Pope Francis and Gay People

[Mr Pee]

... possibly sometime to post about music in general, classical music in particular, Radio 3 output, perhaps BBC output in general? ... but no.

You're extremely quick to criticize others, amateur, either for what they post about or the manner of their postings, and your tiresome habit of quoting of the house rules is somewhat hypocritical, to put it mildly.

Before you have a go at Scotty for responding to this thread, let's remember who initiated it, shall we? Starting yet another thread on Gay rights and then suggesting he should not respond is ridiculous. Why not get off your favourite hobby horse and start a thread on a musical/Radio 3 topic yourself?

[ahinton]

You're extremely quick to criticize others, amateur, either for what they post about or the manner of their postings, and your tiresome habit of quoting of the house rules is somewhat hypocritical, to put it mildly.

And you habitually refrain from such criticism?

Before you have a go at Scotty for responding to this thread, let's remember who initiated it, shall we? Starting yet another thread on Gay rights and then suggesting he should not respond is ridiculous. Why not get off your favourite hobby horse and start a thread on a musical/Radio 3 topic yourself?

No one has "had a go" at scotty merely for responding to this thread; I cannot - and therefore have no wish to - try to speak for am51 on this or anything else, but I believe that I am correct in interpreting his remarks anent scotty here as having been prompted largely by scotty's many responses in this thread, a disturbing proportion of which clearly evidence a persistent ostrich-like stance and a concomitant studious avoidance of answering certain quite reasonable questions put to him that have been duly noted and remarked upon by several other contributors besides am51.

[amateur51]

You're extremely quick to criticize others, amateur, either for what they post about or the manner of their postings, and your tiresome habit of quoting of the house rules is somewhat hypocritical, to put it mildly.

Before you have a go at Scotty for responding to this thread, let's remember who initiated it, shall we? Starting yet another thread on Gay rights and then suggesting he should not respond is ridiculous. Why not get off your favourite hobby horse and start a thread on a musical/Radio 3 topic yourself?

It's an important issue Mr Pee and just because you are complacent about it, doesn't mean that others are too. If you find it tiresome, the remedy lies in your own hands.

[Flosshilde]

To revert to the topic, there's a review of a new book on Pope Francis in the Guardian aon Saturday - http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...ew?INTCMP=SRCH

The review says that Fascinatingly, Vallely argues that the Bergoglio lionised by liberals – living in the slums where he was so non-churchy that he was known as "The Dude", and urging compassion towards those traditionally ostracised by Catholicism – developed during the latter part of his life in direct response to the priest's guilt and self-chastisement over his actions under the [Argentinian] dictatorship.

[Ferretfancy]

To revert to the topic, there's a review of a new book on Pope Francis in the Guardian aon Saturday - http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...ew?INTCMP=SRCH

The review says that Fascinatingly, Vallely argues that the Bergoglio lionised by liberals – living in the slums where he was so non-churchy that he was known as "The Dude", and urging compassion towards those traditionally ostracised by Catholicism – developed during the latter part of his life in direct response to the priest's guilt and self-chastisement over his actions under the [Argentinian] dictatorship.

Catholicism, the ultimate guilt trip.

[jean]

In this case, if the reports are correct, the guilt was justified and the response wholly positive.

[Ferretfancy]

In this case, if the reports are correct, the guilt was justified and the response wholly positive.

True Jean, I thought that immediately after I had posted it, it was a cheap comment.

[Mr Pee]

And you habitually refrain from such criticism?


No one has "had a go" at scotty merely for responding to this thread; I cannot - and therefore have no wish to - try to speak for am51 on this or anything else, but I believe that I am correct in interpreting his remarks anent scotty here as having been prompted largely by scotty's many responses in this thread, a disturbing proportion of which clearly evidence a persistent ostrich-like stance and a concomitant studious avoidance of answering certain quite reasonable questions put to him that have been duly noted and remarked upon by several other contributors besides am51.

If by

ostrich like stance

you mean that he has a view that is deeply held and that he is not prepared to compromise on simply to placate the likes of Amateur and yourself, then fine, he's an ostrich and so am I. Better that than somebody like David Cameron whose beliefs on such matters are apparently completely flexible, as long as such compromises bring him a few more votes from the Gay "community".

And as for failing to answer questions, as I've said before, not getting the answers you want is not the same as not answering.

[ahinton]

If by you mean that he has a view that is deeply held and that he is not prepared to compromise on simply to placate the likes of Amateur and yourself, then fine, he's an ostrich and so am I. Better that than somebody like David Cameron whose beliefs on such matters are apparently completely flexible, as long as such compromises bring him a few more votes from the Gay "community".

No, that is not what I meant, which hardly surprising since that is also not what I wrote. I am not remotely interesed in scotty or anyone else according to whatever views I might hold; my concern extends no farther than trying to encourage him to accept that society changes all the time and a Church that resolutely refuses to recognise the inevitable existence of that change and accept it, preferring instead to ignore the interests, concerns, aspirations, etc. of its membership, is sticking its head in the sand just as much as is anyone who condones or accepts that kind of trenchant and inflexible attitude and takes it for granted as though that is not merely the right thing to do but the only thing to do.

And as for failing to answer questions, as I've said before, not getting the answers you want is not the same as not answering.

Indeed - but as I have also said before, I'm not interested in hearing the answers that you might think that I may want to hear; I'm interested only in scotty facing up to the particular questions put to him, not only by am51 and me, thinking about them and what he feels about them and then trying to answer them honsetly in his own words, whereas what he's continually endeavoured to do instead is sidestep them.

[Sydney Grew]

. . . him . . .

Is it not then Mr. H. a great desideratum when participating in places of public discussion such as this to address ever the what and never the whom?

[scottycelt]

Is it not then Mr. H. a great desideratum when participating in places of public discussion such as this to address ever the what and never the whom?

Nil Desperandum, Mr Grew!

If multiple (and previously 'repetitive') forum answers would now appear to have somehow mysteriously disappeared into the Great Ether at least the gender of 'him' has been successfully identified!

I continue to strive to remain positive and to be humbly grateful for even the smallest of mercies.

However, in accordance with previous policy, I shall now return to my self-imposed exile, at least as far as this most obviously "challenging" of forum threads is concerned.

Sometimes it is best to simply acknowledge abject personal failure and turn, with fresh and renewed hope, to something a little less unfathomable.

[ahinton]

Is it not then Mr. H. a great desideratum when participating in places of public discussion such as this to address ever the what and never the whom?

I have no idea, since I do not know what you are writing about here, so perhaps you might care to explain; it would not, after all, have been possible to respond to Mr Pee's post without mentioning the member to whom he refers therein.

[french frank]

However, in accordance with previous policy, I shall now return to my self-imposed exile, at least as far as this most obviously "challenging" of forum threads is concerned.

Sometimes it is best to simply acknowledge abject personal failure and turn, with fresh and renewed hope, to something a little less unfathomable.

scotty, I think that wise. There must be more than a few Catholics on this forum who consider it the better part of valour to lie low until the blast has past!

[jean]

Pope Francis has reportedly called a young gay Catholic man in France to reassure him about his sexuality.

Christophe Trutino had written to the Pope to emotionally explain his inner turmoil in reconciling his sexuality with his faith, explaining how he was terrified he was going to hell for being gay, local media reported.

The 25-year-old sales assistant from Toulouse said that due to the ongoing row over France’s battle over same-sex marriage, he was struggling to stay a believer in the Catholic faith.

rutino said he was left stunned when he then received a phone call from the head of the Catholic Church himself.

“Your homosexuality. It doesn't matter”, the Pope reportedly told him, according to the local newspaper La Dépêche du Midi.

"It was he who started the conversation," Trutino said, according to a translation on The Local.

"He said 'Christopher? It's Pope Francis'. I was unsettled, of course. I asked, " Really? " He replied : "Yes."

“I received the letter that you sent me. You need to remain courageous and continue to believe and pray and stay good,” the Pope told him during the nine-minute conversation in Spanish.

“Your homosexuality. It doesn’t matter. One way or another , we are all children of God. This is why we must continue to be good," the Pope told him...

[Mr Pee]

Can't we just merge all these tiresome threads about homosexualism together? It would make navigation a lot easier. Or why not just set up a seperate homosexualist sub-forum. Perhaps it could be called "The Glory Hole".