87 lines
4.6 KiB
HTML
87 lines
4.6 KiB
HTML
<p>"Jesus was a revolutionary", "Jesus Christ's revolutionary message",
|
|
"the Christian revolution." These are phrases we've probably all heard
|
|
before in reference to Jesus Christ and His teachings. Most notably,
|
|
the equivocation of Jesus Christ with any kind of revolutionary spirit
|
|
tends to come from those who wish to change some fundamental Church
|
|
Teaching, and by framing our Lord as a revolutionary, it makes it appear
|
|
that such changes are "what Christ would've done", or indeed possible in
|
|
the first place. Yet, this makes little to no sense, neither biblically
|
|
nor philosophically.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>To start, what is a <i>revolution</i>? Well, as the Oxford Dictionary
|
|
would define it, a revolution is: "A forcible overthrow of a government
|
|
or social order, in favour of a new system." In this case, we know
|
|
certainly that our Lord was not trying to overthrow any government. In
|
|
fact, He purposefully avoided titles that would associate Him with the
|
|
political liberation from foreign powers that the people of Israel had
|
|
been hoping for, preferring instead to use the title "Son of Man."
|
|
Therefore, it is clear that if one wishes to imply that Jesus caused
|
|
some kind of revolution, it would be to the social order and not the
|
|
government. But even this is unfounded in any real biblical evidence. In
|
|
fact, it's quite the opposite. Jesus makes clear that His mission is not
|
|
to change or abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them:</p>
|
|
|
|
<blockquote>
|
|
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I
|
|
have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until
|
|
heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a
|
|
letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished."<br />
|
|
- Matthew 5:17-18 (NRSVCE)
|
|
</blockquote>
|
|
|
|
<p>However, we do know that Jesus does continuously make efforts to
|
|
correct the Pharisees on their interpretation of the Law. So what does
|
|
this mean? Did Christ lie when He said He had come to fulfill the Law?
|
|
No, it means that, much like many Christians of today, the Pharisees
|
|
held to their own traditions rather than those of God. In their pride,
|
|
they held their own customs to the same standard as the Law given by
|
|
God (or perhaps even higher).</p>
|
|
|
|
<blockquote>
|
|
"'You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.'
|
|
Then he said to them, 'You have a fine way of rejecting the
|
|
commandment of God in order to keep your tradition!'"<br />
|
|
- Mark 7:8-9 (NRSVCE)
|
|
</blockquote>
|
|
|
|
<p>Therefore, it becomes clear that it was not Jesus Christ who was the
|
|
revolutionary, but the Pharisees. Our Lord came to fulfill the Law which
|
|
the Pharisees had manipulated.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>However, even from reason alone we can see how calling Jesus Christ a
|
|
revolutionary is illogical. Jesus Christ is God the Son, who has existed
|
|
since the beginning, eternally with the God the Father. He is also the
|
|
Truth and the Word through which all was made. As God, He is also all
|
|
good, and perfect, and <i>ordered</i>. God cannot contradict Himself,
|
|
otherwise there would be disorder and falsehood. What Christ teaches is
|
|
the same Law with which God created the Universe: Divine & Natural
|
|
Law. These have existed since always, and are prior to any Man-made
|
|
conceptions of law. As such, since Divine & Natural Law precede
|
|
the laws of Men, it would be the laws of Men that are revolutionary, and
|
|
Jesus Christ, who upholds Divine & Natural Law a reactionary or
|
|
counter-revolutionary.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Now, of course, usually the retort is that although all this is
|
|
true, the we say something is revolutionary or not in contrast to the
|
|
anthropological social order, not the metaphysical. But even if we
|
|
accept such an excuse - which I do not - it encourages certain very
|
|
false ideas as to what can and cannot change with regards to Church
|
|
Teaching. Namely that fundamental Church Dogmas & Doctrines can be
|
|
changed, which they cannot. The idea is that if Jesus came and
|
|
<i>revolutionized</i> all that God had revealed to the people of Israel
|
|
prior, then who is to say that teachings cannot be revolutionized again?
|
|
It calls into question the Dogma of the Church that the fullness of
|
|
Divine Public Revelation was received with Jesus Christ, and all we need
|
|
to know for our Salvation is present in Sacred Scripture and Sacred
|
|
Tradition, which are interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church (see
|
|
CCC § 74-87)<sup><a href="#r1" >[1]</a></sup>. As such, even if it is
|
|
just for the sake of avoiding scandal, we must refrain from calling
|
|
Jesus Christ a <i>revolutionary</i>.</p>
|
|
|
|
<label id="r1" >[1]</label>
|
|
<a
|
|
href="https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm"
|
|
target="_blank" >
|
|
https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm
|
|
</a>
|