The Two Timelines Of Fatima And Apocalypse. One Way Or The Other.
{PART ONE}
I. General Overview Of Prophecy
II. Fatima And The Period Of Peace
III. Looking At The Big Picture With The Gospel Accounts
IV. The False Version Of La Salette (1879)
V. Our Lady Of Good Success (Quito, Ecuador)
{PART TWO}
VI. Two Thousand Years Of Catholic Prophecy
-The Early Centuries Until The Holy Monarch
-Additional Examples And Timeline Differences
-The Changes In The Timeline Leading Toward The Final Days
-From The Great Monarch To The Heavenly Scourge
-Bl. Anna-Katarina Emmerich-Of Future Popes: St. Malachy And The Monk Of Padua
{PART THREE}
VII. "That Time Shall Be No Longer": Apocalypse Chapter Ten -Considering The Chronology
Our Lady said "if what I say to you is done, many souls will
be saved and there will be peace". That alone summarizes the first
possible outcome - the period of peace which comes beforehand, and which
forestalls a crisis for the Church.
All of this is different from what seems to be the main point of the eschatological discourse, which is a warning to not be led astray from the true nature of the Second Coming of Christ, which is what is to occur in the years before the real, actual end. Our Lord admonished His followers: "Take care", He said, "that you do not allow anyone to deceive you. Many will come making use of my name; they will say, Here I am, the time is close at hand; do not turn aside after them" (Luke 21:8~Knox).
We will briefly contrast Apocalypse chapters 11 and 13 before comparing them (and others) with the 1879 version of La Salette to show how it mixes the two timelines.
Common to both of these is the period of time called "two and forty months". This is the reign of the beast, in either timeline.
There is no "two and forty months" in chapter twelve because that
period is completely different, except that it is the origin point
(1958-1965) of what culminates in chapter thirteen (soon). The 1,260 days is common to
chapters eleven and twelve, but the "time and times, and half a time" is
unique to chapter twelve. Perhaps because, as is the case with the first
half of chapter twelve, the apostasy, or at least the schism, had not reached the Church in the
dioceses around the world: it was in Rome with the cardinals in both timelines. It is equivalent, spiritually, to the period
leading up to but before Vatican '2'. There is no Vatican '2'-style
apostasy in the first timeline; at least not from within. It is
not a case of a substitution of religion by false authority. It is
persecution from outside, with changes and apostasy imposed by force. [20A]
-First Timeline Summary And Book Of Life Thesis
VIII. The Book Of Life
-Thesis And Some Objections And Answers
-Where It All Ends And Begins Again
-The Application Of The Book Of Life
--Sealed And Unsealed Compared With The Baptism
--Particular And General Judgement
--The Merits Of Our Lord
--Deletion
--"Unmaking The Ring"
IX. The Arrangement Of Apocalypse And Final Notes/Two Timelines Signs
Sr. Lucia/Fr. Fuentes Interview Revisited (1957)
Holy Shroud of Turin
Parable Of The Labourers
Angel Of Chapter Ten Revisited
General And The Particular Judgements
Default Timeline And Catholic Prophecy
Formation Of Souls
There Has To Be A Cause For Hope
Where Are The Four Living Creatures ?
X. The Prophecy Of Daniel Chapter Twelve
St. Michael's Intercession
The Last Three Trumpets And Where They Go
The Seven Thunders, The Nullification Of A Timeline, And A Paradox
What The Prophet Daniel Was Given To See
I. General Overview Of Prophecy
The
Apocalypse is not clear and easy to decipher. Some believe it is a long
form prophecy concerning the history of the Church; others believe the
events contained therein must happen very close to the end. [1] There is
truth in both of these perspectives.
When
considering these verses, one should also consider the whole history of
Catholic prophecy. Although revelation ended with the last apostle, St.
John, it does not follow that 'private revelation' (as these later
prophecies are called) can be safely ignored, even if they seem to be
contradictory. They still say something, even if they are obsolete (cannot be fulfilled due to changed conditions).
Post-scriptural
prophecies, even with the approbation of the Church, are not on the
same level as the revealed Word. Their fulfillment is conditional. Over
time the spiritual conditions may change so that what was prophesied can
no longer come to pass. One great example of this are the prophecies
concerning the 'Great Monarch', who was to deliver the Church from a
severe crisis, and was to be accompanied by an 'Angelic Pope'. Some time
after the French Revolution the great monarch ceased to appear in
prophecy. [2] He was not mentioned at all in Fatima.
When a prophecy is given, the end-point which is foreseen is a kind of 'fast forward simulation' of the spiritual state of the world from that time
until its fulfillment, assuming there are no significant changes in the
interim; if there were, the variables would change, which would result
in a different outcome. This is different from scriptural prophecy which
must be fulfilled in any event and is necessarily more generalized;
however, the things it is more specific about are clear enough, unless
one reads them without the baseline of actual Catholicism, which is necessary for a true understanding.
Prophecy
tends to vary more widely whether it is concerned with the 'period of
peace', how it may come about, [3] and the final persecutions of the
antichrist. The latter are more consistent. Again, the great monarch illustrates this as he may not
necessarily arrive to assist the holy pope who was to reign, as he might
not be there at all. [4] But the 'period of peace' is one of those elements
which must come to pass before the Second Coming, one way or the other.
Of
things pertaining to the reign of antichrist, there is consistent
mention of the two witnesses, Enoch and Elias. As they appear in
scripture (Apoc. 11:3-12) it must be so, even as the 'beast' himself
must appear. [5] However, they will not appear in the chapter
thirteen 'timeline'; instead, the 144,000 elect are there to bear
witness; conversely, there are no 144,000 elect in the chapter eleven
'timeline', as the two witnesses are there instead.
In
the Gospel accounts given in St. Matt. 24, St. Mark 13, and St. Luke
21, neither the beast nor the two witnesses are mentioned. The elect
are, however; and it must be so, as the Gospel accounts tell us about the
days before the real actual end of the world and the second coming of
Christ, and His elect are of particular concern to Him. Apocalypse gives
more than one possible end: The first is indicated in chapter eleven [6]
and a second, very definite one in chapter twenty. We will discuss how
the Gospel accounts pertain to either 'timeline'.
There
are also the prophecies of Daniel, in particular his twelfth chapter,
which cannot be neglected since Our Lord Himself references Daniel and
the 'abomination unto desolation' in Matt 24:15. Daniel also speaks of "a time, and times, and half a time" - 3.5 years -
which correlate to similar lengths of time in Apocalypse; but not with chapter
twelve, as the great tribulation is not the concern of that chapter.
It
is necessary also to examine the false version of La Salette (1879),
how it happened, and why it is necessary to distinguish that from true
prophecy. We will see that its blending of elements which belong to
either timeline but not both causes unnecessary confusion. Properly
understood, La Salette is very enlightening. But it is not a precursor
to Fatima. They are actually quite different in their ends.
One
of the conclusions it is hoped would become apparent is that there are
two possible timelines leading towards the Second Coming; and that of
these two, one was actually never meant to happen.
II. Fatima And The Period Of Peace
The 'period of peace' must precede the Second Coming, one way or another. [7] With Fatima, as commonly understood,
it would appear to have been possible either way - to prevent the
crisis in the Church prior to the coming of antichrist - but this is not
quite true. What actually happens is that if Our Lady's requests were
heeded, the crisis of the Church (consisting of spiritual
persecution and the loss of the papacy) would be forestalled; and the
period of peace would have come about before the coming of antichrist
which precedes the Second Coming by a relatively short time; otherwise,
there is no peace, a crisis does befall the Church (again a spiritual
one, not of open persecution) in which the true papacy is not to be
found; the Faith is lost, until there is a small remnant left which is
persecuted in the end by the antichrist; and only after all these events and after
the defeat of the antichrist would come the period of peace. And finally,
following that, will be the Second Coming (preceded by the events announced in the Gospels).
This scenario is unique to Fatima. Beforehand, the crisis in the Church was more likely to consist of open persecution in which the papacy is compromised by the prevention of the election of another pope; the spiritual persecution, in which the papacy and the Church was attacked from within, is relatively new (in terms of Catholic prophecy). What must precede the Second Coming is not only the period of peace, but following that an open persecution when the devil is unchained from hell: "And when the thousand years shall be finished, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison and shall go forth and seduce the nations...and shall gather them together to battle...and they...encompassed the camp of the saints and the beloved city" (Apoc. 20:7-8). At that persecution, which precedes the Second Coming, the faithful are admonished: "Then they that are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains" (Matt. 24:16). [8]
This scenario is unique to Fatima. Beforehand, the crisis in the Church was more likely to consist of open persecution in which the papacy is compromised by the prevention of the election of another pope; the spiritual persecution, in which the papacy and the Church was attacked from within, is relatively new (in terms of Catholic prophecy). What must precede the Second Coming is not only the period of peace, but following that an open persecution when the devil is unchained from hell: "And when the thousand years shall be finished, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison and shall go forth and seduce the nations...and shall gather them together to battle...and they...encompassed the camp of the saints and the beloved city" (Apoc. 20:7-8). At that persecution, which precedes the Second Coming, the faithful are admonished: "Then they that are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains" (Matt. 24:16). [8]
At
Fatima, Our Lady gave to the three shepherd children a Secret in
which two possible scenarios are laid out, either of which may come to
pass depending on whether certain conditions are met. The secret
properly begins with the vision of hell, then the means to save souls,
and what will happen if certain conditions are met, or not:
‘You
have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God
wishes to establish in the world devotion to My Immaculate Heart. If
what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be
peace. The war is going to end; but if people do not cease offending
God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius XI. When you
see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great
sign given you by God that He is about to punish the world for its
crimes by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of
the Holy Father.'
The
Great War of 1914-1918 was in in progress at the time the secret was
given. It was not to be revealed until much later, as such an early
revelation would be bewildering - another worse war predicted when the
current one was still ongoing - which might have made recognition of the
apparitions of Fatima impossible. As it was, the hierarchy was slow to
make this recognition (1930).
With
repentance and a conversion to a more virtuous life on the part of
many, this second war might be prevented; but more to the point, the
"persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father" might be stopped.
Those persecutions are the infiltration of the Church who were working
to undermine the Faith by advancing to higher positions, until even the
Papacy was threatened. [9]
Our
Lady could simply have said that 'unworthy men would undermine the
Church from within' but as this is allowed to happen as a punishment for
sin and lukewarmness, such a warning would not strike the problem at
its root. A stronger faith on the part of the Church fortified with
virtue would address it, which is the purpose of establishing
devotion to Her Immaculate Heart. She continues:
‘To
prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to My
Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First
Saturdays. If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted and there
will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world,
causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred,
the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be
annihilated. In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy
Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a
period of peace will be granted to the world. In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved, etc.'
If
Her requests were heeded, there would be peace, without any
qualifications. This is the path which leads to the chapter eleven
scenario. The 'errors of Russia' would be neutralized, as well as the
infiltration of the Church, and the papacy would remain; at least for as
long as the peace shall last. [10]
Otherwise,
what will happen are dire consequences, in which error proceeds
unchecked until, at the last, various nations are "annihilated". [11]
(She did not have to formally announce the Apocalypse; instead it
appeared She deliberately avoided doing so. Otherwise that, too, might have
made recognition of the apparitions very difficult, if not impossible.)
Today (2025) we see the establishment of error in every place and in
every way.
At
the end appears the first line of the third secret. Unveiled by design
by Sr. Lucia in her fourth memoir, it does not affirm that Rome will
keep the Faith. Normally it is assumed that Portugal would keep the
Faith, but to affirm the obvious for one necessarily suggests otherwise
for the other.
One part is not italicized, and this is because it is now believed to be a false addition (see here
and its third footnote in particular). If one reads the secret without
this addition, the sequence is more logical: The 'annihilation of
nations' is announced, which would seem to be the end-point for a series
of events, for what else can happen afterwards, if not the imminent
Second Coming ? So it would seem, except for the first sentence of the
third secret given us by Sr. Lucia. In the rest of the third part, Our
Lady likely gives the reasons why the dogmas of the Faith are not
preserved elsewhere, and the fate of the faithful remnant (see about the
third secret vision here),
and very possibly stopping just short of announcing the 'period of
peace' which is the thousand years of Apocalypse chapter twenty. It is
categorically unlikely She ever indicated this other period of peace,
which is the same reason She never indicated the Apocalypse directly.
The reason for this is that there is a greater secret within the secret, and
it is in the Apocalypse; the purpose of this secret is not to
mislead us: in fact it is for safety, and for our own good. It is for the devil to mislead himself and defeat himself for our
greater good.
Our
Lady could not make any reference to Apocalypse without indicating the
timeline on which events were proceeding. Particularly if it was as yet
undecided: the timeline is decided when a crisis is averted by an
intercession of Heaven resulting in a period of peace. The thing is, the
devil must have been aware of this too. The Apocalypse is structured in
such a way that it is impossible to construct a sequence of events
representing one timeline without resulting in some kind of
contradiction. For example, the sequence from the opening of the seals
until the woes of the final three trumpets (chapters 7-9) is
straightforward until chapter ten, when St. John must "prophesy again to
many nations, and peoples, and tongues, and kings" (Apoc. 10:11).
III. Looking At The Big Picture With The Gospel Accounts
To
step away for a moment, and look at the larger picture: It has been
asked, of Fatima, "Why the secret ?" Why not just say what it is ?
A
partial answer is already given: That there is a secret within the
secret, and not to know it is for our own good. [12] Whatever else
happens, the general principle is that Heaven wants what is best for
souls and the devil wants what is worst for souls. But Heaven cannot lie
to us or even to the devil to achieve Their ends.
If
the first question be asked of Our Lady of Fatima (the Queen of
Prophets) then it is fair to ask: Why the Apocalypse, and why is it so
confusing ?
The
Gospel accounts of the days before the Second Coming, recounted three
times by Sts. Matthew, Mark and Luke, have already given sufficient
signs to inform the faithful when generally to expect it. What they do
not say is
anything about the antichrist (named so only by St. John) or the 'man of sin' spoken of by St. Paul in the second book of Thessalonians.
There
are two reasons for the omission: First, there are two different
versions of the antichrist manifest in chapters eleven and
thirteen of Apocalypse; one is singular, and the other is preceded by
seven 'heads'. Either are said to 'ascend out of the abyss' or the
'bottomless pit' (Apoc. 11:7; and the 'eighth' of Apoc. 17:8,11).
Secondly, the antichrist is come and gone long before the Second Coming,
as indicated in the twentieth chapter of Apocalypse, but especially for the second timeline. [13]
In
the second timeline (before the Second Coming and after the period of
peace) the beast and the false prophet are shown to already be in hell
when the devil is cast therein after his last attempt to seduce the
world: "And there came down fire from God out of heaven, and devoured
them; and the devil, who seduced them, was cast into the pool of fire
and brimstone, where both the beast and the false prophet shall be
tormented day and night for ever and ever" (Apoc. 20:9-10). What this means is: prior to the devil's final defeat, those two were already
there around one
thousand years before, when the events of chapters thirteen through nineteen came to pass.
So
the antichrist does not necessarily appear prior to the Parousia
(Second Coming),
but only if the period of peace had come first. [14] Our Lord spoke only
of those signs which would definitely come to pass regardless of
whatever else has happened in the interim; if He did not speak of the
antichrist, then his time is not necessarily close to the Parousia.
The
Apocalypse is not needed to shed light on the Second Coming and the end
of time; the Gospel accounts already do that. So why the secret (of
Fatima), and why the singularly mysterious account (of Apocalypse) ?
The
answer lies with the mysterious book which is the center of Apocalypse:
"And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne, a book,
written within and without, sealed with seven seals" (Apoc. 5:1). This
is the book of life of the Lamb (Apoc. 3:5, 13:8, 17:8, 20:12,15, 21:27,
22:19). It is also spoken of by Daniel the Prophet: "...a time shall
come, such as never was from the time that nations began, even until
that time. And at that time shall thy people be saved, every one that
shall be found written in the book" (Dan. 12:1).
St. John indicates that the antichrist denies both the Father and the
Son: "To whom do we give the lie, if not to him who tells us that Jesus
is not the Christ? Such a man is Antichrist, disowning as he does both
the Father and the Son" (1 John 2:22~Knox). And we see in Apocalypse
chapter five that the book, 'written within and without', was given by
'him that sat on the throne' (who represents the Father) to the Lamb:
"And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat on
the throne" (Apoc. 5:7).
St.
Paul indicates that the 'man of sin' "is the rebel who is to lift up
his head above every divine name, above all that men hold in reverence,
till at last he enthrones himself in God’s temple, and proclaims himself
as God" (2 Thess. 2:4~Knox).
All of this is different from what seems to be the main point of the eschatological discourse, which is a warning to not be led astray from the true nature of the Second Coming of Christ, which is what is to occur in the years before the real, actual end. Our Lord admonished His followers: "Take care", He said, "that you do not allow anyone to deceive you. Many will come making use of my name; they will say, Here I am, the time is close at hand; do not turn aside after them" (Luke 21:8~Knox).
The period of peace comes to an end when the devil and his demons are unchained (Apoc. 20:7).
This is indicated at the beginning of each of the Gospel accounts by
mention of 'wars and rumours of wars' or 'wars and seditions'
(revolutions) as if it were a new thing; and false Christs begin to
arise, who whether through possession or some other reason, try to draw
the world away from the true expectation of the Second Coming.
Note that unlike the time of antichrist, it is not so much a question here of disbelieving
in Christ, but of diverting people away from the expectation of the
real one, by inducing them to follow after false one(s). On the other
hand it is possible that when the thousand years are up, the devil,
being unchained, begins to sow anew discord in the hearts and minds of people
who, seeing that one thousand years had gone but Christ had not returned,
begin to disbelieve that He ever would; if they love not the
truth, they might prefer to believe that rather than the signs Our Lord
had clearly given in His End-Times discourse. Presumably these doubters
will be led by those who foment 'wars and seditions'; and from the other
side as it were, will be those false prophets and false Christs who say
that it is not true, He has returned: "for many will come in my name,
saying, I am he; and the time is at hand: go ye not therefore after
them" (Luke 21:8). [15]
Doubtless the various false Christs will be localized
to particular regions, the better to seduce the peoples by employing
falsehoods which might be more effective to a particular tribe, or
tongue, or people, or nation. Will they be there in place of the elect, who normally would be there ? In this, the deception is not
entirely unlike the one from our own time, in which people are deceived
by false popes who apparently were validly elected - there was no
visible interference with the conclave, and, to all appearances, all
went as it should (That is why the papacy itself was removed from the
world.) [16] To explain the 'false Christs' in place of the elect, if it will be so:
After
one thousand years have passed, the world will be entirely different.
But it will not have forgotten what had happened before; though long
distant from living memory, the knowledge and records of the time of the
antichrist and that tribulation would have been faithfully kept. There, too,
are those of the 'first resurrection' (Apoc. 20:4-6), who are the elect,
and who carry the memory with them. The question is whether they are still
there at that time. If they were, there should be no way for
the people to be deceived, for the elect are there to tell it
to them. [17] But they might not be there if they are captured: The
'wars, and rumours of wars' and 'wars and seditions' (revolutions) might
be due to those of the world who are seduced by the devil and who go
about rounding them up; but it is as likely that the elect, after the
thousand years are up, and knowing the Second Coming is at hand but
also that the devil is about to be unchained, might be at council in 'the holy city', until the armies of the devil, gathered from 'the
four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog (Eastern and Western
hemispheres ?), arrive there (Apoc. 20:7). "And they came upon the
breadth of the earth, and encompassed the camp of the saints, and the
beloved city". This seems to be the same situation described by St. Luke: "And
when you shall see Jerusalem compassed about with an army; then know
that the desolation thereof is at hand" (Luke 21:20). Shortly thereafter
it is overrun, and there will be seen "the abomination of desolation,
standing where it ought not" (Mark 13:14); also spoken of by Daniel the
prophet: "When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation,
which was
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that
readeth let him understand" (Matt. 24:15).[17A]
Our
Lord also told us: "And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached
in the whole world,
for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come".
This is the announcement of His imminent second coming, whether it be
from the elect initially; or perhaps Enoch and Eli having returned to
preach this to the world, if the elect are not there to do so. [18] "And
unto all nations the gospel must first be preached" (Mark 13:10). This
is part of Our Lord's answer to the question put to Him by his disciples
on Mt. Olivet: "Tell us when shall these things be? and what shall be
the sign of thy coming, and of the consummation of the world?" (Matt:
24:3). So the 'gospel of the kingdom', in this context, is the announcement of His second
coming, for then the kingdom is imminent. [19]
He also said, and this is true of either timeline:
"For in those days shall be such tribulations, as were not from the
beginning of the creation which God created until now, neither shall be.
And unless the Lord had shortened the days, no flesh should be saved:
but for the sake of the elect which he hath chosen, he hath shortened
the days" (Mark 13:19-20). In the first timeline, there would not have been
the punishments of the trumpets or the vials (Apoc. chapters 8-9, 16) because of the period of peace. So those events would not have been seen in the world until the last days.
It can be seen another way however: That the tribulation of the last days are, or can be, worse than what was experienced during the antichrist tribulation.
So what is to come during those last days will not have been seen from
the beginning until the time Our Lord had said these words; and neither shall be,
that is to say, not even during 'the Apocalypse' - the time of the beast
and antichrist, and the tribulation associated with them. Compared even
to that, the end-days calamities might be such that nobody would
survive, except that the days had been shortened. This is in contrast even
to the Apocalypse chapter thirteen timeline, in which the days had not been shortened.
Finally,
Our Lord said: "Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass,
till all these things be done" (Matt. 24:34) which simply means that
from the time when the period of peace has ended until there "shall
appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven...and they shall see the Son
of man coming in the
clouds of heaven with much power and majesty" (Matt.24:30) many people
shall still be living who had seen the end of the period of peace. All
of this happens during the "little time" of the devil's loosing as
written in Apocalypse
chapter twenty, verse three.
IV. The False Version Of La Salette (1879)
Before
continuing with the two timelines it is first necessary to examine a
well-known prophecy which happens to be false (though it is based on the
true one), but which is still widely accepted as genuine.
La Salette is a true Marian event with true prophecies, and the message which was meant for the Pope was
received and acted upon, and there it should have ended; however, one
of the seers, Melanie Calvat, went beyond what she was called upon to
do. Why this is so is unclear. It is possible for the servants of
Heaven, having accomplished their mission, to experience a failing
afterwards. This is not without precedent in sacred scripture: When
Jonas preached to Nineve and its people heard and did penance, the city
was not destroyed (Jonas 3); and then Jonas "took it sore amiss, and was
an angry man that day" (Jonas 4:1~Knox) because he thought he was made
to look a fool: he predicted the city would be destroyed in forty days
and it did not happen.
Knowing
what was in the secret which was passed on to Pope Pius IX, and
similarly observing nothing happening afterwards, something akin to Jonas'
reaction apparently happened to Melanie Calvat. Details can be found
at La Contre-Réforme Catholique here (her writings) and here (her disobediences) and in the section "False Version of Melanie's Secret" here but we will summarize:
The
testimony of Melanie of 1847 is compared and contrasted with that of
1879. Unlike in the older version, Maximin Giraud is relegated to the
background while Melanie's account became as of 'a dialogue of her
little heart' with Our Lady. The conclusion drawn by the CRC, which
referred to her reveries as a 'Childhood Gospel' is as thus: "That, in
our interpretation, they represent the temptation of Eve".
She entered the convent at Corenc as a postulant in 1850. Instead of
guarding her from the world, "she lived in an atmosphere of unctuous
admiration: visitors flocked to the convent, priests and lay people
drank in her words...her novice mistress was captivated, exalted
her...when it was her mission to keep her in the shade". She also
suffered from particular attacks of the devil. Maximin 'emerged
victorious' from the temptation, keeping himself from all illusion, but
Melanie, "who was strongly assailed by the devil at Corenc, – the devil
who got her into a thousand eccentricities – gave in". In short, she
yields to mythomania, which causes her to look down on Maximin, and,
convinced that she knows the secrets of God, "inflates her
mystical illusions in step with the contradictions she meets" such as
further attacks of the devil, this time at Darlington. CRC concludes:
"Thus, Maximin’s path, like Saint Peter’s after his denial, seems to be a
path of fidelity, whereas Mélanie’s is the path of infidelity and of
schism". [20]
We will briefly contrast Apocalypse chapters 11 and 13 before comparing them (and others) with the 1879 version of La Salette to show how it mixes the two timelines.
The original version of the secret of La Salette was allegedly recovered from the Vatican archives in 1999 (see here and here). Considering that the Vatican has been definitively compromised since
1958, the archives cannot be trusted since then and is likely to have
been tampered with in some way beforehand. The third secret vision of
Sr. Lucia released by the Vatican in June 2000 was similarly suspect;
but the badly-fitting interpretation suggested that it was genuine, and
it has since been found to harmonize perfectly with Apocalypse chapter fourteen (which see here). We will see that, if these secrets of La Salette are genuine, they will harmonize with the first timeline only.
The main points about Apocalypse chapter 11 are:
1. The Church (temple of God) is measured with a reed, but without the hierarchy (court).
2. The holy city is captured by the enemies of God for two and forty months.
3. The two witnesses appear to prophesy for 1,260 days.
4. Punishments are brought about by the two witnesses.
5. The beast (the antichrist, singular) defeats and kills the two witnesses.
6. For 3.5 days the two witnesses lie unburied in spiritual "Sodom and Egypt".
7. They rise and go to heaven.
8. A great earthquake destroys part of the great city.
9. Second woe is past; third comes quickly. The seventh angel sounds the trumpet.
10. The wrath of God is come to punish to wicked and reward the good.
11. "The temple of God is opened in heaven". Implying that at some point it was closed.
The main points about Apocalypse chapter 13 are:
1. The beast with seven heads comes up out of the sea (the antipapacy comes to prominence).
2. The dragon gives the beast his power.
3. A 'death's wound' of the beast is healed (perhaps "up from the bottomless pit" Apoc. 17:8).
4. The beast, given power and voice, fights against the saints for "two and forty months".
5. All adored the beast whose names are not in the book of life.
6. Another beast arises from the earth, with two horns like a lamb, and speaking like a dragon.
7. He makes great signs to lead the world to the first beast.
8. Animates the image of the beast who was wounded but lived (likely John Paul II).
9. Imposes the mark of the beast on the world.
Both
versions of the secret of La Salette speak of a crisis in the Church,
the coming of a Holy Monarch, a period of peace, and a return to sin
afterwards which shortly precedes the coming of antichrist.
However, it is the 1879 version which mixes the two timelines.
The 1879 version
is ordered into thirty-three paragraphs. In the second paragraph,
Melanie
is condemning many in the priesthood for sins: "...the priests, by their
bad life, by their irreverences and their impiety...by love of money,
love of honor and of pleasures...Yes, the priests are asking for
vengeance, and vengeance is suspended over their heads, etc" (this is
before the
period of peace - each particular quote may be stated to be before or
after). This is not to be found in the (apparently) original
text. There, the worst that was said about them is: "[Among] God’s
ministers, and the Spouses of Jesus-Christ, there will be some who will
go astray, and that will be the most terrible" (1851, after the period
of peace). [21] This resembles the idea behind the words of Our Lord at
Quito (Our Lady of Good Success): "Know, moreover, that Divine Justice
releases terrible chastisements on entire nations, not only for the sins
of the people, but for those of priests and religious
persons...Straying from their divine mission, they degrade themselves in
such a way that, before the eyes of God they quicken the rigor of the
punishments…". [22] It is not a case of a general apostasy as in Vatican
'2' when nearly all priests went along with the council; here they are
persecuted overtly: "The priests and the Sisters, and the true servants
of my Son will be persecuted, and several will die for the faith of
Jesus Christ" (1851, before the period of peace).
The
next two parts recall Our Lord's words in His discourse: "God is going
to strike in a manner without example. Woe to the inhabitants of the
earth! God is going to exhaust His wrath, and no one will be able to
take himself away from so many afflictions combined". St. Matthew
records something similar: that there will be such tribulation
the world has never seen nor will it afterwards; and that unless the
days had been shortened no one would survive (Matt. 24:21-22).
In
the fifth paragraph, and continuing to pour wrath upon the priests, Melanie
writes: "The leaders, the guides of the people of God...have become
these wandering stars that the old devil will drag along with his tail
to make them perish". One can hardly fail to see the reference to the
dragon in Apocalypse: "And his tail drew the third part of the stars of
heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the
woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered,
he might devour her son" (Apoc. 12:4). There is no equivalent statement in the 1851 text, either from her or from Maximin. [23]
Afterwards,
she writes: "Society is on the eve of the most terrible scourges and of
the greatest events; one must expect to be ruled with an iron rod and
to drink the chalice of the wrath of God". The very next verse of
Apocalypse (after the dragon's tail) also speaks of the rule of the iron rod: "And
she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron
rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne" (Apoc. 12:5). It
is true that the world will be ruled with rigor by someone with a Divine
mandate, but this does not happen the same way in both timelines. [23A]
"A
great king will go up on the throne, and will reign a few years.
Religion will re-flourish and spread all over the world, and there will
be a great abundance, the world, glad not to be lacking nothing, will
fall again in its disorders, will give up God, and will be prone to its
criminal passions" (Melanie, 1851).
Is it a rod of iron or a reed ? like When
the time of the antichrist has arrived, St. John is instructed to
"measure the temple of God, and the altar and them that adore therein"
with a "reed like unto a rod" (Apoc. 11:1). Indeed, the period of peace
was (to be) an easy time which eventually went unappreciated and seems hardly a rule
with a rod of iron.*
(* The commentary by Yves Dupont on the Monk Hilarion's prophecy indicates
that the rule of the holy pope will be firm: "Will rule with a rod of
iron". It may be so, but most people at this time would willingly be
thus ruled, because of the nature of his victory and that of the great
monarch, in which super-abundant graces are received. Or it could be that the reed represents no official rule at
the time, there being no pope any longer. The latter is more likely.)
It must be asked what would be the manner of the period of peace if Pius XII had
consecrated Russia ? His successor who was elected but did not reign
(Siri) was to "rule with an iron rod" (Apoc. 12:5). But the papacy
itself was "taken out of the way" (2 Thess. 2:7) so from that point
there was to be no reign of any pope for the duration of these times.
But there are two other references to this reign: in Apoc. 2:27 and
Apoc. 19:15. Both of these appear in a different context than that of
1958; they refer to a time far afterwards. As has been proposed in "Faith Undermined (1958-1965)" this reign was prorogued and not cancelled.
The
1879 version continues with various details regarding particular
chastisements which we will largely pass over here. There are references
to Pius IX, that he should not leave Rome after 1859; Napoleon and his
machinations; Italy's chastisement and that of the clergy; and the
workers of signs and wonders.
"In
the year 1864, Lucifer with a great number of demons will be unleashed
from hell; they will abolish the faith little by little and even in
persons consecrated to God, etc" (1879). In the nineteenth century in
particular there were various prophecies which foretold a time when
demons would be allowed to come out of hell and upon the earth to enact
retribution which is permitted by God. This would take the form of
physical attacks and destruction as per the Three Days' Darkness [24] or this prophecy from Elizabeth Canori-Mori (d. 1825):
"...through
an effect of His Mighty Hand He will punish these impious blasphemers
by giving permission to the infernal spirits to come out from hell.
Innumerable legions of demons shall overrun the earth, and shall execute
the orders of Divine Justice by causing terrible calamities and
disasters...I saw in the bowels of the earth a dark and frightening
cavern, whence an infinite number of demons were issuing forth, who
under the form of men and beasts came to ravage the earth, leaving
everywhere ruins and blood, etc". [25]
It
is possible that Melanie meant to reference the devil's loosing in
Apocalypse chapter twenty when she wrote that the demons would be
'unleashed from hell' in 1864.
The
Gospels seem to be referenced again when she writes: "France, Italy,
Spain and England will be in war; blood will flow in the streets;
Frenchman will fight with Frenchman, Italian with Italian, etc" (1879).
This is the same idea as "nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom
against kingdom, etc" (Matt. 24:7); and further, although a little
dissimilar: "And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one
another: and shall hate one another" (Matt. 24:10) as well as: "And you
shall be betrayed by your parents and brethren, and kinsmen and friends;
and some of you they will put to death" (Luke 21:16). Although this
will happen (nation rising against nation) after the period of peace,
the 1879 text places it beforehand. It does not matter whether she
exaggerated the conflicts and disorders prior to the victory of the
Church or those which come about near the end; it all seems to be mixed
up.
In
the twentieth paragraph (1879), the fate of Paris and Marseilles are
much as in the original version (they are destroyed). Afterwards, the
angels would be commanded to put all the enemies of Christ to death, and
the world would 'become like a desert'. This is like what is called in
prophecy the 'heavenly scourge' but not necessarily the 'three days'
darkness', which is a scourge not from Heaven but permitted by the same.
There is no indication of any such intervention in the original secret
by either of the seers, but this intervention would be contingent on
there being no other alternative; which means no great monarch to
bring the victory. It is only said, in the original secret, that the enemies of the Church will
try to murder the pope but will be unable to do so.
After
'twenty-five years of abundant harvests' of peace in the world, "a
forerunner of the antichrist with his troops from several nations will
fight against the true Christ, the only Savior of the world; he will
spill much blood, and will want to annihilate the worship of God in
order to make himself be looked upon as a God" (par. 22, 1879). The
original version has nothing so specific. In 1851, it was written that
the world "will fall again in its disorders...and will be prone to its
criminal passions" which does not seem enough to warrant the 1879 description; but a number of "God's
ministers, and the Spouses of Jesus-Christ, there will be some who will
go astray, and that will be the most terrible" - as a result of the
persecutions they are undergoing it seems. Then: "Lastly, hell will
reign on earth. It will be then that the Antichrist will be born of a
Sister, but woe to her! Many will believe in him, because he will claim
to have come from heaven, woe to those who will believe in him!".
The
1879 version goes into more detail, to which we will arrive in a moment.
All things considered, it would appear that there is some considerable
time from the end of the period of peace until the reign of the
antichrist; perhaps roughly equal to that of the period of peace
itself. But there is no question here of a bad council and a series of
antipopes as in our own time. It is not that kind of 'spiritual
punishment' as that indicated by Sr. Lucia to Fr. Fuentes. The
antichrist is supposed to have emerged from a young age and gone forth
conquering. He was supposed to have brothers who also went forth with
brilliant successes. In the context of that timeline, it is not so much a
subversion of all of the governments (as per Russia's errors in our own
timeline) as persecution from without. Then, during that era, there would
come a point when it is impossible to elect a successor to St. Peter.
That is when the papacy is "taken out of the way" as St. Paul
tells us (2 Thess. 2:6-7). A revolt would have come first, during
which the "man of sin" is revealed, and although the manner of this is
unknown in the first timeline, it is possible that the revolt was caused
by the actions of the antichrist, who conquered Rome; and
the hierarchy there, weak in faith and morals, rebelled against the true
pope (if there was one), so that the papacy was "taken out of the way". [25A] This scenario would set
up the opening to Apocalypse chapter eleven very well, in which St.
John was instructed to "measure the temple of God, and the altar and
them that adore therein" according to the rule of faith, but not as it
were with papal authority; the measure is only by the "reed like unto a
rod". [26] But the faithful were then without leaders:
"But
the court, which is without the temple, cast out, and measure it not:
because it is given unto the Gentiles, and the holy city they shall
tread under foot two and forty months:" (Apoc. 11:2).
The
"court" after their revolt (2 Thess. 2:3) has lost the faith and are with the
enemies of the Church at the beginning of the reign of antichrist, first timeline, which
is the equivalent of the "two and forty months"
of chapter thirteen; but these have nothing to do with each other
except by each being the alternate of the other timeline. The revolt in this
case is public and not hidden within a conclave; just as the holy city
is outwardly overrun and not spiritually subverted from within as had happened in 1958.
In
paragraph twenty-three she writes: "...there will be wars until the
last war, which will then be made by the ten kings of the antichrist,
which kings will have all one same design and will be the only ones who
will rule the world". This is a very obvious example of borrowing from
the other timeline to widen the scope of La Salette prophecy. The ten
horns of the beast of Apocalypse chapter thirteen are the culmination of
the spread of Russia's errors - of communism, equality, and all nations
having the same such design with what is called 'democracy' but which
is actually soviet - which originated from the ten horns of the
dragon of chapter twelve. The 1851 version has no hint of this. It is
likely that the 'brothers' of the antichrist (par. 26) were supposed to
be the other 'heads' of the beast - but there being other 'heads' has to do with chapter
thirteen only and has no parallel in chapter eleven nor with the
1851 text (and probably not with any other prophecy. And we know from
Apoc. 17:10 that they come in succession and not in parallel).
In
paragraph twenty-seven, she writes: "The seasons will be changed, the
earth will produce only bad fruits, the stars will lose their regular
movements, the moon will reflect only a feeble reddish light; water and
fire will give to the globe of the earth convulsive movements and
horrible earthquakes which will cause to be engulfed mountains, cities
[etc.]".
The
editor of the 1904 edition adds this note: " 'I have from Melanie that
this etc. is not made part of the text. The Blessed Virgin showed her
other cataclysms without naming them and without pronouncing the word
etc.' (Le Secret De Melanie, p.57."
Although
not part of the 1851 text, this part does not seem to contradict it. Indeed
it is more than likely true: Sr. Lucia was also shown a vision
which was not part of the third secret text. [26A] As La Salette (both
versions) concerns not only the crisis but also the reign of
the antichrist (which must be close to the time of the second coming),
we can find its
parallel in the Gospel accounts:
"And immediately after the tribulation
of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give
her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of
heaven shall be moved:" (Matt. 24:29); also "And there shall be signs in
the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress
of nations, by reason of the confusion of the roaring of the sea and of
the waves;" (Luke 21:25).
Again, in that timeline these things would be happening prior to
the second coming, but Melanie seems to think there will be another
period of peace afterwards: "[After the defeat of antichrist] water and
fire will purify the earth and will consume all the works of the pride
of men, and all will be renewed: God will be served and glorified". The
original La Salette does not say or even imply this; it merely ends with
the beginning of antichrist's reign.
The
next part is well known: "Rome will lose the faith and become the seat
of the antichrist". This is not said in the 1851 text, nor in Maximin's
secret, but it is practically the center-point of the second timeline;
but in the first timeline, as the 'holy city' is overrun by the enemies of the Church
and the 'court' given over to the Gentiles, it means essentially
the same thing. In chapter eleven, when the two
witnesses are killed, it is called "the great city, which is called spiritually,
Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord also was crucified" (Unless it were Jerusalem also overrun; that is the only other possibility). [26B]
In
paragraph thirty she writes about the 'true disciples of God' and Our
Lady's true devotees; and of the 'Apostles of the last times'. These
must be the elect, who are signed in Apocalypse chapter seven,
and figure in many other places therein, even if they are not named as
such: for example, the 'saints' of chapter thirteen against whom the beast makes
war. The elect are also in the Gospel accounts, because they
concern Heaven's plan for the end-times; but are not named in chapter eleven. [26C]
In
paragraph thirty-one she mentions the two witnesses by name: "The
Church will be eclipsed, the world will be in consternation. But behold
Enoch and Elie filled with the Spirit of God; they will preach with the
strength of God...". This was not in Melanie's original text but it is
in one version of Maximin's, which parallels chapter eleven of
Apocalypse very well: "On Henoch and Elias: ‘They will suddenly appear
on earth full of the spirit of God, when the Church becomes darkened and
the world in terrible agony...They will have great success against the
heresies of the Antichrist. But in the end they will be delivered unto
death’".
In paragraph thirty-two there is added several details not to be found in either of the 1851 texts:
"...Men
will beat their head against the walls, they will call upon death, and
on another side death will be their torture...". Loosely, this is the
same idea as in Apoc. 9:6: "And in those days men shall seek death, and
shall not find it: and they shall desire to die, and death shall fly
from them". Perhaps it is part of the vision she saw but was not told to
write; but it will have been something different, not the fulfillment
of that part of Apocalypse.
"Who will be able to overcome, if God does not shorten the time of the ordeal?". Nothing is said in Apocalypse chapter eleven about shortening the time (neither, for that matter, in chapter thirteen). It is mentioned in the Gospels: "And unless the Lord had shortened the days, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect which he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days" (Mark 13:20).
For
chapter eleven, the time of the reign of the beast and of the two
witnesses is 'two and forty months' and '1,260 days'. That cannot be
made shorter. By the time being 'shortened', Our Lord may have been
speaking of the period of peace representing the victory of the Church
preceding the antichrist, in the
first timeline: Otherwise, the tribulation might be twice as long, and nobody might be alive at the end - contradicting Our Lord's words: "Amen I say to you, that this
generation shall not pass, till all these things be done" (Matt. 24:34). [26D]
For
our timeline, the only indication that the time would be shortened
after the one thousand years of Apocalypse chapter twenty, is that the
devil is "to be loosed a little time", and that the army which
"encompassed the camp of the saints, and the beloved city" is destroyed
by "fire from God out of heaven". This does not have any direct parallel
with the Gospel accounts, except that Our Lord "hath shortened the
days". [27]
"Pagan
Rome will disappear". Straight from chapter eighteen of Apocalypse. It
does not have even a parallel in chapter eleven, which merely declares that "at that
hour there was made a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city
fell: and there were slain in the earthquake names of men seven
thousand: and the rest were cast into a fear, and gave glory to the God
of heaven" (Apoc. 11:13).
This cannot
happen in the first timeline. If
Russia was converted and the papacy subsequently never "taken away" at
that point, the third secret would then be revealed, then declared to be
null. [28]
And in the last paragraph (1879) it is stated that the beast ascends out of the abyss:
"Behold
the time; the abyss opens. Behold the king of kings of darkness. Behold
the beast with his subjects, calling himself the savior of the world.
He will raise himself up with pride into the air in order to go even up
to heaven; he will be smothered by the breath of the holy Archangel
Michael".
The
beast will be seen as 'good' to those who do not have the Faith or a
love of the truth in either timeline. Because of this, seeing the
chastisements and calamities falling on them, and not repenting of their
sins, they will blame those who keep the Faith (and the two witnesses
in the first timeline) for causing those things to happen. [29] The
beast's attempt to ascend to Heaven is not a parallel to the battle of
chapter twelve, although that should not have to be said.
V. Our Lady Of Good Success (Quito, Ecuador)
These
prophecies are generally ranked lower in order of importance to those
who pay attention to such things. After Sacred Scripture, Fatima is
generally considered to be first among prophecies, as it should be, and
as we have seen. But all previous ones are not for nothing. Without exception, they
all indicate the chapter eleven timeline of Apocalypse.
Our Lady Of Good Success (Quito, Mother Mariana, d. 1635).
This
is discussed first because of its detail and its seeming
application to either timeline. Our Lady prophesied the almost complete
reign of error by means of the masonic sect by the 20th century. This
was due in great part to unfaithful religious who, "under the appearance of
virtue and bad-spirited zeal, would turn upon Religion". Various
sacraments would be greatly neglected, such as Extreme Unction and
Matrimony; almost everyone would find it easy to live in sin, with many born
illegitimate, and with an "almost total and general corruption of customs".
Holy Orders would be "ridiculed, oppressed and despised"; there would be
"unbridled luxury", loss of innocence in children, lack of modesty in
women, and the silence of those who should speak.
This
resembles somewhat our own times but at an earlier stage of spiritual corruption. By the
end of the 19th century, many of these things were already beginning to
come to pass, but would be forestalled somewhat by the reign of St. Pius
X (and by the prevention of the reign of a false pope at that time, the
freemason Rampolla). It seems also that the reign of Pius IX had prepared
the ground for St. Pius X's arrival.
There
is an indication that it might have been otherwise. Our Lady continues:
"The secular clergy...will became careless in their sacred duties. Lacking the divine compass,
they will stray...become attached to wealth...Lacking a Prelate and
Father to guide them...many priests will lose their spirit, etc"
(italics ours). This may indicate either a lengthy interregnum (but for
what reason ?) or perhaps the reign of a false pope at the time who
might encourage this state of affairs. Our Lady does not indicate specifically what else might
be happening in the world; only the spiritual situation. However, She does say that this
time would be brought to an end:
"Therefore,
clamor insistently without tiring and weep with bitter tears in the
privacy of your heart, imploring our Celestial Father that, for love of
the Eucharistic Heart of my Most Holy Son and His Precious Blood...He
might take pity on His ministers and bring to an end those Ominous times, sending to this Church the Prelate who will restore the spirit of its priests" (emphasis ours).
'Those
ominous times' are the only words which indicate that the conditions
existed for a crisis which may well require divine intervention to
overcome, whether through the Great Monarch or a Great Prelate. This
intervention would 'shorten the days' of tribulation of the first
timeline. It would seem
that Pius IX* was that great prelate, according to the words we are
given during a vision of December 8th, 1634: His "pontifical
infallibility will be declared a dogma of the Faith by the same Pope
chosen to proclaim the dogma of" the Immaculate Conception. He was also
to be "persecuted and imprisoned in the Vatican by the unjust usurpation
of the Pontifical States through the iniquity, envy and avarice of an
earthly monarch".
* (This was misunderstood at writing due to the ordering of the prophecy. It becomes clearer.)
Our
Lady also foretold the coming of a 'truly Catholic' president for
Ecuador, who turned out to be Gabriel Garcia Moreno (1821-1875) who
consecrated the republic to the Sacred Heart of Jesus in 1873.
Pope
Pius IX was found to be incorrupt in the year 2000, and Gabriel
Moreno's incorrupt heart is kept at the Cathedral in Quito. In 1906,
Mother Mariana's body was also found incorrupt. The writings from which
the prophecy was translated was written around 1790. Presumably they
were not lost since then, nor altered. Some people interpret Our Lady's
warnings about the spiritual crisis in the Church to happen "in the
mid-twentieth century" [30] as applying to Vatican '2' but, as surprising
as it may seem, this is not the case.
Assuming
the original sources are true, it would appear that Pius IX is
already the Prelate who was sent to restore the spirit of the priests of
the Church. So what might this mean for the fulfillment of this prophecy ?
Since
he was the one who defined Papal Infallibility and the Immaculate
Conception, immediately we can see the dual Fatima timeline being
prepared: The last two Marian dogmas had to be defined, and Pius IX
completed the first, which represents the first living creature of
Apocalypse in chapter four. Pius XII's definition of the Assumption
accounts for the fourth living creature: an 'eagle flying'. And Papal
Infallibility ensured that the devil would redouble his attacks upon the
papacy. It is not difficult to see, in hindsight, that he would see
this as an opportunity to attack the faith by means of guaranteeing
error under this title: that the Pope cannot err in faith and morals. On
the other hand, this dogma emphasizes all the others, and makes
perfectly clear (at least it should) what its contradiction
in the person of the (apparent) pope signifies. [31]
In
1579, Our Lord appeared to Mariana de Jésus Torres and said to her to
prepare for a life of continuous martyrdom. In 1582, having a vision of
Our Lord on the Cross, her guardian angel told her: "Arise and approach,
for God desires to reveal to you a great secret. This punishment will
be for the 20th century". Then she saw three swords over the head of
Christ, on each were written: "I SHALL PUNISH HERESY"; "I SHALL PUNISH
BLASPHEMY"; "I SHALL PUNISH IMPURITY". [32] She was given to understand
that 'all would take place in the 20th century'. Mariana chose to become
a sacrificial victim for the 20th century. We note that nothing is said
about the 21st century. [33] This does not mean it is false, but for
another timeline, if events should have taken that course. We continue:
Our
Lady speaks of the persecution of religious communities by means of the
masonic sects. This was spoken of in La Salette as well (both
versions). To weaken the Church and her members spiritually it is a
common tactic of the devil to persecute religious communities; until he
attacked the whole Church at once, spiritually, through a false pope and
the resulting illicit council. After that, there was no need for
concerted persecutions as before. [33A]
The
reign of Pius IX appears to be a turning point which marks either the
beginning of those troubles leading to a crisis requiring divine
intervention to overcome, or, when it probably should have begun if the first timeline was to be fulfilled. [33B] Interestingly, he was born on a May 13th
(1792). His reign was the longest in history, from 1846-1878, beginning
in the same year as La Salette and ending the year before the publication
of the false version of the secret of La Salette.
Speaking of Ecuador, but likely also as a parallel to the rest of the world, Our Lady told Mariana:
"Thus
I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and from
shortly after the middle of the 20th century, in what is today the
Colony and will then be the Republic of Ecuador, the passions will erupt
and there will be a total corruption of customs, for Satan will reign
almost completely by means of the Masonic sects".
Thus
we are given to understand that there is no interruption to the growing
crisis. The reign of Pius X checked the advancing corruption of the
age, as well as the Marian apparitions of France in the 19th century.
Again, the reference to the middle of the 20th century implies a
turning point, but not as the beginning of something new.
There
are several references to the 20th century: That Mariana be a victim
soul for that century, that 'all would take place in the 20th century',
that this message of Our Lady to Mariana as Our Lady of Good Success
will "only become known to the general public in the 20th century".
After
Pius IX is Leo XIII, who reigned from 1878 to 1903. During his time he
made many overtures to the world in good diplomatic faith but this
policy did not work. It likely gave the freemasons the opening to
attempt to install one of their own in the papal chair: Cardinal
Rampolla, elected in 1903, but for the veto of the heir to the Holy
Roman Empire, Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria-Hungary.
Their
attempt was unsuccessful, and Pius X abrogated the veto afterwards so
that it may not be abused by the enemies of the Church in the future.
However, the prophecy of Good Success appears to continue from around
this point: That the crisis has its origin from the end of the 19th
century and is continuous until around the mid-point of the 20th century.
Either one of two things happened: First, that, in this alternate
timeline, Rampolla's election was never annulled. Second, that it was annulled, but Guiseppe Sarto was not elected or
his anti-modernist campaign was unsuccessful, and the freemasons
continued to gain dominance and success in the corruption of nations as
described by Our Lady at Quito.
Of
these two alternatives the first seems more likely. Logically, the
devil would not need to bother establishing communism in Russia as a
tool of the 'mystery of iniquity' which had here, with the freemasons,
etc,
already controlled the West and from which he would launch the worst
persecution of the Church on two fronts: from within and from without.
The
freemasons were already doing this, from the French Revolution to the
infiltration of the hierarchy resulting in Rampolla. But with Russia,
the devil can, on one level at least, keep the watchers' eyes focused on
an external threat (as opposed to the 'hidden hand' of freemasonry)
while the infiltrators worked their way up from
within. It may also be that, spiritually, Russia is a better instrument
to 'spread these errors throughout the world' since its first error, and
the longest, is its schism from the Church through the rejection of
the papacy. This error becomes the same for those who embrace a false
pope or a series of antipopes against the dogma of the faith
(disregarding the contradictions between them); in so doing, they have
repeated Russia's first error, of not accepting the pope. It may be
worse to accept a false pope as true rather than a consider a true pope
as false or accept no pope at all. However, it probably does not matter
much. [34]
Our
Lady seems to imply that the papacy is impaired in some way: "Lacking a
prelate and a father to guide them ... many priests will lose their
spirit, placing their souls in great danger". Was there, then, no pope
at the time ? Was an antipapacy established already in 1903 ? We cannot
know for certain; what is more certain is that whatever might have
happened is not the same as that described in Apocalypse chapter twelve:
In 1903, the conclave elected an unworthy candidate without pressure
from within as opposed to 1958. [35]
In
this other timeline, there is no false council and false sacraments
introduced by an antipope. There is also no established atheistic
communism with its characteristic implacable persecution; but the
tribulations caused by the masonic sects are also great. Our Lady says
"the Sacrament of Extreme Unction will be little esteemed. Many people
will die without receiving it" but it will still be valid. As for the
"Sacrament of Matrimony, which symbolizes the union of Christ with His
Church, it will be attacked and profaned in the fullest sense of the
word" - but it will still be administered by validly ordained priests.
She continues:
"The Sacred Sacrament of Holy Orders will be ridiculed, oppressed and despised". But it will not have been replaced by an invalid form of ordination.
She continues: "…The demon will try to persecute the Ministers of the Lord in every
possible way and he will labor with cruel and subtle astuteness to
deviate them from the spirit of their vocation, corrupting many of them.
These corrupted priests, who will scandalize the Christian people, will
incite the hatred of the bad Christians and the enemies of the Roman,
Catholic and Apostolic Church to fall upon all priests. This apparent
triumph of Satan will bring enormous sufferings to the good Pastors of
the Church…"
The
hierarchy is curiously absent from the words of Our Lady at Quito.
Neither the bishops, the cardinals or even the pope are mentioned
explicitly while all of this is happening. Our Lady observes that during
this epoch when the Church is under concerted attack by the masonic
sect, "The vices of impurity, blasphemy, and sacrilege will dominate in
this time of depraved desolation, and that one who should speak out will be silent".
Was She speaking of the pope or any number of faithful who should speak
out ? Another source translates it differently: "Those who should speak
will fall silent" which would indicate the faithful in general. From
here it is impossible to say with any certainty whether Our Lady is
referring to a weak pope (who, although not heretical, does not raise his
voice against the secular and masonic powers) or to many faithful in
general, cowed into silence; but it may well be both.
In
the sixth apparition, on Feb. 2, 1634 (the 40th anniversary of the
first appearance of Mary as Our Lady of Good Success), Mother Mariana
was praying before the Blessed Sacrament when the sanctuary lamp went
out. This symbolized the extinguishing of the light of faith in the
world during this epoch. Our Lady gave five reasons for this:
1st: At the end of the 19th century and during the 20th heresies would prevail not only in Ecuador but universally.
2nd:
Religious communities would shrink, become infected with heresies, and
many vocations would be lost. "The faithful souls would suffer a
continuous and slow martyrdom, weeping in secret and imploring that such
dire times be shortened".
3rd:
A worldwide campaign against the virtues of chastity and purity would
succeed in ruining the youth: "There will be almost no virgin souls in
the world".
4th:
The masonic sects would have untold influence on society and even the
Church. Secular education and the corrupting influences of impurity
would result in many priestly vocations being lost. Many who remain will
become careless and lax in their duties. "Lacking a prelate and a
father to guide them ... many priests will lose their spirit, placing
their souls in great danger". The remaining priests will be persecuted
"with vituperations, calumnies and vexations in order to stop them from
fulfilling their ministry" but will remain unswerving. Our Lady of Good
Success implored that the people of this time should 'clamor
insistently' to the Heavenly Father for an end to 'these ominous times'
sending to the Church a prelate and father who would restore the spirit
to the priests".
"In
order to dissipate this black cloud, that prevents the Church from
enjoying the clear day of liberty, there will be a formidable and
frightful war, ... This night will be most horrible, for, humanly
speaking, evil will seem to triumph. This, then, will mark the arrival
of my hour, when I in a marvelous way, will dethrone the proud and
cursed Satan, trampling him under my feet and fettering him in the
infernal abyss. Thus, the Church and Country will be finally free of his
cruel tyranny".
5th: The lamp went out was due to those who have the “financial means to help the Church but do nothing.
We are most interested in some of the details for the fourth reason given here.
At the culmination of this growing crisis, presumably just after the mid-point of the 20th century (after a continuous period of darkness from the end of the 19th century) there is to be one
formidable and frightful war, which immediately puts this prophecy
outside of our own Apocalyptic timeline. One of the reasons for 'the
Great War' of 1914-1918 was to dismantle the last Catholic empire
(Austria-Hungary) and to 'democratize' Germany (as opposed to the rule
of the Emperors) [36] and lastly it was a springboard from which to
inflict communism on Russia, whether or not that was the intent from the
beginning. [37]
She
does not speak of the great monarch, but it is possible he takes part
in this 'formidable and frightful war' and needed divine intervention to
prevail; it is more possible if Austria-Hungary still existed as an
empire at this time. From the ordering of the prophecy it is probable
that the holy pope came about before this war, but this is not
necessarily the case. In other Catholic prophecies the holy pope may not
arrive until after the divine intervention.
At the last, when "evil will seem to triumph", there is a divine intervention from the Mother of God Herself, when She will "dethrone
the proud and cursed Satan, trampling him" under Her feet and
"fettering him in the infernal abyss". Afterwards there will be a period
of peace: "the Church and Country will be finally free of his cruel tyranny".
The
period of peace here is not what happens prior to the Second Coming,
when many things are to come to pass within a generation. The end
point of the prophecy of Our Lady of Good Success does not signify the
end of time, but the period of peace which precedes the Gospel accounts
of the signs of the Second Coming. The events from the end of the 19th
century to the end of this tribulation (past the mid-point of the 20th
century) is already 'a generation'; the generation spoken of by Christ
prior to His Second Coming will have been living from the time the period
of peace has come to an end until they see Him Who "cometh with the clouds,
and every eye shall see him, etc." (Apoc. 1:7).
One
cannot say with certainty whether or not this, the first timeline which
culminates in the beast of Apocalypse chapter eleven, is dominated by a
series of antipopes. If it were, there might well be seven in total -
but this would have to involve speculation involving Apocalypse chapter
thirteen - and perhaps many other unanswerable questions. This is
perhaps the closest we can speculate:
The
papacy can be 'taken away' (2 Thess 2:7) only once, and this signifies
the coming of the antichrist. Even if Rampolla had unworthily claimed
the papacy, the papacy itself cannot have been 'taken away' at this
time, as it is still possible to elect another pope. There is no indication of a false council which replaced the
sacraments with faux imitations. Many of the persecutions of the Church
came externally, from the masonic sect, though if there had been at
least one antipope he could have disrupted the hierarchy with lasting
consequences. It is equally likely there were some weak popes who were
ineffective in preventing the growing crisis of faith. There could have
been an extended interregnum - perhaps caused by the masonic sect - but
not without the possibility of a valid election during the entire time.
In any case the situation could not be rectified without a divine
intervention.
Lastly,
we note that it is Our Lady who fetters the prince of darkness in the
infernal abyss. In Apocalypse chapter twenty it is St. Michael - but it
might be said that he does this at the behest of Our Lady. On the other
hand, it can well be said that, in this other timeline, things must
happen differently.
Footnotes
1.
For the former, Fr. Kramer believes this to be true of the book 'sealed
with seven seals'. For the latter, Haydock makes reference to them in
his commentary on chapter ten of Apocalypse.
2.
This did not happen immediately (at least until around 1850) as it
appeared there was a chance he would regain his throne though it would
be difficult; otherwise there would be another 'Great Ruler' but not
necessarily French, nor even a monarch (at least from the start). For
example, Fr. Laurence Ricci (d. 1775) speaks of a "valiant duke" who
will "arise from the ancient German house which was humiliated by the
French monarch"; later, Josefa von Bourg (d. 1807) speaks of "a
descendant of Constantine, Pepin, and St. Louis, who has been tried by a
long period of disappointment to come from exile to rule over Europe"
(from Prophecy For Today, Fr. Edward Connor, 1956, pp.31-38). This will be explored further as we progress.
3. The 'Three Days' Darkness', which is meant to defeat the enemies of the Church at a time of intense crisis, is
considered by some a doubtful prophecy although it appears several
times; it is related to the 'heavenly scourge' which is possibly the
same thing. It will be treated as genuine for the purposes of this
section. All the more so since it is moot, as we will see, and will
never be fulfilled along with the chapter eleven timeline.
4. An indirect way to establish the latest point at which the holy monarch may appear is the 1903 election of the freemason Rampolla. His
election was vetoed by the 'heir legatee' of the Holy Roman Empire,
using an ancient privilege of the Holy Roman Emperors which was disused
for centuries but was still 'on the books', so to speak. St. Pius X
abrogated this privilege after his election, fearing that it may be
abused by the enemies of the Church at a later time.
5.
This is one example of how things specific to one timeline are not to
be found in another; and is why unless they are agreeable to any timeline such details are not to be found in the Gospel accounts at all. It was said any
timeline because, theoretically speaking, there may be any number of
possible variations; and there is also Our Lord's words to consider
about the days which signify His Second Coming: "So you also when you
shall see these things come to pass, know ye that it is very nigh, even
at the doors" (Mark 13:29). The question here is whether all
these things must arrive at within the same timeframe, or whether most
of these may come beforehand, during the time of the beast, and the
remainder to come at the real, actual end (Apoc. 20:7-10). For instance,
when Jerusalem is "compassed about with an army" (Luke 21:20) this is a
definite sign for the end; but does "Jerusalem" here mean the actual
city or does it stand for the city of the relocated Papacy* at the real,
actual end (Apoc. 20:7-10) ? For at that time, after the 'period of
peace' is ended, the holy city is under attack: the armies of the world
"came upon the breadth of the earth, and encompassed the camp of the
saints, and the beloved city". It is not said whether the city was
despoiled then, but "there came down fire from God out of heaven, and devoured them". So presumably it had happened, and Heaven responded.**
The answer to whether all these
things must arrive within the same timeframe is given in Matt. 24:34:
"Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these
things be done". This means that within a single generation, from the
ending of the period of peace until there "shall appear the sign of the
Son of man in heaven" (Matt. 24:30), all of these things will come
about. So the Gospel accounts of the end, of Matt. 24, Mark 13 and Luke
21, has nothing to do with our time, of Apocalypse chapter thirteen.
* The Papacy is relocated after the destruction of Rome as "Great Babylon" in Apocalypse chapter eighteen.
** It is not certain
that it is despoiled in the second timeline ending. It is so in the first
(Apoc. 11:1-2); but chapter twenty seems to indicate that it might be
prevented.
6. The ending in chapter eleven is rather abrupt.
7.
In all three Gospel accounts 'wars and rumour of wars' are spoken about
as though it were a new thing (Matt. 24:6, Mark 13:7, Luke 21:9). This can
only happen if there were a significant period of peace beforehand. It
does not make sense otherwise to state what is always (normally)
happening in the world. We will return to this point.
8.
Either way the locus of the persecution, spiritual or physical, which precedes the period of
peace is the papacy. It is
overcoming this which gives victory to the Church to bring about the
period of peace which precedes the Second Coming. In both timelines the
papacy is 'taken away' to precede the coming of antichrist. We have seen
how it happens in one; in the other timeline it is likely that the next
papal election is prevented by an attack upon the cardinals. In
Apocalypse chapter eleven the 'holy city' is overrun (verse 2): "But the
court which is without the temple, cast out and measure it not: because
it is given unto the Gentiles. And the holy city they shall tread under
foot, two and forty months:".
9.
The persecutions of the Church are not always external and physical.
They may consist of heretics, faithless prelates, and infiltrators who
are wolves in sheep's clothing; and whom, it is strange, find it so important to
lead people away from the Faith when it really does not concern them,
if they do not have it. This is part of the 'mystery of iniquity'.
10.
St. Paul said that the papacy would be "removed from the enemy's path"
(2 Thess. 2:7~Knox). It must happen in any case; in this case, the
'period of peace' would have come first.
11.
This is not to be as a result of nuclear war, but of the actions of the
antichrist and the calamities which follow the trumpets and the vials. Otherwise chapter thirteen could not be fulfilled.
12.
It is possible that, until Sr. Lucia wrote it, the devil did not know
it either. His minions (the freemasons in Portugal at the time) already
tried to scare the secret out of the seers, resulting in their absence
from the August 13 apparition (they would subsequently see Her on August
19), but their plan was without success. It is not confirmed, but an idea
was suggested that the devil and his demons are blind when it comes to
eavesdropping on holy conversations, such as those between Our Lady of
Fatima and Lucia, Francisco and Jacinta. But it seems they are able to
read these things if they are written down. This is not confirmed.
13. Really, only
for the second timeline, but this was not supposed to be in any way
obvious. That would possibly give away the purpose behind the
Apocalypse.
14. Various Catholic prophecies speak of the reign of antichrist relatively close to the Second Coming.
15.
At this time in the world, there is no paganism. All the false
religions had disappeared whether through conversion or death in the
years of Apocalypse chapters 13-19. So Christ's words here are for all,
since all were presumably Christian at least in name during the one thousand years; at its end, not so much. But we do not know how everything will look like then.
16. See "Siri Thesis: Sedevacante or 'Sederomota' ?". How it is to be restored is unknown.
17.
And yet Our Lord said of that time that "there will rise up false
Christs and false prophets, and they shall shew signs and wonders, to
seduce (if it were possible) even the elect" (Mark 13:22). This implies
that it should not be possible to deceive the elect, all the more so as
they were living as the 'first resurrection' of Apocalypse chapter
twenty. It also implies that the elect might not be there to help dispel
the illusion.
17A. It was figured that 'the holy place' is in 'the holy city' and thus that St. Luke's use of the word 'desolation' (in the Douay-Rheims translation) correlated with the appearance of the 'abomination unto desolation' in the holy city. But this is not necessarily the case. The Knox translation gives it as: "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, be sure that the time has come when she will be laid waste". The term 'abomination of desolation' is the same in both translations in Mark 13:14.
18.
In the first timeline, which is the concern of all Catholic prophecy
before Fatima, Enoch and Eli is spoken of various times and in parallel
with Apocalypse chapter eleven. If they return in the second
timeline it is impossible to say what exactly they will be doing, unless
it happens to parallel the first timeline (Apoc. 11); but this ought
not to be so, because what is common to both timelines at the end should
be in the Gospel accounts.
19.
This seems to be the simplest solution. During the period of peace, the
world is become Catholic, at least in the main; thus, at the end, the
Gospel does not need to be preached, but the 'Gospel of the kingdom' may
literally mean the news that the Second Coming is at hand. In this
context it is reasonable to surmise that the devil will try to mislead
many by 'false Christs' who claim to be Him already returned, and
proclaiming a false kingdom come.
20. How this applies to Fatima: Fr. Dhanis' modernist critique of Fatima is itself ably critiqued by the author of The Whole Truth About Fatima, Vol. I.
See especially, in part two, "The Modernist Solution Of Father Dhanis"
(p. 269) and "The Solution Of The Historical Critique" (p. 337). The
thing is, the thesis that Fr. Dhanis applies to Fatima's Lucia dos Santos really applies to
Melanie of La Salette: That the original secret from Our Lady was
changed and added thereunto so that what we were given was not the
faithful and accurate transmission of Her words. His conclusion, not
stated but clearly implied, was that nothing remains of Fatima which is
reliable after 1917. It is not to be wondered that Fr. Dhanis, being a
modernist, would take this line; his purpose was not to provide an
honest criticism but to oppose Our Lady's message as being "not in line
with modern sensibilities". It so happens that Melanie of La Salette unwittingly provided him a template with which to do it.
21.
The irony of Fr. Dhanis' attack on Fatima by applying Melanie's
failings to Sr. Lucia is that it also works in reverse: We can see more
easily which parts of the 1879 text was influenced by what and also to
show the two timelines by the presence of both in the text, which contrasts with any valid prophecy.
22.
At Quito, Our Lord appeared to be speaking of times when priests lose their fervor
in general but of the end-times in particular. He did not speak of a
false council which might have brought this about, though He did say:
"Lacking a Prelate and Father to guide them with paternal love,
gentleness, strength, wisdom and prudence, many priests will lose their
spirit, placing their souls in great danger". This implies that the
Church might be in an extended interregnum at the time. It might be that
for the time, another Pope cannot be elected, but not for the same
reasons as the extant timeline since 1958.
23. This part comes after the period of peace: "[Among]
God’s ministers, and the Spouses of Jesus-Christ, there will be some
who will go astray, and that will be the most terrible". This would be during antichrist's reign. Since the
antichrist comes after the period of peace, and his reign is measured by
3.5 years, not twice 3.5 years, Apocalypse chapter twelve cannot
represent the apostasy of the timeline of chapter eleven. It is
completely different. Melanie's reference is bewildering.
23A.
For instance, in timeline one it may be the great monarch and the holy
pope OR just the holy pope. In timeline two it can only be the holy
pope.
24. The Three Days' Darkness has been called doubtful by some but as it appears on a few
more occasions it is well worth looking into, and we will do so.
25A.
Or perhaps, after the reign of the last pope according to the prophecy
of Malachy, the cardinals were in conclave, but never got as far as
electing a successor.
26. The measure is of the number of faithful who keep the faith; but as there is no pope they are not measured by their adherence to the pope but by keeping the faith unaltered, as it was up until then.
26A. The question arises as to why she was shown these visions but not told to write them down at the time. It is probable that if the timeline had continued to unfold along the lines of La Salette prophecy she would have wrote about them later, but in that case she would relay it accurately and not in the form of the 1879 text. She might even have done so in the alternate 1879.
26B. Depends on whether their Lord is Our Lord or St. Peter. If they speak for the Church at this time when there is no pope but instead the antichrist then it may well be the latter. The fact that it cannot easily be said which tells us that it is meant to conceal a truth which would become apparent at the time; but it is not known why; unless it was necessary as part of the 'secret' of Apocalypse (see 'Part Three').
[*
Nov.22/25 edit: Their Lord is the last pope, 'Petrus Romanus', who was 'taken out of the way' according to the first timeline scenario. Then the great city, 'called spiritually, Sodom and Egypt', could be anywhere.]
26C. Why would the elect not be named in both chapter 11 and chapter 13 unless, again, it was necessary as part of the 'secret' of Apocalypse (see 'Part Three').
26D. 'Mitigated' might be Our Lord's meaning for the second timeline. In the first timeline, with the victory of the Church, the
time itself was shortened; but in ours although the time is not
shortened the tribulation as such has not yet happened. The spiritual
punishment may be said to have been mitigated with the papacy being
"taken away". Although it may seem strange to put it that way, the fact
is no one can be faulted for not following the papacy by that fact. How
far this may 'mitigate' the spiritual chastisement (spoken of by Sr.
Lucia in 1957) is difficult to discern. But for certain it does
'shorten' its scope.
27.
In the context of the first timeline, it seems easier to discern why Our
Lord might shorten the days "for the sake of the elect which he hath
chosen" (Mark 13:20). It is so that they can be chosen. For the second, it might well be due to the fact
that 'the camp of the saints, and the beloved city' is surrounded by the
armies of God, and Magog. But it is impossible to be more precise on
this point.
28.
This is in Apoc. 10:6. "That time shall be no longer". Paradoxically,
the only way to know about the text for certain is if it was rendered
null. This also tells us that it is useless to believe anyone who says
he knows its contents.
29. This 'flipping of the script' will be treated in "Flipping The Script".
30. Initially, this source was used but several points were taken from here and here and here. Nothing was found about this prophecy in Fr. O'Connor's Prophecy For Today nor Yves Dupont's The Coming Chastisement. One
source does not mention the words which apply to Pius IX; another omits
the passages which appear to apply to Vatican '2'. In attempting to
reconcile this prophecy with the two timelines it is necessary to have
access to all of Our Lady's words. At least one of those gave them in
chronological order, which is useful, though not complete it seems.
31.
Up until this point, the first attempt was made to reconcile Good
Success with the two timelines. Now a second attempt is made, using
additional references. It is all retained for completeness.
32. Loosely speaking, this might mean 'liberty' for heresy, 'equality' for blasphemy, and 'fraternity' for impurity.
33.
Also nothing was said, as far as can be ascertained, about all of these
things beginning in the mid-20th century. One source has said that Our
Lady "pointed to shortly after the mid-20th century as a crucial point
in the crisis". It would behoove commentators not to change dates to fit
this prophecy into what they think is its timeline. There appears to be
no interruption in the timeline as given by Our Lady at Quito.
33A.
It still happened in places, and is still happening; but today it is
more of a persecution of anybody who is against global communism. It
seems to have become so over time.
33B.
Given the turmoils which occurred in the 19th century it is difficult
to say for sure. But as we proceed, we will see that the advancing
corruption did not quite happen in the Church so much as around Her. But to examine this in exacting detail is beyond the scope of this site.
34.
Russia rejected not only the pope at the time of the schism but the
papal primacy itself. By embracing antipopes (seen as oxymoronic
'heretical popes' and confused with historical 'bad popes') over
against, and
contradictory to, the dogma of the faith, one tacitly rejects the papacy
by disregarding the binding nature of the dogmas which were defined by
all previous popes. At the same time, many people think they are being
faithful to the papacy. In the end, if the dogmas do not matter, neither
does the papacy.
BY
'accepting a false pope as true' it is meant after his heresy and
unworthiness of the papacy has become manifest; at the time of
Roncalli's appearance on Oct. 28, 1958, it was not possible to make the
distinction. This is explored further in Part Three. But the idea is that to follow the antipapacy right to the end leads to the antichrist in particular (and not just his precursors) without fail.
35.
It follows then, that "what withholdeth" the appearance of the
antichrist, who "now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the
way", is not actually taken away at that time, either timeline, in fact. That is fulfilled with Apoc. 12:5 in the second timeline only.
36. The position of Kaiser was derived from traditions belonging to the Holy Roman Empire.
37.
It has been said that the Kaiser had a hand in this, wishing to take
Russia out of the war so that all resources can be diverted to the
Western Front.
38. This article
which discusses the omniscience and foresight of God is very good in
order to understand this. What may be difficult for people to grasp is
why another timeline was posited if only one of them was intended all
along. The rest of this section is intended to try to answer this
question. The short answer is for the devil to deceive himself trying to
deceive us, and without Heaven lying to us, or him. It is to be
remembered that prophecy is conditional (outside of Scripture)
and may become obsolete when the conditions required for its fulfillment
had changed. The threshold difference required for such a change can
only be speculated upon.
As to whether each timeline was known
to God beforehand and whether the one which came about actually would
come about, this excerpt from the above referenced article tells us how:
"An argument for God’s knowing future free human actions, then, can be put succinctly in the following format:
1. God is omniscient.
2. An omniscient being knows all truths.
3. Therefore God knows all truths.
4. There are truths about future contingent events (e.g., future free human actions).
5. Therefore, God knows all truths about future contingent events."
1. God is omniscient.
2. An omniscient being knows all truths.
3. Therefore God knows all truths.
4. There are truths about future contingent events (e.g., future free human actions).
5. Therefore, God knows all truths about future contingent events."
No comments:
Post a Comment
--