Empowering destitute people towards transforming communities

6.4The public church’s view of the future (eschatology)

Would the public church focus on the hope that is to come, the final manifestation of the triumph of God? Or would it hold to an eschatology embedded in history?
Bevans and Schroeder (2005:67) discuss an understanding of eschatological fullness “not as the end of historical process and the inauguration of a timeless, spiritual state, but as history’s transformation and fulfilment”. They explain that growth to full humanity and maturity, growth as God’s image into God’s likeness, was part of God’s original plan.
Swinton (2000:55) enriches one’s understanding by explaining the eschatological implications of the Imago Dei as it is manifested in Christ and restored in believers through the power of the Holy Spirit. He suggests that the true likeness of God (the image of God as it manifests itself in people) is to be found not at the beginning of God’s history with humankind, but at its end. Hence, Christ was as a result given also as the image of God by which we may know what God wills and does, what can and will be in present and future.
Consequently the church must adopt a “past” perspective on eschatology that manifests itself in the present: God at work in history gives us hope for today. At the same time there is a future perspective, where we nurture a prophetic imagination of the reality that could be. This hope manifests itself primarily in the present, and it causes action today: hopeful action, because we are assured of God’s victory and action, through the ages, today, and in the future. To use the words of Wuppertal (1989:781):

…this divinely wrought reality (God’s gift of SHALOM) exercises a mighty influence in the present world, although it still waits its final fulfilment. Soteriologically, peace is grounded in God’s work of redemption. Eschatologically it is a sign of God’s new creation which has already begun. Teleologically it will be fully realized when the work of new creation is complete.

The public church therefore is called to manifest something of the impending peace of God, His SHALOM, which is given to His creation in and through Christ, and which is central to the structure and character of the ministry and mission of the church in all its aspects (Swinton, 2000:57). According to Brueggemann (1976:15), the vision of SHALOM should be the “guiding light” which directs and vitalizes the whole of the church’s ministry.

6.5Comprehensive salvation in the public church

How would a church of this kind deal with the issue of salvation? It would understand and communicate salvation as comprehensive salvation, in ways that respect human dignity and choice, and it would do so by employing “public language”.
A public church would first of all understand salvation in a very comprehensive manner, where such a salvation constantly strives for greater degrees of SHALOM in people’s lives and in this world. In a nutshell, comprehensive salvation can be captured in the word “SHALOM”, with all the richness of meaning in this concept. This matter was discussed extensively earlier on in this chapter, but some remarks in terms of the ministry of the public church should be helpful.
A public church practising comprehensive salvation would minister to people in their total need, in terms both of individual need and that of society; soul and body; present and future. Such a comprehensive understanding of salvation would manifest itself in the action of the church labouring for the termination of economic, social, political, physical, psychological and spiritual suffering. As Apple (1994:16) points out:

To spread the kingdom of God is more than simply winning people to Christ. It is also working for the healing of persons, families, and relationships. It is doing deeds of mercy and seeking justice. It is ordering lives and relationships and institutions and communities according to God's authority”.

Salvation as a concept practised by the public church must also carry within itself the accountability to participate responsibly in God’s caring actions towards this world, as Swinton (2000:56) expresses it: “Salvation and redemption is not just a personal experience, it is also a cosmic process which has been initiated in the life and death of Jesus Christ, and is continued in His resurrection work carried out, inter alia by the life and witness of His church”. In other words, we must live personal and communal lives which anticipate the restoration of the Imago Dei in its fullness. Why? Because the public church recognizes that, in the process of redemption, fallen humanity is gradually being conformed to the image of God in Christ.
Wagers (1998:3), reflecting on “political liberation” as part of comprehensive salvation, asserts that the church cannot ignore structures of power wherever and however we "do" theology. Liberation theology offers a view of sin and evil that regards sin as social, historical fact, reflected in the absence of love in human relationships and also in our relationship to God. Sin demands a radical liberation and, in turn, a political liberation. From this perspective, the structures of power that create economic inequality lie at the heart of evil in the world. This is salvation understood in comprehensive terms to include social healing and justice, the kind of salvation the public church would strive for in our world.
Comprehensive salvation also calls the public church continuously to be involved in evangelism, the process where we communicate with word and deed the good news of God’s love in Christ that transforms life, proclaiming, by word and action, that Christ has set us free (Gutierrez, 1988:xxxvii, xli.) Evangelism thus also issues an invitation to share in the hope we hold out to the world. Swinton (2000:54) goes one step further than “set us free” when he focuses on salvation as reconciliation with God: a salvation needed because of the breaking of human-divine relationships. The public church therefore carries within its being the message and hope of reconciliation with God – which it communicates in creative ways within its context.
A public church would also, at all times, communicate comprehensive salvation in ways that respect human dignity and choice. Bosch (1995:413) asserts very strongly that evangelism should never deteriorate into coaxing, much less into threats: people should turn to God because they are drawn by God’s love, not because they are driven by fear of hell. Bevans and Schroeder (2005:348) echo this sentiment:

…just as the Triune God’s missionary presence in creation is never about imposition but always about persuasion and freedom respecting love, mission can no longer proceed in ways that neglect the freedom and dignity of human beings. Nor can a church that is rooted in a God that saves through self emptying think of itself as culturally superior to the people among whom it works.

The public church would respect people’s freedom and dignity, while upholding God’s love as an alternative to what this world has to offer. Cozens (2005:12) voices something of our own struggle sometimes to reconcile our “bold witness” as the church with our respect for the free choice and dignity of people, in stating that we know we are called to respect others and treat others with humility and love as we would wish to be treated ourselves; while we also know that we are called to confess Christ and Him crucified. We do not always know how these two fit together, the challenge and the respect for people’s choices, but it is perhaps not our job to know right now. And actually, that ought to keep us honest.
Lastly, a public church would communicate comprehensive salvation, in non-coercive ways, in public language: that is, in “publicly visible and publicly intelligible ways” (Fowler, 2002:1). This communication implies the need to develop a public language. In the words of De Beer (2003:2):

We should be careful of how we talk of God in the public arena. Jesus said we should be as wise, shrewd even, as the serpents. Bonhoeffer said we need to learn how to speak of our most fundamental values in a religionless way. How to speak what we believe to be in the heart of God, without mentioning God’s name. And that is not to compromise our faith, but to be wise in how the values of the kingdom are transferred into the public arena of the city (De Beer, 2003:2).