FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Pope Francis: Christ “Made Himself the Devil” (OnePeterFive)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
There really aren't any words...

"As a result of H. Reed Armstrong’s recent article on the influence of Hans Urs von Balthasar and Henri de Lubac on the thinking of the contemporary Church, I found myself perusing an analysis of von Balthasar’s “Delirious Hope that All be Saved” by Dr. Christopher Malloy, professor of theology at the University of Dallas.

In the midst of that essay, one particular paragraph stood out, because it jogged my memory about something almost entirely unrelated:

    And as for the related claim that Jesus took on our sins themselves – not simply the punishment due to them – here we have Balthasar coming very close to supporting, if not outright supporting, the notion of penal substitution. Perhaps Balthasar avoids claiming the Christ truly became guilty, thus freeing himself from Luther’s blasphemy on this matter. But his assertion that Christ takes on damnation itself cannot square with the truth of hell. Hell is a place of sinful alienation, a place of aversion from the divine good. But Christ cannot become averse to the divine good. (On this topic, see Thomas Joseph White, “Jesus’ Cry on the Cross and His Beatific Vision” Nova et Vetera 5 (2007): 573-581.) The Catholic view regarding Christ’s act is that it was atonement, a vicarious act of satisfaction. By his loving obedience, Christ offered the Father a satisfaction sufficient for the forgiveness of infinitely many persons. Thus, he died for all. However, one must receive the fruit of this redemption by being justified in order to benefit from it. [emphasis added]

I went immediately and began searching the Internet to find Francis’ own words on this topic, which I recalled reading near the beginning of his papacy. I found the first instance here, at Vatican Radio, from June, 2013:"

More here:

http://www.onepeterfive.com/pope-francis...the-devil/
I am sorry, but with all due respect 1P5 missed the shot on this one. They built up on a story that began in Italy at the hands of a journalist called Socci, that has become quite popular in our circles due to his outspoken articles on the Francis papacy.

But what Socci missed is that the Pope did not say "the devil".

As a native Italian I can tell you exactly what the Pope's words were: "Christ made himself sin, devil, serpent for us".

There is a huge difference in the language between "diavolo" ed "il diavolo". We in English use "devil" and "demons". That's not the case in Italy - not in many parts of Italy. Demons are called "diavoli". Parents will affectionately call their children "diavoletto" ("little devil").

The Pope was preaching on the statement of Christ who said He' be lifted up like the Serpent in the desert, and on St. Paul's statement that "He made himself sin". Since the Serpent is the biblical symbol for the Devil, the Pope emphasized that in Christ's self-effacement he went as far as to take upon himself the very punishment deserved by mankind (remember the psalm, "I am a worm and not a man, despised by all?" and the other psalm, "Why have you forsaken me?" and the other psalm, "Friend and neighbor have walked away from me, my one companion is darkness"?). In this he becomes "diavolo", meaning from the Latin, the very enemy that he was defeating. "Oh death, were is your sting?" Or as the Eastern liturgy says, "Death was swallowed up by death".

I am not going out guns blazing for Pope Francis, but in this case he's being accused unfairly of blasphemy. And that's a huge accusation. With all due respect to 1P5 and Mr. Socci, I know my Italian.
(04-12-2017, 09:53 PM)Macarius Wrote: [ -> ]As a native Italian I can tell you exactly what the Pope's words were: "Christ made himself sin, devil, serpent for us".
I don't think it's ever okay to say that Christ made himself "devil," either "the Devil" or "[a] devil." He also did not make himself sin (in the way Pope Francis refers to) or a serpent. St. Paul refers to Our Lord "becoming sin for us," but that's different than what Pope Francis mentions in the article:

"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." - emphasis mine

That's Martin Luther's theology, not the Catholic Faith.

The Protestant notion is that Christ took our place as a sinner (penal substitution, which the article refers to). The true, Catholic doctrine is that Christ took our sins upon Himself and atoned for them by shedding His precious blood on the cross. Very big difference there.
(04-12-2017, 11:29 PM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]The Protestant notion is that Christ took our place as a sinner (penal substitution, which the article refers to). The true, Catholic doctrine is that Christ took our sins upon Himself and atoned for them by shedding His precious blood on the cross. Very big difference there.

I don't understand the difference. Could you please explain?
(04-13-2017, 08:25 AM)Etimasia Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-12-2017, 11:29 PM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]The Protestant notion is that Christ took our place as a sinner (penal substitution, which the article refers to). The true, Catholic doctrine is that Christ took our sins upon Himself and atoned for them by shedding His precious blood on the cross. Very big difference there.

I don't understand the difference. Could you please explain?
Of course! Smile

The Bible says that Our Lord became like us "in all things, except sin." The Protestant notion that Jesus took our place as a sinner violates this Scripture verse because it rewrites it and makes it, "[Jesus became like us] in all things, including sin." When Jesus was on the cross, He carried every sin that mankind would ever commit, while still being pure and innocent of them all. Strange analogy, but there's a difference between carrying a container full of mud without getting the mud on yourself and carrying the mud in a container that leaks and gets all over you. When Jesus died, He died to atone for every sin He carried, but He was never, ever a sinner Himself.

The Lutheran notion adopted by various Protestants is a blasphemous one, as can be seen here (emphasis mine):

"Some prominent theologians contend that when the Lord languished upon the cross, he literally bore our sins in his body, so that in reality, Jesus actually died as a “sinner.”Martin Luther, the prominent Protestant reformer, taught that the prophets of the Old Testament foretold, “that Christ should become the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulterer, thief, rebel, and blasphemer, that ever was or could be in the world.”He alleged that the Lord lost his innocence at Calvary, and died as a sinful being (Luther on Galatians, Chapter 3:13, London Edition, 1838, pp. 213-215, as quoted by Albert Barnes, “2 Corinthians & Galatians,” Barnes Notes on the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955, pp. 334-335)."

https://www.christiancourier.com/article...-the-cross

Disclaimer: Protestant website
(04-12-2017, 11:29 PM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]He also did not make himself sin ... or a serpent. St. Paul refers to Our Lord "becoming sin for us,"

2 Corinthians 5:21
"Him, who knew no sin, was made sin for us"
"Eum ,qui non noverat peccatum, pro nobis peccatum fecit "

John 3:14
"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up"
" Eet sicut Moses exaltavit serpentem in deserto, ita exaltari oportet Filium hominis"

St. Augustine explains this most interestingly in his XII Tractate:

"The Lord calls to mind a great matter, which was done in a figure with them of old: And as Moses, says He, lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that every one who believes in Him may not perish, but have everlasting life.

A great mystery is here, as they who read know. Again, let them hear, as well they who have not read as they who have forgotten what perhaps they had heard or read. The people Israel were fallen helplessly in the wilderness by the bite of serpents; they suffered a great calamity by many deaths: for it was the stroke of God correcting and scourging them that He might instruct them.

In this was shown a great mystery, the figure of a thing to come: the Lord Himself testifies in this passage, so that no man can give another interpretation than that which the truth indicates concerning itself.

Now Moses was ordered by the Lord to make a brazen serpent, and to raise it on a pole in the wilderness, and to admonish the people Israel, that, when any had been bitten by a serpent, he should look to that serpent raised up on the pole. This was done: men were bitten; they looked and were healed.

What are the biting serpents? Sins, from the mortality of the flesh.

What is the serpent lifted up? The Lord's death on the cross. For as death came by the serpent, it was figured by the image of a serpent.

The serpent's bite was deadly, the Lord's death is life-giving. A serpent is gazed on that the serpent may have no power.

What is this? A death is gazed on, that death may have no power. But whose death? The death of life: if it may be said, the death of life; ay, for it may be said, but said wonderfully.

But should it not be spoken, seeing it was a thing to be done? Shall I hesitate to utter that which the Lord has deigned to do for me? Is not Christ the life? And yet Christ hung on the cross. Is not Christ life? And yet Christ was dead. But in Christ's death, death died. Life dead slew death; the fullness of life swallowed up death; death was absorbed in the body of Christ. So also shall we say in the resurrection, when now triumphant we shall sing, Where, O death, is your contest? Where, O death, is your sting?

Meanwhile brethren, that we may be healed from sin, let us now gaze on Christ crucified; for as Moses, says He, lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believes in Him may not perish, but have everlasting life. Just as they who looked on that serpent perished not by the serpent's bites, so they who look in faith on Christ's death are healed from the bites of sins."
None of those say He became a sinner, though. Like I said, that's Lutheran and not Catholic.
(04-13-2017, 05:34 PM)In His Love Wrote: [ -> ]None of those say He became a sinner

Neither did the Pope, though... Smile He said "si è fatto peccato", that is, "he made himself sin". That's an exact quote from St. Paul:

(04-13-2017, 05:26 PM)Macarius Wrote: [ -> ]2 Corinthians 5:21
"Eum ,qui non noverat peccatum, pro nobis peccatum fecit "

The truth is that some people are trying to blow this one out of proportion as "further evidence" that the Pope has pronounced heretical or blasphemous statements. But this one is a lost fight.

Also let's not forget that Lutheran theology did not come out of Luther's sleeve. It came out of Catholicism. And not ALL of it is condemned - only the heretical statements. That's why it's tricky to study the writings of other denominations or religions without first knowing back and forth what the Church teaches on those subjects. I don't know the latter, so I don't attempt the further. That works for me, though - it's not a universal solution.

Have a blessed Good Friday.
In my second post, I showed a quote where Pope Francis clearly said Jesus became the sinner for us. He said it twice.

Is this another case of bad translation? I certainly hope so, because it sounds horrible in English.

God bless you and have a very blessed Easter.
With all the wondering and knowing that scripture has many layers of meaning. I had a thought one time regarding the bronze serpent raised on a staff or pole.  It occurred to me that a shepherd carries a staff. In fact our bishops have such a staff I think as a representation of their authority. So I wondered if the looking at the serpent on the pole could be construed as to "look at the authority of the Church to be healed from the bite, or deceit, of the serpent".....Just wondering.
Pages: 1 2