Antichrist is an ecumenist, Cardinal tells Pope

Zenit is carrying details of the Lenten meditations being delivered this week to the Pope by Cardinal Giacomo Biffi, former Archbishop of Bologna. According to Zenit, Biffi told his listeners: "The Antichrist presents himself as pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist." This apparent attack on ecumenism comes as in an unprecedented move, the Orthodox have been given their own chapel in the Catholic Cathedral in Trier. The chapel will be used for both Catholic Byzantine and Orthodox services, a move which will get some Orthodox jumping up and down. Richard Owen is reporting on the Antichrist from Rome. That Pope Benedict XVI should have chosen Biffi, once himself considered possible papabile, for his Lenten meditations is of itself interesting. Biffi has in the past made quite clear what his views are about the dangers of the modern era. But that Biffi should then go straight in with a talk straight out of the Book of Revelation gives a fascinating insight into the present mindset of senior in Rome. This picture, by Durer, shows Christ and the Antichrist. Biffi also said in his meditation to the Pope and other Vatican clerics: 'He will convoke an ecumenical council and will seek the consensus of all the Christian confessions, granting something to each one. The masses will follow him, with the exception of small groups of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants.'

Biffi was quoting the Russian mystic Soloviev, about whom he delivered a lecture in 2000. Soloviev, he said, also prophesied that 'days will come in Christianity in which they will try to reduce the salvific event to a mere series of values. He described how in his 'Tale of the Antichrist, Soloviev's last work before he died in 1900, he foresaw that a small group of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants would resist and say to the Antichrist: 'You give us everything, except what interests us, Jesus Christ.'  Biffi said: 'Today, in fact, we run the risk of having a Christianity which puts aside Jesus with his cross and resurrection.'  Biffi, who is 78, also said that if Christians 'limited themselves to speaking of shared values they would be more accepted on television programs and in social groups. But in this way, they will have renounced Jesus, the overwhelming reality of the resurrection.'  He said this was the danger that Christians face in our days … 'the Son of God cannot be reduced to a series of good projects sanctioned by the prevailing worldly mentality.'

The doctrine of the Antichrist is firmly rooted in Biblical orthodoxy. Muslims also believe in a similar concept, the False Messiah. Translated from the Greek, antíkhristos, it means the opposite of Christ. The term appears several times in the New Testament, and in today’s world, could apply to someone setting themselves up as a contemporary, Christ-like saviour of the world.
Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther identified the Pope as the Antichrist. The philosopher Nietzsche even called himself the Antichrist. Many have used the Book of Revelation to identify the Antichrist using the “number of the beast”, 666. More recently, in the best-selling US Left Behind novels, authors Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins appear to indicate that the Antichrist might be the secretary general of the United Nations.

Cardinal Giacomo Biffi first raised his suspicions that the Antichrist was on the loose in today's world in his lecture delivered in 2000 when he was still Archbishop of Bologna. The present Pope has also in the past referred approvingly Soloviev. In his 2000 lecture, Biffi described the teachings of Soloviev as 'at once prophetic and largely unheeded.' Biffi said Soloviev had foreseen the vicissitudes and troubles of the 20th century 'with striking clarity'.

Citing Soloviev’s final work, 'The Three Dialogues and the Story of the Antichrist', which he completed on Easter Sunday 1900, shortly before he died, Biffi said he was struck by how clearly Soloviev, pictured here, foresaw that the 20th century would be 'the epoch of great wars, civil strife and revolutions.' All this, he said, would prepare the way for the disappearance of 'the old structure of separate nations' and 'almost everywhere the remains of the ancient monarchical institutions would disappear.' This would pave the way for a 'United States of Europe'. Soloviev predicted that the Antichrist will be a 'convinced spiritualist', a philanthropist, a pacifist, a  vegetarian and a determined defender of animal rights. He will not be hostile 'in principle' and will appreciate Christ’s teaching. But he will reject the teaching that Christ is unique, and will deny that Christ is risen and alive today.

It seems an odd time to be attacking ecumenism, given that dialogue with the Orthodox has recommenced and that the Pope was recently received by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. And also given that the first report from Iarccum , a statement signed off by bishops of both churches and now available from SPCK, recommended various radical moves such as Anglican bishops attending Catholic bishops' ad limina visits to Rome. And that this statement, described by its authors as a 'call to action', also included the following paragraph: 'We urge Anglicans and Roman Catholics to explore together how the ministry of the Bishop of Rome might be offered and received in order to assist our Communions to grow towards full, ecclesial communion.' Even if the Anglicans do schism and disappear in their infighting over gays, their church buildings will not be neglected. Some Catholics are already talking about reclaiming what they regard as their rightful heritage.

For myself, I think Soloviev resembles a bit our own Rowan Williams. And as for Nietzche, am I alone in detecting a resemblance between him and one Richard Dawkins? In any case, one thing we can be certain of is that the Antichrist will not be a woman. And actually, ecumenical prospects have never looked better. Why? Besides the hopefulness of the Iarccum report, for the first time, possibly in centuries, the Orthodox, Anglican and Roman Catholic churches are headed by three great theologians, a positively Thomist Trinitarian assembly of great minds, able to communicate with each other as none other could. Lent is a time of great soul searching, of examing our motives and actions of the past year at the deepest possible level as we prepare to start over after Easter. I would so love to know what the Pope is really thinking, as he meditates this week on the description of the Antichrist as pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist. Just as with resemblances, it would be unwise to draw deep conclusions from superficial appearances. These things are rarely as straightforward as they might seem.

 

Comments

[Ian E. Wightman]

Whatever we today think or consider to be the nature and person of the 'antichrist' has no relation to what was recorded almost 2000 years ago. We ought not to, and the Pope & Co. especially, ought not to apply latter day meaning or understanding and expressions to the concept of 'antichrist'.
We also ought to first ask ourselves what 'Christ' is before we decide what "the one in place of Christ" is. Remember, in Jesus day the gentile religions were termed 'the dead' because the scripture said the Messiah was an Hebrew of David's line of faith. Consequently the New Testament epistles record that, "the dead in Christ shall rise first...", meaning that the religions of the gentiles (the dead) would accept Jesus as the Messiah and convert, which has already happened.
Today the 'rising of the dead' has taken on a totally different meaning by our latter day conception and comprehension of the Scriptures, In the same way, the 'antichrist' we muse on is as false as the real one.
Cardinal Biffi would do so much better to learn what Jesus said to Peter at the end, you see, Peter was young then and now today he is old.

[Eleni]

Orthodox Christians, we must live the one true Faith, which we believe and was passed down to us by the Apostles, and our Holy Orthodox Church and which we know through the Creed. All the rest we leave in God's Hands. Our job is to live the Faith and let the Holy Spirit do His work. That's all we can do. No one can know about when Christ will come again, but God alone knows. Keep the Faith and live and let live.

[Fr. Hans Jacobse]

"Translated from the Greek, antíkhristos, it means the opposite of Christ"

One small but important clarification. "Anti" doesn't mean "opposite" as much as it means "in place of." Thus "antikhristos" means "the one in place of Christ." It's a subtle but important distinction since it removes the Hollywood conception that the Antichrist is some kind of modern Vandal warrior.

[Chris Gillibrand]

The Venerable John Henry Cardinal Newman was ahead of Cardinal Biffi by hundreds of years. Writing in the
Patristical Idea of Antichrist ,
he states,
“…… the coming of Christ will be immediately preceded by a very awful and unparalleled {57} outbreak of evil, called by St. Paul an Apostasy, a falling away, in the midst of which a certain terrible Man of sin and Child of perdition, the special and singular enemy of Christ, or Antichrist, will appear; that this will be when revolutions prevail, and the present framework of society breaks to pieces; and that at present the spirit which he will embody and represent is kept under by "the powers that be," but that on their dissolution, he will rise out of their bosom and knit them together again in his own evil way, under his own rule, to the exclusion of the Church.”

And further
“Surely, there is at this day a confederacy of evil, marshalling its hosts from all parts of the world, organizing itself, taking its measures, enclosing the Church of Christ as in a net, and preparing the way for a general Apostasy from it. Whether this very Apostasy is to give birth to Antichrist, or whether he is still to be delayed, as he has already been delayed so long, we cannot know; but at any rate this Apostasy, and all its tokens and instruments, are of the Evil One, and savour of death.”

It is also important to recognize that as the devil is not a fallen god but a fallen angel that the antichrist is an opponent of Christ’s reign on earth, but not in heaven.

There was a time in the late 1960s when Joseph Ratzinger now Pope Benedict toyed with the idea that the end of the world was upon us, when he was involved with the group that established the Gustav Siewerth Academy. The quite conservative founders were reacting in horror to the student revolutions in 1968 and also focused on the more apocalyptic aspects of the visions of Our Lady at La Salette. The Pope’s own very methodical doctoral thesis deals with the Franciscan St Bonaventure’s considerations of the eras of the world, culminating in the final judgement and he will have been well aware that the Spiritual Franciscans took the signs of the times, including the Life of St Francis itself, rather more seriously than others and got themselves excommunicated.

PS The Pope is Augustinian, Rowan Williams is inclined that way and any Orthodox runs away from Thomism as fast as their legs can carry them. St Thomas Aquinas did after all write “Against the Errors of the Greeks”, a work of the year 1264 which whatever one thinks of it, has stood the test of time as it covers all the issues.

[Alice C. Linsley]

Jean, your tone suggests that you are very angry. Why? You would win more sympathy for your cause (whatever that is) with a dash of sweetness.

[Martin]

"Well if we see the results of the second vatican council, the simple truth is that this so called false ecumenism is dangerous or inspired by antichrist. John 23 invited observers from other religions in order to change Catholic Truth!"

It is indeed regrettable that these observers were invited, and the pope was heavily criticised for it at the time. Ecumenism can only be on the basis that it does not compromise orthodox teachings.

[Martin]

"There were no innocent South African civilians. All South Africans were subjected to a racist definition under Apartheid and were assigned rights on that basis. Conscription ensured that all whites were complicit at some stage."

Oh, so that makes Mandela's actions in conspiring to blow them up all right then, doesn't it?

[Mikael Rosén]

Well if we see the results of the second vatican council, the simple truth is that this so called false ecumenism is dangerous or inspired by antichrist. John 23 invited observers from other religions in order to change Catholic Truth!

[Jean]

Ah right, Gospel witness. Democracy is all fine and dandy so long as democratically elected Governments do what the RC Church tells them to do, If not any old fascist dicatatorship will do - preferably if supported by genocidal maniacs. Makes perfect Gosple sense, doesn't it?

[Gospel Witness]

Hitler gave us Fascism in Spain. Were it not for his aid, Franco would never have gained control. The Catholic Church supported Franco against the socialistic Republic because the Republicans very unwisely enacted laws that violated many teachings of the Roman Catholic Church within the first 6 months of governance.

[Gareth Rhymes]

Thanks be to God that Christ centred teaching is comeing from the Catholic Church. Only holding fast to Him and the His redeming sacrifice on the cross will help us and the world in the face of all our problems, above all our relationships with God, broken by sin. A concentration by the Church on 'niceness' over the hash message of judgment and redemption would be deadly, and eternaly so. It therefore represents the Church's greatest challenge, as it greatly threatens its prioritisation of its chief work, spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ.

[Benjamin Waterhouse]

Ermm... Orthodoxy ("right" belief and "right" worship) doesn't have a monolithic leader, especially not the turkish EP. Ecuminism is The panheresy of out times.

In Him
Sinner Benjamin

[Jean]

There were no innocent South African civilians. All South Africans were subjected to a racist definition under Apartheid and were assigned rights on that basis. Conscription ensured that all whites were complicit at some stage.

The fact that Martin can airbrush Apartheid out of the picture shows his real affinity to authoritarian and totalitarian regimes and why he can aslo see no wrong with a Catholicism that gave us the Inquistion, fascism in Italy, Spain and Portugal, and, more recently, rampant toleration of child sex abuse throughout the world.

Uber Catholics like Martin have no undersatnding of the secular world, no concept of democracy or civil rights, because for them the citizen is effectively still a Serf in a Feudal system of total temporal and spititual domination. The children were expendable - it is the Church as a system which mattered, and this was codified in Canon Law.

He now wants to impose his Sharia law type ideas of religious authority and doctrine on others in society - effectively a throwback to a Fascist era. Many wars were fought to defeat such tyranny and the Catholic Church lost and has now retreated to its bunker in the Vatican - hoping that some Goebbels like creatures like Martin can still gain it some influence in the world. But the world has moved on and the Martins Talaban view of history has been left far behind.

We may end up having to fight fundamentalist Islam, but fundamentalist Catholicism was defeated a long time ago and no one in the real world listens their rantings anymore.

[Martin]

"wasn't Nelson Mandela someone who was "acceptable" to almost everbody globally? Did he not put forward a creed of uniting peoples, a message of putting aside differences to emphasise that which is shared between all people?"

Really? I thought he was merely a terrorist who has successfully undergone a process of rebranding. Was he "uniting peoples" when he was conducting a campaign of armed violence against innocent South African citizens?

[Robert May]

The "picture, by Durer," shown with this article does not depict Christ and the Antichrist but The Woman Clothed with the Sun and the Seven-headed Dragon [www.wga.hu.index1.html] as described in Revelation 12.

[J Pearce]

Christians are not against ecological efforts. We are to be good stewards of God's earth!

Oh, please! What a load of fatuous rubbish! The contributions to debate on climate change by the major religions have been marked by an almost deathly silence! The truth of the matter is, the more zealous of the religious are just sitting around on their fat asses, passively waiting for some environmental cataclysm to occur, in the belief that somehow its inevitable ("Armageddon" and all that medieval rubbish) and that they are going to come out of it unscathed while all the godless heathens get their "just desserts" and are wiped out.

The fact that a senior Catholic has now tarred environmentalism with the "Antichrist" brush, shows the sickeningly deluded mentality at the heart of Christianity in regards to climate change.

"You are missing the point. Cardinal Biffi is sketching a profile of someone who would be acceptable to almost everyone globally. That's the point.

Forgive me for pointing this out, but wasn't Nelson Mandela someone who was "acceptable" to almost everbody globally? Did he not put forward a creed of uniting peoples, a message of putting aside differences to emphasise that which is shared between all people? Philosophically, there's not that much of a difference between what he preached and the concept of ecumenism in religion, really, is there? Yet, according to your principles, he should have been vilified for being a secular equivalent of your "antichrist".

I reckon if JC were to put in an appearance in this day and age, he would preach a gospel of environmentalism and ecumenism - and people like you would put him straight back up on the cross, in the belief that he was actually the antichrist. You can guarantee that the Catholic Church would want shot of him, so warped and corrupted it has become on its own power.

[Alice C. Linsley]

Christians are not against ecological efforts. We are to be good stewards of God's earth! You are missing the point. Cardinal Biffi is sketching a profile of someone who would be acceptable to almost everyone globally. That's the point. This person will speak all the right words, but will have nothing of real value to offer, and in the ends his works will be burned as the chaff. Those who recognize what is of lasting value will recognize that this person, be he ever so nice, is anti-Christ.

[Mary Treherne]

If material spreading on the web turns out to be authentic than this cardinal does indeed have something to fear. For a new interpretation of the moral teachings of Christ is questioning the whole of tradition and history.

Check these links:
http://www.energon.uklinux.net
http://thefinalfreedoms.bulldoghome.com
http://www.dunwanderinpress.org

[J Pearce]

MJG - humour. Earth concept!

I really don't get how an anti-christ can be someone who believes in environmentalism. It should be pretty bloody obvious - even to those certain people who prefer to take their moral stance from the 1576 - that global warming is definite and very real challenge - threat, in fact - to human existence. And that also includes Catholics. No, really, it does. Honest.

What frightens me most is the obvious undercurrent to some of the posts on this thread, that clearly identify a strand of thinking within Christianity that believes that environmental change is a phenomenon that "doesn't apply" to the devoutly religious.

To which my answer is - tell that to the parents of the kids who died in Alabama a few days ago. Or the innocent dead of New Orleans. Or...I could go on ad infinitum.

[michael Irons [PERCIVAL]]

the sure sign of anti christ is self justification using religious principles and the rigmarles of theoly
permitting a harm that is pointed to as possible and ireversible and gratuitous is a sign of anti christianity whether by a fallible or infallible state agent [vatican inc] since the harm that is done when done by a actual tespass warned of is a act of positive choice when that office has the remedial steps necessary
also the harm if only possible by means of the church juggernaut in question is attributable to the author of thr harm who can no longer claim that his competence sits clearly above the mountain of sentences about good
relativism begins where it first commences and that will be as subatomic and in the approaches to language itself
conceit and murder are where two desires operate in tandem with harm and against law and against the good of the church and the public
This can be shown as proved although it seems extraordinary
A juggernsut is indefensible when a predilection leads to a maloutcome QED and thrology finds the path to the core criime by measuiring the effect and going back to the cause with everything considered
The outcome might be immaculately simple
There will be no rest for the wicked however
at the tope of the word mountain moral judgement can continue and judgement never stops even where a pontiff might commence to accept his bishop and them their archbishop
But if in doing so a harm ensures than all his works are void since the defect is everywhere
I delineate a crime made of action of inaction about a incidental requirement to correct a defect that is itself mundane and technical although a right to a answered requirement
Denial creates the trespass since the matter is simply a correction of a minor matter such as how far sound travels [a exact distance of one or another kind]
the dismissal of the necessity subverts the meaning of necessity with harm
It must not be denied yet it has no importance in itself
A diocese that rejects everyone because it hides the fact that its crown is stolen [if it had one] prevents its restoration or replacement by anyone able to do that by rejecting them
ther dismissal is notjhing and negative but its effect is gravely positive
what is the law about a denial of a immaterial nothing [technical such as bus fare needed by other forces from someone who ows a mammon duty that is secular but concrete]with a absence of good as a result
Infallibility should be able to not trespass and gentle law allows for this to be possible so when that law is transgressed it is a positive material fact
QED proof available

[Matt]

"...Antichrist will be a 'convinced spiritualist', a philanthropist, a pacifist, a  vegetarian and a determined defender of animal rights. He will not be hostile 'in principle' and will appreciate Christ’s teaching. But he will reject the teaching that Christ is unique"

Could this refer to our own dear Prince Charles, and his desire to drop the definite article from "defender of the faith"? The rest of it fits too...

[bob]

Al Gore is not the antichrist. Don't be ridiculous! He is just warning of global warming and ice melting and sea levels rising. Doesn't this have something to do with HIs country not signing the Kyoto protocol?

Leave him be. He's not religious.

[Paul]

A sixth diocese cowers behind bankruptcy, escaping its responsibility to hundreds of children raped by god’s messengers on earth. Plain evidence abounds of a church structure that knew of these crimes and hid the truth. Cardinal Biffi need not look to mystical ramblings for evidence of the anti-christ. Evidence abounds in the diocese of San Diego, California, USA. When the good cardinal has restored god’s love to those people perhaps we can all devote some concern to the risks posed by peace loving ecumenical environmentalists.

[Aurelius]

The main figure on the left of the Durer image is actually the Virgin Mary, and the main one on the right is the Beast - a distinct figure in the Book of the Apocalypse to the Antichrist.

Otherwise, spot-on!

[Alice C. Linsley]

There is much mystery surrounding the Anti-Christ. In the Epistles one gets the sense that this isn't an actual human, but the spirit of an age. St. John warns about the "spirit of Anti-Christ" that has gone out into the world. How fascinating that a Roman Cardinal should find the writings of the Russian Orthodox poet-philosopher inspiration for his meditation! If you read Solovyov, you discover that he saw early the trajectory of liberal social engineering. His work is prophetic and I think that Biffi is dead on. So do many Orthodox and Protestants, probably the very people who will continue to be targeted by "the spirit of the age."

[simon]

the Son of God cannot be reduced to a series of good projects sanctioned by the prevailing worldly mentality.

I think this is quite important. Too often nowadays we think we nearly know it all, that there are just a few little scientific issues regarding the motion of galaxies and the 'world' of the very small (that may have massively significant applications but are nonetheless irrelevant to the majority of current empirical science), and a few diseases that could be dealt with more efficiently. What we end up with is an increasingly arrogant stance on things, one which hides behind a general ethos of good intentions.

In reality most of the best scientists realise we are far from scratching the surface of this universe we live in - let alone any realms that may have a more absolute reality. A physicist will tell you that the universe consists of a space-time medium permeated by fields and waves. When we touch a table, there is nothing 'solid' making any contact anywhere, just very strong and 'short distance' fields repelling each other. A biological chemist will readily admit that we don't have the first clue what life actually is - they can recognise the signs of its presence but haven't the foggiest idea what it is. A quantum physicist could blow our minds away by describing what the world would be like without decoherence - and yet would be unable to describe the nature of the decoherence event in anything other than statistical maths. And any good physicist worth their salt would admit how staggering the sheer existence of symmetry is. The fact that one side of an '=' sign is equivalent to the other side no matter how you manipulate it (within a few simple rules), and can be applied anywhere in the known universe, is a far bigger and more amazing mystery than most assume.

"The prevailing worldly mentality" is that human morals and human understanding have surpassed ancient creeds, and that Jesus was a wise teacher who had some important points to make. When I became a Christian, I realised that Jesus was there at the creation of the universe, and believe that he knows more than me.

[Stephen Hand]

No, this is no retreat into medieval times but the constant teaching of the Catholic Church for which the world is not eternal, nor history a meaningless redundant futility or mythic progressive ascent to utopia.

Biffi simply repeats that for every Catholic teaching, the Fathers of the Churchtaught, there is a clever counterfeit version which is essentially antichristic (whether love, brotherhood, dialogue, ecumenism, or what have you).

This will become acute at the end of time, be it near or very far off.

Only in the Church, Catholics believe, with Peter, the Rock against whom the "Gates of Hell cannot prevail" (Mt 16:18) according to the promises of Christ, are we grounded in true interpretation. See Cardinal Ratzinger's (Pope Benedicts) Dominus">http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html">Dominus Iesus

Those who consider this all mythic nonsense may myth the Boat! :-)

[MJG]

" it looks like Catholicism is retreating into the medieval past faster than a Frenchman legs it from a fight" Wow! Bigotry AND zenophobia all on one post! What is it about religion, including, it would seem, the liberal(ish) form, which gives us so much inner peace and charity?

[john gregory Flinn]

"The Antichrist presents himself as pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist."

Oh yes, very drole!
He or she must be Greenpeace, or FOE - only I'm not sure about their ecumenism.
They certainly present themselves well in the other spheres and have persuaded much of the world to their 'truths'.
I'm thinking principally of their cant concerning carbon dioxide's role in global warming, but there are other 'truths' which they peddle and derive a devoted following.
Now, I wonder if they could meet Soloviev's version as well.... maybe!

[alan]

Ruth - the whole supernatural baldlerdash with its devils, demons, hell, purgatory, the beast and antichrist is so sick. If we could put all peddlers of this humbug naked on a desert island and let them sort things out between themselves, maybe they would come to their senses and recognise the problems of real life. Maybe not, though, they're too far gone, I fear.

[C Ventana]

What is true is that a charismatic, popular, influential man is trying to start a movement warning of total global catastrophe unless he is followed.

His solution is largly economic and focuses on each individual's carbon footprint number. Revelations 13:17 is nothing if not an economic policy.

And it happens to also be true that if you add up the ascii identifiers to the lowercase letters of his name, and include the ascii indentifier to the space it adds up to 666

097 = a
108 = l
032 = space
103 = g
111 = o
114 = r
101 = e
----
666

I'm not making it up. See for yourself.

http://www.asciitable.com/

[J Pearce]

Oh, I don't know. Given the overall tenor of this guys approach, it looks like Catholicism is retreating into the medieval past faster than a Frenchman legs it from a fight. Why is it that the orthodox religious feel it necessary to drag everyone back to an era of rampant disease, poverty, mud huts and feudalism? It couldn't possibly be something to do with trying to regain some of their power they ceded, due to the rise of science and rationalism, could it?

By the way, it has also just occurred to me that Sir Paul McCartney is suspiciously close to being a "'convinced spiritualist', a philanthropist, a pacifist, a vegetarian and a determined defender of animal rights"...

Oh my God - Macca is the Antichrist! I knew it! And here's the proof - how much money is he worth? 66.6 million! "The Frog Chorus" contains a hidden message telling you to "get the Pope"! Play both sides of the "White Album" at 33.3 revs per minute and it adds up to...66.6!

Run to the hills!

[Gerard Mulholland]

Who is Creator must be perfection.
Who is perfection must be invulnerable.
Who is invulnerable needs no defence.
Who offers love cannot require submission.
Who offers free will cannot require obedience.
Who offers peace cannot require conflict.
Who offers joy cannot require suffering.
Who offers forgiveness cannot require retribution.

[Alice C. Linsley]

Great report, Ruth.

[Mike Homfray]

Awfully naughty, but then the Antichrist is Rowan Williams?? Looks like it according to this definition....

[Alan Jacobs]

I think it's inaccurate to say that the Cardinal was "attacking ecumenism." If he did not believe in some kind of authentic ecumenism, he would not have included Protestants and Orthodox along with Catholics among those who resist the Antichrist. Rather, he is saying that the Antichrist's strategy will be to employ the language of ecumenism, which he will pervert. To say that there is a danger of something being perverted is not the same as saying that that thing is itself bad.

[Londiniensis]

Dear Miss Gledhill,
As you pointed out ten days ago, you do not write the headlines in "The Times", but I assume that you do write the headlines on your own blog. Why then sensationalise and so trivialise and distort the central message of Cardinal Biffi's lenten homily?

As you yourself quote further down in your post, Cardinal Biffi said "if Christians 'limited themselves to speaking of shared values they would be more accepted on television programs and in social groups. But in this way, they will have renounced Jesus, the overwhelming reality of the resurrection.' He said this was the danger that Christians face in our days … 'the Son of God cannot be reduced to a series of good projects sanctioned by the prevailing worldly mentality.'"

It is a shame that you left out of your post what Cardinal Biffi went on to say: "there are relative values, such as solidarity, love of peace and respect for nature. If these become absolute, uprooting or even opposing the proclamation of the event of salvation, then these values become an instigation to idolatry and obstacles on the way of salvation."

These two passages surely are the kernel of the homily (and of the Soloviev passages), and the comments on ecumenism, ecology and pacifism should be read in this context - there was no attack on ecumenism - but it doesn't make for a good headline and an apocalyptic woodcut.

[Emanuel Appel]

a letter from America

Dear Ruth,

I'm puzzled re the whole question of "ecumenism" and the "Antichrist". My reading of western history leads me to the idea that "schism" is merely a bunch of Greeks and Italians having a brawl as to who will lead the gang. Tony Soprano would understand the Renaissance Popes very well.

"Antichrist" and the end of days seems to come from the mind of a Greek on mind bending drugs. The cruelty and and the almost welcoming vision of the world destroyed is totally out of character with the religion of Israel and her most famous son in the West, Yeshua. It is exactly the Russian who, most likely, spit in that Jew's face if he ever came back.