The Great Monarch

[spauline]

I agree - we do need to be more aware of our spiritual protection for our own “endtimes”.

I honestly think your interpretation is just as likely to happen in some sort of fashion if it’s not happening already…

Hi, Jennifer,

thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut. Just though I’d comment that in my view as this one layer of meaning, this spiritual assault doesn’t occur at the very end. It is something that I see as going for the whole of the Church’s doctrinal development. I can send you a link to my article if you like.

To cut it short, I see a spiritual pyramid of the sources of Divine Truth, where the higher on the pyramid, the more reliable and complete is the source, but one that is less evident.

With that in mind, the pyramid is rather simple:

I. God the Trinity and Incarnation
II. the Pope
III. The Rest of Bishops and Oral Tradition
IV. the Written Tradition (Scripture)
V. Reason

The seven steps [trumpets! ] would then be as follows:

1. 
   *]The Initial Trinitarian and Christological Heresies (attack the Trinity of God)
   *]Islam (not only attack Trinity and Incarnation, but deny Christ’s Messiahship and set up extra-Christological Revelation [Muhammed])
   *]The Great Schism (attack the Pope)
   *]The scandal of Middle Age clergy (make rest of bishops look bad to prepare for attack on them (see Matt. 24:9-10))
   
   *]The Protestant Rebellion (attack the rest of bishops and Oral Tradition)
   
   *]The “Enlightenment” (attack Written Tradition, descend into mere natural religion, leaving only reason)
   *]Modern Secular Apostasy (even attack reason, deny necessity of any religion [atheism, relativistic hedonistic materialism])
   Note, the last three in red are the great woes. I have interesting discussion on the symbolism of the numerology: five months, two ten thousands of ten thousands, and two horns like a Lamb, in which I argue that the five loaves and two fish are symbol of the seven Sacraments, and that the partitioning of the five and two symbolizes how the sacramental life of separating heretical communities retain only two sacraments (so like the two sacraments of heresy, baptism and marriage), and I apply this the similar numbers of five and two above.
   
   But anyway, just thought I’d cap it up for you.
   
   Blessings to you!
   scott

 

[Ron_Conte]

As far as your description on the end times goes, I prefer EWTN’s explanation any day, since your site holds little credidibility.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/endtimes.htm

EWTN does not have a theological position on the end times.

I’m familiar with the position of Donovan and Birch, from their audio series on the topic of eschatology. They believe that the tribulation is divided into two parts, that there will be a time of relative peace after the first part, that the Antichrist is not in the world today, that certain signs and events must occur before the Return of Christ, such that His return is not imminent. They have some good insights into eschatology.

Re: David Gregson’s comment on my site, he gave a reasonable and faithful response. I don’t object to his mild criticism.

my predictions are speculative, and the section of the site that deals with the future clearly says so. However, other sections of the site are not about the future:

there is free legal Catholic music
religious poetry
guest articles on many topics
a pro-life section
a section for prayers and devotions, including the divine mercy chaplet

my articles include topics such as:
papal infallibility
the teaching authority of the magisterium
the Trinity
limbo
baptism
Mariology
and more.

But you are free to disagree.

Ron

 

[Jennifer123]

Hi, Jennifer,

thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut. Just though I’d comment that in my view as this one layer of meaning, this spiritual assault doesn’t occur at the very end. It is something that I see as going for the whole of the Church’s doctrinal development. I can send you a link to my article if you like.

To cut it short, I see a spiritual pyramid of the sources of Divine Truth, where the higher on the pyramid, the more reliable and complete is the source, but one that is less evident.

With that in mind, the pyramid is rather simple:

I. God the Trinity and Incarnation
II. the Pope
III. The Rest of Bishops and Oral Tradition
IV. the Written Tradition (Scripture)
V. Reason

The seven steps [trumpets! ] would then be as follows:

1. 
   *]The Initial Trinitarian and Christological Heresies (attack the Trinity of God)
   *]Islam (not only attack Trinity and Incarnation, but deny Christ’s Messiahship and set up extra-Christological Revelation [Muhammed])
   *]The Great Schism (attack the Pope)
   *]The scandal of Middle Age clergy (make rest of bishops look bad to prepare for attack on them (see Matt. 24:9-10))
   
   *]The Protestant Rebellion (attack the rest of bishops and Oral Tradition)
   
   *]The “Enlightenment” (attack Written Tradition, descend into mere natural religion, leaving only reason)
   *]Modern Secular Apostasy (even attack reason, deny necessity of any religion [atheism, relativistic hedonistic materialism])
   Note, the last three in red are the great woes. I have interesting discussion on the symbolism of the numerology: five months, two ten thousands of ten thousands, and two horns like a Lamb, in which I argue that the five loaves and two fish are symbol of the seven Sacraments, and that the partitioning of the five and two symbolizes how the sacramental life of separating heretical communities retain only two sacraments (so like the two sacraments of heresy, baptism and marriage), and I apply this the similar numbers of five and two above.
   
   But anyway, just thought I’d cap it up for you.
   
   Blessings to you!
   scott

1. 
   Thanks-
   This is interesting. I’d like to know what Ron, or anyone else interested in eschatology, thinks about it. I don’t by any means consider myself an expert or even learned on the subject.
   
   I wonder though what is your take on prophecy dealing with physical troubles. I’m thinking of Jesus and how he mentions the “birth pangs” and in Revelation where it describes physical effects on the Earth?

 

[spauline]

Thanks-
This is interesting. I’d like to know what Ron, or anyone else interested in eschatology, thinks about it. I don’t by any means consider myself an expert or even learned on the subject.

I wonder though what is your take on prophecy dealing with physical troubles. I’m thinking of Jesus and how he mentions the “birth pangs” and in Revelation where it describes physical effects on the Earth?

OH, but of course there are physical troubles. Those are especially the consequences of the apostasy. But the good news that I feel is that the consequences of sin and non-Catholic errors will be manifested in the Minor Chastisement, such that humanity learns its lesson, Christians are reunited into the RCC, and glorious restoration of Catholicism is brought about. Only after this significant Age of Peace, will the great apostasy come. But then only in the second apostasy will humanity no longer have an excuse.

Toward that end, you might consider reading these two articles that expand on this subject of Christian disunity and unity:

The Two Witnesses: Scripture and Tradition

The Prayed for Unity of Christians and Christ’s Plan.

Also, for the full development of the Trumpet Theory, here is the article:

The Seal , the Mark , and Everything In Between

Blessings, and thanks again!
scott

 

[bones_IV]

There are similarities and differences between the conceptions and births of Jesus and Mary.
See my lengthly article:
catholicplanet.com/virgin/virginity-Jesus-Mary.htm
or its summary:
catholicplanet.com/virgin/index.htm

Mary’s virginal conception and birth was taught by Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich. I make arguments for this speculative theological idea based on Scripture and on Tradition.

Ron Conte

You’re a little confused.

CCC
419 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135The question I ask you is where did the Church claim that Ann gave birth to Mary without the normal process? The Church doesn’t teach that. Joachim was her father in the biological sense, as well as the familial. Another thing is that Tradition is not invented period. Not vice versa. It must go back to the apostles. Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich cannot partake of the Magisterium, Ron. Only Bishops hold that. Fifth, whatever revelation the Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich did or did not receive is Private Revelation only and cannot be part of Church doctrine.

Essentially you’re beating a straw man.

 

[zorrox]

You’re a little confused.

CCC
419 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135The question I ask you is where did the Church claim that Ann gave birth to Mary without the normal process? The Church doesn’t teach that. Joachim was her father in the biological sense, as well as the familial. Another thing is that Tradition is not invented period. Not vice versa. It must go back to the apostles. Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich cannot partake of the Magisterium, Ron. Only Bishops hold that. Fifth, whatever revelation the Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich did or did not receive is Private Revelation only and cannot be part of Church doctrine.

Essentially you’re beating a straw man.

I think this was a pious belief held by many during the middle ages

 

[Ron_Conte]

Thanks-
This is interesting. I’d like to know what Ron, or anyone else interested in eschatology, thinks about it. I don’t by any means consider myself an expert or even learned on the subject.

I wonder though what is your take on prophecy dealing with physical troubles. I’m thinking of Jesus and how he mentions the “birth pangs” and in Revelation where it describes physical effects on the Earth?

No, I don’t agree at all with scott’s assessment of what the seven trumpets are. I’ve written extensively on this topic on my site, so I won’t go into it in depth here. The articles are on my site for those who are interested.

Ron

 

[Climacus]

You’re a little confused.

CCC
419 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135The question I ask you is where did the Church claim that Ann gave birth to Mary without the normal process? The Church doesn’t teach that. Joachim was her father in the biological sense, as well as the familial. Another thing is that Tradition is not invented period. Not vice versa. It must go back to the apostles. Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich cannot partake of the Magisterium, Ron. Only Bishops hold that. Fifth, whatever revelation the Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich did or did not receive is Private Revelation only and cannot be part of Church doctrine.

Essentially you’re beating a straw man.

Bones,

I respect your zeal for the Faith, but would you give it up on attacking Ron? He is a speculative theologian. There have been many many speculative theologian through time eg St Augustine, St Thomas Aquanis, John Duns Scotus, Garigou LaGrange, and the list could go on.

These men have sought deeper insights into the Deposit of Faith. If it werent for John Duns Scotus’ new insights into the Immaculate Conception perhaps the Dogma never would have been defined by Pius IX at that time in history.

Ron has a degree from Boston College in theology and philosophy. He has been studying and meditating over these topics for years. He is attempting to make new insights into the Faith for future generations just as many men in the Church have done before him.

I think you need to consider what he is doing and why before you make anymore remarks considering him.

And by the way I am a very conservative Catholic who once considered and studied toward the priesthood.

Nicholas Corrao

 

[spauline]

No, I don’t agree at all with scott’s assessment of what the seven trumpets are. I’ve written extensively on this topic on my site, so I won’t go into it in depth here. The articles are on my site for those who are interested.

Ron

Look, I hope you realize Scripture can have MANY layers of meaning at same time. I guess until I look at your position, I should not have attacked it immediately. Perhaps your views are correct, especially since you indicat it is based on some mystics. But I don’t think it needs to be only *one *meaning. Preterist meanings, futurist meanings, spiritual historicist meanings. They could all be true in their respective levels. Must it be only one to detriment of all others? I think understanding like this can eliminate alot of heated arguments.

 

[Ron_Conte]

I agree that Scripture has many levels of meaning.

However, certain interpretations contradict other interpretations and so not every suggested interpretation can be merely another level of meaning.

The view that most of the events of Revelation have already occurred is incompatible with the view that none have yet occurred (my view).

The view that Revelation is merely an expression of the hopes of an oppressed people, with no information about the future, is incompatible with the view that it predicts the future.

But there may be other interpretations which are compatible with one another and which represent different levels of meaning. My focus is on the level of meaning whereby Revelation foretells future events.

Ron

 

[bones_IV]

Bones,

I respect your zeal for the Faith, but would you give it up on attacking Ron? He is a speculative theologian. There have been many many speculative theologian through time eg St Augustine, St Thomas Aquanis, John Duns Scotus, Garigou LaGrange, and the list could go on.

These men have sought deeper insights into the Deposit of Faith. If it werent for John Duns Scotus’ new insights into the Immaculate Conception perhaps the Dogma never would have been defined by Pius IX at that time in history.

Ron has a degree from Boston College in theology and philosophy. He has been studying and meditating over these topics for years. He is attempting to make new insights into the Faith for future generations just as many men in the Church have done before him.

I think you need to consider what he is doing and why before you make anymore remarks considering him.

And by the way I am a very conservative Catholic who once considered and studied toward the priesthood.

Nicholas Corrao

Are you defending the heretical claims he’s made concerning the Immaculate conception? It sure sounds that way. Being a Catholic has nothing to do with looking into future events. Straw man agrument.

 

[bones_IV]

Bones,

I respect your zeal for the Faith, but would you give it up on attacking Ron? He is a speculative theologian. There have been many many speculative theologian through time eg St Augustine, St Thomas Aquanis, John Duns Scotus, Garigou LaGrange, and the list could go on.

These men have sought deeper insights into the Deposit of Faith. If it werent for John Duns Scotus’ new insights into the Immaculate Conception perhaps the Dogma never would have been defined by Pius IX at that time in history.

Ron has a degree from Boston College in theology and philosophy. He has been studying and meditating over these topics for years. He is attempting to make new insights into the Faith for future generations just as many men in the Church have done before him.

I think you need to consider what he is doing and why before you make anymore remarks considering him.

And by the way I am a very conservative Catholic who once considered and studied toward the priesthood.

Nicholas Corrao

Being a Catholic has nothing to do with looking into future events. Straw man agrument.

 

[bones_IV]

What exactly is a speculative theologian?! That makes no sense.

 

[Climacus]

Bones,

This is the last time I argue with you. Ron has made no heretical claims concerning the Immaculate Conception. I dont know where you came up with that. And if you do not know what a speculative theologian is than just do a search yourself. I dont have time for this.

Nicholas

 

[Volodymyr_988]

Who will the Great Monarch be?

Do you have any references?

“Where’s that in the Bible?” Or in the Early Church Fathers?

Let’s try to stick to what Our Lord has revealed to us in Public Revelation which is for everyone. :ehh:

 

[bones_IV]

Bones,

This is the last time I argue with you. Ron has made no heretical claims concerning the Immaculate Conception. I dont know where you came up with that. And if you do not know what a speculative theologian is than just do a search yourself. I dont have time for this.

Nicholas

He said that Mary’s birth was a virgin birth. This is heretical, the Church has never taught this. Never in my life have I been so insulted by such a statement. I asked a question and this is the respect I get. Shame on you.

 

[lak611]

Who will the Great Monarch be?

Do you have any references?

Is this another private revelation? I don’t see anybody with the name Great Monarch in the Bible. If this is private revelation, why is it posted in the Sacred Scripture forum?

 

[Ron_Conte]

the great monarch is referred to in Sacred Scripture, but the term ‘great Catholic monarch’ comes from various Saints and Blesseds. It is not clear in every case whether their understanding of this comes from their interpretation of Scripture, or from private revelation, or both.

[Daniel]
{8:5} And I understood, and behold, a he-goat among she-goats came from the West above the face of the entire earth, and he did not touch the ground. Furthermore, the he-goat had a preeminent horn between his eyes.
{8:6} And he went all the way to the ram that had the horns, which I had seen standing before the gate, and he ran towards him in the force of his strength.
{8:7} And when he approached near to the ram, he was enraged against him, and he struck the ram, and broke his two horns, and the ram could not withstand him, and when he had cast him down on the ground, he trampled him, and no one was able to free the ram from his hand.
{8:8} But the he-goat among she-goats became exceedingly great, and when he had prospered, the great horn was shattered, and four horns were rising up beneath it by means of the four winds of heaven.

{8:20} The ram, which you saw to have horns, is the king of the Medes and Persians.
{8:21} Furthermore, the he-goat among she-goats is the king of the Greeks, and the great horn, which was between his eyes, is the same one, the first king.

The he-goat (the first king) is the great Catholic monarch.

Ron

 

[spauline]

I agree that Scripture has many levels of meaning.

However, certain interpretations contradict other interpretations and so not every suggested interpretation can be merely another level of meaning.

The view that most of the events of Revelation have already occurred is incompatible with the view that none have yet occurred (my view).

The view that Revelation is merely an expression of the hopes of an oppressed people, with no information about the future, is incompatible with the view that it predicts the future.

But there may be other interpretations which are compatible with one another and which represent different levels of meaning. My focus is on the level of meaning whereby Revelation foretells future events.

Ron

I’m not really sure you mean multiple meanings like I mean multiple meanings. You seem to assume only ONE chronological and time period level is possible. What is wrong with saying, on ONE level, the whole book applies mostly to period 60 AD to 90 AD, on SECOND level, whole book applies to last few years before Second Coming, and that on THIRD level, whole of book is about great spiritual subages of ENTIRE age of Church, from pagan Rome to AC?

Also, I do not believe all layers have equal importance, in fact, I would say both futurism AND preterism are not very important, because the apoc subjects are really dealing with overall spiritual history of salvation from beginning of world to end of it, and not minor temporal details of very beginning or very end of Church history.

I have written small discussion on this on website:

Why both Futurists AND Preterists miss the point.

I don’t know irf above would help in understanding where I am coming from.

For example, knowing that at end of world, if someone attempts to “harm” literal Enoch and Elijah will get same medicine back is not as important as knowing that if anyone attempts to “harm” the truths of God as proclaimed from Scripture and Tradition, one harms his very self to the same spiritual degree (i.e., Rev 11 with Two Witnesses).

 

[BlueKnight]

There is going to be a holy catholic monarch who is going to raise an army in France to fight off evil men and restore holy peace? Where do I sign up?

Blue Knight