Dugin and Parvulesco

My view has certainly been a minority position in the Latin Church since Saint Augustine, but originally, before the definition of the biblical canon, it was those who denied the divine inspiration of the book of Apocalypse who denied premillennialism while those who accepted its divine inspiration also accepted premillennialism. After the definition of the canon (which included the book of Apocalypse) opponents of premillennialism reinterpreted the millennial reign.

Furthermore, I do not deem the events of the Seventy Weeks prophecy to be in the future; I do not know why you think premillennialism depends on that idea.

Regarding Fatima; adherents have merged the great monarch theme and the words ascribed to Fatima, so that they read a vast Catholic empire into the Fatima prediction of a period of peace. About the great monarch theme it can be noted that Adrien Péladan was spreading that idea in the 19th century in his work “Dernier mot des prophéties”; his sons, Adrien and Joséphin Péladan, were rosicrucians, the latter of whom took the esoteric name “Sar Mérodack” referring to the Babylonian Marduk. The great monarch idea was also spread by naundorffists, adherents of Karl Wilhelm Naundorff who was an occultist whose son Adelberth Naundorff founded the theosophic lodge “Post Nubila Lux” in the Netherlands. Later André Lesage, a friend of Marcel Lefebvre, spread the great monarch theme among the followers of Lefebvre, claiming Davidic ancestry for the kings of France in his work “Ascendances davidiques des rois de France”, showing influence of Pierre Plantard who blasphemously claimed that the Merovings were descended from Jesus.

Both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches tend towards partial preterism as their general eschatological views. Clerics may not use this term, but when you read the Church Fathers and chart history, it’s partial preterism that dominates. Premillennialism is definitely out. The Seventy Weeks prophecy alone invalidates premillennialism. Once you remove the Seventy Weeks prophecy as a future event from the premillennial house, it all begins to crumble. I don’t see a way around this.

But it’s interesting that you as a premillennialist see Fatima’s millennialism as bankrupt.

Fatimists tend to believe the lie that Soviet Communism collapsed, because then they can entertain the rest of the Fatima narrative. To admit that the errors of Russia have spread and that Russia’s consecration was of no effect, they have to forget about the entire Fatima event, which they don’t want to do because they fixated on signs and wonders, which our Lord warned us not to do.

I actually agree with premillennial eschatology, and though it is controversial I have seen no evidence that it has ever been condemned in a dogmatic canon by a pope or general council; in fact, I believe it can never be condemned thus because the doctrine is required for the consistency of biblical prophecy and it was received by Saint Irenaeus of Lyon from the Apostle John through Saint Polycarp of Smyrna.

However, according to the premillennial doctrine the visible millennial reign of Christ on earth takes place after His parousia (not before), which happens at the beginning of the seventh millennium of creation (the seventh day of the millennial week). After the millennial reign the general resurrection, the final judgement and the renewal of the earth take place at the beginning of the eighth millennium (the beginning of eternity), corresponding to the day of Christ’s resurrection (the day after sabbath, the eighth day).

But Fatima adherents speak of a general or quasi general conversion of temporal powers to Catholicism before the parousia, and I do not believe that will happen. It has never happened since the Ascension of Jesus into heaven, even at the height of the temporal influence of the Church of Rome during the pontificate of Innocent III (the christianitas with Catholic temporal powers was even then a bastion surrounded by pagan darkness), and a universal Christian governance on earth will not happen before the parousia.

There is a tendency to dream of temporal victories and triumphs for Catholicism, but Christians must not forget that as they await the return of their Master, they will have difficulties and tribulations.

Timothy Fitzpatrick: “You got to wonder if Parvulesco’s “Paris–Berlin–Moscow axis” is based on the Grand Orient Masonic connections between the three powers.”

Parvulesco and Dugin spoke of the UK and the USA as island kingdoms and sea-powers, and they wanted the Asiatic and European landmasses to form a structured continuum to contest the dominance of the sea-powers.

Regarding freemasonry, though, I came across a quote from Parvulesco’s ramblings in his book “Le retour des grands temps” (“The return of the great times”), the chapter “La mission occulte de Julius Evola” (“The occult mission of Julius Evola”):

“À cette enseigne, l’Église, la Franc-Maçonnerie et le Judaïsme s’y trouvaient directement concernés dans leur double éidétique, intact, persistant virginalement dans l’invisible, et c’est la convergence, l’intégration et les épousailles abyssales de ces Trois Instances qui constitueront alors l’immaculée conception du Nouvel Un, de l’Un final demandant à émerger une nouvelle foi à travers l’identité suprahistorique de la “Roma Ultima”.”

English: “In this respect the Church, Freemasonry and Judaism would there find themselves directly concerned in their double eidetic, intact, virginally persisent in the invisible, and it is the convergence, the integration and the abyssal nuptials of these Three Instances that will constitute then the immaculate conception of the New One, of the final One demanding to emerge once again throughout the suprahistorical identity of the “Roma Ultima”.”

Parvulesco spoke of a “Roma Principia” (“First Rome”) as a cosmic force manifesting geopolitically and of Rome as such re-emerging as a “Roma Ultima” (“Final Rome”) in which he wanted to see the Church, freemasonry and Jewish kabbalah converged. Dugin identifies Moscow with Parvulesco’s re-emerging imperial Rome.

Note his blasphemous use of the words “immaculate conception” for his paganistic concept.

Thanks so much for sharing this information, Harj. This could be key to solving not only Fatima but its uses in the geopolitical realm. I asked this question on X:

If Russia represents the kabbalistic divine feminine, who represents the divine masculine which is to eventually unite with the feminine? And what will this unification look like geopolitically? Could the answer be the state of Israel or some repackaged manifestation of it?

Fatima’s period of peace is highly millenarianist, which is anathema to the Catholic faith. How did the Vatican fail to discern this and instead approve the apparition? That alone is enough to dismiss it, but of course there are many more problems with Fatima.

You got to wonder if Parvulesco’s “Paris–Berlin–Moscow axis” is based on the Grand Orient Masonic connections between the three powers.

I do not know what to think of Fatima; in the actual words ascribed to it is not seen the politico-religious role that Fatima adherents now give to Russia. Fatima spoke of a period of peace following a conversion of Russia to Catholicism but not of an era of international religious renewal under a Moscovite geopolitical leadership.

However, Parvulesco used Fatima to further his esoteric-political idea of a Eurasian empire and wanted occultists to bring about a convergence of the Russian Orthodox Church with the Church of Rome in that context. From the Wikipedia article “Jean Parvulesco”:

“He later wrote geopolitical articles in various publications, including the daily newspaper Combat, advocating the creation of a “Paris–Berlin–Moscow axis” to counter “Anglo-Saxon hegemony,” a concept previously advanced by Gabriel Hanotaux and mentioned by Raymond Abellio in the second volume of his memoirs Les Militants.”

That man is the cause of the adoption of eurasianism by the European New Right (“Nouvelle Droite”), which in my country is represented by Robert Steuckers, a personal friend of Dugin who is said to have introduced National Bolshevism to him. That is why Dugin said that they are the architects of the New Right.

Since Alexandre d’Alveydre and his concept of secret masters occultists have had an obsession with pagan Asia, and I see therein the black hand of the demonic powers that occultists serve, which seek to raise the dark East against the descendants of the historical Catholic Europe. You can see some of that orientalist obsession referred to in the writings of Markus Osterrieder on Russian occultism called: “From Synarchy to Shambhala: The Role of Political Occultism and Social Messianism in the Activities of Nicholas Roerich”.

My own political view to counter the phenomenon is pan-europeanism to build up a united Europe as its own geopolitical force that has sovereignty over the European continent and that can withstand Moscow and the gathered forces of Asia; not the masonic version of Coudenhove-Kalergi, but a Catholic integralist version combined with white ethnopolitics.

These clowns always have to have something wierd or gross going on don’t they?

Hah! Really. It makes one wonder whether he ever really stopped being an anti-war hippie.