In the next year or so we should have a first confirmation of whether Nostradamus' prophecies are true or not, including those mentioned in the first message about the restoration of Monarchy in France under a Spanish King, who is said will unite Spain and France under his sceptre.
Quatrain VI 54 is the key to dating all of Nostradamus' prophecies and the one which will provide us with a reality check of their validity.
VI 54
Au poinct du iour au second chant du coq
Ceux de Tunes, de Fez, & de Bugie :
Par les Arabes captif le Roy Maroq,
L'an mil six cens & sept de Liturgie.
At daybreak at the second crowing of the cock,
Those of Tunis, of Fez and of Bougie,
By the Arabs the King of Morocco captured,
The year sixteen hundred and seven, of the Liturgy.
Link:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/nos/mrg/nosmrg06.htmThe quatrain speaks quite clearly of an Arab invasion in Northern Africa -- in Tunisia, Algeria (with its city of Fez) and Morocco, whose King the Arabs will capture. This invasion is to take place in the year "1607 of the Liturgy." If "of the Liturgy" means "since the very first Liturgy," i.e. that celebrated in memory of Christ immediately after His Ascension to the Heavens in the year 33 AD, the year 1607+33=1650 AD should have already witnessed this Arab invasion. A brief recourse to history proves nothing of this sort happenned in any of the three North African countries in 1650. Thus, the expression must mean "since the Liturgy as I know it" - that is, as it was known in Nostradamus' lifetime.
Which Liturgy, though? The Catholic One or the Orthodox One? The Orthodox One used during the vast majority of the year is that of
St. John Chrysostom. He had finished It by 397 when he leaves Antioch due to his election as Archbishop of Constantinople, according to
Encyclopaedia Catholica: "It is true that most of these homilies were preached at Antioch (387-397) before he went to Constantinople. It would seem, then, that the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom was in great part that of his time at Antioch, and that he introduced it at the capital when he became patriarch." If we add 1607 to 397, we get 2004, clearly not a correct year, as none of these foretold events occurred in 2004.
Thus, it follows that "the Liturgy" must mean the Catholic One, That of St. Ambrose used in the West since "about 400" AD according to the same
Encyclopaedia: "By the fifth century we come back to comparatively firm ground, after a radical change. At this time we have the fragment in Pseudo-Ambrose, "De sacramentis" (
about 400. Cf. P.L., XVI, 443), and the letter of Pope Innocent I (401-17) to Decentius of Eugubium (P.L., XX, 553). In these documents we see that the Roman Liturgy is said in Latin and has already become in essence the rite we still use." If we add 1607 to "about 400", it follows that next year or so we should have a clear confirmation of whether or not Nostradamus is a legitimate prophet.
Even if this quatrain does not become fulfilled next year or the following, it doesn't mean that Nostradamus was a charlatan. It may simply mean that my interpretation key is wrong and that by "of the Liturgy" he may have meant something different.
Regardless, Nostradamus is not a saint of the Church and as such his prophecies carry nowhere nearly as much credibility as those of St. Methodius of Patara, St. Brigitta of Sweden, or St. Seraphim of Sarov, which speak of a Spanish Bourbon King and of the French Monarchy. However, if this key prophecy does become true next year or so (by 2008 at the latest), it logically follows that since even somebody much less than a saint was inspired by God with such a proven gift of prophecy, even more so then God's saints must be believed and their prophecies must be expected to become reality, for the strenghtening of the faith of those who hear them and see them fulfilled.
God bless!
Borbon Fan