Apocalypse 101: Preterism and Futurism virtually useless intrinsically

  • Thread starter Thread starter spauline
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

spauline

Guest
I’m not going to reinvent the wheel, so I am republishing apoc 101 that shows the fruitlessness of futurism (and preterism):

Ok, let me give more theological elaboration:

Apocalypse 101, if you will:

WHY does the world end?

Because God can no longer draw a greater good from it.

What is the greatest good God can draw from the world?

Redeeming it to the maximum possibility.

How is the world redeemed?

By God redeeming man’s souls.

How does God redeem the human soul?

By redeeming the two faculties of soul: Intellect and Will.

How does God redeem the intellect?

By revealing TRUTH to it.

How does God redeem the will?

By giving it assistance and life [GRACE!] to do the things revealed to it in the intellect (see above).

How does God reveal truth to men? Where should they go to find this revelation?

There are five primary sources of Revelation that work together: God Himself, as Trinity and Incarnation. But in this age, the Revelation is no longer given (in general) through a direct manifestation of God to humanity. Rather, God has left the task of PASSING ON Revelation to men and MEDIATED sources.

What are these mediated sources?

The sources are the ORAL Word of God, and the WRITTEN Word of God, or Scripture.

How do we find the ORAL Word of God?

The Oral Word of God is found in the Apostolic Tradition that was not written in the Scriptures but that was taught by the Apostles orally and handed down and preserved by the men to whom to the Apostles committed it.

Who are these men?

They are called Bishops.

And where do we find these Bishops?

The Bishops that are true and legitimate successors of the Apostles are those who are in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches respectively.

But why are there two of these Churches? Are the bishops of these two groups the same in authority and kind?

No, the bishops of the Catholic Church are in union with the Bishop of Bishops, the Pope, the Bishop of Rome. This Bishop, being the successor St. Peter, the first and preminent bishop, has a special authority over the entire Church. The Bishops of the Orthodox Churches are NOT in union with the Pope, even though they are legitimate successors of the original Apostles.

How are these bishops associated with the Oral Word of God that you talked about?

In the Catholic Church, when there is a debate over a particular doctrine or issue of faith and morals, the Bishops gather together to consider the question by Scriptures, and the Oral Tradtions that they have passed on, many of which are found in Earlier Fathers’ writings. Guided by the Holy Spirit, they then vote on how to resolve the doctrinal question.

What if there is not a consensus?

Then Peter decides the issue. That is why he is special. He is like the tie breaker Vice President if Congress gets stuck.

You said there were five sources of Divine Truth. What are they then?

There is the Triune and Incarnate God Himself, and then there are four primary mediated sources of truth: the Successor of Peter, the General Collection of Bishops and Oral Tradition, the Written Tradition [Scripture], and finally, the unaided human intellect, or Reason. Even from Reason, without any of the other sources, we can know there is only one all-powerful God and certain of the principles of the natural law, like you shouldn’t steal, lie, commit adultery, or commit murder.

OK, but then, we were talking about the end of the world. Why does it end again?

It will end when no more practical Redemption can be brought to it. Which means, it will end when humanity as a near whole (saving a remnant of the Gentiles and the fullness of the Jews) utterly rejects all sources of Divine Truth above and no longer seeks the graces of God to live these truths, and, IN SUCH A MANNER that, there is no practical way for them to be restored to faith and pursuit of virtue.

…
 
…
But why would the world end? I mean, couldn’t God forgive them, or bring them back to faith?

That is the crux of the problem. Obviously, God has been able to convert persons from sin at earlier times in salvation history. The Jews repented of their sins in the Exile. The pagan Romans converted to Christianity after their persecutions of the Church. But in the end of the world, humanity will not just reject God’s truth and no longer seek His Will, but they will do so in such a manner that there will be nothing ontologically possible that can bring them back to God, even when the horrible consequences of their apostasy come. That is the difference between all other ages of sin in history. In this FINAL one, the Gentiles, as a near whole, will be IRREDEEMABLE, incapable of being restored to repentance. A similar analogy is discussed in Hebrews 6. “it is impossible to bring back those who have once tasted of the good fruits of the age to come……” IOW, once humanity has fully tasted of the fruits of the God’s truth and grace, it will be practically impossible to restore them once they fall away after that. IOW, they will be like the demons were: fully understood everything about God that can be known in this side of time, and yet rejecting him none the less.

But isn’t this too pessimistic. Couldn’t God bring the world into the Gospel in such a way that they go on living in the love of God forever?

No, the Catholic Church rejects this notion because it goes against what God has revealed in Scripture and Tradition. Specifically, in 2 Thess. 2, St. Paul speaks of the reality that “iniquity” is something that works in human history, but it can only be “restrained” for some time before its fullest manifestation goes beyond the Redemption in human history. In other words, admittedly, the Holy Spirit has been able to draw many good and greater spiritual goods from the repeated manifestations of Original Sin in human history, but what St. Paul is saying is, there will come a final manifestation of the fallen nature such that no subsequent conversion can be derived. Similar to the notion that when Christ fell the third time in the way of the cross, he could no longer raise himself in the mere power of his Human Nature. In a similar vein, eventually the fruits of the fallen nature of man will drag him into a fall in history such that no subsequent spiritual resurrection is possible within that same history. Hence, the subsequent resurrection is beyond human history, the end of time, the eternal New Creation.

Is there any further basis for such theology?

…
 
…

Yes, let’s start with St. Peter’s Second Epistle. In it, in chapter 3, he discusses the world in the beginning and the world at the end of human history. In the beginning, in the more or less immediate aftermath of the fall, wickedness reigns in Noah’s Day. God’s Response is the destruction of the world by water. But it is a redemptive action, a prefigurement of Baptism. In that first great Divine Intervention, God CLEANSED the earth of sin, and began anew, the Recreation of the world, the Redemption of man. In contrast, at the end of the world, wickedness once again reigns, but is no longer redeemable, it is fully culpable for its sin. It is a world that has fully known the God of Catholicism, has fully understood the truth, but has cast it aside irrevocably. Hence, God destroys the world as in the beginning, but this time, by fire, seeing as it is truly judgement and condemnation, and not a merciful act.

Are there other instances where this theology exists?

Absolutely, try the beast of Revelation 17. Traditional Catholic scholars, prior to the modern onslaught of liberalism, saw the beast in its primary sense as the image of the fallen nature of man. Hence, the “beast was.” That is, in the beginning, the fallen nature of man reigned in human history. In Noah’s day, prior to the Flood, wickedness, the fruit of Original Sin, was the primary force in history. As of yet, God had issued no significant Revelation or Redemption. The fallen nature was, as of yet, unchecked. So, again, the beast “was”. But even with the Flood, the renewal of humanity was already under way. Through the Flood, God cleansed the earth of sin and began anew. Hence, already, God was beginning to heal the wounds of sin. So then sin, or the “beast” is already taking a back seat to the Redemptive action of God in human history. Hence, as of St. Johns’ time, which was pagan Rome, the beast “is not.” And this was even more true when St. John wrote, for already then, the Messiah had come and Redeemed us, purchased the graces of all Redemption that would ever be applied to man, whether before or after the First Coming. Hence, the Redemption of the whole of humanity was under way. So, again, the beast “was not.” However, that the fallen nature is taking a back seat does not abrogate the fact that sin, or the fallen nature, shall repeatedly manifest itself in secondary punctuated assertions. Hence, already, five stages of sin had passed in the Old Law (“five have fallen.”) But again, the beast “shall be again”, in the eighth time. In the final time, after the fullness of the Gentiles, man shall fall in such a manner in which his heart, as a near whole, is utterly hardened to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, utterly immune to be being broken from its prideful assertion against the Divine Love. Hence, the Holy Spirit being “gotten out of the way” (see again 2 Thess. 2), there is nothing to prevent humanity’s self destruction of itself. For if man is utterly an enemy of God, who is Infinite Love and Gift, who is all deserving of Love, how much more impossible will it be for man to love his fellow man, who is a sinner. Therefore, the dragon’s lie in Revelation 13, in which he tells humanity that they can fully ignore God, His Truth, His Will, and that the mere Creation, divorced from its life-giving sacramental tree of love and mystery, can alone, with its mere superficialities, satisfy the longing of the human heart, shall give way to its unveiling. For man that had been seduced to this shall see the end of such a lie is death. Yes, they have utterly died spiritually, it is only a matter of time before they die physically. And that is the symbolism of the sixth vial. The dragon who spoke the lie that man can build his own utopia utterly independent of God and His Will, then also “assembles the nations” towards destruction. And as, the vials convey, in that time, even when the horrific chastisement that is mostly the consequences of their sins begins, they shall blame God and curse him all the more, even though, in fact, they bring these miseries upon themselves.

…
 
…

OK. But why can’t the apocalypse be like in futurism. Shouldn’t it predict how all these atrocities happen, like where the earthquakes will occur, and how big the armies are, and how the WW whatever shall play out politically?

No, that would be useless. Because again, the self-destruction is but the FRUIT of the inner spiritual depravity. The world is ending because humanity is, as a near whole, INCURABLY turned against God. Again, as we have just seen, when man no longer cares for God, he is selfish, arrogant, passionately ambitious. He loves not God, therefore, even more he hates his brother. Hence, wars and horrors are the inevitable fruit. If God did not intervene, the world would still end anyway, in the sense that, the reprobate shall martyr the Church into extinction (for the reprobate does not like to be preached at. For they are reminded of their condition. Therefore, like the Egypt, Antiochus, Rome, they kill those that are a “threat” to their dominion.), and then they shall destroy themselves. Again, after spiritual death, physical death eventually follows. But knowing how this is carried out specifically is not the point. The entire point is, HOW WILL THE CHURCH KNOW when humanity IS incurable spiritually? That is the question, NOT, how will they destroy themselves once this condition is reached.

But so then, why is the apocalypse written, if we don’t know how the world will end?

The Scriptures and Tradition already contain, IMPLICITLY, the answers to how the Church can recognize when God’s Plan is coming to completion. Already within the deposit of faith, the greater spiritual ages that lead into the final trial are somehow there, they simply must be RECOGNIZED through doctrinal development, which means that, as more Church history progresses, and as the deposit of faith becomes ever more explicit, deeper, so then she shall gradually recognize, with a deeper sense, the spiritual developments that attend this final trial. And the central question of that is the question of the Gentiles. Remember, the full number of Gentiles must come into the faith before humanity shall be without excuse. But the degree of that number is not yet clear. There are varying viewpoints. The greater tendency has been Augustine, who, based on the Wheat and Tares parable, sees the Church history as gradual maturing, weeding out of the gray, so that there be but full wheat (devout Catholics) and full weeds (total apostates), and then at some point, the weeds outnumber, and the final trial occurs. That has been the Church’s tendency. The fully approved private revelation is a different opinion. For them, there is Christian division, which leads to an INTERMEDIATE apostasy, but that is followed by a chastisement that succeeds in convicting humanity of its sins, they repent, Christians are reunited, and the near whole of humanity embraces the Church. Then, after that significant rest, the world falls away irrevocably, the time of the end. The issue is not resolved, therefore. But so then, these are the questions to ponder, not “Will Russia blow up Algeria in the last days? Or will Germany attack Mexico first?” And again, seeing as Christian division is the seed of the modern apostasy, questions of what lies ahead ecclesiologically are at the forefront.
 
I will now post my other stuff as I am able that was lost in the End times thread.

Let us keep this clear of politics, OK? Thanks! 😛

Why the OT can’t be all Fiction

Here is the discussion on the necessity of some OT history and stages:

Some Catholics are so liberal, they say, does it really matter in ANY sense whether there ever was a Flood, or Babel and Abraham, or the Exodus, or the Exile. What matters only is the lessons from the stories.

This is PRACTICALLY false teaching.

Part of the reason for the serious flaw in this liberal, over-skeptical theology is that whereas full allegory is a possible genre in some cases, it is a seriously grave theological error to believe that even the major stages of OT history could be nothing but fictitious myths simply meant to teach us moral lessons.

Why?

Because, God had to PREPARE the way for the Coming of the Messiah, which necessarily involves both Divine Revelation and Intervention.

Put it another way, we could ask, why didn’t the Eternal Son become Incarnate immediately after the Fall?

Let us take advice from Jack Nicholson, whom Jeff Cavins coined in his Bible study: “You can’t HANDLE the truth!”

The truths of Catholicism are so utterly beyond the mere condition of natural reason, that if God is to make the coming of Messiah efficacious for humanity, He cannot send Him and bring the fullness of truth immediately, because humanity is not ready for Him.

Look at this way, if they didn’t listen to Noah, would they listen to Jesus? Could humanity, which must first reap the consequences of the fall that are paganism, the natural fruit of a grossly immature and undeveloped humanity intellectually and scientifically, comprehend and handle the Trinity and Incarnation? For if even after all the Jews were given with basic monotheism, THEY rejected the Trinity and Incarnation, how could the whole of humanity handle it?

IMPOSSIBLE.

Hence, certain minimal ages are necessary to prepare the way for the Coming of Messiah. For this reason, eventually, the Catholic Church shall have to sort out, DOGMATICALLY, the minimal history of the OT that MUST be historical in some sense to prepare for Messiah, as well the history of the Church that God wished to reveal.

This, in fact, is really what the apocalypse is about. Hence, the apocalypse is not very much about the very end of the world. It is much more about the ultimate stages of OT and NT history that are essential to understand the Divine Plan.

This is why the supreme layer of meaning for the apocalypse, the most applicable to the questions that ultimately concern the Church, is not preterism or futurism, or even idealism, but rather, SPIRITUAL HISTORICISM.

I will post more later.

I would like to now elaborate on the “necessary ages” of the OT that are absolutely in need of being historical in order to pave the way for the coming of Messiah.

Again, as I have pointed out, both St. Augustine and St. Methodious of Olympus speak of five ages of the Old Law. St. Augustine actually delineates what partitions them. Also, five kings of the beast are referenced as fallen in Revelation 17:9-11. St. Hypollytus suggests the kings of the beast are ages.

From this data, I am arguing that the five ages as outlined by St. Augustine are a primary key to unlocking what the Church would, of necessity, admit must be history in the OT as essential stages to prepare for Christ. For the quote of Augustine, see below.

And, basing myself on the self same passage from Augustine, I wish to expand on known Catholic theology according to Augustine’s further classificaiton of the ages into the preeminent stages (the first two), and the remaining three that the Jews traversed, which Augustine calls a prophecy of the Gospel, hence implying that the three kings of the beast for the NT era are precisely the spiritual fulfillment of the three ages of the Jews.

Clearly, even apart from this data, the Old Testament Covenant given to the Jews is obviously an absolute necessity to prepare for Messiah. Why? Because, as the NT Cov is so utterly intricate and beyond reason, God would need to set up a great “foreshadowing” of the Laws and Doctrines of the NT in order for the NT Cov to be able to be accepted when it is given.

Also, remember, humanity progresses in stages. Hence, God cannot give the fullness of truth all at once. (Jack Nicholson: “You can’t HANDLE the truth!”) Therefore, the OT covenant with Abraham and Moses is an essential warm up preparation for the fullness.

…
 
…

For one, basic monotheism must be first driven in before the incomprehensibility of the Trinity is to be shewn, as well as the Incarnation.

All these reasons demand that the OT Cov with the type of Abraham and Moses be traversed and given prior to the NT.

Now, let us use logic: If God gave the OT to the whole of humanity, it would not work. Why?

Because of the law of the stubbornness of the fallen nature. Most of the Jews rejected the NT, and I would say this is because of the stubbornness of the human will to take things too literally, to take things that that are merely preparatory to be the end themselves, instead of only pointing to the final end.

For this reason, had God not given the OT to only a remnant nation, and rather to the whole world, then by the principle of the stubborness, when the fullness would come, the near whole world would reject, like the Jews. Which would therefore backfire.

Remember, God is guiding history and responding to the fallen nature in such a manner that He can, in the end, bring about the greatest possible spiritual good, which is the conversion to the fullness of truth of as many persons as possible.

Hence, the OT is given only to a small portion of humanity, so that when the fullness comes, even though most of the small porition shall reject it, nevertheless, the remainder of humanity that has wandered in darkness and not been able to find what it is looking for (like the Greeks’ myriads of philosophies), will be so hungry for the answer, they will rejoice when the full bug is thrown before them.

Note also, my theory from before, that once the cov with the type of Abraham is given, it necessarily follows the three stage path of the saint, and this is precisely why the ages of the Jews and Church are three.

Hence, we have seen the necessity of at least the three Jewish stages for the OT.

What about the first two?

Well, let us reason further: why didn’t God then immediately give the OT cov in the times of Noah, and wait until after Babel?

here is where i conjecture the necessity for God to let the preeminent stages come first, because remember, God must evolve the salvation and revelation only in so far as man is ready.

I argue that it would not make sense for God to have man initially divided in language and nations from the beginning without a just reason. After all, God desires peace for the world in so far as it possible.

Hence, the preservation of the oneness of human language must be permitted until the division of humanity can be brought into history in a mannner that is revelationally efficacious.

Now, before I present the main argument for the preeminent stages, remember that I associate them with the two horns of the false prophet, that, in effect, in as much as Solomon declared that there is nothing new under the sun, and that hence, all iniquity has already occurred in the times prior to Abraham, so then, the supreme forms of iniquity are aptly summarized in the first two preeminent ages, and that these ages are precisely tied to the antithesis of the two sacraments remaining in heresy, Baptism and Marriage, which also relates to how God responds or heals these forms of iniquity, both in these sacraments, and in the Divine Interventions that attended the preeminent stages.

Therefore, I am arguing this: because the lies that summarize all iniquity are two in number, so then, God had to first ALLOW humanity to fall for these two lies in succession, and respond in the historical sacramental sense to heal them, BEFORE bringing the Prefiguring Covenant.

Hence, I am arguing that the preeminent stages are NECESSARY to prepare the way for the prefiguring covenant that is to be traversed according to the three stages of the saint, and therefore of any People of a Primary Revelatory Covenant (Judaism/Catholicism).

The first two ages, then, come according to the supreme lies of iniquity, first, anti-Baptism, and then anti-Marriage.

The essence of the first stage is anti-Baptism, the negation of the Divine Truth and Will (wickedness), which was Noah’s day. And the Divine Response, or Redemption, is a HISTORICAL Baptism, the Flood.

The essence of the second stage is anti-Marriage, man’s spiritual fornication with the Creation at Babel, where the Creation and man’s selfish and arrogantly passionate ambition is exalted above the Creator, that is, just as man’s true end is to marry God, to be given and receieved in total self-donating love, so the counter part is the Whore, where man, turning from His calling to God, joins himself superficially with the world, that is the Creation, and makes it its final end, or utopia, that is, materialism.

And the Divine Response to this stage of iniquity is a spiritual, HISTORICAL Marriage, his betrothal to the Jewish People.

…
 
…

and note that allowing the human oneness of language and nation initially, in its self ambition, driving it towards the deception of a global cooperation towards utopia (but one divorced from God, and hence, inevitably futile because of the fallen nature that will eventually rip it asunder, man destorying himself), the response at Babel becomes the appropriate time for God to initially reveal to humanity the futility of attempting a materialistic utopia apart from a relationship and submitting to God, without which a lasting peace cannot be attained.

Hence, at Babel, God must forcefully (that is, through a positive Divine Intervention), divide humanity so as to firstly, afford Him the ability to choose a special nation to betroth Himself to (Abraham, the Jews), as well as postpone humanity’s tendency to attempt materialistic dominion in selfish ambition.

hence the spiriutal marraige after Babel to the Hebrew people is manifesting the solution: man does not NEED to be at war and divided, but only a COVENANT with God, His Truth Grace and Love, can form the true glue that is able to bring humanity together in love and peace that is to be lasting, that is, to last as long as humanity loves and God and neighbor.

Note, then, also, these two same lies, as Solomon alludes to, are the same lies that exist in any subsequent age of sin beyond the preeminent stages: Egypts pyramids harken back to the selfish ambition at Babel, as do the world empires of Babylon, Persia, and Greece, and finally Rome. The same wickedness of Noah’s day is practiced by the Greeks and Romans, the sin of turning from God’s truth in paganism and polytheism, the sins of flesh, murder, idolatry, materialism. The same selfish ambition that drove Bable is the same arrogant ambition that drives the lust for power and glory that feed the leaders of the ancient pagan kingdoms of antiqiuty.

hence, the two horns of the false prophet harken these two supreme lies, the summary of all iniquity: anti-Baptism, and anti-Marriage.

This is all I can share for now.

Quote:
St. Methodius of Olympus, Ecclesiastical Writer (+300 AD):
Writing on the eight ages of the world: “Five are the ages of the old law, the sixth age is designated to the Church, the seventh is the millennium of rest [when Christ will reign over the earth], and the eighth designates the eternity of heaven” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Ibid., Vol. IX, p. 742)Now leaving the book on the Millennium by Father Iannuzzi above, the following quote I discovered by St. Augustine concerning the “six ages of the world” to correspond essentially exactly as I had attempted to partition the “five kings who have fallen” (Rev. 17:9) and the “five ages of the old law” of St. Methodius and St. Hypollytus above:

St. Augustine, On the Catechising of the Uninstructed
CHAP. 17.–THE SPECIMEN OF CATECHETICAL DISCOURSE CONTINUED, IN REFERENCE SPECIALLY TO THE REPROVAL OF FALSE AIMS ON THE CATECHUMEN’S PART
CHAP. 22.–OF THE SIX AGES OF THE WORLD. 39. "Five ages of the world, accordingly, having been now completed (there has entered the sixth). Of these ages the first is from the beginning of the human race, that is, from Adam, who was the first man that was made, down to Noah, who constructed the ark at the time of the flood. Then the second extends from that period on to Abraham, who was called the father indeed of all nations which should follow the example of his faith, but who at the same time in the way of natural descent from his own flesh was the father of the destined people of the Jews; which people, previous to the entrance of the Gentiles into the Christian faith, was the one people among all the nations of all lands that worshipped the one true God: from which people also Christ the Saviour was decreed to come according to the flesh. For these turning-points of those two ages occupy an eminent place in the ancient books. On the other hand, those of the other three ages are also declared in the Gospel, where the descent of the Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh is likewise mentioned. For the third age extends from Abraham on to David the king; the fourthfrom David on to that captivity whereby the people of God passed over into Babylonia; and the fifth from that transmigration down to the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ. With His coming the sixth age has entered on its process; so that now the spiritual grace, which in previous times was known to a few patriarchs and prophets, may be made manifest to all nations; to the intent that no man should worship God but freely, fondly desiring of Him not the visible rewards of His services and the happiness of this present life, but that eternal life alone in which he is to enjoy God Himself: in order that in this sixth age the mind of man may be renewed after the image of God, even as on the sixth day man was made after the image of God.
 
…

Also from all eternity, the Scriptures are predestined, the Writings that, while usually not being systematic, but more poetical, should beautifully and eloquently reveal the inner mysteries of God, in poetic form, in urgency of call, to give an inspired voice to the raw dogmatic realities that are preserved by the Fathers. But so that the full implications of the meaning of the Sacred Written Words should nevertheless be preserved amongst the fathers alone, and in supreme form, Peter (for a family has only one father, whose mission is to teach and discipline), so then the voice of the Church would have be one, under Peter, the singular Fatherly voice that guides the Ultimate, Divine Father’s children on earth.

From these three great sources of truth, the Scriptures, the general mediated Fathers, and the supreme Earthly Father, they intrinsically predetermine three primary forms of disciples of the Messiah, each having their proper relationship to these very three sources.

In the first place, there are the utterly faithful, who accept all three sources, that is, Catholics, the ones who belong fully to the one true Church of Christ.

Next, there is the class that accepts the general mediated fatherhood and the Scriptures, but not the supreme Father, and these are called schismatics.

And finally, the third class is they who accept only the minimum source, the Scriptures. And these are called heretics.

But so then, seeing as there is no division in the first class, which is always the unity willed by Christ, so then there will always be, in any creation, two and only two primary forms of rift, or division, in the Body of Christ, namely, schism and heresy.

Moreover, because the majority of the Sacramental life is intrinsically bound to the brotherhood of the mediated fathers, so these two forms of division necessarily lead to intrinsic consequences for the Sacramental life of the separating communities or churches. In particular, the first form of division, that is, schism, being itself the minor of the two, retains the Sacramental life, because the fatherhood is still shared, whereas the second form of rift, heresy, being far more serious, necessarily does injury to the Sacramental life, seeing as the fatherhood is lost, leaving only the Writings. And for this reason, all sacraments that absolutely require the mediated fatherhood must necessarily be lost.

And to be sure, seeing as the heretics precisely attack the claims of the fathers, must they not also intrinsically, out of necessity, attack the notion of Sacramentality?

To be brief, I would like to discuss why the heretics retain only Baptism and Marriage? That is, that they lose five sacraments always, and retain only these two.

In short, I see the minimal remnant of grace they retain as by no means arbitrary, but ordered by the Will of the Lamb, and strategic, namely, that what heretics retain is the minimal grace and signs to heal what i consider to be the two supreme lies of the dragon that undergird all other iniquity, that is, that even the seven cardinal sins of Catholic moral theology are not sufficiently general to summarize all basis of iniquity. And these two lies I precisely link to the be very antithesis of the minimal signs of grace that are retained by heretics, namely, what can be called “anti-Baptism” and “anti-Marriage”.

…
 
…

In short, the first lie of the dragon (“You will surely not die”) is the total antithesis of Baptism. And what do we mean? We mean that, the dragon implies by his lie that “God is lying”. Which is another way of saying, that God is neither the Truth, nor does He determine truth, but that man does. That we ourselves, as independent gods, determine what is true. And that we need not seek out to obey the commands of God and His truth, but only do our will, whatever it should be. And these primary lies are the total antithesis of the minimal condition of salvation, namely Baptism, which is received not except that, opposite the dragon, the catechumen says, “I DO believe in what God has revealed [that is, I have FAITH in all Divine Revelation], and I seek to obey Him and avoid wickedness. [Repentance]”. And all these expressions of a clean heart are simply the general sign of the person’s acceptance of the Fatherhood of God, implying that he himself is a child of God, utterly dependent on a Loving Divine Father to impart to him the truth, that the Father truly cares for him, and that he should therefore seek to do His Father’s Will for his own benefit and happiness, and that the actualization of such love can only come from the Father Himself, that is, Divine Assitance to live the truth taught the child, truth he could have never known unless the Father would have told him, just as there are things a little child would never know unless his earthly father told him. For, except that a person have these minimal implicit dispositions toward the Divine, so then Baptism is not possible for the person, even implicit desire for it. So then, to summarize, the first primary lie of the dragon is anti-Baptism, the lie that says, “Have no concern for Divine truth, nor to seek and obey the Divine Will. Believe as you wish, and live as you wish, determine your truth utterly yourself.” And in fact, this then establishes the child of the devil, in total antithesis to the child of God, just as Baptism makes us children of God.

The second lie then brings to fruition the first lie: for once man is no longer a child of God in any sense, he then must necessarily have a goal for which to live. But since this goal is not the possession of God in the end, it necessarily means the child of the devil lives only for the material world. And hence, in this context, seeing as the child of the devil utterly rejects all Divine Truth, and since God’s Revelation and purpose in creation is to offer it unto man as a glorious gift of love, filled with spiritual meaning and as mediation for grace, which leads one to seek not one’s own good but the good of the other, that is, self-sacrificing love and gift of self, and the reception of love from others, so then, when the child of the devil utterly divorces himself from God and the self-donating love called for, the material creation replaces God and love, and is brutally ripped from the Divine arms of love, and therefore utterly stripped of its spiritual mystery as catechesis and sacrament, hence, being taken only for its superfiicial and selfish ends. IOW, the second lie is MATERIALISM, the fullest assault on the mystery and sacramentality of Creation, the Creation replacing God, and becoming the supreme end, the brute, superificial end of man, a means only towards selfish gratification, pride, egostical and arrogant accomplishment, and the attainment of material things for their own sake. And seeing as the Church, per JPII, understands the supreme sacramental sign in creation to be none other than marriage, which we have seen mirrors the central mystery of all existence, the Infinite Family of Love in the Trinity, so then Materialism, the second of the greatest lies of the dragon, that summarize all iniquity, in its proper sense, can be likened to anti-Marriage, which is appropriately imaged in the Whore of the Apocalypse, where this supreme sign of God’s Love within Himself is utterly mocked and debased, the human body, taken as end in and of itself, and exchanged as a mere good, as in contract, utterly independent of self-giving and receiving love, becoming abuse, and selfish taking, grasping in arrogance and lust, as opposed to covenant, which is an eternal exchange, in love, of whole persons.

Anyway, the point is that, the minimal sacraments that heretics retain, being two, are in no wise arbitrary, but in fact are predetermined by Christ, in that the Lamb, wishes to leave his separated children with the minimal signs of healing necessary to combat the same two lies that summarize all opposition to God, the same two primary lies that the dragon implied in the beginning, in the garden, when he exercised his first great deception upon humanity, a deception that remains essentially the same in form in all the ages of sin.

…
 
…

But anyway, considering that there are two primary forms of division in the body of Christ, that we have seen are intrinsically necessary in any Divine Plan that includes the New Covenant, is it merely a coincidence that of the four Gospels, there are two, and only two, primary stories in them in which Christ miraculously feeds a multitude of persons, from a handful nourishment objects, the one being found in two Gospels, and the other in all four? And were it not enough, to also considert that the explicit numerification of such objects is seven in both cases (i.e., the number of Sacraments), and that in this first story, the number of loaves is seven (in so far as schismatic retain all seven sacraments), and that in the second story, the numerical partition is five and two, which correlates that in the case of the other form of separation, that is, heresy, in fact five sacraments are lost, and only two are retained?

And to consider also that in the case of the seven and five, they are loaves, which require the earth, and that the two are fish, and that the Scriptures use earth and sea as metahpors? And how? That Peter is the rock, the solid foundation of truth (Matt. 16:18), that the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim 3:15), and that the sea is rather where there is chaos, and lack of foundation (the beasts arise from the sea, heretics are tossed to and fro by every wave of doctrine), so that the meaning of the loaves is their requirement of the earth, or foundation of truth, alone which can be had except that the Fathers are accepted, for the Fathers alone preserve the traditions that explain the true meaning of Scripture, so that they be not tossed to and fro, as are heretics, who only accept the Writings, and not the traditions of the Fathers?

IOW, that heretics have no loaves whatsoever, for they without the foundation of any earth, and hence, they have only two fish, which Christ graciously leaves them, and that schismatics, still do a little fishing (for they have a few fish besides their seven loaves), in that, whereas they have general Tradition, and therefore earth, they nevertheless have not the Rock, which is Peter, so that they shall be a little confused, fish a little bit?

BTW, any coincidence that, in the apocalypse, the Lamb has seven horns (Seven Sacraments, the power of his redemption), and that the false prophet has two horns, like a Lamb, but speaks as a dragon, in so far as the theological essence of the false logos, the total antithesis to God’s truth and goodness, has been veritably summarized, as we have seen, as the total attack and mockery, or plaigarization (Tertullian taught the dragon plagiarizes the Sacraments), of the two very sacraments left to heretics, which would appropriately make these lies the supreme “heresy”?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top