Francis has openly called for civil unions for homosexuals. Wherein Fr. Z rants.

Today – the 1st anniversary of when the demon idols of the hideous Pachamama were pitched into the Tiber River [HERE] – we learn that Francis has openly called for civil unions for homosexuals.

He did so in an interview for documentary about him.  CNA has the story HERE.   The documentary was seen in Rome today.  It will be released for North America on Sunday … which, given the content seems a desecration of the Lord’s Day.

“Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it,” Pope Francis said in the film, of his approach to pastoral care.

After those remarks, and in comments likely to spark controversy among Catholics, Pope Francis weighed in directly on the issue of civil unions for same-sex couples.

“What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered,” the pope said. “I stood up for that.”

He said it in the filmnot off camera as an aside, an off the cuff remark.

It’s one thing when some diocesan bishop in Argentina says something which flies directly in the face of the Church’s teaching.  It’s another when that diocesan bishop is in ROME.

Francis has, in the past, opined about this spiritually deadly proposition.  In 2014 he said something along these lines to Corriere della Sera.  In 2017 he is cited in a book called Politics and Society with a French sociologist Dominque Wolton.

And, in a seemingly affirmation that he really does think this possible, he says so in a video.

Creeping incrementalism, friends.   Step by step.  Brick from brick.  Acquiescence to adultery in Amoris.   Where does it end?   I think we are seeing where it ends.

First, it is quite simply horrifying that he, a Catholic, a Jesuit, a priest, a bishop, etc., would think that.

Second, it is quite simply horrifying that he, all of the above, would say that to someone else, anyone.

Third, it is quite simply horrifying that he would say it on camera, which means permanent record of this thoughts.

Fourth, it is quite simply horrifying that, on reflection and without doubt consultation on the content of the document, would permit that part to be left in documentary.

This will have dire consequences for the warp and weft of the Church.

Remember: an interview in a documentary is NOT a papal document or official teaching of the Church.   However, Francis has revealed his mind in a public way about same-sex unions.

The language of “rights” makes what he said extremely dangerous.

I try whenever reason permits to chalk stuff like this up to incompetence.  We should not immediately leap to imagine malice or purposely error, even heresy, as the first explanation if we can reasonably impute it to incompetence.   I want to say, “Okay, perhaps all these people around Francis are so amateurish that they quite simply screw up again and again and again and again and again.”

Francis gave an implicit endorsement of all that goes with active homosexuality including sodomy.  By putting this in terms of rights, the “right” to a family – whatever that means! – does he therefore also condone adoption of children by same-sex couples?  In vitro fertilization? Surrogate motherhood?

I’ve been calling for REPARATION… REPARATION… REPARATION!

There is more need of REPARATION than ever before.

Something is seriously wrong and we have to – all of us – be prepared for the divisive consequences of this horrifying development.

FATHERS!  BISHOPS! 

It’s time for TRADITION.

Full bore TRADITION.

What are you guys waiting for?   Do you need MORE?!?

To you good lay people out there, entrust all of this to St. Joseph, Terror of Demons and Protector of the Church.   Joseph, most chaste.  Joseph, head of the Holy Family.

Tomorrow is the Feast of St. John Paul II.  Since 2013 we have seen a systematic attack and dismantling of the Wojtyla magisterium.  Ask him to intercede.  He would tell us – right now –

DO NOT BE AFRAID!

I say, be strong and determined.  These are evil times.   But WE are the team God assembled for these evil times.  From before the creation of the entire cosmos, He wanted all of us in place here and now.   Be confident in divine support of your vocation and many graces.

Be steadfast.

Holy Church is not greater than her Lord.  If Christ underwent His Passion, the Church must, too, undergo her passion.

This is, for us, the greatest honor God could offer to us in this vale of tears.

It’s time for TRADITION.

Full bore TRADITION.

And… this… as the Holy See issues an obvious Pachamama 10 Euro coin….

Comment moderation is ON.

Please share this post!
Share

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Cri de Coeur, Jesuits, Liberals, Pò sì jiù, Sin That Cries To Heaven, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, Wherein Fr. Z Rants, You must be joking! and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

59 Responses to Francis has openly called for civil unions for homosexuals. Wherein Fr. Z rants.

  1. arga says:

    Hasn’t the pope just repealed the 6th commandment? TO say civil unions for homosexuals is good, isn’t he approving of homosexual behavior? And if so, how can the church then condemn cohabitation or sex outside of marriage? This seems to me to be a nuclear bomb on the credibility of the church in all matters dealing with sexual morality.

  2. Longinus says:

    I consider this statement by the pope as a very strong endorsement of Biden’s version of a “faithful Catholic”.
    Shameful!

  3. The Egyptian says:

    I am so tired of this man playing jenga with the church.
    Smoke of Satan my rear, this is a full on fire

  4. Irish Timothy says:

    Thank you Father Z! This sums it up as good as one can hope for. Time for extra rosaries, fasting, mass, confession and trust in God. And pray for those that agree with the Pope. We have to do that too, as alarming as this announcement from him is today. Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Joseph pray for us!

  5. Kevin says:

    Mad absolutely mad! I can only figure the Pope is concerned that abandoned partners and children will have no right to state assistance if the state doesn’t recognise civil unions.

    These views are however his own, and once again by expressing them without clarifing that they are his own, he causes confusion.

    In the 2013 book On Heaven and Earth, Pope Francis did not reject the possibility of civil unions outright, but did say that laws “assimilating” homosexual relationships to marriage are “an anthropological regression,” and he expressed concern that if same-sex couples “are given adoption rights, there could be affected children. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help them shape their identity.”

    God protect those who might be caused to fall because of this error of judgement.

    Pray and fast for him.

  6. Gaetano says:

    Pope Francis doesn’t just make me question the wisdom of Vatican II.

    He makes me question the wisdom of Vatican I.

  7. Ave Maria says:

    The man from Argentina has surrounded himself with homosexuals so this should not be a surprise. He has welcomed them to the Vatican and appointed a certain jesuit promoter of sodomy to a higher position. He lives with them at his nice ‘hotel’. We are left without a chief shepherd to help us in holiness. We must look to our other holy clergy and cling to Jesus and Mary. Many are still denied the sacraments so those of us who are not must receive them as much as possible and realize that we may not always have access. This is a demonic assault and spiritual war. Stay in a state of grace! We cannot defend the cesspool at the Vatican; we are humanly on our own. But we are not spiritually on our own.

  8. samwise says:

    Snowball effect: same-sex union, bisexual union(s) & polyandry/polygamy, Sharia law.

  9. aam says:

    Looking back, I’m wondering if Benedict XVI abdicated under duress, hence his abdication was invalid, hence he’s still the pope?

  10. Rev. Paul L. Vasquez says:

    Not ashamed to admit I came here to read your thoughts before beginning to make up my mind about mine, as you are the ecclesiastic closest to tradition who does not routinely bash the Pope. Indeed this is not an official statement, nevertheless it is disturbing. In a time when clarity is necessary above all else, we have not had that. I do not wish ill to the Holy Father, as that would be the opposite of a Christian disposition, but goodness, can I wish for the bold proclamation of the Truth? I have it on reliable authority that it will set us free.

  11. ChesterFrank says:

    During the start of the gay-marriage lobbying civil union was offered to them and they refused it. I have to think this pope can’t escape his South American background. His advisors and those that seek his influence on social issues are exclusively socialists and leftist. Pope Benedict from the beginning was vilified by the left, while this pope was embraced by them from the beginning. Those same leftist (including clergy/USCCB)know how to play him like a fiddle . Pope Francis refused to make JP2 a doctor of the Church. The one who should have been made a doctor of the Church is Benedict.

  12. iamlucky13 says:

    I’m very concerned about how this was said, but less so about what specifically was said. I remember, after all, when the media reported that Pope Benedict XVI had reversed Church teaching on the use of condoms.

    I have more thoughts about two specific quotations:

    “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family.”

    At the basic level, this is true. It is a right in particular way for children, and in another particular way for a husband and wife. I think it is true in a looser sense for unmarried adults, who also need supportive, chaste relationships with others.

    The crucial part that was left unstated, of course, is that these relationships must always follow the commandments and the right order God has created us for.

    “What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered”

    A civil union law that helps adults to mutually support each other in ways appropriate to their state in life is not, at face value, out of the question. I don’t know exactly how Pope Francis intended it, but it is obvious how it will be interpreted by all those who disagree with the Church’s teachings about homosexuality. Furthermore, suggestions about civil unions as a means for those who experience same sex attraction to support each other raise serious practical concerns about living regularly in a near occasion of sin.

    What a mess. On one hand, I really want to give this the benefit of a generous doubt and suppose that he wants to address the practical and social needs of those who experience same sex attraction. But could he really be unaware how much confusion comments like that would generate if not accompanied by very careful and precise clarification? Or did he provide some clarifications the producers of the documentary deliberately left out?

    On the other hand, if his mind really is that “civil unions” could be a wink and nod to live out homosexual lifestyles without directly challenging Church teaching, how is he willing to sow division in the Church by proposing it in such a careless manner?

    I have frequently thought of the metaphor of the bull in a China shop when considering how Pope Francis carries out is papacy. It is frustrating to be left with hoping he is as ignorant as the bull of the mess he is making.

  13. acardnal says:

    cf. 1 Cor 6:9, Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men . . . will inherit the kingdom of God.

  14. SanSan says:

    Civil Unions between homosexuals……how many IVF’s and surrogacy will be done to “make” their “happiness” complete? I am scandalized. This really hurts today – don’t we have enough to process these days? God help Holy Mother Church and help your children persevere.

  15. KateD says:

    My heart is filled with dread for this poor man…and at his age. It explains why so many mischeivous prelates feel so emboldened to treat the faithful so poorly.

    They are difficult for us to contend with in this life, but this life is so short. I am less concerned about the discomfort they cause me in this life than the discomfort they will experience in the next. I reeeeealy don’t want that for them.

    Ultimately, they will do what they will do. What can we do but pray and continue to calmly, lovingly speak the Truth?

    At the end of the day, though it’s unfortunate the Pope would say such a thing, God’s Word supercedes the Pope’s.

    I am sorry for the Pope and for those who will be led astray.

    As for me andy family…..we will pray for them.

    -Sigh-

  16. PetersBarque says:

    This makes me sick to the core of my being.

  17. DeeEmm says:

    Ummmm………., consecration of Russia???

    “I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart….
    If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace. If not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church.”

    Are we undergoing the price of disobedience? Was the consecration done as the Blessed Mother asked? The Church is now persecuted from within and without. We fight against an avalanche of errors, a constant flow of immorality propped up as virtue thereby scandalizing the faithful. Heed Mary’s words regarding the price of not doing the consecration. There is no ambiguity in her language and in my humble opinion it is a place to start if we are to navigate our way out of this horrible mess.

  18. Jvoyn says:

    The simplest answer is usually the correct one. Mary, undoer of knots, pray for us.

  19. ajf1984 says:

    Perhaps now is the time for the lay faithful to engage in serious study of John Paul II’s magisterium, and I cannot more highly recommend the Master of Arts in John Paul II Studies at the University of St. Thomas in Houston, TX, for this! https://www.stthom.edu/Academics/Institutes/John-Paul-II-Institute/Degrees-and-Programs/Graduate/MA-in-John-Paul-II-Studies/Index.aqf

    I am currently enrolled in this program, and happily recommend it.

  20. Fulco One Eye says:

    I listened to EWTN radio today and specifically to Francis’ fellow Jesuit Father Mitch Pacwa to see how they would address this. At first there was an attempt to blame the media for exaggeration – as if somehow that was a way out. Then after reading a quote from the documentary they backed off that dodge a bit. Then they attempted to interpret what was said in the most innocuous way but that segued into an admission that this action by Francis was unfortunate and would lead to confusion. I say this not as a criticism of Father P or EWTN because like all of us we have to deal with this latest magnum mess from Francis. That you are less evasive in your response is comforting to laymen like myself since it’s impossible to chase down our local clerics who have become very swift and clever in avoiding the truth about the Pope.

  21. DMorgan says:

    I am without words to express what is churning inside of me right now. Holy St. Joseph ora pro Nobis! Holy Mary, Mother of God, protect your children!

  22. Peter Stuart says:

    Horrifying is not a strong enough word. Frankly, I’m tired to death of this hairsplitting about “well, it’s not official teaching…” At least 99 out of 100 Catholics think whatever the Pope says *is* official teaching. That makes it very hard to be among the 1% (or fewer) who know the difference.

    Here’s the thing: SSA Catholics like me who have been struggling to be faithful (and losing a lot of battles) just got thrown under the bus. And the James Martin SJ’s of this world are going to have a field day running the bus back and forth over us. And bishops are too busy with recycling and illegal immigration and Trump hate to care, except maybe to take a turn driving the bus.

  23. JesusFreak84 says:

    Ex-wives of “gay” men and faithful Catholics probably feel pretty similar right now…

  24. jz says:

    Well if we can dare to hope that all men might saved in the end, what’s the harm? I mean we don’t want these people to be unhappy do we? Do YOU want them to feel discarded?

  25. Just Some Guy says:

    So, my church has a milquetoast, thinly veiled liberal, Spririt of Vatican II priest whose sermons are as awful as you might expect from that description and who will likely welcome this latest Francis commentary enthusiastically. And yet I am obliged by my faith to hear his stupefying, soul-deadening preaching each Sunday – and have my wife and children malformed by it. I realize it is my responsibility to educate myself and my family on the faith and its doctrines. But I do wonder how it can be an obligation to sit through this week after week when I know the truth is something different. I do have a slightly less troubling choice a bit farther away, but what if I didn’t? I am supposed to be nourished in the faith by the preaching, no discouraged and left to wonder why I even bother.

  26. Ariseyedead says:

    To be blunt, but also honest, when the Pope says stupid stuff like this, it makes it very difficult to listen to anything he has to say. Is it now up to the faithful to figure out when we really need to listen and obey what the Pope teaches or commands and when we are better off to simply ignore him? Given fallen human nature, that’s a recipe for disaster.

  27. Semper Gumby says:

    Speaking of “children of God and hav[ing] a right to a family”: children should not be raised merely for the political satisfaction of adults, whoever those adults may be. Parenting is a vocation and incurs duties beyond being “legally covered.” Francis should “stand up for that.”

    Children flourish best with a mother and a father- children, to use Francis’ word, have a “right” to that. (Yes, there are heterosexual parents that could improve their parenting, that’s not the issue here. Furthermore, a number of Christian adoption agencies are discriminated against for their insistence a child flourishes best with a father and mother.)

    The recent lengthy essay from the Vatican is known by the Italian, not by the Latin, phrase “Fratelli tutti.” Hopefully, the next essay from the Vatican will not be written in Phoenician and wax philosophical about “tophets.”

    Well done to those who threw the Pachamama idols into the Tiber. Pachamama worship involved child sacrifice.

  28. CatholicnArkansas says:

    St. Paul’s letter to the Romans Chapter 1

    18 God’s anger is being revealed from heaven; his anger against the impiety and wrong-doing of the men whose wrong-doing denies his truth its full scope. 19 The knowledge of God is clear to their minds; God himself has made it clear to them; 20 from the foundations of the world men have caught sight of his invisible nature, his eternal power and his divineness, as they are known through his creatures. Thus there is no excuse for them; 21 although they had the knowledge of God, they did not honour him or give thanks to him as God; they became fantastic in their notions, and their senseless hearts grew benighted; 22 they, who claimed to be so wise, turned fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the imperishable God for representations of perishable man, of bird and beast and reptile. 24 That is why God abandoned their lustful hearts to filthy practices of dishonouring their own bodies among themselves. 25 They had exchanged God’s truth for a lie, reverencing and worshipping the creature in preference to the Creator (blessed is he for ever, Amen); 26 and, in return, God abandoned them to passions which brought dishonour to themselves. Their women exchanged natural for unnatural intercourse; 27 and the men, on their side, giving up natural intercourse with women, were burnt up with desire for each other; men practising vileness with their fellow men. Thus they have received a fitting retribution for their false belief. 28 And as they scorned to keep God in their view, so God has abandoned them to a frame of mind worthy of all scorn, that prompts them to disgraceful acts. 29 They are versed in every kind of injustice, knavery, impurity, avarice, and ill-will; spiteful, murderous, contentious, deceitful, depraved, backbiters, 30 slanderers, God’s enemies; insolent, haughty, vainglorious; inventive in wickedness, disobedient to their parents; 31 without prudence, without honour, without love, without loyalty, without pity. 32 Yet, with the just decree of God before their minds, they never grasped the truth that those who so live are deserving of death; not only those who commit such acts, but those who countenance such a manner of living.

  29. Ariseyedead says:

    There’s a fire in the Vatican…

  30. Grumpy Beggar says:

    Hmm. . . Vatican News is heralding the documentary without any reference whatsoever to homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, transgenderism – strange . . . it almost appears to be a deafening void HERE; while the Bitter Pill article was slobbering all over the topic.
    I guess, considering all the spin doctors who have earned their doctoral degrees in bovine scatology jumping on and manipulating Pope Francis’ every word and gesture, we won’t know for sure until we have a chance to see the documentary ourselves.

    At this time, I would note a contradictory subtlety in that the LGBT lobbied so vehemently that their reign of fear coerced the dictionaries to include homosexual civil unions in the definition of marriage. They want us all to call it “marriage.” But the Bitter Pill says “civil unions for gay couples” – not something along the lines of “gay marriage.” In an honest world, it would only take a single simple stone in David’s sling to slay their Goliath ; only one little question: We could simply ask the pope, “Holy Father, is it ‘civil unions for gay couples’, or is it ‘marriage’ that they are raving about ?” (Do you guys think the world could withstand the answer? :-0 )
    Reading the Bitter Pill and Fr. James Martin S.J.’s tweets really twists my stomach at times. If a snake had arms and hands to write with, I’m almost certain that what it wrote would resemble some of those tweets. Ughhh!. . . *face. . . palm*
    They and we, all need lots of prayers.
    And as Fr. Z so often reminds us Confession for each of us is never a bad idea. If personal holiness has to be our initial response, personal Confession is a sure step towards that goal – towards consistency in giving Jesus our best effort.

  31. The Masked Chicken says:

    “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it,” Pope Francis said in the film, of his approach to pastoral care.

    The charitable read for this sentence is that Pope Francis does not mean “rights to a family,” as in reproduction. He seems to be addressing the situation of someone being excluded from a family because they are a homosexual. He say, “nobody should be thrown out…”. This would not make sense if he were talking about family as in making a family. It refers to being part of a pre-existing family.

    The rest of the quoted material is disturbing, however. The laws of a society are supposed to represent the morality of a society. Unfortunately, the situation in many modern societies is that morality seems to be derived from whatever laws a society can get away with. Morality becomes a power play dress up in false compassion. It seems that Pope Francis might not be able to distinguish true compassion from false compassion, in this case, mortal sin from societal sin. Two people of the same sex can be friends. They can even live together as roommates (many college people do). What they can’t do is claim some sort of “civil union”. This implies something beyond friendship. It implies a relationship under law similar to marriage. It implies the sort of Protestant religion that sees marriage itself as only a civil union between a man and a woman, capable of divorce. Civil unions of homosexuals is the principle of private determination or judgment carried to the extreme. It is the same nonsense undergirding the famous footnote 351 in Amoris laetitia. It completely ignores 2000 years of Catholic teaching about homosexual relationships, about the true goods of marriage, and about the relationship between Christ and the Church.

    The Chicken

  32. donato2 says:

    It is time for faithful and courageous Cardinals, if there are any, to step up and call out the Pope for undermining clear and unalterable Church teaching. This Pope should step down if he can’t bring himself to accept that teaching.

  33. rbbadger says:

    Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence has issued a statement on this. It is precisely the sort of statement we need. Short, too the point, and one which points out that the Holy Father’s idea is, well, “inadmissable”.

    https://dioceseofprovidence.org/news/statement-of-bishop-thomas-tobin-on-the-comments-of-pope-francis-regarding-civil-unions#.X5B7pAdWgH4.twitter

  34. KSC says:

    Many people have now been condemned to hell because Cardinal Bergoglio has given them permission to sodomize one another. “Is the pope catholic” is no longer an easy question to respond too….

  35. Byzshawn says:

    As an Eastern Rite Catholic (or Orthodox in union with Rome), I have sadly had many occasions over the last 7 years to regret the Union of Brest.

  36. The Cobbler says:

    Wasn’t Pachamama originally homosexual, too? Like her lover is another goddess and she can bear children without a male begetting them?

  37. SemperServusDei says:

    I will continue to pray my traditional Benedictine monastic diurnal in Latin, seek out the traditional Mass whenever I can, including at an SSPX chapel if need be, pray to St. Michael, St. Rocco, St. Lucy and of course pray the Rosary daily, and offer reparations. I will cling to almighty God and to the Traditional teachings of the Faith. But one thing I will not do is read another thing this pope writes or tweets or says. I can’t judge his motives, but he is doing massive damage to the Faith, sowing confusion, and promulgating heresy. I believe the pandemic was brought on in large part by the scandalous idolatry he promoted and participated in at the Vatican one year ago. I pray for his conversion, his replacement, and his salvation, and I pray for his successor… and I pray for the conversion of the world in spite of the pope. These are trying times, but as you said, God chose each of us for these times. May His will be done!

  38. iamlucky13 says:

    Peter Stuart – continue to be strong in your resolution to do what is right. I don’t think you’re being thrown under the bus: Nobody has any right to criticize you for trying honestly to be faithful to God and his vocation for you, despite living in a world that tries to lead you astray. However, you do deserve clear, consistent teaching to support you in your efforts, and I pray for the Church to return to giving that to all of us.

  39. JMody says:

    This is the third (at least) episode in a game of “chicken” that the Holy Father seems to play for reasons which are completely beyond me.
    1. The whole Pachamama/devil-worship-in-Vatican-City. We do NOT want to inculturate everything, because some of it is deadly error, from which Christ and the Church are trying to free us! If we do, where is the parish that is conducting the Aztec/Mayan human sacrifice, from which Paunchymama is only slightly removed? But we didn’t actually endorse devil worship, did we? So we were preserved from teaching error (I hope), right?
    2. The whole death penalty issue. The 1997 catechism was already treading on very thin ice when it said that the use of the death penalty was allowed in some cases but modern society has the means … in other words, the morality of execution depends on the means of the state to incarcerate. Those with limited means can execute, but those with ample means should … refrain? Avoid it as a sin of murder? So Pope Francis tells us it is never acceptable. Does that mean that Augustine, Innocent III, Pius XII, Thomas Aquinas and a host of others were teaching error? Or is Francis teaching error? Or is there some room between “not acceptable” and “immoral”? That would preserve us from teaching error (I hope), wouldn’t it?
    Now this – if there is a right for these people to have their “union” recognized by the state, which is ordained by God to order our affairs in this life (whether they know it or not) to their proper end which is God, does that mean that God recognizes the union? Does that mean that St. Paul taught error? Or any of Francis’ predecessors? Or does a civil union for legal “cover” not rise to the same level as saying “it’s allowable”, and so we are preserved from teaching error (I hope)?

    So, in the game from cinema, we race toward the cliff and see who can stop closer to the edge of oblivion. We certainly seem to be getting closer and closer each time. I closed my eyes this time – does the quiet mean we’ve stopped, or that we’ve gone over the edge and are now airborne? (Niki Lauda said this was the reason to count to 3 or 5 after a crash before trying to get out of the racecar)
    – – – –
    Extra credit: Does this mean that the McCarrick report is coming soon, with a surprise ending?
    – – – –
    Extra credit 2: How far down this road leads to apostasy or worse?

  40. Rod Halvorsen says:

    Father Z says: “Remember: an interview in a documentary is NOT a papal document or official teaching of the Church.”

    This is true, but overworked. [And it’s true.] Truth is, Catholics are primed to accept whatever a Pope says as being what the Church teaches. They are wrong of course, but then, they have the taller soapbox, or so it often seems.

  41. Kerry says:

    Two paragraphs from Archbishop Vigano at life site news: “Jorge Mario Bergoglio is trying to force some Cardinals and Bishops to separate themselves from communion with him, obtaining as a result not his own deposition for heresy but rather the expulsion of Catholics who want to remain faithful to the perennial Magisterium of the Church. This trap would have the purpose – in the presumed intentions of Bergoglio and his “magic circle” – of consolidating his own power within a church that would only nominally be “Catholic” but in reality would be heretical and schismatic.
    This deception draws on the support of the globalist élite, the mainstream media and the LGBT lobby, to which many clergy, bishops, and cardinals are no strangers. Furthermore, let us not forget that in many nations there are laws in force which criminally punish anyone who considers sodomy reprehensible and sinful or who does not approve of the legitimization of homosexual “matrimony” – even if they do so on the basis of their Creed. A pronouncement by the bishops against Bergoglio on a question like homosexuality could potentially lead civil authority to prosecute them criminally, with the approval of the Vatican.”
    The short article: https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/archbishop-vigano-responds-to-new-film-in-which-pope-endorses-homosexual-civil-unions

  42. Richard_amdg says:

    Calm down, God is not mocked. Providence guided the Church at Vatican I to define papal infallibility to demonstrate, among other things, that Francis is not Pope. Our Blessed Lord will not be defeated by a bunch of morons in shepard’s clothes; He will have His Day and His enemies will be scattered. Get back to basics: meditate on the Acts of Faith, Hope and Charity.

  43. NOCatholic says:

    I am sick and tired of my faith in the indefectability of the Church, being tested by this Pope.

  44. maternalView says:

    I do wonder about the people attempting once again to nuance the Pope’s words. Who are they trying to convince that he still holds to Church teaching? I spent part of this afternoon reading posts of and responding to Catholic women on FB who are delighted to read/hear the Pope’s words because it’s exactly what they want to believe–that the Pope is saying being gay is ok and allowing them to have civil unions is ok because it’s not “marriage” and they have “rights”. I’m tired of having to nuance and reread and hope he meant something else. There comes a point where you have to realize he can’t possibly be unaware of the confusion he causes. The Church is the Bride of Christ and is bigger than any one Pope so maybe it’s time to just start saying the Pope is wrong instead of being afraid that it makes us look bad (and excusing it instead). I also wonder how much more it is going to take to get people on their knees and back to traditional practices of the Catholic faith.

  45. Pingback: THURSDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit

  46. Padre Pio Devotee says:

    The Reparation Prayers of Fatima come to mind. The three prayers, “My God I believe, I adore….”, “Oh Most Holy Trinity Father, Son, and Holy Ghost…”, “Oh Most Holy Trinity I adore you. My God, My God I love you in the Most Blessed Sacrament.”

    The conversion prayers given by Our Lord and Our Lady to Sr. Lucia in the 1920’s.

    As well as the Reparation Prayers Of the Holy Face given to Sr. Marie of St. Peter by Christ in the 1800’s comes to mind as well.
    “May the Most Holy, Most Sacred, Most Adorable….”

  47. LarryW2LJ says:

    I caught this in the middle of the day at work yesterday and it had quite the effect on me, I wasn’t the same for the rest of the day – the feeling I had can most closely be described as “being in shock” – you know, how you feel after a slip and fall, or after being in an auto accident.

    Immediately, my mind went to – how far away are we now from “blessing” civil unions. That seems to me to be where this would lead. Secondly, this is kind of a slap in the face to faithful SSA Catholics who are trying to carry their cross and live chaste lives. Wouldn’t this AT THE VERY LEAST put them into a near occasion for sin – if they were to enter into a civil union?

    Incompetence or not, the Holy Father has to be aware that his words have weight. About an hour after the story broke the secular media was on this like a pack of hungry dogs on a side of beef. It was declared that the Catholic Church is finally “waking up” and is breaking its long stance on homosexuality.

    Enough, already!

  48. elaine sharpling says:

    Ignore – it is not the teaching of the church and that is what matters. Get on with trying to be a better Catholic than yesterday.

  49. Lepanto ! says:

    If it walks like a duck it probably *is* heresy …or sodomy as the case may be.

  50. Imrahil says:

    On those who can’t understand why people “nuance the Pope’s words”… well… all words said by whomever deserve to be nuanced. Plus, I don’t want the Holy Father to be a heretic, insert expletive. (And yes, I think: nor should any other Catholic). Plus, nuancing is only possible insofar as there is something there to be nuanced. It’s simply not true that you can argue away everything. We are Catholics. We believe in truth, insert expletive. That means we have to believe in something more than emotional leanings; and that means we have to believe in hairsplitting.

    After we’ve settled that we may look at the precise meaning of words rather than just the general direction, let’s do so, right?

    So: Pope Francis called for what is called “civil unions”; no arguing around that. (Nevertheless, thanks to the dear Masked Chicken’s comment; interesting context. But still… he did argue for civil unions.)

    He did not argue for “gay marriages” as specifically opposed to civil unions; no arguing around that either.

    It is important to make ourselves clear that just because arguing for civil unions is not arguing for gay marriages doesn’t make it good, or even defensible. The civil union (which technically in law is just “two person [perhaps: of the same sex] having this-and-that legal relationship”, nothing about sexuality) is unneccessary; it is the practical aiding and abetting of a counternatural sin; it is in political practice always the dogwhistling sound of “we would introduce gay marriage if we could”; it usually means throwing tax money or tax-reductions meant to provide for families down a drain; and it has proven itself to be over-and-done-with after fifteen years, being disliked by the homosexuals themselves (for not being marriage) from the onset. Actually it is already outdated – in the civilized world, that is, but in the less civilized world which still persecutes the homosexuals with violence, this bureaucratic monster isn’t the thing they would think of either, is it. (A classical case of “when the Church wants to be up to date, she’s always ten years behind the times”.)

    So, arguing for civil unions as a Pope is really bad. Breathtakingly bad.

    But bad as it is, it isn’t arguing for gay marriage.

    The Holy Father has – once again (after capital punishment) – managed the feat to become as close to proclaiming heresy* as it is possible without actually doing so. But in that sentence, the “without actually doing so” is still rather important, don’t you-all think?

    [*For convenience’s sake, I treated “marriage is between one man and one woman” as a dogma. It’s the truth anyway, but normally I should have looked up (or at least wondered whether someone might perhaps look up) whether there is really an “anathema sit” about that somewhere in the Church documents.]

  51. “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it,” Pope Francis said in the film, of his approach to pastoral care.

    Like Chicken and Imrahil, I didn’t read this as suggesting anything other than the ‘family that is the Church’ or perhaps ‘the parish’– ‘have a right to a family’ surely is simply a rhetorical re-iteration of ‘a right to be a part of the family’.

    Then he goes on to his own nonsense, however.

  52. maternalView says:

    Too many of us have been seduced into believing the way to understanding and maybe even finding truth is to nuance everything in the culture and in that way everyone can be happy………the “other” side (however you define that be it in politics or religion those who question or defy traditional values) now count on their opposition to be “good” people willing to be satisfied with gray, nuanced sentences…..partly true so that one is unable to dispute the entire idea…..and to be satisfied that at least it wasn’t complete heresy! We’ve settled for being mislead as long as that doesn’t happen. (I use nuance in the sense it is used in culture-as a way to avoid actually saying what is meant or to imply something that wasn’t said-not in the sense that it would be used in the scholarly study of a topic such as theology). The Pope knows he’s speaking to the public and it’s a mystery to me how he could possibly be unaware of how his words are heard. Let’s get real. Don’t we all know people–priests, politicians, bosses who say something and when you call them out on it they respond “well…I didn’t say that exactly….” knowing full well they were just vague enough they had cover. Haven’t we been victims long enough of the Card. Bernadine-style of obscuring Church teaching with nice sounding concepts that avoid the “hard” truths?

  53. KateD says:

    Civil unions and gay marriage help absolutely no one. Differentiating between the two is splitting hairs and condoning sin either way.

  54. teachermom24 says:

    Sad, very sad, but completely predictable. Pope Francis is consistent: Amoris Laetitia, pachamama, endorsing homosexual unions. Why should anyone be surprised? And it will continue because he is who he has shown himself to be. That’s how we all are unless there is some major intervening force that changes our course.

    Pope Benedict could not right the ship. He could not cleanse the Church of the putrefaction that he saw is there. We have gotten glimpses of it since his resignation and certainly there is much, much more we do not know (and, personally, I don’t want to know). By counter-example, Pope Francis is working as God’s instrument for the purification, the purgation, of the Church seen in these actions that help us realize what is and what is not Truth. The lines between what is the true Church and what is not are becoming clearer.

    Pope Benedict predicted a much smaller Church. It is happening.

  55. JoHNewman says:

    Current issue = one of the multitude of reasons why a Jesuit should never (ever) become pope.
    @elaine sharpling – Exactly!

  56. Gabriel Syme says:

    It seems quite clear to me that Jorge Bergoglio hates the Catholic faith and those who attempt to adhere to it. It is quite clear from a honest analysis – with years of evidence – that he does not personally hold the Catholic faith.

    He does not promote the gospel of Jesus Christ, but rather a set of masonic principles of human fraternity about “brotherhood”. The most lavish praise I saw of his latest encyclical was from the Grand Masonic Lodge of Spain, which commented that the Pope had embraced their principles and said the encyclical showed how far the Catholic Church had strayed from its former positions.

    Yes, even the Masons can see the current state of the Church, while many within the Church resolutely refuse to.

    In his time in office he has done nothing but attack the faith, doing his best to over-turn, or at least confuse, what were previously clear principles. His speeches typically include attacks on the character of Catholics themselves. I find it quite chilling to look back at still pictures of his public speaking, invariably his face is contorted with hatred, sneering as he shakes his fists.

    He is, surely, the pinnacle and living embodiment of “the counter Church” which came into being in the 1970s, birthed by Vatican II and “the smoke of Satan” which Pope Paul infamously linked with that period.

    (If he is not the pinnacle, then God help us, because its hard to imagine how the Church could sink much lower than this.)

    In the decades since the 70s, Bergoglio and many clergy of his generation have grown to hate the Church and become lost in love with false religions and paganism. If we are honest and look back at notable points of his pontificate, then we must accept this as being true. The scandalous ecumenical declarations, washing the feet of muslims, hiding his pectoral cross in the presence of non-Christians, venerating Pagan idols.

    He reminds me of the priest who married my wife and I – another Jesuit and a man I have great affection for. When planning the wedding, he was openly revolted at the notion that Catholic things (e.g. Gregorian Chant) might be found at a Catholic wedding. He was so eager to elevate my wife’s nominal presbyterianism to the same level as the Divinely instituted, bi-millennial Catholic faith – exactly the kind of thing Bergoglio does at every turn.

    This pontificate is a startling sign of how sick and dysfunctional the modern Church is. It has been like pus rising to the surface of a contaminated wound, a wound which people tried so hard to tell us was “just fine”, for so very long.

    That a man like Bergoglio could become a Bishop – never mind Pope – shows how far back the malaise and poor governance goes. The Church has been in a daze since the 70s, with flower-power spangled eyes, that there has been a massive dereliction of duty at every level. Men today are often made archbishops and cardinals because they are “time served” not because they are holy men or faithful shepherds.

    We can see this quite clearly when we look at the college of cardinals today which, with a few notable exceptions, is stuffed full of crooks, perverts, incompetents, liars and schemers, It is truly remarkable how the Church has managed to concentrate so much filth in such a small body of men. How dispiriting it must be for hardworking priests in parishes across the globe.

    The other strong indicator of the poor health of the Church is – of course – the reliable silence from the majority of Bishops in the face of Bergoglio, who has made fools of us all with this latest stunt.

    My wife has a homosexual relative who is getting “married”. My non-Catholic in-laws naturally assumed I would not allow my children to attend the ceremony (which would have been their first experience of any kind of wedding). They just “took it as read” – it didn’t even need discussed – because even they knew our Catholic values, even if the Pope does not.

    This was not to cause offence (of course not) but because otherwise would be to permanently distort their understanding of marriage and the Christian concepts and values surrounding it. And because, of course, many good prelates, from Benedict XVI to Bishop Tobin of Providence, have warned that Catholics should not attend such ceremonies.

    People understood and accepted this (quietly if not happily) because they respected my faith and my efforts to raise my kids as Christians. But they will have now seen the headlines – Bergoglio made the front page of several newspapers here, just as he calculated he would – and will now think that I am just a bigot: after all, the Pope says its OK, so whats the problem?

    Thanks Jorge.

  57. Pingback: PopeWatch: Father Z – The American Catholic

  58. robtbrown says:

    Iamlucky says,

    A civil union law that helps adults to mutually support each other in ways appropriate to their state in life is not, at face value, out of the question.

    In no way can a Catholic understanding of State of Life include homosexuals living together. To praise homosexual unions for their mutual support is like praising Auschwitz for its organizational excellence.

Comments are closed.