Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Johannes on November 20, 2024, 03:51:51 PM
-
Some commentary to consider from Haydock DR version:
(https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2 Thess)Ver. 3-4. First, &c.[2] What is meant by this falling away, (in the Greek this apostacy) is uncertain, and differently expounded. St. Jerome and others understand it of a falling off of other kingdoms, which before were subject to the Roman empire; as if St. Paul said to them: you need not fear that the day of judgment is at hand, for it will not come till other kingdoms, by a general revolt, shall have fallen off, so that the Roman empire be destroyed. The same interpreters expound the sixth and seventh verses in like manner, as if when it is said, now you know[3] what withholdeth, &c. That is, you see the Roman empire subsisteth yet, which must be first destroyed. And when it is added, only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way; the sense, say these authors, is, let Nero and his successors hold that empire till it be destroyed, for not till then will the day of judgment come. Cornelius a Lapide makes this exposition so certain, that he calls it a tradition of the fathers, which to him seems apostolical. But we must not take the opinion of some fathers, in the exposition of obscure prophecies, where they advance conjectures (which others at the same time reject, or doubt of) to be apostolical traditions, and articles of faith, as the learned bishop of Meaux, Bossuet, takes notice on this very subject, in his preface and treatise on the Apocalypse, against Jurieux. St. Jerome indeed, and others, thought that the Roman empire was to subsist till the antichrist’s coming, which by the event most interpreters conclude to be a mistake, and that it cannot be said the Roman empire continues to this time. See Lyranus on this place, St. Thomas Aquinas, Salmeron, Estius, and many others; though Cornelius a Lapide, with some few, pretend the Roman empire still subsists in the emperors of Germany. We also find that divers of the ancient fathers thought that the day of judgment was just at hand in their time. See Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory the Great, &c. And as to this place, it cannot be said the fathers unanimously agree in their exposition. St. Chrysostom[4], Theodoret, St. Augustine in one of his expositions, by this falling off, and apostacy, understand antichrist himself, apostatizing from the Catholic faith. And they who expound it of Nero, did not reflect that this letter of St. Paul was written under Claudius, before Nero’s reign. According to a third and common exposition, by this revolt or apostacy, others understand a great falling off of great numbers from the Catholic Church and faith, in those nations where it was professed before; not but that, as St. Augustine expressly takes notice, the Church will remain always visible, and Catholic in its belief, till the end of the world. This interpretation we find in St. Cyril[5] of Jerusalem. (Catech. 15.) See also St. Anselm on this place, St. Thomas Aquinas, Salmeron, Estius, &c. In fine, that there is no apostolical tradition, as to any of the interpretations of these words, we may be fully convinced from the words of St. Augustine[6], lib. xx. de Civ. Dei. chap. 19. t. 7. p. 597. Nov. edit., where he says: For my part, I own myself altogether ignorant what the apostle means by these words; but I shall mention the suspicions of others, which I have read, or heard. Then he sets down the exposition concerning the Roman empire. He there calls that a suspicion and conjecture, which others say is an apostolical tradition. In like manner the ancient fathers are divided, as to the exposition of the words of the sixth and seventh verse, when it is said you know what hindereth; some understand that antichrist must come first. Others, that the beforementioned apostacy, or falling off from the Church, must happen before. And when St. Paul says, (ver. 7.) that he who now holdeth, do hold; some expound it, let him take care at the time of such trials, to hold, and preserve the true faith to the end. When the expositions are so different, as in this place, whosoever pretends to give a literal translation ought never to add words to the text, which determine the sense to such a particular exposition, and especially in the same print, as Mr. N. hath done on the seventh verse, where he translates, only let him that now holdeth the faith, keep it until he be taken out of the way. — And the man of sin[7] revealed, the son of perdition, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. He is called again, (ver. 8.) that wicked one….whom the Lord Jesus Christ shall kill with the spirit of his mouth. By all these words is described to us the great antichrist, about the end of the world, according to the unexceptionable authority and consent of the ancient fathers. It is as ridiculous as malicious to pretend, with divers later reformers, that the pope, and all the popes since the destruction of the Roman empire, are the great antichrist, the man of sin, &c. Grotius, Dr. Hammond, and divers learned Protestants, have confuted and ridiculed this groundless fable, of which more on the Apocalypse. It may suffice to observe here that antichrist, the man of sin, the son of perdition, the wicked one, according to all the ancients, is to be one particular man, not so many different men. That he is to come a little while before the day of judgment. That he will make himself be adored, and pretend to be God. What pope did so? That he will pretend to be Christ, &c. (Witham) — St. Augustine (de Civ. Dei. book xx. chap. 19.) says, that an attack would be made at one and the same time against the Roman empire and the Church. The Roman empire subsists as yet, in Germany, though much weakened and reduced. The Roman Catholic Church, notwithstanding all its losses, and the apostacy of many of its children, has always remained the same. (Calmet) — The two special signs of the last day will be a general revolt, and the manifestation of antichrist, both of which are so dependent on each other, that St. Augustine makes but one of both. What presumptive folly in Calvin and other modern reformers, to oppose the universal sentiments of the fathers both of the Latin and Greek Church! What inconsistency, to give such forced interpretations, not only widely different from the expositions of sound antiquity, but also widely different from each other! The Church of God, with her head, strong in the promises of Jesus Christ, will persevere to the end, frustra circuмlatrantibus hæreticis. (St. Augustine, de util. cred. chap. xvii.) — In the temple. Either that of Jerusalem, which some think he will rebuild; or in some Christian Church, which he will pervert to his own worship; as Mahomet has done with the churches of the east. (Challoner)
-
I'm a bit puzzled at the four votes that said the great apostasy started before Vatican 2. They were supposed to explain when before Vatican 2 they are referring to, but nobody did.
Catholicism was by far the largest religion in the world in 1958. Nothing even comes close. And Catholicism in 1958 was what is inaccurately referred to now as "traditional Catholicism" today.
I don't see how that can be considered a time of great apostasy. And if the great apostasy occurred before Vatican 2, when and how?
-
To answer the question in the title, within the lifetime of people still living, Catholicism was by far the largest religion in the world, of all religions including false ones. It was far larger than all heretical and schismatic sects combined. Just look at that graph.
There are people alive today who lived in that time.
Now, the number of people who believe what the Catholic Church taught in 1958 is less than .01% of what it was a few decades ago. This has never happened in history since the time of Christ. Nothing even remotely resembling such a thing has ever happened.
If this is not the great apostasy, then what do you think the great apostasy is going to look like?!
-
There is no specific point that can be set as the start of the Apostasy, rather that V2 was the catalyst.
For instance, Cardinal Cushing's denial of EENS - "We're told there is no salvation outside the church— nonsense."
The faith of many was faltering before V2.
-
Are we in the great Apostasy? No, per the Church Fathers. All of them unanimously say that before the antichrist comes, the entire world will be Catholic. (not every single person, but as a whole, every nation will be a catholic nation). This has not happened yet. Many great nations have never been Catholic (i.e. Africa, China, Asia, Middle East, etc). This period where the gospel will be accepted by all nations, is that period of peace, promised by Our Lady of Fatima, the 6th age of the Church, the 'Age of Mary'. When Russia is consecrated to Her, She will convert the muslims, the protestants, the hindus and pagans. She will unite the Orthodox and other schismatic sects back to the Church, and there will be one Faith across the whole world.
This period will be short, but it will be magnificent. Just as the Resurrected Lord was only on earth for 40 days and he worked many miracles, so this resurrection of the Church will be filled with miracles and great works. It will follow the 5th age of persecution, which started roughly 500 years ago, around 1517 with Martin Luther and the start of Protestantism. Since then, the Church has been under attack, persecuted, and (in our days) seemingly destroyed and overcome by Her enemies.
But as the prophecies say, God will grant the Church the Angelic Pope and the Holy Monarch, who will lead the West back to Christianity and (eventually) will convert the East, through Our Lady. Then as the Church Fathers say, there will be the 3rd and final Holy Roman Empire, which will rule over the Catholic whole world.
Then, after this period of peace, when the Holy Monarch has died, then his kingdom will be split into 10 parts, with 10 kings to rule. This is when the antichrist will appear on the scene, as a young man. These 10 kings will war against each other for power, as a punishment for the world's sins, as the people will fall into lukewarmness and apathy of Faith. Then, as the Apocalypse tells us, eventually the antichrist will convince 7 kings to follow him and they will unite and conquer the 3 who are are for God. Then will the antichrist have power and his rule of 3.5 years will begin.
But the great "falling away" begins when the Holy Monarch dies, as this will signal to those who are watchful that the 'Age of Mary' is over and the peace of Christ is at an end. Then begins the final 7th age of antichrist, as the Apocalypse describes.
-
https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/demonstrations-that-the-3-days-of-darkness-is-actually-part-of-divine-revelation/msg932527/#msg932527
-
You’re missing the point. There is no unanimous opinion on the EXACT specifics of the falling away. But there is agreement, generally.
1. St Paul says that the Antichrist will not come before the great falling away.
2. It is unanimous (or near unanimous) that the Church Fathers said the 3rd and Final Holy Roman Empire will exist before Antichrist. This is a direct implication that the whole world will be catholic. (Which it’s not today and NEVER has been).
3. This 3rd catholic empire is spoken of countless times in prophecies, consistently given to us in almost every century, going back to the 400s.
4. The Apocalypse speaks of 10 kings and 10 kingdoms, which lines up with the return of the Empire. It describes these 10 kings being coerced and conquered by Antichrist.
Add all this up, and the great “falling away” is the fall of the 3rd Holy Roman Empire and the fall of Catholicism (generally speaking) back into paganism and worship of Antichrist.
What we see now is the “falling away” of Western Christianity to atheism. What will happen in the future is the “falling away” of the entire Christian world to Antichrist.
Our times are a prefigurement of what is to come. Our Lady will triumph over Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ now. In the future, Our Lord will have the victory over Antichrist.
That’s why Our Lady said that after Russia is consecrated, “a certain period” of Peace will be granted to the world. Because Her victory is not over the actual Antichrist, but only over his agents who prefigure his coming.
Christ will have the final victory over Antichrist and He will be the one to convert the Jєωs before the end of time. This will be His reign and the Social Kingship, when the Jєωs convert and Scripture is fulfilled.
All this lines up with the Apocalypse and the many, many prophecies.
-
You’re missing the point. There is no unanimous opinion on the EXACT specifics of the falling away. But there is agreement, generally.
…
2. It is unanimous (or near unanimous) that the Church Fathers said the 3rd and Final Holy Roman Empire will exist before Antichrist. This is a direct implication that the whole world will be catholic. (Which it’s not today and NEVER has been).
…
I'd like to see a sample of that alleged "unanimous (or near unanimous)" opinion.
It has been quite a few years since I dived into (dabbled in?) eschatology, but my recollection is that the "unanimous (or near unanimous)" opinion of the Fathers was that prior to public arrival of "the man of sin," the Faith would be heard throughout the world, not that "the whole world will be catholic [sic]."
While rest of your numerical interpretations have the appearance of syllogism, they are actually a jumble of opinions and interpretations partly dependent on your point #2, perhaps arguable, but a long way from persuasive, and not at all dispositive.
-
St Jerome (4th cent)...in his commentary on the Book of Daniel:
"Therefore, let us state what all the Ecclesiastical writers [omnes scriptores ecclesiastici] have passed down [tradiderunt]: At the consummation of the world, when the Kingdom of the Romans has been destroyed, when ten kings shall have divided the territory of the Romans between themselves, an eleventh shall rise to a small kingdom, who when he shall have overcome three of the ten kings, i.e. the kingdom of the Egyptians, of the Africans and of the Ethiopians and consequently as we learn more manifestly - whom he shall have killed, the other seven kings shall submit their necks to the victor [the eleventh king].
St Jerome says that (ALL Ecclesiastical writers agree...i.e. unanimous) - the "Kingdom of the Romans" will be destroyed before antichrist arises to power. There is currently not a Roman Empire. Thus, we can safely infer that there will be a 3rd and final Roman Empire, as many, many prophecies, Saints and Church Fathers teach.
Since this Roman Empire will be catholic, then it will be a Holy Roman Empire. Since this Empire will be global, then we can infer that the whole world will be catholic (legally and politically).
Also, let's remember that St Jerome died in the early 400s. He composed the Bible and was considered the most learned of all Latin Fathers. He would've been able to read all the opinions of the Church Fathers and know what was the consensus and what wasn't. Those who lived prior to the peace of Constantine in 325 did not have the luxury to "compare notes" as the Church was fractured and under various persecutions. St Jerome was able to view all writings of the Church Fathers together, at once. Those who lived previously did not have this ability.
the Faith would be heard throughout the world, not that "the whole world will be catholic [sic]."
It's a little bit of potato, potatoe. One could debate on what does the being "heard" mean? If we go by history, then as Christ's time was a peaceful one for the world, then "hearing the Faith" means one had the opportunity, in a foreign land, to peacefully accept the Faith and not be persecuted. In our present day, many countries are hostile towards Christianity so while many can "hear" the Truth, they don't have the opportunity to peacefully accept it, nor peacefully practice it. (Many muslims/chinese/africans are under threat of death if they accept the Faith.) My opinion is that there will be a time (i.e. the 3rd Holy Roman Empire) when there will be peace and thus the "hearing" of the Faith will be easier and genuine.
-
We also find that divers of the ancient fathers thought that the day of judgment was just at hand in their time. See Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory the Great, &c. And as to this place, it cannot be said the fathers unanimously agree in their exposition.
Ok, so they don't agree on the "place of judgement". But they agree on many other things.
St. Chrysostom[4], Theodoret, St. Augustine in one of his expositions, by this falling off, and apostacy, understand antichrist himself, apostatizing from the Catholic faith. And they who expound it of Nero, did not reflect that this letter of St. Paul was written under Claudius, before Nero’s reign.
According to a third and common exposition, by this revolt or apostacy, others understand a great falling off of great numbers from the Catholic Church and faith, in those nations where it was professed before; not but that, as St. Augustine expressly takes notice, the Church will remain always visible, and Catholic in its belief, till the end of the world. This interpretation we find in St. Cyril[5] of Jerusalem. (Catech. 15.) See also St. Anselm on this place, St. Thomas Aquinas, Salmeron, Estius, &c. In fine, that there is no apostolical tradition, as to any of the interpretations of these words
What is the article talking about? What are "these words"?
-
"She shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel."
Our Lady triumphs over the serpent and his antichrist.
Pope Leo Xlll heard Our Lord and satan having a conversation from the tabernacle. Our Lord gave him 100 years to try and destroy the Church.
Our Lady to sister Lucy in 1929. "The time has come for the Holy Father to consecrate Russia to My Immaculate Heart." (I believe this starts the 100 years, because Our Lady could have asked for this in 1917 but she stated I will come to ask for the consecration)
"If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted and peace will reign throughout the world.
IF Not, Russia will spread her errors raising up wars and persecutions against the Church..........
"IN THE END, my Immaculate Heart will triumph and a period of peace will be granted to the world."
"The devil is in the mood for a dicisive (final) battle" Sr. Lucy
Prophecy is conditional according to man's response. It is clear that Catholics did not respond. At this present time in history there are only a very small remnant holding and practicing the true, tradional faith. Novus Ordo and Protestants do not hold the true faith.
Even Archbishop Lefebvre called Rome Apostate Rome.
At the time of the antichrist, Enoch and Elias will preach the true gospel throughout the whole world.
Some say the period of peace that will be granted after the antichrist is 45 days. Others have stated 25 years.
-
Before the antichrist comes, the Catholic Monarchy and the Holy Roman Empire will return. All of the world is awash in democracy/republic forms of govt. But the Monarchy will return. We are living in the End Times (plural) but not the End Time (antichrist). We are in the end of the 5th age, with the 6th age upon us (short peace) and then the final 7th age (antichrist) to come.
-
St Jerome says that (ALL Ecclesiastical writers agree...i.e. unanimous) - the "Kingdom of the Romans" will be destroyed before antichrist arises to power. There is currently not a Roman Empire. Thus, we can safely infer that there will be a 3rd and final Roman Empire, as many, many prophecies, Saints and Church Fathers teach.
Since this Roman Empire will be catholic, then it will be a Holy Roman Empire. Since this Empire will be global, then we can infer that the whole world will be catholic (legally and politically).
.
Well, the kingdom of the Romans was destroyed legally in 1823 (or so) by Napoleon, in the sense that he changed the name of the empire to simply Austro-Hungarian Empire. The empire with the new name officially ceased to exist entirely at the end of World War One. So the kingdom of the Romans has definitely been destroyed.
I don't see where you get the idea that there will be three Roman Empires.
-
One could debate on what does the being "heard" mean? If we go by history, then as Christ's time was a peaceful one for the world, then "hearing the Faith" means one had the opportunity, in a foreign land, to peacefully accept the Faith and not be persecuted. In our present day, many countries are hostile towards Christianity so while many can "hear" the Truth, they don't have the opportunity to peacefully accept it, nor peacefully practice it. (Many muslims/chinese/africans are under threat of death if they accept the Faith.) My opinion is that there will be a time (i.e. the 3rd Holy Roman Empire) when there will be peace and thus the "hearing" of the Faith will be easier and genuine.
.
People are required to embrace the Faith regardless of whether they will be persecuted for doing so or not. I have never heard of any guarantee that people will not be persecuted for the Faith. On the contrary, Our Lord's words seem to give us a guarantee that we will always be persecuted for being His followers. I don't see any equivalence between hearing the Faith and being able to practice it without being persecuted.
-
Well, the kingdom of the Romans was destroyed legally in 1823 (or so) by Napoleon, in the sense that he changed the name of the empire to simply Austro-Hungarian Empire. The empire with the new name officially ceased to exist entirely at the end of World War One. So the kingdom of the Romans has definitely been destroyed.
I don't see where you get the idea that there will be three Roman Empires.
I posted the link to another thread where the idea of a 3rd and Final Holy Roman Empire is consistently prophecized throughout the centuries. And it is nearly unanimous that the Church Fathers proclaim the same. See quotes which back this idea up.
People are required to embrace the Faith regardless of whether they will be persecuted for doing so or not. I have never heard of any guarantee that people will not be persecuted for the Faith. On the contrary, Our Lord's words seem to give us a guarantee that we will always be persecuted for being His followers. I don't see any equivalence between hearing the Faith and being able to practice it without being persecuted.
Yes all this is true. But the Church Fathers are nearly unanimous (if not unanimous) that there will be a period of peace, a period of calm for the Church before the antichrist comes. And countless prophecies say that the world will be preached the gospel during an extraordinary time of peace for the Church, towards the end of the world.
These are not my ideas; i'm simply reading what saints/prophecies/Church Fathers say. And consistently say.
-
Are we really supposed to imagine a future time when Catholics the world over get a happy respite of a couple decades and basically everybody becomes Trad and that none of them remember these wretched days of heresy, apostasy, schisms, and the near total destruction of the Catholic Church and fall for some antichristic deception in mass droves? History cannot pass over the last 65 years of devastation and conflict in silence - no one would ever forget this dark time. Parents would tell their children about it until the end of the world, all the Catholic schools would teach it in their history courses. That is, unless every single one of the millions of books, articles, magazines, and destroyed, and every single person alive who sees and understands the current state of things is dead.
What do you think of Bishop Sanborn's comment, "If this isn't the Great Apostasy - I don't know what is".
You're oversimplifying it. There would be a period of peace, let's say 40-50 years. Then the Holy Emperor dies and his kingdom is split up into 10 kingdoms. Then the decline begins. This could take another 40 years. Then the antichrist comes onto the scene, as a young prodigy and fights battles at a young age, say 18. (The Church Fathers say that the antichrist will be a military genius at a young age).
The 10 kings start bickering with one another, the world becomes more lax, the previous religious fervor declines. The antichrist doesn't come into power until age 30 (to mock Our Lord). So from age 18-30 there are political skirmishes as the 10 kings jockey for power.
40 years of peace.
40 years of post-peace, moral decline.
12 years of war, with a young pre-antichrist winning battles.
52 years later, the antichrist gains power.
Very reasonable. It's been roughly 50 years since the end of the Vietnam war. It's been a longer time since V2. What young adult in their 20s or 30s even CARES about V2 or Vietnam? What adults in their 40s or 50s care about Vietnam? They weren't alive. Same for V2.
I think you underestimate the power of time and the short attention-span of the avg human being.
-
It is the nature of prophecy that it's meaning is not made clear until AFTER its fulfillment
.
This.
I think a lot of the focus on supposed private revelations is mostly a waste of time. God does not want us to see the future. I don't know of any prophecy that was correctly interpreted before it happened. I am interested in hearing if anyone can provide a counterexample.
I am asking here "Are we in the Great Apostasy?
Well, nearly everyone who had the faith a few decades ago no longer has it. Hundreds of millions of people simultaneously abandoned the faith. The faith is about one hundred-thousandth of what it was less than a lifetime ago. This disaster is several orders of magnitude worse than anything that has happened in the entire 2,000 years of the Church. If this isn't enough for us to know we are in the great apostasy, then I don't know what would be.
-
The most recent example of real-life "forgetting of history"...+ABL, Pope Benedict and the motu mass.
+ABL died in the early 90s. Fast forward only 25 years when Benedict issued his "motu mass" in 2005. Benedict argued that "+ABL's fight" was over. Tradition and V2 could co-exist. The "motu mass" was new-rome's peace offering to Trads.
How many young adults in the 2000s left Tradition and accepted the indult? A good %.
How many younger Trads (less than 50 yrs old) go to both Trad and indult, depending on the situation? A higher %.
How many younger Trads these days still go to the sspx/Tradition but think the indult is "ok to attend, sometimes"? A very high %.
So it only took 25 years for Trads who were born in the 80s (i.e. Millenials) to give up the Faith. They didn't know +ABL; they were too young. All they know are stories. Then +Benedict comes along and practices "revisionist history" and BOOM, people buy it because a) they don't care about history, b) they think their parents are too extreme, and c) they don't take their Faith seriously.
It doesn't take long for times to change. The "next generation" (i.e. 20-30 years) doesn't care about history as much as you think. They care about the NOW.
-
Before the antichrist comes, the Catholic Monarchy and the Holy Roman Empire will return. All of the world is awash in democracy/republic forms of govt. But the Monarchy will return. We are living in the End Times (plural) but not the End Time (antichrist). We are in the end of the 5th age, with the 6th age upon us (short peace) and then the final 7th age (antichrist) to come.
The great Monarch would have come if Russia was consecrated as asked. Prophecy is conditional. In the end, we will have a shorter period of peace when those who are left on the earth will be converted to the true faith.
-
I think you may be underestimating the need for our species to have a historical link to the past, especially for Catholics, where the history of our faith is one of the strongest proofs for its veracity against its critics.
Most people live for the now. I think you're overestimating the care about history. Most people nowadays care about what's on tik tok and what's the next, new restaurant.
It is the nature of prophecy that it's meaning is not made clear until AFTER its fulfillment
Not all prophecies are shrouded in ambiguity. Many are quite clear, especially as we get closer.
- thus I am asking here "Are we in the Great Apostasy? Even after prophecy has been fully revealed, the truth of it can still be rejected, i.e. Jesus rejected as Messias by the Jєωs. Some argue that the 10 Kingdoms are the EU and the 7 kings are the false popes. Could not the Great Apostasy be a prolonged event? Could not the period of peace be a period of "spiritual" peace for the elect?
I think we are in a pre-figurement of the times of antichrist. We are at war with the 'agents' of antichrist, which Our Lady will defeat. In the end time, Our Lord will defeat the actual antichrist.
Is it even a possibility to you that the Great Apostasy is happening or already has happened and that part of us getting ready for the Antichrist - so as to be able to reject him - is in some way dependent on acknowledging this?
Oh sure, it's possible. But too many things don't line up for it to be the Great one. I think our times prefigure the actual end time.
-
The great Monarch would have come if Russia was consecrated as asked.
Maybe. Many prophecies say he will reign for 25 years, some say a 100 (including his holy successors). He will definitely reign, I have no doubt. Our Lady's peace is not a prophecy (anymore); it's a promise. And if there will be a peace, I say that God will return his Church (and the world) to His preferred method of government -- a monarchy.
-
I don't know of any prophecy that was correctly interpreted before it happened.
:confused::confused::confused: The 3 wise men (and they weren't even Jєωιѕн) correctly interpreted the prophecies and traveled to Bethlehem to see the new king. Holy Simeon in the temple interpreted Christ's birth as being the Savior, and he foretold to Our Lady that she would suffer much. Many prophecies concerning Christ were quite simple - born of a virgin, the house of David, etc.
-
:confused::confused::confused: The 3 wise men (and they weren't even Jєωιѕн) correctly interpreted the prophecies and traveled to Bethlehem to see the new king. Holy Simeon in the temple interpreted Christ's birth as being the Savior, and he foretold to Our Lady that she would suffer much. Many prophecies concerning Christ were quite simple - born of a virgin, the house of David, etc.
Those are instance of prophesies correctly interpreted after they happened. :laugh2:
-
Those are instance of prophesies correctly interpreted after they happened. (https://www.cathinfo.com/Smileys/classic/laugh2.gif)
Uhhh... no, they aren't. The 3 Kings and Holy Simeon knew the prophecies and what to look for. Then they found it, in Christ. Many didn't know the prophecies and never recognized Christ. Duh.
-
St Jerome says that (ALL Ecclesiastical writers agree...i.e. unanimous) - the "Kingdom of the Romans" will be destroyed before antichrist arises to power.
Part of this looks like a hyperlink but is not.
Where is the source for this quote?
-
You're oversimplifying it. There would be a period of peace, let's say 40-50 years. Then the Holy Emperor dies and his kingdom is split up into 10 kingdoms. Then the decline begins. This could take another 40 years. Then the antichrist comes onto the scene, as a young prodigy and fights battles at a young age, say 18. (The Church Fathers say that the antichrist will be a military genius at a young age).
The 10 kings start bickering with one another, the world becomes more lax, the previous religious fervor declines. The antichrist doesn't come into power until age 30 (to mock Our Lord). So from age 18-30 there are political skirmishes as the 10 kings jockey for power.
40 years of peace.
40 years of post-peace, moral decline.
12 years of war, with a young pre-antichrist winning battles.
52 years later, the antichrist gains power.
Very reasonable. It's been roughly 50 years since the end of the Vietnam war. It's been a longer time since V2. What young adult in their 20s or 30s even CARES about V2 or Vietnam? What adults in their 40s or 50s care about Vietnam? They weren't alive. Same for V2.
I think you underestimate the power of time and the short attention-span of the avg human being.
But how long will it take to get to the peace part?
-
I just wanted to quote this option from the poll:
Yes, it started sometime before Vatican II (please specify)
More people selected this option than any other option in the poll, and yet none of them "please specified". So, if you selected this option, can you "please specify" the time before Vatican II that you think the great apostasy began?
-
I just wanted to quote this option from the poll:
More people selected this option than any other option in the poll, and yet none of them "please specified". So, if you selected this option, can you "please specify" the time before Vatican II that you think the great apostasy began?
The majority of Catholics at the time of Vatll must have been lukewarm with no great love for the Church and her teachings. Most just went along or fell away completely. Maybe they were just bench warmers going through the motions. That is why I voted in the poll "before Vatican ll."
St. Paul tell us that "because men did not receive the love of truth, God sends them the operation of error."
-
The majority of Catholics at the time of Vatll must have been lukewarm with no great love for the Church and her teachings. Most just went along or fell away completely. Maybe they were just bench warmers going through the motions. That is why I voted in the poll "before Vatican ll."
.
Let me try this one last, final time:
sometime before Vatican II (please specify)
:facepalm:
St. Paul tell us that "because men did not receive the love of truth, God sends them the operation of error."
So you think the great apostasy began at the time of St. Paul?
-
When the Vatican denies Jesus and preaches an evil gospel and the world is evil with many deceived, it’s a part of the great apostasy.
It started before Vatican II with free masonry infiltrated the Catholic Church with modernism. Pope Pius X gave us warnings.
-
.
Let me try this one last, final time:
:facepalm:
So you think the great apostasy began at the time of St. Paul?
No, I do not think the Great Apostasy started with St. Paul, but St. Paul explains the reason why God allows souls to fall into error. He says basically, because men do not love the truth they are allowed to fall away, apostasize.
-
I just wanted to quote this option from the poll:
More people selected this option than any other option in the poll, and yet none of them "please specified". So, if you selected this option, can you "please specify" the time before Vatican II that you think the great apostasy began?
11 people picked this option. Yet they are all shy about giving an explanation. Please respond, we will try not to criticize you, too much. :cowboy: