I was raised in a family which stressed the need for personal salvation, the imminent return of Jesus Christ and the impending doom of the Great Tribulation. We were fundamentalists, although we never used the term. Instead we called ourselves "Bible Christians." And our Bibles told us about the coming Rapture, the seven years of Tribulation which would follow and the triumphant victory of Christ at Armageddon. It all seemed very clear to us how the "end times" were going to play out.

I grew up during the 1970s, when the Cold War was raging, the energy crisis was escalating and the European Common Market was coming together just as the Book of Revelation said it would, at least according to the preachers we listened to and the books we read. While in junior high I read Hal Lindsey's The Late Great Planet Earth and There's A New World Coming, two of the biggest-selling books of the decade. I marvelled that so many people, including Catholics, could not see the coming of the Great Tribulation. Many sermons and Bible studies focused on the approaching Rapture, the return of Christ "in the clouds" to secretly take his Church, consisting of "true believers," up to heaven. Catholics and most mainline Protestants were not "true believers." The belief in the Rapture is rooted in the fourth and fifth chapters of 1 Thessalonians, which are placed into an elaborate chronology of "end time" events based on other passages from Revelation, Daniel and Matthew 24. Often the Rapture is called the "day of the Lord" which will come like "a thief in the night" (1 Thess. 5:2). After this secret removal of believers will come the rise of the AntiChrist and the implementation of the Mark of the Beast during seven years of Tribulation. At the end of those seven years will be the second coming of Christ and Armaggeddon, the final battle between good and evil. Particular attention is given to modern day Israel since it is believed these great events will finally come to pass in the generation immediately following Israel's reemergence as a nation. Then, after his second coming, Christ will set up his kingdom in Jerusalem and reinstate the sacrificial system of the Mosaic Covenant, including the sacrificing of animals in the Temple. This Millennial reign will last a thousand years.

For most Catholics, such beliefs about the future are usually quite foreign and even bizarre. Many are aware that certain Evangelical and "non-denominational" Bible churches hold puzzling views about the end of the world, but usually ignore them. Most people, regardless of denomination or church affiliation, are unfamiliar with the term "dispensationalism." Yet it is the common source for those groups who believe in the Rapture, the seven year Tribulation and the literal thousand year reign of Christ. Dispensational assumptions permeate much of American Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism and have shaped conservative American Protestant views of "church" and "organized Christianity" to an enormous degree. Dispensational methods of Scriptural interpretation have also greatly influenced conservative Protestantism over the past century, leaving an indelible mark on literally millions of American Protestants.

Most people who hold dispensational beliefs aren't not familiar with the history of those premises, assuming they are based in the Bible and have ancient roots. But dispensationalism is actually a rather recent arrival, having been around less than 200 years. The acknowledged father of dispensationalism is John Nelson Darby, an Irish lawyer who left his successful practice to become an Anglican priest. Born in 1800, Darby was a contemporary of John Henry Newman, the famous leader of the Oxford Movement in the 1830s who would later become Catholic and eventually a cardinal. While Newman's studies of Scripture and history led him to the Catholic Church, Darby's studies of Scripture, coupled with a disenchantment with mainstream Christian churches, led him to develop the idea of a "true" church and the apostasy of the established churches - especially the Catholic Church. He believed this true church was spiritual in character and should have no involvement in earthly affairs. He wrote that "that the church is properly heavenly, in its calling and relationship with Christ, forming no part of the course of events of the earth, which makes the rapture so simple and clear . . . Our [Christians'] calling is on high. Events are on earth." [1]

In 1827 Darby left the Anglican priesthood and by 1831 was among the leaders of the Plymouth Brethren, a "non-denominational" movement which denounced mainline Christianity. He began to teach that the true church would need to be removed from the earth in order to make way for the completion of God's dealings with the Jews. He named this secret removal of the church the Rapture. This belief was something completely new in Christianity. No previous Christian, Catholic and Protestant alike, had ever proposed or taught about such an event.

Darby, in keeping with the millennarianism so popular in Britian at that time, created a timeline which broke history into "dispensations," either six or seven in number. These indicated various ages in which God dealt with humans in distinct ways. Dispensations were "administrations" through which God tested humans and proved their utter sinfulness before him. For Darby the church formed a parenthesis between the dispensation of the Gentiles (before Christ) and the coming dispensation of the Kingdom. We currently live in this dispensation of the church, which began during the ministry of the Apostle Paul. It is an era of grace in which the rejected Messiah is building up his heavenly people, the Christians. Meanwhile, God's real issue in human history is with his earthly people, the Israelites. The Rapture will be the necessary removal of the heavenly people from the world so that God's work with the earthly people might be finished.

The history of the Plymouth Brethren in England was marked by serious internal conflict and division, but their belief in the Rapture and opposition to "apostasy" attracted many followers. This influence spread to America in the mid-1800s where the Brethren's rejection of the growing liberalism within Protestantism took immediate root. They affirmed a strict literal reading of Scripture and taught with a strong evangelistic fervor. Darby visited the United States and Canada several times between 1862 and 1878, and his lectures and writings became fairly popular. Especially important was his influence among established denominations such as Presbyterians, Baptists and Methodists. The weakness of mainline Protestant churches in the United States allowed dispensationalism to become both "non-denominational" and still spread rapidly throughout major denominations in America. A series of Bible studies developed in New York state and eventually gave birth to the Niagara Conferences, which convened between 1883 and 1897. These conferences were attended by people from a variety of denominations who came to study the Scripture, particularly Biblical prophecy. American and British leaders of the loosely knit dispensational viewpoint presented their respective views about the biblical prophecy, the dispensations and the Gospel.

Dispensationalism at the end of the 19th century still possessed a variety of viewpoints, with many key issues still unresolved and heavily debated. Cyrus I. Scofield, a Kansas City lawyer, would change that by cementing the way dispensationalism would be understood for the next few decades. Having gained a reputation as a speaker and leader during the Niagara Conferences, Scofield (who had no formal theological training) decided he would create a "study Bible" containing extensive notes, cross references and commentary so that the "scientific" nature of the dispensations and biblical prophecy would be evident to the average layman. After several year's labor and with the assistance of a group of editors, the Scofield Reference Bible (King James Version) was published in 1909. Presented in a neatly organized and systematic manner, its dispensational premises regarding key passages of Scripture - especially books like Daniel and Revelation - entered into the mainstream of conservative American Protestantism. In the thirty years following publication, Scofield's reference Bible sold about two million copies. It is still used widely today, along with the updated version, the New Scofield Reference Bible (1967).

Scofield largely followed Darby's teaching in outlining his seven dispensations: Innocence (Adam), Conscience (to the Flood), Human Government (Gentiles after flood), Promise (Abraham to Moses), Law (Moses to Christ), Grace (Church), and future Kingdom. In his 1896 work, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth, Scofield explained the significance of these different time periods:

"The Scriptures divide time...into seven unequal periods, usually called 'Dispensations' (Eph. 3:2), although these periods are also called 'ages' (Eph. 2:7) and 'days' -as, 'day of the Lord,' etc. These periods are marked off in Scripture by some change in God's method of dealing with mankind, in respect of two questions: of sin, and of man's responsibility. Each of the dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment-marking his utter failure in every dispensation. Five of these dispensations, or periods of time, have been fulfilled; we are living in the sixth, probably toward its close, and have before us the seventh, and last - the millennium." [2]

Scofield taught that Scripture contains passages meant for each respective time period and that many passages had nothing to do with present day Christians in the "Church Age." This meant that most of Christ's teachings, including the Sermon on the Mount, were for the future Kingdom age, not for the Church! William Pettingill, an editor of The Scofield Reference Bible, claimed "The Sermon on the Mount, then, is not the way of salvation for the sinner. Neither is it the rule of life for the Christian . . . He [Christ] has not neglected to give to His church ample directions for her guidance, but these directions are not to be found in the Sermon on the Mount. The Sermon on the Mount is pure law . . ." [3] This was another radical break from 1900 years of Christian teaching which had always placed great emphasis on the importance of the Gospels and the centrality of the Beatitudes, which were always considered normative for growth in the Christian faith. But for the dispensationalist the writings of Paul became normative for the "church age." In this regard, Scofield's teachings bear a strong resemblance to those of Marcion, the third century heretic who insisted on an absolute break between the Old and New Testaments and who held Paul's writings to be the central works of Christianity.

After Scofield's death in 1921, his pupil and colleague Lewis Sperry Chafer took up the dispensational torch. Chafer, like Scofield, had no formal theological training, a fact he took apparent pride in. He also was a popular speaker and was tireless in his efforts to spread dispensational beliefs throughout America. In 1924 he helped found what would become Dallas Theological Seminary in Texas, which, along with Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, was to be a major center of dispensational teaching. Building upon Scofield's work, Chafer would further systematize dispensational theology, writing an eight volume Systematic Theology and a number of other books and articles. Chafer reiterated the absolute distinction made between Israel and the Church in his book titled Dispensationalism: "The dispensationalist believes that through the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity." [4]

His Systematic Theology was a massive attempt to relate every area of theology to the dispensational understanding of such distinctions. For Chafer this was imperative if the Gospel was going to be preached correctly. He insisted that unless a person held dispensationalist beliefs they were doomed to teach a false Gospel: "How many even sincere men can preach an uncomplicated gospel sermon? No man can be trusted to do this until he is dispensationally instructed...The great expositors of this and past generations are such because they are thoroughly established in these essential distinctions." [5] This provided the basis for a consistent anti-Catholic perspective which ran through Chafer's writings, as indicated by his references to "Romanism" and "Romish" beliefs.

After Chafer's death in 1951, the torch of Dispensational thought was carried by Charles Ryrie, a highly popular professor at Dallas Theological Seminary. Ryrie wrote several books on a variety of topics, but the most important was his 1965 apologetic for the dispensational movement, titled Dispensationalism Today. In large part it was a response to some severe attacks on dispensationalism by various Protestant writers, most of them from the Reformed branch of Protestantism. Ryrie stated that the indispensible belief of a dispensationalist is that he "keeps Israel and the Church distinct." [6] He further contended that "The time of her [Church] existence is distinctive to this present dispensation, which makes the Church distinct from Israel and not a new spiritual Israel." [7]

Ryrie stressed the distinct interpretative method of dispensationalism. He popularized the unique method of Biblical interpretation Scofield had outlined in his writings. Defending his stance regarding the Church and Israel, Ryrie wrote:

"This distinction between Israel and the Church is born out of a system of hermeneutics which is usually called literal interpretation...The word literal is perhaps not so good as either the word normal or plain, but in any case it is interpretation that does not spiritualize or allegorize as nondispensational interpretation does..." [8]

This so-called "literal" approach to Scripture was - and still is - very appealing to many people. The complexity of Scripture is apparently made "plain" and easy to understand with the dispensational method. Much of the untidiness and obscurity of the Bible is made understandable; each portion of Scripture is matched with its proper dispensation, allowing the reader to focus on those passages meant for them as Christians in the current dispensation of grace. And the events of the "end times" are supposedly made clear and understandable for everyone, if only they will listen.

Anticipation of the Rapture and the beginning of the end grew in the 1940s and 50s. And the upheaval of the late 1960s and early 1970s presented a great opportunity for someone with a skill for popular writing and a background in the dispensationalist focus on "end times." That someone was Hal Lindsey, a former Dallas Theological Seminary student. Beginning in the early 1970s Lindsey published a series of books, including The Late Great Planet Earth, Satan is Alive and Well and There's a New World Coming. These books contained his version of soon to occur apocalyptic events as seen through the lens of a popularized dispensationalism. Although some dispensationalists were not entirely supportive of Lindsey, his books would prove to be among the biggest selling books of the decade (selling some 35 million copies) and among the most influential as well.

Lindsey used a canny mix of paranoia, current events, selective use of Scripture and a sci-fi style to convey his vision of impending doom. Lindsey claimed that many Biblical prophecies were being fulfilled right before our eyes: the restoration of Israel as a nation, the "apostasy" of mainline churches, the complete collapse of morality and the frightening realities of the Cold War. He interpreted the destructive visions of The Book of Revelation as scenes of nuclear war. Unlike dispensationalists of the past, Lindsey did not locate the Whore of Babylon in the Catholic Church; it was instead a global network of New Age religions consolidated under the AntiChrist.

Lindsey stayed true to the Darbyite view of "church" and emphasized the non-denominational character of "real" Christianity. He claimed that the word church referred to a "group of people that is called together for some special purpose . . . Sometimes it refers to all true believers in Jesus Christ. It doesn't make any difference what religious 'brand' they're under as long as they're in a living union with Christ through a personal faith in Him as their Saviour." [9] Any understanding of the Church as the family of God, with a visible presence and structure, is ignored or rejected, replaced with the individualistic and subjective stance so common in Fundamentalism.

The 1970s and 80s witnessed a huge proliferation of books, tapes and assorted media presenting elaborate explanations of current events in light of Biblical prophecy. Intricate and convoluted arguments were used to locate the true AntiChrist and diagram the involved military actions leading up to Armageddon. However, with the fall of the Soviet Union and the arrival of rapidly changing global politics, people like Lindsey had to revise their futuristic blueprints. The changes brought on by a computerized world linked through internet technology have become their focus for calculating possible end-time events. Lindsay continues to put out books and has a regular television program which focuses on the Y2K bug as the most likely trigger for his "end times" scenarios. His paranoid and sloppy style has been copied by numerous writers and speakers, such as Pat Robertson, each claiming to have the key insight into the final days of the world.

While the past few years have brought many attacks on dispensationalism, its popularity continues. A striking example of this are the Left Behind books co-authored by Tim Lahaye and Jerry B. Jenkins (see "Waiting To Be Raptured" for a critique of these books). These Christian "End Time novels" have set a string of publishing records en route to selling millions of copies. Still, sharp attacks on dispensationalism by Reformed Protestants and a variety of other Evangelicals have occasionally put the movement on the defensive. One common response by dispensationalist leaders over the past century has been that the early Church was dispensationalist, although in a "seed" form. They appeal to the fact that certain early Church Fathers were premillennialists who believed in a literal thousand year reign of Christ.

It is true that many of the early Church Fathers, such as Irenaeus and Justin Martyr, were premillennialists. But they were not dispensationalists. They viewed the Catholic Church as the New Israel and did not believe the Church would end in apostasy. Perhaps most importantly, they did not understand the Church to be an invisible, spiritual entity which would be secretly taken from the earth before the final events of the world. The idea of a secret, pre-Second Coming Rapture would have been completely foreign to them. In addition, premillennialism was never a universal, formal teaching of the Catholic Church and by the fifth century it was no longer held by any of the Fathers.

A large rift has developed in dispensationalism, with the academic side pursuing a more moderate and traditional understanding of end time events and Biblical interpretation. But the reality is that most dispensationalists hold to an older form of the movement and it is those people Catholics usually deal with - not academics and scholars. Many of these dispensationalists, consciously or not, view the Catholic Church and Protestant mainline churches just as Darby did. It was part of Darby's genius that he expressed a distrust of organized Christianity which struck a deep chord with Americans. Because Darby's "true" church was spiritual, it had no need for creeds, organization or ritual. This worked very well in a young country where tradition and ecclesial roots were either shaky or nonexistent. It especially appealed, and still does today, to people who wished to be separated from institutions which they found to be corrupt, evil, or unsuitable to their tastes. The Rapture was a logical step in Darby's pessimistic outlook and it remains an enticing promise for people today: escape from earthly troubles for the few who are true and spiritual while the unrepentant and unsaved majority suffer terribly.

Although dispensationalists claim their "literal" reading of the Scripture gives them the fullness of truth, the evidence is otherwise. This is especially true in how they view the Church, a matter which really is the biggest point of contention between them and the Catholic Church. The idea that the Church is a temporary insert in the flow of history is contrary to Catholic teaching, from the time of the Apostles onward. The Catechism of Catholic Church states that "God created the world for the sake of communion with his divine life, a communion brought about by the 'convocation' of men in Christ, and this convocation is the Church. The Church is the goal of all things. . . " [10]

Catholics believe the Church is not just invisible, but also very visible, active in the world: "The Church is in history, but at the same time she transcends it. It is only 'with the eyes of faith' that one can see her in her visible reality and at the same time in her spiritual reality as bearer of divine life" [11] She must be visible on earth in order for her unity to be seen by humanity. Men and women, who are both physical and spiritual in nature, are called to enter the Catholic Church which is earthly and sinful, heavenly and holy. The Church is at one and the same time a pilgrim Church, in exile on earth, and also the "spotless bride of the spotless Lamb" [12]

Dispensationalists often criticize the Catholic Church for claiming to be the Kingdom of God. But the teaching of the Church is more nuanced and complex than that. The seed of the Kingdom exists in the Church, but is not yet fully realized here on earth: "Now the Father's will is 'to raise up men to share in his own divine life.' He does this by gathering men around his Son Jesus Christ. This gathering is the Church, 'on earth the seed and beginning of that kingdom'" [13] The Kingdom has begun, but has not been fully revealed. It is a mystery which has yet to be completely known: "The Church 'is the Reign of Christ already present in mystery'" [14]

In breaking away from the Anglican Church and forming his mistaken doctrines, Darby was merely following the centuries old tradition of separatist sects like the Montanists and the Anabaptists who could find good only in themselves and their exclusive teachings. He was also following the general pattern of men like Luther and Calvin in the 16th century who declared themselves final arbiters over Scripture and Tradition. The culmination of this attitude can be seen in this revealing statement by Ryrie: "The fact that the church taught something in the first century does not make it true, and likewise if the church did not teach something until the twentieth century, it is not necessarily false." [15]

Ryrie fails to explain how it is that we can read the Bible in a totally different way from the previous 1800 years of the Church's understanding of it. He ignores the fact that Scripture itself calls the true Church "the household of God" and "the pillar and support of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). If the church cannot be counted on for correct teaching, who can? The individual who makes up the church? In responding to the criticism that dispensationalism is a recent theological innovation, Ryrie writes: "Some who use this device to discredit dispensationalism are honest enough to admit that history is never the test of truth - the Bible and only the Bible is." This raises some important questions. If Scripture can be read "plainly" and is for all men, then why did it take 1800 years for someone to figure out what it really means? This resembles the claims of the Church of the Latter-Day Saints, which believes that the truth was lost for nearly two thousand years.

Catholics should recognize the irony of this position. We agree that the Bible is the source of inspired, infallible truth. But where did the Bible come from? And who defined the canon of Scripture? And who interprets what Scripture means, especially books like Daniel and Revelation which are full of difficulties? The dispensationalist relies upon his interpretive method, which is based on a tradition not even two centuries old! This extreme form of sola scriptura, coupled with a dislike for the examination of history, is a telling weakness in the dispensational approach to truth. The Catholic rests on the assurance of Christ that the "gates of Hades shall not overpower" the Church founded upon Peter and the Apostles. Our view of the Incarnation and our trust in Christ's words show us that God works infallibly through the Church in interpreting Scripture and guiding believers on earth.

The Incarnation also shows us that creation is good and that the logical study of the created order is healthy. So while God reveals himself in a unique and singular way in Scripture, the truth about God is also shown through the use of reason and the study of history (see Romans 1). Catholics are not bound to a fatalistic and pessimistic view of history. Rather, we have hope for the future, just as John Paul II continually says: "Be not afraid!" But this attitude is rare among dispensationalism, which possesses a kind of neo-Gnostic view of history and the created order. Mark Noll, a well respected evangelical scholar and a professor at Wheaton College, criticizes this facet of dispensationalism in his book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. He points out that dispensationalists believe in a "supernaturalism" that ignores the world and the proper place of creation. He writes:

"The supernaturalism of dispensationalism . . . lacked a sufficient place for the natural realm and tended toward a kind of gnosticism in its communication of truth . . . Bible verses were quoted to explain conditions and events in the world, but with very little systematic analysis of the events themselves" [16]

Recognizing the language of dispensationalism when talking with Evangelicals and Fundamentalists will help one to understand what that person likely believes about the future, the Church, and the interpretation of Scripture. If they profess belief in the "Rapture" you know they probably have a low view of the Church and a pessimism about the future of humanity. Ask them if they know where that belief came from. Question them about where the term "Rapture" appears in Scripture or when it first appeared. Share with them the vision of the Catholic Church for the world and mankind, especially as we prepare for the Third Millennium and the Pope's call for renewal. We agree with dispensationalists that our final hope is Christ, but they need to see that the Church, as the Body of Christ, will not fail or be "removed," but will overcome and one day be completely revealed as the Kingdom.

©2000 Carl E. Olson

END NOTES

[1] From Darby's Collected Letters and quoted in Ernest R. Sandeen's The Roots of Fundamentalism, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1970) 63.

[2] Cyrus I. Scofield, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth, (Nepture, New Jersey: Loizeaux Bros., 1896) 12.

[3] William L. Pettingill, The Gospel of the Kingdom: Simple Studies in Matthew, (Findley, OH: Durham Publishing Co., n.d.) 57-58.

[4] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism, (Dallas, TX: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1936) 107.

[5] Lewis Sperry Chafer, "Gospel Preaching," Bibliotheca Sacra 95 (July 1938): 343.

[6] Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1965) 44.

[7] Ryrie, 154.

[8] Ryrie, 45-46.

[9] Hal Lindsey, There's A New World Coming, (Santa Ana, California: Vision House Publishers, 1973) 41.

[10] Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), 1994, paragraph 760.

[11] CCC 770.

[12] CCC 769 and 796; also see Rev. 22:17; Eph. 1:4; 5:27.

[13] CCC 541.

[14] CCC 763.

[15] Ryrie, 14.

[16] Mark A. Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994) 132.

For more: "No Rapture For Rome"