This particular heresy is more typical of Lutherans
Since God cannot commit sin, this is also blasphemy.
Pray for the pope. Pray for Catholics who don’t know heresy when they hear or see it proclaimed.
Read the pope’s words for yourself at the official Vatican News website.
(Do it now, before the story is taken down.)
For the record – here’s the pertinent text:
Vatican Radio) Christian life is not a spa therapy “to be at peace until Heaven,” but it calls us to go out into the world to proclaim that Jesus “became the sinner” to reconcile men with the Father. These were Pope Francis’ words during his homily at Mass Saturday at the Casa Santa Martha.
The Christian life is not staying in a corner to carve a road which takes you into heaven, but it’s a dynamic that encourages one to stay “on the road” to proclaim that Christ has reconciled us to God, by becoming sin for us. In his usual profound and direct way, Pope Francis focuses on a passage from the Letter to the Corinthians, from today’s liturgy, in which St. Paul very insistent, almost “in a hurry”, uses the term “reconciliation”five times.
“What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it’s not it … True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: ‘This is your sin, and I will sin again’. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us. “
It is the beauty and the “scandal” of the redemption brought by Jesus and it is also the “mystery, says Pope Francis, from which Paul draws” zeal “that spurs him to” move forward ” telling everyone” something so wonderful “the love of a God” who gave up his Son to death for me. ” Yet, explains Pope Francis, there is a risk of “never arriving at this truth” in the moment when “we ‘devalue a little the Christian life”, reducing it to a list of things to observe and thus losing the ardor, the force of the ‘”love that is inside” of it:
17 Comments
Doug Lawrence's Catholic Site 
Hi,
I was hoping when I first read this, that, something was lost in the translation or something. After reading it a few times on different sites, this is one of the most perverting things of scripture I have read so far.
Btw: As a “still” Lutheran member of my (ELCA) 1st church, which blasphemey (besides the homosexual priests) do they promote that says Jesus is a sinner?
The whole thing about the lamb being worthy to open the seals in Revelation, is because he was without sin and worthy of it. If Jesus means God with us, saying Jesus is a sinner is the same as saying God is a sinner.
The question is, why would he intentionally say such an awful thing?
Martin Luther himself proposed a very similar belief – and Luther had a number of other very unusual ideas about sin, as well.
Pope Benedict’s personal theology contains many Lutheran characteristics – and so does Pope Francis’ – except perhaps when it comes to the Jews.
As for the “whys” – who knows?
Thank you for commenting.
Doug
DIVERSION: The cute little Toddler, dresses as “Little Pope” during Carnival!
Now convinced that this appalling story is true, I must remain speechless in order to avoid an occasion of sin.
I am not Catholic but I do believe that what the Pope said is correct. When Jesus was asking God to take the cup, it wasn’t because of the physical pain that he was to endure but the pain of being separated from His Father. When he said: Why have you forsaken me, I believe it was because He felt what is what like to be without His Father. That is what sin does. It separates us from our Father. Jesus never sinned but He did as the Lamb take on our sins on the cross so that we can be reconciled to Christ.
As a member of the Holy Trinity, a separation of the type you mention is impossible. As for the “why have you forsaken me” phrasing – I suggest you reference Psalm 22: Unto the end, for the morning protection, a psalm for David. (22:2) O God my God, look upon me: why hast thou forsaken me? Far from my salvation are the words of my sins.
Jesus was citing (from the cross) the prophetic scripture, written 800 years earlier by his forefather, King David, which actually described Jesus’ crucifixion.
As Saint Paul explains, Jesus Christ is the holy and sinless propitiation for our sins – the atoning sacrifice who turned God’s righteous anger to grace and his just judgments to mercy. The only reason such a thing could have happened is because Jesus had become one of us in all things except for sin – a perfect and obedient man – even unto death on the cross – so our sins could be forgiven.
For much more on this in all its many aspects see: https://douglawrence.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/passionfinawebl.pdf
Thank you for commenting.
Doug
Doug,
Quite an Extensive Commentaryand very Complete!
What was the Scripture, that said, He bore Our Sins, in 1 Peter and 2 Corinthians about? He was the unblemished Lamb go God, the Sinless Son of God, who was made the Propitiation, by the Father, for Sin!
Maybe, at the Cross, The Ultimate Sacrafice, the Son of God,became our Sin, so we might be free, to enter Everlasting Life!
There’s a very big difference between bearing the sins of the world on your own body and becoming a sinner, yourself! In truth, accomplishing both would be an impossibility – even for Jesus Christ, the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity. If Jesus had ever sinned – even in the slightest – he would have come under the power of Satan, sin and death – and would no longer have been suitable to be our redeemer/propitiation for sin – and certainly not worthy of resurrection from the dead. Besides – the Council of Trent long ago, solemnly declared that it is impossible for God to commit sin – since sin is contrary to the Divine nature.
Doug
If I said to an American with an average to fair education, “Four score and seven years ago.” they would know it was Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. They could also probably recite a few more verses of the speech. So, when Jesus said, “My God, my God why have you forsaken me,” All the Jews around Him would have known He was quoting from Psalm 22. When we read the entire Psalm it goes from what sounds like despair, to a glorification of God who does not abandon us, who is our hope. Just as I when I was a Jew growing up, in our grief when losing a loved one, prayed the Mourner’s Kaddish, which focuses on God’s goodness. Knowing the entire Psalm and not just the first verse tells us more of the Faithfulness, unity and cooperation of the three persons in the Trinity, than one would first assume if we don’t know it’s context.
I can’t presume to speak for the Pope, but having been raised in a Sephardic Jewish home before baptism and life as a Catholic, I was exposed to a household in which Hebrew, Greek, Ladino, Spanish and English were all spoken. The same concepts can sound radically different when translated verbatim. I would imagine from my exposure to different languages, that what he said would more accurately be translated, that Jesus took our sins upon himself, to the cross.
The old saying, “The translator is a traitor.” seems to ring true here.
As an example, if I told you that my father and grandfather both had curly jet-black hair until they were 45 years old, and after than were completely bald. Then asked you to describe their hair after 45, most would reply they had no hair. The reality is, both of us speaking English, you would be wrong. Bald is a perfect English word meaning white haired. As they both were and I am now.
Lastly before you all fall asleep from this long Epistle, I am no fan of Pope Francis, and his off the cuff comments. But then again St. Peter was it would appear just as impetuous, and who chose him? Pray for the Pope, and the Church, even or especially when he makes you scratch your head.
You obviously subscribe to an extremely liberal interpretation of the Pope’s statements. There’s not necessarily anything wrong with that, so long as a correct and thoroughly Catholic semblance of the actual truth remains; something which unfortunately, does not even remotely apply to the Pope’s words, in this and many other cases.
I’m glad you have the charisms I lack so can judge that I take a liberal interpretation. My formation was in the SSPX, (where I had to like a few other convert seminarians hide my Jewish heritage due to the suspicion that all Jews even converts were trying to subvert the Church) I returned to full communion with the Holy See when and because of the election of Pope Benedict XVI. My local ordinary has not once requested or insisted I offer the OF or update to conform to the Liberal rot some of the clergy here in Southern California espouse.
As for Pope Francis, he does trouble me quite a bit. His off the cuff and impulsive comments, even worse the spin given what he says that reports a different position than he held is even more concerning for me. But I’m sure I would have had the same issues with St. Peter, who denied our Lord three times before the cock crowed, who’s faith was weak when our Lord bid him to walk on the water to meet Him. Who taught that eating non-kosher foods was permitted but refused to do so himself.
I do not advocate the wholesale acceptance of Mamon, but do advocate praying for the only person on earth who at least externally seems to be the current validly elected Pope, and rather than making a quick judgement, reading through trusted and authentic Catholic sources, and doing so with the mind of the Church. (while my library as one may imagine is primarily Pre-Vatican II theologians from the Fathers, the Angelic Doctor, and Migne. The few Post Vatican II writers I have would be along the lines of the Late Fr. Hardon and Abp Sheen from before and after the Council. I do have some arch-heretics like Kung and Rahner (Karl and Hugo as distanced on the shelf as their theology) so I can see what they said in context, having never found them to have any credibility.
This epistle is getting a bit long, but the point is, claiming someone to have a Liberal stance, with so little background information is both lacking in charity and puts one in the position of elevating one above the Magisterium. Do I like what Pope Frances is reported to write or say? No. Do I accept that every translation or even statement will be something that I understand in the cultural or linguistic style used by those from other cultures? No. Being of Spanish extraction having spent time with my family in Spain, and Greece I do however know that we can often misunderstand what we read in translation. Myself included. But I see too many who either wholeheartedly support or always suspect those they label. I’d rather see another Pius XII on the throne, but as we have Francis, I feel we need to be very careful in what we read, and how we obtain the information, trying to determine if someone else’s spin has been added to what he is reported to have said.
Please take a moment to fully “parse” my reply and you will see that I wrote no such thing. Doug
Exactly. That’s really true. Doug could you give me exactly the reference regarding the original text of Pope Francis speech on that particular issue. If I am not mistaken, is it in Italian? Thanks .
You’ll find the piece at this link: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-christian-life-proclaims-the-road-to-reco
Select the language by clicking at the top right of the article.
You’re welcome!
Doug
WHAT is going on? I cannot think of a more ANTITHESIS of Doctrine, than LUTHER and a JESUIT!!!
Maybe Jesus took on all the sins of the world, brought them to Hell and left them there. He did descend into Hell according to the Apostles Creed. What else would he have done with the sins that he took upon himself for our sake?
“Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers” 2 Timothy 2:14