What Is Going On With Fatima - Weird Stuff?

[Bruce S]

[quote]Quote:John Paul II Blesses First Rock of New Fatima

The following is a translation from the original Portuguese of the article "Primeira Pedra da nova Igreja foi retirada do túmulo de S. Pedro" at

[url="http://www.santuario-fatima.pt/portal/"]http://www.santuario-fatima.pt/portal/[/url]

Foundation Stone of the new Church from the crypt of St Peter's

The Benediction (Blessing) ceremony and the placement of the foundation stone will take place on June 6, precisely coinciding with the date in which the Universal Church celebrates the Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity.


(program of events/ceremony, see agenda)

The Rector of the Sanctuary of Fatima went to Rome last March and was received in private audience with the Holy Father, for whom he had delivered a message from the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, D. Serafim Ferreira e Silva. The objective of the meeting was the offering of the Holy Father to the Sanctuary of Fatima, of the foundation stone to the Church of the Most Holy Trinity, which started construction in early February and is being built at a speedy pace.

The Foundation Stone, true stone (foundation) in the spiritual sense, consists of a precious (valuable) and historical marble fragment from the crypt of the Apostle St. Peter, housed in the Basilica dedicated to him in the Vatican.

The offering of the Holy Father, whose love for the Sanctuary of Fatima was demonstrated on numerous and various occasions, is one more sign of of the manifestation of his profound faith and indebtedness to Our Lady of Fatima, and for the fact that he was not mortally wounded during the attempt on his life on May 13, 1981. [cf. Apocalypse 13:3 --Novus Ordo Watch editor]

At the same time, this valuable relic will also be cherished by all who will visit the new temple (church), in the sense of cultivating respect for the supreme authority of the Church, which the Secret of Fatima gives creedence to as of the utmost importance.

In the Memorias of Sister Lucia it is clearly shown the importance of the devotion to the Pope that is in the hearts of the three little shepherd children, especially of little Jacinta. This angular stone of the new church will therefore confirm the three great devotions (loves) of the Christians of Portugal: The Eucharist, Mary, and the Pope.

[QUOTE] [url="http://www.traditioninaction.org...8-2004.htm"]http://www.traditioninaction.org...8-2004.htm[/url]

Quote:HINDU CEREMONY IN FATIMA – The May 22 issue of Portugal’s National Weekend Newspaper gave a written account of a news report recently broadcast by SIC Portuguese television. A Hindu religious service was held in the Chapel of the Apparitions at the Fatima Sanctuary. According to Portugal’s National Newspaper, 60 Hindus led by a high priest traveled to Fatima to pay homage to the goddess Devi, their divinity of nature. Standing behind the altar of the Chapel of the Apparitions, a Hindu priest led the prayer sessions. As the scene was broadcasted, the TV reporter commented on this “unprecedented unique moment in the history of the shrine.”

Msgr. Luciano Guerra, the rector of the Sanctuary, also appeared in the newscast and stated: “These meetings give us the opportunity to remind ourselves that we live in community.” Which is, I comment, a hypocritically vague statement meant to legitimate the blasphemous event he permitted.

After worshipping their gods in the Chapel, the Hindus were shown visiting a miniature-model of the new Basilica already under construction. Subsequent to that, each Hindu was greeted by the Bishop of Leiria, Serafim Ferreira e Silva, who bowed deferentially to the Hindu priest. The Hindu priest was then shown vesting both Bishop Ferreira e Silva and Msgr. Guerra with Hindu prayer shawls. The reporter explained to the viewers: “On the shoulders of the highest representatives of the Church in Fatima, the Hindu priest places shawls with inscriptions from the Bhagayad Gita, one of the sacred books of Hinduism.”

The newscast ended with scenes of the Hindu priest lighting a candle at the present day Sanctuary, while his followers danced outside the Chapel of the Apparitions and chanted praises to their gods.

Indisputably this event represents, by the way of facts, the beginning of pan-religious ceremonies in Fatima, taking place even while the syncretistic shrine is being built. It is a confirmation of what has been said: the plan is going ahead led by the Catholic ecclesiastical authorities in Fatima[/quote]

I have been following Fatima for about two years now, almost weekly, and it gets weirder and weider.

Can anyone explain this, or put some context to these odd events?

Edited June 10, 2004 by Bruce S

[dUSt]

Please state the topic of debate and affirm your stance on the topic. I ask that nobody reply to this thread until Bruce's topic and stance are defined.

[Livin_the_MASS]

Look what I found it goes against what you say how can this be come look and see [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/travels/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20000513_sodano-fatima_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_pau...-fatima_en.html[/url]

[dUSt]

Any other posts in this thread will be deleted until Bruce clearly defines his topic and stance.

[dUSt]

Bruce. I simply asked for the stance that you are debating. Please define that so we have something to debate.

Here's an example of what I'm looking for:

Topic: Fatima Center
Stance: The Fatima Center is __________ because __________.

Without you clearly defining what point you are trying to make, how can we even logically begin to debate it?

Thanks.

[Donna]

There's [i]nothing[/i] weird going on there, Bruce.

Is someone jumping to conclusions?

Edited June 11, 2004 by Donna

[Ellenita]

Bruce, please hurry up and answer dUSt's questions so that we can join in this thread!

Some of us are itching to talk about Fatima.....

[Bruce S]

Bruce. I simply asked for the stance that you are debating. Please define that so we have something to debate.

Here's an example of what I'm looking for:

Topic: Fatima Center
Stance: The Fatima Center is

Bruce - > Has it been hijaacked by Universalists, and why?

__________ because

Bruce - > I personally wonder at the rush to Revelation, and could this be where the Muslims, Buddhists, and others merge? Could this presage a NEW appearance of the Apparition Mary at some later time that would happen at this site?


__________.

Without you clearly defining what point you are trying to make, how can we even logically begin to debate it?

Thanks.

Bruce -> This really WAS not supposed to BE a debate thread, dUST, but a discussion about the Fatima Interfaith Center.

Why so touchy?

[Child of God]

Has it officially become an interfaith center?

What is with the "secrets" that are supposed to be revealed?

[Aloysius]

This is the debate table. If it's not supposedta be a debate post it in open mic.

there's another part of PhatMass?!! lol, 99% of your posts are in the debate table, and i bet the other 1% was sent to the Back Alley

Read Jason's link.

PAX

[jasJis]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Jun 11 2004, 05:36 AM'] Why so touchy? [/quote]
Bruce S,

You come and post here with a clear bias and prejudice, and with a sarcastic demeanor while claiming to be 'neutral'. You then refuse to engage in a coherent and reasonable dialog when challenged about the nature and message of your posts. To say your actions are disengenuous is an understatement. You are like a kid that keeps tapping the person in front of them for no reason and when the tapped person acts irritated, you question them why they are so touchy, it's not like you gave them a bruise or struck them with a fist.

[dUSt]

Bruce,

Your claim is that the Fatima Center has been hijacked by Universalists. That's all I wanted to know. Now that we know the intent of this post, it should be fairly easy to refute.

[quote]Bruce - > I personally wonder at the rush to Revelation, and could this be where the Muslims, Buddhists, and others merge? Could this presage a NEW appearance of the Apparition Mary at some later time that would happen at this site?[/quote]
No, and no.

[quote]Bruce -> This really WAS not supposed to BE a debate thread, dUST, but a discussion about the Fatima Interfaith Center.[/quote]
This is the Debate Table.

[quote]Why so touchy?[/quote]
Please accept my apologies.

[Budge]

Ive studied this issue and Im very concerned. I used to be a Unitarian-Universalist and today I am a Baptist--see my intro.

Why is this stuff happening?

People have taken photos. I have gone and translated Portugese on Babel to see what is going on and its not pretty.

LEE PENN is A CATHOLIC just so you all know...even though this link is to an Anglican site

[url="http://www.occfgroup.org/tcc/modules/news/article.php?storyid=36"]http://www.occfgroup.org/tcc/modules/news/....php?storyid=36[/url]


[quote]Nonetheless, such ideas appear to be taking hold at Fatima, despite official
denials and claims that hardline traditional Catholics are stirring unfounded
controversy over Fatima. Even more surprising, perhaps, is that the trends do
not appear to be opposed--so far--by Pope John Paul II.

Fatima is the site where the Catholic Church says an Angel of Peace and the
Virgin Mary appeared to three children on several occasions in 1916 and 1917,
giving them messages for the Church and the faithful, and calling all to
conversion, repentance, and prayer. Two of the three Fatima visionaries, who died
soon after the apparitions, have been canonized by Pope John Paul II. One
visionary, Sister Lucy, is still living; she is a cloistered nun.

The controversy surrounding the Roman Catholic shrine at Fatima began in the
fall of 2003, when a Portuguese newspaper reported that the site would be
remade into an interfaith shrine. Catholic officials denied the assertion, saying
that the shrine will retain its Catholic, Marian focus.

But in early May this year, a Hindu priest worshiped his faith's gods at the
altar of Fatima's Chapel of the Appartions, and he clothed the shrine's rector
and the diocesan bishop in Hindu priests' vestments.

Reporting on the Hindu service on May 5, the Portuguese broadcast news
services SIC and SIC Notícias said that the Hindu priest chanted prayers from the
altar, on behalf of 60 Hindu pilgrims who gathered before him, outside the altar
rail. A local television reporter explained, "This is an unprecedented
unique moment in the history of the shrine. The Hindu priest, or Sha Tri, [prayed]
on the altar the Shaniti Pa, the prayer for peace."

Additionally, the news report showed "scenes of the Hindu priest lighting a
candle at the shrine while his followers [danced] outside the Chapel of the
Apparitions chanting praises to their gods."

The TV broadcast showed that after the service, each of the Hindus was
"personally greeted by the [Roman Catholic] Bishop of Leiria-Fátima," who then
"bowed to the Hindu priest repeating his gesture of greeting." [b]The Hindu priest
then clothed the diocesan bishop and Msgr. Luciano Guerra, the rector of the
Fatima shrine, with a Hindu priestly shawl. [/b]The reporter told his viewers, "On
the shoulders of the highest representatives of the Church in Fatima, the Hindu
priest [placed] a shawl with the inscriptions of the Bagavad Gita, one of the
sacred books of Hinduism."

The two Catholic dignitaries explained these events with rhetoric reminiscent
of that used by Frank Griswold, the Presiding Bishop of the U.S. Episcopal
Church. Fr. Guerra said during the broadcast that: "These meetings give us the
opportunity to remind ourselves that we live in community." And the diocesan
bishop, D. Serafim Ferreira e Silva, told a local newspaper: "We don't want to
be fundamentalist, but sincere and honest." The only Griswoldian buzzwords
they forgot were "reconciliation" and "inclusive."[/quote]


I can find 20 articles and news links PROVING something is going on over there.

[Hananiah]

Poor Father Pacwa. I wonder why he chose to publicly deny that these events took place.

[cmotherofpirl]

From "In Brief" Lay Witness magazine, p.19

All Religions at Fatima?
see communiqué below
A few months ago, some news sources unsympathetic to the Vatican claimed that they had information about a supposed “interfaith shrine” at Fatima, the site of Our Lady’s 1917 apparitions (see pp. 46-47). The information originally surfaced in the weekly Portugal News, an English-language paper in Algarve, Portugal. The paper published an article that took some of the rector’s statements out of context and painted a questionable picture of the future shrine at Fatima, strongly suggesting that Fatima was compromising its Catholic identity.

Subsequent reports based on this erroneous information claimed that “at the inspiration of delegates from the U.N. and from the Vatican and also according to statements from the Rector of the Shrine, Fatima ‘is to be developed into a center where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to their gods.’” CUF’s information specialists received a number of inquiries about this alleged “interfaith shrine” and wrote directly to Fr. Luciano Guerra, the rector of the shrine at Fatima. Fr. Guerra eventually sent a note stating that the rectory in Fatima had published a communiqué on its website that addressed the many inquiries they had received regarding the shrine. Fr. Guerra called the original report “very tendentious” and provided a link to a thorough explanation of the situation.

The communiqué from the shrine answers the erroneous reports and clarifies the plans for the shrine. It states that: “The worship space which, God willing, will soon start to be built—and which the journalist claims will be similar to a stadium—in fact will be a church with capacity to seat 9,000 people and will be marked exclusively for Catholic worship.”


FATIMA, SHRINE OF ALL RELIGIONS?

Communiqué from the Rectory of the Shrine of Fátima

1. The Rectory of the Shrine of Fátima, and certainly other Church authorities, have in these last two months received a considerable amount of mail, such as e-mail, faxes, and so on, following a piece of sensational news that came out in the weekly Portugal News, a newspaper published in English in Algarve, at the time of the International Congress on "The Present of Man and the Future of God", which, as we informed the public, was held in the Shrine this past October.


The news, which provoked strong reactions on the users of the Internet (those who sought us out were approximately one hundred), claims that, at the inspiration of delegates from the U.N. and from the Vatican and also according to statements from the Rector of the Shrine, Fátima "is to be developed into a centre where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to their gods". Furthermore: "The future of Fátima, or the adoration of God and His Mother at this holy Shrine, must pass through the creation of a shrine where different religions can mingle". And that's not all, listen: "The Shrine of Fátima is about to undergo a complete reconstruction with a new stadium-like basilica being erected close by the existing one built in 1921”.


2. It is our firm conviction that the great majority, perhaps the totality, of the reactions received is the result of a long orchestration, centred in the United States, by people bitterly opposed to Vatican Council II, specifically to what pertains to a wider opening of the Church, with emphasis on the ecumenical and inter-faith dialogue. During the days of the Congress, there were held in Fátima demonstrations by two more protest organizations, headquartered one in Canada, the other in France. The masterminds of these groups barricaded themselves, many years now, behind a thick argumentation, from where they throw accusations to the authorities of the Church, including the Pope himself, as being heretics, apostates and unfaithful to the responsibilities thrust upon them.


3. So that the readers may compare the content of the news published by Portugal News with the oral presentation of the Rector in the final session of the Congress - only time he spoke - whose entire text we are publishing in "Voz da Fátima"(Voice of Fátima), here are verbatim the pertaining references, taken from the recording of that speech: "It is true that (...) we are all very far from journeying towards the only, or through the only, bridge. We could therefore relax, since, if one's bridge is collapsing, it could happen that the neighbour’s bridge is not. But it is also true that a disease of epidemic proportions seems to have threatened the faith of all religions, of all confessions, of all traditions, during the last decades. That's why we rejoice in the brotherly presence of the representatives of the various spiritual schools and we are sure that their presence here opened the way for a greater future openness of this Shrine; Shrine that seems already vocationed, thanks to divine providence, for contacts and for dialogue (...). This calling is almost explicit, in regard to the oriental, orthodox and catholic churches, in the message of the Angel of Peace; and, in regard to the Islamic religion, in the name itself that God chose for the town where Mary would one day appear: Fátima".


4. From these words one can conclude that we are truly opened to ideas and values that are universal, therefore open to dialogue with other faiths, following an already ancient practice of the Church. But it is evident that we are not open to share the way we worship, the least in what pertains to the sacraments, specifically the Eucharist, which is the ultimate and most perfect expression of Christian unity and that we can’t unfortunately celebrate not even with our closest brothers of the protestant denominations. Therefore the worship space which, God willing, will soon start to be built - and which the journalist claims that it will be similar to a stadium - in fact will be a church with capacity to seat nine thousand people and will be marked exclusively for catholic worship. It will be located not next to the present basilica, but between the "Cruz Alta" (High Cross) and the public road. And, when it seems to us to be opportune, after what already is happening in Fátima and in many other sacred places, this new basilica would be able to receive brothers from other faiths who may want, in a brotherly manner, know how we pray.


The claim of Portugal News that the October Congress was held at the inspiration of the UN and the Vatican and that it was sponsored by the World Conference for Religion and Peace and that it would have been its annual meeting is deprived of any basis in reality. The idea of the Congress was born entirely in the Rectory of the Shrine, having its inspiration in the reading of the message of Fátima, as referred to in the last number of this communiqué, within the spirit of Vatican II.


5. After having given the correct interpretation of the spirit and words of the October Congress, it seems to us to be useful to add some words of reflection on the many controversies that arose from the beginning concerning the apparitions and messages of Fátima. They represent one further example of how farther we have to journey until we are able to dialogue, within and outside the Catholic Church, on the subject of religion as well as on other social relationships.


6. The Rectory of the Shrine has recently published a leaflet titled "Inquérito aos Assinantes do Jornal Fraternizar" (Inquiry made to the subscribers of the Newspaper To Fraternize), where it tries to demonstrate how any "extremist" look on Fátima may be damaging to the point of one not being able to ascertain the true facts, of distorting the texts, of inventing second intentions and of accusing of mental insanity people that are very normal and well-known as very wise.


7. Today another extremism - we would say from the opposite side - forces us to come public to denounce categorical statements that also distort the true facts and are very offensive to the dignity of the people working in this Shrine.


8. It doesn't look to us pretentious to try a journey, even though very rapid, through the history of the Church and of the World, starting in Jesus time and visiting briefly some of the great religious controversies, in order to pick up some lessons. Who does not remember the Sadducees, Essenes, Pharisees and Zealots of the public life of Jesus? We could go on, within Christianity and outside of it, in religion as well as in politics, with the Gnostics, the Manicheans, the Montanists, the Ultra-Montanists, the Rigorists, the Cathars, the Protestants, the Puritans, the Progressives, the Conservatives, the Liberals, the Centrists, the Right Wing, the Left Wing; those who demand and build an image of God as being more near us, more merciful, more condescending with our weaknesses, less threatening, on the side of the poor, and then those from the other side who fight on to keep tradition and order, who defend a transcendental God, who stick to the letter of Sacred scriptures, who take seriously the salvation of the soul because they believe in eternal life, but also in apocalyptic threats, sometimes even of the most controversial revelations. In another words, disparities so significant that religion seems to be a pretext rather than a reason so that some, blindly determined not to lose the course of history, may want to dedicate all their energies to seeking to prove that there is no paradise on earth; while others, neglecting to show love and justice towards the poor, which are the larger part of humanity, may want to engage in stubborn crusades, to the point of entering into conflict with the authorities of the Church for not interpreting the messages of a particular private revelation the same way they do.


9. Behold the extremes and the extremisms! Which, in more crucial causes and circumstances, can lead to fundamentalism, fanaticism and terrorism. The ultimate evil doesn't reside in the faith, not even in the ideas alone, but in the factors that mould our psyche, and here we mention four of the most important ones: temperament, character, culture and education.


10. Jesus, in the famous scene of the Final Judgement, used the image of right and left to separate the just from the evildoers. We are not yet in the Final Judgement; we are still pilgrims journeying towards full brotherhood, have many sinners to our left and to our right, are plagued with weeds in all our fields. On the other hand, we still have time for the dialogue that can unite us. And, if we do not enter into dialogue, our destiny will be that of Cain: he killed Abel to put an end to his annoying company and spent the rest of his life in an agonizing loneliness, with the voice of his brother's blood hammering away in the ears of his conscience.


11. We must admit that, in disputes of religion as in any others, we are always dealing with brothers, which we can't reject as enemies, for, even for the enemies, we have a mandate of forgiveness. How are we to proceed, then, when very often we are faced with extreme positions, some of them occurring because we even have the bad habit of turning into an extremist any moderate person who simply doesn't go along with our opinions? Being more specific: if, amongst those interested in Fátima, some deny everything regarding the apparitions and almost everything regarding Our Lady, and some, on the other hand, love dearly both to the point of demanding miracles that God doesn't want to perform, how are we to proceed? There is only one way out: an immense respect, a great effort to love the good that there is in others, both on the left and on the right, and a determined willingness to maintain the unity of the whole to the point of going the extra mile. So that it never comes, unless in rare cases, to the tragic end which consists in having someone trying to kill our own inner being, our own identity. There we should not allow anyone to get.


12. Since fractures are always a negative thing, we understand the effort of all those with responsibility for the cohesion of institutions and of all those who take position in the centre, so to speak, in order that the extremes may stay relatively quiet and may not decide to secede or may not be forced to do it. In this respect the Church of Christ is really similar to other social bodies, although with the differences inherent to the mysterious presence of Jesus, Who remains faithful to His promise of eternal life, communion and light, as we are reminded, in this time of Christmas, by St. John the Evangelist.


13. Christians know that the Church did rethink thoroughly, since Vatican Council II, its relationship with the various religions, within and outside of Christianism, even its position regarding agnostics and atheists, in order to detect what in all of them one can find of God, given the fact that it is impossible that, even in the most confused man, one may not find some trace of the Creator. We consider this attitude a luminous road.


14. In the message of Fátima, facts and words seem to contain, at least, two implicit calls to the exercise of this spirit of dialogue with people of different convictions. Thus, in the apparitions of the Angel of Peace we find two important clues: the fact that the Angel prostrated himself down on the ground while praying, in the first and third apparitions; and the fact that, in the third, he did give communion, under the species of bread, to the oldest seer, since she had already received her first communion, and, under the species of wine, to Francisco and Jacinta, who had not. Considering the fact that both practices had fallen into disuse, centuries ago, in the Latin Catholicism, and have remained still alive amongst the oriental Christians, it is acceptable - it seems even compulsory - to see in that an invitation to try to link Fátima to the oriental churches, both catholic and orthodox. In other words, the message of the Angel of Peace contains an appeal to the ecumenical dialogue with those churches separated from Rome more than a thousand years ago. Dialogue that, thanks to God, is progressing slowly but determinedly by both parties.


One year after the apparitions of the Angel, Our Lady chose the Cova da Iria (Iria's Hole) as a place where to appear. She knew beforehand that this unknown place would come to be called more easily Fátima, since it was located within the limits of the only parish, the only town, that in Portugal bears the name of the daughter of Mohammed, the founder of Islam. Right next to Fátima there were other towns with Christian names, which Our Lady could have chosen. Well, She knew beforehand that, in such circumstances, Her choice would often remind us of the Muslim religion, which the Arabs certainly practiced here before the Christian reconquest.


Our Lady knew that the human being pays a lot of attention to coincidences and therefore, soon or later, would reflect on this coincidence of Her apparitions with the name of the daughter of Mohammed. That would be the case, even though, as some historians think possible, the name of the village of Fátima may not have anything to do with the daughter of the founder of Islam. That being the case, it seems to us that, in order for us to be faithful to the message of Fátima, we have at least to see in it a little window of opportunity to look into our brothers to the South of us, maybe even a door through which we can leave Fátima to visit them and vice-versa. Nothing of this has been done so far, but all things need time to mature. Unfortunately the urge to go at it slowly has been stronger than the other way around.


As to the faithful of other religions, and even to the many without religion, the message of Fátima may also present a discreet appeal, precisely in the first apparition. Prostrating himself down on the ground and reciting a prayer without any connotation to any specific religion - since it is limited to the concepts of faith, adoration, hope and love - it doesn't seem to us to be pretentious, on the basis that all human beings are created by God and loved by Him, to admit that, basing ourselves in that prayer, we could try earnest contacts with other religions, with agnostics and even with atheists. Being that the thinking of the Church, expressed in many documents and gestures, it will also continue to be the road for us to travel.


Shrine of Fátima, Dec.28, 2003


The Rector, Fr. Luciano Guerra












Return to Articles from Current Issue of Lay Witness

Membership | Information Services | Lay Witness | Faith & Life | Faith Facts | Links | Contact Us

BACK TO HOMEPAGE


International Headquarters
827 North Fourth Street
Steubenville, OH 43952
800-MY-FAITH (800-693-2484)


Building Project Raises Eyebrows

By Delia Gallagher

ROME, JAN. 1, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Controversy has broken out over the construction of a new building near the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal.

Several Web sites devoted to news about Fatima have expressed outrage at the possibility that the new building might be used for interreligious purposes.

"Fatima to Become Inter-faith Shrine" headlined the Nov. 1 online dispatch of English-language Portugal News.

In the report, the rector of the shrine, Monsignor Luciano Gomes Paulo Guerra, says, "The future of Fatima, or the adoration of God and his mother at this holy shrine, must pass through the creation of a shrine where different religions can mingle."

The head of the Leiria-Fatima Diocese, Bishop Serafim de Sousa Ferreira e Silva, faxed me a three-page statement written in Portuguese (I had it unofficially translated) by the rector of the shrine, dated Dec. 28.

The letter resumes the news published by Portugal News, including Monsignor Guerra's statement that the shrine would become a place "where different religions can mingle."

According to the letter, the rector has been inundated by correspondence due to this "sensationalist news."

The rector clarifies: "God willing, a religious space, will begin to be constructed very shortly, and though it is the presumption of some journalists that it will resemble a stadium, it will in fact be a church, with seating for 9,000; it will be exclusively destined to be a place of Catholic worship, located not next to the current basilica, but between the Cruz Alta and a national road and, when opportune, ... can receive pilgrims of other convictions who wish to fraternally partake in our way of prayer."

Regarding the controversy surrounding the building, the rector mentions specifically Father Nicholas Gruner, a Canadian priest who runs The Fatima Crusader, a quarterly newsletter.

"It is our conviction," says Monsignor Guerra, "that the article in Portugal News has been guided by some members of the group led by Father Gruner, a priest who finds himself in an irregular canonical situation, who persists in his crusade in favor of the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, according to the secret of Fatima (although it has been said and re-said that this consecration has already occurred) and who distributed pamphlets during our October conference against the realization and intentions of the conference."

Father Gruner was suspended "a divinis" by the Vatican in 1996 -- meaning he is relieved of his priestly functions, primarily administering the sacraments. He continues to take a critical stance toward John Paul II's vision of ecumenism, as evidenced by a 2000 document called, "We Resist You to Your Face" -- the You referring to the Pope.

The conference to which Father Guerra refers was held Oct. 10-12 and sponsored by the Sanctuary of Fatima, entitled, "The Present of Man -- The Future of God: The Place of Sanctuaries in Relation to the Sacred."

Conferees included Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue; Cardinal José da Cruz Policarpo, patriarch of Lisbon; Bishop Silva; Father Jacques Dupuis, professor of theology at Rome's Gregorian University; and Monsignor Guerra.

On the third day of the conference the floor was opened to representatives of Hindu, Buddhist, Judaic and Islamic religions. Orthodox and Anglican representatives also spoke.

During the conference no mention was made of the construction of a new shrine.

When I recently spoke to Archbishop Fitzgerald in Rome, he said he was surprised that the news of the building had caused such consternation.

"As far as I know, there are no plans that the building is designed specifically for inter-faith purposes," the archbishop said. "We recognize that Fatima is a place of pilgrimage for many religions." But he added that the shrine nonetheless retains its Catholic identity.

"It was the Pope himself who said in Assisi in October 1986 that we are all pilgrims together," continued Archbishop Fitzgerald. "As I said at the conference in Fatima, we must learn to journey together, for if we drift apart we do ourselves harm, but if we walk together we can help one another to reach the goal that God has set for us."

Monsignor Guerra's statement concurs with Archbishop Fitzgerald's sentiments, as most of it is taken up with an explanation of the importance of interreligious dialogue.

The rector of the shrine contends that the Fatima apparitions were exhortations to ecumenical dialogue. His statement says that the Virgin Mary knew that her choice of the site in Portugal would one day be understood as a deliberate association with the daughter of the Islamic prophet Mohammed (whose name was Fatima).

Monsignor Guerra further suggests that in the Fatima apparitions there are "at least two implicit calls to the exercise of the spirit of dialogue with persons of other convictions."

In the first and third apparitions, he said, the Angel of Peace lies prostrate on the ground in prayer. In the third apparition, Communion under the species of bread is given to the oldest seer, while the two younger, Francisco and Jacinta, receive Communion for the first time under the species of the wine.

Since the practice of receiving Communion under both species has fallen out of wide use in the Latin-rite Catholic Church, but not in the Orthodox Churches, "the message of the Angel of Peace contains an exhortation to ecumenical dialogue with those Churches separated from Rome for a thousand years," writes Monsignor Guerra.

The angel's prostration in prayer "has connotations for any religious confession," and recalls that "all human beings are God's creatures and loved by him, and that with such prayer we can maintain serious contact with other religions, such as agnostics and even atheists."

What started out as a debate over a building seems to mask a larger question of the ecumenical work of the Catholic Church as a whole, and Fatima in particular.

Edited June 12, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[Budge]

Ive seen pictures of this stuff on websites,

I wonder about Father Pacwa too, I know he is priest who wrote against New Age movement. It would seem he over anyone would see what was going on.
[quote]Subsequent reports based on this erroneous information claimed that “at the inspiration of delegates from the U.N. and from the Vatican and also according to statements from the Rector of the Shrine, Fatima ‘is to be developed into a center where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to their gods.’” [/quote]

Ive read reports that there delegates from the UN involved with this. The UN favors merging all religions and I can prove this with a document I found through UNESCO, one of their major groups.

Please read this with an open mind. Trust that I had YEARS learning the one world religion plans of the New Age even while in the UU church. I knew signers of the Humanist Manifesto to academics in the liberal elite.

[b]
Heres the plan in black and white. I explore interfaithism elsewhere online and protest it.

[url="http://www.unesco.org/dialogue2001/delhi/values.html"]http://www.unesco.org/dialogue2001/delhi/values.html[/url]



[quote]
It was also suggested that inter-religious dialogue should be preceded by intra-religious dialogue, and the dialogue should aim at the discovery of universal sources of consciousness. [b]It was further suggested that all religions can come together in joint service to man.[/b] It was then pointed out that this joint service to man will be manifest in the promotion of human rights, justice and development that is sustainable and development that creates constant movements of harmony and good will.

[b]A suggestion was made that peace will come when we can accept in our own temple the divine presence celebrated in the temples of other religions. In a remarkable poetic expression, it was declared that as one advances in age, one learns more and more how to smile and wait. It was also felt that a truly spiritual being wishes sincerely that a Christian should become a better Christian, that a Muslim should become a better Muslim, that a Buddhist should become a better Buddhist, instead of wishing that one should be converted from one religion to the other. [/b]True conversion, it was underlined, is the inner conversion from egoism to universality, [b]to the realization of the divinity of man [/b], and to the program of action of developing good individuals and enlightened citizens.


This in a nutshell is the NWO Luciferian plan--I am premill so I believe that the prophecies of Revelation are coming to pass.

I have my own concerns that the Vatican supports UNESCO--even celebrating a 50th anniversary of ties with them. Bush had the US rejoin UNESCO, when Reagan refused years ago knowing what they were about.

Given the above, why does the Vatican support UNESCO?

[url="http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=32242"]http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=32242[/url]

[quote][b]PAPAL MESSAGE MARKS 50 YEARS OF VATICAN-UNESCO COOPERATION
VATICAN,[/b] Dec 11, 02 (CWNews.com) -- Pope John Paul II has sent a message to the UN's Scientific, Educational and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, marking 50 years of Vatican membership in the organization, and saying that the Church will continue to work for true human freedom.[/quote]





Notice the comments about Christians becoming better Christians, Muslims becoming better Muslims.

One major reason I left the Catholic church was the universalism, I would have joined the Trads if not for other beliefs I differed on. Some people have told me you dont know what you are talking about. Which is kind of shocking given that when I was UU for all those years, I knew universalism from the inside out. I even considered entering the UU ministry but didnt have the money and health to make that young dream come true.






[[quote]9. Behold the extremes and the extremisms! Which, in more crucial causes and circumstances, can lead to fundamentalism, fanaticism and terrorism. [/quote]

One thing to remember about the last days, all true Christians who stand against the AntiChrist and I believe there will be Catholics too among that group. (wheat and tares) will be considered terrorists and fundamentalists.

That one statement alone shows the agenda of this article.

Guerra can spin it all hed like but he reveals himself in the sentence above.

THIS ARTICLE IS ABOUT SOMEONE WHO WAS THERE!

[url="http://www.fatima.org/sprep111303.htm"]http://www.fatima.org/sprep111303.htm[/url]

and includes photos.


Fatima to Become Interfaith Shrine? An Account From One Who Was There
by John Vennari

[quote]The theme of "Sanctuary" for this Congress reflects the lowest-common-denominator ecumenism prevalent for the past forty years. It is an approach that plays down doctrinal differences in the various religions and emphasizes "what we have in common".

Most disturbing of all, the new ecumenical religion, trumpeted at this Fatima Congress, is actually the religion of Freemasonry. The French Freemason Yves Marsaudon wrote approvingly:

One can say that ecumenism is the legitimate son of Freemasonry ... In our times, our brother Franklin Roosevelt claimed for all of them the possibility of ‘adoring God, following their principles and their convictions.’ This is tolerance, and it is also ecumenism. We traditional Freemasons allow ourselves to paraphrase and transpose this saying of a celebrated statesman, adapting it to circumstances: Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Israelites, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, freethinkers, free-believers, to us, these are only first names; Freemasonry is the name of our family. [22]

This Freemasonic religion is now promoted in Fatima. I heard it coming from the mouth of the soft-spoken Father Jacques Dupuis. Yet Dupuis’ words were a sugar-coated masonic doctrine from the underworld. It was Pope Pius VIII who rightly said of Freemasons, "their god is the devil".[23][/quote]


I was horrified by Assisi as well so have seen Pope take direct actions himself.

Something is going on in Fatima. They can tell people all they want it wont be an interfaith shrine.

[Bruce S]

My PERSONAL opinion, and Budge and I have been discussing Fatima in this, is that Revelation sets out a prophecy, one that WILL be fulfilled, where a UNIVERSAL church will completely fall into apostacy, give rise to the FALSE PROPHET, who will work with the final AntiChrist to complete the events that the Apostle John wrote about.

Now a NEW appearance, of the "Apparition Mary" at the Fatima site, AFTER the Rapture of those who know scripture, at a time of great fear, and confusion, giving assurance to the world, to Muslims, Buddhists, Hindu's and nominal "Christians' with TV present, would certainly make for this prophecy to unfold.

And I personally, believe that Fatima will be where this all begins. It has crediblity with Catholics, is an approved site, has huge ties to the Muslim community, Zeitun showed that the Muslim world will flock to Marian Apparitions.

Budge and I are "connecting the dots" here, no one really will know how the end finally plays out, or the timing. We do know [as bible believers] that it WILL happen, and it has to happen in real time, and in real places.

Fatima, despite the denials of the Catholic Church, certainly seems to be assembling the players for a UNIVERSAL APOSTACY from Christianity.

My two cents.

Peace

[cmotherofpirl]

Interesting. Have you been watching Desmond?

There will be a uninversal apostacy. The Mass will cease. Malachys prophecies are not considered totally credible, but they are interesting.

The endtimes have very specific prophecies attached to them, and one of the biggies is the jews will convert en masse.
We are no where near this happening.

And since the rapture is a protestant invention of the 1800's , it doesn't work. If you remember the jews in the desert, all those who apostasized with the golden calf, where not taken anywhere, they died on the spot. They were "raptured" right to hell.

Edited June 13, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[yiannii]

They were "raptured" right to hell. hahaha ... I know it's not funny but it's the way you put it.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Bruce S' date='Jun 13 2004, 09:53 AM'] My PERSONAL opinion, and Budge and I have been discussing Fatima in this, is that Revelation sets out a prophecy, one that WILL be fulfilled, where a UNIVERSAL church will completely fall into apostacy, give rise to the FALSE PROPHET, who will work with the final AntiChrist to complete the events that the Apostle John wrote about.

Now a NEW appearance, of the "Apparition Mary" at the Fatima site, AFTER the Rapture of those who know scripture, at a time of great fear, and confusion, giving assurance to the world, to Muslims, Buddhists, Hindu's and nominal "Christians' with TV present, would certainly make for this prophecy to unfold.

And I personally, believe that Fatima will be where this all begins. It has crediblity with Catholics, is an approved site, has huge ties to the Muslim community, Zeitun showed that the Muslim world will flock to Marian Apparitions.

Budge and I are "connecting the dots" here, no one really will know how the end finally plays out, or the timing. We do know [as bible believers] that it WILL happen, and it has to happen in real time, and in real places.

Fatima, despite the denials of the Catholic Church, certainly seems to be assembling the players for a UNIVERSAL APOSTACY from Christianity.

My two cents.

Peace [/quote]

There are a thousand different theories about the end times and people have been speculating since the first century. The problem is still the authority question. Bruce and Budge both lack any authority to figure the equation out. Just like John Hagee and Tim LaHaye lack the authority.

It's really no different than seeing images in the stars. Where you may be convinced you see the Big Dipper, someone else may see something totally different. But who is right?

And the Left Behind rapture is Hocus Pocus. It's based on poor exegesis.

[quote]Premillennialists often give much attention to the doctrine of the rapture. According to this doctrine, when Christ returns, all of the elect who have died will be raised and transformed into a glorious state, along with the living elect, and then be caught up to be with Christ. The key text referring to the rapture is 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17, which states, "For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord."

Premillennialists hold, as do virtually all Christians (except certain postmillennialists), that the Second Coming will be preceded by a time of great trouble and persecution of God’s people (2 Thess. 2:1–4). This period is often called the tribulation. Until the nineteenth century, all Christians agreed that the rapture—though it was not called that at the time—would occur immediately before the Second Coming, at the close of the period of persecution. This position is today called the "post-tribulational" view because it says the rapture will come after the tribulation.

But in 1830, a Scottish visionary, who belonged to a sect known as the Irvingites, claimed while in a trance that the rapture would occur before the period of persecution. This position, now known as the "pre-tribulational" view, also was embraced by John Nelson Darby, an early leader of a Fundamentalist movement that became known as Dispensationalism. Darby’s pre-tribulational view of the rapture was then picked up by a man named C.I. Scofield, who taught the view in the footnotes of his Scofield Reference Bible, which was widely distributed in England and America. Many Protestants who read the Scofield Reference Bible uncritically accepted what its footnotes said and adopted the pre-tribulational view, even though no Christian had heard of it in the previous 1800 years of Church history.

Eventually, a third position developed, known as the "mid-tribulational" view, which claims that the rapture will occur during the middle of the tribulation. Finally, a fourth view developed that claims that there will not be a single rapture where all believers are gathered to Christ, but that there will be a series of mini-raptures that occur at different times with respect to the tribulation.

This confusion has caused the movement to split into bitterly opposed camps.

The problem with all of the positions (except the historic, post-tribulational view, which was accepted by all Christians, including non-premillennialists) is that they split the Second Coming into different events. In the case of the pre-trib view, Christ is thought to have three comings—one when he was born in Bethlehem, one when he returns for the rapture at the tribulation’s beginning, and one at tribulation’s end, when he establishes the millennium. This three-comings view is foreign to Scripture.

Problems with the pre-tribulational view are highlighted by Baptist (and premillennial) theologian Dale Moody, who wrote: "Belief in a pre-tribulational rapture . . . contradicts all three chapters in the New Testament that mention the tribulation and the rapture together (Mark 13:24–27; Matt. 24:26–31; 2 Thess. 2:1–12). . . . The theory is so biblically bankrupt that the usual defense is made using three passages that do not even mention a tribulation (John 14:3; 1 Thess. 4:17; 1 Cor. 15:52). These are important passages, but they have not had one word to say about a pre-tribulational rapture. The score is 3 to 0, three passages for a post-tribulational rapture and three that say nothing on the subject.
. . . Pre-tribulationism is biblically bankrupt and does not know it" (The Word of Truth, 556–7). [/quote]

MYTH 1 — "The Left Behind books represent a fringe belief system that very few people take seriously."

Exactly how many copies of the Left Behind books must be sold before the theology they propagate can be taken seriously? Fifty-seven million? That’s actually where sales stand as I write this, making the novels (consisting now of eleven books and supposedly ending with book 14) the biggest-selling series of Christian fiction ever. Then there are the two movies, CDs, children’s books, devotionals, greeting cards, and a host of other products, along with a Web site that attracts hundreds of thousands of fans every month.

But that’s only part of the larger picture. The biggest-selling work of non-fiction (other than the Bible) since 1970 is dispensationalist Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth (Bantam, 1970), which sold more than 40 million copies and established the blueprint for a number of other popular, self-described “Bible prophecy” experts (including Tim LaHaye, creator and coauthor of the Left Behind series). LaHaye’s first work of “Bible prophecy” was The Beginning of the End (Tyndale, 1972), essentially a carbon copy of Lindsey’s mega-seller. In the years that followed, Lindsey and LaHaye, along with authors such as Salem Kirban, David Wilkinson, Dave Hunt, Grant Jeffrey, John Walvoord, and others, produced a string of best-selling books warning of the rapidly approaching pretribulation Rapture, the Antichrist, and the tribulation.

The success of these books and of the dispensationalist system isn’t “fringe.” Far from it — they’re actually quite main- stream, influencing even nominal Christians and non-Christians. It reflects a trend that has been steadily growing for several decades. While Lutherans, Methodists, and Episcopalians dwindle in number and influence, Fundamentalist and conservative Evangelical groups continue to form and grow vigorously, making their mark increasingly in the secular realm. Many of these Fundamentalists — including “non-denominational” Christians, “Bible-believing” Christians, “born-again” Christians, Baptists, and Assembly of God members — are antagonistic toward the Catholic Church and her teachings, and a majority of them believe in some form of dispensationalism.

Harvard historian Paul Boyer, author of When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture (Harvard University Press, 1998), estimates that 30 to 40 percent of Americans believe in “Bible prophecy” and hold to eschatological beliefs such as those taught in the Left Behind novels. Admittedly, such numbers are difficult, if not impossible, to verify with any real accuracy. Still, it can be safely said that tens of millions of Americans believe in a pretribulation Rapture and would readily accept the Left Behind books as a fairly accurate, fictionalized depiction of the fast-approaching end of the world.

MYTH 2 — "Catholic beliefs about the end times are quite similar to those of Fundamentalists such as Tim LaHaye."

Studying dispensationalism (as in studying almost any theological system) is like exploring an iceberg — the vast majority lies beneath the surface, out of sight and unnoticed by the casual observer. On the surface, dispensationalists and Catholics appear to agree about the Second Coming, a future Antichrist, and an impending trial and time of apostasy. And, in fact, common beliefs about aspects of these teachings do exist. Although it comes as a surprise to many Fundamentalists, the Catholic Church clearly believes in the Second Coming, “a final trial,” and a “supreme religious deception . . . of the Antichrist” (Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC], 675).

As noteworthy as these agreements are, the differences between premillennial dispensationalism and Catholic doctrine are even more striking. Stripped to their bare essentials, these include three premises about the past and present, and two beliefs about the future.

The first dispensationalist premise is that Jesus Christ failed to establish the kingdom for the Jews during His first coming. Dispensationalists believe that Christ offered a material and earthly kingdom, but the Jews rejected Him. John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), the ex-Anglican priest who formed the dispensationalist system, wrote, “The Lord, having been rejected by the Jewish people, is become wholly a heavenly person.” This dualistic notion was echoed and articulated by Darby’s disciples, including Cyrus I. Scofield (editor of the Scofield Reference Bible), Lewis Sperry Chafer, and many of the popularizers of the system. Leading dispensationalist theologian Charles C. Ryrie, in his systematic Basic Theology, gives this convoluted explanation: “Throughout his earthly ministry Jesus’ Davidic kingship was offered to Israel (Matthew 2:2 and 27:11; John 12:13), but He was rejected . . . Because the King was rejected, the messianic, Davidic kingdom was (from a human viewpoint) postponed. Though He never ceases to be King and, of course, is King today as always, Christ is never designated as King of the Church . . . Though Christ is a King today, He does not rule as King. This awaits His second coming. Then the Davidic kingdom will be realized” (Matthew 25:31; Revelation 19:15 and 20).

This supposed failure leads to the second premise that the Church is a “parenthetical” insert into history. Put another way, the Church was created out of necessity when the Jews rejected Christ. Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952), whose eight-volume Systematic Theology is the dispensationalist Summa, wrote, “The present age of the Church is an intercalation into the revealed calendar or program of God as that program was foreseen by the prophets of old. Such, indeed, is the precise nature of the present age.” The Church is not, in dispensationalist theology, the new Israel spoken of by St. Paul (see Galatians 6:16) but is utterly separate from Old Testament Israel. So long as the “Church age” continues, the Old Testament promises made to Israel are on hold, waiting to be fulfilled.

The third premise, so vital to dispensationalism, is the existence of two people of God: the Jews (the “earthly” people) and the Christians (the “heavenly” people). This is the language and theological vision established by Darby and taken up by leading dispensationalists ever since. In Rapture Under Attack (Multnomah, 1998), LaHaye notes that the pretribulational dispensationalist view is the “only view that distinguishes between Israel and the church,” and then remarks that “the confusion of Israel and the church is one of the major reasons for confusion in prophecy as a whole . . . Pre-Tribulationism is the only position which clearly outlines the program of the church.”

As LaHaye’s statement indicates, these premises result in the belief of the pretribulation Rapture. This event is necessary because the heavenly people (Christians) must eventually be taken from the earthly stage so that the prophetic timeline can be “restarted” and God’s work with the earthly people (Jews) resumed. That work will involve seven years of tribulation, which dispensationalists believe will be a period of God’s chastisement on the Jewish people, resulting in the vast majority of Jews being killed, but also in the conversion of those remaining.

This, finally, leads to the second belief about the future: an earthly, millennial kingdom established by Christ for the Jews. Based on passages such as Revelation 20 and Ezekiel 40-48, this includes the claim that animal sacrifices will be renewed in a rebuilt Temple. Some dispensationalists think these sacrifices will be symbolic; others believe they will have salvific value, befitting a theocratic government.

All five of these points are incompatible with Catholic doctrine. Christ did not offer an earthly kingdom, nor did He fail, nor was He rejected by all of the Jews; His mother, the apostles, and the disciples were all Jews who accepted Him as the Messiah. The Church is not a sort of “Plan B,” but is, according to the Catechism, the “goal of all things,” reflecting the Catholic recognition of how intimately Christ has joined Himself to the Church (cf. Ephesians 5). The Old Covenant is fulfilled in the New, and there is only “one People of God of the New Covenant, which transcends all the natural or human limits of nations, cultures, races, and sexes: ‘For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body’” (CCC 1267).

Flowing from incorrect, flawed premises, the idea of a pretribulation Rapture is foreign to Catholic theology. Based largely on St. Augustine’s City of God, the millennium has long been understood (if not formally defined) to be the Church age — a time when the King rules, even though the Kingdom has not been fully revealed (cf. CCC 567, 669).

MYTH 3 — "The Rapture is a biblical and orthodox belief."

LaHaye declares, in Rapture Under Attack, that “virtually all Christians who take the Bible literally expect to be raptured before the Lord comes in power to this earth.” This would have been news to Christians — both Catholic and Protestant — living prior to the 18th century, since the concept of a pretribulation Rapture was unheard of prior to that time. Vague notions had been considered by the Puritan preachers Increase (1639-1723) and Cotton Mather (1663-1728), and the late 18th-century Baptist minister Morgan Edwards, but it was John Nelson Darby who solidified the belief in the 1830s and placed it into a larger theological framework.

This historical background leaves the dispensationalist with two options: claim the pretribulation Rapture is biblical but went undiscovered for 1,800 years, or argue that it has been the belief of “true Christians” ever since Christ walked the earth. Ryrie, in his apologetic Dispensationalism Today (Moody, 1965), makes a case for the former by stating: “The fact that the church taught something in the first century does not make it true, and likewise if the church did not teach something until the twentieth century, it is not necessarily false.” LaHaye and others argue for the latter, pointing to passages such as 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18, 1 Corinthians 15:51-53, and Matthew 24 as clear evidence for the pretribulation Rapture (those passages make several appearances, for instance, in the Left Behind novels).

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 is especially vital to the dispensationalist:


For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.
There are three problems with claiming this passage refers to the Rapture. First, neither it nor the entire book of 1 Thessalonians mentions Christ returning two more times, or makes any reference to such a distinction. Second, dispensationalists believe the Rapture will be a secret and silent event, yet this passage describes a very loud and public event. This is all the more problematic because dispensationalists insist that they interpret Scripture “plainly” and “literally,” allowing for symbolism only when such is the obvious intent of the author. Finally, dispensationalists teach that all other New Testament references to Christ coming in the clouds (Matthew 24:30 and 26:64; Mark 14:62; Revelation 1:7) refer to His Second Coming but inexplicably deny that that is the case here.

1 Corinthians 15 and its reference to “the twinkling of an eye” is often used as a proof text but is equally unconvincing. The point of the passage is that Christians will be glorified at the Second Coming, not that they’ll be secretly whisked off the planet prior to the tribulation. It describes an event that will occur at “the last trumpet” and states that “the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed” (1 Corinthians 15:52).

Yet LaHaye and Left Behind coauthor Jerry B. Jenkins, reflecting the common dispensationalist interpretation, claim in Are We Living in the End Times? (Tyndale, 1999) that Matthew 24:29-31 describes the Second Coming, which will include “a great sound of a trumpet” (Matthew 24:31). So how can 1 Corinthians 15, which speaks of “the last trumpet,” refer to the Rapture when there is yet another trumpet to be sounded, several years later, at the Second Coming?

Some dispensationalists have admitted, at least in a backhanded fashion, the recent roots of the pretribulation Rapture. In an article titled “The Origin of the Pre-Trib Rapture” (Biblical Perspectives, March/April 1989), LaHaye’s colleague at the Pre-Trib Research Institute, Thomas D. Ice, writes that “a certain theological climate needed to be created before premillennialism would restore the Biblical doctrine of the pre-trib Rapture.” He continues: “Sufficient development did not take place until after the French Revolution. The factor of the Rapture has been clearly known by the church all along; therefore the issue is the timing of the event. Since neither pre- nor post-tribs have a proof text for the time of the Rapture . . . then it is clear that this issue is the product of a deduction from one’s overall system of theology, both for pre- and post-tribbers.” In fact, the Rapture as dispensationalists conceive of it was never part of the early or medieval Church’s theology but is the modern creation of Darby less than 200 years ago.

MYTH 4 — "The early Church Fathers believed in the Rapture and the millennial kingdom on earth."

This clever argument, used by Ryrie, LaHaye, Lindsey, and others, is effective in persuading those with little knowledge of historical theology or the beliefs of the early Church. True, several early Christian writers — notably Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Methodius, Commodianus, and Lactanitus — were premillennialists who believed that Christ’s Second Coming would lead to a visible, earthly reign. But the premillennialism they embraced was quite different from that taught by modern dispensationalists.

Catholic scholars acknowledge that some of the Fathers were influenced by the Jewish belief in an earthly Messianic kingdom, while others embraced millennarianism as a reaction to the Gnostic antagonism toward the material realm. But the Catholic Church does not look to one Church Father in isolation — or even a select group of Fathers — and claim their teachings are infallible or definitive. Rather, the Church views their writings as valuable guides providing insights and perspectives that assist the Magisterium — the teaching office of the Church — in defining, clarifying, and defending Church doctrine.

Those early premillennialists did not hold to distinctively modern and dispensationalist beliefs, especially not the belief in a pretribulation Rapture and the radical distinction between an earthly and a heavenly people of God; such beliefs didn’t come about until many centuries later. The early Church Fathers, whether premillennialist or otherwise, believed that the Church was the New Israel and that Christians — consisting of both Jews and Gentiles (cf. Romans 10:12) — had replaced the Jews as God’s chosen people.

In attempting to prove the validity of their beliefs by appealing to early Church Fathers, dispensationalists always ignore the Church Fathers’ unanimous teachings about the nature of the Eucharist, the authority and nature of the Church, and a host of other distinctively Catholic beliefs. They also conveniently blur the lines between the historical premillennialism of certain early Church writers and the dispensational premillennialism of Darby and his disciples.

MYTH 5 — "The Left Behind books are harmless entertainment that encourage Christians in their faith and help them better understand the Book of Revelation."

Even when presented with the faulty theological premises underlying dispensationalism, some Catholics still insist that the Left Behind series is just good fun — a light read with a sound moral message. Some, however, go even further and claim the books have changed their lives, provided answers about the end of the world, and made sense of the Bible, particularly the Book of Revelation. Responding to my book, a Catholic reader wrote, “I personally believe that the dispensationalists have done Catholics a favor by alerting them to the serious times we live in and by encouraging them to search out the Scriptures.” She never makes mention of Catholic scholarship or magisterial documents.

Another Catholic reader of the series told me, “You condemn these books because they are successful.” In fact, I’ve strongly critiqued the Left Behind books because they’re written by a noted Fundamentalist (with serious animus toward the Catholic Church) in order to propagate a theology that is incorrect, misleading, and contrary to historic Christianity.

One message of LaHaye’s that comes across clearly in books such as Are We Living in the End Times?, Rapture Under Attack, and Revelation Unveiled is that the Catholic Church is apostate, Catholicism is “Babylonian mysticism” and an “idolatrous religion,” and Catholics worship Mary, knowing little about the real Jesus Christ. It’s difficult to overstate the dislike — even hatred — LaHaye has for the Catholic Church or to exaggerate the ridiculous character of his attacks. He condemns the use of candles in Catholic churches, insists there’s hardly any difference between Hinduism and Catholicism, and emphatically declares that the Catholic Church killed at least 40 million people during the “dark ages.”

When I asked LaHaye, via e-mail, why he never refers to Catholic sources or official documents in his writings, he replied:

Because I think that for centuries the Catholic Church has presented church history in a manner protective of “Mother church.” . . . I have seen more concern on the part of your church for Hindus, Buddhists, and other pagan religions than they do [sic] for those who love Jesus Christ as He is presented in the Bible and are committed to making Him known to the lost so they will not be Left Behind.
In other words, the Catholic Church is simply wrong and doesn’t deserve a fair hearing. LaHaye has not only revealed himself to be an anti-Catholic polemicist but a theologian with a seriously skewed view of God’s salvific work. In a newspaper interview, LaHaye said, “We’ve [himself and Jenkins] created a series of books about the greatest cosmic event that will happen in the history of the world.” What is that “greatest cosmic event”? The Incarnation? The Cross? The Resurrection? No, the Rapture — a modern, man-made belief based on a distorted Christology and an anemic ecclesiology.

But don’t the books help people understand the Bible? According to contemporary Christian music star Michael W. Smith, “Left Behind has brought understanding and clarity to [the Book of] Revelation, a book of the Bible usually seen as confusing and dark.” This echoes LaHaye’s assertion that St. John’s Apocalypse “gives a detailed description of the future.” But a perusal of dispensationalist interpretations of the Book of Revelation written over the last several decades suggests otherwise. Dispensationalists disagree about nearly every major element of the book, including the identity of the Whore of Babylon (i.e., a reformed Roman Empire, the Catholic Church, Iraq, the United States), the mark of the Beast (i.e., computer chips, bar codes, social security numbers, laser technology), and numerous other entities, personages, nations, and events.

More importantly, dispensationalists give little attention to the rich Old Testament allusions or the first-century context of the Book of Revelation. To the contrary, Hal Lindsey proffers in There’s a New World Coming (Vision House, 1973) that “Revelation is written in such a way that its meaning becomes clear with the unfolding of current world events.” Considering that none of Lindsey’s interpretations of the book’s prophetic utterances has come to pass over the past 30 years — including his conviction that the Rapture would occur in the 1980s — one can only wonder at Lindsey’s unflagging confidence. Futurists such as dispensationalists have always been prone to read current events into the Book of Revelation’s mysterious passages, and prophetic speculators of the past connected it to the French Revolution, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, and the founding of the modern Israeli state in 1948. More recent events supposedly shedding light on St. John’s vision include the Cold War, the Persian Gulf War, and the conflict with terrorism and Iraq.

The appeal of the pretribulational Rapture is understandable. The idea that those living today are “the generation” who will see Christ’s return is attractive and intoxicating. “My prophetic studies have convinced me,” LaHaye writes, in Rapture Under Attack, “that we Christians living today have more evidence to believe we are the generation of His coming than any generation before us.” It’s no surprise that many people want to hear that they won’t have to die. Such promises of escape from suffering, illness, pain, and potential martyrdom are tempting, but they aren’t an option for Catholics. Each of us will endure suffering, and the Church will, one day, have to endure a final, great trial: “The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection” (CCC 677). The pretribulation Rapture, dispensationalism, and the Left Behind books, in the end, are long on promises and short on biblical, historical, and theological evidence.

Carl E. Olson is the editor of Envoy magazine (www.envoymagazine.com) and the author of Will Catholics Be “Left Behind”?: A Catholic Critique of the Rapture and Today’s Prophecy Preachers (Ignatius, 2003). He has written for First Things, This Rock, National Catholic Register, and other periodicals



Dispensationalism and its Errors


Summary of Dispensational Beliefs:

Literal interpretation of the Sacred Scripture; specifically, A literal and physical fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecies in regard to Israel.

The "Kingdom Offer"
Distinction between Israel and the Church
A pretribulation "rapture" and a literal , futurist view of the Book of Revelation.
This essay examines the peculiar beliefs of Dispensationalism and what is wrong with this doctrinal system. It is the hope of the author that a better understanding of this movement will help Catholics to dialogue with Dispensationalists and to help correct the various erroneous views that they hold. This in turn, it is hoped, will lead to Dispensationalists coming more easily to an understanding of the Catholic Church as the fulfilment of God's promises to Israel in Scripture. .

Modern proponents of Dispensationalism include Moody Bible Institute, Dallas Theological Seminary, Hal Lindsey, Jerry Falwell, and Dave Hunt. So the reader can see that this movement is quite well established.


Dispensational Beliefs
Dispensationalism teaches that God has dealt with man through various successive "dispensations" or stewardships and that on each occasion, man has failed in his duties. Dispensation claims to focus on God's glory in showing how man is incapable of reaching God's standards.

Scofield's definition of a dispensation (or stewardship) was: "A period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God" (Scofield Reference Sacred Scripture p5). It is a distinguishable era in the overall plan of God. Dispensationalists look at the model of Luke 16:1-2 and Luke 12:45 as a model for God's relationship to man in the various dispensations. In this model there are two parties, with the steward being accountable, and the conditions change with time.
According to traditional dispensational belief, these dispensations or stewardships totalled seven and were as follows:


Dispensation 1: Adam - Noah
Dispensation 2: Noah - Moses
Dispensation 3: Moses-David
Dispensation 4: David - Christ
Dispensation 5: Church Age
Dispensation 6: Millennium kingdom
Dispensation 7: Eternity
There are other ways of dividing up the dispensations, for example:


Dispensation 1 - Innocence . Creation - Fall
Dispensation 2 - Conscience. Fall - Noah.
Dispensation 3: Human Government. Noah- Abraham.
Dispensation 4 - Promise. Abraham - Moses.
Dispensation 5: Law. Moses - Church.
Dispensation 6: Church- Tribulation
Dispensation 7: Kingdom or Millennium, when Christ will be a literal king on the literal throne of David for 1000 literal years.
(Note: Eternity is not categorised as a dispensation.)
Yet another list could be:

Adam- Noah
Noah- Abraham
Abraham-Mount Sinai
Mount Sinai- Pentecost
Pentecost- Great Tribulation (the Church Age)
Tribulation - Great White Throne (Millennium)

In each dispensation, man fails in his responsibilities to God. So of course the Church age dispensation , according to this belief system, has to fail as well. The reader will no doubt note that the fact that there is more than one way of defining the dispensations, especially with regard to the earlier ones, is an indication of the poor Scriptural support for this system.





History
Dispensationalism as a religious belief system has it's origins in the 1830s in England, when one Mr. John Nelson Darby (1800-1880) developed the ideas of various dispensations under which God tested man through human history. Side by side with the development of this system was a revelation give to 20- year-old Margaret MacDonald at a prayer meeting, in Port Glasgow Scotland, where she had a vision of the "rapture". Dispensationalism and the "rapture" were to become intimately connected in an erroneous and novel teaching, unknown in the history of Christianity. The doctrines of Dispensationalism were systematized by Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921) is his "Scofield Reference Sacred Scripture" (Oxford University Press,1909). We shall see that this work produced an interpretation of Scripture totally at odds with historical interpretation and antithetical to the Catholic faith.

Darby was greatly disillusioned with the established Church of England of his time and this fact helped him towards a theology of dispensations, or stewardships, where God was testing man in each "stewardship" and man was failing each time. Naturally, the Church age would also have to fail also, according to Darby. Consequent to this, Darby believed that the current Church Age could not be the kingdom described in the New Testament and promised by the Old Testament prophets. Instead he concluded that the church age(i.e. the present) is a period unknown to the OT prophets, and that it is inserted into the "70 weeks" prophetic "clock" of Daniel 9: 26-27, which he thought should have been fulfilled by Jesus' ascending to the literal throne of David at His first Coming (see the "Kingdom Offer" below).

In 1833 at the Powerscourt conference in Dublin,Ireland, Darby presented his view of the parenthetic model of the Church in the prophetic fulfillment of the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel 9:26-27.

The rapture, or removal of the church to heaven preceding the Tribulation period, when the stopped prophetic "clock" begins ticking for Israel again with the "Seventieth Week of Daniel", was Darby's innovation. Darby, with no basis for his interpretation, inserted this "parenthesis" into his understanding of Daniel 9:26-27. We shall see in a later essay why this whole approach is mistaken from the very start.

Darby broke not only from previous millennarian teaching but from all of church history by asserting that Christ's second coming would occur, not in one, but in two stages. The first, an invisible "secret rapture" of true believers could happen at any time, ending the great "parenthesis" or church age which began when the Jews rejected Christ.

Darby seeked to legitimize his new rapture and its two "Second Comings" so he divided the Sacred Scripture up into passages for Israel and passages for the Church. According to traditional Dispensationalism Jesus came to deliver the Kingdom to the Jews, (the so-called "Kingdom Offer") but the Jews rejected Him and caused Him to die on the cross. Thus, Christ's death on the cross was not part of God's plan (at least not His plan for that time). As a result, the coming of the kingdom was postponed until the Second Coming of Christ and is not present today except in "mystery" form. The rejection of Christ led to a stopping of the prophetic clock (see especially the Book of Daniel) and a "parenthesis" was introduced, which the Dispensationalists call the Church Age. In other words, God created the Church as a plan B in response to the Jews' rejection of the Messiah, which the Dispensationalists say was totally unanticipated even by the Old Testament prophets (including Daniel, of course).

Key Dispensational verses:

Jer. 31:31-37 - God's promise of the New Covenant for Israel (not just for the Church) will be fulfilled.
The refutation of this verse is found in the words of the Letter to the Hebrews. This prophecy is fulfilled in Hebrews 10:16,17.

Another verse cited by Dispensationalists is Rom. 11:29 - God's promises to national Israel are irrevocable. So Dispensationalists think they must be given to the physical entity of Israel at some point in the future. However, under Dispensationalism, God's promise to Abraham will last only 1,000 years, but God said it would be for ever.

As mentioned above, Darby divided Scripture up into passages which he thought applied to Israel and passages which he thought applied to the Church. This is a fundamental basis for dispensational belief, the basis for which lies in their interpretation of the verse 2 Tim 2:15 which in the KJV reads: "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

This word "dividing" is found only in the KJV:


Douay-Rhiems: "rightly handling the word of truth."
NAS: "handling accurately the word of truth".
NIV: "who correctly handles the word of truth".
RSV: "rightly handling the word of truth".
So there is no idea of dividing up the Scriptures in this verse, the idea comes from the poor KJV translation.

In the Vulgate, the word used is tractantem, while the Greek is orthomounta which means "properly use as one thing". So there is no justification for using the word "dividing" here.

Another verse used by Dispensationalists to justify dividing up God's Word to different ages is Luke 12:42 Master dividing the food. However, a study of Matthew 7:6, John 16:12 and 1 Corinthians 3:2, sheds light on the actual meaning of this verse: The teacher is to be diligent in giving the different classes of hearer "their portion of meat in due season" (Luke 12:42).

Another focus of dispensational belief is the claim that their view of Scripture focuses on the glory of God, rather on the sinfulness of man. But is the central issue of the dispensational interpretation really God's glory and not man's salvation?

In actual fact, no. God is seen to be playing a game with man, putting him through lots of tests and waiting for him to fail. It does not show God's love for man. Note that a God who makes an offer (like the kingdom offer) that he has no intention of honouring is not exactly filling Himself in glory. So the central issue of dispensational theology isn't God's glory, though it is claimed to be.





The Dispensational View of the End Times

As mentioned above, the "millennium" proposed by Darby (and supposedly based on Revelation 20:7) is fundamentally Jewish in nature and a time when the Jews will be exalted above the Gentiles. The Gentiles will be on the lowest level in Christ's rule (the saints will have been raptured, of course). In addition, and here is where Dispensationalism must ask itself questions about it's Christian outlook, the sacrificial system of the Old Law will be restored, so Jesus as the Lamb of God will not be the focus of their worship. Note that Dispensationalism is "futurist" as it regards the Book of Revelation as a description of future events. They also believe that the seven churches of Revelation 2-3 are Jewish churches which give witness during the seven year tribualtion.
The millennium (of Revelation 20) will be a period of earthly paradise and worldwide peace in which the supposedly unfulfilled promises to Israel will be literally and physically fulfilled. The millennium is when certain Old Testament prophecies and promises made to Israel will be fulfilled which Dispensationalists see as not yet fulfilled. In contrast, Catholic teaching (and traditional Protestant teaching also) says that these promises and prophecies have been and are being fulfilled in the Church.

Dispensationalists think the millennium is necessary because the Old Testament prophecies have to be fulfilled in a literal and a physical manner, i.e. they must relate to the physical land of Israel, and not it's spiritual heir. This is a mistaken viewpoint, as we shall see later, when we consider the Church as the new Israel. Also note that the dispensationalists make the mistake of thinking a "literal" fulfilment must mean a "physical", and not "spiritual", fulfillment . Again, we shall see what the New Testament says in this regard.

The "parenthesis" or Church Age, which Darby inserted into Daniel 9:26-27, will end when Jesus comes invisibly at the rapture to take all believers (except OT saints) up to heaven (NOTE this requires an invisible coming of Christ, mentioned nowhere in Scripture) to celebrate the "Marriage feast of the Lamb" with Christ for seven years, the length of the Tribulation.

God then is supposed to focus once again on the Jewish people. The tribulation, Antichrist, bowls of wrath (Rev. 15 and 16) come next. A Jewish remnant of 144,000 preaching the gospel of the Kingdom (Matt 24:14) (it's at this point the Church is supposedly "raptured"), and Armageddon (Rev. 16:16). Then the Second (or Third!) Coming, the instant conversion of the entire nation of Israel, the resurrection of the tribulation and Old Testament saints, and the "sheep and goats" judgement (Matt. 25:31-33). The goats will be cast into hell, the sheep and the believing Jews will enter the Millennium in their natural human bodies. Israel, gathered from it's worldwide dispersion to Christ, will accept their King, and so will begin the millennium age as, once again, God's covenant people ( see George E. Ladd, Crucial Questions About the Kingdom of God, pp. 50,51). The "mystery church" and the resurrected tribulation and old testament saints will live in the heavenly Jerusalem suspended above the earthly city. After 1,000 years Satan will be released from the chain with which he had been bound at the beginning of the millennium ( Rev. 20:4) and many of the children born to the "sheep" and the Israelites will follow him into revolt against Christ. Christ will again destroy His enemies, followed by another resurrection of the glorious, another resurrection of the unrighteous, a final judgment (the "white throne judgment"), and at last a new heavens and a new earth (Rev. 21-22). At the very heart of the Dispensational belief is the idea that Israel and the Church are two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity."

Needless to say, this view of the end times is completely contradictory to the idea of the Church as the spiritual heir of Israel and the Kingdom of God on Earth. In actual fact, the Catholic Church's position (and in fact, the position of other covenant-based churches -Episcopsal, Lutheran, Presbyterian etc) are in agreement in this regard. The reader is recommended to look up the Catechism of the Catholic Church for further information.

Next we shall see why the distinction between Israel and the Church is not correct view to take. Basically the fundamental error is that Dispensationalists seek a consistently literal approach to Sacred Scripture (hence their expectation of a physical fulfillment of prophecy) but they fail to note that a literal fulfillment doesn?t have to be a physical fulfillment; it can also be a spiritual one.




The Dispensational distinction between Israel and the Church, and why it is wrong
First we shall look to see if the supposedly unfulfilled prophesies of Zechariah are fulfilled in the First Coming of Christ. If they are, we ask "are they fulfilled in a spiritual way in the Church, or must the be fulfilled literally?"

Zechariah 2:10,11 "For, lo I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord. And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day and shall be My people; and I will dwell in the midst of thee"
Zechariah 3:3,4. "Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe the with change of raiment"
Zechariah 3: 8,9."behold, I will bring forth my servant the Branch. For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua"
Zechariah 6:12-15 "the Man whose name is The BRANCH,"shall build the temple of the Lord.........He shall bear the glory, and He shall sit and rule upon His throne; and He shall be a priest upon His throne."

All these passages are fulfilled in Heb. 2:9; 8:1

Continuing with Zechariah 9:9"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion... behold, thy King cometh unto thee"

This prophecy is fulfilled in Luke 19:38 when Christ come to Jerusalem to die for the salvation of mankind.

Continuing, Zechariah 13:7-9 "Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, and against the Man that is My Fellow, saith the Lord of hosts. Smite the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered"

This prophecy is fulfilled in the death of Christ and especially in Matt. 26:31.

Finally, from Zechariah: Zechariah 14:8"And it shall be in that day that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem"

This prophecy is fulfilled in John 7:37,38 "Jesus stood and cried saying, If any man thirst, let him come to Me and drink, he that believeth on Me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water".

As further evidence to the effect that these prophecies were to be fulfilled in a spiritual, and not physical, manner, we see the very well-kown example of John 2:19ff:

"Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up"...But He spoke of the Temple of His Body."

What else can be said about this supposed separation between Israel and the Church? We have seen that the prophecies of Zechariah are fulfilled in the First Coming of Christ, and so do not wait a literal physical fulfillment. The reader is asked to bear in mind also that in the history of the Church, none of the early Church Fathers made a distinction between Israel and the Church as two separate peoples of God. In fact St. Justin Martyr in "Dialogues with Trypho" (chapters 123-125, 135) shows he regards the Church as being the true Israel. Saint Augustine saw the period of the millennium as being fulfilled spiritually in the Church, the binding of satan having taken place during the earthly ministry of Our Lord. The new birth of the believer was the first resurrection in Rev. 20. Verses 1-6 are a recapitulation of the preceding chapters. (He did however think the 1000 years to be literal, representing the inter-adventual period.)

Next, we shall look at some other prophecies of the Old Testament, and see if their fulfillment is in the Church or the people of Israel. By showing their fulfillment to be in the Church, we shall demonstrate the essential continuity of Israel and the Church, with God having one people, with one destiny, saved by One Saviour.

Promise to Israel -
"Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, Which cannot be measured or numbered. And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not My people," There it shall be said to them, 'You are sons of the living God.'" -Hosea 1:10

Fulfilled in the Church - "What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" As He says also in Hosea: "I will call them My people, who were not My people, And her beloved, who was not beloved." "And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, 'You are not My people,' There they shall be called sons of the living God." -Romans :22-26

Promise to Israel - "On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old" -Amos 9:11

Fulfillment in the Church - Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. "And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: 'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; So that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the LORD who does all these things.' "Known to God from eternity are all His works. -Acts 15:14-18

And there are many other Old Testament passages referring to Israel that are in the New Testament applied directly to the Catholic Church.

Spoken to Israel - "And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions. And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days. "And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth: Blood and fire and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls." -Joel 2:28-32

Applied to the church - When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place..."But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved." -Acts 2:1,16-21

A very interesting case: the "new covenant" of Jeremiah:

Spoken to Israel - "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah--" -Jer 31:31 Obviously, this prophecy is directed to Israel. But if the church is fulfilling the promise given to Israel as contained in the New Covenant, dispensationalism, and dispensationalist premillennialism, is dead.

Applied to the church - "Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you." -Luke 22:20

Dispensationalism has used various arguments to get around this insurmountable problem. Consistent Dispensationalists have long recognized the problem. E.W. Bullinger noted that the cup of the Lord's Supper was indeed the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-33, but that it was directed to Israel and not to the church, and for that very reason the "mystery" church should not administer it. Other dispensationalists have sought a soluton in the notion of a second "new covenant". John F. Walvoord, who became the president of Dallas Theological Seminary, is one proponent of this view. However, it cannot be supported from Sacred Scripture, because the Dispensationalists, as we have seen, look at some verses, devise their theology around them, then try to invent new and groundless theories to explain the verses (such as Luke 22:20) which demolish their whole theological base.

In the Old Testament, Israel is called "beloved of God" (Deut. 33:3), "children of God" (Is. 2:2,4, Is 63:8), the "house of God" (Num. 12:7), the "kingdom of God" (Exod. 19:6), the "people of God" (Deut. 27:9), the "vineyard of God" (Is. 5:3-7), the "bride of God" (Hos. 1:2, Ez. 16:32), the "children of Abraham" ( Is. 41:8), the "chosen people" (Deut. 7:7; 10:15; 14:2) , the "circumcised" (Gen. 17:10), the "new covenant" (Jer. 32:31-33), the "olive tree" (Jer. 11:16, Hos. 14:6)

In the New Testament, Christians are called "beloved of God" (Col. 3:12, 1 John 3:1), "children of God" ( John 1:12, John 11:52, Rom. 8:14,16 John 3:1), the "house of God" (1 Tim. 3:15, Heb. 3:2,5,6,), the "kingdom of God" (Rom. 14:17, 1 Cor. 4:20), the "people of God" (2 Cor. 6:16, Eph. 4:12, Eph. 5:3, 2), the "vineyard of God" (Luke 20:16), the "bride of God" (2 Cor. 11:2, Eph. 5:31,32), the "children of Abraham" (Gal. 3:7,29, Gal. 4:23,28,31), the "chosen people" (Col. 3:12, 1 Pet. 2:9), the "circumcised" (Rom. 2:29; Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11), the "new covenant" (Luke 22:20, 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6), the "olive tree" (Rom. 11:24) Similarly in the new Testament, Christians are called Israel: in John 11:50, 51, 52, 1 Cor. 10:1, Gal. 6:15, 16, Eph. 2:12, 19 and they are called Jews in Rom. 2:29.

Now we shall briefly take a look at some verses from Scripture which do not fit with the Dispensational outlook and which are therefore not taken literally and are distorted to fit into the Dispensationalist viewpoint. The Preterist Archive provides several examples, among which are the following.

Isaiah 9:7
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Dispensationalists don't believe this. They believe there will be a 2,000 year pause for the Church Age.

Daniel 2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

Dispensationalists don't believe this Scripture is to be taken literally. They believe the stone "became a great mountain" after a 2,000 year pause.

Matt. 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (also Matt. 4:17; 10:7)

Dispensationalists don't believe this Scripture is to be taken literally. They believe "the kingdom is heaven is at hand- during the millennium".

Daniel 4:34: "And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose kingdom is from generation to generation".

Dispensationalists don't believe this either. Instead, they believe the most High's dominion will be established thousands of years into the future, at the end of the "Church age" parenthesis. So His Kingdom will not be from generation to generation until then, apparently.

Matt. 21:43: "Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

Once again, dispensationalists don't believe this. Instead they believe all the promises to Israel were unconditional and the Gentiles would never get them.
There are many other examples of this kind at the Preterist Archive website (note: non-Catholic)





The "Kingdom Offer"

Dispensationalism teaches that the purpose of the (first) Coming of Christ was to establish an earthly political kingdom. With His chosen people, Israel, over which Christ would have ruled from the literal throne of David, and in which all Old Testament prophecies were to be literally and physically fulfilled. This kingdom would have been a perfected continuation of the Davidic kingdom of the Old Testament with David's Son, Jesus, ruling in his place for one thousand years.
This view is in obvious stark contrast to the traditional teaching of the catholic Church (and many Protestand demoninations) which teaches that Our Lord came at the appointed time to be crucified for the salvation on humanity.

According to dispensationalism, when the Jews rejected Christ's legitimate offer of the kingdom, which was supposedly predicted by the prophets) that kingdom was then postponed , and entered a "mystery" form, i.e. the Church Age (see Matt 13) until the second coming of Christ. In this Church Age, supposedly, the kingdom of heaven is embodied in Christendom and "God is now ruling on the earth insofar as the parables of the mystery of the kingdom of heaven require. In this mystery phase of the kingdom, good and evil mingle together and are to grow together until Christ returns" (this quote is from Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology). Then the same earthly Davidic kingdom which they are supposed to have refused will be established in the form of the millennium (see earlier). During the millennium all the plans which were supposedly foiled by the Jews at the first advent will be fulfilled literally (and physically).

What this means in essence is that Our Lord, who occupies the throne of heaven, is expected to take over a throne once occupied by an earthly king! This is one of the very highpoints in dispensational teaching on the end times. What an idea, but Peter shows in Acts 2:29-36 that Our Lord has for nearly two thousand years occupied the throne of which David's throne was a mere type:

"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life and we are all witnesses of the fact. Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. For David did not asend to heaven, and yet he said

"The Lord said to my Lord:
Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet."

Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
In refutation of the point regarding the kingdom entering a "mystery" form in Matt 13, it can be said that In Matthew, Christ is presented first as the Son of David. Then when He is rejected by the Jews He is presented as the Son of Abraham in whom all the nations of the earth shall be blessed. The break with the leaders of the nation comes in chapter 12, where the Jews commit blasphemy by ascribing the works of the Holy Spirit to the devil.

In Matt. 13, the Lord opens up a new ministry, the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, revealing things that had been kept secret from the foundation of the world, NAMELY the unexpected form that the kingdom would have on earth after Israel had rejected the King. This is set forth in the seven parables of that chapter, and tells us what the Christian life will be like on this earth. This kingdom of Heaven on earth is the Catholic Church.

The dispensationalists, unable to deal with these parables, push them out to the time after the Tribulation era.

What if the Jews had accepted Jesus' offer to establish an earthly Davidic kingdom at his first advent? According to (at least hard-line)dispensationalist teaching, people would then have been saved by legal obedience. The big problem here is that it means people could be saved by some other means than by the death of Christ on the cross. S.D. Gordon (Quiet Talks About Jesus, p. 114) says:

"It can be said at once that His dying was not God's own plan. It was conceived somewhere else and yielded to by God. God has a plan of atonement by which men who were willing could be saved from sin and its effect.
That plan is given in the Old Hebrew code. To the tabernacle or temple, under prescribed regulations, a man could bring some animal which he owned. The man brought that which was his own. It represented him."

S. D. Gordon makes the fatal mistake of thinking that the Old Testament sacrifices were meant as a method of salvation. However this is not true: the Old Testament sacrifices were put in place after to teach the Israelites never to worship the idols of Egypt again. Remember that these sacrifices were commanded by God after Israel had fallen into idolatry in this way. These sacrifices were never in themselves meant as a means of salvation.


Here is the big problem, Christ made an earthly Kingdom offer knowing that the Jews would refuse, therefore the offer could not have been redeemed. An offer that is impossible to honor is not a sincere offer but a fraud. Does the dispensationalist really say that God makes insincere offers?





The alleged distinction between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God: does it really exist? No.
An important feature of Dispensational thought is the idea that the kingdom of Heaven is distinct from the kingdom of God. this distinction is used by dispensationalists to claim the kingdom promised by Jesus has not yet arrived. We shall see, however, that the kingdom of Heaven and the kingdom of God are one and the same, as spoken by the New Testament writers.
Consider at the outset, Matt 11:12 and Luke 16:16. In the first passage, our Lord referred to that kingdom as the kingdom of heaven, while in the second passage, - while speaking of the same man, same time, and same message - He referred to that same kingdom as the kingdom of God. Clearly they must be the same kingdom.

Other examples:

Matthew 4:17: From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."

Mark 1:14-15: Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee,preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Again, we see that the kingdom of God is identical with the kingdom of heaven. Th ekingdom has not been postponed, it is here right now, and it is called the Catholic Church.


Were the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God one and the same? Yes.
Matthew 13:11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.

Mark 4:1 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

Luke 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

See also the "eye

Edited June 13, 2004 by Brother Adam