I think he has some good insights, and I like book, but it's not necessarily a favorite

I don't know what the best is, as the Apocalypse itself is so difficult to decipher before everything unfolds. I find Fr. Sylvester Berry's to be among the best I've read. Attached below.

After the defeat of Antichrist the Gentile nations will return to the Church and the Jєωs will enter her fold. Then shall be fulfilled the words of Christ: ''There shall be one fold and one shepherd.'"

I was piecing together this post, though I see Decem already mentioned it.

In "The Apocalypse of St. John" (1921), Fr. Sylvester Berry gives a similar interpretation as Fr. Kramer, in which there is a universal triumph of the Church for centuries after the defeat of Antichrist, and prior to the end of the world.
https://archive.org/details/theapocalypseofs00berruoft/page/n3/mode/2up

I was piecing together this post, though I see Decem already mentioned it.

In "The Apocalypse of St. John" (1921), Fr. Sylvester Berry gives a similar interpretation as Fr. Kramer, in which there is a universal triumph of the Church for centuries after the defeat of Antichrist, and prior to the end of the world.
https://archive.org/details/theapocalypseofs00berruoft/page/n3/mode/2up

Thanks, Joe, for the quotes.

The problem I have with the Fr. Berry and Fr. Kramer view is that it's Catholic utopian, and a sort of Catholic Judaizing eschatologically speaking, which is shown in its emphasis on an earthly reign and governance (like the Jєωs expected from the Messiah) and also in its focus on the Jєωs and a mass conversion of them. There's what I would call a materialist or physical expectation in the temporal world that smacks of the Judaizers.

In my view, the Kingdom, in its only manifestation on this earth and in this age, has already come: Christ reigns now, and has reigned since the Cross in His kingdom established some 2,000 or so years ago in the Catholic Church. And I reject the "mass conversion" theory of the Jєωs, who have been rejected for their corporate sins and "shall not be heir with the son of the free woman" in a corporate or collective sense. Galatians 4:40. The individual elect among them have come in, and will come in, and it is wonderful when they do so "for the sake of the fathers." Romans 11:28. I grant that I'm in the minority, probably large minority, on the latter point.

So I find this streak and tendency in the work of Fr. Berry and Fr. Kramer troubling.

Wow.

I did not read your post before I posted mine.

I want to sleep on what you've said. You make perfect sense, but I have a gut feeling that some distinction can be made between the tempo-material effects of Christ's Victory on the Cross, and the false notion of a temporal Messias.

Let me leave you with this for now. Oft when I consider the Fifth Joyful Mystery, it seems to me that Jesus left His Mother and Father with the intention of taking up residence in the Temple, just as His Mother had. He foreknew the outcome - rejection; and thus did not inform His Parents prior to the time, recognizing that He would return to Nazareth with them not many days hence.

What did He intend to do?

I have a pious belief that He actually manifested Himself to the priests and scribes. They would have known everything - His Mother and Father, His lineage, the time of His Birth, the prophecies of Daniel, the accounts given by the Magi, the timing of the murder of the Holy Innocents.

They knew Him to be the Messias; they rejected, envied, and hated Him; they plotted His murder - not when He appeared in His public ministry at the age of 30, but when He manifested Himself to them at the age of 12.

They sent Him packing.

They kicked Him out of His own Temple. They literally stole the Temple from God. God had His own designs and plans, which He allowed them to ruin - for a time.

This sin must have brought upon them a terrible curse. Their hearts were hardened, and they became as cruel beasts - the very beasts we meet 18 years later - implacable in a satanic hatred and envy of very God. 

I believe that Jesus had twelve Apostles in that Temple - twelve men who rejected His call. I believe He would have ruled from the Temple with His Apostles, and they would have gone out from Jerusalem into the whole world.

I believe that Peter and the Eleven, though foreknown and chosen in the Mind of God, were nevertheless the recipients of graces originally intended for others - as the throne of the Saints in Heaven were originally intended for the fallen angels. Jesus would have gone first to His priests, no?

God's word does not return to Him void. There is going to be a time in the history of the world when the fulness of Christ's Victory is realized. His power and majesty must be felt over the whole earth - for "the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof." (Psalm 23) I believe this has been decreed from the Beginning.

Yes, His kingdom is not of this world, but He, as God-Man, must rule in the midst of His enemies.   

Surely this earthly reign, none other than a universal, world-wide Christendom, can be distinguished from the Jєωιѕн lie. For though the perfidious Jєωs have never, and will never, see their pipedream realized, we have already tasted and seen the splendors of the Social Reign of Christ the King in Europe. What remains now is only its perfection by way of purification and extension.

Off to sleep now! :)

Thanks, Joe, for the quotes.

The problem I have with the Fr. Berry and Fr. Kramer view is that it's Catholic utopian, and a sort of Catholic Judaizing eschatologically speaking, which is shown in its emphasis on an earthly reign and governance (like the Jєωs expected from the Messiah) and also in its focus on the Jєωs and a mass conversion of them. There's what I would call a materialist or physical expectation in the temporal world that smacks of the Judaizers.

In my view, the Kingdom, in its only manifestation on this earth and in this age, has already come: Christ reigns now, and has reigned since the Cross in His kingdom established some 2,000 or so years ago in the Catholic Church. And I reject the "mass conversion" theory of the Jєωs, who have been rejected for their corporate sins and "shall not be heir with the son of the free woman" in a corporate or collective sense. Galatians 4:40. The individual elect among them have come in, and will come in, and it is wonderful when they do so "for the sake of the fathers." Romans 11:28. I grant that I'm in the minority, probably large minority, on the latter point.

So I find this streak and tendency in the work of Fr. Berry and Fr. Kramer troubling.