Reporting an announced struggle between the “man-god” and the “God-man.”

Christ and Anti-Christ

IN AN address on the National Broadcasting Company’s Catholic Hour, Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, associate professor of philosophy at the Catholic University of America, declared that the signs of the times prove we are at the end of a non-religious era of civilization, and are entering “what might be called the religious phase of human history.” In making this statement, however, this noted Catholic professor was quick to qualify what he meant by “religious.” We quote:

“But do not misunderstand; by religious we do not mean that men will turn to God, but rather that the indifference to the absolute which characterized the liberal phase of civilization will be succeeded by a passion for an absolute. From now on the struggle will be not for colonies and national rights, but for the souls of men. … From now on men will divide themselves into two religions—understood again as a surrender to an absolute. The conflict of the future is between the absolute who is the God-man and the absolute which is the man-God; the God who became man and the man who makes himself God; between brothers in Christ and comrades in anti-Christ.”

In reaching this conclusion Msgr. Sheen declares that “we are witnessing the end of historic liberalism.” This Catholic professor does not use language the meaning of which is at once apparent.

By “historic liberalism,” for example, he refers to the attitude of the public mind for which Protestantism and Democracy were largely responsible; namely, a break away from the “absolute” authority of the Catholic Hierarchy. True, to begin with, the Protestant churches had their own absolutes, that is to say, creeds outside of which, they claimed, no one could be saved. But this viewpoint gradually broke down in Protestant circles so that now the general idea is that it doesn’t matter what one believes or who he obeys so long as he is morally upright; and in many instances the spirit of liberalism has shattered even moral standards.

Now as Msgr. Sheen sees it, this viewpoint is giving way to a passionate desire for absolutes. This is just another way of saying that we are entering an era of dictatorship, in which individuals “surrender” themselves to a centralized authority and cease to do any thinking for themselves. Or, if we don’t like the word dictatorship, we could call it totalitarianism, for absolute and total mean the same. As Msgr. Sheen sees it, the great struggle from now on will be to decide what kind of absolutism, or totalitarianism, is to rule the world. He sees two ultimate opponents in this struggle; namely, the “God-man” and the “man-God,” the contending warriors for these being, on the one side, “brothers in Christ,” and on the other side, “comrades in anti-Christ.” And he has some interesting things to say about the anti-Christ. We quote again:

“The anti-Christ will not be so called, otherwise he would have no followers. He will wear no red tights, nor vomit sulphur, nor carry a spear, nor wave an arrowed tail as the Mephistopheles in Faust. This masquerade has helped the devil convince men that he does not exist, for he knows that he is never so strong as when men believe that he does not exist.

“Nowhere in Sacred Scripture do we find warrant fob the popular myth of the devil as a buffoon who is dressed like the first ‘red.’ Rather is he described as an angel from heaven, and as the Prince of this world whose business it is to tell us that there is no other world. His logic is simple: if there is no heaven, there is no hell; if there is no hell, then there is no sin; if there is no sin, then there is no judge; and if there is no judgment, then evil is good and good is evil.”

Sheen’s reference to the first “red” seems to leave no doubt but what he is thus cleverly identifying Communism as the great anti-Christ of today. As the Catholic Church sees it. then, the totalitarianism of the “Reds” is the “absolute” now being offered to the people by the anti-Christ, Communism. In place of this the church proposes to offer to the world the totalitarianism, or the absolutism, of the Vatican; so the war is on. That this is what Msgr. Sheen really means is apparent from the following quotation, also contained in his radio address:

“Jews, Protestants, and Catholics should unite against a common foe. It is not a unity of religion we plead for; that is impossible when purchased at the cost of the unity of the truth, but a unity of religious peoples. … In a word, if anti-Christ has his fellow travelers, then why should not God and his divine Son?”

Thus we learn that Msgr. Sheen is not referring to either Jews or Protestants as anti-Christ. But his clever use of the expression “fellow travelers” does identify exactly who and what he means the Communists—and he is inviting all religionists to unite against this common enemy, which he labels the real anti-Christ. As he sees it, this anti-Christ is a “man-God.” This is rather a vague expression, but interpreted, it is a reference to the idea of exalting a civil government to the virtual position of a god in the minds of the people. It is the worship of the state, in which the laws of the state become the “absolute” criterion of what is right and wrong the arbiter of human consciences.

This is not a new thing in the history of man, but rather a revival of the ideology of pagan Rome. In the old pagan system the emperor was not only civil ruler, but religious ruler as well, and the title ascribed to him was “Pontifex Maximus.” A most enlightening comment on this is found in “The Time Is at Hand,” page 288, which we quote:

“The Roman Empire had not only conquered the world and given it politics and laws, but, recognizing religious superstitions to be the strongest chains by which to hold and control a people, it had adopted a scheme which had its origin in Babylon, in the time of her greatness as ruler of the world. That plan was that the emperor should be esteemed the director and ruler in religious as well as in civil affairs. In support of this, it was claimed that the emperor was a demigod, in some sense descended from their heathen deities. As such he was worshiped and his statues adored; and as such he was styled Pontifex Maximus—that is, Chief Priest or Greatest Religious Ruler. And this is the very title claimed by and given to the pontiffs or popes of the Roman Hierarchy since the Antichrist obtained ‘the power, and seat, and great authority’ of the former ruler of Rome.—Rev. 13:2”

As Msgr. Sheen sees it, the surrender of the will of the people to a civil government as is done in a totalitarian country constitutes a worship of the state, hence the state becomes a god. True, the head of world Communism is not claiming to be “Pontifex Maximus” over his people, as did the ancient pagan emperors. This would not be good strategy. Instead, every effort is being made to break down confidence in the authority of the Vatican, as well as other religious authorities which claim to supersede that of the state. Moscow has given official recognition to the Greek Catholic Church within Russia, but makes it plain that the church exists only by the sufferance of civil authority, Situations similar to this existed in the Pagan Roman Empire, where a considerable degree of religious liberty was granted as long as the supreme authority of the Pontifex Maximus was not called in question.

The Catholic professor says that the anti-Christ he is speaking of will set up a counter-church. We quote again:

“He will set up a counter-church which will be the ape of the Church because he, the devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse, and emptied of its divine content. … In desperate need for God, he will induce modern man in his loneliness and frustration to hunger more and more for membership in a community that will give man enlargement of purpose, without any need of personal amendment and without admission of personal guilt.”

The “counter-church” the professor speaks of may be the Russian Greek Catholic Church which the Communists are now using where it furthers their ends to do so. But the more general idea seems to be that of social equality, prosperity, and a more or less libertine standard of morals, as the supreme objectives of life, plus, of course, an absolute surrender of the will to the state which oilers these advantages. Thus does the Catholic Church see in Communism what it calls the anti-Christ, which is exalting itself in these last days to challenge the religious authority of the Vatican, where the Pope is alleged to rule as the Vicegerent of Christ.

Forms of government, as well as, ideologies, must adapt themselves to the changing conditions of the world, so the totalitarianism of today varies in some details from the totalitarianism of Pagan Rome. However, Msgr. Sheen seems to have put his finger on the underlying principle of totalitarianism when he defines it as a “man-god” arrangement—that is, the exaltation of the authority of man as “absolute,” and the demand for full surrender and abject obedience to such authority.

It was precisely this idea that was embodied in the title Pontifex Maximus. The Catholic professor doesn’t realize—or else he isn’t revealing that he knows—that when Papal Rome superseded Pagan Rome, Papacy adopted the same ideology, but gave it a religions appearance by claiming that the supreme authority of the Pope as Pontifex Maximus was in the fact that he was the Vicegerent of Christ. However, as all who understand the Scriptures know, the Pope does not speak for Christ nor for God any more than did the pagan emperors.

The “Holy Roman Empire” was holy in name only. It took the name of Christ, and claimed to rule by the authority of Christ, but it neither believed nor practiced the doctrines of Christ, and turned its back upon him by uniting with civil authorities in its abortive and spurious effort to set up Christ’s kingdom. Now, in its final struggle for existence, it is clever strategy to divert attention from itself by claiming that another godless government is the real anti-Christ. Probably communist totalitarianism will never make such boastful claims of supreme authority over the consciences of men as have been made by the papal hierarchy, and which would still be made today but for fear of world opinion.

When Papal Rome gained the ascendancy over Pagan Rome, the latter went into oblivion. Later, under the smashing blows of Protestantism and the opposition of Napoleon, the power of Papal Rome was greatly curtailed. There are Catholic writers who look upon the present period, described by Msgr. Sheen as the era of “historic liberalism,” as the “little season” during which Satan is loosed and is deceiving the whole world. It should be remembered that Papal Rome claimed to be the kingdom of Christ, and that the thousand years of that reign was the period of the Dark Ages when the authority of the Catholic hierarchy was virtually unquestioned. In this view, the alleged thousand years of Christ’s reign ended with the loss of temporal power by the Pope.

The period of “historic liberalism” has been one in which no absolute, or total authority has been recognized by the majority of the people. Millions of Catholics have continued to look upon the dogmas of their church as “absolutes,” but these alleged absolutes hate been challenged by millions of others and rejected as having no legitimate authority in their lives. “Liberty” been the watch-word of the people, and unbridled liberty can’t live together with the authority of “absolutes.”

As the masses of the people veer further away from centralized authority they gradually lose respect for all authority, hence today we see a tragic increase of chaos in practically every part of the earth where the absolutisms of dictators are not being enforced to keep the people under restraint. The great distress of the people which is caused by this drift toward anarchy furnishes fertile soil in which to plant the seeds of totalitarianism. The people are beginning to feel frustrated and helpless. Confused in their own thinking they find a haven of supposed security in turning to a seat of authority where they can leave their problems and let someone else be responsible for the outcome.

Msgr. Sheen calls this the death of “historic liberalism,” and doubtless the Catholic Church would see in this change of world thinking an excellent opportunity to re-establish its own authority throughout the world. But the church sees an ominous figure standing in the path of conquest, a figure which Professor Sheen designates the anti-Christ, but actually the revival in large measure of that which Papacy supplanted when she originally came into power. So it will be a struggle, according to Sheen, between the two. While the Vatican is ready and anxious to offer escape from chaos in the refuge of totalitarianism, the Communists have the same idea, As a matter of fact, Mussolini and Hitler did the same thing, and the Vatican sought to ride to glory with them, but of course was disappointed when they went down in inglorious defeat,

Apparently the Vatican doesn’t care to take a chance of this kind with Communist totalitarianism. Now the strategy is different. It is to be a fight for first place in the consciences of men, a struggle, as Sheen says, to win souls. The “God-man” system will win all it can, and the “man-God” system of absolutes will do the same. So the war is on. It is a war of intrigue, of propaganda, and of power politics in high places. Hunger, cold, disillusionment, and discouragement are preparing the victims for capture, making them ready to surrender to almost anything which offers relief and some sense of security.

Which side will win in this battle for the souls of men? Only a prophet could answer this question. If the Catholic Church were indeed the true church, and the authority of the Vatican were that of the real kingdom of Christ instead of a counterfeit of that kingdom, then there would be no doubt as to who would be the victor in this great struggle, for Christ’s kingdom could not be defeated. But as it stands, there is no reason to believe that God is backing either side. It is merely a case of one humanly constituted authority vying with another for the position of chief ruler in the world.

In the final picture, therefore, they both will lose, for they will he engaged in a mortal combat which will bring this present evil world to a full end, preparatory to the manifestation of the kingdom of Christ. With the people disillusioned still further by the failure of both the Vatican and other forms of totalitarianism to provide security and peace for them, they will then say, “Let us go up to the mountain [kingdom] of the Lord, … and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths.”—Micah 4:1-4

If we think of liberalism as the privilege of doing as one pleases, the people will find that the kingdom of Christ will not be liberal. It will offer “absolutes” to the people which will be inflexible in their application; and full obedience to these absolutes will be the only way to eternal life. It is true that the fallen race does need to be told what to do. The people have lost their way, and are becoming more and more confused. The rule of absolutes is the only solution, but they must be divinely inspired, and backed by divine authority and power. The kingdom of Christ will function on this basis, and by obedience to the absolutes it will offer, the people will find their way to lasting life and happiness.

Liberalists Strike Back

“THERE are men, and Monsignor Sheen is one of them, who believe in the infallibility of an Italian gentleman called Pius XXI, They believe in a place of torment for their opponents, the unbelievers, … and they call it hell.” Thus did Pierre van Passen, noted author and Unitarian minister, strike back at Fulton J. Sheen following the report in Time of his radio address in which he asserted that the age of “historic liberalism” is ending. In the interests of fair play Time magazine also published generous excerpts from van Passen’s speech, which was delivered in Boston, a stronghold of both Catholicism and Unitarianism.

It is significant, we think, that a popular news magazine such as Time, with its millions of readers, should open its columns to such a forthright condemnation of Catholic doctrines and practices as that contained in Pierre van Passen’s speech. It certainly proven that freedom of the press is far from dead in America; and it also proves that the non-Catholic controlled press does not fear Catholic public opinion. Many Protestant Church publications have been saying similar things for a long time, but when Time magazine, lays such facts openly before its readers, that in itself is news worthy of notice. Commenting on Msgr. Sheen’s reference to “believers” and “unbelievers,” van Passen is reported as saying:

“But if they [Catholics] are believers, I must take leave to call the Dyaks of Borneo, and the natives of Nigeria and Papuans also believers, for they believe too, and most positively in their demons, spooks, their grimacing medicine men, in, the savage power of amulets, scarabs and other trinkets and taboos. … And who are the unbelievers? They are, among others, people who do not believe in survival after death, who do not believe in the resurrection of the body or in the infallibility of the Pope, … in the sacrificial and propitiating nature of the Mass. They are the unbelievers, the infidels … and, I suppose, also, the damned, in Msgr. Sheen’s classification.”

Van Passen, being a Unitarian minister, is as far afield from the real truth of the Gospel as Msgr. Sheen, but in another direction. He sees clearly the errors and superstitions of the Catholic Church, but has no real truth with which to replace them. His philosophy of liberalism tends in the direction of unbelief in any and every type of religion and religious authority. Seldom does liberalism find a stopping place in its urge to be free from dogmas of the past. Because of this, the true doctrines of Christ are scorned upon with equal distaste as the false. Nevertheless, men like van Passen are able to identify the evils of churchianity. His Boston speech continues to do this. We quote again from the Time report:

“The age of liberalism is dead, says the Monsignor. … It is so dark, says Msgr. Sheen, that the liberals cannot even find the dock to see how late it is. And there he is somewhat right. It is dark! But it is not so dark as yet that we cannot see that a good deal of the darkness rampant in the world today emanates and derives from those smoke screens which the prelates and the priests of the Roman Church put out to confuse the American people about the real issues at stake in the universal social struggle. …

“In official encyclicals the Roman Church has utterly denounced every democratic institution, not vaguely, but naming by name the public schools, freedom of the press, freedom of conscience, equal franchise, separation of church and state, liberalism, modernism, Americanism. … The Roman Church has systematically fought every liberal constitution in Europe and in the Americas. It has placed itself squarely across the path of modern science and research and … seeks to perpetuate the very evils from which democracy vows to liberate humanity.”

The closing statement in the foregoing quotation reveals the weakness of the Liberalist’s viewpoint. It is well that they have no confidence in the dogmas and superstitions of the Catholic Church, but their mistake has been in discarding their belief in the Creator’s plan through the medium of Christ’s kingdom, to rid mankind of the evils which plague the people. The modernist viewpoint discards all hope that the God of the universe will ever intervene and do anything for the people. What is done, the Liberalists think, must be done by them, through democratic institutions.

In view of world conditions today, this is a gloomy outlook. How much better it is to recognize that neither the totalitarianism of the Catholic Church, nor the liberalism of the Modernists, can save the people from the results of their own foolishness and selfishness; that only the kingdom of Christ can do this. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the kingdom of Christ is indeed the only hope of the world. It is a glorious hope, and will yet be the “desire of all nations.”—Haggai 2:7

| Home Page | Table of Contents |