Posted on 12/02/2013 7:06:42 PM PST by marshmallow
Jes·u·it·i·cal
adjective
of or pertaining to Jesuits or Jesuitism.
( often lowercase ) practicing casuistry or equivocation;
using subtle or oversubtle reasoning; crafty; sly; intriguing.
Or as the say you can take the Jesuit out of the Jesuits but not the Jesuit out of the Jesuit.
On Saturday, Radio Vatican said Pope Francis had said,
“In the Gospel, Jesus does not become angry, but pretends to when the disciples do not understand him,”
The ancient Fathers would baulk at such a suggestion, I can't think of one who would be be comfortable with the idea that the Gospels did not reveal the plain meaning of what Jesus said and did, it is only the Jesuits of the 17th century who would begin to suggest otherwise.
There is no suggestion in the Gospels that Jesus feigns, or pretends anything. On the contrary he is the 'Truth'. He says, "Let your 'yes' mean 'yes' and your 'no' mean 'no'". His Kingdom stands in contradistinction to that of the kingdom of the Father of Lies.
If Jesus really does 'pretend' to be angry but isn't really what else does he pretend? Is he really just 'acting' in other emotional responses, when he sighs, when he weeps, when he rails against the Pharisees. Is he really grinning broadly when he calls Simon Peter, 'Satan'?
I do not agree with Pope Francis on this, we do not need smiley or angry face marks to interpret the Gospels. Perhaps this says more about the Pope than it does about Jesus. Rather than Jesus pretending, is Pope Francis 'pretending'? After all if one believes the Son of God can and does 'pretend', why shouldn't the Pope? And if the Pope can 'pretend', why not the Church?
(Excerpt) Read more at marymagdalen.blogspot.com ...
Francis "damage control" thread du jour.
The radio link you provide says “In the Gospel, Jesus does become angry,” but your blog link says “In the Gospel, Jesus does not become angry,”
Just saying
wow
did he really say that? or was it “out of context” again, as some keep saying?
Jesus was just pretending?
wow.
You know what....
I call BLASPHEMY!
For me...judgment is still out.
 |
 |
 America demands Justice for the Fallen of Benghazi! |
 |
 |
A very interesting point.
I don’t pretend to know what the pope meant by what he said. I’m hoping it is just a bad translation considering some of his other odd remarks.
The ancient Fathers would baulk at such a suggestion, I can't think of one who would be be comfortable with the idea that the Gospels did not reveal the plain meaning of what Jesus said and did, it is only the Jesuits of the 17th century who would begin to suggest otherwise.
Don't look at me - he's your pope!
Say whaat?
Say what?
False prophet...
Maybe there’s just a little too much being made out of this. Jesus often spoke in parables as well, not revealing exactly what he was talking about for reasons perhaps unknown at the time. The important thing is that he made the most important meaning known, even though the reasons might not have been understood.
It might be that holding contradictory notions in one’s head leads to madness.
Nice, genial madness, but madness just the same.
Maybe the pope is speaking in parables and nobody has figured that out yet...
I think everyone is just so critical of the Pope because he’s the “Pope”. But just like Jesus, he’s a man. But unlike Jesus, he’s not perfect. The articulation may just differ from the interpretation.
Pope Francis errs and lacks perfection in his own understanding, or else he has blundered badly in his communication. OR BOTH, sadly.
All I know for certain is that the enemy is stirring increasingly in the world, and the Pope shall not be spared. I am concerned for his sake as well as my own.
But I’ve never seen such a continual questioning of this man’s “true” meanings of what he’s said. A person simply cannot screw up that often, like EVERY time he opens his mouth. How many points is he going to be spotted before his game actually counts?
I am bored with these almost-daily contretemps.
The Pope should not be preaching daily, or else his daily homilies should not be recorded and reported.
He should not be giving interviews.
Popes should speak primarily through Magisterial documents, and prepared, vetted texts—e.g., the Wednesday audiences.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.