Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

[_Abyssinia]

7 things you need to know about what Pope Francis said about gays

by Jimmy Akin Monday, July 29, 2013 10:45 AM Comments (17)

Has Pope Francis taken a dramatic new tone on homosexuality? Has he broken with former Pope Benedict’s approach? Here are 7 things you need to know . . .

The press is buzzing right now with claims that Pope Francis has taken a sharply different line than his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, on the subject of homosexuality.

Some are suggesting that the new pope has announced that “gay is okay.”

What did Pope Francis really say, and how unusual is it?

Here are 7 things to know and share . . .

1) Where did Pope Francis make these remarks?

He made them during an 80-minute interview with reporters aboard the plane returning from World Youth Day in Brazil.

2) What was he asked that led to the remarks?

We may not know exactly what the question was until a transcript is released, but apparently, he was asked about the reputed “gay lobby” at the Vatican.

More info on that here.

3) What exactly did he say?

According to the best current accounts, he said:

There’s a lot of talk about the gay lobby, but I’ve never seen it on the Vatican ID card.

When I meet a gay person, I have to distinguish between their being gay and being part of a lobby. If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn’t be marginalized. The tendency * is not the problem … they’re our brothers.

4) What does this mean?*

The first part of the statement seems to downplay the who “gay lobby” issue. He’s not denying that there is one there, but he’s suggesting that the talk is somewhat overblown.

He then explains his approach to dealing with gay people: He distinguishes between their “being gay” and “being part of a lobby.”

What he means by “being gay” is something he further unpacks.

In ordinary parlance, “being gay” can mean anything from having same-sex attraction to leading an active “gay lifestyle” to endorsing and advocating a pro-homosexual ideology.

The last of these would be functioning as a member of a lobby, and he indicates that this is not what he is talking about.

He then describes those he is talking about as people who “accept the Lord and have goodwill.”

He then seems to further clarify who he is talking about by saying that “The tendency * is not the problem … they’re our brothers.”

Taking his statements together, what emerges is a portrait of individuals who have same-sex attraction but who nevertheless accept the Lord and have goodwill, as opposed to working to advance a pro-homosexual ideology.

This would definitely include people with same-sex attraction who strive to live chastely (even if they sometimes fail).

It also, possibly, could include individuals who are not living chastely but who are not actively lobbying a homosexual agenda. It would be nice if he’d said a little more to clarify the point further.

5) What does he say about people in this category?*

He says that he does not think he is in a position to judge them and that they should not be marginalized.

He also says that the mere tendency (same-sex attraction) “is not the problem,” and that “they’re our brothers.”

6) How new is this?

Not very.

Disclaiming a right to “judge” others is something that goes back to Jesus. It does not mean a failure to recognize the moral character of others’ actions, however.

One can form a moral appraisal that what someone else is doing is wrong (Jesus obviously does not forbid that) without having or showing malice toward them.

The statement that they should not be marginalized is similarly in keeping with the Holy See’s approach to the subject, as 1992 Vatican document On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

The statement that same-sex attraction “is not the problem,” when understood correctly, is also nothing new. “The problem,” as Pope Francis seems to here be understanding it, is going beyond merely having a sinful tendency–a temptation to which one is subject.

Obviously, temptations are problem, but if we resist temptation we do not sin. “The problem,” on this understanding, is giving into the temptation and sinning or–worse–building an ideology around the sin and trying to advocate the sin.

Finally, the statement that “they’re our brothers” is also no novelty. Christians, like everyone, have struggled with every sort of temptation all through history.

Same-sex attraction is just one temptation among numerous others, and the fact that a person suffers from this temptation no more deprives him of the status of being a brother in Christ than any other temptation does.

7) How different is any of this compared to Pope Benedict?

The press has been (as usual) trying to make unfavorable comparisons to Pope Benedit, noting that during his time the Holy See issued a document saying that those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies should not be ordained to the priesthood.

Pope Francis did not mention that document or its policy and so has done nothing different than Benedict there.

Neither are any of Francis’s remarks contrary to the approach Benedict took during his pontificate.

In fact, Benedict himself (as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) was the signer of the previosly-mentioned letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, as well as the follow-up document on non-discrimination regarding homosexual persons.

So, as usual, the press is painting a false picture by contrasting the “good” Francis and the “bad” Benedict.

…

 

[_Abyssinia]

7 things you need to know about what Pope Francis said about gays

by Jimmy Akin Monday, July 29, 2013 10:45 AM Comments (17)

Has Pope Francis taken a dramatic new tone on homosexuality? Has he broken with former Pope Benedict’s approach? Here are 7 things you need to know . . .

The press is buzzing right now with claims that Pope Francis has taken a sharply different line than his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, on the subject of homosexuality.

Some are suggesting that the new pope has announced that “gay is okay.”

What did Pope Francis really say, and how unusual is it?

Here are 7 things to know and share . . .

1) Where did Pope Francis make these remarks?

He made them during an 80-minute interview with reporters aboard the plane returning from World Youth Day in Brazil.

2) What was he asked that led to the remarks?

We may not know exactly what the question was until a transcript is released, but apparently, he was asked about the reputed “gay lobby” at the Vatican.

More info on that here.

3) What exactly did he say?

According to the best current accounts, he said:

There’s a lot of talk about the gay lobby, but I’ve never seen it on the Vatican ID card.

When I meet a gay person, I have to distinguish between their being gay and being part of a lobby. If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn’t be marginalized. The tendency * is not the problem … they’re our brothers.

4) What does this mean?*

The first part of the statement seems to downplay the who “gay lobby” issue. He’s not denying that there is one there, but he’s suggesting that the talk is somewhat overblown.

He then explains his approach to dealing with gay people: He distinguishes between their “being gay” and “being part of a lobby.”

What he means by “being gay” is something he further unpacks.

In ordinary parlance, “being gay” can mean anything from having same-sex attraction to leading an active “gay lifestyle” to endorsing and advocating a pro-homosexual ideology.

The last of these would be functioning as a member of a lobby, and he indicates that this is not what he is talking about.

He then describes those he is talking about as people who “accept the Lord and have goodwill.”

He then seems to further clarify who he is talking about by saying that “The tendency * is not the problem … they’re our brothers.”

Taking his statements together, what emerges is a portrait of individuals who have same-sex attraction but who nevertheless accept the Lord and have goodwill, as opposed to working to advance a pro-homosexual ideology.

This would definitely include people with same-sex attraction who strive to live chastely (even if they sometimes fail).

It also, possibly, could include individuals who are not living chastely but who are not actively lobbying a homosexual agenda. It would be nice if he’d said a little more to clarify the point further.

5) What does he say about people in this category?*

He says that he does not think he is in a position to judge them and that they should not be marginalized.

He also says that the mere tendency (same-sex attraction) “is not the problem,” and that “they’re our brothers.”

6) How new is this?

Not very.

Disclaiming a right to “judge” others is something that goes back to Jesus. It does not mean a failure to recognize the moral character of others’ actions, however.

One can form a moral appraisal that what someone else is doing is wrong (Jesus obviously does not forbid that) without having or showing malice toward them.

The statement that they should not be marginalized is similarly in keeping with the Holy See’s approach to the subject, as 1992 Vatican document On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

The statement that same-sex attraction “is not the problem,” when understood correctly, is also nothing new. “The problem,” as Pope Francis seems to here be understanding it, is going beyond merely having a sinful tendency–a temptation to which one is subject.

Obviously, temptations are problem, but if we resist temptation we do not sin. “The problem,” on this understanding, is giving into the temptation and sinning or–worse–building an ideology around the sin and trying to advocate the sin.

Finally, the statement that “they’re our brothers” is also no novelty. Christians, like everyone, have struggled with every sort of temptation all through history.

Same-sex attraction is just one temptation among numerous others, and the fact that a person suffers from this temptation no more deprives him of the status of being a brother in Christ than any other temptation does.

7) How different is any of this compared to Pope Benedict?

The press has been (as usual) trying to make unfavorable comparisons to Pope Benedit, noting that during his time the Holy See issued a document saying that those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies should not be ordained to the priesthood.

Pope Francis did not mention that document or its policy and so has done nothing different than Benedict there.

Neither are any of Francis’s remarks contrary to the approach Benedict took during his pontificate.

In fact, Benedict himself (as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) was the signer of the previosly-mentioned letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, as well as the follow-up document on non-discrimination regarding homosexual persons.

So, as usual, the press is painting a false picture by contrasting the “good” Francis and the “bad” Benedict.

…

 

[_Abyssinia]

Used url shortener

7 things you need to know about what Pope Francis said about gays

by Jimmy Akin Monday, July 29, 2013 10:45 AM Comments (17)

Has Pope Francis taken a dramatic new tone on homosexuality? Has he broken with former Pope Benedict’s approach? Here are 7 things you need to know . . .

The press is buzzing right now with claims that Pope Francis has taken a sharply different line than his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, on the subject of homosexuality.

Some are suggesting that the new pope has announced that “gay is okay.”

What did Pope Francis really say, and how unusual is it?

Here are 7 things to know and share . . .

1) Where did Pope Francis make these remarks?

He made them during an 80-minute interview with reporters aboard the plane returning from World Youth Day in Brazil.

2) What was he asked that led to the remarks?

We may not know exactly what the question was until a transcript is released, but apparently, he was asked about the reputed “gay lobby” at the Vatican.

More info on that here.

3) What exactly did he say?

According to the best current accounts, he said:

There’s a lot of talk about the gay lobby, but I’ve never seen it on the Vatican ID card.

When I meet a gay person, I have to distinguish between their being gay and being part of a lobby. If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them? They shouldn’t be marginalized. The tendency * is not the problem … they’re our brothers.

4) What does this mean?*

The first part of the statement seems to downplay the who “gay lobby” issue. He’s not denying that there is one there, but he’s suggesting that the talk is somewhat overblown.

He then explains his approach to dealing with gay people: He distinguishes between their “being gay” and “being part of a lobby.”

What he means by “being gay” is something he further unpacks.

In ordinary parlance, “being gay” can mean anything from having same-sex attraction to leading an active “gay lifestyle” to endorsing and advocating a pro-homosexual ideology.

The last of these would be functioning as a member of a lobby, and he indicates that this is not what he is talking about.

He then describes those he is talking about as people who “accept the Lord and have goodwill.”

He then seems to further clarify who he is talking about by saying that “The tendency * is not the problem … they’re our brothers.”

Taking his statements together, what emerges is a portrait of individuals who have same-sex attraction but who nevertheless accept the Lord and have goodwill, as opposed to working to advance a pro-homosexual ideology.

This would definitely include people with same-sex attraction who strive to live chastely (even if they sometimes fail).

It also, possibly, could include individuals who are not living chastely but who are not actively lobbying a homosexual agenda. It would be nice if he’d said a little more to clarify the point further.

5) What does he say about people in this category?*

He says that he does not think he is in a position to judge them and that they should not be marginalized.

He also says that the mere tendency (same-sex attraction) “is not the problem,” and that “they’re our brothers.”

6) How new is this?

Not very.

Disclaiming a right to “judge” others is something that goes back to Jesus. It does not mean a failure to recognize the moral character of others’ actions, however.

One can form a moral appraisal that what someone else is doing is wrong (Jesus obviously does not forbid that) without having or showing malice toward them.

The statement that they should not be marginalized is similarly in keeping with the Holy See’s approach to the subject, as 1992 Vatican document On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

The statement that same-sex attraction “is not the problem,” when understood correctly, is also nothing new. “The problem,” as Pope Francis seems to here be understanding it, is going beyond merely having a sinful tendency–a temptation to which one is subject.

Obviously, temptations are problem, but if we resist temptation we do not sin. “The problem,” on this understanding, is giving into the temptation and sinning or–worse–building an ideology around the sin and trying to advocate the sin.

Finally, the statement that “they’re our brothers” is also no novelty. Christians, like everyone, have struggled with every sort of temptation all through history.

Same-sex attraction is just one temptation among numerous others, and the fact that a person suffers from this temptation no more deprives him of the status of being a brother in Christ than any other temptation does.

7) How different is any of this compared to Pope Benedict?

The press has been (as usual) trying to make unfavorable comparisons to Pope Benedit, noting that during his time the Holy See issued a document saying that those with deep-seated homosexual tendencies should not be ordained to the priesthood.

Pope Francis did not mention that document or its policy and so has done nothing different than Benedict there.

Neither are any of Francis’s remarks contrary to the approach Benedict took during his pontificate.

In fact, Benedict himself (as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) was the signer of the previosly-mentioned letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, as well as the follow-up document on non-discrimination regarding homosexual persons.

So, as usual, the press is painting a false picture by contrasting the “good” Francis and the “bad” Benedict.

…

 

[njlisa]

I’m waiting to find out what the Pope actually said. The mainstream media is run by pathological liars. What matters is what is in the Pope’s encyclical.

That’s why I posted this link from the National Catholic Reporter above.

 

[livingwordunity]

That’s why I posted this link from the National Catholic Reporter above.

The National “Catholic” Reporter is a very unorthodox and anti-Catholic publication. They are notorious for attacking and distorting Catholic doctrine. Their opinion is no better than the opinion of a satanist.

 

[njlisa]

The National “Catholic” Reporter is a very unorthodox and anti-Catholic publication. They are notorious for attacking and distorting Catholic doctrine. Their opinion is no better than the opinion of a satanist.

I looked for a report in the National Catholic Register, and they’ve yet to report it. I would have posted it were it available.

 

[Colorad007]

The National “Catholic” Reporter is a very unorthodox and anti-Catholic publication. They are notorious for attacking and distorting Catholic doctrine. Their opinion is no better than the opinion of a satanist.

I agree with that completely. Whenever I read the NCR and especially those who comment on articles therein, I feel so depressed. They literally rejoice at any perceived unorthodoxy in the Holy Father. I can believe that the folks at the New York Times hate the Pope and the Church he shepherds. But I cannot fathom that so many Catholics actually hate what the Church teaches.

 

[livingwordunity]

I looked for a report in the National Catholic Register, and they’ve yet to report it. I would have posted it were it available.

That’s because, unlike the National “Catholic” Reporter, the National Catholic Register acts responsibly and waits for the truth to come out before reporting.

 

[shockerfan]

What did Pope Francis say that was actually news?

Quote from Pope Francis: “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
What is news in that statement? It is the same consistent Catholic teaching that I have always known.

Did Pope Francis say that he is blessing homosexual acts? No
Did Pope Francis say that he will now bless same sex unions? No

He also said in the context of gay persons: "We shouldn’t marginalize people for this. They must be integrated into society.”
What is news in that statement? Nobody should be marginalized, and all are members of our society. Again, what is new?

I must be missing something…

 

[njlisa]

Did anyone read the story I posted from the National Catholic Reporter?

 

[livingwordunity]

The National “Catholic” Reporter is a very unorthodox and anti-Catholic publication. They are notorious for attacking and distorting Catholic doctrine. Their opinion is no better than the opinion of a satanist.

 

[pepipop]

Well, it was on the national UK TV news tonight. The Pope in a plane with a microphone, saying who was he to judge homosexuals, with the usual secular bent attached to his words. Pope Francis must no doubt be exhausted after his tour of Brazil, possibly he should not have allowed interviews to take place until he was a lot more rested.

As, whilst many catholics may understand where he is coming from - the secular world definitely will not.

 

[livingwordunity]

Well, it was on the national UK TV news tonight. The Pope in a plane with a microphone, saying who was he to judge homosexuals, with the usual secular bent attached to his words. Pope Francis must no doubt be exhausted after his tour of Brazil, possibly he should not have allowed interviews to take place until he was a lot more rested.

As, whilst I understand where he is coming from - the secular world do not.

The heterodox ignore what he says in his official encyclical but instead make a doctrine out of an off the cuff remark that they twist to say something that he didn’t actually say.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

The only thing that the Pope said in regards to homosexuality is that which should already be known by Catholics. Those with SSA should not be treated as second class citizens, but should be treated with respect and love just as you would with anyone else. However, homosexual acts and ideas toward so-called homosexual “marriage” are sinful and should be avoided.

The fact that the media is jumping on this tells us that one of two things is true, however: either (a) The Church – that is, members of the Church – has not broadcast the truth about homosexuality clearly enough, or (b) The media has ignored the Church’s attempts to do so.

I suspect both (a) and (b) are true, to some extent.

 

[Colorad007]

Did anyone read the story I posted from the National Catholic Reporter?

Yeah, and it was so irresponsible. As Fr. Z pointed out on his blog this morning, it is amazing that the NCR chose to lead with this unoriginal comment on homosexuality, treating it as though it were a major doctrinal shift, but not the fact that the Holy Father slammed the door shut on female priests, or his comments on abortion and gay marriage.

The wolves are gathering. They know that taking the Church along with the culture they’ve now ostensibly won would be the absolute final blow. It didn’t work to just hate on the Church. The Church didn’t change no matter how “out of touch” the world thought it to be. So now they’ve turned to just outright lying about the Church.

This is so much like Benedict’s comments couple of years ago on contraception.

 

[njlisa]

Let me refer you to post 121 because my point is getting no traction.

 

[livingwordunity]

Let me refer you to post 121 because my point is getting no traction.

If you want to know what the Pope thinks about homosexuality read his encyclical.

 

[pepipop]

The fact that the media is jumping on this tells us that one of two things is true, however: either (a) The Church – that is, members of the Church – has not broadcast the truth about homosexuality clearly enough, or (b) The media has ignored the Church’s attempts to do so.

I suspect both (a) and (b) are true, to some extent.

Quite true, hopefully this may lead to highlighting the church’s true position, more clearly.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I disagree completely and I think the evidence is that in general those who identify as homosexual are hypersexualized. Homosexuality is for the most part completely accepted in the US and Europe today. There is no evidence I know of that men who have sex with men are having less sex with men despite it being accepted today when it was condemned in the recent past. From what I understand Gay Days at Disney World is a time any person of decency should avoid. If living in the light tempers homosexuality then this event does not comport.

You seem to confuse living in the light with living in electric lighting. I do not think “living in the light” means accepting sin as acceptable – but that is what the gay movement does. It says that these things aren’t sins.

That’s a far cry from admitting, “This is a sin, and I desire this sin, and I want to change.” How do straight married men battle pornography and adultery? By saying to each other, “This is a sin, and I desire this sin, and I want to change.” But same-sex attracted people in the Church today are often encouraged NEVER to talk about their attractions except in confession. How exactly is that supposed to let healing light into their lives?

I have personal experience. I deal with SSA, and I have found that the more I discuss it with other people I can trust, the easier it is for me to resist sin.

 

[livingwordunity]

What did Pope Francis say that was actually news?

Quote from Pope Francis: “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
What is news in that statement? It is the same consistent Catholic teaching that I have always known.

Did Pope Francis say that he is blessing homosexual acts? No
Did Pope Francis say that he will now bless same sex unions? No

He also said in the context of gay persons: "We shouldn’t marginalize people for this. They must be integrated into society.”
What is news in that statement? Nobody should be marginalized, and all are members of our society. Again, what is new?

I must be missing something…

Some people want to imagine something that is not there in what he said.