{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
"The Pope will cross the sea in a year when the Feast of St. George (April 23rd) falls on Good Friday, and St. Mark’s feast (April 25th) falls on Easter Sunday, and the Feast of St. Anthony falls on Pentecost and the Feast of St. John the Baptist falls on Corpus Christi".*
"The Great Monarch will come to restore peace and the Pope will share in the victory".
Father Lavinsky (d. 1708): "The world will be harassed by civil wars and greater destruction than ever before. Germany will be partitioned and have many enemies. Religion will be greatly oppressed and monks will be banished. During their banishment, the Cross, to the astonishment of all, will shine in double splendor through many lands because of the great ruler".
St. Thomas a'Becket (12th century): "A knight shall come from the West. He shall capture Milan, Lombardy, and the three Crowns. He shall then sail to Cyrprus and Famagoste and land at Jaffa, and reach Christ's grave where he will fight. Wars and wonders shall befall till the people believe in Christ toward the end of the world."
Old English Prophecy (On a tombstone at the Kirby cemetery, Essex):
"When pictures look alive, with movements free, (T.V. and movies)
It should be recalled at this point that in accounting for the two timelines in this manner it is also necessary to explain these particular omissions (to wit, the antichrist unmentioned in the Gospels). It might be argued that these omissions explain the two timelines. Christ was speaking of the last days in which the generation which saw the period of peace come to an end will also see the second coming. To omit mention of the antichrist is peculiar to say the least - especially given the other details He saw fit to mention. But if there were an alternate timeline in which the antichrist would not be present near the end, then Our Lord cannot mention him as a proximate sign of the Parousia.
The small flock that remained faithful were conducted by the angels before the throne of St. Peter. The good Christians, praising God, thanked Him and the Apostles for protecting them and also for "having protected the Church of Jesus Christ by not permitting her to be infected with the false maxims of the world". This very clearly is a demonstration of Christ's promise being kept: "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).
Dupont also observes that the legions 'are those of Henry, the great Catholic prince'. 'Many prophecies', he continues, 'say that he will ride a white horse, and this may be taken quite literally, for by that time Europe will be in ruins and there will be nothing else for travelling'. This may be true, or it may simply be an integral part of who he is as the instrument of victory for the Church, as much as his limp; for he is aided not by the devices of this world but by Heaven.
He is more explicit later on: "And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; lo, he is here: do not believe. For 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 13:8-9). [40B]
In the second timeline, it begins much the same: There is an expectation of the second coming of Christ, because the Church knew the proximate time was 'a thousand years after the tribulation'. At that time will appear false Christs and false prophets, seeking to divert people away from being faithful to Christ's Word concerning His return. Shortly after they begin to appear, the devil begins to 'seduce the nations', "which are over the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, and shall gather them together to battle, the number of whom is as the sand of the sea" (Apoc. 20:9); and it begins with 'wars and seditions'. The rest of it is already described in section III (Part One), and one can go no further with this. However there are still a couple of points which may be made concerning especially the second timeline:
Perhaps after the devil is loosed again, and begins to seduce the world, many do not want to heed the signs of the end of the world; though they know it by the signs, and also by the time that has passed as the period of peace, one thousand years.
"And unto all nations the gospel must first be preached" (Mark 13:10). This verse, given in between the previous two, indicates another possible interpretation: Not only that the Word is preached first to all nations, but also that the imminent Second Coming is also thus preached to all nations, with the admonishment to all to be in the state of grace and to keep watch.
-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
VI. Two Thousand Years Of Catholic Prophecy
The
basic pattern is always the same, until Fatima: a crisis concerning the Church comes
about requiring some special intervention which results in a period of
peace preceding the coming of antichrist.
The
particulars are somewhat variable. From the early centuries a 'Great
Monarch' was expected to intervene and, together with the Holy Pope,
bring about the resolution of the crisis and the triumph of the Church.
However, from the time of the French Revolution the great monarch began
to appear in prophecy less prominently, or he appeared to be having additional difficulty, or he may not appear
at all.
From the time a prophecy is given, the 'spiritual state' of the world at that time
is fast-forwarded as it were a computer simulation, until it
culminates with the crisis point; the resulting vision is an extrapolation of the trajectory of the world from that time. In short, it is a kind of Heavenly foresight of the direction the world is going in, so long as it remains precisely on that path.
During the intervening time, certain
actions may be taken or changes may occur to affect the level of faith in the world
which would then change the outcome, thus requiring a fresh prophecy
'update'.[38A]
Thus it is that prophecies which appear to be impossible to be fulfilled now (such as concerning the great monarch) are not false;
they are merely no longer applicable. However, they still tell us something concerning the
greater or lesser progress of the Enemy in the world.
"Heaven and earth shall pass: but my words shall not pass" (Matt. 24:35) Our Lord said, with the implication that other words might pass.
We
ought not to be hasty in our judgment, then. For example, the prophecy
of St. Malachy concerning the popes until the end of time may or may not
be a forgery; but it is not false because it no longer fits our timeline. Rather, our timeline no longer fits the prophecy.
With
that in mind, we will examine a sampling of Catholic prophecies from
the early centuries. These will be given mostly in chronological
order, so far as the dates are known. All are taken from Prophecy For Today (Fr. Edward O'Connor, 1956) and Catholic Prophecy - The Coming Chastisement (Yves Dupont, 1970). [39]
-The Early Centuries Until The Holy Monarch
St. Hippolytus (d. 235): "The Great French Monarch who shall subject all the East shall come around the end of the world".
It
is to be wondered how 'French' was derived from the translation of this
early prophecy. At any rate, that the great monarch will be French
appears many times in prophecy.
St. Cataldus of Tarentino
(c. 500): "The Great Monarch will be in war till he is forty years of
age; a king of the House of Lily he will assemble great armies and expel
tyrants from his empire. He will conquer England and other island
empires. Greece he will invade and be made a king thereof. Clochis,
Cyprus, the Turks and barbarians he will subdue and have all men to
worship the Crucified One. He will at length lay down his crown in
Jerusalem".
Sometimes
what is prophesied may be very specific. In this example we see for the
first time that his reign will end when he lays down his crown in
Jerusalem. That he invades Greece might be due to the then-future
'Orthodox' schism; that he invades England might be due to the
then-future Anglican schism; and "other island empires" might be a
reference to the American colonies. What he saw or what he knew might be
metaphorical, i.e. future events translated to his understanding of the
world without reference to technology (which is more or less explicit
in Apocalypse). Since his prophecy comes relatively early, not much has
yet happened which can be derived from his time until the beginning of
the end-times which would account for these references. Islam has not
even appeared yet, though the mention of the Turks might account for it.
St. Caesar of Arles
(469-543): "When the entire world, and in a special manner France, and
in France more particularly the provinces of the North, of the East, and
above all that of Lorraine and Champagne, shall have been a prey to the
greatest miseries and trials, then the provinces shall be succored by a
prince who had been exiled in his youth, and who shall recover the
crown of the lilies.
"This
prince shall extend his dominion over the entire universe. At the same
time there will be a Great Pope, who will be most eminent in sanctity
and most perfect in every quality. This Pope shall have with him the
Great Monarch, a most virtuous man, who shall be a scion of the holy
race of the French kings. This Great Monarch will assist the Pope in the
reformation of the whole earth. Many princes and nations that are
living in error and impiety shall be converted, and an admirable peace
shall reign among men during many years because the wrath of God shall
be appeased through repentance, penance and good works. There will be
one common law, one only faith, one baptism, one religion. All nations
shall recognize the Holy See of Rome, and shall pay homage to the Pope.
But after some considerable time fervor shall cool, iniquity shall
abound, and moral corruption shall become worse than ever, which shall
bring upon mankind the last and worst persecution of Antichrist and the
end of the world".
A very clear prophecy which indicates a 'period of peace' to come before the arrival of antichrist and
the end of the world. The two will follow closely after the period of
peace. That the prince should "recover the crown of the lilies" is
interesting, for it implies that it is lost at some point, as it has
been due to the French Revolution. But this early in history there is
nothing yet to indicate that there should be any particular difficulty
with the French crown; it might be due to being conquered in war rather
than by revolution at this point. However, we know that the devil is
aware of these prophecies, so even from then he knew that one of his
prime foes will be the future French Monarch.
During the 'period of peace', there
will be "one common law, one only faith, one baptism, one religion". By then, "this gospel of the kingdom" will have been "preached in
the whole world, for a testimony to all nations" (Matt. 24:14) "and then
shall the consummation come". In the first timeline period of peace, then, the
antichrist was imminent, or at least not so distant; and though many years might pass,
"this generation shall not pass" (Matt. 24:34) "till all these things
be done". This is at least from the end of the period of peace, which means
Our Lord implied there was one when He said "you shall hear of wars and
rumours of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For these things must come
to pass, but the end is not yet" (Matt. 24:6). He would only
give this as a sign if it were something new and not always present
already in some form. [40]
Bl. Rabanus Maurus
(d. 856): "Our principal doctors agree in announcing to us that towards
the end of time one of the descendants of the kings of France shall
reign over all the Roman empire; and that he shall be the greatest of
the French monarchs, and the last of his race. "After having most
happily governed his kingdom, he will go to Jerusalem, and depose on
Mount Olivet his sceptre and crown. This shall be the end and conclusion
of the Roman and Christian Empire".
The
second known mention of the great monarch's laying down the symbols of his
office: his sceptre and crown in Jerusalem. Bl. Maurus also adds that
this is the 'end and conclusion' of Christendom: From that point
forward, the period of peace is coming to an end, and there will never
be another victory of the Church until the Second Coming. Not for
nothing did Our Lord ask, almost rhetorically: "But yet the Son of man,
when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?" (Luke 18:8).
He was already speaking of a time when the elect might "cry to Him day
and night". Will He "have patience in their regard" (Luke 18:7) ? He also promised that the days will be
shortened.
Monk Adso
(d. 992): "Some of our teachers say that a King of the Franks will
possess the entire Roman Empire. This King will be the greatest and last
of all monarchs, and after having prosperously governed his kingdom he
will come in the end to Jerusalem and he will lay down his sceptre and
his crown upon the Mount of Olives. This will be the end and
consummation of the Empire of Rome, and immediately afterwards
Antichrist will come".
Monk
Adso does not say whether the antichrist is born at this time or
whether this is when he becomes the way that he is; or only when begins to come to
power. Our Lord said that 'this generation will not pass' until all
things are fulfilled; so it seems that it may be some years from the ending
of the period of peace until the last days. But that generation which
had seen the period of peace will not have passed by then.
{Yves
Dupont comments: The Great King will be of Frankish descent, although
his actual nationality is uncertain. Inter-marriage between the various
royal families of Europe makes it possible for virtually every prince to
claim Frankish ancestry.}
Perhaps this has the advantage of hiding his identity from the devil until it is too late to stop him. (Heaven would prevent the devil from attacking him directly, but the devil can prevent his coming by undermining the French throne. There is a certain, it seems, self-imposed limit by Heaven as to how much They can intervene. Events have to happen according to free will).
Abbot "Merlin" Joachim (d. 1202): Full text here.
The Holy Pope who is to come is under the special protection of the
angels. He will "recover the states of the Church", "reunite the exiled
temporal powers" and even recover the kingdom of Jerusalem. He "shall
undo all wrong" and it is likely this includes restoring the monarchies
in various places which were overthrown by masonic revolutions.
The East-West schism will be healed with the return of the Eastern church. "The
sanctity of this beneficent Pontiff will be so great that the highest
potentates shall bow down before his presence. This holy man shall crush
the arrogance of religious schism and heresy", and so undo the harms done by the Protestant revolt and others.
In this period of peace everything will "prosper
beyond all human hope...this holy Pope shall be both pastor and
reformer. Through him the East and West shall be in everlasting
concord". This is tonally different from the rule of him "who was to rule all
nations with an iron rod" (Apoc. 12:5) - but this is only in appearance. The rule of Christ the King is light for those rightly disposed.
"The
city of Babylon shall then be the head and guide of the world. Rome,
weakened in temporal power, shall forever preserve her spiritual
dominion, and shall enjoy great peace"... The thing about this passage is
that Babylon and Rome are spoken of as different cities. In our
timeline, it is not possible to see them differently. But in the other
timeline, 'Babylon' is to be the seat of the great monarch, whilst Rome
retains the papacy. In our timeline, the true papal successor to 1958
combines these roles, pope and monarch, after it was no longer possible
for the great monarch to come; so it is that the true papal successor to
1958 will come to rule all nations 'with an iron rod'.
"The
dispersed nation (Jews) shall also enjoy tranquillity. Six and a half
years after this time the Pope will render his soul to God"... It is not
said that the Jews actually convert at this time. Perhaps many of them
will. This 'angelic' pope's reign is not very long, but during his time
many wrongs are righted, his successors will maintain it, and it seems most will be converted.
"At
the beginning, in order to obtain these happy results, having need of a
powerful assistance, this holy Pontiff will ask the cooperation of the
generous monarch of France (Great Monarch)...A temporal throne becoming
vacant, the Pope shall place on it this king whose assistance he shall
ask . . ."... The request of Paray-le-Monial, for the King of France to
consecrate his kingdom to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, was to ensure that
this would happen; then his power is at the service of the angelic pope.
"A
man of remarkable sanctity will be his successor in the Pontifical
chair. Through him God will work so many prodigies that all men shall
revere him, and no person will dare to oppose his precepts"... He will
also prevent the clergy from accumulating riches, and will enforce
modesty and morality in public and in culture. He was to rule for a long
time. If anyone, this is the pope who reigns 'with an iron rod' -
except he does not. The monarch does that, but many are inspired to
follow this holy pope's edicts by his sanctity.
"His
three immediate successors shall be men of exemplary holiness, One
after the other will be models of virtue, and shall work miracles,
confirming the teaching of their predecessors. Under their government
the Church shall spread, and these Popes shall be called the Angelic
Pastors"... Altogether there are five holy popes who reign when the crisis
is averted, and during this time the gospel is truly 'preached unto all
nations'.
Thus far we see nothing resembling the dual path of fulfillment which is unique to Fatima.
Werdin d'Otrante (13th century): "The Great Monarch and the Great Pope will precede Anti-Christ.
"The
nations will be in wars for four years and a great part of the world
will be destroyed. All the sects will vanish. The capitol of the world
will fall. The Pope will go over the sea carrying the sign of redemption
on his forehead, and after the victory of the Pope and the Great
Monarch peace will reign on earth".
"The Pope will cross the sea in a year when the Feast of St. George (April 23rd) falls on Good Friday, and St. Mark’s feast (April 25th) falls on Easter Sunday, and the Feast of St. Anthony falls on Pentecost and the Feast of St. John the Baptist falls on Corpus Christi".*
"The Great Monarch will come to restore peace and the Pope will share in the victory".
* Yves
Dupont notes that this concurrence of feasts last occurred in 1943; the
next such concurrence would be in 2038. Nostradamus said something
similar.
Werdin d'Otrante does not specify five holy popes but his vision appears to extend only as far as the establishment
of the period of peace, with certain knowledge of what comes afterward.
This is the first mention of the pope having to go overseas when Rome
falls (what else is the 'capitol of the world' ?). The 'concurrence' of
feasts is also mentioned by St. Bridget of Sweden (died 1373), Venerable
Magdalene Porzat (died 1850) and even Nostradamus. These are all
included under 'Questionable Prophecies' by Fr. O'Connor because what
was indicated did not come to pass; but when one considers that there
are two possible timelines for the end-times then it is understood that
these prophecies are not false but obsolete.
One
also notes the relative consistency in the timeline: Around the middle
of the 20th century is a certain certain point, just as indicated by Our
Lady of Good Success.
Brother John of the Cleft Rock
(1340): "The White Eagle (Great Monarch), by order of the Archangel
Michael, will drive the crescent from Europe where none but Christians
will remain—he himself will rule from Constantinople. An era of peace
and prosperity will begin for the world. There will no longer be
Protestants** or Schismatics; the Lamb will reign and the bliss of the
human race will begin. Happy will they be who have escaped the perils of
that terrible time, for they can taste of its fruit through the reign
of the Holy Ghost and the sanctification of mankind, which can be
accomplished only after the defeat of the Black Eagle (Germany).
** [Note from original] There were no Protestants in the 14th century; the word perhaps should be "heretics".
"God
will raise up a holy Pope over whom the angels will rejoice.
Enlightened by God this man will reconstruct almost the entire world
through his holiness and lead all to the true faith, and everywhere fear
of God, virtue and good morals will be dominant. He will lead all
erring sheep back to the fold, and there shall be only one faith, one
law, one rule of life, one baptism on earth. All men will love each
other and do good, and all quarrels and war will disappear".
Brother
John seems to indicate that there would be some peril involving Islam,
if the great monarch had to drive them out of Europe. The schisms of the
East and of the Protestant revolt are healed, and the gospel is
preached to all nations. It seems the devil is fettered in the
abyss, as effectively as he would have been according to Apocalypse
chapter twenty, but not for nearly as long. Even so, 'all quarrels and
war will disappear'.
One
can argue that the 'thousand years' of peace in Apocalypse does not
necessarily mean that exact number of years, but indicates a total and
complete condition of peace in the world: Peace in Christ, and peace on
earth; not merely the absence of war. In the other timeline it
might be interpreted that way. [41]
Bl. Johannes Amadeus de Sylva
(d. 1482): "Germany and Spain will unite under a great prince
designated by God. After much slaughtering, the other nations will be
forced to come into this union. There is no hope for the unbelievers
until all Germany becomes converted; then all will happen quickly.
Because of Germany’s unfaithfulness, the time will be prolonged until
all countries unite under the Great Ruler. After this union mass
conversions will take place by the command of God, and peace and
prosperity will follow".
It
seems that, in the first timeline, Germany is 'the instrument of
chastisement' for Europe at least, as opposed to Russia being the
instrument of chastisement for the whole world. There also seems consistently to be one great general war involving many nations; not two.
Blessed Catherine of Racconigi (1547): "After three centuries a descendant of Francis I of France will rule Europe like Charlemagne".
The
timeline seems to vary somewhat from the mid-19th to mid-20th
centuries. Perhaps what is meant was 'after three centuries, but not
four'.
Holzhauser (d. 1658) quoted in extenso:
"When everything has been ruined by war; when Catholics are hard
pressed by traitorius co-religionists and heretics; when the Church. and
her servants are denied their rights, the monarchies have been
abolished and their rulers murdered . . . then the hand of Almighty God
will work a marvelous change, something apparently impossible according
to human understanding. There will rise a valiant monarch anointed by
God. He will be a Catholic, a descendant of Louis [X, (yet) a descendant
of an ancient imperial German family, born in exile. He will rule
supreme in temporal matters. The Pope will rule supreme in spiritual
matters at the same time. Persecution will cease and justice shall
reign. Religion seems to be oppressed, but by the changes of entire
kingdoms it will be made more firm.
"He
will root out false doctrines and destroy the rule of Moslemism. His
dominion will extend from the East to the West. All nations will adore
God their Lord according to Catholic teaching. There will be many wise
and just men. The people will love justice, and peace will reign over
the whole earth, for divine power will bind Satan for many years until
the coming of the Son of Perdition.
"The reign of the Great Ruler may be compared with that of Caesar Augustus who became Emperor after his victory over his enemies, thereby giving peace to the world, also with the reign of Emperor Constantine the Great, who was sent by God, after severe persecutions, to deliver both the Church and State. By his victories on water and land he brought the Roman empire under subjection, which he then ruled in peace...
"The reign of the Great Ruler may be compared with that of Caesar Augustus who became Emperor after his victory over his enemies, thereby giving peace to the world, also with the reign of Emperor Constantine the Great, who was sent by God, after severe persecutions, to deliver both the Church and State. By his victories on water and land he brought the Roman empire under subjection, which he then ruled in peace...
"The Great Monarch will have the special help of God and be unconquerable.
"The Fifth Epoch of time dates from the reign of Charles V until the reign of the Great Monarch.
"The Sixth Epoch from the Great Monarch until Antichrist. This Sixth Epoch of the Church—‘the time of consolation’—begins with the Holy Pope and the Powerful Emperor, and terminates with the reign of Antichrist. This will be an age of solace, wherein God will console His Church after the many mortifications and afflictions she had endured in the Fifth period for all nations will be brought to the unity of the true Catholic Faith".
"The Sixth Epoch from the Great Monarch until Antichrist. This Sixth Epoch of the Church—‘the time of consolation’—begins with the Holy Pope and the Powerful Emperor, and terminates with the reign of Antichrist. This will be an age of solace, wherein God will console His Church after the many mortifications and afflictions she had endured in the Fifth period for all nations will be brought to the unity of the true Catholic Faith".
This
prophecy by the Ven. Holzhauser offers a detailed account with mention
of the various epochs of the Church. The great monarch was to be
descended from Louis X yet born in exile. The monarchies had been
abolished and perhaps this applied to France as well. But as early as
St. Caesar of Arles (469-543) it was said that "the provinces shall be
succored by a prince who had been exiled in his youth, and who shall
recover the crown of the lilies".
Here
we have a very clear map of the timeline: "...peace will reign over the
whole earth, for divine power will bind Satan for many years until the
coming of the Son of Perdition". This is unlike Apocalypse chapter
twenty, as we have seen. But neither is false - they only apply to different timelines.
Charles
V was Holy Roman Emperor from 1519 to 1556. His reign saw the break-up
of Christendom beginning with the Protestant revolt and this state of
affairs would generally continue until the reign of the great monarch -
about four hundred years - which would mark the 'Fifth Epoch'. The Sixth
Epoch contains the period of peace but must also include the waning
years until the reign of antichrist. It seems likely the antichrist
would come to reign in the 21st century in the first timeline as well as
the second.
Rudolph Gekner
(d. 1675): "A great prince of the North with a most powerful army will
traverse all Europe, uproot all republics, and exterminate all rebels.
His sword moved by Divine power, will most valiantly defend the Church
of Jesus Christ. He will combat in behalf of the true orthodox faith,
and shall subdue to his dominion the Mahometan Empire. A new pastor of
the universal church will come from the shore (of Dalmatia) through a
celestial prodigy, and in simplicity of heart adorned with the doctrines
of Jesus Christ. Peace will be restored to the world".
That
the Mahometan empire be subdued and Jerusalem re-captured is
consistently a part of the first timeline. The holy pope is said here to
come from Croatia (Dalmatia). In others (Telesphorus) he is said to be
French. Perhaps he is French by lineage but grew up in Dalmatia (or
vice-versa).
Father Lavinsky (d. 1708): "The world will be harassed by civil wars and greater destruction than ever before. Germany will be partitioned and have many enemies. Religion will be greatly oppressed and monks will be banished. During their banishment, the Cross, to the astonishment of all, will shine in double splendor through many lands because of the great ruler".
As
Germany was never really unified until 1871, its partitioning might
come as a surprise to people (reading this at around 1700). It is
probably as a result of the wars she became involved in, at the behest
of the masonic sects. In our own timeline, Germany lost significant
territory after the first world war, and was really partitioned after
the second. But in spiritual terms, Germany was not on the side of the
masonic sects during the war of 1914-1918 - another difference between
the timelines. [42]
Fr. Laurence Ricci, S.J.
(d. 1775): "After the rule of Napoleon a time will come when the people
will become poor and the world will be punished in three ways: wars,
famines, and pestilences. At a time when the whole world seems doomed
God will intervene. With His aid a valiant duke will arise from the
ancient German house which was humiliated by the French monarch. This
great ruler will restore stolen Church property. Protestantism will
cease and the Turkish empire will end. This duke will be the most
powerful monarch on earth. At a gathering of men noted for piety and
wisdom he will, with the aid of the Pope, introduce new rules, and ban
the spirit of confusion. Everywhere there will be one fold and one
shepherd".
This
is the first mention of the great monarch as a duke. Here, he is
clearly not of the line of French Kings. It is around this time that the
great monarch begins to come not from France (due to the overthrow of
that monarchy by the masonic revolution of 1789).
Holzhauser
said that "the Great Monarch will have the special help of God and be
unconquerable". He did not have to have such power as that of a king -
he could be a duke commanding the loyalty of probably not many at the
beginning. In contrast to this, Melanie Calvat indicated (in the 1879
version, it is true, but she did see something) that the
antichrist would start conquering relatively young and, with his
siblings, achieve brilliant victories. That would seem to be a kind of
anti-great monarch, who is undoing what the great monarch achieved with
Divine assistance to bring about the period of peace.
Josefa von Bourg
(d. 1807): "God will choose 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. He will have the sign of the cross on
his breast and besides being a religious man, will be kind, wise, just
and powerful. Under him the Catholic religion will spread as never
before".
Another
mention of a French monarch who is without his throne. It is not clear
whether he takes part in the restoration or is restored to the throne
afterward. Around this time the great monarch plays a lesser role, it
seems, in the victory of the Church.
Abbe Souffrand
(d. 1828): "The Great Ruler will perform such great and noble deeds
that the infidels will be forced to admit the working of God’s
Providence. Under his reign the greatest righteousness will be practised
and the earth will bear in overabundance.
"Between the cries 'Everything is lost' and 'Everything is saved' there will be scarcely any interval".
"Between the cries 'Everything is lost' and 'Everything is saved' there will be scarcely any interval".
Similar to the previous, it is not clear how this is brought about. The 'Great Ruler' is not said here to be conquering.
Brother Louis Rocco
(d. 1840): "A Great Monarch will arise after a period of terrible wars
and persecutions in Europe. He will be a Catholic; he will not be
German".
Similar to the previous two; the great monarch arises after the "period of terrible wars and persecutions".
Sister Rose Asdenti of Taggia
(1847): "A great revolution will spread all over Europe and peace will
not be restored until the white flower, the lily (Bourbon), has taken
possession of the throne of France".
It seems at this point that the French monarchy will be restored, not by the great monarch, but as a prerequisite for his coming; that is to say, this restoration is a result of the victory, but does not bring it about. These later prophecies do not see the great monarch taking a very great role in obtaining the victory, but he will reign with the holy popes afterwards.
Joseph Goires
(d. 1848) : "The people will be united under a powerful monarch who
will make new laws and banish corruption from the earth. To the Church
will fall the task of rebuilding society. Before this man comes to save
them, the people will realize how bitter it is to desert God".
It
seems here that the monarch works with the Church to rebuild society
after terrible calamities which had to come if the great monarch could
not himself bring about the victory. It appears that the tribulations grow worse in the later prophecies. It might be simply that more details can be given than in earlier centuries; but certain very specific details were given even as far back as Caesar of Arles (469-543) who wrote that many regions "particularly the provinces of the North, of the East...shall have been a prey to the
greatest miseries and trials" and he singled out Lorraine and Champagne in particular; but he did not go so far as to say rebuilding.
The difference might be a matter of degree: This is a very late prophecy in which the great monarch figures prominently, but he is still there. If he is not, then as we will see, the difference is much greater than merely of degree. (St. Hildegaard below would seem to discount this, at least concerning the difference in degree if the great monarch is present.)
Venerable Magdalene Porzat
(d. 1850): "An enormous bird (Great Monarch) shall awake as from a
sleep, and with its terrible bill and claws will sever the ox’s neck and
shall eagerly devour the intestines of the wicked dragon. He shall drag
to the mud the tricolor (revolutionary) flag of the French and restore
to their dominions the legitimate kings. A just and pious man born in
Galicia shall be the Supreme Pontiff; then the whole world shall be
united and prosperous, One faith only and one emperor shall reign over
the whole earth".
The
monarch here is called from sleep as it were, which is his state in
exile and without his throne. The metaphorical nature of this
description does not say whether he will take part in military conquests
or whether he is undoing all of the masonic constructs after he is
enthroned. And here the holy pope comes from Galicia; perhaps the
changes in the timeline at this point, which affected how the great
monarch was to come about has also altered the requirements for the holy
pope. It seems unlikely to be otherwise.
Rev. Theophilus Reisinger, O.M. Cap.
(d. 1940): "The Great Monarch was destined to have been Archduke Franz
Ferdinand (his assassination was the spark that started the first world
war), but because of the many 'souls of atonement' the reign of
Antichrist was postponed, and hence, also that of the Great Monarch".
This
is not so much a prophecy as a commentary. As a prophecy, this would be
false; as a commentary, valid so far as that goes for what was known at
the time.
-Additional Examples And Timeline Differences
Thus far we have examined in chronological order most of the great monarch prophecies as given in Prophecy For Today. There are some additional ones from Yves Dupont's Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement:
St.
Methodius (4th century): "A day will come when the enemies of Christ
will boast of having conquered the whole world. They will say:
'Christians cannot escape now!' But a Great King will arise to fight the
enemies of God. He will defeat them, and peace will be given to the
world, and the Church will be freed from her anxieties."
This concerns the revolutions which began to engulf many parts of the
world beginning with France in 1789. At some later point, had this
continued unabated, almost all governments would be given to the masonic
revolutionary spirit, and many people would go along with it, in order
to spare their own lives and those of their families. Without the
acquiescence of many of these weaker souls, it is doubtful these
revolutions would succeed so far as that. [42A]
Pius IX
(19th century): "There will be a great prodigy which will fill the
world with awe. But this prodigy will be preceded by the triumph of a
revolution during which the Church will go through ordeals that are
beyond description".
This
prophecy, close to our time and by a pope who was aware of the secret
of La Salette at the time, is instructive in that what he says cannot be
ascribed to Fatima in either way that it is fulfilled: neither with the
consecration of Russia nor without. [43] We have seen the spiritual ordeals of false popes on the one hand; and on the other there would not have been those spiritual ordeals of false popes. There were physical persecutions in places, but not to the scale in which the life of the Church (and therefore of the world) would be endangered, and which would have, in the timeline before Fatima, resulted in the three days' darkness or otherwise a 'heavenly scourge'.
St. Thomas a'Becket (12th century): "A knight shall come from the West. He shall capture Milan, Lombardy, and the three Crowns. He shall then sail to Cyrprus and Famagoste and land at Jaffa, and reach Christ's grave where he will fight. Wars and wonders shall befall till the people believe in Christ toward the end of the world."
{Yves Dupont comments: As it
stands this prophecy is abstruse. However, it confirms what is known
from more specific prophecies : The Knight is the great Christian King
who will be chosen by God to destroy Communism and to whom the U.S.A.
will lend its material power. He will fight first in France and in
Germany, then in Italy, and he will liberate the Vatican ('Three Crowns'
equals the Tiara). He will then sail to Palestine to restore
Christianity there. Many prophecies confirm this, however incredible it
may now sound.}
From the perspective of the
two timelines St. Thomas a'Becket cannot be speaking of communism which
only emerges when all of the devil's previous efforts proved vain (it could be argued that it might have come anyway but we do not know). However
it should be noted that as prophecy shifted from 'severe crisis and divine
intervention' to Fatima, the first timeline continued even
though there is no longer a question of such a crisis that a great
monarch, divinely protected, had to intervene. Rather, it is a spiritual
crisis of the determined infiltration of the priesthood
which began not very long after communism was established in Russia. It
is almost as if the devil, seeing how close he was in 1903 (election of the freemason Rampolla), resolved
to try again with much more effort.
The timeline was still divided into "period of peace beforehand leading into Apocalypse chapter eleven and the antichrist", or "no period of peace beforehand leading into Apocalypse chapter thirteen and the antichrist".
St. Hildegard
(12th century): "The time is coming when princes and peoples will
reject the authority of the Pope. Some countries will prefer their own
Church rulers to the Pope. The German Empire will be divided. Church
property will be secularized. Priests will be persecuted. Toward the end
of the world mankind will be purified through sufferings. This will be
true especially of the clergy who will be robbed of all property."
{Yves
Dupont comments: This prophecy is already partly fulfilled: many
countries became protestant in the 16th century, and the German Empire
was divided as a result.}
St. Hildegard
(Continuation). "A powerful wind will rise in the north carrying heavy
fog and the densest of dust by divine command, and it will fill their
throats and eyes so that they will cease their savagery and be stricken
with a great fear. Before the comet comes, many nations, the good
excepted, will be scourged by want and famine. The great nation in the
ocean that is inhabitated by people of different tribes and descent will
be devastated by an [sic] earthquake, storm, and tidal wave. It will be
divided and, in great part, submerged. That nation will also have many
misfortunes at sea and lose its colonies. By its tremendous pressure the
comet will force much out of the ocean and flood many countries,
causing much want and many plagues. All coastal cities will live in
fear, and many of them will be destroyed by tidal waves, and most living
creatures will be killed, and even those who escape will die from
horrible diseases. For in none of those cities does a person live
according to the laws of God.
"Peace will return to the world when the white flower again takes possession of the throne of France. During this period of peace, people will be forbidden to carry weapons, and iron will be used only for making agricultural implements and tools. Also during this period, the land will be very productive, and many Jews, heathens, and heretics will join the Church."
"Peace will return to the world when the white flower again takes possession of the throne of France. During this period of peace, people will be forbidden to carry weapons, and iron will be used only for making agricultural implements and tools. Also during this period, the land will be very productive, and many Jews, heathens, and heretics will join the Church."
This
prophecy very clearly refers to the United States. Other prophecies
there are in which the pope goes over the sea, presumably to the United
States; perhaps after these disasters the nation converts at the behest
of the holy pope. The reference to the throne of France does not make it
clear whether it is the great monarch who helps to bring about the
victory, or only that the victory is complete when the throne of France
is restored. Several prophecies seem to go either way on this. The
difference is made by the progression of the devil's influence in the
world. But this prophecy seems to indicate a greater such progression than
other prophecies up until this point. [44]
Before
continuing, a certain difference between the two timelines up until
Fatima should be highlighted. The mid-20th century is generally
indicated as the point at which the crisis comes to a head and is
resolved in a miraculous manner (great monarch) or a frightful one (a
scourge sent by heaven). But afterwards, what would happen ? As bad as
the evils of the world might have progressed to that point (if the faith were weaker; but the French Marian apparitions had strengthened it), for
certain it would not have progressed so far:
There would not have been such immodesty, divorce, contraception and abortion
on the scale we see today; and certainly not the rise of the things
relating to Sodom and Gomorrah. It might have been worse then it
actually had been in the first half of the 20th century - if
there were no St. Pius X for example - but nowhere near what has been
happening since the 1960's. The whole time period might have resembled,
morally, the 1960's to the 1980's or 1990's at the latest, but without
computer technology. Perhaps without television either.
Computer
technology began in the 1940's and began to be more widely applicable
during the 1950's. This was possible by the uninterrupted economic
growth and development of technology in the United States. But as we can
see from the last prophecy, this would not have been likely if
disasters as those described had happened. Not only that, but with the
period of peace, economic impetus would be greatly slowed. There would
be no Rothschild central banks to manipulate currencies or other
influences which lead to a more frenzied economic output for which
computer technology is needed to track and process everything (which is
more or less how it developed in the 1950's). Money would not be diluted
with inflation and would go much farther, which means less need to work
all of the time. Whether or not television would exist in that timeline is
debatable.
But
it is very likely there would be no nuclear era. And without the
frenzied economic output of the previous century, no bourgeoning power
demands for all the electronic devices such as computers and industrial
machinery, etc. But certainly there would be radio and perhaps film. Perhaps, instead of television, the weekly news might be shown in theatres. If not, then pictures could still be printed.
In
His eschatological discourse, Our Lord was recorded by Sts. Matthew,
Mark and Luke as telling the disciples that they will hear of it: "And
when you shall hear of wars and seditions, etc". At the least, radio
should be in operation to bring the news from afar, and from region to
region. On the other hand, He tells them: "And when
you shall see Jerusalem compassed about with armies, etc". Or: "When you
shall see the abomination unto desolation, standing where it ought not,
etc". This could be via newsreels, such as those which recorded footage
from the two world wars (or just one, according to the timeline), or simply photography proliferated through newsprint.
All
of that is a possibility for the other timeline, pre-Fatima. If it were
the period of peace according to Fatima (especially if Pius XII has
consecrated Russia with the bishops of the Catholic world in
1952), then it is possible for the news of the world to be seen
everywhere on screen in real time as the years progress to the arrival
of the antichrist. But the second timeline is the only one in which this
is guaranteed to be the case, at least during the time of antichrist,
as we can glean from Sr. Lucia's third secret vision. Afterwards, and particularly after the millennium of Apocalypse chapter twenty (when the real end is arrived at), is unknown.
"When pictures look alive, with movements free, (T.V. and movies)
When ships like fish swim beneath the sea, (Submarines)
When men outstripping birds can soar the sky, (Jets and rockets)
Then half the world deep drenched in blood shall die".
For the commentary on this old English prophecy one can perhaps omit T.V. Otherwise, it fits the first timeline very well.
St. Edward
(11th century): "The extreme corruption and wickedness of the English
nation has provoked the just anger of God. When malice has reached the
fullness of its measure, God will, in His wrath, send to the English
people evil spirits who will punish and afflict them with severity by
separating the green tree from its parent stem the length of three
furlongs. But at last this same tree, through the compassionate mercy of
God and without any national assistance, shall return to its original
root, reflourish, and bear abundant fruit".
{Yves Dupont
comments: Here again we see that the Anglican schism was predicted
centuries before its actual occurrence. But St. Edward, the King of the
Anglo-Saxons, was off the mark concerning the duration of the schism —
unless a furlong is not meant to be a century, or unless this prophecy
was tampered with at some time in the past. This is not rare with older
prophecies; we are on much firmer ground with the many 19th-century
prophecies, which we also possess. It is to be noted, too, that there
was no English nation as such in the 11th Century, but only a kingdom of
the Angles and Saxons. This discrepancy, however, may be due to a
mis-transcription.}
It
was likely meant to be 'not less than three centuries, but not a
fourth' which would still mean at least four centuries from the year of
the Anglican schism until the mid-20th century. However, considering the
antiquity of this example, it perhaps indicates a change in the
progression of error since St. Edward's time which resulted in an
increased schismatic period for England.
So
what we are seeing with these changes in the details
of the timeline is the result of the devil's machinations to obtain
the worst possible end, using the prophecies he can read as well as we can to gauge his progress. Though
the Church may approve various apparitions and prophecies they do not,
since the death of the last apostle, carry the same weight as Sacred
Scripture which is the totality of Revelation added to the tradition
of the Church as established from the beginning.
In contrast, the
words of Our Lord in His eschatological discourse and St.
John's Apocalypse are 'set in stone'. The end of this world is prophesied from that
beginning, and all the prophecies received since then concern
the progression of one of the two timelines until the crisis point
before the period of peace. It was not obvious from the beginning that
there are two timelines. Was that ever said ? It does not appear
so. This only became possible with Fatima and its two outcomes. Every
other prophecy was strictly linear. [45] That a period of peace would
come at some point was only apparent, at first, in Apocalypse (chapter
twenty). It is only gleaned indirectly from the eschatological
discourse.
-The Changes In The Timeline Leading Toward The Final Days
The Prophecy of Premol
(5th century) states, among other things, that as well as wars of all
kinds and famines, that 'Lutetius' (called Paris in the interpretation)
may be destroyed; also that the pope will be "hastening in his flight to
other shores". A major schism is indicated: "Thy Church, O Lord, is
torn apart by her own children. One camp is faithful to the fleeing
Pontiff, the other is subject to the new government of Rome which has
broken the Tiara".
The 'new government' can only be the regime of an antipope, or a regime in which an antipope is the figurehead of the Church.
This is not the only reference to what must be an antipope in Rome: The Capuchin Friar (18th
century) states that the clergy will be reduced to poverty and will 'have to beg from lay people their food and everything necessary';
further he states that the pope will 'die during these calamities', and
that the Church will be reduced to anarchy. But after a time, 'by the
Catholic clergy and people the true and lawful Pope will be elected who
shall be a man of great holiness and goodness of life'. Yves Dupont
comments that the reference to the 'true and lawful Pope' in itself is
enough to justify this interpretation.
Looking
back at Our Lady of Good Success, the clergy's troubles make
greater sense with this in mind: She said that they 'lack the divine
compass' and elsewhere that they have not 'a Prelate and Father to guide
them'. She also said that many would become attached to wealth, which
seems to contradict what the Capuchin Friar said, but this may be
resolved by consideration of the 'two camps' spoken of in the prophecy
of Premol: The camp that follows the 'new government of Rome' becomes
wealthy while those who refuse to recognize its legitimacy are stripped
of all things; also perhaps this growing attachment to wealth, on the part of some at least, had been growing in prior years and exacerbated when the 'new government of Rome' came to
be.
Another way it might happen is this: The
'new government in Rome' might have been a secular government which
forced a new election despite there already being a pope; the true pope
was forced to flee, and some prophecies say he would die in exile.
Meanwhile, the false pope might have gone ahead with a series of
'reforms' designed to weaken the Church spiritually. During the times of
confusion, a schism ensues; not a tiny schism of a few sedevacantists
as opposed to most of the Church as per our own timeline, but roughly
half, or a third. We cannot know with any precision.
What
did not happen was a schism. Antipope Montini (Paul 6), during an
address not many years after Vatican '2', asked whether there would be 'a clash, a struggle, an anathema' ? During the same address, or another
near to it, he also said that 'through some crack the smoke of satan
has entered the Church'. That he was at the time responsible for it he
well knew; but it is possible that the enemies of the Church (some of
whom must surely have known of these prophecies) must also have asked
themselves why it had not happened. [46]
The devil knew why it had not happened (see "The Faith Undermined (1958-1965)"); if it had, he would be able to focus his efforts on the part which had split from Rome, which would then be the true Church. It would be useless to speculate on how that scenario would have continued, because it was not possible to be otherwise - if the papacy was to be undermined in that manner, what had resulted was the only possible outcome.
We continue with a well-known saint and an interesting commentary from Yves Dupont:
St. Vincent Ferrer
(15th century): ''Armies from the West, East, and North will fight
together in Italy, and the Eagle shall capture the false king, and all
things shall be made obedient unto him, and there shall be a new
reformation in the world.
"In
the days of peace that are to come after the desolation of revolutions
and wars — before the end of the world — Christians will become so lax
in their religion that they will refuse the sacrament of Confirmation,
saying that it is unnecessary. And when the false prophet, the precursor
of Antichrist, comes, all who are not confirmed will apostatize, while
those who are confirmed will stand fast in their faith, and only a few
will renounce Christ."
{Yves Dupont comments: From a complete
study of prophecies it is almost certain that there will be two distinct
periods of wars: one to come soon, which will be followed by a period
of peace and prosperity; and another to follow the period of peace, and
which will be that of Antichrist. The latter period will in turn be
followed by the triumph of the Church and by another period of peace of
unknown duration. The Gospel, too, seems to confirm that there will be
two different periods: the beginning of the end, and the end proper,
with an intervening respite.}
Of
the first timeline there is no indication of a particular false prophet (in service to the antichrist according to chapter eleven) as opposed to the false prophet explicitly so
named (Apoc. 16:13, 19:20, 20:10): That is the second beast of chapter
thirteen, working signs in service to first beast (Apoc.
13:13-14, 19:20).
Dupont
posits that there are two 'distinct periods of wars' and seemingly two
distinct periods of peace. The first would be the wars and crisis which precede the Church's triumph. Afterwards, the antichrist
comes with the wars for which he is responsible, followed by 'another period of peace of unknown duration'. This might be true up to a
point in the first timeline, or perhaps it is really true; but it is to
be wondered whether there would have been another significant period of peace
after the antichrist in that case (a period of peace before and afterwards ?). There might be a respite, but the 'wars, and rumours of wars' would already have come and gone as one of
the proximate signs of the Second Coming.[46A]
There
might appear to be two distinct periods of peace if one is aware of
only one timeline; but as there are two of them (timelines), it means
there is only one actual period of peace to precede the Second Coming.
This cannot then be mistaken for any other time in the history of the
world, as there can only be one such instance of complete peace. And the whole world will be aware of it.
Bl. Mary of Agreda
( 17th century) . "It was revealed to me that through the intercession
of the Mother of God all heresies will disappear. The victory over
heresies has been reserved by Christ for His Blessed Mother. In the
latter days, the Lord will in a special manner spread the renown of His
Mother. Mary began salvation, and by her intercession it will be
completed. Before the second coming of Christ, Mary, more than ever,
must shine in mercy, might, and grace in order to bring unbelievers into
the Catholic faith. The power of Mary in the latter days will be very
conspicuous. Mary will extend the reign of Christ over the heathens and
the Mohammedans, and it will be a time of great joy when Mary is
enthroned as Mistress and Queen of Hearts.
"An unusual chastisement of the human race will take place towards the end of the world".
"An unusual chastisement of the human race will take place towards the end of the world".
Yves
Dupont points out that there are many prophecies and apparitions which
speak of the special role of Mary in the latter days. [47] Rue du Bac, La
Salette, Lourdes, and more. It is interesting that Bl. Mary of Agreda
says explicitly that 'all heresies will disappear' through Our Lady's
intercession. It is also true that this will come about in a particular
way during the first timeline, but not necessarily so during the second
timeline; at least not in the same way. In the second timeline, Our
Lady's intercession preserves the faith of the Church in its remnant and
protects the elect. And it is through their perseverance and Our Lady
that the Church must obtain victory in the end. [48]
What
seems to happen towards the end of the world is something like this
(first timeline): All heresies are vanquished, and the world, in the
main, becomes part of the Church. This happens as a result of the
resolution of the crisis before the antichrist, and then after the period of peace there is the
apostasy (which comes about with the coming of the
antichrist and very near to the second coming). The crisis which came
about before the period of peace, as bad as it might have been, was not to be the apostasy. However, with the ending of the period of peace
and the coming of the antichrist is the time spoken of in Our Lord's
eschatological discourse, and St. Paul in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2.
Although He does not mention the antichrist, the effects of his actions
are seen in the persecution of those who did not 'fall away': "They will
lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the
synagogues and into prisons, dragging you before kings and governors,
for my name’s sake" (Luke 21:12). There is no question of false
religions being present as the world had mainly converted to Catholicism beforehand. The locus is about whether or not people will
still believe in Our Lord's Second Coming - or not. [48A]
In
the second timeline, the apostasy comes about with the antichrist but
with no period of peace beforehand; but after the period of peace
(Apocalypse chapter twenty), when the devil is loosed again, he causes another
apostasy. This time, the antichrist is not present (having come and
gone long before) but the words of Our Lord's eschatological discourse
apply to that time, in which 'God and Magog' (or whomever are the
powers directed by the devil at that time) persecute those who did not
'fall away':
"They will lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up
to the synagogues and into prisons, dragging you before kings and
governors, for my name’s sake" (Luke 21:12). Again, there is no question of false religions being present. Again as well, the locus is about whether or not people will still believe in Our Lord's Second Coming - or not.
In
short: There are no two periods of peace, there is only one; there is
one apostasy or two depending on the timeline; and also depending on the
timeline, the antichrist may or may not be present during the apostasy
preceding the return of Christ. It should be added that St. Paul did not
say that the Second Coming would necessarily follow soon after the time
of antichrist, but that he must come at some point before the Second
Coming. [49] Also, he made no indication of whether or not there was a
period of peace beforehand, or afterward.
-From The Great Monarch To The Heavenly Scourge
The
manner in which the crisis is resolved changes notably in the 19th
century. Due to the French Revolution in particular, the great monarch
can no longer intervene; and it appears that, by a certain point, he
cannot come even after the Church is rescued by other means. We will try
to follow these in chronological order, beginning with the 18th
century.
Sister Marianne Gaultier
(d. 1804): "So long as public prayers are said, nothing shall happen.
But a time will come when public prayers shall cease. People will say:
Things will remain as they are. It is then that the great calamity shall
occur. Before the great battle, the wicked shall be the masters, and
they will do all the evil in their power, but not so much as they will
desire because they shall not have enough time. The good and faithful
Catholics, less in number, shall be on the point of being annihilated,
but a stroke from Heaven will save them. Such extraordinary events shall
take place that the most incredulous shall be forced to say: The finger
of God is there.' O power of God! There shall be a terrible night
during which no one shall be able to sleep. These trials shall not last
long because no one could endure them. When all shall appear lost, all
will be saved. It is then that dispatches shall arrive, announcing good
news. It is then that the Prince shall reign, whom people will seek that
before did not esteem him. The triumph of religion shall be so great
that no one has ever seen the equal. All injustices shall be righted;
civil laws shall be enacted in harmony with the law of God and of the
Church. The education given to children will be most Christian. Pious
guilds for workmen shall be restored".
It
is not said here what is the manner of the stroke from Heaven which
will save them, but it is not the great monarch's victory in battle. It
will be quite obvious that it is from God: 'The finger of God is there', even the incredulous will say; and the 'terrible night during which no
one will be able to sleep' already prefigures the three days' darkness,
although it is here only one night. The great monarch is then sought
after, for then people will understand that it is the will of God that
he rule over them. He will re-organize society in justice after the end of these upheavals.
The
'great calamity' is to consist: "1. in a great flight; 2. great
tribulations in many large cities of France; 3. a horrible massacre in
the capitol, namely, Paris". [49A] It would seem to be the sudden onset of something like a communist revolution, but not in the same way it happened in Russia; here, they are intent only on murder, rather than installing a new and illicit regime. Other prophecies
(Canori-Mora, Belez) also indicate a sudden onrush of events.
It
is not clear when the timeline shifts to the overt divine intervention or
heavenly scourge. Brother Rocco speaks at an unknown time in the 19th
century:
Brother Louis Rocco
(19th century): "Terrible wars will rage all over Europe. God has long
been patient with the corruption of morals; half of mankind He will
destroy. Russia will witness many outrages. Great cities and small towns
alike will be destroyed in a bloody revolution that will cause the
death of half the population. In Istanbul (Constantinople) the Cross
will replace the half-moon of Islamism, and Jerusalem will be the seat
of a King. The southern Slavs will form a great Catholic Empire and
drive out of Europe the Turks (Mohammedans), who will withdraw to North
Africa and subsequently embrace the Catholic faith."
Nothing
is said about the three days' darkness but apparently half of the world
would perish. This will not be entirely due to the 'bloody revolution'
of which Br. Rocco speaks; it could be from a 'stroke from Heaven'
which stops the evildoers before they can complete their victory. Some
prophecies predict that three-fourths of mankind will perish; perhaps
due to all things from the 'murder revolutions' to the stroke from Heaven.
Marie de la Faudais
(19th century): "There will come three days of complete darkness. Only
blessed candles made of wax will give some light during this horrible
darkness. One candle will last for three days, but they will not give
light in the houses of the Godless. Lightning will penetrate your
houses, but it will not put out the blessed candles. Neither wind, nor
storm, nor earthquake will put out the blessed candles. Red clouds, like
blood, will cross the sky, and the crash of thunder will shake the
earth to its very core. The ocean will cast its foaming waves over the
land, and the earth will be turned into a huge graveyard. The bodies of
the wicked and of the righteous will cover the face of the earth. The
famine that follows will be severe. All plant-life will be destroyed as
well as three-fourths of the human race. This crisis will be sudden and
the punishment will be world-wide".
The prophecy listed under the name of Marie Julie Jahenny is very much the same, only worded differently, so it will be omitted.
This
gives the impression of being more a commentary than an actual
prophecy, but it serves to summarize the effects of the tribulation
preceding the victory of the Church over all of those given to darkness.
It looks very much different from the scenario outlined by St. Caesar
of Arles or Werdin d'Otrante among many others.
Elizabeth Canori-Mora
(d. 1825) gives many details concerning both the scourge and the
beginning of the restoration afterwards. There is what seems to be a
revolution in which "all men shall rise one against the other, and they
shall kill one another without pity". Given how freemasonry operates, it
is likely that there is more than two sides to this; in all the
confusion, perhaps, many might not know who their real enemy is. The
various heretical sects may be against the Church and each other and the
Mohammedans, for instance. But the main animosity will be against the
Church: "These presumptuous men in their mad impiety believe that they
can overthrow God from His throne".
To
punish the world, God will give "permission to the infernal spirits to
come out from hell". Overrunning the earth, "they shall attack
everything; they shall injure individual persons and entire families;
they shall devastate property and alimentary productions, cities and
villages". The demons will hardly care whom they are allowed to attack;
their hatred of mankind goes for all, but "God will allow the demons to
strike with death those impious men because they gave themselves up to
the infernal powers and had formed with them a compact against the
Catholic Church". In so doing, God shows how foolish it is for the
impious to make such a compact with the 'principalities and powers of
darkness'; and He shows it also in warning through prophecy.
The
true and good Catholics will not have to fear them: "They shall
experience the powerful protection of the holy Apostles, St. Peter and
St. Paul, who will watch over them lest they may be injured either in
their persons or their property". But of the constructs of the enemies
of the Church the "edifices they profaned will be pulled down and
destroyed, and nothing but ruins shall remain of them". Afterwards
Saints Peter and Paul will come down and chain the demons again and
command them to "return into hell whence they had come".
The small flock that remained faithful were conducted by the angels before the throne of St. Peter. The good Christians, praising God, thanked Him and the Apostles for protecting them and also for "having protected the Church of Jesus Christ by not permitting her to be infected with the false maxims of the world". This very clearly is a demonstration of Christ's promise being kept: "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).
Afterwards:
"St. Peter then chose the new pope. The Church was again organized;
religious orders were reestablished, etc", and before too long, "all men
shall become Catholics, and shall acknowledge the Pope as Vicar of
Jesus Christ". Here we see that the more acute the crisis the more
glorious shall be the Church's triumph. We also see that the main issue
before the world prior to the Second Coming is not which religion is true, but whether
it is true - whether Our Lord really is coming again for the judgement.
In the first timeline, the antichrist and his followers attempt to deny
this; in the second timeline, it happens differently, but the words of
Our Lord in His discourse apply exactly as well.
Nursing Nun of Belez
(d. 1830): "There will be a great slaughtering whereby the wicked will
try to eradicate the religion of Jesus Christ. After they have killed a
great number they will raise a cry of victory, but suddenly the good
will receive help from above. This great crisis, in which the good will
eventually triumph, will be of short duration, namely about three
months. The majority of the wicked will perish and the living will be
very much afraid over the chastisement of the others. They cannot but
recognize the finger of God and adore His omnipotence. Many will then be
converted and justice restored".
The
crisis has the nature of a trap being sprung of a sudden by the impious
sects. Perhaps they are aware that, at this point and because of their
iniquities, the great monarch is not coming to stop them. Even if he
could, he would not have time. It is even possible that the impious
sects are aware of such prophecies as the three days' darkness in the
times when they are ready to attempt to destroy the Church, and imagine
themselves as 'hell being unleashed on earth' for that purpose. Being
not of the truth, and believing the father of lies and joining with him
in ultimate rebellion, it is not so unlikely.
Father Bernard Maria Clausi, O.F.M.
(d. 1849): "Before the triumph of the Church comes, God will first take
vengeance on the wicked, especially against the godless. It will be a
new judgment, the like has never been seen before and it will be
universal. It will be so terrible that those who outlive it will imagine
that they are the only ones spared. All people will then be good and
contrite. The judgment will come suddenly and be of short duration. Then
comes the triumph of the Church and the reign of brotherly love. Happy
indeed they who live to see those blessed days. However, before that,
evil will have made such progress that it will look like all the devils
of hell were let loose on earth, so terrible will be the persecution of
the wicked against the just, who will have to suffer true martyrdom".
Like a few other examples, this does not sound like a prophecy per se
so much as a commentary. However, we see again that the stroke of
Heaven 'will come suddenly and be of short duration'. As there is no
great monarch anymore at this point in the timeline there is nothing to
stop the godless from carrying out their wicked plans to the furthest
extreme. Here 'godless' probably indicates communism, which must by then
(the 1930's ?) have made many inroads, whereas the 'wicked' is first of
all the masonic sects. This is a simplification but probably correct in
the main.
It
would seem that the vengeance God takes first 'on the wicked,
especially against the godless' is proportionate to their actions.
Bl. Anna Maria Taigi
(d. 1837): "God will ordain two punishments: one, in the form of wars,
revolutions and other evils, will originate on earth; the other will be
sent from Heaven.
"First, several earthly scourges will come. They are going to be dreadful, but they will be mitigated and shortened by the prayers and penances of many holy souls. There will be great wars in which millions of people will perish through iron. But, after these earthly scourges will come the heavenly one, which will be directed solely against the impenitent. This scourge will be far more frightful and terrible; it will be mitigated by nothing, but it will take place and act in its full rigor". (Additional text here).
"First, several earthly scourges will come. They are going to be dreadful, but they will be mitigated and shortened by the prayers and penances of many holy souls. There will be great wars in which millions of people will perish through iron. But, after these earthly scourges will come the heavenly one, which will be directed solely against the impenitent. This scourge will be far more frightful and terrible; it will be mitigated by nothing, but it will take place and act in its full rigor". (Additional text here).
The
'great wars' in which 'millions will perish through iron' might be
mistaken for both world wars, but as has been seen, there is only one world war in the first timeline. There may also be
revolutions which look like wars. Judging from the progression of the
details of these prophecies in how the crisis is
resolved, it appears that so long as the great
monarch's arrival is possible, it is more likely to culminate in a modified
version of the second world war which the great monarch brings to an
end. [50] At the last, the ultimate crisis comes about as a violent communist
revolution in which they attempt, in one fell swoop, to destroy the
Church.
The
situation in France is described as being 'a frightful anarchy'. In the
end, the factions agree 'to have recourse to the Holy See'. The pope will 'nominate a most Christian King for the government of France'.
During
the three days' darkness, 'it will be impossible to use any man-made
lighting during this darkness, except blessed candles'. No technology
will avail; it is not simply a blackout by a failure of the power
systems. Batteries will not work also. This point is brought up because
there appears to be no equivalent to this effect in the second
timeline. It has to do purely with the three days' darkness in the first
timeline.
Bl.
Taigi continues: "After the three days of darkness, St. Peter and St.
Paul, having come down from Heaven, will preach in the whole world and
designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and
will settle upon the cardinal who is to become Pope. Christianity, then,
will spread throughout the world, etc".
Several
prophecies indicate the miraculous election of a new pope, and the
roles of Saints Peter and Paul during the resolution. Given the
situation that comes about if the coming of the great monarch is
thwarted, there is no question of there being a normal election. This is
not the case if the monarch had been present.
The
nomination of a Christian King for France by the pope at the time
(before the three days' darkness) does not appear to be as of a 'great
monarch designate' for the world after the resolution. This appears to only concern France and its government for the post-three days' darkness world. There appears to
be two essential possible endings for the first timeline: Either the
great monarch reigns with the holy pope or only the holy
pope reigns alone; and if not the former, then the three days' darkness
is necessary to bring about the latter. As the crisis becomes more
acute, the victory in the end becomes the more total.
At this point in the examination, it should be noted that there are two double alternatives:
The first double for the first timeline (leading into Apocalypse
chapter eleven preceding the end via either the great monarch or three days' darkness); and then the two timelines proper,
leading into Apocalypse chapter eleven or thirteen preceding the
end (with the period of peace following the latter); but the
introduction to the two timelines, Fatima, itself has two alternatives;
one leads to Apocalypse chapter eleven and the other, to chapter
thirteen.
So
essentially, there is a third possibility for the first timeline but
only one for the second. However, the permutations for the first
timeline are strictly linear: It does not hinge upon a choice made or
not made (unlike Fatima). It progresses from one possible resolution to
the next according to the devil's own progression in hindering the great monarch or any other resolution.
It
appears that a certain turning point came at the beginning of the 20th
century, with the election of Rampolla which was then vetoed. The devil had succeeded in thwarting the great monarch from coming; as
we have seen through several prophecies the devil's time was to be the
first half of the 20th century to about the mid-way point; but then he was thwarted, not by the great monarch, but his heir-legateé - so in essence by the intervention of the great monarch after all.
What
happened after this is known now by hindsight: Rather than attempt to
destroy the Church by a frontal assault, now that he saw the veto option
had been removed (by St. Pius X), he would try again to undermine the
papacy. Did he expect Rampolla to be elected ? He must have thought it
possible, else he would not have tried; or he might have tried anyway.
Be that as it may, the effort to undermine the papacy from within was
not his main focus; at least not at first. Until then, he was attempting to 'surround' the
Church by hostile secular and masonic governments. After 1903, it
appears he switched his focus to attempting to infiltrate the hierarchy
as his primary goal. And for that, Our Lady of Fatima came to Portugal
the same year he subverted Russia. [51]
In a sense, St. Paul's declaration that "now you know what withholdeth, that [the man of sin] may be revealed in his time...only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way" (2 Thess. 2:6-7) seems to apply in a double manner: To the authority of the Christ the King through both the Holy Roman Emperor and the Papacy. The throne was itself brought about by the papacy and the Church; when it was 'taken out of the way', this prefigured the actual fulfillment of St. Paul's words.
Three more prophecies are given for completeness:
Blessed Gaspar Del Bufalo
(19th century): "The death of the impenitent persecutors of the Church
will take place during the three days of darkness. He who outlives the
darkness and the fear of these three days will think that he is alone on
earth because the whole world will be covered with carcasses".
Sister Marie of Jesus Crucified (19th century): "All the nations will be shaken by war and revolution. During the three days of darkness, the followers of the evil cause will be annihilated, so that only one-fourth of mankind will survive".
Franciscan Friar (18th century): "All the religious orders will be suppressed, except one, the rule of which will be as rigid and severe as that of the monks of the past. During these calamities the Pope will die. As a result, the most painful anarchy will prevail within the Church. Three Popes will vie for the pontifical throne, one German, one Italian, and another Greek. They will all be installed by the armed might of three factions".
Sister Marie of Jesus Crucified (19th century): "All the nations will be shaken by war and revolution. During the three days of darkness, the followers of the evil cause will be annihilated, so that only one-fourth of mankind will survive".
Franciscan Friar (18th century): "All the religious orders will be suppressed, except one, the rule of which will be as rigid and severe as that of the monks of the past. During these calamities the Pope will die. As a result, the most painful anarchy will prevail within the Church. Three Popes will vie for the pontifical throne, one German, one Italian, and another Greek. They will all be installed by the armed might of three factions".
Two
are from the 19th century, when the first timeline shifted, and the
last is from the 18th. We have not seen here another example of three
popes vying for the pontifical throne; at most there was two: the true
pope forced to flee and an antipope installed in Rome, whether by a
forced election or some other means. They are not irreconcilable, but it is difficult to envision.
-Bl. Anna-Katarina Emmerich
She
lived from 1774 to 1824, and her life was one of suffering. She bore
the stigmata of Our Lord. The text is taken from Yves Dupont's Catholic Prophecy: The Great Chastisement.
May 13, 1820:
"I saw also the relationship between the two popes. . . I saw how
baleful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it
increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city (of Rome).
The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness. . . Then,
the vision seemed to extend on every side. Whole Catholic communities
were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom.
I saw many churches close down, great miseries everywhere, wars and
bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took to violent action. But it did
not last long.
"Once
more I saw that the Church of Peter was undermined by a plan evolved by
the secret sect, while storms were damaging it. But I saw also that
help was coming when distress had reached its peak. I saw again the
Blessed Virgin ascend on the Church and spread her mantle [over it]. I
saw a Pope who was at once gentle, and very firm. . . I saw a great
renewal, and the Church rose high in the sky."
This
first part is seems to be a short form of the prophecies as a whole; some of the
subsequent parts tell a similar story, from the start of the crisis to
the end, but with a different perspective.
Yves
Dupont comments, 'many prophecies predict an anti-pope and a schism'.
And many more predict persecution and bloodshed even in the Vatican. But
the schism is not complete, unlike 1958-1965. This false church would
increase in size instead of being established virtually complete from
the start. [51A]
This
appears to be the last major prophecy pertaining to the great monarch
who brings about the victory rather than the three days' darkness.
Sister Marianne (d. 1804) is the first we have seen to prophesy an
intervention which is like the three days' darkness (and certainly not
brought about by the great monarch in any direct way) though the event seems to
be only for one night. As there appears to be some overlap between the
monarch or three days' scenario it can only be said that this change
occurred sometime between the French Revolution (July 14, 1789) and the
last words we have of Emmerich (April 22, 1823), or a period of not
quite thirty-four years. It is probably futile to try to pin down the
exact point, and there is no reason to waste time doing so.
The 'wild and ignorant mob' which took to violent action seems to resemble
the sudden attempt by the wicked to destroy the Church which is stopped
by the three days' darkness, but here it is not the same. This mob is 'wild and ignorant' instead of seemingly well-organized for their 'mad
impiety'. It would not last long, but it is not said what stops them. It
is probably not a sudden action by Heaven, or allowed by Heaven.
Sept. 12, 1820:
"I saw a strange church being built against every rule. . . No angels
were supervising the building operations. In that church, nothing came
from high above. . . There was only division and chaos. It is probably a
church of human creation, following the latest fashion, as well as the
new heterodox church of Rome, which seems of the same kind. . .
"I
saw again the strange big church that was being built there (in Rome).
There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by
Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints and other Christians.
But there (in the strange big church) all the work was being done
mechanically (i.e. according to set rules and formulae). Everything was
being done according to human reason. . .
"I
saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was
something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed to
be very successful. I did not see a single Angel nor a single saint
helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw the seat of a
cruel people armed with spears, and I saw a laughing figure which said:
'Do build it as solid as you can; we will pull it to the ground' ".
This
strange church being built is, according to Yves Dupont, 'unholy and
humanistic, but it is not Communist inspired, otherwise Communists would
not want to pull it to the ground'. This church does not go as far as "Babylon the great" (Apoc. 17:5) in which every false religion is
present but not the true one: "the habitation of devils, and the hold of
every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird"
(Apoc. 18:2). It seems to be a church of compromise with the world.
Perhaps it is ecumenical, with various heretical sects having a part in
it, together with those Catholics who did not stay with the Holy Father
but consented to follow what must be an antipope in Rome. [52]
What
the 'cruel people armed with spears' do correlate with is the
'condemnation of the harlot' at the behest of the ten kings of the
beast: "And the ten horns, which the beast had in thy vision, will
become the harlot’s enemies; they will lay her waste, and strip her
quite bare, eat her flesh away, and then burn down what is left of her"
(Apoc. 17:16~Knox). In the second timeline, that is what becomes of the
Vatican 2 church, with its novus ordo, which becomes replaced with every
false religion (this is yet to be seen; but that is what seems to be the meaning of the verse). In the first timeline, it is the intent
of the wicked of the world to pull down this 'church of darkness' (as
Bl. Emmerich calls it later on), thinking that they are defeating the
true Church.
The 'movement led by Ecclesiastics' seems to be the Church in exile, which
is being maintained while it is out of Rome and, presumably, the
dioceses as well.
On
July 12, 1820, Bl. Emmerich had a vision of the holy Emperor Henry.
There was a short Mass with Our Lord Himself 'clad in priestly
vestments'. The Gospel of St. John was not read at the end. Our Lady
urged him not to falter (for the enemies of the Church are still to be
defeated), and an angel "touched the sinew of his hip, like Jacob...from
that day on he walked with a limp".
Yves
Dupont notes that other prophecies speak of the great monarch's limp.
Also, he notes that St. John's Gospel was not read at the end, which is
one of the 'reforms' of the Mass imposed by the false church in 1964.
But it is not known precisely what significance this has here.
August to October 1820:
"I see more martyrs, not now but in the future. . . I saw the secret
sect relentlessly undermining the great Church. Near them I saw a
horrible beast coming up from the sea. All over the world, good and
devout people, especially the clergy, were harassed, oppressed, and put
into prison. I had the feeling that they would become martyrs one day.
"When
the Church had been for the most part destroyed (by the secret sect),
and when only the sanctuary and altar were still standing, I saw the
wreckers (of the secret sect) enter the Church with the Beast. There,
they met a Woman of noble carriage who seemed to be with child because
she walked slowly. At this sight, the enemies were terrorized, and the
Beast could not take but another step forward. It projected its neck
towards the Woman as if to devour her, but the Woman turned about and
bowed down (towards the Altar), her head touching the ground. Thereupon,
I saw the Beast taking to flight towards the sea again, and the enemies
were fleeing in the greatest of confusion. Then, I saw in the distance
great legions approaching. In the foreground I saw a man on a white
horse. Prisoners were set free and joined them. All the enemies were
pursued. Then, I saw that the Church was being promptly rebuilt, and she
was more magnificent than ever before."
Yves
Dupont connects the Woman here with the Church as depicted in Apoc.
12:5. This vision is similar in its idea, but is not in any way the same event,
except insomuch as this is the first timeline equivalent of what did happen in the second.
Dupont also observes that the legions 'are those of Henry, the great Catholic prince'. 'Many prophecies', he continues, 'say that he will ride a white horse, and this may be taken quite literally, for by that time Europe will be in ruins and there will be nothing else for travelling'. This may be true, or it may simply be an integral part of who he is as the instrument of victory for the Church, as much as his limp; for he is aided not by the devices of this world but by Heaven.
There
is in Apocalypse a white horse and its rider mentioned twice: That of
the first seal (Apoc. 6:2) and of the last battle, Armagedon (Apoc.
19:11). The first has nothing to do with this vision; the second is what
the prince of Bl. Emmerich's vision represents if the second timeline
never came to pass. In other words, the rider and the white horse of chapter nineteen represent a much greater victory (after a much greater
crisis) than is apparent in the first timeline.
After the victory at Armagedon there is the millennial
period of peace followed by the tribulations which will precede Our
Lord's Second Coming. But there will be no beast or antichrist at that
time. In this vision, the beast does not come yet although he is close;
the presence of the great monarch prevents the crisis from progressing
to that extent (as would the three days' darkness if it came to that);
but after that shorter period of peace the beast would indeed arrive.
If
this were to happen, how would Apocalypse be interpreted ? Would
chapter nineteen be seen as a symbolic vision ? It might, but more
likely it will not, as we will see in the examination for chapters ten
and eleven (in any case, nothing in the first timeline seems to fulfill this without doubt). Another question would be how might chapter nineteen be
interpreted if the great monarch had not come, but the three days'
darkness instead. Again, chapter ten holds the answer (in Part Three). [52A]
As
for the beast which 'comes up from the sea', we may contrast this
vision with our own timeline: The great monarch's presence apparently
enabled a kind of intercession for the good of the Church which is close
to, but not quite, Christ's promise that the 'gates of hell shall not
prevail' against the Rock upon which He established His Church. It is
almost as if the great monarch were somehow spiritually related to St.
Paul, who was also martyred in Rome, as was St. Peter; formerly Saul the
Roman citizen who was once an enemy but was converted by Our Lord.
There does not seem to be a direct correlation except that the great
monarch and the holy pope are working together as Sts. Peter and Paul
did in the early Church. Their martyrdoms in Rome planted the seed for
the conversion of Rome and its leadership to the Faith. Constantine was
the first Catholic emperor but probably the seeds of the great monarch
go back to St. Paul. [53]
The masonic sects had undermined the papacy and the Church but had not defeated them. The papacy was displaced but not replaced;
the Church was in schism but the faithful part remained apart from the
antipope. It is interesting that, at the sight of the Woman with child,
the enemies were halted; and the beast was stopped also, but 'projected
its neck towards the Woman as if to devour her' and she did not flee,
nor did she need to (this differs greatly from Apoc. 12), but turned to the altar and
bowed. This shows that the number of Catholics who had remained faithful
and fervent (represented by the Woman's bow to the altar) had made
possible the coming of the great monarch who thence came to deliver
them; in this way it was possible for the holy pope to intervene and
prevent the establishment of the reign of antichrist. [53A]
This
vision also tells us that, prior to the victory, there was no pope. The
beast represents the antichrist (who will arrive only when the papacy
is 'taken out of the way'), but is not here with seven 'heads'. This is the
singular beast as per Apocalypse chapter eleven. Except that this beast
comes 'up out of the sea' which is the description of the beast in
Apoc. 13:1. If at this point it came to be that another pope cannot be elected, then the antipapacy would have begun then (and remember that this would be at the mid-20th century),
and might have had seven 'heads' over time; but that extended interregnum
cannot happen in the first timeline, due to the great monarch, or the
action of his heir.
Also, this
was the beast and not the dragon of Apocalypse chapter twelve. The
latter had waited until the 'man-child' (representing the pope) was born and then tried to
take him. It is at that point that the papacy was 'taken away' or
"removed from the enemy's path" as Knox put it (2 Thess. 2:7). In the
vision, it appears the beast was attempting to prevent another true pope
from ever being elected.
This would result in a very different scenario from
the second timeline; but the presence of the great monarch made
that an impossibility. The absence of the great monarch and the continuing presence
of the true papacy, or rather the absence of the antipapacy,
made possible the three days' darkness. What this means is that, without such an intervention, possibly 'no flesh should be saved' (Matt. 24:22), as that time of tribulation would not in any way be shortened. But if that had happened, then the 'gates of hell' can
be said to have prevailed; so it cannot happen.
In short, what appears to be the worst-case scenario, our timeline, turned out for the better (we will see why in Part Three); and what appeared to not be the worst-case scenario in comparison, the three days' darkness, really would have been the worse result.
In
our timeline, the papacy is 'removed from the enemy's path' so adhering
to the antipope would not bear the same penalty it normally would. It
is one thing to remove the reigning pope and install another (as one can
choose whom to follow), and quite another to prevent one from being elected (then one cannot choose), but it is still quite another thing to elect one, remove him without his election ever being known, and substitute another in his place
(the Siri Thesis, 1958). In this case, one has no choice but to follow
the false one without ever knowing there is already a true one, and so
make the false submission by default. That is why the papacy was 'taken
away' and is not only sede vacante, but 'sede remota'.
When
Bl. Emmerich had seen the beast come up out of the sea, it was probably
near the end of the crisis, as it seemed as if the beast was arriving
near the point when the masonic sects could claim victory. She saw many
faithful being harassed and persecuted and what is most interesting to us here
is that she 'had the feeling that they would become martyrs one day'. She was seeing the generation 'which shall not pass' until all
the signs which precede the Second Coming have arrived. So the
generation Our Lord spoke of had to be alive before the period of peace had even begun. Thus, Our Lord's words (Matt. 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) which implied a certain change from peaceful times to times of conflict
and strife has to be more than just implication. However, what was not implied
was the manner in which that particular generation would see it through: The members of the first resurrection (Apoc. 20:4-6) and therefore of the
second timeline will experience it very differently and for much longer. [53B]
The question to answer at this point is whether, before Fatima, it was even possible for the beast of chapter thirteen to arrive (and therefore the whole
second timeline connected to it). Either way, the antichrist is a
type of false pope, or antipope. This is because he only arrives when the true papacy
is 'taken out of the way'. When that has happened, it means that despite appearances to the contrary it is no longer possible to elect one. For the first timeline, it simply means that this world is coming to an end, and to expect the Second Coming.
The
beast of chapter thirteen has seven 'heads', but only one is the
antichrist in particular (2 Thess. 2). The beast of chapter eleven, who
is he ? He is mentioned only once, when he moves against the two
witnesses: "And when they shall have finished their testimony, the
beast, that ascendeth out of the abyss, shall make war against them, and
shall overcome them, and kill them" (Apoc. 11:7). He 'ascended out of
the abyss' and the beast of chapter thirteen is said to 'come up out of
the bottomless pit'; this might be a distinction without a difference,
except that it is not. They are not the same beast.
None
of the Catholic prophecies we have seen are specific in the manner of
the coming of the antichrist in the first timeline, and even Apocalypse
chapter eleven gives him only passing mention. Since he is singular, and
since he 'ascends out of the abyss', he might be the return of the
antipope who attempted to build the 'false church of darkness'. But can this really be true, since there was a true pope for at least part of
the time the crisis was in progress ? But he was not the antichrist then, and it would be many years later when the last pope has ended his reign, when the papacy is 'taken out of the way'.
The manner of the beast's 'ascending out of the abyss' may then be a form of possession by the devil. This is all the more probable when considering the reaction of the world to the beast of chapter thirteen (as of someone coming back from the dead). There is not the same wonderment for the beast of chapter eleven; in fact no reaction is recorded at all.
It is not possible to derive any further conclusions on this point from what is given in revelation and prophecy.
The greater
point concerns the beast 'coming up out of the sea' and going
back when he could not prevent a true pope from being elected. We also keep returning to Apocalypse chapter ten for the answer, which we shall explore after finishing with Catholic prophecy. We continue with Bl. Emmerich:
On
August 10, 1820 the vision was of the Holy Father "in great anguish".
He was no longer in Rome, and surrounded by enemies, with few friends.
The "false church of darkness is making progress" (the schism grows);
and he is constantly pressured, though he is frail. He has a particular
confidant, an aged priest who is trustworthy. There seem to be many
possible traitors in his midst.
If
in the 19th century the pope were to have left Rome at an especially
inopportune time, it might have been during the Vatican
Council (1869-70). This might be an occasion for the 'church of darkness' to begin,
if something had happened during the Council itself to cause Pius IX to
leave. This would result in a total period of about seventy years for
the crisis to develop, assuming it was all to be resolved in the
mid-20th century. It would mean an extended schism, but not
necessarily an extended interregnum, as the faithful portion of the
hierarchy would still be able to elect a successor. However, the longer such a
situation continues, the greater the schism will be, with many more fostering growing doubts about the true Church; and more will
believe that it is 'safer' to stay with Rome despite the schism. But
that is opening yet another possible timeline path. [54]
On
August 25, 1820 the vision is of the faithful gathered near the church
of St. Mary Major, who were worried because the pope was nowhere to be
seen and there were alarming rumours in the city. In the vision Bl.
Emmerich opened the church doors, and the people were surprised that
they had opened, though they could not see her. Our Lady appeared and
urged that people must pray fervently and with outstretched arms, the
way Our Lord prayed for them on the Cross. Above all they must pray "for
the Church of Darkness to leave Rome"...In the vision, Emmerich could
see that the people there were all good and devout people; there "were
no traitors...among them, yet they were afraid of one another. One can
judge thereby what the situation was like".
The
situation would be like a citizenry living in a nation with a hostile
government, with (perhaps) half of them loyal to the regime in power and
the other half loyal to the legitimate government not in power, and
with the hostile government wishing to imprison those who oppose them.
Except in this case the church of darkness is allied to the masonic
sect's regime which sees the loyal Catholics as a threat to all who call
themselves Catholic, since, for safety, the church of darkness would
pledge itself to the regime, and thus avoid persecution. Similar to the
world today in the sense as of one side being prevented from working
together, whereas the other side is well-connected and supported by the 'operation of error' (the media and institutions).
September 10, 1820:
"I saw the Church of St. Peter: it had been destroyed but for the
Sanctuary and the main Altar. St. Michael came down into the church,
clad in his suit of armor, and he paused, threatening with his sword a
number of unworthy pastors who wanted to enter. That part of the Church
which had been destroyed was promptly fenced in with light timber so
that the Divine office might be celebrated as it should. Then, from all
over the world came priests and laymen, and they rebuilt the stone
walls, since the wreckers had been unable to move the heavy foundation
stones".
Yves
Dupont said that this does not necessarily mean that St. Peter's itself
would largely be destroyed, though it is possible. It can be that
and also symbolic of the near destruction the Church as a whole experienced
during this tribulation. Most importantly, "the wreckers had been unable
to move the heavy foundation stones" which is an obvious reference to
the Rock (Matt. 16:18).
For
our timeline, it cannot mean the same thing, for the foundation stones
themselves will be moved by Providence, [55] and Rome will be no more
(Apoc. 18) after the main part of Apocalypse - before the period of
peace - has come to pass. But the foundation, though moved, is not
destroyed.
September 27, 1820:
"I saw deplorable things: they were gambling, drinking, and talking in
church; they were also courting women. All sorts of abominations were
perpetrated there. Priests allowed everything and said Mass with much
irreverence. I saw that few of them were still godly, and only a few had
sound views on things. I also saw Jews standing under the porch of the
Church. All these things caused me much distress".
A major difference between the two timelines is that a true Mass
is still widely said in one of them, and thus it matters whether or not it is
said with irreverence. Even if it is a false mass, should it still be
said with reverence, to imitate the piety of what should be apparent for
every true Mass ? Otherwise, it would just be a caricature meant to
throw aspersions on the true Mass, if nothing else. But the main point
is, said badly though it is, the Mass had not been replaced with another
in the timeline of Bl. Emmerich's vision.
On
October 1, 1820, Bl. Emmerich again urges prayer that the pope does not
leave Rome; "countless evils would result if he did". False doctrines
are being demanded of him; a capitulation to heretics and schismatics
which resembles ecumenism.
On
October 4, 1820, Bl. Emmerich sees St. Peter's in ruins, with various
clergy contributing to the destruction but not 'wishing to do it openly
in front of the others'. Were they ashamed to be the ones visibly doing
it, but that does not stop them ? Our Lord told her that 'this
translation of the Church from one place to another meant that she would
seem to be in complete decline'. When He says 'from one place to
another' it is difficult to find this to mean other than 'from Rome to
another place'. However, none of the other prophecies seem to indicate
this. There is no such event as described in Apocalypse chapter eighteen
in the first timeline (and which is supposed to happen during the reign
of antichrist in the second timeline).
In
any event, the pope is urged not to leave Rome, as Bl. Emmerich herself
does in her vision of October 7, 1820. In that vision, the pope was
frail, could not walk, and surrounded by untrustworthy advisors, who
seemed to be urging him to leave Rome.
In
a vision with an unspecified date, Our Lord mentioned by name Prussia,
"the enemy" and "Moskva, the land of Moscow, bringing many evils". At
the least, the age-old schism of Russia and the beginning of the
Protestant revolt seem to be referenced as the origin of the Church's
crisis. At worst, those nations become active persecutors themselves by
this time, although if it were not communism established in Russia as in
our own timeline it might be by some other influence by the masonic
sects. [56]
The
June 1, 1821 vision contains "long processions" of bishops whose
"faults towards religion were shown by external deformities". A few "had
only a body, with a dark cloud instead of a head. Others had only a
head, their bodies and hearts were like thick vapors. Some were lame;
others were paralytics; other were asleep or staggering". We can do no
better than to quote Yves Dupont's interpretation at length: " 'Heads
like fog' may mean errors of thinking. 'Heads only, no bodies and no
hearts' may mean high intellect, but divorced from reality and with no
charity. 'Lame' may mean performance of duty in a halfhearted way. 'Paralytics' may mean powerlessness to do anything although the
knowledge of what should be done is not impaired. 'Asleep' may denote an
unawareness of the vital problems which are facing the Church. 'Staggering' may mean that the burden of responsibility is too heavy".
He
also adds that the vision (second paragraph of June 1, 1821) may refer to an ecumenical
council, in which only a few bishops were sound. The first paragraph
must refer to this too, at least while they were gathering, as Emmerich saw 'long processions' of bishops. It is unlikely, then, that this is a
reference to the spiritual state of affairs of the Vatican Council of
1869-70, although it is possible. The previous vision had mentioned
Prussia which, due to the Franco-Prussian war, caused the recall of
French troops leaving Pius IX a virtual prisoner. The third paragraph
hardly seems to describe Pius IX however: "...He was weakened by old age
and by much suffering...He often fainted and seemed to be dying".
Either all of these describe the situation after 1903 (as per the
general timing of the prophecies we have seen) or the timeline described
by Emmerich shifted again not very long after her visions. It might be
that the Marian apparitions which began soon afterwards prevented the
deterioration of the spiritual condition of the Church for a time,
beginning with Rue du Bac (1830), La Salette (1846) and Lourdes (1858).
In this way we might be seeing the point-counterpoint of what is
prophesied and what is done to avert the crisis, if enough people have
enough faith. Our Lady's intercessions were enough to prevent the majority of bishops from appearing as they had, in that sorry spiritual state, in the vision.
In no wise can this apply to the 'Second' Vatican Council, because the pope is still present in this vision. If people believe that there was a valid pope there, then they are like those bishops in the vision.
We will pass over a few short additions to look at only one more section:
April 22, 1823:
"I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas
that were dangerous to the Church. They were building a great, strange,
and extravagant Church. Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be
united and have equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every
description. Such was to be the new Church. . . But God had other
designs".
In
that timeline they were beginning to build it even though a
true pope was reigning. Probably after the schism, in which the
schismatic sect was in force in Rome, they were building it in earnest.
It was to be a spiritual kind of Tower of Babel, in which people
belonging to errors of all kinds labour to build a kind of kingdom of
Heaven on earth. In the second timeline they would succeed, and its
culmination is called "Babylon the Great" in Apocalypse; but only
because the papacy is removed from Rome would they get that far. But the
thing is, the people who will not have a love for the truth will
believe that it is the true papacy after all, still in Rome, with a new
gospel. That it contradicts the actual Gospel is part of the 'great
message' of this new gospel.
"But God had other designs". He still does.
-Of Future Popes: St. Malachy And The Monk Of Padua
The references for these are from Prophecy For Today and Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement.
St. Malachy is supposed to have been granted a vision of all future
popes, when he visited Pope Innocent II in 1139. The pope, who was 'deeply troubled at the time', apparently derived solace from the list.
Then the list was not heard from again until 1590.
St.
Bernard of Clairvaux, a good friend of his, did not mention this list
in his work, 'Life of St. Malachy'. And why was the list lost for so
long ? Some say the list is a forgery, utilizing hindsight for the
previous popes on the list and clever ambiguity for future ones. It is
not our purpose to decide this question here, but to see whether it fits
the solution of the two timelines for all Catholic prophecy. [57]
Pius
IX (1846-78) was "Crux de Cruce" ('Cross from a Cross'); Leo XIII
(1878-1903) was "Lumen in Caelo" ('Light in the Heavens'); Pius X
(1903-14) was "Ignis Ardens" ('Burning Fire'); Benedict XV (1914-22) was
"Religio Depopulata" ('Religion Depopulated' - First World War); Pius
XI (1922-39) was "Fides Intrepida" ('Intrepid Faith'); Pius XII
(1939-58) was "Pastor Angelicus" ('the Angelic Shepherd').
We
will not compare the remainder of the list with the antipopes who have
occupied the Vatican since 1958. Instead, we will match them with the
first timeline:
"Pastor et Nauta" - 'the Shepherd and the Sailor'. [58]
"Flos Florum" - 'Flower of Flowers'.
"De Medietate Lunae" - 'From the Half of the Moon'.
"De Labore Solis" - 'From the Labor of the Sun'.
"De Gloria Olivae" - 'From the Glory of the Olive'.
"De Gloria Olivae" - 'From the Glory of the Olive'.
The
general timeline indicates that the crisis begins around 1900, and is
resolved around the mid-20th century. This is, in the main, according to the earlier
accounts of the first timeline, in which the great monarch figures
prominently (fitting, as St. Malachy had this vision around 1139). The Abbot
"Merlin" Joachim (d. 1202) speaks of the last
popes: The Angelic Pope, the 'pastor and the reformer' with the Great Monarch will resolve all conflicts. He reigns during the first few
years, and his immediate successor will be 'a man of remarkable
sanctity'; and 'his three immediate successors...shall be called the
Angelic Pastors'. Assuming the period of peace begins with the "Pastor Angelicus", it might
have been Pius XII who reigned with the great monarch to bring about
the period of peace. The next four spoken of by Abbot Joachim accounts
for "Pastor et Nauta" through to "De Labore Solis".
"De
Gloria Olivae", as the last pope, is possibly martyred (the olive is a reference to Gethsemane) by either the antichrist or his allies and it is then that the papacy is 'taken out of the way'. He is not
numbered among those spoken of by Abbot Joachim, possibly because the
period of peace ended when he began. [59]
Werdin
d'Otrante (13th century) sees the victory of the pope and the great
monarch when the Great Pope goes 'over the sea carrying the sign of
redemption on his forehead'. This would seem to indicate 'the Shepherd
and the Sailor'. Or, this is the successor to the holy pope who obtained
the victory with the great monarch, and who would go about visiting the
many areas in the world which were becoming part of the Church.
St.
Hildegard (12th century) saw a comet which would cause devastation in
many areas, especially 'the great nation in the ocean'. This could be
represented by either Lumen in Caelo ('Light in the Heavens') or Ignis
Ardens ('Burning Fire'); and the wars which beset Christendom at the
time (early 20th century) could also be Ignis Ardens and Religio
Depopulata. During these conflicts, Fides Intrepida ('Intrepid Faith')
keeps the Church in some unity until the Pastor Angelicus arrived with
the great monarch. This represents the basic earlier scenario in
which the great monarch can and does intervene and when there is no
false church being built either despite the pope, or during a schism, or
during an interregnum.
St. Malachy's prophecy may or may not be accurate in the later
first timeline scenario in which there might be a three days' darkness
or some kind of intervention which is swifter and more deadly than the
victory brought about by the great monarch (in response to the greater
existential threat to the life of the Church, and therefore to the life
of the world). But it is interesting that the prophecy (we are assuming
it is indeed genuine) remained unknown for a long time, until 1590. At that point, there was as yet no significant change in the timeline.
Perhaps one should go back further: As far back as 1579, Our Lord appeared to Mariana
de Jésus Torres to prepare her for a life of suffering and to be a
messenger of Heaven. Her prophecy was lost for many years but was
destined to emerge in the 20th century for the 20th century. At the same
time this was being done, the prophecy of St. Malachy would be
discovered in 1590. Our Lady of Good Success did not speak of the great
monarch, but She spoke of a 'frightful war', and of a sudden
intervention the nature of which is not divulged, in which the devil
would be quickly defeated. It is almost as if this prophecy was meant
to slot in among the 'three days darkness' set, or perhaps right around
the scenario seen by Emmerich (right before the three days' darkness
began to appear). [60]
In
any event, according to the earlier first timeline, the victory is
brought about by the Great Monarch with the Pastor Angelicus, and the
progress of the period of peace can be tracked by the descriptions
attached to his successors: 'the Shepherd and the Sailor' visits all
parts of the world, establishing them officially in the Church; the
'Flower of Flowers' is the peak of the period of peace; 'From the Half
of the Moon' is ostensibly past the halfway point; and 'From the Labour
of the Sun' sees the winding down of the period of peace, when unrest
begins anew. 'From the Glory of the Olive' (the olive being a reference
to Gethsemane) sees the martyrdom of the last pope, or at least the
prevention of another election [61] and the establishment of the
antichrist in place of the papacy. [62]
Yves
Dupont notes that "A study of the entire prophecy shows that
fulfillment is made possible only by including anti-Popes — almost a
death blow to the integrity of the prophecy since Malachy’s vision of
all Popes of the future could hardly have included those who were not to
be Pope at all, and Innocent II would not have derived much 'comfort'
from a prophecy involving ten anti-Popes". [63]
It is rather even more in favour of
the prophecy that it be accurate despite including antipopes, and for
two reasons: First, it shows that the papacy had not been 'taken away'
during the reign of any of those antipopes. The list is not so
much a declaration of true popes reigning in Rome as a record of who reigned (will reign) in Rome as pope, whether they are true or not. Again, it affirms that
the papacy was still there nonetheless. The example of Pius VII
("Aquila Rapax"), who was certainly obscured by Napoleon, shows that the
list highlights a detail of someone who reigned in Rome as pope while
the papacy was still there, whether antipope or not, whether
overshadowed or not. We say 'while the papacy was still there' because
in hindsight, we can see when it was 'taken out of the way' in actuality (1958); and also in the first timeline: because it was a list of the
popes until the very last one, until the papacy was 'removed from the enemy's path' in preparation for the antichrist.
Second, it is that the sequence
is accurate despite including antipopes which favours the prophecy. If one accepts that it was a
1590 forgery, one would have to explain how it came to fit the
descriptions of actual popes when their time came, during their times,
especially Benedict XV ("Religio Depopulata"); and also how the number
of them fit into the chronology established by other prophecies for the
first timeline until the actual end, particularly Abbot "Merlin" Joachim's
(d. 1202) account.
The
Monk of Padua in 1740 "added his own observations to the prophecies of
Malachy, even indicating the name each future Pope would take". He
seemed to be correct until Benedict XV (1914-22) whom he thought would be
Paul VI; and Pius XII (1939-58) was incorrectly designated as Gregory
XVII. The one who would have been 'Flower of Flowers' whom Dupont
mistakenly believes was Montini (Paul 6) was to be Paul VII, meaning
there was supposed to be an actual Paul VI beforehand. [64]
Dupont
theorizes that the latter part of his work might be a forgery, but it
is the shift in the timeline which really explains it. Fatima began
during the reign of Benedict XV (the first the Monk of Padua had incorrectly designated), which meant the crisis which would lead
to the great monarch or the three days' darkness of the first timeline
would from then never appear. [65]
The
apparitions to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque at Paray-le-Monial in 1689
were passed over on account of not dealing directly with the time of
crisis. It should be obvious at this point that the consecration of
France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus would have preserved the monarchy
from which the great monarch was to spring forth. After the revolution
of 1789, the prophecies began to shift from the great monarch as the
locus of the intervention to save the Church. The consecration of Russia
to the Immaculate Heart of Mary was meant to preserve the papacy and
end the crisis which came from Russia. That new crisis was not solely in
the form of open persecution (Spain, 1936-39 is one example) but of a
spiritual warfare within the Church herself.
(Part Three next)
Footnotes
38A.
The computer analogy is really the only way to illustrate this. It is
perhaps Providential, then, that computers exist today with which to
make it.
39.
The common thing about these prophecies is that, due to sin, a crisis
must come at some point. That many prophecies are, in their specifics,
no longer applicable (e.g. the great monarch) does not render their
common theme inapplicable as well. Throughout the ages they kept many
members of the Church focused on the last days lest by the passage of
centuries since Our Lord's eschatological discourse they might lose
sight of it. Also the devil was paying attention to these as well, and
there is a purpose for that too.
53B.
The first resurrection is made possible, or rather signified, by Our
Lord's words that 'this generation shall not pass' (which had seen the
end of the period of peace) until all the signs given in the
eschatological discourse have come about. It is also made possible, in a
sense, by the depths of the devil's deception (Apoc. 2:24) in that the
response by Heaven is become greater; it is to be wondered, then,
whether the beast 'which shall come up out of the bottomless pit' is
permitted by Heaven as a way of opening the way for the first
resurrection.
40. This began as a footnote but required its own section. It is an addition to section III (Looking
At The Big Picture With The Gospel Accounts, in Part One). Comparing how the
eschatological discourse may apply to either timeline as the end of time
unfolds.
41.
Almost certainly it might be interpreted that way. In Apocalypse we read that "in the days of the voice of the seventh
angel, when he shall begin to sound the trumpet, the mystery of God
shall be finished, as he hath declared by his servants the prophets"
(Apoc. 10:7). The seventh angel sounds the trumpet in Apoc. 11:15. If the 'mystery of God' be finished then, there is no reason to believe there is to be another thousand years; but it would be the time near to the Parousia.
42.
As for the second world war, the reason why the Soviet Union had so
many armies positioned westward is because they were planning to invade
Europe and bring communism all the way to Portugal. It is also the
reason why Germany managed a series of overwhelming victories against
them - the Red armies were not positioned for defense. Providentially,
then, Germany struck first. This is in spite of the narrative which
insists that the war was 'fought for freedom' by the Allies.
42A.
This is not a condemnation of those weaker souls. Who knows how one
shall stand, unless he were put to the test ? But it is to be observed
that these revolutions cannot succeed without a significant number of
allies within the nation; otherwise to bring about the same results it
would have to be through invasion.
43. Some people think that the 'conversion of Russia' (due to its consecration) means 'conversion
from an aggressive enemy' to a kind of peace. All that can be said for
this perspective is the silence of Sr. Lucia regarding Pius XII's 1952 consecration when she spoke to
Fr. Fuentes in 1957.
44.
The thing about this comet is that, if it was always going to happen,
it would have by the mid-20th century. This is not an event which can be
interpreted one way or another according to the timeline. For instance,
the sixth seal event might be caused by a comet, but it will possess a
very different meaning whether or not Garabandal (which is not of
Heaven) and its other effects are attached to it. Further, the comet is
not
mentioned explicitly in most other such prophecies, approved by the
Church, of which we are aware. But one of the differences between this
and others is
the manner in which the throne of France is regained: St. Hildegard does
not explicitly say that the great monarch goes forth to defeat the
enemies of the Church but that 'peace will return when the white flower'
regains the throne. This supposes that the throne was well and truly
lost at some point (as per the revolution of 1789); and the
circumstances for gaining the victory of the Church without the great
monarch seems always to be fraught with a great many
more difficulties and tribulations. But given the timeframe of when this
prophecy was given, it must be supposed that he is there nonetheless,
and regains his throne in full when the victory is achieved.
It
is curious that, at this early point, there is mention of difficulty
for the great monarch. This
prophecy is an outlier like Our Lady of Good Success and does not fit
quite in the order of 'progression' as has been posited. They are
examples, perhaps, of looking ahead with a view to events progressing
more badly than many of the other prophecies would indicate. But
generally speaking, in earlier prophecies the great monarch is simply
there, and it is in later prophecies that it appears more or less that
he has to 'regain the throne'. For example, Abbot "Merlin" Joachim
(d.1202) relates: "A temporal throne becoming vacant, the Pope shall
place on it this king whose assistance he shall ask, etc"; and this does
not connote the need for the throne to be regained
One more point of concurrence to be made: Werdin
d'Otrante indicated that the pope would cross the sea on a concurrence
of feasts which occurred last in 1943; Nostradamus indicated something
similar, only that the war would end in that year (Prophecy For Today,
pp. 13-14). St. Hildegard here spoke of the passing of a great comet
which must have come beforehand. Could this possibly be related to the night illlumined by an unknown light
of 1938 announced by Our Lady of Fatima to signal the imminent second
and greater war ? Was it the comet at an angle of approach which is not
normally visible ? And if so, what changed its approach so that it would
have only the effect of a sign and not the much more deleterious consequence of St. Hildegard's vision ?
45.
It was said that Pius IX has told one of his advisors, concerning the
Secret of La Salette, that (paraphrase) "It is good that we were warned;
otherwise we would have found ourselves at an impasse, from which
escape would be impossible". If this were true, then La Salette is the
only other prophecy which is not strictly linear, but it remains different
from Fatima in that it would be a divergence within the same timeline but not branching to another. However, this is assuming that the above anecdote is true, and also that
the apparent 1851 version of La Salette is not, because there does not
seem to be anything within it which would indicate a particular choice
the pope had to make.
It
is noted that we are told only what is needed for our salvation. The
two timelines and the unsealing of the book of life were not needed to
be known for our salvation, although as we are seeing the answers to
that mystery was indeed present from Apostolic times.
46.
We do not recall the dates of this address or addresses, but one of
them might have been to the U.N. As these quotes are generally well
known, it is assumed the reader is probably also familiar with them.
46A. There should be only one 'period of peace' accompanying the triumph of the Church. There is one either way in Fatima; these variables cannot be multiplied.
47.
There may be a particular reason for the number of these apparitions in
the 19th century, as we will see in Part Three.
48.
It is certainly coming about in a different way in the second timeline.
Many of the world will follow the beast, but in the end the beast and
his allies will be destroyed at the battle of Apocalypse chapter
nineteen. The rest of the world must repent and turn to Mary. But it is not possible to describe in any detail at this
time how all this may come about.
Fr. Kramer in The Book Of Destiny has an interesting perspective about the events of chapter nineteen, but we are not moving too far ahead in this timeline; we are only attempting to account for the other one.
49.
There is a point to why the whole thing is not simply straightforward
as it would be if the Apocalypse was never written. That point is the
Book of Life, of which there is more to say in Part Three
49A. This part is from Prophecy For Today, p.25.
50. As late as the 18th century Bernhardt Rembordt (full text here)
describes a deliverance by means of the great monarch, or allies of the
same, without having to resort to a Divine intervention in which much
of the world would perish. He prophesied a terrible battle in which
"both men and women will fight for their Faith". At the last, "a foreign
King will appear and win a victory for the cause of the righteous".
Afterwards, since France at that time is divided (hence no great monarch
from there), the German Empire chooses "a simple man as the Emperor",
who rules for a short time; then his successor "will be the man for whom the world has longed". The great monarch did not absolutely
have to come from France; but if he could not then the alternative, in
which there is a three days' darkness to succor the victory, is very
close. This scenario appears to be as close as possible to the divide
between those alternative crisis points in the first timeline.
51.
Although his primary goal from thence was to subvert the Church from
within, he was also prepared to attempt another frontal assault another
way: using Russia as the Soviet Union. We think that he did not know the
secret of Fatima because it had not yet been committed to paper (the
fallen angels are, we believe, blind to those not under their
sway). Thus, he might not have known that the second world war was
prophesied until after it had already begun; that is to say, he probably did not know it had been prophesied. We note that the idea of "two world wars" appeared nowhere in prophecy before.
Until
the pre-emptive strike by Germany in 1941* and then Japan later that
year, the conflict had been regional. It is also in 1941 that the secret
of Fatima was written down for the first time and submitted to Pius
XII. The invasion of the Soviet Union prevented a first strike by the
Red Army (for they were assembling as if for war on the Eastern front)
which might have been an occasion for the three days' darkness to stop
them - but that was meant to be impossible once Fatima was established
as the prophetic timeline (either way) to be fulfilled.
*
We are well aware of everything that has been said regarding that war.
But this is our conclusion nonetheless, and without regard to any other
detail.
One
can go back and forth for a long while with what-if speculations. This
is assuming the devil did not know the secret of Fatima. The timing of
events may shed some light. At the apparition of Tuy, Spain in 1929, Our
Lady told Sr. Lucia: "The moment has come in which God asks the Holy
Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the
consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by
this means". She soon "rendered an account of this" to her confessor,
who ordered her to "write down what Our Lord willed to be done" (so this
was written down immediately). Much later, in the 1950's Dr. Bella Dodd
testified to the U.S. House Un-American Activities Committee that in
the 1930's Stalin had sent a large number of infiltrators to penetrate
the seminaries and gain rank in the hierarchy. We see now what the devil
was attempting, but did he do this in response to Tuy or was Tuy in response to his plan ? It is, after all, in response to the subversion of Russia that Our Lady came to Fatima.
51A. This is not to say that everyone
was 'outside of the Church' or has lost the Faith immediately by dint
of having an unknown false pope foisted upon them. This is why the
papacy was 'taken out of the way', as St. Paul tells us in
Thessalonians, so that the requirement to adhere to the papacy was also taken away.
This was unknown on both fronts (the false pope and the taking away) so
it is just. It is nevertheless true that, as Sr. Lucia told Fr. Fuentes
in 1957: "the devil does everything to overcome souls consecrated to
God, because in this way the devil will succeed in leaving the souls of
the faithful abandoned by their leaders, thereby the more easily will he
seize them".
52.
Perhaps the reason why Bl. Emmerich did not specify an antipope is (by
inspiration perhaps) to avoid confusion with the 'man of sin' of 2
Thessalonians ch. 2. Later on she does mention the beast of Apocalypse; but again, not in connection with an antipope or Thessalonians.
52A.
In a similar vein (of how something may be interpreted according to
either timeline) it should be stressed again that the Gospel accounts of
the last days are structured so as to be true whether or not the
antichrist is actually present at that time. All the details Our Lord
has given will come to pass either way, so that, whether or not the
antichrist is there at that time, we may correctly conclude when it is
time to keep watch for the Parousia.
53.
This can of course be debated. For instance, there was no Catholic
Emperor during the first three centuries and
there is no great monarch in the last two centuries according to
prophecy. In a sense, the great monarch represents the defender of
Christendom as an established civilization whereas the pope is there
from the first few converts until the spiritual end of Christendom. The
purview of the great monarch is within the purview of the papacy.
53A.
There is something odd to consider in all this: On the one hand, if the
members of the Church had kept the Faith sufficiently, there is no
reason the great monarch should not come; but if they had been largely
overcome by the depredations of the 'mystery of iniquity', then the
three days' darkness might come instead; but then in our timeline we see
that neither the great monarch nor the three days' darkness came (and
no ultimate crisis either of the sort we have seen). This is probably
due to the effects of the Marian apparitions of the 19th century in
reviving the Faith after the great monarch had been turned aside by the
revolution of 1789. The point is that the victory of the Church seems
balanced against the ultimate crisis which threatens her in this world
in a way that seems to carefully steer events towards the second
timeline. This can only be seen in hindsight as it is impossible to
discern this beforehand. The reason for this will become apparent in
Part Three.
There
is a certain trade-off which has been operating for a long time. God
can very easily override any of the devil's plans at any moment before
they are even made but that would not be fair. The ultimate
example is, as we have seen, allowing the devil to succeed in
infiltrating the papacy so that the papacy can be 'taken out of the
way'; then, as we have seen in Apocalypse chapter twelve, the woman
escaped his trap, so that "the dragon was angry against the woman: and
went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of
God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (Apoc. 12:17).
The woman escaped the trap precisely because
the papacy was 'taken out of the way'. In a sense it is mathematical,
like a zero-sum equation. It is not known how else to express this.
54.
It is not remembered where this quote came from, but Pius IX apparently
said once (paraphrase), "It is good that we were forewarned; otherwise
we would have found ourselves at an impasse, from which escape was
impossible". This was referenced in footnote #45 as well. He might have
been speaking of the visions of Emmerich, if not La Salette, which
seems more probable. It might be that this schism is how the timeline
proceeds if the great monarch still can intervene; if not, then it may begin with the 1903 election of a false pope.
At
any rate, Pius IX was astute enough to quickly close the Council, to be
continued at a later time, and remain in Rome. So it was not possible
for the masonic sects to force him to flee, and perhaps catch the majority
of the hierarchy in Rome, and declare him dead (even if he is only
missing) and so cause the election of an anti-pope. At this point, the
speculations are becoming layered, and so it is not possible to proceed
further along this line.
55.
Spiritually, it has been done already, when the papacy was 'taken up to
God' in Apoc. 12:5 (which here means the office moreso than the
individual, as there was not another after him) and 'removed from the
enemy's path' (2 Thess. 2:7~Knox).
56.
Fatima seems to be the only prophecy to indicate communism, if not by
name, then by its operational base from 1917 - Russia. It is easy enough
to understand why, since the devil would simply choose another name for
his
leading ideology (to confound prophecy and cause it to be made false).
Otherwise, freemasonry is indicated. The former chosen (in name only
now) are
understood to be an influence by default since the beginning.
57. One
particular detail to note is the description for Pius VII
(1800-23): "Aquila Rapax", 'the Rapacious Eagle'. Fr. O'Connor notes
that "since this Pope was the most gentle and dove-like of men the
inscription has presented difficulties which some have tried to
circumvent by applying the prophecy to Napoleon at whose hands Pius
suffered so much". It would seem that Napoleon overshadowed Pius VII at
the time to the effect that St. Malachy's vision resulted in that
description.
The description of Benedict XV likewise is more descriptive of the times in which he reigned than the man himself: Benedict XV (1914-22) was "Religio Depopulata" ('Religion Depopulated').
58. 'The
Shepherd and the Sailor' might have been Siri, though others think that
Roncalli fits the description better as he was Patriarch of Venice and
expressed a desire to travel. Roncalli might also have been aware of this
prophecy. The details that pertain to Siri are: He was the Archbishop of
Genoa, the maritime city which was his life-long home, where he was
born the son of a dockworker (Il Lavoro, Genoa, Italy, May 3, 1989, p. 4).
59.
This is not to fault him with anything. It is simply that he could do
nothing about it; the period of peace had run its course, enthusiasm had
waned, and the time had come when the papacy would be taken out of the
way for the coming of antichrist and the last days before the Second
Coming.
60. The
devil must have been aware of the words of Our Lady of Good Success,
which presents seemingly a worse crisis than the earlier great monarch
prophecies, though it would not be more generally known until the 20th
century (or after the worse crisis should already have begun). Before then, there was a work published in 1790 by Fr. Manuel
Sousa Pereira which was based on Mother Mariana's own autobiography and
that is all. Whether or not this had any effect on the devil's machinations is
open to debate. It should be noted again that Our Lady of Fatima did not
refer to "Communism" but "Russia's errors", and that Russia's first
error was the rejection of Papal Primacy.
One has to be aware that the devil is not above reading the plan and preparing counters for it. In fact, that was counted on, it seems. If it is difficult to imagine this going on in the spiritual realm it is understandable.
61.
If he is not martyred, then at least the conclave to elect his
successor is overrun: This might be the beginning of the 'wars, and
rumour of wars' which the faithful might then hear about, and about the
time when the holy city is "tread underfoot two and forty months" (Apoc.
11:2).
62.
Again, at this time the 'false Christs' would be appearing to deceive
the faithful one way, while the antichrist deceives another way those
who at that time have become lukewarm and love not the truth; those who
have lost their fervour and say in their hearts, "My lord is long in
coming," (Matt. 24:48~Knox).
63.
He also speaks of "John XXIII" appearing twice on the list: No. 50,
'Stag of the Siren', and No. 107, 'the Shepherd and the Sailor'. They
were both antipopes; but he was not aware of this.
64. The actual list of the Monk of Padua is not available to us at this time.
65.
If the divergence in names began with Benedict XV, would a divergence
in the person who might take the name begin earlier ? As the crisis was
supposed to begin in the early 20th century (as prophecy to
indicates taken as a whole), it is difficult to imagine that it would
begin with Guiseppe Sarto as Pius X, unless the crisis began
after him, or unless his reign was cut short. However, after this point
it is pure speculation, and one can go no further.
Addition To Section III (Two Timelines Part One): Looking At The Big Picture With The Gospel Accounts
This began as a footnote but is its own section now. It has its own footnotes at the end.
40. Fr.
O'Connor comments (about the gospel being preached in the whole world
first): 'St. Augustine points out (Ep. 199, n. 48) that this does not
mean that all men will come into the Church, but simply that the gospel
shall have been preached to all nations and all men given the
opportunity to embrace it. He also comments, "What does the phrase 'then
it will come' mean except that it will not come before that time. How
long after that time it will come, we do not know. The only thing we
know for certain is that it will not come sooner" (Ep. 197, n. 4). St.
Augustine therefore considers the universal preaching of the gospel a
very remote sign of the world’s end'.
This
observation works for the second (chapter thirteen) timeline in
particular, as there is a definite and significant period of peace
before the end.
In fact, it applies to both periods since the victory
of the Church necessarily implies that the gospel will be preached to
all nations and without hindrance. However, there is a difficulty to be
considered: Christ said that this generation 'shall not pass' until all
these signs have occurred. What, then, of the gospel having been
'preached to all nations', followed by a thousand years of peace ? This
cannot of course be contained in one generation.
There
are a couple of possible solutions: First, the elect are alive during
the whole time (as the 'first resurrection', Apoc. 20:4-6); [40A] and even before
their time, the gospel had been preached to all nations during
the reign of Pius XII (this also means that for every subsequent
generation this requirement is already filled and cannot be undone). So, with the elect, that generation had not 'passed away until all things are fulfilled'.
(But
after the main part of the Apocalypse, from chapters thirteen to
nineteen, the gospel may well have to be preached again to all nations,
since the Faith is all but disappeared from the world at that time. The elect will presumably do
this {how the Church is to be re-constituted is to be seen when the
time comes}. Thus might begin the millennium of the Church victorious in
the world, but unlike the first timeline, the crisis was far worse and
so the victory afterwards is that much greater, as is the length of the
period of peace.)
The
second solution is like St. Augustine's: That once all nations had
heard the gospel, the end of time (beginning with the antichrist) may come at any time afterwards, but
not before. This is the solution for the first timeline specifically.
The
third solution combines St. Augustine's and the specific words recorded
by the three evangelists who had recorded the eschatological discourse.
St. Matthew writes: "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" (Matt. 24:14). St. Mark writes: "And unto all nations
the gospel must first be preached" (Mark 13:10). St. Luke does not
include this line at all. And all three of them almost identically relate
that 'this generation shall not pass until all these things are done' and that 'Heaven and earth shall pass' but not His Word.
St.
Matthew seems to indicate that 'the consummation' encompasses the whole
time from the end of the period of peace until the Second Coming
proper. Consider the epoch of the period of peace as when 'the gospel is preached to all nations' for in that time the Church
has no hindrance. St. Mark's account does not contradict this. St. Luke
does not say. But all three agree that, at the beginning of the very end, there shall be news of 'wars and seditions' as if this phenomenon is new to
this generation.
But this solution is the most likely:
It
should be added that 'unto all nations the gospel must first be
preached' (Mark 13:10) can itself be taken as a veiled announcement of
the period of peace following the Church's triumph, which is necessarily
implied in all Catholic prophecy afterward, so that whether it is for approximately forty years or one thousand, either way
the generation which saw the end of the period of peace will also live
to see the Second Coming. This is not contradicted by St. Matt. 24:14,
if what he meant by 'the consummation' is the whole time beginning with
the ending of the period of peace. In other words, if what he meant is
something like "...but before all this begins to happen" (the Gospel had
to be preached to all nations, without hindrance as per the period of
peace following the victory of the Church) then the first line of each
of the Gospel accounts falls into place as announcing the end of the
epoch of peace and the return of war and strife.
But
what is the context of this, the 'gospel of the kingdom' ? Is it the same
for both timelines, or does it have more than one meaning ?
The
disciples went with Our Lord to the temple, and He announced to them,
"These things which you see, the days will come in which there shall not
be left a stone upon a stone that shall not be thrown down" (Luke
21:6). He was speaking of the end of the world, and not only the destruction
of the temple. The rest of His discourse bears this out.
Our
Lord was asked by His disciples, "Master, when shall these things be?
and what shall be the sign when they shall begin to come to pass ?"
(Luke 21:7). Or: "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). Or: "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the
sign when all these things shall begin to be fulfilled?" (Mark 13:4).
After
the hint about the period of peace having come to an end (and there are
reasons why it was hinted and not spelled out), Our Lord gave what
seems to be another proximate sign for the beginning of the end:
In
St. Mark's account, Our Lord says that "many will come in my name,
saying, I am he; and they shall deceive many". St. Luke records His
words as: "Take heed you be not seduced; for many will come in my name,
saying, I am he; and the time is at hand: go ye not therefore after them".
St.
Matthew adds: "And he shall send his angels with a trumpet, and a great
voice: and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds,
from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost bounds of them"
(Matt.24:31).
As
for when the elect are gathered together by the angels, it would seem
to be right at the end, so close to the Second Coming itself that Our
Lord spoke of it afterward (Matt. 24:29-31 and Mark 13:26-27). We will
see a possible reason for this (involving 'Gog, and Magog' of Apoc. 20:7-8).
For
the first timeline (Apoc. 11), the context is that
these things are happening during the time of the rise of the antichrist
and culminating with his reign (of 'two and forty months').
This should be the same time as when "Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the Gentiles; till the times of the
nations be fulfilled" (Luke 21:24).
For
the second timeline (Apoc. 13), the context is that
these things are happening far beyond the living memory of the world
except for the elect and members of the first resurrection. But that
generation which saw the end of the period of peace will not have
passed by the time all is fulfilled.
This
would immediately solve the difficulty of the generation that will live
to see the period of peace to the very end, as it is not said precisely
when this generation begins. We may conclude that 'this generation' is
the same which had seen the end of the period of peace all the way to the Parousia.
It is interesting that Our Lord opens His discourse (and all three
record it almost the same way) with the warning that false
Christs will appear: "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". All three also immediately follow with the end of the peace in
the world: "And when you hear of wars and revolts, do not be alarmed by
it; such things must happen first, but the end will not come all at
once" (Luke 21:8-9~Knox).
He is more explicit later on: "And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; lo, he is here: do not believe. For 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 13:8-9). [40B]
St. Matthew does not say 'false Christs' but only false prophets, and St. Luke does not mention them at all.
So it seems that the first sign
of the end of the period of peace is the appearance of false Christs,
declaring that it is He, and the end is near; and others who point to these false Christs. At the same time, or very
shortly thereafter, there will be heard of wars and rumours of wars.
In
the first timeline, the deception may well be between the 'false
Christs' and false prophets on the one hand, and the antichrist on the
other. The former will deceive many into a false expectation of Christ's
return, and the latter will deny it entirely. In our world today,
there is no such false Christs, because the devil wishes to lead all to
the antichurch (and because the world is not in fact very near the end). It seems necessary for him to very specifically
lead everyone to follow the false papacy (rather than away from it) which is also to be somehow greater than the
papacy it pretends to be. See Apoc. 13:8 and 2 Thess. 2:4-9.
One
thing to consider about the first timeline is the proximity of the
defeat of the antichrist to the end. Different Catholic prophecies
indicate that it should not be a very long time.
Apocalypse indicates the commencement of this short time with the
sounding of the
seventh trumpet: "And the seventh angel sounded the trumpet: and there
were great voices in heaven, saying: The kingdom of this world is become
our Lord’s and his Christ’s, and he shall reign for ever and ever.
Amen" (Apoc. 11:15). The world must then be in expectation of the end,
but not with the expectation of faith: "And the nations were angry, and
thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged,
and that thou shouldest render reward to thy servants the prophets and
the saints, and to them that fear thy name, little and great, and
shouldest destroy them who have corrupted the earth" (Apoc. 11:18). It
is to be wondered whether at this time there would still be 'false
Christs,
and false prophets' operating. [40C]
In the second timeline, it begins much the same: There is an expectation of the second coming of Christ, because the Church knew the proximate time was 'a thousand years after the tribulation'. At that time will appear false Christs and false prophets, seeking to divert people away from being faithful to Christ's Word concerning His return. Shortly after they begin to appear, the devil begins to 'seduce the nations', "which are over the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, and shall gather them together to battle, the number of whom is as the sand of the sea" (Apoc. 20:9); and it begins with 'wars and seditions'. The rest of it is already described in section III (Part One), and one can go no further with this. However there are still a couple of points which may be made concerning especially the second timeline:
The
false Christs may deceive people into thinking they may be 'taken' like
the elect: "And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together
his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to
the uttermost part of heaven" (Mark 13:27); Our Lord urges
His followers to "go ye not therefore after them". The only reason which
comes to mind which might make this believable, to people in the world at the time, is the disappearance of
the elect, who might have been taken by the armies of 'Gog, and Magog'.
Their absence is, until they are gathered by the angels, notable.
It is entirely possible, also, that the elect themselves are supplanted
during this time, perhaps not all at once, but little by little as the
"wars and seditions" work their way around the world. In that case, the
'false Christs' may also represent false elect, which is why Our Lord
said "For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will
seduce many" (Matt. 24:5); or "Take heed you be not seduced; 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). In this case, the words 'in my name' might mean 'as though one of the elect'.
These scenarios concerning the false Christs, though somewhat
contradictory, may even operate simultaneously as the devil knows
how to work with contradiction.
Lastly,
the main point of the eschatology is to describe the circumstances of
Our Lord's return, and how important it is not to be deceived: Not to
follow after false Christs; not to expect the Parousia immediately when there is
wars and rumour of wars after there has not been such things for a very
long time; and to "take heed to yourselves, lest perhaps your hearts be
overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness, and the cares of this life,
and that day come upon you suddenly" (Luke 21:34).
It
almost seems as if Our Lord were describing the devil's attempt to
subvert the meaning and circumstances of His Second Coming. There might
be many, inspired by the devil, asking "Where is Christ ?" when the
thousand years are finished and He is not seen; even after several wars have
come to pass and the rumour of more continues; and additionally, "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); and even such "great signs and wonders, insomuch as to
deceive (if possible) even the elect", if the elect were there to warn them (Matt. 24:24). [40D]
Perhaps after the devil is loosed again, and begins to seduce the world, many do not want to heed the signs of the end of the world; though they know it by the signs, and also by the time that has passed as the period of peace, one thousand years.
Many might have let their "hearts
be overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness, and the cares of this
life" and do not want to think about it all ending soon.
Those
who keep faith and wait for Our Lord despite everything that is
happening "shall be hated by all men for [His] name’s sake" (Luke 21:17).
Our Lord forewarns, "look to yourselves. For they shall deliver you up
to councils, and in the synagogues you shall be beaten, and you shall
stand before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony unto them"
(Mark 13:9). In the context of all of this, is that testimony about the imminent Second Coming; that the
kingdom is near, despite the denials of many and the false signs and
wonders and false Christs and false prophets ?
"And
when they shall lead you and deliver you up, be not thoughtful
beforehand what you shall speak; but whatsoever shall be given you in
that hour, that speak ye. For it is not you that speak, but the Holy
Ghost" (Mark 13:11). One will not have to explain why everything is
happening; but the main point concerns the expectation of the Second Coming.
"And unto all nations the gospel must first be preached" (Mark 13:10). This verse, given in between the previous two, indicates another possible interpretation: Not only that the Word is preached first to all nations, but also that the imminent Second Coming is also thus preached to all nations, with the admonishment to all to be in the state of grace and to keep watch.
40A.
As for how this is supposed to work, we do not yet know. It likely has
something to do with the book of life being unsealed; it might be
something reserved for the end-times. We know the last beast, the
'eighth', comes up out of the abyss; the 'first resurrection' somehow is
its opposite. That is as far as we can go for now.
40B.
The differences in the Gospel accounts seems to mean that whatever
detail is not
common to all three has a different meaning according to the timeline.
For example, only St. Luke reported that Jerusalem would be surrounded
with an army, and then trodden-over by it, but instead both St. Mark and St. Matthew wrote of the 'abomination of desolation' in the holy place.
According to the timeline which is fulfilled, the 'holy place' thus
mentioned is not necessarily in Jerusalem. Could be Rome; could be
Fatima. It could be two separate events: one around Jerusalem, and one
concerning the holy place.
40C.
It seems that the world did not, after the antichrist, have a very
great expectation of the second coming of Christ, but instead remained
in rebellion. This would be the great apostasy in the first
timeline. To them who kept the faith is addressed the words of the
eschatological discourse, as they would be taking heed (and would
convince some of their neighbours at the least).
40D. Our Lord knows the devil will try to deceive the world concerning the
Second Coming; He warns against it; and the devil knows He warns against
it and will try to subvert the warning. It is almost circular. Our Lord's words concerning His
Second Coming causes the devil to try to subvert them, which means Our
Lord warns against that subversion, and the devil will try to undermine that, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment
--