Sunday, July 29, 2012

The "Soggy Fish Sandwich" Theory

I know it's been around for a long time, but I've never actually heard it at my church before.  After a long trial period at this parish, we finally heard heresy from the pulpit, or rather from the center aisle, since the priest in question doesn't seem to like preaching from the pulpit.

Father Mike didn't actually say that Jesus did not in fact multiply loaves and fishes, but he implied that "commentators" say the real miracle "might have been" inspiring the people to all share their packed lunches like good socialists.

At my family's home parish, the FSSP priest described this theory of the miracle as Jesus simply guilting each member of the crowd into pulling out "the soggy fish sandwich" he had been carrying around in his pocket, a description which apparently originated with Fr. Benedict Groeschel.  He also went on to explain in no uncertain terms that "this is a heretical understanding of this gospel."

This episode is apparently a big deal, as it appears in all four Gospels.  Obviously a remarkable miracle occurred.  Could it really have been just about sharing?  This isn't Sesame Street.

Think about it.  The priest today apparently accepted as fact that idea that nobody would set out on a pilgrimage without packing food.  But would any of them have packed enough for more than three days in the wilderness?  Even if they did, was there any real need to share?  If each had enough food for himself, everyone would have just eaten his own food.  What's so miraculous about sitting down on a hillside and having lunch?  Would you really want to swap for someone else's tuna salad if you had your own?  Alternatively, were the people holding out for a free lunch despite having enough food?  It seems like the modernists have backed themselves into a bad Semitic stereotype if the jaw-dropping miracle in question was simply teaching Jews to share.

CB - Round-up
Can't we just accept the fact that thousands of people were in the wilderness with Jesus for several days, their food reserves had run out, and that Jesus as the omnipotent Son of God worked a miracle worth recording for posterity?  It certainly makes the most sense, and it would spare us these driveling homilies fit only for toddlers.

3 comments:

  1. The deacon who delivered the homily at my parish would agree with you. His point was that Jesus isn't like algebra where you have to "show your work." It doesn't matter why the boy was the only one smart enough to pack a lunch, or where the 12 wicker baskets came from to save the leftovers. We believe that Jesus cured the sick and resurrected from the dead, yet feeding 5,000 men is questionable? Seems like it would be a no brainer for Him!

    ReplyDelete
  2. That is so crazy!! Where do these people come up with this stuff!!! I'm heartbroken! It makes me so sad when I hear priest talk like that. What happened to the faith that they had when they became priest?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't know that that's heretical (unless they're saying there's no such thing as miracles at all). I think it's just illogical.

    ReplyDelete