If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge...A person once asked me 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… We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible.
is a clear exposition of the Catholic teaching about any concupiscent attraction that may result in actual sin, including homosexual practice.
Running around condemning the Pope who teaches correct things clearly is silly, or perhaps evil. Direct your anger at the leftwing media that first convinced everyone that the Church "hates the gays" and now is surprised to find out otherwise.
If the question of homosexuality had been asked of any pope holding that office before 1957, their answer would have been an unambiguous: “No! I absolutely do not approve of homosexuality; it is a mortal sin”. So if you believe that this pope’s media-pleasing, non-answer (albeit not inconsistent with Church dogma) was preferable, we will simply agree to disagree.
As for the “left-wing” media that constantly distorts the truth, understand that my complaint is not with them; that is what I would expect of promoters of the secular world. It would be foolish to expect anything else. Rather, my complaint is with the bishops and this pope who clearly lack the spiritual courage (or wisdom) to stand up and boldly defend the faith. It is their role to rebuke the media and scream to the world that there is such a thing as sin, and that the practice of homosexuality is one of the four sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance. But they don’t; they stand mute.
I would respectfully suggest that my criticism of this pope was not for his teaching “correct things”, but for “not” teaching the horror of sin when he had the chance. For you to say that is silly or evil mocks the truth. St Athanasius went for 17 years condemning Pope Liberius and almost every bishop in his day. I have little doubt that both the world and the Church thought him silly, or worse, at that time as well. And while the issue in his day was Arianism, today it is Modernism––a heresy that St Pope Pius X condemned as the “synthesis of all heresies”.
There was a better day in the life of the Church that I am old enough to have experienced first hand as an Altar Boy during the early 1940’s. At that time the Catholic Church was not the weakened, lukewarm and compromised organization that she has become today. She was strong, respected and spoke with a single voice. If the media dared challenge any truth, the bishops and priests immediately took to the pulpits and boldly condemned their lies to the faithful in the pews. And, unlike today, all listened.
But that was a long time ago, and times change. Indeed, many of my childhood companions who are still alive, have simply accepted the teachings of the bishops as a necessary “modernization” of the Church and have abandoned the truths they were once taught by the prelates, priests and nuns of their day. I have not. And while I disagree with your unchallenged support of this pope and his Modernist philosophy, I do understand that you are far from alone; apparently much of the world stands with him and the Modernist Church who’s teachings are in stark opposition to what is believed by traditional Catholics.
One last thought. Don’t miss this recently posted piece, above, entitled:In the Vatican there is a NEW PROGRESSIVE INQUISITION.
And N.B., the guy who wrote this is far from a traditionalist. It’s obvious that for whatever reasons he decided to turn a blind eye toward Francis, but even if the pope really doesn’t know as much as the average reader of the W/P (which is absurd), what about the rest of those Modernist prelates? Do they all get a pass? This is what’s going on in the Modernist Church of Nice.