Rohr misses this in assessing the Gospel as he overlooks the hard words Jesus has about various sins in the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere: “But note that Jesus’ concept of ‘the reign of God’ is totally positive-not fear-based or against any individual, group, sin or problem” (107, emphasis original).Įven more fundamentally, Rohr falls into religious indifferentism regarding the basic mission of Christ and his Church: Some might say Rohr is at least partially right. For example, Jesus did not lead with judgment against the woman at the well (John 4). But after introducing himself as the Messiah and showing the woman her worth, he called her to holiness, noting she had been married five times and was living with someone to whom she wasn’t married. He does not lead with his judgments”(95, emphasis original). We believe as Christians that Jesus gave us the ideal eyes by which to see the real nature of reality. It’s that by which we see all ideas in proper context. Rather, it’s a non-demanding, non-threatening, ultimately optional way of life: “The gospel is not a competing idea. “Real nature” is important, because Rohr does not present Catholicism as it really is. Rohr’s Jesus is much more benign. For Rohr, Jesus merely gives “ideal eyes by which to see the real nature of reality” (emphasis added). Jesus wasn’t afraid to be a demanding teacher, and many left him when they couldn’t stomach his teaching, e.g., on the Eucharist (John 6:47-71). Jesus also proclaimed that he came to bring a sword and not peace if peace meant a false irenicism in which merely human family members were chosen at the expense of faithful alliance with him, their Savior (Matt. 10:34-39).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |