Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Francis: Church could support civil unions
CNN ^ | 03/05/2014 | By Daniel Burke

Posted on 03/05/2014 2:19:44 PM PST by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-105 next last
To: SeekAndFind

Civil unions could be any sort of connection, for legal purposes. It could be a mother and son, two brothers, or two sisters. It could have absolutely NOTHING to do with sexual relations, and that’s probably why most homosexual activists didn’t like the idea. They wanted MARRIAGE, because they saw that as a way to weaken marriage overall. Civil unions wouldn’t accomplish that.


51 posted on 03/05/2014 3:45:01 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

This excuse for a Pope is fundamentally transforming the Catholic church the way Obama is transforming America.


52 posted on 03/05/2014 4:09:53 PM PST by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Francis is the Jocelyn Elders of Popes that is somehow always misunderstood.


53 posted on 03/05/2014 4:16:59 PM PST by plain talk (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Even then they would never be satisfied.


54 posted on 03/05/2014 4:23:46 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mgist

Soros is affiliated with NCR, as in National Catholic Register?? Or am I misunderstanding your statement?


55 posted on 03/05/2014 4:26:57 PM PST by PatriotGirl827 (O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Pope Francis: Church could support civil unions

With each pronouncement on social and political issues Pope Francis makes the more I'm inclined to believe Pope Benedict was ousted. It is not a far stretch, in my mind at least, to see similarities between what President Obama is doing to our Constitutional system and what Pope Francis is doing to the Catholic Church................

56 posted on 03/05/2014 4:29:23 PM PST by varon (Para bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Did the Popey happen to mention whether any of that would affect the salvation of any of those lost souls?


57 posted on 03/05/2014 4:39:22 PM PST by cherokee1 (skip the names---just kick the buttz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why is the MSM always doubted to have gotten it right when reporting on conservatives at the free republic and always assumed to have gotten it right when spinning what the Pope says into something he didn’t say ?


58 posted on 03/05/2014 4:40:53 PM PST by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That is it. This guy is basically reverend Jeremiah Wright dressed in a white robe. This always was the fundamental weakness of the Catholic faith, as a hierarchical organization the Church is only as good as the current Pope. This one is a social gospel Marxist. God have mercy.


59 posted on 03/05/2014 4:47:24 PM PST by BurningOak (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2830849/reply?c=1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx; Genoa

Onyx, I read those words and saw nothing in them to even faintly hint at “support” for civil unions of same sex individuals. Francis is not stupid. The question he is asked is clearly hinting at the idea of same sex unions, otherwise there would be no mention of “up to what point,” as if to say, where would the Catholic church draw the line. Francis hedges his answer in the vague generality that civil unions can exist for many reasons, but are especially tied to economic considerations, and therefore (I interject my interpretation here) there is nothing wrong with civil unions in the abstract, which is logically true.

However, it is an unfortunate dodge of the real question, because it ignores the fact that here in the US, “civil union” can never be thought of as a legal abstraction. To us it has become short-hand for state-recognized same sex cohabitation. Look at all the responses on this thread. That’s what folks are hearing, even though its not what he,said. It is a classic cultural communication snafu, and it should be addressed and remediated as soon as possible.

Full disclisure: I am not Catholic nor do I agree with substantial components of Catholic teaching. But everyone deserves a fair hearing, including Francis.


60 posted on 03/05/2014 5:00:53 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; NYer; little jeremiah

I don’t seem to recall Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI needing much clarification ‘after-the-fact’. Even when reporters tried to play the gotcha game, you were aware of what he meant and how it tied into the magisterial teachings of the Church (and those that did try, they had to parse him to the point where it was very obvious his words were misquoted).

Not so much now.

Regardless of what Pope Francis means, his lack of clarity is providing an occasion to sin.


61 posted on 03/05/2014 5:04:57 PM PST by Ultra Sonic 007 (Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al_c
"Once again, his remarks have been taken out of context and spun to mean something he did not say"

Funny how this particular Pope seems to have this problem all the time.

I can't recall another Pope in my (short) lifetime who is ALWAYS being "misquoted", and for some reason it's always in a way that liberals really like.

62 posted on 03/05/2014 5:06:06 PM PST by boop (I just wanted a President. But I got a rock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Consider the source. Is CNN playing epater les bourgeoises?
63 posted on 03/05/2014 5:15:04 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

RE: “diverse situations of cohabitation [are] driven by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, as for instance to assure medical care.”

Well, that COULD mean ( not sure, but just giving Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt ) that as a matter of civil law, he recognizes that such “unions” (note the quotes) may be a way for Catholics to recognize the reality of a secular society without supporting same sex marriage.

The same principle I guess, applies to divorce. The Catholic Church FROWNS upon it, but recognizes that in a secular society, it may be made legal.


64 posted on 03/05/2014 5:15:14 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Well, that is officially over.

Hold the phone and demand a transcript. This is CNN -- remember, lying (by implication, omission, interpolation, extrapolation, or statistics) is what these guys do best.

65 posted on 03/05/2014 5:17:44 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BurningOak
See my last. Don't go for the cheese. This is the RatB@stardLyingMedia talking, and our FRiends are seeing strong signs of torquing and twisting in the "story".

Demand a transcript and read it with a magnifying glass before you despair and start telling people the Rock has split.

66 posted on 03/05/2014 5:21:15 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I promise you that when it comes to my church, there is no grey area. These are LIES.

It is another assault on the faithful. At the end of the day we all know who wins this war. I know God has mercy even for the lost souls who unwittingly deceive, but when realize how they have offended our God’s bride the church, I don’t see how they can forgive themselves.

That day will come, who’s side are you on?


67 posted on 03/05/2014 5:23:03 PM PST by mgist (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: onyx

RE: THIS is ALL I could find

based on the link and response to the question you provided... here is how I see is view:

As a matter of civil law, he recognizes that such “unions” (note the quotes) may be a way for Catholics to recognize the reality of a secular society without supporting same sex marriage.

The same principle I guess, applies to divorce. The Catholic Church FROWNS upon it, but recognizes that in a secular society, it may be made legal. That by no means tells us that the church will endorse such “unions”.


68 posted on 03/05/2014 5:24:27 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I promise you that when it comes to my church, there is no grey area. These are LIES.

It is another assault on the faithful. At the end of the day we all know who wins this war. I know God has mercy even for the lost souls who unwittingly deceive, but when realize how they have offended our God’s bride the church, I don’t see how they can forgive themselves.

That day will come, who’s side are you on?


69 posted on 03/05/2014 5:24:43 PM PST by mgist (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: BurningOak

You are a troll. Nothing conservative about you. For anyone to accept this country’s compromised media as an excuse to attack THE ONLY church that stands in the way of Marxism, is a con. a conservative heretic. Consider yourself outed.


70 posted on 03/05/2014 5:29:24 PM PST by mgist (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
"I think this is where social conservatives made their biggest error, which was in their opposition to civil unions."

I note the use of "their" instead of "our" concerning social conservatives. Clearly you are not one.

Here's the thing. God did not "err" when He said homosexuality is an abomination before Him. So you go ahead and sanction civil unions, or any other kind of union, between perverts, and see how far you get with your argument on Judgement Day.

I will NEVER support such a thing.

71 posted on 03/05/2014 5:36:38 PM PST by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: boop

It’s not the pope’s problem ... it’s the media’s problem. They twist his words to fit their agenda.


72 posted on 03/05/2014 5:48:42 PM PST by al_c (Obama's standing in the world has fallen so much that Kenya now claims he was born in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Please someone tell Francis that sodomy is a sin. You guys in Rome still believe that sin exists, right? Real sin, I mean.


73 posted on 03/05/2014 6:05:28 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"marriage is between a man and a woman." However, he said, "We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety."

If this is an actual quote properly placed in context, then turn out the lights, the party's over. Who was the pope you all were worried about showing up?

74 posted on 03/05/2014 6:10:39 PM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Go here ... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3129967/posts


75 posted on 03/05/2014 6:14:37 PM PST by al_c (Obama's standing in the world has fallen so much that Kenya now claims he was born in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Thanks for posting the exact quote, in context. He makes me nervous in general, but this example doesn’t appear to threaten church dogma. I continue to hope that he doesn’t turn out to be a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing.


76 posted on 03/05/2014 6:23:17 PM PST by catbertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Uh, Francis, do you know why the two men want to have a “civil union”? Its not cause they like to play golf together . . . . . . .


77 posted on 03/05/2014 6:35:10 PM PST by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

I’m a CONSERVATIVE, period.

Socially I am a “social conservative” but my adversion to too much government tends to put me against how far LEGAL “social conservatives” are willing to go to make ILLEGAL what are sometimes, in a democratic pluralistic society, left to social persuasion and not the law - alcohol, marijuana, and sex outside of marriage, for instance.

But, yes, as CONSERVATIVE, I understand the activists in the “gay” community are in part knowledgeable with a segment of the legal community, and in part usefuel idiots of the lawyers and the really knowledgeable ones, whom ARE working not merely for “equal rights” for “gay” couples, but to undermine marriage.

To me, the separate institution of civil unions helps dissipate the attack on marriage on the legal front, because unlike a redefinition of marriage to accomodate “same-sex” couples, it does not open the door to all kinds of “couples” being granted “marriage”, which the LEGALIZED redefinition of marriage does do.

Civil unions for “same-sex” couples, does not open the door to legalized (licenses for) polygamy, the way redefining marriage to include “same-sex” couples does.

If someone is for preserving the legal definition of marriage to the human historical definition of marriage, then having the separate civil unions for “same-sex” couples is preferable and if it was the dominant (state by state) “solution” for “gay couples”, it would KEEP “marriage” defined as it has been. THAT in the long run would be more favorable for “social conservatives”, than the present course of events.


78 posted on 03/05/2014 6:54:56 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: mgist

“Regardless of your personal opinions there are gay men who have officially “come out” and said that the LGBT organizations are attacking families and don’t speak for all.”

Your not telling anyone anything most of us don’t already know.

However, among the “gays” that don’t go along with the LGBT activism in favor of marriage being redefined under law as including “gay” couples, they would tell you they are in favor of separate civil unions for monogamous “gay” couples.


79 posted on 03/05/2014 6:58:43 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I would agree. What the Roman Catholic Pope means by his statement may be more nuanced, theologically, and legally than someone could interpret the raw statement to mean. I suppose, there will be clarification of it in time.


80 posted on 03/05/2014 7:02:33 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Let’s see. Who was the other guy who went from “traditional” marriage to “civil unions” to gay marriage. OBAMA!


81 posted on 03/05/2014 7:09:43 PM PST by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

“If you say yes to civil unions, then there is no reason not to accept polyamorous ‘civil unions’ or any type of union. What limits could there be?”

No. It would not necessarily mean that. Civil unions are being adopted with a specific purpose in mind - monomgamous “same-sex” COUPLES. It will/would be easier to maintain that very basic intent.

However, the legal arguments in use and accepted by too many judges for REDEFINING marriage to accomodate “same-sex” couples CREATES the slippery slope of MARRIAGE being opened up to anyone who wants it, because it is a demand for redefining it on “universal” terms.

We wanted to preserve MARRIAGE, both in law and socially. By arguing against the separate and distinct civil unions, the goal post was moved - GO DIRECTLY TO MARRIAGE.

I think the mistake was forcing the whole issue into the legal definition of marriage. Tolerating under law, the separate civil unions, would have done more to protect marriage socially as well as legally - as separate and distinct.


82 posted on 03/05/2014 7:12:29 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: All

We never had this problem with Pope John Paul or Pope Benedict. Clearly this Pope is a disappointment to real Christians. Something weird comes out of his mouth every week.

I guess popes are like presidents - you have some good ones and some awful ones. I’m glad I am Baptist and I have a direct connection to Jesus(called prayer) and don’t have to go through this no-principles Pope.


83 posted on 03/05/2014 7:13:06 PM PST by ClarenceThomasfan (My dream ticket is Cruz/Rubio 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I am arguing that in the legal and political arena, by fighting against civil unions so much, the opposition just went straight after marriage itself. I am arguing that if more conservatives had been willing to support separate and distinct civil unions, our long term abilities to keeping marriage separate and distinct were going to be greater. Now, the entire thing has collapsed into an all or nothing on marriage itself. That is a process that I think more conservative acceptance of civil unions would have blunted.


84 posted on 03/05/2014 7:22:46 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: al_c

RE: Go here ... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3129967/posts

Based on the link and response to the question provided... here is how I see his view:

As a matter of civil law, he recognizes that such “unions” (note the quotes) may be a way for Catholics to recognize the reality of a secular society without supporting same sex marriage.

The same principle I guess, applies to divorce. The Catholic Church FROWNS upon it, but recognizes that in a secular society, it may be made legal. That by no means tells us that the church will endorse such “unions”.


85 posted on 03/05/2014 7:25:22 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Sodom and Gomorrha
86 posted on 03/05/2014 8:00:10 PM PST by Cedar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Father and father to the left!!! Damn.


87 posted on 03/05/2014 8:38:50 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; SeekAndFind

Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod
Belief and Practice
http://www.lcms.org/belief-and-practice


88 posted on 03/05/2014 8:51:00 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I will raise $2M for Sarah Palin's next run, what will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
our society has a diminishing number of babies and children, and that means all the Catholic churches and schools will have diminishing parishoners and students....

someone please tell the Pope that young people have NO reason to marry...none....we're not pawns of some religious hierarchy....we can have civil unions just as good as the next couple, except we can skip all those long premarital classes that are required....

I don't care about civil unions...let them have it....but I never expected my Pope to be blessing them....

what are we supposed to do as Catholics????....

89 posted on 03/05/2014 9:30:35 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I’m getting close to where you are.....let religious people maintain the santity of marriage as a true commandment...let us have our Christmas feasts and our Good Fridays and our Ash Wednesday’s and let everyone else go about their business...I am so tired of the civil statists controlling my religous expression....


90 posted on 03/05/2014 9:33:34 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mgist
no...the real problem is conservatives do not marry and do not produce children....that is it in a nutshell....no marriage...no children....no power.....

different when I was a kid when everybody had several kids everywhere, when the churches were full of families and believe it or not, children were actually WELCOMED at weddings...

no political reasons can trump the fact that we just aren't making enough of our "own" kind...

91 posted on 03/05/2014 9:39:36 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mgist

Grow up. Nothing good has come from this guy from day one. He attacks capitalism and he plays footsies with the enemies of the family. At a time when the family is under unprecedented attack, he is negotiating surrender terms. Stop making excuses.


92 posted on 03/05/2014 9:59:51 PM PST by BurningOak (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2830849/reply?c=1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: al_c

When somebody preaches against homosexuality in Biblical terms there is no mistaking the message. When one uses platitudes and retreats, the media has plenty of room to interpret things as it sees fit.


93 posted on 03/05/2014 10:01:28 PM PST by BurningOak (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2830849/reply?c=1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

Thunderation is sure abounding here, when we don’t even have an accurate picture of what is being thundered at.

It MIGHT be another take on making a household an official household. Two brothers could be a household without sin; they could be celibate all their lives.


94 posted on 03/05/2014 10:15:57 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BurningOak

How do you know the original missive is like this?

The media distorts the pope; the media distorts Billy Graham. What’s new? Surely we shouldn’t blame the pope or Billy Graham till we know what they did say.

This pope is doubtless thinking chaste households. That may or may not be a viable end-run around the problem, but it’s the first mention I’ve seen.


95 posted on 03/05/2014 10:20:40 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Recognizing a government sanctioned union does not equal condoning such a union. He said himself that no doctrine regarding this will change.


96 posted on 03/06/2014 4:02:35 AM PST by al_c (Obama's standing in the world has fallen so much that Kenya now claims he was born in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He’s either in on the homo agenda or the most incoherent
pope ever. It’s always “he’s taken out of context” or “he misspoke”
or the media lies, but in most cases he said and meant what
he said leaving his supporters to twist themselves into
pretzels trying to cover for him. The infiltration and
take over of the church has been going on for quite some time
now, why is this pope so misunderstood when all the others
weren’t? Like Obama with America, Francis the fondeler is
there to oversee the decline and fall of the Catholic Church.


97 posted on 03/06/2014 5:15:30 AM PST by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

True or not, Francis is the worst Pope in a long time. When there’s this much smoke, there’s fire.


98 posted on 03/06/2014 5:40:28 AM PST by opres
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurningOak
"Grow Up"?

So that's what they meant by "projecting". There will come a day in your life when you realize the not everything in print is true son. "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth" Goebbel's propaganda 101 We are in a spiritual war, choose to side with the Father of LIes, you will pay the consequences. People of faith need to consider the possibility that they may even remotely be offending our Father, by slandering God's people. There is always a price to pay for offenses, even though God is always merciful. There is no room for the Holy Spirit in a soul that hates his brother. Marxists divide, lie, spread hate, calumny, resentment, etc., don't fall for the Father of Lies deception.

99 posted on 03/06/2014 6:17:26 AM PST by mgist (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: cherry

RE: I don’t care about civil unions...let them have it....but I never expected my Pope to be blessing them....

Based on the statement he made that I’ve read, I did not see it as blessing them.

READ IT HERE:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3129967/posts

He simply acknowledged that secular societies could recognize such unions (much like divorce is recognized, yet frowned upon by the church ).


100 posted on 03/06/2014 6:56:47 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson