Reflection - The Middle

By Steve Hall

https://bible.usccb.org/bible/readings/021922.cfm
James 3:1-10
Mark 9:2-13

Lunatic or God? While others may have made a similar observation, I personally give credit to C.S. Lewis for noting that there is no middle ground: Jesus was either a lunatic or he was what he claimed to be: the Son of God. It is naive to categorize him as just a prophet, a teacher, a moralist or, as some say, as a revolutionary. His claim to be the Son of God offers us but two choices: lunatic or Son of God. For two thousand years, and for thousands more yet to come, this is, and will be, the central issue for mankind. Why? Because the answer of ‘lunatic’ negates the only faith men have that presumes God to be involved with mankind.

The account of the Transfiguration brings this subject to mind. Even those who lived with Jesus were unclear during those years of his presence on earth. Yes, he could be the Messiah. Yes, he may well have come from God. Yes, he seems more than just a man. But . . . . Consider just three brief passages from the gospels; and note the expectations, or, maybe I should say the lack of expectations.

“And they [the disciples] discussed it among themselves, saying, "We brought no bread." But Jesus, aware of this, said, "O men of little faith, why do you discuss among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet perceive? Do you not remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? Or the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered?” (Matthew 16:7-10)

On the very evening of the Last Supper John tells us that:

“Philip said to him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father.’”
(John 14:8-9)

Then, of course, there’s the incident at sea.

“And the men marveled, saying, ‘What sort of man is this, that even winds and sea obey him?’“
(Matthew 8:27)

The scene depicted in today’s gospel almost defies belief. Recall the details.

“Jesus was transfigured before them,
and his clothes became dazzling white,
such as no fuller on earth could bleach them.
Then Elijah appeared to them along with Moses,
and they were conversing with Jesus.”

And then there’s Peter.

“Rabbi, it is good that we are here!
Let us make three tents.”

Three Tents! THREE TENTS! You’ve got to be kidding.

We can hardly blame Peter or the other disciples for what we perceive as a lack of faith, or even a resistance to the evidence laid bare before them. If we’re honest we would admit that we would have done the same. When, as a child, I first heard the gospel stories I imagined that I would not have been so dense. But maturity changes our perspective. The disciples were, in fact, doing what men always do when confronted with dissonance.

• We may deny that which appears to be incongruous with the ‘known’.
  
• We may even seek to prove that the source of discordance is not true, real, or authentic.
  
• We may choose to ignore it because ‘we can’t wrap our mind around it’.
  
• We may choose to explain it away, attempting to make it conform to what we know.
  
• Or we might just change the subject. Let’s build some tents.
  

It’s difficult at times to reconcile reality with what we think we know. That’s dissonance. Most elements of our faith create some level of cognitive disruption.

• The Bible only makes sense as being the Word of God if God is willing to interact with mankind.
  
• The Incarnation only makes sense if God is willing to lower himself to be with his creation.
  
• The Resurrection only makes sense if Jesus was the Son of God.
  
• The initial spreading of the gospel only makes sense if men can truly be inspired and moved by God.
  
• The Eucharist as understood by the Church only makes sense if God desires us to be united to the person of his Son.
  

These levels of dissonance are unique in that, even after they are known, there is nothing similar to which I can compare them nor is there an area of human knowledge to which I can turn for understanding.

Jesus, Peter, James and John descended the place of the Transfiguration and Peter wanted to talk about building tents. His plan was to compress the incident into something which was, at least historically, familiar. The Gospels make it clear that the issue never went away after the Resurrection. Neither did it go away after the Ascension. The dissonance inherent in the person of Jesus left only with the coming of the Spirit; for the Spirit brought understanding. Faith will come in no other way. Yet, as many of us may experience from time to time, traces of dissonance remain.

Faith, or the lack thereof, is not a product of human endeavor. It is not a goal which can be reached with sufficient human effort. Faith may be, indeed, should be informed by theology; but theology does not create faith. This is why faith only comes when we meet a person, the person known as Jesus, the Christ. And this meeting is made possible through the Spirit that removes the blinders of dissonance.

The extraordinary association with Jesus over the previous two or three years may have made it difficult, even impossible for the Apostles to view Jesus as a lunatic. But to accept him as the Son of God in the sense that we understand that phrase today was more than their human minds could believe on their own. It still is today. It is the Spirit who leads us to understand that the choice of lunatic is lunacy.