Ok To Believe Vatican May 1 Day Become Whore Of Babylon?

[Nihil Obstat]

They say that at the height of the Arian crisis, most of the world's bishops were Arian heretics. Certainly the hierarchy could become largely corrupted.

The Church will always remain faithful though. It just might be a bit more difficult to find.

 

The gates of hell can never prevail against the Church, but they are permitted minor, temporary victories. Look at North Korea. There is no Church in North Korea. The priests are dead, the bishop of Pyongyang disappeared sometime after 1949, and nobody has seen him since. Yet even though the Church in North Korea is temporarily defeated, the Church across the world will always have the final victory.

[Nihil Obstat]

Such confidence is overtly presumptuous ;)

Not according to faithful readings of approved private revelations. I do not wish to sound stubborn, but the fact of the matter is that if we look at the vast corpus of approved private prophesy, the initial conditions which point to the start of the Minor Chastisement simply are not present, nor anywhere near. Not to mention that the age of peace which follows the Minor Chastisement could last decades, even centuries. The end times are not upon us. We do not know when they are, but right now we can know some things about when they are not.

[mortify ii]

Not according to faithful readings of approved private revelations. I do not wish to sound stubborn, but the fact of the matter is that if we look at the vast corpus of approved private prophesy, the initial conditions which point to the start of the Minor Chastisement simply are not present, nor anywhere near. Not to mention that the age of peace which follows the Minor Chastisement could last decades, even centuries. The end times are not upon us. We do not know when they are, but right now we can know some things about when they are not.

 

You're probably right about the corpus of private revelation, and I would be interested in knowing what particular events you are looking for, but just to clarify I'm not referring to the End times with a capital "E". Rather I'm referring to a chastisement, whether this is the minor chastisement that leads up to apocalyptic events you refer to above, I do not know. What I am fairly certain in is that we are facing a current chastisement, and it's not based on any specific sign I was expecting to see based on a private revelation, but simply by the current crisis the Church is facing. God is not simply permitting it, but positively willing it. I know I'm probably coming across as that destitute old man you see in movies holding the sign saying, "The End is Nigh!" but it seems a sober reflection on our current reality would bring one to that conclusion. Hopefully I am just that crazy man, and what we are instead facing is an actual renewal, but I honestly don't know. Whatever the Lord wills let it be, I just know I need to better myself to make myself more worthy of the title of Christian.
 

[Nihil Obstat]

It would actually have been more correct for me to have said that we are certainly not currently in the midst of the minor chastisement, therefore nowhere near the Major Chastisement and the time of the Antichrist.

The first sign will be that most of the world falls away from the faith, then the world will go to war. Then we might speculate that the minor chastisement is at hand.

[mortify ii]

It would actually have been more correct for me to have said that we are certainly not currently in the midst of the minor chastisement, therefore nowhere near the Major Chastisement and the time of the Antichrist.

The first sign will be that most of the world falls away from the faith, then the world will go to war. Then we might speculate that the minor chastisement is at hand.

 

Well I take it Nihil that you don't believe we are currently in a crisis. I look at our situation and feel that most have lost the faith, and turning on the television is a constant reminder that wars of worldwide potential may be looming. But again, I suppose it all depends on perspective, I may be that silly crazy guy people point at and laugh after all :)

[Ed Normile]

What was said, it will come like a thief in the night. I truly feel that all should be more worried about their "end times" which could be tomorrow even for one as young as FP or for an old clown like me. We never know what life has in store for us, in a state of grace we do not have to worry if the end times is for the church in toto or if its just our personal end times as we just stepped in front of  bus or took a major heart attack. Remember the Book of Reveleations is written in an apopalyptic style, and trying to take it literally is a mistake that far too many people engage in.

 

ed 

Edited December 13, 2013 by Ed Normile

[Nihil Obstat]

Well I take it Nihil that you don't believe we are currently in a crisis. I look at our situation and feel that most have lost the faith, and turning on the television is a constant reminder that wars of worldwide potential may be looming. But again, I suppose it all depends on perspective, I may be that silly crazy guy people point at and laugh after all :)

Certainly I believe we are in a crisis. But it is not the crisis, so to speak. We are not currently in the minor chastisement, and certainly not the Major. We might say in a more colloquial sense that we are experiencing chastisements in a general way, but not those pointed out in prophesy.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Just be open to the will of God in your life mortify. You don't have to better yourself, you have to allow God to do so, as i am sure you are to the best of your given lot at this present time, hopefully. I believe Holiness is a journey not necessarily a destination, for truly only God is always correct and absolutely perfect in all things. Also may i suggest if television over excites you to some degree whether up or down praying about slowly reducing your amount of T.V including the news and eventually stopping it all together, if it is the will of God for you. I can handle maybe 1 hour of t.v on the odd occasion, it's all geared to excite even the news it is not just plain old news, it's designed to excite people whether the t.v media is doing this willingly or un willingly, when we as Christians need to be at peace in faith, hope and love and not over excited. I would just grab a reputable news paper if you can read and wan't to keep up with the news even a few versions each day, but even than don't believe absolutely everything you read in it 100%, some, half or most editors and journalists sometimes, half the time or most of the time add some chilli to the meat and potatoes when the dish was only meat and potatoes which than can mis lead people into thinking and believing that the original dish was meat, potatoes and chilli when it was only meat and potatoes, though the chilli was on the table it wasn't part of the dish. Does that make any sense. I hope i have made sense with this, sorry i'm a bit stupid sometimes in my explanation of things mortify, please forgive.

 

Onward christian souls.

 

JESUS is LORD.

 

P.s. I like the topic, what,who or where is the whore of Babylon and what does she represent and what does she actually do. Nice. Also the book of the apocalypse never damns her to hell either, the beast, the false prophet the anti christ and the army of the anti christ according to the book of the apocalypse are said to be being cast into the eternal hell. Correct me if i'm wrong peoples. :)

Edited December 13, 2013 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[NotreDame]

I grew up with a mother that would stress about the end of the world when I was a kid and talk about all sorts of hokey prophesy and, baed on my experience and those of other friends/family who experienced the same, that's a horrible thing to do to a child.  It certainly does not help a kid's faith to be immersed in some sort of fatalistic, uninformed paranoia (which it will be to the child, who does not have sufficient maturity or spiritual foundation to understand it as anything else.)   All of you worried about end-times stuff... Please, never share these concerns with your kids, or if you do so, do it on a very, very limited basis.

 

All that being said, if you want a great blog on prophecy check out this guy:

 

http://unveilingtheapocalypse.blogspot.com/

 

He's constantly referencing old points, so you'll need to go back to the beginning and read all the posts going forward in the proper order to get it.

[blazeingstar]

We may be nearer to the endtimes than were the Apostles, but we are not 'near' in the sense of a few more years, or even a few more decades. At this point there is no way to determine how 'near' we in fact are.

We will be able to make some general estimates when certain things start happening, none of which have begun to happen.

 

My point wasn't to emphasize that the end is near, but just that it is "nearer" than it was before, and it is not unreasonable to think that the Benedict/Francis split, especally with the SSPX and FSPX crowds and other more victrolic TLM followers will cause a major rift, the makings of which can be clearly seen already.  I think that this fracturing is an additional chink in the armor weither or not it is another 500 years before another split.

 

This guy?

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmarian_Catholic_Church

 

Good grief, no that wasn't who I was talking about, but that does prove my point.

I should have been clearer that I wasn't questioning his reasons for leaving.  I was just reflecting on, given the different styles of CA vs PM, I'd take the latter.

 

CAF has a different mission and duty and is also hevily trolled.  They have banned many topics beucase the trolls are very vicious and take up moderators time as well as drive good members away.  The trolls who come to PM are not nearly as bad or as frequent.

[tinytherese]

I've taken college level Church history classes and an ecclesiology class (theology of the Church). I've learned that there has never been a time in the Church that was free from scandal. The Church has been through many problems, continues to have many problems, and will have many problems until the world ends.

 

Instead of worrying ourselves sick about the state of the Church and looking into sketchy conspiracy theories, pray for Church and encourage others to pray for it.

 

 

²⁶ Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? ²⁷ And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life?^{[f] 28} And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; ²⁹ yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.

 

³⁰ But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little faith? ³¹ Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ ³² For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.

 

³³ But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well.³⁴ â€œTherefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Let the day’s own trouble be sufficient for the day.   (Matt 6: 26-34)

 

 

"Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour" (Matt 25:13). We don't know when the end of the world is coming and we're not supposed to know when it'll happen. We're just supposed to be ready for it in case it ever happens in our lifetime. As Ed mentioned, we're also supposed to be ready to meet our Maker.

[Eliakim]

Phellow Pholks oph the Phorum,

 

The thread is deviating. 

 

Please keep to the original question which essentially boils down to this:

 

Apostate means turning away from the true faith: this only qualifies the Roman Catholic Church, for what other Church would fit the description of falling away from the true faith into apostasy in the last days?  Therefore when Revelation says there will be a "whore" on "babylon/seven hills", how can it *not* apply to the Roman Catholic Church, at least the exterior or "official validly ordained majority hierarchy" seated at the Vatican? 

 

Christ's promise the gates of hades will not prevail applies to the true believers/body of Christ, not the Vatican...let's not confuse the two as indissoluble. 

 

Tinytherese, no one disputes there were always scandals in the Church.  The question is deeper than this (and I would fervently argue the amount of paedophoelia coverups brought to light are far beyond "scandal" and wade into the realm of "rotten to the core").  In fact the question is important in helping one be vigilant enough to avoid deception whenever the last days do come. 

 

E

[NotreDame]

Eliakim - thread's here deviate and tend to take on multiple conversations at once.  So no chance of keeping them 100% on topic, but it's fair to re-ask your question or steer your particular conversation back to the original.

 

TinyTherese - I like your approach in regards to eschatology, but not in regards to scandal.  When faced with scandal in the church, we should do much more than pray:

 

“It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly.”
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 45

 

“Augustine says in his Rule: ‘Show mercy not only to yourselves, but also to him who, being in the higher position among you, is therefore in greater danger.’ But fraternal correction is a work of mercy. Therefore even prelates ought to be corrected.”
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4, Sed Contra.

“It is better that scandals arise than the truth be suppressed.”
Pope St. Gregory the Great 6

“But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: ‘Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.’”
Pope Leo XIII7

 

More here:

 

http://www.stpeterslist.com/7334/the-path-to-hell-is-paved-with-the-skulls-of-bishops-8-quotes-and-sources/

[cmaD2006]

Phellow Pholks oph the Phorum,

 

The thread is deviating. 

 

 

Welcome Eliakim to Phatmass!

 

As Notre Dame said ... threads on Phatmass are allowed to deviate as this one did.  And in fact the whole discussion stayed true to whether or not the end times are near, so it deviated but the deviation was quite related to the original discussion.

 

I do need to say this -- trolls still can get banned on Phatmass.  The key is how the discussion goes -- and if this discussion becomes heated it may get moved to debate table.

 

Debate table is where serious debating (but not personal attacking -- that isn't allowed) occurs.

 

BTW I am a mod (those with the "Regulator of Phatmass" are moderators on the phorum).  There are currently three mods and dUSt (the phorum-master).

[tinytherese]

No one here is saying that we shouldn't want to correct scandal nor that we should be complacent about scandal. 

 

Regarding the theory that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon here are two articles on the subject:

 

Hunting the Whore of Babylon

Some anti-Catholics claim the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18. Dave Hunt, in his 1994 book, A Woman Rides the Beast, presents nine arguments to try to prove this. His claims are a useful summary of those commonly used by Fundamentalists, and an examination of them shows why they don’t work. 

 

#1: Seven Hills

 

Hunt argues that the Whore "is a city built on seven hills," which he identifies as the seven hills of ancient Rome. This argument is based on Revelation 17:9, which states that the woman sits on seven mountains. 

 

The Greek word in this passage is horos. Of the sixty-five occurrences of this word in the New Testament, only three are rendered "hill" by the King James Version. The remaining sixty-two are translated as "mountain" or "mount." Modern Bibles have similar ratios. If the passage states that the Whore sits on "seven mountains," it could refer to anything. Mountains are common biblical symbols, often symbolizing whole kingdoms (cf. Ps. 68:15; Dan. 2:35; Amos 4:1, 6:1; Obad. 8–21). The Whore’s seven mountains might be seven kingdoms she reigns over, or seven kingdoms with which she has something in common. 

 

The number seven may be symbolic also, for it often represents completeness in the Bible. If so, the seven mountains might signify that the Whore reigns over all earth’s kingdoms. 

 

Even if we accept that the word horos should be translated literally as "hill" in this passage, it still does not narrow us down to Rome. Other cities are known for having been built on seven hills as well. 

 

Even if we grant that the reference is to Rome, which Rome are we talking about—pagan Rome or Christian Rome? As we will see, ancient, pagan Rome fits all of Hunt’s criteria as well, or better, than Rome during the Christian centuries. 

 

Now bring in the distinction between Rome and Vatican City—the city where the Catholic Church is headquartered—and Hunt’s claim becomes less plausible. Vatican City is not built on seven hills, but only one: Vatican Hill, which is not one of the seven upon which ancient Rome was built. Those hills are on the east side of the Tiber river; Vatican Hill is on the west. 

 

#2: "Babylon"—What’s in a Name?

 

Hunt notes that the Whore will be a city "known as Babylon." This is based on Revelation 17:5, which says that her name is "Babylon the Great." 

 

The phrase "Babylon the great" (Greek: Babulon a megala) occurs five times in Revelation (14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2, and 18:21). Light is shed on its meaning when one notices that Babylon is referred to as "the great city" seven times in the book (16:19, 17:18, 18:10, 16, 18, 19, 21). Other than these, there is only one reference to "the great city." That passage is 11:8, which states that the bodies of God’s two witnesses "will lie in the street of the great city, which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified." 

 

"The great city" is symbolically called Sodom, a reference to Jerusalem, symbolically called "Sodom" in the Old Testament (cf. Is. 1:10; Ezek. 16:1–3, 46–56). We also know Jerusalem is the "the great city" of Revelation 11:8 because the verse says it was "where [the] Lord was crucified." 

 

Revelation consistently speaks as if there were only one "great city" ("the great city"), suggesting that the great city of 11:8 is the same as the great city mentioned in the other seven texts—Babylon. Additional evidence for the identity of the two is the fact that both are symbolically named after great Old Testament enemies of the faith: Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon. 

 

This suggests that Babylon the great may be Jerusalem, not Rome. Many Protestant and Catholic commentators have adopted this interpretation. On the other hand, early Church Fathers often referred to Rome as "Babylon," but every references was to pagan Rome, which martyred Christians. 

 

#3: Commits Fornication

 

Hunt tells us, "The woman is called a ‘whore’ (verse 1), with whom earthly kings ‘have committed fornication’ (verse 2). Against only two cities could such a charge be made: Jerusalem and Rome." 

Here Hunt admits that the prophets often referred to Jerusalem as a spiritual whore, suggesting that the Whore might be apostate Jerusalem. Ancient, pagan Rome also fits the description, since through the cult of emperor worship it also committed spiritual fornication with "the kings of the earth" (those nations it conquered). 

 

To identify the Whore as Vatican City, Hunt interprets the fornication as alleged "unholy alliances" forged between Vatican City and other nations, but he fails to cite any reasons why the Vatican’s diplomatic relations with other nations are "unholy." 

 

He also confuses Vatican City with the city of Rome, and he neglects the fact that pagan Rome had "unholy alliances" with the kingdoms it governed (unholy because they were built on paganism and emperor worship). 

 

#4: Clothed in Purple and Red

 

Hunt states, "She [the Whore] is clothed in ‘purple and scarlet’ (verse 4), the colors of the Catholic clergy." He then cites the Catholic Encyclopedia to show that bishops wear certain purple vestments and cardinals wear certain red vestments. 

 

Hunt ignores the obvious symbolic meaning of the colors—purple for royalty and red for the blood of Christian martyrs. Instead, he is suddenly literal in his interpretation. He understood well enough that the woman symbolizes a city and that the fornication symbolizes something other than literal sex, but now he wants to assign the colors a literal, earthly fulfillment in a few vestments of certain Catholic clergy. 

 

Purple and red are not the dominant colors of Catholic clerical vestments. White is. All priests wear white (including bishops and cardinals when they are saying Mass)—even the pope does so.

The purple and scarlet of the Whore are contrasted with the white of the New Jerusalem, the Bride of Christ (Rev. 19:8). This is a problem for Hunt for three reasons: (a) we have already noted that the dominant color of Catholic clerical vestments is white, which would identify them with New Jerusalem if the color is taken literally; (b) the clothing of the Bride is given a symbolic interpretation ("the righteous acts of the saints;" 19:8); implying that the clothing of the Whore should also be given a symbolic meaning; and (c) the identification of the Bride as New Jerusalem (Rev. 3:12, 21:2, 10) suggests that the Whore may be old (apostate) Jerusalem—a contrast used elsewhere in Scripture (Gal. 4:25–26). 

 

Hunt ignores the liturgical meaning of purple and red in Catholic symbolism. Purple symbolizes repentance, and red honors the blood of Christ and the Christian martyrs. 

 

It is appropriate for Catholic clerics to wear purple and scarlet, if for no other reason because they have been liturgical colors of the true religion since ancient Israel. 

 

Hunt neglects to remind his readers that God commanded that scarlet yarn and wool be used in liturgical ceremonies (Lev. 14:4, 6, 49–52; Num. 19:6), and that God commanded that thepriests’ vestments be made with purple and scarlet yarn (Ex. 28:4–8, 15, 33, 39:1–8, 24, 29). 

 

#5: Possesses Great Wealth

 

Hunt states, "[The Whore’s] incredible wealth next caught John’s eye. She was ‘decked with gold and precious stones and pearls . . . ’ [Rev. 17:4]." The problem is that, regardless of what it had in the past, the modern Vatican is not fantastically wealthy. In fact, it has run a budget deficit in most recent years and has an annual budget only around the size of that of the Archdiocese of Chicago. Furthermore, wealth was much more in character with pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem, both key economic centers. 

 

#6: A Golden Cup

 

Hunt states that the Whore "has ‘a golden cup [chalice] in her hand, full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication.’" This is another reference to Revelation 17:4. Then he states that the "Church is known for its many thousands of gold chalices around the world." 

 

To make the Whore’s gold cup suggestive of the Eucharistic chalice, Hunt inserts the word "chalice" in square brackets, though the Greek word here is the ordinary word for cup (potarion), which appears thirty-three times in the New Testament and is always translated "cup." 

 

He ignores the fact that the Catholic chalice is used in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper—a ritual commanded by Christ (Luke 22:19–20; 1 Cor. 11:24–25); he ignores the fact that the majority of Eucharistic chalices Catholics use are not made out of gold, but other materials, such as brass, silver, glass, and even earthenware; he ignores the fact that gold liturgical vessels and utensils have been part of the true religion ever since ancient Israel—again at the command of God (Ex. 25:38–40, 37:23–24; Num. 31:50–51; 2 Chr. 24:14); and he again uses a literal interpretation, according to which the Whore’s cup is not a single symbol applying to the city of Rome, but a collection of many literal cups used in cities throughout the world. But Revelation tells us that it’s the cup of God’s wrath that is given to the Whore (Rev. 14:10; cf. Rev. 18:6). This has nothing to do with Eucharistic chalices. 

 

#7: The Mother of Harlots

 

Now for Hunt’s most hilarious argument: "John’s attention is next drawn to the inscription on the woman’s forehead: ‘THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH’ (verse 5, [Hunt’s emphasis]). Sadly enough, the Roman Catholic Church fits that description as precisely as she fits the others. Much of the cause is due to the unbiblical doctrine of priestly celibacy," which has "made sinners of the clergy and harlots out of those with whom they secretly cohabit." 

 

Priestly celibacy is not a doctrine but a discipline—a discipline in the Latin Rite of the Church—and even this rite has not always been mandatory. This discipline can scarcely be unbiblical, since Hunt himself says, "The great apostle Paul was a celibate and recommended that life to others who wanted to devote themselves fully to serving Christ." 

 

Hunt has again lurched to an absurdly literal interpretation. He should interpret the harlotry of the Whore’s daughters as the same as their mother’s, which is why she is called their mother in the first place. This would make it spiritual or political fornication or the persecution of Christian martyrs (cf. 17:2, 6, 18:6). Instead, Hunt gives the interpretation of the daughters as literal, earthly prostitutes committing literal, earthly fornication. 

 

If Hunt did not have a fixation on the King James Version, he would notice another point that identifies the daughters’ harlotries with that of their mother: The same Greek word (porna) is used for both mother and daughters. The King James Version translates this word as "whore" whenever it refers to the mother, but as "harlot" when it refers to the daughters. Modern translations render it consistently. John sees the "great harlot" (17:1, 15, 16, 19:2) who is "the mother of harlots" (17:5). The harlotries of the daughters must be the same as the mother’s, which Hunt admits is not literal sex! 

 

#8: Sheds the Blood of Saints

 

Hunt states, "John next notices that the woman is drunk—not with alcohol but with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus . . . [cf. verse 6]." He then advances charges of brutality and killing by the Inquisitions, supposed forced conversions of nations, and even the Nazi holocaust! 

 

This section of the book abounds with historical errors, not the least of which is his implication that the Church endorses the forced conversion of nations. The Church emphatically does not do so. It has condemned forced conversions as early as the third century (before then they were scarcely even possible), and has formally condemned them on repeated occasions, as in theCatechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 160, 1738, 1782, 2106–7). 

 

But pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem do fit the description of a city drunk with the blood of saints and the martyrs of Jesus. And since they were notorious persecutors of Christians, the original audience would have automatically thought of one of these two as the city that persecutes Christians, not an undreamed-of Christian Rome that was centuries in the future. 

 

#9: Reigns over Kings

 

For his last argument, Hunt states, "Finally, the angel reveals that the woman ‘is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth’ (verse 18). Is there such a city? Yes, and again only one: Vatican City." 

 

This is a joke. Vatican City has no power over other nations; it certainly does not reign over them. In fact, the Vatican’s very existence has been threatened in the past two centuries by Italian nationalism. 

 

Hunt appeals to power the popes once had over Christian political rulers (neglecting the fact that this was always a limited authority, by the popes’ own admission), but at that time there was no Vatican City. The Vatican only became a separate city in 1929, when the Holy See and Italy signed the Lateran Treaty. 

 

Hunt seems to understand this passage to be talking about Vatican City, since the modern city of Rome is only a very minor political force. If the reign is a literal, political one, then pagan Rome fulfills the requirement far better than Christian Rome ever did. 

 

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

 

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

 

source http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

 

 

The Whore of Babylon

In another tract, Hunting the Whore of Babylon, we looked at nine arguments given by fundamentalist Dave Hunt for his claim that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon from Revelation 17–18. His arguments are typical of those used by fundamentalist anti-Catholics and are easily proven wrong. (See that tract for details). 

 

But we can go beyond a mere critique of the shallow anti-Catholic arguments like Hunt’s. There is irrefutable evidence in Revelation 17–18 (the chapters Fundamentalists love to quote against the Catholic Church) that proves that it is impossible for the Catholic Church to be the Whore.

 

A Vision in the Wilderness

 

When John introduces the Whore in Revelation 17, he tells us: "Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who is seated upon many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the dwellers on earth have become drunk.’ And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of b.asphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and bedecked with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: ‘Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations.’ And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly" (Rev. 17:1–6). 

 

This passage tells us several things about the Whore: (1) She is an international power, since she "sits on many waters," representing different peoples (17:15), and she has committed fornication with "the kings of the earth," and she has inflamed "the dwellers on earth" with her fornication. (2) She is connected with the seven-headed Beast from Revelation 13:1–10. That Beast was a major pagan empire, since its symbolism combined animal elements from four other major pagan empires (compare Rev. 13:1–2 with Dan. 7:1–8). (3) The Woman is connected with royalty, since she is dressed in the royal color purple. (4) The Woman is rich, for she is "bedecked with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup." (5) She has committed some kind of fornication, which in Scripture is often a symbol of false religion—lack of fidelity to the God who created heaven and earth. (6) She is symbolically known as Babylon. (7) She is a central cause of "abominations" in the land, abominations being a reference to practices, especially religious practices, that are offensive to God. And (8) she persecutes Christians "the saints and . . . martyrs of Jesus." 

 

While the rest of her description could refer to a number of things, the symbolic designation "Babylon" narrows it down to two: pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem. It is well known that the early Church Fathers referred to pagan Rome as "Babylon"; however, there are also indications in Revelation that the Whore might be apostate Jerusalem. Historically, a number of commentators, both Protestant and Catholic, have adopted this interpretation. 

 

The Seven Heads

 

Continuing in Revelation, the angel begins to explain to John the woman’s symbolism: "This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while" (Rev. 17:9–10). 

 

Fundamentalists argue that these seven mountains must be the seven hills of ancient Rome. However the Greek word here, horos, is almost always translated "mountain" in Scripture. Mountains are often symbols of kingdoms in Scripture (cf. Ps. 68:15; Dan. 2:35; Obad. 8–21; Amos 4:1, 6:1), which might be why the seven heads also symbolize seven kings. The mountains could stand for a series of seven kings, five of whom have already fallen. 

 

This passage gives us a key rule of Bible interpretation which is often denied by Fundamentalists: A symbol does not have to refer to one and only one thing. Here Scripture itself tells us that the heads refer both to seven mountains and seven kings, meaning the symbol has multiple fulfillments. Thus there is not a one-to-one correspondence in the Bible between symbols and their referents. 

Also, the mountains could be a reference to pagan Rome, yet the Whore could still be a reference to apostate Jerusalem. In this case, her sitting on the Beast would not indicate a geographical location but an alliance between the two powers. The Whore (Jerusalem) would be allied with the Beast (Rome) in persecuting "the saints and . . . martyrs of Jesus." (Note that the Whore also sits on many waters, which we are told are many peoples, [cf. 17:15]. The context makes it clear that here her "sitting" on something does not refer to a geographical location.) 

 

This passage gives us one reason why the Catholic Church cannot be the Whore. We are told that the heads "are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come." If five of these kings had fallen in John’s day and one of them was still in existence, then the Whore must have existed in John’s day. Yet Christian Rome and Vatican City did not. However, pagan Rome did have a line of emperors, and the majority of commentators see this as the line of kings to which 17:10 refers. Five of these emperors are referred to as having already fallen, one as still reigning in John’s time, and another yet to come. Since Jerusalem had no such line of kings in the first century, this gives us evidence that the Beast (though not the Whore) is Rome.

 

The Ten Horns

 

The angel also interprets for John the meaning of the Beast’s ten horns: "And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. These are of one mind and give over their power and authority to the beast; they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful" (17:12–14). 

 

This shows us that the Beast is allied with ten lower rulers and with their own territories. Some Fundamentalists bent on making this apply to modern times and the Catholic Church have argued that the horns refer to the European Community (EC) and a revived Roman empire with the Catholic Church at its head. The problem is that there are ten kings, but there are now manymore than ten nations in the EC. 

 

However, what we are told about the horns does fit one of the other candidates we have for the Whore—apostate Jerusalem. The angel tells John: "And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the harlot; they will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire, for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by being of one mind and giving over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled" (17:16–17). 

 

If the Whore is Jerusalem and the Beast is Rome (with the ten horns as vassal states), then the prophecy makes perfect sense. The alliance between the two in persecuting Christians broke down in A.D. 66–70, when Rome and its allied forces conquered Israel and then destroyed, sacked, and burned Jerusalem, just as Jesus prophesied (Luke 21:5–24). 

 

The Whore’s Authority

 

Finally the angel tells John: "And the woman that you saw is the great city which has dominion over the kings of the earth" (17:18). This again points to pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem. In the case of the former, the dominion would be political; in the case of the latter, it could be a number of things. It could be spiritual dominion in that Jerusalem held the religion of the true God. It could be a reference to the manipulation by certain Jews and Jewish leaders of gentiles into persecuting Christians. 

 

It could even be political, since Jerusalem was the center of political power in Canaan and, under the authority of the Romans, it ruled a considerable amount of territory and less powerful peoples. On this thesis "the kings of the earth" would be "the kings of the land" (the Greek phrase can be translated either way). Such local rulers of the land of Canaan would naturally resent Jerusalem and wish to cooperate with the Romans in its destruction—just as history records they did. Local non-Jewish peoples were used by the Romans in the capture of Jerusalem. 

 

The hub of world commerce

 

Continuing in chapter 18, John sees the destruction of the Whore, and a number of facts are revealed which also show that she cannot be the Catholic Church. For one, she is depicted as a major center of international trade and commerce. When it is destroyed in chapter 18, we read that "the merchants of the earth [or land] weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their cargo any more" (18:11) and "all shipmasters and seafaring men, sailors and all whose trade is on the sea . . . wept and mourned, crying out, ‘Alas, alas, for the great city, where all who had ships at sea grew rich by her wealth!’" (18:17–19). 

 

Pagan Rome was indeed the hub of world commerce in its day, supported by its maritime trading empire around the Mediterranean, but Christian Rome is not the hub of world commerce. After the Reformation, the economic center of power was located in Germany, Holland, England, and more recently, in the United States and Japan. 

 

Persecuting apostles and prophets

 

When the Whore falls we read, "‘Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you’. . . . In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth" (18:20, 24). This shows that the Whore persecuted not just Christians, but apostles and prophets. Apostles existed only in the first century, since one of the requirements for being an apostle was seeing the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1). Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27–28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10). 

 

Since the Whore persecuted apostles and prophets, the Whore must have existed in the first century. This totally demolishes the claim that Christian Rome or Vatican City is the Whore. Rome was not a Christian city at that time, and Vatican City did not even exist, so neither of them could be the Whore. Furthermore, Fundamentalists continually (though wrongly) claim that Catholicism itself did not exist in the first century, meaning that based on their very own argument Catholicism could not be the Whore! 

 

Fundamentalists are fond of conjecturing that in the last days there will be a "revived Roman empire," such as the one that persecuted Christians in the first century. Yet they never draw the inference that this empire would be headed by a revived pagan Rome, with the bishop of Rome leading the Christian underground, just as he did in the first century. 

 

Still, Revelation 18:20 and 18:24 prove that the Whore had to be a creature of the first century, which, in the Fundamentalist view, the Catholic Church was not. Thus, on their own view, their identification of the Catholic Church with the Whore is completely impossible! Only ancient, pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem could possibly be the Whore. 

 

If Not the Whore, the Bride

 

The fact that the Catholic Church is singled out by Fundamentalists as the Whore reveals that they intuit the fact it has an important role in God’s plan. No other church gets accused of being the Whore—only the Catholic Church. And it is understandable why: The Catholic Church is the largest Christian body, larger than all other Christian bodies put together, suggesting a prominent place in God’s plan. Fundamentalists assume, without objectively looking at the evidence, that the Catholic Church cannot be the Bride of Christ, so it must be the Whore of Babylon. 

 

Yet the evidence for its true role is plain. The First Vatican Council taught that "the Church itself . . . because of its marvelous propagation, its exceptional holiness, and inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works; because of its Catholic unity and invincible stability, is a very great and perpetual motive of credibility and an incontestable witness of its own divine mission" (On the Catholic Faith 3). 

 

So why is the Bride maligned as the Whore? Jesus himself answered the question: "If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household" (Matt. 10:25). "If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world . . . the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you" (John 15:18–20). 

 

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

 

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

 

source http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-whore-of-babylon

Edited December 15, 2013 by tinytherese