The Pope's comments on Civil Unions is fake news- he is in line with the CDF guidance...

[fides' Jack]

6 minutes ago, Peace said:

As I wrote before:

And let's keep it real here. Some of ya'll are simply haters. If the Pope responds in 1 year ya'll will bicker and complain that he should have responded in 1 month. If he responds in 1 month, ya'll will bicker and complain that he should have responded in 1 week. If he responds in 1 week, ya'll will bicker and complain that he should have responded within 24 hours. If he responds within 24 hours, ya'll will bicker and complain that he should have responded within 2 hours. If he responds within 2 hours and says XYZ, ya'll will bicker and complain that he should have said ABC. If he says ABC, ya'll will bicker and complain that he should have said DEF. And on, and on, and on, because that is precisely what haters do. They can only see fault and cannot see good. Could that be a reason why PF thinks that not responding to it all in the first place is a better option?

But this is simply not true.  And I don't appreciate being called a "hater".

It seems like every other thing the pope says is good, and every other thing he says is not good.  He's made some amesome statements about abortion, and I'll be the first to defend those statements.

I don't think anyone here is a PF hater.  But there's an awful, awful lot that he's done wrong in his relatively short tenure.  

HOWEVER, the way you describe our treatment of him is exactly how several people here have treated Trump, and exactly how the media treats him, and exactly how millions of people have treated him.  I suppose that's neither here nor there is this thread, but just something to be aware of.

Edited October 26, 2020 by fides' Jack
Misspelled amesome

[Peace]

4 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

But this is simply not true.  And I don't appreciate being called a "hater".

If it doesn't apply to you, then you have nothing to worry about.

But if the shoes fit, lace them up.

4 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

It seems like every other thing the pope says is good, and every other thing he says is not good.  He's made some amesome statements about abortion, and I'll be the first to defend those statements.

I don't think anyone here is a PF hater.  But there's an awful, awful lot that he's done wrong in his relatively short tenure.  

HOWEVER, the way you describe our treatment of him is exactly how several people here have treated Trump, and exactly how the media treats him, and exactly how millions of people have treated him.  I suppose that's neither here nor there is this thread, but just something to be aware of.

Yeah, I agree that some of the treatment of Trump, especially by those on the left and some media outlets, is unfair.

[fides' Jack]

Wow, we agreed on something.  Nice!  High-five!

[Peace]

Just now, fides' Jack said:

Wow, we agreed on something.

I disagree.

[Anastasia]

20 hours ago, Aloysius said:

Francis's claim to be "silent like Jesus" could easily be part of the PR game it's reasonable to suspect he's doing.

The Pope excusing his silence via referring to the silence of Jesus on trial is a news to me. Then, if it is his regular excuse, the current situation gives it a symbolic twist.

Christ ceased answering Pilate after their exchange:
”I have been born and have come into the world for this reason—to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.”
Pilate asked, “What is truth?”

Pilate was either incapable or unwilling to recognize the Truth in front of him so Jesus stopped speaking, as He always does when another refuses to see the truth. However, He never disengages if a person sincerely wants to learn the truth; further more Our Lords always initiates an engagement/connection. His disengagement is always a result of a disengagement of another person when there is nothing can be done "to break through" in a human soul. 

In the current situation (and in some previous previous) with the Pope we see the opposite: the disciples = Roman Catholics are thirsty for the truth and demand it and the Pope is silent. The Pope = “Christ” refuses to say the truth = to be the truth to his disciples.

[HumilityAndPatience]

On 10/26/2020 at 3:36 AM, Peace said:

As for him habitually creating a blur, I think that is a bunch of BS too. People pour over thousands and thousands of words that the man speaks or writes, finds one footnote or 10 seconds of speech in an hour long interview, that can be ambiguous, creates a huge mountain of croutons out of it, feeds this croutons to the media, and then blames the Pope for the result of their own creation. And what, you never think that people have been defamed by the media at large? You never think that people jump to unfair conclusions without doing due diligence? But it's all the Pope's fault for not cleaning up this mountain of croutons to your satisfaction. Whatever.

Just catching up with this thread- well said on the above... People go on these days as if they are "the remnant" of the faith. But views such as the above are the real remnant

On 10/26/2020 at 4:04 AM, Peace said:

What I want to know is, what specifically did you want him to say when someone calls him an enabler of a sex offender? What, he literally has to state "That is completely untrue" as if that statement by itself is going to shed any light on the situation? I don't get that perspective at all, but that's just me.

Agreed. This logic is lost in the noise of sensationalism. In groping for guidance amidst the Church's trials and tribulations, the laity are looking to the media for answers. 

On 10/26/2020 at 1:58 PM, Peace said:

Personally, I think the Catholics are insane who are putting literally all of the heat on PF, when 99% of the abuse cases actually occurred on the watch (and were flourishing on the watch) of the 3 or 4 popes that came before PF.

Apparently, Benedict knew about the sexual abuse allegations and put McCarrick on "suspension". PF eventually laicized this cardinal. What does anyone have to say about Benedict's handling of the matter? You will hear nary a peep, on this website.

Let's keep it real. Many folks have it in for the Pope because he is not "Trad friendly" and are using the scandal to attack the PF. If they really cared about the victims or resolving the problems then they would at least have something to say about these other folks as well.

Truth right here @Peace. 

[dUSt]

https://aleteia.org/2020/11/02/vatican-secretariate-of-state-clarifies-popes-civil-unions-comment/

 

[HumilityAndPatience]

thanks @dust I am sure all reasonable interpretations of this will be steamrolled by the vogue sensationalist ones...

[Guest]

 I did read over on CA what I thought was an excellent response.  He did include some history of civil unions: https://forums.catholic.com/t/should-catholics-support-civil-unions/632455/29 - go to November 5, post by CRM_Brother (I could not work out how to accurately link to the post itself).

[KnightofChrist]

On 11/3/2020 at 6:35 AM, HumilityAndPatience said:

thanks @dust I am sure all reasonable interpretations of this will be steamrolled by the vogue sensationalist ones...

Still want to see the Pope clarify his own statements on this and various other issues. 

[Anastasia]

4 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

Still want to see the Pope clarify his own statements on this and various other issues. 

Most likely there will be no real clarifications from the Pope. The problem is that if the Pope clarifies anything he will lose. Right now, there are “progressive people” who are absolutely sure that the Pope is on their side, pro- “homosexual unions” and even “homosexual marriage” (taking it as the latest example). And there are also Roman Catholics who are still hoping that “he did not mean that”.  If the Pope says “I am against homosexual unions and “marriages because it is a sin; the Church will never bless them” he will lose those who took his words as an endorsement of homosexual unions and stop seeing him as their ally and “a nice, carrying person", not like those “rigid heartless nuts”. On the other hand, if he says “I endorse homosexual unions, get use to that” then probably it will be too much even for the patient Roman Catholics.

"Clarifications" done via the third person always leave a gap for maneuvering. "There was nothing wrong done, it all depends on how you look at a collage" etc. 

Edited November 7, 2020 by Anastasia