Last week, Kim Davis and her lawyers claimed that Davis had met “privately” (and secretly) with Pope Francis when he was in Washington DC. The claim was that Davis was invited to the Vatican’s DC Embassy and that Pope Francis thanked Davis for her bravery and courage in standing up for heterosexual marriage and her illegal acts to exclude gay couples from enjoying their constitutional right to marry. For days, the Vatican did not release any formal statement about the meeting, so Davis’s version of events sort of became the public record and everyone was like, “Ugh, the Pope made such a bad call.” Then on Friday, the Vatican finally said something. Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi issued this statement:
“Pope Francis met with several dozen persons who had been invited by the Nunciature to greet him as he prepared to leave Washington for New York City. Such brief greetings occur on all papal visits and are due to the Pope’s characteristic kindness and availability. The Pope did not enter into the details of the situation of Mrs. Davis. His meeting with her should not be considered a form of support of her position in all of its particular and complex aspects.”
Basically, the Vatican is all, “Seriously, he meets with so many people, just because he shakes someone’s hand, doesn’t mean he endorses their life/politics/etc.” There are still questions though, and the questions, answers and speculation are sort of fascinating. The Vatican’s people are insisting privately to media outlets that THEY had nothing to do with the Davis meeting. Left unsaid is who exactly invited Davis to the embassy. The answer might be the papal nuncio to the US, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, who was already tossed out of the Vatican’s hierarchy a few years ago and set out to pasture in America. You can read more about him here.
Basically, this whole thing has turned out to be a HUGE headache for the Vatican’s PR people who believed that they had pulled off the American visit flawlessly, only to see this one small moment get blown up. So, in an attempt at damage control, the Vatican released some very interesting information to go along with the Kim Davis statement – CNN got an exclusive about Pope Francis meeting privately with an openly gay couple, Yayo Grassi and Iwan Bagus. Grassi was one of the Pope’s students in Argentina (before the Pope was the Pope), and Grassi got for-real invited to meet with the Pope through all of the appropriate channels. The Pope knew full well that Grassi was/is gay and he was fine with it, which seemed to be the message he was trying to preach, before Kim Davis and her lawyers hijacked the conversation.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I really wish this women would go away for good.
It’s aggravating that random, mostly insignificant people, are able to parlay their 15 minutes – thanks to cable news and whatnot – into this level of notoriety. I mean the Vatican isn’t likely to ever issue a statement about most of us
+1 to both of you
I agree. I think the most upsetting thing that she even was invited. That she even shook his hand. Why?
This was not a “random, mostly insignificant” person–this is a woman who has parlayed herself into being a spokesperson against gay marriage. The thing I find most amusing about this is that a fundamentalist Protestant managed to manipulate the Roman Catholic Antichrist, er, Pope, into appearing to support her position. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Papal Nuncio is going to get his ass kicked to the curb for this one.
Annaliese, but no one would have ever heard of her outside of her district in Kentucky, or not more than one quick news blurb, if not for our endless analysis of mostly insignificant events. She didn’t start a movement and her actions were dealt with appropriately, with absolutely no impact on the status of gay marriage. She’s not a spokesperson for anything but her own self promotion.
Yeah, why did he have to meet with her at all? Kim Davis could be Dick Cheney’s twin, by the way.
That’s what I’m wondering. I’m sure there are many other people who are doing truly good and charitable works that are more deserving of being there.
Nailed it.
That’s why I’m not buying the Vatican’s denials. Why meet with her at all? She’s not Catholic. She hasn’t helped the sick or the poor. She hasn’t volunteered to do anything except spread her bigotry. But she gets a one on one. Plus it was in secret. If they didn’t think anything of meeting with her why do it in secret? Why not put it on the tour, so that Catholics could line the street as he went to meet her? Why not invite the media, as he’d done during his trip? Because, IMO, he agrees with her, wanted to give her some encouragement and knew that it would make him look bad to those people who think he’s all about change. He isn’t. IMO.
Whenever Kim Davis’ name comes up, I just immediately think of Jean-Ralphio singing “the wooooooooooooorst.”
https://www.tumblr.com/search/jean%20ralphio%20gifs
I have nothing else to add to this conversation.
Ahahahha that is amazing. I miss Jean Ralphio, so thank you!
Awesome!
And this is why she should have been in jail, and stayed in jail.
Regardless of how long the meeting was; it was disappointing that she was given the privilege of being in a room with him. That is quite different than her being in a crowd.
Exactly. Thank you. It looks like they want to have a cake and eat it too. Look at us we are so progressive but on the other hand look we are still the same. Hypocrites. Yuck.
It’s not that the Pope is some liberal progressive, he’s really not. But this meeting wasn’t his idea, he didn’t vet them or arrange it. It does look like Vigano took the opportunity to promote his own beliefs and help out Staver.
I think Charles Pierce’s article in Esquire is a good rundown of Staver and Vigano’s connection.
“The man is a real player within the institutional church. He first came to prominence as a whistleblower during one of the several investigations of the Vatican Bank, which may be what got him exiled to this godless Republic in the first place. Despite that fact, Vigano is well-known to be a Ratzinger loyalist and he always has been a cultural conservative, particularly on the issue of marriage equality. In April, in a move that was unprecedented, Vigano got involved with an anti-marriage equality march in Washington sponsored by the National Association For Marriage. (And, mirabile dictu, as we say around Castel Gandolfo at happy hour, one of the speakers at this rally was Mat Staver, who happens now to be Kim Davis’s lawyer.) In short, Vigano, a Ratzinger loyalist, who has been conspicuous and publicly involved in the same cause as Kim Davis and her legal team, arranges a meeting with Davis that the legal team uses to its great public advantage. Once again paraphrasing New Orleans lawyer Lamar Parmentel from The Big Easy, the Vatican is a marvelous environment for coincidence.”
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a38440/pope-francis-swindled-kim-davis-meeting/
In the linked NYT article, Davis’ lawyer said the invitation was from Archbishop Vigano, who is a cultural conservative and was forced to leave the Vatican because they didn’t like the rough and pushy way he ran things under his then-boss Pope Benedict. So I think Vigano tried to pull something over on the Pope and tried yet again to force his (right-wing) ideological way on the Vatican.
If the Pope wanted to support Davis, he’s not such a coward that he would do thing so sneakily and make her and her lawyer his spokespeople instead of saying it himself. That doesn’t seem to fit his pattern, imo. Also, the article says that he wanted a smooth tour, so I doubt he’d screw it up over the likes of some idiot like Davis. If he wanted to send a message, there’s all sorts of channels he could do it from.
The NYT article states that the lawyer says there’s a voice message from Vigano about a private meeting with the Pope, but again, that’s from Vigano.
This right here. Most church watchers think that this was Vigano’s way of trying to push his agenda and he expected the Vatican’s PR people to react the way they did (which is how it turned into a big deal). What he probably was not counting on was how big a deal it turned into, forcing them to say something. The part I love the most is it just shows her true colors. It’s all about her, not “her God”.
So he was “ratf*cked.”
@ Miss Jupitero
I like that expression 😛
That was my issue too. The point is that she was invited. Not the length and/or depth of the visit.
Davis was invited by Archbishop Vigano who fired from the Vatican. The Archbishop set up Pope Francis!
@Shaunna well the Pope inadvertently played right into it when answering Terry Moran’s question about Kim Davis/government officials & the right of conscientious objection.
of course the ultimate irony of this is that the conservatives are aghast when the Pope says something they don’t like but are all “see, the Pope says we have a right to use the government to impose our religion” in this case, especially since the fundamentalist denominations are rather nasty about the Catholics (“papists!!!) & their blasphemy trying to pass of as Christians. Heck the fundamentalists who love Texas Gov Greg Abbott for wanting the bible to be the arbiter of civil law pilloried him for a FB post about the Virgin Mary http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/2015/08/18/texas-religious-right-reveals-its-anti-catholicism/
I’m calling bs on the the pearl clutching “OMG He was set up!!” business. I don’t really understand why if this archbishop was fired he would have any business deciding who the pope will have private meetings with? If he did though doesn’t it seem like the pope and his team would at least have a final sign off on it?
@Snarky, read the linked articles on Vigano, he wasn’t fired, but removed from the Vatican bureaucracy. He’s the Vatican’s envoy to the US. So yes, he’d have say over many of the details, including some of the people meeting the pope.
@cr – See the last line in my post “If he did though doesn’t it seem like the pope and his team would at least have a final sign off on it?
The cherry on top of the icing for me among these reports was the tidbit that the refusenik’s lawyers accused the Pope of lying about how the meeting went down.
Yeah. Right. Most bodaciously excellent nice try.
Yes, that was the odd thing about it. So what are Davis and her lawyer saying then? The Pope supports them but he’s a liar so you can’t believe him? LOL…
Sounds like Davis’ lawyers are projecting (they have a history of lying, e.g. saying that there was a big rally in Peru to support Davis).
Why can’t Davis just go on some reality show like other famehussies? Or a pap stroll with the Affleck nanny?
They’ve been spinning it as, “But Kimmy met with him at the Vatican Embassy” – trying to draw a distinction from where the Vatican said the (group) meeting had taken place, at the Apostolic Nunciature. Thing is, the Vatican Embassy is AT the Apostolic Nunciature. They’re counting on people not knowing there’s very little physical distinction between the two places.
Still doesn’t explain why she’s so proud of having met someone that, according to her religious beliefs, is the anti-Christ. Aside from her hypocrisy in general, that is.
“most bodaciously excellent” – I’m stealing that turn of phrase, thank you for the giggle it gave me!
It is about what I figured happened. Kim Davis needs to respect the separation of church and state. If she cannot in good conscience do her job, she needs to leave her job.
I agree. Davis is very selfish in that she doesn’t care about the ramifications of what would actually happen if religion is allowed to interfere with government policies. Then it could be a free-for-all for every type of religion to do so and conversely, it means that the government can interfere with religion. I bet Davis wouldn’t like it if her church was forced to start paying taxes and start obeying other government policies, right?
Do modern-day, right-wing, conservative religious people not know the history of why we have a separation of church and state? Are they actually that ignorant or purposely ignorant?
>Are they actually that ignorant or purposely ignorant?
Yes. Both.
And on top of that, they’re sure that we all need to follow them to their own personal Jesus. For our own good. Because, rapture.
Where the hell did I put that cauldron and broomstick again?
Bingo, everyone has a right to have their own beliefs, but you don’t get the right to be paid $80K a year and stomp on someone else’s belief. Also her religion does not believe in the Pope or Catholicism, in reality this shouldn’t be a big deal to her as their views are very different. Catholics and especially Jesuits like Pope Francis, believe the bible are stories meant to teach us concepts whereas fundamentalist like Davis, believe in word for word literal interpretation, but considering it has been translated so many ways this always cracks me up and speaks more to the lack of education of fundamentalist. Speak to a Jesuit teacher about the bible and they will explain how books of the bible were written in different times to deliver different messages to people and the language used was the language of the time. I took a course once at Georgetown about the Bible and it was one of the most interesting courses I have ever taken.
I am just waiting for news of her being offered a reality show. Gross
Yeah but it’ll be on radio. The conservative media is pretty demanding that their women look like Stepford Wives.
That made me laugh. She’s no Brandi.
Seriously, I never thought I’d say this, but I was surprised that she was supported by FOX news. I found out while channel surfing that they were going to have her on that Megan something show. I know it was idiotic of me to be shocked, yet I was, that anyone could support this troll.
At this point, Fox News is just trolling. They get their ratings from hate-watchers and the endless replaying of their clips by other sources. I honestly think if we ignored them, they’d disappear.
The backlash against the Pope has been huge. That’s heartening to me, in the sense that people find this woman utterly repulsive, as they should. It’s also a shame, in a way, because it has overshadowed the entire visit. Whoever made the decision to invite this slug to meet the Pope should be exposed and fired. She should be called out as the liar she is.
You know the Pope is P-O’d about this. Somebody is going to get some black marks on their annual review…
They will, but the thing is, these Vatican types are brilliant at evil intrigue. They’ve been practicing for centuries, with much higher stakes. It seems that this scandal is going to be pinned on someone who was already being “punished” by being sent away from the Vatican to the U.S., and who is due for retirement in a few months anyway. He got to sabotage an important trip planned by the Vatican faction that got rid of him. Very sweet revenge.
Ha! That’s a good point. The Vatican isn’t some upstart just figuring out this PR thing.
Davis’ lawyer said in the linked NYT article that the invitation was from Archbishop Vigano, who was forced out and transferred to the US for his rough-shod culturally conservative ways, and is a few months away from the 75-year-old mark, “the age at which bishops must submit a formal request to the Vatican for permission to resign. These requests are not automatically accepted, and bishops often stay in their appointments long after. It seems unlikely, church analysts say, that Archbishop Viganò will be one of them.”
So I don’t think Vigano cares anymore about protecting the Pope, because he doesn’t seem to have much to lose. He’s already been transferred, he’s nearly 75, they can’t do much more to him so, imo, he’s going to go out making as much trouble as he can for the sake of his right-wing ideology.
What a truly awful place to work the Vatican must be, all those people looking to stab each other in the back all the time…like the friggin Tudor court or something.
@bettyrose, you are so, so right. For an institution that purports to care for everyone, they pretty much only care for their own aggrandisment. They have had centuries to hone their PR skills. It’s not so easy these days when the great unwashed have education and internet information at their finger tiips, to pull the wool over the faithfuls’ eyes. Doesn’t stop them trying though. It is literally like turning over a rock and seeing the putrid things that are squirming about underneath. That being said Francis is worrying to the Vatican hierarchy because he insists on, you know, trying to actually follow Christ who hated no one, and chose the way of the poor. Anathema!
I’m always struck by how golden it all is. So much gold, from a religion started from such a humble man (who didn’t really exist). That always struck me as hypocritical.
I think it overshadowed the optics they were trying to create with the visit, which was working flawlessly. He talks the good talk in regards to gay issues, but he still works with governments to prevent gay people from getting the LEGAL right to marry or adopt children (like in Poland and Argentina).
If you support a gay person’s salvation in the afterlife, but *actively* work to lower their quality of life in THIS lifetime, I don’t think you are an ally to that community. The pope is a false friend to the gay community.
Agree. I tried to explain to my aunt, “who has nothing against gays, she just doesn’t believe that they should get married,” that believing someone’s love of another person is sinful and wrong IS having something against them. It’s saying that who they are is wrong, and their feelings are invalid and disgusting. But it’s like talking to a wall.
It’s pretty obvious that the meeting was one of those thousands-at-a-time meet and greets that many popes do.
I’m only surprised that she was invited to a private one rather than a public one.
Considering the lie told about the Peru rally, i’m also not surprised that Kim Davis and her people turned this simple meet and greet into a papal endorsement of her platform and told an untruthful version of it.
The invitation was from this particular archbishop who seems to be a right-wing trouble-maker and is nearly at the age of possible forced retirement anyways, and seemingly has an agenda and imo, wants to go out with a bang. I draw my conclusions from the linked NYT article.
I doubt it was the Pope who wanted to meet Davis, but it was Vigano who wanted to dirty up the water by having Davis meet the Pope. I don’t think Vigano cares much about protecting the Pope PR-wise, when it comes to his own hurt feelings and his right-wing ideology.
I just want to add that I don’t even know whether or not to believe it was a private meeting, considering who’s saying it was and the Pope’s side saying it wasn’t like what Davis and her lawyer are describing.
Considering he had met old friends who happen to be gay the day before, I believe the Vatican’s position.
There are a lot of conservative cardinals who are against the pope, so I imagine that there is a lot of people within the Church who try to undermine him.
I agree. I think that’s what happened.
During his US travel,the Pope Francis said the gay marriage was an abnormality so no it is not an error or he barely met her.He agree with her
What I don’t get is why wouldn’t he say so himself? I will wait until he does come out and gives Davis public credence. I don’t see the point of him making Davis and her lawyer his spokespeople and his only channel for this point of view.
He’s the pope, so yeah he’s not marching in any pride parades, but to agree with her is to say it’s okay to obstruct justice to impose your will in opposition to the law. That just feels so contrary to the pope who just addressed congress with a message of helping the poor and marginalized over pushing partisan agendas.
“Abnormality” is a long ways away from “burnable in hellfire”. He obviously accepts individuals who are openly gay, which means he’s approachable on the subject. I think it will be a long journey for the official Church, which at one time was really serious about marriage having to be open to the possibility of children (meaning they had a problem with known sterility). It’s a very old institution and changes take a while. But Francis has an approach that might speed things up if people stop yelling about a handshake with Kim Davis and start paying attention to the practical openings he provides. The 75-year-old Vatican politician who tried to set him up is of a generation that won’t be around forever. But you have to remember that the Pope is not able to make changes all by himself. He is only one part of the church hierarchy- the bishops are a much larger part, and the third part (the laity) is the largest of all. When enough members of the Church insist on change, it will happen. Just because people try to absolve themselves of responsibility by claiming “I can’t do that or I must do that because the Church says so” doesn’t mean that’s really true. Catholics follow their conscience like everybody else, and beliefs change as the beliefs of the people change.
The old conservative guard at the Vatican – like Vigano – does not like this Pope or his more inclusive agenda. But unlike, say, 1,000 years ago, when they would just assassinate a Pope, they can’t get away with that as easily in the age of 24/7 media; anything would be met with skepticism by the public. So Vigano tried character assassination instead, using Kim Davis and likely knowing she wouldn’t be able to keep her stupid mouth shut about their “secret” meeting.
Terrible terrible woman, she ruins everything she touches with her ignorance and obsessiveness.
I also think The Vatican had to be doing a big WTF like you said because they did pull off the visit so flawlessly only for this idiot to come blathering in at the end about her ‘special’ visit. Totally ruined it and caused a HUGE backlash (which I gotta say I’m proud of, go folks!).
The fact is Kim Davis is a lying egomaniacal liar who lies and leaves her ego over everything she touches. Her lawyers were lying about the huge outpouring for her in Peru (seriously?) and they probably saw this Pope’s visit as a way to legitimize her insanity. Predictable and someone should have known some dumbass (apparently Vigano) would try to weasel in and put her 50 yr old woman stuck in the 5th grade self in another spotlight.
…..And when the Pope returned to Rome he excommunicated a priest the very day he came out as gay.
That’s not at all what happened. Please don’t be misleading. I don’t have a horse in this race. But that priest violated the celibacy rule- neither straight not gay may have a relationship. Also, that priest already has a book set to be published and in print any day now. I read a few articles on it, and no where have I read he’s been excommunicated. They are examining his duties and which he can/cannot retain.
that’s not entirely true… there is one way that a priest may be married. If an already married pastor of another christian faith converts to Catholicism and becomes a priest, he may remain married. Although, I think that this happens only very rarely and has only occurred with straight marriages, I would be curious about what would happen if the married, gay pastor were to convert… Seems unlikely.
It’s the celibacy issue with Roman Catholic Priests, and there is one caveat that allows married non-celibate Priest in the Roman Catholic Church. The Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, Syrian Orthodox, Ameminan, etc. did not require celibacy many moons ago when the western side did. If you are from that sect, which the Roman Catholic acknowledge as part of their church you can stay married if you move over to the western side. This is how we have a few married priests.
He was fired, not excommunicated. Pina Colada’s right.
Now, those mafiosos down in Sicily, Pope Francis did excommunicate the lot of them PUBLICLY, which was pretty awesome
I’ll be the first to admit that hearing about Pope Francis meeting with Kim Davis was quite a downer for me. I’m a lapsed Catholic and I’ve realized that organized religion can’t possibly be for me so long as it calls for unfair treatment of women and far too much concern about what other people are doing behind closed doors in their bedrooms at night (the anti-gay sentiment truly baffles me. I do not understand why they care so much). Francis has made me feel spiritual again. It’s true what the say–once a catholic always a catholic. I was moved to tears repeatedly during his trip here as people were beside themselves just to see him drive by them, or when he asked that his car would pull over so he could go hug and kiss a disabled person.
The news about his “meeting” with Kim Davis also kind of brought me down to reality. The world, or at least America, has latched onto this man and created this persona that really isn’t true. He isn’t some forward-thinking, progressive pope who is going to change the core doctrine of the catholic church. He is making strides by reaching out and becoming “the people’s pope,” but he still doesn’t agree with women as priests or reverends, and he is still 100% pro-life.
The story about Kim Davis was immediately followed by news of Pope Francis meeting with a gay couple that he is personal friends with. This time it was a real meeting, not just “come stand in line to shake hands with the pope and receive your complimentary rosary.” It shows that the man is what he says he is. He is a catholic who calls for people not to judge, or at least to judge less. He doesn’t fully support gay marriage, but he says “who am I to judge?” he doesn’t support abortion, but he has called on all catholics and catholic clergy to lighten up and treat women who’ve had them with respect because he knows what a battle it has been and remains for women who’ve had to make that tough choice. He isn’t going to change the core elements of catholicism, and he made that clear in his speeches here in the U.S., but he is calling on people to judge less and be more charitable and his own actions back up what he preaches.
My point is that Pope Francis seems to be stuck between people who are creating their own mythological version of him, where he is going to change all catholic doctrine and create a brand new version of the catholic church, and when he doesn’t live up to that expectation, people are sorely disappointed and disgruntled. We all, including myself, should listen more to what the man says instead of placing our own hopes and expectations on him. So far, he has stayed true to everything he has preached, and I respect him for that.
Daria – I too am a lapsed Catholic – I had the same reaction as you to the Pope’s visit. I love how inclusive he is, how he is so focused on the message to “love one another”, take care of each other, don’t judge. This is what I try to teach my kids, even if we don’t make it to church every weekend and might eat meat on Fridays during Lent etc etc….
The expectation that he is suddenly going to throw out Catholic doctrine is unrealistic. It’s still the Catholic church. But I think his message is going to reach a lot of people who have felt that the church doesn’t speak to them anymore. I might disagree with some of the church’s positions, but there is still a lot of good there.
I disagree. If you’re going to just cherry pick the bits you want to follow and discard the rest why bother with it all? This sort of attitude just leads to your beliefs following your behaviour when it’s supposed to be your behaviour following your beliefs. And no, I’m not religious. I’m agnostic.
I don’t know MND, I think I can still call myself Catholic and not believe 100% of the doctrine. If every Catholic who disagreed with a church teaching left the church, there wouldn’t be many people left. Just using birth control would knock out a whole lot!
I think the Pope is saying to people like me, come back, be included. I would venture to say that everyone cherry picks their beliefs/ethos in some fashion.
It’s not cherry-picking. It’s the true dynamic of the Catholic Church. For instance, the idea of infallibility is three-pronged: infallibility of the pope in certain strictly defined statements (hardly ever happens), the infallibility of the bishops as a whole, and the infallibility of the people as a whole. The idea is that God established a Church as a guide and God does not mislead. But beliefs are shifting all the time as times and situations change. The very meaning of the words are different in different eras and so re-interpretation is always necessary. The “cherry pickers” as you call them are actually an essential part of the sifting process.
@MND, I found your post a bit baffling. How do you think that you’re in a position to say “I disagree” to someone else’s personal religious beliefs? What @Anname said not only didn’t affect you whatsoever, it also didn’t include anything pertaining to issues one might have a strong opinion on, like a stance on gay marriage or abortion. If she said she believed that the sky was green, that doesn’t give you an open invitation to come along and say, “no, you’re wrong because I don’t feel that way.” Live and let live.
I still consider myself a Catholic and I don’t practice and likely never will again. I actually have my own views on Christ as a person, don’t believe any of the miracle stories, and certainly don’t believe in a virgin birth. I’m free to form my own opinions and cherry pick as I see fit. Sorry that you think you or anyone else has a right to step in and dictate what people can and can’t believe.
Daria -Your whole post is excellent, the last bit is spot on
Kim Davis and her lawyers tried to big foot the US papal visit with the help of an archbishop who was benched by the pontiff. The pope’s people should have vetted Davis and the meeting more thoroughly and His Holiness would not have been in such an embarrassing situation. The slow response from the Apostolic Palace made the mess worse. By revealing the visit with the gay couple the Vatican threw Davis under the Pope-mobile. Davis deserves it – this hypocrite, who has been married FOUR times – preaching the sanctity of marriage. She can’t even make one marriage last.
I hope this is a wake up call for Francis to see how far Vatican factions against his views are willing to go to take him down.
“The pope’s people should have vetted Davis and the meeting more thoroughly and His Holiness would not have been in such an embarrassing situation. ”
I’m presuming that the Vatican was expecting the embassy to deal with the vetting, and was not expecting Vigano to have his own agenda in regards to setting up meet and greets with ‘average’ Americans.
I genuinely worry for him if he actually tries to punish those involved in the child abuse problem or if he tries to reform the Vatican bank.
The Vatican’s response was slow only because they had to figure out who the heck she was and if she was anywhere near the Pope at any time. Their first response was correct – she was part of a group. Obviously her lawyer finagled an invite from the very anti-gay marriage fellow in charge in the Embassy. I wouldn’t expect the Pope’s peeps from outside the U.S. to question the invitation list for such things, her notoriety is local. They obviously figured out how he was being set up, hence the story about his splendid and truly private visit with his gay former student and the fellow’s partner. That’s a polite way to say the Pope thinks differently than Kim Davis. When he was asked about conscientious objection in general, he made it clear that he wasn’t talking about specific cases because he had no specifics (translation: “I have no idea if this applies to Kim Davis”). What he said about the right to conscientious objection is certainly universally true. Much harm is done by people just following orders without considering the morality of the action. Kim Davis’s problem is just that she wanted to keep her cushy $80,000 a year job (and pass it on to her son, as her mother had to her) while violating the law and refusing to allow anyone else in the office to follow their own conscience. That’s not the way conscientious objection really works.
I just found it interesting that Kim Davis and her people were playing this up given that many right wing Southern evangelicals I knew growing up thought the Pope was the anti-Christ.
So true.
That’s because religion is less relevant these days. So the religious are having to soften their stance on a few things to include more people. They’re not in a position to throw their weight around as much as they used to. If they tried to people would just walk away.
Yes, it was Vigano, who is hard line anti-gay-marriage. The implication is that the Pope was blindsided. Vigano picked out some people for a kindof receiving line – they met the Pope and got rosaries and that was it.
Kim Davis managed to torpedo all the good will the Pope had created. She is a divisive (IMHO evil) person who exploited her visit for her own agenda, with a lot of help from her lying lawyer. All people think of now is her lies instead of his focus on huge global issues. Nice job, Vigano.
But he hasn’t denied he said what he said.
He has already stated he stands with the church’s stance against gay marriage, so it’s no secret. He is just a more inclusive pope, but has not changed his views on gay marriage in the least.
“Pope Francis on Sunday reaffirmed Catholic opposition to gay marriage as he opened a three-week gathering of bishops from around the world but said the Church had to show love and understanding towards all. Francis dedicated one third of his homily to the topic of love between man and woman and its role in procreation.
“This is God’s dream for his beloved creation: to see it fulfilled in the loving union between a man and a woman, rejoicing in their shared journey, fruitful in their mutual gift of self,” he said. ”
But to have said that to this woman thanking her for her courage and to stay strong, who he obviously knew some background because of what he said, was disheartening, because it was used by her and her far right to bolster what she’s doing.
It doesn’t bother me that he would support this, since the church is very against gay marriage and have made it clear. Free speech, free beliefs. Although, he tried to stay lowkey during his visit and bring a feeling of inclusiveness and a more welcoming church. It bothers me that this woman, who should be doing her job, was given access to him by an invitation to just a dozen people to meet him.
That guy is a good guy. Look at that face. I don’t necessarily think he’s the most modern, but I think he’s a good guy. I so love that he took on capitalism/materialism.
The Pope is the head of the Catholic church, forget the hipe of the media, he is against gay marriage. He would never be rude, but he is against it
I don’t mind his position. It’s reductive to look at where he is now and see that as bad because he doesn’t match your ideal. What he’s doing is changing the tone around gay marriage. He’s pushing for tolerance and more of a “mind your own business” attitude in an atmosphere where people have been screaming at each other in judgment. By changing the tone and redirecting attention, he’s laying the groundwork for future change–whether he wants it or not. The policy process is one of change over time. It’s not static, like a political position. I respect that he hasn’t taken an explicit position on the topic because he’s sidestepping division.
“Constitutional”?
Maybe legal, but not “constitutional.”
Exactly. Marriage is mentioned nowhere in the Constitution.
Lots of things that are legal are not mentioned specifically in the Constitution. The Constitution was not supposed to mention every single issue, but its amendments make blanket protections of various general civil rights.
Example: abortion. The Constitution doesn’t mention abortion, yet it’s legal because it’s protected under the 14th amendment (Roe vs Wade).
The Supreme Court ruled on June 26, 2015 that gay marriages are protected under the 14th amendment (Obergefell v. Hodges).
Since June 26, 2015, gay marriages are Constitutional under the protection of the 14th amendment.
From Wikipedia:
“In the United States, same-sex marriage has been legal nationwide since June 26, 2015, when the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that state-level bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.
The court ruled that the denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples and the refusal to recognize those marriages performed in other jurisdictions violates the Due Process and the Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The ruling overturned a precedent, Baker v. Nelson.”
I’m a gay person from a Catholic family going back many generations. Please understand what this means to many of us. The pope not only did not meet with any gay Catholic advocacy groups, there was NO ANSWER from the Vatican to their requests and petitions to meet.
When we heard about the pope’s meeting with a Pentecostal Christian who many believe is homophobic, it was a kick in the gut. Like hearing that Dad gave your school bully a hug after kicking you out of the house for coming out. This is a deep emotional reaction that might not be relieved by finding out whose fault it all is. Right now I hurt too much to even care.
Jinx, I’m a lapsed Catholic and I’m also saddened by this. I’ve wondered that if this were a public meeting, how come the story didn’t make it to news sooner? People would’ve recognized her if she were standing with a group of other people, no? I’m feeling disheartened and hesitant to trust either side of the story. It wouldn’t be the first lie Kim Davis’ team told nor would it be the first lie told by the Vatican. Like my dad said, “Spin doctors at work for damage control. C’mon guys, try to convince us that the world is still flat and pictures of it from the moon are not to be trusted since the landing was a hoax and actually filmed at a secret location in the desert in Nevada…”
But how much can you hold him personally responsible? He’s already distancing himself from Davis. How much of that was just the toxicity of the institution? Who organized his agenda? Are those people working against him or with him? It strikes me that the institution of the Church/Vatican is in such disarray that it is hard to say how much the Pope’s agenda is being supported or undermined by his own people.
I understand your POV, Greenieweenie. I still have my reservations and thought that maybe Pope Francis just didn’t know who she was, but I spoke with several European friends of mine who said that the Kim Davis story made good news there, so it just comes as a shock that he didn’t fully understand who she was when he met her.
Kim Davis and Archbishop Vigano will be popular couples’ Halloween costumes this year. I wonder where one would get a stringy long-haired wig and adult size jumper.
Maybe there are some old Mama June Halloween costumes still around from last year? 😛
Great, so we’re across homophobia and racism. What else do we have on the checklist of appalling human behaviour that we need to address?
And she wore her best gray t-shirt for her “private” meeting with His Excellence. 😂
Stop trying to defend the Dope, Frances Ratzlinger is a veery clever and informed man, he knew exactly who Kim Davis is. Don’t believe the spin.
Too late, Pope. You let her and That Hate Foundation run the narrative.