Reuters: Three years on, pope leaves Catholic conservatives feeling marginalized

[otjm]

Going back to the early days of the papacy, I think that what many conservatives found so alienating was the way the pope stated that he wanted to change the conversation away from abortion and marriage and the issues of social Catholic conservatism.

I think it would help if you would quote his statement. That seems a bit over broad as a paraphrase.

It is one thing to be a pariah on these issues from society in general when conservatives stick their necks out on these issues in defense of Church teaching and morality. But t is very disconcerting to see that this is no longer a deep and abiding interest of the papacy itself in standing with conservatives on the issues of the day.

It seems to me that the Pope has spoken volumes with his declaration of the Year of Mercy; and his focus on the sacrament of Reconciliation. To presume that it is no longer a deep and abiding interest seems to say that this is the only thing he can speak on, or that it has to be constantly brought up. I don’t agree with your analysis, although I agree that because he is not commenting on it each and every week, there are conservatives who feel he is no longer interested in the matter.

It is never easy to swim upstream against the currents of culture, to be labeled as a hater and a bigot just on account of putting Church belief over personal belief.

2,000 years of history back that up.

And virtually every conservative, like everyone else, has personal associations with homosexuals, with divorced, with people who have vehement disagreement with Church doctrine. To the extent that conservative Catholics choose to talk about these things at all, it has meant putting themselves on the line, and subjecting themselves to friction and vehemence and accusations of self-righteousness, hypocrisy,heartlessness, etc., etc. etc.

Not to make too fine a point of it, but there are a whole lot of peole in the middle - not particularly conservative or liberal - who are in the same position. For some reason, it appears some people think only conservatives follow the Magisterium.

With the Church’s assurance that this was the path of Christ, the teaching of Christ, courageously advocating for the Church was tolerable. To see Pope Benedict, for example, being treated with the same derision and contempt when he took his stance against condoms as being the solution for African AIDS pandemic, people were given the feeling of solidarity with the Church and the papacy itself here. Conservatives were not alone in the difficult and often demeaning venture of standing up for a higher morality, against the morality of the world, which the world itself advocates as a higher morality.

Right from the beginning of his papacy however, Pope Francis re-aligned himself. Conservatives were left alone on these issues, as the Pope became the media darling for leftist causes.

That is seriously inaccurate. The secular media has misquoted, selectively quoted, and where they can’t put a spin, ignored what he has had to say. How much did the secular media have to say about his comments about Reconciliation? The silence was deafening.

 

[commenter]

Perhaps the “conservative” media outlets you mentioned are attempting (imperfectly) to preserve doctrines and traditions that had helped the average Catholic keep on the narrow straight road to heaven? It’s not anti-Papal to point out dangerous theology and encourage the faithful to stand fast and hold on to all of the traditions regardless of who is now allegedly proposing new paths to God.

The media outlets that oppose the Vatican (and bishops) did not begin during this papacy, but during Pope Francis’ predecessors’. They are caught up in the larger anti-religious authority climate of recent decades. That anti-magisterium momentum will carry the websites forward. Even if Pope Francis’ successor is a clone of Pope Benedict, they will still be finding new dirt, for each new issue, to oppose the Vatican, just as they did during the Pope Emeritus’ papacy. They don’t know how to function in any other way, besides opposing Catholic authority.

Catholic Answers, for instance, is in union with its local bishop. The media outlets I refer to are not in union with their local bishop. How can we trust their theological assessment?
You may argue, I don’t trust my local bishop any more than I trust Pope Francis. Then how much do you trust those doctrines and traditions defined by previous popes and bishops?

 

[Darryl1958]

I think it would help if you would quote his statement. That seems a bit over broad as a paraphrase.

I did provide the link that had all this information included. It was as detailed and as specific as is possible.

It seems to me that the Pope has spoken volumes with his declaration of the Year of Mercy; and his focus on the sacrament of Reconciliation. To presume that it is no longer a deep and abiding interest seems to say that this is the only thing he can speak on, or that it has to be constantly brought up. I don’t agree with your analysis, although I agree that because he is not commenting on it each and every week, there are conservatives who feel he is no longer interested in the matter.

Suffice it to say that a papal declaration of a Year of Mercy is hardly a refutation or a disagreement with my analysis.
And it is not just my analysis. It is the analysis of Reuters whose report has inspired this thread.

Not to make too fine a point of it, but there are a whole lot of peole in the middle - not particularly conservative or liberal - who are in the same position. For some reason, it appears some people think only conservatives follow the Magisterium.

Everybody is in the same position. We all live in the same world, and experience the same social reality. The only difference is that it is conservatives who focus on the issue. Typical of those in the middle are snide comments that those who focus on the issue don’t give a hoot for babies after they are born.
Would you like a personal anecdote to explain how I know how it is different for conservatives?

With the Church’s assurance that this was the path of Christ, the teaching of Christ, courageously advocating for the Church was tolerable. To see Pope Benedict, for example, being treated with the same derision and contempt when he took his stance against condoms as being the solution for African AIDS pandemic, people were given the feeling of solidarity with the Church and the papacy itself here. Conservatives were not alone in the difficult and often demeaning venture of standing up for a higher morality, against the morality of the world, which the world itself advocates as a higher morality.

Conservative Catholics have never really felt other Catholics as having their back on the issue, and now they believe that a pope who complains about ‘obsessing’ over the issue to the extent where the full Catholic teaching is becoming ‘disjointed’ does not have their back now either.

That is seriously inaccurate. The secular media has misquoted, selectively quoted, and where they can’t put a spin, ignored what he has had to say. How much did the secular media have to say about his comments about Reconciliation? The silence was deafening.

That Catholics believe in Reconciliation is not really new. It is hardly surprising that the NYT did not write much on the fact that the Catholic Church is still sacremental. that is not news. That is hardly worthwhile for a secular news agency to report on. The change in relationship between the conservatives in the Church and the papacy, and a papacy that is more focussed on Green than on morality IS very much newsworthy for secular media organization.

 

[JPUSC]

I think it would help if you would quote his statement. That seems a bit over broad as a paraphrase.

“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that"

“The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in small-minded rules.”

“The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently…We have to find a new balance…"

Pope Francis, America Magazine

“I share with you two concerns. One is the Pelagian current that there is in the Church at this moment. There are some restorationist groups. I know some, it fell upon me to receive them in Buenos Aires. And one feels as if one goes back 60 years! Before the Council… One feels in 1940… An anecdote, just to illustrate this, it is not to laugh at it, I took it with respect, but it concerns me; when I was elected, I received a letter from one of these groups, and they said: “Your Holiness, we offer you this spiritual treasure: 3,525 rosaries.” Why don’t they say, ‘we pray for you, we ask…’, but this thing of counting… And these groups return to practices and to disciplines that I lived through - not you, because you are not old - to disciplines, to things that in that moment took place, but not now, they do not exist today…”

Pope Francis

 

[Darryl1958]

“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that"

“The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in small-minded rules.”

“The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently…We have to find a new balance…"

Pope Francis, America Magazine

“I share with you two concerns. One is the Pelagian current that there is in the Church at this moment. There are some restorationist groups. I know some, it fell upon me to receive them in Buenos Aires. And one feels as if one goes back 60 years! Before the Council… One feels in 1940… An anecdote, just to illustrate this, it is not to laugh at it, I took it with respect, but it concerns me; when I was elected, I received a letter from one of these groups, and they said: “Your Holiness, we offer you this spiritual treasure: 3,525 rosaries.” Why don’t they say, ‘we pray for you, we ask…’, but this thing of counting… And these groups return to practices and to disciplines that I lived through - not you, because you are not old - to disciplines, to things that in that moment took place, but not now, they do not exist today…”

Pope Francis

Thanks for the footwork that it takes to sift through all the data to find exact quotes.

The full article from American Magazine is also indirectly linked in my previous post through the NYT article.

 

[JPUSC]

Thanks for the footwork that it takes to sift through all the data to find exact quotes.

The full article from American Magazine is also indirectly linked in my previous post through the NYT article.

Here’s more from the early days of his papacy:

“The most serious of the evils that afflict the world these days are youth unemployment and the loneliness of the old.”
Pope Francis

“I believe in God, not in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God, there is God and I believe in Jesus Christ, his incarnation.”
Pope Francis

“Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them.”
Pope Francis

“Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.”
Pope Francis

“Vatican II, inspired by Pope Paul VI and John, decided to look to the future with a modern spirit and to be open to modern culture. The Council Fathers knew that being open to modern culture meant religious ecumenism and dialogue with non-believers. But afterwards very little was done in that direction. I have the humility and ambition to want to do something.”
Pope Francis

 

[JPUSC]

I raise my voice against liturgical, catechetical, and other abuses in my parish and diocese.

This is what Pope Francis had to say to the clergy and religious in regards to people like you reporting them to the CDF and other authorities:

“Perhaps even a letter of the Congregation for the Doctrine (of the Faith) will arrive for you, telling you that you said such or such thing… But do not worry. Explain whatever you have to explain, but move forward… Open the doors, do something there where life calls for it. I would rather have a Church that makes mistakes for doing something than one that gets sick for being closed up…”

(earth hour? good grief!)

press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2016/03/18/160318c.html

 

[kyrie03]

I don’t know if I should thank you or not for posting all of those statements made by Pope Francis…I’m now nauseous.

JPUSC & Darryl, you probably just shut down this thread. For how can one defend, unless to claim you aren’t getting the quotes from a news outlet controlled by a bishop?

Perhaps the reason people ignore what is happening in the Church, explain it away, or attack those who point out the harsh reality is because it’s too painful to admit. Yet meditation on the Passion and uniting our prayers and sufferings to those of the crucified Bride of Christ can merit graces and hopefully redemption for the persecutors and the sleeping. There, but for the condescension of Christ, would I also be.

“Forgive them, O Lord, they know not what they do.”

 

[kyrie03]

I agree. I think Catholics must start praying the Rosary everyday. I also think praying to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and fasting will help. We need to pray with a sincere heart. God will hear us. The wrong that was done will be corrected if enough souls pray for it. Many people are not willing to make a sacrifice or a commitment to daily prayer. I think if we want change this is what we need to do.

There is false sense of Mercy being preached…a mercy without repentance and retribution for the wrongs committed. We aren’t being reminded to make amends for our sins.

Prayers, repentance and sacrifice are what Our Lady has consistently requested in her approved apparitions. It seems that these will have to be forced from mankind through chastisement.

 

[graciew]

[QU

OTE=JPUSC;13762603]Here’s more from the early days

During his 15 years as archbishop of Buenos Aires and his 10 months as Pope Francis, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has consistently defended the dignity of human life from the moment of conception to natural death. In the face of what Pope Francis has called the “throwaway culture” of our times, a recurring theme in his teaching has been concern for the most vulnerable and defenseless human beings, including children — born and unborn — the disabled, and the elderly. While he made it clear in a widely publicized interview that “it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time,” it is equally clear that Pope Francis has not hesitated to speak out time and again about the crucial task of building a culture of life.

In the following pages, Columbia presents excerpts from some key pro-life statements by Cardinal Bergoglio-Pope Francis.

CRYING OUT TO THE LORD

The Holy Father [John Paul II] warns us that “nowadays a model of society appears to be emerging in which the powerful predominate, setting aside and even eliminating the powerless: I am thinking here of unborn children, helpless victims of abortion; the elderly and incurably ill, subjected at times to euthanasia; and the many other people relegated to the margins of society by consumerism and materialism. … This model of society bears the stamp of the culture of death, and is therefore in opposition to the Gospel message. Faced with this distressing reality, the Church community intends to commit itself all the more to the defense of the culture of life” (Ecclesia in America, 63). …

We are like Peter that night on the lake: On the one hand, the presence of the Lord encourages us to accept and face the waves of these challenges; on the other hand, the environment of self-sufficiency and arrogance — pure pride — that this culture of death is creating threatens us, and we are afraid of sinking in the midst of the storm. The Lord is there: We believe it with the certainty that the power of the Holy Spirit gives to us. And, in defiance of the Lord, there is the muffled scream of countless unborn children: this daily genocide, silent and protected. There is also the cry of the dying ones who have been abandoned and who are begging for a tender caress that this culture of death cannot give. And there is the multitude of families reduced to shreds by the proposals of consumerism and materialism. In the midst of this conflict and in the presence of Jesus Christ in glory, united today as the faithful people of God, we cry like Peter did when he began to sink, “Lord, save me” (Mt 14:30), and we stretch out our hand to grasp the only One who can give true meaning to our going into the waves.

— Meeting of Latin American politicians and legislators, Aug. 3, 1999.

THE MORAL COMPASS

When a civilization loses its orientation, the compass goes crazy and starts to spin. It points in all directions; anything goes. But in this crazy compass we find two key signs, two signs of a profound existential disorientation. In a civilization that relativizes life, always (it is a constant) the children and the elderly become objects of experimentation.

— Homily at Mass for Education in the Metropolitan Cathedral, April 10, 2002.
PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY

The [Aparecida] document asks governments, regulators and health care providers to defend the inalienable value of life, and to encourage conscientious objection in the face of laws or government regulations that are unjust in the light of faith and reason. This is a matter of “eucharistic consistency,” which means “to be conscious that they cannot receive holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia and other grave crimes against life and the family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments and health professionals” (436). …

I want to focus in particular on two stages of life that I consider essential for the growth in peace of different generations: childhood and old age. They are the two extremes of life, and they are the most vulnerable and the most forgotten. A society that abandons its children and eliminates its elderly is mortgaging its future. …

I would like us to make our own the concluding prayer of the Aparecida Document, praying especially for our families, through the intercession of the Virgin Mary and St. Joseph:

“Remain in our families, enlighten them in their doubts, sustain them in their difficulties, console them in their sufferings and daily struggles, when around them shadows build up which threaten their unity and their natural identity. You are Life: remain in our homes, so that they may continue to be nests where human life is generously born, where it is welcomed, loved and respected from conception to natural death.”

— Article titled “The Family in the Light of the Aparecida Document” (Familia et Vita, 2008).

 

[kyrie03]

It seems to me that the Pope has spoken volumes with his declaration of the Year of Mercy; and his focus on the sacrament of Reconciliation. To presume that it is no longer a deep and abiding interest seems to say that this is the only thing he can speak on, or that it has to be constantly brought up. I don’t agree with your analysis, although I agree that because he is not commenting on it each and every week, there are conservatives who feel he is no longer interested in the matter.

That is seriously inaccurate. The secular media has misquoted, selectively quoted, and where they can’t put a spin, ignored what he has had to say. How mucjh did the secular media have to say about his comments about Reconciliation? The silence was deafening.

Time to examine the call to reconciliation and proclamation of Year of Mercy more deeply. Reality is that every priest, not just specially selected Missionaries of Mercy, have authority to forgive sins. Also, it’s disturbing that priests such as Fr Patrick Baikauskas have been selected to be a Missionary of Mercy.
purdueexponent.org/city_state/article_ba2bfd22-d0e7-11e5-ab99-a3c0d2218ca3.html

Why is it disturbing? In 1996 this is what the press reported about the future Missionary:
Patrick Baikauskas, 43, an openly gay candidate and supporter of homosexual rights, backs a tough welfare-to-work policy, opposes mandated affirmative action and calls for a constitutional amendment to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision upholding a woman’s right to an abortion.
articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-02-16/news/9602160033_1_abortion-rights-republicans-gop-nomination

Mr Baikauskus bragged, “I’m 47 years old. I’m divorced. I’m a recovering alcoholic. I’m gay!” Stephen Brady of Roman Catholic Faithful attempted to prevent this man’s ordination in 2002. Citing a 1961 Vatican directive which declared that “advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty” as well as a more recent declaration from Rome which states that admitting homosexual men to the priesthood is “absolutely inadvisable,” “very risky” and further added that men with homosexual tendencies are “not fit” to receive the sacrament of ordination, Mr Brady called upon Archbishop Justin Rigali of St. Louis to expel Patrick Baikauskas from the Dominican Order of Preachers at St. Dominic priory on the campus of St. Louis University. Baikauskas, 50, was recently showcased in a 5-page Illinois Times spread, which highlighted his history of homosexual activism, his divorce, his homosexual relationship with a “partner” who subsequently died of AIDS, his battle with alcoholism, and his eventual admission to the Dominican priory. freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/809073/posts

Maybe the future priest repented of his activities? Here’s from Illinois Times: Brady says he’s accepted the likelihood that Baikauskas will one day be ordained. He’d still like him to publicly renounce his “gay activist past” and embrace the Catholic teaching on homosexuality, which accepts the orientation but forbids the lifestyle.
“I am not sure what he wants me to denounce,” responds Baikauskas. “My working for services for people living with AIDS? My working to secure equality in the workplace and housing for gay men and women? The church is not against these things. Neither is the church opposed to people being in love. So I cannot denounce any of those things.”
illinoistimes.com/mobile/articles/articleView/id:300

Why would one specifically seek to confess to this Missionary of Mercy instead of to the priest to whom one regularly confesses? What sort of pastoral advice might you receive?

 

[graciew]

Continues…
SIGNS OF HOPE

We are aware that the tragedy of our time is the split between the Gospel and culture. Families, institutions and society in general are unable to find new ways of sustaining themselves and growing. In our country, we are faced with the loss of values that are at the root of our identity, with the resulting risk of the unraveling of our social fabric. …

In spite of such social fragmentation, fundamental values endure in our homeland: the battle for life from conception to natural death; the defense of human dignity; the ability to appreciate freedom, constancy and concern for the demands of justice; the effort to educate children well; esteem for the family, friendship and affection; and a sense of celebration and popular creativity that does not give up but seeks to firmly resolve difficult situations in daily life. All these are signs of hope that encourage us to proclaim Jesus Christ as we seek new ways to transmit the faith, a transmission so battered by the crisis described above.

— Address during the “Ad Limina” Visit to His Holiness Benedict XVI, March 14, 2009.

ON EUTHANASIA AND ABORTION

Our morality also says that one has to do what is necessary and ordinary, in those cases where the end is foreseeable. Quality of life must be ensured. The strength of medicine, in terminal cases, is not so much about making someone live another three days or three months, but rather in making sure the body suffers as little as possible. One is not obligated to conserve life with extraordinary methods, which at times can go against the dignity of the person. But active euthanasia is different — this is killing. I believe that today there is covert euthanasia: Our social security pays up until a certain amount of treatment and then says, “may God help you.” The elderly are not taken care of as they should be, but rather are treated like discarded material. Sometimes they are deprived of medicine and ordinary care, and little by little this kills them. …

The moral problem with abortion is of a pre-religious nature because the genetic code of the person is present at the moment of conception. This means that a human being already exists. I separate the issue of abortion from any religious concept. It is a scientific problem. To not allow further progress in the development of a being that already has the entire genetic code of a human being is not ethical. The right to life is the first human right. Abortion means killing someone who cannot defend himself.

— Book of conversations in 2010 between Cardinal Bergoglio and Rabbi Abraham Skorka, titled Sobre el Cielo y la Tierra (On Heaven and Earth).

Throughout his ministry as archbishop and pope, the Holy Father has issued a clarion call to affirm life
Pope Francis greets pilgrims with disabilities and senior citizens after celebrating Mass for “Evangelium Vitae” Day June 16, 2013. The day called attention to care for the aged, the unborn, the sick and those with disabilities. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)
THE BATTLE FOR LIFE

I consider that [the battle against abortion] to be part of the battle in favor of life from the moment of conception until a dignified, natural death. This includes care of the mother during pregnancy, the existence of laws to protect the mother postpartum, and the need to ensure that children receive enough food, as well as providing health care throughout the whole length of life, taking good care of our grandparents, and not resorting to euthanasia. Nor should we perpetrate a kind of killing through insufficient food or a nonexistent or deficient education, which are ways of depriving a person of a full life. If there is a conception for us to respect, there is a life for us to take care of. …

A pregnant woman isn’t carrying a toothbrush in her stomach, or a tumor. Science has taught us that from the moment of conception, the new being has its entire genetic code. It’s impressive. Therefore, it’s not a religious issue but, rather, a clear moral issue with a scientific basis, because we are in the presence of a human being.

— Book of conversations with Cardinal Bergoglio titled Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words by Francesca Ambrogetti and Sergio Rubin (G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 2013). Originally published as El Jesuita: Conversaciones con Jorge Bergoglio (2010).

SAVING TWO LIVES

With respect to the [veto of the] non-punishable abortion law in Buenos Aires, we sense once again that we are deliberately moving toward the limitation and elimination of the supreme value of life and ignoring the rights of unborn children. When talking about a pregnant mother, we are talking about two lives. Both must be preserved and respected, because life has an absolute value. …

Abortion is never a solution. For our part, we must listen, support and understand in order to save two lives: to respect the smallest and most defenseless human being, to adopt measures to preserve his life, to allow him to be born and then to be creative in finding ways that will lead to his full development.

— Message regarding the approval of the law on non-punishable abortions, Sept. 9, 2012.

 

[graciew]

Continues…
SAYING “YES” TO LIFE

All too often, as we know from experience, people do not choose life, they do not accept the “Gospel of Life” but let themselves be led by ideologies and ways of thinking that block life, that do not respect life, because they are dictated by selfishness, self-interest, profit, power and pleasure, and not by love, by concern for the good of others. It is the eternal dream of wanting to build the city of man without God, without God’s life and love — a new Tower of Babel. …

Dear brothers and sisters, let us look to God as the God of Life, let us look to his law, to the Gospel message, as the way to freedom and life.… Let us say “Yes” to life and not death. Let us say “Yes” to freedom and not enslavement to the many idols of our time. In a word, let us say “Yes” to the God who is love, life and freedom, and who never disappoints. … Let us ask Mary, Mother of Life, to help us receive and bear constant witness to the “Gospel of Life.”

— Homily for “Evangelium Vitae” Day, June 16, 2013.

CALLED TO BE WITNESSES

A widespread mentality of the useful, the “throwaway culture” that today enslaves the hearts and minds of so many, comes at a very high cost: It asks for the elimination of human beings, especially if they are physically or socially weaker. Our response to this mentality is a decisive and unreserved “yes” to life. … Things have a price and can be sold, but people have dignity; they are worth more than things and are above price. So often we find ourselves in situations where we see that what is valued the least is life. That is why concern for human life in its totality has become in recent years a real priority for the Church’s Magisterium, especially for the most defenseless (i.e., the disabled, the sick, the newborn, children, the elderly, those whose lives are most defenseless).

In a frail human being, each one of us is invited to recognize the face of the Lord, who in his human flesh experienced the indifference and solitude to which we so often condemn the poorest of the poor, whether in developing countries or in wealthy societies. Every child who, rather than being born, is condemned unjustly to being aborted, bears the face of Jesus Christ, bears the face of the Lord, who even before he was born, and then just after birth, experienced the world’s rejection. … And every elderly person, even if he is ill or at the end of his days, bears the face of Christ. They cannot be discarded, as the “throwaway culture” suggests! They cannot be thrown away! …

Be witnesses and diffusers of the “culture of life.” Your being Catholic entails a greater responsibility: first of all to yourselves, through a commitment consistent with your Christian vocation; and then to contemporary culture, by contributing to recognizing the transcendent dimension of human life, the imprint of God’s creative work, from the first moment of its conception. This is a task of the new evangelization that often requires going against the tide and paying for it personally. The Lord is also counting on you to spread the “Gospel of Life.”

— Address to the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, Sept. 20, 2013.

THE FOUNDATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenseless and innocent among us. Nowadays efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from standing in the way of this. Frequently, as a way of ridiculing the Church’s effort to defend their lives, attempts are made to present her position as ideological, obscurantist and conservative. Yet this defense of unborn life is closely linked to the defense of each and every other human right. It involves the conviction that a human being is always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of development. Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting foundations for the defense of human rights, which would always be subject to the passing whims of the powers that be. Reason alone is sufficient to recognize the inviolable value of each single human life, but if we also look at the issue from the standpoint of faith, “every violation of the personal dignity of the human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offense against the creator of the individual” (Christifideles Laici, 37).

Precisely because this involves the internal consistency of our message about the value of the human person, the Church cannot be expected to change her position on this question. I want to be completely honest in this regard. This is not something subject to alleged reforms or “modernizations.” It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life. On the other hand, it is also true that we have done little to adequately accompany women in very difficult situations, where abortion appears as a quick solution to their profound anguish, especially when the life developing within them is the result of rape or a situation of extreme poverty. Who can remain unmoved before such painful situations?

— Apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, Nov. 24, 2013.

Pope Francis’ statements during his time as archbishop were drawn from a special fall 2013 issue of Familia et Vita titled The Teachings of Jorge Mario Bergoglio-Pope Francis on the Family and Life (1999-2013). The issue was prepared by the Pontifical Council for the Family and published in Spanish and Italian by Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Excerpts from the Holy Father’s pontificate are from the Vatican website. All excerpts are used with permission.
Source kofc.org/en/columbia/detail/gospel-life-according-pope-francis.html

 

[kyrie03]

Yes Gracie, there is no question Ab Bergoglio took a strong stance against abortion. We pray that as the chief teacher and ruler of the Catholic Church today that he will stand strong and hold onto ALL of the traditions taught by the Church. And then confirm his brethren in the truth

 

[graciew]

I don’t know if I should thank you or not for posting all of those statements made by Pope Francis…I’m now nauseous.

JPUSC & Darryl, you probably just shut down this thread. For how can one defend, unless to claim you aren’t getting the quotes from a news outlet controlled by a bishop?

“Forgive them, O Lord, they know not what they do.”

Open, open , wider ,wider...
Culture of life , throwaway culture...

 

[graciew]

Yes Gracie, there is no question Ab Bergoglio took a strong stance against abortion. We pray that as the chief teacher and ruler of the Catholic Church today that he will stand strong and hold onto ALL of the traditions taught by the Church. And then confirm his brethren in the truth

I am Catholic. This is our family. And there is room For all humanity. Trust God and God bless you.

 

[JPUSC]

Open, open , wider ,wider…

Behind closed doors, pope supported civil unions in Argentina, activist says

Less than an hour after he fired off an angry letter to Catholic Church leaders about their handling of Argentina’s same-sex marriage debate, Marcelo Marquez says his phone rang.

He was surprised to hear the voice on the other end of the line. It was Jorge Mario Bergoglio, then the archbishop of Buenos Aires, and now the pope.

What Bergoglio said to him at a meeting soon afterward that year, 2010, was even more surprising, Marquez said.

For months, church officials had made sharp, public criticisms of the push to legalize same-sex marriage in the South American country. But privately, Bergoglio seemed to be more open to discussion, according to Marquez.

“He told me. … ‘I’m in favor of gay rights and in any case, I also favor civil unions for homosexuals, but I believe that Argentina is not yet ready for a gay marriage law,’” said Marquez, a gay rights activist, a self-described devout Catholic and a former theology professor at a Catholic seminary.

The pope’s reported willingness behind-the-scenes to accept civil unions as a compromise may offer new insight into how he will lead the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics.

cnn.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/argentina-pope-civil-unions

On Gay Unions, a Pragmatist Before He Was a Pope

BUENOS AIRES — The very idea was anathema to many of the bishops in the room.

Argentina was on the verge of approving gay marriage, and the Roman Catholic Church was desperate to stop that from happening. It would lead tens of thousands of its followers in protest on the streets of Buenos Aires and publicly condemn the proposed law, a direct threat to church teaching, as the work of the devil.

But behind the scenes, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who led the public charge against the measure, spoke out in a heated meeting of bishops in 2010 and advocated a highly unorthodox solution: that the church in Argentina support the idea of civil unions for gay couples.

The concession inflamed the gathering — and offers a telling insight into the leadership style he may now bring to the papacy.

nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/pope-francis-old-colleagues-recall-pragmatic-streak.html

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/04/ncr-report-from-argentina-bergoglio-did.html?m=1

Pope Francis Suggests Gay Civil Unions May Be Tolerable By Church In Interview With Italian Paper Corriere Della Sera

Pope Francis has signalled that he could see the Catholic church tolerating some forms of same-sex civil unions — though not marriage — when it comes to situations such as medical care and property for gay couples.

In an interview with the Italian daily Corriere della Sera, the pope said that “matrimony is between a man and a woman,” but moves to “regulate diverse situations of cohabitation (are) driven by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, as for instance to assure medical care,” according to a translation by Catholic News Service.

“It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety,” Francis said.

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/pope-francis-civil-unions_n_4904060.html

 

[JPUSC]

Those who attack the current pope indirectly undermine the teachings of Pope Benedict, Pope Pius XII, and so on - papal teaching that helped make up what you and I now call Catholic teaching. Don’t think of papal teaching as something only from former popes.

Let’s see…who attacked a current pope and almost lost his position because of it?

Pope Francis’ run-in with Benedict XVI

Pope Francis came close to losing his position within the Catholic Church after he criticised his predecessor seven years ago.

In 2005, then Pope Benedict quoted from an obscure medieval text which declared that the Prophet Mohammed, founder of the Islamic faith, was “evil and inhuman”, enraging the Muslim population and causing attacks on churches throughout the world before an apology was issued.

Reacting within days to the statements, speaking through a spokesman to Newsweek Argentina, then Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio declared his “unhappiness” with the statements, made at the University of Regensburg in Germany, and encouraged many of his subordinates with the Church to do the same.

“Pope Benedict’s statement don’t reflect my own opinions”, the then Archbishop of Buenos Aires declared. “These statements will serve to destroy in 20 seconds the careful construction of a relationship with Islam that Pope John Paul II built over the last twenty years”.

The Vatican reacted quickly, removing one subordinate, Joaquín Piña the Archbishop of Puerto Iguazú from his post within four days of his making similar statements to the Argentine national media, sending a clear statement to Cardinal Bergoglio that he would be next should he choose to persist.

Reacting to the threats from Rome, Cardinal Bergoglio cancelled his plans to fly to Rome, choosing to boycott the second synod that Pope Benedict had called during his tenure as pontiff.

“The only thing that didn’t happen to Bergoglio was being removed from his post”, wrote investigative journalist Horacio Verbitsky in his column in left-wing daily newspaper Página/24. “The Vatican was very quick to react.”

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/the-pope/9931030/Pope-Francis-run-in-with-Benedict-XVI-over-the-Prophet-Mohammed.html

 

[graciew]

url]

I will be translating main sources from Spanish.
Fair play: no heresay,gossip or somebody says he said that behind closed doors…

Open and wider means sth different. Think harder… I trust you.
Take care and give me some time! My washing machine broke down!

 

[unafraid]

As someone who loves the Church and the Holy Father, this thread leaves me saddened, and very disappointed. What has Pope Francis, as a man who has devoted his entire being to the spreading of the Gospel, with passion, patience, and fidelity, ever done to deserve such slander? And, what offends me most is the fact that this slander comes from those who identify themselves as fellow “Catholics”.

If this is the level to which this site has descended, then perhaps a new, less polarized, site needs to be developed. If someone without any formation would happen upon this thread, they could possibly take away the false impression that Pope Francis is some sort of “antipope”.

Restraint needs to be a part of any debate regarding the Vicar of Christ, regardless of the polemics being discussed. Respect is part of the Catholic ethos. There is a need for a sense of decorum; there is a need for more understanding relative to the station of the man being vilified.