Last week, when I made a short list of some of the cool things Pope Francis has done thus far, I completely forgot to talk about the way he’s changed (rhetorically, at least) the Church’s stance on the LGBT community. Pope Francis is not just Time Magazine’s Person of the Year, you see, he was also given the same honor by The Advocate, the American LGBT-rights magazine. It’s a big deal! I like the Photoshopped NOH8 on his cheek too – it’s a very provocative, interesting cover choice.
Anyway, The Advocate has a massive write-up about “the year in gay rights” and why people like Edie Windsor and Ted Olson weren’t named the person of the year (although they did make the list of “most important people of the year”). The Advocate says they chose Pope Francis because “Pope Francis is leader of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics all over the world. There are three times as many Catholics in the world than there are citizens in the United States. Like it or not, what he says makes a difference.” Here are some highlights from the cover story:
Pope Francis’s stark change in rhetoric from his two predecessors — both who were at one time or another among The Advocate’s annual Phobie Awards — makes what he’s done in 2013 all the more daring. First there’s Pope John Paul II, who gay rights activists protested during a highly publicized visit to the United States in 1987 because of what had become known as the “Rat Letter” — an unprecedented damning of homosexuality as “intrinsically evil.” It was written by one of his cardinals, Joseph Ratzinger, who went on to become Pope Benedict XVI. Since 1978, one of those two men had commanded the influence of the Vatican — until this year.
…As Argentina’s archbishop, Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio opposed marriage equality’s eventual passage there, saying in 2010 that it’s a “destructive attack on God’s plan.” When Bergoglio became pope, GLAAD was quick to point out that he’d once called adoption by same-sex couples a form of discrimination against children.
But it’s actually during Pope Francis’s time as cardinal that his difference from Benedict and hard-liners in the church became apparent. As same-sex marriage looked on track to be legalized in Argentina, Bergoglio argued privately that the church should come out for civil unions as the “lesser of two evils.” That’s all according to Pope Francis’s authorized biographer, Sergio Rubin. Argentine gay activist Marcelo Márquez backed up the story, telling The New York Times in March that Bergoglio “listened to my views with a great deal of respect. He told me that homosexuals need to have recognized rights and that he supported civil unions, but not same-sex marriage.”
As pope, he has not yet said the Catholic Church supports civil unions. But what Francis does say about LGBT people has already caused reflection and consternation within his church. The moment that grabbed headlines was during a flight from Brazil to Rome. When asked about gay priests, Pope Francis told reporters, according to a translation from Italian, “If someone is gay and seeks the Lord with good will, who am I to judge?”
… Francis’s view on how the Catholic Church should approach LGBT people was best explained in his own words during an in-depth interview with America magazine in September. He recalled, “A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.”
He said that when he was a cardinal, “I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During [a recent] return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.”
He continued, “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”
The Advocate goes to list various secondary stories about Pope Francis’s willingness to open dialogue around LGBT issues, and how he surrounds himself and promotes some of the more pro-tolerance priests and bishops within the church. Apparently, Pope Francis is well aware that if he used his platform to stridently condemn gay marriage and/or homosexuality in general (like Pope Benedict did), the church would share in the blame for hate crimes, for the lack of tolerance in all God’s creations, etc. It’s an interesting piece, and I’m interested in seeing what Pope Francis does in 2014. Will the conservative hard-line Catholics try to reel him in? Or will they let him off the leash even further?
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Hip Pope. Right On
I’m a recovering Catholic myself, but I think this was the right choice. He’s someone who’s actually changing the dialogue about the role of the church in the modern world.
I am also a recovering Catholic! I like that term. He’s one of the few Catholic officials of any kind in a long time that haven’t made me want to commit some type of aggravated assault. I think it’s cool that, even without changing church doctrine, he is shifting the focus back to the issues at hand: loving one another and focusing more on ourselves and what we are doing to serve God rather than perseverating on minor issues that have to do with other people’s bodies and choices. First things first! (That is a recovery term as well.) I still don’t know if I will ever go back to the Church, but either way it’s nice to know that some good leadership has come in.
I think he has the potential to shift with the times.
While Pope Francis is making changes, I think it is too early to give some of the credit he has been receiving. He is still toeing the traditional line when it comes to the role of women and the church. Time will tell, of course.
I don’t ultimately think we’ll see major changes to the church’s attitude toward women under Francis. Doctrine moves slowly. To the extent Francis has a role in promoting change, I think it’s through shifting emphasis from some of the more divisive, alienating debates to things that most people find admirable but that are often easily forgotten, like charity and compassion.
What a wonderful selection! Nice to see someone that:
1. Doesn’t Twerk ( Miley Cyrus)
2. Doesn’t have a porn tape in his past. (Kim Kardashian)
3. Hasn’t been to rehab. (Lindsay Lohan)
4. Hasn’t had an affair. ( Most senators)
5. Doesn’t pimp out his children. (Kris Kardashian)
6. Hasn’t stolen (Bernie Madoff)
7. Hasn’t gotten someone pregnant that was married at the time. (Simon Cowell)
To name just a few. It’s just refreshing to see a “nice” person, that truly deserves it and one that we don’t have to be ashamed of.
As a Catholic, I find the rest of the world’s reaction to our Pope so interesting. He is not changing anything, people. The Catechism (our code of beliefs) is not up for revision. He has instead been able to show the reality of what has always been the foundation of our faith – love and service to God and each other. He is not progressive, he is actually totally regressive!
ITA
Agreed. I think people like what they think Pope Francis is saying but I’m not sure they understand it. I’m as baffled by his popularity in secular circles as I am over the general dislike of Benedict. I love them both.
@ Francesca @Anne
Perfectly stated.
Prolly because Popes are not known for stances like:
“My mind is open”
“let’s Talk about it”
“If you are a nice moral person Is none of my business”
“Oh look you are a “lesser” person, How can I serve you?”
“Nah lemme be chill and live like I’m a regular person not a Brunei potentate”
” This Doctrine stuff isnt useful to heal and Minister so much”
Usually Popes skew towards the rethoric of: “I, unmarried man, way out of touch with normal stuff will tell you what to do, drone on, live in a glass castle and YOU BETTER OBEY or you’re out”
Word.
Exactly QQ! I find it “so interesting” that Francesca can’t understand why people disliked a cold, Nazi, pedophile-hider and like a man who is trying to cut through the bullshit and heal people through a relationship with a community of believers and their God.
He didn’t change the church’s stance on the LGBT community though. He said the church’s opinion on it was clear, but that they shouldn’t focus on it all the time and be more welcoming. If you go to a mass, during the homily the priest talks about homosexuals, birth control, and abortion almost every week. I really think the pope is saying to members of the Catholic church to be more welcoming to EVERYBODY and telling the priests to tell church members what they’re doing right, not what they’re doing wrong, but I don’t think he’s condoning homosexuality.
agree. The point is – homosexual sex is still a sin. That cannot be rewritten. But so are lots of other things we do daily – hate, greed, envy, sexual promiscuity, etc. So, if u choose this religion, u need rather concentrate on your own sins than shaming others.
@Sam
This has nothing to do with me being “a really good Catholic” or not. My interest in this thread is, and always was, to give correct information on the subject of statements attributed to the pope in the media. I am not particularly religious and never suggested that I was. In any case, you keep saying “canon law” and “doctrine” (I’m pretty sure you mean the Catechism, since there’s no single body of text called “doctrine”), but if you have really studied the Catechism and Canon Law you would not have made the false statements that you just did.
Here’s what the Catechism says:
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.”142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm
And here’s what Canon Law has to say about the topic: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html
This IS the last post I’ll make in this thread.
No, but he did do something major. For decades, many religions have assumed that homosexuality is not just a sin, but a serious, major sin that qualifies for automatic damnation. The Pope, with his comments, suggested that homosexuality, while still sinful, is only one among many sins, one that might not, compared to other things, be that bad. He’s suggesting that homosexual people can still attain Heaven and know God if they live lives that are otherwise good and moral and filled with good acts. That might not seem like a lot to most of us, but that represents a major theological shift for a lot of people – especially the Catholic Church. It’s not a huge step in terms of actual policy, but it’s a big step in possibly changing how the Church thinks and acts towards gay people in general. And I can support that. But I agree that he needs to step it up and act in a way consistent with his statements.
@ SAM – I agree with you. As a lesbian I think what the Pope stated was a huge step for the GLBT community. I personally feel like his message of not judging others, including homosexuals, is an important one. Although he hasn’t changed the churches official stance on homosexuality he is making baby steps which I think is fantastic. I know many gay people who do not believe he has done enough for the gay community, which Is an opinion I respect. We all have different views on issues. However, for myself as a person from The Mormon faith (which I have left) I believe the Pope is doing something that other religions are not.
In addition to his statement of not judging homosexuals, I am very impressed with how he has addressed issues around poverty, capitalism, etc. He seems like a humble person and unlike previous Popes actually is hands on with the public. I read an article about how he helped homeless people while wearing “normal” clothes so people didn’t recognize him. I like him and hope he is able to continue speaking on many issues in addition to gay rights.
It’s not a theological shift. See, this is what I don’t get (as I mentioned in a longer post below). There is no shift. The pope is not saying anything new. At. all.
May I politely suggest that those of you who believe the pope is making new and profound statements are simply not schooled on basic Catholic theology, doctrine, and dogma?
For example, @Sam, you wrote “the pope suggested that homosexuality, while still sinful…”. The Church does not teach that homosexuality is sinful. This blatantly false. The Church teaches that homosexual acts are sinful, and this pope has not said anything to the contrary. He still supports and promotes celibacy for gays. Do you believe gays should be celibate? I don’t know a single secular, non-believer who would accept that.
My priest has never talked about homosexuality, birth control or abortion. He even said a couple of times that we should move away from tradition a bit. As someone who attended religion class for 12 years, I can say that we only talked about homosexuality once for maybe 15 minutes. Our teacher just said that homosexuals are God’s creatures and should be loved and accepted. We mostly learned about the “love and tolerance” part, history of Christianity and about other religions ( and we never called them unbelievers or said that they were wrong or sinners). Divorced people, single parents, no one was ever excluded or condemned.
I am deeply Catholic, and support gay rights and birth control. I have friends who are atheists and agnostics and I don’t think they’re going to hell. It saddens me deeply that people seem to focus only on the negative sides of my Church.
Having said that, I love my pope(s). Go Papa Franjo 🙂
Maureen, you’re grasping at straws. The celibacy rule is not based upon the belief that homosexual acts are wrong. The celibacy rule came about because the Catholic Church believes that religious marriage can only exist between a male and female. Thus, a gay couple can never enter into a religiously correct marriage. Hence, any homosexual acts are de facto outside of marriage and thus, fornication. It’s really not a different standard at all. Gay people are treated under the same rule as unmarried straight people. The Chuch actually has never proscribed a rule expressly about homosexuals. They simply fall under the same fornication prohibition as anyone else who is regarded as unmarried by the Catholic Church.
Also, I think you’re misreading everything I said. I never said he argued against homosexuality. What he has suggested is that homosexuality, even as a sin, is no morally or spiritually worse than any other sin out there. This Pope has made very clear that he regards the worst sins as those that exploit or manipulate others – thus, his emphasis on economic and social wrongdoing, as opposed to more private matters. That is why the theology appears to be shifting – he is arguing for a shifting analysis of the weight of sin, not the nature of it.
@ Sam
I’m not sure what you’re so angry about. I repeated your own words and explained that you weren’t quite accurate. You weren’t. That’s not grasping at straws. I have no need to grasp at straws. And it’s nothing for you to get angry about.
Catholic teaching is clear that homosexual acts are not “wrong” just because “they fall under the category of un-married fornication” and then the statement that the Church “has never actually proscribed a rule…”.. Wow, I honestly don’t know where you would even get that from. And I don’t mean this as snark. I’m being honest. The Church refers to them as “intrinsically disordered”, as a mental illness that requires therapy and that those “afflicted” should remain celibate. This is very strong language. It is the very reason that many find this teaching very offensive and hard to swallow.
I do NOT want to get into a back and forth here about what the Catholic Church actually says about homosexual acts, because I don’t come to this blog for religion and theology. But I’ll say this: Anyone is free to google this issue and discover what the Catholic doctrine is on the issue of homosexuality, and homosexual acts, and homosexual persons.
Maureen: I did better than Google. I actually went and got a degree in Christian Theology. I’ve actually sat down and read the Catholic Canon law and Doctrine. Again, you’re point is incorrect. The Catholic teaching has never been that there is something particularly wrong with homosexual acts. The offense is sexual activity outside of a religious-sanctioned marriage. An unmarried man and woman who have sex commit an offense equal to two men who are sexually active. Under the canon law, one is not worse than the other. You are trying to argue that homosexuality is somehow prescribed against specifically in the canon law. If you bothered to actually read it (which I assume a really good Catholic like yourself would have done) you’d know no such prohibition exists.
I go to Mass every week and I can’t recall one homily which mentions birth control, abortion etc etc. I suppose every priest has his own agenda. We have a new priest starting at our church this week following the sudden death of our previous one. So we may find he has different priorities. However, regarding Pope Francis, I think he is a good man who has brought a lot of joy, not only to Catholics but to the wider world. In these days of bad governments (well here in the UK anyway) it is nice to have someone that we can look up to, as I certainly have no faith in our parliament.
I’m really glad your priest or the other people who commented on this don’t have priests who talk about this regularly. I grew up in one of the most “traditional” diocese in the United States. Maybe the priests here just want to drill it in our heads. It is so traditional to the point where people would move from around the world to come to our diocese. While we don’t let girls serve, or women read the readings on Sunday, or give communion, we do have one of the highest amount of seminarians and sisters in the U.S. (Just a little fun fact for everybody, haha). I guess it just goes to show the differences from diocese to diocese.
@Mackie, I’ve never heard such rules for girls. Here, women read the readings, we have altar girls and a nun gives communion along with the priest.
@spooks, I know, it sounds weird to other people, but when you’ve grown up with that it just seems normal. The people from my diocese are shocked when they visit other diocese and see girls serving or women giving communion haha. I should say though, women can read the readings, but on Sundays it’s always a man. When the pope gave the interview about homosexuality the bishop and some priests wrote in the church bulletin “What the pope really meant…” They can be pretty closed minded sometimes, but it’s home…(and I don’t necessarily obey what they say all the time. 🙂 ).
I was born and raised in the Catholic Church. I have gone to masses in English and Spanish, and I have never heard a sermon about homosexuality, abortion or birth control. Even in Mexico they do not talk about those subjects. My godmother is a Mexican nun and she just tells me to be good and have compassion. I have never heard anyone in service be hateful or spew negativity.
His job is by no means easy. I think he’s doing fantastically
I am a catholic and I know that in some towns or areas, the catholics there are more conservative, including the priests (side eyeing unmarried couples, divorces within the family, gay people, etc), but there are a lot of people that are open and do not think anything of it, baptize, get together with anyone, etc.
One thing that they take into account, tho, is becoming a godparent, in my area they prefer non divorced people to become godparents. never heard of any priest being unwelcome of gay or divorced people otherwise, except the communion for divorced people and people married to those divorced people.
My father was divorced and my mom married him, they were not able to take communion because of this, they were “living in sin”, but if they wanted to do so, like in a church where they did not know them, noone would have ever known.
my mom was very respectful and in every mass she made an act of contrition, which is the equivalent of the actual communion, and is well received by God, as far as I know), we, children of divorce were never mistreated in any way or form by the church.
I’m waiting for him to actually do something first besides taking polls and welcoming Afr ican in vaders to Italy. Then I’ll pass judgment. Otherwise, it’s as bad as giving a Nobel Prize to a Us urper who just got elected.
I’m a Catholic, so I like him. But I honestly don’t get what everyone else is excited about. He hasn’t said ANYTHING that isn’t already part of Catholic teaching. Atheists can go to heaven if they are people of good will? Yep, that was covered way back in the 60’s at Vatican Council II (which Pope John Paul II was present at and a big supporter of when he was Archbishop of Krakow). Treatment of the poor? Covered by Jesus 2,000 years ago. The Catholic Church has more doctrines and teachings regarding preferential treatment of the poor than I can keep track of. And that’s reflected in the overwhelming charity of Catholics worldwide. As for the Pope’s comments about gays and “who am I to judge”, the media conveniently leaves out the part where the Pope expects gays to be celibate if they are Christians. Again, that’s Catholic doctrine: being gay isn’t a sin, it’s homosexual behavior that the Church condemns — and that means Pope Francis, too. As for abortion and female priests, this pope has not said one word in favor of either. Regarding his comments about Capitalism: he never even used the word. What he complained about was “greedy consumerism”. He used the word CONSUMERISM, not Capitalism. The secular media changed his words and then tried to sell him as a Socialist.
It doesn’t bother me if people like him or don’t like him. I don’t choose my friends based on who likes the Pope. But I just am perplexed by the way the media has chosen to make this man out to something he isn’t. It’s as if the media has created a pope with an “alter ego”. One that seculars, and gays, and atheists can like. However, this man still believes, represents and teaches all the things that make people dislike the Church. So I just don’t know what the excitement is and why it matters. Why does it matter what the pope thinks about atheists going to heaven?? Do you think atheists care? They don’t. Why should they care if the pope thinks they can go someplace atheists don’t even believe exists? I have atheist friends and they do not care about this.
MAybe it is the difference of personalities between Benedict and Francis? the other one has been regarded as conservative, cold, etc. Some forget that Benedict was the one who had opened the Twwitter account, for example, not Francis, I know because I followed the Pope before Francis was elected. Some pople kind of trashed Benedict while I think that his personality was probably not a popular one.
Now comes Francis, full of LAtin warmth. What is not to like. He is not going to change some of the most rigid rules that have been part of his church, at least not over the course of a year or two.
I like that he is closer to the people, he is emending a lot of people that we have to be there for others, yes, things get lost and forgotten with time. MAny of us catholics or others live day by day and forget to make time for those who need us beyond our family.
being a Christian, (and humans), I think that we have to care and not be egotistical and self serving, at least not all the time. Francis with his nice demeanor and seemingly sincere stance, has won my heart, and it does not hurt that he is from the Americas, either.
This is something really cool about Catholicism and the papacy. There is room for absolutism and humanism in the same space. So much symbolism. I love it.
@ ennie
I absolutely think it’s partially about personalities. Maybe people think the pope is a man who takes on a role, like an actor does, and then when he becomes pope he must act and speak in one particular way that is “pope-ish”? So if you look at the last 3 popes you can see an extraordinary range of personalities just between these 3 men. Maybe that confuses some people who have decided that certain of these men don’t fit their image of “pope-ish”. Go back a little further and include the 3 popes previous to JP, B-16, and Francis, and you’ll find 3 more men nothing like each other and nothing like the most recent 3 men. Francis is just a different personality. He’s also from a different culture. A Polish man, a German (Bavarian) man, and an Argentinian man. So I think personality and culture have soooo much to do with it. My favorite was JP II who was so incredibly darling, charming, loving, and so tender. Benedict, I also like a lot because of his “classical European” manner. And now Francis, with this very down-to-earth manner. Whatever, I like them all for different reasons!
@ Francesca
I just love your comment. I feel the same. It’s very earthy and mystical at the same time.
I never got the hate for Benedict. He visited Croatia in 2011, and sadly, I could not attend. My friend, who was there, said he seemed like such a warm person, and that he felt his “light”.
@Maureen
About the atheists going to heaven thing.
You’re right, most atheists don’t care whether they’ re going to heaven or not. But when the Pope speaks on this subject, it’s not because he’s trying to make atheists feel better. As a Catholic, would you like to interact with a person condemned to hell better than with someone having a chance to go to heaven? Pope’s words are about making Catholics treat atheists more openly, not just in a preachy way or as condemned sinners.
As someone who was raised Catholic and who considers herself an atheist, I don’t believe in heaven, so it’s not as if I’m relishing my free ticket. I do, however, appreciate the Pope’s statements. Like many atheists, I have friends and family members who are believers, many of whom are Catholic. Statements of this sort make it easier to respond to harassment, nagging, or rude comments about my religious beliefs or lack thereof, and have done a great deal to stop my mother fretting about the state of my soul.
I agree with you completely that Pope Francis hasn’t advocated many changes in doctrine. I’d be very surprised if he does so in the future. I do appreciate some of his attempts to highlight other issues, such as consumerism, poverty, the treatment of prisoners, and human rights. Whether or not I agree with him, the Pope is an influential figure and sets an example for many people. To the extent he uses that influence to call attention to problems that I agree are serious detriments to human health, happiness, or liberty, I tend to approve of him. To the extent he uses that influence to concentrate on areas where I think people should be allowed more freedom, I tend to disapprove. It always ends up being a mix, and in this case, there’s a little more of the former than there previously was. I’m not under any illusions that the Pope is going to be a force for secular humanism. It just seems that we have slightly more concerns in common.
I am a homosexual born and raised in the deep South. I grew listening to the garbage DD Phil spews. I heard it in my church, I heard it in my school. I hear it now on the local radio stations, and I read it on billboards as I make my way into work in the morning. I choose to live in the South. It is my home, and for better or worse, I love it here. I have also chosen a wonderful partner with whom I hope to spend the rest of my life. I, did not, however, choose my sexual orientatation. Oh, the choice to be myself has been all my own. I suppose I could keep everything buried deep inside me, living in fear that should I ever meet God, I may be thrown into a burning Hell because I am gay. I wish more religious leaders would teach love and acceptance, work to build ecumenical congreations, and preach less about sin and how to avoid a life in Hell. I really do not know too much about the current pope, but I did see the picture of him embracing the man with the horrid tumors all over his face, and tears filled my eyes. He seems like a courageous person, one who does not live in fear of the unknown.
I would like someone to show me a source where ONE single legitimate Catholic social commentator, priest, bishop, pope, or lay person has spewed hate for gays and condemned them to hell or otherwise spoken of them in a de-humanizing, malicious manner.
I extend this challenge to every person who reads this.
The Catholic Church does not, and never has, taught horrible things about gays or advocated that gays be treated in any way except with dignity and compassion. I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart that so many Christians have failed gay people by making them feel unloved. There IS a way to be loving and treat people with dignity even if you passionately disagree with the way they live their lives.
Uh, Google Rick Santorum. He’s a devout Catholic who’se said that gay families (not even the people, their familes) “destabilize society”. He’s also suggested that the Catholic sex abuse scandal happened due to an inordinate number of gay men in the ranks of priests (which of course suggests that gays are more likely to be child molesters). Google it for yourself if you want to see.
Is that dehumanizing enough for you?
Hi Maureen,
To be fair I don’t really know much about the Catholic religion. I admit that I could be ignorant of the teachings of the faith. However, as a child my best friends dad stopped attending his Catholic Church specifically because of its view on homosexuality. Also I found an article from a Catholic priest who came out as gay who felt like the religion did teach anti-gay beliefs. So, to be fair, some Catholics do have a different viewpoint on the subject. The link to the article is below.
As far as my stance on the subject. As a former Mormon I would be overjoyed if one of our leaders stated so publicly not to judge homosexuals. So that is why I expressed that I think the Pope is doing good by publicly making that statement.
http://www.richarddawkins.net/news_articles/2013/5/28/catholic-priest-condemns-church-teachings-as-he-comes-out-as-gay
Rick Santorum is an idiot and hardly the representative of a Catholic. He also doesn’t believe in the evolution which the Church does, he supports the death penalty which the Church does not, etc. He’s firstly a republican and a Catholic second.
@ June
What I’m asking about it for sources where Catholics have advocated for the mistreatment of gays, or have encouraged people to mistreat or disrespect gays, or can cite any legitimate Catholic sources (theology, etc) which advocate for what I’ve described. Just “not liking” a teaching is not what I’m interested in. I don’t like lots of things. Not liking something is not here nor there for me.
@ Sam
I didn’t anticipate Rick Santorum or else I might have asked for TWO examples. Santorum is embarrassing and I don’t think his personal views on homosexuals should have been part of his political platform. I was really, really angry that he did that. Maybe he did it because he’s too stupid to talk about economy or international relations. Still, expressing one’s PERSONAL opinion is not the same as advocating for the mistreatment of a person. What I’ve heard is that Christians treat homosexuals with hate. So, what I’m asking is: where’s the hate?
I agree with @Spooks: Santorum is all about politics. He doesn’t have a job without politics. He stupidly thought that he would rally Republicans to himself if he went off the rails on social issues. That backfired on him big time.
Spooks, Santorum is considered extremely devout and orthodox by most standards. He’s heavily involved in Catholic civic organizations and talks at length about his faith. He’s a Catholic. You’re basically playing No True Scotsman now (look it up).
I don’t get your point Sam ( And I know what No true Scotsman means 🙂 ). He is considered orthodox, yet he doesn’t follow all teachings of the Catholic Church. I didn’t say he isn’t Catholic, I just said that he isn’t an example of your regular Catholic. Maybe I didn’t express myself well.
Honestly, not being from the US, I don’t see how any true Catholic could be Republican considering their stance on fiscal issues.
Maureen,
This is the last time I’m going to respond because, honestly, I don’t really care at this point. However, I’m just going to point out that a lot of religions do not have written doctrine which says to mistreat/judge specific groups if people. I would actually argue that the majority of faiths don’t. I can’t recall any Mormon doctrine that does. That doesn’t mean that the religion does not teach beliefs outside of it’s written doctrine. I am sure that there isn’t written Catholic doctrine that’s says to mistreat people. I’m just pointing out that other people have a different viewpoint on the churches teachings. You can accept the former Priest’s viewpoint that the church did teach anti-gay beliefs or not. If he says he felt like it did, and that he taught it as a priest, that’s his perspective, and I’m not going to invalidate it.
In the end I am just saying that I think anytime any leader says not to judge anyone it is a good thing. If the Advocate wants to celebrate his statement then that is great!! Good for him and I hope that he continues to do the good work he has done so far.
Working to deny consenting adults the right to marry is dehumanizing and malicious.
Maureen: The Knights of Columbus is a key contributor to measures opposing the legalization of same sex marriage. If a church wishes to set its own rules who may and may not marry, I’ll leave that alone, but I feel it is both dehumanizing and not treating people with dignity to try to prevent others – including people who do not share your religion – from having secular, civil rights.
LOVE YOUR POST!
I wish you the best.
I had personal experiences in which I heard Catholics deacons and leaders in the church state that the abuse scandal in the Catholic church would not have happened if there were no gay priests. Those priests are pedophiles because they are monsters not because they are homosexuals.
I wish him all the best. And for the people who think he isn’t revolutionary, I think he is. He is refreshing in his decency and stating things that should be obvious to everyone calling themselves Christians. My grandma said once to me that he wouldn’t make it long, because he’s pissing off the fundamental wing in Vatican. I hope she won’t be right.
I think he’s an awesome choice. He seems to be very real and genuine, I can’t help but like him.
I usually avoid faith based conversations online but I’ve enjoyed both sides of the commentary here. You have all been considerate and well reasoned. Best to all!