The Eschaton Has Been Immanentized IV: The World Is Not Enough

Last updated on: September 6, 2009 at 12:30 pm by Henry Karlson

The Eschaton Has Been Immanentized IV: The World Is Not Enough 2009-09-06T12:30:39-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

One of the reasons why many people say we should not “immanentize the eschaton,” is that we should not absolutize politics. There are many problems with this response. Of course it is to be said that Voegelin and Buckley suggested that this phrase is to be seen and interpreted along these lines, suggesting that those who do not agree with them therefore are looking to turn the political realm into the absolute. What is wrong with this line of reasoning?

First, the logical connection between the two has not been established. When the eschaton is immanent, this is not to be seen as if the eschaton is identified with the world it has entered. Rather, it points out that there is a relationship between the two: the transcendent is immanent while remaining transcendent; that is to say, the immanent is not the transcendent. This means any idea of something within the world itself, such as politics, as being absolutized by the immanenation of the eschaton is erroneous. On the other hand, the rejection of this immanence closes off the immanent world from the transcendent, turning it into a realm of itself – a fallen realm in which either the transcendent becomes meaningless (leading to practical atheism, as Henri de Lubac has shown) or the immanent world becomes meaningless (and is therefore to be transcended as per the Gnostics). Indeed, it is the second aspect which tends to be the way this idea is used, to deny the value of this world, and to reject works done in this world because they are not absolute. This is the tradition we see within Reformation Protestantism, be it Luther or Calvin: they tell us that our works are worthless, that our lives here are worthless, and all that is in this world is worthy of destruction. Karl Barth continued this tradition in his rejection of the analogia entis (analogy of being), and the otherwise valuable writings of Jacques Ellul find themselves turned around and in error in following this Protestant root. Ellul indeed offers as a good, concise presentation of where this line of thought leads:

But just as repentance has always to be renewed in the Christian life, just as we have ever anew to find ourselves under judgment, just as Christ is crucified to the end of the world, just so the ‘No’ pronounced by God over man and his works and his history, is a ‘No’ which is total, radical and ever present.

[…]

The work of man is always under the ‘No,’ which is absolutely real. The death of Jesus Christ, the judgment of the Father on the Son, the ‘My God, why?’, these are terrible realities, absolutely devastating to us. Likewise our death and our judgment are real, serious and terrible.

So also the annihilation of works and of history is a genuine and total annihilation. We cannot minimize it by saying: ‘Yes, but afterward . . .’, for it is God who pronounces that afterward, and not we. [1]

Here we see what happens when the world is seen as radically separate from the eschaton. While Ellul, it must be noted, wanted to show how the Church could bring the presence of the kingdom into the world, he nonetheless followed through with the dualism which pervades Gnostic, Protestant, and some forms of Catholic thought and showed us where it ends: in annihilationism, which is exactly what one should expect if there is no communion between the world and the eschaton.

What Hans Urs von Balthasar said in his criticism of Karl Barth is valid here. Here the question of the analogia entis is important. This is the teaching that there is a relationship between God and creation, and that an analogy between God and humanity can be made—the similarity between the two allows for rational, natural theology to form a proper (though deficient) conception of God. It also means that there must be something within humanity which is positive. The difference between the two forever makes sure that there is no identification between God and creation. For Barth, the analogia entis was “the doctrine of the Anti-Christ” because it gave too positive a value to humanity. Indeed for Barth, this was the foundational difference between Catholicism and Protestantism: Catholicism can find positive value in the world through the analogia entis, while Protestants think any such value is a Satanic assertion trying to bridge the gulf between creation and God.[2] Balthasar, in his reading of Barth, notes Barth was to somewhat modify this criticism, though substantially the problem remained the same: without the analogia entis, Christology ends up perverted, because there is no way to preserve the positive value of Christ’s humanity. Indeed, this explains why within the Reformation, and so also in Barth’s theology, humanity becomes mere puppets to the will of God. There can be no real value to free will; either one ends up with double predestination or universalism. For Barth, the eschatological map of egress-regress became an absolute principle which all things follow.[3] To be consistent with this, Barth moved on from the dualism between God and creation to an eschatological monism: the only way God could reconcile the world to himself is through a monistic enterprise which gives creatures no true sense of freedom as they encounter the absolute in God![4] The analogy of being prevents this monism – for it leaves room for the creature, and gives to it, its own interdependent existence. “Rightly understood, the analogy of being is the destruction of every system in favor of a totally objective availability of the creature for God and for the divine measure of the creature.”[5]

This is exactly the point when we understand the relationship of the eschaton to the world in Christ: the two are not divided and separate, but they are able to be in communion with each other, so that the world can indeed have positive values and not to be rejected, while not making the world the absolute. The eschaton engages the world, and brings it grace, allowing nature to be engraced. Because grace engages nature, there must be something there, something real, which embraces that grace, which is why the analogy of being is important: for it keeps the integrity of creaturely being. “Grace is something for a nature and in a nature. And thus it presupposes a nature, logically if not necessarily chronologically.”[6] And that nature must, in its own right, be open to God; it exists only in and through God’s grace, not of itself; and so it cannot be seen as something independent and pure in and of itself.[7]

Now the second problem with Voegelin’s and Buckley’s ideology (even if they did not see it as such) is that many assume that if one agrees with their conclusion, you must accept their premise, and if you deny their premise, you accept their conclusion. The problem with this is simple: one can have the right conclusion even if one’s arguments are invalid. Those who understand the work of Christ as immanentizing the eschaton in the world are not looking for the absolute in politics; indeed, there is a general agreement all around that politics and its limited sphere should not be absolutized and identified with the transcendent. When Ellul writes, “The fact that Jesus Christ is truly the Lord of the world in no way guarantees that the works performed by man in this world are expressions of that lordship, or that they are entirely dedicated to salvation, and therefore that we can participate in them wholeheartedly and without reservation,”[8] Christians can stand in agreement. Indeed, Christians should know that the political realm is a minor realm indeed, and should not be the focus of our concern. But neither should it be ignored and seen as entirely outside of the Christian life, that we can’t use it as long as we understand its relative value. The Christian must always make use of the things of the world without being trapped by them. That is exactly the point when we see that the eschaton has been immanentized: we are shown that there is more than what lies within the world, and that we can and do have access to the kingdom of God which transcends the world despite living in that world.

Footnotes

[1] Jacques Ellul, False Presence of the Kingdom. Trans. C. Edward Hopkins (New York: The Seabury Press, 1972), 23 – 4.

[2] See Hans Urs von Balthasar, Karl Barth: Darstellung und Deutung seiner Theologie. 4th ed. (Einsiedeln: Johannes Verlag, 1976). English translation: Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Theology of Karl Barth, trans. Edward T. Oakes, S.J. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1992), 47 [henceforth, KB] where Balthasar traces Barth’s interest to the work of Erich Przwara.

[3]Thus he understands Barth’s following of Reformation Predestination is understandable within the dictates of egress-regress, and it leads to a declaration of the end which should be beyond our view: “The schema of egress and regress dominates Barth’s doctrine of predestination, so much so, as we have seen, that one is in danger of somehow getting ‘behind’ the curtain of God’s judgment and sneaking a peek at the cards in the Judge’s hand,” Balthasar, KB, 259.

[4] In Barth, the supernatural necessarily overpowers nature; but, to be sure, this is not surprising coming from a Reformed theologian.

[5] Balthasar, KB, 255. [ Sie ist Destruktion jedes Systems zugunsten einer restlosen objektiven Verfügbarkeit des Geschöpfs zu Gott und zum göttlichen Maß hin., 267].

[6] Balthasar, KB, 281. [Gnade ist Gnade für eine Nature und an einer Natur. Und insofern setzt sie im logischen [nicht notwendig im zeitlichen] Sinn eine Natur voraus, 291-2]

[7] Henri de Lubac rightfully points out, however, this must not be seen as if we have any claim to God, that we can demand grace from him – grace has to be the free gift of God to us: “God is not governed by our desire. The relationship between the two things must be in fact the opposite one: it is the free will of the giver which awakens the desire. This is incontestable. There can be no question of anything due to the creature. But, one may perhaps say, it remains true none the less that once such a desire exists in the creature it becomes sign, not merely of a possible gift from God, but of a certain gift. It is the evidence of a promise, inscribed and recognized in the being’s very self. Is one not then right to conclude from the existence of that desire to the effective reality of the gift? St. Thomas certainly seems to reason this way. But if so, then man is surely arriving by the use of his natural reason alone at the knowledge that he is made for the vision of God, which seems to make the effective supernatural become the object of natural knowledge,” Henri de Lubac, The Mystery of the Supernatural. Trans. Rosemary Sheed (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1998), 207-8.

[8] Ellul, False Presence of the Kingdom, 16.

Eschatology

Gnosticism

Henry Karlson

Previous Post

September 4, 2009

From Barry Goldwater, on Vietnam

Next Post

September 6, 2009 Sins That Cry Out To God

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was Samuel's mother, who prayed for a child at Shiloh?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Peninnah Leah Hannah Rebekah