Thanks, I appreciate the prompt response. I will state up front, I am presenting the Catholic view, to the best of my ability, and the view I am presenting I think is consistent with the Eastern Orthodox, and most Confessional Protestants (Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians, etc)
It is my understanding that the doctrine of the “rapture” was not taught in Traditional Christianity, and was not a doctrinal position of most Protestant Christianity until the 19th century. The “Rapture”, is most commonly associated with “Pre-millennialists Protestants”, since that branch of Protestantism gave the doctrine of the rapture much attention. From my Catholic background, my general understanding of this doctrine is that when Christ returns, all faithful Christians 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, for Pre-millenial Rapture supporters, I think, is St. Paul’s 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.”
Rapture-Pre-millennialists 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). I believe this period is often called the tribulation. Now, until the 19th century, all Christian Confessions agreed that the “rapture”, although it was not called by this term at this 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.
However, in the 1800s, some Protestant Ministers began to claim that the “rapture” would occur before the period of persecution. This position, now known as the “pre-tribulational” view, seemed to be first embraced by John Nelson Darby, an early leader of the Fundamentalist Protestant movement that became known as “Dispensationalism.” Darby’s view of the rapture was then adopted by a man named C.I. Scofield, who taught the rapture in the footnotes of his Scofield Reference Bible, which was widely distributed Protestant Commentary in England and America. Many Protestants who used the Scofield Reference Bible uncritically accepted what its footnotes said and adopted the pre-tribulational view as a major doctrine of their respective Protestant Tradition.
However, No Christian had ever heard of Darby and Scofield’s rapture doctrine in the previous 1800 years of Church history. Shortly thereafter, it seems a third position developed, known as the “mid-tribulational” view, which claims that the rapture will occur during the middle of the tribulation and finally, it now appears that 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.
I think many will agree that this confusion among Protestant Christians has caused much division, even among Protestant Christians, themselves; causing Church’s to split into camps labeling each other as heretical, etc.
So, I have described, I hope accurately, the Protestant Pre-millenial view, and other forms of the Rapture, charity dictates that I should provide a clear and non-polemical vie of the Catholic Church’s position.
From the Catholic perspective, and I would add also the Eastern Orthodox perspective as well as Traditional Confessional Protestants (Lutherans, Reformed, Calvinist, Presbyterians, etc) is that the problem with all of the positions (except the historic, post-tribulation view, which was accepted by all Christians, including non-premillennialists) is that they split the Second Coming of Christ 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. While some of the fathers writings imply a literal millennialism view, none of them agreed on what that meant, and none ever taught a doctrine similar to how the Rapture is taught today. One key Doctrinal point for why I state the Church Fathers did not teach the “rapture” is that none of them ever taught 3 comings of Christ. Origen, as the article linked above notes, clearly taught against the pre-millennial view, and St. Augustine, whose theology would be the bedrock of the Latin/Western Church clearly rejected it. This three-comings view of Christ is foreign to Scripture and Sacred Tradition, as no early Church Father ever taught such a view, nor is this view in any of the early Creeds of the Church (Apostles and Nicene) .
As far as the millennium goes, the Catholic Church agrees with the position of the early Church, as articulated by St. Augustine and, thus, with the a-millennialist view. The Catholic position has thus historically been “a millennial” (as has been the majority Christian position in general, including that of the Protestant Reformers, such as Luther and Calvin), though Catholics do not typically use this term. The Church has rejected the pre-millennial position, sometimes called “millenarianism” For example, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (paragraph 676), it states:
“The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the “intrinsically perverse” political form of a secular messianism.
So again, the Catholic Church rejects pre-millennialism, which is the historic position of all of the Christian Tradition. Both of the Apostles Creed (2nd century Baptismal Creed of the Church of Rome) and Nicene Creed (325 AD), which is said at every Sunday Catholic Liturgy/Mass, as well as Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy, appears to reject pre-millenariansism, stating that Christ will return “to judge the living and the dead,” not to reign on earth for a thousand years and then judge the living and the dead. Since the Church is not pre-millennial, the question of a pre-trib Rapture does not arise, as pre-tribulationism is a variant of pre-millennialism.
Again, although the Catholic Church “does not” use the term rapture, the Church does acknowledge that there will be an event where the elect are gathered to be with Christ. Scripture clearly declares it as St. Paul writes:
“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. (1 Thess. 4:16–17)
The point of contention is the timing of this event: The Catholic Church believes it occurs at the Second Coming, not several years before it. This interpretation is entirely consistent with the teaching in the Apostles Creed (circa 200 AD) Nicene Creed (325 AD). This is indicated by Paul’s reference to it taking place when Christ descends from heaven: the Second Coming. Scripture does not envision the Second Coming accomplishing the Rapture, followed by a “Third Coming” inaugurating the eternal order or the Millennium.
I think this is a sensitive point for Rapture-Dispensationalists, who try to overcome the “Third Coming” problem by arguing that the Rapture and the final coming of Jesus are simply “two phases of one coming.” However, this seems to me, and others, as a rationalization. If Jesus comes to die for our sins, goes back to heaven, comes again to rapture his followers, goes back to heaven, and then years later comes again to slay the Antichrist, then that is three comings, not two.
Again, what does the Catholic Church say about the Millennium? It has not authoritatively addressed the issue of a-millennialism and post-millennialism in an Ecumenical Council. Furthermore, the Catholic Church, nor the Eastern Orthodox, do not even use those terms. But it is clear that the Church adheres to what has been the dominant view throughout Christian history—that the Millennium is going on now. It equals or is roughly equal to the Christian age.
Does this mean that the Catholic Church believes that there is no reign of Christ? No. Christ is reigning now, from heaven as the eternal King of Kings. For example, in Catholic Liturgy, the last Sunday of the Liturgical Year, which is the Sunday before the Holy Season of Advent, is referred to as “The Feast of Christ the King”. This feast, in the context of Liturgy, clearly is teaching the faithful that Christ is already reigning. As Chirst told the apostles, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matt. 28:18). And, discussing the resurrection of the dead, St Paul explains:
“But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. (1 Cor. 15:20–26, emphasis added)
The destruction of death involves the resurrection of the dead—all of the dead, not just some dead, or death would not have been destroyed. This occurs in Revelation 20:13–14, which is after the Millennium (cf. Rev. 20:1–6).
Thus Christ reigns—along with the saints (cf. Rev. 20:4–6)—in heaven, and this reign is extended on earth through the Church, which is an expression of the mystery of the kingdom of God (cf. Luke 17:20–21) and the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 3: 15). The Church is described by St. Paul as the body of Christ (1 Cor 12: 12-14), the Bride of Christ (Eph 5: 26-27) and by St. Peter as the People of God (1 Pet 2: 9-10). Since Christ has one Body, and One Bride, and one people, and since God is a God of perfect communion (Holy Trinity), then Christ is not only reigning in Heaven, he is reigning here on earth through his body, the Church. In closing, we are presently living in the golden age of Christ’s reign, because he has become incarnate and revealed the Truths of God to humanity.
So as not to fly a false flag, I am not a chr*stian (though I used to be). I am a Noachide who regards the idea of a non-literal "spiritual messiah" as one of the most harmful ideas that has ever come into existence.
I am serious about that. Don't like music? There are quite a few pre Nicene Fathers who viewed all music as the work of pagans (which at the time was probably true). Don't like the rich? There are a few who demanded you surrender literally everything to be a Christian.
So that there were a lot of premill Christians isn't surprising. St. Paul talks of them, and basically says for them to stop starring at the sky and get to work! See, there were a great many who thought Jesus was coming very soon, and didn't want to work in the mean time.