Holy Father, your are rock, not a caricature of Marshmallow Fluff:
Vatican letter on pope’s civil union remarks assures doctrine unchanged
ROME – A letter sent from the Vatican to bishops’ conferences around the world seeking to explain the Pope Francis’s recent remarks on civil unions has argued that the pope’s words taken out of context and that his position does not constitute a change in Church teaching on the issue.
So far so good:
Titled, “To help understand some of the expressions of the pope in the documentary, Francesco,” the letter says its intent is to offer “useful points of clarification” about the pope’s words and insists that it was sent “per his instruction.”
The letter goes on to provide background on the incident, saying that over a year ago Pope Francis was asked during an interview “two different questions at two different times that, in the aforementioned documentary, were edited and published as a single answer without the proper contextualization, which has generated confusion.”
Pointing to the pope’s assertion in the film that “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it,” the letter said this statement was a reference “to the pastoral need that, within the family, a son or daughter with a homosexual orientation should never be discriminated against.”
But then there is this little bombshell which makes me think this is damage control behind the pope's back:
Although several bishops’ conferences have confirmed receiving the letter, it was unsigned and was not printed on official letterhead, which officials in these bishops’ conferences found strange for a document from the Secretariat of State.
It is unknown who ordered the letter to be written, who sent it, if Pope Francis is aware, and if, as the letter claims, it was in fact the pope who asked that a clarification be made.
16 comments:
Father, I couldn’t agree more with your final reaction.
Gaudete in Domino Semper!
HELL indeed.
The saying: “shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted” comes to mind.
It would not be too great an exaggeration to say that the Baltimore Catechism and what any Pope from Pius IX to Pius XII taught regarding marriage and sexual morality could have been quoted right now in a Vatican statement- it would hardly matter - the damage has been done.....not forever, but for some time.
I was reading yesterday of a Fr B M, a theologian and ethicist at Fordham University, who is himself gay, gushing how his phone began to “blow up” with elated messages from his LGBTIQ+ friends, who were “universally jubilant” over reports that Pope Francis had expressed his personal support for civil unions for same-sex couples.
As if Francis and his closest advisers going back to 2013 with the “Who am I to judge?” could be so simple and naive to not know how the world’s secular media works with sound-bites and how such statements can be spun and will be presented to the world, and how many will perceive these headline statements and the conclusions many will make......I feel they must know and not care what it looks like (and what it is) to 1. be applauded by SO many who either disregard or even despise traditional Christian teachings on sexual morality and 2. to cause upset, pain and confusion to Catholics who have struggled to live up to those traditional moral teachings.....This latest stuff just brings back many painful memories like January 2015 BBC and worldwide headlines: “Pope Francis: No Catholic needs to breed like ‘rabbits’ “. How many secular humanist types and nominal Catholics would have loved reading that; while how many Catholics around the world were like me who concluded my parents were fools (or regarded as fools by the highest in the Church) to have had a large family and there was no need for them to have bred like rabbits my youngest 2 brothers and youngest sister?
I have read Fr Hunwicke and others explain how Francis can be simultaneously a true Pope and Vicar of Christ and be a somewhat silly or even foolish, garrulous old man. I would like to believe that; but I really can’t. I believe Francis is truly the Pope but I don’t believe all his seriously problematic one liners over 7 years are simply the result of him being a naive, garrulous and somewhat silly old man.......to state the obvious, on reflection, only God can truly know Francis’ heart and mind, his true motivations and intentions, and his true agenda. It is too depressing to ponder the worst case scenario here...
Sorry, I did not intend to ramble on so much.
PF finishing the job Vatican II started!!!
The pope's statement, taken out of context or not, sounds more what I would expect to hear from Michael Curry, the presiding bishop of the ever-declining Episcopal Church...a Church declining so much that it does not claim even 1 percent of the nation's total population.
A few more exclamation points with the "What The Hell" please!!!!!
I thought the faux catholic priest or Mark Thomas would be here to support PF
Did you HAVE to mention MT? Now we're going to get at least 3 successive slobbering posts when his meds kick in.
Pax
Not MT
PLEASE don't encourage either of them!!!!!
There's a faux priest posting here? I usually see contributions from Fr Fox and Fr Kavanaugh. Is one of them not validly ordained?
You forgot the Peanut Butter......LOTS of Peanut Butter........
The social consequences of Covid-19 lockdowns in Australia this year have included BIG increases in use of alcohol and illegal drugs and even bigger increases in the consumption of the worst and at times illegal online pornography and domestic violence but no indications of more Catholics going to confession.
By the way, I read a good article in “The Australian” today about an “Axis of hate crosses ideological divide” - how the New York Times, all left/ liberal and Woke Americans, the Communist Party of China, millions of Muslims worldwide who regard the USA as “the Great Satan” including the mullahs’ regime that rules Iran ALL have in common a desperate longing to see Donald Trump defeated.......
And why can’t people pause to ask if the Trump presidency has hastened American decline, as The New York Times and all his liberal-leftist critics argue then WHY is it that the 2 national governments in the world which would most benefit from US decline very much want to see the end of Trump?
BTW (2) it was good to see today that the 24 race horses at Australia’s world famous Melbourne Cup were not forced to take a knee for BLM !!
PS - finally, what with the horse race “that stops a nation” and the US election, the latest New Normal in Western Europe and the UK was almost ignored with breaking news from Vienna of people shot dead, more wounded including police wounded, and reports of hostage taking in 6 different locations in Vienna, Austria; and the public told to shelter in place as so far only one heavily armed terrorist has been shot dead and at least several more are still on the loose in Vienna - diversity and multiculturalism, and political decisions leading to large parts of Europe being c. 10% Muslim etc at times does not work out that great.
3 prophetic voices in 1968:
Paul VI fears and predicts a great lowering of moral standards - especially as regards sexual morality in western Europe and the USA...
The great Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe stated that while Christianity had taught that men ought to be as chaste as pagans thought honest women ought to be; she predicted the contraceptive morality will teach women in the future they need to be as little chaste as pagans thought men needed to be...
And another prophetic voice of 1968 was that of Enoch Powell who in criticising mass immigration back then said that looking forward he was filled with foreboding and like the ancient Roman he saw the River Tiber foaming with much blood...
- ie from his famous "Rivers of Blood" speech.
The Times and others called this an evil speech....and an appeal to racial hatred etc..
I think it was George Orwell who said what in an age filed with lies anyone brave enough to say the truth will be the most hated.
I sometimes look around at Mass and wonder how many people here would like me follow and read several Catholic blogs and online publications?
Less than 10% or less than 5%?
I am not at all criticizing such people at Mass who don't read Catholic blogs and online publications. They may often be better off not doing so. But even the clear majority of those Catholics who still attend Mass will probably never read all the online explanations and discussions re what Francis REALLY said and meant.
If this year ends in December (like it ended in December 2013) with Pope Francis being named Person of the Year by The Advocate, a major US based LGBTLMNOP magazine - many Catholics might read a headline about that and wonder what the hell is going on, but have no time nor inclination to read endless online discussions and the dissecting and explaining of Francis' words that can lead him to be a LGBT Person of the Year.
I occasionally also wonder why the Vatican bothers to release an attempted nuanced clarification after a famous Francis one-liner. To every one person who is interested a hundred plus have already formed an opinion re the silly old Catholic Church finally catching up with the times under Pope Francis...or formed the opinion that unfortunately certain core aspects of Catholic morality are being abandoned.
Elizabeth Anscombe: .......the contraceptive MENTALITY will teach women in the future they need to be as little chaste as ancient pagans in Rome thought men needed to be.
What has been and will be the cost in the future in the UK and Western Europe - and the USA too eventually - of extra police, extra private security guards and now deploying the military to protect churches and synagogues and other possible soft targets from Islamic terrorists? and I don’t mean just the financial costs. As well as around the clock protection to people as harmless as novelists, film makers and political commentators who have received repeated serious death threats from Muslim extremists.
What was said about British Muslims in 2015 (that was also true of other European nations) that more British Muslims were fighting for ISIS than serving in the British Army was an important observation then, especially as many returned to Britain (and Western Europe) after fighting for ISIS. And political leaders in Poland and Hungary and Trump and others have been condemned for not wanting large scale Muslim immigration into their nations. They don’t seem so irrationally ignorant and bigoted now?
Meanwhile how rare it is for someone to clearly and openly state and acknowledge the obvious regarding the Church of England and most of the German Lutheran Church and many Catholic bishops in France and the USA having a religious message that has become a form of left-wing politics - supporting the climate change activists and “diversity action” and social welfare projects and condemning (as Francis put it) the “not Christian” ‘Me First’ logic in response to migrants and refugees.
Post a Comment