Every time an orthodox Catholic calls Bravo Sierra on some liberal scheme -- as here -- or even mildly criticizes some heterodox inanity, up goes the sniveling cry: is this how Jesus would want you to talk? Would Jesus want you to spread such hatred? What would Jesus say?
Seems to me these questions are easily answered by taking a good look at some of the things Jesus actually did say.
1. Jesus Calls His Enemies Children of the Devil
John 8:43-45: "Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear My word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.
2. Jesus Calls His Enemies Liars
John 8:54-55: Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of Whom you say that He is your God. But you have not known Him; I know Him. If I said, I do not know Him, I should be a liar like you; but I do know Him and I keep His word.
3. Jesus Calls His Enemies Hypocrites (Just a Couple Examples out of Many)
Matthew 15:7-9: You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: 'This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me; in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.'"
Matthew 22:15-18: Then the Pharisees went and took counsel how to entangle Him in His talk. And they sent their disciples to Him, along with the Hero'di-ans, saying, "Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God truthfully, and care for no man; for You do not regard the position of men. Tell us, then, what You think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, "Why put Me to the test, you hypocrites?..."
4. More Choice Names Jesus Had for His Enemies
Matthew 23:15: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you traverse sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves."So what is my point here? Is it to condone gratuitous nastiness? Absolutely not: Jesus never engaged in nastiness, and neither said nor did anything without a point.
Matthew 23:16-17: "Woe to you, blind guides, who say, 'If any one swears by the temple, it is nothing; but if any one swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.' You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred?"
Matthew 23:27-28: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs [whited sepulchres], which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity."
Matthew 23:33: "You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?"
My point is that Jesus is no hippie. My point is that the image liberals seem to have of a granola-chewing, birkenstock-wearing, recycling Jesus, tolerant to the point of being blind to everything that is sick and wrong, is a huge lie. My point is that the little pleasantries that make liberals squeal like little girls and dissolve into puddles of tears are nothing compared with the words of Jesus recorded in Scripture.
Christianity is not soft, squishy, mushy nor gushy. And neither is her Founder.
Excellent response, Anita. As you say, liberals always pull out the WWJD? stuff when they're called on what they're up to.
ReplyDeleteWould love to see them respond to your post. But, honestly, what could they possibly say?
Would they argue with God Himself? Well, sure they would.
Of course, when they're advocating for homosexuality, abortion, stealing (welfare), they NEVER ask WWJD?
Well Anita and Paul,
ReplyDeletethanks for reminding us that Jesus was never afraid to say the truth, even if it was sometimes difficult to swallow.
On the other hand, there's an enormour gap between supporting abortion, stealing and homosexuality, and taking communion in the hands (which is our original subject here).
Taking communion in the hands is not theologically wrong if it's done with proper respect. I admit that some people lost this respect, which is why people like you guys would like a return to taking communion in the mouth. That's an understandable reaction, but again, on this particular topic, do we need to generalise and say that all people who take communion in the hands are Children of the Devil, Liars, Hypocrits, Chidren of hell ?? COME ON !!! That's just being bitter, and using Jesus' straightforward language as an excuse.
Jean-remy Duboc,
ReplyDeleteI read the linked post and comments. The original author was not referring to you or me who have been trained to receive in the hand, but to those who pushed it in direct disobedience to the church; they deserve reprobation in strong terms, not those who follow along because they have not been taught better.
The universal norm is communion on the tongue; we have an indult which permits us to do what the church has not mandated, but something else. Do you want to do what the very presence of Jesus Christ in the world wants us to do, or what he doesn’t want but permits?
Now, you have demonstrated that you have a preference for what you think, rather than what the Universal Church suggests. I would suggest that you would do your faith a favor by studying this matter in more depth; perhaps starting with “The Spirit of the Liturgy” by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.
God bless,
Mark
, do we need to generalise and say that all people who take communion in the hands are Children of the Devil, Liars, Hypocrits, Chidren of hell ?? COME ON !!!
ReplyDelete-------------
Jean-remy,
Nobody has said that. Ever. Again, you're missing the point.
What I'm saying is that those who used Vatican II as an opportunity (and still do) to usher in all manner of things that damages the Faith of people are the destroyers of the Faith. Purposeful. Intentional.
Communion in the hand was another scheme to downgrade the Faith of the followers. And boy, has it worked.
Just look at what they (the destroyers) denigrate. Anything "old school" Catholic, anything that builds up the Faith. Anything that draws away from the Faith, they're all in favor of.
When I returned to the Church in '98, I met with a priest and discussed coming back. This guy was the stereotypical effeminate priest - I mean, he was so bad you'd think you were being put on.
Anyway, I'm asking him about the parish in particular, since I wanted to make sure I didn't come back to one of those loopy parishes. He laughed and said "Well, we don't want to be TOO Catholic." I remember thinking "what the heck?"
And I think this is exactly what the "destroyers" think like. Anything "old" is bad, and any new "innovation" is good.
They are exactly who we think they are. And if Jesus came back to clear out some temples today, I'd bet He'd start with the loopy parishes, not an SSPX parish.