Divine Will revisited.

Peter, before I read this, I was pondering a "word" that has been on my heart the past two weeks: damnable division.

At this hour, when the world is turning rapidly, and with ferocity, against the Church and all that is good, true, and beautiful... it will be an absolute travesty if we, who are brothers and sisters, devolve to a bar brawl over these things. After all, we are all proclaiming a common theme here: preparation for the return of Our Jesus! We are all going to melt into love for one another in Heaven... but oh God, may it begin now. May we not sadden our Saviour by such differences.

The only danger I see in our differences is that the those of us who embrace St. John's clear chronology, which was espoused by the Fathers, and is supported by contemporary mystical revelations (such as the one you are referring to Peter), is that if there is antichrist manifestation on the horizon, we have a duty to warn as such. Most certainly, we are seeing apostasy all around us, and most alarmingly, unmitigated lawlessness as courts overturn the natural law. I think the warning of St. Pius X supercedes anything I can say:

Who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is—apostasy from God… When all this is considered there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may be already in the world the “Son of Perdition” of whom the Apostle speaks. —POPE ST. PIUS X, E Supremi, Encyclical On the Restoration of All Things in Christ, n. 3, 5; October 4th, 1903

So onward Peter.

 

Thank you Richard. I will archive this myself. I would love to read the entire section, if that is possible. From what I can read, the author is stating the case perfectly, identifying both the heresy and mitigated heresy of millenarianism, but stating the proper theology of a triumphant era.

Excellent, thank you.

 

The court might say that, before one determines someone to be guilty, that the accused should be given the benefit of the doubt. I admit, your comments are also unsettling, as they are suggesting dishonesty on Fr. Iannuzzi's part. Mistaken? Perhaps. But I see that Richard has posted photos above which reveal that you were in fact mistaken on the authorship of the volumes. So, perhaps this is an opportunity for humility: you too can be mistaken.

 

First, I think these questions are better put to Fr. Joseph himself. I am not his spokesman. Nor do I take everything he says as Gospel. We've had our debates. But one thing I can say for certain is that he is as careful as one can be to remain faithful to Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium. His integrity in this regard is laudable.

Regarding Faustian's revelations, I think it is very noteworthy that two of the "Fathers" of Divine Mercy, of its translation and promulgation, have confirmed Fr. Iannuzzi's theology on the end times. The late Fr. Kosicki gives a commendation on Fr. I's. Splendour of Creation. Also, I traveled with Fr. Seraphim Michalenko, the priest whose picture appears in the beginning of the Diary, and he heard me preach the theology on the "day of the Lord", according to the early Fathers, and he affirmed what I was teaching.

Last, I agree with Fr. Iannuzzi and many Venerables and Servants of God who say that the return of Jesus is imminent. But what is being referred to here is more akin to the light of dawn than the apparition in glory in the flesh of the Son (which comes at the very end of time: see Dear Holy Father... He is Coming!). In this regard, I defer to St. Bernard and Pope Benedict:

the “sabbath rest” or "era of peace"....

…is like a road on which we travel from the first coming to the last. In the first, Christ was our redemption; in the last, he will appear as our life; in this middle coming, he is our rest and consolation.…. In his first coming Our Lord came in our flesh and in our weakness; in this middle coming he comes in spirit and power; in the final coming he will be seen in glory and majesty… —St. Bernard, Liturgy of the Hours, Vol I, p. 169

This, Benedict XVI notes, is the proper tone for understanding the renewal of the Church anticipated by the Holy Fathers (see The Popes, and a Dawning New Age and What If... [there is no era of peace]):

Whereas people had previously spoken only of a twofold coming of Christ—once in Bethlehem and again at the end of time—Saint Bernard of Clairvaux spoke of an adventus medius, an intermediate coming, thanks to which he periodically renews his intervention in history. I believe that Bernard’s distinction strikes just the right note. We cannot pin down when the world will end. Christ himself says that no one knows the hour, not even the Son. But we must always stand in the imminence of his coming, as it were—and we must be certain, especially in the midst of tribulations, that he is near. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Light of the World, p.182-183, A Conversation With Peter Seewald

Note the word "imminence"...

Echoing the mystical revelations of Luisa Piccarreta, Conchita, Robin, Hannibal, etc. he adds:

Why not ask him to send us new witnesses of his presence today, in whom he himself will come to us? And this prayer, while it is not directly focused on the end of the world, is nevertheless a real prayer for his coming; it contains the full breadth of the prayer that he himself taught us: “Your kingdom come!” Come, Lord Jesus! —POPE BENEDICT XVI,Jesus of Nazareth, Holy Week: From the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection, p. 292, Ignatius Press

This coming of the Kingdom within in a new mode is precisely what is referred to as the imminent coming of Jesus.

Jesus himself is what we call ‘heaven.’ —POPE BENEDICT XVI, quoted in Magnificat, p. 116, May 2013

Stephen, can you send me a link to the Lactantius text so I can read it in full? Gracia! Send to my email if you still have it on hand. Bless you.

 

By the way, sometimes I hit "Post Reply" but go back and modify spelling errors, or add a comment. I don't know how this forum works (if it sends out only the initial post). So my apologies. Please note the forum post is the last draft.

 

Our Blessed Mother said To Sister Lucia......
The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.”

Sr. Lucia affirms in correspondence.........
On August 29, 1989, that the consecration of Russia “has been accomplished”on the 25 March 1984 and that “God will keep His word.”.


I will not argue with the Holy seer, Sr Lucia!

and as we know many good fruits occured, concerning the then USSR and communism, post consecration of March 1984.

However I also agree with you that evil continued in the world and that satan was and is very active.

The reign of the Immaculate Heart has not been fulfilled!

I believe that when Our Lady spoke of the consecration of Russia and the reign of Her Immaculate Heart, she was speaking of two different events.

 

The key word that needs to be added is that Sr. Lucia 'allegedly ' affirms. She did not confirm this publicly, but allegedly through one man, Cardinal Bertone, then Father Bertone (I believe).

 

The Consecration was done in 1984, but it came too late and by then the errors of Russia had spread to the West just as Our Lady had predicted. One problem was solved (Russia was consecrated and nuclear war was averted) but another problem was created because the Consecration came too late.

The evidence that the message of Fatima is still relevant today can be seen in the headlines every week where we see the West and Russia inching closer to another confrontation. But there is hope: after all, it was Pope Benedict himself who reminded us on May 13, 2010 that Fatima is not yet fulfilled:

"We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete. Here there takes on new life the plan of God which asks humanity from the beginning: “Where is your brother Abel […] Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground!” (Gen 4:9). Mankind has succeeded in unleashing a cycle of death and terror, but failed in bringing it to an end… In sacred Scripture we often find that God seeks righteous men and women in order to save the city of man and he does the same here, in Fatima, when Our Lady asks: “Do you want to offer yourselves to God, to endure all the sufferings which he will send you, in an act of reparation for the sins by which he is offended and of supplication for the conversion of sinners?” (Memoirs of Sister Lúcia, I, 162).

At a time when the human family was ready to sacrifice all that was most sacred on the altar of the petty and selfish interests of nations, races, ideologies, groups and individuals, our Blessed Mother came from heaven, offering to implant in the hearts of all those who trust in her the Love of God burning in her own heart. At that time it was only to three children, yet the example of their lives spread and multiplied, especially as a result of the travels of the Pilgrim Virgin, in countless groups throughout the world dedicated to the cause of fraternal solidarity. May the seven years which separate us from the centenary of the apparitions hasten the fulfilment of the prophecy of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, to the glory of the Most Holy Trinity..." https://w2.vatican.va/content/bened...documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20100513_fatima.html

 

Have we just come full circle?
We start out questioning if Luisa is the real deal , and we end back at Fatima.

 

I would like to thank Mark particularly for this post. I think the 'intermediate' coming of the Lord is the key to understanding this difficult topic. The quotes from St Bernard and Pope Benedict are really enlightening.

 

I had not followed this for quite some time. How blessed we are to have such good minds and hearts contributing their best to MOG. Way over my head but the level of debate is truly inspiring all the same. St Teresa was right - it is best to pick a learned teacher.

 

Hello Mark,
So you are telling me that Fr Iannuzzi still claims its a 1952 theological commission when we can all see from the book itself that it was no such thing and that Abbott vonier was dead by 1938-and the copyright was originally from 1927. It says clearly is was arranged and edited by Canon George Smith DD PHD. There is no mention anywhere of a 1952 theological commission becaus it didnt exist. Mark I find it quite incomprehensible that you will just accept what Fr has told you without studying the source itself. Concerning the Divine Mercy Diary it matters not one bit that two priests like fr Iannuzzi's understanding of the words contained, however it doesnt change the fact that he made up a phrase which is not in there. I also spoke with the spiritual director of the Convent in Poland (about 2004 on this question of whether final/second coming really means last judgment or "middle coming") where St Faustina is buried and he gave me this look as if I were stupid and said of course it means the end of the world. Since then, as I have shown clearly in "Heralds of the Second Coming", St Faustina told Blessed Michael Sopocko on her deathbead(as he recorded in his own diary) that he must do all in his power to promotoe divine mercy because there is not much time left until the "end of the world."
Concerning the middle coming theory, I remember 3 years ago in our previous debates showing how both St. John Paul and Benedict XVI clearly stated it refers not to an intermidiate time to come, but the ordinary day to day life of the Christian who partakes of the Sacraments. Pope Francis has since added his own teaching fully in line with that view: "St Bernard tells us that there is a third coming of the Lord: his coming to us each day: each day, the Lord visits his Church. He visits each one of us. And our soul also enters into this likeness: our soul comes to resemble the Church; our soul comes to resemble Mary”." Of course Francis is saying we are in this third period already. Also Benedict XVI makes a great point that Bernard wasnt basing this third coming on rev 20 but on Jn 14:23 "If a man loves me he will keep my word, and my Father will love him and we shall come to him and make our home with him". Unfortunately Mark its another case of misleading and manipulating the truth. As far as this being a "bar brawl" as you described it, I and others here see it as no such thing. Quite simply we are only interested in proclaiming the truth that the Church has taught and recently (in 1995) clearly stated in an official document of the CDF. We are not peddling our own interpretations, but setting out what popes and official document (Vatican II Catechism etc) have said. I stand by my comments that Fr Iannuzzi has questions to answer on his use of texts because they have been exposed as misleading-but I of course am not judging his intentions. I love all priests Fr Iannuzzi included, but we all have a duty to tell the truth even if it is uncomfortable.

 

I'm afraid that I do see this whole discussion as something of a "bar brawl" because of the hectoring tone, and I urge all participants to exercise restraint in the wording of their posts, please. There is an obvious inconsistency in claiming not to judge intentions only a few sentences after stating that someone is 'misleading and manipulating the truth', which are terms which themselves imply intention. That is equivalent to 'throwing the stone and withdrawing the hand', and I would gently recommend a little re-reading and re-wording of the above claim.

The underlying problem here isn't the theological disagreement in itself - that's just a fact of life. It's the attempt at anathemization which makes charitable debate difficult if not impossible. As long as posts such as these continue to equate personal interpretation of the truth with truth itself (e.g. the reference here to the CDF document from 1995 which some of us here simply do not interpret in the same way) we can't make any progress. To refuse to accept the reader's role in interpreting a document is not to understand the nature of the act of reading, which is Hermeneutics 101.

Regardless of which eschatological scenario will ultimately prove more accurate, it cannot (and I repeat cannot) be the case that positing an Era of Peace is in itself unanimously considered a heterodox position by the Magisterium. If that were the case, then Fr Gobbi's Blue Book would not have an Imprimatur. A more recent example is the 2015 publication with a Nihil Obstat from Archbishop of Szczecin Andrzej Dzięga, of the private revelations to 'Adam-Człowiek' (real name Paweł Szczerzyński (1969-2014)) which speak extensively about the coming renewal of the earth by the Holy Spirit and an age of great evangelization and glory for the Church, and explicitly contradict, indeed warn against the notion of an imminent end of the world.

The issue here of course is not whether these alleged communications to 'Adam-Człowiek' were supernatural in origin. Perhaps they were 'private meditations'. And perhaps they will turn out to have been completely erroneous, who knows (although somehow I don't think so, for reasons that I've set out on the thread dealing with Fr Adam Skwarczyński, who himself claims to have seen the New World in visionary experience)? All I am trying to say is that the competent Church authority considered the material to contain nothing contrary to faith or morals. That may infuriate some commentators, but it's a fact.

In itself, this is a fairly modest claim, but an important one for this discussion, which is why I insist upon it. All we need is a withdrawal of the accusations of heresy, nothing more. Then we ought to be able to proceed in a less acrimonious fashion.

 

Sorry Peter,
But you were quite happy to have a pop at Emmett before I ever got involved so you cant have it both ways. I completely disagree with you abou this not being a theological issue. that for me is the only issue. As far as fr Gobbi goes, the messages never once proclaimed a temporal era of peace, and if you would like to debate those particular messages I am more than happy to because they back up everything I have said (and yes I know very well that Fr Gobbi's own interpretation was a spiritual millenium). As to whether they are genune is another matter altogether. Please explain how he CDF document only applies a certain type of millenarianism, because it says no such thing

 

Wait a moment... I really don't think you've understood what I'm saying. Of course there is a theological issue, but what I am trying to establish is some more charitable rules of engagement for this particular discussion on this thread. What anyone may say outside that on their own websites or blogs is not something over which I have any say.

Below is what I said regarding Emmett O'Regan. The passage in bold type was not addressed to him but to the forum participant who directly attacked Fr Iannuzzi as a 'deceiver'.

"At the risk of sounding blunt, these flippant ad hominem attacks on a priest and theologian such as Fr Iannuzzi as are now appearing on this thread surely constitute a serious breach of etiquette and I appeal for them to stop immediately, otherwise I will call for their removal.

Although Emmett O'Regan has some stimulating ideas, theologically he is not remotely in Fr Iannuzzi's league, as those of us who have studied his doctoral dissertation on Luisa Piccarreta's writings defended at the Pontifical Gregorian Academy in Rome will attest. The insistence of Emmett O'Regan and similar writers that the millennium should be dismissed on the grounds that a strict Augustinian eschatology is the exclusive position of the Church doesn't stand up to historical scrutiny, as I tried to demonstrate in the portion of my introductory essay to Brian Nugent's book Marian Apparitions in Ireland dealing with questions of private revelation and eschatology"

For the record, I am in no way attacking Emmett O'Regan personally. He has a perfect right to his opinions and is doing stimulating work, even if I don't agree with it. That's absolutely fine, and I don't have a problem with some of it, although I would say that if he or you wish to continue with the accusation against Fr Iannuzzi of deliberate manipulation of the data (which is quite another thing from sloppy research), you are upping the ante beyond mere intellectual disagreement and need to understand the implications of what you are doing.

.

 

I want to say that I very much appreciate the time and the knowledge that you and all the theologians here have to offer on this issue! So thank you all for weighing in!

May God bless you all.

Being an ordinary Catholic who depends on the authority of the Church for direction and on theologians to give us clarity on many teachings, so we the ordinary Catholics of the world, can navigate through the subtle diversions from truth that satan either allows or inspires; it is a wonderful gift from the Sacred Heart of Our Loving Lord Jesus, for us here on the MoG forum to be informed of the many, writings and teachings of all our Popes and Saints and to allow the Holy Spirit to enkindle in our hearts the fire of His Love and the wisdom of His teachings.

I consider this, an education which in no way resembles a bar room brawl.

Come Holy spirit fill the hearts of Thy faithful and enkindle in them the fire of Your love. Amen.

 

Hi Mark, its good to be able to speak with you! I really enjoy your writings - you have a real gift. Even though we may not agree on the subject of the Millennium, I hope we can engage in some constructive dialogue here. To me, the fundamental mistake that Fr. Iannuzzi makes is in asserting that millenarianism is directly equated with Chiliasm, and that by positing a future spiritual millennial reign of Christ, this in some way stops his view from being a type of millenarianism. I can see why those who follow his ideas think that it is not a type of millenarianism, since he confines it to this very narrow definition. If this is the case, then the words of the Catechism in CCC 676 doesn't apply. But the fact is, the word millenarianism is very broad in scope, and includes much more than just Chiliasm under its umbrella. It refers to the expectation of the establishment of an earthly utopia in the future, not just whether Christ will reign in the flesh or not (which is Chiliasm). While there are two main Christian forms of millenarianism - premillennialism and postmillennialism, there are also non-Christian and even secular forms of millenarianism (e.g. Communism, Nazism, transhumanism etc.). The Catechism specifically singles out these secular forms of millenarianism as the most dangerous, referring to it as the "deception of the Antichrist".
If we look to footnote 577 of the Catechism, we find that after it identifies the most dangerous form of millenarianism as "the "intrinsically perverse" political form of a secular messianism", it then goes on to cite Pope Pius XI's anti-Communist encyclical Divini Redemptoris. So we know it is all types of millenarianism that is being condemned here, with these secular forms of millenarianism being specified as the most dangerous. What Fr. Iannuzzi proposes is a spiritual type of millennialism, which in turn is a Christian form of millenarianism. We should keep in mind that Joachim de Fiore also postulated a spiritual reign of peace in his third age of the Holy Spirit, which was condemned by the Church, and is also classified as millenarianism. Dr Paul Thigpen labels Fr. Iannuzzi's view on the Millennium as "spiritual millenarianism" in his book The Rapture Trap (pp204-205). What the Catechism is particularly concerned about is the attempt to "immanentize the eschaton" (Eric Voegelin) - "to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgement". Millenarianism places undue attachment to the material world, contrary to the words of Christ:

"Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever." (1John 2:15-17)

In this regard, I think the following paragraphs of Divini Redemptoris are especially edifying:

"And here We wish, Venerable Brethren, to insist more particularly on two teachings of Our Lord which have a special bearing on the present condition of the human race: detachment from earthly goods and the precept of charity. "Blessed are the poor in spirit" were the first words that fell from the lips of the Divine Master in His sermon on the mount. This lesson is more than ever necessary in these days of materialism athirst for the goods and pleasures of this earth. All Christians, rich or poor, must keep their eye fixed on heaven, remembering that "we have not here a lasting city, but we seek one that is to come." The rich should not place their happiness in things of earth nor spend their best efforts in the acquisition of them. Rather, considering themselves only as stewards of their earthly goods, let them be mindful of the account they must render of them to their Lord and Master, and value them as precious means that God has put into their hands for doing good; let them not fail, besides, to distribute of their abundance to the poor, according to the evangelical precept. Otherwise there shall be verified of them and their riches the harsh condemnation of St. James the Apostle: "Go to now, ye rich men; weep and howl in your miseries which shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten; your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be for a testimony against you and shall eat your flesh like fire. You have stored up to yourselves wrath against the last days. . ."
But the poor too, in their turn, while engaged, according to the laws of charity and justice, in acquiring the necessities of life and also in bettering their condition, should always remain "poor in spirit," and hold spiritual goods in higher esteem than earthly property and pleasures. Let them remember that the world will never be able to rid itself of misery, sorrow and tribulation, which are the portion even of those who seem most prosperous. Patience, therefore, is the need of all, that Christian patience which comforts the heart with the divine assurance of eternal happiness. "Be patient, therefore, brethren," we repeat with St. .lames, "until the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, patiently bearing until he receive the early and the later rain. Be you therefore also patient and strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand." Only thus will be fulfilled the consoling promise of the Lord: "Blessed are the poor!" (paras 44-45)

 

Glad to be of help.

Here is the section I cited in its entirety:

XI: The Last Judgement

The phraseology of the Scriptures does not always make it very apparent whether certain happenings which are prophesied are to be catastrophic events of short duration or long periods of God’s visitation. Thus, in the various utterances of Christ concerning the end of the world it is not easy to distinguish lengthy times of tribulation from sudden manifestations of God’s anger, appearing with the rapidity of lightning. Many of God’s judgements are long drawn out punitions and the catastrophic chastisements are, on the whole, rare. A thought frequently expressed in a certain class of modern literature is this, that the World’s History is the World’s Judgement. There is much truth in such a view. There is, however, no doubt whatever concerning the nature of the Last Judgement; it is described as an event of terrifying suddenness and as something entirely outside the historic development of mankind. Its date is so mysterious that no one knows it, not even the angels of God: “But of that day and hour no one knoweth: no,not the angels of heaven,but the Father alone.” Even the signs which are to be the precursors of that day will be no clear indication of its exact hour: “For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord shall so come as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, "Peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come upon them, as the pains upon her that is with child. And they shall not escape," The Last Judgement, therefore, ought to be regarded by us as a great mystery, as to its date, as to its nature, and as to its purpose. We can, in a way, understand the meaning of those temporal judgements of which we have spoken above; we can even grasp the doctrine of God’s dealings with the soul at death; but when we come to the Last Judgement we are in presence of a dogma which is entirely outside all experience and for which we have no terms of comparison. Very wisely, in a passage quoted in an earlier page, St Thomas considers the Last Judgement as the counterpart of the creation of all things out of nothing. No finite measure can be applied to that greatest of all events, it is an act on an infinite scale. It is true that several very precious hints are dropped by the inspired writers as to its tremendous import, but the few suggestions which are given are in themselves allusions to possibilities quite beyond our grasp. The most constantly recurring idea is this, that God will reveal all things on that day; but it is easy to see that such revelation is a mystery, great beyond all words. So we must exert our faith and believe that God will make all things manifest, as we believe that at the beginning he created light. How this revelation will take place no finite mind can know, because it is truly the revelation of an infinite thing—the whole economy of God’s grace on the one hand, and the whole range of the created free will on the other; so that not only facts but even possibilities will be disclosed, in order to discover to every eye God’s providence in all its perfection.

Nor would it be in keeping with Catholic thought to say that the Last Judgement is nothing else than the beginning of eternity or the state of eternity. It is to be an event, a passing act off finite duration, not an everlasting condition. There will be a moment when that great judgement will begin and there will be a moment when it will end, though its results will be interminable. In other words, it will be an act of God such as he never did before and such as he will not again repeat. Never again will the human race be gathered in all its entirety as at that supreme hour, but that such an assemblage of all the human beings that ever existed will take place is one of the very few clear indications concerning that act of God that has been made known, though the race, thus brought together, will be separated, and this for all eternity: “And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit on the seat of his majesty. And all nations shall be gathered together before him: and he shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats : And he shall set the sheep on his righthand, but the goats on his left.” A revelation will then be made which will be truly miraculous in its effects, but transient as a divine act. This revelation will be given to the wicked as much as to the elect. It is a manifestation of God's justice and sanctity, different in kind from that Vision of God which the elect in their souls enjoy even now before the great day. Nothing but an act of divine omnipotence can explain that manifestation of God’s justice to all flesh. This great event is invariably called the “day of the Lord” as if it were an event so particularly different from all other historic happenings as to be the one day outside eternity worthy of the Son of God. Its importance will be commensurate with the Person of the God Incarnate...." (Cont.)

 

(Cont.)...

"The day of the Lord consists in four manifestations of God’s omnipotence whose literal reality cannot be doubted by any Catholic: there will be the destruction of the physical world through fire; there will be the raising up of all the dead; there will be the revelation of all the hidden things of man's conscience and God’s providence; and then, ultimately, there will be the separation of the good and the wicked. The day of the Lord will contain all that, and the term “Last Judgement ” may be applied to this whole complex of divine operation. It is certain that the Resurrection of the dead will precede the judgement, properly so-called; there is more room for doubting the sequence of happenings with regard to the universal conflagration, but it would seem that the fire in which all men then living will find their death will be the first act in this tremendous drama. Out of the ruins of the world that was till then, a new world will be created which will be truly part of the Resurrection. It will be in that new world that the judgement will take place; it will be in that new world that Christ will appear in glory and majesty. St Thomas adopts this order for these great mysteries. The world will be purified in that searching fire and the reprobate will be cast out of it, because they will be unworthy of it in its new perfection.

It is evident that no pictorial presentment can be attempted of so vast a change of all things. The great ideas of the Scriptures are still the most potent and most satisfying expressions. To try to depict the Last Judgement will always be a miserable failure, even if the artist be a Michelangelo. Just let us take in their literal meaning words like the following, in which the four great facts are described, and we shall be as near visualising that solemn truth as it is possible for man to be.

“The Lord delayeth not his promise, as some imagine, but dealeth patiently for your sake, not willing that any should perish, but that all should return to penance. But the day of the Lord shall Come as a thief, in which the heavens shall pass away with great violence and the elements shall be melted with heat and the earth and the works which are in it shall be burnt up. Seeing then that all these things are to be dissolved, what manner of people ought you to be in holy conversation and godliness? Looking for and hasting unto the coming day of the Lord, by which the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved and the elements shall melt with the burning heat. But we look for new heavens and a new earth according to his
promises, in which justice dwelleth."

“Wonder not at this: for the hour cometh, wherein all that are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God. And they that have done good things shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; but they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgement.”

“Their conscience bearing witness to them: and their thoughts between themselves accusing or also defending one another, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ.”

“Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world...Then shall he say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.”

Christ will do the judgement in Person, he will appear as the God-Man, in full glory. Whether his coming will be before or after the conflagration and the Resurrection it is not possible to say; but that he will execute judgement is in the very essence of our Creed: Qui venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos. Much more, indeed, could be said concerning the many speculations of theologians about things of such magnitude; but there is just one article of St Thomas which, through its very dignity, is not out of place here: "Whether the judgement be done by word of mouth.” "It is difficult to say with any certainty what is true in this matter; however, it seems more probable that all that judgement from the point of view of the discussion, from the point of view of the accusation of the wicked, and of the praise of the good, and from the point of view of the sentence pronounced over both classes, will be carried out only mentally. For if the deeds of every one were spoken orally, a length of time would be necessary, great beyond all concept.”

There are in the Gospels and in the Epistles words of great solemnity which compel us to stop one moment more in our considerations on the Last Judgement. Christ and his Apostles declare, with the greatest emphasis possible, that the elect will also judge, that they will be seated in majesty as judges on that day: “And Jesus said to them: Amen, I say to you that you, who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” St Paul makes use of this great Christian hope in order to pour contempt on the quarrelsomeness of some of the Corinthians who went to law before the unbelievers: “Know you not that the saints shall judge this world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know you not that We shall judge angels? How much more things of this world?" Such words are too clear to admit of any other interpretation than a literal one. There will evidently be an active participation of the elect, or at least some of the elect, in that final condemnation of the world. The Fathers freely use a term which no doubt recalled a familiar scene in the Roman law courts, they speak of assessors, men who sat by the side of the judge, by their very presence giving support and approval to his verdict ; it was natural for them to say that the saints will be Christ's assessors on that day. The practice of religious poverty in life or the merit of martyrdom would single out a person to be specially fit to be Christ’s assessor when he will speak his terrific anathema over sinful mankind. But even without metaphors it ought to be easy for us in a way to understand that the very contrast between the high sanctity of so many of the elect and the darkness of the reprobate will be a judgement severe beyond words..." (Cont.)

 

(Cont.)

"We could not conclude this section without reference to a matter which is one of the undying controversies of both friend and foe. The enemies of Christ's Godhead have often said—and they are still saying it—that Jesus had what might be called an eschatological obsession; he was under the impression that the world would soon come to an end, and he announced his appearance as Judge of the living and the dead as an event not far distant, in fact to take place in the lifetime of the men who were his foes. And as such a catastrophe has evidently not taken place, Christ’s claim to be God is an untenable ambition. On this subject volumes have been written. It is certain that our Lord warned the men with whom he lived, and especially the Apostles, always to watch lest their Lord and Master, coming at an unexpected moment, find them asleep. But, on the other hand, it is just as evident that Christ leaves the hour of that advent in great uncertainty and that no one could conclude from his words that he taught a coming in the immediate future. There is in all those passages which either inculcate vigilance or else leave the date of the Master’s return in such uncertainty, a blending of the near future and the mysteriously remote future which is truly unparalleled. Thus, speaking of the near future, Christ says: “Take ye heed, watch and pray. For ye know not when the time is. Even as a man who, going into a far country, left his house and gave authority to his servants over every work and commanded the porter to watch. Watch ye therefore (for you know not when the lord of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cock—crowing, or in the morning): Lest coming on a sudden, he find you Sleeping. And what I say to you I say to all: Watch." All this sounds as if Christ meant his Apostles to expect the possibility of the judgement at any time, and yet in the verse before: "But of that day or hour no man knoweth, neither the Angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father," we have his most emphatic utterance as to the unknowable character of the great event.

So we have again a description on the part of our Lord of the kingdom of God which is any thing but catastrophic: "And he said: So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the earth, and should sleep and rise, night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up whilst he knoweth not. For the earth of itself bringeth forth fruit, first the blade then the ear, afterwards the full corn in the ear. And when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come." Here we see the world's history described in the metaphor of a ripening field: the Sower himself, who is evidently Christ, is as one who leaves the seed to itself to do its work, as one who has gone away. So we might multiply instances of that mysterious blending of the two ideas, the necessity of watchfulness and the remoteness of the final harvesting. But it we bear in mind what has been said in an earlier page, how Christ’s judicial operations are unceasing, we can readily understand how there is need tor every man to be always on the watch. The coming of Christ to each one at death is a complete judgement, and he who is not prepared for that coming is truly a foolish man. Thus those well known parables on the necessity of watchfulness have been applied by the Christian doctors both to the individual human being, always in danger of death, and also to the whole human race, always in danger of the catastrophic advent of Christ. This is truly a divine grasp of the situation; what is true of man in his universality is also true of man individually. If we take it for granted that Christ at no moment ceases to be Judge, then we shall easily comprehend the complete actuality of all his parables and utterances with regard to the imprudence of being unprepared for his coming. It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Even without waiting for that new world we serve him now with fear and reverence. For our God is a consuming fire.”

Whatever may have been the thoughts of the Apostles before Pentecost concerning the establishment of a triumphant kingdom of their Master during their own lifetime, it is certain that when once they had begun their great ministry the catastrophic coming of Christ was as much part of their preaching as it had been in that of their Lord. It was a certainty; the date of it mattered but little for practical behaviour, Christians had always to be ready: “But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgement and perdition of the ungodly men. But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand tears, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord delayeth not his promise, as some imagine, but dealeth patiently for your sake, not willing that any should perish, but that all should return to penance. But the day of the Lord shall come as a thief, in which the heavens shall pass away with great violence and the elements shall be melted with heat and the earth and the works which are in it shall be burnt up."

Another form of illusion in this great matter of Christ's second advent has been much more universal, much more persistent, and is, in a way, more easily forgivable. This form of religious dreaming is even older than the Gospels; it is man's hope of the millennium. It has always been the faith of certain pious people, whom the iniquities of the world have afflicted in their souls, that there would be on this earth some day a very magnificent kingdom of God. With the advent of Christianity it was, of course, Christ who would be the King of that happy era of human sanctity. It is not easy to contradict people and prove them to be wrong if they profess a hope in some mighty triumph of Christ here on earth before the final consummation of all things. Such an occurrence is not excluded, is not impossible, it is not at all certain that there may not be a prolonged period of triumphant Christianity before the end. The point of division between the legitimate aspirations of devout souls and the aberrations of false millenarism is this: the Chiliasts - as believers in the millennium are called, from the Greek word for thousand - seem to expect a coming of Christ and a presence of him in glory and majesty on this earth which would not be the consummation of all things but would still be a portion of the history of mankind. This is not consonant with Catholic dogma. The coming of Christ int he second Advent - the Parousia, as it is is called technically - in orthodox Christianity is the consummation of all things, the end of human history. If before that final end there is to be a period, more or less prolonged, of triumphant sanctity, such a result will be brought about, not by the apparition of the Person of Christ in Majesty but by the operation of those powers of sanctification which are now at work, the Holy Ghost and the Sacraments of the Church. The Chiliasts of all times and shades of opinion, and there are many to be found even today, seem to despair, not only of the world, but even of that dispensation of grace which was inaugurated at Pentecost; they expect from the visible presence of Christ a complete conversion of the world, as if such a happy result could not be otherwise brought about. They have still to learn the meaning of Christ's words to the Apostles: 'It is expedient to you that I go. For if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you: but if I go, I will send him to you.'

The Catholic Church has full confidence in the present order of supernatural life, and if she sighs for the return of her Christ it is not because she despairs of the work he has done, but because she desires to see that work made manifest to all men, that it may appear what wondrous things Christ accomplished for man before his Ascension into heaven."