Type vs. Anti-Type

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kecharitomene
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kecharitomene

Guest
I was watching a show on EWTN recently, that was hosted by Rosalind Moss and Kris Franklin. I thought it was a blockbuster of a show because of they direct and exact fashion that they addressed the various topics they would discuss, AND because they even expressed great emotion and joy for their conversions to the Catholic Church.

One on the most impressive elements of the discussion, was when Roz refered to the Eucharist as the (forgive me if my terms are a bit askew) anti-type and the Manna in the desert as the type. She went on to say that there are many examples of the type and anti-type relationship between old testament and new testament. I belive the sudy of such is referred to as “typology”.

Roz alluded to some “ground rules” that must be applied when performing a type vs anti-type examination. The one that I recall her specifically pointing out in the Manna vs. Eucharist discussion was the the anti-type must always be superior to the type, thus the Eucharist must REALLY be the body of Christ in order that It should be superior to the Manna in the desert which really came down from Heaven. She went on to say, for if the bread is only a symbol, and remains unchanged, then it fails the type anti-type examination because it is truly inferior to the Manna.

I was looking for more examples and amplifications of this typeological process. I am hoping to gather some specific examples, as they seem to be great apologetical instruments at the present time.

Thanks, and I hope to hear from you all soon.

Pax Christi
 
Hi Kecharitomene,

Here are some important typological examples:
  1. The Flood—>Baptism
St. Peter (1 Peter 3:20-21) identifies the flood which washed the earth but which Noah survived as an important type of baptism. “Now it was long ago, when Noah was still building that ark which saved only a small group of eight people ‘by water’…That water is a type of the baptism which saves you now, and which is not the washing off of physical dirt byt a pledge made to God from a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

This is an important defense on the efficacy and necessity of baptism. Just as the water of the flood cleansed the world from filth and make way for a new creation, so does baptism wash away the stains of original sin and make us a new creature (regeneration).
  1. Sabbath—>Sunday
The reason we celebrate Sunday as the Lord’s day rather than the Jewish Sabbath is partly typological. The Church Fathers saw in the Sabbath the completion of the old creation, which had since been spoiled by sin. But the work of the new creation was accomplished through the Paschel mystery, when Christ died and rose. With his resurrection, the new creation was completed. That is why for us Christians, the old creation “foreshadows” the new creation that is usherd in by Christ. So to remain observant of the Saturday Sabbath is to remain stuck in the shadow, while to celebrate the Lord’s Resurrection on Sunday is to live in the fulfillment of that old creation.
“From now onwards, never let anyone else decide what you should eat or drink, or whether you are to observe annual festivals, New Moons, or sabbaths. These were only pale reflections of what was coming: the reality is Christ” (Col 2:16-17). All these referred to by St. Paul were Jewish practices, all finding their fulfillment in our Lord.
  1. Melchizedek—>Jesus Christ
In Genesis 14:18, Melchizedek, King of Salem met Abram and offered bread and wine. Melchizedek was considered someone special: both King and Priest, King of Salem [Peace] and offered bread and wine. Even the Jews (see Psalm 110) regarded the Messiah as someone who was “priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.” The Church saw in Melchizedek a type of Christ, because Jesus too is King and Eternal High Priest King of Peace and King of righteousness, and he offers bread and wine. The Letter to the Hebrews saw in Christ the fulfillment of Melchizedek (Heb 5:10; 6:20; 7:2-3). The importance of this type is that it foreshadows the offering of bread and wine, and that it fulfills Psalm 110’s mention of an everlasting priesthood–important in our understanding of a perpetual sacrifice, as is the Mass and the heavenly liturgy.
  1. Ark of the Covenant–>Mary and the Immaculate Conception
The Ark of the Covenant contained three things: the tablets of the Law, the jar of Manna, and the stick of Aaron which blossomed. In these three items we have foreshadows of Christ as: the Word of God (John 1:1), the Bread from Heaven (John 6), and the Eternal High Priest (Hebrews 7:24). Because of the sacredness of these objects, the Ark had to be equally dignified: made of acacia wood (a hardwood, almost incorruptible) and overlaid completely in gold. Now if the Ark had to be pure and undefiled by virtue of its contents, how much more should the vessel containing the fulfillment of these contents (our Lord) be just as pure to dignify the one she bore?

I’ll post more as they come along.
 
Moses turned the water of the Nile into blood.

Christ turned water into wine (another symbol of life) at the wedding feast in Cana. He also turned wine into His blood at the Last Supper. If, as most non-Catholics argue, the wine remained wine at the Last supper, then Moses worked the greater miracle in Egypt.

The “type” MUST be inferior.

Eve was created sinless. Mary is the “new Eve”. If Mary was conceived with original sin, then the “type” (Eve) would be superior to the “anti-type” (Mary).

Peace in Christ…Salmon
 
Nitpicking - I think the term is ante-type; not anti-type. Ante implies before; Anti implies against or opposed.
 
Joe Kelley:
Nitpicking - I think the term is ante-type; not anti-type. Ante implies before; Anti implies against or opposed.
Click to expand...

[Also nitpicking] The type is earlier, the anti-type is the fulfilment of the type - it is “instead of” (“anti” in Greek = “instead”) the type because it fulfils it. “Antitypos” is a Greek word - the Latin “ante” is unrelated.​

First Adam = type
Last Adam = antitype

Which is why an “antichristos” is a “replacement Christ” - but not in the sense of being a deputy or “vicarius”; a vicar does not abolish his superior’s position - he is in place temporarily. FWIW ##
 
Is it fair to say that Abram was a type of Simon bar Jonah?

How about Cain a type of Judas Iscariot?

Hannah a type of St. Anne?

I think I am catching on.
 
40.png
Salmon:
Moses turned the water of the Nile into blood.

Christ turned water into wine (another symbol of life) at the wedding feast in Cana. He also turned wine into His blood at the Last Supper. If, as most non-Catholics argue, the wine remained wine at the Last supper, then Moses worked the greater miracle in Egypt.

The “type” MUST be inferior.

Eve was created sinless. Mary is the “new Eve”. If Mary was conceived with original sin, then the “type” (Eve) would be superior to the “anti-type” (Mary).

Peace in Christ…Salmon
Click to expand...
Good point. I was just thinking abou this fact. In my previous post, I indicated that the Great Flood prefigured baptism. Since that’s true, then what happens at Baptism must be even greater than the Flood. Amazing isn’t it?
 
40.png
porthos11:
Good point. I was just thinking abou this fact. In my previous post, I indicated that the Great Flood prefigured baptism. Since that’s true, then what happens at Baptism must be even greater than the Flood. Amazing isn’t it?
Click to expand...
1 Peter 3:18-21 “in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.”

speaks of the OT temporal salvation prefiguring NT spiritual salvation.

Romans 6:3: Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
4: We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

The same holds true for Moses leading the Jews in their passage through the Red Sea, finding temporal salvation through the destruction of the pursuing Egyptians.

This marked the beginning of the years of wandering in the desert for the Jews, prefiguring our spiritual wandering. The Jews were in search of the temporal “promised land” which foreshadows our searching for our spiritual “promised land”, i.e. eternal salvation in heaven.

Yes, it’s quite amazing.

A veritable “seamless garment” that all fits together.

Peace in Christ…Salmon
 
40.png
Kecharitomene:
Is it fair to say that Abram was a type of Simon bar Jonah?
How about Cain a type of Judas Iscariot?
Hannah a type of St. Anne?
I think I am catching on.
Click to expand...
The Jews considered themselves "children’ or descendants of Abram-> Abraham. It might be a stretch to compare that to us being children or descendants of Simon bar Jonah->Cephas (Peter). Granted, both were leaders.

Keep in mind that…“types” don’t point toward other “types”.

“Types” always point toward fulfillment.

Melchizedek, with his offering of bread and wine to God, definitely foreshadows the ultimate High Priest, Jesus Christ.

The manna, which physically sustained the Jews in the desert, prefigures the Eucharist which sustains us spiritually on our journey.

It’s not some curious puzzle that God designed for the purpose of saving the clever. Rather, it is a great tapestry, revealing God’s purpose and plan that leads us to recognize Him and His work that surrounds us, ever so gently nudging us always toward the realization that God is ever-active in our lives and the lives of our spiritual ancestors…

Peace in Christ…Salmon
 
The Catechism speaks about typology:

117 … We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a **sign or type ** of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.

The unity of the Old and New Testaments

128 The Church, as early as apostolic times, and then constantly in her Tradition, has illuminated the unity of the divine plan in the two Testaments through typology, which discerns in God’s works of the Old Covenant prefigurations of what he accomplished in the fullness of time in the person of his incarnate Son.

129 Christians therefore read the Old Testament in the light of Christ crucified and risen. Such typological reading discloses the inexhaustible content of the Old Testament; but it must not make us forget that the Old Testament retains its own intrinsic value as Revelation reaffirmed by our Lord himself. Besides, the New Testament has to be read in the light of the Old. Early Christian catechesis made constant use of the Old Testament. As an old saying put it, the New Testament lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is unveiled in the New.

130 Typology indicates the dynamic movement toward the fulfillment of the divine plan when “God [will] be everything to everyone.” Nor do the calling of the patriarchs and the exodus from Egypt, for example, lose their own value in God’s plan, from the mere fact that they were intermediate stages.
 
40.png
Kecharitomene:
Roz alluded to some “ground rules” that must be applied when performing a type vs anti-type examination…She went on to say, for if the bread is only a symbol, and remains unchanged, then it fails the type anti-type examination because it is truly inferior to the Manna.
Click to expand...
This general principle of types is referenced by Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:7-11 and Hebrews 8:1-7.
 
Joe Kelley:
Nitpicking - I think the term is ante-type; not anti-type. Ante implies before; Anti implies against or opposed.
Click to expand...
Thank you - I was thinking this doesn’t make sense - makes sense now
 
Could the original poster of this forum show me where I can find all typologies?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top