So, verse 10: „These men blaspheme whatsoever things they know not, and what things soever they naturally know, like dumb beasts, in these they are corrupted.‟ That is a picture of many people today. They scorn anything that is above them that they do not know about—a scorn for higher things. And the things they do know, they behave like beasts. In these they are corrupted. A mass of newspaper readers today are like that. And the newspapers pander to their scorn for higher things, and then pander to their wallowing in lower things.

Balaam, Numbers 22:33, that is probably the reference to his… oh, that is the reference to the ass, actually. The verse they give you is where the ass, or the donkey, stops Balaam. Numbers 16:32? No, „the error‟ refers to… Challoner refers to that verse about Balaam beating the ass. I do not know why. But where do you find Balaam giving his satanic advice to Balak? I cannot remember, but it may even not be in Numbers. It may be in another book of Scripture that it is told that Balaam gave that advice to Balak. The satanic advice was to make the Israelites sin, and then God will no longer be their friend, and then you can defeat them. And that is very often the case.

„The error of Balaam, they have for reward poured out themselves, and have perished in the contradiction of Core.‟ That is the revolt. Numbers 16:32-33.

An interesting thing to note there: „And the Lord said to Moses, ‚Command the whole people to separate themselves from the tents of Kore and Dathan and Abiron.’ Moses arose and went to Dathan and Abiron, and the ancients of Israel followed him. And he said to the multitude, ‚Depart from the tents of these wicked men. Touch nothing of theirs.’ And when they were departed from their tents round about, Dathan and Abiron came out, stood in the entry of their pavilions with their wives and children. Moses said, ‚By this you will know that the Lord hath sent me to do all the things that you see, and that I have not forged them of mine own head.’‟ Interesting, you see? „My authority is from God, and it is not me. I am not on an ego trip. That I have not forged them out of my own head. If these men die the common death, and if they be visited with a plague, like everyone else, then I was not sent by God. But if the Lord does a new thing, and opens up the earth and swallows them down, and everything they belong to, and they go alive into hell, then you will know that my authority is from God, and that by blaspheming my authority, they have been blaspheming God.‟

„Immediately as he had made an end of speaking, the earth broke asunder under their feet, and opening her mouth devoured them with their tents and all their substance. And they went down alive into hell, the ground closing upon them, and they perished from among the people. But all Israel that was standing round about fled at the cry of them that were perishing, saying, ‚Lest perhaps the earth swallow us up also.’‟ Which suggests that the Israelites got the message. „And a fire coming out from the Lord destroyed the 250 men that offered the incense.‟ Then the lawful priesthood, Eleazar, the son of Aaron, picks up again.

So, interesting that authority had to be confirmed from on high. And that is how it is again today. Authority in the Church has been so rocked and so undermined by the misbehavior of men that it is going to take another divine manifestation to restore clout to authority, secular and religious, I think you can say. Democracy has made such a monkey of secular authority, and churchmen have made such a monkey of Church authority, that it is going to take an act of God to re-establish authority. Because authority does come from God, ultimately. And that example from Moses shows Him Himself establishing, re-establishing authority. It has happened also in the Church all the time with miracles. Miracles give churchmen authority. Miracles gave Padre Pio tremendous authority because people know that God is with him if he works miracles. But something like the thunder and lightning on Mount Sinai or the earth swallowing up these rebels—they have perished in the contradiction of Core. These heretics that Jude is talking about are disputing authority. They are rebels. They are animals. They are rebels and animals, like so many people today. They are proud. People today are proud of their rebellious spirit. Just look at the way they stand, the way schoolchildren behave, the way they dress. Everything breathes rebellion. Look at statues of Thomas Jefferson; they just breathe revolt.

Verse 13: „Raging waves of the sea.‟ You frequently had in the Apocalypse the sea as an image of the Gentiles or as an image of the world: unstable, dangerous, undrinkable, unreliable, unpredictable, just sloshing around, „foaming out their own confusion; wandering stars to whom the storm of darkness is reserved for ever.‟ Hell, obviously. Notice the rootlessness. Again, people today are rootless. A rolling stone gathers no moss. People today drift around and do not stay in one place, do not put down roots. And because they do not put down roots, they do not bear fruit. In order to bear fruit, you have got to put down roots, metaphorically speaking. Rootless. They are going to finish up in hell.

These are murmurers. That is a sin, murmuring. What commandment is that? The eighth commandment, is it not? Murmuring. Anybody remember from moral theology? Murmuring. What is that? Is it murmuratio? Maybe that is the Latin word for it. In any case, they are always talking down, talking behind people’s backs, and usually talking down authority. You cannot live like that. A society cannot live like that because society needs authority. Society cannot exist without authority because authority is the efficient cause of society. And so, to talk down authority is grave. You may remember the respect our Lord had for Annas and Caiaphas in His passion, and the respect of Paul in front of the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem. Even when they were talking nonsense, he regretted having said so when he found out that it was the high priest. The respect for authority. On the contrary, these people that Jude is talking about, no respect for authority, murmurers, full of complaints, walking according to their own desires, and their mouths speaketh proud things, admiring persons for gain’s sake. Money, money, money, or gain. Today, obviously.

God allowed the early Christians—obviously from 1 and 2 Thessalonians, especially 2 Thessalonians—it is clear that the early Christians thought that the end of the world was coming soon. They thought that soon after Christ would come the general judgment. And 2 Thessalonians is very much to get rid of that mistake. Still, the idea is around. And of course, always, the general judgment is as close as any particular person’s death. That is when he achieves the state in which he will go through the general judgment. So, in that sense, everybody is close to their general judgment.

But, „in the last time there should come mockers walking according to their own desires and ungodliness.‟ Whatever even Jude himself perhaps thought that time was, it is, in fact, the last time, obviously about 2,000 plus years after Christ. So, they were mistaken materially, but formally, it remains true. „In the last time will come mockers walking according to their own desires and ungodlinesses.‟ You have got two passages speaking about the ungodliness of people in the last times. 2 Timothy 3:1-6, where it actually refers you to Jude 1:18: „Know also this, that in the last days shall come dangerous times.‟ And 1 Timothy 4:1: „The spirit manifesteth that in the last time some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy and having their conscience seared.‟ So those are two other passages portraying the men of the last times, which is our times really. We are not far from the end of the world surely. Also, there is a reference in 2 Peter 3:3: „In the last days there shall come deceitful scoffers walking after their own lusts saying, ‚Where is his promise or his coming?’‟ Et cetera. So those are other paragraphs saying the same thing as Jude says here: the prophecy of the horribleness, the decadence of men, the degeneracy of men at the end of the world.

„Mockers walking according to their own desires and ungodliness. These are they who separate themselves, sensual men, having not the spirit.‟ Men who mark themselves out as animal rather than spiritual; psuchikoi instead of pneumatikoi. Compare 1 Corinthians 2:14. You may remember Saint Paul speaking about spiritual and animal man: that the spiritual man can judge the animal man, but the animal man cannot. „The sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the spirit of God for it is foolishness to him and he cannot understand because it is spiritually examined. But the spiritual man judgeth all things and he himself is judged of no one.‟ So for spiritual and animal, see 1 Corinthians 2:14.

Any questions on Jude? That is another book of scripture that you have studied. Interesting, very relevant so to speak. Very much the state of things or people today.

Regarding a reference in the Apocalypse to the seven spirits around the throne of God, I am not sure. Where was that? Was it Apocalypse chapter 10, talking about Michael? „And I saw another mighty angel.‟ No, that was not Michael in chapter 10. I do not know. I would have to look it up in a good encyclopedia or reference. There must be a simple answer to that question about Michael, and I have never known it. I will see if I can find out. Anything else on Jude? All right.

Peter was certainly back in Rome at the end of his life, and he was martyred in Rome under the Emperor Nero in AD 64 or 67. I do not know what the latest state of that scholarly dispute is, but apparently, those are the alternate dates for the martyrdom of Peter. He was crucified by his own request upside down. He said, „I am not fit to be crucified like my Lord.‟ So he asked them to crucify him upside down, which they did. We see pictures of Peter crucified upside down. He was crucified, whereas Paul had his head cut off. Why? Paul was a Roman citizen, so he had the privilege of having his head cut off instead of being crucified. Crucifixion was sort of the treatment for a slave, whereas a Roman citizen was not crucified. So Peter was on the level of a slave, so to speak. That he was martyred in Rome is a well-known fact, much alluded to in early Church documents. It is too obvious to be disputed really. Notably, no other church claims the honor. If Peter had died anywhere else, wherever it was would have obviously claimed the honor; we would have heard about it. Added to which, it was entirely fitting that the Eternal City should be consecrated by the blood of Peter and Paul, the princes of the apostles. That is in the hymn of the liturgy of June the 29th. It is a handsome hymn, written in iambic pentameters. Most of the hymns in the breviary are written in four-line verses, often iambic tetrameters. The advantage of this shorter verse form in Latin is that you have many long syllables. The hymn for Rome, however, is in iambic pentameter and mentions Paul and Peter consecrating the Eternal City with their blood.

Next point: you have lists of popes and numerous Church Fathers refer to Peter being the first Bishop of Rome. Have you looked at this in apologetics? Probably you have. Surely, yes. Okay, I do not need to insist.

In recent years, within the last 10 years or so, an Italian woman, a doctoress, was in charge of excavating right down there in the middle, in the heart of it. And they found astonishing evidence that it really is Peter’s bones. They found what really does look like Peter’s own bones right there. I forget exactly what makes them say with such certainty that it is Peter’s own bones. There was a report about a strange amount of bones, and suddenly two legs appeared below, suggesting how he was reburied by Constantine. It caused quite a stir in Rome only five, six, seven years ago. The stir was because this was proof that Church tradition was right, Catholic tradition was right. When the modernists try to discredit all of these old traditions, especially that Peter’s bones are there, to validate the direct connection with the apostle, the direct founding of the Roman Church, they try to cast doubt upon it. And she, the doctoress, was a persona non grata in Rome precisely because she was proving, in the teeth of all these modernists, that what the old Church says is absolutely true. I think 30 Days or Inside the Vatican was writing about it. It was the physical evidence right there.

I know that when Father Rudy Goyti and Father Escarra took a group of seminarians to Rome some years ago, Father Duschlau wanted them to visit the excavation. It is very interesting. Of course, as you can expect, the tomb of Peter himself, or the bones of Peter himself, or the grave of Peter himself, will have been encircled and then encircled again, much like the attempts to contain the Chernobyl reactor—a clumsy comparison. But for some reason, in recent years, they have been digging in there and found, for experts, complete evidence that it is Peter’s own bones still there, which is what you might expect. Christians in any age would not easily have allowed it all to be disturbed. The modernists have discredited it without daring to go in there and try and destroy it. It would be a little risky fooling around with the bones of Saint Peter. Imagine going up to the pearly gates and having to face him!

There are also inscriptions in the catacombs. There is one printed in this little manual on a grave in the catacombs: „Petri et Pauli, orati pro Victore‟ – Peter and Paul, pray for Victor. Or „Pauli et Petri, petite pro Victore.‟ So that is a section that has been very much updated in recent years, and it is always the same: archaeological evidence confirms ancient tradition of the Church.

Briefly, 1 Peter 5:1: „The ancients therefore that are among you I beseech, who am myself also an ancient and a witness of the sufferings of Christ.‟ Again, that might be fraudulent, but there are not all that many who were actually witnesses to the sufferings of Christ, a witness of the Passion. And the author says he is also a Church leader. So the author of the epistle is apparently a leader of the Church and a witness of the Passion of Christ. There are not all that many people that it could be.

There are, again, throughout the text of 1 Peter, over 50 texts recalling passages from the Gospels. Fifty-four texts somebody has counted. The Gospel of Mark is supposed to have been taken from the lips of Peter; Mark wrote down Peter’s own account of the life and death of our Lord. And lastly, there is a marked similarity between 1 Peter and the speech of Peter in Acts 15. That is an argument from content, an internal argument.