Catholic Prophecy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Starwynd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Starwynd

Guest
Other than thr Tribulation of protestantism, how different is the Catholic Bible on prophcy from the KJV?

Esepcially the book of Revelations. Are there any major differences?
 
Catholics see the Mass in Revelation. Scott Hahn has a great book on this “The Wedding Supper of the Lamb”.
 
Many Catholics also see Mary in the woman in Revelation. Mary is a type of Israel and the Church, so all three interpretations are valid, but one normally doesn’t allow the allegorical to over-ride the literal.
 
NotWorthy said:
Catholics see the Mass in Revelation. Scott Hahn has a great book on this “The Wedding Supper of the Lamb”.
Click to expand...
Hahn’s view is unique to himself. It is not the view of Catholics in general, nor is his view found among any of the Fathers, Doctors, and Saints of the Church.
 
Ron_Conte said:
Hahn’s view is unique to himself. It is not the view of Catholics in general, nor is his view found among any of the Fathers, Doctors, and Saints of the Church.
Click to expand...
Are you sure about this? Doesn’t Hahn show at the end of the book that what he “discovered” has been taught by numerous early theologians, or am I mixing this up with another book.
 
No, Scott Hahn’s interpretation of the Book of Revelations is in line with Catholic thought. The connection between the Mass and the Book of Revelations is clear if you’ve at all read Revelations and although many Catholics are unaware of this strong and very important connection, it is well known in the eastern Church.

The Book of Revelations, unlike it is popularly know to be, is actually about the past, the present, and the future (not just the future). Some parts of it talk about Mary, the birth of Jesus, the rebellion of the angels, and other past events. Some of it was future prophesy, but has already happened and is therefore now past, for example the sack of Jerusalem and the 144,000 Christians saved. And now we have the present, the Mass. The Book of Revelations talks about how Heaven is, and what you’ll notice is that it’s a lot like Mass. That’s because Mass IS Heaven on Earth. Some would also make the claim that some of the endtime prophesies are being fullfilled in this day of time. Will Catholics are not really bound to a teaching on this in the present, it should be known people have been claiming that the endtimes prophesies were happening for quite some time now, famously with Hitler as the anti-Christ (obviously untrue). Also Jesus tells us that these things will happen like a thief in a night, we won’t know when, but, He says, we should be ready always.

I also recommend reading The Lamb’s Supper by Scott Hahn as someone already recommended, because you can’t begin to understand Revelations in a forum post, it requires much more thought.

But as for your question: much of Revelations isn’t bound to a certain teaching or interpretation although there is the norm of Catholic thought. For example, the beasts in Revelation are more commonly thought to be metaphors. What I mean is that they exist, but they might not actually look like how they are described, it could instead be a metaphor of the disgust of their ‘soul’. You’ll also find that the beasts in Revelation and pretty much everything Satan does in it is all an attempt to mock God. You’ll understand more with reading that book so I really recommend it.
 
Starwynd said:
Other than thr Tribulation of protestantism, how different is the Catholic Bible on prophcy from the KJV?

Esepcially the book of Revelations. Are there any major differences?
Click to expand...
Hi Starwynd,
I can’t tell from your question if you mean differences in the actual texts of the Bible - or differences in how those texts are interpreted. If you mean differences in interpretation, then the above posters have answered your question.

If however, you mean differences in the text of “Revelations” in a Catholic Bible versus the “Revelations” text in the KJV, there are probably no essential differences. (Just language differences such as also exist between the KJV and other Protestant versions such as the RSV, NIV, etc.)
 
Thank you, but I mean what will happen with the end times, not the pure text.
 
NotWorthy said:
Catholics see the Mass in Revelation. Scott Hahn has a great book on this “The Wedding Supper of the Lamb”.
Click to expand...
It’s certainly one way of looking at it. There are simply too many facets to Revelation to boil it simply down to the Mass, although that is certainly one aspect.
 
Those who claim that other theologians before Scott Hahn interpreted the Book of Revelation as referring to the Mass, please give a citation to support what you are saying.
 
Let’s focus on some of what Hahn teaches about the Mass and the Book of Revelation:

Do we have the Sign of the Cross at Mass? Cf. Rev 7:3 “Saying: Hurt not the earth nor the sea nor the trees,** till we sign the servants of our God in their foreheads.**”

How about “Allelulia”? Cf. Rev: 19:1-6 “1 After these things, I heard as it were the voice of much people in heaven, saying: Alleluia. Salvation and glory and power is to our God. 2 For true and just are his judgments, who hath judged the great harlot which corrupted the earth with her fornication and hath revenged the blood of his servants, at her hands. 3 And again they said: Alleluia. And her smoke ascendeth for ever and ever. 4 And the four and twenty ancients and the four living creatures fell down and adored God that sitteth upon the throne, saying: Amen. Alleluia. 5 And a voice came out from the throne, saying: Give praise to our God, all ye his servants: and you that fear him, little and great. 6 And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of great thunders, saying: Alleluia: for the Lord our God, the Almighty, hath reigned.”

And the “Holy Holy Holy” Cf. Rev 4:8 “And the four living creatures had each of them six wings: and round about and within they are full of eyes. And they rested not day and night, saying: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come.”

How about the consecration - behold the Lamb Cf. 19:9 “Blessed are they that are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb.”

And there are plenty more. Moreover, he cites the position of the Church Fathers many times “The Supper of the Lamb.”

Perhaps Dr. Hahn will be a future “Doctor of the Church,” but his approach to Revelation is eminently sensible.
 
Ron_Conte said:
Still no answer? Anyone?
Click to expand...
i agree for the most part. It is dismissive persons who will say the apocalypse is PRIMARILY about the liturgy.

To be sure, it USES liturgical imagery, but it is NOT about the liturgy per se. The apocalypse, even as Ludwig Ott points out, is traditionally about God’s Plan for the Redemption of the human race, that is, the path and meaning and purpose and theological analysis of the ages of salvation history.
 
Did Scott Hahn actually say something like this:

that the world will continue to be the same spiritually for 10,000 years from now, and nothing will change, and the fundamentalists will still cry wolf, and yet nothing serious will happen in history, and people will just sluff off the fundamentalist warnings of the imending doom?

If he did, he is spiritually blind. He needs to be hit over his head with a two by four from Father Rutler.

Father Rutler said in thirty years from now, there won’t be high schools.

If someone thinks the modern world can continue in secular apostasy with no devastating consequences historically, they are blind. the world is about to go through the minor chastisement, a dress rehearsal for the end of the world. If he cannot see this, he is spiriutally blind.

:mad: :mad: :mad:
 
Hahn specifically says that his teaching that Revelation corresponds to the liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church is not the ONLY interpretation of revelation. Nor does he believe that the Book of Revelation has already been fulfilled (a preterist). He is merely pointing out the synchronicity between parts of revelation and the Liturgy.

It’s difficult to understand why this is so controversial.
 
Ron_Conte said:
Those who claim that other theologians before Scott Hahn interpreted the Book of Revelation as referring to the Mass, please give a citation to support what you are saying.
Click to expand...
On this thread, forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3524815#post3524815 Mr. Conte writes, "Most of what West teaches is in accord with the teaching of the Church. His theology is not very original. He is good at presenting ideas, but he is not an original thinker."

So, this is a criticism of just re-teaching what the Church teaches. It’s not “original.”

However, in this thread, forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4093070#post4093070 Mr. Conte states, "In addition, Hahn’s theology is often plagued by novelties, not found in Tradition, Scripture, or Magisterium. It is as if he is reinventing the Christian Faith."

So, when another theologian comes up with “novelties” actually based on Tradition and Scripture (such as the Lamb’s Supper, based on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Book of Revelation), the criticism is that he is being “novel.”

Not being original is criticized and being novel is criticized. Why would someone who published a book entitled “New Insights into the Deposit of Faith” criticize a theologian for being novel?

I’m scratching my proverbial head.
 
Squanto said:
Hahn specifically says that his teaching that Revelation corresponds to the liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church is not the ONLY interpretation of revelation. Nor does he believe that the Book of Revelation has already been fulfilled (a preterist). He is merely pointing out the synchronicity between parts of revelation and the Liturgy.

It’s difficult to understand why this is so controversial.
Click to expand...
I completely agree 🙂 I just finished the book - he is quite explicit, as you said here, that this is not the only interpretation of Revelation. Frankly, that approach, seeing a revelation or prophecy satisfied in more than one event is consistent with other prophecies in scripture.

For example, the virgin birth referenced in the Old Testatment (which could mean virgin or young woman in the Hebrew word used in the Old Testament) is acknowledged to have been most directly representing a “sign” of an event in Old Testament times, but it also forshadowed its more significant fulfillment in the birth of Christ who was, in fact, born of a virgin.

Similarly, the description of “end times events” in Matthew could actually be describing the more immediate destruction of the second temple in 70 AD, while also forshadowing the “end times”.

In addition, Melchezidek, who was an actual priest king of Salem pre-figured Christ, the more complete and perfect fulfillment of the priest king. So, the liturgy of the Eucharist can be found in Revelation, without invalidating its representing an end times scenario (if that is the correct interpretation).

Blessings,

Brian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top