Opposites

 Who was this man on the Judean hill, and who opposes him? Perhaps he could be described in one manner by examining some reactions to what he was teaching.

One doesn’t venture far into a study of the Sermon on the Mount without encountering the word Christology. Simply stated, it means the branch of Christian theology relating to the person, nature, and role of Christ, the Galilean.

With many writers it isn’t simple a study of the man’s life as presented by the writers of the gospels. It descends further, involving the dialectic between the lessons of the Galilean and the stance of those who reacted those lessons. Those reactions vary.

Author Leo Tolstoy, trapped in an unhappy marriage, found solace in the Sermon. In the words of Alexandre Christoyannopoulos, Greek author, lecturer, and Christian pacifist, Tolstoy, at one point in his life, became horrified at the thought that “that life seemed to have no meaning if death was guaranteed to follow.” He even contemplated suicide before turning to a study of religion. As Christoyannopoulos describes the experience of Tolstoy’s seeking of a meaning to life:

“Then came the breakthrough. He observed that the peasants around him—which as a proud aristocrat he had hitherto overlooked—seemed to approach death with calm and serenity. But why? What was it that helped them remain so serene in the face of the apparent futility of life? Tolstoy realised that what they had was ‘faith’. This intrigued Tolstoy, yet it also gave him hope. So he plunged into the Bible with renewed enthusiasm, in the hope that the meaning of life would finally be disclosed to him – and this time, it was.”

Tolstoy evidently found that the teachings in the Sermon, seemingly so antithetical to harmony and success in life, could lead to a perfect state if followed.

Friedrich Naumann, a German liberal politician and Protestant parish pastor is reported to have said that the teachings of the Sermon were incompatible with capitalism. It’s hard to argue with that.

Consider as well the messages polluting our senses from the current mob of “pray for pay” theologians. If one can call their spewing a philosophy, it is one that cannot be more in contrast and opposition to that of the Galilean.

What government today would last upon a policy of not resisting evil, but forgiving it? Indeed, one might eventually come to regard the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount as a body of righteous teachings employed in a cosmic struggle with the forces of everyday life. Perhaps that is why hear so little of them voiced from either the pulpits or the halls of government.

It has taken a crisis of enormous proportions for us to see, as Tolstoy saw, where power derived from principles such as the Galilean espouse may be found. It is being manifested by those whom the inhabitants of Manhattan skyscrapers would call “America’s peasants.” They are finding peace and meaning to life by tending those whom the Galilean would later call, “The least of those among us.” Their lights are shining so brightly that they drown the howling of the hyenas.