REALLY, CATHOLICS ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE POPE'S INTERVIEW?

Southern Orders ^ | March 6, 2014 | Fr. Allan J. McDonald

[NYer]

It continues to amaze me how some Catholics (not all) and usually supposedly traditional Catholics, continue to nitpick what Pope Francis says and are as manipulative of what he says as the progressive media that does the same thing.

This is what the Pope said about true marriage and civil unions yestersday:

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. It is about pacts of cohabitating of various natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety.

MY COMMENTS:

First the Holy Father makes clear that marriage is between a man and woman! Duh! But he knows the question is posed to him because there is great confusion in society today from those who are trying to redefine that which is already definitively defined and cannot be changed.

Then he says that secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. (And yes, this is part of the states responsibility, but this is far from the Pope endorsing cohabitation in the sense of a sexual relationship. And he acknowledges that there are many forms of cohabitation--a single son with an elderly mother and he cares for as a son cares for a mother. Can cohabitation have the same civil protection economically in terms of health benefits, social security and the like? It is not a sexual union or cohabitation.)

Keep in mind, that the Church is opposed to legal divorce. In Italy the Church fought tooth and nail to prevent legal divorces. Was this good? My Italian mother and Canadian father, both conservative Catholics told me no!

The problem in Italy prior the the Council was that men would leave their wives and children and cohabitate with another woman. He became a deadbeat dad, did not support his wife or children because the legal aspects of the separation had not been addressed in a court of law for the protection of persons, children and property.

Civil divorce protects the parties who are divorcing and their children and possessions. It is the duty of the state to do this and enforce it. Not the Church.  The Church can only state that the civil union of divorced and remarried Catholics is not recognized by the  Church and that the initial marriage is the valid one until proven otherwise in an ecclesiastical court of law. 

So the Church, in terms of divorce and remarried couples, acknowledges today (not in the past) the need for civil unions to be regulated by the state to protect people and their civil rights. The Church does not acknowledge these civil unions as marriage and in fact says there is a public sin involved which prevents these couples from receiving Holy Communion if the union is sexual in nature, rather than fraternal.

[verga]

Post #8 was in reference to the original post about civil unions, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good old fashion rant. This is the part where a christian would apologize for their error... I am not holding my breath.

I have come to the conclusion that no matter what a catholic does the protestants will find something negative to say. If the pope was seen walking on water the FR headline would read "Pope can't swim."

[metmom]

Your projection is noted.

[metmom]

I was responding to the comment about distrusting the pope.

I realize what the topic of the thread was about, but a man who cannot be trusted to not rob the dead, cannot be trusted at all.

Otherwise, the pope has been put on the level of politicians where people claim that what he does in his private life has no bearing on his ability to hold office.

That is simply not true. People’s morality is not compartmentalized like that. A man who cannot be trusted in private, cannot be trusted in public.

And he has already demonstrated that his ability to make sound judgment is basically non-existent.

[verga]

Your lack of Christian charity and humility is what is really noted. Good thing I didn’t hold my breath.

[metmom]

Jesus called the Pharisees, the legalistic religious leaders of His day, a brood of vipers, hypocrites, and white washed tombs.

Would you also accuse Him of lack of *Christian charity* for speaking the truth?

[verga]

Did you or did you not make a false accusation to me? Would a true Christian have apologized for their error?

The answer to both questions is yes.

Anyone that does not demonstrate Christian charity or humility is not a Christian.

Feel free to have the last comment.

[Alex Murphy]

Every year at lent and advent the secular media tries to find ways to stir the pot and get Catholics and other Christians all jacked up over nothing.

Every year, at least one FRoman Catholic comes out and demands that the Religion Forum censor the news during Lent. Is that going to be you, this year?

[verga]

Every year, at least one FRoman Catholic comes out and demands that the Religion Forum censor the news during Lent. Is that going to be you, this year?

To quote a mediocre mind "Documentation please"

[Gamecock]

If this Pope is seen walking on water give me a call.

But in the mean time there is a huge difference between walking on water and being a thief.

[Gamecock]

So are you saying stealing from the dead and calling that sin honoring them is a Roman Catholic tradition?

[Gamecock]

Metmon is not the leader of a large faith group. Frank is. Frank stole from a dead man’s hands. That is the issue here.

[verga]

First off it is Francis as a minimum and his proper Title is Pope Francis.

That is the issue here.

No the issue is metmonm's false accusation against me, her complete lack of Christian humility and charity.

This has been a pattern with this poster and with her sycophant supporters. She is caught in an error refuses to admit it, changes the subject, and you all rush to her defense.

[Alex Murphy]

I have come to the conclusion that no matter what a catholic does the protestants will find something negative to say. If the pope was seen walking on water the FR headline would read "Pope can't swim."

I've read that Ted Kennedy could actually drive across water.

[verga]

So no documentation for you wild claim in post 47, we can assume you are making this up out of whole clothe.

[xone]

In distrusting the pope, you demonstrate a distrust for Christ's promise.

Or a recognition that the church and the Pope are two different things.

[Alex Murphy]

So no documentation for you wild claim in post 47, we can assume you are making this up out of whole clothe.

You know what they say about people who assume!

[xone]

my two gold tooth crowns

Those are already claimed by the IRS.

[xone]

Good thing I didn’t hold my breath.

A matter of opinion for sure.

[verga]

You know what they say about people who assume!

No I don't, but we know what they call people that can't prove what they claim.

[Gamecock]

That.