Replies

Bishop Sheen and “shallow” do NOT go together. I am not a Catholic, but consider Fulton Sheen one of the greatest theologians of the 20th century. I remember as a kid in the 1950’s my Dad, a Methodist churchman, had THE Bishop’s show on Sunday mornings as we were getting ready for church. To be honest, Bishop Sheen frightened me a little with all of his theatrics.lol I’ve had the opportunity to view many of his messages over the past several years as they were rebroadcast on The Church Channel. He was an awe-inspiring figure. (Though Milton Berle may have disagreed ;)

Well, for one, read carefully what he says regarding the Fourth Word. It is little more than saying that Jesus is our example of trust in God. Imitate Him and all is well.

That said, I readily grant you that he says, “Now in the fourth word, He acted as mediator for sinful humanity.” But read what Sheen writes thereafter. Jesus is described as our Mediator in the sense that He shows us how to endure the separation from God brought about by sin and yet not lose trust. What kind of mediation is this?

This fourth word of the Lord is the key word of the seven. This is the climactic point of the vicarious atonement, wherein the Lamb of God, who carries the burden of all the world’s sins, endures the horror of eternal separation from God - Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani! - because of that sin, i.e. hell and damnation, for us, and thus pays our debt of sin. Is this what Sheen says? No, decidedly not. He remains enmeshed in the web of philosophy rather that breaking from it into the pure light of theology. On which point see, for example, 1 Corinthians 1 and 2.

I’m sorry. This is weak tea, irrespective of how much notoriety Bishop Sheen enjoyed in his time. I am simply looking at what he said here. And what he said reveals a shallow grasp of the atonement. His Christology is good, as I would expect from a Catholic theologian. But his Soteriology - at least as here expressed - is weak, whether purposely or inadvertently (which is not mine to judge).