AP is now reporting that the comments came from a highly edited interview where Pope Francis also said “what I said is that they have a right to a family. And that doesn’t mean I approve of homosexual acts, not at all.”
Keep in mind, too, that when Pope Francis says homosexuals “have a right to a family” His Holiness was not speaking of them having children or adopting children in a “civil partnership”. He was speaking about their family of origin.
In other words, the pope is encouraging Catholic parents and siblings not to disown their homosexual children/siblings, etc.
Does that mean parents must attend a “wedding” of a “civil partnership” or they must condone homosexual acts? No they don’t have to be complicit in sin.
Would you accompany your son, daughter, brother or sister as they enter a bank to rob it? Would you join them in planning out how they will carry off the robbery?
All moral issues are connected. Keep that in mind and it would do well for the Holy Father not to have amnesia about that either.
However, parents and siblings should visit their children in prison, even if that prison is a relationship of mortal sin.
11 comments:
Do you have a link to this?
I noted four days ago on Father McDonald's blog that the Where Peter Is blog had posted the following from Pope Francis' 2019 A.D. interview...the interview from which the "Francesco" movie employed selective editing to make it appear that Pope Francis had said "X."
https://wherepeteris.com/those-pope-francis-quotes-video-editing-and-media-controversy-2/
"...what I said is that they have a right to a family. And that doesn’t mean I approve of homosexual acts, not at all.”
From Where Peter is blog, here is the context of the above remark from Pope Francis in 2019 A.D. — the director of the movie "Francesco" spliced the comments to alter the Pope's declarations, as well as context:
“Once I was asked a question on a flight—it made me angry afterwards, it made me angry because of how the media reported it—about the family integration of people with homosexual orientation, and I said: homosexual people have a right be a part of a family, people with homosexual orientation have a right to be in a family and the parents have the right to recognize this son as homosexual, this daughter as homosexual. Nobody should be thrown out or be miserable because of it.
"Another thing—I said—when we see some sign in children that are growing, and then you send them… I should have said to a ‘professional’, but I said ‘psychiatrist’.
"I wanted to say a professional, because sometimes there are signs in adolescence or pre-adolescence where they don’t know if it is a homosexual tendency or if the thymus gland atrophied with time—I don’t know, a thousand things, no? So, a professional.
"The headline of the newspaper: ‘The Pope sends homosexuals to the psychiatrist’. It is not true! They asked me a question and I repeated again: ‘They are sons of God, they have a right to a family, and so forth’.
"Another thing is… and I explained: I was wrong in using that word, but wanted to say this: ‘When you notice something str’… “Ah, it’s strange…”. No, it’s not strange. It’s something out of the ordinary. In other words, they took a small word to nullify the context.
"There, what I said was: ‘they have a right to a family’. And that does not mean approving homosexual acts, not in the least.”
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Could you provide the AP links?
I can’t find the AP but this is from CNA by way of CWR:
They asked me the same question another time and I repeated it, ‘They are children of God, they have a right to a family, and such.’ Another thing is – and I explained I was wrong with that word, but I meant to say this: When you notice something strange – ‘Ah, it’s strange.’ – No, it’s not strange. Something that is outside of the usual. That is, not to take a little word to annul the context. There, what I said is that they ‘have a right to a family.’ And that doesn’t mean to approve of homosexual acts, not at all.”
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/10/22/pope-francis-homosexuality-comments-heavily-edited-in-documentary-no-vatican-comment-on-civil-unions-2/
The liberals like James Martin lean on a man's opinion, call it doctrine and mislead. Faithful Catholics have Scripture and Tradition.....Romans 1, 1 Cor 6. Which will you trust your soul with?
It's like when they try and tell us Sodom and Gomorrah was about hospitality lol. They conveniently ignore Jude 7.
What are you basing your interpretation on? Do you have a transcript of the entire interview? For what it's worth, all interviews most are "heavily edited," the question is whether they are edited in a way that is true to the speaker's intent.
Bee here:
Oh really? And who is going to now put that cat back into the bag? Because news flows one way, and any "clarifying" comments or even retractions get a lot less publication than the original statement, which hit the world like a flash-bang explosion, and THAT is what people heard and will remember.
This is what he does. He makes these statements against doctrine, then after the initial celebration/outrage, follows up with a statement to placate all the scandalized faithful, which, by the way, are not all those who claim to be Catholic. Does no one else see a pattern here?
So I guess we are to believe no one at the Vatican viewed this movie before its release, or saw it in the editing phase....?
And what of this: "CWN Editor's Note: Evgeny Afineevsky, the director of the film Francesco, in which Pope Francis made his controversial remark about civil unions, has been awarded the Kineo Movie for Humanity Award. The prize was bestowed on him in the Vatican Gardens on October 22, the day after the papal remarks generated worldwide headlines."
Sorry. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice (or more times), shame on me.
I am sick and tired of being whipsawed by this Pope. I don't believe his "clarifications" or denials or claims of editing. He's not a victim here. He is victimizing us. I believe he believes exactly what he originally said.
God bless.
Bee
You would think, that after all of the times he has been misquoted...he would make sure all is right before publishing, that excuse holds no water now.
"There, what I said was: ‘they have a right to a family’. And that does not mean approving homosexual acts, not in the least.”
Well whoopdy-doodle doo! At this point, the media isn't interested in any walk-backs or qualifications. All they want is the original statement so they can run with it.
And that is why previous popes exercised almost surgical care about making statements to the press and did so with exacting clarity.
Confusion is NOT a fruit of the Holy Spirit any more than religious diversity is something that God wills.
Bee,
You are always a voice of reason and good common sense
Post a Comment