The Apocalypse—Letter by Letter, by Steven Paul

I am wondering if this book The Apocalypse—Letter by Letter, by Steven Paul is
a good Catholic reference book about researching and getting insight on the Book of Revelations

Thanks! theresa4601

Good question, which is why I came here to find an answer. I found the document in question on Mark Mallet’s blog (markmallett.com). He’s a totally orthodox Catholic from Canada and I don’t think he’d mention it if it weren’t okay. Still, I wondered. That said, if you’re looking for help with the Book of Revelation, both Scott Hahn and Jeff Cavins have CDs out on this very subject. Both are easy listening and quite revealing. :thumbsup:

Thanks so much for the info!
prayers for you and yours
theresa4601

I’m glad there is a thread about this strange but important book. I paste here the review I wrote for it on Amazon.com:

"The quirky, doughnut-scarfing author of this book is proof positive that God is no respecter of persons when he chooses his Prophets. :cool: Steven Paul demonstrates the necessity of accurately translating the syntax and metaphor used in the Book of Daniel in order to understand the language of the Apocalypse. Accurately parsing the Greek of the Book of Revelation is ungramatical in English, but unmistakably reveals St John’s precise meaning, --as well as suggesting a plausible method of interpreting that meaning. Paul shows how the inaccuracies of all English translations of the Bible’s last book has inadvertently concealed the concrete clues for understanding its message.

Though the author posits a couple of incorrect theological conclusions (notably failing to see that the “woman clothed in the Sun” is simultaneously The Church AND the Virgin Mother of God as exemplar of the Church) these flaws do not compromise or detract from the success of his rigorous textual analysis.

Steven Paul’s attention to St John’s use of metaphor and literal statements makes the book of Revelation more comprehensible in our time of increasing globalization. This book is useful as a practical guide for “reading the signs of the times”, to explain the spiritual zeitgeist precipitating the rise of the Anti-Christ–.

Coincidentally, I read this book just after reading “Hope of the Wicked” by Ted Flynn: Steven Paul’s book delineates the spiritual dynamic, --and Flynn’s the socio-politic arena where history is forged by current events. Reading both these books in conjunction makes for an eerie but coherent picture of what will soon be upon us. Fear not; --but hold on to your hats; it’s gonna get worse before it gets better . . . .":eek:

–Even if you have read and dismiss “Hope of the Wicked”, --don’t let that put you off reading S. Paul’s thought-provoking book. It’s not a quick read; but will lend a whole new perspective to any other books on the Apocalypse you read.

I can’t thank you enough for this reply, also for the reference to “Hope of the Wicked” by Ted Flynn. I will purchase this asap. prayers for you and yours theresa4601

Thank you Theresa4601–I am most humbly grateful for your prayers. --Aunt Raven

It is not theologically incorrect to posit that the Woman clothed with the sun is the Church and not the Virgin Mary. In fact up until the second Vatican council that was always the tradition of the Church and can be found in footnotes of almost all Catholic bibles before that time.

But let me ask you this. Is it not the unerring dogma of the Church that the Virgin Mary was conceived without sin and free from the curse of Eve? How then is it that the Woman clothed with the sun is in great distress from labor? Where is it written in the bible or catechism that Mary was ever in labor? The modernists depth of analysis was to recognize the word "virgin" and leap to the conclusion that it is the Virgin Mary. They are wrong. Steven Paul, my brother-in-law spent years researching his proof before committing it to paper. So show me his error.

QUOTE=Aunt Raven;7622507]I'm glad there is a thread about this strange but important book. I paste here the review I wrote for it on Amazon.com:

"The quirky, doughnut-scarfing author of this book is proof positive that God is no respecter of persons when he chooses his Prophets. :cool: Steven Paul demonstrates the necessity of accurately translating the syntax and metaphor used in the Book of Daniel in order to understand the language of the Apocalypse. Accurately parsing the Greek of the Book of Revelation is ungramatical in English, but unmistakably reveals St John's precise meaning, --as well as suggesting a plausible method of interpreting that meaning. Paul shows how the inaccuracies of all English translations of the Bible's last book has inadvertently concealed the concrete clues for understanding its message.

Though the author posits a couple of incorrect theological conclusions (notably failing to see that the "woman clothed in the Sun" is simultaneously The Church AND the Virgin Mother of God as exemplar of the Church) these flaws do not compromise or detract from the success of his rigorous textual analysis.

Steven Paul's attention to St John's use of metaphor and literal statements makes the book of Revelation more comprehensible in our time of increasing globalization. This book is useful as a practical guide for "reading the signs of the times", to explain the spiritual zeitgeist precipitating the rise of the Anti-Christ--.

Coincidentally, I read this book just after reading "Hope of the Wicked" by Ted Flynn: Steven Paul's book delineates the spiritual dynamic, --and Flynn's the socio-politic arena where history is forged by current events. Reading both these books in conjunction makes for an eerie but coherent picture of what will soon be upon us. Fear not; --but hold on to your hats; it's gonna get worse before it gets better . . . .":eek:

--Even if you have read and dismiss "Hope of the Wicked", --don't let that put you off reading S. Paul's thought-provoking book. It's not a quick read; but will lend a whole new perspective to any other books on the Apocalypse you read.

Further, the modernists managed to butcher the Lectionary as well by changing the Greek word ouranos to mean “sky” instead of heaven so now it reads “A great sign appeared in the sky” I guess they wanted to correct 1900 years of false tradition? But they left the same word to mean heaven in scores of other places while imposing their opinion on this verse. Make no mistake, if you are staring at the sky, you will miss the great sign. Because it appears in “the heaven” which is the kingdom of God, the Church. It is a papal assassination. Read the book.

Check my last 2 posts at

letterbyletter.blogspot.com/

For more explanation of the Woman Clothed With the Sun and the sign in “heaven”

Wow, Zebedee, I am honored to meet you --your brother-in-law was a genius, and I'd like to say how grateful I am that you and your wife put all that labor into assembling this important book which was his legacy. I keep "Apocalypse Letter by Letter" by my bedside and often read part of it before going to sleep at night. I have recommended it to countless people, --some of which have actually bought and read it. I have been distressed that people more educated than I do not seem to get what he makes so plain--but then I have spent time teaching (English) grammar.

OK, you wrote; "It is not theologically incorrect to posit that the Woman clothed with the sun is the Church and not the Virgin Mary. In fact up until the second Vatican council that was always the tradition of the Church and can be found in footnotes of almost all Catholic bibles before that time.

"But let me ask you this. Is it not the unerring dogma of the Church that the Virgin Mary was conceived without sin and free from the curse of Eve? How then is it that the Woman clothed with the sun is in great distress from labor? Where is it written in the bible or catechism that Mary was ever in labor? The modernists depth of analysis was to recognize the word "virgin" and leap to the conclusion that it is the Virgin Mary. They are wrong. Steven Paul, my brother-in-law spent years researching his proof before committing it to paper. So show me his error."

--OK Zebedee, I'm not concise, so bear with me: We seem to be opposing a "Both / and" and an "either /or". The answer is not in the Bible, nor in the Catechism, but in the Liturgy, which is just as inspired (and I'm not talking post-Vatican II atrocities, and so not a "modernist" choice of readings) The reading for more than one pre V2 Marian feast uses the "woman clothed with the sun" verses from the Apocalypse. The principle is "lex orandi, lex credendi" : "the law of prayer is the law of faith" or, "what you pray is what you believe".

Mary is the mother of the whole Christ, and as we know from St Paul, mysteriously and mystically he speaks the Lamb "slain from the foundation of the world." --Our Lord's passion is present all through time, even though after the Resurrection he is in glory and suffers no more. True, Our Lady suffered no pain of normal child-birth at Bethlehem because she suffered no penalty for any sin. However, she is not called "Our Lady of Sorrows" and "Queen of Martyrs" for nothing:

--On Calvary she spiritually suffered birth-pangs for the birth of the entire Church, and in mystical union with the eternal sacrifice of her Son. So these readings for her feasts (such as the Assumption, and the currently unpopular but still valid Mass of Mary Mediatrix of all Graces) want us to see the "both / and" : Mary both Mother of the historical Jesus Christ (head) and of the Universal Church (mystical body).

To be "in labor" (meaning partuition) is a metaphor which need not be literal --St Paul himself refers in Galatians 4:19 to "My little children of which I am in labor until Christ be formed in you. . ." , and we know he wasn't talking about maternity consequent on a sex-change operation ;-)

So the metaphor is easily and simultaneously applicable to the Church itself as well as Mary as mother of a suffering and persecuted Church (even if you don't believe in private revelation, it is noteworthy that Our Lady wept at La Salette in the character of the suffering Mother of the Church, --even though she is in Heaven where she cannot suffer -- a great mystery, but I and many others have no problem understanding this)

In a mystical (= hidden) way, Mary has already borne / is bearing / the travail of the Church through time-- it says so in the Liturgy I referred to above. So I don't think we're actually disagreeing. A way to understand how one can view these verses simultaneously as "The Church" and "Mary, exemplar of the Church" is to recall those "lenticular" pictures I loved as a kid: turn it one way, it's one scene; turn it another, and it's different, but thematically related; --but it's the same picture. Does this make sense?

I absolutely agree that according to Steven Paul's analysis, a holy Pope who is a great leader is going to be assassinated when the Church suffers its greatest persecution in history.

And now a request: Please ask your saintly brother-in-law to pray for me, that one day I might become a canonical hermit to pray for the church 24/7 in silence and solitude?

Thank you so much for your kind and thoughtful reply. I am a fumbler and beyond my ability to explain Steve’s work. And you have rightly explained the Holy Mother’s rightful place as Mother of the Church, a position earned through the human suffering she endured.

But Steve did make another point that a close reading of the Apocalypse would confirm. That is that the time of the end of Chapter 11 is not the same as the time of the beginning of Chapter 12. This is a key point that makes his book different than others, even “The Book of Destiny” by Father Herman Bernard Kramer. The scene of the Ark of the Covenant belongs to one time period and phase of the Father’s plan while the Great Sign belongs to another.

So that is why he is perplexed with the use of the conjoined reading in the Liturgy. You don’t see that a lot. But his point was only to question and not condemn. He really wanted to call attention to the sacred author’s real meaning, which you have agreed is an event in the history of the. Church, one perhaps foreshadowed in 1981?

I hope you’re right about the 1981 incident, but some deep instinct tells me that was temporarily “dodging a bullet”, and there is a more terrible fulfillment in store which Steve predicts from his rigorously careful translation. The increasingly anti-Christian climate fostered by the EU makes it far less an improbability than I would have thought a few years ago.

Oh, and don’t forget that Our Lady is called “Ark of the Covenant” --litany of Lorreto and a lot farther back than that, by some of the early Church Fathers.

As with all prophecy, the paradoxical details will be clear only in hindsight. I am observing that the only people who actually “get” the picture painted by “Apocalypse Letter by Letter” are those who have a serious prayer life.

Of course the answer everyone wants is "what time are we in with respect to the Apocalypse?"

And Steve was meticulous in piecing that together. For him to be right, the assassination would not occur until some other things come to pass, namely the time of 200 million horsemen.

As I read and re-read many times over, it seems they are not all military but include "agents and agencies" that include military power. Kramer called them secret societies and communists. We see in our time how wars develop with economic and political motives sometimes hidden from public view. The Vatican warned that the Iraq War was unjust and would lead to secondary or collateral effects, especially persecution of Christians, Sadly, they were right. In Egypt and elsewhere in the world, Christians bear the brunt of new-found "freedom". And here in the U.S. our own elected officials have legislated or passed regulations violating Christian conscience.

Another clue to the times we're in can be fund in a single Greek word. Steve wrote:

"A translation more accurate than “multitudes” for the odd noun [okhloi] is “disordered
crowds” or “mobs.” The Greek term refers to the bloody persecution in Asia and Africa, and, perhaps, to social turmoil in some places after the event of the 200 Million Horsemen earlier [9:15-19]."

And around the globe we are seeing just such a scene. Multitudes protesting in the streets, in some cases not even able to articulate what they want.

A news reporter yesterday almost made me come out of my chair. He said, "What the world seems to need now is a charismatic leader to pull it out of this."

We'll be getting one all right. Stay tuned.

[Note: I am aware of the Holy Mother's title "Ark of the Covenant." The first Marian book I ever read had that title. Again, timing is everything. The time of the two witnesses in Chapter 11 is the 1260 days, the same amount of time that in Chapter 12 come after the Great Sign. And after that the Ark of the Covenant is seen in "heaven". So even though the two verses are in proximity, they are not in chronological order.]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.