A.R. and K.S., fromMary and Jesus, respectively. Both answers agreed in that logically this is a free will choice, but that never, under any circumstance, can violence be approved of, not even in self-defense. They also explained that, when someone prays for protection, this someone would not face the necessity of using weapons, because it would not happen that s/he would be in the wrong place in the wrong moment. In other words, the obtained guidance would lead the person who is praying for protection along paths avoiding dangers.

But I wondered how it was possible then that Jesus died a violent death. He had more guidance than anyone else did. And how is it possible that so many martyrs died violently, of whom we suppose that they were people filled with Love and faith, nevertheless, it seems that they didn’t enjoy protection.]

The two messages through A.R. and K.S. tell the truth. And between Jesus’ violent death and the contents of the mentioned messages, there is just a seeming contradiction. Yes, it is an easy topic; I will explain it to you in detail.

You read that Jesus had knowledge that he was in danger. First, there is John the Baptist’s message setting out explicitly that John had warned Jesus. John was already “dead,” but had maintained contact with Jesus from the spirit world. And here enters the principle we discussed in connection with the Law of Activation, that is, you can interpret the warning as a blessing, an opportunity to escape. But a blessing is not mandatory, which means, it is always the individual who has to make the decision.

Jesus took the warning seriously. You can read in the Bible that he obviously camped on the Mount of Olives, or rather, in the Garden of Gethsemane. He could have found lodging easily in Jerusalem. It was also possible for him to spend the night in the house of his good friend, Lazarus, in Bethany, just a few miles from Jerusalem, right on the opposite side of the Mount of Olives. But he did not. Why? For reasons of safety.

It was my betrayal which gave the high priest’s henchmen the hint concerning his whereabouts, and so they located him and took him prisoner.

In short, Jesus had the opportunity to escape, to get away, and he received the warning in time, but he didn’t take advantage of it. He took certain precautions, but he stayed practically in the city, or very near to it, fully AWARE of the danger. He did not seek death, of course, but he understood that after several years spent with us, after continuous preaching, even we, his most intimate disciples, did not understand well, and that our faith was little.

He knew that each event, although seemingly fatal, bears opportunities, and he took a risk. The consequence of his attitude was his death, certainly, but further on, also his resurrection, and as you will understand, it was his resurrection which finally convinced the disciples. It was his resurrection which started the process of increasing his followers’ faith so much, that the coming of the Holy Spirit in such a spectacular way, like it happened at Pentecost, was possible. In that sense, and only in that sense, his death was a sacrifice for humanity. And as A.R. informed you, this decision caused in him the only doubt regarding his mission: “Had he completed everything to the best of his ability?” “Should he have protected himself and stayed longer with his followers?” A difficult decision, but he chose the right thing.

I don’t want you to understand me wrong. Jesus’ resurrection, or his previous death, were not the great events for salvation, you know this already. But the effect they had in convincing Jesus’ followers was decisive.

You have read the New Testament many times. In certain Gospels, the disciples are portrayed as a stupid bunch, unable to understand anything. Well, certainly it was not so, but it is also true that we didn’t understand everything. And according to the text of the gospels, although they exaggerate, can you imagine that Jesus’ disciples had enough faith, enough maturity and decisiveness so as to receive the Holy Spirit in such a spectacular way? Most certainly not. It was the experience of Jesus’ crucifixion, which left them scared to death, desperate, and then the Master’s resurrection and appearance, which established true, firm, sure faith. And without that faith, Pentecost would not have been possible, at least not so soon. If Jesus had decided to hide, to escape, it would not have been bad either. Like in so many cases, there were several options, and it is then that the soul perceptions can help us to choose the best option.

You can interpret the martyrs’ case in a similar way. They had knowledge of the danger, hence they had the opportunity to save their lives, but they did not. They chose death, in order to be an example, or for other reasons. There were even reasons pretty close to suicide. You have read about this.

But from this story you can deduce an extremely important conclusion:

When you face a problem, there are generally several solutions. There are truly bad solutions, and more or less good solutions. But there is not only one good solution. Therefore, we almost always have the possibility to choose among several viable ways.

You are thinking of the case of Jagerstatter. Very well. It fits marvelously in here. Describe here in few words this famous case.

[Franz Jagerstatter, who was born on May 20th, 1907 in St. Radegund, Austria, was called up into the army of Hitler’s Germany for the first time in August 1940. He had a big family and cultivated a farm, and so he was released from service and could return home after a few days. In October, he was forced back to the army, where he served until the month of April of 1941, but he was never sent to fight at the front line. When Germany’s situation got worse during World War II and Jagerstatter received once again an order to join the ranks, he categorically refused to do so on March 1st, 1943. He declared that he would not lend himself in the service of Hitler’s world domination.

Jagerstatter did not maintain contacts to Austrian resistance groups, but acted according to his own conscience. He knew that his behavior would not change the course of history, but he wanted to establish a visible sign. Among the military officers interrogating him there was a very understanding colonel who explained him that his decision, of course, meant his death. He insisted that Jagerstatter had to care for his family, who would suffer from his refusal, according to the law of “Sippenhaftung”, which means, the whole family’s shared responsibility, a law which allowed the Hitler regime to exert great pressure against any intent of insurrection, executing even innocent relatives of the dissidents. The colonel promised Jagerstatter even that he would not be sent to the front line, but to a military hospital, where he could help the wounded, without need for touching one single weapon. But Jagerstatter kept on refusing. On August 9th, 1943, Jagerstatter was transferred to Brandenburg/Havel and beheaded at 16:00 as the first of 16 victims.

There is a group in the Roman Catholic Church advocating Jagerstatter’s beatification. There is also much resistance against this motion, because some officials of the named church think that Jagerstatter acted in an exaggerated fashion, risking not only his own life, but also the lives of all his family.]

Well, did Jagerstatter do the right thing? And here remember that almost always there are several viable options. If Jagerstatter acted this way following his conscience, he did the right thing. If his conscience had advised him to cede, it would not have been bad either. Both options are acceptable. The only unacceptable option was to voluntarily support a criminal regime.

Remember, besides an optimum choice, there are almost always other good options. We have the possibility to choose. And also, the optimum choice for a person depends on their soul condition. Two people in one and the same situation will very probably have different good options.

What I wish to convey is, listen to your inner voice, let yourself be guided, and do everything with love. This way you cannot be wrong. And if you really make an error, nothing is lost. The Father’s universe always allows corrections, sooner or later.

But now we have got to stop. You are sleepy and can scarcely follow what I am trying to explain to you.

Yes, tell G___.

Good night, your brother,



© Copyright is asserted in this message by Geoff Cutler 2013