Pope's meeting with Kim Davis not an endorsement, Vatican says

[Lily_Bernans]

I don’t know if anyone mentioned this, but Pope Francis also met with a same-sex married couple and embraced them while smiling. I saw the footage. Does that mean he supports SSM or rather that he affirms the dignity and worth of all people, including Kim Davis?

Yes, it means he loves all people and affirms their dignity. Kim Davis, included. I don’t agree with her at all, but even I affirm her dignity as a child of God and wish her no harm. And I think it was wonderful that Pope Francis embraced the SS couple. At our parish, we have several. We love them, we welcome them, we affirm their dignity.

Personally, I don’t care who marries whom, and I don’t think children are the sole focus of a marriage, but I am a Roman Catholic and if I were lesbian (I’m a heterosexual female) I would follow the Church’s rules just as I would follow the government’s if I were a government employee.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Here is the NY Times piece nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/europe/pope-francis-kim-davis-meeting.html?_r=0 The bit about the Archbishop’s future is toward the end.

It is also out in stronger terms in several other places, some that are less reputable and I would not link to here. Simply search Google news for “Vigano”.

I am not saying that its true that the Archbishop is on his way out, but I am saying that the Vatican reaction has been remarkable and that I would not be surprised if the highest levels of the Vatican were upset. This was obviously a very important and well planned trip. The Pope had a message to bring to the US and the UN. But now this issue is dominating the news about his visit, instead of focusing on the issues the Pope focused on. That has to be frustrating.

Thank you for the link. I appreciate it. I agree with you that it has to be very frustrating for the Vatican since the rest of the Pope’s visit went SO wonderfully and was so important. Well, this will probably be forgotten in a week or two as we focus on something else. The news channels are focusing more on the Oregon school shootings now (horrible!).

I would not be surprised if the Archbishop “retired,” either, though, I have no idea if he will, of course.

 

[Marie5890]

I would not be surprised if the Archbishop “retired,” either, though, I have no idea if he will, of course.

Well, turning 75, is is required to submit his request for retirement. It’s up the the Holy See to either accept or reject.

It wont be a surprise if they accept his is my thinking now.

 

[Mulligan2]

Here is the NY Times piece nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/europe/pope-francis-kim-davis-meeting.html?_r=0 The bit about the Archbishop’s future is toward the end.

It is also out in stronger terms in several other places, some that are less reputable and I would not link to here. Simply search Google news for “Vigano”.

I am not saying that its true that the Archbishop is on his way out, but I am saying that the Vatican reaction has been remarkable and that I would not be surprised if the highest levels of the Vatican were upset. This was obviously a very important and well planned trip. The Pope had a message to bring to the US and the UN. But now this issue is dominating the news about his visit, instead of focusing on the issues the Pope focused on. That has to be frustrating.

Thanks for sharing the link. It validates all of the initial thoughts I had when this story first broke.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Thanks for sharing the link. It validates all of the initial thoughts I had when this story first broke.

I had those same thoughts. I will be saying some extra prayers for the Holy Father, not that he did anything wrong. He did not. I just don’t like to see him used, as the article pointed out, simply because he loves all people.

On the other hand, it was wonderful to read about his meeting with Mr. Grassi, his former student and Mr. Grassi’s partner. How lucky Mr. Grassi is to have had Pope Francis for a teacher!

 

[Good_Tidings]

You can bet the LGBT community is dangerously powerful. I wonder if they put huge false guilty pressure on the Vatican and the Vatican broke.

From what I understand Kim Davis repented of her prior life. I think Kim Davis will go down in the history books as a hero.

Only in Texas.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Phil Lawler says in part:

Well, of course the meeting did not indicate the Pope’s support for the political stand taken by Kim Davis “in all of its particular and complex aspects.” It is unlikely that Pope Francis was fully briefed about the legal dispute that put Davis behind bars in Kentucky; he was not offering her a blanket endorsement. But he did meet with her; he did offer her encouragement. It was a gesture, not a public statement. But the meaning of that gesture is unmistakable.

Still later it was revealed that the Pope also met with an old friend, a former student, who is homosexual. This, we were solemnly instructed, clearly showed that he did not support Kim Davis. Nonsense! Pope Francis has frequently said that the Church should reach out in friendship toward homosexuals; that was never in question. By meeting with Kim Davis he sent a different message: that Christians should not be treated as pariahs when they challenge the fashionable public consensus.

catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1116

I think Phil Lawler makes a lot of sense here.

 

[Robyn_p]

I don’t know if anyone mentioned this, but Pope Francis also met with a same-sex married couple and embraced them while smiling. I saw the footage. Does that mean he supports SSM or rather that he affirms the dignity and worth of all people, including Kim Davis?

Right. Not everything he does needs to be made into a political statement.

Personally, I’m tired of both the right and left using Francis. Neither side is actually listening to what he has to say, they just want to claim him as their own. Like a trophy. Problem for them is he can’t be forced into any neat box.

 

[Catholic_farmer]

Right. Not everything he does needs to be made into a political statement.

Personally, I’m tired of both the right and left using Francis. Neither side is actually listening to what he has to say, they just want to claim him as their own. Like a trophy. Problem for them is he can’t be forced into any neat box.

Thank you. He epitomizes the love Jesus had for everyone. He is calling ALL the sheep. How they respond is up to them.

I think the people who are the most critical of Pope Francis’ actions are those who feel as if they are more worthy of meeting the Pope than someone else. If we are practicing Catholics, then we are among the 99 sheep safe in the fold. He’s trying to reach the lost sheep because he loves them, too.

 

[Marie5890]

Right. Not everything he does needs to be made into a political statement.

Personally, I’m tired of both the right and left using Francis. Neither side is actually listening to what he has to say, they just want to claim him as their own. Like a trophy. Problem for them is he can’t be forced into any neat box.

Amen.

He isn’t a Democrat and he isn’t a Republican. He is not even an American.
He is Christ’s Vicar, a disciple of Our Lord who is doing his best to serve the Lord.

Something we can all meditate on

 

[meltzerboy]

Phil Lawler says in part:

catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1116

I think Phil Lawler makes a lot of sense here.

Yes, this sounds like a reasonable take on the issue.

 

[Colorad007]

Yes, it means he loves all people and affirms their dignity. Kim Davis, included. I don’t agree with her at all, but even I affirm her dignity as a child of God and wish her no harm. And I think it was wonderful that Pope Francis embraced the SS couple. At our parish, we have several. We love them, we welcome them, we affirm their dignity.

Personally, I don’t care who marries whom, and I don’t think children are the sole focus of a marriage, but I am a Roman Catholic and if I were lesbian (I’m a heterosexual female) I would follow the Church’s rules just as I would follow the government’s if I were a government employee.

You are seriously going to compare Kim Davis to a homosexual couple?

That is amazing.

 

[HCTC]

QUOTE=Robyn p;13328711]Right. Not everything he does needs to be made into a political statement.

Personally, I’m tired of both the right and left using Francis. Neither side is actually listening to what he has to say, they just want to claim him as their own. Like a trophy. Problem for them is he can’t be forced into any neat box.

Thank you. He epitomizes the love Jesus had for everyone. He is calling ALL the sheep. How they respond is up to them.

I think the people who are the most critical of Pope Francis’ actions are those who feel as if they are more worthy of meeting the Pope than someone else. If we are practicing Catholics, then we are among the 99 sheep safe in the fold. He’s trying to reach the lost sheep because he loves them, too.

Amen.

He isn’t a Democrat and he isn’t a Republican. He is not even an American.
He is Christ’s Vicar, a disciple of Our Lord who is doing his best to serve the Lord.

Something we can all meditate on

So well said by all of you, and I couldn’t agree more. The Holy Father is not concerned with politics. His concern is about our souls. He approaches us sinner to sinner and accompanies us on our journeys. I think that he asks us to remember that we are family and to renew the loving bonds of family. He is amazingly apart from our usual, routine way of thinking. It is so refreshing - like a drink of cool water after a long hike.

 

[PRmerger]

Personally, I don’t care who marries whom, and I don’t think children are the sole focus of a marriage, but I am a Roman Catholic and if I were lesbian (I’m a heterosexual female) I would follow the Church’s rules just as I would follow the government’s if I were a government employee.

Just to clarify: it sounds as if you’re saying that the CC teaches that “children are the sole focus of a marriage”. (You preface “I would follow the Church’s rules” with the comment regarding children being the sole focus).

If that is what you indeed were saying, then I will have to correct you and say that the CC does not teach this.

 

[Thomas_White]

Only in Texas.

What might that mean?

 

[BrethrenBoy]

I recently found this article about the Archbishop that arrange the meeting. mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/europe/archbishop-at-center-of-mystery-of-papal-meeting-with-kim-davis.html?_r=0

 

[Scottgun]

If that is what you indeed were saying, then I will have to correct you and say that the CC does not teach this.

Exactly. And moreover it’s not just the “Church’s rules”, it is Divine precept, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” And before someone objects, CCC 2336: “The tradition of the Church has understood the sixth commandment as encompassing the whole of human sexuality.”

 

[meltzerboy]

Exactly. And moreover it’s not just the “Church’s rules”, it is Divine precept, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” And before someone objects, CCC 2336: “The tradition of the Church has understood the sixth commandment as encompassing the whole of human sexuality.”

Adultery per se is not the issue here. The issue is that the Church teaches that marriage serves BOTH a procreative and a unitive function.

 

[Scottgun]

Adultery per se is not the issue here. The issue is that the Church teaches that marriage serves BOTH a procreative and a unitive function.

My point is that the Sixth Commandment is not just about adultery, so I wasn’t being per se at all. It covers all of human sexuality and isn’t just some narrow sectarian church rule as the earlier poster suggested. I of course agree about both procreative and unitive. True marriage (man and woman) has complementarity, fecundity, and teleology. Other arrangements inherently lack one or more of these and the legalized fairy tale of same-sex “marriage” has none of them.

 

[meltzerboy]

My point is that the Sixth Commandment is not just about adultery, so I wasn’t being per se at all. It covers all of human sexuality and isn’t just some narrow sectarian church rule as the earlier poster suggested. I of course agree about both procreative and unitive. True marriage (man and woman) has complementarity, fecundity, and teleology. Other arrangements inherently lack one or more of these and the legalized fairy tale of same-sex “marriage” has none of them.

OK then. My apologies.