Milleniarism, postmillenialism, premillenialism, amillenialism and Catholic Cathechism

Your posts, laced with ALL CAPS shouting and exclaimation points internet yelling, are tiring....

You are conveniently negating the promise of the certain period of peace being granted to the world, by on the one hand saying "in the end" means after the judgement (therefore the peace is not in the temporal order), and on the other saying it is conditional and not definite.......

These are your opnions only, and are clear only to you, because they are such.

 

some use caps, some use underlining and color - what does it have to do with the content of the arguments?

In the end is not an era of peace, but the Triumph of the Immaculate heart. However, the Eternal kingdom after the Judgement will, be an era of peace, though not for everybody.

Your opinions are clear only to you as well. What kind of argumentation is this? a "charitable" way of "shut up"?

 

With all due respect In Search how can it be an era of peace when millions of lives are torn from the womb? And continued conflicts throughout the world that have killed millions. There is no peace when the innocent are slaughtered in their millions.

Mother Teresa

I was surprised in the West to see so many young boys and girls given into drugs, and I tried to find out why - why is it like that, and the answer was: Because there is no one in the family to receive them. Father and mother are so busy they have no time. Young parents are in some institution and the child takes back to the street and gets involved in something. We are talking of peace. These are things that break peace, but I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing - direct murder by the mother herself. And we read in the Scripture, for God says very clearly: Even if a mother could forget her child - I will not forget you - I have carved you in the palm of my hand. We are carved in the palm of His hand, so close to Him that unborn child has been carved in the hand of God. And that is what strikes me most, the beginning of that sentence, that even if a mother could forget something impossible - but even if she could forget - I will not forget you. And today the greatest means - the greatest destroyer of peace is abortion. And we who are standing here - our parents wanted us. We would not be here if our parents would do that to us. Our children, we want them, we love them, but what of the millions. Many people are very, very concerned with the children in India, with the children in Africa where quite a number die, maybe of malnutrition, of hunger and so on, but millions are dying deliberately by the will of the mother. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today. Because if a mother can kill her own child - what is left for me to kill you and you kill me - there is nothing between.

 

You have added this point...And it is BS. Your mention of this idea then calls out Pope Benedict XVI as a liar when he says the Triumph is yet unfulfilled.

 

it is in correspondence with the validity of the consecration - it was not done as requested

 

I think you have to slow down a bit with your responses, Jon, as you are not reading the answers, but just typing your objections. Triumph of the Immaculate Heart is not fulfilled - where did I state that it IS? I state that it will be fulfilled only after the Last Judgement which is way beyond any earthly life

 

Absolutely not. I really wanted to hear your opinion, so I asked for your description of the era of peace foretold by Our Lady of Fatima. You provided none, and sidestepped the issue. (until amending your previous post with the weak inference that "some conditional form" of this period came and went already....).

And this is what I am referring to :

This is your opinion only. And if you believe it to be true (..and maybe it is), speak it in love, not in pride, arrogance and disdain. The "ends" don't justify the "means."

 

Period of peace only comes after the Triumph, therefore the inference you made about the form of peace that came after the fall of the Soviet Union cannot be valid in light of the words of Benedict XVI on May 13, 2010.

 

OK, I replied already somewhat ironically - the era of peace after consecration corresponds to the validity of the consecration. The Consecration of Russia was never done as requested, so, since it was the condition of the possible peace for some time and conversion of Russia ( which is much more important, IMHO), the results are not the best as well - the fall of the communist empire occurred, but the conversion of Russia did not - and Russia is gaining strength in it's evils again.
But I do not think that the strictly conditioned results can be even applied to the term "era of peace" ( as a variation of millennial reign) which we are all discussing here at all - exactly because of it's conditionality.

As per speaking in love - I do not feel much love neither from you, Jon( mostly annoyance - why on earth is she even questioning Mark) nor from the other forum members who happen to be Mark's sympathetics, so maybe it will be advisable first to direct the request to yourself.

 

well, then it will not be fulfilled until the Last Judgement

p.s. I just checked on the Fatima site - you are right, I mixed up the chain of the events.

 

insearch... you are the only person on this forum (and possibly Stephen) who believes that the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary comes after the Last Judgement. So no matter how you twist your arguements they are not sticking to anyone else on this forum. Have you not noticed this?

 

And?

What does it prove? Nothing at all. I am not twisting anything - I am exposing the twisting of the quotes, used by Mark and that is what annoys you. The Fatima messages does not have anything to do with the topic of the discussion at all.

I'll refrain form the quotes from the Scriptures where the opinion of majority is not the synonym of the Truth - strictly because of charitable love

 

BTW, I just found that this discussion has been HERE, on this forum before - and it is not only me and Stephen who do not agree with Fr.Ianuzzi and Mark Mallett opinions on the temporal Kingdom.

http://motheofgod.com/threads/end-times-era-of-peace-millenarism.4165/page-2

 

Just saying... you are talking to yourself on this forum for you have found no other to convince

 

No, I am not. I do not have to convince myself and could care less if anyone else is convinced or not - I do not believe in the temporal Kingdom YET to come, but that it is there already for almost 2000 years, and that coincides ( surprise, surprise) with catholic doctrine and CCC

I was not the forum member when that thread was started, but the same talking points of the millennialists( including the out of the context quotes which MM has been parading around)were discussed there as well - just found it reassuring, that my reservations coincided with the others (and it is not only Stephen, but at least 3 others)while until a few days ago I have not even been interested in the topic

 

Oh yes, it absolutely is your opinion. There is no layman, no priest, no bishop, no cardinal, no pope who has ever applied this reasoning to Our Lady's statement. It is absolutely novel from anything I have ever seen (which first appeared in Stephen's book). That is because it is completely illogical in every sense of the word and a bastardization of the context. Our Lady said:

When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father. To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of reparation on the First Saturdays. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world. —The Message of Fatima, www.vatican.va​

She asked for certain conditions to be met to prevent the aforementioned punishments. Without them, she said, they will spread throughout the world, but "in the end" she will Triumph resulting in a "period of peace."

I am going to be blunt—this is the kind of warping of words that we have seen in protestant fundamentalism. You have taken this quote and tried to make it fit your definition because you have refused to accept the Magisterium's clear statements that a period of triumphant sanctity in the Church is permissible. Faced with the quotes of the Holy Fathers above where all three of them clearly defined a period of universal peace within the temporal realm that one pope said "We believe and expect with unshakeable faith," you have resorted to personal interpretations that depart from Sacred Tradition. Thus, any statement, whether it is papal or from an approved mystic that refers to an "age", "epoch", "era", "reign", must therefore be read as referring to the eternal Kingdom, even though it defies logic, is intellectually dishonest, and ignores the clearly temporal contexts and terms. I'm sorry, but that is nothing but modified and mitigated protestantism.

As for the "period of peace" having occurred, one is free to speculate on this "private revelation." Some have suggested that the “period of peace” has already happened with the collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the “Cold War.” However, I believe that is a rather myopic viewpoint since, following the fall of the Berlin wall were the genocides in Rwanda, former Yugloslavia, and the Sudan; then there’s the plague of pornography and no-fault divorce that has ravaged families; this has been followed by the rise of violent crime and dramatic increase in teenage suicide and STD’s; and of course, what kind of peace has there been in the womb as hundreds of millions of babies have been brutally slaughtered through abortion? It would seem that the “period of peace” is yet to come, for to be sure, we have not heeded Our Lady’s requests.

However, all that said, the Pope himself is polar opposite to your assertion that the period of peace, and therefore triumph of the Immaculate Heart, has already happened (because they are clearly linked). He said in 2010:

May the seven years which separate us from the centenary of the apparitions hasten the fulfillment of the prophecy of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, to the glory of the Most Holy Trinity. —Homily, Fatima Portugal, May 13th, 2010; www.vatican.va​

He followed those comments up in an interview with Peter Seewald:

I said that the "triumph" will draw closer. This is equivalent in meaning to our praying for the coming of God's Kingdom. —Light of the World, p. 166, A conversation with Peter Seewald.​

​

Ultimately, this means praying for the definitive coming of God's Kingdom. But it is absurd to say that it refers to this exclusively. Everyday we pray "thy kingdom come." In the ecclesiastically approved doctoral dissertation on Servant of God Luisa Picarretta's writings, she also explains how this coming of the Kingdom in the hearts of the faithful awaits the Church in a "new era". So, according to Catholic theology and Our Lord Himself, the "Kingdom of God is near"; it is not restrained nor limited to its definitive coming, as Pope Pius XI said,

The Catholic Church, which is the kingdom of Christ on earth, [is] destined to be spread among all men and all nations… —Quas Primas, Encyclical, n. 12, Dec. 11th, 1925; cf. Matt 24:14​

Yes. We believe and expect this with unshakable faith.


Well, I said I would respond to some of your points above "insearch", and I have. Regarding Theological Commissions, they are commissioned by the pope. They consist also of members of the Magisterium. The statement from this commission is Magisterial (unless you wish to call theologian and priest, Fr. Joseph Iannuzzi a liar, where he quotes the commission in this regard). Because Fr. Austin Flannery compiled the writings of Vatican II into a book does not nullify their authoritative weight. However, I clarified my footnote above so there is no ambiguity.

Sorry for stepping in on this conversation Jon. You have a great mind! Blessings.

 

How about FINISHING and STARTING the quote from the Encyclical so actually everybody can see the cut & pasted words have nothing to do with the premise of the millennium temporal reign?


and this is the whole quote from Pope's encyclical Quas Primas, upon reading of which one has clear understanding that the quote pertains not to imaginary millenialistic views of future spreading of the Kingdom of God, but CURRENT ( for the year of 1925) necessity and task: "should with every token of veneration salute her Author and Founder in her annual liturgy as King and Lord, and as King of Kings. " and later the paragraph relates to some will say ecumenical reality of the catholic Church ( NOT and in the PAST, not the future).


http://www.love2learn.net/reviews/bkbteduc/mason.htm?page=11
12. It was surely right, then, in view of the common teaching of the sacred books, that the Catholic Church, which is the kingdom of Christ on earth, destined to be spread among all men and all nations, should with every token of veneration salute her Author and Founder in her annual liturgy as King and Lord, and as King of Kings. And, in fact, she used these titles, giving expression with wonderful variety of language to one and the same concept, both in ancient psalmody and in the Sacramentaries. She uses them daily now in the prayers publicly offered to God, and in offering the Immaculate Victim. The perfect harmony of the Eastern liturgies with our own in this continual praise of Christ the King shows once more the truth of the axiom: Legem credendi lex statuit supplicandi. The rule of faith is indicated by the law of our worship.

IS not WILL BE - IS from the first century and was destined to spread among nations since Our Lord Jesus Christ predicted it

Nothing new under the sun - cut&paste of the quotes as you feel they will fit your idea, without any reagrd to the real aim of the writings.

​

 

NOBODY has ever stated that the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart has already happened. On the contrary, like the Popes I stated that it will only happen after the Last Judgement​

​

And NO, it is NOT only my opinion. As a matter of fact it is shared by Holy Fathers as well, one of whom I will quote below:​

​

​

For those who believe in Medjugorje, it is worth pondering why Mirjana has said she is not allowed to explain the meaning of the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart,and in Fatima Our Lady did not either. only the popes (Pius XII, John Paul II and Benedict XVI has stated what it means.​

Pope Benedict XVI: praying for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart is "equivalent in meaning to praying for the coming of God's Kingdom" "Light of the World" page 166. The kingdom comes as stated by the catechism AFTER the last judgment.​

On the same page Benedict says this about the prayer to hasten the triumph of the Immaculate Heart from his homily at Fatima in 2010 "This statement was not intended-i may be too rationalistic for that- to express any expectation on my part that there is going to be a huge turnaround and that history will suddenly take a totally different course"​

In 1984 he stated Fatima's 3rd secret related to the novissimis which is the end times and in a letter to bishop Pavel Hnilica in 2000 he said the secret show the persecutions until the end of the world.​

 

insearch, grab a Catechism and start all over again. Cheers.

 

ouch, it hurts to be caught in the twisting of the quote, doesn't it, Mark?