The Chairman of the German Bishops' Conference and archbishop of Freiburg, Robert Zollitsch, believes that Christ’s crucifixion is just a psychological support for those who suffer. On Holy Saturday, the archbishop denied the Expiatory Death of Christ in an interview with the German TV station 'Hessischer Rundfunk'. Christ "did not die for the sins of the people as if God had needed a sacrificial offering or something like a scapegoat" - the archbishop said. According to him the dying Christ … [More]
This is 100% protestant! The words of Zollitsch, in the global context, can't be understand in any other way than in the sense of negating the Expiatory Sacrifice of Christ. There are many Biblical cites and quotations around here... indeed, it's basic catechism doctrine the mistery of Redemption: Christ wanted to suffer and die to satisfy God for our sins. But I MUST say that the heresy of Zollitsch is understandable since the "church" you see in Rome, IS NOT the Catholic Church. That "church"… [More]
Dear Chonak, this Archbishop denies especially the catholic doctrine by answering "NO" (concerning catholic doctrine which is described in the question) and putting his strange solidarity theory instead. Read it - and hear it! - in German, the original. Then you will see.
To the contrary: There is a significant difference between "not ... because" and "not ... as if". (not-A-as-if-B) implies that both A and B are false. (not (A because B)) allows A to be true, it denies that B is the reason for A. The bishop's words "... nicht deswegen..." indicate that he was not denying that Christ died for the sins of men, but rejecting a specific explanation of the atonement.
The gtv-translation is correct because in German he uses the subjunctive. That is why the "because" is correcty translated with "as if". Not a minute later, he denies especially the character of expiation by answering the interviewers question with "no". If you are capable of reading German, please look at this: Frage: „Also, sie würden jetzt nicht mehr so formulieren, dass Gott quasi seinen eigenen Sohl hingegeben hat, weil wir Menschen so sündig waren? So würden sie es nicht mehr formuliere…[More]
"You would now no longer describe it in such a way that God gave his own son, because we humans were so sinful? You would no longer describe it like this? " Archbishop Zollitsch confirmed with a clear "no"
PS >>He needed (nobody) to punish<< but: He needed His son to obtain satisfaction
Are you aware that the translation of the bishop's first sentence contains an error? Did gloria.tv make this translation, or did it come from some other source? Christ "did not die for the sins of the people as if God had needed a sacrificial offering or something like a scapegoat" - the archbishop said. However, the bishop used the conjunction weil, which means "because", not "as if". So the sentence should be: Christ "did not die for the sins of the people because God had needed a sacrificia… [More]
What saddens me the most is that there doesn't seem to be any reaction from the Vatican about this. Just a few weeks ago there was an earthquake of condemnation coming from Catholic bishops from around the world when SSPX Bishop Williamson stated his opinion on the holocaust. However, this Bishop seems to claim that Jesus Christ is not the Lamb of God, the redeemer who shed his blood to save us from our sins. Sacred Scripture is very clear: "And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to … [More]
Incoherent rambling as well as heretical. Well, one would hope that it would have little chance to seduce *anyone* with those factors standing against the man. He's as devoid of eloquence as he is of truth.
He's not the only one in powerful positions to make that claim. Last Thursday's Irish Catholic quoted the new Abbot of Glenstal Abbey; Mark Patrick Hederman as agreeing with Gay Byrne on a special Holy Week programme that Christ didn't die for our sins. He said that God came on the earth mostly to find out what it means to be human. To be made Abbot, Mark Hederman had to first be ordained a priest, what on earth does he think the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is, which as a priest he … [More]
Christ certainly did share in our sufferings and have solidarity with us in that fashion, but His sacrifice on the cross was much more than that. Matthew 20:28 even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many Romans 5:8-9 But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Since, therefore we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. Romans 8:3 For God has done … [More]