Page 228 - New English Book L

227

“I shall go to the Father, and he shall send you
another apostle whose name shall be Periqlytos, that he
may remain with you for ever.” Now with the additional
italicized words, both the robbed modesty of Jesus (pbuh) is
restored and the nature of the Periqlyte identified.

We have already seen that the Periqlyte is not the Holy
Spirit, that is to say, a divine person, Gabriel, or any other
angel. It now remains to prove that the Periqlyte could not
be a consoler nor an advocate between God and men.

1. The Periqlyte is not the “Consoler” nor the
“Intercessor.” We have fully shown the material
impossibility of discovering the least signification of
“consolation” or of “intercession”. Christ does not use
Paraqalon. Besides, even from a religious and moral
point of view the idea of consolation and intercession
is inadmissible.

(a) The belief that the death of Jesus (pbuh) upon the
Cross-redeemed the believers from the curse of original
sin, and that his spirit, grace, and presence in the Eucharist
would be for ever with them, left them in need of no
consolation nor of the coming of a consoler at all. On the
other hand, if they needed such a comforter, then all the
Christian presumptions and pretentions concerning the
sacrifice of Calvary fall to the ground. In fact, the language
of the Gospels and that of the Epistles explicitly indicates
that the second coming Jesus (pbuh) upon the clouds was
imminent (Matt. xvi. 28; Mark ix. 1; Luke ix. 27; 1 John
ii. 18; 2 Tim. ii. 1; 2 Thess. ii. 3, etc.).

(b) Consolation can never make restitution of the loss.
To console a man who has lost his sight, wealth, son, or
situation, cannot restore any of those losses. The promise
that a consoler would be sent by God after Jesus (pbuh)
had gone would indicate the total collapse of all hope in
the triumph of the Kingdom of God. The promise of a