Basically, the whole controversy centers around the period of peace which is to follow the Great Chastisement and precede the Rise of Antichrist. Mr. Bowring, following a strict interpretation of the private prophecies of Our Lady of La Salette sees the interim peace as lasting no more than 25 years. Thus, the period of Great Chastisement and Great Tribulation of Antichrist practically run into each other, giving survivors of the Great Chastisement only a quarter century to catch their breath before the whole thing starts up again with the next apocalyptic phase. In contrast, Mr. Birch interprets such prophecies more loosely, allowing for at least a couple centuries between the Great Chastisement and the Great Tribulation of Antichrist. He too acknowledges the 25 year span prophesied at La Salette, however, he more loosely interprets this as meaning a 25 year period of absolute peace wherein the Great Monarch rules unquestionably and the world population appreciates what God has done. He also cites other Church approved prophets and mystics that back this interpretation. (The whole book is a much more thorough and exhaustive work on the subject of private revelation.) After this 25 year period, the world starts it's downward decline again. However, Birch recognizes that it may take a couple centuries for the depravity of man to reach the point where the final Antichrist makes his public appearance.
Both books correctly recognize the Jewish identity of the final Antichrist, (whenever that period of Antichrist is supposed to come), and the nature of the final apostasy that will lead to the Great Tribulation that concludes the Book of Revelation and sets the stage for the physical return of Jesus Christ. The final apostasy of course is the rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah, in favor of a new Jewish "king" that will present himself as the "real Messiah." Both books recognize that a future anti-pope will likely aid in this deception. They just disagree on the timing . Bowring thinks it happens strictly 25 years after the Great Chastisement, while Birch allows room for it to happen much later.
In my personal opinion, when we consider the magnitude of the Great Chastisement, and what this will ultimately do to the human race, it seems ridiculous to me that humanity would turn it's back on Christ totally within just 25 years. I suppose it's possible when we consider the fallen state of mankind and what we're capable of. Nevertheless, we're talking about a majority of the world's population being wiped out in the Great Chastisement. We're talking about events so horrendous and catastrophic, indeed so "Biblical" in proportions, that it's sure to leave a scar on the survivor's memory so deep that falling totally back into depravity is unlikely. There is one thing about the 25 year mark that makes logical sense, which is why I tend to agree more with Birch's interpretation of the period of peace. Twenty-five years is exactly how long it takes for a new generation to be born and raised that has no personal memory of the Great Chastisement. If anybody is going to start doubting, it's going to be this generation. However, it is all together likely that the doubt, and subsequent slide back into depravity, will not occur overnight. The generation that remembers the Great Chastisement is still around, and will likely still be around for another sixty or seventy years. It is only after this generation is completely gone that the threat of doubt becomes a substantial danger.
So in review, I like the spiritual message of Mr. Bowring's book (The Secrets, Chastisement, and Triumph of the Two Hearts of Jesus and Mary
12 comments; post here:
I enjoyed the videos and I will have to check out those books. Thanks!
I like the videos, but Garabandal? Medjugorje? Oh yeah, and don't forget to buy the book!
I would love to share the first one with friends and family, but the "only Mary can save you part at the end" would freak out their protestant (in)sensibilities and drive them further away.
Sir Knight,
Haven't six consecutive bishops of the Diocese of Santander condemned the alleged apparitions of Garabandal?
Some of the prophecies made have turned out to be clearly false. Evidently a great miracle was supposed to take place which Pope Paul Vl and St. Padre Pio would witness and, Paul Vl personally knew the date the miracle would occur. Another false prophecy made was that at the time of Pope John XXlll (when this apparition took place) there would only be three more popes until the end of time. This alone tells us that this is a false apparition. There are more red flags concerning this false apparition that are to numerous to cite here. Also, all of the visionaries signed an agreement with the Vatican promising that they would never speak about or promote this false apparition again.
As for the illumination of conscience, some genuine saints have had revelations concerning this including St. Faustina, St. Edmund Campion so I don't discount this. The devil is very sly and fully capable of mixing genuine revelations in with his false ones in order to deceive.
Citing unreliable visionaries is unfortunately all to common among modern authors of this genre. The legendary Yves Dupont cited prophecies from the likes of Nostradamus and Edward Cayce. You just can't get more "off base" than those two. (What business does light have with darkness, or prophecy with the occult?) Yet in spite of that Dupont put together some fairly good booklets outlining the basics of Catholic prophecy.
Meanwhile younger authors like Kelly Bowring likewise cite unreliable visionaries as well, not as bad as Nostradamus and Edward Cayce mind you, but unreliable nonetheless. Still, Bowring manages to pull of an imprimatur! How did he do it!?!
Bowring employs a similar strategy as Dupont. He builds the framework of his book on reliable Church approved prophets, and then uses the unreliable and questionable (albeit sensational) prophets as backup to help drive home the main points already outlined by approved prophets. Both authors managed to get away with this method, and Bowring used it so well he even got an imprimatur.
Personally, I don't like this method of writing. I tend to think it's like playing with matches. That's yet one more reason why I prefer Mr. Birch's book instead - "Trial, Tribulation & Triumph." Birch is very careful to make sure he only uses reference texts from Church approved visionaries. He literally throws out anything that is the least bit questionable. To me, that's rock solid writing, and that is why I recommend his book over Bowring's.
Seems you aren't the only one Sir Knight with a "the end is near" message amongst Catholic speakers this week. Michael Voris of RealCatholicTV.com/ Had this to say tonight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oT9wQ4odwz8&playnext=1&videos=s0sWYCzQdb4&feature=sub
Has anyone been watching his youtube videos and/or RealCatholicTV videos? Agree with him? Disagree with him?
Mr Knight, let me repeat what i said on another post of yous: we must be careful not to go "apparition chasing" or falling into the alleged prophecies, or putting words into Our Lady's mouth. Authentic apparitions are ALWAYS backed up by miracles (Fatima, Lourdes). As for the rest (Garabandal, Bayside, Medj) its best to ignore them. I was driving on I 95 yesterday and saw a huge billboard with a picture of Mary and the message "It is my time" Call 1800 Medj---- The "message" you get is bland feel good "isn't life wonderful" dribble.
No, dear Knight, we have the church's AUTHENTIC teaching about the end times (You know not the day or the hour) the faith to live, the mass to nourish us and confession to purify us. Pete Frey
The blogger questions the prophecy of the 25-year gap between the Chastisement and the Antichrist and the "strict chronology of events". He says he thinks, or rather hopes, it will be longer delayed than the prophecies state, and he says he prefers authors who agree with him.
But, this is not how religious history shows such things. Remember, it was a short time from Palm Sunday to Good Friday. When the devil attacks and incites supporters, they can become attackers quickly enough.
But, overall, I appreciate this blogger's comments, really. As the author of one of these books in review, I can only say that I followed the sources, and only the one's that had received solid Church recognition. I added no speculation, even if I would have wanted to, like hoping the delay from the time of the Chastisement to the time of the Antichrist would be longer. Instead, I avoided all such speculation, and that is likely why my book received the Imprimatur, while the other in this review did not.
When it comes to prophecy, accuracy is better than wishful or speculative thinking. The first is credible, while the latter is not, as time and history proves well. May I suggest Habakkuk 2:2-3 on this point.
Thank you again for your kind review. I hope your readers like "The Secrets, Chastisement, and Triumph" book and its solid reporting of the heavenly Message for our times.
I believe I have discovered a problem in the passages which Mr. Bowring quotes,.............................
(A) “France, Italy, Spain and England will be at war. Blood will flow in the streets. Frenchman will fight Frenchman, Italian will fight Italian. A general war will follow which will be appalling...The wicked will make use of all their evil ways. Men will kill each other, massacre each other even in their homes...The righteous will suffer greatly. Their prayers, their penance's, and their tears will rise up to Heaven...(B) And then Jesus Christ, in an act of His justice and His great mercy, will command His Angels to have all His enemies put to death... the earth will become desert-like. (C) And then peace will be made, and man will be reconciled with God. Jesus Christ will be served, worshiped and glorified. Charity will flourish everywhere. THE NEW KINGS WILL BE THE RIGHT ARM OF THE HOLY CHURCH, which will be strong, humble, pious in it's poor but fervent imitation of the virtues of Jesus Christ. THE GOSPEL WILL BE PREACHED EVERYWHERE AND MANKIND will make great progress in it's faith, for there will be unity among the workers of Jesus Christ and man will live in fear of God… " This peace among men will be short-lived. Twenty-five years of plentiful harvests will make them forget that the sins of men are the cause of all the troubles on this earth. (D) A FORERUNNER OF THE ANTICHRIST, with his troops gathered from several nations, will fight against the true Christ, the only Saviour of the world. He will shed much blood and will want to annihilate the worship of God to make himself be looked upon as a God."................................
“There will only be true peace on earth after the death of the Antichrist... (1) after the Antichrist, who will fall body and soul into hell, the ground opening in the presence of the thousands of spectators coming from all the parts of the world to be witness to his exaltation (as he announced) and (claimed) entrance to heaven, (2) all will convert, glorying the single God of heaven and earth; THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WILL BE PREACHED IN ALL HIS PURITY ON ALL THE EARTH. The churches will be re-established (reouvertes); THE KINGS WILL BE THE RIGHT HAND OF THE HOLY SEE; there will be one Shepherd and only one herd; charity will reign in all people’s hearts. (3) THE WORLD WILL STILL LAST (FOR) CENTURIES.”..............................................
Carefully compare the wording in event (C) “THE NEW KINGS WILL BE THE RIGHT ARM OF THE HOLY CHURCH” with event (2) “THE KINGS WILL BE THE RIGHT HAND OF THE HOLY SEE”...they are almost verbatim descriptions. In the first quote, after the kings have been made the right arm of the holy church a forerunner of the antichrist will come. In the second quote the world still lasts for centuries after the kings have become the right hand of the holy see. Very odd. Very confusing. It is hard to believe that they are reffering to two different events.
I tend to agree more with Mr. Birch's chronology of events.
Another point to consider:
Although some of Fathers of the Church thought that the Antichrist would appear shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire (c. 476 A.D.), St. Irenaeus’ works do not allow such an interpretation. As he himself declares, “For in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall it be concluded…in six days created things were completed: it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the sixth thousand year…when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day.”
Although some of the Fathers thought that the six thousand year mark was already close at hand (500 A.D. was only about 4500 years of history), their prophetic vision remains valid.
“After the three days of darkness, St. Peter and St. Paul, having come down from Heaven, Will preach in the whole world and designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and settle upon the cardinal who is to become Pope. Christianity, then will spread throughout the world. He is the Holy Pontiff, chosen by God to **withstand the storm**. At the end, he will have the gift of miracles, and his name shall be
praised over the whole earth.”
Originally, I had thought that the Three Days of Darkness concluded the chastisement of Communism, but Mr. Bowring says that it will conclude the reign of Antichrist (which according to him will come a couple decades after the chastisement of Communism.) In that case, what “storm" is Taigi referring to? This new pope is supposed to usher in the Era of peace (lasting centuries).
According to the La Salette prophesy at the end of the Chastisement of Communism, “Jesus Christ, by an act of His justice and His great mercy towards the righteous, **will command His angels to put all His enemies to death. At one blow the persecutors of the Church of Jesus Christ and all men given to sin will perish, and the earth will become like a desert…”**
Doesn’t the above sound like Taigi’s Three Days of Darkness?
“There shall come over the whole earth an intense darkness lasting three days and three nights. Nothing can be seen, and the air will be laden with pestilence which will claim mainly, but not only, the enemies of religion. It will be impossible to use any man-made lighting during this darkness, except blessed candles. During this alarm, the faithful should stay in their houses and recite the Rosary and beg God for Mercy. He, who out of curiosity, opens his window to look out, or leaves his home, will fall dead on the spot….”
“All the enemies of the Church, whether known or unknown, will perish over the whole earth during that universal darkness, with the exception of a few whom God will soon convert. The air shall be infected by demons who will appear under all sorts of hideous forms….”
Instead Mr. Bowring links Taigi’s Three Days of Darkness with this part of the La Salette prophesy...
“Here is the king of the kings of darkness…In pride he will rise skyward to go up to Heaven; he will be stifled by the breath of St. Michael the Archangel. He will fall and the earth - which for three days will have been in constant change - will open its fiery bosom; he will be plunged forever with all his followers into hells eternal chasms.”
Your thoughts on this?
Catholic Knight: In your article you talk about the 25 years prophesied by Our Lady of La Salette. That is from the false version of Melanie's secret which was released in 1879. I am a firm believer in Our Lady of La Salette, but it is WELL established that only the first publication of the seers prophecy of 1851 is actually approved by Church authorities, while the later publication in 1879 which has questionable additions has been unapproved by the Magisterium. The unapproved portion put into question includes the part about the period of peace only lasting 25 years (while the approved edition in 1851 does not contain that). For more information, see these sources, which are well referenced and reliable:
http://www.arcaneknowledge.org/catholic/lasalette.htm
http://www.unitypublishing.com/prophecy/fake-salette.htm
The idea the period of peace only lasts 25 years is far-fetched and contradicts what other Church-approved prophecies seem to indicate. Logically speaking, it will likely take at least one generation to restore Christendom and convert most of the known world to Catholicism as the prophecies indicate will happen. Many prophecy scholars predict the period of peace will last at minimum 50 years and possibly as long as 500 years.
Post a Comment