Pagan Blood Running through Christ's veins

[TheresaCatholic]

So, Pope Francis stated:

"“The mention of women – though none of those referred to in the genealogy has the category of the great women of the Old Testament – allows us a particular rapprochement: it is they, in the genealogy, who tell us that pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus, and who recall the stories of scorn and subjugation. In communities where we are still weighed down with patriarchal and chauvinistic customs, it is good to note that the Gospel begins by highlighting women who were influential and made history.”

The use of the words, “Pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus”, somewhat confuses me. I mean, if God cleansed the Blessed Mary of the stain of original sin so that she would be faultless when it was time to bear the Christ, God the Son, then why would he allow pagan blood in his lineage? Where would it come from?

 

[NuclearReceptor]

I thought she was immaculately conceived so that there wasn’t even anything to be cleansed of? (I’m sure the actual spiritual and theological reality is far more complicated than what we can understand.)

The fact that she never, ever had a hint of sin in her soul was important enough to declare dogmatically I guess.

Anyways, I think his phrasing is very awkward and will be misinterpreted by others, as if other religions are given value now.

I try to give excuses to Pope Francis’ awkward choice of words, but it’s always out of deference to his office as pope, not because I find his words useful to reach out to non-Catholics.

 

[TheresaCatholic]

We’re all born with original sin. We’re taught that God himself intervened and cleansed her of that sin. According to Catholic Bridge: The dogma simply means that through the merits of Jesus, Mary was preserved from original sin from the moment of her conception.

That would mean God would have had to specifically intervene. According to the same source, We are born into sin both through our mother and through our earthly father. Jesus was born of Mary and if she would have been infected with original sin, then Jesus would have been infected also. Original sin is kind of like the HIV virus or alcoholism. If the mother has it during pregnancy then the child gets it. Of course every mother (except Mary) has original sin.

Since Mary had a mother and a father, both of whom contained the stain of original sin, it had to be God himself who cleansed her at conception to keep that stain from being passed on to her, so that she would be the perfect vessel. That’s the way I understand the immaculate conception at least.

 

[TheresaCatholic]

that’s not the way it sounded in the quote to me… It sounded as if he were saying that there was pagan blood in his veins because of his lineage.

“It is they, in his genealogy, who tell us that pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus”

That sounds nothing like the pope saying, “He’s the messiah of all.” Christ is the Messiah of all is basically understood. But that doesn’t mean he has “Pagan Blood in his veins.”

Cause he also came as the Messiah of Atheists. Does he have Atheist blood in his veins? why did he specifically choose Pagan as a modern equivelant when Atheism is more prominent than Paganism today.

 

[stpurl]

I wonder if he was referring to Ruth, the Moabite woman who became the mother of Jesse (through her marriage to Boaz), Jesse of course being the father of David. Both Mary and Joseph were of the house of David. . . although really, one could say that ‘pagan blood’ runs in the veins of all people, as Adam and Eve would be considered pagan, would they not? Another ‘head-scratcher’, but I’m not going to, well, I don’t like the phrase ‘waste time’ as after all he is our Pope, but let’s just say I have other spiritual reading and prayer that I can do in lieu of pondering iffily-translated remarks. There are many very wise and beautiful words of Pope Francis–and Pope Benedict, Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Paul VI, etc. etc. not to mention the giants of Catholic teaching and certainly front and foremost the God-breathed scriptures, which are more worthy of my time, I think!

 

[MPat]

The use of the words, “Pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus”, somewhat confuses me. I mean, if God cleansed the Blessed Mary of the stain of original sin so that she would be faultless when it was time to bear the Christ, God the Son, then why would he allow pagan blood in his lineage? Where would it come from?

That almost certainly means that some of ancestors of Jesus were non-Jews. And some were, for example, Ruth (who has already been mentioned).

Perhaps the confusion is caused by the fact that English has a special word “Gentiles” for non-Jews, while many other languages just reuse the word “pagan” there.

So, just replace “pagan” with “Gentile” and get “Gentile blood runs through the veins of Jesus”.

 

[NuclearReceptor]

The phrase “pagan blood” sounds too literal. He could’ve just said Jesus in His Humanity has lineage from non-Israelites who worshiped falsely in the past. But Jesus cannot have “pagan blood” in the literal sense. Given the transubstantiation of wine into His Blood, I don’t know what Pope Francis was thinking with that phrasing. Pagan = impure, at least by connotation and association if not actuality.

 

[TheresaCatholic]

How would Adam and Eve be considered Pagan when they worshiped the one True God? They predated Paganism. Even their children worshiped and sacrificed to the one true God (thus the rift between Cain and Abel). Paganism and worshiping false Gods did not happen for a long time later.

 

[TheresaCatholic]

See that’s my curiosity Nuclear. It seems awfully odd that he would specifically state that he had Pagan blood in his lineage. I went through various translations of what he said, and Pagan blood is the closest, and it is what all of the sites I’ve tested translations against claim he said. He specifically said, “pagan blood”. It just seems, I don’t know. I can see the Ruth argument… but it doesn’t seem to fit the full story.

 

[tgGodsway]

The founding Apostles did not believe in the immaculate conception. Neither did Christ. It was invented centuries later by people far removed from the eye witnesses to Christianity.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Matthew seems to have a second motive for inserting these four women into the otherwise all-male genealogy: They are all Gentiles. Tamar and Rahab were Canaanites, Ruth a Moabite, and Bathsheba was probably a Hittite. Their presence on the list foreshadows the role of the Messiah, who opens Gods saving plan to the Gentiles. Matthew is saying that just as Gentiles are part of Jesus lineage, they are part of his future.

The Genealogy of Jesus: Shadows and lights in his past | America Magazine

 

[seekerz]

Why would use of the phrase “pagan blood” be a problem? I truly don’t understand.
Christ became human so he could die for sinners, and His genealogy just serves to show the degree to which He humbled Himself. From Haydock’s Bible commentary on Matt 1:5 -

Ver. 5. See Josue, chap. ii. & dein. We nowhere else find the marriage of Salmon with Rahab; but this event might have been known by tradition, the truth of which the divinely inspired evangelist here confirms. (Bible de Vence) Rahab was a debauched woman, preserved in the pillage of Jericho, where she had been born. In this genealogy only four women are mentioned, of which two are Gentiles, and two adulteresses. Here the greatest sinners may find grounds for confidence in the mercies of Jesus Christ, and hopes of pardon, when they observed how the Lord of life and glory, to cure our pride, not only humbled himself by taking upon himself the likeness of sinful flesh, but by deriving his descent from sinners, and inspiring the holy evangelist to record the same to all posterity. (Haydock)

I don’t know about anyone else, but it will take me a couple lifetimes to get to the point where I can venture to correct the Pope about matters like these!

 

[NuclearReceptor]

Just because he is pope doesn’t mean we can’t express the sentiment that the phrasing was awkward and ambiguous and open to interpretation.

Every Catholic (and Orthodox) should know what he probably meant. But what about non-Christians and the proneness of some to constantly twist Pope Francis’ words to some pan-theistic false ideology?

 

[seekerz]

People twist Christ’s words, so it’s no wonder they might twist the Pope’s. I would imagine those same words which might be twisted, might also serve as a welcome beacon to today’s “pagans”. I use quotes because real faith is not passed on by bloodlines anyhow - it’s a matter of the heart.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

Therese do you have a link to the article?

Yes, some people in Jesus human genealogy, His human ancestors, did start as non Jews. Ruth is one example. She found God, but started out as a Pagan priestess.

Pagan is not a dirty word. It demonstrates those who worship false God’s, or do not believe, can and do find God.

Our Blessed Virgin is the Immaculate Conception. Our Lady was born without sin. As was Jesus. The devil had no influence over them.

Our Lady told St Bernadette at Lourdes that she is the Immaculate Conception.

From http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p2.htm

The Immaculate Conception

490 To become the mother of the Savior, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role."132 The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as “full of grace”.133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God’s grace.

491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135
492 The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: she is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son”.136 The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” and chose her “in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love”.137

493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God “the All-Holy” (Panagia), and celebrate her as “free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature”.138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.

“Let it be done to me according to your word. . .”

494 At the announcement that she would give birth to “the Son of the Most High” without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that “with God nothing will be impossible”: "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word."139 Thus, giving her consent to God’s word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God’s grace:140

As St. Irenaeus says, "Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race."141 Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert. . .: "The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith."142 Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary “the Mother of the living” and frequently claim: "Death through Eve, life through Mary."143

 

[Vico]

The use of the words, “Pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus”, somewhat confuses me.

So did you know that Yhwh became the main God of the Jews only after the destruction of the kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians, which was about 720 BCE?

 

[ericc]

The founding Apostles did not believe in the immaculate conception. Neither did Christ. It was invented centuries later by people far removed from the eye witnesses to Christianity.

“did not believe” sounds overly dramatic. I don’t think you could prove that. The most you can do is argue from silence, which won’t do much good. The priority of the apostles was not on Mary but on spreading the Good News. The terminology of the early church has not been “invented” yet. Trinity, substantiation, hypostatic union etc were words coined to describe the nature of God, who Jesus is over the centuries to combat heresies… Jesus didn’t teach his apostles such language probably he wanted them to figure out for themselves who he is. Many debates and cross-accusation of heresies abound when early Christians tried to define clearly what those attributes were. Marian terminology was a much later development when confusion about the nature of Jesus were settled in the Church Councils. You still have hold outs today. Mariology didn’t just happen out of thin air. Immaculate conception is the Church understanding of how Jesus can be born sinless out of sinful human flesh (among other reasons) for example. I am not an expert by any means.

 

[Zaccheus]

So, Pope Francis stated:

"“The mention of women – though none of those referred to in the genealogy has the category of the great women of the Old Testament – allows us a particular rapprochement: it is they, in the genealogy, who tell us that pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus, and who recall the stories of scorn and subjugation. In communities where we are still weighed down with patriarchal and chauvinistic customs, it is good to note that the Gospel begins by highlighting women who were influential and made history.”

The use of the words, “Pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus”, somewhat confuses me. I mean, if God cleansed the Blessed Mary of the stain of original sin so that she would be faultless when it was time to bear the Christ, God the Son, then why would he allow pagan blood in his lineage? Where would it come from?

“Pagan blood runs through His veins” means there were pagans in His genealogy. Since He is the son of Mary, that means there were pagans in her genealogy. This in no way implies any fault in her. It’s just true that she had pagans among her ancestors.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The founding Apostles did not believe in the immaculate conception. Neither did Christ. It was invented centuries later by people far removed from the eye witnesses to Christianity.

Where exactly are you getting that the Apostles and Christ didn’t believe that Mary was conceived without sin? I don’t recall any of them addressing the issue, so you’re just assuming silence means unbelief or putting your own hangups in their heads.

 

[1ke]

The use of the words, “Pagan blood runs through the veins of Jesus”, somewhat confuses me. I mean, if God cleansed the Blessed Mary of the stain of original sin so that she would be faultless when it was time to bear the Christ, God the Son, then why would he allow pagan blood in his lineage? Where would it come from?

I don’t understand where your confusion lies. God preserved Mary from original sin, this is a spiritual matter. Lineage is a biological matter.

Biologically, Jesus has both Jewish and non-Jewish (a.k.a. Pagan, a.k.a. Gentile) ancestors. This is a fact.

Spiritually, Mary was preserved free from original sin. Biologically, her lineage comes in the same manner as Jesus’s, the fact of who her ancestors were. Some were not Jews.

One has nothing to do with the other.