Yes, I agree with what you say from the Pope’s perspective. But from Kim Davis’ perspective, it seems to me she abandoned the teaching of the Church to become an Apostolic Pentecostal, which is really Oneness Pentecostalism. Thus I would think that the Pope’s validation of her conscientious objection should not mean so much to her, although she might admire him as a loving person.But that’s really one of Pope Francis’ big missions… to acknowledge the good rather than to condemn based on one aspect of people. That has been what Vatican II has tried to initiate in its ecumenical endeavours. We need to meet people on the common ground of what is right and good in their lives and not divide ourselves based on the ‘heresy’ part. That scares some people but it’s the way forward in evangelisation.
Pope Francis seems to have taken this opportunity to remind that conscientious objection is a human right and what Ms Davis did in staying firm to her beliefs in the face of the onslaught of the gay lobby… was a virtuous act.
Good points.If the Pope asked someone for a private meeting, I think the person should keep the meeting private and not tell the media.
If she met the Pope, she should have respected his unspoken wishes. If the vatican wanted this public, they would have made it so beforehand, when they were planning the meeting.
This was a personal blessing not to be shared, and it does not sit well with me that she had to alert the media.
I agree. The quotations they use in the article have problems too. Their main source is left anonymous and their quotations from Archbishop Cupich don’t sound as negative as the article does.No mention of what was said at the meeting, only that the Pope was “blindsided.” The article doesn’t make much sense.
If the linked story turns out to be true, then an endorsement of Kim Davis obtained deceptively is of no value anyway. Your disappointment may pale in comparison to that of the pope over the back-stabbers in his midst.chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/10/01/vatican-source-pope-blindsided-by-meeting-with-controversial-kentucky-clerk/
Code:This is going to be pretty disappointing if the Vatican appears in essence to be apologizing for the Pope's meeting with Kim Davis.
I spent a year working in the Vatican as part of my theology training (had to live in Rome, though, not Vatican City). I made a lot of friends (priests) there, several of whom I keep in close contact with (sorry for the grammar!). I said from the beginning the Pope didn’t even know who Kim Davis was and that he’d been set up. Someone asked me - in spite - if I’d confirmed the Pope had been “used.” At the time, I simply replied “yes” because I didn’t know if the story had come out yet. I see it has. I wrote one of my priest friends at the Vatican last night, and he confirmed what this person has in the article you linked to. The Pope was set up by those who do not like him, though I will name no names. (Sadly, politics has always been a part of Vatican City.) The Pope DOES believe in conscientious objection, but NOT when one has sworn an oath before God to uphold the law. He did NOT know Kim Davis. (This comes from a priest at the Vatican, not me. I am no longer in Rome. I work in New England.)This is an interesting take on the meeting.
esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a38440/pope-francis-swindled-kim-davis-meeting/
I don’t understand what makes it a ‘set up’ though. If it was just a 10 to 15 second meeting in a reception line… like the Queen does… it doesn’t mean anything. It’s just a hello and handshake normally organised as a treat for the visitor… not to make any political statement. My head is spinning trying to understand the ‘set up’ part. Did your priest friend say who the others in the queue were and if they were all Catholic figures apart from Ms Davis?I spent a year working in the Vatican as part of my theology training (had to live in Rome, though, not Vatican City). I made a lot of friends (priests) there, several of whom I keep in close contact with (sorry for the grammar!). I said from the beginning the Pope didn’t even know who Kim Davis was and that he’d been set up. Someone asked me - in spite - if I’d confirmed the Pope had been “used.” At the time, I simply replied “yes” because I didn’t know if the story had come out yet. I see it has. I wrote one of my priest friends at the Vatican last night, and he confirmed what this person has in the article you linked to. The Pope was set up by those who do not like him, though I will name no names. (Sadly, politics has always been a part of Vatican City.) The Pope DOES believe in conscientious objection, but NOT when one has sworn an oath before God to uphold the law. He did NOT know Kim Davis. (This comes from a priest at the Vatican, not me. I am no longer in Rome. I work in New England.)
Personally, I ADORED and LOVED St. JP II. I know Pope Francis is very different from St. JP II and Pope Benedict, however I love all three of them and believe all three to be saintly, godly men. I believe the politics behind this are awful, and I believe what was done to Pope Francis was awful. He is our Holy Father, agree with him or not.
In the end, I think the whole thing will backfire on Kim Davis. No one uses our Pontiff and gets away with it. God does not allow that. Knowing that some in the Vatican are attempting to use the Pope, I will double or triple my prayers for him. This should not have happened to such a loving man. I’m sure Pope Francis loves Kim Davis because he loves everyone, but he would not have met with her had he known the facts, and I’ve been told by a priest at the Vatican, although he cannot confirm it, that the “meeting” was only a 10- or 15-second “reception line” thing at the host’s residence…
I believe Kim Davis has the right to object - by quitting her job. She is not in the private sector, she is a government official who swore an oath to uphold the law, something she is not doing. Had she been in the private sector, my view would be different.
I think we all need to pray for our beloved Holy Father. He asked us to anyway. I know I will be praying for him.
My heart breaks for Pope Francis. I pray for him daily, but I will triple my prayers now. I hope everyone here is praying for our beloved Holy Father no matter what they think of this media story.If the linked story turns out to be true, then an endorsement of Kim Davis obtained deceptively is of no value anyway. Your disappointment may pale in comparison to that of the pope over the back-stabbers in his midst.
What if everyone else in the reception line called the media with their conversation? It is not done out of respect to the church and Holy Father.I don’t understand what makes it a ‘set up’ though. If it was just a 10 to 15 second meeting in a reception line… like the Queen does… it doesn’t mean anything. It’s just a hello and handshake normally organised as a treat for the visitor… not to make any political statement. My head is spinning trying to understand the ‘set up’ part. Did your priest friend say who the others in the queue were and if they were all Catholic figures apart from Ms Davis?
It just seems so unreasonable to expect someone to never speak a word to anyone ever about something as wonderful as meeting with the Pope. To keep it under wraps would be especially impossible for someone so scrutinised by the media at the moment. It’s completely unreasonable to blame the woman for the chook yard shenanigans of the popular press and us hysterical chickens who love to turn over every little morsel of grain and comment on it.What if everyone else in the reception line called the media with their conversation? It is not done out of respect to the church and Holy Father.
Even if her platform is in agreement with the church-you do not do these things without permission. The vatican was caught offguard by this.
His own words seem to suggest that he Does believes conscientious objection applies to people who have sworn an oath before God to uphold the law, because he said it includes government workers: “It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right. It is a human right.” sourceThe Pope DOES believe in conscientious objection, but NOT when one has sworn an oath before God to uphold the law.
What do you think of the principle that says “An unjust law is no law at all”? I think we should only treat just laws as laws and treat unjust laws as acts of violence with no legal force.I believe Kim Davis has the right to object - by quitting her job. She is not in the private sector, she is a government official who swore an oath to uphold the law, something she is not doing.
Can you give an example? I think they are not very different. They talk about the same things, use the same words, teach the same doctrine, uphold the same morals – where is the big difference?Personally, I ADORED and LOVED St. JP II. I know Pope Francis is very different from St. JP II and Pope Benedict
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Kim Davis’ attorney is disputing the Vatican’s description and interpretation of her Sept. 24 meeting with Pope Francis.
Attorney Mat Staver told The Associated Press early Friday that the meeting was an affirmation of the Kentucky county clerk’s right to be conscientious objector.
He says Vatican personnel initiated contact with Davis’ camp on Sept. 14 saying the pope wanted to meet her. He says Vatican security picked up her and her husband up from their Washington hotel and brought her to the Vatican embassy. He says Vatican officials told her to change her hairstyle so she wouldn’t be recognized since they wanted the encounter kept secret.
bigstory.ap.org/article/f27eb8dd7bf744aa9fb11572c15748f4/vatican-popes-visit-davis-not-form-supportStaver disputed a Vatican spokesman’s claims that the pope only met with Davis in a receiving line. He said the couple was in a room with only the pope and Vatican personnel.
I see he’s up to his old tricks.Davis’ lawyer disputes Vatican description of meeting
bigstory.ap.org/article/f27eb8dd7bf744aa9fb11572c15748f4/vatican-popes-visit-davis-not-form-support
So even her lawyer said the meeting was to be kept secret, and she disobeyed for her own benefit–ie: affirmation–Davis’ lawyer disputes Vatican description of meeting
bigstory.ap.org/article/f27eb8dd7bf744aa9fb11572c15748f4/vatican-popes-visit-davis-not-form-support