Jesus was a prophetic voice, but not a violent political revolutionary, Pope Benedict XVI said in Sunday comments on Christ’s expulsion of the animal sellers and money changers from the Temple in Jerusalem.
“It is impossible to interpret Jesus as a violent person. Violence is contrary to the Kingdom of God; it is a tool of the Antichrist. Violence never serves humanity, but dehumanizes,” said the Pope in his March 11 Angelus address at the Vatican.
His remarks criticized the occasional interpretation of this episode in a political revolutionary sense that places Jesus in line with the Zealot movement.
The Zealots were a Jewish political movement who were “zealous” for God’s law and “ready to use violence to enforce it,” the Pope explained. They were waiting for a Messiah who would liberate Israel from Roman rule. Jesus, however, “disappointed them in this,” to the extent that “some disciples deserted him and even Judas Iscariot betrayed him.”
Though Jesus was not being political, he was being prophetic, said the Pope. The prophets “in the name of God, often denounced abuses, and they did sometimes with symbolic gestures.”
The key to understanding the actions of Christ, the Pope said, is to listen to Jesus’ words during the event: “Take these things, and make not my Father’s house a market!”
These words reminded the disciples of Psalm 69: “He devours zeal for your house.”
This Psalm is “a cry for help in a situation of extreme danger because of the hatred of enemies,” the Pope said. This is the same situation that Jesus will experience in his passion. It is “zeal for the Father and for his house” which, therefore, led Jesus to the cross.
His zeal, though, is “the zeal of love that pays personally, not that of a person who wants to serve God through violence.” In fact, the “sign” that Jesus gave as proof of his authority was his own death and resurrection, when he said he would “destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it.” This “temple” was his own body.
“With Easter Jesus begins a new cult, the cult of love, and a new church which is Christ himself, the risen Christ, by which every believer can worship God the Father ‘in spirit and truth,’” the Pope concluded.
“Dear friends, the Holy Spirit has begun to build this new temple in the womb of the Virgin Mary. Through her intercession, we pray that every Christian becomes a stone of this spiritual house.”
Jimmy Akin: How can Jesus’ death save people who died before his time?
Benjamin Wiker: Benedict XVI: Doctor of the Church
Comments
Post a Comment
We are called to have zeal for love, not for the money.
We are called to be faithful not successful.
As long as we keep measure our church (local parish) in amount of people coming to the church instead of speaking the Truth which can be found offensive to some of our brothers and sisters, we will be loosing them.
We are either faithful and look for God, or successful and look for money.
“No one knows if this Jesus Christ existed, and if he DID, NOTHING is known about him!” Bertrand Russell 1928 “Why I am not a Christian”
While everyone would agree that Jesus was not violent, the actS of yelling and overturning tables was an act anger or upset. God did show those emotions. Does the Holy Father disagree with that?
@Mike - not sure why you posted this but I CLEARLY know Jesus existed. He is a historical fact of history and claimed to be God, of one nature, and the 2nd person. This Russell you quote is simply misguided and mislead and he is free to do so. But to say Jesus Christ existed is shear stupidity. It ranks with ‘there was no holocaust’ as well.
I struggle with this one big time and am glad the vicar had commented on this exact issue. But how does this all mix with the Just War theory. How do we reconcile the wars we are in, What is going on in Iran. Certainly, no one wants a regime that gives not rights to humans and violates them on every corner, and has a religion that says it can kill people if they don’t convert, to have a nuclear bomb. The question is, what do we do about it. Do we spy, do we bomb? Can we blow things up over there if we don’t hurt any people? Can we covertly set off a bomb that sets their nuclear program back decades? Do we do nothing and wait for a suicide bomber to set a bomb of in the middle of San Fran or Chicago, Atlanta or New York? I have trouble squaring all this.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.