The truth concerning the thousand year reign of Rev.20 Part 1

Ok,
so I asked the question yesterday if people would change their mind on the erroneous belief in a coming "spiritual millennium" based on Revelation ch.20 as proposed most notably by Fr Joseph Iannuzzi and supported by among others Mark Mallett and Kelly Bowring, if I could prove beyond doubt from an approved private revelation with the highest level of approval i.e. from a pope that this is a doctrinal error. I am not quite sure what to make of nobody actually answering the question , nevertheless I am sure we all want to know and embrace the truth even if it means letting go of long held opinions.
The revelation in question comes from St Hildegard of Bingen, who was procalimed a Doctor of the Church in one of Pope Benedict XVI's last acts as Pontiff in October 2012. Before exploring what the revelations teach us, I want to quote from Pope Benedict talking about St Hildegard, so that we have an idea of just how highly her visions and theological prowess were thought of from her own time in the 12 century right up to the present:
"In her many writings Hildegard dedicated herself exclusively to explaining divine revelation and making God known in the clarity of his love. Hildegard’s teaching is considered eminent both for its depth, the correctness of its interpretation, and the originality of its views...These works were born from a deep mystical experience and propose a perceptive reflection on the mystery of God. The Lord endowed her with a series of visions from childhood, whose content she dictated to the Benedictine monk Volmar, her secretary and spiritual advisor, and to Richardis von Stade, one of her women religious. But particularly illuminating are the judgments expressed by Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, who encouraged her, and especially by Pope Eugene III, who in 1147 authorized her to write and to speak in public...Her main writings are the Scivias, the Liber Vitae Meritorum and the Liber Divinorum Operum. They relate her visions and the task she received from the Lord to transcribe them...With acute wisdom-filled and prophetic sensitivity, Hildegard focused her attention on the event of revelation. Her investigation develops from the biblical page in which, in successive phases, it remains firmly anchored. The range of vision of the mystic of Bingen was not limited to treating individual matters but sought to offer a global synthesis of the Christian faith. Hence in her visions and her subsequent reflections she presents a compendium of the history of salvation from the beginning of the universe until its eschatological consummation. God’s decision to bring about the work of creation is the first stage on this immensely long journey which, in the light of sacred Scripture, unfolds from the constitution of the heavenly hierarchy until it reaches the fall of the rebellious angels and the sin of our first parents.This initial picture is followed by the redemptive Incarnation of the Son of God, the activity of the Church that extends in time the mystery of the Incarnation and the struggle against Satan. The definitive Coming of the Kingdom of God and the Last Judgement crown this work. (Apostolic Letter of Pope Benedict XVI proclaiming Hildegard a Doctor of the Church 7/10/2012).
Pope Benedict also devoted 2 general audiences to Hildegard in 2010 in which he referred to her as: " this great woman, this "prophetess" who also speaks with great timeliness to us today, with her courageous ability to discern the signs of the times" (Sept 1/2010)

 

Hello Stephen, apologies, I had meant to post a response but it slipped my mind, and with your post dropping rapidly off the Recent Posts lists it stayed slipped.

I'm not sure if I can express it as politely as I would like, but here goes: the urgency to respond to your post is damped by the the impression I have gained that you only post in relation to the book you have written.

Now there has been rather a lot that has has happened in the forum which I get the impression that you are not aware of. So while I would quite like to read your book to get another viewpoint I must admit that I am currently not willing to pay for it. Please understand that's its not the fault of you or your excellent book. It's just that i don't like buying books. Now if perhaps you could offer some form of incentive...

 

Hey! I responded! Of course I'm interested, IF you have valid evidence. Give us the gist of it.

 

I have gone back and forth on this for a while, but I am now firmly in Fr. Iannuzzi's camp. I would have to say that, yes, I side with the Fathers of the Church over a Doctor of the Church. They were closer to the time of Christ, and even a Doctor of the Church can be (and has been - see St. Catherine of Siena) mistaken in mystical revelations.

In fact, part of what you quoted from St. Hildegard was demonstrably wrong at that time. You quote her as being told by the Father, "My Son has accomplished His Will in the world, and the Gospel has been preached openly throughout all lands..." In fact, at that time, the Gospel had NOT been preached openly throughout all lands...perhaps all lands known to St. Hildegard.

 

I think it is more the case that:

1. You are a 'professional theologian' having authored a book. We are all amatuer theologians compared to you.
2. You have studied the subject more thoroughly (no bad thing) & have a definite advantage in that regard.
2. You are smarter than many of us (well at least me anyway).

I bought & read your book. I thoroughly enjoyed it, scholarly, well-written but (Isn't there always a but! ), I felt short changed by the conclusion by the sudden ending of it all.

Let me make it clear that I do not believe in a 'spiritual millenium' that is a literal one thousand year reign of Christ.

What I can't get my head around is the 'era of peace' and the 'triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary' being the both one and the same thing as the final definitive coming of Jesus Christ.

 

Its worth recalling that certain Church Fathers held heretical stances, wheras Doctors are given the title because of their outstanding witness to the Faith. Would you side with the many Fathers who held that we are in the seventh day now? Do you think the Holy Spirit has guided popes of the past 1500 years to completely miss that we are about to enter a seventh day rest, or maybe just maybe there are a lot of charlatan visionaries which are sowing confusion. Perhaps Pope Benedict was wrong to praise the accuracy of Hildegard's interpretations?

 

It is a good point that certain Church Fathers held heretical stances, but I am persuaded by the number of very early witnesses that Fr. Iannuzzi brings to bear.

I don't think that the Holy Spirit has had to guide Popes one way or the other on the issue, since the Church is currently open to either stance, as far as I have understood. I think Pope Benedict XVI (my favorite Pope, by the way) can praise the accuracy of Hildegard's interpretations without meaning that every single thing she said was right on the mark.

I am also with 'Garabandal' (the forum member) in questioning how an "era of Peace" or a "triumph of the Immaculate Heart" can be referring to the eternal peace that will ensue after the Second Coming.

 

Exactly. Stephen if you wish to address this point, that would be great.

 

Jerry,
To address this point about the triumph. The triumph of Mary can only come through the triumph of Her Son, in the sense that Mary's role in salvation history is not something autonomous to that of God. As we all know, Mary is present from Genesis to Revelation-encompassing the entire span of salvation history, but it is always within the plan of God to bring redemption through Mary(first coming) through to its ultimate conclusion at the end of the world (second coming). As Pope John Paul stated in Redemptoris Mater, Mary will be present at the last Judgment as Mediatrix of Mercy. Pope Benedict spoke in this way "Although the Kingdom of God bursts definitively into history with Jesus’ Resurrection, it has not yet come about fully. The final victory will only be won with the Second Coming of the Lord, which we await with patient hope."This final victory at the end of the world will bring the transformation of the entire universe, not complete destruction. The triumph of the Immaculate Heart therfore is Mary giving us Jesus at his second coming to judge the living and dead. How will she do this? by crushing the head of the serpent through her children. Its what this entire marian age is about. Remember what she told Alphonsine Mumareke in Kibeho(one of the three approved visionaries) "I have come to prepare souls for my Son's return" A triumph before a supposed spiritual millenium would be no triumph at all, because in reality it would be only a truce. Satan wouldnt be defeated because in that theory he still has one more war to wage after the thousand year reign. It makes absolutely no sense.
Also the bigggest problem is that people take the Book of Revelation as if it has an almost precise chronological order. It doesnt. For instance, Why is it 4 chapter before Rev 20 do we read about the seven bowls of plagues in which verse 17 states "the end has come"Also a too literal reading of it is also a mistake, for instance in the famous ch 12, when we read about the male child brought into the world, why is he described as being taken up straight up to God when we know he lived for 33 years and died upon the Cross?
The Book of Revelation describes the ongoing battle throughout time which gradually becomes more violent towards the end as St John Paul stated in 1986. To go back to Rev 20 one aspect that nobody seems to take note of is that from verse 7 to 10 we read about Satan going out to deceive the "nations" (which must still be in existance through the so called spiritual millennium and the"camp of the Saints" which obviously refers to the Mystical Body of Christ-the Church. So even within the text there is proof that the thousand years-even symbolically does not show a world ruled by a triumphant Christianity as Fr Iannuzzi would say; it clearly shows that two opposing forces are stiill waging a war-the nations and the Church. It makes perfect sense to me, from reading the writings of popes and approved private revelations that we are now in that period after the thousand year reign in which satan has been let loose for a little while to decieve the nations which explains why evil laws like abortion, gay marriage etc have come about. In St Hildegard's revelations there are also five epochs from her time to the end of the world and nowhere is there a time of peace before the last judgment. One final point: Pope Benedict stated in Light of the World that praying for the "triumph of the Immaculate Heart" was the same as praying for the coming of the Kingdom-which as stated in the Catechism and in the Pope Benedict quote above, is clearly the state of the world after the last judgment. We might not like to read it, but that is the Pope explaining and correcting the interviewers understanding of it! But perhaps more importantly for those who hold this temporary era of peace view, Pope benedict rubbished the idea of a sudden change in history saying he was "too rational" to expect any change. And of course knowing everything from Fatima and other revelations he more than anyone is in the know! But, that last view has been expressed by many popes in encyclicals-they all say the battle with evil will continue until the very end of the world-there will be no let up.
Stephen

 

Hi Stephen you brought up an interesting reminder when I read above that Mary's plan goes all the way back to Genesis. It actually goes all the way back to the fall. In the Mystical City of God, it is said that Satan always knew it would be a woman that would be his undoing so he searched and searched for her since the beginning. God kept her well hidden in His plans up through her birth, her "yes" and the birth of Jesus. Amazing! Sorry to get off task, carry on. This was just a nice reminder for me of how great God is and how His plan is all that matters because we are all a part of it and in it and the part we play is ultimately our choice as it was Mary's. Even though He had the plan for salvation, she still had the choice to make and thankfully her choice was the great, YES!!

 

This all fascinating to me- as a Protestant I went through my Rapture phase and believing in an actual Millennium to the more Catholic point of view as I got older. As a Catholic now I find the question of the whole spiritual reign versus actual coming of the Kingdom (end of the world) above my pay grade. I know I just have to be ready for the Lord's return no matter how it is going to happen

 

Thanks Stephen for explaining all of that. It makes more sense to me now.

 

The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated. In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.

Stephen - how then do you interpret the above prophecy from Fatima?

 

"Because I want the whole Church to recognize that consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in order to then extend Her public veneration, and to place alongside devotion to My Divine Heart, devotion to Her Immaculate Heart."

This dosen't fit with your thoughts Stephen...The triumph of the Immaculate Heart therfore is Mary giving us Jesus at his second coming to judge the living and dead.

 

Mac,
Shouldnt your last sentence be :"This doesnt fit with your thoughts Pope Benedict XVI...?
I am only giving the interpretation of the popes, not my own. My interpretation is worth nothing.
Garabandal, a couple of things I would point out concerning that prophecy. Firstly, Our Lady said in the end my Immaculate Heart will Triumph. Pope Benedict stated in Sept 2000 in a Letter to Bishop Pavel Hnilica(one of the great Fatima scholars) that the martyrdoms seen in the vision relate to the persecution "until the end of the world". I think obviously too much has been read into Russia itself. Pope Benedict implied that in Light of the World by stating that Fatima's prophetic mission remains in place even though the great ideology of communism is now in the past.Basically,it seems to me from reading the popes and other apporved recent revelations like Kibeho and San Nicolas Argentina, that seeing the prophecy as relating only to Russia's conversion is a restrictive interpretation, because the focus wihtout doubt has moved to the return of Jesus in those apparitions. Also for anyone here who is a follower of Fr Stefano Gobbi, have a read of the analysis I wrote concerning his revelations.You will see that the triumph of the Immaculate Heart prophecy is always tied to the coming of Jesus in glory. http://divinemercypopes.com/?p=139
Going back to the spiritual millennium issue for a moment. I have a question for anyone who can get round a huge problem with the theory. As we know from the Catechism, and St Paul's letter to the Romans, to say nothing of Tradition and the magisterium, we know the Jews are converted as a nation in the time immediately prior to the last judgment. St Paul teaches their admission to the faith will bring about the resurrection of the dead. As that is the case, how is it possible to have the world converted during the thousand years (yes symbolic) but somehow not the Jews? If they dont convert-the very chosen people, then you cannot say that a true temporal Kingdom of Jesus is reigning over humanity

 

Sometimes I post at UTA blog to defend Father Iannuzzi and Mark Mallett but do not get much of a
response for I am not smart either. I do not have a grammatically correct writing style (Let me tell you, my journalist experienced kids point out my constant errors in grammar).

The messages from Heaven agree, the unapproved which are the yet to be approved with the messages approved by the Church.

We are close to the middle coming of Christ, the spiritual Eucharistic reign of Christ on earth. Some call it the Millennium except only God knows the exact time for this period.

stephen, thank you for bringing up these differences of belief between Catholics.

 

Good explanation including only scripture, early Church Fathers, Popes, approved mystics here:

http://www.markmallett.com/blog/the-second-coming/:

The Church teaches that the “second coming” is at the end of time, but the Church Fathers accepted that there may also be a coming of Christ in “spirit and power” before then. It is precisely this manifestation of Christ’s power that slays the Antichrist, not at the end of time, but before the “era of peace.” Let me repeat again the words of Fr. Charles Arminjon:

St. Thomas and St. John Chrysostom explain… that Christ will strike the Antichrist by dazzling him with a brightness that will be like an omen and sign of His Second Coming… The most authoritative view, and the one that appears to be most in harmony with Holy Scripture, is that, after the fall of the Antichrist, the Catholic Church will once again enter upon a period of prosperity and triumph. —The End of the Present World and the Mysteries of the Future Life, Fr. Charles Arminjon (1824-1885), p. 56-57; Sophia Institute Press

If before that final end there is to be a period, more or less prolonged, of triumphant sanctity, such a result will be brought about not by the apparition of the person of Christ in Majesty but by the operation of those powers of sanctification which are now at work, the Holy Ghost and the Sacraments of the Church.—The Teaching of the Catholic Church: A Summary of Catholic Doctrine, 1952, p. 1140

.....Because this coming lies between the other two, it is like a road on which we travel from the first coming to the last. In the first, Christ was our redemption; in the last, he will appear as our life; in this middle coming, he is our rest and consolation. —St. Bernard, Liturgy of the Hours, Vol I, p. 169

 

....and then this:

But between the Passion of the Church, and its eventual glorious Ascension into Heaven, there will be a period of Resurrection, of peace—a time known as the "Era of Peace." (corresponds with the 7th day...of rest)

......it will be a reign of Christ in the hearts of His faithful—a reign of His Church in which she accomplishes her twofold mission to preach the Gospel to the very ends of the earth, and to prepare herself for the return of Jesus at the end of time.

....
In fact, Fr. Joseph Iannuzzi, perhaps the foremost scholar of Church tradition and biblical understanding on the Era writes,

During the Era of Peace, Christ will not return to definitively reign on earth in the flesh, but will "appear" to many. As in the the Book of Acts and in the Gospel of Matthew, Christ made "apparitions" to his elect of the newborn Church shortly after his resurrection from the dead, so during the Era of Peace Christ will appear to the remnant survivors and their offspring. Jesus will appear to many in his risen body and in the Eucharist…

God spiritually recalls to life those that have died in Christ to instruct the faithful remnant that has survived the tribulation.—Antichrist and the End Times, pp. 79, 112

REIGN OF JUSTICE AND PEACE

This period is what has become known in Catholic tradition not only as "the Era of Peace," but as the "Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary," the "Reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus," the "Eucharistic Reign of Christ," the "period of peace" promised at Fatima, and the "new Pentecost." It’s as though all these various concepts and devotions are beginning to converge into one reality: a period of peace and justice.

It will at length be possible that our many wounds be healed and all justice spring forth again with the hope of restored authority; that the splendors of peace be renewed, and the swords and arms drop from the hand and when all men shall acknowledge the empire of Christ and willingly obey His word, and every tongue shall confess that the Lord Jesus is in the Glory of the Father. —Pope Leo XIII, Consecration to the Sacred Heart, May 1899

.....
Jesus alludes to such a time occurring at the end of the age (not the end of time). It would happen after those tribulations written of in Matthew 24:4-13, but before the final battle with evil.

…this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come. (vs 14)

It will bring about the unity of the churches; it will see the conversion of the Jewish people; and atheism in all it’s forms will cease until Satan is loosed for a short time before Christ returns to place all His enemies beneath His feet.

http://www.markmallett.com/blog/the-coming-era-of-peace/

 

Could not have said it better Garabandal! I too enjoyed Stephen's book. It did end with no hope for an era of long peace. I am no theoogian either, but I think that the era of peace that Our Lady of Fatima (1917) spoke of, could likely be the 25 years of peace our lady spoke of at La Sallette (1846), which will be brought to light in the upcoming years climaxing the 'age of Mary' (as St. Louis DeMontfort spoke of) with the 5th and final dogma on Mary and the crushing of Satan's head. Then ushering in the Second Coming of Christ sometime after the 25 years of peace of the Triumph of Mary's Immaculte Heart. It just seems to me that our Lord wants this upcoming victory to be known and celebrated via His mother for a perid of time.

I most certainly could be wrong, but I could see the 25 years of peace foretold at La Sallette ending as she foretold, thereby the world becoming worse then it is now, which then could usher in the 2nd coming of Christ. But I definately feel the long era of peace of 1000 years is a high probability at some point.

 

I admit to not having a clear direction here. As long as the TRIUMPH comes , I will be happy. But I think La Salette covers these times best .... A period of peace before Anti-Christ.

“This peace among men will be short-lived. Twenty-five years of plentiful harvests will make them forget that the sins of men are the cause of all the troubles on this earth.

“A forerunner of the Antichrist, with his troops gathered from several nations, will fight against the true Christ, the only Saviour of the world. He will shed much blood and will want to annihilate the worship of God to make himself be looked upon as a God.
According to St. Augustine, the “first resurrection” is of the souls being saved just after their death. These will wait with Christ until the Final Judgment when they will be reunited with their bodies, which is the “second resurrection.” The “first death” is that of the body, but the “second death” is that of the damned soul. St. Augustine states that the “1000 years” is a number symbolic of a long time, alluding to the time between the first advent of Christ, when the devil was “chained” (lessened and restrained) until the end times when he is unchained for a short time to seduce the nations. In other words, as we write, the “millennium” has passed, and Satan is now unchained. Satan himself and all Hell are now on earth, since 1940 according to some prophecies. He will be fully chained again during the Peace and then fully unchained one more time during the 3 ½ year reign of Antichrist.

The Peace will last only 25 years, according to the prophecy of Our Lady of La Salette, not 1000 years. Those who “reign with Christ a thousand years,” according to St. Augustine, are the souls of the elect who have died since the first Advent. They reign in Heaven with Christ awaiting the redemption of their bodies and complete happiness of body and soul at the Final Resurrection.

“But we look for new (read: “ renewed”) heavens and a new earth according to his promise in which justice dwelleth” (II Peter 3:13) Here the Peace is indicated. It is not the heavenly Jerusalem descending at the end of time in Apocalypse 21, 22. It is not an ethereal paradise of the saved where “we be always with the Lord” (I Thessalonians 4:16) For after the Peace most of the world will fall to Antichrist.

By erroneously combining the references to the final resurrection in I Thessalonians 4 and other such passages with those of the Rapture in Matthew 24 as referring to one event, an idea arose of the earthly reign of immortal saints enjoying heavenly paradisiacal bliss after a rapture. Combine this error of a paradise of the saved on earth with a literal interpretation of the 1000 year reign in Apocalypse, chapter 20, and the millenarian error is completed.

Once again it is helpful to see that Apocalypse chapter 20 is a quick, general summary of all Christian history, ending in the Last Judgment. In Apocalypse 20:7-11, the surrounding of the camp of the saints by Gog and Magog who have seduced the nations, and God’s destruction of those forces is a Summary of the Tribulation/Chastisement. But trying to make these lines into Russia attacking the modern secular State of Israel is obviously stretching the context. It involves a misinterpretation of “Israel” as a Jewish State, instead of as the Scriptural intention, the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ -- which the People of God (Israel) became upon Christ’s death in as much as they accepted Him as their Messiah.