Has Francis Ever Read The Gospel?

Here, Jesus is seen in an Oscar-worthy performance of pretend anger, says the Bishop of Rome.

Here, Jesus is seen in an Oscar-worthy performance of pretend anger, says the Bishop of Rome.

“In the Gospel, Jesus does not become angry, but pretends to when the disciples do not understand him,” the Pope explained, adding that at Emmaus Jesus says, “’How foolish and slow of heart.’”

Last time I looked, Jesus made a whip out of cords and used it to drive the money-changers out of the temple. Not much pretending, here. I am sure if Francis had been the recipient of one of Jesus’ whip strokes he would not have talked about pretending, at all. Besides, it is clear that for a single man to drive everyone out nothing less but sheer Divine Fury must have been at work. You don’t make a whip to whip things. You make a whip to whip people. Does Francis know that?

Extremely disquieting is, also, the idea that Jesus would “pretend” with his disciples. There is nothing in the Gospel, or in Christianity, suggesting Jesus was ever less than completely truthful and honest. The idea that he had to “pretend” because the disciples did not understand might or might not be blasphemous, but is stupid at the very least, and extremely dangerous to boot. God cannot deceive, and therefore Jesus cannot pretend. If Jesus had been willing to “pretend”, then everything he said could be put in the same drawer: “he was pretending to mean such and such here, because the Apostles did not get that a proper pasta must not be overcooked”, or the like. “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life” does mean that He is and speaks the Truth, sempre e comunque. Then there would be the small matter that in the Old Testament God doesn’t seem to be “pretending” much, either, and His anger is very, very real. So either God has “evolved” in a peaceful being who is Buddha-like and never angry, or someone has to go back to the very basics. 

Now let us develop this. How is it that Francis expresses himself so easily in a heretical way? Either he does not know what he talks about – not unlikely, though inexcusable in a Pope – or he has just swept the bad news under the carpet, under the fiction that Jesus “didn’t really mean” that particular aspect, and was just “pretending”. Once Francis has jumped on this train it is rather obvious that – to mention at random – atheists can be saved, the covenants with the Jews is still in place, and you don’t have to convert anyone.

This Pope is making a Gospel in his own imagine and resemblance. Because he is so ‘umble. He asks you to believe it. Don’t do it.

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle! 

Mundabor

   

Posted on December 2, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 11 Comments.

  1. Like, this is what Modernists do, like, one day uber Catholic and the next day, like really cool so you want to hang out in their crip, ya dig?

  2. I can’t help but wonder what our Pope Emeritus thinks when he is reading this stuff. It must pose a great suffering for him. Our local priest in yesterday’s sermon used what I thought was a very disparaging verb to describe Jesus in yesterday’s gospel. He said Jesus was “grumbling” that his followers were not grasping that they must be ready at any hour. Doesn’t that conjure up an ugly persona of Our Lord as a sullen, defeated man who can do nothing but grumble? Where is the awe in the Truth and profundity of Our Lord? I weep for the modern Church.

    • Let us ask ourselves: how many priests would have used such comparisons 100 years ago?
      How many now?
      Why?

      All questions Francis will always avoid.

      M

  3. From a homily of St. Bede the Venerable, Priest
    Matins, first week of Lent, Volume I, page 1519, Roman Berviary in Latin and English, Baronius Press

    “What the Lord signalled symbolically by cursing the fruitless fig tree soon became clear when He threw the hagglers out of the temple. For it was no fault of the fig tree that it had no fruit when the Lord happened to be hungry: it was not yet the season for fruit. But the priests who carred on commerce in the Lord’s house WERE at fault: they had quit producing the fruits of piety which the Lord expected and hungered for in them. The Lord withered the fig tree with a curse, in order to bring home a lesson to those who saw or heard of this incident. They themselves deserved a much more severe judgement of God if they deluded themselves by the religious ring of their words, as by a covering rustle of green leaves, all the while failing to produce fruitful deeds.”

    ” And because they failed to grasp the significance of this sign, Christ brought down upon them in all its severity the punishment they deserved. He put a violent end to the commercial transactions being carried on in that house in which it had been commanded that only divine things were to be done: sacrifices and prayers to be offered to God, the word of God to be read, listened to and sung… But how much greater will be the punishment He levels on anyone He finds passing the time there in laughter, idle talk, or any other vice? …”

    “The Lord does not allow the transactions in His house of those commercial dealings which can be done without hindrance elsewhere. Without a doubt, then, those things which are never licit will certainly incur heaven’s wrath if they are done in dwellings consecrated to God.”

  4. The more one sees, hears and reads it seems the entire community in Vatican City is one great ” lets pretend ” game with Simon Sez and Sesame Street thrown in for additional giggles.

  5. Would you give a citation for the quote, please? I can’t find it…

  6. Never mind, please delete I found it at NCR

  7. I’ve read the linked article, and have little idea at the point of the ‘homily’ which seems to be the usual mix of VII slogans, stream-of-consciousness rambling and theological confusion.

    If you’ll excuse the link, I couldn’t help but be reminded of a similar delivery:

    How and when did “freedom” (whatever supposed to be taken to mean) become a dogma of the Catholic Faith, trumping almost all else but “joy”? Wasn’t it precisely Lucifer’s desire? Hasn’t it been the catch-cry of the anti-Christ revolution since Luther?

    “And this is salvation: to make us people, God’s people, to have freedom.” What?

  8. Meanwhile, there’s no mistaking what is intended here, http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/papal-nuncio-the-holy-father-wants-bishops-in-tune-with-their-people/

    “Go ye therefore and get ‘in tune’ with all nations, engaging in dialogue and learning from them in the name of.. “

%d bloggers like this: