This is what the Pope said about true marriage and civil unions yestersday:
Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. It is about pacts of cohabitating of various natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety.
MY COMMENTS:
First the Holy Father makes clear that marriage is between a man and woman! Duh! But he knows the question is posed to him because there is great confusion in society today from those who are trying to redefine that which is already definitively defined and cannot be changed.
Then he says that secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. (And yes, this is part of the states responsibility, but this is far from the Pope endorsing cohabitation in the sense of a sexual relationship. And he acknowledges that there are many forms of cohabitation--a single son with an elderly mother and he cares for as a son cares for a mother. Can cohabitation have the same civil protection economically in terms of health benefits, social security and the like? It is not a sexual union or cohabitation.)
Keep in mind, that the Church is opposed to legal divorce. In Italy the Church fought tooth and nail to prevent legal divorces. Was this good? My Italian mother and Canadian father, both conservative Catholics told me no!
The problem in Italy prior the the Council was that men would leave their wives and children and cohabitate with another woman. He became a deadbeat dad, did not support his wife or children because the legal aspects of the separation had not been addressed in a court of law for the protection of persons, children and property.
Civil divorce protects the parties who are divorcing and their children and possessions. It is the duty of the state to do this and enforce it. Not the Church. The Church can only state that the civil union of divorced and remarried Catholics is not recognized by the Church and that the initial marriage is the valid one until proven otherwise in an ecclesiastical court of law.
So the Church, in terms of divorce and remarried couples, acknowledges today (not in the past) the need for civil unions to be regulated by the state to protect people and their civil rights. The Church does not acknowledge these civil unions as marriage and in fact says there is a public sin involved which prevents these couples from receiving Holy Communion if the union is sexual in nature, rather than fraternal.
15 comments:
"It continues to amaze me how some Catholics (not all) and usually supposedly traditional Catholics, continue to nitpick what Pope Francis says and are as manipulative of what he says as the progressive media that does the same thing."
"Supposedly" being the operative word...
But the issue is not about a son helping his elderly mother, is it? There are already laws in place in many nations. Inheritance rights, Powers of Attorney for personal care or finances, wills, tax deductions for disabled family members. No, this is about something else and we all know it. It is the elephant in the room.
The Church has no business giving any hint that it would ever support civil unions because it is a societal legal work around of same-sex so-called marriage and a way for the Church to give its "pastoral" blessing.
Same with a second grade marriage after divorce.
This chaos has been created not by John and Mary Catholic but by the current Bishop of Rome.
The continuance of media interviews is a downgrading of the papacy to that of a politician, not the Vicar of Jesus Christ!
This last year has been a "mess" and I for one, am tired of everyone being an apologist for the obvious.
Perhaps papal resignations will become more frequent, one can only hope.
And then, we will have one who will end that novelty along with the rest.
By the way, how's that homosexual cabal doing? Pretty fine methinks.
VC I wonder if you have any divorced family members. Maybe your relative wasn't at fault, your relative was left high and dry by the other spouse. Would you not counsel her to go and see and lawyer and make sure her legal rights are protected? Or maybe your relative is in an illicit civil union, homosexual or otherwise and that relative is completely dependent upon their partner for everything including health care and support. Would you not want that relative protected legally or would you allow the person who was supporting that relative to up and go and take with him what was shared in common in terms of money and property?
Let's get real here. And yes, the single man who is poor, can't work but cared for his mother, why can't he get her health benefits, social security and the like apart from what is left in the will?
These are legal matters, with some moral obligations. The church doesn't make civil law, but she has to recognize that civil law is meant to protect citizens.
At half a century from Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae, can the Church take up again the theme of birth control? Cardinal Martini, your confrere, thought that the moment had come.
All of this depends on how Humanae Vitae is interpreted. Paul VI himself, at the end, recommended to confessors much mercy, and attention to concrete situations.
It "all depends on how Humanae Vitae is interpreted", what is that supposed to mean? That is modernism in a nutshell. The authentic teaching of the Church on contraception is clear and is not subject to the personal interpretation of anyone, even Pope Francis. Mercy does not trump justice. And making people feel comfortable in their sin is not pastoral.
Catholicism 101, it is never permitted to perform an objectively evil act in order to achieve a good.
Why will Pope Francis not clearly uphold the teachings of the Church clearly and without caveats?
"Traditional Catholics" have reason to have concerns with Pope Francis' statements and actions because they are not clear and can easily be interpreted anyway anyone wants to and that is a problem because he is pope and has the responsibility to be crystal clear in his teaching of the Faith. What he is doing is not accidental, it's impossible to think it is. It happens EVERY time he talks off the cuff. Because when he talks off the cuff he is saying what he really believes. He believes these things.
Francis may be pope but that does not give him the right to cause scandal and confusion in the lives of ordinary, hard working, practicing Catholics. It's not right. And that is not being disrespectful to the Pope. But I think he is very disrespectful to simple, Faith filled Catholcs who are horrified with some of the things coming out of the mouth of a pope.
Anonymous 99
I think it would only be a surprise if you could post a headline saying: "Pope Francis Gives Interview, Nobody Complains".
This in reference to the kcup containing the "precious blood of our Savior". Not funny, especially coming from a priest......and during Lent. Our Lord didn't suffer the Passion and Crucifixion in order for it to be made light of, especially by a priest. A priest. And we wonder why the state of the Church is a wreck. Could you picture Bishop Sheen or Cardinal Mindzenty posting such a picture and comment, or any priest 50 years ago? It's disgraceful and it's not funny.
Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable. There are special prayers offered for the blasphemies committed against the body and blood of Our Lord, I suggest you pray them.
KCUP, you've posted this under the wrong post. Go to the one with the picture and I've reprinted what was the original start up to this, which was actually under the Ash Wednesday post and what i actually encountered in a homebound visit.
Because of the size of the kcup it appears you can't post under that, but if you click on the title of the post it will bring you the post and the comment I left there for you but you can see the original comments under the Ash Wednesday post.
I love Pope Francis, but as a Father, I am dissapointed with him. As a father as Pope, It would be better if the Pope either gave concise and definite answers as opposed to long and squishy answers. Haven't we had enough of that the last 50 years, and don't you think it's why it is so easy for the press to twist his words?
Example: from a conservative new media site: Catholic Church Could Tolerate Some Gay Civil Unions
Just like any children He needs to realize we need him to speak clearly and concisely on doctrine and issues because what we have so lacked since the last council is clarity on so many issues. I wouldn't do this with my own children, why doesn't our Holy Father understand?
Thank you Father for being a daily voice of reason amongst us traditionalists.
I believe that the constant anger, dissent and complaining fuel the opposition, hurt the cause of tradition and are also very useful tools of the devil.
I love Pope Francis, but I am disappointed in him as a Father. As a Father, Pope Francis should know he needs to speak clearly and concisely to his children, otherwise they will look for the loop holes or be confused in what he wants. Considering how confused and chaotic the last 50 years of Church history has been, it would be very helpful if he was exactly that--clear and concise. Instead, he talks in long and winding answers that are just so fertile for misinterpretation and obfuscation. Like we haven't had enough of that in the last 50 years? Can the Pope really not know that there are progressive Catholics and secularists who are just waiting to figure out how to use him for their agenda. He should read Pope Benedict's talk to Rome's clergy about the media circus around the Vatican II council, the so-called "Council of the Media."
I'm one of the "traditional" or "orthodox' or just plain Catholic folks that gets asked by my relatives who are orthodox, but just don't pay attention, "what the heck did the Pope just say?" I mean really he didn't learn from "Who am I to judge?" It really is frustrating to be getting hammered by progressive siblings who really are just using the Pope as an excuse to oppose the Church and by more traditional Catholic friends who think the Pope is somehow undermining the Church. Some days I can see the traditionalists points about the Pope. I still don't agree, but I do agree the Pope makes things very messy with the way he deals with the media.
It would be better if he just stopped talking to them off the cuff for awhile and issue some teaching documents that were actually clear and concise. Letting the confusion and chaos calm down would be a very good thing. Everyone needs to take a collective chill pill and remember we are all Catholics and not everything has to or is meant to change. God's peace be with you.
Sorry about the double posts...I thought my first one got munched by my browser and the other one was well, a bit lengthier. Please forgive me if they didn't add to the discussion in a positive way. Ave Maria!
Why did you censor my post? There was nothing bad in it.
Dear Father,
You asked, "VC I wonder if you have any divorced family members. Maybe your relative wasn't at fault, your relative was left high and dry by the other spouse." ...
As a matter-of-fact, I was a divorced single father of a three year old boy who not only raised him but took care of my 91 year old mother in my home until the day she died, whilst keeping a management career and doing my work in chant in the church. I also waited my turn for an decree of nullity and am now very happily married. I know exactly that of which I speak and I respected the laws of the Church even when it was very hard to do!
So, ask me if I resent the German bishops and I want my $900 back for the "donation" to the tribunal!
What does all this stuff have to do with the Church other than to advocate for social benefits for people?
"Civil unions" are for people of homosexual inclinations, that is a fact and this whole thing is become obfuscated by beating around the bush.
I guess you didn't expect the answer you got.
VC, tell me how the Church is going to stop civil unions? Did we do it with divorce? No. This is outside what Pope Francis can do or can't do.
There are two three kinds of civil unions as the Church understands these:
1. People who are in second marriages not recognized by the Church--there are many, many of these today!
2. Partnerships where there is no sexual componant
3. And now what is being promoted as gay marriage (which the church does not acknowledge) but we can acknowledge civil unions and the civil laws that govern these.
Any Catholic in a civil union that is sexual, heterosexual which currently is the prevalent one and now the homosexual ones, although in some quarters these are called marriages, is in a objective state of sin and has made that sin public. They are allowed to attend Mass but are not permitted to receive Holy Communion and when they do, they do so unworthily.
Many people that go to this blog can read and understand what the Pope is saying, because we can read between the lines, and read carefully and understand our faith, and we understand that Francis is not abandoning Orthodoxy. However, he is simply being reckless with his interviews. How do I know that? I live in Protestant dominated Valdosta, Ga. There's not a day that goes by that some Protestant doesn't ask me about the Pope changing doctrine from birth control to homosexual unions. People are naïve and this is dangerous to our faith. When attendance and conversions are way up, I'll eat my crow with some hot sauce, but until then I will continue in penance and prayer.
Post a Comment