Pope endorses same-sex civil unions in new documentary film

[grandvizier1006]

Just came here to express my sympathy. If he’s going to eventually say what I think he is, then faithful Catholics will be in quite a bind. I’m truly sorry.

Is this the last days? IDK. But I truly hope that in the future, if Christians are basically forced to endorse homosexuality 100%, that God will forgive us of our errors as long as we attempt to remain faithful otherwise. Although such a thing will be difficult.

 

[LizaMarie]

As someone who has studied both the Catholic and Orthodox Church I do understand somewhat about Papal infallibility and speaking Ex Cathedra on faith and morals versus giving an opinion. For example, the Pope can give an opinion on evolution, for example, but the faithful don't have to believe it as the Pope is not speaking on faith and morals. But I am confused-shouldn't Christians pastors be turning people away from their sins, and not condoning them? Of course LGBT people are created in God's image and have rights and deserve respect, but- Ugh I find this troubling. I loved Benedict the 16th, but I'm having trouble with this pope. I'm just afraid this is going to give more ammunition to those who want to persecute Conservative Christians who stand for traditional marriage and sanctity of human life.

 

[Markie Boy]

I totally understand how the ex-cathedra clause "works". I just don't find it in line with how Jesus taught.

It's like I can lie all I want yet claim I'm not lying, as unless I first stated I was now going to not lie it doesn't count.

I can't say that is in line with "let your yes be yes, and no be no".

Point being - how long will people support this concept - as the edge of the cliff appears closer. Will you follow it over the cliff?

This line of thinking has current clergy believing nobody can judge or remove a pope - yet is has been done it the past, proving that current thinking is wrong.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Could the Pope now be defined as a Heretic? Clearly he is professing beliefs that are against the church.

 

[Davidnic]

Just for some clarity what he's saying isn't heresy but it is problematic theologically.

Homosexual acts are still considered gravely disordered. And they cannot engage in the sacrament of marriage.

This has nothing to do with infallibility because he is offering his opinion on a political arrangement not a sacrament.

However there are implications for what the Church views as a pseudo marriage and the definition of a family.

So keep in mind a few things. He has not changed anything about sacraments or the immorality of homosexual acts.

However he has opened the way for more confusion and for people to interpret it differently than what it is. I'm not saying his proclamation fits with Catholic teaching but it does not actually touch on infallibility.

It is a Prudential judgment on a political and legal issue.

Now. Are homosexuals children of God like he says...of course. Should they not be thrown out or discarded from their families like he says...of course. But that does not mean that the sacrament of marriage is open to them and he is not suggesting that.

The thing is one part of the quote talks about how he stood up for that... That being civil unions. So he might be talking about historically when he backed civil unions while a Bishop in Argentina as a compromise away from legalizing gay marriage.

I would hold off full judgment on exactly the details of what he said until we see a full transcript.

 

[Davidnic]

Remember the pope has also said on this topic that laws assimilating homosexual relationships into actual marriage are anthropological regression and that adoption rights for homosexual couples would affect children because every person needs a male father and a female mother.

So I would think context here is going to matter apart from two quotes broken apart from a documentary in Italian given with no context.

 

[Davidnic]

There's no excuse for a Pope to be this confusing again and again but we should wait for a transcript before trying to process what's actually going on.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Just for some clarity what he's saying isn't heresy but it is problematic theologically.

Homosexual acts are still considered gravely disordered. And they cannot engage in the sacrament of marriage.

This has nothing to do with infallibility because he is offering his opinion on a political arrangement not a sacrament.

However there are implications for what the Church views as a pseudo marriage and the definition of a family.

So keep in mind a few things. He has not changed anything about sacraments or the immorality of homosexual acts.

However he has opened the way for more confusion and for people to interpret it differently than what it is. I'm not saying his proclamation fits with Catholic teaching but it does not actually touch on infallibility.

It is a Prudential judgment on a political and legal issue.

Now. Are homosexuals children of God like he says...of course. Should they not be thrown out or discarded from their families like he says...of course. But that does not mean that the sacrament of marriage is open to them and he is not suggesting that.

The thing is one part of the quote talks about how he stood up for that... That being civil unions. So he might be talking about historically when he backed civil unions while a Bishop in Argentina as a compromise away from legalizing gay marriage.

I would hold off full judgment on exactly the details of what he said until we see a full transcript.

How do you explain this quote?

Cruz, who is gay, said that during his first meetings with the pope in May 2018 after they patched things up, Francis assured him that God made Cruz gay.

 

[zippy2006]

Regardless of fine print - this blows the idea of Papal Infallibility out of the water. If the Holy Spirit is really guarding him, he could not do crazy stuff like this.

I don't think we should make this thread about Papal Infallibility. As others have said, this doesn't transgress that doctrine, and there are plenty of other threads that focus on it. Popes in the past have also done crazy stuff like this.

To your point, though, Pope Francis' trajectory seems to be heretical. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, he is moving the Church towards reversing unchangeable teaching. Unless that trajectory changes the problem will need to be addressed. It seems obvious that the Church has to revisit the question of how a pope can be deposed.

This has nothing to do with infallibility because he is offering his opinion on a political arrangement not a sacrament.

I don't think it's that easy. If Pope Francis were to affirm that that modern civil unions are licit arrangements for homosexual persons, and that therefore such persons are free to engage in sexual relations within those unions, then he would be espousing heresy. It doesn't matter that he is talking about a political union, or that he isn't talking about a sacrament. If he claims that homosexual acts are acceptable in certain situations then he has contradicted magisterial teaching.

Still, a heretical pope would not cause a problem for papal infallibility simpliciter, but if he were to enshrine his personal heretical views into doctrine it would become a problem right quick!

 

[Davidnic]

I don't think we should make this thread about Papal Infallibility. As others have said, this doesn't transgress that doctrine, and there are plenty of other threads that focus on it. Popes in the past have also done crazy stuff like this.

To your point, though, Pope Francis' trajectory seems to be heretical. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, he is moving the Church towards reversing unchangeable teaching. Unless that trajectory changes the problem will need to be addressed. It seems obvious that the Church has to revisit the question of how a pope can be deposed.



I don't think it's that easy. If Pope Francis were to affirm that that modern civil unions are licit arrangements for homosexual persons, and that therefore such persons are free to engage in sexual relations within those unions, then he would be espousing heresy. It doesn't matter that he is talking about a political union, or that he isn't talking about a sacrament. If he claims that homosexual acts are acceptable in certain situations then he has contradicted magisterial teaching.

Still, a heretical pope would not cause a problem for papal infallibility simpliciter, but if he were to enshrine his personal heretical views into doctrine it would become a problem right quick!

Well yes if he said those acts are acceptable. But he hasn't as far as we know. And I would agree with those who have a concern that even condoning a pseudo-marriage is an issue.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

PROVIDENCE - Hours after Pope Francis for the first time endorsed same-sex civil unions, Providence Bishop Thomas J. Tobin called such relationships “objectively immoral” and said the Catholic church should not accept them.

Francis' support for civil unions came in the documentary “Francesco,” which was released in Rome Wednesday. Other topics discussed by the pope included racial and income inequality and migration, according to the Associated Press.

But Tobin took issue with Francis calling for a civil union law, which he said “clearly contradicts what has been the long-standing teaching of the church.” Tobin was a vocal opponent of Rhode Island’s move to civil unions and the eventual passage of a gay marriage bill.

Providence Bishop Tobin criticizes Pope Francis again, this time over civil unions for gay people - The Boston Globe

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Well yes if he said those acts are acceptable. But he hasn't as far as we know. And I would agree with those who have a concern that even condoning a pseudo-marriage is an issue.

Well David if the Pope made these comments:

Cruz, who is gay, said that during his first meetings with the pope in May 2018 after they patched things up, Francis assured him that God made Cruz gay.

And states that there should be civil unions then ipso facto he is saying that these acts that happen in any relationship are normal.

 

[Davidnic]

Well David if the Pope made these comments:


And states that there should be civil unions then ipso facto he is saying that these acts that happen in any relationship are normal.

Actually no. God made me free and prone to gluttony and loves me as He created me.

But it doesn't mean that my predilection to a sin is morally licit.

 

[zippy2006]

Excellent video:

@chevyontheriver, @Markie Boy, @Fenwick

 

[Davidnic]

The pope has said in the past that it is a contradiction to speak of gay marriage, and he has stood by the fact that sexual acts can only happen in the context of marriage.

So taking this to mean that he is somehow giving a stamp of approval to homosexual acts is not accurate.

Now do I think that it opens the door to people interpreting it as that. And given his history of confusion and then not trying to really clear up the record it's a massive massive problem. Oh yeah.

 

[Davidnic]

Excellent video:

@chevyontheriver, @Markie Boy, @Fenwick

I'll have to watch that Matt Fradd is always good

 

[Gnarwhal]

Although I am glad this isn't an ex cathedra statement I still don't understand why Pope Francis said this. I don't really know what to say about it or how to move forward. I still want to be Catholic but this has stunned me.

He has a track record of brinkmanship; thoughts and commentary that flirts with the line of acceptable ideas on faith and morals.

I honestly don't thing the ex-cathedra clause is true. Nobody can make a list of historical ex-cathedra statements and agree on them - rendering the whole thing useless.

It does. Papal proclamations are only infallible if they're ex cathedra, and that happens very rarely. If a Pope sits upon the Chair of St. Peter and contradicts the Magisterium then he de facto ceases to be Pope. But if he doesn't make a statement from said chair then it's not infallible and thus not binding, it's just commentary and nothing more.

Now do I think that it opens the door to people interpreting it as that. And given his history of confusion and then not trying to really clear up the record it's a massive massive problem. Oh yeah.

Unfortunately that seems to be the case. My newsroom—staffed by a few homosexuals—is running with it as if the Church is now affirming of homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle.

 

[Michie]

Archbishop Viganò responds to new film in which Pope endorses homosexual civil unions

'One does not have to be a theologian or a moral expert to know that such statements are totally heterodox and constitute a very serious cause of scandal for the faithful.'

 

[narnia59]

Not only is this not an "ex-cathedra" statement, it is not even an exercise of his teaching office. People need to remember that and look at the things he has said about same-sex activity that have actually been an exercise of his teaching office. He's upheld the teaching of the Church in this regard.

An interview the pope gives, a homily the pope gives etc. are not an exercise of even the ordinary aspect of his teaching office like a papal encylical would be. This is not Magisterial teaching.

I agree that he is careless with his words and sows seeds of confusion and that is most unfortunate. And there are those who will take it and run with it because that's the direction they want things to go. But the sky is not falling here in terms of church authority remaining intact and church teaching remaining constant. We need to keep our heads about us, and be willing to fast and pray for our Church and her leaders.

 

[narnia59]

Just for some clarity what he's saying isn't heresy but it is problematic theologically.

Homosexual acts are still considered gravely disordered. And they cannot engage in the sacrament of marriage.

This has nothing to do with infallibility because he is offering his opinion on a political arrangement not a sacrament.

However there are implications for what the Church views as a pseudo marriage and the definition of a family.

So keep in mind a few things. He has not changed anything about sacraments or the immorality of homosexual acts.

However he has opened the way for more confusion and for people to interpret it differently than what it is. I'm not saying his proclamation fits with Catholic teaching but it does not actually touch on infallibility.

It is a Prudential judgment on a political and legal issue.

Now. Are homosexuals children of God like he says...of course. Should they not be thrown out or discarded from their families like he says...of course. But that does not mean that the sacrament of marriage is open to them and he is not suggesting that.

The thing is one part of the quote talks about how he stood up for that... That being civil unions. So he might be talking about historically when he backed civil unions while a Bishop in Argentina as a compromise away from legalizing gay marriage.

I would hold off full judgment on exactly the details of what he said until we see a full transcript.

I am doubting we ever get a full transcript. It's a documentary he was interviewed for, correct? So they've taken what they want and left the rest on the cutting room floor.

I just posted this, but not only does it not have to do with infallibility it doesn't have to do with the exercise of his teaching office at all. But the world won't know that, and will run with it. And that is most unfortunate. Your comments are very good.