Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

[opus101]

You nailed it with this! The pope said “the worse problem is lobbying by this orientation.” I will be blunt because what I often discern by those afflicted with SSA is that they are lobbying, in a sense, for their cause when they talk about being open, or coming into the light or sharing their affliction with anyone who will listen. II understand it is acceptance from society that they desire (and they confuse this with love) but what they do not understand is that this is precisely the goal of the gay lobby. “I am gay and we are here and you are all bigots who oppose us.” Everyone wants to be accepted for who they are, but to place the emphasis of one’s state of being upon a purely sexual inclination is to reject the other human characteristics that comprise the totality. It seems to me an obsession.

Coming into the light is to acknowledge the “thorn in the flesh” and fall before the feet of Jesus with a plea to integrate our entire being and use our affliction as a means to become holy.

I agree wholeheartedly. In addition (to the words in bold print above), in some cases it’s more attention-seeking rather than acceptance-seeking. Part of the narcissistic aspect present in a large portion of this particular population craves special attention.

It’s somewhat similar to the priest who personalizes"his" liturgy so much that he becomes the center of attention. He craves being seen as “different” than the others, and is upset when people do not care to give him this notoriety. He wants his propensity for being different to be hailed and celebrated.

 

[57thDimension]

To answer your first question, I believe Dictionary.com has a perfect example of how I personally define “statistics”: dictionary.reference.com/browse/statistics

If that’s the definition you are using, then no, statistics cannot “say anything.”

To answer your second question: No, I never said that there was a 100% chance of anything.

Perhaps you didn’t mean it, but that’s what your words were saying.

I’m just saying that using “statistics” rarely work

This is simply untrue.

becasue we are all individual children of God.

What bearing does this have on statistics?

To answer your third question, I mean by not granting the office of Bishop becasue of his past, and I did not use the right term. Saint Augustine was the time of the Patristic Era, not the “Early Church”

He was made a bishop by one person, not the people. The people were more concerned with his connection with a heresy (Manichaeism), than anything else. The last I checked, their concerns were well-founded given the existence of a number of bishops-gone-rogue at the time.

+Sebastian

 

[MikeMurphy47]

Very interesting. I find it cool also that Pope Francis is trying to bring the Catholic Church into the digital era. On Pray With The Pope a new website, Catholics worldwide are able to join others in an unbroken prayer chain. These advancements make it appealing for the younger generation to try, and is transforming the church away from its traditional ways.

I encourage everyone to visit this new website, because being a dedicated Catholic and joining all my brothers and sisters in our faith worldwide is something very exciting!

 

[Brendan_64]

Everyone wants to be accepted for who they are, but to place the emphasis of one’s state of being upon a purely sexual inclination is to reject the other human characteristics that comprise the totality. It seems to me an obsession. .

Would you say that a person who identifies themselves by their skin colour, “I am black”, or their ethnicity “I am Hispanic”, or by their nationality “I am American”, is also obsessed and ignoring the other characteristics that comprise their totality?

 

[57thDimension]

Would you say that a person who identifies themselves by their skin colour, “I am black”, or their ethnicity “I am Hispanic”, or by their nationality “I am American”, is also obsessed and ignoring the other characteristics that comprise their totality?

It’s a liberal thing. If you listen to the Republican and Democrat conventions, you will hear the highest number of ‘labels’ being used at the Democrat conventions. If you read through articles by liberals, you are constantly reminded about all the ways that you can divide people.

+Sebastian

 

[fix]

Would you say that a person who identifies themselves by their skin colour, “I am black”, or their ethnicity “I am Hispanic”, or by their nationality “I am American”, is also obsessed and ignoring the other characteristics that comprise their totality?

If those were disorders then yes.

 

[fix]

Good point! One portion you quoted is “Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women.” Since priests often do marriage counseling how exactly can the homosexual ones be really efficacious?

A priest is a spiritual father. The disorder of homosexual attraction presents many obstacles. Only by post modern relativistic standards is it hard to grasp.

 

[Brendan_64]

It’s a liberal thing. If you listen to the Republican and Democrat conventions, you will hear the highest number of ‘labels’ being used at the Democrat conventions. If you read through articles by liberals, you are constantly reminded about all the ways that you can divide people.

+Sebastian

It’s not just a ‘liberal thing’., it’s not political. People of all political shades label themselves : White, Black, American, Texan, Irish-American, Hispanic, Native-American, Gay, Straight etc.

People cannot logically argue that for a person to give identify himself under one label is an obsession, whereas identifying himself under another label isn’t an obsession.

 

[opus101]

Would you say that a person who identifies themselves by their skin colour, “I am black”, or their ethnicity “I am Hispanic”, or by their nationality “I am American”, is also obsessed and ignoring the other characteristics that comprise their totality?

The above self-identifications are not analogous to “gay”. It’s not a “disorder” to be of a particular ethnicity, nor is it a sin to act on it.

In fact, the above characteristics are things to be celebrated. They are not mentioned in Saint Paul’s list of things that should not even be talked about.

Anyway, we’re not talking about the mere mentioning or admission of homosexual tendencies. We’re talking about the unnecessary, unasked-for, needless celebration of a particular sinful inclination. In other words, the propensity to give “too much information”…information that is best kept between a person and his confessor.

 

[livingwordunity]

It’s not just a ‘liberal thing’., it’s not political. People of all political shades label themselves : White, Black, American, Texan, Irish-American, Hispanic, Native-American, Gay, Straight etc.

People cannot logically argue that for a person to give identify himself under one label is an obsession, whereas identifying himself under another label isn’t an obsession.

In trying too hard not to be a racist one narrows their focus so that they see everything in terms of race. It’s not racist to acknowledge that the fact that there are racial differences. But it’s racist when people see everything in terms of race even if they don’t think of it as such. I myself have always loathed how people, mainly liberals, put so much emphasis on race. I’m the child of a black mother and a white father. So I don’t fit neatly into these racial labels. The racial labeling system that liberals insist on forces people like me to choose one race over the other so that they can force fit what doesn’t really fit. A well known example of this is Obama who is part black and part white but campaigned as the first black president. When I became a Catholic, I found it very refreshing that in our faith no matter what people’s race we are brothers and sisters of one human race of the faithful united to God. I think it’s sad that some Protestant denominations are divided based on race.

 

[clem456]

I saw in another thread on CAF that the word “Judge” is not an accurate translation of the Spanish. The actual wording gets more into hating or casting aside?

In any event, the focus has been on the word “judge”. Notice what Francis did NOT say.
He did not say “the Church cannot judge”, did not say “I can’t make judgments” or “we should not have judgments”, did not say “the Church cannot speak about” or “I accept the sin of”. He said none of those things.

He actually says a very profound thing:
Who am I to judge? Who am I…
Is the Pope confused about who he is? Doubt it. Is he searching for his identity? Doubt it. I would have to believe that from his lifetime of religious formation he probably knows exactly who he is, and he probably sees himself truthfully in the eyes of God and in relation to his fellow human beings. The question he poses for us all is “who are we, in relation to God’s judgment?”
God gives us his “I am”, how do we respond to that? What is Francis asking of us with this question?

 

[Brendan_64]

In trying too hard not to be a racist one narrows their focus so that they see everything in terms of race. It’s not racist to acknowledge that the fact that there are racial differences. But it’s racist when people see everything in terms of race even if they don’t think of it as such. I myself have always loathed how people, mainly liberals, put so much emphasis on race.

But its OK for conservatives to see everything in terms of nationality? American, Mexican, Canadian, British etc. How is that division any better?

Or is the label Irish-American the product of liberal division? How is that label any better than identifying oneself as Hispanic, or Afro-American?

 

[livingwordunity]

But its OK for conservatives to see everything in terms of nationality? American, Mexican, Canadian, British etc. How is that division any better?

I don’t know who you are talking about, but it’s not about me. I’m what a liberal would like to label a “conservative”, but what I am is Catholic first, period. In fact, that’s why I left the Democrat party because they have set themselves in direct opposition to the Catholic Church, and my loyalty is to the Catholic Church and not to any political party. I will never accept the crazy idea that the Catholic Church has a “war on women”.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I think that many people - myself included - have a problem because this particular temptation to sin is now days understood to be somehow different from other temptations and that this is OK. Because I don’t see organised “tempted to steal” groups of people, or “tempted to cheat on their spouse” groups. They don’t insist on getting special treatment in terms of continual public announcements from the church that it is OK to feel tempted to steal or cheat as long as they don’t actually do it. Yet we have those who are attracted to the same sex in the church who want to proclaim their temptation to the world and a compassionate hug because it is OK to be tempted like that.

I don’t know what to think anymore. Actually, no, I do know. I am sick and tired of it, because these people march to the tune of the secular music whether they want to admit it or not.

Why can’t we Catholics be discreet about our various temptations to sin, seek help when we need it and stop scandalising the faithful with our need to come out and be loud and proud and to stress the temptation to our sin as a kind of identity?

Here’s the difference: the culture is not loudly proclaiming that stealing is morally acceptable, but the culture is loudly proclaiming that homosexual sex is morally acceptable. This means that we need to support people who are tempted in this way, publicly.

If you saw a teenager get up in church and give a testimony about her commitment to keep her virginity until marriage, wouldn’t this be an inspiration? Yes, because the culture largely accepts fornication.

On the other hand, if you saw a teenager get up in church and give a testimony about her commitment to refrain from brutally murdering people, despite her temptations, you would rightly be upset – not because her act of discipline was not commendable, but because there seems to be no reason to talk about such things. People tempted to murder don’t have cultural voices constantly telling them that killing people is their identity, that they need to kill people to be emotionally and spiritually whole.

But those tempted to homosexual actions DO deal with such voices, every day. I know that we might **wish **that homosexual activity was safely in the “murder” category of socially reprehensible wrongness, but it isn’t. In the world we live in, there needs to be exceptional support for exceptional sins. Homosexual activity is an exceptional sin, because the people tempted to the sin are being told that it is anything but sinful. We need to provide a counterwitness.

We treat different things differently. This is a far cry from condoning sin.

 

[The_Bucket]

That is a fantastic summation Prodigal Son. God bless you man.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Anyway, we’re not talking about the mere mentioning or admission of homosexual tendencies. We’re talking about the unnecessary, unasked-for, needless celebration of a particular sinful inclination. In other words, the propensity to give “too much information”…information that is best kept between a person and his confessor.

Huh? Nobody here is celebrating sinful inclinations. All we’re talking about is people merely mentioning that they struggle with homosexual attractions. I agree that these people then shouldn’t walk around talking about how cute other guys are, or talking about what particular things cause temptation.

It would be a pretty huge step if I could just tell fellow church members “I deal with same-sex attraction”, and not feel like I would be condemned, or that “people didn’t want to hear about it”. I certainly don’t support people flaunting their attractions.

The term “gay” is something of a hot-button issue, but I assure you that if a decent fellow from church acted like everybody else, and simply occasionally said that he was a “gay celibate”, you wouldn’t find him terribly offensive.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Statement of Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted reflecting on Pope Francis’ message of love and truth

PHOENIX — The Most Rev. Thomas J. Olmsted, Bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix, today issued the following statement reflecting on Pope Francis’ pilgrimage to Brazil:

Pope Francis just concluded his first apostolic pilgrimage abroad to celebrate World Youth Day in Brazil. Millions of people crowded together to welcome and pray with the Holy Father, including many from the Diocese of Phoenix. Thanks to Catholic news outlets and social media, many millions more tuned in from afar to witness this tremendous celebration of faith.

During the July 22-28 visit, Pope Francis was out and among the people, visiting not only with the youth and Church leaders gathered there, but also with prisoners, the poor, the sick and drug addicts. His message was clear: We are all to follow in Christ’s footsteps, to do so with missionary zeal, and to be messengers of the Lord Jesus in the public square.
Catholics of the world enthusiastically shared the Holy Father’s emphases on fidelity, love and inclusion, but it was comments made by Pope Francis on his return trip to the Vatican that have gained a great deal of traction today in the media. In response to a question about homosexual priests, Pope Francis replied:

“A gay person who is seeking God, who is of good will — well, who am I to judge him?” the pope said, according to Catholic News Service. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well. It says one must not marginalize these persons, they must be integrated into society. The problem isn’t this (homosexual) orientation — we must be like brothers and sisters.”

Pope Francis’ remarks reiterate Catholic teaching that the Church is open to all people, including those with same-sex attractions, but homosexual activity is contrary to the Gospel of Christ — just as all sexual activity outside of marriage would be. A priest must be able to live a healthy, celibate lifestyle, whether or not he has ever experienced same-sex attractions.

I also take this opportunity to emphasize that people with same-sex attractions deserve compassion, respect and sensitivity, and that every sign of unjust discrimination must be avoided.

I am delighted that the Holy Father continues to lead us in Christ’s footsteps and that his message of love and truth has reached so many people. I pray that our clergy, religious, laity and especially our youth will take up his call and bring the light of faith to the world.

Media Contact
Rob DeFrancesco
Director of Communications
rdefrancesco@diocesephoenix.org
(602) 354-2130

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix was established Dec. 2, 1969, by Pope Paul VI. Led by the Most Rev. Thomas J. Olmsted, more than 820,000 Catholics make this diverse, vibrant and faith-filled diocese their home.

 

[clem456]

Huh? Nobody here is celebrating sinful inclinations. All we’re talking about is people merely mentioning that they struggle with homosexual attractions. I agree that these people then shouldn’t walk around talking about how cute other guys are, or talking about what particular things cause temptation.

It would be a pretty huge step if I could just tell fellow church members “I deal with same-sex attraction”, and not feel like I would be condemned, or that “people didn’t want to hear about it”. I certainly don’t support people flaunting their attractions.

The term “gay” is something of a hot-button issue, but I assure you that if a decent fellow from church acted like everybody else, and simply occasionally said that he was a “gay celibate”, you wouldn’t find him terribly offensive.

I take tremendous support from small groups like bible studies. I am in two of these and it is a good opportunity to talk frankly with each other about the struggles we face. It has to be done (talking about things), we are not meant to struggle with these things alone. This is different from broadcasting your problems to the world at large, true.

 

[Tigg]

Homosexual activity is an exceptional sin, because the people tempted to the sin are being told that it is anything but sinful. We need to provide a counterwitness.

I cannot agree that homosexual acts are exceptional sins since any un-repented morally grave evil will put us in the same place of having lost our eternal happiness. I guess the question is, “who are we listening to?” Surely the voice of conscience, the unspoken word of God from within, is stronger to the one who is “seeking God” (the pope’s words) than the radical homosexuals who are not interested in any gospel message. I agree with opus101 and would say that the openness of certain SSA individuals to label themselves as such (“too much information”) only promotes and encourages the false message that homosexuality is a common thing inherent with much more of the population than is actually true. Have your quiet and confidential support groups and take the necessary steps to remain chaste but do not try to convey to the world at large that yours is an exceptional need or your struggle greater than what any one else might suffer.

 

[opus101]

Huh? Nobody here is celebrating sinful inclinations. All we’re talking about is people merely mentioning that they struggle with homosexual attractions. I agree that these people then shouldn’t walk around talking about how cute other guys are, or talking about what particular things cause temptation.

Actually, I wasn’t talking about those who simply “mention” their struggles in this area, nor was I talking about those who mention “how cute other guys are”. I was talking about something that lies in between…namely, making a big deal about their sexual orientation and how wonderful they are for not giving in to it. I’m referring to things like a teenager’s blog that was the subject of a post not long ago…“Gay, Catholic, and Doing Fine”.

It would be a pretty huge step if I could just tell fellow church members “I deal with same-sex attraction”, and not feel like I would be condemned, or that “people didn’t want to hear about it”.

Why on earth do you feel a need to tell others that you deal with SSA? Why do you feel that they should want to hear about it? It might be okay in a prayer group setting, or some kind of group like Courage, or the confessional.But why do you feel a need to focus on yourself so much that this would even be germain to any discussion whatsoever in a Church setting?

The term “gay” is something of a hot-button issue, but I assure you that if a decent fellow from church acted like everybody else, and simply occasionally said that he was a “gay celibate”, you wouldn’t find him terribly offensive.

Actually I probably would, and do, find it unnecessary, offensive and sad. Sad because the fellow is obviously so self-absorbed and obsessed with the notion that his disordered sexual orientation is relevant to others. Sad because he used the term “gay”, which does not refer to people w/ SSA struggles who are celibate. In our culture, “gay” has come to mean someone who supports and is active in that lifestyle.

Sad because there are so many, many other aspects to life on this earth than sex…why limit oneself to this label?