FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Pope Francis on homosexuality: My position is "that of the Church"
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
This is google translated (I cleaned up the grammar slightly) from the Vatican website from the Press Conference Pope Francis gave on returning from Rio. I found it reassuring, and also informative on how Pope Francis determines what to talk about. Haven't found it in English yet.

http://attualita.vatican.va/sala-sta...ews/31494.html

Patricia Zorzan:
“Speaking on behalf of the Brazilians. Society has changed, young people have changed and you see so many young people in Brazil. You did not mention abortion, marriage between persons of the same sex. In Brazil, a law was passed that extends the right to abortion and allowed marriage between persons of the same sex. Why did you not talk about this?”

Papa Francesco:
“The Church has already expressed this perfectly. It was not necessary to go back, as I have not even talked about fraud, deceit or other things on which the Church has a clear doctrine!”

Patricia Zorzan:
“But it is a topic that interests the young …”

Papa Francesco:
“Yes, but there was no need to talk about this, but the positive things that open the way to the boys. Is it not? In addition, young people know exactly what is the position of the Church!”

Patricia Zorzan:
“What is the position of Your Holiness, can we talk about it?”

Papa Francesco:
“That of the Church. I am a son of the Church!”
 
Unfortunately, all I see is more vagueness and someone who is skirting the issue.

Why not repeat the Church's doctrine, when specifically asked, even though everyone supposedly knows it so well?
(08-01-2013, 10:05 AM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately, all I see is more vagueness and someone who is skirting the issue.

Why not repeat the Church's doctrine, when specifically asked, even though everyone supposedly knows it so well?
You might as well ask why our Blessed Lord didn't yield to Satan's prodding if everyone supposedly knew so well that He was God.
(08-01-2013, 10:05 AM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately, all I see is more vagueness and someone who is skirting the issue.

Why not repeat the Church's doctrine, when specifically asked, even though everyone supposedly knows it so well?

Maybe he's tired.  Maybe he expects others to research it,  Maybe he's being conversational.  Maybe he doesn't realize his every move is being analyzed by armchair theologians and doesn't know the proper way to interact with people so a bunch of folks on a message board will be happy. 
(08-01-2013, 11:18 AM)Melchior Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2013, 10:05 AM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately, all I see is more vagueness and someone who is skirting the issue.

Why not repeat the Church's doctrine, when specifically asked, even though everyone supposedly knows it so well?

Maybe he's tired.  Maybe he expects others to research it,  Maybe he's being conversational.  Maybe he doesn't realize his every move is being analyzed by armchair theologians and doesn't know the proper way to interact with people so a bunch of folks on a message board will be happy. 

Maybe, maybe, maybe.

excuses, excuses, excuses.

Or, better yet, when you don't have a good excuse, go on the offensive (ie. take a stab at the "message board folks").

(08-01-2013, 10:15 AM)St. Drogo Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-01-2013, 10:05 AM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately, all I see is more vagueness and someone who is skirting the issue.

Why not repeat the Church's doctrine, when specifically asked, even though everyone supposedly knows it so well?
You might as well ask why our Blessed Lord didn't yield to Satan's prodding if everyone supposedly knew so well that He was God.

The problem is that the media is jumping on every vague statement. I saw someone celebrate our Holy Father’s vague statements on Facebook and not only that, suggested that even if the Church is against marriage for homosexuals, it is quite possible the Church may support civil unions.  He even went as far to say that  he believes Jesus would have supported civil unions for homosexuals.

There were times Jesus did not answer the Pharisees’ questions directly because they didn’t actually want to hear the truth. They wanted to trap him.  At other times, he was straight and to the point.  I hope to see Pope Francis speak more directly….sometimes.
(08-01-2013, 10:05 AM)2Vermont Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately, all I see is more vagueness and someone who is skirting the issue.

Why not repeat the Church's doctrine, when specifically asked, even though everyone supposedly knows it so well?

Oh, I totally agree that he's skirting the issue and should have clearly repeated the doctrine.  I just think this is a LOT better than nothing, and certainly helps given the "who am I to judge" comment.  At least we can say that he believes that the Church's teaching via the Catechism is expressed "perfectly", and at least we know that ultimately he's with the Church here, even if he's a bit vague or silent about it. 

I look at it like this.  If he was actually heterodox here, we would not be able to accept that.  At least we know he's orthodox, he's just going to communicate it in a way we don't agree with.  Ultimately, although I won't like it or agree with it,  I can live with a flawed communication style, whereas I couldn't live with heterodox teaching.

In other words, communicating the right teaching in the wrong way is FAR better than communcating a wrong teaching.  Or maybe I just  have low standards.

I think everyone knows what Catholic teaching is. And for those who don't (both of them*), there's the Catechism of the Catholic Church that makes it all pretty clear. I don't wee why the Pope should be expected to speak robotically, quoting the Catechism, every time he opens his mouth.

I also think it's perfectly fine -- GOOD, in fact -- to emphasize charity toward homosexuals while also taking the "lavendar mafia" quite seriously. The one doesn't preclude the other.


* The media and the revolutionaries like to play dumb, but they are just playing dumb. They can't be so stupid as to be unable to comprehend a few paragraphs of the Catechism, which is undoubtedly available in just about every library in the United States. And they can't be so stupid as to expect the Pope to contradict the Catechism. (What I find sad is that some trads apparently expect that)

The very fact that this controversy exists, and we are wondering what the Pope should have said or not, shows that what he did do was not sufficient.
He is a public figure and should know how to deal with the media, obviously he doesn't because they are controlling the narrative.
He needs to keep himself quiet or learn how to speak to the media so he isn't missquoted or misinterpreted.
(08-01-2013, 03:15 PM)winoblue1 Wrote: [ -> ]The very fact that this controversy exists, and we are wondering what the Pope should have said or not, shows that what he did do was not sufficient.
He is a public figure and should know how to deal with the media, obviously he doesn't because they are controlling the narrative.
He needs to keep himself quiet or learn how to speak to the media so he isn't missquoted or misinterpreted.

I agree, but in my mind a bigger question is whether he is now thinking "oh no, I misspoke again, I really need to be more careful", or is he fine with throwing these ambigous statements out there and generating scandal?
Pages: 1 2