Wow. In Seattle WA, just a hop and a skip from where I am there is a statue of Lenin in the Fremont neighborhood on a street corner there. It's been there for years too, I am surprised that someone hasn't destroyed it over the years.
Antonio Socci: Benedict XVI’s Understanding of the End Times Yesterday · Public “The Two Parts of the Church” By Antonio Socci (Excerpt from Il Dio Mercato, La Chiesa, e L’Anticristo (Rizzoli, 2019)). In September 2013 – only seven months after the resignation of Benedict XVI – Giorgio Agamben published a book with an eloquent title: Il Mistero del male. Benedetto XVI e la fine dei tempi [The Mystery of Evil: Benedict XVI and the End Times] (Laterza, 2013). This philosopher’s interpretation of the event of the “resignation” made in the heat of the moment is surprising. It refers back to the question of the Antichrist and the kathécon.[1](We shall later see that other thinkers such as Mario Tronti and Massimo Cacciari have interpreted the “resignation” of Benedict XVI in this apocalyptic key; however they are coming from a Marxist point of view.) But let’s begin with Agamben. He focuses on an old essay written by the young theologian Joseph Ratzinger on the 4th-century theologian Tychonius who, commenting on the Book of Revelation, does not place Jerusalem and Babylon in opposition to one another (as Augustine would do, subsequent to Tychonius, in his famous work The City of God), but rather proposes that Jerusalem includes Babylon within itself.[2] Ratzinger wrote: “It thus follows that the Antichrist is a part of the Church, it grows in her and with her up until the great discessio, which introduces the definitive revelatio,” that is, the return of Christ and the universal judgment.[3] Ratzinger observed that “his doctrine [that of Tychonius] is objectively completely Catholic” and he demonstrated that it was instead Augustine who distinguished two cities, Jerusalem and Babylon, the “city of God” and the “earthly city” (that of the devil).[4] The young theologian Ratzinger added: “Augustine objected against Tychonius’ concept of the Church, saying that the separation [discessio] between Christ and the Antichrist will not occur only in the end times, but is already fundamentally present now.”[5] After recalling this old essay written by the future pope, Agamben notes that “during the General Audience on April 22, 2009, […] before placing his pallium on the tomb of Celestine V, Benedict XVI made a new reference to the figure of Tychonius regarding the way in which we ought to understand ‘the mystery of the Church’ today.”[6] On that occasion, Pope Benedict XVI explained Tychonius’ thought in these words: In his commentary he sees the Apocalypse above all as a reflection of the mystery of the Church. Tychonius had reached the conviction that the Church was a bipartite body: on the one hand, he says, she belongs to Christ, but there is another part of the Church that belongs to the devil. Agamben writes: The fact that Tychonius’ thesis now receives the sanction of the bishop of Rome, who calls him a “great theologian,” is certainly not a matter of indifference. What is in question is not only the thesis of the two-part body of the Church; what is also in question is above all the ecclesiological implications of this teaching, that is, the “great discessio,” the great separation between evildoers and the faithful – between the Church as the body of the Antichrist and the Church as the body of Christ – which much take place in the end times. Seen from this perspective, the abdication [of Benedict XVI] cannot fail to evoke something like a discessio, a separation of the beautiful Church [Ecclesia decora] from the “dark Church [Ecclesia fusca],” and yet Benedict XVI knows that this can and must happen only on the eve of the second coming of Christ.[7] Then Agamben adds: The [contemporary] Church has long since closed its eschatological office; but the decision of Benedict XVI [to resign] shows that the problem of the last things continues to act underground in the history of the Church. […] What interests the Apostle Paul [in 2 Thessalonians] is not the last day, not the end of time, but rather the end times [the times immediately preceding the end]. […] And one of the theses of Tychonius’ Commentary on the Book of Revelation, which Benedict XVI knew well, was that the prophecies of the Book of Revelation do not refer to end of time but rather to the condition of the Church in the interval between the first and second coming of Christ, that is, in the historical period which we are still living now. […] If we situate this understanding of Benedict XVI in the context of the situation he personally faced as pope, the “great refusal” of Benedict XVI is far from a reference to a future eschatological schism: his “refusal” recalls, on the contrary, that it is not possible for the Church to survive if it passively defers the solution of the conflict that tears apart the “two-part body” to the end of time.[8] And thus we arrive at the “resignation” of Benedict XVI. Translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino @pellegrino2020 [1] From 2 Thess 2:6-7: “But the one who restrains is to do so only for the present, until he is removed from the scene.” The kathécon is the “one who restrains” the anomos, the “lawless one” before the Second Coming of Christ. [2] This essay was republished as the first chapter of Il nuovo popolo di Dio [The New People of God] (Queriniana, Brescia 1992). Tychonius (alternatively Ticonius) was an African Donatist writer of the late 4th century whose thought is incorporated into the writings of Augustine and also the Venerable Bede. His best-known work is “Seven Rules of Interpretation [of the Bible]” which are quoted and explained by Augustine in De doctrina Christiana III, 30-37. Tychonius’ Commentary on the Apocalypse is now lost (it is quoted by Bede in his Explanatio apocalypsis, PL XCIII, 130-134). It is believed that Augustine’s Commentary (PL XXXV, 2415-52) is a modified version of Tychonius. The late 5th-century writer Gennadius says of Tychonius, “He flourished at the same time as Rufinus; in the reign of Theodosius and his son,” thus dating his writing to somewhere between 379 and 423. [3] Ibid., p. 20. The Latin word discessio means a separation or division, meaning a great cleavage or cutting in two. It also has the sense of withdrawal. [4] Ibid., p. 24. [5] Ibid. p. 23. [6] From Benedict XVI’s General Audience of April 22, 2009 (the rich depth of the teaching of Benedict’s general audiences on the Fathers of the Church is astonishing when compared to the content and style of the Bergoglian magisterium): more................
Continued......... “Ambrose Autpert's most important work is without a doubt his commentary on the Apocalypse [Expositio in Apocalypsim] in 10 volumes: this constitutes, centuries later, the first broad commentary in the Latin world on the last book of Sacred Scripture. This work was the fruit of many years' work, carried out in two phases between 758 and 767, hence prior to his election as abbot. In the premise he is careful to indicate his sources, something that was not usual in the Middle Ages. Through what was perhaps his most significant source, the commentary of Bishop Primasius of Hadrumetum, written in about the middle of the sixth century, Autpert came into contact with the interpretation of the Apocalypse bequeathed to us by Tychonius, an African who lived a generation before St Augustine. He was not a Catholic; he belonged to the schismatic Donatist Church, yet he was a great theologian. In his commentary he sees the Apocalypse above all as a reflection of the mystery of the Church. Tychonius had reached the conviction that the Church was a bipartite body: on the one hand, he says, she belongs to Christ, but there is another part of the Church that belongs to the devil. Augustine read this commentary and profited from it but strongly emphasized that the Church is in Christ's hands, that she remains his Body, forming one with him, sharing in the mediation of grace. He therefore stresses that the Church can never be separated from Jesus Christ. In his interpretation of the Apocalypse, similar to that of Tychonius, Autpert is not so much concerned with the Second Coming of Christ at the end of time as rather with the consequences that derive for the Church of the present from his First Coming, his Incarnation in the womb of the Virgin Mary. And he speaks very important words to us: in reality Christ "must be born, die and be raised daily in us, who are his Body" (In Apoc., III: CCCM, 27, p. 205). In the context of the mystic dimension that invests every Christian he looks to Mary as a model of the Church, a model for all of us because Christ must also be born in and among us. Under the guidance of the Fathers, who saw the "woman clothed with the sun" of Rv 12: 1 as an image of the Church, Autpert argues: "the Blessed and devout Virgin... daily gives birth to new peoples from which the general Body of the Mediator is formed. It is therefore not surprising if she, in whose blessed womb the Church herself deserved to be united with her Head, represents the type of the Church". In this sense Autpert considers the Virgin Mary's role decisive in the work of the Redemption (cf. also his homilies In purificatione S. Mariae and In adsumptione S. Mariae). His great veneration and profound love for the Mother of God sometimes inspired in him formulations that in a certain way anticipated those of St Bernard and of Franciscan mysticism, yet without ever deviating to disputable forms of sentimentalism because he never separates Mary from the mystery of the Church. Therefore, with good reason, Ambrose Autpert is considered the first great Mariologist in the West. He considers that the profound study of the sacred sciences, especially meditation on the Sacred Scriptures, which he describes as "the ineffable sky, the unfathomable abyss" should be combined with the devotion that he believed must free the soul from attachment to earthly and transient pleasures (In Apoc. IX). In the beautiful prayer with which his commentary on the Apocalypse ends, underlining the priority that must be given to love in all theological research, he addresses God with these words: "When you are intellectually examined by us, you are not revealed as you truly are: when you are loved, you are attained". [7]Giorgio Agamben, Il mistero del male. Benedetto XVI e la fine dei tempi, Laterza, Roma-Bari 2013, Kindle position 163, 170. [8]Ibid., Kindle position 170-177, 184, 192.
This also comes from Benedict XVI: "All our anxieties are ultimately fear of losing love and of the total isolation that follows from this. Thus all of our hopes are at bottom hope in the great and boundless love: they hope in paradise, the Kingdom of God, being with God and like God sharing His nature (2Peter 1:4) All our hopes find their culmination in the one hope: Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. The earth will become Heaven. In His Will is to be found all our hope. Learning to pray is learning to hope and thus learning to love."
IF the anti-Christ is already in the world there is one sure fired way to keep him and his minions away. HUMILITY. I have read many times the devil never tempted Our Lady because she was so humble and kind. The devil would not demean his proud arrogant evil spirit, tempting someone he considered useless and insignificant. Such was the humility of the Queen of Heaven as she travelled through her earthly pilgrimage. O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee. Amen
Just using our faith knowledge, scripture and what the Popes and Prophets have said about this in our life time, one would be foolish not to acknowledge the Antichrist is among us in the world today. Archbishop Fulton Sheen spoke most candidly on this. Pope Benedict surely understood and spoke to this, as well as St. Pope John Paul II. Antonio Socci seems to understand as much too. We are truly the generation Jesus spoke of when he said, "when I return will I find any faithful"?
You would think, we have reached that point...and that it couldn’t get worse. But I believe it can. The politics of the world seems to be slowing down Globalism. But the church seems to be speeding up the process. We also have the Coronavirus that could force governments to unite. But that seems unlikely. I hope he’s not here yet...but it wouldn’t surprise me. The positive behind all of this...is that the evil one is close to his end. That means he wants to take as many souls with him. But that means the return of Jesus is coming soon.
https://www.markmallett.com/blog/2019/09/26/the-unfurling-revolution/ The best information on climate change and the left’s agenda. Mark Mallet has redeemed himself.
I’m beginning to believe this more and more. I really was hoping the chastisement of fire was the one at the end of the world.
It really is not a time to be sad, but it is our time, as faithful Christians in the one true church, to glory in God and his plan. All the saints if they could have chosen, would have chosen our time to be alive. We are going to see horrible things true, but we will see glories on earth as have never been seen or heard. And when it is all over after the 3 days of darkness, we will be living in the kingdom of the Lords Prayer, where his will shall be done as it is in heaven. A glorious era of peace after watching what God has done for those who remained faithful.
I Do believe this. And I am not so much sad as dismayed at the awful things unfolding around us. Man cut loose from God his creator by his own self will is not a pretty sight and will only get worse I fear.
Bill Gates response to the Covid 19 https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/How-to-respond-to-COVID-19 by Bill Gates There are two reasons that COVID-19 is such a threat. First, it can kill healthy adults in addition to elderly people with existing health problems. The data so far suggests that the virus has a case fatality risk around 1%; this rate would make it several times more severe than typical seasonal influenza and would put it somewhere between the 1957 influenza pandemic (0.6%) and the 1918 influenza pandemic (2%). Second, COVID-19 is transmitted quite efficiently. The average infected person spreads the disease to two or three others. That’s an exponential rate of increase. There is also strong evidence that it can be transmitted by people who are just mildly ill or not even showing symptoms yet. This means COVID-19 will be much harder to contain than Middle East Respiratory Syndrome or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), which were only spread by those showing symptoms and were much less efficiently transmitted. In fact, COVID-19 has already caused 10 times as many cases as SARS in just a quarter of the time. The good news is that national, state, and local governments and public health agencies can take steps over the next few weeks to slow the spread of COVID-19. For example, in addition to helping their own citizens respond, donor governments should help low- and middle-income countries prepare for this pandemic. The health systems in many of these countries are already stretched thin, and a pathogen like coronavirus can quickly overwhelm them. And poorer countries have little political or economic leverage, given wealthier countries’ natural desire to put their own people first. “By helping countries in Africa and South Asia get ready now, we can save lives and also slow the global circulation of the virus.” By helping countries in Africa and South Asia get ready now, we can save lives and also slow the global circulation of the virus. (A significant portion of the commitment Melinda and I recently made to help kickstart the global response to COVID-19—which could total up to $100 million—is focused particularly on developing countries.) The world also needs to accelerate work on treatments and vaccines for COVID-19. Scientists were able to sequence the genome of the virus and develop several promising vaccine candidates in a matter of days, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations is already preparing up to eight promising vaccine candidates for clinical trials. If one or more of these vaccines proves safe and effective in animal models, they could be ready for larger-scale trials as early as June. Drug discovery can also be accelerated by drawing on libraries of compounds that have already been tested for safety and by applying new screening techniques, including machine learning, to identify antivirals that could be ready for large-scale clinical trials within weeks. All these steps would help address the current crisis. But we also need to make larger systemic changes so we can respond more efficiently and effectively when the next epidemic arrives. It’s essential to help low- and middle-income countries strengthen their primary health care systems. When you build a health clinic, you’re also creating part of the infrastructure for fighting epidemics. Trained health care workers not only deliver vaccines; they can also monitor disease patterns, serving as part of the early warning systems that will alert the world to potential outbreaks. The world also needs to invest in disease surveillance, including a case database that is instantly accessible to the relevant organizations and rules that require countries to share their information. Governments should have access to lists of trained personnel, from local leaders to global experts, who are prepared to deal with an epidemic immediately, as well as lists of supplies to be stockpiled or redirected in an emergency. In addition, we need to build a system that can develop safe and effective vaccines and antivirals, get them approved, and deliver billions of doses within a few months of the discovery of a fast-moving pathogen. That’s a tough challenge that presents technical, diplomatic, and budgetary obstacles, as well as demanding partnership between the public and private sectors. But all these obstacles can be overcome. One of the main technical challenges for vaccines is to improve on the old ways of manufacturing proteins, which are just too slow for responding to an epidemic. We need to develop platforms that are predictably safe, so regulatory reviews can happen quickly, and that make it easy for manufacturers to produce doses at a low cost and a massive scale. For antivirals, there will need to be an organized system to screen existing treatments and candidate molecules in a swift and standardized manner. Another technical challenge involves constructs based on nucleic acids. These constructs can be produced within hours after a virus’s genome has been sequenced; now we need to find ways to produce them at scale. In addition to these technical solutions, we’ll need diplomatic efforts to drive international collaboration and data sharing. Developing antivirals and vaccines involves massive clinical trials and licensing agreements that would cross national borders. We should make the most of global forums that can help achieve consensus on research priorities and trial protocols so that promising vaccine and antiviral candidates can move quickly through this process. These platforms include the World Health Organization R&D Blueprint, the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium trial network, and the Global Research Collaboration for Infectious Disease Preparedness. Bill and Melinda Gates are donors to Lucis Trust https://deanslist.info/lucis/ What is Lucis Trust? https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_lucytrust04.htm
This is a valuable piece of information, WBTW. It’s a total confirmation. It begs the question: what exactly is the hidden agenda? It looks benign: to help the world through the pandemic crisis, but I do not for one minute believe that is the whole picture.
Well, as djm posted awhile back in a different thread (#44 of the coronavirus thread), Bill and Melinda Gates were involved in a symposium in October of last year (2019) which ran a simulation of a pandemic. Here is a link to videos from their symposium http://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/videos.html They have invested heavily and for years in vaccinations. They have critics. Here is a link to a story that attempts to debunk all the critics of Bill and Melinda Gates activities, but look at the name of the person that penned the article and the symbol of the group he represents https://skeptoid.com/blog/2013/12/16/why-would-bill-gates-want-to-kill-one-billion-people/ by Mike Rothschild
I forgot about the Lucis Trust, but I remember reading about it from when I was young. The Lucis Trust was originally started by Alice Bailey in 1922. She was a devotee of Madame Blavatsky the famed occultist. Lucis Trust is an abbreviated form of the original name given to the organization in 1920, which was The Lucifer Trust. I guess the original name was a little too "in your face" so they changed it. The organization is heavily tied into occultism and the New Age movement.
