The musings and meandering thoughts of a crotchety old man as he observes life in the world and in a small, rural town in South East Nebraska. I hope to help people get to Heaven by sharing prayers, meditations, the lives of the Saints, and news of Church happenings. My Pledge: Nulla dies sine linea ~ Not a day without a line.
“Liberalism is therefore the radical and universal denial of all divine truth and Christian dogma, the primal type of all heresy, and the supreme rebellion against the authority of God and His Church.”
–Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany
Below is an excerpt from a TAN Books classic, Liberalism is a Sin by Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany. This outstanding work touches on “Liberalism,” the error of our times.
When it was first published in Spain in 1886, Liberalism is a Sin sought to make an attempt to sound the alarm and warn the people in the decades leading up to the deluge of the Spanish Civil War.
Since then this little gem has excited considerable commotion among more astute Catholics. The first English edition was published in 1899 and in subsequent years it went through various reprints. TAN Books published its own version in 1979 and again in 1989 and 1993.
Liberalism is a Sin is one of the most important books for Catholics today. Everyone should read it. We encourage readers to purchase two copies – one for yourself and one for a friend.
Society can either choose the mistaken notion of Liberalism, or it can turn to the light of Christian Revelation; hopefully it is not too late for many. The excerpt below, taken from Chapter 25, touches on the difficult question of how Catholics sometimes fall into the trap of Liberalism.
The quote reads thus:
Various are the ways in which a faithful Christian is drawn into the error of Liberalism.
Very often corruption of heart is a consequence of errors of the intellect, but more frequently still, errors of the intellect follow the corruption of the heart. The history of heresies very clearly shows this fact.
Their beginnings nearly always present the same character, either wounded self-love or a grievance to be avenged; either it is a woman that makes the heresiarch lose his head and his soul, or it is a bag of gold for which he sells his conscience.
Error nearly always has its origin, not in profound and laborious studies, but in the triple-headed monster which St. John describes and calls concupiscentia carnis, concupiscentia oculorum, superbia vitae – “concupiscence of the flesh, concupiscence of the eyes, the pride of life.”
Here are the sources of all error, here are the roads to Liberalism. Let us dwell on them for a moment.
Men become Liberal on account of a natural desire for independence and for an easy life.
Liberalism is necessarily sympathetic with the depraved nature of man, just as Catholicity is essentially opposed to it. Liberalism is emancipation from restraint; Catholicity the curb of the passions.
Now, fallen man, by a very natural tendency, loves a system which legitimizes and sanctifies his pride of intellect and the license of passion.
Hence, Tertullian says, “The soul, in its noble aspirations, is naturally Christian.” Likewise may it be said that man, by the taint of his origin, is born naturally Liberal.
Logically then does he declare himself a Liberal in due form when he discovers that Liberalism offers a protection for his caprices and an excuse for his indulgences.
Men become Liberal by the desire for advancement in life.
Liberalism is today the dominating idea; it reigns everywhere and especially in the sphere of public life. It is therefore a sure recommendation to public favor.
On starting out in life, the young man looks around upon the various paths that lead to fortune, to fame, to glory, and sees that an almost indispensable condition of reaching the desired goal is, at least in our times, to become Liberal.
Not to be Liberal is to place in his way, at the outset, what appears to be an insurmountable obstacle. He must be heroic to resist the Tempter, who shows him, as he did Jesus Christ in the desert, a splendid future, saying: Haec omnia tibi dabo si cadens adoraveris me: “All this will I give thee, if, falling down, thou wilt adore me.”
Heroes are rare, and it is natural that most young men beginning their career should affiliate with Liberalism. It promises them the assistance of a powerful press, the recommendation of powerful protectors, the potent influence of secret societies, the patronage of distinguished men.
The poor ultramontane requires a thousand times more merit to make himself known and to acquire a name, and youth is ordinarily little scrupulous.
Liberalism, moreover, is essentially favorable to that public life which this age so ardently pursues. It holds out as tempting baits public offices, commissions, fat positions, etc., which constitute the organism of the official machine.
It seems an absolute condition for political preferment. To meet an ambitious young man who despises and detests the perfidious Corrupter is a marvel of God’s grace.
Men become Liberal out of avarice, or the love of money.
To get along in the world, to succeed in business, is always a standing temptation of Liberalism. It meets the young man at every turn. Around him in a thousand ways does he feel the secret or open hostility of the enemies of his faith.
In mercantile life or in the professions he is passed by, overlooked, ignored. Let him relax a little in his faith, join a forbidden secret society, and lo, the bolts and bars are drawn; he possesses the “open sesame” to success!
Then the invidious discrimination against him melts in the fraternal embrace of the enemy, who rewards his perfidy by advancing him in a thousand ways.
Such a temptation is difficult for the ambitious to withstand. Be Liberal, admit that there is no great difference between men’s creeds, that at the bottom they are really the same after all.
Proclaim your breadth of mind by admitting that other religious beliefs are just as good for other people as your faith is for you; they are, as far as they know, just as right as you are; it is largely a question of education and temperament what a man believes; and how quickly you are patted on the back as a “broad-gauged” man who has escaped the narrow limitations of his creed.
You will be extensively patronized, for Liberalism is very generous to a convert. “Falling down adore me, and I will give you all these things,” says Satan yet to Jesus Christ in the desert.
Such are the ordinary causes of perversions to Liberalism; from these all others flow. Whoever has any experience of the world and the human heart can easily trace the others.
Source: Liberalism is a Sin by Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany (published by TAN Books), pp. 121-124.
Ostensibly, for heresy and blasphemy. More realistically, it was a power and money grab by Philippe le Bel.
In the 14th century, the Knights Templar were arrested and dissolved. At dawn on Friday, 13 October 1307, King Philip IV of France ordered the Grand Master Jacques de Molay and scores of other French Templars to be simultaneously arrested. Were the charges brought against the Templars just? Or did corruption at the French court lay behind their arrest?
What gave the Templars their power? Find out in this video:
Olaf Scholz's cabinet has laid out an extremely progressive agenda
Habemus chancellor! There is white smoke over Berlin as the new German government concluded its coalition talks and announced its agenda for the next four years. If you expected a slight tilt to the Left from Merkelism, think again: Germany is in for a radical overhaul.
In the press conference yesterday afternoon, the four party leaders went through the motions of praising each others’ conduct during coalition talks in an effort to allay fears that Germany’s first three-party coalition will lead to instability and division. They stressed that they had agreed on basic principles such as the raising of minimum wage, building new and affordable homes and combating climate change.
But even a cursory glance at the 178 page coalition treaty reveals that their agreement went further than the basics. Much further. Baerbock spoke of a ‘paradigm shift’ in German politics rather than just ‘finding the lowest common denominator’ and it seems the three progressive parties have indeed found a lot of common ground after all.
On a social level, the coalition treaty places huge emphasis on younger people. The voting age will be lowered to 16 not only for European elections but also for general polling. This is hardly surprising as both the Greens and the Liberals draw a significant proportion of their support from younger demographics, but it would require an amendment of the constitution, a much more radical change than the half-sentence dedicated to it suggests.
In terms of migration too, German society is in for a paradigm shift. The coalition treaty speaks of Germany as an ‘immigration society’ and wants to change the law accordingly. It promises to make the acquisition of German citizenship easier, increase the immigration of workers and enshrine the representation of diversity in law (without mentioning specifically what this will look like).
In addition, existing legislation regarding trans people will be replaced with a ‘self-declaration law’, which will allow everyone to change their gender by declaration alone. Gender reassignment surgery will be fully funded through the public health system. ‘Rainbow families’ will receive more support ‘especially in middle-size businesses and in the civil service’ but also in education, which is traditionally a devolved matter for the individual states.
Foreign policy and security doesn’t start until page 143 but it also contains some radical decisions. NATO remains an ‘indispensable’ part of German policy in which the coalition ‘will invest accordingly’ but equally the UN is described as ‘the most important institution.’ ‘While nuclear weapons remain part of NATO’s strategic concept’, Germany will support this but in the long run, the aim is ‘a Germany free of nuclear weapons’.
In terms of energy, Germany will bank largely on renewables in the hope that the technology will develop accordingly. The nuclear power plants will be switched off next year, as planned. Coal will be phased out by 2030 (8 years earlier than previously planned) and of non-renewables only gas is deemed ‘indispensable for the foreseeable future’. However, the document contains no comments at all about Nord Stream 2, the controversial gas pipeline from Russia to Germany.
A selection of other announcements include the legalisation of cannabis, the banning of arms sales for specific conflicts, the return of museum objects to other countries, the acceleration of the accession of the Western Balkans into the EU and the even equal representation of male and female MPs in the Bundestag.
Tensions in Germany are already high with a renewed migrant crisis in the east, widening class divisions and ongoing problems with the integration of radicalised political and religious communities. Germany undeniably needs big changes after sixteen years of slow-moving Merkelism. But knee-jerk identity politics from Berlin does not strike me as the way to move the country forward together.
It's not only Catholics who don't believe in the 'rapture', a 19th-century invention of a renegade Anglican cleric. The Orthodox and most mainline protestants don't either.
Catholics do not believe in the Rapture. It’s not part of our eschatology, and it violates historic tradition on this matter. For that matter, the Eastern Orthodox don’t believe in the Rapture either, nor do the Coptic Christians, nor do non-Evangelical Protestants. In fact, the majority of Christians, throughout the world, do not believe in the Rapture. The doctrine is almost 100% exclusive to Evangelical Christianity, which is dominant in North America, and most of the English-speaking world. Before I go any further, I probably ought to clarify what I mean by the term “Rapture.”
Basically, the Rapture is a concept that’s very popular in Evangelical Protestantism (Evangelicalism). It’s derived from the teachings of John Nelson Darby, an Anglican minister who went rogue in the early 1800s and became one of the founders of an Evangelical sect called the Plymouth Brethren. The earliest recordings of the Rapture doctrine come from him. Prior to Darby, nobody had ever heard of the Rapture doctrine, and it was completely foreign to the writings of Christians prior to the nineteenth century. One of his disciples, in his later years, was a young lawyer by the name of Cyrus I Scofield, who later published the Scofield Reference Bible in the early twentieth century. Scofield included Darby’s Rapture notes in the margins of this publication. This Bible became extremely popular in Evangelical seminaries all over North America, mainly for its copious cross-references and notes. That is how the Rapture doctrine went from the obscure teachings of a British minister, to the prevailing eschatology of Evangelical Christianity in North America and around the world.
The word “Rapture” has become a household word in most regions of North America. Here’s the gist. The doctrine teaches that in the last 3 ½ to 7 years of world history, millions of people (all over the globe) will vanish, just before the arrival of the Antichrist and the events prophesied to unfold in the Book of Revelation (Apocalypse). They call these prophesied events the “Tribulation.” Those who vanished are immediately taken into heaven, body and soul, where they will wait out the Tribulation in paradise, before returning with Christ at the end of the world, to set up a theocratic kingdom on earth, with Jesus Christ as King, to last a thousand years.
It sounds great, right? All you have to do is believe in Jesus, and you too can be spared from the most difficult period of world history. You can avoid the Antichrist, persecution and martyrdom entirely. These people, taken in the Rapture, are called the “true Christians,” and they consist primarily of Evangelicals, perhaps a few mainstream Protestants, and maybe a few Catholics here and there, so long as they don’t “worship Mary” and such. Basically, Catholics need to reject a good portion of Catholic teaching in order to be considered worthy enough to be taken in the Rapture.
Those who are not taken in the Rapture are “left behind.” This is a term which refers to people who were not considered worthy to be taken in the Rapture. These people will have to endure the horrors of Antichrist, the Tribulation and probably martyrdom for 3 ½ to 7 years while they await the Second Coming of Christ. Those who are “left behind” will consist of non-Christians, some mainstream Protestants, and probably most Catholics. Now, this may not be how all Evangelical laypeople view the Rapture. I find the average Joe tends to be much more liberal about who gets taken in the Rapture. However, this is how the Rapture is taught from behind the pulpit in most Evangelical churches.
Suffice it to say, Catholics cannot believe in the Rapture doctrine, mainly because it’s rubbish.
Here’s why…
There is nothing written in Scripture that specifically says there is a Rapture before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. One can find a plethora of Scripture passages that reference the Second Coming, and the events that will transpire before, during and after. However, one would be hard pressed to find a single passage that explicitly says Jesus will come to secretly snatch-away (Rapture) his Church some 3 ½ to 7 years before his official and public Return at the end of the world. In fact, every Biblical reference to the Church being taken up to meet him in the air is a reference to his Second Coming at the end of the world. The Scriptures are plain and clear on this. The two events are simultaneous – one in the same. Jesus Returns, and the Church rises up to meet him in the air. There is no space of time between the Church rising up and the Second Coming. Nothing in Scripture implies that, nothing at all. The Rapture doctrine not only lacks Biblical support, but it directly contradicts thousands of years of Christian tradition concerning the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. It’s just the eccentric teaching of a rogue Anglican minister that was picked up by a lawyer who published it in a Reference Bible. That’s it. That’s all there is to it. For all of the books, novels, movies and video games produced, the thousands of Evangelical pastors who have preached it, and the millions of Evangelicals who believe it, the doctrine has never been anything more than that. It’s a 200 year old doctrine, formulated by an obscure Anglican clergyman who forfeited his ministry to found yet another branch of Protestantism, made popular by a single lawyer who published a pretty handy Reference Bible about 100 years ago.
Catholics should not be troubled by this, because it’s not our place to believe any of it. In fact, we should reject it outright. It not only contradicts the traditions of the Church on this topic, spanning 2,000 years, but it has zero support in the Scriptures. The passages Evangelicals use, to support their belief on the Rapture, either point directly to the Second Coming of Christ, or else they are interpretation blunders that they’ve given doctrinal weight to. When we consider the magnitude of this outright heresy, and the overwhelming number of Evangelicals who subscribe to it, the credibility of Evangelicalism itself should be questioned. That’s a big part of what happened to me. Once I discovered the outright Scripture-twisting needed to support the Rapture doctrine, and the utter simplicity of historical Christian teaching on the Second Coming, I was compelled to abandon my Evangelicalism entirely. I switched over to traditional Protestantism, in the form of Anglicanism, before eventually becoming Catholic.
Here is one common Bible passage used by Evangelicals to support their Rapture doctrine…
For this we tell you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with God’s trumpet. The dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. So we will be with the Lord forever.
1 THESSALONIANS 4:15-17
Take a good look at this passage. Read it over a few times. Is there anything in here that indicates a massive separation of time between believers being “caught up” and the Return of Christ? No. The plain-sense reading of that passage seems to indicate the two features (being caught up to Christ, and descent of Christ from heaven) are one simultaneous event. Don’t take my word for it. Read it again. Read it in any Bible translation version you want. Read it in the original Greek if you like. Knock yourself out! Enjoy! Read it over and over again. If you see anything in that passage indicating a massive separation of time between believers being “caught up” and Jesus Christ descending from heaven, let me know. Because as far as I’m concerned, it just isn’t there.
Here are some more Biblical passages Evangelicals use to support their Rapture doctrine…
Behold, I tell you a mystery. We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we will be changed. For this perishable body must become imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable body will have become imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then what is written will happen: “Death is swallowed up in victory. “Death, where is your sting? Hades, where is your victory?”
1 CORINTHIANS 15:51-55
But immediately after the suffering of those days, the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken; and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky. Then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. He will send out his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together his chosen ones from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other… But no one knows of that day and hour, not even the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
MATTHEW 24:29-31, 36
But you watch. Behold, I have told you all things beforehand. But in those days, after that oppression, the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, the stars will be falling from the sky, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. Then he will send out his angels, and will gather together his chosen ones from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the sky… But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
MARK 13:23-27, 32
Once again, the plain-sense reading of these passages seems to be pretty clear. They concern the Second Coming of Christ at the end of the world. They give vivid descriptions of what that will be like, and it sounds amazing! But there is nothing in here to indicate a massive amount of time, spanning 3 ½ to 7 years, between the Second Coming of Christ, and the resurrection of the dead in Christ, and the coming together of all believers to meet him in the air. Once again, the plain-sense reading of these passages seems to indicate a singular, multifaceted event, where everything happens simultaneously. There is nothing here to indicate two separate events, where believers are caught-up (raptured) in one event, then 3 ½ to 7 years pass, before the Second Coming happens in another event. Don’t take my word for it. Read those passages again. See for yourself. If you can spot anything that indicates a span of time separating the resurrection and ascension of believers, from the Second Coming of Christ, please let me know. Because I’ve been reading these passages for over thirty years, and I still have yet to see it.
Now we move on to the so-called “proof text” Evangelicals use to back their Rapture doctrine. Here, they say, is proof positive that there is a separation of events between the catching-up (rapture) of true Christians, and the Second Coming…
But no one knows of that day and hour, not even the angels of heaven, but my Father only. As the days of Noah were, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in those days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ship, and they didn’t know until the flood came and took them all away, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and one will be left. Watch therefore, for you don’t know in what hour your Lord comes. But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what watch of the night the thief was coming, he would have watched, and would not have allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore also be ready, for in an hour that you don’t expect, the Son of Man will come.
MATTHEW 24:36-44
As you can see, a plain-sense reading of this passage would seem to indicate that there will come an event when some people will be taken away, and others will be “left behind.” The implication here, so Evangelicals tell us, is that God is taking away true believers to heaven, while those who are not Christians, or false believers, will be “left behind.” Thus, they triumphantly declare, the Rapture and Second Coming are two completely different events, separated by a span of time. Namely because, if some are “left behind,” what else could they be “left behind” for, other than the Tribulation of Antichrist.
Hold on there, not so fast! Let’s take a closer look at that passage, shall we? What did Jesus say in this passage, BEFORE he started talking about people getting “taken” and others left behind? He was talking about the Great Flood of Noah, right? What exactly did Jesus say about that? Read the passage again. He said people carried on with their normal business, and then the Great Flood came and took them all away. Whoa! Hold on there a second. Just reading this passage in the plain-sense, without injecting our own personal biases, or Darby’s Rapture doctrine, Jesus himself compared being taken away with being swept away in the Great Flood? He compared being taken away with judgement? Don’t take my word for it. Read it again. See for yourself. Based on the context of Jesus’ own comparison/analogy, how can being “taken away” mean anything other than judgement? How can it mean anything other than some kind of punishment? It’s a serious question. Read the passage again. See for yourself.
The context of Jesus’ words here is clearly one of judgement. Those who are “taken away” are taken into judgement. They’re being punished. While those who are “left behind” are being spared. Based on Jesus’ own analogy here, you actually WANT to be “left behind.” You don’t want to be “taken away.”
But if there is any doubt here, the plain-sense reading of being “taken away” as judgement is backed by Luke’s version of the same discourse. In this version, the Apostles ask Jesus to explain himself. Let’s read and see what his response is…
Being asked by the Pharisees when God’s Kingdom would come, he answered them, “God’s Kingdom doesn’t come with observation; neither will they say, ‘Look, here!’ or, ‘Look, there!’ for behold, God’s Kingdom is within you.”
He said to the disciples, “The days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. They will tell you, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Don’t go away or follow after them, for as the lightning, when it flashes out of one part under the sky, shines to another part under the sky; so will the Son of Man be in his day. But first, he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. As it was in the days of Noah, even so it will also be in the days of the Son of Man. They ate, they drank, they married, and they were given in marriage until the day that Noah entered into the ship, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise, even as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; but in the day that Lot went out from Sodom, it rained fire and sulfur from the sky and destroyed them all. It will be the same way in the day that the Son of Man is revealed. In that day, he who will be on the housetop and his goods in the house, let him not go down to take them away. Let him who is in the field likewise not turn back. Remember Lot’s wife! Whoever seeks to save his life loses it, but whoever loses his life preserves it. I tell you, in that night there will be two people in one bed. One will be taken and the other will be left. There will be two grinding grain together. One will be taken and the other will be left.”
They, answering, asked him, “Where, Lord?”
He said to them, “Where the body is, there the vultures will also be gathered together.”
LUKE 17:20-37
Did you catch that? Where are they taken, Lord? Jesus answers; to a place where the buzzards will feast on their corpses.
In both versions of this discourse, in both Matthew’s gospel and Luke’s gospel, Jesus prefaces his “taken away” analogy to the Great Flood of Noah. Any plain-sense reading of this discourse should alert the reader to the prospect that whatever follows isn’t going to be good. The Great Flood was a bad deal, wherein millions of souls perished, as they were swept away by the deluge, and only Noah and his family were “left behind.” The same goes for Lot and his daughters. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were completely destroyed by fire, and only Lot and his daughters were “left behind.”
Then Jesus begins to talk about his Coming, and how some will be “taken” and others will be “left behind.” In Luke’s gospel, however, his Apostles explicitly ask him, where will they be taken? Jesus replies they will be taken to a place where the buzzards will feast on their flesh. This is the plain-sense reading of these passages. So it seems, according to my plain-sense interpretation of these passages, that we actually want to be “left behind,” because being “taken away” implies something really, really bad. Do you doubt my plain-sense interpretation? That’s cool. Go ahead and doubt it. I encourage you to doubt it. Please do! Instead, just go back and read the passages for yourself again, as many times as you like, in any Bible translation you like, and tell me if you come up with a different interpretation that supports the Rapture doctrine. I don’t think you will, but you’re welcome to try.
The last so-called “proof” Evangelicals will often use to back their Rapture doctrine is a singular, and obscure verse in the Book of Revelation…
After these things I looked and saw a door opened in heaven, and the first voice that I heard, like a trumpet speaking with me, was one saying, “Come up here, and I will show you the things which must happen after this.”
REVELATION 4:1
Here in this chapter we see a symbolic view of heaven. I say “symbolic” here, only because there are no words to describe the glory of heaven. The phrase “come up here” is misinterpreted by many Evangelicals as a reference to the Rapture. This is because the voice has the sound of a trumpet, and they cross-reference this to St Paul’s warning that the Second Coming of Christ will be announced with the sound of a trumpet. This is accompanied by the phrase in this verse, “things which must take place after this.”
Evangelicals then recall their own misinterpretation of the seven churches, of the previous two chapters, as “seven church ages” in Christian history. So in their estimation, since this passage now says “after this,” they presume the following text refers to the future Tribulation period.
At best, this is shoddy Biblical exegesis. It would seem that many Evangelicals are oblivious to the fact that God uses a trumpet sound to announce many things in Scripture. If we look back to the first chapter of the Revelation, we can see that John already heard this trumpet-voice in his vision of Christ. Does that mean the Rapture happened then too? Are there two Raptures now?
Evangelical proponents of the Rapture will double-down at this point, correctly observing that the word “church” does not appear in the Book of Revelation again until the nineteenth chapter. Therefore, in their estimation, this “proves” that the Church has been removed from the world during the 3 ½ to 7 year Tribulation in the Last Days, only to return to earth with Christ at his Second Coming later. Of course, there is a problem with proving something from the negative. The lack of a word really doesn’t prove anything. By the same token, we could say the exact same thing about the name Jesus, which does not appear in the Book of Revelation until Chapter 12. So does that mean all these other symbolic references to Christ are not really references to Jesus Christ at all? If we follow the Evangelical logic of negative proof, then we have to assume so. Thus, the image of the man described in Revelation Chapter 1 was really somebody else. Nope! I’m not buying it, since the plain-sense reading of Revelation Chapter 1 is a clear representation of Jesus Christ. In other words, in order to support this radical Evangelical interpretation of Revelation 4:1, we must do violence to the entire Book of Revelation, and force interpretations where they don’t make sense, breaking our own rules of interpretation as we go along.
Negative proof is no proof at all. The phrases “come up here” and “things which must take place after this” are exactly what they sound like. The author is simply called to come witness the scene in heaven. It means nothing more. The reference to time, “after this,” simply means after the first vision of Jesus Christ and his message to the seven types of churches on earth. Anything more is reading into the text.
Evangelicals really don’t have much more to support their Rapture doctrine in the way of actual Scripture. There are mountains of books, Bible commentaries, and opinion heaped upon opinion, which could take years to read them all. I’ve read most of them. None of them, however, actually prove anything. It’s all just one vast echo-chamber, propagating and reverberating the obscure opinion of a rogue Anglican minister, who left Anglicanism some 200 years ago, to pursue a newly budding Evangelical form of Protestantism, that has since blossomed into thousands of new and independent churches, nearly all of them espousing his Rapture doctrine.
Iused to be part of one such Evangelical affiliation called Calvary Chapel, which is heavily into the Rapture doctrine. Like many new Evangelical organizations, this particular church was practically founded on the Rapture doctrine. I left it in the late 1990s for a more classical Protestant church where such bizarre interpretations of Scripture are not found. That classical Protestant church was Anglican, the form of Christianity that John Nelson Darby abandoned to pursue Evangelicalism. Eventually I became Catholic. There are many reasons for that, which I won’t get into here.
If you’re an Evangelical who is just now discovering the insanity of the Rapture doctrine, please allow me to encourage you to do something…
First, do your own homework. Don’t take my word on it. Actually read all the so-called “proof” passages for the Rapture doctrine, in their context, and read them in a plain-sense way.
Second, once you’ve decided that the Rapture is a false doctrine, you need to get away from any church that’s teaching it. If they’ve flubbed up that teaching of Christ so badly, who knows what other teachings of Christ they’re getting wrong. Get out! Go somewhere else.
Third, while I would of course encourage you to consider the Catholic Church (I am a Catholic, so you can’t blame me for trying), if you’re just not ready for that, I completely understand. I wasn’t ready for such a big leap myself back in the late 1990s. So, I get it. Instead, if the Catholic Church is just too much for you, I would encourage you to instead consider the type of Christianity that is most common to the English-speaking people throughout history. By this I mean Anglicanism. If you’re going toward Anglicanism, then you’re going away from John Nelson Darby and his Evangelical Rapture doctrine. Remember, Darby (the inventor of the Rapture doctrine) had to leave the Anglican Church before he could formulate it or promote it. Now I would never steer you toward a liberal Anglican denomination, so The Episcopal Church is OUT, and so is the Anglican Church of Canada. Instead I’m going to recommend two Anglican jurisdictions in North America that should give you exactly what you’re looking for — an expression of Protestant Christianity that is firmly established in the English-speaking world, by English-speaking people, and primarily for English-speaking people. These are the Anglican Church in North America which leans more Protestant/Reformed in style, and the Anglican Church in America which leans more catholic in style. Beyond that, I would only recommend conservative Methodism, which is a direct spin-off of Anglicanism. Because the United Methodist Church has decided to follow The Episcopal Church into liberal modernism, I am recommending the newly established conservative Methodist church instead. The Global Methodist Church is currently in formation, and their website may be down until their official launch in 2022, but you can find some of their churches here. In these churches, both Anglican and Methodist, you will find the most ancient customs and teachings of the historic Christian faith, going back more than a millennium, specifically geared for English-speaking people with a British cultural heritage (UK, US, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa). In these three churches, you’ll be safe from the Rapture doctrine, and most other bizarre misinterpretations of Scripture for that matter.
Fourth, tell your Evangelical family and friends about this. Maybe share this article with them. Explain to them the problems with the Rapture doctrine, and how any church that espouses it is perverting the teaching of Jesus Christ on his Second Coming. If they’re perverting this teaching, they are likely perverting other teachings of Christ, whether they realize it or not.
CONFESSIONAL. The place where the sacrament of penance is administered. In the early Church it was any kind of seat and was generally before the altar in the Middle Ages. In the sixteenth century it took the form of a separate compartment for the kneeling penitent and for the priest, furnished with a grille. This form became prescriptive until after the Second Vatican Council. The new Order of Penance does not specify for the Latin Rite what the confessional should be. It merely says: "The sacrament of penance is celebrated in the place and location [in loco et sede] prescribed by law" (Ordo Paenitentiae, IV, 12).
The Notre Dame Cathedral, one of the most iconic buildings in France, lost both its roof and spire during the 2019 blaze in which it was almost entirely destroyed.
While it has been decided that the exterior of the cathedral will be rebuilt with traditional materials, questions have now been raised regarding the fate of the building’s interior.
According to renovation plans divulged to The Telegraph, the cathedral may have its interior become a politically correct “theme park”, with parts of the building’s interior that were left mostly untouched by the fire set to change dramatically.
Confessional boxes, altars, and classical statues are to be replaced with modern art murals, while light and sound effects will be added to the building in order to create so-called “emotional spaces”.
“Themed chapels” are also to be added to the building as part of what is being dubbed a”discovery trail”. The chapels will feature Africa and Asia prominently, with Europe, the Americas and Oceania being cast into the background.
The final chapel of the trail, dedicated to so-called “reconciled creation”, will focus entirely on environmentalism. Bible quotes will also be projected onto chapel walls in a variety of languages, including Mandarin.
“It’s as if Disney were entering Notre Dame,” said Paris-architect Maurice Culot, adding: “What they are proposing to do to Notre Dame would never be done to Westminster Abbey or Saint Peter’s in Rome. It’s a kind of theme park and very childish and trivial given the grandeur of the place.”
An unnamed senior source close to the renovation questioned: “Can you imagine the administration of the Holy See allowing something like this in the Sistine Chapel?,” warning that the planned rework would “mutilate” the work of architect Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, who led a major restoration of the church during the mid-19th-century.
“This is political correctness gone mad,” the source continued, saying: “They want to turn Notre Dame into an experimental liturgical showroom that exists nowhere else whereas it should be a landmark where the slightest change must be handled with great care.”
According to the source, General Jean-Louis Georgelin –who was put in charge of reconstruction efforts by French President Emmanuel Macron — as well as Paris Archbishop Michel Aupetit, are keen on pushing forward with the proposed plans despite scepticism among those involved in the project.
A crucial meeting of France’s national heritage commission on the renovation is set to take place on December 9th.
The 14th-century building has previously been at the centre of architectural controversy, with a number of modernist redesigns having been proposed since the fire. Some proposals have included the addition of a glass roof, with others suggesting the building’s iconic spire should be replaced with one made almost entirely out of glass.
Wait. Minorities don’t celebrate Christmas? Oh. I see. They’re talking about Muslims but they don’t want to say Muslims because they fear having their heads torn off. Literally.
But it gets even crazier when you see who’s criticizing this insanity.
Breitbart:
UK Civil servants have axed the word ‘Christmas’ from a proposed government campaign, for fear the term will offend minorities.
British civil servants have apparently embraced their inner Scrooge, vetoing the use of the word ‘Christmas’ from being used in a coronavirus testing drive aimed at students, arguing that the use of the term runs the risk of offending minorities within the country.
The campaign, which reportedly would have revolved around ministers using the slogan “Don’t take COVID home for Christmas,” is part of a larger government effort to limit the spread of the Chinese coronavirus after two cases of the Omicron variant were discovered on-shore.
‘We have been advised by Cabinet Office that we should not use the word Christmas – as the Government campaign needs to be inclusive and some religions don’t celebrate Christmas,” an email seen by The Mail on Sunday read. “The other option was ‘festive season’ which keeps the emotional motivation.”
“We have gone with ‘Don’t take COVID-19 home for the holidays’ – as it links to school and university Christmas holidays,” the email continued. “The alliteration with ‘home’ and ‘holidays’ scans well and is memorable.”
Despite the politically correct alliteration, this suggestion was also shot down in a follow-up email sent by a different British bureaucrat.”
Conservative MP Saqib Bhatti lambasted the decision to remove the mention of Christmas from the campaign.
“As a Muslim, I find it ridiculous we can’t enjoy this special time of year. I look forward to showing my new son his first Christmas tree. The idea you can’t mention Christmas is completely ridiculous,” Bhatti said.
A Muslim MP is the one taking these maniacs to task. Good for him.
He also talks about celebrating Christmas which confuses me a little bit. Um. What is he celebrating? The cultural Christmas? That all seems rather besides the point when you’re talking about celebrating the birth of Christ, doesn’t it?
Once again, there’s danger on all sides. On the one hand, for some, Christmas can’t be mentioned because it’s too religious. Others, however, celebrate Christmas but a hollowed out Christ-less version. Too religious/not religious.
I honestly don’t know which one presents a greater immediate danger.
I begin with a brief word on what this article is not. It is not a detailed synopsis of the content of Dr. Peter Kwasniewski’s newest book. Nor is it a summary of the book’s potent argumentation. Yes, those points matter. But sometimes it is impossible to get past the raw and transforming impact that a book can have. For this reason, I cannot bring myself to write a standard book review.
Now, normally I approach a new book by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski with great anticipation and enthusiasm. His books offer an abundance of Catholic substance and riches. But this time the anticipation was lacking. To be honest, I approached his latest offering, Ministers of Christ: Recovering the Roles of Clergy and Laity in an Age of Confusion, more with a feeling of fear mixed with indifference.
You see, I have mentally checked out. I have mentally checked out of Pope Francis’ Catholic playground. He has taken away my Mass. He has taken away much of the public pride and joy that comes with being a Catholic. He has armed the Church with a legion of episcopal minions to do his bidding. And he has been a constant source of frustration for my own faith. Lord have mercy on him and all, but I have mentally checked out, at least temporarily. Sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to ignore it.
Nevertheless, I decided to build the old metaphorical bridge and get over myself. Or, at least, I put my mental block on hold. Yes, I did in fact pick up Kwasniewski’s new book. Of course I did. Thanks be to God I did.
My first thoughts as I began the book were as follows: if I ever write a book, I will never, EVER, get Leila Lawler to write the foreword for it. I’m joking, I think. Yes, Lawler wrote the foreword for Ministers of Christ. Her foreword is good. Really good. It was an absolute delight to read. It would surely overshadow anything I could ever say. Thankfully, her foreword was written for a Kwasniewski book. He came out all right in the end.
In terms of the actual book, it was not at all what I was expecting. I simply expected a thorough review and analysis of Pope Francis’ post-synodal (his 8th synod? 11th? I forget…) attempt to formalize having women in the sanctuary. In reality, what I got from this book was far more than anticipated.
The book has it all. Yes, there are foundations given concerning the human body, being male/female, the priesthood, Church history, “Incarnate realism,” and, ultimately, how this all relates to Pope Francis’ meandering path towards women deaconesses. Kwasniewski is a teacher at heart, after all. In this regard, Ministers of Christ offers timely, compelling, and convincing argumentation refuting the latest theological gimmick from the Vatican. Such intellectual excellence is what readers have grown to expect from a Kwasniewski book – may we never take this blessing for granted.
But, as stated, the book is so much more. I found it to be a how-to for living an abundant Catholic life within the body, vocation, and epoch God has provided us all.
A few examples: there is outstanding advice given on how to handle the Church crisis (as learned from Arian times). The chapter on active participation is a complete gem, and surely pummels arguments in favor of the busybody-ministry so rampant in the modern Church. The chapter on veils, on its own, is worth the price of the book. The section on St. Therese of Lisieux is very touching; the chapter on the Josephs very necessary. Finally, Kwasniewski’s explanation that the traditional Latin Mass, by its very nature, is the opposite of current gender theory truly hit home – no wonder so many people want to see the TLM banned.
In short, each subsequent chapter had the effect of renewing my faith and confidence in Christ’s Church. This book became for me an inspired roadmap towards living a devout Catholic life. Undoubtedly, it was just what I needed for overcoming my mental and spiritual desolation.
My fear and indifference melted away as I read Ministers of Christ, or, I should say, as I plowed through Ministers of Christ – I say this because the 300+ pages flew by quickly and smoothly. Yet it is one of those books – and I don’t say this about many – that I will pick up and reread. Inevitably, it is because Kwasniewski hit upon an idea, a notion, a longing, a hope and a prayer, deep within my overwhelmed and overburdened soul. As I read, I pondered some deeper questions of life…
Who are we?
What has become of us?
Why have I checked out, mentally?
What am I supposed to be doing?
Where is God in all of this… mess?
To all of these questions that prayerfully arose throughout my reading, I will simply offer a few words from Kwasniewski himself:
All of us are far too consumed with the idea of ‘working for God.’ We have to learn to rest in God. What is eternal life? It is the most intense activity: perfectly resting in the Father (p. 205).
And one more:
This, I believe, is the primary lesson that St. Joseph, the man of silence, the man of prompt obedience to the divine Word for which he was intently listening, would wish to teach us today. Perhaps he would say: ‘Given a choice between another hour at the human office and the recitation of part of the Divine Office, choose the latter. It will be better for you, for your work, for the Church, and for the world (p. 208).
In other words, maybe the key to all of this… this mess… this activism… this destruction… this loss of male and female… this loss of purpose… this loss of peace… has been our loss of prayer. Step by step, may we… I… recover what it truly means to pray… to rest in the Father… to have life… to have it more abundantly.
No, I did not expect the book to take me, in my own mind, where it did. But I am most thankful that it did. Now, I pray others will allow themselves the same.
A man known for his love of peace, kindness and great generosity, demonstrated throughout his life such as in giving bread to the poor. He was murdered in 1127 in the church of St Donatian in Bruges. He was beatified in 1882 by Pope Leo XIII.
1. The spirit of peace pervades the Gospel. When Jesus is born, choirs of Angels sing above the stable in Bethlehem: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men of good will.” (Luke 2:14) When our Saviour has risen gloriously from the dead, He appears to His disciples and greets them with the words: “Peace be to you.” Finally, when He is departing from this earth He leaves His peace to His followers as their inheritance. “Peace I leave with you,” He says to them, “my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Do not let your heart be troubled, or be afraid.” (John 14:27)
Exactly what is the peace of Jesus Christ? It is much different from worldly peace, presuming that the world can give some kind of peace. St. Paul says of the Saviour that “he himself is our peace.” (Eph. 2:14) How are we to understand what is meant by this? The Apostle himself explains when he writes: “Having been justified by faith, let us have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Rom. 5:1)
Jesus Christ, therefore, is our peacemaker. He has shouldered our iniquities and has offered Himself to the Father as a victim of expiation and of reconciliation. It is at the price of Christ's precious blood that we have regained peace with God and freedom from our sins. This is the peace which our Lord has given us. Let us remember, however, that if we return to the slavery of sin we shall lose at once the jewel of peace which Jesus Christ has bestowed on us. “There is no peace to the wicked.” (Is. 48:22) We have experienced on many occasions how true this is. Sin destroys peace of soul because it deprives us of Jesus, without Whom peace cannot survive. Let us resolve, therefore, to remain always close to our Lord and far from sin. Then only shall we be able to preserve our peace of mind in the midst of temptations and of earthly sorrows.
2. We should not imagine, however, that the peace which Jesus brought to us is a lifeless peace like that of a cemetery. On the contrary, it is the peace of conquest, a living peace. It cannot be attained by the sluggard who is aiming at an easy and comfortable existence, but by the generous warrior who is always prepared to throw himself into the fight for virtue, for the glory of God, and for the salvation of souls.
The peace of Jesus Christ is a victory over the evil which is rampant within us and around us. It demands vigilance, strife, and perseverance in fidelity to our Lord. It requires the spirit of sacrifice, the love of God, and dedication to the welfare of our fellow-men. It is the fruit of internal and external combat. It excludes all rancour, envy, detraction, and malice, which is why it costs so much hardship and conflict. When a man has gained the victory, however, he experiences that wonderful spiritual tranquillity which God alone can give.
3.”Blessed are the peacemakers,” said Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, “for they shall be called children of God.”(Mt. 5:9)
True Christian peace, which accompanies the perfect control of the passions and complete dedication to God's cause, makes us like God and enables us by His grace to become His adopted children. He is the God of peace, in Whom there is no conflict, but only perfect order and harmony. Since He is pure act, He understands Himself fully in all His beauty and perfection, and knowing Himself He loves Himself. He is peace, in an active and not in a passive sense. For this reason the peacemakers are singled out in a special way as the children of God. In other words, they become like God when they acquire that interior tranquillity which is the fruit of virtue and of victory over the flesh. With the help of divine grace, we should do our utmost to gain this peace.
The Holy Prophet Nahum, whose name means “God consoles,” was from the village of Elkosh (Galilee). He lived during the seventh century B.C. The Prophet Naum prophesies the ruin of the Assyrian city of Nineveh because of its iniquity, the destruction of the Israelite kingdom, and the blasphemy of King Sennacherib against God. The Assyrian king Ashurbanipal died in 632 B.C., and over the next two decades, his empire began to crumble. Nineveh fell in 612 B.C.
Nahum differs from most of the prophets in as much as he does not issue any call to repentance, nor does he denounce Israel for infidelity to God.
Details of the prophet’s life are unknown. He died at the age of forty-five and was buried in his native region. He is the seventh of the Twelve Minor Prophets
The Prophet Nahum is invoked for people with mental disorders.
Troparion — Tone 4
We celebrate the memory / of Your prophet Nahum, O Lord; / through him, we entreat You, / save our souls.
Kontakion — Tone 2
(Podoben: “Today You have shown forth...”) Enlightened by the Spirit, your pure heart became the dwelling place of most splendid prophecy; / for you saw things far off as if they were near. / Therefore, we honor you, blessed and glorious Prophet Nahum.
In this world of ours we do not so much go on and discover small things: rather we go on and discover big things. It is the detail that we see first; it is the design that we only see very slowly, and some men die never having seen it at all. We see certain squadrons in certain uniforms gallop past; we take an arbitrary fancy to this or that colour, to this or that plume. But it often takes us a long time to realize what the fight is about or even who is fighting whom.
So in the modern intellectual world we can see flags of many colours, deeds of manifold interest; the one thing we cannot see is the map. We cannot see the simplified statement which tells us what is the origin of all the trouble.
CHAPTER L. Of the Brethren who are working at a distance from the Oratory, or are on a journey
1 Apr. 1 Aug. 1 Dec.
Let the brethren who are at work at a great distance, or on a journey, and cannot come to the Oratory at the proper time (the Abbot judging such to be the case) perform the Work of God there where they are labouring, in godly fear, and on bended knees. In like manner, let not those who are sent on a journey allow the appointed Hours to pass by; but, as far as they can, observe them by themselves, and not neglect to fulfil their obligation of divine service.
December 2nd 2021, the 27th day of the Moon, were born into the better life:
At Rome, (about the year 363,) the holy Virgin and martyr Bibiana, who under, the profane Emperor Julian was for Christ's sake flogged to death with scourges loaded with lead. There likewise, the holy martyrs the Priest Eusebius, the Deacon Marcellus, Hippolytus, Maximus, Adria, Paulina, Neo, Mary, Martana, and Aurelia, who suffered martyrdom under the judge Secundian, in the persecution under the Emperor Valerian, (in the year 256.) Likewise at Rome, (at the end of the 2nd century,) the holy martyr Pontian and four others. In Africa, the holy martyrs Severus, Securus, Januarius, and Victorinus, who were there crowned with martyrdom, (about the year of Christ 300.) At Aquileia, (about the year 409,) the holy Confessor Chromatius, Bishop (of that see.) At Imola, (in the year 450,) holy Peter, Bishop of Ravenna, styled Chrysologus, (or him of the golden words,) famous for his teaching and holiness, whose feast we keep upon the 4th day of this present month. At Verona, (in the sixth century,) the holy Confessor Lupus, Bishop (of that see.) At Edessa, (about the year 468,) holy Nonnus, Bishop (first of that see, and afterwards of Heliopolis in Syria,) through whose prayers Pelagia the penitent was converted to Christ. At Troas, in Phrygia, holy Bishop Silvanus, famous for miracles. At Brescia, holy Bishop Evasius. V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins. R. Thanks be to God.
