Sunday June 14, listeners to the mass broadcast on France Culture were able to witness a rather disconcerting homily. The text of the day, taken from the Gospel according to Saint Matthew (10, 5-6), nevertheless delivered clear and unambiguous instructions from the very mouth of Our Lord to his Twelve Apostles:
“Do not take the way that leads to the pagan nations or enter any city of the Samaritans; go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. HAS”
Faced with the harshness and specificity of this mission order – which is part of the precise historical and eschatological framework of the salvation proposed to the chosen people – the preacher chose to ignore any textual explanation. However, from the first minutes of the sermon, this passage was immediately used to justify a speech on the universal love of Christ.
How can we, without batting an eyelid, use a verse of strict geographical and community restriction to make it a universalist justification?
This approach is not isolated. It echoes the theses developed by Father Benoist de Sinety in his work The Cause of Christ. He describes as “counterfeiters” those who spend their time defending a Christian identity or reflexes of preservation, affirming:
“Let us not look for Christ in hate speech or identity withdrawals; there is none. He is where we heal the wounds, where we welcome the stranger…
But aren’t the real “forgers” those who practice selective sorting in the Scriptures to eliminate what disturbs the official dogma of universal love of Christ? The Gospel according to Saint Matthew is full of harsh structures that official dogma today tries to water down. Let us think of Matthew 15:26, facing the Canaanite woman: “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs. “Attempts by modern translators to soften the term to “puppies” or “little dogs” change nothing: in the ancient Semitic world, the word marks a watertight boundary of exclusion. What can we also say about the absolute radicality of Saint Luke 14, 26:
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father, his mother, his wife, his children […] he cannot be my disciple. HAS”
By refusing to face the literal and historical reality of the text, the Church opens the door to the most destructive criticism for the faith. Historians of historical-critical exegesis, like Simon Claude Mimouni, bring to light such contradictions. For secular criticism, this large permanent gap demonstrates that the Church has carried out an artificial universal rereading to erase the initial nationalism of the Jesus of history.
Our priests must stop being afraid of the holy rigor of the texts. By wanting to smooth out the Gospel to make it compatible with the values of the world, we end up emptying the Word of Jesus of its substance.
This article is a free article, not written by the editorial staff of Salon Beige. If you also wish to publish an op-ed, you can do so by clicking on “Submit an article” at the top of the page.
Post Views: 2Â 452
/regions/2026/06/16/6a31137d47540308077317.jpg "\"It is the image of the past and the railway culture\" : threatened with ruin, the Florentine Tower of Hirson is in ple")
