ANTI-MILLENARIANIST CRETINISM

(Translated by Oregoncoug, November 2012)

It’s amazing to see how with intellectual pretensions some can assume the luxury of expressing their ignorance with an air of wisdom.  It is regrettable that Father Jose Maria Mestre Roc, in an article entitled “Reflections on the Apocalypse” appearing on the website SPES of October 14, 2012, knocks off an essay with such ease on so difficult a theme.  That usually happens in those whose brains have a contexture that lacks depth and is therefore superficial.

Misusing his surnames that, translated into Spanish, would be “Master of Stone,” this name would not exactly indicate consistency and firmness, but rather a certain cerebral rudeness.  There is no other explanation for such ignorant and supine mental slips that with the greatest eagerness and lightness all of a sudden discard every Millenarianism, not only the carnal and Judaic one condemned by the Church Fathers, but also the Patristic Millenarianism that was the common doctrine of the Primitive Church during her first four centuries.  There must be some lack of grey matter to dare dispense with caution and prudence in so difficult and complicated a theme, and even worse, a theme so little known today.

Only an easy-going dolt simple in the head could afford to do so, such that as a fish dies by being eaten by the mouth, so a fool drools by the mouth.

No one before has ever dared to discard every Millenarianism with such magisterial flippancy, let alone to include Spiritual or Patristic Millenarianism.  The Church herself has never done such a thing and in truth one must be very simple to get so inconspicuously into so large a mess which thereby suggests little understanding and a mind of narrow judgement that makes one think of a disease known as “Cretinism of the Alps.”

Thus is explained how the little priest in question can cast off his casual remark and say:  “As a general judgement I think that we should discard all Millenarianism, both material (which has been condemned by the Church as heretical) and spiritual (which the Church cannot teach and in any case cannot teach with safety).”

Let us see what he condemned, or better, for what he has censured the Church and what was the worth of the censorship or prohibition he enacted, things the “Master of Stone” neither calibrated nor considered.  For him this is practically equivalent to a conviction that verges almost on doctrinal heresy, but without explicitly saying so.

The censures were two, although since the first amounted to a self-condemnation, he had to make a second censure because the first had wrongly said “corporally,” with which he negated the Bodily Reign of the Sacramental Christ from the Tabernacle, thus having to correct the expression and change it to “visibly,” as Father Castellani foresaw:  “Not much was done by the Church when by a decree of the Holy Office she prohibited the teaching of a mitigated Millenarianism, clearly defined in the same prohibition, since that prohibition naturally cannot be legitimately extended because ‘odiosa sunt restringenda‘…”.  (“Christ:  Does He Return or Not?” ed. Dictio, Buenos Aires, 1976. p. 68).

Hence the recognized excellence of an exegete such as Fillion, always mentioned with respect, on the subject of Millenarianism in the quotation cited by Father Castellani:  “After having read numerous pages along these lines, we do not believe it is possible to give an entirely satisfactory explanation for them.”  (Ibid, p. 70).

Monsignor Straubinger, who is famous and has a recognized exegetical reputation, says:  “On this point, the so-called question of Millenarianism has been much discussed in past centuries with the interpretation that taking the millennium literally as the reign of Christ, placing those thousand years of verses 2-7 between two resurrections, distinguishing the first as that of verses 4-6 that is attributed only to the righteous, and the second and general one as that of verses 12-13, which refer to the last judgement of verse 11.”  (Note 6 to Chapter 20 of the Apocalypse).

As Father Castellani saw, there are three classes of Millenarianism to be noted in the pitched battle being waged in the Church:  “But the most vexed and inexcusable question about the Resurrection is the Kingdom of the thousand years that occupies Chapter 20 of the Apocalypse.  This is one of the current struggles of the Church, though not well known, yet those who are fighting that struggle know it very well.”  (“Catechism For Adults, ed. Grupo Patria Grande, Buenos Aires, pp.  175-176).

To condemn or dismiss every Millenarianism without distinction can only be done by a naïf, someone ignorant or foolish, so that it is not presentable to speak of censorship or prohibition without specifying which class of Millenarianism is meant, and without indicating the exact theme of what is censured, thereby implying more than they should, which is something typical of a mental rudeness of unheard of proportions unbecoming in an exegete.

To generalize this censorship is complete nonsense that the Church has never sought concerning such a punctual matter.  This is stupid fearfulness that makes the narrow-minded pontificate in error, the which borders on a Pharisaic spirit of Satanic Anti-Millenarianism.

The obstacles placed by the Church were always against carnal Jewish heretical Millenarianism, never against Patristic Millenarianism.

To discard Patristic Millenarianism is to discard the original source of the Church, and if today this is not so clear that is not the fault of the Church, but of the men of the Church, who with their human miseries obscure and blur the truth.

There is no need to say to others what the Church did not say, and what she did say is:  “Systema millenarismi mitigati tuto docere non posse.”  (Decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, signed on July 21, 1944 and published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis on July 28, 1944).

To claim to condemn or censure every Millenarianism based on this decree which is, incidentally, disciplinary is to overextend the parameters of the text “odiosa sunt restringenda“; and moreover either to have bad faith or be ignorant, or perhaps both at once, especially when the document speaks explicitly of Mitigated Millenarianism, something that many seem not to take into consideration today.

We should also take into consideration what Father Eusebio Garcia de Pesquera said:  “The Latin expression ‘tuto docere non posse’ is difficult to translate accurately.  But it is evident that with that phrase there is a desire to avoid a clear statement on the doctrinal orthodoxy or heterodoxy of mitigated millenarianism.  One is only put on guard against it, so that those opinions, or rather their points of view on the meaning of many scriptural passages, are not taught normally and quietly in the scholarly centres of the Church.”  (Maran Atha  The Lord Returns!, ed. Circulo, Zaragoza 1982, p. 85).

As if this were little, the previous decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, from July 11, 1941, was not only a blunder, but even a crude and stupid quasi-heresy showing the incompetence of its members who, stupidly and fearfully blinded by an exacerbated anti-millenarianism, erroneously, abusively and falsely decreed against all Millenarianism in the following terms:  “The system of Millenarianism, even the mitigated, which teaches that according to Catholic revelation Our Lord Christ must come bodily to this earth to reign before the Final Judgement, whether with previous resurrection of many righteous or without them, cannot be taught without danger.”  So much so that they had to correct themselves with a second decree in the year 1944, since they were spewing out these words from on high, without realizing they were condemning the reign of the Blessed Sacrament from the Tabernacle, which is made present in every consecration and that reigns bodily from the Tabernacle.

Therefore the second decree, published in the A.A.S. on July 28, 1944, made rectification and pointed out that their decree does not deal with every Millenarianism (including even the spiritual) but only with the mitigated, in turn replacing the term bodily with visibly.  And the censorship is not doctrinal, but simply disciplinary, since the expression “tuto docere non posse” (its teaching is not safe) denotes as much.

It is clear that if they had to make corrections this was because they had evidently been wrong and that on the part of the Holy Office.

Thereby Spiritual or Patristic Millenarianism is safe and free from any and every censorship and prohibition; and Mitigated Millenarianism is the only teaching that remains prohibited or censored, for their teachings being dubious or dangerous, and nothing more, which is to say that even the condemnation of Mitigated Millenarianism is not a fulminating one as many claim.

As we see, this in no way affects Spiritual or Patristic Millenarianism, and Mitigated Millenarianism, as Father Castellani shows, would indeed be very well prohibited for being “theology for Negroes,” with apologies to the Negroes who have no guilt or spade in this burial.

Thus Father Castellani says:  “Spiritual Millenarianism, on the contrary, has not been condemned, nor ever will be:  the Church will not saw off the branch on which she sits, which is to say, Tradition.”  (Alcaniz – Castellani, the Church Fathers and the Parusia, ed. Paulinas, Buenos Aires, 1962, p. 350).

Later Father Castellani with dry wit adds:  “It is therefore forbidden in South America to teach that Christ will reign visibly from a throne in Jerusalem, above all the nations, presumably with his Ministers of Agriculture, Labour, Planning and even War if one is offered.  Very much prohibited.  Theology in the manner of Fulton Sheen.  ‘Theology for Negroes,’ as Ramon Doll calls this fable.  With apologies to the Negroes.  No millenarianist Holy Father, and there are many, as we have seen, or any serious writer, has thus described the Kingdom of Christ.”  (Alcaniz – Castellani, The Patristic Church and the Parusia, ed. Paulinas, Buenos Aires, 1972, p 351).

Father Antonio Van Rixtel says in turn concerning this censorship, situating the issue well:  “Yet here we are, facing a disciplinary decision of limited scope:

 

1.  This is not a condemnation of the doctrine of the Kingdom, but declared only that it is dangerous to teach a certain view of it, namely, the characteristic view of Mitigated Millenarianism.

 

2.  It is thus a disciplinary measure that prohibits the teaching of that view of Mitigated Millenarianism, for being dangerous.

 

3.  This danger derives not so much from the doctrine of the Kingdom as such, but from the specific point of view that, as we see, affects the mitigated millenarianists.”  (Caviglia Campora – Antonio Van Rixtel, Third Millennium, “The Mystery of the Apocalypse, ed. Glaudius, Buenos Aires, 1995, p. 510).

And we already know that the danger is what Father Castellani has with discernment pointed out to us.

It is important to see how an exegete who is not a millenarianist like Cornelio Alapide, in his Commentary on the Prophet Daniel VII, 27, nevertheless sees when obligated by the revealed text and thereby recognizes what others less learned or lucid find easy and quick to deny or discard:  “I say it is certain that the reign of Christ and the Saints will come, and that this kingdom will not only be spiritual as it has always been on earth, even when the Saints have been persecuted, already when they were subjected to persecutions and labours, but that this kingdom will be bodily and glorious, which is to say that the Saints must reign with Christ here on earth with their bodies and souls, and then reign forever in Heaven.  Moreover I believe this kingdom will originate on earth at the time of the killing of the Antichrist, when the latter is dead and stripped of his dominions, and then the Church will reign throughout the Universe, and the fold will repair what remains of the Jews and Gentiles and later the Kingdom will be translated to the skies and for all eternity.”  (Cited by Cristino Morrondo, Canonic Readings of Jaen, Catastrophe and Renewal, Jaen, 1924, p. 215).

Hence the obviously flippant remarks of Father Jose Maria Mestre, in whom intelligence shines by its absence, who with greatest eagerness discards every Millenarianism as we have seen, that the same Cornelius Alapide himself is forced to admit.

The Church would never be hindered from teaching a true doctrine, says the Father, but without distinguishing that the Church is one thing and the men of the Church who can do so are quite another.

One must know what comes from the Church and what comes from the men of the Church.

Menendez y Pelayo notes this distinction in the following fragment:  “Certainly the Mallorcan theologian, Fr. Juan Buenaventura Bestard, Commissioner General of the Order of Saint Francis in India, bitterly fought against the entire system of Father Lacunza in some Observations printed soon after the prohibition from Rome, in 1824 and 1825.  But we all know that the topic of millenarianism (the Spiritual, be it understood) is debatable, and although the opinion on the temporal kingdom of Jesus Christ on earth has against it almost every father, theologian and expositor since the end of the Fifth Century onwards, beginning with St. Augustine and St. Jerome, it is also true that other more ancient Fathers professed it, and that the Church has nothing defined, at most only able to correct the thesis that Father Lacunza put forward beyond danger with a great scholarship of Biblical erudition and with no little ingenious subtlety as perhaps unusual and widely shared in many lands.  Neither should it be taken as heresy to say, as he does, that Jesus Christ must come in glory and majesty not only to judge men but also to reign for a thousand years with the righteous and the renewed and purified world that will be like a transfer of the celestial Zion.”  (History of the Heterodox Spaniards, Marcelino Menedez y Pelayo, ed. B.A.C., Madrid, 1967, pp. 668 – 669).

And as Don Marcelino says well when clarifying the point on the previous page:  “Saint Jerome (on Chapter 20 of Jeremiah) dares neither to pursue it nor to condemn it, since it had already been adopted by many Christian saints and martyrs, so that everyone is licit to follow his own opinion, reserving all to the judgement of God.  What has been anathematized since then is the judgement of the carnal millenarianists who supposed that the thousand years were to be spent in continuous parties, revelry and sensual delights.”  (P. 667).  As if the idyllic harem of the Muslim paradise would be translated to earth for the Christians.

The Church cannot stop teaching, and much less leave in oblivion for a long time, a doctrine that comes from the Apostles, as Father Mestre says.  But, if we look well we see the Church has not ceased for a single day to ask in the Our Father for the millennial Kingdom of Christ, when praying ‘Thy Kingdom come’ (adveniat regnum tuum).  Suffice it to recall that millenarianism was common doctrine for the first four centuries of the Early Church and therefore of the Apostles, as claimed by Papias, something that Father Mestre claims to deny, attributing falsehood to him.

Not only Saint Papias, but also Saint Polycarp, as direct disciples of Saint John, and Saint Irenaeus was a disciple of Saint Polycarp, so that his doctrine goes back to Saint John and therefore Saint Polycarp says that what he teaches comes from the Apostles:  “So the tradition of the Apostles has been made manifest throughout the entire world and can be perceived in the Church by those who want to see the truth.  (…)  showing that the tradition the Apostles possessed and the faith they announced to men came to us by the succession of bishops…“.  (Saint Irenaeus, Against the Heresies, ed. Apostolado Mariano, Seville, 1994, Book Three, p. 18).  With this Saint Irenaeus wants to express that what he teaches comes from the Apostles.  And referring to his teacher Saint Polycarp (whose teachings he heard as a child), in order to testify once again that his doctrine comes from a direct disciple of Saint John, he says:  “But Polycarp was not only indoctrinated by apostles and lived in the company of many who had seen Our Lord, but he was also named bishop of the Church of Smyrna in Asia by the apostles, whom we also saw in our youth (…)  Now he also always taught what he had learned from the Apostles, which he also transmitted to the Church, and which is the only true teaching.”  (Ibid., p. 20).  And that is why Saint Irenaeus said:  “There are those who heard him say that John, the disciple of the Lord, went to Ephesus to bathe when he saw the Judaizer Cerinthus within, so that he ran out from the baths without bathing, according to him, for fear of going into the baths because Cerinthus within was the enemy of truth.  And Polycarp himself responded to the Jew Marcion in that way when on a certain occasion he went out after meeting him  and said ‘We recognize you,’ ‘I know you as the firstborn of Satan.’  The circumspection the Apostles and their disciples had was so great that they would not communicate with those who distorted the truth though by not even one word…“.  (Ibid., pp. 20 -21).

Where the doctrine that Saint Irenaeus, like Saint Polycarp and Saint Papias professed came from is beyond any doubt.  Moreover, when he speaks of the millennium he goes on to say:  “If someone does not accept these things as referring to the times of the Kingdom, he will fall into an infinity of contradictions and difficulties (…)  The blessing of which we have just been speaking therefore unquestionably refers to the times of the Kingdom:  When the righteous reign having risen up from among the dead (and have been, by the deed of that same resurrection filled with honour by God); when the liberated and renewed creation itself produces every kind of food in abundance, thanks to the dew from the sky and the fertility of the land.  This is what the priests who have seen John, disciple of the Lord, remember having heard from him, when he evoked the Lord’s teaching concerning those times.”  (Against the Heresies, Apostolado Mariano, Seville, 1999, Book Five, pp. 120 -121).

Later he continues:  “Behold what Papias, hearing John, companion of Polycarp, venerable man, attested in writing in his Fourth Book, since there are five books composed by him.  And he added:  ‘All this is credible for those who have faith.  Because, he continues, as Judas the traitor went away credulous and asked himself:  How could God create such fruits?  The Lord responded:  Those who live shall then see.’ “.  (Ibid., p. 122).

Thus we see there is a continuity and origin in this doctrine from the Apostle Saint John, and it is also clear that neither Saint Papias nor Saint Polycarp were wrong or false in what they taught, but they preached what they had heard directly from the mouth of Saint John.

Spiritual or Patristic Millenarianism comes in direct line from Saint John, which was not a small matter, and for this reason was therefore the common doctrine during the first four centuries of the Church, but then like with everything, decadence came, forgetting, and one of the reasons was seeing that the end was not as immanent as they had believed in the beginning and moreover they had in front of them a pagan world to conquer, like a mother with her newborn who is concerned with the cries and hunger of her son, without thinking about death and the distant funeral.

Morrondo makes clear explaining how things came to this confusion, saying:  “The hope that we announced, the priests then announced, that is, the disciples of the Apostles.  The Fathers of the first and second post-apostolic generations gathered and retained the teachings and others reproduced them, being the general belief of the Christian People until the Fourth Century.  Why, then, has the teaching been obscured and forgotten and even refuted by so many writers, from that date until today?  This also has an easy and understandable explanation, since the heretics and Judaizers adulterated them with vulgarities that the Christian Gospel and reason condemned, and it is clear (although fortunately including no Father of the Church among them) many orthodox publicists impugned this Kingdom of Christ, but with such bad luck that they used the same argument against the spiritual Kingdom that we should want them to use against the carnal and heretical.  And since then adulteration and confusion has ruled and spread the darkness until in our days it formed the air we breathe  and that must be dissipated.”  (Catastrophe and Renewal, ed. Cristino Morrondo Rodriguez, Typography of the Catholic People, Jaen, 1924, p. 13).

But neither Saint Jerome and Saint Augustine condemned Patristic Millenarianism, and they instead whipped the carnal and Judaic Millenarianism of Cerinthus, Apollonius and Nepos.  On this matter we see the important observation made by Father Lacunza:  “In effect these two legions of Judaizing millenarian partisans of Nepos and Apollonius, and the books that came out against them from Saint Dionysus and Saint Epiphanius alike, as well as from others, seem to form the exact epoch in which the entire and total silencing concerning the Coming of the Lord in glory and majesty came about.  Until then the Divine Scripture had been understood as they sound according to their own obvious and literal sense, and therefore they had believed faithfully and simply all the things about this Coming of the Lord tell us and that the divine scriptures themselves announce, and if there had been some disputes these were not due to the things themselves but because of the indecent and mundane mode with which the heretics and Jews spoke about them.  But when after them the Judaizing legions arrived who took much from both Jews and heretics, and who were much more learned and argumentative than the Christians, everything then began to become disordered, to darken and to confuse truth with error.  The Sacred Scriptures appeared to fall silent.”  (The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty, ed. Carlos Wood, London, 1826, Book I, pp. 99-100).

If we add to this the pitched battle against the Jew Arius and his followers, we understand what was the concern at the time, and why there was oblivion such that Father Lacunza says with wisdom:  “In those times of obscurity the Catholic doctors found themselves completely occupied with resisting and refuting the Arians who were infinitely more dangerous than all the millenarians, since they touched immediately on the Person of the Messiah himself and on the very substance of religion.  So in these circumstances it was not possible for them to apply themselves to formal examination, to take on themselves so great a work as separating, according to the Scriptures, the precious from the vile when the Judaizers had mixed up and adulterated so much.”  (Ibid., p. 100).  And so it is clear that those who invoke the authority of Saint Jerome prove nothing in that regard, since Saint Jerome says as Father Lacunza states:  “We can not condemn these things, because there are among them many Catholic doctors and many martyrs, and with this we understand well that there were then to be seen no Millenarians except the Catholics and saints, and therefore they do not deserve to be included in the over-all judgement.  Then on this point, on which we are speaking, the authority of Saint Jerome proves nothing, and if it proves anything it is the opposite of what those who cite him intend.”  (Ibid., p. 95).  And the same situation exists with respect to Saint Augustine as Father Lacunza makes us see:  “With all this we can say the same about Saint Augustine in proportion to what we have said about the other fathers, which is that in everything he speaks against there is nothing (or anything by which to infer from them) than the indecent errors of Cerinthus and those who had followed him.”  (Ibid., p. 96).

With the entry of the pagans into the Church together with the entire Roman Empire with the conversion of Constantine, there was a world to civilize and convert; if the errors of crass Millenarianism, that had to be discarded at any cost, are put next to this,  then the most practical approach for now seemed to be to turn the page like Saint Augustine did on occasion at the request of Saint Jerome and dedicate himself to spreading the Gospel, since he had in the beginning adhered to Millenarianism and later abandoned it, although without condemning it.  Thus Patristic Millenarianism entered into a long and prolonged hibernation, through the Middle Ages until today when with the already very mature and consolidated Anti-Christian Revolution, the apocalyptic events prophesized for the End Times, return to be glimpsed again.  But some, very outdated, do not leave their deep slumber, still believing they have much to conquer or reconquer, like in the early times, and what happens is that they lose the sense of reality that draws us to live in the light of faith and the apocalyptic prophecies.

This explains the general oblivion, yet does not deny that there is a great conspiracy of silence and plotting, as Father Castellani stated:  “But today there is a type of plot that prevents the old exegesis… and makes the allegory of Saint Augustine obligatory by means of punishments or threats”  (Catechism For Adults, ed. Grupo Paria Grande, Buenos Aires, 1979, pp. 170-180).

The profound reason that Patristic Millenarianism is being fought today is the following, as Father Castellani makes us see:  “This rude light unmakes and empties the eternal illusion of Babel to build a tower that reaches up to Heaven, made from pure brick and mud, to recover and rebuild the old Eden with human strength alone, to carry the Kingdom of God to its conclusion by political means, so that this world will endure for a very long time and always in constant progress.  These are the main dreams of the modern world and have always been the deepest and most tenacious temptations of men, today widespread and dominant everywhere outside the Church.  Against them stands the Apocalypse, the austere vision of Millenarianism.”  (The Papers of Benjamin Benavides, ed. Dictio, Buenos Aires, 1978, p. 65).

Patristic Millenarianism is considered thus by various authors, such as for example Saint Irenaeus, who affirms:  “Now when the Antichrist will have destroyed everything in this world and has reigned for three years six months and has been sitting in the temple of Jerusalem, then the Lord shall come on clouds from the skies in the Glory of his Father and he will send the lake of fire against the Antichrist and his followers; he will at the same time inaugurate the times of the Kingdom for the righteous; in other words, the rest, the seventh day, was sanctified and the promised inheritance will then be given to Abraham the Indo-European nobleman:  This is the kingdom in which, according to the word of the Lord, ‘many from East and West shall come and sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob‘ “.  (Against the Heresies, Book Five, ed. Apostolado Mariano, Seville, 1999, p. 114).

And further:  “These events cannot be placed in supra-celestial places because the prophet says God will show His splendour to every nation beneath the heavens, but they will occur in the times of the Kingdom, when the earth has been renewed by Christ and Jerusalem shall have been restored anew according to the model of the Jerusalem above.”  (Ibid., p. 128).

And rounding out the theme, Saint Irenaeus teaches:  “This is already found in the Book of Genesis, according to which the end of the age will take place on the sixth day, which is to say, the year 6000, after which will come the seventh day, day of rest, about which David says:  ‘Here is my rest, the righteous shall enter through it.’:  this seventh day is the seventh millennium, the Kingdom of the righteous, in which they shall live with incorruptibility, after creation has been renewed by those who have been saved for this purpose.”  (Ibid., p. 133).

For his part, Father Joseph Rovira says concerning the Kingdom of the Saints:  “With the anti-theocratic powers destroyed and the Devil chained and imprisoned, the Kingdom of Christ and the Saints will then follow.”  (Encyclopedia Espasa-Calpe, Parusia Article, p. 439).  And later on page 440 he says:  “This text clearly predicts that the destruction of the Antichrist and the other anti-theocratic powers will be followed not only by a triumph but a Kingdom of Christ and the Saints, a Kingdom that will be on the earth or beneath the sky.  As Daniel says:  a Kingdom in which power will be held by the People of the Most High Saints, to whom (which people) every king shall serve and obey.  It is therefore very probable that immediately after the death of Antichrist the world will not end but that there will still be the Holy Church, the Kingdom of the Saints that will exercise sovereignty over all the earth.  (…)  See, for example, what Cornelius a Lapide says:  “Then, with the Kingdom of Antichrist destroyed, the Church shall reign over the entire earth and from out of the Jews and Gentiles there shall be only one fold, with only one shepherd.”

Cristino Morrondo in turn, referring to the Apocalypse, tells us:  “The Apocalypse deals with the events that will precede, accompany and follow after the Second Coming of Jesus Christ on earth, with preparations as signs announcing the nearness of the reign of peace and universal justice (…) Jesus Christ will come as he has solemnly promised and we confess in the Creed and symbol of the Faith, his arrival coinciding with a general apostasy and the manifestation of the Antichrist.”  (Catastrophe and Renewal, Jaen, 1924, p. 23-24).

Father Benjamin Martin Sanchez, expressing his particular opinion concerning Millenarianism, commenting on Chapter 20 of the Apocalypse, tells us:  “I firmly believe (after careful Bible study) in a millenarianism on earth (and if someone does not like the word ‘millenarianism,’ say ‘wonderful time of peace’ of a thousand or thousands of years) that will take place after the death of Antichrist and following the universal judgement of nations, and the chaining or suppression of the action of Satan will contribute to this.  The converted ex-Jews will make good use of their conversion, the faith will multiply, there will be a definitive triumph of the Church of Christ and the prophecy will be fulfilled concerning ‘one flock under one shepherd’…” (Explicated New Testament, ed. Apostolado Mariano, Seville, 1988, p. 427).

Father Eusebio Garcia de Pesquera says:  “In the approaching Parusia, Jesus will come to establish his Kingdom in this world:  over all and above all, a reign therefore much more complete than the spiritual reign now over dispersed minorities, a universal reign and with the fullness of the exercise of authority.”  (Maran Atha, ed. Circulo Zaragosa, 1982, p. 67).

Father Leonard Castallani:  “There are three millenarianisms (as one must say because millenarianism is grammatically incorrect).  One is spiritual millenarianism, which consists in interpreting literally what Saint John says in the Apocalypse and nothing more.  Taking this as something that shall come to pass, however difficult or rare that may seem, thus understanding this chapter like almost all the fathers of the first four early centuries, from the first century when the Apostles were still alive.  They tranquilly believed there was going to be a Kingdom of a Thousand-Year Reign, and that the Church will be supremely prosperous and governed in fact by Jesus Christ, after the Parousia or after Jesus Christ has come down to defeat the Antichrist (…) so all this would undoubtedly have been understood in this way but for the stumbling block of carnal millenarianism.”  (Catechism For Adults, ed. Grupo Paria Grande, Buenos Aires, 1979. P. 176).

So likewise Father Antonio Van Rixtel:  “With the destruction of Antichrist as with the chaining of Satan, the rebuilding of the  tabernacle of David, the restoration of all the saints from during the tribulation of all things, then the Sixth Age is consumed and the Seventh Age begins:  The Sabbath Age or Day of Revelation of the Sons of God, the Age of the Messianic Kingdom, with vast ‘peace’ and justice, in which Christ shall triumph over every one of his enemies and the kingdoms of the world will become the kingdoms of Our Father and his Christ.”  (Third Millennium, The Mystery of the Apocalypse, Caviglia Campora – Antonio Van Rixtel, ed. Gladius Fundacion Gladius, Buenos Aires, 1995, p. 609).

Father Pablo Caballero Sanchez, C.M., using the pseudonym Anthon Bileham under which he writes:  “This is the “Hope’ in the Pledge of the victorious kingdom with the Parousia of Jesus, hope mocked by the anonymous satirical doctors.”  (p. 463); These are:  “The Wedding of the Lamb with the Millennial Church” (p. 365); This is:  “The Lordship of Jesus Christ and his battalion of ‘the living’ is imposed on the world for an entire millennium of peach and justice.”  (p. 579-580); “Then the thousand years of Sabbath rest for God’s People far away from the Dragon chained beneath the influence of the resurrected witnesses of God” (p. 605); “After the Millennium, ‘it is necessary that the Dragon be unleashed for a short time.’  So has the divine wisdom preordained.”  (p. 611); “The resurrected righteous accordingly live  the life of glory, not limited to a thousand years but unfailing and eternal, and they share the active dominion of Christ on earth for a thousand years of the Sabbatical Age, until the Son presents the Kingdom consummated in perfection to his Father and God is thus all in all.”  (Visions of the Apocalypse, Quito, 1955, p. 616).

Father Manuel Lacunza was a man of deep and high prayer who spent five hours every day with his face on the ground, as Menendez y Pelayo attests when he says:  “as his own challenger, Father Bestard, said of him, that ‘every day he persevered immobile for five long hours, with his face down into the ground.'”  (History of Heterodox Spaniards, ed. B.A.C., 1967, p. 667).  Concerning the millennium Father Lacunza says:  “After the coming of Jesus Christ we await in glory and majesty there is still a large amount of time, that is, a thousand years, whether exactly that or only inexactly so, until the resurrection and universal judgement.”  (The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty, ed. Carlos Wood, London, 1816, p. 103).

This is what all these Patristic Millenarianist authors, who interpret the Apocalypse literally and not allegorically, have said in summation.

Saint Irenaeus already warned against allegorism in his “Against the Heresies”:  “if some try to interpret these prophecies in the allegorical sense, they are not able to agree on every issue among themselves…”  (Against the Heresies, Book Five,  p. 130).  And later Saint Irenaeus again emphasizes:  “And none of this can be interpreted in an allegorical manner, but on the onntrary everything here is firm, true and possesses an authentic existence, made by God for the enjoyment of righteous men.”  (Ibid., p. 130).

So Melanie, the visionary of La Salette, said:  “It is a great error if  we wish to make the end of the world coincide with the end of Antichrist.  After the temporal or bodily fall of Antichrist, the Church will flourish brighter than ever.  All the Hebrews who remain will embrace the Faith, all the Christians who remain alive will be renewed in a living faith, and the Kingdom will have no other religion outside the Church, nor sects, and the most beautiful and most universal peace shall reign for centuries, after which the Faith will again grow cool…”  (Document Pour l’Histoire de la Salette, au Chanoine de Brand, Letter No. 450).

Father Arminjon, who was no millenarian and whose book was read by the little Saint Theresa (having it as her bedside reading), nevertheless recognized that:  “The most accredited feeling and the one that seems to best conform with the Holy Scriptures, is that after the fall of Antichrist the Catholic Church will enter once more into an era of prosperity and triumph.”  (Fin du Monde Présent et Mystères de la Vie Future, ed. Office Central de Lisieux, 1970, p. 70).

Father Emmanuel days the same:  “We have said, and maintain as incontestable, that the death of Antichrist will be followed by a triumph without equal of the Holy Church of Jesus Christ.”  (La Sainte Eglise, ed. Clovis, 1997, p. 334).

The canon Crampon in his publication of the New Testament in French, commenting on the passage in Chapter 20, verse 6 of the Apocalypse, said:  “They shall reign with him for a thousand years.  In agreement with the preceding, we  can envision this reign of a thousand years, prelude to the final glory as one realization, the most complete of the Regnum Adveniat Tuum of the Lord’s Prayer. The Church has obtained a great victory over Satan and over the world, in which the Prince of Darkness can no longer make her the victim of his seductions…  (During the first centuries of the Church, millenarianism was conceived as the glorious return of Jesus Christ coming to reign on earth with his Saints for a thousand years before the general judgement.).”

Nothing more remains but to adhere wholeheartedly and admit the apocalyptic understanding of history, repeating the prayer that Pope Pius XII made in his Easter message of April 21, 1957:  “It is necessary to remove the tombstone with which they have tried to lock truth and goodness in the tomb.  One must get Jesus resurrected with a real resurrection and admit no dominion of death (…)  Come, Lord Jesus!  Humanity has no strength to remove the stone that they themselves have made trying to prevent your return.  Send thine angel, oh Lord and make our night shine bright as day.  So many hearts, oh Lord, are waiting for Thee!  So many souls are consumed to hasten the day when Thou alone shall live and reign in hearts!  Come, oh Lord Jesus!  There are so many signs that thy return is not far off!”

MARAN ATHA, COME LORD JESUS

 

Padre Basilio Meramo

 Bogota, October 23 of 2012