Friday, September 1, 2017

CHARTING NEW TERRITORY: THE CHURCH GETTING HER NOSE OUT OF PEOPLE'S SEX LIVES


In a new book on Pope Francis soon to be released, the pope offers a kind of doctrine and then a personal opinion:

He repeats his opposition to gay marriage but accepts the civil union of people of the same sex.

(This is my comments:) How about Holy Communion for those in any kind of human relationship configurations?

Personally, I am not a control freak and I do have a live and let live perspective on life. I also believe that anyone at their death and personal judgment have to answer for themselves.

Does the pope need psychoanalysis to clarify his thinking in general and the implications of his acceptance of same sex civil unions and the reception of Holy Communion? Evidently Pope Francis says YES!

In a new book, Pope Francis reveals that he consulted a Jewish psychoanalyst once a week for six months when he was 42 years old and that it “helped me a lot at a moment in my life…when I needed to clarify things.” He disclosed this very personal detail of his life for the first time in a book-length interview with a French intellectual, Dominique Wolton, that will be published on Sept. 6, the day the pope travels to Colombia.

Read all about it here!

12 comments:

Dialogue said...

I once watched an entire Woody Allen movie.

Gene said...

Don't leave the windows open at the Vatican or the squirrels will grab him right out.

Mark Thomas said...

Here is Carl Reiner's interview with the world's greatest psychiatrist (Mel Brooks).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_s0-VwnM0o

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

My suspicions have been confirmed: I always thought he was a red-diaper baby. It is so sad. The Vicar of Christ owes more his "Boss" than loose talk in search of human respect. If the report is correct and not a false translation the implication is that the six months with the Jewish psychologists was not much help in making him a better priest or pastor. I would try the older Jewish Philosopher (>2000 years ago) next time.

Anon-1

Joseph Johnson said...

Gene,
ROFL! 'You mean like the trained squirrels that dragged the spoiled brat Veruca Salt to the garbage chute in the second Willie Wonka movie? My daughters grew up loving that particular part--they have the song memorized ("a rather different set of friends").

Fr Martin Fox said...

I don't begrudge anyone seeking the help of a psychologist, psychiatrist or other counselor. After all, people come to me, and other priests, for similar situations (and I frequently refer people on when I know it's beyond my capabilities). Some people need someone to talk to, in order to sort things out. Some people would be better off if they did see someone, and their families would benefit if they sought that help, too.

But I am very sorry to see him give approval to "civil unions" -- if that is accurate. It is "America" Magazine, after all.

rcg said...

I don't think this admission is a bad thing at all. However, it does suggest that he is dealing with uncertainty and that is clearly an issue in his leadership style. He wants to have everything compatible and included.

John Nolan said...

Pope Francis can think what he likes about homosexual civil partnerships, but the teaching of the Church regarding them is set out clearly and unambiguously in a ruling by the CDF dated 3 June 2003, approved by John Paul II.

This has magisterial authority, whereas the personal opinion of a bishop, even the Bishop of Rome, does not. Six years ago Archbishop Vincent Nichols said much the same thing - civil partnerships OK, same-sex marriage not OK - which was a volte-face on what the bishops had said concerning civil partnerships in 2003.

If Francis wants to overturn the teaching of his recent predecessor, whom he himself canonized, on a matter concerning faith or morals, then why doesn't he go ahead and do it formally? His Peronist economic theories, his half-baked and conventional environmental politics, his belief that the Falkland Islands belong to Argentina, his insouciance when faced with the greatest threat to European civilization (mass alien migration); none of these require religious submission of intellect and will. And they certainly won't get it from me.

Will the forthcoming book be yet another stage in the unravelling of this dysfunctional papacy? I hope and believe so. The culture of intimidation and bullying which characterizes policy at the highest level seems to be spreading downwards.

Dialogue said...

Well said, John Nolan. By the way, if the Falklands belong to Argentina, then Argentina belongs to Spain, and Spain belongs to Morocco, and Morocco belongs to Rome. Rome, of course, belongs to the Holy See.

TJM said...

John Nolan,

At this very moment, Mark Thomas is scurrying about looking for a tendentious list of non sequiturs to refute your apt observations regarding his "Golden Calf!"

Mark Thomas said...

"Pope Francis can think what he likes about homosexual civil partnerships, but the teaching of the Church regarding them is set out clearly and unambiguously in a ruling by the CDF dated 3 June 2003, approved by John Paul II."

Pope Endorses Referendum Denying Marriage And Adoption Rights To Same-Sex Couples

Pope Francis encouraged "everyone to continue their efforts in defense of the family" ahead of a vote Saturday on an anti-LGBT referendum in Slovakia.

Originally posted on February 4, 2015, at 4:46 p.m.

Updated on February 4, 2015, at 6:33 p.m.

J. Lester Feder
BuzzFeed News World Correspondent

Pope Francis gave his blessing on Wednesday to a referendum that would ban marriage and adoption rights for same-sex couples in Slovakia, which will be voted on this Saturday.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

John Nolan said...

To be fair, the excerpt from the interview published by Alatetia (vide supra) does not give any indication that Pope Francis accepts (i.e. finds acceptable) homosexual partnerships. Calling them 'civil unions' does not in the least imply approval or acceptance.

Gerard O'Connell, writing in 'America', might have information that we don't, or have access to a more accurate translation. Alternatively he is misrepresenting the Pope's comments, either accidentally or deliberately. Admittedly, the Pontiff does himself no favours by the style of his discourse which is rarely precise.