Equality of marriage and love

robindch

A cardinal from Africa announces that 'Homosexual unions' are a 'problem for humanity':

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/homosexual-unions-a-problem-for-humanity-says-cardinal-1.2373405

The guy's name is Cardinal Sarah, btw, so there may be other issues at play.

Penn

http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2015/10/02/0749/01616.html

The brief meeting between Mrs. Kim Davis and Pope Francis at the Apostolic Nunciature in Washington, DC has continued to provoke comments and discussion. In order to contribute to an objective understanding of what transpired I am able to clarify the following points:

Pope Francis met with several dozen persons who had been invited by the Nunciature to greet him as he prepared to leave Washington for New York City. Such brief greetings occur on all papal visits and are due to the Pope’s characteristic kindness and availability. The only real audience granted by the Pope at the Nunciature was with one of his former students and his family.

The Pope did not enter into the details of the situation of Mrs. Davis and his meeting with her should not be considered a form of support of her position in all of its particular and complex aspects.

So, even though he specifically choose to meet her and not mention it, and even though she said that he showed his support for her, that doesn't mean that he supported her.

Glad that's been clarified.

Cabaal

Penn wrote: »

So, even though he specifically choose to meet her and not mention it, and even though she said that he showed his support for her, that doesn't mean that he supported her.

Glad that's been clarified.

Interesting logic alright,
I guess if he met a rapist and the rapist saw nothing wrong with what they did and believed they were 100% right to do it and that god support him in raping. The pope telling the rapist to be strong and giving them gifts means the pope isn't supporting the rapist?

Ok, its an extreme example but lets face it she was found wrong by a court of law. Inviting her, telling her to be strong and giving her gifts is a level of support.

Nodin

Penn wrote: »

http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2015/10/02/0749/01616.html



So, even though he specifically choose to meet her and not mention it, and even though she said that he showed his support for her, that doesn't mean that he supported her.

Glad that's been clarified.

...doesn't support all of her views. I'd say that the ones not supported surround the Protestantism, and the ones that do concern the gheys.

Peregrinus

Penn wrote: »

So, even though he specifically choose to meet her and not mention it, and even though she said that he showed his support for her, that doesn't mean that he supported her.

Glad that's been clarified.

Well, just to pick nits, the Vatican statement doesn't say that he "specifically chose to meet her", or even that he just plain ol' chose to meet her. It says that she was among those invited by the Nunciature to greet him. Does Frankie micromanage these affairs to the extent of personally drawing up the invitation list that the nunciature will send out? Possibly. But possibly not. I'm not prepared to assume the former.

Somebody was persuaded that it would be a good idea to invite Davis to this gig. That somebody wasn't necessarily Frankie.

Penn

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, just to pick nits, the Vatican statement doesn't say that he "specifically chose to meet her", or even that he just plain ol' chose to meet her. It says that she was among those invited by the Nunciature to greet him. Does Frankie micromanage these affairs to the extent of personally drawing up the invitation list that the nunciature will send out? Possibly. But possibly not. I'm not prepared to assume the former.

Somebody was persuaded that it would be a good idea to invite Davis to this gig. That somebody wasn't necessarily Frankie.

I doubt it's an either/or situation. It might not necessarily have been the Pope who requested that she be there, but chances are he either requested it, or someone suggested it and he agreed with it. They specifically mention that who he's able to meet is subject to "the Pope's kindness and availability". She had to have been fairly high up on the list, considering too that this wasn't a public meeting, but one in private. I strongly doubt he wasn't in some way involved in the decision to have her there.

Peregrinus

I think we're both guessing here, but my guess is that the guest list is suggested by the Nunciature and shown to the Pope or someone in his office before the invitations go out. They might ask for names to be added to it; rarely, I suspect, for names to be taken off it. The likelihood is that they did know that Kim Davis' name is on the list, but it's also possible that they didn't fully appreciate her significance - she doesn't get the same airplay in Italy as she does in the Anglosphere, and this wouldn't be the first time the Vatican has turned out not to be up with the chatter on the interwebs. Insofar as she's a figure of public interest in the US, the Vatican would rely on the Washington Nunciature to make a judgment about whether it's appropriate to invite her - that's the Nunciature's job, after all.

And, to carry on with the nitpicking, they don't "specifically mention that who he's able to meet is subject to 'the Pope's kindness and availability'"; they say that the fact that such meetings usually occur during papal visits is due to his k.c. and a., but they don't suggest that that has any bearing on who gets invited and who does not. And I wouldn't say that the meeting was "in private"; it was an invitation-only affair, but there were several dozen assorted people there. I'd say this was a walk-through, handshakes, general distribution of rosaries kind of thing.

Penn

Fair enough, I don't deny you may be right, I'm largely basing my opinion on what Kim Davis' lawyers says he told her:

"Pope Francis "thanked her for her courage" and told her to "stay strong", Mr Stavers said."

Peregrinus

Penn wrote: »

Fair enough, I don't deny you may be right, I'm largely basing my opinion on what Kim Davis' lawyers says he told her . . .

Yes. Though, as Robin has already pointed out, he may not be the most reliable source.

Hotblack Desiato

Cabaal wrote: »

Interesting logic alright,
I guess if he met a rapist and the rapist saw nothing wrong with what they did and believed they were 100% right to do it and that god support him in raping. The pope telling the rapist to be strong and giving them gifts means the pope isn't supporting the rapist?

Ok, its an extreme example

Not really, the RCC has given a great deal of support to rapist clerics.

marienbad

Penn wrote: »

Fair enough, I don't deny you may be right, I'm largely basing my opinion on what Kim Davis' lawyers says he told her:

"Pope Francis "thanked her for her courage" and told her to "stay strong", Mr Stavers said."

The curious thing is though she probably hates Catholics just a little bit less than the gheys .

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

Somebody was persuaded that it would be a good idea to invite Davis to this gig. That somebody wasn't necessarily Frankie.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The likelihood is that they did know that Kim Davis' name is on the list, but it's also possible that they didn't fully appreciate her significance.

Come off it
When he answered the question on the plane about people exercising freedom of concience, I was prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt; that he might not know about the whole Kim Davis controversy.
When it transpired that she had secretly been sent for, and then met with, and told to "stay strong", that indicates he knew exactly what was going on.

dublinman1990

A Catholic priest who was meant to be attending the Chruch Synod on the Family to discuss the the ''issue'' of Gay Believers in the CC has recently come out as a gay man.

http://www.thejournal.ie/vatican-gay-priest-2366369-Oct2015/

A direct quote from the Journal

In a statement a spokesman for Pope Francis said Polish priest Krzystof Charamsa's actions had been ''very serious and irresponsible'' and that he would be automatically kicked out of his post as a theologian in the Vatican.

Shrap

recedite wrote: »

When it transpired that she had secretly been sent for, and then met with, and told to "stay strong", that indicates he knew exactly what was going on.

Eh? Where from? Missed that. Assumed it like, but missed the proof. Obviously, that doesn't change the fact that nefarious anti-Frances forces weren't lobbying for and arranging this but it DOES dramatically damage his credibility.

(Personally favour the scenario that he's too forward thinking :rolleyes: for the Vatican and they have taken him down using Kim Davis....)

Cabaal

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34436671

Pope Francis to open Church synod amid gay row

Pope Francis is due to celebrate Mass at St Peter's Basilica in the Vatican, at the start of a synod of bishops that will focus on family issues.

The run-up was dominated by a row over a Vatican priest who on Saturday announced he was in a gay relationship.

Poland-born Krzysztof Charamsa said he wanted to challenge the Church's "backwards" attitude to homosexuality.

He was later dismissed from his post at the Vatican's office in charge of guarding Roman Catholic doctrine.

A spokesman said Msgr Charamsa's decision to give interviews on the eve of the synod was "grave and irresponsible" and would put Pope Francis under "undue media pressure".

Is it still all about the peace, love and acceptance of people...after all Popey did say ""If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?" "

Even if this guy wasn't in a relationship they would have sacked him for saying he was gay, so they and popey can still judge pretty well.

recedite

Shrap wrote: »

Eh? Where from? Missed that. Assumed it like, but missed the proof.

She was specifically invited to a gathering. And then a brief meeting of the two seems to have been engineered.

Peregrinus

Everyone at the gathering had a "brief meeting" with the pope. That's why they keep it to a few dozen people. They all get a handshake and a rosary beads.

Cabaal

Peregrinus wrote: »

Everyone at the gathering had a "brief meeting" with the pope. That's why they keep it to a few dozen people. They all get a handshake and a rosary beads.

rosary beads cost money you know, can't be handing them out to just anyone for free!

Shrap

Ho hooo! Conspiracy fail in Pope's inner circle.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, who arranged the Pope’s meetings in Washington (including the one with Kim Davis), is expected to be held responsible for blowback resulting from the meeting with Davis. According to the New York Times, Viganò is “likely to be removed at the first respectable opportunity” if blowback from the meeting with Davis continues to build.

http://usuncut.com/news/pope-francis-expected-to-fire-archbishop-who-set-up-the-meeting-with-kim-davis/

Peregrinus

Well, Viganò isn't in the pope's inner circle, which is part of the backstory to all this. Under Benedict XVI he was Secretary-General of the Vartican City Governorate, which is a very senior position, but he lost an internal power struggle with the then Secretary of State and (over his vociferous protests) was demoted sideways, so to speak, to become nuncio to Washington. This happened a couple of years before Francis was elected, and Viganò's career and Francis's have never really intersected.

It's not clear whether he dropped Francis in this mess in a fit of pique, or whether he simply took his eye off the ball (responsibility for sending out the invitations to this gig lay with "his office", but that doesn't necessarily mean that he involved himself in the process; just that he was responsible for it) or whether some socially conservative donor to the American church called in a favour (or knows where a body is buried!) or whether he actually thought that this meeting would be a good idea. But none of these explanations reflects particularly well on him.

There'll be a "respectable opportunity" to remove him quite soon. He turns 75 in January and is required to submit his resignation. Traditionally, early acceptance of his resignation is a signal that they can't wait to be rid of him. If they think he's doing a good job they'll sit on his resignation for up to two years before accepting it.

Cabaal

Oh dear!

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/italian-priest-suspended-after-paedophilia-comments-1.2382271

A 75-year-old Italian priest, Don Gino Flaim, has been suspended from his functions at the San Pio X church in Trent, northern Italy, after he made comments in which he appeared to “justify” paedophilia.

Don Gino said: “I can understand paedophilia. Homosexuality, I don’t know, I think it’s a sickness. I have worked a lot with schools and I know children.

“Unfortunately, there are children who seek out affection because they do not receive it at home. And maybe if they come across some priest, well maybe he will yield (to temptation). I understand this ... It doesn’t surprise me that these type of cases exist because the Church is a community of sinners”.

Oh dear...

PopePalpatine

#NotAllPriests :pac:

Cabaal

McAleese maintains church deemed homosexuality ‘disorder’
US archbishop Charles Chaput says former president ‘trying to control’ Catholic faith

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/mcaleese-maintains-church-deemed-homosexuality-disorder-1.2383749

The former president of Ireland Mary McAleese has dismissed a statement by the Archbishop of Philadelphia Charles Chaput that the Catholic Church never said homosexuals were disordered.

Speaking to The Irish Times on Wednesday Archbishop Chaput, who recently hosted the World Summit of Families in Philadelphia which was attended by Pope Francis, said “I’ve read the documents and the church has never said that homosexual persons are disordered.”

He's wrong on this one, they did say....more then once!
It seems he wants to re-write the church's history because the viewpoint is awkward now.

Nodin

Cabaal wrote: »

Oh dear!

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/italian-priest-suspended-after-paedophilia-comments-1.2382271

Oh dear...

Normally ye'd need a large bomb to dig a hole that deep that quick.

seamus

Nodin wrote: »

Normally ye'd need a large bomb to dig a hole that deep that quick.

Wasn't there another priest or bishop a couple of years back who made similar comments along the lines of, "one of the causes of child sex abuse is sexy children"?

(Paraphrasing, obviously )

Cabaal

seamus wrote: »

Wasn't there another priest or bishop a couple of years back who made similar comments along the lines of, "one of the causes of child sex abuse is sexy children"?

(Paraphrasing, obviously )

Thats about what he said though

Back in 2013:

Earlier this month, Polish Archbishop Jozef Michalik came under much-deserved fire when he kinda-sorta-totally blamed kids for attracting pedophile priests with their sexy troubled vibes. Michalik told reporters that children of divorce or broken families often "[seek] closeness with others and may get lost and may get the other person involved, too."

Shrap

Earlier this month, Polish Archbishop Jozef Michalik came under much-deserved fire when he kinda-sorta-totally blamed kids for attracting pedophile priests with their sexy troubled vibes. Michalik told reporters that children of divorce or broken families often "[seek] closeness with others and may get lost and may get the other person involved, too."

Yeah, I remember that didn't go down too well in my neighbouring parish where there was a paedophile priest who actively sought out children of separated families. My best friend's family being a case in point, where the priest in question actually called to the house demanding that the one male child come and "seek guidance" now that his mother was gone away. He was seen off by the lad's extremely large father and uncle, who were under no illusions.

Another case in point was the severely troubled child Brendan O'Donnell, who was "helped" after the occasion of his mother's death but wasn't so lucky to have anyone in his life to drive away the predator. Small wonder he went on to murder people, including a different priest.

The priest's grave here has recently been made invisible in the church grounds, as every attempt at keeping his grave since he died in 1997 was met with the destruction of it. The damage he did here to so many men I know and love today leaves me very fcuking angry, and I never even met the scumbag.

recedite

Shrap wrote: »

Ho hooo! Conspiracy fail in Pope's inner circle.
http://usuncut.com/news/pope-francis-expected-to-fire-archbishop-who-set-up-the-meeting-with-kim-davis/

...not meant to be interpreted as an endorsement of her views, but rather a simple exchange of pleasantries between the Pope and a group of admirers, one of whom happened to be Davis..

I'm not buying it. If she was such an admirer, would she not become a member of his religion?
And if he knew nothing, why tell her to "stay strong"?

I think some old guy in Washington is about to find out what a scapegoat is. He'll still have his luxury retirement accommodation though, so he might not be too concerned.

Peregrinus

recedite wrote: »

I'm not buying it. If she was such an admirer, would she not become a member of his religion?

Do you become a member of the religion of every person you admire?

recedite wrote: »

And if he knew nothing, why tell her to "stay strong"?

Well, the only evidence we have that he said that (or, come to think of it, that he said anything at all to her) is from her lawyer who I think we have already established is not the most reliable source.

robindch

Lifestyle choice? Probably not according to epigenetical science.

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/link-between-dna-marks-and-sexual-orientation-found-men