Amen.
Well, once again those who disagree with the Protestant Wrecking Crew could only do so because they don't understand or haven't read Scripture.
LONG before I even THOUGHT of being Catholic it was a commonplace that God was "without parts or passions". Consequently those parts of the Scripture which you all cheerfully take as justification for scornfully proclaiming that we are either ignorant or stupid were understood as a moving effort to portray as best as it could be portrayed in human language what the Divine ACTION of Love is like.
By this reckoning, true Love is what God IS (and God chooses to be what He is), and what we call love is a kind of simulacrum of true love or a projection on a dull and torn screen of the Divine Love. Consequently, on a day to day basis, Love and pity and whatnot are things we suffer, things that happen to us. Only over time do we learn that real Love and Pity and the rest are actions and acts of will.
That God the Son of God suffers and dies is by the same sort of reckoning part of the incomprehensible mystery of the Incarnation. One thing we can say with some confidence is that God didn't send his only begotten Son because he FELT like it. He CHOSE, and chose freely, to do so.
But maybe it's just incomprehensible to us stupid Catholics, since those who have γνωσις, uh, I mean knowledge, know the nature of God so well that they can confidently mock those with whom they disagree.
I feel so, oh, I don't know, deflated ... not puffed up anyway. I leave that to those with γνωσισ.
You don't think it might just be possible that the word passion is being used in different ways here? If you'll excuse my ignorance in suggesting it....