Pope Francis and Gay People

[Mr Pee]

The key point, Mr. Pee, which you seem not to be able to grasp, is that the group confined are not allowed out of it, except possibly under very limited circumstances defined by those responsible for confining them there.

Do please explain how that relates to an internet forum. I fail to see any connection.

[Flosshilde]

Is there any point in trying to explain anything to you?

[french frank]

Do please explain how that relates to an internet forum. I fail to see any connection.

It would apply if there were certain internet forums to which they were directed (and friends could visit them) and other forums where they were made to feel unwelcome or told to go away.

Let me just say that ALL 'campaigners' are tiresome to those who don't support their campaign: gays, feminists - and even those who campaign against the BBC (with the most supportive of intentions, let me add!)...

[eighthobstruction]

Here is the link I promised yesterday.

In that it gives the reactions of gay Catholics themselves to the Pope's statements, I hope it will be considered admissible.

...Today, [Pope Francis] has delivered some thoughts which are more explicitly favourable, insisting that gays should be integrated into society, must not be marginalized or discriminated against, and should be welcomed into the priesthood. Welcome words indeed. There is in fact absolutely nothing new in this – it’s all absolutely standard, orthodox Catholic doctrine, which contains two parts. There is a compassionate side, directing that we should be treated with respect, compassion and sensitivity, and protected from unjust discrimination, and from violence or malice, in words or in deeds. Then there’s the harsh side, denying absolutely any hope of physical expression of our loves in genital acts. The problem has been that many bishops, and the previous two popes, have ignored or directly flouted the compassionate parts of teaching, focusing exclusively on the harshest bits. Francis is not in any way signalling a shift in actual teaching – but he is introducing some sorely needed balance. That alone is welcome.

There’s a way to go yet to introduce sanity into the Catholic Church approach to human sexuality, for people of any orientation, but this is a great start.

(My emphasis.)

A bit disappointing once it is picked over 'business as usual, but with a smiling face'....but what a lovely smiling face (steely eyes behind for sure)....

[jean]

Clutching at straws, you might say.

[Mr Pee]

Is there any point in trying to explain anything to you?

Well, FF just seems to have managed it.....

[Flosshilde]

& very well too. Do you understand now?

She obviously has more patience, & perhaps experienced less of your obtuseness.

[Mr Pee]

& very well too. Do you understand now?

She obviously has more patience, & perhaps experienced less of your obtuseness.

Or perhaps she just knows what she's talking about.

[jean]

My own particular anxiety is that as the Church moves towards more liberal social attitudes, which of course I welcome, it also embraces more liberal attitudes to the Liturgy - which seems to involve translating beautiful Latin into rather horrible English, and ditching the best of the music altogether.

This I do not welcome at all.

[ahinton]

A bit disappointing once it is picked over 'business as usual, but with a smiling face'....but what a lovely smiling face (steely eyes behind for sure)....

On the face of it, yes but, as I observed earlier, we will have to wait and see whether this turns out to have been little more than a piece of weasel word utterance or the beginning of a genuine campaign on the Pope's part to deliver due compassion and equality of opportunity and other treatment and respect to homosexuals and to women both inside and outside the Church. CofE hasn't exactlyt had the best record on any of this over the years but it has at least now gotten rather ahead of the Roman Catholic Church on such matters.

[ahinton]

My own particular anxiety is that as the Church moves towards more liberal social attitudes, which of course I welcome, it also embraces more liberal attitudes to the Liturgy - which seems to involve translating beautiful Latin into rather horrible English, and ditching the best of the music altogether.

This I do not welcome at all.

Whilst that might well be an anxiety, the one does not necessarily of itself have to presume the other, does it? I am not a Christian myself but I would nontheless in principle share your concern over these issues.

[pilamenon]

But it's perfectly reasonable for those posters who are married to mention their spouse 'at every possible opportunity'

I don't think it's appropriate to name names, as you did in your post - once again it personalises the issue, which is how interesting discussions get derailed and deleted.

On the Pope's comments, I am sceptical. He does seem keen to project a different, perhaps more open and humble image than his predecessor, but the theology and teaching remain the same.

[Sydney Grew]

What has not yet been discussed in this thread - unless I have missed it - is the position of the "gay lobby" in the Vatican in all this. A number of reports have started that Pope Francis has acknowledged the existence of such a "lobby," but whether He approves of it or does not is not entirely clear to me from anything I have read. Some reports say He disapproves, others say He approves. Some reports say there is a "scandal" involving homo-sexualistic blackmail, other reports that it somehow led to Benedict's resignation, and yet others say that there is no such "lobby" at all. A "gay lobby" as such, pure and simple, is in fact something that ought to be encouraged is it not?

[jean]

I don't think it's appropriate to name names...

I agree - but I don't think it's acceptable, either, to hint darkly that one or two posters behave in some unacceptable way, leaving everyone to guess who they might be, or even agonise over whether they're one of them.

[jean]

What has not yet been discussed in this thread - unless I have missed it - is the position of the "gay lobby" in the Vatican in all this.

No it hasn't, so far.

A number of reports have started that Pope Francis has acknowledged the existence of such a "lobby," but whether He approves of it or does not is not entirely clear to me from anything I have read.

Not sure. Good article on the topic in today's Guardian.

A "gay lobby" as such, pure and simple, is in fact something that ought to be encouraged is it not?

Not if it pretends not to exist at all, as is likely in an organisation which excoriates homosexuality.

Some reports say there is a "scandal" involving homo-sexualistic blackmail...

All too likely in such circumstances.

Remember the good old days when homosexual men lived in fear discovery? No wonder so many of them were blackmailed. Yet I hear it argued sometimes even now that there's something in homosexuality per se that invites blackmail.

.