Then He was not “just a good man…”

            A fourth distinguishing fact is that He does not fit, as the other world teachers do, into the established category of a good man.  Good men do not lie.  But if Christ was not all that He said He was, namely, the Son of the living God, the Word Of God in the flesh, then He was not “just a good man”; then He was a knave, a liar, a charlatan and the greatest deceiver who ever lived.  If He was not what He said He was, the Christ, the Son of God, He was the anti-Christ!  If he was only a man, then He was not even a “good” man.

But He was not only a man.  He would have us either worship Him or despise Him-despise Him as a mere man or worship Him as true God and true man.  That is the alternative He presents.  It may very well be that the Communists, who are so anti-Christ, are closer to Him that those who see Him as a sentimentalist and a vague moral reformer.  The Communists, have at least decided that if He wins, they lose; the others are afraid to consider Him either as winning or loosing, because they are not prepared to meet the moral demands which this victory would make on their souls.

If He is what He claimed to be, a Savior, a Redeemer, then we have a virile Christ and a leader worth following in these terrible times; One Who will step into the breach of death, crushing sin, gloom and despair; a leader to Whom we can make totalitarian sacrifice without loosing, but gaining freedom, and Whom we can love even unto death.  We need a Christ today, Who will make cords and drive the buyers and sellers from our new temples; Who will blast the unfruitful fig trees; Who will talk of crosses and sacrifices and Whose voice will be like the voice of the raging sea.  But He will not allow us to pick and choose among His words, discarding the hard ones, and accepting the ones that please our fancy.  Sheen, Bishop Fulton J. (p. 6-7)

How can anyone dismiss not only the existence of Christ but who and what He is and what He represents?  The questions Bishop Sheen poses cannot with any logic and reason be either dismissed or ignored.  The existence of Christ, in and of itself poses a dilemma to our moral compass whether we like it, want it, to or not.  History dictates this, the same as the existence of Hitler, Marx and Abraham Lincoln.  What Christ poses is a moral demand with authority that no world leader, political figure or vigilante did, can or will.

54” Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. 56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. 57 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. 58 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. 59 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall live for ever.” (John 6:54-59)

4 “Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in me. 5 I am the vine; you the branches: he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing. 6 If any one abide not in me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up, and cast him into the fire, and he burneth.” (John 15:4-6)

1 “Who hath believed our report and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? 2 And he shall grow up as a tender plant before him, and as a root out of a thirsty ground: there is no beauty in him, nor comeliness: and we have seen him, and there was no sightliness, that we should be desirous of him: 3 Despised, and the most abject of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with infirmity: and his look was as it were hidden and despised, whereupon we esteemed him not. 4 Surely he hath borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows: and we have thought him as it were a leper, and as one struck by God and afflicted. 5 But he was wounded for our iniquities, he was bruised for our sins: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his bruises we are healed.”  (Isaiah 53:1-5)

15 “Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? 16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”  (Matt 16:15-18)

43 “You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thy enemy. 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you: 45 That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust. 46 For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have do not even the publicans do this?” (Matt 5:43-46)

Can anyone pose such moral demands without being sane and actually be who Christ says He is?  How could someone raise a dead man, and be insane, yet have not only twelve men follow Him and His teachings, but an entire society and in turn a “Holy Roman Empire?”  It would seem one would have to deny history in large blocks of decades or centuries in order to dismiss or attempt to dismiss such events.  We can however, ignore history.  We can dismiss in our own minds because we want to live according to our own moral demands or lack thereof…

In history and time, water will rise to its own level, figuratively speaking in order to determine what is real and authentic and/or not.  Would it not stand to reason in view of people like, Marx and Hitler, time and history with sound logic and reason determine both of them mentally disconnected based on their attempts to fulfill their twisted and sick ideology of reality and the world?  Does history look upon such figures in a favorable light, if to be followed and/or imitated?  Does not history demand the use of sound logic and reason in order to understand events that took place?  I would assert that if either Marx or Hitler were sane, with a sound moral compass, history and humanity would not view them as evil dictators, which killed people on mass scales, in order to control and manipulate society and the world…just ask any death camp survivor.

Would it therefore, not stand to reason, Christ was not insane nor a political figurehead or Satan?  Examples of people such as Catherine of Siena, Therese of Lisieux, Francis of Assisi, Padre Pio, Pope John Paul II, Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, Pope Benedict and Thomas Moore, using sound logic and reason that followed the moral demands of Christ, are viewed with respect and admiration, to that of Hitler and Marx?  It is absurd to assert, not only is Christ insane but those that followed Him since 33 AD must also be insane?  As in scripture, the book of The Acts of the Apostles, taking place several years after the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ, when Peter and the other apostle’s of Christ were arrested and brought before the council for questioning;

34 But one in the council rising up, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, respected by all the people, commanded the men to be put forth a little while. 35 And he said to them: Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do, as touching these men. 36 For before these days rose up Theodas, affirming himself to be somebody, to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all that believed him were scattered, and brought to nothing. 37 After this man, rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the enrolling, and drew away the people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as consented to him, were dispersed. 38 And now, therefore, I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this council or this work be of men, it will come to nought; 39 But if it be of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God.  (Acts 5:34-39)

It is with the freewill people dismiss the moral demands of Christ, choose to live according to their own moral compass, as it is fun, easy, and more importantly- such a life makes no moral demands.  However, I would assert no sound logic (and/or philosophical) assertion can attempt to rationalize that God does not nor cannot exist.  While many use and feed the ego in order to be seen in favorable light in the eyes of the world, it is power, authority, and prestige that drive the ego with pride and arrogance.  No one that is philosophically honest, looking for the objective truth, can dismiss the moral demands that Christ puts forth to us.  One can, however, choose to ignore such demands based upon the overriding desire to feed the ego and pride to be our own Gods.  “But He will not allow us to pick and choose among His words, discarding the hard ones, and accepting the ones that please our fancy.”  Sheen, Bishop Fulton J. (p. 7)

                                     References 

(1958). Sheen, Bishop Fulton J.  The Life of Chirst. New York: Sheed and Ward.

(2007). Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible, Retrieved from VulSearch  4.1.6.