Skip to comments.This Passage In The Pope's First Major Interview Has Made A Lot Of People Very Excited
Posted on 09/21/2013 10:24:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Pope Francis can't seem to help but get good press recently, what with his humble new car, an endearing and sincere-seeming series of phone calls to random members of the public, public messages of tolerance, and the first papal selfie.
All that goodwill seems to have consolidated with his first long interview. The interview was conducted with Rev. Antonio Spadaro, editor-in-chief of La Civiltà Cattolica, and translated in full by America Magazine.
It's certainly a long read, but to give you the gist, many people are picking up on this one passage in particular:
The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The churchs pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently. Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus. We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow."
That message is likely to anger more conservative members of the clergy who had hoped that Pope Francis may use the interview to clarify his feelings on divisive issues like abortion, gays and contraception. Instead, he seems to be saying that the church shouldn't focus on those issues but instead look at the bigger picture of how to make the Catholic Church a more inclusive place.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Then there’s this statement:
A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person? We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.”
Hate the sin, love the sinner. But homosexualism is sinful, is immoral and unhealthy and we must never endorse it.
And so lengthens the procession. He has joined the Methodists.
I wonder if the author is informed when he includes abortion on the same level with homosexuals and contraception and implicitly concludes that the Pope will change church doctrine concerning all three in what we might call a libertarian direction. I cannot understand how the test which the Pope applies, which is how God sees a person apart from the sin, can be invoked-nor do I suggest the Pope would invokesuch a test-to condone abortion.
It would be an abandonment of the very principle His Holiness endorses to condone the murder of an unborn child. The distinction, of course, is to look for a victim and where none exists to refrain from invoking the power of the state to control the behavior. That means that homosexuality and contraception are not fit subjects for governments to control.
It seems, although it is not clear, that the pope regards them as unfit subjects for the church to denounce. Whether that means that the church will condone them is another matter. My interest, as I noted above, is how the church's position impinges on my political life.
RE: It seems, although it is not clear, that the pope regards them as unfit subjects for the church to denounce.
I wonder why homosexuality and abortion are unfit to denounce.
The logic seems simple enough -— The church believes in the Bible as God’s word, God’s word condemns both homosexuality AND murder. Therefore, what follows for the church ??
It is right to say “Neither do I condemn you” (John 8:11)... but if the church stops there and ignore the next statement, then it is not preaching the complete Gospel.
Did he really use the word ‘gay’? That word has been stolen from traditional society where it was used to connote joy, happiness, light frivolity.
RE: Did he really use the word gay?
Those words were translated into English.
Translated from what language?
In Spanish the word is also homosexual. In Latin it is homosexualis. In Italian it is omosessuale.
The word ‘gay’ means lighthearted and carefree, a happy-go-lucky disposition. The meaning of gay as homosexual is a new phenomenon. It should be taken back by injecting popular culture with its historic meaning. For example, “the Pope was in gay spirits today as he met with ...”.
The homosexual lobby plays word games. Homosexual Civil Unions and Homosexual Partnerships become Homosexual Marriage becomes Gay Marriage becomes Marriage Equality.
They should not be allowed to infringe on language any more than they be allowed to exaggerate their numbers (e.g. 1% to 10%).
*8joined the Methodists.**
What do you mean?
Did you read the entire interview? Link above.
Question! What feelings/attitude/judgement is proper as to the sinner who promotes the sin?
Question! What feelings/attitude/judgement is proper as to the sinner who promotes the sin?
I have no idea what he's saying there. None. And that's not good. It sounds like babble, that can be interpreted to mean just about anything. From anyone else I'd call it bravosierra. When it comes from the Pope, I just don't know what to make of it.
Trying to break through the slanted, liberal media and their fixations on abortion, unnatural marriage and and sodomy.
A new and extensive interview with Pope Francis is making headlines around the world.
The New York Times initially headlined its story, Pope Bluntly Faults Churchs Focus on Gays and Abortion.
USA Today declared: Pope seeks less focus on abortion, gays, contraception.
And CBS News proclaimed: Pope Francis: Catholic Church must focus beyond small-minded rules.
Wow! Did the Pope really characterize the Churchs teachings on abortion, homosexuality and contraception as small-minded rules that the Church should get beyond?
Thats what youd think by scanning the headlines, but the short answer is that the Pope said no such thing. Once again, this was a case of the secular press hyperventilating and taking the Popes remarks out of context.
Yup. The liberals think nothing of printing lie after lie after lie in an attempt to advance their godless socialist agenda.
All in all, as I witness this media debacle, what I hate more than even the MSM's selecting, cropping and framing of papal images and sound-bites, is their cheap, shallow, cynical political language.
"In a sop to doctrinal reactionaries in Jerusalem, Jesus of Nazareth today voiced support for the so-called 'Ten' 'Commandments'. This is widely interpreted by faith experts as a compromise designed to quiet critics who say he has slid too far in his rhetoric about mercy and grace."I'm rolling my eyes so far I can see the front of my brain.
The problem with vague language is the individual can interpret it to mean whatever is preferred, not unlike the Vatican II documents.
“I have no idea what he’s saying there. None. And that’s not good. It sounds like babble, that can be interpreted to mean just about anything.”
I have also felt that his words are mostly babble, with no real clear meaning. The tendency for it, though, seems to be towards a universalism/liberal point of view.
It seems pretty clear that he wants the church to shy away from condemning sinful behavior. Unless the media is giving him the lost in translation treatment.
As someone whose completed Seminary, and earned an STB in a pontifical degree...
MSM doesn’t know their ass end from their pie hole when it comes to understanding how the Catholic Church thinks.
Basically the Pope just stated that the dogmatic teaching of the Church is not a narrow but a broad teaching on all aspects of life. It has a richness to it which enlivens more than certain moral issues of life. Which is obvious to people who’ve studied and lived it carefully...He only wanted to emphasize the point that it is wrong to “only” apply the faith to narrow issues, because the dogmatic teaching encompasses far more.
To use a sports analogy, the rules of baseball tell us more than 3 strikes is equal to one out. It tells us that to reach home base you have to sequentially run from first, second and third base. It tells us everything we need to know about playing baseball...But if no one knows how to even throw a pitch or catch a ball...make sure you explain that too, not just the three strike rule.
That’s basically what he was saying (in far more eloquent language) about teaching the faith in that paragraph.
What Pope Francis is saying here, is that it's not enough to just repeat law, and more law, and yet again law; the Church must first, and always, evangelize, which means to draw people into the love of Christ our God.
The moral law doesn't mean much to people who see it as just an irrelevant restriction on their freedom, imposed on them by busybodies who are interlopers in their lives; but once the are attracted to Christ and begin to acquire the mind of Christ, gradually it makes sense to them: they grasp the horror of what they're doing, AND they have the grace which strengthens them to do good and avoid evil.
What the Pope said to the gynecologists is beautiful: that the unborn child has the face of Jesus Christ, the face of the Lord! That is not "shying away from condemning sinful behavior"; it is, rather, showing exactly why these things are to be condemned.
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.