AP Report Oct 22 2020 "Plot thickens over origins of pope’s civil union endorsement"

  • Thread starter Thread starter IanM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is a major issue I have with Francis. Almost always his comment are not clear. I have no doubt that JPII and Benedict had this happen to them, but when it happens over and over and over and over, there needs to be more thinking before saying.
 
I’ve read that the translation was inaccurate. He was talking to parents…and said that homosexuals have a right to be IN A family. That means if our kid comes out, we don’t disown them. Legal protection? Maybe that’s a reference to parents who write their gay kids out of their wills. He’s said repeatedly that marriage is only between a man and woman. I wish people would remember that when these interviews take place.
 
lwest said:
I’ve read that the translation was inaccurate. He was talking to parents…and said that homosexuals have a right to be IN A family. That means if our kid comes out, we don’t disown them. Legal protection? Maybe that’s a reference to parents who write their gay kids out of their wills. He’s said repeatedly that marriage is only between a man and woman. I wish people would remember that when these interviews take place.
Click to expand...
" Argentine archbishop and Pope Francis advisor says ‘civil union’ not mistranslated in documentary

 
And other priests have said it was mistranslated. So who do we believe? Since he comment that ‘homosexuals have a right to be in a family’ was directed toward parents…why couldn’t his comment about legal protection be a reference to parents who want to write their gay kids out of their wills? He’s said many times that marriage is between a man and woman.
 
Last edited:
lwest said:
And other priests have said it was mistranslated. So who do we believe?
Click to expand...
I personally think it prudent to go with Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez as he is described as Pope Francis` " long-time theological advisor" and as a compatriot, presumably has a sound knowledge of nuance in “Argentinian” Spanish.
 
It doesn’t change the fact that Pope Francis has said on more than one occasion that marriage is between a man and woman. Since the beginning of the statement was directed toward parents, he could have meant that ‘legal protection’ means gay children be protected if their parents write them out of their wills.
 
I really wish that the Pope could choose his words more carefully. He is driving people from the church not bringing them in.

A family member of mine told me he read this story and said “now the Pope supports homosexuals civil unions but I am not welcome as a civilly married Catholic?”

He was wrong and I tried to be charitable in my explanation but Pope Francis isn’t helping to bring people in, he confusing both the well and poorly catechized and pushing people away in the process.
 
ZemD said:
I really wish that the Pope could choose his words more carefully.
Click to expand...
That was my prayer years ago, in the beginning of his papacy. My concern for his “carelessness” - after more and growing repetitions of such “missteps” in words, became the concern for his habitual imprudence, that is, an absence of the virtue of prudence. That imprudence I’m beginning to see as so deeply rooted and consistent, as to be intentional, purposeful, deliberate, desired.

Which brings in me a deep shudder in my soul. God is at work - I have no doubt - but I shudder to think that the time may have come, which I never thought I’d live to see. I do not think that the end times must be as prophesied, not if we can heed the calls to repentance and do so, and bring forth a Church of true and holy witness.

I see no signs of this happening, yet - instead I see compromise upon compromise with the contradictions of the world. I see a swamp in the Church hardly distinguishable from the swamp in the world. Yet God has not yet, not today so far, dealt with us as we deserve. Still He holds back, with mercy.

Will we change? Will we learn? Will we repent and reform and return to the vocation Christ has laid upon us?
 
The statement by Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, described here as “a long-time theological advisor to Pope Francis,” clears up nothing. In Argentinian law, there is a clear distinction between “convivencia” and “unión civil.” “Unión civil” is the same as civil union in English: a contract that two people can voluntarily enter into, that stops short of being fully equivalent to a marriage. In those jurisdictions in Argentina that recognize civil unions between same-sex couples, there is a requirement that the couple must have been together in a stable relationship for a specified minimum period, before they are legally entitled to sign a “civil union” contract. In Argentina, the legal term used by the authorities to designate that stable relationship is “convivencia.”

My conclusion is that the Pope can only have been intending to convey the idea that all couples living in a stable relationship, though without any formal contractual basis either as a marriage or as a civil union, should nevertheless be afforded some kind of legal recognition, without the need to formally enter into a civil union, to which the Catholic Church remains opposed.
 
lwest said:
I’ve read that the translation was inaccurate.
Click to expand...
But you hear this over and over with francis. You hear all types of excuses about what he said and what he really said and if you understood his language you would understand just how nuanced it is.

There is even a post that francis is doing this so gay kids cant get written out of wills. When did this become the business of the church? it is 100% none of Francis business or that of the church.
 
BartholomewB said:
My conclusion is that the Pope can only have been intending to convey the idea …
Click to expand...
This is the crux of the issue.

The only one that can truly clarify what Pope Francis meant is Pope Francis. He could very easily address the confusion directly and say what he meant in clear language.

That way we are not left speculating about what we could only have intended to convey. It isn’t up to anyone else to provide or fill in what he intended. He ought to clearly state what he intended so no one is left trying to decipher the meaning.

Christ spoke in figurative language and parables to make people think more deeply on what he was saying. His message, though, was entirely consistent and once you understand how he was using metaphors and parallels his intended meaning becomes clearer as a big picture. He himself had clarity so his aim was to unsettle those around him who thought they knew but really didn’t.

Unfortunately, clarity with regard to what Pope Francis says becomes more clouded and uncertain as time goes by. He doesn’t use previous statements as steps to achieve greater clarity with subsequent statements. He appears to be putting to words his own uncertainty regarding how Church Tradition is to be applied to current issues. That is why many are left confused - he doesn’t have certainty.

That, in itself, isn’t the crux of the issue because we live in confusing times. Perhaps he should admit his own state and call on everyone to seek God’s will rather that rely on cryptic messages to make it appear that uncertainty is desirable or necessary. We need certainty in these times.
 
Last edited:
IanM said:
40.png
lwest:
I’ve read that the translation was inaccurate. He was talking to parents…and said that homosexuals have a right to be IN A family. That means if our kid comes out, we don’t disown them. Legal protection? Maybe that’s a reference to parents who write their gay kids out of their wills. He’s said repeatedly that marriage is only between a man and woman. I wish people would remember that when these interviews take place.
Click to expand...
" Argentine archbishop and Pope Francis advisor says ‘civil union’ not mistranslated in documentary
Argentine archbishop and Pope Francis advisor says 'civil union' not mistranslated in documentary
Click to expand...
Some people have argued over the Spanish word that is being translated as “civil union”, but that’s not what the original poster was getting at. That poster was saying that Pope Francis’ words directed at parents was getting edited into sounding like a justification for civil unions with same sex relations, children, etc. Pope Francis’ reasons for civil unions are different.
 
Last edited:
“There’s no such thing as bad publicity.” I don’t know who first said that, but I suspect it may have been a Jesuit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top