Eric writes and he says

Resurrection is one of the most important but under-discussed aspect of our faith. Could you clarify some questions I have about resurrection with a little tie in to eschatology?
We know that Jesus’ body went to heaven during the Ascension. The Assumption says that Mary’s body was taken into heaven, and the same seems to have happened to Elijah.

What does this say about our future resurrection? It seems that while our bodies are in the ground, it would be possible for God to give us resurrected bodies in heaven. Are the bodies of all saints in heaven after death? If so, will the resurrection be in heaven for eternity, or will we return to this creation for eternal life, or will God make a new creation where we will live forever?

If bodies of saints (other than Mary and a few others) aren’t in heaven, will the resurrection occur just prior to or during Jesus’ return, or will the return be attended by those still living at that time (something like when Jesus went to preach to those who died before his death), and those who have died before will wait for a new creation to receive new bodies? If all saints are at the return in their resurrected bodies, will this be the existence where we will live forever, or will there be a new creation that hasn’t been tainted by sin?”

Wow, there’s quite a lot there. I think the best way to proceed would be to break down Eric’s set of question part by part and go through it a bit at a time. The very first thing he says is that

Resurrection is one of the most important but under-discussed aspect of our faith.

In popular circles, I certainly agree. There is not enough discussion of the fact that the Christian faith believes in the Resurrection of the dead.

We say it constantly, whenever we say the Apostles’ Creed, or when we say the Nicene Creed. There’s always a reference to the Resurrection of the body, the resurrection of the flesh and so forth. We talk about Jesus’ resurrection quite a bit, but it’s obviously not enough in some ways because there are many people who have the idea that when we die, our soul goes off to heaven and that’s it, assuming we’re saved.

There are many people who have this idea we’ll exist in a disembodied form for all of eternity, which is not what the Christian faith teaches. Because there’s that popular misunderstanding, I would agree that the subject of resurrection is under discussed.

At least in the popular sphere there has however been quite a lot of discussion of resurrection and what it means in theological circles. That’s something that’s gone back all the way through history and there have been lots of Christian author to have weighed in on the subject, such as St. Thomas Aquinas. He’s just one example among thousands of authors who have discussed this.

But in particular there began, in the twentieth century, a renew discussion of the resurrection. Particularly in Catholic circles in the second half of the twentieth century. As a result of that, there are a number of interesting documents that have been produced by the Magisterium or by organs affiliated with the Magisterium that address some of these new perspectives and some of the problems that they contain. I’ll be talking about that as we get into material.

Eric then asks:

Could you clarify some questions I have about resurrection with a little tie in to eschatology?

I’ll certainly do my best. I wanted to pause for just a second though to mention what eschatology is for those who may not be familiar with it because it’s one of those $10 theological words.
It comes from the Greek word “eschatos” which means “last” or “a last thing.” Eschatology is, as you might guess, is the study, or the doctrine, of the last things.

There are typically two divisions to eschatology; one is personal eschatology, which deals with the fate of individual human beings. This covers subjects like the so-called ‘four last things’: death, judgments, hell, and heaven. You often get purgatory thrown in there too in that discussion because it’s a prelude to heaven and then our own personal resurrection.

The other division is sometimes called ‘corporate eschatology’ or ‘general eschatology’ and it refers not so much to the last things of the individual person, but the last things of the world. Such as the end of time, the signs preceding the second coming, the second coming itself, the general resurrection of everybody, the judgment of the dead and the setting up of the eternal order. That’s what Eric’s referring to when he refers to that.

Eric then lays some groundwork by talking about some people who know have bodies in heaven.

He says we know that Jesus’ body went to during the Ascension. The Assumption says that Mary’s body was taken into heaven and the same seems to happen to Elijah. That’s quite true.

Sometimes people ask a question about Elijah because at the end of his life in 2nd Kings, Chapter 2, he is taken up to heaven. How can that be if Jesus’ hadn’t died yet and the gates of heaven were not yet opened? (And just by coincidence, we talked about the opening of the gates of heaven in our previous episode, number 033). It would seem that Elijah is an exception, that even though, as a general rule, people were not able to go to heaven until the time of the Resurrection, that God may have made some exceptions to that rule. At least that’s what the text suggests.

If you read 2 Kings 2:1, it introduces the subject and says:

Now when the LORD was about to take Elijah up to heaven by a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal.

The word that’s used here for heaven is “sh’mayim.” The ordinary Hebrew word for heaven, it’s the same word that’s used to talk about heaven in Hebrew Scriptures. Just based on that word it would seem that that’s where Elijah went. In which case, he’d be the exception to the general rule.

The fate of the great majority of those who have left the world at that time was to descend to sh’ol, the place of the dead. Between his death and Resurrection, Christ went and preached to them to announce the opening of heaven so the righteous dead are transported, in spirit, to full glory with God.

Although the great majority, except for a few righteous people, who rose from the dead at the time of the Resurrection of Christ, or proximity to the Resurrection of Christ, according the Gospel of Matthew.

Most of them didn’t have their body, that’s getting ahead of ourselves a little bit. Elijah looks like he may have been an exception, although one could purpose ways in which maybe he wasn’t himself given the full Glory of Heaven until the time of the resurrection.

Scripture does locate the place that Elijah was taken as shamayim or heaven. The same word is also used to refer to not only the celestial heaven, but also the atmospheric heaven, where the birds of heaven are and the astronomical heaven, where the stars are.

Unless Elijah is somewhere in the Earth’s atmosphere or in outer space, which seems implausible, then it would be presumed he went to the sh’mayim, where God is in the celestial heaven.

Hope that clarifies Elijah’s situation a little bit. What does this say about our future resurrection? It seems while our bodies are in the ground, it would be possible for God to give us resurrected bodies in heaven.

Ok, I’m not 100% sure, what Eric has in mind here, but I think I can get at the question reasonably. The main premise would seem to be, if heaven were a place that could receive bodies, like Jesus, Mary’s and perhaps Elijah’s body, then it would be possible for it to have other bodies in it.

It would be possible, in theory, for every saint to have a body with them in heaven. It wouldn’t even have to be the same one that is in the ground here on Earth, God could make a new body for someone who’s in heaven. I think that’s what Eric may be getting at.

As a logical possibility, I have to agree. It’s true for God in his omniscience to do that, it seems clear that even though we don’t understand how space and time work in the afterlife, that heaven is at least capable of receiving bodies like Christ’s, and Mary’s and perhaps, Elijah’s.

We know that normally, in this world, bodies are extended in space and perhaps there is something analogous in space in heaven, or not, it’s hard to say. At least there is something capable of receiving a body. That opens the possibility, logically speaking, could God create or have bodies, for everybody who’s in heaven. Hypothetically, the answer is yes, God’s omniscient, he can do that if he wants.

There is a set of questions that would be raised by that. One is we have no reason, based on the data of theology, that God does this, that God creates bodies for people in heaven. In fact, the overwhelming suggestion, in the sources of faith, is that this does not happen, that we continue to exist without our bodies in heaven.

I’m going to mention some alternative views that have cropped up recently in the discussions that occurred in the twentieth century that have been rejected by the Magisterium. In principle, it would be logically possible, but we just don’t have evidence for that.

The strong indication from all the sources that the Christian faith has access to, Scripture and tradition, is that we continue to exist in a disembodied state prior to the end of the world. One of the places that discusses this, is a document that was released by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, back in 1979.

This document, which is called the Letter on Certain Questions Concerning Eschatology (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19790517_escatologia_en.html), was released by the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, at that time, was Cardinal Seper–before Cardinal Ratzinger became the head of the congregation. Different guy; same institution.

This document responds to some of the questions that were being raised at the time after they had been raised in Protestant circles for sometime after the second Vatican started having Catholic theologians painting them. Some were entertained as part of ecumenical dialog.

The doctrine that’s distinctly Catholic, that’s not shared by our Protestant brethren, is the Assumption of Mary. So there were questions that came up in ecumenical dialog regarding Mary and saints. Some said maybe there’s a way we can understand the assumption in a way that’s acceptable to both Protestant and Catholics.

Maybe you have that she’s not the only one to be assumed. Maybe we can understand everybody’s death and afterlife in the same way we understand the Virgin Mary’s. There’s a sense in which everybody gets assumed into heaven upon their death and then we don’t seem to have as much point of division between Protestant and Catholics.

That was one of the possibilities that was raised. I’ve read books from that period where people are talking about that possibility, but it’s not something that the Magisterium accepts. That is made quite clear in the letter on Letter on Certain Questions Concerning Eschatology.

If you read it, particularly if you read down to sections 5 & 6 (although the structure of the document isn’t numbered all the way through), you will see, in #5, it says:

In accordance with the Scriptures, the Church looks for “the glorious manifestation of our Lord, Jesus Christ” (Dei Verbum, I, 4), believing it to be distinct and deferred with respect to the situation of people immediately after death.

That is something that will play a role later on in our discussion. The next numbered paragraph, #6, deals directly with the question at hand. It says:

In teaching her doctrine about man’s destiny after death, the Church excludes any explanation that would deprive the Assumption of the Virgin Mary of its unique meaning, namely the fact that the bodily glorification of the Virgin is an anticipation of the glorification that is the destiny of all the other elect.

Right there is a rejection of the hypothesis that began to be discussed in the second half of the century that might flatten out the uniqueness of the Assumption of the Virgin, and say, “Oh no, that happens to everybody.”

Everyone at the end of their life is raised to heaven and bodily glorified there even though they have a body that’s here on Earth in their grave. The Magisterium here says no, that’s not the case, Mary’s bodily glorification in heaven today, is something that is not shared by all of the other saints. It’s an anticipation of the glorification that is the destiny of all the other elect.
To apply that to Eric’s question, there is a difference between the case of the Virgin Mary, Jesus, perhaps Elijah and the case of the saints in general. They don’t have their bodies with them in heaven so even though, hypothetically God give them a body there and heaven could contain it that is not in fact the case.

Another document also deals with some of these questions in a more in depth way than the letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does. This document came out a few years later because the subjects continue to be discussed. It was prepared by the International Theological Commission, which is a body that works under the auspiciousness of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The International Theological Commission is headed by the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It includes a variety of Vatican appointed theologians.

What they do is discuss questions and they prepare opinion papers at the request of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and prefect. Because these eschatological questions continue to be discussed, it was decided the International Theological Commission would begin developing a paper, which eventually appeared in 1992 under the title Some Current Questions in Eschatology.

To help you understand the doctrinal status of this document, it needs to be pointed out that the International Theological Commission is not itself an organ of the Magisterium, the way the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is.

What its purpose is, as I’ve said, is to prepare studies on particular questions. If the members of the International Theological Commission vote to release the document, that they’ve prepared on whatever subject it, may be, then it carries the weight of the International Theological Commission and is submitted to the Pope and to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

It can then be published to the public with the approval of the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith assuming that the Holy See doesn’t have any difficulty with it. That’s according to the final statutes for the International Theological Commission that were promulgated by John Paul II.

If you have a document that’s been release by the International Theological Commission, it isn’t itself a magisterial document, but the fact that it’s been published, with the permission of the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, signals that the Holy See does not have any difficulty with it.

It at least articulates what would be consider permitted Catholic theological opinion. In fact, because of the nature of the International Theological Commission to produce a consensus document of “here’s the state of the question,” theologically.

It also tends to represent a mainstream view among orthodox Catholic theologians, which is precisely the kind the Vatican appoints to the International Theological Commission. With that as background, the document sum current questions in eschatology that came out in 1992. After it was submitted for debate in the plenary session of the International Theological Commission (that’s where they gather in Rome and discuss things).

After it was submitted to debate in the plenary session of December 1991, it was fully approved by written vote in forma specifica, which means it has the weight of the International Theological Commission behind it.

According to the statutes of the International Theological Commission, it is now published with the approval of His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, President of the Commission.

What we’re going to read in this document, while not magisterial, represents a consensus of mainstream orthodox Catholic theology that the Holy See does not have any difficulty with.

If you look in section 1.2.5 of this document there is some material has to do with Eric’s question regarding the saints in heaven having resurrected bodies. It says:

1.2.5. Finally, we must note that in the Creeds there are dogmatic formulas of a very realistic kind referring to the body of the resurrection. The resurrection will take place “in this flesh, in which now we live”.31 Therefore, the body that now lives and that will ultimately rise is one and the same. This faith shines forth clearly in early Christian theology. Thus Saint Irenaeus admits the “transfiguration” of the flesh, “because being mortal and corruptible it becomes immortal and incorruptible” in the final resurrection; 32: but this resurrection will take place “in the very same bodies in which they had died: for if (the resurrection were) not in these very same (scil. bodies), neither would those who had died be the same as those who would rise.” 33: The Fathers therefore think that personal identity cannot be defended in the absence of bodily identity. The Church has never taught that the very same matter is required for the body to be said to be the same. But the cult of relics, whereby Christians profess that the bodies of the saints “who were living members of Christ and the temple of the Holy Spirit” must be “raised and glorified” by Christ, 34 shows that the resurrection cannot be explained independently of the body that once lived.

To refer this back to Eric’s question, if someone’s’ body is presently in a grave and their spirit is in heaven they do not have a body in heaven because they are waiting a resurrection in the very same body.

There is also, a little further on, a discussion of the some of the theories that came about in the twentieth century. This section starts at 2.1, and it says:

A fixed moment of time is attributed in the New Testament to the resurrection of the dead. Paul, after he announced that the resurrection of the dead will take place through Christ and in Christ, added: “but each in proper order: Christ the first fruits and then, at his coming (en te parousia autou), all those who belong to him” (1 Cor 15:23).

A specific event is designated as the moment of the resurrection of the dead. For, by the Greek word parousia, is signified the future second coming of the Lord in glory, different from his first coming in humility;35 the manifestation of h is glory (cf. Tit 2:13) and the manifestation of the parousia (cf. 2 Thess 2:8) refer to the same coming. The same event is expressed in the Gospel according to John (6:54) by the words “on the last day” (cf. also Jn 6:39-40). The same connection of events is given vivid expression in the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, 4:16-17, and is affirmed by a great tradition of the Fathers: “at his coming all men will rise.”

It then says:

A new theory of “the resurrection at the moment of death” is opposed to this affirmation. In the most widely diffused form of this theory, the explanation given appears to pose a grave threat to the realism of the resurrection, since the resurrection is affirmed without any relationship to the body that once lived and is now dead.

Concerning “the resurrection in death”, the theologians who propose it want to suppress the existence after death of a “separated soul”, which they consider to be, as it were, a remnant of Platonism. The fear of Platonism that motivates the theologians espousing resurrection in death is quite understandable; Platonism would be a most serious deviation from Christian faith, since for Christian faith the body is not a prison from which the soul is to be liberated.

Precisely for this reason, it is not at all clear that these theologians, in fleeing Platonism, affirm the final or resurrection bodiliness in a way which shows that bodiliness truly involves “this flesh in which now we live”.37 The older formulas of faith spoke with quite another force about the raising up of the very same body that is now alive.

The conceptual separation between a body and a corpse, or the introduction into the notion of body of two diverse concepts (a difference is expressed in German by the words “Leib” and “Körper”, while in many other languages it cannot be expressed) are scarcely understood outside academic circles.

Pastoral experience shows us that the Christian people are greatly perplexed when they hear sermons affirming that the dead person has already risen while his corpse is still buried. It is to be feared that such sermons have a negative influence on the Christian faithful, and foster today doctrinal confusion. In this secularized world in which the faithful are beguiled by the materialistic philosophy of absolute death, it would be a very serious matter to increase their perplexities.

More Moreover, the Parousia in the New Testament is a specific event concluding history. Violence is done to the texts of the New Testament if one seeks to explain the Parousia as a permanent event that is nothing other than the encounter of an individual with the Lord in his own death.

2.2. “On the last day” (Jn 6:54), when people will rise gloriously, they will reach complete communion with the Risen Christ. This is evident, from the fact, that then the communion of people with Christ will be in accord with the full existential reality of both. Moreover, with history at an end, the resurrection of all his fellow servants and brothers and sisters will complete the mystical body of Christ (cf. Rev 6:11). Thus, Origen said: “There is only one body that is said to rise in judgment.” Rightly, therefore did the Eleventh Council of Toledo profess that the glorious resurrection of the dead would be not only on the model of Christ but also on “the model of our Head”.

This community aspect of the final resurrection seems to be dissolved in the theory of resurrection in death, since the latter kind of resurrection would be purely individual. For this reason, some theologians who favor the theory of resurrection in death seek a solution in a so-called atemporalism: they say that after death time can in no way exist, and hold that the deaths of people are successive (viewed from the perspective of this world); whereas the resurrection of those people in the life after death, in which there would be no temporal distinctions, is (they think) simultaneous.

But this attempted atemporalism, according to which successive individual deaths would coincide with a simultaneous collective resurrection, implies recourse to a philosophy of time quite foreign to biblical thought.

This is something I’ve often pointed out at times because the Church recognizes that God himself is absolutely outside of time. There is a widespread opinion, even among ordinary lay Catholics that time therefore doesn’t exist in heaven for humans. This raises many questions along precisely this line.

I’ve pointed out quite a number of times, that if you look at the biblical data and the theological data, it seem–even if we don’t know how time works in the after life–there is at least a sequentiality that occurs for humans in the afterlife: You have death, the particular judgment; are you going to heaven, maybe a time in purgatory, your purification is finished, you experience heaven and after that you experience the general resurrection.

It’s not as if time for humans completely evaporates and everything happens simultaneously, the way it does for God.

The International Theological Commission is now pointing this out. It says

[T]he New Testament’s way of speaking about the souls of the martyrs does not seem to remove them either from all reality of cessation, or from all perception of succession, (cf. 1 Thess 4:13-18).

Similarly, if time should have no meaning after death, not even in some way merely analogous with it’s terrestrial meaning, it would be hard to understand why Paul used formulas referring to the future in speaking about their resurrection when corresponding to the Thessalonians who were asking about the fate of the dead.

Moreover, a radical denial of any meaning for time in those resurrections, deemed both simultaneous and taking place in the moment of death, does not seem to take sufficiently into account the truly corporeal nature of the resurrection; for a true body cannot be said to exist devoid of all notion of temporality. Even the souls of the blessed, since they are in communion with the Christ who has been raised in a bodily way, cannot be thought of without any connection with time.

The International Theological Commission puts to rest another proposal that seeks to identify the moment of an individuals resurrection with the moment of his death.

Eric then says:

If bodies of saints (other than Mary and a few others) aren’t in heaven, will the resurrection occur just prior to or during Jesus’ return, or will the return be attended by those still living at that time (something like when Jesus went to preach to those who died before his death), and those who have died before will wait for a new creation to receive new bodies?

We’ve already seen that the general resurrection is timed to coincide with the return or parousia, of Jesus Christ, the second coming, the specific passage of scripture that most closely addresses Eric’s question is found in 1st Thessalonians 4.

If you start reading at verse 13 you’ll see that the passage says:

[13] But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, (by which Paul means dead) that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.
[14] For since, we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.

So we have the Second Coming.

[15] For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep.
[16] For the Lord himself, will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
[17] then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.
[18] Therefore, comfort one another with these words.

According to St. Paul, he says he is declaring this by the word of the Lord so this is divine revelation. It’s not just an opinion or something like that. There are passages, at least there’s one passage where St. Paul says, “I don’t have a command from the Lord but here’s what I think.”

Here in this passage, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he’s indicating that this is really going to happen, it’s not an opinion, it’s fully backed by divine authority. He indicates that there will be people who are still alive at the time of the Second Coming but those who have died will be raised at that time and all of the Christian faithful will be gathered to be with Christ forever.

Those who’ve fallen asleep during the Christian age won’t have to wait for a new creation in order to be resurrected; they’ll be resurrected at the time of the Second Coming.

I’m going to fuse a couple of passages from Eric’s email, because he recapitulates a little in his discussion:

If so, will the resurrection be in heaven for eternity, or will we return to this creation for eternal life, or will God make a new creation where we will live forever?

At the very end of his email, he says,

If all saints are at the return (the second coming) in their resurrected bodies, will this be the existence where we will live forever, or will there be a new creation that hasn’t been tainted by sin?”

He recapitulates the question in a bit of a different form so I want to include both forms to respond to. Let’s look first at the biblical data; the bible indicates there is to be a new heaven and a new earth, in other words a new creation.

That’s something mentioned as early as the book of Isaiah and in the New Testament we get a quite good bit of information about how it fits into the Christian understanding of the end of the world.

One of the key passages is 2 Peter 3, if you start reading with verse 3, you’ll see the text says

[3] First of all you must understand this, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own passions
[4] and saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation.”

Peter responds with:

[5] They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago, and an earth formed out of water and by means of water,

(Referring to the world as it’s creation is described in Genesis 1). Then he says:

[6] through which the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.

Let’s stop there for a minute. What he’s saying is that there was a heaven and earth and formed by water and that world destroyed by water. Picking up in verse 7:

[7] But by the same word, the heavens and earth that now exist have been stored up for fire, being kept until the Day of Judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
[8] But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
[9] The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
[10] But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up.
[11] Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness,
[12] waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire!
[13] But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
[14] Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace.

Here’s the first chunk of Biblical data that we’re going to look at regarding the new creation. It’s commonly asked what’s the relationship between the new heaven and earth, and the present heaven and earth.

One possibility is that they will be entirely new creations. It’s possible to say, “Ok, God will annihilate the present world, return it to nothing, then create a new world–ex nihilo, out of nothing.”

God may preserve the resurrected humans, move them from this original universe, and put them in the new universe. That’s a possibility, that’s something people ask about.

If you read what Peter is saying closely, there’s another possibility here because he says that there was, originally, a world that was formed out of water, then destroyed by water.

He then refers to the heavens and earth that now exist, in contrast to that earth, and he says that the new one is being stored up for fire. Then there will be a new earth beyond that one. Peter seems to conceive there being three worlds: the world before the Great Flood, the world between the Deluge and the Second Coming of Christ, and then there’s the world after the Second Coming, in which righteousness dwells.

We know, from the text of Genesis, that God didn’t annihilate the world at the Great Flood. He just renovated, restructured the world. He wiped out the previous civilization, and started over.

If the first world was not altogether annihilated, and if the second world was not created from nothing when Moses landed on Mt. Ararat, then that suggests a continuity between the present world that’s reserved for fire and the new world that’s going to come after.

Instead of annihilation followed by a replacement of a new creation ex nihilo, it might be a renovation of the world–something that radically restructures it’s order and makes it new in that sense, but not new in the sense of being an entirely new creation from nothing.

Bear in mind that possibility, because, we’re going to come back to it. The next piece of data is in Revelation 6, this occurs in the passage in which the lamb is opening the seven seals on the scroll in heaven. If you start reading with verse 12, you find this:

[12] When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood,
[13] and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale;
[14] the sky vanished like a scroll that is rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.
[15] Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the generals and the rich and the strong, and every one, slave and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains,
[16] calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
[17] for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand before it?”

In the book of Revelation there are a lot of different things that are described and it’s often quite difficult to figure out how they relate to each other, but something to note is we have the sky or heaven being depicted as if it’s vanishing “like a scroll that’s rolled up.”

We also have a convulsion of the earth it says “every mountain and island was removed from its place.” That alteration of heaven and earth–with the disappearance of heaven and the alteration of earth–is something that could be conceived of as the disappearance of the current heaven and earth and the coming of the new heaven and earth.

Whether or not it anticipates it, or depicts it, in Revelation 6 is something people could have different opinions on. But in Revelation chapters 20 and 21, we have a direct reference of the passing of the present earth and heaven and their replacement by the new heaven and earth.

If you started with Revelation chapter 20, verse 11 you’ll see that it says:

[11] Then I saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it; from his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them.
[12] And I saw the dead, great, and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also a book was opened, which is the book of life, the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done.
[13] And the sea gave up the dead in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead in them, and all were judged by what they had done.
[14] Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire;
[15] and if any one’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
[1] Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.
[2] And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband;
[3] and I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself will be with them;
[4] he will wipe away every tea r from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.”
[5] And he who sat upon the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” Also, he said, “Write this, for these words are trustworthy and true.”

Here in Revelation 21, we have a clear and unmistakable reference to the final passing away of the current heaven and earth and the introduction of the new heaven and earth.

This unfortunately doesn’t tell us the precise relationship between the new heaven and earth and the current new heaven and earth. It doesn’t indicate, at least from what I can see, whether they are a brand new creation from nothing or whether or a renovation.

The language could be taken to suggest they are a replacement because in Revelation 20:11 it says that the “earth and sky fled away.” Then the heaven and new earth are introduced in Revelation 21:1.

You could look upon this as a replacement, but the book of Revelation uses a great deal of symbolism, and so the moving away, the fleeing of the present earth and heaven from God could be a form of symbolism. It could mean that their old form passed away. Saying that they fled away doesn’t mean they were annihilated. What it says is that they “fled away, and no place was found for them.”

That actually personifies heaven and earth as if they were intelligent beings that could run away from another intelligent being and search a place to hide. But the physical world is not an intelligent being that could run and hide. Right there we see a certain element of symbolism.

You can see the same thing in verse 13, where it talks about how Death and Hades gave up the dead in them. Hades is the place of the dead and it’s depicted here in parallel to Death itself.

What would it mean for Death and the place of the dead to give up the dead in them? They would seem to mean the same thing.

So referring to Death and Hades seem to involve an element of symbolism in this passage. The point is that the dead are being raised–all of the dead (because we have the general judgment at this point and your ultimate fate is decided). But Death and Hades, especially Death, is not literally a container that contains dead people.

And Hades is just the place of the dead. What it’s precise nature is, is hard to say. This passage contains elements that are accommodated to the way we can presently understand things, and that tends to have the effect of personifying them. In fact, Death and Hades are presented earlier on as if they were beings.

We see that in the next verse, verse 14:

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.

Death and Hades are depicted as if they are beings that you could through into the lake of fire. Just as though you could through the individual dead people now resurrected into the lake of fire if their names are not found in the book of life.

Since Death and Hades aren’t really intelligent beings, it again looks like we have a form of personification going on here, the same way we did with heaven and earth fleeing God’s presence and trying to find a hiding place and not succeeding. We shouldn’t be too quick to read this passage as if it indicates and full annihilation and a new creation ex nihilo.

Both interpretations would seem to be possible given the language of the passage.

In the face of the biblical ambiguity, the thing to do is turn to later sources, in particular what the Magisterium has said.

If you look at the section of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 1042, it says:

1042 At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign forever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. The universe itself will be renewed:

The Church . . . will receive her perfection only in the glory of heaven, when will come the time of the renewal of all things. At that time, together with the human race, the universe itself, which is so closely related to man and which attains its destiny through him, will be perfectly re-established in Christ.
It appears that the Catechism is teaching the renewal understanding rather than the replacement understanding that we previously discussed. It doesn’t talk about the current earth being destroyed and an entirely new one being made from scratch, instead it uses the word “renew.” It says, “The universe itself will be renewed.” And it makes the further point that the universe is closely related to man and that it finds it’s destiny through him, saying it will be perfectly re-established through Christ.
Catechism of the Catholic Church 1043 says:

1043 Sacred Scripture calls this mysterious renewal, which will transform humanity and the world, “new heavens and a new earth.” [630] It will be the definitive realization of God’s plan to bring under a single head “all things in [Christ], things in heaven and things on earth.” [631]

1044 In this new universe, the heavenly Jerusalem, God will have his dwelling among men. [632] “He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.” [633]

1045 For man, this consummation will be the final realization of the unity of the human race, which God willed from creation and of which the pilgrim Church has been “in the nature of sacrament.” [634] Those who are united with Christ will form the community of the redeemed, “the holy city” of God, “the Bride, the wife of the Lamb.” [635] She will not be wounded any longer by sin, stains, self-love, that destroy or wound the earthly community. [636] The beatific vision, in which God opens himself in an inexhaustible way to the elect, will be the ever-flowing well-spring of happiness, peace, and mutual communion.

1046 For the cosmos, Revelation affirms the profound common destiny of the material world and man:

Then the Catechism has a quotation from St. Paul where he says:

“For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God . . . in hope because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay….We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

1047 The visible universe, then, is itself destined to be transformed, “so that the world itself, restored to its original state, facing no further obstacles, should be at the service of the just,” sharing their glorification in the risen Jesus Christ.

Right there we have an reaffirmation of the transformation of the world and in the previous quotation of the linkage of the world to the just. We seem to have an endorsement of the renovation rather than the annihilation, new creation, ex nihilo idea.

Finally, the Catechism in the final paragraph 1060 says:

At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. Then the just will reign with Christ for ever, glorified in body and soul, and the material universe itself will be transformed. God will then be “all in all” (1 Cor 15:28), in eternal life.

That’s what the Catechism has to say. It also has a quotation from Gaudium et spes, which is one of the Vatican II documents. It talks about the new heaven and earth there with some very usefull and spiritually profitable things to say so I’d encourage you to read that, it’s paragragh 39 but it’s not quite addressing the set of topics we’re talking about here. So I’m not going to read that in detail.

I’ll close by reading one additional little paragraph from the International Theological Commission document that we quoted earlier. Obviously it’s vastly less authoritative than the Catechism or the 2nd Vatican Council, but it does put things in a particularly helpful way.

If you look at section 1.2.4 of Some Current Questions in Eschatology, it says:

The communion with God in this last stage will not be merely spiritual. God, who in his revelation invites us to this final communion, is at the same time the God of this world of creation. This “first creation” will also be in the end assumed into the final glorification.

It is in this sense that Vatican Council II declared: “Enduring with charity and its fruits, all that creation which God made on man’s account will be unchained from the bondage of vanity.”30

This would, again, seem to emphasize the renewal theory rather than the annihilation and replacement theory of the relationship between the coming world and the present world. In the International Theological Commission’s language, the present, first creation will in the end be assumed into the final glorification.

It understands the significance of what the Vatican II says. When Vatican II speaks of all that creation that God made on mans’ account being unchained from the bondage of vanity.

###