Behold the explanation of Father Castellani regarding the vision of the Apocalipsis concerning the "Great Harlot":

In Sacred Scriptures, women is a symbol for "religion".

"The harlot" is the religion being corrupted.

"The harlot" will be at the service of the Antichrist.

She will be the human part of the Church hiding, adulterating and persecuting the truth.

In the Bible is called "prostitution" to the adulterous marriage between the Church and the world.

The Great Harlot is the catholic religion changed, she will the adulterous false church at the end of times.

The Apocalipsis mentions that she will be fornicating with kings, meaning that religion will be placed at the service of the kingdoms of the Antichrist. And by that very fact she will be serving other god. It is called idolatry.

About 100 times in Sacred Scriptures "harlot" equals "idolatry".

"And I saw the women drunk with the blood of martyrs" says de Apocalipsis. The text means that this false religion (VAT II) will use the reputation of the dead saints while at the same time will persecute the living saints.

All this explanation leads to justify calling the council VAT II the "Great Harlot" of the Apocalipsis.

.

I think your messages are very interesting, Enoc, but they unfortunately
fail to put your points across due the the shortcomings of how they are
rendered here.  You're touching on some pretty heavy stuff and it would
be far too easy to derive a variety of conflicting interpretations of the
words you have here.  


Am I supposed to know who Fr. Castellani is????  
You're making me feel inadequate, Enoc.  And I don't think that was your
intention.  

The SSPX has not yet married the harlot, but it is already boyfriend, trying to marry her. If it is already a mortal sin to look at with lust a women; with how much gravity will be judge he who wants to marry a harlot who is not Catholic? Therefore it does not matter that the SSPX has not yet made an agreemeent with Rome, the SSPX has already sinned in her heart and in his courting the harlot.
Cardinal Pie said: " It is at the doctrinal level that the battles are won or lost and what decides the future; to wait to see the consecuences to react,
it will be already to late to fight, this was the error of catholics at the XIX century in front of the errors of the french revolution".
It is clear, the SSPX as institution has betrayed already Our Lord. At the individual level, those priests who have not reacted strongly yet, have a very heavy complicity in the betrayal.

Is that the same as this.......?

The SSPX has not yet married the harlot, but is already the
harlot's boyfriend, that is, trying to marry her.  If it is already
a mortal sin to look with lust at a woman, with how much
gravity will he be judged, who wants to marry a non-Catholic
harlot?  Therefore, it does not matter that the SSPX has not
yet made an untoward agreement with Rome, for the SSPX
has already sinned in her heart, by way of this courting of the
harlot of apostate Rome.


I'm pretty sure that is what you would like to say, Enoc, because it really
makes a lot of sense.  But it seems to me that this is a very deep and also
important doctrine, above, and it really needs to be taken apart and put
back together in a variety of ways, so that our dense minds can appreciate
it better.  What you have to say is not easy to accept, and it is quite the
revolting thought for the rampant Accordista mindset. Your words are
very much in harmony with the Resistance and more than that, they seem
to go into that region where the faint-hearted fear to tread.


Cardinal Pie said: "It is at the doctrinal level that the battles
are won or lost, and what decides the future.  One who
waits to see the consequences before he reacts would be
already too late to engage the fight.  This was the error of
the Catholics in the XIXth century, in the wake of the errors
of the French Revolution,"  for they should have known
better, having already had the experience of the Revolution.


This principle shines brightly on, first and foremost, Bishop Tissier de
Mallerais, who should be no stranger to the lessons of the French Revolution,
since he is, after all, French, and yet he abstains from action, and he
recommends that priests of the SSPX follow his example and therefore
likewise abstain;  and he has become, unfortunately, the model for however
many good SSPX priests there are, who look up to His Lordship for the
example he proffers, from his virtual self-imposed prison, both physically and
allegorically, in the Windy City.



Musical interlude:
Gordon Lightfoot, "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald".......



It is clear, the SSPX as institution has already betrayed Our
Lord.  At the individual level, those priests who have not
reacted strongly yet, have a very heavy complicity in this
still-worsening betrayal.


At the individual level, those priests who have not come forth to make their
proper opposition to the false teachings of the Menzingen-denizens, make
for themselves an ever-worsening lot by way of their adherence to the bad
example of +TdM and +AdG, if not HEBF himself, who leads the apostasy.  



Thank you, Enoc.

.

Enoc, what you have already said about Fr. Castellani is highly
intriguing.  Can you give any more details of his life, or, can you
perhaps post the Espanol version of his own autobiography, if
there is one to be found?  

It seems to me, at first glance, that you might be sitting on
a goldmine of important information, and I can hardly imagine
that there are not a small number of people who would be
willing to help translate it.  

For example, I know of a team of historians who are eager
to take on projects like this, although 60 books would be
too much to undertake all at once.  But if there is one book
in particular that would be key to begin with, they might
be prone to be in touch with you in that regard.  

What you have here could be highly consequential for the
goals of the Resistance.  

Don't you think so, Matthew?  

Here you have one of his books in English

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/141645

Thank you, Cristian.  

Here is one of the chapters from the book that members might
find immediately interesting. This translation leaves Fr. Castellani
making quotes of Scripture that are not exactly what the Douay-
Rheims has, even though I expect that is the only version he
used.  Perhaps he had a Spanish translation of it, though.  
However, I have been told there was never any official such
published, but there were several quasi-imitations in Spanish.  
Correct me if I'm wrong.  

Anyway, I have taken the liberty of providing the actual DRV
quotes after each of Fr.'s, and I have included the chapter and
verse references, which he habitually omits.  It is my experience
that seeing how this work is dated 1950, it was still
commonplace at that time for many Catholic authors to make
minor adaptations to the literal words of Scripture, so as to
make it more easily work, in context, to most effectively
support their message; and this actually had been very effective
overall, for example, in preaching, when the listeners are drawn
in to the sermon and pay attention better when the words have
a contiguous flow to them, however, when the actual and literal
quotes are used, the listener tends to be put off by the lack of
continuity of style, and this effects the occurrence of them
losing attention, being distracted, or perhaps not being able to
easily understand the message intended by the preacher.  See
for yourself, here below, where Fr.'s Scripture quotes actually
sound better in their places than do the literal quotes which I
have subsequently provided.

This chapter immediately got my attention because the phrase
"The signs of the times" was one of the little gems of Scripture
that the Modernists at Vat.II used to promote their program of
affiliation with the unclean spirit of Vat.II. So this is a topic that
anyone, who would be well-equipped to face the challenges of
this same unclean spirit of Vat.II, would be well-advised to study
thoroughly.  Additionally, I have repaired a few minor typos which
are too mundane to note with the brackets, misspelling of words
and reversal of modifiers so typical of Spanish>English translations.



[/size]
All prophetic books are necessarily obscure and are only completely clear once the prophecies are fulfilled. For instance, the Book of Revelation includes a prophecy of every persecution the Church would suffer, typically in the first (Nero’s) and the last one (by Antichrist), followed by God’s timely punishments and Christ’s victories.

Two thousand years after the First Coming, being as we are closer to the prophecies’ fulfillment and in that sense better placed because of our position in time, it is only natural that we should understand them improvingly. “Shut up the words—says the Angel to Daniel—even to the time of the end”. But an Angel says to St John: “Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand”.

So it is not rash to think that Holhauser or Lacunza have deduced certain things from Revelation that the first Fathers did not understand as clearly, all the more so when they interpret the book in perfect harmony with all the Saintly Fathers;  not inventing, but unrolling and getting to the bottom of matters, which is the proper method of developing Christian Doctrine.

Anyway, the first Christians clearly understood eschatology in their own terms and times—the proof being that the believing Jєωs flew from Jerusalem to Pella as soon as they felt Armageddon was upon them when they saw that Titus’ Second Army was laying siege to the city. After that the book was shut for them. The interpretations and commentaries multiplied in such manner that to read them all and try to compose them is a real pain in the neck—as anyone can find out reading Alcázar, or Cornelius á Lapide for instance, as I have been doing these days.

Infidels have always thought these prophecies to be delirious nonsense. Lukewarm Christians avoid them. And yet, the Book of Revelation makes a special promise to those who keep them: “Blessed is he that keeps those things which are written therein”.
[The actual quote is: “Blessed is he, that readeth and heareth the words of this prophecy;   and keepeth those things which are written in it; for the time is at hand” (Apoc. i. 3).]
But when a prophecy is fulfilled, then those who have kept it in their hearts—and only them—easily see that this is their realization and cannot be anything else. So happened to Gamaliel and every Jєω who came to believe in the First Coming. “O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky;  but can ye not discern the signs of the times?” [The actual, and extended quote is:  “1 And there came to him the Pharisees and Sadduccees tempting:  and they asked him to shew them a sign from heaven. 2 But he answered and said to them:  When it is evening, you say:  It will be fair weather, for the sky is red. 3 And in the morning:  To-day there will be a storm, for the sky is red and lowering. You know then how to discern the face of the sky:  and can you not know the signs of the times?  A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign:  and a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.  And he left them, and went away” (Mat. xvi. 1-4).]

Bossuet’s remark to the effect that “a prophecy may be fulfilled without its contemporaries knowing it” is all right as long as one understands it properly. If it’s taken to mean “without all contemporaries acknowledging it” it would be nothing but balderdash so long as it would, in fact, be tantamount to saying that “the Church wouldn’t know it”. If such a thing were true the prophecies would be quite futile, nothing but mummery, or at the very least, unworthy of God’s wisdom and compassion. “Now learn a parable of the fig tree. When his branch is tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: so likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at doors”. [The actual quote is:  “32 And from the fig tree learn a parable: When the branch thereof is now tender, and the leaves come forth, you know that summer is nigh. 33 So you also, when you shall see all these things, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors. 34 Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. 35 Heaven and earth shall pass, but my words shall not pass” (Matt. xxiv. 32-35).]

Quote from: Cristian

Here you have one of his books in English

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/141645

Thank you, Cristian.

You are welcome.
 

This translation leaves Fr. Castellani
making quotes of Scripture that are not exactly what the Douay-
Rheims has, even though I expect that is the only version he
used.  Perhaps he had a Spanish translation of it, though.  

Well, this translation is not of Castellani, but rather (I think) of some conservative, who is alive now.
And I`ve no idea where he got the translation. Perhaps some modern version? I don´t know.

However, I have been told there was never any official such
published, but there were several quasi-imitations in Spanish.  
Correct me if I'm wrong.  

I don´t think there was ever a translation from the Douay. It wouldn´t have been a good idea either. We had very good translations both from the Vulgate and specially from the Hebrew and Greek.

Anyway, I have taken the liberty of providing the actual DRV
quotes after each of Fr.'s, and I have included the chapter and
verse references, which he habitually omits.

Very good idea!

Anyway here is another one which I specially love... much more than the other one (actually I don´t like the other one :)...

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/174468

Cristian,

Thank you for posting this book.  It is one more that I will add to books that I hope to read.