|
|
|
“If thy hand scandalize thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life, maimed, than having two hands to go into Hell, into unquenchable fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.” (St. Mark 9.42-43) |
Jorge Bergoglio (a.k.a. “Francis”):
“Receive the forgiveness of God and go among the line of souls who contemplate Him, the souls of those who are unrepentant, and thus cannot be forgiven, simply disappear.” and “Hell does not exist, the disappearance of sinful souls exists.”
Jesus Christ:
“Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Saint Matthew 25:41)
“If thy right hand scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than that thy whole body be cast into hell.” (St. Mat. 5:30)
Pope Francis insists that such antiquated concepts as Hell and punishment — even eternal and unimaginable suffering — cannot possibly be true! In fact he recently assured us that “No one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel. Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves” 1
“
Who, then, uttered this nonsense?” you demand.The answer, of course,
is Saint Mark. What is more, we reply, we have never so much as heard
of the Bible in terms of logical premises and conclusions, or Sacred
Scripture understood as so many syllogisms.
Is there a “Logic of the Gospel”? Is there a “logic of the Gospel”,
we ask? One that supersedes and ultimately reveals as absurd what we
find in the Gospels? In order to really arrive at what is written in
the Gospel and uttered by Christ, must we abandon the obvious and demand,
instead, that it be reconstructed — and reinterpreted — along the lines
of a truth table?
A Propositional Exegesis of Holy Scripture?
In other words, must I
now construe the teachings of Holy Scripture not in terms of faith —
but logic — or more to the point, in terms of logical consistency (a
fabricated “consistency” that Francis never explains) rather than Divine
Revelation?
As reasonable men we must not simply disagree with Francis, but hold
this preposterous notion to be nothing less than absurd. The Four Gospels
are not, and have never been, understood as even latently logical treatises
— subject to the laws of propositional logic — rather than the Laws
of God enunciated by His Son and the Prophets in Sacred Scripture.
Indeed, one of the vexing issues that, in current circles, “do not accord
with the logic of the Gospel” occurs in today’s reading: Jesus became
angry. It does not “fit” the progressive (and fictitious) notion that
Jesus — and His Father, for that matter — never become angry! In fact,
they are never offended! They are totally understanding and accepting
of any sin and every evil; even our blasphemy! After all, the real Jesus
reveals Himself as properly emasculated in our effeminated culture,
and in the rudifacient “children’s homilies” at Mass by Deacon Dick:
|
“See Jesus come. |
I hate to break it to you
and to offend your feminized sensitivities — and proclivities — but
Jesus was a man. Not Mr. Rogers, not Mrs. Doubtfire, and definitely
not a wimp. He was beaten, scourged, mocked, crowned with thorns, and
crucified — that is not the stuff of wimps. Or delicate men.
And, yes — He occasionally became angry!
It is recorded in and testified to in all four Gospels-that-are-not-textbooks-on-logic.
We believe it!
Not because you have arrived at a satisfactory truth-variable through
logic — but because God said so — in Holy Scripture. And because it
is what the Holy Catholic Church authentically teaches and has taught
for 2000 years. Because it makes sense! And because Christ is True God
and True Man! The Bible is not a Truth Table. It is the Living Word
of God. It is Truth, just as Christ is Truth Himself (Saint John 14.6)
— and most annoying to some, a truth at which you will never arrive
through propositional logic.
Only through Faith.
___________________
1
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-marriage-idUSKCN0X42TB
Geoffrey
K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Printable PDF VersionComments? Write us: editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
Further Reading on the Papacy of Francis:
-
Francis as the Prince of this World and the Logical Conclusion of Vatican II
-
The Art of Plausible Deniability: Closing Thoughts on Amoris Laetitia
-
Francis — the Great Divider in the Post Modern Catholic Church
-
Against Pharisees: by Bishop Athanasius Schneider concerning Amoris Laetitia
-
A Tale of Two Popes: The Newest Paradigm — The Emeriti, Resignation, and Dissolution
-
Quotations from Chairman Francis and other Philosophical Absurdities
-
PachaPapa — a Pagan Pope — and Definitely not my “Holy Father”
-
Carefully Crafted Bad Language — from the Vicar of Jesus Christ on Earth?
-
The “Amazonian Face” of the New Church of Accompaniment and Ecology
Totally
Faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith entrusted
to the Holy See in Rome
|
|
The Face
and the |
