Eschatology

By Dermot A. Lane
Eschatology in the minds of many is understood to refer to the study of the last things
(Eschata), namely death, judgment, heaven, hell and the second coming of Christ. Within this
5perception, eschatology appears as an appendix to the rest of theology. However, from a
historical point of view this description of eschatology is derivative, coming from broader and
more biblical understanding of eschatology which is founded on the Christ-Event: the
announcement of the coming reign of God, the public ministry of Jesus, the death and
resurrection of Jesus, and the outpouring of the Spirit. In the first century of Christianity the
10"end of time" was understood to have been anticipated in the death and resurrection of Jesus;
the "last days" have been inaugurated by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. This primary
meaning of eschatology should be the basis of any particular understanding of death, judg-
ment, heaven, hell and the second coming of Christ.
In the course of the history of theology these two aspects of eschatology have tended to
15become detached. As a result it is possible to detect the existence of at least two different
strands of eschatology, the one focusing on the destiny of the individual with graphic accounts
of the hereafter in terms of heaven, hell and purgatory, and the other attending to the
collective destiny of the world—natural and human—in terms of the general resurrection of
the dead and the dawning of a New Creation. These two eschatologies, individual and
20collective, must be kept together in any adequate theological treatment of the last things.
The twentieth century has witnessed something of an "eschatological renaissance in Christian
theology" (C. Braaten "The Kingdom of God and Life Everlasting," Christian Theology:
Introduction to its Traditions and Tasks, ed. P. Hodgson and R. King, Philadelphia: Fortress
Press, 1982, p. 275). A major factor influencing this rediscovery of eschatology has been the
25biblical renewal in christology. Karl Barth points out that "Christianity that is not entirely and
altogether eschatology has entirely nothing to do with Christ" (K. Barth, The Epistle to the
Romans, London: Oxford University Press, 1933, p. 314). This renewal in eschatology in turn
is having an important influence on the rest of theology. J. Moltmann maintains: "The
eschatological is not one element of Christianity, but it is the medium of Christian faith ...
30Hence eschatology can not really be only a part of Christian doctrine. Rather, the
eschatological outlook is characteristic of all Christian proclamation, of every Christian
existence and of the whole church." (J. Moltmann, The Theology of Hope, London: S.C.M.
Press, 1967, p. 16). As a result eschatology in this century is exercising an important critical
function in regard to the whole of theology, especially in areas of christology, ecclesiology
35and liberation theology. However, before we can gather the fruits of this renewal in twentieth
century eschatology we need to review the origins and development of eschatology. The first
part of this article will concentrate on the biblical origins and the history of eschatology, and
the second part will pull together some of the emerging insights of twentieth-century
eschatology.
40Biblical and Historical Background
Old Testament Eschatology. The OT is an appropriate point of departure for any overview of
eschatology, not simply because it helps us to understand the NT better, which it certainly
does, but also because it introduces us into a world of symbol, myth and metaphor which is
the primary language of eschatology. Further, many of the concerns of OT eschatology as we
45shall presently discover, overlap with the concerns of twentieth-century eschatology.
In broad outline it is possible to detect the presence of different forms of eschatology in the
OT. On the one hand there is a strongly prophetic eschatology. The future promised by the
505544712.doc 1
 prophets is a future about life in this world: an end to poverty and injustice among the chosen
people, the creation of peace on earth among nations, and the introduction of a new harmony
between people and nature. On the other hand there is within late Judaism the gradual
emergence of an apocalyptic eschatology, an eschatology that is primarily other-worldly in its
5concerns. Within apocalyptic eschatology there is an emphasis on the transformation of this
world into a new reality.
From the eighth century onwards the prophets begin to point towards a time in the future
when Yahweh will judge Israel and the rest of the world. This time is known as the "day of
the Lord," a time of upheaval and destruction as well as a time of renewal and return to the
10ways of Yahweh. One way of describing this imminent future is to employ the ancient myth
of a struggle between good and evil, between the God of life and the black monster from the
deep. This myth is used in the biblical account of creation and in the eschatology of the
prophets. In both instances God overcomes the forces of evil and darkness. One of the
prophets in the Book of Isaiah predicts: "In that day the Lord with his hand and great and
15strong word will punish Leviathan, the fleeting serpent ... and he will slay the dragon that is in
the sea" (Isa 27:1). At the same time: "On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all
peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of wine ..." (Isa 25:6-8).
It is this victory of Yahweh over the forces of evil that is the basis of the promise of a new
creation in this life. The theme of a new creation, developed after the Babylonian exile, is a
20statement of dissatisfaction about the world as it is and an expression of hope that this world
will be changed by Yahweh: "For behold, 1 create new heavens and a new earth, I will rejoice
in Jerusalem and be glad in my people; no more shall be heard in it the sound of weeping and
the cry of distress" (Isa 65:19). Clearly, the eschatology of the prophets which is a major part
of OT eschatology is this-worldly, with little or no reference to what we today would call the
25next life. Hope is centered in what will be done in this life by way of divine intervention on
behalf of the people of Israel. This action of Yahweh will bring about the restoration of Israel
to its former position of power and glory among the nations.
Within this vision length of days is interpreted as a blessing of Yahweh and short life as a
curse to be overcome in the future. For the prophets, Yahweh is at the center of this-worldly
30eschatology; Yahweh is the one who will in the future change our world into a better place to
live. It is Yahweh alone who can make good a world that has gone astray through the failure
of people to be faithful. In addition, the prophets focus their eschatology on the future of the
people as a whole rather than simply on the individual.
This prophetic eschatology of the OT is taken up in the second century B.C. and changed into
35a new movement called apocalypticism. The word apocalypse means a special kind of
revelation, usually given in symbolic and dramatic language which requires the interpretation
of an angel. The main example of apocalypse in the OT is given in the Book of Daniel which
was written during the Maccabean crisis. During that time, the Jews were persecuted under
the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes; Jewish laws and practices were suppressed; many were
40put to death as martyrs for practicing their religion. Within this context the author of the Book
of Daniel raises the question of a reward for the righteous. For the first time in Judaism the
possibility of life beyond death is explicitly affirmed: "And many of those who sleep in the
dust of the earth shall awake, some shall live forever, others shall be an everlasting horror and
disgrace. And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; and those
45who lead the many to justice shall be like the stars forever." (Dan 12:2-3).
What is significant here in the late emergence of apocalyptic thought within Judaism is the
explicit hope for some form of existence beyond this world. This new dimension of Jewish
faith points beyond life in this world, implicitly critiquing a purely prophetic, this-worldly
form of hope. Once again the victory of Yahweh over the beast and the conquest of evil by the
505544712.doc 2
 forces of good are affirmed—but now in a manner that goes beyond life in this world. This
new faith and hope in some kind of life after death develops in subsequent centuries. By the
time of Jesus there is an emerging faith and hope among different Jewish groups in some form
of resurrection.
5These hopes, both prophetic and apocalyptic, generate a keen expectation that the Lord will
come and reign as King among his people: initiating an era of peace and justice, restoring the
fortunes of Israel, and bringing about a new alliance between people and nature. The details of
this expectation are extremely varied in late Judaism. Yet they coalesce into an expectation
summed up in the powerful symbol of the coming Reign of God.
10The New Testament Period. These eschatological hopes and expectations make up the
atmosphere in which the mission and ministry of Jesus is played out. The over-riding horizon
of the life of Jesus is the announcement of the Reign of God: "Now after John was arrested,
Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying 'the time is fulfilled, and the
kingdom of God is at hand, repent and believe in the gospel'" (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:43). The
15parables and the miracles of Jesus are about the coming Reign of God into our world.
On the one hand the Reign of God is "at hand"(Mk 1:14-15) and "in the midst of you" (Lk
17:21) according to Jesus. The signs of this presence of the Reign of God are healings and
exorcisms: the blind see, the lame walk, the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor
have good news preached to them (see Mt 11:4-5 and Lk 4:18-19). On the other hand the
20Reign of God is also something straining to be fully realized in the future: Jesus prays "thy
kingdom come" (Lk 12:2-4); Jesus intimates a future Reign of God in the parables of growth
(Mt 13:18-33); Jesus looks to a time of final judgment and consummation (Mt 25:1-46).
Throughout the preaching of Jesus there is a tension between the present and the future,
between the visible and the invisible, between (he prophetic and the apocalyptic elements of
25the Reign of God. Thus of all the categories used to sum up the life of Jesus, the one most
acceptable and agreeable among commentators is that of Jesus as eschatological prophet (R.
Bultmann, K. Rahner, and E. Schill-ebeeckx). Jesus is the prophet pointing towards the end:
proclaiming the imminence of the Reign of God and the dawning of God's salvation. Further,
it is as eschatological prophet announcing the Reign of God that Jesus is put to death. This
30nearness of the Reign of God proclaimed in word and deed becomes a threat to the political
and religious leaders of the day. It is this threat that provokes the death of Jesus on the cross.
For the disciples of Jesus, his death on the cross is the moment of eschatological crisis.
Everything that Jesus had said and done, especially in terms of the coming Reign of God, is
called into question.
35This crisis of the cross is not annulled by subsequent experiences. Instead, the eschatological
crisis of the cross is interpreted apocalyptically as the turning point of history. This can be
seen in Matthew's apocalyptic interpretation of the death of Jesus: "And behold, the curtain of
the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom: the earth shook and rocks were split; the
tombs were also opened and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and
40coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to
many"(Mt 27:51-53). Equally, Mark's association of darkness with the cross and his reference
to the tearing of the curtain in the temple from top to bottom also have apocalyptic connota-
tions (Mk 15:33-39).
At the same time it must be acknowledged that it was the new experiences after the death of
45Jesus that brought out the full force of the eschatological significance of the life and destiny of
Jesus. Something new, in terms of presence, peace, reconciliation, power, and the Spirit is
now experienced by the disciples from the other side of the cross. This new and transforming
experience is interpreted in a variety of different images: exaltation, glorification, living with
God, resurrection, ascension, and Pentecost. Among these different interpretations of one and
505544712.doc 3
 the same experience of the living Jesus in a new form after Calvary, the image of resurrection
predominates. The image of resurrection takes over from the other images because of its
eschatological and soteriological significance. Within Judaism, resurrection from the dead
was one of the important signs of the end of time and the dawning of salvation.
5It is Paul who spells out explicitly the eschatological significance of the death and resurrection
of Jesus. Paul's eschatology is an explicitly Christ-centered eschatology, beginning with the
historical Paul in First Thessalonians which emphasizes the resurrection of Christ and the
second coming and then moving to the Deutero-Pauline writing of Colossians, Ephesians and
the pastoral epistles. In broad terms Paul argues that the death and resurrection of Jesus
10inaugurates a new era in history. Something new has been set in motion through the resurrec-
tion and the outpouring of the Spirit. Humanity and the world have entered into the final
stages and are now moving together towards the end. The general framework of Paul's
eschatology is that of the difference between the first and second coming of Christ. The
language of this framework is one of contrast between the aeons. The horizon is the
15permanent tension that exists between what has already taken place historically in Christ and
that which is not yet fully realized.
This eschatology of Paul is closely bound up with his christology and the one cannot be
understood without the other. For Paul, Christ is "the fulness of time" (Gal 4:4 Eph 1:10), so
that "if anyone is in Christ, he is a New Creation, the old has passed away and the new has
20come" (2 Cor 5:17). Further, Christ is "the revelation of the mystery which was kept a secret
for long ages but is now disclosed" (Rom 16:25, 26; see also Col 1:26; Eph 1:9, 10; Eph 3:4,5;
1 Cor 2;7). Thus the appearance of our Savior Christ Jesus "abolished death, brought life and
immortality to light" (2 Tim 1:10). In virtue of this we are now living in "the end of ages" (1
Cor 10:11) and in the "later times" (1 Tim 4:1) so that we are encouraged "to put away the old
25man, (and to) put on the new man" (Eph 4:22; Col 3:9). Above all, the glorified and risen
Christ is "the first born among many" (Rom 8:29; Col 1:18), "the first fruits of those who have
fallen asleep" (1 Cor 15:20). A new ontological unity and solidarity has been established
between Christ and humanity in and through the resurrection. To highlight this Paul draws a
parallel between Adam and Christ: "For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the
30resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive." (1
Cor 15:21-22).
It is impossible to develop a wholly consistent and systematic account of eschatology from the
Pauline corpus of writings. The strength of Paul's eschatology is that it resists any easy
categorization: moving as it does from dialectic (the already into the not yet) to paradox
35(dying and rising in Christ) to mysticism (being "in Christ"). Yet what is clear is that
something new has been introduced into our world by the Christ-Event. This something new,
effected through the resurrection and the Spirit of Christ, affects the direction of humanity,
history and the cosmos which are now moving together towards the time of fulfillment. Sin
and death have been overcome by the cross and replaced by grace and new life in Christ.
40The Patristic Period
The concerns of the first few centuries of Christianity within the patristic era are closely
connected to those of the first century even though the time between the first and second
coming of Christ has been prolonged. They include a preoccupation with the Parousia, the
resurrection, judgment and the transformation of the present world order (J.N.D. Kelly, Early
45Christian Doctrines, London: A. and C. Black, 1958/1960, p. 462). These concerns are
symbolized in the emergence of two contested and controversial positions within the
eschatology of the patristic period: Millenarianism and Apokatastasis.
Millenarianism arose out of discussions about the meaning of the second coming of Christ.

505544712.doc 4
 For many, when Christ does return he will reign on earth with his redeemed followers for a
period of one thousand years. Though no longer taken seriously, this particular view of the
second coming can be found among a few of the early Fathers.
Another popular outlook among some of the Fathers in the early church was the claim that at
5some time in the future all things will be restored in Christ and that therefore even hell will
come to an end. This outlook, known as apokatastasis, is associated with Origen and can be
found in varying degrees in Gregory of Nazian-zus and Gregory of Nyssa. Although
apokatasiasis was condemned under the influence of Augustine by an edict of Justinian in 543
A. D. and by the Council of Constantinople in 553 A.D., it continues to exercise a cautious
10fascination among some theologians.
By far the most intriguing and arresting development within patristic eschatology concerns the
understanding of death and its relationship to the resurrection. Several Fathers of the early
church grapple with the meaning and necessity of death. It is suggested that God invented
death as a kind of remedy for sin. Without death, sin is in danger of becoming immortal,
15whereas with death sin can be removed once and for all. For many, the sinful individual is
likened to a flawed piece of art that needs to be reduced to its raw state so that it may be
restored to perfection. Theophilus writing about the Fall sometime in the year 180 A.D. gives
the following example: "Take some sort of vessel that is discovered to have a particular defect
after its completion. It is recast and refashioned so that it becomes new and perfect. A similar
20thing happens to man through death: he is, if 1 may put it that way, broken in pieces that he
may be found whole and sound at the resurrection." (Theophilus of Antioch, Ad Autolycum
No. 2, 26 [Sources Chretiennes, 20, 162-164]). A similar perception of death can be found in
Methodius, writing towards the end of the third century in a work on The Resurrection. God
through death "dissolved man into his primeval matter, in order that, by a process of
25remodelling, everything blameworthy in him might melt away... for the melting down of the
statue ... corresponds to the death ...of the body, while the refashioning and restoration of the
original material finds its parallel in the resurrection" (taken from W.J. Burghardt "The
Eschaton and Resurrection: Patristic Insights," The Eschaton: A Community of Love, J. Papin,
ed., Philadelphia: Villanova University Press, 197, pp. 203-229 at 211). Thus the breakdown
30of the individual in death becomes the basis of the breakthrough in resurrection. In this way, it
begins to emerge that death is not simply the wages of sin but also the remedy of sin. As such,
death is not only a part of the Fall but also an essential element in the story of salvation which
terminates in the resurrection.
Eschatology During the Middle Ages
35During the medieval period it is possible to detect a series of shifts that were to have a
significant influence on the shape of subsequent eschatology. Though some of these shifts
took place over centuries, they do add up to a particular theology of the last things during the
Middle Ages. At the risk of oversimplification these shifts could be said to include at least the
following developments: the particular demands of history begin to overshadow the faraway
40Parousia; the unified vision of present and future, of body and soul, is broken up into a variety
of sharp dualisms, the general and individual resurrections of the dead give way to a strong
emphasis on the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. All in all medieval eschatology
became highly individualized and largely neglectful of the social dimension of eschatology.
Some of these shifts in medieval eschatology can be seen in the developments that are dis-
45tinctive of the medieval period.
One such development in the late twelfth century is the emphasis given to purgatory as a
separate place and state existing somewhere between heaven and hell. While it is true that a
sense of purgation and the forgiveness of sins can be found in the biblical tradition (2 Mac
12:43-46; Mt 12:32; 1 Cor 3:10-15) and in the early Christian tradition (e.g. through the
505544712.doc 5
 practice of praying for the dead which was established by the third century), it was only in the
twelfth century that the existence of purgatory as a place came into prominence. The Second
Council of Lyons (1274) refers explicitly to the doctrine of purgatory, though it carefully
avoids any discussion of the question of fire out of deference to the Eastern Church. Less than
5a hundred years later purgatory was to become fixed in the western imagination through
Dante's Divine Comedy. With the rise of interest in purgatory came the development also of
an elaborate system of indulgences applicable to those in purgatory. This development was
later to become the source of bitter division within the Christian tradition.
Another development illustrative of the above shifts in medieval eschatology can be found in
10the teaching of Pope Benedict XII in the Constitution Benedictus Deus (1336). In that
document the enjoyment of the Beatific Vision by the souls of the just immediately after
death, and the existence of an intermediary state between death and bodily resurrection, are
affirmed. The context of this document was a series of speculative sermons given by Pope
John XX11 as a theologian claiming that the blessed will enjoy the full vision of the triune
15God only after the general resurrection. Whatever way one adjudicates this not unimportant
medieval controversy, it seems reasonable to hold in retrospect that the unified vision of
biblical eschatology is diminished.
A third example of the shifts taking place in the medieval period can be found in the teaching
of the church at the Fifth Council of the Lateran. That Council affirmed in 1513 the
20immortality of the soul as a dogma of the faith. The immortality was seen as something that
could be proved by reason and found in the scriptures. The contemporary debate about the
relationship of the philosophical doctrine of the immortality of the soul to the biblical doctrine
of the resurrection of the body is an issue that the Fifth Council of the Lateran as such did not
address and therefore should not be seen as settled by that Council. Once again the
25individualist concern, as distinct from the collectivist concern, of the medieval eschatology
becomes quite evident.
These developments in the medieval period reappear to some extent at the time of the
Reformation, especially in regard to the doctrine of purgatory. The reformers objected
strongly to the possibility of obtaining merit after death through the sale of indulgences and
30the performance of good works on behalf of the dead. The Council of Trent at its twenty-fifth
session reaffirmed the doctrine of purgatory and the value of prayers offered for the dead as
something intrinsic to Catholic faith.
Post-Reformation Period
It is probably true to say that very little development occurred directly in the area of
35eschatology between the time of the Reformation and the twentieth century. What did take
place, however, were certain developments in the world of natural and human sciences that
were less and less sympathetic to the biblical and theological perspectives of eschatology. A
review of these is not possible here, yet some passing account of them will help towards an
understanding of the state of eschatology at the beginning of the twentieth century.
40The seventeenth century saw the rise of science and the adoption of a mechanistic view of the
world. Within this new scheme there took place in the eighteenth century what has become
known as "the death of nature" (C. Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the
Scientific Revolution, New York, Harper&Row, 1980) and the emergence of a strongly
supernaturalistic dualism. Both of these affected eschatology directly in later times. On the
45one hand the demise of nature placed the natural world outside the influence of eschatology.
On the other hand the adoption of a supernatural dualism had the effect of playing down the
significance of the element of "the already" and over-emphasizing the "not yet" within
eschatology.

505544712.doc 6
 These effects are compounded in the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century and the early
nineteenth century with its claim to be able to control the course of history and to dominate
nature. A secularized form of eschatology moves to the center of the stage with progress,
control and domination becoming the new "last things." In effect eschatology is reduced to a
5kind of naturalistic teleology. Whatever room is left for the eschatological creativity of God's
presence is confined exclusively to the outside realm of the supernatural and the next life.
The late nineteenth and early twentieth century felt the impact of the social and industrial
revolutions as well as the emergence of the evolutionary hypothesis. Christian faith did not
adjust comfortably to these developments. If anything, the Christian faith became defensive
10and introverted. The gap between the natural and the supernatural widened, the split between
the sacred and the secular increased, the dualism of body and soul became more marked, and
the separation of this life and the next world became more apparent. The possibility of an
immanent eschatology was taken over by the myth of unlimited progress, social revolution
(Marx) or evolution (Darwin). The potential for change in the world and the promise of
15unlimited progress become the object of a this-worldly hope. Thus Ernst Troeltsch could write
at the beginning of the twentieth century: "The eschatological bureau is closed down"
(quotation taken from C. Braaten, art. cit. p. 289). Insofar as eschatology did continue to exist,
it operated at a private and individualistic level within theology.
Twentieth Century Eschatology
20Vatican II and the 1979 Instruction. In terms of teaching by the Catholic Church we must turn
to the documents of the Second Vatican Council and an instruction issued by the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1979. Vatican II did not develop a formal
eschatology as such. Yet it does deal with eschatological issues in its Dogmatic Constitution
on the Church and its Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World. Both
25documents reflect some of the fruits of the renaissance in eschatology that have been taking
place in the twentieth century.
The Constitution on the Church devotes a chapter to "The Eschatological Nature of the
Pilgrim Church and her Union with the Heavenly Church" (48-51). This chapter begins with a
description of the future in terms of the restoration and reestablishment of all things in Christ:
30"The final age of the world has already come upon us" through the work of the risen Christ ...
and his life-giving Spirit. "The renovation of the world has been irrevocably decreed and in
this age is already anticipated in some real way" (48). Article 49 goes on to affirm a close
union between the living on earth and the saints in heaven. It points out that the saints in
heaven help to build up the church and to make intercession with the Father on behalf of the
35living. Article 50 reminds us that the "Church from the very first ages of the Christian religion
has cultivated ... the memory of the dead" and always encouraged prayers for the dead. In
particular the church venerated the saints and the blessed Virgin Mary in heaven: imploring
their help and being inspired by their lives. Finally, article 51 notes the existence of a vital
solidarity of the church on earth with those "who are in glory or who are still being purified
40after death." This section concludes by noting that in our worship here on earth "we are
responding to the deepest vocation of the Church and partake in a foretaste of the liturgy of
consummate glory."
In the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World there are two articles on
eschatology which are significant because they locate the importance of human efforts to
45build a better world and the struggle for justice within the overall eschatological plan of God.
Article 38 begins by saying that Christ through his life, death and resurrection sums up the
meaning of history. The same Christ is now at work in the world through the energy of his
Spirit, enabling people to look to the future with hope and at the same time animating people
to work in the here and now towards that future. Some are called to witness to the next life
505544712.doc 7
 and some are called to "dedicate themselves to earthly service ... and to make ready the
material of the celestial realm." Article 39 states explicitly that "the expectation of a new earth
must not weaken but rather stimulate our concern for cultivating this one." Why? Because
human efforts to build a better world are "able to give some kind of foreshadowing of the new
5age." To be sure, the Council points out, there is a difference between earthly progress and the
growth of the Kingdom of God. Yet, if this earthly progress "can contribute to a better order-
ing of society," then "it is of vital concern to the Kingdom of God " because one day we will
find the values of the human enterprise "freed of stain, burnished and transfigured."
This teaching of Vatican II on eschatology is remarkable for the way it overcomes the
10separation of individual and social eschatology, links the present and the future, and
establishes a unity between the earthly and the heavenly.
In 1979 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued an instruction "On certain
questions concerning eschatology." The context of this document would seem to be certain
controversies, mostly in Germany, surrounding the anthropology and language of traditional
15eschatology. In general this document reaffirms the faith of the church in regard to
eschatology: the resurrection of the whole person, the subsistence of the "human self" after
death, the practice of praying for the dead, the second coming of Christ, the bodily assumption
of Mary, eternal punishment for the sinner, and the possibility of the purification of the elect
before they see God. In particular, the document warns against "arbitrary imaginative
20representations" which are "a major cause of the difficulties that Christian faith often
encounters." It also points out that a proper picture of life after death must acknowledge the
existence of a "fundamental continuity" as well as a "radical discontinuity" between the
present life and the future. One curious feature about this document from the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith is the slight but significant difference between the official text in the
25Ada Apostolicae Sedis (1979, p. 939) and the text published in Observatore Romano, 23 July
1979, pp. 7-8. The official texts says that the human self subsists "though deprived for the
present of the complement of its body." This statement reflects the traditional view that the
general resurrection of the dead takes place only at the end of time. In contrast, the text in
Observatore Romano omits the clause "though deprived ...," leaving open the possibility of
30individual resurrection immediately after death.
Two Examples of Twentieth-Century Eschatology. The rise of eschatology in the twentieth
century has been brought about by a number of factors. Triggering off this interest was the
important work of Johannes Weiss, especially his book Jesus's Proclamation of the Kingdom
of God (German Original, 1892). Weiss argued that eschatology was at the very center of
35first-century Christianity and that if we are to understand the gospel of Jesus we must come to
grips with eschatology. This emphasis was taken up and continued by Albert Schweitzer. This
biblical focus in turn was complemented by the many questions about the future of humanity
arising out of the horrors of two world wars and the Jewish holocaust. Further, the sixties saw
the development of different theologies of hope (J. Moltmann, W. Pannenberg), and the
40seventies the emergence of political theology in Europe and liberation theology in Latin
America. In addition, eschatology has been given a new urgency through the result of the real
possibility of a nuclear destruction of the human race and the world. A whole new cluster of
questions has arisen for eschatology from the possibility of being able to think about what up
to now was regarded as unthinkable: a man-made ending of our world and its future.
45Alongside these developments there has also been the emergence in this century of a new
historical consciousness, a new ecological awareness, and a new sense of the solidarity of the
human race. In response to these developments, a variety of different eschatologies has
emerged. We will sample here two different but complementary examples.
Jürgen Moltmann has pioneered the rediscovery of eschatology in this century, especially

505544712.doc 8
 through his work The Theology of Hope (1967) and numerous other publications (e.g.. The
Future of Creation). For Moltmann eschatology should permeate the whole of theology and
should not be left as a single tract coming at the end. Moltmann sees the future as something
which breaks in upon the present from above. The future is about advent (adventus). The
5major emphasis in Moltmann is on the future as something radically new and different from
the present. The foundation of this particular approach is the God of the scriptures who is first
and foremost a God of promises. God has broken into history from above in the past, in the
Exodus experience and in the resurrection of Jesus, and God will break into history again in
the future. The primary emphasis in Moltmann is upon the category of the future as advent;
10the future exercises an important and creative influence upon the present. For Moltmann there
is a radical break between the present and the future as advent. "Present and future, experience
and hope, stand in contradiction to each other in Christian eschatology "(The Theology of
Hope, p. 18; see also p. 143).
In contrast to Moltmann, Karl Rahner grounds eschatology in our experience of the present,
15especially our Christian experience of the present. Eschatology is based on the dynamism of
present experience (transcendental revelation) and the particular thrust this experience has
received from the gift of the Spirit poured out upon the world through the death and
resurrection of Christ (categorical revelation). "To extrapolate from the present into the future
is eschatology" (T.L Vol. 4, p. 337). The future is seen as that which brings to fruition what
20has already been set in motion by the self-bestowal of God's grace in creation (first grace) and
the Christ-Event (second grace). For Rahner, the emphasis is placed on the element of "the
already" brought about by the Christ-Event and the outpouring of the Spirit. It is only in virtue
of God's gracious copresence to the creature in the first instance that we can begin to talk and
to hope about the possibility of a consummation of that relationship in the future. Having
25established this point of departure in eschatology, Rahner is quite careful to acknowledge that
there is a radical difference between the present and the future, between historical beginnings
and transcendental endings in the eschaton.
These two approaches to eschatology should not be counterposed against each other. Instead
they should be seen as mutually enriching and complementary. The strength of Rahner's
30position is the recognition that something new, dynamic and creative has been set in motion
by the reality of the crucified and risen Christ. Without this new moment in history, it would
be difficult to sustain the confidence and hope in the future that Christians have. Indeed one of
the problems with Moltmann's emphasis on the future is that it could give the impression of
deferring life's meaning to the future alone, whereas an important element in the Christian
35message is that God is already present and active in our world.
This particular impression is less true of the later writings of Moltmann. On the other hand the
strength of Moltmann's emphasis is that it properly locates the future as belonging primarily to
the creative love and gracious mercy of God. In this way, Moltmann makes room for the
important elements of newness, transformation and unexpectedness in regard to the future. He
40also brings out the prophetic conflict that can exist between the present and the future, and the
consequent implications this has for the political role of the Christian in the world.
These theologies of Rahner and Moltmann have done much to rehabilitate the state of
eschatology in the twentieth century. They have certainly brought eschatology to the center of
theology. Yet this rehabilitation is itself in need of further refinement on at least two fronts.
45On the one hand eschatology requires a new and coherent conceptual framework. This
framework will have to be in touch with our contemporary experience and understanding of
the world. Further, this framework will have to have some compatibility with the inherited
tradition of eschatology. On the other hand this new framework will have to be governed by
basic principles of interpretation and theological understanding.

505544712.doc 9
 The Possibility of a New Framework
One of the basic problems with classical eschatology is that its particular frame of reference
belongs to a social and cultural era quite different to the present one. As a result the
conceptual mode of expression begins to lose contact with the underlying context of
5eschatological statements. The mode of signification (modus significandi) is no longer in
touch with the reality signified (res significata). The dualism between heaven and earth, the
separation of body and soul, the sharp contrast between this life and the next do not translate
adequately our contemporary experience of existence, society and the world. Bernard
Lonergan's observation that we have passed from a classical culture to a historical
10consciousness is particularly applicable to the world of traditional eschatology. Also
noteworthy here is the influence of modern science upon the classical framework of
eschatology. A further factor, already alluded to, is the impact of the nuclear threat upon
eschatology (see G. Kaufmann, Theology for a Nuclear Age, Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
1985). Rahner sums up this shift in the following way: "The change in cosmology from
15ancient to modern times certainly presents a deep-seated problem for eschatological
assertions" (T.I. Vol. 4, p. 324). Vatican II makes the point: "... the human race has passed
from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one. In consequence,
there has arisen a new series of problems, a series as important as can be, calling for new
efforts of analysis and synthesis" (G.S. 5). A new framework is needed as a first step to
20provide eschatological statements for theological interpretation. The purpose of such
framework is not to provide new information about eschatology as such but rather to present a
coherent system capable of mediating the appropriate symbolic meaning of eschatological
statements. It would be important that such a framework be able to overcome the
individualism and dualisms of much classical eschatology. Equally, it will be important that
25the framework be able to unify, or at least hold together in creative tension, what we have
referred to as the prophetic and apocalyptic as well as the individual and social dimensions of
eschatology. Thirdly, this framework should be able to take on board the broad findings of
modern science that might inform a contemporary cosmology and anthropology. An
exclusively anthropocentric view of the cosmos runs the risk of ignoring the place of ecology
30within eschatology, while an overly ecological eschatology could forget about the unique
place of the person within creation.
Such a framework is at present struggling to come to birth through the confluence of many
impulses from different areas of life: feminism, ecology, the new physics and process
philosophy. Feminism (A. Carr, R.R. Ruether) focuses on the interconnectedness of the whole
35of life; ecology (J. Cobb, C. Birch) encourages a new relationship between the individual and
nature; the new physics (F. Capra, D. Bohm) points towards the dynamic character of all
reality; process philosophy (A.N. Whitehead, C. Hartshorne) highlights the permanency of
becoming within being. These emphases are beginning to add up to a new vision of life which
is described, for want of a better name, as a Post-Modern view of the world (D. Griffin).
40Within this emerging vision, it is impossible to understand the part in isolation from the
whole. An organic unity obtains between the one and the many. A fundamental line of
continuity exists between the past, the present and the future. Above all, a strong emphasis is
placed on "the obvious solidarity of the universe" (A.N. Whitehead) and the forgotten "roots
of all togetherness" (W.H. Auden).
45This Post-Modern vision of the world enables us to overcome many of the dualisms of
classical eschatology in regard to matter and spirit, nature and humanity, humanity and
history, historical process and the Kingdom of God. Because this view of reality is open-
ended and unfinished, it is vulnerable to the unifying spirit of Christ presently at work in the
world, and the creative love of God that will transform the whole of reality in the fulness of
50time. In this way a new series of critical correlations can begin to take place between this

505544712.doc 10
 post-modern view of our world and eschatology: the unity of the person and individual
resurrection, ecology and the new creation, the struggle for justice and the second coming, the
historical process and the Kingdom of God, the solidarity of the human race and the general
resurrection of the dead. These critical correlations between this emerging post-modern view
5of the world and eschatology should be able to keep open the important dialogue between the
world and Christianity called for by Vatican II (G.S. 4, 5, 36, 62). Within this dialogue
eschatology has an important critical and constructive role to play.
By way of conclusion we must outline some principles that might guide the development of
eschatology. These principles can be divided into two closely related categories: general
10principles governing the interpretation of eschatology and theological principles guiding the
construction of eschatology.
Principles of Interpretation. The interpretation of eschatological statements needs to be
guided by a few basic principles. In the first instance it must be pointed out that eschatological
statements are not about the provision of information concerning the future, nor are they about
15the prediction of events to come, nor do they deal with a sphere of reality that is in any sense
empirical. Instead, eschatological statements are a particular interpretation of the potential of
human experience, especially human experience that has been shaped by the Christian reality
of grace and Christ. In •the words of the early Rahner, our "knowledge of the future ... is an
inner moment of the self-understanding of man in his present hour of existence— and grows
20out of it" {T.I. Vol. 4, p. 331), and more explicitly in the later Rahner "eschatology is man's
view from the perspective of his experience of salvation" (Foundations of Christian Faith, p.
433). Eschatological statements, therefore, must be grounded and controlled by an appeal to
Christian experience. The kind of experience in question would include the human experience
of being personally incomplete and unfinished, an experience that generates hope, discloses
25our orientation towards the future as promise, and ultimately reveals our dependence/
relatedness/belongingness to the mystery of God as absolute future and fulfilment.
A second principle guiding the interpretation of eschatological statements concerns the
language of eschatology. This language is both metaphorical and symbolic as well as
dialectical and analogical. Like all theological language, eschatology is significantly limited in
30its final import. The little we do know about matters eschatological is given to us more by
way of negation than by affirmation. The words of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 about
the relationship between the creator and the creature are particularly applicable to the
relationship that exists between human experience and eschatology: "No similitude can be
expressed without implying a greater dissimilitude" (D.S. 806). What Aquinas had to say
35about the mystery of God is also equally valid to the mystery of the eschaton: "The ultimate
of man's cognition of God is to know that he does not know God" (De Potenlia q. 7, 5, ad.
14).
A third principle of interpretation for eschatological statements must take account of the
critique leveled against eschatology by the modern masters of suspicion (Marx, Nietzsche,
40Freud), namely that eschatology is a distraction from the pressing problems of this life. In the
light of this criticism it must be affirmed that authentic Christian statements of eschatology
commit us with a new energy and deeper zest for the cultivation of this life in virtue of the
Christian promises held out for the future. An eschatology that does not take seriously our
responsibility for this world is not a truly Christian eschatology. Interpretations of eschatology
45that fall short of this requirement are in danger of becoming ideological and are also at the
same time theologically defective. Thus we find the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in
the Modern World stating: "They are mistaken who, knowing that we have no abiding city but
seek one which is to come, think they can shirk their earthly responsibilities" (G.S. 43; see
also 39).

505544712.doc 11
 Theological Principles of Eschatology
These principles of interpretation must be complemented by equally important theological
principles that ought to guide the construction of eschatology. The first of these principles
affirms that the person of Christ is the norm and foundation of eschatology. As one author
5puts it: "The future is an extrapolation of what has already been given in Christ and the Spirit"
(H. Berkhoff as quoted by J. Moltmann in The Future of Creation, p. 41). It is the crucified
and risen Christ who is the hope of the world and the shape of the future to come. The resur-
rection of Jesus from the dead gives us a preview of the end and an assurance that the world is
on its way to a still outstanding future. The resurrection of Jesus is the acorn of the oak tree to
10come. The resurrection of Jesus is, therefore, the centerpiece of eschatology germinating
personal, social, and ecological hope. To this extent eschatological constructions ought to be
translatable into christological statements.
A second theological principle of eschatology would suggest that a "red thread" should be
seen to run through the doctrines of creation, redemption and consummation. The God of
15creation is the God of consummation. What God has set in motion in creation. God brings to
fulfilment in the eschaton. Within creation God calls all human beings to communion (L.G.
13; G.S. 19). This universal calling, this first grace, is the seed of eternal life that is made
explicit in Christ, the second grace. This offer of eternal life must be freely acknowledged and
cultivated in present existence. Eternal life, therefore, is something that is initiated in this life
20and not something simply coming at the end of this life, a point emphasized by Pauline (Gal
4:6-7; Col 3:3-4; 2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:7, 14) and Johannine (Jn 5:24; 17:3) writings. What is all
important here is the image of God adopted in our eschatology. The God of eschatology is a
God who is personally copresent and coactive in creation and the Christian community. The
God of Christian eschatology is the living God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus, a God of
25historical covenant and incarnation: Emmanuel. Once this God is allowed to become an
outsider God, as has happened in the Christian tradition from time to time, then eschatology is
reduced to the level of being an appendix to theology.
At the same time the transcendent dimension of this creational and incarnational God within
eschatology must also be acknowledged. This brings us to our third and final theological
30principle for eschatology. In emphasizing the unity between creation, salvation and consum-
mation, the impression must not be given that historical beginnings and eschatological
endings exist on the same level or that they coincide. Eschatology goes beyond the action of
God in creation and salvation, explicitly affirming the introduction of something qualitatively
different, new and transformative in the gift of eternal life. Our hope in the future is not
35simply about an optimistic development, or progress, or evolution of the present in an
unending line. The logic of Christian hope is not the logic of inference but rather the logic of
imagination. Thus we find theologians cautioning against understanding eternal life simply as
the continuation of this life (K. Barth, Dogmatics in Outline, E.T. 1949; J. Moltmann, The
Crucified God, p. 170) or merely a matter of going on "after a 'change of horses'"(K. Rahner,
40T. I.,Vol. XIII, p. 175). To give this impression would be to ignore the finality of death and to
run the risk of playing down the uniqueness of historical existence. Instead, eternal life must
be presented in terms of the completion of this life. A new and creative tension between the
present and the future, between the already and the not yet, between the known and the
unknown, between the present life and eternal life, must be maintained in eschatology. At
45most we can merely image the promise of new life in Christ to come because "no eye has seen
nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"
in this life (1 Cor 2:9).
Bibliography: Z. Hayes, What Are They Saying About the End of the World, New York;
Paulist Press, 1983. A. van der Walle, From Darkness to Dawn, London: S.C.M. Press, 1984.

505544712.doc 12
J. Moltmann, Theology of Hope, London: S.C.M. Press 1967. K. Rahner, Foundations of
Christian Faith, London: D.L.T., 1978, Cht. IX. E. Fontinell, Self, God and Immortality,
Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986.
Source: Komonchak/Collins/Lane, The New Dictionary of Theology.

505544712.doc 13