Fr. Fahey - On the Antichrist

CHAPTER IX

The Coming of Antichrist

In Chapter VII we saw that there was a connection between that apostasy of the non-Jewish nations and the conversion of the Jewish nation. In Chapter VIII, we have seen something of the grandiose plans of the Jewish nation for an anti-supernatural organisation of the world, that is, for a design which is the very opposite of humble submission to the divine plan for Order proclaimed by Christ the King. In this Chapter I propose to say something about the Man of Sin, whose coming is mentioned by St. Paul, in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, immediately after having spoken of the apostasy or revolt of the nations. False teachers had spread confusion in the Church of Thessalonica by affirming that the end of the world was at hand. St. Paul wrote this Epistle to restore calm by the assurance that two events are to take place before the end of the world, namely, the apostasy or revolt of the nations and the appearance of Antichrist. A little work, written by Father Augustine Lémann and entitled L’Antéchrist, makes my task an easy one.1



THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFFS AND APOSTASY

Father Lémann mentions several warnings given by the Vicars of Christ concerning the revolt of human reason against the divine plan for Order. In the secret consistory of December 30, 1889, Pope Leo XIII said: “We desire the preservation of the Catholic Faith in its integrity, for that integrity is endangered when governments assign to the State the role of claiming for human reason measureless and limitless sovereignty. In plain language, this is nothing else than the rejection of all that God has revealed and complete separation from the Church.” Pope Leo again spoke of apostasy in a Protestation addressed to his Secretary of State, Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro, October 8, 1895: “The ultimate aim of the occupation of Rome was not attained, at least completely, by the conquest of political unity. We are speaking now, not of the intentions of all those who co-operated therein, but of the plans of the sectaries who were the prime movers in the affair. No: that act of violence . . . was intended by the Freemasons to be simply a step towards the accomplishment of a deeper, darker design . . . In order to attack the spiritual power of the Holy See, a beginning was made by overthrowing its earthly rampart . . . Is all this the triumph of Italy? Is it not rather the advent of apostasy?”

Twice in the course of the year 1901, the Venerable Pontiff repeated the same warnings, first in the letter addressed to the superiors of religious orders and congregations, on June 29, and then in the consistorial Allocution of August 15. In he Letter of June 29, he said: “It is only too true that in the designs of the [Masonic] Sect, the disorganisation and extinction of the Religious Orders constitute a clever manoeuvre destined to prepare the way for the apostasy of the Catholic nations.” A fifth time, Pope Leo returned to the subject in his Allocution to the Sacred College of December 23, 1902, in which he insisted that “what is aimed at and what is intended is the overthrow of Christian institutions and the reconstruction of States on the basis of pagan naturalism.”

The warnings of Blessed Pius X are just as solemn as those of Leo XIII. In his first Encyclical, he addresses the Hierarchy of the world as follows: “


Both Pontiffs, namely, Leo XIII, and Blessed Pius X, with apostolic clear-sightedness and firmness, insist upon the steady advance of apostasy. And the apostasy they speak of is that prophesied by St. Paul.


ANTICHRIST IN SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION

Let us now see what can be known about Antichrist from Scripture and Tradition.

Three portraits of Antichrist are to be found in the Bible.

“In this little horn that grows, the Fathers, notably Saint Irenæus, Theodoret, Lactantius, St. Jerome, the modern Commentators, Maldonatus, Cornelius à Lapide, Calmet, etc., and many contemporary exegetes, have rightly seen a figure of Antichrist. The horn is the symbol of strength and power. It is the great offensive and defensive arm of certain animals. Before the Assyrian discoveries it was rather difficult to explain why Daniel had chosen this symbol to represent Antichrist. To-day it seems quite natural. In Chaldæa where the prophet was then living, the statues of the Babylonian gods and kings had horns on their tiaras.”11

The second portrait is that of the Beast in the Apocalypse.

“That the Beast is the figure of Antichrist has been the common opinion of Catholic commentators from ancient times to the present day. The use of the expression, ‘the Beast,’ shows that in the being in question, the bestial character will dominate instead of human feelings and sentiments. The coat of a leopard, the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion indicate also that he will combine cunning, ferocity and strength.”13

The third portrait of Antichrist is that of the man of sin in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians.

“There is no doubt,” writes St. Augustine, “that the Apostle is here speaking of Antichrist.”15

“From these three portraits,” continues Father Lémann, “it is possible to deduce a number of conclusions with regard to the person, the reign, the persecution and the end of Antichrist. These conclusions can be classified under four headings as follows:

   A. Things that are certain.
   B. Things that are probable.
  C. Things that are undecided.
  D. Things that have not a solid foundation.”16

Space will permit of only a brief outline of what is contained under A, B, and C.


A. Things concerning Antichrist that are certain.

I. Antichrist will be a trial for the good (Apoc., XIII, 7), and a chastisement for the impious and the apostates (II Thess., II, 9-11).

II. Antichrist will be a man, a human person.

III. Antichrist will not be Satan in human form, but a man and only a man.19

IV. Antichrist will have great powers of seduction, owing to certain personal qualities.

V. The beginnings of Antichrist’s career will be lowly and obscure.20

VI. Antichrist will increase in power and make conquests.

VII. The rule of Antichrist will be world-wide.

VIII. Antichrist will wage a terrible war against God and the Church.

Father Lémann indicates some of the measures which, to judge by the experience of past persecutions, Antichrist will enforce more thoroughly and more cruelly than ever before. Two   of them are: Proscription of Christian teaching and obligatory teaching of error. We can see them already in force in the countries behind the Iron Curtain. Father Lémann adds that “the schools without God or rather against God are a preparation for the second measure.” In that he is perfectly correct, for the Declaration of the Rights of Man of the French Revolution, in the name of which these schools function in France, signified repudiation of membership of Christ, and was thus a declaration of war on the divine plan for order.22

IX. Antichrist will claim to be God and will demand exclusive adoration.

X. By means of diabolical prodigies, Antichrist will seek to prove that he is God.

“The question is often asked,” writes St. Augustine, “whether these expressions ‘signs and lying wonders’ are to be understood in the sense that the prodigies wrought by Antichrist will be only apparent, not real; or as signifying that the really extraordinary feats performed by him will draw on to error and falsehood those who accept them as proofs of a divine mission? The great Doctor replies: “This will be known later.”24

“This hesitation has given rise to two currents of opinion. Some think that the prodigies wrought by Antichrist will be real prodigies and that they will lead to the acceptance of falsehood, that is, to belief in the divinity of Antichrist.25 Others hold that all the miracles of Antichrist will be false and unreal and that they will be accepted as true thanks to the action of the demon on the senses of his followers.”26

XI. The domination and persecution of Antichrist will be merely temporary. The man of sin will be destroyed (Dan., VII, 26; Apoc., XIX, 20; II Thess., II, 8).



B. Things concerning Antichrist that are probable.

First Probability.

The Jews will acclaim Antichrist as the Messias and will help to set up his kingdom.

“It is upon this reproach addressed by our Lord Jesus Christ to the Jews, his contemporaries and adversaries, that this belief is based, and it can be said that it is the common opinion of the Fathers of the Church, for example, St. Jerome, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory the Great, St. Ephraim, St. John Chrysostom, etc., etc.,27 . . . When we see the enormous financial power of the Jews increasing daily, when we consider their intrigues, their successful occupancy of the chief places in the principal states, their mutual understanding from one end of the world to the other, then in presence of such a preponderance, we have no difficulty in realising that they will be able to contribute to the establishment of the formidable empire of Antichrist. The joyous welcome the Jews will give to Antichrist and the aid they will furnish him are therefore probable. They are not certain. Why? Because most of the texts of the Fathers refer to the words of St. John, V, 43, addressed by our Divine Lord to the Jews, and in connexion with this text, St. Thomas remarks that, after the true Christ, a great number of false Messiahs had appeared and had been welcomed by the Jews. Accordingly, this text considered by itself might be held to refer, not to Antichrist, but to anyone of these false Christs. Nevertheless, adds St. Thomas, this text can be held to refer to Antichrist with probability, because of the authority of the holy Fathers who have so understood it.”28

Unfortunately, Father Lémann is quoting from an opusculum attributed to St. Thomas, which, according to Père Mandonnet, O.P., is not authentic.29 The erudite Dominican historian definitely places it amongst the apocryphal writings attributed to the holy Doctor. On the same page, however, Father Lémann refers to Suarez, De Antichristo, which contains the same doctrine in practically identical terms. “This text probably refers to Antichrist,” writes the learned Jesuit theologian, “on account of the authority of the Saints whom I have quoted. Nevertheless, taken by itself its doctrine is not compelling, because, since the time of Christ, several on their own authority have pretended to be the Messiah and have been welcomed by the Jews, as is evident from Josephus (De Bello Judaico, Lib. 2, c. 6) . . . And we read in Acts VIII, that Simon the Magician pretended to be the Messiah and that many Jews believed in him. The words of Christ can be applied not to one alone but to all those false Messiahs . . . The former explanation, however, as I have said, is the better, for there is one whom the Jews expect and one whom they will all welcome. The others who pretended to be the Messiah were not received by all the Jews, but only by a certain few.”30


Second Probability.

The Persecution of Antichrist will last three years and a half.

“It has been pointed out previously (Eleventh Point that is certain), that the power and the persecution of Antichrist will be only temporary. That is certain. Is it possible to determine their exact duration? One can give only a probable, not a certain, answer, according to the two texts quoted.”31



C. Things that are undecided.

These are points that are not based upon the unanimous consent of the Fathers or upon precise texts of Holy Writ.

First Undecided Point.

The Nationality of Antichrist.

“According to several Fathers of the Church, followed by certain exegetes, Antichrist will be a member of the Jewish race and even of the tribe of Dan. ‘Here, however,’ remarks Bossuet, ‘it is a question not of dogma or of authority, but of conjecture.’32 And it must be added that these conjectures do not rest on any solid foundation.”33 Father Lémann then takes the different arguments advanced in favour of the Jewish nationality of Antichrist and replies to them. To the objection, taken from Malvanda, De Antichristo, that it is probable that the Jews will receive Antichrist as the Messias and that they would not do this if he were not of the Jewish race, Father Lémann replies: “Down the centuries, the Jews have welcomed all the enemies of Jesus Christ and His Church and have constituted themselves their auxiliaries. In the Great Sanhedrin, held at Paris in 1807, they applied the Biblical titles, exclusively reserved to the Messias, to Napoleon, though Napoleon was not of Jewish blood.34 They even welcomed the principles of the French Revolution as the Messias: ‘The Messias came for us on Feb. 28, 1790, with the Declaration of the Rights of 35 He sums up as follows: “The Jewish nationality of Antichrist remains an undecided question. It is neither certain, nor probable. It is merely possible, nothing more.”36


Second Undecided Point.

The Name of Antichrist.

“St. John has indicated it, but in an extremely mysterious manner, by giving merely the number of this name: “That no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name . . . He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man; and the number of him is six hundred and sixty-six“ (Apoc., XIII, 17, 18).

“Amongst the people; of antiquity, and particularly amongst the Hebrews, the Greeks and the Latins, the letters of the alphabet were used as numbers. Each letter had its numerical value. That gave rise to the following procedure: By adding together the numerical value of the letters used in a passage, a number was obtained, and with the letters which were represented by this total, a name was elaborated. As the number of the Beast was 666, the figures of this number were changed into letters and thus form the mysterious name of Antichrist. This was tried in Greek, in Hebrew and in Latin, but it was sheer waste of time. The results obtained were so different that no precise definitive conclusion could be drawn.”37


Third Undecided Point.

The Seat of Antichrist’s Empire.

“Here again there are two opinions. The first is that of St. Irenæus who writes as follows: “At the time of his reign, Antichrist will transfer the seat of his empire to the earthly Jerusalem.”38, St. Hippolytus, Sulpicius Severus, Aretas, Rabanus, St. Robert Bellarmine, Lessius, Cornelius à Lapide and others, including Suarez, are of the same opinion. Here are the words of the last-named theologian: ‘From what we have said about Antichrist being a Jew by race and finding his chief support among the Jews, it follows immediately that he will restore the city of their ancestors and its temple, in which they have always taken a special pride.’39 . . . Besides, if Antichrist were to act otherwise, how could he get himself accepted as the Messias by the Jews who dream of earthly glory for Jerusalem and imagine that that city will become the capital of the future Messianic kingdom. This last argument seems to become stronger in our times thanks to the rise and growth of Zionism . . . The second opinion designates the Rome of the Popes as the metropolis of Antichrist’s kingdom.”40


Fourth Undecided Point.

The Temple in which Antichrist will present himself for adoration.

“What temple will be the scene of this abomination?

“One opinion maintains that it will be the temple of Jerusalem, which will be restored by Antichrist either in whole or in part. This opinion is held by St. Irenæus, St. Hippolytus, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. John Damascene, and a certain number of exegetes, ancient and modern. According to them the word temple must be taken in its strict, literal meaning. For, they argue, in the time of St. Paul, the author of the Epistles to the Thessalonians, the Temple of Jerusalem was the Temple. The name was sufficient indication of the building that was meant, as is clear from St. Luke (Acts, III and V), and other texts. At that epoch, Christian temples did not yet exist, and the Temple of Jerusalem alone was called the Temple of God. Accordingly, ‘it is more probable,’ writes Suarez, ‘that it is of it that St. Paul speaks.”42

“Opposed to this view there is another, which affirms that it is not definitely proved that St. Paul, when speaking of the Temple of God, had in view the Temple of Jerusalem. St. Jerome, in his explanation of the Apostle’s words writes: ‘He will enthrone himself in the Temple of God, that is to say, either in Jerusalem as some think, or in the Church, which seems to me most likely.’43 St. John Chrysostom also says: ‘Not in the Temple of Jerusalem, but in the Temple of the Church.’44 Theodoretus explains clearly what is meant: ‘What the Apostle calls the Temple of God are the churches in which this impious wretch will occupy the first rank, the first place, striving to get himself accepted as God.’45 . . . This is also the opinion of St. Hilary, Cajetan, Estius and others. In presence of the division of opinion in his day, St. Augustine held that the question was undecided.”46



THE DATE OF THE COMING OF ANTICHRIST

“Nobody can indicate it, as Scripture and Tradition are both silent on the point. God alone knows the year and the hour, and it is His secret . . .In Chapters XXIV-XXV of St. Matthew, our Lord announces clearly the end of the world and outlines the signs that will precede it, but He does not fix a date. Following the example of his Master, St. Paul, in the Second Chapter of the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, announces clearly the coming of Antichrist, but he does not assign a date for that event. He merely indicates the sign that will precede it, namely, the Apostasy of the Nations: ‘Unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.”47



DECREE OF THE FIFTH LATERAN COUNCIL

The Church, guided by the Holy Ghost and always prudent, has added nothing to the brief remarks of the Apostle . . . What is more, in order to prevent the recurrence of indiscretions which had taken place, she has forbidden under pain of excommunication to assign a date for the coming of Antichrist or for the General Judgment. This decree was drawn up in 1516, at the Fifth Lateran Council, under Pope Leo X, and it runs as follows:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1L’Antéchrist was published in 1905 by the Librarie Catholique Emmannel Vitte of Lyons and Paris. (back)
2Psalm II, 1. (back)
3Job, XXI, 14. (back)
4II Thess., II, 3. (back)
5Encyclical Letter, E Supremi Apostolatus Cathedra, Oct. 4, 1903. The translation has been made from the original text as published by the Bonne Presse, Paris. (back)
6I St. John, II, 18. (back)
7I St. John, IV, 3. (back)
8II St. John, I. 7. (back)
9Encyclical Letter, E Supremi Apostolatus Cathedra. Oct. 4, 1903. (back)
10L’Antéchrist, by Father Augustine Lémann, pp. 11-15. (back)
11L’Antéchrist, by Father A. Lémann, pp. 18, 19. (back)
12Apocalypse, XIII, 1-8. (back)
13L’Antéchrist, by Father A. Lémann, p. 20. (back)
14II Ep. to the Thessalonians, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11. (back)
15The City of God, Bk. XX, n. 19. (back)
16L’Antéchrist, p. 22. (back)
17Renan, L’Antéchrist, (Paris, 1873, pp. 478, 479). (back)
18L’Antéchrist, by Father Lémann, p. 24. (back)
19Suarez, De Antichristo, Sect. 1, n. 4 and 5. (back)
20“I considered the horns, and behold another little horn sprung out of the midst of them.” (Dan., VII, 8).
“The horn is called small, because it will grow little by little, and because it will arrive at domination, not by hereditary right, but by fraud.” (Cornelius à Lapide, in Ep. ad Thess., II, 11). (back)
21L’Antéchrist, by Father Lémann, p. 30. Father Lémann quotes a remarkable page from the great Spanish writer, Donoso Cortès, Oeuvres, t. II, pp. 229-230. (back)
22L’Antéchrist, pp. 32-34. (back)
23“He will come, when he comes, with all Satan’s influence to aid him: there will be no lack of power, of counterfeit signs and wonders.” (The New Testament, by Mgr. R. A. Knox). (back)
24De Civitate Dei, Lib. XX, n. 20. (back)
25Suarez, De Antichristo, sect. IV, n. 10. Suarez exposes the two opinions in excellent fashion. (back)
26Corn. à Lap., II Thess., II, 9. Bern. a Piconio, II Ep. ad Thess., c. II, 9. (back)
27Father Lémann quotes from the writings of the above-mentioned Fathers and others. The text of St. Jerome will suffice for all. “The Lord speaking of Antichrist says to the Jews: ‘I am come in the name of my Father and you receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive’ . . . The Jews, after having despised the truth in the Person of Jesus Christ, will welcome falsehood by acclaiming Antichrist” (Epist. 151, ad Algariam, quæst. II). (back)
28L’Antéchrist, pp. 44.47. (back)
29Des Écrits authentiques de St. Thomas d’Aquin, pp. 110, 155. (back)
30De Antichristo, Disp. 54, Sect. 1, n. 7. In a note on page 47 of L’Antéchrist, Father Lémann enumerates 25 false messiahs, who received a partial welcome from the members of the Jewish nation. In their joint work, La Question du Messis (pp. 22-24), the two Fathers Lémann enumerate with a greater wealth of detail the twenty-five false Messiahs, and conclude with the words: “Not merely once, not merely ten times, but twenty five times, our ancestors were led astray by this mirage. Because they failed to recognise the true Messiah, they were drawn to seek Him where He was not.” (back)
31L’Antéchrist, p. 48. “The supreme power and reign of Antichrist will last three years and a half. I speak of his supreme power and rule . . . How long he will take to prepare and establish his rule is not clear to me . . . It does not seem very likely that he will accomplish all these things in the short space of three years and a half. That alone is certain that at the most he will remain on his throne three years and a half.” (Suarez, De Antichristo, Sect. II, n. 3). (back)
32Apocalypse, Preface, n. 13. (back)
33L’Antéchrist, by Father Lémann, p. 49. (back)
34Minutes of the Great Sanhedrin. (back)
35Archives Israélites, 1847, p. 801. (back)
36L’Antéchrist, by Father Lémann, p. 49. (back)
37L’ Antéchrist, pp. 58-61. (back)
38Irenæus, Adv. hæreses, lib. V, c. 25. (back)
39Suarez, De Antichristo, sect. V, n. 7. (back)
40L’Antéchrist. pp. 58-61. (back)
41“This is the rebel who is to lift up his head above every divine name, above all that men hold in reverence, till at last he enthrones himself in God’s temple, and proclaims himself as God.” (The New Testament, by Mgr. R. A. Knox). (back)
42Suarez, De Antichristo, Sect. V, n. 5. (back)
43St. Jerome, Ad Algariam, quæst. II. (back)
44In II ad Thessal., II. (back)
45In II ad Thessal., II. (back)
46St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, Lib. XX, n. 19. (back)
47II ad Thess., II, 3. “The Apostasy must come first; the champion of wickedness must appear first, destined to inherit perdition.” (The New Testament, Mgr. R. A. Knox). The Apostasy and Antichrist are to come before “the day of the Lord,” spoken of just previously. (back)
48Cf. Acts, 1, 7. (back)
49Father Lémann quotes the original text in a footnote. (back)

Source


The Kingship of Christ and The Conversion of the Jewish Nation
                                                BY
REV. DENIS FAHEY, C.S.Sp., D.D., D.Ph., B.A., Professor of Philosophy,

Holy Ghost Missionary College, Kimmage, Dublin

Imprimi Potest. O'CARROLL, C.S.Sp., Praep. Prov. Hib.
Nihil Obstat: JACOBUS BROWNE, Censor Deputatus.
Imprimatur: †JACOBUS, Episcopus Fernensis. die 26 januarii 1953
First printed : January 1953
“In the end my immaculate heart will triumph.”
(13 July 1917, at Fatima, Portugal)