The logic of the Gospel is permeated by the logic of the cross. “The word of the cross is a scandal to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks, but to those who are called both Jews and Greeks; it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.” In the Orthodox Christian tradition, the crucified man is “the king of glory”. The logic of the centurion and the lord of the flesh are the foundation of God’s logic. They did not believe in a teacher or a miracle worker or a resurrected man; they believed in a crucified God. They were not the “not seeing and not believing” that the mouth of the resurrected Christ opened. They were the ones who saw the contrary and did not believe in it. They are the believers in the “other things” they saw and are eternally blessed.
But what is the compatibility of “whoever will save his soul, let him lose it; and whoever will lose his soul in my sight, let him not save it” or “if he shall be first, he is the first of all, the first of all, and the deacon of all” with common human reasoning? Who who wants to be first is compatible with last place? Who who wants to gain his life, beforehand and consciously consents to its loss?
What founder of a new religion, however true and beautiful, would begin his call by urging his representatives to rely more on God’s enlightenment and less on their abilities or preparation? “And when they shall be offered unto you upon the synagogues, and upon the principalities and powers, take no thought how ye may account for yourselves, or what ye may say: for the Holy Ghost shall teach you in this hour to see what ye shall say.”
“Blessed are the poor… blessed are those who weep now…” or “He that seweth thee upon the right jaw, turn to him the other also”, if they are not nonsense, what else can they be but the basic axioms of a logic that carries from friendship with the passions and submission to death and the meeting of God?
How can the Church that constantly teaches the communion of believers at the same time promote the solitude of monks? How, when its teaching is that the body is a “temple of the Holy Spirit in me” does it understand the logic of the rapists of nature and the flesh, accept the life of ascetics? How does her preaching of moderation and mediocrity combine with the admiration of her extremities?
The super-logical logic has nothing to do with claims, with comparisons, with arrogant perceptions. It equates enemies with friends, death with life, time with eternity. It transforms the here and now into from here and everywhere and forever, human weakness into strength, physical fear into spiritual pride, anxiety into faith and hope, the “heavy” commandments of the gospel into a “good yoke”, the slavery of the flesh into freedom under God. It gives human beings a divine fragrance. It makes man a god; “Ye are gods yourselves, and sons of the Most High.”
“Abbas Antony said that the time is coming when men shall see that they shall see something that shall not be seen, and they shall rise again, saying, ‘Thou shalt not be like unto them’.” The time is coming when people will lose their reason and if they see someone reasonable, they will rebel against him, saying that you are mad, because he is not like them.
Who, really, can understand the logic of the Gospel, the wisdom of the cross?
