I
don't recall how, but earlier this evening I stumbled across this blog, where yesterday – under the great title "The
Antichrist Will Be a Liberal!" – the author posts a quote from the Times (UK) and
Catholic Online. These articles, from two very different
directions, report on words to Pope Benedict from retired Cardinal Giacomo
Biffi, who led a just-completed retreat for His Holiness and other Vatican
officials.
According
to these articles, reports from Vatican Radio have related that Biffi has been
speaking on meditations from a nineteenth-century Russian philosopher,
concerning the Antichrist. It may surprise non-Catholics and Catholics alike,
but we do believe that there is, or will be, an Antichrist (although references
to this figure in the Book of Revelation are arguably about Nero), even while
not subscribing to the silly and non-scriptural (yes, folks) "Rapturist"
teachings of many of our fundamentalist brothers and sisters.
Quoting
one Vatican Radio report, the articles quote Biffi: "the Antichrist presents himself as a pacifist, ecologist
and ecumenist. He convokes an ecumenical council and seeks the consensus of all
the Christian confessions, conceding something to each one. The crowds follow
him, except for tiny groups of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants. Chased by
the Antichrist, they tell him, 'You have given us everything except for the one
thing that interests us, Jesus Christ'."
It
appears that the blog's author, TrulyEqual, read the UK article much more
closely than the one from Catholic Online; the Times seems to view the Cardinal as not in step with where they
feel he should be. TrulyEqual quickly goes ballistic at the concept of the
Antichrist being a liberal, and plays up even further what he sees as extreme
conservatism on Biffi's part.
After
reading TrulyEqual's posting, I sent in a comment to the effect that he (and my
fellow commenter-respondents) needed to look more closely at what the
Antichrist would be like – i.e., more than the mere "opposite-of-Christ".
That lengthy comment follows, below, in just a moment. Let me point out first,
though, while I wipe egg from my face, that I didn't look further into Cardinal
Biffi, and relied mostly on TrulyEqual's sketch of him… which seems more
caricature than true to life. My sharing his misunderstanding allowed me to
toss off a clever bon mot,
which I now must withdraw.
Anyway,
my comment to TrulyEqual, only slightly edited:
"Antichrist" = simply
someone who is against "Christ(ianity)". But re THE Antichrist, see
the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 675-7, for the
Church's official view:
"Before Christ's second coming the Church must pass through a final trial
that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies
her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the 'mystery of iniquity' in the form of a
religious deception offering [all] men [and women] an apparent solution to their problems at the price of
apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the
Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God
and of his Messiah come in the flesh.
"(The Antichrist's deception already begins to take shape in the world
every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope
which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment.
The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the
kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the 'intrinsically
perverse' political form of a secular messianism.)
"The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final
Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection. The
kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church
through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God's victory over the final
unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven. God's
triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after
the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world."
This may not exactly clear things
up, folks. But bear in mind that when a man in the Church, from
the fellow who wipes down the pews and kneelers, to Cardinal Biffi, and all the
way up to His Holiness on the Throne of Peter himself, says something… he isn't
necessarily speaking for the Church, the mystical body of Christ
(Romans 12:4-5; etc.). (Exception, of course, is when the Pope
speaks ex cathedra, which is very seldom.)
By its simplest definition, "conservative"
means "looking out for your own needs first", whereas "liberal"
is "looking to the other person's needs first". If the Antichrist is
to fool the majority of the world and Christianity, it will not be as an
obvious, evil buffoon (e.g., George Bush II, Jong-Il Kim, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
etc.); we would easily see that that particular kind of emperor
is pants-less.
No; expect someone kindly, loving,
patient, compassionate, big-hearted, generous, honorable, emulable,
genuine-seeming, and so on. He will indeed be seen to care about the
environment, the poor, AIDS, minorities, et cetera. The antithesis of Jesus in
aim and objective, he will be very Christ-like in appearance in manner. (Expect
him to be a church-goer as well. Why not? The Devil quotes scripture, too; see Matthew4:5-6.)
His means to ultimate success will
be to seduce morally/spiritually as many people of the world as he can —
Christians, yes, but also Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Parsees, Buddhists, Animists,
pagans… you name it. Picture someone seemingly able to bridge the prohibitive
chasms separating all these traditions, even reconciling actual warring
factions.
Up to this point, all these things
are in fact very good. He will have great charm and resources, and a genuine
talent for marshalling more resources toward those on-the-surface great ideals.
(Likely he will not exhibit any kind of miraculous powers, since
that would identify him as being beyond merely human.) What we won't be able to
detect is that somehow, through this seduction, he will have gained our very
souls. I don't know how; I haven't a clue – or I'd be arming myself (and you
guys, too).
Think… at what price can your soul
be bought? I don't mean money, sex, success, power, etc. How about this: would
you repudiate your God and faith if someone could cure world hunger thereby?
Would you curse Jesus if that were someone's price for definitely stopping
genocide forever?
Brother!
Personally, I think boffo Biffi is full
of Bologna, and should retire from his current position, too. [This is that "clever bon mot" I mentioned above. It's
very out of line; sorry about that.] Yet, frustratingly, I find myself
ending up on his same square of the board when it comes to picturing what the
Antichrist would be like (and I've never given it this much though before —
thanks, TrulyEqual… I think).
I'm a die-hard liberal, yet very
traditional practicing Catholic… and if the Antichrist is going to succeed in
the West, he's going to have to appeal to me and my kind (pardon
the delusion of grandeur); we've already seen how easy it is to morally seduce
conservatives.
No comments:
Post a Comment