S
souldiver
Guest
I thought it is said in the Bible a few times that Jesus is gentle and Christians should be gentle. Anybody here thinks otherwise? Especially Protestants.
- Status
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Do you mean that they should go around casually telling people that they’re being naughty or that, if people ask them whether they’re being naughty and the Christian does think they’re being naughty, they should tell them so?
S
souldiver
Guest
I mean. just harsh in general.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
Harsh is a difficult word to zero in on. (Naughty is a word I reserve for children rather than adults, sorry Kaninchen, I am not trying to ruffle you, I do understand what you are saying and agree).
Harsh can mean “mean”, harsh can mean, “cruel”. If the word meant blunt direct and to the point straight up and down no nonsense, for the sake of direction, I would agree, but unfortunately it doesn’t just have that connatation, it has a very negative aspect to it, so I would prefer to not use the word in the Christian approach. If one is being harsh in a positive manner, then it can be twisted to mean they are being harsh in a negative manner.
A
Abu
Guest
We should offer the faith, hope and charity with understanding and with conviction. Denigration of the faith may need truth with firmness.
M
MartinJordan
Guest
R
RPRPsych
Guest
As Christians, we are called to love God and our neighbour.
Love does not mean being “nice” or “friendly” all the time. Counselling the doubtful, admonishing the sinner and teaching the ignorant are all spiritual works of mercy which can call for a firm approach. At the same time, we are not to be uncharitable, hypocritical or wrathful. It’s a delicate balancing act, akin to parenting in some ways.
A
Alex_H
Guest
We are to speak the truth in love. Tell people when they are wrong but don’t go out of our way to be hurtful.
S
susanlo
Guest
I think gentle and harsh can have various connotations.
Jesus was never violent or cruel. Jesus was filled with compassion on those he came in contact with. His example should not lead anyone to harsh and aggressive action.
Jesus was willing to blatantly disobey current cultural norms and make waves in society for his behavior. (Eating with tax collectors and prostitutes, disobeying Sabbath laws, etc. etc.) He was never wishy-washy. He did not just “go with the flow.” Jesus’ example should lead his followers to bold courage to stand up for their beliefs in the face of conflict.
One occasion he did become angry was when he saw the money-changers at the Temple and he drove them out and overturned tables (John 2:13-17 & Matthew 21:12-13).
R
rcwitness
Guest
Im not sure id say Jesus “disobeyed Sabbath laws” but rather prioritized them according to greater laws of faith and mercy.
The money changers event was interesting because he was angry and harsh, but not put of control. He took the time to make a whip!
W
Wannano
Guest
Hi Susanlo, great to have you here! Just one question about Jesus cleansing the temple. I know we assume Jesus was angry in that setting because of the actions He took in driving them out, however, I do not see that the Bible says specifically that He was angry. Is it impossible to take aggressive action without acting out of anger? Just wondering…
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
No-nonsense direction can be amazingly oblique.
Think lateral to show them to think lateral as well.
Religion gets given a false image as off-pat and head-on. I don’t know where that gets copied from.
Think lateral to show them to think lateral as well.
Religion gets given a false image as off-pat and head-on. I don’t know where that gets copied from.
S
susanlo
Guest
You are right.
He of course didn’t disobey God’s Sabbath law. He did disobey the social laws and expectations for behavior on the Sabbath. He wasn’t meek or afraid of upsetting social standards.
K
KEP1983
Guest
When someone asks “what would Jesus do?” remind them that flipping over tables and calling people whitewashed tombs is within the realm of possibilities.
Being loving doesn’t always mean being “nice.”
In fact, I would say that the politically correct cultures obsession with niceness is actually rooted in love of self, not love of neighbor. We want others to look nicely upon us, and we want to do what we want to do, so our culture has created an unwritten social contract that says we just let everyone do what they want without criticism.
If you really care about your neighbor, you correct them when they’re doing something wrong and self destructive. If you love yourself and your reputation more than your neighbor, you smile at them and act nice when they do the aforementioned wrong thing.
Being loving doesn’t always mean being “nice.”
In fact, I would say that the politically correct cultures obsession with niceness is actually rooted in love of self, not love of neighbor. We want others to look nicely upon us, and we want to do what we want to do, so our culture has created an unwritten social contract that says we just let everyone do what they want without criticism.
If you really care about your neighbor, you correct them when they’re doing something wrong and self destructive. If you love yourself and your reputation more than your neighbor, you smile at them and act nice when they do the aforementioned wrong thing.
S
susanlo
Guest
That is a good question. I have heard different interpretations of this.
In John 2:17, his disciples remember Psalm 69:9 “for zeal for your house consumes me,…” Zeal would imply strong emotion. But it doesn’t indicate what emotion is used at this time.
And I would answer that it is possible to take aggressive action without anger.
H
HelenRose
Guest
Well it sort of depends. If I am witnessing a person harming another person, I am called upon to stop the abuse and being gentle may not be the best policy.
In the desire to show forth God’s Love, Mary’s Compassion and the Beauty of our wonderful Catholic Church, I would think that kindness, understanding and humility would go a lot further than harshness.
T
tseleehw
Guest
I agree with other posters who have said that it is difficult to determine what is exactly considered “harsh” in today’s society. I think plenty of the things that Jesus did and said in the Gospel would be considered “harsh” by today’s standards.
Look at Pope Francis. The last two Christmases he used his message to Vatican clergy to lecture them on not showing mercy and for excessive materialism and worldliness. A lot of people considered his messages harsh. Were they? Lots of people have different opinions.
Is it harsh to warn someone if they continue on a path of immorality they could suffer eternal damnation? I think if you bluntly stated this to someone, people would criticize you for being harsh, not matter how you said it. Yet we are called by the church to admonish the sinner.
In the end you’re not going to get everyone to agree about what is considered harsh or not. IMO I think the Catholic Church specifically could stand to be a little more direct and no-nonsense on certain things but it depends on the situation and who you’re dealing with.
Look at Pope Francis. The last two Christmases he used his message to Vatican clergy to lecture them on not showing mercy and for excessive materialism and worldliness. A lot of people considered his messages harsh. Were they? Lots of people have different opinions.
Is it harsh to warn someone if they continue on a path of immorality they could suffer eternal damnation? I think if you bluntly stated this to someone, people would criticize you for being harsh, not matter how you said it. Yet we are called by the church to admonish the sinner.
In the end you’re not going to get everyone to agree about what is considered harsh or not. IMO I think the Catholic Church specifically could stand to be a little more direct and no-nonsense on certain things but it depends on the situation and who you’re dealing with.
H
HelenRose
Guest
I think the key here is: who has the authority to correct? Jesus and Popes have the authority, speak with authority and sometimes have used that authority in a harsh manner. But lay people do not have the authority and we can not know what the Holy Spirit has in store for anyone we may be talking to.
Humility is the key. “The holier than thou” attitude has caused far more problems than kindness and compassion.
T
tseleehw
Guest
I disagree that it is only Jesus and the Pope or even all clergy that have the authority to correct others (not sure if that is what you are implying here). Lay people can certainly attempt to correct others if they are on a sinful path. Two of the spiritual acts of mercy are to admonish the sinner and instruct the ignorant, after all. I do agree that humility is needed and it should be done with kindness, not with a “holier than thou” attitude.
There are certainly specific things in this regard that should be handled by clergy alone (such as dealing with the status of a marriage in the Church) but generally lay people should also look to assist others, especially close family and friends.
H
HelenRose
Guest
I have no problem with correcting someone if it will actually do some good. The problem is using the word “harsh.”
It is very difficult to not come across as holier than thou even with the kindest of admonishments. We all have our own talents and abilities and there are very few people who have the skill and empathy to correct someone successfully. Most of us will only make matters worse.
- Status