I have Consistently Said, a) I am Catholic, b) I'm a Writer, c) I Intend to Get Married

New blog on the kid: I have Consistently Said, a) I am Catholic, b) I'm a Writer, c) I Intend to Get Married · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere:Is It Licit to Point Out Who the Man of Sin Is or Isn't? Overall Yes · All the Bible is Essential Doctrine, If You Have Time to Read

If anyone takes me as having said sth which would exclude me from being Catholic, he has not dared to take that up with me.

Lots of people have questioned me being a writer. But ...

• I do write
• people do read me
• occasionally, I even get money from what I write.

Whether, when I hold up a cardboard with my blogs*, the man who gives me extra much thinks my writing is great or thinks I'm mad, but due to my writing a special case among madmen, warranting some special delicacy, doesn't totally matter for this purpose. Either way, I actually do get money for having written and money for proposing what I have written as sth to read. For the record, many seem to actually have some joy at seeing me, and having an occasion to give me sth, and it sometimes seems to correlate to when I've given a forceful defense of Young Earth Creationism or of Catholicism. However, there is a certain risk that those who enjoy the defenses of YEC, right where I am, often are on the non-Catholic to Anti-Catholic spectrum, and that means, they could be confusing a defense of Young Earth Creationism with:

• Sola Scriptura
• or theologemes that they think they can deduce from Scripture, if unhampered by Catholic Tradition.
  
  
  • About soteriology
  • or ecclesiology
  • or sacramentology.

That some of them do so, would in and of itself not be a total disaster. The disaster is when Catholics pick on to their view and try to stamp me as non-Catholic for being Young Earth Creationist.

I do not claim to know whether Anthony Stine's refusal to engage with a colleague, but one poorer than himself, is due to this or was due to this, and if when I give good reasons why YEC is the consistent position precisely for a Catholic, they want some other reason to avoid me. Like "date-setting" or for that matter calculating who the Antichrist is.

Now, there is a real authority** against this, namely:

We decree and ordain, with the approval of the sacred council, that nobody -whether a secular cleric or a member of any of the mendicant orders or someone with the right to preach by law or custom or privilege or otherwise — may be admitted to carry out this office unless he has first been examined with due care by his superior, which is a responsibility that we lay on the superior’s conscience, and unless he is found to be fit and suitable for the task by his upright behaviour, age, doctrine, honesty, prudence and exemplary life. Wherever he goes to preach, he must provide a guarantee to the bishop and other local ordinaries concerning his examination and competence, by means of the original or other letters from the person who examined and approved him. We command all who undertake this task of preaching, or will later undertake it, to preach and expound the gospel truth and holy scripture in accordance with the exposition, interpretation and commentaries that the church or long use has approved and has accepted for teaching until now, and will accept in the future, without any addition contrary to its true meaning or in conflict with it. They are always to insist on the meanings which are in harmony with the words of sacred scripture and with the interpretations, properly and wisely understood, of the doctors mentioned above. They are in no way to presume to preach or declare a fixed time for future evils, the coming of antichrist or the precise day of judgment; for Truth says, it is not for us to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority. Let it be known that those who have hitherto dared to declare such things are liars, and that because of them not a little authority has been taken away from those who preach the truth .

This is however a disciplinary rule. It's from Session XI of Lateran V, held on 19.XI.1516. The inofficial heading is "on how to preach" ... which shows that it is as disciplinary as 813, Tours, stating that after the reading of the Gospel in Latin, the priest needs to add an explanation in the popular language, more specifically Theodisc or Rustic Roman.

Note please, laymen are not directly mentioned, only indirectly insofar as a layman could have a venia praedicandi. Lay writers are not mentioned. As it is disciplinary, it's not a dogmatic definition about what Jesus meant with "day and hour" ... If you have a parish in either Finland or Poland, Ireland or the Hurons in pre-colonial times, I don't think the Theodisc language would be much good (I think it is exclusive rather than inclusive of Swedish and English, would apoply to only Low and High German, certainly not to the other languages of Finland and Ireland, namely Finnish and Gaelic) and the Rustic Roman tongue would not be much better. The Council of Tours from 813 is simply not expressing just eternal truth, just quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus. It is adding time and place specific rules for the then and there. I think it would be as disastrous to apply this from Lateran V to the actual end times.

It is possible that Pope Leo X thought, when promulgating this, that it would suffice all the way up to the end times, that Catholic morality, rather than specifics from prophecy, would suffice to identify the Man of Sin. He somewhat later in Decet Romanum Pontificem (which he ordered to be nailed to Church doors, with a specific twist of irony) ordered people, not indeed to kill Luther, but to reduce his existence to utmost misery, to bare necessities, and to a dire need to submit just in order to survive. We know very well he was not able to get this through. While Lutheranism is somewhat eclipsed by Anglicanism and Presbyterianism, internationally, it is still fairly big in Europe, a legacy to Luther's wordly success. Similarily the bull Cum ex apostolatus was counting on the Catholic peoples to rise as a man against any man falsely promoted to, not just papacy, but even secular government, if having been taken redhandedly in the crime of heresy. Later, the Catholics of England and Ireland were certainly not able to obey this, the Stuart loyalty was a second best, and the Republic of Kilkenny or Confederation of Kilkenny, was shortlived.

The ancient order had to be eroded before it could be overthrown. It has had to be overthrown before it can be, probably soon, persecuted. When the Antichrist comes, he will not be facing a large Catholic community with a very firm grasp on Catholic morality and a stout courage to apply this in politics. He will be going after souls, and in order for souls to survive, to not damn themselves, they will have to make personal decisions with not a full support from Catholic society. Every bit of Biblical and other Catholic prophecy that can help to identify him should be scrutinised for detail, including the gematria mentioned in Apocalypse 13:18.

Some say "if we prematurely identify someone as the Antichrist, who isn't, then that will help the real Antichrist when he comes" ... only if you make the identification too firm and definite. There is such a thing as preliminary and prudential judgements. Plus, if they keep saying it too long, that will also help the real Antichrist when he will have come. Note that I use the tense of Future Perfect, rare in English colloquially spoken. Some time in the future, it will be a fact already past, that the Antichrist has come. This is true whether the coming itself is, to us now, future, past or present.

So, to call someone a non-Catholic, because he is giving specific options for who the Antichrist and the False Prophet might be, is indeed a non sequitur. Given that loads of my production actually do not deal with this subject, it would seem some Catholics are infiltrated by the False Prophet or the Antichrist or both, either because they have been identified by me, or because what I otherwise promote is well argued and very apt to be a block on their road map, if it catches on.

If it were only Catholics zealous about following Lateran V, this would not be happening. They could be content that I was in error on this point and see if there was some other thing of mine they could publish, for instance in Young Earth Creationism. And if they somehow would like to pretend that Young Earth Creationism is not Catholic, they are in trouble, as long as I'm free, since that's easy to refute. They could win an oral debate by pure bullying tactics, perhaps, but not a written debate, and they would not be in a position to order me, since I'd take Cum ex apostolatus to imply among other things that a Catholic dignitary who's not YEC is only usurping the dignity.

So, if you hear these claims about me, or about what I'm supposed to have agreed to in the past, they are fraudulent: a) that I were going to become Muslim, b) that I were going to become Jew, c) that I were going to become Protestant, anything between 7DA and Lutheran, d) that I were going to join a monastery or a seminary for receiving holy orders, e) that I were going to "look for a real job" (as if I agreed to my writing not being one), namely apart from writing and from trades related to it, f) that I were going to try admission into a half-way house, g) that I were going to get over certain habits along with AA, h) that I were intent of returning to Sweden to get a life there, i) that such and such a shrink can claim I agreed to some kind of therapy, ALL of these are untrue. It may be somewhat easier for me to get the life I actually want, if people stop inventing what I am supposed to have been wanting last time they said "hello-goodbye-how are you?" and disappeared. It would also be easier if people stopped defending urban legends about Catholic teaching, discipline and other customs to the point of marginalising with premeditated intent someone challenging these urban legends.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Sts Lucian, Maximian and Lucian, MM, of Beauvais
8.I.2025

* Like those I linked to on:
https://linktr.ee/hansgeorglundahl
** Lateran V:
Fifth Lateran Council 1512-17 A.D.
Council Fathers - 1512-1517 A.D.
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum18.htm