The Rapture - do Catholics believe in it (Catholic Responses Only)

Festus

Another thread has generated an interesting comment on the Rapture. As a Catholic I don't believe what protestants describe as the Rapture.

However I may be wrong.

Can some more knowledgeable Catholics out there enlighten me as to what the official Catholic position on the Rapture is.

To my mind the explanation here is good enough.

"As Roman Catholics, we might ask, “Has the Church censured anything regarding the Rapture doctrine?” The answer would have to be no and yes. No, to my knowledge, there has never been an explicit statement relative to the Rapture. But as we have seen, the Rapture forms part of a particular millennial expectation based on a particular use of biblical texts. Yes, the Church has explicitly rejected both this kind of speculation and this way of interpreting the Scriptures.


The Council of Ephesus (431) denounced it as “a deviation and a fable.”* It was denounced again in 1516 at the Fifth Lateran Council. In 1824, the work of Manuel Lacunza (noted above) was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books. In 1941 and 1944, responding to questions from the Archbishop of Santiago, Chile, the Congregation of the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) again rejected this kind of millennial speculation with explicit reference to the work of Lacunza. As recently as April 22, 1998, with the turn of the millennium approaching, Pope John Paul II warned again against this way of thinking.
In interpreting biblical texts, the Church has stressed that it is essential that we take account of their literary genres since truth is expressed differently in different types of writing (Vatican II: Dei Verbum #12; Catechism of the Catholic Church #110).


In its 1993 document, The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church, the Pontifical Biblical Commission both reaffirmed this (Section I-A) and rejected as inadequate the so-called “fundamentalist” interpretation at play in the Rapture doctrine and scenario (Section I-F).


As John Paul II expressed it on April 22, 1998, “We know that the apocalyptic images of the eschatological discourse about the end of all things should be interpreted in light of their intense symbolism.” It is not language that should be taken literally."


Would anyone care to disagree with Michael D. Guinan, O.F.M., Ph.D ?

EDIT: * is disputed.

georgieporgy

Hell No!

meaning I don't believe in the rapture story.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

antiskeptic

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And 1 Thessalonians 4?

This wouldn't contradict a single event view and one not involving a literal millenial reign (eg: the idealist view)

13Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. 14We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18Therefore encourage each other with these words.

Festus

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This I think it key. It is an etymological corruption. A valid translation for rapere exists - to be snatched up or caught up or carried up. However there is a definition of rapture to mean joy or ecstasy.

In Catholic eschatology the joy would be in passing the Judgement and entering Heaven. Before being judged presumably the emotion would be less than rapturous.

My understanding is that the living and the dead are raised up to meet Christ to be judged, the dead first as they have already had their particular judgement, then the living as they have yet to be judged.

bridgetown1

Festus wrote: »

Another thread has generated an interesting comment on the Rapture. As a Catholic I don't believe what protestants describe as the Rapture.

However I may be wrong.

i am a protestant (c of i) and we don't believe in it either!!!!

PDN

antiskeptic wrote: »

And 1 Thessalonians 4?

This wouldn't contradict a single event view and one not involving a literal millenial reign (eg: the idealist view)

Moderating Note:
Please respect the Catholic Response Only tag at the top of the thread. This thread is for Catholics to discuss their view of the Rapture, not for there to be an argument between Catholics and non-Catholics.

However, we are watchful, on both "Catholic Response Only" or "Christian Response Only" that such a thread designation is not used to be provocative, or to post stuff that is manifestly factually inaccurate.

In this regard I should point out that the First Council of Ephesus in 431 did not condemn the concept of the Rapture. Some later authors (last 200 years ago) have claimed that it condemned the idea of a literal Millenium, but not the Rapture. In fact, if you examine all the earlier sources we have for the Council of Ephesus, they were dealing with a very different subject, namely the Nestorian controversy.

Festus

PDN wrote: »

In this regard I should point out that the First Council of Ephesus in 431 did not condemn the concept of the Rapture. Some later authors (last 200 years ago) have claimed that it condemned the idea of a literal Millenium, but not the Rapture. In fact, if you examine all the earlier sources we have for the Council of Ephesus, they were dealing with a very different subject, namely the Nestorian controversy.

I love it.

Dr. Guinan suggests it was denounced - spoken against.

PDN implies condemnation - declared to be reprehensible, wrong, or evil usually after weighing evidence and without reservation

If Dr. Guinan had suggested condemnation I think you would have had a fair point but he speaks of it being denounced.

So it was either denounced at the Council of Ephesus or it was not denouced at the Council of Ephesus.

To counter "it was not condemned" is provocative.

PDN

Festus wrote: »

I love it.

Dr. Guinan suggests it was denounced - spoken against.

PDN implies condemnation - declared to be reprehensible, wrong, or evil usually after weighing evidence and without reservation

If Dr. Guinan had suggested condemnation I think you would have had a fair point but he speaks of it being denounced.

So it was either denounced at the Council of Ephesus or it was not denouced at the Council of Ephesus.

To counter "it was not condemned" is provocative.

Sorry for not noticing the hair-splitting between denouncing something as "a deviation and a fable" and condemning it. If you see that distinction as 'provocative' then heaven help us all.

Either ways, the Council of Ephesus did neither because it never mentioned the Rapture.

Here's a summary of the Council's decisions from a TV station I never watch http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/EPHESUS.HTM

Also: http://www.dailycatholic.org/history/3ecumen1.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05491a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3810.htm

Festus

PDN wrote: »

Sorry for not noticing the hair-splitting between denouncing something as "a deviation and a fable" and condemning it. If you see that distinction as 'provocative' then heaven help us all.

Just a useful etymological excercise. Change a word here, there, whatever. There is much confusion regarding the rapture - why add to it?

But if you don't mind, this is a Catholic only thread and with all due respect I refer you to the recent mod message.

georgieporgy

I suppose, like Bill Clinton might say, it depends on how you define Rapture. I took it to mean a 1000 year "heavenly" experience living on earth with Jesus who has returned and sorted out all the bad guys.

But if we're talking about what happens to those still living at the end of the world ,- do they die like everybody else , or do they skip the dieing bit and go directly to their final destination with all the other resurrected people? I have an open mind on it and as I suspect it won't involve me I don't give it much thought.

Towards the end of the last century I knew some charismatics who expected it would happen 'soon', but now that 2010 is almost behind us I presume they are having a rethink.

PS I like charismatics but sometimes they concentrate too much on the future

georgieporgy

Festus wrote: »

Just a useful etymological excercise. Change a word here, there, whatever. There is much confusion regarding the rapture - why add to it?

But if you don't mind, this is a Catholic only thread and with all due respect I refer you to the recent mod message.

I think PDN is close to converting (:D) so maybe we can tolerate him. And anyway - he is the mod.

santing

Festus wrote: »

But if you don't mind, this is a Catholic only thread and with all due respect I refer you to the recent mod message.

PDN is catholic, just not Roman Catholic. We can't help that the official message of the Roman Catholic Church is that they are the one and only Catholic Church.

Now if the request was "Roman Catholic Responses" only, ...

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

I suppose, like Bill Clinton might say, it depends on how you define Rapture. I took it to mean a 1000 year "heavenly" experience living on earth with Jesus who has returned and sorted out all the bad guys.

That would be the Millenium, not the Rapture.

georgieporgy

PDN wrote: »

That would be the Millenium, not the Rapture.

agreed. but lots of people confuse the two.

i found this link to be the most complete with a good description of all the various views

http://www.catholic.com/library/Rapture.asp

georgieporgy

santing wrote: »

PDN is catholic, just not Roman Catholic. We can't help that the official message of the Roman Catholic Church is that they are the one and only Catholic Church.

Now if the request was "Roman Catholic Responses" only, ...

good point. but for linguistic ease RCC people usually label themselves 'catholic' and youse guys 'protestant', but we do fully accept your interpretation of 'protestant'.

we find it clumsy to call ourselves roman catholics or papists ,etc, when having informal discussions. but we don't mind if you use those terms when referring to us because..... you have your own familiar labels.

it's a bit like feminists getting upset when a man uses the generic word "man" when referring to mankind. they would prefer him say "women and men" all the time. (hope this doesn't start a new thread or get me banned!)

PDN

georgieporgy wrote: »

good point. but for linguistic ease RCC people usually label themselves 'catholic' and youse guys 'protestant', but we do fully accept your interpretation of 'protestant'.

we find it clumsy to call ourselves roman catholics or papists ,etc, when having informal discussions. but we don't mind if you use those terms when referring to us because..... you have your own familiar labels.

it's a bit like feminists getting upset when a man uses the generic word "man" when referring to mankind. they would prefer him say "women and men" all the time. (hope this doesn't start a new thread or get me banned!)

I agree.

Everyone understands what the tag on the thread means - so let's not get too pedantic about the wording.

wolfsbane

Festus wrote: »

Just a useful etymological excercise. Change a word here, there, whatever. There is much confusion regarding the rapture - why add to it?

But if you don't mind, this is a Catholic only thread and with all due respect I refer you to the recent mod message.

Catholic Bible citation:
1 Thessalonians 4:15 We can tell you this from the Lord's own teaching, that we who are still alive for the Lord's coming will not have any advantage over those who have fallen asleep.
16 At the signal given by the voice of the Archangel and the trumpet of God, the Lord himself will come down from heaven; those who have died in Christ will be the first to rise,
17 and only after that shall we who remain alive be taken up in the clouds, together with them, to meet the Lord in the air. This is the way we shall be with the Lord for ever.
http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=59

hinault

I'm Roman Catholic and I'd never heard of the Rapture until I started to frequent these threads.

I don't believe in the literal interpretation that the Rapture concept seems to adhere to.
I don't think that civilisation will end at Armageddon.
Think about it : the people who wrote the Bible had to come up with a location that was known to the contemporary readers.
The writers couldn't have said the end of time will take place in say Paris, because obviously Paris was unkown to the contemporary readers of the Bible.

The entire concept appears to be more of this "Evangelical, let's make it up as we go along" doctrine.

CCCP

I am Catholic (considering Orthadoxy must add)
I don't believe in the rapture. It's a creation of man. While it's true the Bible says that those who follow Christ will be spared the tribulations, there is no word rapture in the Bible, and there is no mention of people being magically transported out of this world before the tribulations like many American style "Christians" believe and expect is imminent

Most Catholics believe that revelations was written about events that have for the most part already taken place.

I myself find Revelations presence in the Canon Dubious at best, But thats another thread.

antiskeptic

CCCP wrote: »

I am Catholic (considering Orthadoxy must add)
I don't believe in the rapture. It's a creation of man. While it's true the Bible says that those who follow Christ will be spared the tribulations, there is no word rapture in the Bible, and there is no mention of people being magically transported out of this world before the tribulations like many American style "Christians" believe and expect is imminent

Most Catholics believe that revelations was written about events that have for the most part already taken place.

I myself find Revelations presence in the Canon Dubious at best, But thats another thread.

See the post two above yours. That would appear to support the rapture and isn't from Revelation.