To add to my OP, hahn implies that the "multiple cups" of the last supper is related to the four cups of the seder meal by the fact that there are multiple cups or more than just one cup.  This seems like a presumption to me.  Perhaps there were multiple cups so that there would simply be enough wine for all 12 apostles to drink.  Perhaps the cups were not that large.  Instead, hahn think that the multiple cups is really a tradition that led to the four cups of the 2nd century Jєωιѕн seder.  That seems far fetched to me.  

Hahn is a goofy NOer, ignore him, don't waste your time trying to untangle his "theology".  Just stick with the traditional teachings.

You have to be very careful with what SF uploads as they are FSSP which means they are NO with smells and bells.

There is one priest who they have giving sermons a lot who I like.  And, it turns out to be the same priest giving the sermon about the seder I linked.  I do like his sermons.  
As for hahn, it can be useful keeping up with their doings.  hahn is probably ewtns most prized theologian.  And, it appears what is going on here is a meshing of sorts of rabbinic and catholic liturgical theology.  He normally doesn't interest me, but a Novus ordite I know was raving about it, and happened to mention how the cups of the last supper are related to the 4 cups of the seder.  And, that set my radar off, because I had just watched the video about the christian seder.  So, I thought I would look into it.    

Its funny because traditional Catholics would insist that feelings do not dictate what they believe, but rather Catholic teaching.  Yet, that does not appear to be the case with the OP.  The reason Fr. Chazal is neutral is because the cups of the seder meal were key to Jesus' Jєωιѕн heritage and His religion in relation to the New Covenant in His Blood.  While the seder meal is certainly condemned now, it is condemned because Christ has now fulfilled the Old Covenant in the New.  What was then, has become the Holy Mass, the replacement of the seder meal, now a sacrifice, and a food, which is the Bread of Life.  Christ takes from the Old and brings it to the new in the manner Hahn describes, based in Scripture and Fathers of the Church.  Just because you've never heard it before, or that it is delivered to you via a NO Catholic doesn't necessarily mean it is false.  Rather, the reference of the Last Supper in light of the seder Holy Thursday meal, Christ is teaching us that the Old Testament and the New are from the same God, fulfilled in Him.  These two covenants are revealed fulfilled by the very Word, and the word "covenant" in the words of Consecration at Mass.  

Scott Hahn may be NO, but he has a command of Scripture unlike most Catholics.  Sure, if you listen to him you gotta keep your eyes and ears open for modernism, but this just isn't that.  I didn't listen to the video because I've heard others like it, so if there is some kind of resurrection of the seder, that is false.  Otherwise, understanding the New Covenant in relation to the Old enriches the Faith. Those with discernment can gain from Hahn's Biblical knowledge safely because he does reference everything, so one can always go back and check his source.    

Feelings welling up from my bowels are not dictating what I believe.  But, what I sense with my ears from my faculty of hearing the unusual things hahn teaches can point me in the right direction.  And, the right direction with this novus ordite a direction of suspicion.  Surely there is a reason why the most liberal novus ordo diocese in the usa(los angeles) prints hahn's weekly columns in their liberal diocesan newspaper every week.  They obviously like something about him.  That in itself warrants suspicion.   

So, I just read chapter 6 in his new book titled "the cups".  

Here are a couple quotes - "But they neglect to drink the cup of wine prescribed to accompany the hymn, the fourth cup.  This is a glaring omission."

"Even twenty centuries later, the omission remains a scandal to readers who have lovingly observed the seder throughout their lives"

"Historians believe the four cups of wine were added later to heighten the banquets sense of festivity", because it was not proscribed in the torah.

"Rabban gamaliel does not number wine among the three essenetial elements of the passover, but the mishnah nonetheless carefully prescribes the dispensation of the drinks."

Here I am paraphrasing.  The first course/cup is kiddush, the second course/cup is little hallel(the questions and answer play), the third cup was the lamb and unleavened bread course/cup of blessing which according to him is the last supper.  And, the fourth cup is the singing of a hymn and drinking the fourth cup of consummation.  

Hahn says jesus does drink a fourth cup of wine, although it was not from a cup nor wine.  And, from memory, it only seems to touch his tongue.  It was vinegar implemented from a hyssop branch which is the same hyssop branch used to sprinkle blood on the israelites called in the seder the cup of consummation.  

However, the fact that the apostles, who were Jєωs, did not raise a concern about not consuming a fourth cup after singing a hymn ought to raise an eyebrow, that perhaps the 2nd century invention was not accurate with what was the passover of old.  Basically, hahn is giving the 2nd century Jєωs credibility to authentically interpret the old practices.  When, we know that the Jєωs are a deceitful antichrist race who will do anything to fool the goyim(in this case christians). 

I guess my gripe is that hahn is at best I think wasting his time here, but more likely offering a defense of post christian Jєωιѕн practice or "covenant".  Because the best way you can look at this is that maybe Jєωs would read this and be converted to the church.  However, at the same time, it lends a type of credibility to what the Jєωs are currently doing, because this seder practice is a post Christian Jєωιѕн invention of the 2nd century.  And, we know how much Jєωs like to be called our older brothers of a still valid covenant(hahns favorite word).  And, it is conceivable that like everything else the Jєωs do, they do it as a reaction to the church.  It is like Christ said, catholics worship what they know, non catholics worship what they do not know(Jєωs especially).  And, like the canary in the coal mine, Jєωs do the same against us.  So, it is conceivable that the Jєωs structured this seder in part as a response to how they read or understand the proceedings of the new testament and the life of Christ.  But, this does not erase the fact that they are committing sacrilege, and are guilty of superstition.  It becomes a type of hypersuperstition, because they potentially read or understand it in light of Christ, whom they knowingly deny.  And, hahn resurrects it.  The best way to think of Jєωs is in a negative light.  That does not mean that we be uncharitable to Jєωs.  NO.  But, we must be wary of them like christ taught.  And, our charity towards them must only flow to them through an ordered structure of cooperation from church and state ordained by God.  And, I do not think it is ordered so rightly to shine a christian light on their 4 seder cups like this. 

I could be over reacting.  But, I prefer it when clerics lead the way in theology, not a NO married convert with a lot of protestant baggage.   

There are so time proven books by Doctors, Saints, and Catholic writers, that no one in their lifetime will ever even scratch the surface. Why then would any Catholic bother with reading anything by Scott Hahn? He is just another Protestant minister on a station run by ex- Protestant ministers, EWTN. Scott Hahn converted together with Gerry Matatics. Scott Hanh went for the money and Matatics went seeking the truth. Scott Hahn is a layman, a blind guide, a king in the country of blind men, the counterfeit Novus Ordo Vatican II church.

It is not a good sign when a Catholic reads Scott Hahn.  

It's not a good sign when one makes a determination before he investigates.

It's not a good sign when one makes a determination before he investigates.

What makes you think he knows nothing of Mr. Hahn and his modernist theological views?

So, I just read chapter 6 in his new book titled "the cups".  

Here are a couple quotes - "But they neglect to drink the cup of wine prescribed to accompany the hymn, the fourth cup.  This is a glaring omission."

"Even twenty centuries later, the omission remains a scandal to readers who have lovingly observed the seder throughout their lives"

"Historians believe the four cups of wine were added later to heighten the banquets sense of festivity", because it was not proscribed in the torah.

"Rabban gamaliel does not number wine among the three essenetial elements of the passover, but the mishnah nonetheless carefully prescribes the dispensation of the drinks."

Here I am paraphrasing.  The first course/cup is kiddush, the second course/cup is little hallel(the questions and answer play), the third cup was the lamb and unleavened bread course/cup of blessing which according to him is the last supper.  And, the fourth cup is the singing of a hymn and drinking the fourth cup of consummation.  

Hahn says jesus does drink a fourth cup of wine, although it was not from a cup nor wine.  And, from memory, it only seems to touch his tongue.  It was vinegar implemented from a hyssop branch which is the same hyssop branch used to sprinkle blood on the israelites called in the seder the cup of consummation.  

However, the fact that the apostles, who were Jєωs, did not raise a concern about not consuming a fourth cup after singing a hymn ought to raise an eyebrow, that perhaps the 2nd century invention was not accurate with what was the passover of old.  Basically, hahn is giving the 2nd century Jєωs credibility to authentically interpret the old practices.  When, we know that the Jєωs are a deceitful antichrist race who will do anything to fool the goyim(in this case christians).

I guess my gripe is that hahn is at best I think wasting his time here, but more likely offering a defense of post christian Jєωιѕн practice or "covenant".  Because the best way you can look at this is that maybe Jєωs would read this and be converted to the church.  However, at the same time, it lends a type of credibility to what the Jєωs are currently doing, because this seder practice is a post Christian Jєωιѕн invention of the 2nd century.  And, we know how much Jєωs like to be called our older brothers of a still valid covenant(hahns favorite word).  And, it is conceivable that like everything else the Jєωs do, they do it as a reaction to the church.  It is like Christ said, catholics worship what they know, non catholics worship what they do not know(Jєωs especially).  And, like the canary in the coal mine, Jєωs do the same against us.  So, it is conceivable that the Jєωs structured this seder in part as a response to how they read or understand the proceedings of the new testament and the life of Christ.  But, this does not erase the fact that they are committing sacrilege, and are guilty of superstition.  It becomes a type of hypersuperstition, because they potentially read or understand it in light of Christ, whom they knowingly deny.  And, hahn resurrects it.  The best way to think of Jєωs is in a negative light.  That does not mean that we be uncharitable to Jєωs.  NO.  But, we must be wary of them like christ taught.  And, our charity towards them must only flow to them through an ordered structure of cooperation from church and state ordained by God.  And, I do not think it is ordered so rightly to shine a christian light on their 4 seder cups like this.

I could be over reacting.  But, I prefer it when clerics lead the way in theology, not a NO married convert with a lot of protestant baggage.  

   This is really sad.  You haven't heard what you listened to at all.  And I have no time to bother explaining it to you.  But you will not get far telling people that Jesus practiced an evil seder meal that was developed after he came.   Nothing could be further from the truth.  Christ took what His Father gave Him and fulfilled it.  No modern Jєω junk, this is the true religion in which Christ was born into, and that which is fulfilled today in the Mass.