Is Christ EVER coming back? Father Leonardo Castellani speaks

[Muzhik]

(The following messages were originally posted by “DeGaulle” on the “Mother of God” forum, and are reposted here with his kind permission.)

Has anyone come across the writings of this almost forgotten priest? He displays some superficial similarities with Pope Francis, having been suspended for many years because of differences with his superiors. Still, he seems closer to the style of Malachi Martin in his independent line of action and thought. Lest I ring alarm bells, Father Castellani was eminently orthodox and a gifted enemy of modernism. It was his view that the Church had begun to go wrong before Vatican II, and this admirer of Aquinas, Augustine, Bossuet, Lacunza, Chesterton, Belloc, and C.S. Lewis among other authors, considered that the root of this fault was that too many had forgotten that Christ was coming back. Too many had taken Teilhard’s bait that the World’s End was something to happen in maybe, for argument’s sake, 18,000,000 years. Effectively, never. Father Castellani, however, was adamant that it could happen any time, as we were told in the Gospels.

Here’s an example of a sermon by Father Castellani:

 

[Muzhik]

Fr. Castellani on the Kingship of Christ

"In front of Pilate, Christ affirmed three times that He was a King in the same sense that Pilate understood it. ‘Then you are a King?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a King,’ in other words, ‘You are correct.’ It is true that He told him, ‘My kingdom is not of this world,’ but He did not say, ‘My kingdom is not here.’ He used the adverb ‘hinc’ (Regnum meum non est hinc) which indicates movement and does not exist in English. This adverb ‘hinc’ meant three things at the same time, ‘My Kingdom does not proceed from this world, My Kingdom is in this world; My Kingdom goes from this world to the other world.’

Apparently He is a ‘poor King’ who doesn’t rule much these days, since if He were reigning, the world would be better. A large part of the world doesn’t even know Him; another part knows Him and renounces Him, like the Jews, ‘Nolumus Hunc regnare super nos’ - ‘We do not want this man to reign over us’ (Lk. 19:14); finally, another part of the world recognizes Him in word but denies Him in deed; we are those cowardly Christians. But there is something else that Christ noted, that if a king’s subjects rebel against him, he doesn’t stop being king as long as he retains the power to punish them and to subjugate them once again. If he didn’t have that power, that’s another thing. And so today modernist heretics admit that Christ is King ‘in a certain sense’, but they deny the Second Coming of Christ. Then, yes, He would be a poor King. The modernists either entirely change the meaning of the Parousia, turning it into something else (as in the case of Teilhard de Chardin) or they say it will come in 18 million years - which is to say ‘never.’

Pope Pius XI instituted the Feast of Christ the King against ‘Liberalism;’ Liberalism is precisely a form of cowardice. Liberalism denies the Kingship of Christ, His power by right over human society. This current Christian heresy is complicated…Liberalism eliminated the Kingship of Christ by saying something [ostensibly] ‘innocent’: that religion was a private matter, and therefore nations should respect all religions and the Church should not get involved in things that don’t concern her–in other words, in public affairs. However, the great German philosopher Josef Pieper observes that if we make God a private matter (a matter within the conscience of each person), by the same token we convert the State into God; and we turn Jesus Christ and the Eternal Father into sub-gods. Indeed, this means that because the State is a public affair, religion would therefore be inferior to it and would have to submit to the State, since what is public is far superior to what is private and the private must submit to it.

In fact, history soon showed that ‘liberal secularism’, or supposed neutrality regarding religion, was n reality true hostility; and it ended up deifying and divinizing the State." (Leonardo Castellani, DominguerasPrédicas, pg. 327).

 

[Muzhik]

Fortunately, there is an excellent short biography by Jack Tollers available on the internet, along with two of this turbulent priest’s books, translated by Tollers, all for free:

Smashwords – Fr. Leonardo Castellani: an introduction – a book by Jack Tollers (Tollers’ excellent biography)

Smashwords – Will Christ Ever Come Back? – a book by Leonardo Castellani (“Will Christ Ever Come Back?”)

Smashwords – Christ and the Pharisees – a book by Leonardo Castellani (“Christ and the Pharisees”)

 

[Muzhik]

(My reply to the original post

YESSSS!!!

I am a big follower of Christ AS King – kind of a leftover from my time in the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA). It was during this time that I became aware of how many of the movements, gestures, and so on that are part and parcel of Roman Catholic practice are rooted in how we are to treat royalty.

(As an example, at one SCA event, a few of the members – still dressed in garb, complete with swords – attended Saturday evening Mass. Understand that SCA rules require that ALL edged weapons be peace-bonded when at an event. That means the item is tied down or otherwise restrained so it cannot be drawn in anger. Before entering the sanctuary, the men all removed the peace-bonding from their swords. Then they all walked in, with great dignity, their ladies at their arm [the men extend their bent right arm to the woman at their side, and the women lay their arms on top of the men’s arms. Not linked, which you would do at a ball or other festive function]. Then, at a signal, they all stopped at once, and while the women curtsied, the men genuflected, drew their swords out a quarter-way from the sheath, then laid the swords on their arms, presenting the pommel towards the tabernacle. This is the proper way one shows that you have sworn fealty towards your king. After holding the poses for a 5-count, the swords were completely sheathed, everyone stood, and they all took their seats.)

This experience with the SCA has led to my belief (which I’ve expressed several times in several venues) that American Protestantism has rejected Christ as King because, you know? We’re Americans and Americans don’t do royalty. Not that we don’t fawn over various members of the British Royal Family because they’re hot and it’s romantic in a Disney sort of way, but it’s not like they’re REAL royalty. So Protestants say G_D is our King, but they view and treat G_D more like our CEO – or even worse, as our Founder Emeritus, whose portrait is in the entryway and to whom we owe a great debt as our founder and all, but we’ve decided to take the Church HE founded in a new direction, more in keeping with the spirit of the times.

Viva Christo Rey!

 

[Brucejlb]

Has anyone investigated the prophecy in the Bible at Daniel chapter 4.
Apparently a few Bible scholars in the early 1800’s calculated that the 7 times
pointed to the year 1914. I was told this by Jehovah’s witnesses. Has anyone else investigated this idea ?