‘The Kingdom of Peace is at Hand’
— Make us Now Understand the Signs —

“When you see the Precursor, it can be said that the mission of ha-Yeshua Mashiach has
begun!”, states an old Jewish saying. Who is the messenger other than the Virgin Mary?
The growing series of announcements telling of the end of time – think of Lourdes, Fatima
and so many others – are all in the spirit of “convert, for the kingdom of God is at hand”.
These series of announcements started in 1846 with Mary’s apparitions to the shepherds of
La Salette. Thus the Mother of God is the herald sent to prepare the new era.

1 – The start of Vatican II
It was on Thursday 11th October 1962 on the feast of Mary’s Divine Motherhood that the first
session of the Second Vatican Council was held. After a silent prayer, Pope John XXIII broke
into the first official prayer with the Veni, Creator Spiritus (Come, Holy Ghost, Creator). This
prayer was uttered so that the Holy Spirit would lead the Council. And, indeed, the fruits borne
by the Council were the work of God. This notion is part of fundamental Church doctrine following Peter’s words during the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:28): “For it seemed good to
the Holy Spirit and to us…” The ‘explanation’ of these or other conciliar texts is a different
matter entirely… Unfortunately not all men are of good will, a will prepared to bow to God.
For them, God is no more than a ‘hypothesis’. (1) Once the strains of the Veni Creator had
faded under the enormous vault of the basilica, the Book of the Gospels was laid ceremoniously on the altar, a custom dating back to the earliest councils. It was then that the Pope
gave his opening speech. He spoke of his confidence that the Church would gain new energy
and power from the Council and asked those present to “look to the future without fear”. His
infectious enthusiasm was released when he said:


«« We feel we must disagree with those prophets of doom who are always forecasting
disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand. (…) They say that our era in
comparison with past eras is worsening, and behave as though they had learned nothing
from history, the real teacher of life. (…) For history shows that things had not, in fact,
been any better in the olden days. The greatest concern of the Ecumenical Council is this:
that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be guarded and taught more
efficaciously (…) faithful to the sacred patrimony of truth received from the Fathers. »»
There are rumors, in spite of the foregoing, that it
would have been preferable to have had one session
only (there were four in total). Pope John XXIII died
after the completion of the first session on June 3rd
1963. The second session started mid-October under
Pope Paul VI. The Council could have been stopped
after the first session if this had really been wanted.
Not an easy thing, but it would have been possible. It
seems John XXIII instructed to cancel the Council on
his death bed, but this was not taken seriously by the
cardinals who were present.
An apostolic council can choose when, and when not,
to exercise the chrism of infallibility. This one was not
to proclaim any new matter in doctrinal truth and certainly not infallible. The reason for the
fiasco of the Council is that, although the guidelines formulated were under the aegis of the
Holy Spirit, their subsequent interpretation was not. (2) In my view, one session would have
sufficed as a form of ‘aggiornamento’ (one of the key words of the Council, which means ‘a
bringing up to date’ in such a way that the deposit of faith can be better pursued). Within two
months after the final session, on January 12 1966, Paul VI said at the General Audience: “In
view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided any extraordinary statements of dogmas
endowed with the note of infallibility, but it still provided its teaching with the authority of the
Ordinary Magisterium which must be accepted with docility according to the mind of the
Council concerning the nature and aims of each document.” This means that while the documents prepared by Vatican II may contain some infallible statements, especially related to
matters already defined by previous councils, they do not enjoy the indisputable status like the
documents produced by the Council of Trent and Vatican I. That being said, Vatican II should
not be interpreted in a vacuum. Everything contained in the conciliar documents must be seen
in the context of the Church tradition and with the understanding that they cannot go against
the former teachings that are sealed with the mark of infallibility. It also means the conciliar
documents can be debated to a certain degree. Most importantly, it means they are subject to
further definition and clarification by the Holy Father, who can most certainly make announcements on topics ex cathedra (only if he says so), and therefore infallibly. The Catholic
Church today is still bound under the same doctrines and teachings as it was before the Vatican Council II.
If you would like to know the legitimite teachings of the Church today, simply pull out a
catechism from the fifties, and there you will find the core of the modern post-conciliar
Church (as is should be)! One can also consult the excellent “Catechism of the Catholic
Church”, the so-called CCC, issued under the auspices of Pope John Paul II in 1992 and
accessible on the Vatican website. (3) The conclusion is simple: as concerns the fundamental
teachings nothing has changed and it is the same today as it was yesterday and as it will be tomorrow. Of course, there are still quite some gray areas in Catholic doctrine that need elucidation, but those can in no way contradict the treasure of faith, as established in the dogmatic
constitutions, that was built up in the past.


But how, in spite of its careful preparation, was it possible that the Council managed to introduce such radical changes within the Catholic Church? I now quote from “The Rise and Fall
of Annibale Bugnini”, or “The Destruction of the Catholic Faith through changes in Catholic
Worship” by Michael Davies # 1990, also called “Liturgical Time-Bombs in Vatican II”: (4)
«« Seventy-five preparatory schemata had been prepared for the Council Fathers, the
fruits of the most painstaking and meticulous preparation for a Council in the history of
the Church. The number was eventually reduced to twenty, and seven were selected for
discussion at the first session of the Council. The Bugnini schema was the fifth of these,
and it was presumed by most bishops that the schemata would be debated in their
numerical sequence. But the other schemata were so orthodox that the liberals could not
accept them – even as a basis for discussion. At the instigation of Father Edward
Schillebeeckx the schemata were rejected with one exception – the Bugnini schema.
This, he said, was “an admirable piece of work”. It was announced at the second general
congregation of the Council in 1962, that the sacred liturgy was the first item on the
agenda for examination by the Fathers. Notitiae looked back on this with considerable
satisfaction in 1972, remarking that the Bugnini preparatory schema was the only one that
was eventually passed without substantial alteration. Father Ralph Wiltgen comments in
“The Rhine Flows into the Tiber: A History of Vatican II”: “It should be noted that the
liturgical movement had been active in Europe for several decades, and that quite a large
number of bishops and periti (experts) from the Rhine countries had been appointed by
Pope John to the preparatory commission on the liturgy. As a result, they had succeeded
in inserting their ideas into the schema and gaining approval for what they considered a
very acceptable document.” (…) The Bugnini schema received the almost unanimous
approval of the Council Fathers on December 7, 1962 and became Vatican II’s
“Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy”. But the Constitution contained no more than
general guidelines. Therefore, to achieve total victory, Father Bugnini and his cohorts
needed to obtain the power to interpret and implement it. (…) The Liturgy Constitution,
based loosely on the Bugnini schema, contained much generalised and, in places
ambiguous terminology. Those who had the power to interpret it were certain to have
considerable scope for reading their own ideas into the conciliar text.
Cardinal Heenan of Westminster mentioned in his autobiography “A Crown of
Thorns” that the Council Fathers were given the opportunity of discussing only general
principles: “Subsequent changes were more radical than those intended by Pope John
and the bishops who passed the decree on the Liturgy. His sermon at the end of the first
session shows that Pope John did not suspect what was being planned by the liturgical
The Cardinal could hardly have been more explicit. (…) The experts (periti) who had
drafted the text, intended to use the ambiguous terminology they had inserted in a manner
that the Pope and the Bishops did not even suspect. The English Cardinal warned the
Council Fathers of the manner in which the periti could draft texts capable “of both an
orthodox and modernistic interpretation.” He told them that he feared the periti, and
dreaded the possibility of their obtaining the power to interpret the Council to the world.
“God forbid that this should happen!” he exclaimed, but happen it did. »»

2 – The theology of the end of times is based on a misunderstanding
Although I am in full agreement with the statement that Christian doctrine, as always taught
by the Church, must be taught again and with modern means, I dare to differ with the Pope’s
statement that our times are comparable to the past – since that is, in fact, what he said in his
opening speech. There is an error of thinking hidden here that is separate from the treasure of
belief that everyone must believe in. (5) It concerns the distinction between ‘eschatology’, or
the theology of the end of times (‘eschatos’ is Greek for ‘end’ or ‘final’), and ‘apocalyptics’,
or the theology of the Last Judgement (‘apocalypse’ means ‘revelation’, and refers to the Book


of Revelation). The former
relates mainly to the Kingdom of Peace while the
latter is involved with disaster. John XXIII stated several times that he was not
sympathetic towards theologians. They ensured that
there was dispute, whereas
the Church needed carers
of souls. The present Pope
has also made his thoughts
known along the same liFour Horses of Apocalypse by Viktor Vasnetsov (1887)
nes. What the Church Fathers have provided, says
Benedict XVI – and he has wide knowledge of the subject – is a rounded-off whole; thereby
divine revelation is completed, though often still in hidden terms. After a long maturation
process, when a dogma is proclaimed, it merely confirms what has long been known, but thus
far has not been so formulated, with the consequence that following the proclamation of the
particular dogma the faithful may no longer doubt its truth.
Since the function of the Church, according to the usual interpretation, is to bring peace on
earth, which follows the eight beatitudes (Mtt. 5:9), and that this is a task that will only be
completed at the end, eschatology feels at home within the established order, while apocalyptics is seen as an attack on it. I now quote from a book by Mark Heirman (6):
«« …apocalyptics is mostly rejected by the Roman Catholic Church (…) Eschatology is
essentially conservative and bound up with privilege and power. Apocalyptics is
revolutionary and belongs to the world of those without rights or power, those who in this
world have nothing to lose but their chains. In this sense eschatology is the objective ally
of the established order and at least of compromise. Apocalyptics is the sworn enemy of
the established order and wishes to come to no compromises at all. Hence apocalyptics
and ‘parousia’ (7) had the upper hand for as long as Christianity was still a small sect in a
world populated by Jews, Greeks and Romans. It was not until the fourth century – when
Christianity was given to the entire Empire – that apocalyptics had to give way to
eschatology, that made things easier for the established Roman Catholic Church that was
quickly getting more powerful. Apocalyptics was banned to the realm of heretics and the
outcast. »»
The controversy between apocalyptics and eschatology is to be regretted – because it is far
from the truth. The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states, under the heading “Hope
of the New Heaven and the New Earth” (articles 1042-1050), that the apocalyptic expectation
should be a joyful one. It says that the revelation affirms the profound common destiny of the
material world and Man, to which should be entertained an eager longing; even creation itself
will be set free from its bondage to decay! Here follows the full text:
«« At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal
judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. The
universe itself will be renewed: “The Church (…) will only receive her perfection in the
glory of heaven, when will have come the time of the renewal of all things. At that time,
together with the human race, the universe itself, which is so closely related to Man and
which attains its destiny through him, will be perfectly re-established in Christ.” (Lumen
Gentium 48) Sacred Scripture calls this mysterious renewal, which will transform
humanity and the world, “new heavens and a new earth”. (Rev. 21:1, 2 Pet. 3:13) It will
be the definitive realization of God’s plan to “gather together under a single head all
things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth.” (Eph. 1:10) In this


new universe, the heavenly Jerusalem, God will have his dwelling among men. “He will
wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be
mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.” (Rev.
21:4) For Man, this consummation (of the old) will be the final realization of the unity of
the human race, which God willed from creation and of which the pilgrim Church existed
in “the nature of a sacrament”. (LG 1) Those who are united with Christ will form the
community of the redeemed, “the holy city” of God: “the Bride of the Lamb.” (Rev.
21:2-10) She will not be wounded any longer by sin, stains, self-love, that destroy or
wound the earthly community. The beatific vision, in which God opens Himself in an
inexhaustible way to the elect, will be the ever-flowing well-spring of happiness, peace,
and mutual communion. For the cosmos, revelation affirms the profound common destiny
of the material world and Man: “For the creation waits with eager longing for the
revealing of the sons of God (…) in hope because the creation itself will be set free from
its bondage to decay. (…) We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail
together until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits
of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our
bodies.” (Rom. 8:19-23) The visible universe, then, is itself destined to be transformed,
“so that the world itself, restored to its original state, facing no further obstacles, should be
at the service of the just”, sharing their glorification in the risen Jesus Christ. (Irenaeus:
Adv. Haeres. 5:32:1) “We know neither the moment of the consummation of the (old)
earth and (its) Man, nor the way in which the universe will be transformed; the form of this
world, distorted by sin, is passing away. And we are taught that God is preparing a new
dwelling and a new earth in which righteousness dwells, in which happiness will fill and
surpass all the desires of peace arising in the hearts of men.” (Gaudium et Spes 39:11)
“Far from diminishing our concern to develop this earth, the expectancy of a new
earth should spur us on, for it is here that the body of a new human family grows,
foreshadowing in some way the age which is to come. That is why, although we must be
careful to distinguish earthly progress clearly from the increase of the Kingdom of Christ,
such progress is of vital concern to the Kingdom of God, insofar as it can contribute to
the better ordering of human society.” (GS 39:2) “When we have spread on earth the
fruits of our nature and our enterprise (…) according to the command of the Lord and in
his Spirit, we will find them once again, cleansed this time from the stain of sin,
illuminated and transfigured, when (the moment has arrived) that Christ presents to his
Father an eternal and universal kingdom.” (GS 39-3) God will then be “all in all” in
eternal life. (1 Cor 5:28) True and subsistent life consists in this: the Father, through the
Son and in the Holy Spirit, is pouring out his heavenly gifts on all things without
exception. Thanks to his mercy, we too, men that we are, have received the inalienable
promise of eternal life. »»
Apocalyptics therefore does not have to be an ideology of disaster. It fits seamlessly with the
notion of the Kingdom of Peace here on earth. For this, see also my article entitled “Calendar
of joy or calendar of mourning”. In fact both notions of apocalyptics and the reign of peace
deal with the same concept, but the theologians – whom John XXIII so disliked – have put us
on the wrong footing. The struggle of reason, which has lasted the entire history of the Church,
is based on an obstinate misunderstanding. Let me explain. God’s plan for the restoration of
Adam’s descendants – meaning us – is divided into chapters. We are now in the evangelical
times and are on our way to a new and glorious chapter in God’s salvation plan for this world,
in agreement with the Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20 :
«« (After his resurrection) Jesus came (to his eleven disciples) and spoke to them: “All
authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples
of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you. And lo, I am with
you always, even to the ‘end’ of the age. »» (8)


The word ‘end’ is the rendering of the Greek ‘sunteleia’, which indicates an entire completion
and not a cutting-off. The end of times, which seems to inspire so much panic, is therefore not
the end of ‘time’ but the end of an ‘era’. My article entitled “Olam Assia” deals further with
this theme. The evil ones, those who really are of bad will, the conspirators, are the ones who
should really fear, for they will be shattered as potter’s vessels. (Ps. 2:9, Rev. 2:27) Finally,
and here I agree, the Last Judgement ‘will’ come but not yet, for first Satan and his henchmen
ought to be chained permanently (Rev. 20:10), something that only will happen definitely
‘after’ the establishment of the Millennium Reign of Peace. (Rev. 20:2-9) (Before the Millennium Reign he will be temporarily chained.) After the Reign, Creation will enter its period of
‘rest’ (Ch. 21 sqq.) about which the apostle Paul writes. (Hebr. 4:8-10). Incidentally the term
‘last Judgement’ does not figure in the Bible. The addition of the word ‘last’ is a piece of inlay
work. Those theologians! And thus I come to the conclusion that if there is a ‘last’ judgement,
it will be a long time in coming. We do not need to worry about it at the moment.

Händel’s Messiah in Hebrew
An exciting development in the revival of the Jewish people is the translation of and accompaniment to Händel’s Messiah in Hebrew by David Loden. He is a member of a
Messianic Congregation in Israel that has the aim of preparing the Congregation of
Yeshua for His return. A pilot production of the oratorio was performed in the spring of
2006. He says: “The Jewish people have always loved Händel’s Messiah. Every time it
is performed in Israel, which is yearly, Jewish people are part of the audience – they
love it. But the Hebrew performance was historic. The Hebrew fits like a glove with
Händel’s music. And what this does is to take the music out of the box of being strictly
art. It now becomes an intelligible witness to the Lord. (…) There is a ‘Sacred Music
Festival’ every year in Israel which is extremely well-attended. (…) Imagine that this
music is sung in the Hebrew tongue and listeners suddenly hear their own Scriptures
not only sung but exposited – just think of the possibilities! It becomes a tool for really
sharing the life of the Messiah. And that is our deepest desire – for people to really
hear the music and the message of The Messiah.”
From “Jews for Jesus” newsletter / Dec. 2007

See part of the performance of “Händel’s Messiah in Hebrew”

3 – The Messianic age started in 1840
How are we to know that the end of our dispensation is close at hand? (9) Will God not want
to prepare his people, as He did when the Messiah was born? The prophet Daniel, in the ninth
chapter of his book, predicted that 69 weeks would pass, or 69 x 7 = 483 years, from the start
of the rebuilding of the temple to the time of the Messiah. It so happens that this corresponded
to the coming of Jesus. And there were more signs, such as the three Magi who asked King
Herod where the prophesied Messiah could be found. Their arrival in Jerusalem must have
been the talk of the town.
And other peoples, even the Aztecs, were prepared by God for the things that were to come.
The conquest of the Aztec Empire (Mexico) at the beginning of the 16th century was preceded
by the appearance of a great comet; apocalyptic storms raged over the land and the Temple of
the cruel god Tezcatlipoca went up in flames in an inexplicable manner; the most important
sign was the rising from the dead of Montezuma’s sister Papantzin, four days after she had
been buried, to warn the ruler of the coming collapse of his empire; the conquistador Cortez,
who was driven by missionary zeal, set foot on land in the year, the month and on the day predicted by the oracle.


Taking all of this into consideration, in our times God will not do otherwise. He will not be
reined in when the day dawns. And important sign is the foundation of the state of Israel in
1948, an event that calls to mind the prediction made by Jesus in Luke 21:29-32: “Look at the
fig tree (symbol of Israel), and all the trees. When they are already budding, you see and know
for yourselves (…) that the kingdom of God is near. (…) This generation will by no means
pass away till all things take place.” There is the prophecy of Rabbi Judah Hai Alkalai (17981878), who identified 1840 as the start of the Messianic Age, something he continued to hold
to despite great resistance. It was precisely in that year that a public discussion was started
under the inspiring leadership of Lord Ashly, “to plant the Jewish people in the land of their
fathers which (it was stated) became a serious political consideration”. Naturally, Ashly had
never heard of Alkalai. A remarkable fact is that the significance of the settling of the Jews in
Israel meant, from his standpoint and from that of a number of influential people, a mass
conversion of the Jews to Christianity, a task that had to be done by missionary work. The
most important of the evangelisation clubs was the “London Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews”, commonly called the Jews’ Society. This association was under the
aegis of the Duke of Kent, brother of the king and father of the later Queen Victoria. The start
of the Messianic Age (the Reign of Peace) means, in addition to the return of the Jewish
people, the fulfilment of the prophecy of Isaiah (29:18): “In that day the deaf shall hear the
words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness”,
which cancels out the prophecy of verse 10, taken up by Paul in his letter to the Romans
(11:8): “God has given them (the Jews) a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see, and
ears that they should not hear, to this very day.” Now, more than 160 years later (after 1840),
we still await the acceptance by the Jewish people of Jesus as their Saviour Messiah so that
from Israel, at present a terrible hotbed of violence, peace might flow out as from an over-full
honeycomb. Is this perhaps a daring proposition? I do not think so.
Something is going on. Definitely. Over the whole world there are at present (in 2007) at least
a half million messianic Jews – Jews who believe in Christ – and the movement is growing
quickly. The largest organisation in this field is “Jews for Jesus” (www.jewsforjesus.org) with
55 branches world-wide. Something is
going on. Undeniably. The most recent
event that speaks to the imagination is
something I would like to share with you.
It so happened that just before his death
one of Israel’s most prominent rabbis
wrote an encrypted name of the Messiah
on a small note (in acronym), which he
requested should remain sealed until
April 30, 2007. When the note was
opened, it revealed what many have
known for centuries: “Yehoshua (Yeshua
or Jesus) is the Messiah”. (10) A few
months before Rabbi Yitzchak Kaduri,
Rabbi Kaduri, with in the corner his letter
known as the “Senior Cabbalist Elder”,
mentioning the identity of the Messiah
died at the age of 105 in the first month
of 2006, he surprised his followers when he told them that he had met the Messiah. Kaduri
gave the message in his synagogue on the feast of Yom Kippur, teaching the congregation
how to recognise the Messiah. He also mentioned that the Messiah would appear to Israel after
Ariel Sharon’s death. The former Prime Minister was in a coma since January 4, 2006 and has
only died in January 2014. Kaduri’s son David confirmed that in his last year his father
dreamed and talked almost exclusively about the Messiah and his coming. “My father has met
the Messiah in a vision” he said, “and told us that He would come soon.” Kaduri was not only
highly esteemed because of his advanced age. Chief rabbis looked up to him as a ‘tsadik’, a
righteous man or saint. Thousands visited him for counsel and healing. His followers speak of
many miracles and his students say that he predicted many disasters. Police closed off Jerusa-


lem streets for his funeral, which became one of the largest ever in a city known for large
funerals. According to the newspaper Arutz-Sheva more than 300,000 people joined the procession to pay their respects as he was taken to his final resting place. “When He comes, the
Messiah will rescue Jerusalem from foreign religions that want to rule the city”, Kaduri once
said. “They will not succeed for they will fight against one another.” See YouTube movie:
“Kaduri's Message - The Messiah Comes”, as well as “Kaduri Reveals Messiah”.

4 – Mary takes on the role of John the Baptist
Since the olive tree is the first of all trees to show green, image of the spiritual budding of the
Jewish people, it means that the mission of the herald taking on the role of John the Baptist,
but now preaching for the whole world, only started after 1840, after the date of the beginning
of the Messianic Age. “When you see the Precursor, it can be said that the mission of ha-Yeshua Mashiach has begun!”, states an old Jewish saying. Who is the messenger other than the
Virgin Mary? The growing series of announcements telling of the end of time – think of
Lourdes, Fatima and so many others – are all in the spirit of “convert, for the kingdom of God
is at hand”. These series of announcements started in 1846 with Mary’s apparitions to the
shepherds of La Salette. (see Appendix) Thus the Mother of God is the herald sent to prepare
the new era. This is – is it not? – the one meant by the prophet Isaiah when he said (40:3):
“The voice of one crying in the wilderness: make straight the ways of the Lord.” A person has
been sent by God, and her name is Mary. She comes as a witness so that all may believe
through her. She is not the Light, but comes to witness of the Light.
When we look closely at the revelations of the Augustinian nun, the venerable A. K. Emmerick in combination with “Maria Puerta del Cielo” (Mary, the Gate of Heaven) then it appears
that John’s mission consisted of two parts. The first played itself out in the ‘desert of Judea’. I
«« Now for him has Judea become the desert and, as before he dwelt in the desert with
springs, rocks, trees and all animals, lived and spoke with them, so he speaks now with
men and sinners, with no thought for himself. (…) Ever permeated with his mission,
aware of his responsibility, serious, severe, simple and zealous, he proclaims but a single
message: Penance! Prepare yourselves! Salvation is at hand, the Saviour comes! »»
It was only after Jesus had allowed Himself to be baptised that the second part of John’s mission started to unfold in all the land surrounding the Jordan, where he preached and also administered a baptism of conversion from sin. It is precisely this explanation of the significance of
the desert that is pointed to by Isaiah when he announces the voice of one crying in the wilderness, and it is in this way that Mary fulfils her calling, now no longer limited simply to the
region of Judea but comprising the entire world, for all people are her children, including those
who have not yet found God, yeah, even those who despise Him.
Consuela, a Spanish housewife, received via revelations a biblical catechesis from Mary
Mother of God as a gift for the Marian year of 1987-88. As is stated on the cover of “Maria
Puerta del Cielo”:
«« This book opens for us “a door to hope” and reveals the high mission of the Virgin
Mary. Her hands hold “the keys to heaven”. For Mary is indeed the “Gate of Heaven”, as
determined by God’s will. In fact, “if the Lord has chosen the way through Mary to come
into the world, the return of humanity to Jesus will also be through Mary”, who is “the
Mother of the Divine Mercy” and “Tabernacle of God and Gate of Heaven.” »»

5 – If you are Jesus, prove it!
The readers of our journal will be sufficiently familiar with the fact that at present many apparitions of Mary occur. And there are even some of Jesus. Among these apparitions doubtless


there are many that are false. The imitator brooks no reins. But you need not be concerned.
God will tell us what is false in his own good time. We should not pull out the wheat together
with the chaff! (11) God Himself, the Lord of the harvest, will do the weeding. (Mtt. 13:29-30)
A priest once asked my opinion of a particular apparition and I answered in the negative, but
added immediately: “Above all, take no account of my opinion.”
And certainly in the last few years there have also been many apparitions outside the Roman
Catholic world. By way of illustration and to close this article I would like to give a characteristic example of an occurrence in Indonesia. Not so much an apparition of Mary but of her
Son. The account is taken from “Bedevaartweb” (Pilgrimage Web – www.bedevaartweb.com),
a Dutch website, which is presented in five languages.
It concerns a remarkable apparition that is little known, remarkable because it was a Christian
phenomenon that occurred in an overwhelmingly Islamic country and, strangely enough, in
and around the house of a Muslim. In the Jakarta neighbourhood of Kramath Lima a Christian
church was being renovated. In the night of 22nd December 2000 a building worker saw the
figure of a man. He thought it was an evil spirit and asked for a winning lottery number so that
he could gamble. The next day he became ill. His two friends, who were sitting next to him,
told the church warden. After hearing their description of the figure, the warden showed them
an image of Jesus. The two confirmed that it looked like what they had seen. Ten days later
the story continued. Not far from there a certain Ajum was at home occupied in Islamic prayer. There appeared a somewhat vague face on the wall. Because others, including a Christian
minister, saw the same thing, it was decided to paint over the wall, but the image – resembling
Jesus – kept returning. Within a week a stream of inquisitive visitors came. Even the international media (CNN) was there. The mullah (Islamic minister of religion) was consulted. When
he stood before the image he called out: “If you really are Jesus, prove it to me with a sign.”
And then it seemed as if the image was attempting to come out of the wall. The mullah was so
shocked at this that he fainted. Later he stated that this was ‘the prophet’ Jesus (Jesus is regarded as a prophet within Islam). The number of visitors had reached more than 10,000 thanks to
the publicity. The local population took advantage of the happening and set up stands selling
food in front of the house. One of these, a man selling chicken stew, to his great surprise was
able to ladle out many more times the usual number of meals.
The authorities were unhappy with all the commotion and closed Anjum’s house to the public
on 12th January. Anjum himself moved to Bogor, outside the city. From that moment the
image appeared no longer inside the house but at the same place on the outside wall, even after
the wall had been painted blue. In the night of 14th to 15th January, in the presence of many
witnesses, the figure drew itself out of the wall and rose into the clouds until out of sight. This
happened at around half past midnight. Since then the cult has died a slow death. The authorities got what they wanted, but the population has not forgotten…
Hubert Luns
[Published in “De Brandende Lamp”, 4th quarter, 2007 - No 112]
[Published in “Positief”, May 2009 – No 392]

- 10 -

Who is God?
(1) I regard the discussion about a hypothetical God as uninteresting. Even Satan believes in
God, but it has done him no good. Atheism is deeply anti-creationist. Not to believe in Creation
– a little stupid, is it not? It takes more faith not to believe in God than to believe in Him. And
yet belief in God says so little: Christian faith is first and foremost a meeting with God. So the
discussion only becomes interesting when we talk about who this God really is. Then we start
to reflect on what the meeting should signify.
The convocation of Vatican II was divinely inspired, but…
(2) I am firmly convinced that not only were the decisions of Vatican II divinely inspired but
that this also applies to the calling together of the Council, as the Pope wrote in his Spiritual
Diary four weeks before the Council started. It was certainly not some wild idea, as witness the
in-depth preparation that preceded it, work that in fact had started under Pope Pius XII, who
in 1948 appointed Mgr. Francesco Borgongini Duca, old fellow-student and friend of the man
who was later to become John XXIII, to the position of chairman of the preparatory workgroup for the council planned for the future.
The Church back to the sources
(3) Pope John Paul II gave on June 25, 1992, his final approval of the text of the Catechism of
the Catholic Church and presented it to the world on October 11, 1992, by means of the apostolic constitution Fidei Depositum, which happened on the 30th anniversary of the opening of
Vatican II. One reads there the following:
«« After the renewal of the liturgy and the new codification of the Canon Law of the Latin
Church and the canons of the oriental Catholics, this Catechism will bring a very
important contribution to the work of the revival of all ecclesial life, willed and put into
application by the Second Vatican Council. (…) For me, then - who had the special grace
of participating in it and actively collaborating in its development - Vatican II has always
been, and especially during these years of my Pontificate, the constant reference point of
my every pastoral action, in the conscious commitment to implement its directives
concretely and faithfully at the level of each Church and the whole Church. »»
From: Liturgical Time-Bombs in Vatican II
(4) The Bugnini schema was accepted by a plenary session of the Liturgical Preparatory Commission in a vote taken on January 13, 1962. But the President of the Commission, the eightyyear old Cardinal Gaetano Cicognani, had the foresight to realize the dangers implicit in certain passages. Father Gy writes: “The program of reform was so vast that it caused the president, Cardinal Gaetano Cicognani, to hesitate.” (Flannery p. 23) Unless the Cardinal could be
persuaded to sign the schema, it would be blocked. It could not go through without his signature, even though it had been approved by a majority of the Commission. Father Bugnini needed to act. He arranged for immediate approaches to be made to Pope John, who agreed to
intervene. He called for Cardinal Amleto Cicognani, his Secretary of State and the younger brother of the President of the Preparatory Commission, and told him to visit his brother and not
return until the schema had been signed. The Cardinal complied. Later a peritus of the Liturgical Preparatory Commission stated that the old Cardinal was almost in tears as he waved the
document in the air and said: “They want me to sign this but I don't know if I want to.” Then
he laid the document on his desk, picked up a pen, and signed it. Four days later he died. From
“The Rhine Flows into the Tiber: A History of Vatican II” by Father Ralph M. Wiltgen – TAN
Books, Rockford, U.S.A. # 1985 (p. 141).
Not all teachings are dogmas
(5) A popular view as concerns a ‘dogma’, which is no dogma, has been voiced by Andrew
Bradstock in “Millenarianism in the Reformation and the English Revolution” # 2001 (p. 77):
«« Following Augustine, the Church had long believed that the reign of the saints foretold
by Revelation was already in operation through its own good offices, and (it has) shown
little enthusiasm for the idea that Christ would return imminently to set up an earthly
kingdom: indeed, the Council of Ephesus declared such a belief heretical in 431. »»

- 11 -

That this was declared heretical is simply not true, as was convincingly demonstrated by Michael J. Svigel in his article from 2001: “The Phantom Heresy: Did the Council of Ephesus
(431) Condemn Chiliasm?”.
(6) Reference: Apocalyptische Tijden - vriend & vijand in de 21ste eeuw (Apocalyptic Times –
friend and foe in the 21st century), by Mark Heirman - Publisher Houtekiet, Antwerp # 1999
(pp. 149-50). With thanks to Luc Léon Paulissen who drew my attention to this source.
(7) ‘Parousia’ means ‘apparition’, ‘arrival’, ‘entry’ and refers to Christ’s return.
The Great Commission
(8) Matthew 28:18-19 is known as the Great Commission to evangelism, which means: going
out, baptising and teaching. Here also we find the closest biblical reference to the Christian
baptismal formula, its earliest extra-biblical reference being the first-century Didache 7:3. It
does not refer to 1 John 5:7, where a late addition to the original reads: “Three bear witness,
the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost.”
(9) ‘Dispensation’ is a term used in the King James and New King James versions (in 1 Cor.
9:17, Eph. 1:10; 3:2 and Col. 1:25). It was taken over by the Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims
Bible (1582), which still is the Bible of choice of traditionalist Catholics. The Catholic New
American Bible (NAB - 1970) uses the word ‘stewardship’ instead. ‘Dispensation’ translates
‘oikonomia’, a word derived from ‘oikos’ (house) plus the verb ‘nemein’ (distribute, administer), sometimes rendered as ‘stewardship’, as in the parable of the unjust steward. (Luke 16)
The Bible demonstrates that God divides
history into periods. Of course, He defines
time in terms of hours, months, years. It is
therefore not strange that God proceeds by
a division in phases that each time come to
an end, like: “...the harvest of the earth is
ripe”. (Rev. 14:15) God’s partitioning plan is
called dispensationalism, which is associated with a conservative Protestant theological approach. How God partitions is something about which theologians strongly disagree, but this does not mean that the concept is wrong.
Who is Jehoshua?
(10) It is extremely interesting that Rabbi
Yitzachk Kaduri uses the form ‘Jehoshua’
for the expected Messiah, since this name in
Hebrew uses the letter ‘shin’ (our ‘s’) in the
middle of the ‘unutterable Name’, the socalled ‘tetragram’, as follows: yod, he, shin,
he, waw. The unutterable Name is generally
expressed by the Jews as Elohim or Adonai
(in both cases ‘Lord’) or as Hashem (the
NAME). In Biblical translations the tetragram is sometimes rendered as Yahweh and
generally rendered as ‘Lord’. By using
Jehoshua for the Jewish Messiah, Kaduri in
fact indicates the divine nature of Jesus.
The agreement between Jesus and the ‘Jehoshua’, living in God’s bosom, was always
understood by the learned rabbis. Why
Lolium temulentum
otherwise would the Sanhedrin have forbidden the use of the name of Jesus, without suffix, for Him whom they later wished to crucify? In fact, the name ‘Jesus’ was a very common first name among the Jews. Even Barabbas
was called Jesus. Therefore, Jesus Christ was not just called ‘Jesus’ but – according to Mtt.

- 12 -

26:71 – Jesus ‘the Nazorean’. Pilate, probably to annoy the Jews, called Him expressly “Jesus,
who is called the Christ” (Christ is Greek for Messiah). (Mt. 27:17-18)
The wheat and the chaff
(11) The chaff or weeds, as most Bibles refer to it, is a translation of ‘zinzanion’, a particular
kind of weed, the dolik (Lolium temulentum). At the start of the season it looks remarkably
like wheat, but must not be pulled up even when found because its roots spread horizontally
and would thus pull up the wheat too. At the end of the season, when the ears of wheat bend
under their own weight, the dolik is easily recognised (no heavy ears) and it stands upright and
can thus be cut. The dolik was a feared plague in the Palestinian wheatfields. Sowing and
spreading it (as an act of revenge) was punishable under Roman law. In our gardens we have a
plant known as the Sabina officinalis. You can find it in among strawberry plants. When the
young leaves come out both plants look exactly the same. If even a small portion of the sabina’s
root remains behind, it will grow back again!


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful