Verhovayak Lapja, 1945 (28. évfolyam, 1-52. szám)
1945 / Verhovay Journal
VOL. XXVIII. MARCH 28, 1945 NO. 6 What Easter Means to Verhovayans The Reasonable Approach to the Mystery of the Resurrection ing- of nature from its winter slumber. Such an interpretation of the Easter story is no more, nor less than the escape of the unbelieving mind from the demands of that story . . . Since their mind is limited by the idea that nothing is possible that isn’t reasonable, they are forced to substitute an explanation that satisfies the natural urge of limited minds for a reasonable explanation of the mysterious. But even those whose mind is limited by the possible, must see the inadequacy of such an explanation. People who cannot accept anything beyond the realm of the humanly reasonable, usually claim to have a logical way of thinking, and logic tells us that the story of the Resurrection is exactly the opposite to the meaning of spring. For the reawakening of nature after the long winter-slumber is a natural occurrance, a matter of natural law, while the resurrection of Christ is contrary to the natural law. For it is a law of nature that the trees lose their leaves and the earth be covered with snow’ during winter and that new life should come to nature with every spring, while it is against the law of nature, as man knows it, that the dead come back to life. The reawakening of nature is a natural thing, the resurrection, on the other hand, is an unnatural or supernatural thing (whichever way we look at it), and, therefore, the story of Easter cannot be used as a symbol for the renew’ed life of nature. It is purely coincidence that gospel to that of an ancient the resurrection happened at the There is hardly anyone who could remain untouched by the festival mood of Easter-time. The general urge for spring-cleaning and the universal practice of dressing up for the occasion are signs of the effect this day has upon all and sundry. It is another question, however, whether or not Easter is understood and appreciated correctly by the masses who willingly submit to the festival spirit but consistently keep aloof of its mental and spiritual significance. In order to arrive at the proper evaluation of this holiday, it is necessary to throw light upon the theories and emotional hocuspocus that has served for generations as a substitute to the real meaning of Easter-day. People, for whom reason is the highest and final authority on the limitations of the possible, consider Easter as a symbol of the arrival of spring. They talk about the resurrection of the earth, the new birth of flowers, the regeneration of all vegetation. Their gladness, that the winter is over and that the lovely fragrance of spring fills the air, takes proportions that approach worship and they actually feel an urge to go to church and to express in some vague way gratitude for the renewed life that lias come to the earth. For them, Christ is like a flower that died on the winterday of Good-Friday, and resurrected to the new life of spring on Easter-day . . . For them, Good-Friday is the symbol of the winter and Easter-Sunday that of spring . . . They REDUCE the significance of the Easter arrival of spring, for it could have happened at any other time of the year. If there should be any significance attached to the fact that the resurrection story happened at the time when spring comes to us, than there should be some significance attached to Christ being born at Christmas, in the middle of winter, the season of decay. No one ever atetmpted to make anything of the fact that Christmas falls on the 25th of December as far as its possible significance in relation to the season of the year is concerned and, therefore, it just doesn’t make sense to jump to conclusions from the fact that Easter happens to be a day in early spring. The using of the story of the resurrection as a symbol of the reawakening nature is just another example of the poor logic used by people who will twist facts in order to make them conform to the limits of reason. THE INNOCENT VICTIM Another misrepresentation of Easter, or rather Good-Friday, (which is the same as the two days are closely related) is the result of an attempt to pay tribute to Christ as the innocent victim of mass hysteria, the plots of his hateful enemies and he is admired for the way he behaved while so suffering: forgiving liis enemies and uncomplainingly accepting the agony of the cross. This, again, is a. weak attempt to reduce the Easter-story to the level of the humanly reasonable. According to this theory, the resurrection is nothing but an imagination that grew out of the protest of his disciples against the injustice that caused his death ... it is nothing but a wish projected into reality by the lively imagination of his followers. Therefore, they accept with reservation the testimony of the five hundred or more who saw the resurrected Lord, but arc willing to pay tribute to the hero of this story due to the unusual attitude he displayed throughout his trials. Now it is true that the resurrection of someone who died, is contrary to reason, but it is also contrary to reason to give any credit to the anemic theory described above. It is contrary to reason, mainly, because Christ was not the only innocent victim of misapplied justice nor was the only one who accepted his fate calmly without hate against those who brought him to cross. In the course of human history there were millions who have suffered innocently, were persecuted without just cause and have died with a dignity that was just as admirable as that of Christ. The Greek philosopher, Socrates, calmly drank the poison cup thrust upon him and while dying, displayed neither fear nor hate. The Christian martyrs of the first centuries followed the legend symbolizing the reawaken-time when we experience the footsteps of Christ and died singing the glory of God and forgiving their torturers and executioners. In all ages there were men and women who were indicted, convicted and executed innocently from the time and previous to that of the ancient prophets up until the witch-hunt at Salem and up to the present day. Some of these innocently condemned are remembered by historians but most of them have been forgotten. Attempts have been made to perpetuate the memory of more than one of them, yet such attempts have always failed. Their story has never become part of public consciousness. The story of Christ is unique in that respect that it has affected and continued to affect thousands of millions throughout two thousand years and is still doing so. As far as human logic is concerned, there is not a single reason why he should have been singled out from among the millions who have innocently suffered violent death. That the Christian Church succeeded in keeping this story so much alive that it still draws millions in faith to the Cross on Calvary, is as much a miracle as the claim of all Christians that he came to life again and lives ever since. Never before and never since has any group of disciples ever succeeded in keeping alive in public consciousness the memory of their master or teacher for any great length of time ... Yet the memory of this story survived two thousand years and still acts as an active and activitating force upon innumerable millions. To claim that Christ gained this immense power of survival by being innocently killed, is against all the rules of logical reasoning. A WORLD BEYOND REASON Only one with the narrowmindedness of bigotry can insist that only the reasonable is possible. And bigotry isn’t a prerogative of the religious—as so many mistakenly claim—for the unbelieving have as much aptitude for developing bigotry as the religious. The reasonable does not embrace all that is possible, it includes only that which is experienced by mankind. But there are many realities beyond the realm of actual experience and human knowledge advances, the realm of the reasonable widens, often including things that before were thought to be impossible and, therefore, inreasonable. There is an immense no-man’s land beyond the borders of human reason. The religious consider this no-man’s land the own territory of God, while the irreligious simply deny its existence. We are not arguing that Christ came to live. This is a matter to be discussed from the pulpits and in the columns of religious publications . Our aim is only to show that the Easter story has much deeper significance than generally attributed to it by Christians and non- Christians alike. In this article we are standing on the platform of the religious in so far as to state that there are actualities and realities that are beyond the reach of human reason. Anybody enlightened enough to admit the limitations of human reason and knowledge, must agree with that. And the significance of Easter should be evaluated on this basis no matter what anyone’s conviction may be as to the personality of Christ. A DIVINE PROTEST Philosophically speaking, Easter is the protest of God against all that is rotten, unjust and hateful in man. He made Christ an example to the world that injustice and hate shall not prevail. Even though they may attain victories, their temporary gain will soon turn into loss for them who mistakenly believe that one can continually live on the theory that “might is right.” Easter is the promise of God that justice, goodness, love and kindness will win in the end, even though, while the fight is on, many an innocent representative of the divine ideals will meet his death by the hand of those who are led by selfishness and hate. Easter is also proof to the world that those who have died innocently, have not lived in vain. They exert an influence of far greater effect than those who stay alive. Their posthumous influence reaches a far greater circle than that which was theirs while they were still living. As far as the joys of earthly living are concerned, their life has ceased. As far as the happiness afforded by their companionship is concerned, they are lost to their families and friends. But their usefulness increases, the substance of |their existence reaches new heights, and their beneficent influence surpasses the limitations that had them caged in while they walked amidst the living. Consider, for instance, Lincoln’s addresses. Posthumously they have influenced more people than they did when he spoke them. The pages of human history are filled with the names of men and women whose activities were not stopped by their death but rather accelerated and developed. The key to man’s value is his usefulness . , . and if his usefulness increases after his death, than that which is best in him, did not die but attained a more abundant life. Martyrs are not men lost, they are men gained for the beenfit of humanity. Their death gave new life to their ideals which induced others to lead a better life. Please, note, that we are not talking about the life of the soul as continuing after death, nor of the resurrection of the dead, nor of any other religious doctrine. We attempt only to
