O
Odilon
Guest
How come the two previous Pope’s never seemed to have this problem?
Pope civil unions comment appears to be an edited mashup, and not in original transcript from 2019
- Status
B
BartholomewB
Guest
This is what I have found from a quick internet search. To get the full picture, we would need information from someone now living in Argentina.
In Argentina, the legal term corresponding to “civil union” is unión civil. In those jurisdictions, such as the province of Río Negro, that extend legal recognition to unmarried couples, the usual requirement is that the two people need to have been in a stable relationship for a specified minimum period. As far as I can tell from this Wikipedia article, it seems the legal term for that stable relationship is convivencia.
Last edited:
N
neophyte
Guest
You’re kidding, right?
P
Polak
Guest
It probably wasn’t actually, just like an article isn’t reviewed in most cases, by people who were quoted in it, and that’s why later they read it and are annoyed that their words were twisted out of context. Much like articles, works of art don’t normally need the approval of those involved in them before being released.
I
Irishmom2
Guest
I don’t actually think he is kidding. You have to admit that this pope (compared to the previous two) has had a lot of comments he made that have not been clear and have easily been misconstrued.
1
1ke
Guest
Was there any doubt that this was a mistranslation or out of context quote?
Only among the fear-mongering click bait sites.
Only among the fear-mongering click bait sites.
O
Odilon
Guest
If this is another misquote by the press, than I am relieved that the Pope is not endorsing sinful behavior. The mistake would then be mine for believing the major media, a group of people that routinely lies to us.
N
neophyte
Guest
Absolutely Francis makes it much easier to do, but to say that the media didn’t do it to Benedict or St. John Paul II is nonsense.
I
Irishmom2
Guest
Except that I did not say that they didn’t. I said he has had more ambiguous comments than either of them made.
O
Odilon
Guest
I disagree. Everyone knew exactly where his two predecessors stood on issues such as the family, marriage, and abortion. To my recollection, the press was not able to, nor did they try to spin what those two men actually stood for or said. If you could provide some examples, I would be open to changing my opinion.
T
TMC
Guest
The “problem” is not the Pope’s ability to communicate, but rather some Catholics’ inability to listen to the Pope when what he is saying conflicts with their political leanings and desires. The only time there is “confusion” is when the Pope says things that upset the right - you know radical things like taking care of the poor, the universal destination of goods, the importance of dignity and respect for all people, the need to stop allowing governments to kill their own citizens. Radical stuff like that.
S
StudentMI
Guest
Or, you know, it conflicts with what the Church teaches.
S
stpurl
Guest
I remember the media commenting that Pope Benedict had approved of the use of condoms by prostitutes as being a moral good. The truth was he said that if a prostitute who was already engaged in a wrong action took an action which the PROSTITUTE felt was an attempt to keep the victim from having a child on top of the wrongful sex, the THOUGHT of the action of trying to ‘lessen’ an ‘evil’ COULD show a step toward recognising and trying to do something morally good, even if the action was not itself morally good.
W
Wesrock
Guest
I’m pretty sure it was even more nuanced than that, and it was male prostitutes engaging in homosexual prostitution. Obviously a condom is a null issue there. But maybe I’m remembering wrong.
M
MikeInVA
Guest
Because they were both native Italian speakers? Oh, that’s right…
M
MikeInVA
Guest
I’m sure that the Pope will make a statement in the next day or so that clears this up.
W
Wesrock
Guest
We have a Jesuit pope, and an orthodox Jesuit pope is still a Jesuit. Meaning that they are very focused on moral economy, meeting people where they are, trying to shine Christ’s light in if there’s even the tiniest crack to shine it into.
The media obviously mismatched some quotes, and the Pope’s comments on civil unions otherwise seem very concerned with designating next of kin laws and inheritance for people who have been effectively living as next of kin for years, not on condoning same-sex relations. With his background as a Jesuit, I think Pope Francis is much less concerned with stating things in black and white terms (and perhaps less concerned with the appearance of scandal), and more concerned with the nuances of a situation. Which can definitely throw a lot of people off.
I could write more, but really I think most people taken aback by his statements misunderstand his entire approach to these things.
Whether it’s the most prudent or helpful approach in practice is a different discussion.
The media obviously mismatched some quotes, and the Pope’s comments on civil unions otherwise seem very concerned with designating next of kin laws and inheritance for people who have been effectively living as next of kin for years, not on condoning same-sex relations. With his background as a Jesuit, I think Pope Francis is much less concerned with stating things in black and white terms (and perhaps less concerned with the appearance of scandal), and more concerned with the nuances of a situation. Which can definitely throw a lot of people off.
I could write more, but really I think most people taken aback by his statements misunderstand his entire approach to these things.
Whether it’s the most prudent or helpful approach in practice is a different discussion.
Last edited:
G
Genesis315
Guest
It does seem to be from the same interview, but it is a mashup of two quotes. And, for some reason, the civil unions quote was cut from the interview or at least the transcript when it was originally published a year and a half ago (which is why it made no headlines back then).
I don’t think there’s any question that this Pope is ok with civil unions as a legal construct affording certain legal protections–this was well known before he became Pope and he has said the same thing in 2014 and alluded to it again in an interview in 2017 while reiterating his opposition to same-sex marriage (to little fanfare).
However, making him say civil unions stem from a “right to a family” edits two different quotes together. Likewise, the transcript makes clear he considers same-sex acts and same-sex marriage unacceptable. As I’ve said, civil unions are not necessarily immoral–Cardinal Levada who was head of the CDF has made the same point–which is likely why the Pope sees it as something to compromise on. But IMO (and as the CDF has noted in the past), they are usually just used as equivalent to same-sex marriage, and so they have generally been opposed by the Church on that ground (for example, some years back in the UK, two sisters applied for a civil union for the legal protections and were denied, which hammered home that point). That’s where I think the Pope is mistaken–not in the principles, but in the practical reality.
Last edited:
G
goout
Guest
Because this Pope is not the same man. His pastoral approach is different. His first concern is to go to the peripheries to bring in the wounded. He subordinates clarity to that first concern. Does that make everyone comfortable? No. Is the Church part of a confused mish-mash in popular dialogue. Yep. Maybe this is the carrying of the cross that Jesus was talking about.Maximian:
How come the two previous Pope’s never seemed to have this problem?
If you do want to understand where P Francis is coming from, this is as good of a talk as I’ve seen. It is long and well considered from a very thoughtful priest.
Last edited:
1
1Lord1Faith
Guest
Francis is not exactly an ivory tower Pope. I think he knows full well the practical reality. I think that he is not a fearful Pope, and so will not have as much hesitation to go forward with something that will challenge a lot of people.
- Status