Parousia

MATTHEW J. PEREIRA

The Greek term parousia, within the con­text of the New Testament, denotes the “presence” or “arrival” of Jesus Christ at the Eschaton (Matt. 24.3; 1Cor. 15.23). Early Christian expectations of apocalyptic salvation were foreshadowed in Palestinian literature, as can be seen by reference to the Old Testament pseudepigrapha and the Qumran texts (Russell 1964). The early church’s sense of the delay of the glorious return of Christ in judgment (Jn. 21.21–23) provided Christians the opportunity to rearticulate the Parousia in a manner that reflected their own theological concerns, which were shaped within specific social and ecclesial settings (Aune 1975). Beyond exclusively focusing on the “last days,” patristic theologians extensively interpreted the Parousia as a present spiritual reality, part of the resurrection mystery, which pointed towards a future hope.

In the early church the Parousia denoted a wide range of spiritual realities, such as the nearness of the gospel, the day of resurrec­tion, Christ’s healing ministry, judgment, and accommodation to humanity. In his Letter to the Philadelphians Ignatius of Anti­och (ca. 35-ca. 98/117) proclaimed that the gospel possesses the transcendent “appear­ance” of our Lord Jesus Christ, his passion and resurrection (Phil. 9.2). Justin Martyr (ca. 100–165) interprets the Parousia as Christ’s power, whereby the Lord resurrects the dead and heals the sick upon his arrival. In his Dialogue with Trypho Justin Martyr also interpreted the deluge as a Christ-event; Noah and his family totaled eight people and thus allegorically represented the eighth day, which is when Christ “appeared” (had his Parousia) and rose from the dead (Dial. 88.2). Fur­ther, in his First Apology, Justin parallels the prophecy of Isaiah with Christ’s healing presence; it is at the Lord’s “coming” that the “lame shall leap ... the lepers be cleansed, and the dead shall rise” (I Apol. 48.2). In the Stromateis Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–215) argues that the “advent” of the Savior will divide the believers from the disobedient (Strom. 1.18). The Lord’s arrival clearly reveals the spiritual state of each person, and thus ensures there will be only just judgment. Further, Clement teaches God has no natu­ral relation with humanity, yet the Lord “accommodated” himself to our weakness (Strom. 2.16). In brief, Christian theolo­gians in the first three centuries interpreted the Parousia as a fundamental christological event associated with Christ’s resurrection power, healing, judgment, and nearness to redeemed humanity.

Origen of Alexandria (d. 253/254) enlarged the doctrine of the Parousia through emphasizing the possibility, for the spiritually advanced, to experience God in the present moment. While known for his speculative tendencies, Origen’s pastoral concerns informed his theology of the Parousia (Etcheverria 1969; Daley 2003: 48). Origen predominantly understood the Apocalypse of John through the lens of Christ, rather than focusing on the “last days” (Daley 2003: 49). There is another “second coming,” according to Origen, where the Lord becomes present to the souls who are being perfected. Overall, Origen interprets the “last times” in a manner that primarily is meant to illumi­nate Christian spiritual growth. The con­summation of the world, according to Origen, involves the present process of spiritual growth realized within each soul (De Principiis 3.6.6). The Kingdom of God is already present in virtuous Chris­tians, while not fully realized (Comm. on Matt. 12.14; Or. 25.2). The Parousia is pres­ently experienced; however, the coming of Christ also remains a future hope only fully realized when “God becomes all in all” (Comm. on Jn. 20.7.47). God’s presence, according to Origen, is experienced through contemplation. The heavenly ban­quet is analogous with contemplation of God, which is delimited by our human capacity (De Princ. 2.11.7). Further, Origen insists our knowledge of God will never be complete; rather, the sojourner is always spiritually advancing through entering deeper into the presence of God (Hom. 17 on Numbers).

With the ascendancy of Constantine as emperor (ca. 272–337) the church entered into an era of relative security. In this new situation a more church-centered eschato­logy became common; for example, Eusebius of Caesarea declared the first fruits of future rewards bring assurance to the faithful in their present state (Vita Const. 1.33; Thielman 1987). The first two ecu­menical councils emphasized Christology and the doctrine of God; consequently, there was perhaps less of a lively theological interest in a future-looking eschatology throughout the 4th century. The Cappado­cian fathers primarily understood the Par- ousia as a spiritual grace related to the process of divinization (Gross 1938). St. Basil of Caesarea (ca. 330–79) mediates between spir­itual interpretations and a theology of apoca­lyptic judgment when reflecting upon the Lord’s second coming. But of particular note is the way in which St. Basil associates the coming of Christ with judgment when addressing monastic communities (e.g., Ep. 46.5). St. Gregory of Nazianzus (ca. 329/ 330–90) interpreted the Lord’s presence as both a judgment and a grace (Mossay 1964). In his oration “On Holy Baptism” Gregory speaks of Christ’s cleansing fire and then adds the caveat, “I know also a fire that is not cleansing, but avenging” (Or. 40.36). This fire, which represents Christ’s judg­ment, is for the wicked that are in need of chastisement. Consequently, for Gregory, the fire, that is the presence of Christ, can be either blessing or bane. St. Gregory of Nyssa (ca. 335–94) developed Origen’s doctrine of perpetual spiritual growth through his interpretation of the beatitude as epektasis (constant spiritual progress). In his Life of Moses Gregory asserts Christians are “never to reach satiety in one’s desire,” for they are inflamed with the desire to see more of God (Life of Moses 2.239).

The Parousia, therefore, had multiple and significant meanings throughout the Eastern Church, but ultimately each definition expressed some aspect of Christ’s redemptive and lordly presence. The Parou- sia, for some theologians, was predomi­nantly an eschatological event, whereas others emphasized the presence and coming of Christ in their present spiritual lives. Ultimately, Christians’ ongoing experience of Christ is the basis for their future hope (e.g., St. John Chrysostom, Homily on Philemon 3.3; Daley 2003: 223). The Parou- sia, more than anything else, expresses the mystery of Jesus Christ, who is with human­ity in the present situation and yet will come back again in his gloriously revealed resur- rectional power (St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on 1Cor. 15).

SEE ALSO: Cappadocian Fathers; Eschatol­ogy; St. Constantine the Emperor (ca. 271–337); St. Cyril of Alexandria (ca. 378–444); St. John Chrysostom (349–407)

REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

Aune, D. E. (1975) “The Significance ofthe Delay of the Parousia for Early Christianity,” In G. F. Hawthorne (ed.) Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, pp. 87–109.

Daley, B. E. (2003) The Hope of the Early Church: A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

Etcheverria, R. T. (1969) “Epidhimia y Parousia en Origenes,” Scriptorium victoriense 16: 313–37.

Florovsky, G. (1956) “Eschatology in the Patristic Age,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 2: 27–40.

Gross, J. (1938) La divinisation du Chretien d’apres les peres grecs. Paris: J. Gabalda.

Mossay, J. (1964) “Perspectives eschatologiques de Saint Gregoire de Nazianze,” QLP 45: 320–39.

Russell, D. S. (1964) The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, 200 bc-ad 100. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

Thielman, F. S. (1987) “Another Look at the Eschatology of Eusebius of Caesarea,” Vigiliae Christianae 41: 226–37.