Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

[NeedsMercy]

“If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge him?”

OHHHHH, MYYYYY!!! :

Happy Dance! :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy:

 

[bellasbane]

“If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge him?”

OHHHHH, MYYYYY!!!

Happy Dance! :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy:

I feel the same way!

(I had to “steal” one of your “big grins” because it said I could only include 8 images in my post. Hope you don’t mind.)

 

[livingwordunity]

“If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge him?”

OHHHHH, MYYYYY!!! :

Happy Dance! :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy:

Or another way to put is to love the sinner but hate the sin.

 

[bellasbane]

Or another way to put is to love the sinner but hate the sin.

Or we can be like Pope Francis and stop judging so that we may not be judged. We all have enough of our own sins to hate. Instead of pointing fingers or picking on other people, perhaps we should worry more about our own sinful nature.

 

[Melvin]

“Homosexual attraction is not evil by itself. Committing such acts are sinful but no more sinful than heterosexual fornication.”

Just a question: how can it be that homosexual attraction, in and of itself, is not evil? As an analogy, suppose a man is attracted to his neighbor’s wife…or neighbor’s wives: Is that attraction evil? Is it good? Is it somehow morally neutral?

If a man is attracted to his neighbor’s wife, should he only seek not to indulge in the lust which naturally follows that attraction, and following that, the physical act of fornication? Should he not also seek to bring the underlying attraction into proper order?

While either attraction, in and of itself, may not amount to “sin,” I personally would not be prepared to believe, in either case, that such disordered attractions, which lead only to evil, are not in themselves, “evil.”

But, I don’t claim to really understand the Church’s teaching on this point…

 

[NeedsMercy]

I feel the same way!

(I had to “steal” one of your “big grins” because it said I could only include 8 images in my post. Hope you don’t mind.)

Here–I’ll give you a few more!

 

[bellasbane]

Here–I’ll give you a few more!

Thanks!

 

[Elizabeth502]

I love the fact that he thinks a “lobby of greed” (“lobby di avari”) is a matter of greater concern than whether or not someone is gay. Puts things into their proper perspective!

That is such a misrepresentation of what he said, since you yourself are referring to the Akin article which Mr. Bay posted.

Even before any more complete explanation comes out (if it does), we know two facts about the interview:

(1) It was about gay clergy.

(2) The Pope in no way prioritized “greed” over any other evil. The evil was specifically called out as lobbying. The “this” toward the end of that paragraph refers to lobbying, not to some wished-for priority on the part of laypeople eagerly listening for what he is not saying. It’s also very important to understand how someone in another language speaks, and how different that is from English, but even in English, the “this” very clearly refers to lobbies of all sorts.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Translation from interview with Pope Francis

Q. You have not spoken yet about abortion or about marriage between same sex. Brazil has passed a law extending abortion rights and another that includes marriages between persons of the same sex. Why has not talked about that?

A. The Church has already expressed perfectly on that, it was necessary to go over that, nor talked about cheating, lying or other things about which the Church has a clear doctrine. No need to talk about it, but the positive things their way to the boys. Moreover, young people know exactly what the position of the Church.

Q. But where you stand on these issues?

A. of the Church, I am a son of the Church.

internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2013/07/29/actualidad/1375093487_146875.html

translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Finternacional.elpais.com%2Finternacional%2F2013%2F07%2F29%2Factualidad%2F1375093487_146875.html

 

[Tigg]

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.

Why should any inclination to sin not be a private matter for the confessional? Why should the “therapy” of homosexuals require the rest of society to hear incessantly of the struggle. I would suggest your battle is no greater than others with a propensity toward that which could kill grace in the soul so as to suffer eternal punishment if not repented.

The Pontiff has said gays should not be marginalized. He is not saying homosexuality should be accepted as the norm. He is not saying it should not be discouraged, and he is not saying it should not be recognized as the disorder it is as defined by the Church.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Why should any inclination to sin not be a private matter for the confessional? Why should the “therapy” of homosexuals require the rest of society to hear incessantly of the struggle. I would suggest your battle is no greater than others with a propensity toward that which could kill grace in the soul so as to suffer eternal punishment if not repented.

I don’t suggest my struggle is any greater. But I disagree that any inclination to sin should be a private matter for the confessional. I also never said it should be broadcast far and wide, although I wonder why someone would have such a strong objection to someone saying (without any pride at all) “I struggle with such-and-such type of sin.” Surely Mary Magdalene, Paul, and Peter shared their own struggles in the proper contexts, without being a burden to others.

I wonder what you think Jesus means when He told us to live in the light. In my experience, the very best way to fight sin is by regularly confessing my sins to a group of brothers, my men’s group, and experiencing their love for me despite my sin. How can I confess my sin without being open about my temptations? In the book of Acts, people confessed publicly in church. I really think you’re missing a key aspect of the Christian message here.

The Pontiff has said gays should not be marginalized. He is not saying homosexuality should be accepted as the norm. He is not saying it should not be discouraged, and he is not saying it should not be recognized as the disorder it is as defined by the Church.

I’m not denying any of these things. When did I encourage homosexuality to be accepted as the norm?

 

[Prodigal_Son]

“Homosexual attraction is not evil by itself. Committing such acts are sinful but no more sinful than heterosexual fornication.”

Just a question: how can it be that homosexual attraction, in and of itself, is not evil? As an analogy, suppose a man is attracted to his neighbor’s wife…or neighbor’s wives: Is that attraction evil? Is it good? Is it somehow morally neutral?

If a man is attracted to his neighbor’s wife, should he only seek not to indulge in the lust which naturally follows that attraction, and following that, the physical act of fornication? Should he not also seek to bring the underlying attraction into proper order?

Interesting and fair comparison.

However, I think you’re wrong when you say that there is “lust which naturally follows from that attraction.” Or maybe your sentence just confuses me. One can find another attractive and struggle with that without lusting after the person. Lust is mediated by the will.

There is nothing wrong with being attracted to your neighbor’s wife. If she’s good-looking and virtuous, it is natural and good to be attracted to her. It is precisely her goodness and your resultant attraction to her that makes your choice to NOT pursue her a sacrifice. But, since you are married, the attraction is a temptation. Don’t indulge it.

Hebrews 4:15: “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.”

Temptation is not sin.

 

[fix]

As I posted in a different topic…

The problem is most people are not reading Church documents.

Topics as weighty as the Church’s stance on homosexuality should not be addressed with two line snippets. As a world leader, the Pope needs to be aware of how his supporters and enemies hang on every word. He didn’t clearly state Catholic teaching with any specificity that IMO does a service to those listening. He did not actually (that I saw) mention the Church’s teachings on homosexuality, even though that was the topic at hand. That, coupled with his recent appointment of Monsignor Ricca the Prelate of the Vatican Bank (apparently not being aware of Ricca’s ongoing encounters (breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/07/21/Francis-Gay-Scandal)) send the wrong message. Many people who live in sin believe they seek God and are doing His will. People who skip Mass do so because they believe it isn’t a big deal. People who use contraception do so because they believe it isn’t a big deal. They don’t do it to throw it in God’s face; in many cases, they simply do it and believe He still loves them. Which, of course He does, but that is not a synonym for “you don’t have to stop what you are doing.”

Like it or not, the impression of what is said is as important as what is being said. Different Popes have different styles, and some are better at certain areas than others. Time will tell with Pope Francis what His unique gifts are, but I think in this case, he didn’t help clarify anything, but may have muddled the issue for many people.

To your point see the liberal posts so far that will mangle the truth to push an anti Catholic agenda. Whatever the Pope actually said does not matter because Church teaching cannot change and “gay” behavior and ideology will always be against our Lord’s will. There is no rationalizing it.

 

[fix]

That is such a misrepresentation of what he said, since you yourself are referring to the Akin article which Mr. Bay posted.

Even before any more complete explanation comes out (if it does), we know two facts about the interview:

(1) It was about gay clergy.

(2) The Pope in no way prioritized “greed” over any other evil. The evil was specifically called out as lobbying. The “this” toward the end of that paragraph refers to lobbying, not to some wished-for priority on the part of laypeople eagerly listening for what he is not saying. It’s also very important to understand how someone in another language speaks, and how different that is from English, but even in English, the “this” very clearly refers to lobbies of all sorts.

The “gay” apologists cannot wait for the Pope to give the green light for mortal sin. It did not happen and will not happen. Nor do his words mean “gay” ideology is to be welcomed.

 

[fix]

“If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge him?”

OHHHHH, MYYYYY!!! :

Happy Dance! :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy: :dancing: :extrahappy:

Yes do not judge his soul but judge any “gay” acts and propaganda as evil. We all agree.

 

[Julian_Bashir]

So he did say: "these persons must never be marginalized and “they must be integrated into society.” (“non si devono emarginare queste persone per questo, devono essere integrate in società”) - saltandlighttv.org/blog/world-youth-day/a-note-on-the-popes-remarks-to-journalists-en-route-to-rome

La Stampa left that part out. Come to think of it, I can’t find it anywhere in the English translation of the CCC either. Its wonderful that Pope Francis was able to clarify that for us.

I love the fact that he thinks a “lobby of greed” (“lobby di avari”) is a matter of greater concern than whether or not someone is gay. Puts things into their proper perspective!

Awesome!

Case and point why Pope Francis hasn’t actually clarified anything by giving off the cuff soundbytes for theological teachings. It seems to locked onto greed because that fits the agenda you push on this website. I am sure others do the same with snippets when it fits their agenda, but if that is our goal, we really don’t need somewhat unspecific comments from the Holy Father to make ourselves feel better. A person can simply just make up a belief that doesn’t actually exist to make themselves feel better - why not simply do that? It is quicker, requires less waiting, and is just as honest as changing what the Pope actually said.

If Pope Francis was as clear as some claim, there wouldn’t be such confusion. Look at how many topics have already popped up on just one website. You can blame the ignorance of Catholics and poor catechesis, but the fact is it is the Pope’s job to reach those poorly catechized people, since it is the Church he leads that through its malaise created generations of ignorant Catholics.

People keep saying things like “ignore the media and blogs.” Why? Those are many of the people who you need to reach, and if your statements has not clarified our teachings for them (which, if you check google, it has not), It has made the problem worse.

And saying like “a lobby of greed is a greater concern than whether or not someone is gay” may in fact be true. A lobby of greed (like the White House, for example) may be of greater concern than a person with homosexual tendencies who strives to live a chaste life, since that is what seeking God refers to - forsaking your disordered passions and striving to live a healthy, Christian, God-oriented life, free of lust, greed, pride, etc.

He also said a gay lobby (again, like the White House, or any group of two or more people pushing for homosexual rights) is of greater concern than an individual who struggles with greed.

A person who has tendencies towards their own sin but fights against it (like not wanting to be generous with their time and money) is of less concern than two or more people fighting for gay civil unions. Look at how many people even on here who seek to argue for homosexual couples and their rights on these very message boards; they are the very people lobbying that the Pope is warning about. Most of us don’t disagree with what the Pope said, but clarity would do the Church some good in the public sphere.

His point wasn’t to make martyrs of people who struggle with being attracted to members of the same gender any more than anyone who struggles with any personal sin, but to highlight the greater danger of groups of people pushing to justify the rights and legitimacy of those groups of people in society, which frankly occurs on this website all the time.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

A lobby of greed (like the White House, for example) may be of greater concern than a person with homosexual tendencies who strives to live a chaste life, since that is what seeking God refers to -forsaking your disordered passions and striving to live a healthy, Christian, God-oriented life, free of lust, greed, pride, etc.

I think nearly everyone on this thread agrees that this is what a person with same-sex attraction should be doing.

You talk about people on this forum trying to push the gay agenda. Who are all these people? Where are they? I don’t notice many of them. I do notice people who think that people like myself are trying to push the gay agenda, however.

Pope Francis made a loud and clear proclamation – in nearly every newspaper in the world – that homosexual *temptation *is not sin. That strikes us as cause for rejoicing, not because we want people to embrace the gay lifestyle (of course we don’t want that!) but because we know so many people who are in hiding because the Church has basically (and inadvertently) sent the message that we are second-class Christians.

 

[Julian_Bashir]

I think nearly everyone on this thread agrees that this is what a person with same-sex attraction should be doing.

You talk about people on this forum trying to push the gay agenda. Who are all these people? Where are they? I don’t notice many of them. I do notice people who think that people like myself are trying to push the gay agenda, however.

Pope Francis made a loud and clear proclamation – in nearly every newspaper in the world – that homosexual *temptation *is not sin. That strikes us as cause for rejoicing, not because we want people to embrace the gay lifestyle (of course we don’t want that!) but because we know so many people who are in hiding because the Church has basically (and inadvertently) sent the message that we are second-class Christians.

I have read your posts, and don’t see you pushing an agenda. But the Pope was the one that warned of gay (and other) lobbies, not me. I just happened to agree.

But go search topics on gay marriage, civil unions, or anything of the like. There are the usual suspects over the years who defend tooth and nail these sorts of things, along with justifying abortion, and other evils. Those are the lobbies we must be wary of.

And frankly, the Pope’s proclamation was anything but clear (did he used the word temptation, or did you add that to clarify what he said?) - hence the confusion in this topic and in so many others places, if you google what he said.

The definition of being clear is when everyone gets the message being conveyed, not simply “it made sense to me…”

 

[Boundless]

Pope Francis made a loud and clear proclamation – in nearly every newspaper in the world – that homosexual *temptation *is not sin. That strikes us as cause for rejoicing, not because we want people to embrace the gay lifestyle (of course we don’t want that!) but because we know so many people who are in hiding because the Church has basically (and inadvertently) sent the message that we are second-class Christians.

Been following the thread, and as a married man with SSA, this pretty much sums up my thoughts about what Pope Francis has said.

When you think that even your temptations make you a worse person than others who have more “socially acceptable” temptations, it’s a cause of deep shame and can even deepen the problem. And Pope Francis has made a bold statement that not only does he not judge people with SSA for merely having SSA, but he doesn’t even judge priests who have SSA as being in some way inferior, so long as they live chaste lives.

That’s a real cause for joy, for those of us who bear this cross. I’m not saying that the Church has formerly told us we are inferior, but it’s wonderful to hear the notion that we’re not stated so very plainly and clearly. As for the argument that he wasn’t clear enough that he didn’t support acting on SSA, I disagree: He said somewhere in his quote that he didn’t approve of digging up people’s past and repented sins and using it against them. If he was implying that acting sexually on SSA wasn’t a sin, then he wouldn’t even be acknowledging that someone’s past sins in this area were in fact sins.

 

[The_Bucket]

The Church never said those with same-sex attraction are second-class Christians. She never said that they were committing sin by simply having these temptations.

But Her leaders have also shied away from this issue, especially in light of the child sexual abuse scandal. I think that has to do with the fact that some folks mistakenly believe that homosexuality has something to do with child molestation. It does not.

The media will twist the Holy Father’s words no matter what he says. Better that he put this out there than be so worried about what others will say that he said. How often do you think Jesus had to correct the record in a world where news spread like a game of telephone? I’m guessing quite often. Did the fact that Jesus knew there would be people misinterpreting or deliberately misinforming the masses about what he said keep Him from preaching? No. Neither should it give His vicar pause.