These are the words from the consummate politician and bureaucrat, the pope: "'the Church doesn't need bureaucrats and diligent office workers but impassioned missionaries consumed by the ardour of bringing to all people the consoling words of Christ.'"
Like all deft politicians, the pope of course did not mean what he said. The Church needs its bureaucrats and office workers. It could not function without them. In fact, the Church is full of bureaucrats that run the various departments within the Holy See [2], and workers are needed to perform chores that are perfunctory.
Telling the world what the Church does not need, bureaucrats and office workers, is only the first part of the pope's loaded statement from the pope's convoluted mind, and it is already problematic.
Then the pope wanted all his staff be be "impassioned missionaries."
The Vatican bureaucrats, many of whom are men of cloth, are supposedly trained to become missionaries, but they are probably so consumed by work and internal politics that they do not even have time to pray, let alone act as "impassioned missionaries." And if they are truly passionate about certain issues, they are not all in agreement. [3] Does the pope want his "impassioned missionaries" with opposing views to preach to the same flock?
The last part of the pope's statement is equally twisted. What did the pope have in mind when he referred to the "consoling words of Christ?" Indeed, some of Christ's words are consoling, but some are not. Should "impassioned missionaries" only focus on Christ's words of comfort and forget about the rest?
In a secular and permissive world, only words of comfort are heeded, and therefore only such words are spoken. This pope, being a street-smart politician, is only concerned with what people want to hear, the words of Christ that console, but not the words of Christ that people do not care to hear, words that are preachy.
For example, Jesus said, "'Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.'" [4] The first part is reassuring, as if "rest" can be had just by relaxing on a sofa with snacks and drinks in front of a television, but before one can even sit down comes the difficult second part which states the conditions to finding "rest." Jesus made them sound easy: "Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart." [5] And He made sure everyone understood how easy they were by saying that "my yoke is easy and my burden is light." [6]. That may be true for one who is truly a saint, but for the common sinner, it is not so easy being "gentle" and "humble" like Jesus carrying His "yolk" at the same time. Is not His "yolk" His heavy wooden crucifixion cross that he had to drag uphill to Golgotha? Is not His metaphoric "yolk" His crucifixion? [7] Who wants to hear about carrying Jesus' "yolk?" Not many--even less who actually wants to and can carry it--and this pope is not about to bring it up anytime soon.
Jesus also said, "'[D]o not worry, saying, "What shall we eat?" or "What shall we drink?" or "What shall we wear?" For the pagans [i.e. the modern "secularists"] run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.'" [8] Here, as in the previous example, Jesus had initially comforted all by telling everyone not to worry about what to eat, drink or wear, for example, when inviting friends over for a party. That sounds great but then in order not to worry, one must "'seek first [God's] kingdom and [God's] righteousness'" [9] (as opposed to submitting to and embracing the self-righteousness of the "highly evolved" secularists of the world). [Emphasis added]. Seeking God's kingdom and God's righteousness first before throwing a party in order not to worry about what food and drinks to get and what to wear? Who does that?
Hardly anyone thinks about God these days. ISIL is probably on people's minds more often than God. If Jesus were here talking about ISIL, His words could be the same as those He said during His time: "'Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul,'" [10] Jesus then asked, "'Are not two sparrows sold for a penny?'" [11]. And concluded, "'Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.'" [12] Before that, Jesus said this: "'[B]e afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.'" [13] Although the first words Jesus said about killers who could not kill the soul could be reassuring (even though it may be not all that comforting for those being savagely maimed or killed), the words that follow, talking about "the One" who can "destroy both soul and body in hell" certainly do not sound like words that console.
When the pope said the Church needed "impassioned missionaries" to bring the "consoling words of Christ" to all the people, was he deliberately striking out the "not-so-consoling" words of Christ? If that is the case, he is no different than the seasoned politicians who only say things their supporters want to hear, and omit the difficult and unwelcomed realities.
[1] http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2016/08/14/pope_at_angelus_church_needs_missionaries_not_bureaucrats/1251347
[2] http://www.vaticanstate.va/content/vaticanstate/en/stato-e-governo/struttura-del-governatorato/organigramma.html
[3] https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/vatican-website-miquotes-pope-francis-on-communion-for-the-divorced-and-rem; and
http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/pope-francis-no-communion-for-divorced-and-remarried
[4] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+11%3A25-39&version=NIV
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Jesus said, "'[M]y yoke is easy and my burden is light.'" Ibid. Is this statement inconsistent with the actual weight of the cross Jesus had to carry and the burden of pain and suffering He had to endure? The answer is no. The betrayal, the arrest, the false accusations, the scourging, the crown of thorns, the carrying of the cross, the crucifixion and the piercing taken together is the "yolk," but not the "yolk" of Jesus, but the "yolk" of man. Man's "yolk" is heavy because of the weight of Original Sin and all its variations. In contrast, Jesus own "yolk" is easy to carry because He is sinless, and therefore His "yolk" is correspondingly weightless. When Jesus said that His yolk was easy and His burden light, He was talking about His sinless "yolk" and not the "yolk" of Sin. So when Jesus said to learn from Him, to be humble and gentle like Him, then one would have taken His "yolk" which is light (actually weightless) and easy to carry (actually there's no need to carry it for Jesus does not have a "yolk."
[8] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A22-34&version=NIV
[9] Ibid.
[10] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+10%3A21-30&version=NIV
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Ibid.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment