In biblical studies, there are two similar-sounding terms of particular importance: exegesis and eisegesis. Exegesis is defined as “an explanation or critical interpretation of a text,” and is the standard method of examining and understanding the Scriptures. Eisegesis, on the other hand, is “the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that the process introduces one’s own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text.”
In today’s homily, Pope Francis engaged, as is often the case, in the latter. And just as he has accused the Blessed Mother of wanting to call God a “liar” when faced with the suffering of her Son — twice — he is now preaching that St. John the Baptist doubted the identity of Jesus while in prison:
Although John was great, strong, secure in his vocation, “he still had dark moments,” he had his doubts,” said Francis. In fact, John began to doubt in prison, even though he had baptized Jesus, “because he was a Saviour that was not as he had imagined him.” And so he sent two of his disciples to ask Him if He was the Messiah. And Jesus corrects the vision of John with a clear response. In fact, He tells them to report to John that “the blind see,” “the deaf hear,” “the dead rise.” “The great can afford to doubt, because they are great,” the Pope said.
Of course, this is not the Church’s understanding of the text. In St. Thomas Aquinas’ Catena Aurea, we see a “discussion” of Matthew 11 amongst the Church fathers. St Hilary of Poitiers affirms:
It is indeed certain, that he who as forerunner proclaimed Christ’s coming, as prophet knew Him when He stood before him, and worshipped Him as Confessor when He came to him, could not fall into error from such abundant knowledge. Nor can it be believed that the grace of the Holy Spirit failed him when thrown into prison, seeing He should hereafter minister the light of His power to the Apostles when they were in prison.
The great biblical scholar, St. Jerome, adds:
Therefore he does not ask as being himself ignorant. But as the Saviour asks where Lazarus is buried, [margin note John 11:23] in order that they who shewed Him the sepulchre might be so far prepared for faith, and believe that the dead was verily raised again—so John, about to be put to death by Herod, sends his disciples to Christ, [p. 406] that by this opportunity of seeing His signs and wonders they might believe on Him, and so might learn through their master’s enquiry.
St. John Chrysostom offers:
Yet whilst John was with them he held them rightly convinced concerning Christ. But when he was going to die, he was more concerned on their behalf. For he feared that he might leave his disciples a prey to some pernicious doctrine, and that they should remain separate from Christ, to whom it had been his care to bring all his followers from the beginning.
And St. Hilary again concludes:
John then is providing not for his own, but his disciples’ ignorance; that they might know that it was no other whom he had proclaimed, he sent them to see His works, that the works might establish what John had spoken; and that they should not look for any other Christ, than Him to whom His works had borne testimony.
No, Your Holiness. St. John the Baptist did not doubt.
Francis, of course, has his own gloss on the text — predicated upon his eisegesis — and it is entirely unsurprising:
The great can afford to doubt, and this is beautiful. They are certain of their vocation but each time the Lord makes them see a new street of the journey, they enter into doubt. ‘But this is not orthodox, this is heretical, this is not the Messiah I expected.’ The devil does this work, and some friend also helps, no? This is the greatness of John, a great one, the last of that band of believers that began with Abraham, that one that preaches conversion, that one that does not use half-words to condemn the proud, that one that at the end of his life is allowed to doubt. And this is a good program of Christian life.” [emphasis added]
As is so often the case with Francis, he passive aggressively uses the occasion of commentary on the scriptures, or various anecdotes, to fire thinly veiled assaults at his critics and opponents. Make no mistake: his commentary on Matthew 11 has been weaponized and aimed at the authors and supporters of the dubia. Which is, perhaps, why irony meters around the world today exploded when Francis said this of St. John the Baptist:
He preached forcefully, he said some ugly things to the Pharisees, to the doctors of the law, to the priests, he didn’t say to them: “But dear friends, behave yourselves!” No. He said to them simply: “You race of vipers!” He didn’t use nuance. Because they approached in order to inspect him and to see him, but never with open hearts: “Race of vipers!” He risked his live, [sic] yes, but he was faithful. Then to Herod, to his face, he said, “Adulterer! It is not licit for you to live this way, adulterer!” To his face! But it is certain that if a pastor today said in the Sunday homily, “Among you there are some who are a race of vipers, and there are many adulterers,” certainly the Bishop would receive disconcerting letters: “But send away this pastor who insults us.” And he insulted them. Why? Because he was faithful to his vocation and to the truth. [emphasis added]
He’s toying with us. He must be. Nobody can be this devoid of self-awareness.
And speaking of eisegesis: for the record, Your Holiness? The miracle of the loaves and the fishes was a real miracle, too.
This man has to be deluded. Wicked, perhaps. Vicious, probably. But he can’t possibly be in his right mind and not see the irony. We need to keep praying.
As an aside, the references here are incredibly useful to me right now, so thank you! A number of my friends are arguing that Francis words should be assumed orthodox until proven otherwise… these references to homilies help prove my reticence.
You forgot the one about our Lord and Savior committing a sinful act for which he needed to beg forgiveness when he created The Fifth Joyful Mystery, and the one about poor repentant Judas who went away sadly rejected by the doctors of the law. https://nonvenipacem.com/2016/04/18/who-does-jorge-follow/
Is there some kind of mental imbalance going on here? How can such behavior be explained?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ea2a2e6f471226ab43afd6d30657996c5132f9a3fc7a3bc5b3201104d3c2e326.jpg
Worst Karaoke duet ever.
‘Anyway Anyhow Anywhere I choose….’ – PF sings the Who!!
“Anyway you Want It?”
Seriously, what question was asked here?
Did the journalist just ask this fellow if he is a Catholic?
No they asked “can the New World Order Bolsheviks just start blowing up Catholic Churches now”? With the soundtrack of Santa Baby in the background.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c8aa70fdf629abbc213d2bc84844b03473168a6f85248b641881dc535828b871.jpg
The doubling down going on above is like birth pangs at this point. Something is close to being born.
It takes a great deal of arrogance, pride, and/or mental imbalance to try to pass one’s own novel thoughts on Scriptural interpretation off as closer to reality than those of the Church Fathers, Doctors, and countless canonized saints.
It’s almost as if Francis is daring us to point out how he accuses himself with his own words. And he does it far too often for it to simply be unintentional or careless; he’s practically holding up a neon sign that says “Hello, Catholic media. I’m preaching heresy, here. Who’s going to finally call me out on it? Bueller? Bueller?”
Any Catholic with half a brain who hasn’t yet succumbed to head-in-the-sand syndrome should, by my estimation, assume that anything Francis says, however orthodox it may seem, is poisoned with some novelty or heresy. We have practically arrived at the point where there are two Churches: the Church of Christ, the Apostles, the Fathers, and the Saints versus the Church of Francis and the Modernists. I know where I stand; I just wish I could find some way to snap the disbelieving out of denial (which, as an aside, I blame entirely upon the post-Conciliar Catholic media for building up the cult of personality of the Pope so high that so many Catholics genuinely believe that one must agree with the Pope on everything in order to be a good Catholic; the damage the cult of papolatry has done to countless souls is incalculable).
Remnant TV has an excellent 23 minute discussion by Michael Matt, Professor Rao on this very topic of pope idolatry, dated December 15, 2016.
I’d like to ask him how doubt could be within John if John as a preborn leaped in Elizabeth’s womb at the approach of Mary who was pregnant with Christ. Did John know less as a mature saint than he knew as a preborn. Pope Francis must have doubts himself because his committment to scripture in its entirety as in the Judas case is spotty but he is not alone in this. Pope Benedict in section 42 of Verbum Domini asserts that the herem massacres were really sins…a similar projection of his own late life pacifism onto the OT violence….eisegesis.
This is painful to witness. We are watching Judas II and the Passion of the Christ’s Church. When will Rick Warren (America’s pastor) and Pope Francis (the world’s Pope) team up on the P.E.A.C.E. plan and that one world church? Is there a launch date we should mark on our calendars? Surely Benedict XVI must still be the real Pope and the man who claims the title is a counterfeit! I truly believe that the Church is carrying her cross to the place of execution.
And none of my Catholic friends see it. What will it take? An earthquake that destroys the Holy See and much of Rome? An over-run of the Muslim hoard and the resulting pillage, rape, and murder (i.e., the Crusades Version 2)? What does this say about the leadership of the Catholic Church? What does this say about the faithful? I will pray for Francis — for his conversion to Catholicism and to Christianity. Does speaking in this way make me a Bad Catholic?
No, this does not make you a “bad Catholic,” Susan. Let Pope Francis be a lesson to all of us: Every Christian awakens every day in need of conversion, and for this we need to surrender our wills and intellects, again and again, to the Holy Spirit.
This is more evidence that he is feeling pressure and it will be helpful in the long run. Too many Catholics still offer uncritical adoration to Francis and can’t believe he is doing or saying anything wrong. The more he continues in this vein, the more people will open their eyes to the fact that there is a serious problem here.
Another huge irony we have here is that Francis is again praising “doubt” – surely he must be aware that the Latin for “doubt” is “dubium” – plural “dubia.” In fact what we have here is St John the Baptist sending his own disciples to Our Lord with a list of dubia in order that they can learn the truth for themselves. Why is (alleged) doubt so praiseworthy in St. John the Baptist, but is absolutely unacceptable for his own Cardinals?
Why? Because John is a Great one like Pope Francis, so he can do what he wants: the Cardinal’s are nothing more than the Pharisees and Scribes who come to judge John/Francis and John/Francis insults them because they deserve it and John/Francis is faithful to the Lord by insulting them. And John/Francis is allowed to doubt because he is a great one and it’s beautiful for it’s able to lead one from the horrible black and white of ‘this is not orthodox, this is heretical.’ Because the Lord is leading Him down a new street, (called moral relativism way), and it is the Devil and his helpers (the Cardinals) who cause the doubt in the great one Francis/John.
My sentiments exactly when I read the news article about this homily of the pope’s. I sensed it was an attempted direct hit for the clergy questioning his explanations. St. John most likely sent these disciples on a mission to question and thus encounter Jesus personally, whereas if St. John had not sent them, they would have died with St. John out of loyalty and they needed to know Jesus for their continued growth in perfection. What a crazy game he is playing – where does he think this is all going as he plays the video out to the end?
St. John the Baptist was beheaded for upholding God’s law re marriage. The Feast of the Beheading of St. John the Baptist is a STRICT fast day. No meat, no dairy products, nothing with meat and/or dairy in them, and traditionally nothing in the shape of a head.
Maybe I’m too cynical, but it seems to me that whoever wrote the Pope’s remarks wanted him to minimize the forceful witness of St. John the Baptist. After all, if St. John “doubted”, then how can you trust his him when he says: “It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.”. (Mark 6: 17)? Then one can falsely rationalize that if St. John’s witness is not true, then maybe one doesn’t have to worry about breaking the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, as well as the two Great Commandments. (Never mind the fact that in breaking them deliberately, one loses sanctifying grace, becomes enslaved to the Enemy and go to hell if they die in that state).
Most Holy Mother of God, save us!
St. Joseph, most chaste spouse of the Virgin, pray for us!
St. John the Baptist, pray for us!
Correction, it is the infidels and not the great ones who doubt. The faithful cardinals today are censuring the Pharisaic Francis in the same way the invincible John the Baptist censured Herod and the Pharisees. Francis is upset with John the Baptist for his calling Herod an “adulterer,” so while pretending to honor him on one hand, he insults him on the other. Worse yet, he blatantly rejects Christ’s miracles and says that the faithful ones who believe in his miracles are entertaining “magic.” This “new path” has been given to Francis, not by God, but by the adversary. There are no “new paths” in God, but it is the devil who springs these “surprises” on the faithful ones.
Very good observation. Thank you!
PF speaks off the cuff like our parish priest does. Our priest said almost exactly the same thing in his homily and to be honest I knew of no other interpretation until I read your article, so thanks for that, it often made me wonder why John appeared to doubt. Btw, does PF know exactly what is in AL? Who knows? God at least does.
And the beat goes on…My priest also gave the same homily. I also knew no other interpretation until I read Steve’s blog with quotes from the Church Fathers.
Maybe they are printing them off some site dedicated to sermons for Episcopalian She-Bishops?
No, it’s the natural reading of the text, without benefit of interpretation by the minds of the Church Fathers
Bizarre. I never saw doubt in J the B’s words. I always saw clarification. That is odd as it can be.
You all saw doubt?
Gotta be honest. When I was writing up a thing about St. John the Baptist a couple years ago, I found myself reading that passage and wondering about it. The natural reading was confusing. Did he doubt? Was he wondering if Christ was who he thought he was, but he couldn’t be sure?
It didn’t sit well with me, so I looked it up. Which is where I found the Catena Aurea, which gave me the answers I was looking for.
If only the pope had those same instincts when preparing a homily…
“If only the pope had those same instincts when preparing a homily…”
When it comes to interpretation of sacred scripture,
“the person who trusts in himself is foolish”. (Proverbs 28:26)
I just asked my wife who was raised Baptist. She never saw “doubt” in it either, and her take on the passage was exactly that of the Fathers as she was taught without being taught it was the position of the Fathers cited. For myself, I always saw it as a request for clarification:
1} John was IN prison. He wanted to make sure THIS man who he heard about was indeed the Christ he baptized. The passage does not make clear whether John knew THIS man being reported to him was the same one as he who John had baptized.
And/or
2} John’s knowledge of the Messiah wasn’t full of “doubt”, but it wasn’t necessarily FULL, either. The concept of Messiah was not fully developed as we see later made clear in the Gospels and indeed many Jews did not fully understand “Messiah”. Think about today. Do we understand all of what the 2nd Coming will be? Of course not. Does that mean we “doubt”? Of course not. Also, remember, the Apostles LIVED w/ Christ and they were confused at times who he was and it was St Peter’s great confession that led to his appointment as the Rock. The reality was, he was singularly faithful in that confession at that time. And what is more, some of the Apostles really DID doubt, St Thomas for example, and even later, right before the Great Commission we see them doubting even THEN! Read Mt 28:16-20 w/ relevant passage: “And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing him they adored: but some doubted……..”
No, John sought clarification for himself and/or his followers. And Christ gives him the ULTIMATE clarification in using the terms of Isaiah 35:5 and 61:1. Referencing the Old Testament, Jesus signals to John right before John’s death that YES this IS the One about whom the Scriptures refer! JESUS is the ONE.
As for the Pope, he has a particular affinity for “doubt”. We have seen it come out in his speaking many times, have we not? Clearly this man is one who doubts, has many doubts and is full of doubt. He tells us this in clear words and his actions demonstrate it as well.
Steve, whatever you read in any passage, did it say St. John the Baptist doubted?
If so, where?
God bless.
Yes, on first reading. Now, with the added wisdom of the Church Fathers, it is clear that it is clarification. I can imagine John, in exasperation (saints are allowed to be exasperated, right?), telling his disciples, “Go, ask Him!” when they were asking if Jesus was the Messiah. This is why good, solid exigesis is so important
This is very hard to believe, but i do believe you.
How could any priest have the audacity to suggest his own personal doubts upon the his flock?
Find another priest.
I’ve had to do this twice in the past 10 years — find another priest, another parish in fact. It took me some time to make the decision in both cases.
In the first case, a lay assistant emailed me to ask if there was something or someone in the parish that caused me to leave, something that they might need to change. I cited false teaching that I’d heard from the DRE in an adult education class called, ironically, “Morality,” and matters of disobedience on the part of the pastor toward specific orders of the bishop.
In the second case, I was part of the RCIA team. The candidates’ preparation was worse than incomplete. The pastor failed to give to the RCIA candidates the Church’s “hard teachings” on the indissolubility of marriage, or counsel candidates on resolving irregular marriages. He told me that he asks *no one* about their marital history in preparation for the sacrament of Marriage. I was appalled.
The assistant pastor at the second parish began his RCIA class on “Ecumenism” in this way: “The Catholic Church isn’t ‘better’ than the other Christian denominations. It’s just ‘different’.” [WHAT?!] If I were a prospective convert, I’d have said to myself, “Then, why do I need to become Catholic and put up with all these ‘new’ rules and regulations at all?”
The same priest queried whether Jewish doctors and other staff who donated to the Catholic hospital where they worked were doing something “holy” or “just good.” He challenged me for the answer, specifically. I said, “Since offering assistance to the poor *must* be one of the 613 ‘mitzvahs’ that the Torah requires of faithful Jews, I’d have to say that this is a ‘holy’ act.” He redirected to the question to the one Jewish candidate who had been *teaching in the parish’s faith formation program for 12 years* at that point. She answered, “Actually, I have to agree with Pat.” The priest was beside himself with frustration.
These incidents and others made me *angry*. They’re are just examples of situations that led me to change parishes. I decided that it wasn’t good for me to be angry at anyone. However, more importantly, I asked myself whether these priests might lead me into error on some point where I might need serious, orthodox teaching. I decided that I couldn’t afford to be led into mortal sin.
Should homilies be delivered “off the cuff”? I’m not a priest, but I assume that most homilies are given some thought.
Homilies should address issues raised in the readings for the particular Mass, unless there is some important reason to depart from that practice. I’ve endured “off the cuff” homilies during which the priest rambled and, worse, mixed up Bible stories and lessons with stories from his childhood so. No preparation shows and defeats the purpose of preaching at Mass.
For many years, homilies have been the only opportunities for “catechesis” outside religious instructions for children and continuing formation for teens and adults. Irrelevant homilies contribute to the confusion among Catholics about what the Church teaches.
St. John the Baptist sure didn’t doubt when he leapt in the womb for the real presence of Jesus, the savior, while Mary and Elizabeth greeted one another. Why would he doubt later?
The Immaculate Conception refers to Mary’s conception, not Jesus’.
Me… red face. Corrected, thanks.
Great point!!!
John didn’t doubt but in his own words, Francis does.
About the only thing I doubt vis a vis the Catholic faith is the existence of gonads between the legs of the rank and file {most} of Red Hat wearers.
Rank and file fires back: Gonads? What is that?
Hmm, maybe because the Pope said so.
Same Pope who said that the Father was unjust in handing over His Son to be killed. I wonder if this is the reason he rarely talks about God’s justice.
PF has provided a terrible misinterpretation of scripture. In fact he owes St John
an apology as well as Catholics in general. It’s John’s deciples who are doubting
Christ,… who may have been such loyal followers of John that they were reluctant
to accept Jesus as the Messiah. Our Lord performs miracles in their presence and
quotes a messianic prophecy about the blind see etc. He adds blessed are they who
are not “scandalized”in me…..who are able to accept me as Lord and Messiah.
I’m a convert and have been a Catholic for about ten years. Before and since that I spent a long time reading the writings of the saints and the church fathers. You could say that the Holy Spirit through the saints, most especially Our Lady did the job of evangelisation, dare I say proselytism, on me. And thank God for it.
I find the current occupant of the Petrine office very confusing, the above another example of his obscuring and gobbledygook. He really must be doing this deliberately. Every time he opens his mouth I feel more disoriented. Basically he and not a few other Catholics seem to prefer if us converts would just stay where we were. In my case that would have been in the clutches of the vapid inheritors of the bile of John Knox. For others that would be the tambourine slapping dames of the C of E. Et cetera. Et cetera.
Thank the Lord for the Church that He founded and the few brave souls that still fight for her and speak clearly. Viva Christo Rey.
The only people who are confused by this Pope are those who try to pretend he is an orthodox prelate.
Give that ridiculous and fruitless effort up and he is clear as a bell.
Or at least who want him to be. But agree with you completely. He is sowing confusing but there is no confusion in terms of what he is about.
I’ve got some friends who just don’t get it and think he’s incredibly orthodox… one of the friends, I just found out hasn’t even read the dubia… I gave him some reading material.
The blindness of so many is almost perplexing. It has to be demonic.
I think that is true though not certain.
Some people just can’t imagine a Pope teaching error so they bury their heads in the sand hoping that when they finally put it back out, all this chaos will have passed.
I desperately wanted him to be orthodox. After all, he did bless my marriage. I really did not want the only pope that I am likely to meet this side of eternity to be a heretical interloper. But the Synods and this AL nonsense were the last straw that forced me to accept that facts are facts and it does no good denying them whilst they stare you in the face
You are not confused. He is confused. At best.
You are not disoriented. He is disoriented. At best.
You are dealing with people who long ago abandoned the mind of Christ, the lens of His Church, all the while engaged in self-delusion because they can’t reconcile the reality they have constructed with what they know they should be about.
They have been performing for the crowd for close to sixty years..
It is very important to keep that always in mind when you are processing him and his cadre. These people really are impaired.
I can’t assume they are morally culpable. They very well might not be. Their faith, their vocations, were hijacked by … at least the zeitgeist.
It is not you. Its them.
Whether you agree with Francis’ interpretation or not, let’s not forget that Ratzinger had substantially the same interpretation.
http://robertaconnor.blogspot.com/2013/06/june-24-2013-john-baptist-in-francis.html?m=1
The Baptism of Jesus
13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. 14 But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
15 Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.
16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
Looks like they both are very misguided in their ” interpretation”. What is so simple and so pure to understand and come to know in the Gospels, has been greatly harmed by many, not just Francis.
What gives so many the right to assume, presume their interpretations on the Gospels?
Degrees from prestigious schools of theology, philosophy, all this intellectual over thinking is becoming more and more filled with ego and narcissism.
Give me a priest like St. John Vianney.
Addendum: Never once does the Gospel state that John doubted. If you lived in a desert, waiting and preparing for the Lord, only to baptize His feet…..does that not conclude that one KNOWS, as a spiritual gift? When the sky opens above Jesus and the Father speaks……does not one know?
It seems as though our Church has been infiltrated with ” great thinkers”, who think too much.
“That’s your problem right there, Your Eminence. That part where you start quoting De Lubac…”
You have hit upon something that everyone who can read understands. For it was Saint John the Baptist who yelled, “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world!” I may not be a theologian, but in Jewish Tradition, a lamb is a sacrificial animal. And John the Baptist in my estimation, was one of the few who knew why Christ was put on this earth. He knew even before he was born. He was given a grace that few if any humans are ever given.
To say that while in prison, he suffered “the doubts” to such a degree is stretching it. Don’t you agree?
Yes, thank you for that excellent post. We utter the words at every Holy Mass, the words of St. John the Baptist.
“To say that while in prison, he suffered “the doubts” to such a degree is stretching it. Don’t you agree?” as you asked.
Stretching it? It infuriates me.
Anyway, Galatians 1:8 applies here.
Ooh…You pack a good wallop, Steve.
All fists and elbows these days, feels like. 😉
Yeah, yeah.
St John doubted. And naturaly, so did Mary at the Cross. And Jesus needed to apologize to his parents when he was found in the Temple. And the Disciples walked on and left Jesus behind to engage Blind Bartimaeus. And weapons makers are evil tho it’s OK to hide behind Spec Ops guys who are armed with those weapons if you are the Pope. And all war is bad except for aggressive invasions of tiny islands populated 100% by sheep and the citizens of other nations. And Lutheran justification is the same thing as Catholic justification. And the synod fathers actually thought it was A-OK for some married and divorced and remarried to receive communion without giving up sexual relations. And prelate supporters of homosexuality and defenders of sex abusers should be given promotions in the Church. And Jesus said the first and greatest commandment was to love man.
Whatever…
This huckster in the papal apartments will have his day in God’s court. Just wait and see.
In the meantime, pray for his conversion.
When the eisegete just makes a mess,
The cardinals must seek redress.
THAT ‘Exhortation’ throw away,
The modernists have had their day.
With your Act of True Correction,
(And of course a new election)
Save the Bride from more dishonour
And tell Pope Francis “You’re a goner!”
Pope on la stampa quoted as saying “God was unjust to his Son. He sent him to a cross.” Does this stuff never end. When will authority speak out. This is not just heresy, it is blasphemy.
I was thinking about that and I wondered: Do we need further proof that he is a heretic?
More words inspired by the father of lies. When will Catholics wake up?
I heard this same homily at Mass on the Sunday before the Bishop of Rome gave it. Recycled? I wanted to ask the priest to prove it, to ask for sources; something.
Read the Bible!
Seriously folks. Maybe this is an advantage we Protestant converts have over the rank and file Catholics, I don’t know, but it is hard to pull a fast one on us if we know the bible. Frank’s tall tales {AKA biblical exegesis} is as the article says; eisegesis. Get your heads in the Bible. As St Jerome said; You can’t know Jesus if you don’t know the Scriptures.
KNOW the Bible. Read it “Cover-to-Cover; Over-and-Over”, NOT like a Protestant who reads selected verses over and over.
Defend the faith.
You can’t fight in this war without a Sword.
And the Sword is the…oh, forget it…just go look it up!!
😉
Look, a great bishop of the Church has told me: “Don’t look to {sic} much on that what the Pope says and does.”
Good point. Because we have seen what he says and what he does.
Ho Hum.
By now it should be obvious:
Bellarmine was wrong.
Suarez was right.
I must confess that when I heard the Gospel reading last Sunday, my initial reaction was that St. John doubted. It seemed unusual, but the most likely conclusion based on the text. I’m very glad that the Church Fathers have an answer to that.
When can we expect a paper version of “The Francis Bible”? Can you imagine what Francis’ Bible would look like?
Bible: In the beginning God created heaven and earth.
The Francis Bible (FB): God does not have a magic wand which is able to do everything.
Bible: Jesus therefore, when He had taken the vinegar, said: It is consummated. And bowing His Head, He gave up the ghost.
FB: Afterwards Mary shouted: Lies! I was cheated!
Bible: Jesus feeds the 5,000 by a miracle.
FB: Eh, it wasn’t miraculous. Everyone was carrying fish and bread with them.
Bible: John sent his disciple to ask Jesus if He be the Christ [so that his disciples would know that He was].
FB: John had doubts about Jesus. I mean, how would John know He was the Messiah?!
Bible: He that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid. [St. Paul]
FB: Heresy, what’s that? It’s just those pesky neo-pelagian, effeminate, white and black traditionalists, again. There’s no such thing as heresy – just diversity of belief, a synodality of faith, where each believes according to his conscience!
Bible: Divorce and remarriage is adultery.
FB: We need to show mercy to everyone [see footnote 300], and allow people to receive Communion because they can’t help being in mortal sin. They’re just born that way!
[Footnote 300: Mercy is not to be shown to traditionalists, since they keep tripping me up on everything. And please don’t send me questions. But, regarding sodomy: who am I to judge, right?]
Who’s to say you can’t compile it yourself? Online version would be easy enough.
Sadly, I wouldn’t be ambiguous enough! Also, it would have be constantly updated to reflect the new daily beliefs of the Pope!
But the Pope is. Just put down his words verbatim.
Also, you can get people to submit additions as well so you don’t have to always be the one looking for them.
Gosh, I wouldn’t even know where to begin! Or what format to use. I mean, a Bible is a big thing!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6eaf5568682c68ca351752c1a854fda0857ebda30d36ed830cf598451f566d88.jpg
Are the Jesuits using affirmative action?
Another blasphemy by Bergoglio:
“Dio è ingiusto? Sì, è stato ingiusto con suo figlio, l’ha mandato in croce. Ma è la nostra esistenza umana, la nostra carne che soffre in quel bambino, e quando si soffre non si parla: si piange e si prega in silenzio”.
“Is God unfair? Yes, he has been unfair with His Son, he sent him on the cross. But is our human essence, is our flesh that suffers in this baby, and when one suffers, doesn’t talk: weeps and prays in silence”.
http://agensir.it/quotidiano/2016/12/15/papa-francesco-udienza-a-bambin-gesu-non-ho-una-risposta-alla-morte-dei-bambini-quando-si-soffre-non-si-parla-si-piange-e-si-prega-in-silenzio/
Even before he was born, Saint John the Baptist knew who Christ was.
“He’s toying with us. He must be. Nobody can be this devoid of self-awareness.”
I think what the Pope did was a brilliant move. With but a few sentences he effectively shut down any thought of resistance from any teetering neo-cath news outlets such as CMTV and Catholic Answers et al. He gave them their tasty morsel of a sound bite to reassure them that the Pope is indeed orthodox and has their back so there’s no need to get testy like those other pharisees.
The National Catholic Register has published email address to send Pope Francis a birthday greeting. Do take the opportunity to share your thoughts directly to Pope Francis in several languages.
Latin: [email protected]
Italian: [email protected]
Spanish/Portuguese: [email protected]
English: [email protected]
French: [email protected]
German: [email protected]
Polish: [email protected]
Thanks James for that public service! The great thing about English is that its universality means that even for those who are far from fluent, it is still relatively easy to make yourself understood so I shan’t be restricting myself to sending just the one message to the English email address.
I have though managed to formulate two ‘French’ messages:
Bon anniversaire! Les cinq dubia?? R.S.V.P.
&
Êtes-vous vraiment le pape? Malheureusement, j’ai mes dubia.
Love that “translator!”
Good job, Steve. The childish one is toying with us, but spiritual adults can see through this. Francis is upset that John the Baptist censured Herod for his adultery, so while pretending to call him faithful on one hand, he calls him an infidel on the other. His contempt of heavenly things is all the more confirmed by his blatant rejection of the miracle of the loaves, insisting they were not multiplied, and insisting that those who take Jesus at his word are entertaining “magic.” No Francis, it is the infidels, and not great ones who doubt this way, but it is the faithful ones who reject these “surprises” that the enemy sends us. These surprises are intended to undermine God’s truth, but unfortunately, the truth is “this or that way,” with no surprises allowed.
I am dumbfounded by the final quote from the Pope about John being faithful to his vocation and the truth. I am simply dumbfounded. Steve Skojec, what on earth do you think he was driving at? I can’t even hazard a guess.
So, his message is: we can have doubts (dubia) about the Lord Himself, but God forbid we have doubts (dubia) about the Pope’s letter!
Tweet that to pontifex
Don’t have Twitter; please tweet it for me. 😉
Hey, you nailed that. That was probably the whole point of the homily.
Wow. Nailed it is right. Get that to the Pope immediately.
“John was the greatest prophet – conduit of the Holy Spirit – in the history of mankind. God Himself, in the Third Person of the Trinity, actually flowed through John in a greater way than any other human being, save for Mary, whom the Third and Second Person of the Trinity flowed through spiritually and corporeally. John’s conception, which was miraculous, was announced to his father Zachariah by the same angel who performed the Annunciation of the Incarnation to Mary. So blessed was John, he was afforded the grace of baptism in the womb, which is the Second Joyful Mystery. Highest praise for John comes directly from the lips of our Lord in Matt 11:11. Would Jesus, omniscient God Incarnate, have called John “the greatest” if John was doubting Him at that very moment? After the miraculous conception, miraculous baptism, birth, life and imprisonment of John, isn’t it reasonable to assume the Holy Spirit provided him one last vision – that of his impending death – to which John responds by sending his disciples to Jesus for their own good? Jesus then answers them with words that would have been instantly recognizable as fulfilling the prophecy from Isiah 35:5-6.” https://nonvenipacem.com/2016/12/17/next-up-on-the-francis-insult-hit-list-st-john-the-baptist-and-the-first-person-of-the-trinity/
If Francis wasn’t a Jesuit, I would accuse him of being a Jesuit. He certainly sounds like one.
I’m sorry, but, pace Skojec, Francis is in fact stupid enough to think that he must italicize his transparent intentions with rhetorical excess, or else we will not get his point, which seems to be, God help us, that he is some sort of prophet, i.e., John the Baptist, inveighing against the “vipers” who oppose him!
Let’s be frank. Francis frequently combines thuggishness with halfwitted preaching.
More and more we see that it is the Pope who is ignorant- ignorant of Catholic thought and teaching on this verse.
Historical criticism anyone?
So here we are clear: The Pope would have accompanied Herod and Herodias.
Why do we argue about the name “doubt”. It’s how we define it. The “doubt” meaning question is sth what lead to consiuos faith. Without it we could just repeat few words without real faith, without progres