Why the hell are we praising the pope about gay people?

[geonuc]

Yeah, my hoax detector went off right away for the same reason as Sigma's. And, I hate to say it, but the fact that someone wrote this hoax and people believed it is kind of the attitude that I'm condemning, here.

Seeing as you seem to have touched a nerve with that last bit, what exactly are you condemning?

[SciFi Chick]

I don't feel superior to you in any way, SFC. I'm sure you know that.

Then what do you mean when you say you're condemning an attitude? Because my attitude is one of hope, and that led me to believe a site that does not make it even remotely clear it was satire. I already feel stupid for falling for that, and to have you condemn my hope just adds insult to injury.

[Sigma_Orionis]

If it makes you feel any better SFC I also thought it was true before noticing the odd thing about the third vatican council.

[FZR1KG]

I feel stupid all the time. That's what drives me to learn more.

[The Supreme Canuck]

Then what do you mean when you say you're condemning an attitude? Because my attitude is one of hope, and that led me to believe a site that does not make it even remotely clear it was satire. I already feel stupid for falling for that, and to have you condemn my hope just adds insult to injury.

I'm not condemning you or your hope at all. That's not what I'm talking about. I have no problem with an attitude of hope in any way; I have a problem with an attitude of blind credulity. Which you did not display.

You misinterpreted a piece of satire that seemed to support your position. Who hasn't? Then, when you were shown the piece was untrue, you changed your mind to fit the new facts. That isn't credulity; that's skepticism. I can't think of much that I respect more than the ability to change one's mind like that, especially when it makes one feel foolish. That's brave. And your skeptical attitude is not at all what I was talking about when I said I condemned "the attitude" being shown by people who believe in the piece - the attitude I was talking about was that shown by people who continue to believe the piece, despite its falsehood.

I was referring to the fact that people are writing pieces like this and are passing them around thinking "How great is this pope, huh?" without examining whether the piece is true and without thinking about the actions of the pope rather than his mere words. You didn't do any of that, but it is why this piece is an example of the thinking that I've had a problem with from the start of this thread. My condemnation is not of a simple error on your part - how could it be? - but of people who aren't even concerned with whether what they believe is true or untrue, so long as it fits their narrative. It's what I've been irritated with in this whole thread. It's why I started this thread.

That's what I meant. I honestly didn't think what I was saying would insult you because in my mind I wasn't talking about you at all. I should have been clearer; I'm sorry.

[Sigma_Orionis]

I think that what pisses off TSC so much, can be illustrated as follows: (bear with me, as usual it's long, convoluted and messy)

One of my favorite Book Series is Maurice Druon's "The Accursed Kings" Series (brite, if you liked Game of Thrones because of its cutthroat politics, you might like The Accursed Kings series, it makes GoT look like kids in Kindergarten with the added effect of being solidly based on real events: Druon was not only a successful author, he was also a historian)

The last novel of the series (Volume VII) is narrated by Cardinal Hélie de Talleyrand-Périgord. In the novel, Cardinal de Talleyrand-Périgord not only narrates how John II lost France to good ole Edward III Plantagenet, but also has a few nasty things to say about the Catholic Church policies of the time (I guess Mr. Druon had a few things to say ).

Specifically there's a passage where the good Cardinal is bitching about the current Pope at the time, he says something like this:

You can't attract souls with Vinegar. When a Hobo talks to other Hobos and refers to them as "my brothers", the effect is not noticeable. However, when a king says it, it's different. Give people some self respect, that's the first condition of charity, ignored by our current lovers of fraternity and other idiots. Precisely because the people are poor and suffer and feel sinful and miserable it's necessary to offer them a reason to believe in the afterlife. Yes, with incense, golden figures and music. The Church must offer the faithful a vision of the heavenly kingdom, a refined and well crafted vision, starting with the Pope and his Cardinals who must reflect a bit of the image of the Supreme Creator.......

In the part where it says "self respect" I think they meant to say "something to feel good about", or am I wrong?

And THAT reminds me of how Advertising Agencies work

[SciFi Chick]

That's what I meant. I honestly didn't think what I was saying would insult you because in my mind I wasn't talking about you at all. I should have been clearer; I'm sorry.

Thanks for clarifying that Friend. I really appreciate it. Sorry I was so damn oversensitive.

[The Supreme Canuck]

Of course - though I don't think you were being oversensitive. What I was trying to say really wasn't clear.

[The Supreme Canuck]

This does not surprise me:

So just how gay-friendly is Pope Francis? Consider this.

In his Christmas sermon, Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta condemned adoption by same-sex couples. He insisted that God's own son was raised by a man and a woman, and not by two men or two women.

How divisive! said the media. But now it turns out that Bishop Scicluna met Pope Francis on December 12. The bishop later told the Times of Malta: “We discussed many aspects… and when I raised the issue that’s worrying me as a bishop [the right for gay couples to adopt] he encouraged me to speak out."

Indeed, the Pope was "shocked" to learn that Malta's proposed Civil Union bill allows gay adoption. And Bishop's Scicluna's controversial sermon seems to have been delivered at his prompting.

None of this should be surprising: back in Argentina, Cardinal Bergoglio roundly condemned gay adoption and said that gay marriage was diabolically inspired. But confusingly – and I still can't quite figure this out in my head – he did clearly back civil partnerships as the lesser of two evils. (When Archbishop Vincent Nichols appeared to do that, his critics in the Vatican were furious.)

What we can say, I think, is that the media read far too much into the Pope's "who am I to judge?" comment about gay Christians in his impromptu interview on the way back from Rio. If Time magazine gave Francis its Person of the Year on the basis of his relaxed attitude to homosexuality, it should have done its homework more thoroughly.

Once again, it seems to me that Francis is saying "I'm not going to judge gay people. But god sure is. Boy, are they ever going to be judged. So very, very judged."

[cid]

Pope Francis and Phil Robertson seem to have much the same mindset...

[FZR1KG]

Not to appear to be siding with the Pope here since I don't really like the church and all, but...

The bishop later told the Times of Malta: “We discussed many aspects… and when I raised the issue that’s worrying me as a bishop [the right for gay couples to adopt] he encouraged me to speak out."

I don't see a problem with this. Voice your concerns. Trying to suppress peoples thoughts usually ends up backfiring. So the pope has a choice, either to introduce a rule that no priest may speak against homosexuality or to let them discuss it. Choice 1 just won't fly. It'll rock the church too much. The logical progression is to allow discussion and once people have gotten used to it not being clear cut, then go further. The fact that its getting mixed messages from the church is a good thing. So far its been one message and that is burn in hell.

[FZR1KG]

Pope Francis and Phil Robertson seem to have much the same mindset...

Why oh fucking why did I look him up. My poor eyes.

[cid]

Pope Francis and Phil Robertson seem to have much the same mindset...

Why oh fucking why did I look him up. My poor eyes.

Quack quack quack...heh heh heh...

[OldCM]

Damn good question. He didn't change a thing as for as Catholic doctrine is concerned. Paraphrasing what he really said, "If a gay guy wants to abide by Catholic doctrine, and remains celebate, who am I do judge him."

Been there. Done that. Not any more.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Pope Francis and Phil Robertson seem to have much the same mindset...

Why oh fucking why did I look him up. My poor eyes.

Quack quack quack...heh heh heh...

I still say those dudes look like a ZZ-Top impersonator convention.

[Sigma_Orionis]

This is an excellent time to pour some more gasoline in this fire

First, the red meat: Good ole Francis threw the conservatives a bone on abortion

HOWEVER, this is very interesting and if you ask me, far reaching.....

Pope With the Humble Touch Is Firm in Reshaping the Vatican

Francis’ reign may not ultimately affect centuries-old church doctrine, but it is already reshaping the way the church is run and who is running it. Francis is steadily replacing traditionalists with moderates as the church prepares for a debate about the role of far-flung bishops in Vatican decision-making and a broad discussion on the family that could touch on delicate issues such as homosexuality and divorce.

(bolding mine)

I wanna how far this goes....

[The Supreme Canuck]

Once again, until I see some actual changes to doctrine, this is no different than a politician's "man of the people" pseudo-populist routine, as far as I'm concerned.

Basically, I don't trust the Church. It's just words. Show me results, then we'll talk.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Changes in Doctrine? Catholic Church? on the same sentence?

[FZR1KG]

Basically, I don't trust the Church. It's just words. Show me results, then we'll talk.

I say that about almost everything.

[Sigma_Orionis]

I still say it, Francis Boy is quite the politician.........

[FZR1KG]

I'm impressed with the Vatican. They have progressed from assassinating Popes to get rid of them to letting them retire. lol

[Sigma_Orionis]

Praise Jesus and pass the mustard brother

[Sigma_Orionis]

Yes, I am posting this one to rile TSC up, why? I think that by now we should be clear on why


Opinion: Will global elite listen to Pope of poor?

Francis also has amassed massive deposits of political capital over his first 10 months in office, with approval ratings around the world that politicians and celebrities have to view with unalloyed envy.

Aaaaaaannnnnnnddddddd THE MONEY QUOTE:

In many ways Francis has become the new Nelson Mandela, meaning the world's leading source of moral authority.