Pope Francis blessed the 'Jesus the Homeless' sculpture:

[Are_grits_groceries]

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- A year ago, Timothy Schmalz's bronze sculpture "Jesus the Homeless" had been rejected by St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York and St. Michael's Cathedral in Toronto.

But in late November, Pope Francis blessed the sculpture at one of his weekly general audiences in front of thousands of eager pilgrims. The pontiff touched the knee of the sculpture and prayed for a few moments. Afterward, he told Schmalz he thought the sculpture was a "beautiful piece of art."

When Schmalz saw Pope Francis touch the sculpture, he said, "I thought well that's just it, this sculpture is symbolically representing what he's doing. He's out there touching the homeless people; he's reaching out to them every single day."

Appropriately, "Jesus the Homeless" may have found a permanent home in Rome, very close to the Vatican. The plan is for the sculpture to be placed close to the Vatican Radio offices near the Tiber River in memory of a homeless woman who slept there every night before dying outside in the cold.
<snip>
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1305240.htm

Well whatever else you think he is or isn't doing, the Pope is sure pissing off a lot of the people we love to hate such as Rush and Bill Donohoe.

[jsr]

1. BREAKING: Marxist Pope Supports Riffraff

[aikoaiko]

5. Riffraff?

[IMG][/IMG]

[daleanime]

10. It's astonishing....

[Tree-Hugger]

18. Time is fleeting....nt

[Bluenorthwest]

2. Francis says gay families come from 'the author of all evil'. Do you take no offense

at the slandering of your nighbors? Do you understand that dozens, maybe hundreds, of homeless go unattended in St Peter's Square each night, hence the woman who died of exposure? Have the others been given homes or just a statue? Exploiting those who suffer to make a wealthy man more powerful is in my eyes a heinous action.
Bill Donohoe is head of a Catholic group which Francis could criticize instead of attacking gay people, but Donohoe is allowed to join the anti gay attacks without a word of criticism from Francis or from the Church whose name Donohue claims. Gays are an attack on God Francis says, Donohoe gets his silent support.
Why do you think Francis refuses to criticize Donohoe while gleefully packing judgement upon the shoulders of innocent gay people? Do you support that choice?
If it was your family being attacked, would you post these OPs about religious bigots in GD? Has the Golden Rule been vanquished in RCC? It is now said that Jesus said 'Do unto gays as you would never allow to be done to yourself'?

[Xyzse]

4. I took offense on that.

However, people are complicated beings and as such have many objectionable views, and things that I won't be able to agree with.

The idea right now, is what particular view does the guy concentrate on, and/or focusing on. He has changed the discussion towards social justice rather than going off on what you are complaining about.

He isn't the one bringing that subject up to the forefront, in not doing so, that is a method of outreach to the community. By placing it at the backburner in regards to priorities, it could allow a cool down, which may bring about greater acceptance later.

It all can't be done immediately like magic. We are dealing with a grandfathered institution that changes very slowly.

[loyalsister]

9. Yes it is offensive

I am open minded because of my family experiences. I have a grandma who is Catholic and donates to "right to life" groups. She also adopts a family every Christmas. She loves our family members who are gay. She doesn't call them evil or sinners, but I'm pretty sure she prays for them to find their way back to "normal." I don't know what she has said or thought in the past, though. Overall, she is a positive force in our family. She genuinely cares about people, and she sets a good example because she doesn't judge. She overlooks my atheism in terms of our personal interactions, yet I'm sure she prays for me to become a Christ loving moral citizen.

There are terrible things in religious texts. Too many who follow the teachings may condemn "sinners" to hell and write them off. It's easy to write people off because of things we don't like about their beliefs, etc. People who don't follow religious doctrine do it, too.
I have a low tolerance for anti-choice, homophobic people. But, overall good intentions and compassionate behavior coming from people whose intolerance is too mild for the RW is something that has positive implications imo. As stated by others, this pope is pissing off the people who have worked hard to marry economic policies that stomp the "other" and hatred of poor and minorities to morality. If those things are separated in the minds of people who aren't exactly accepting, but also are not hateful, I think we could see some positive changes.

I can see the reasoning behind writing the pope off for his history and beliefs, why isn't it possible to consider the possibility that an alternate perspective might have some merit?

[Lucinda]

13. Do you have a link for that quote? TIA n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

36. "‘move’ of the Father of Lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God"

“[T]he Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family," he wrote to the four monasteries in Argentina. "At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”

He went on to describe it as a "‘move’ of the Father of Lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God" and asked for lawmakers to "not act in error." In John 8:44, the Father of Lies is the devil.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/13/pope-francis-gay-marriage-anti_n_2869221.html


He's got a LOT of fuckin' backtracking to do, to un-do that bullshit. It's not impossible. The whole idea of his faith is predicated on the idea of redemption for error/sin. But he better get crackin'. Noises about economic justice is nice and all, but even THAT issue intersects with same sex marriage, and same sex partners adopting children. These issues are all linked to economic issues as well. Joint property, income, taxation, power of attorney, survivorship rights/medical decisions in the case of incapacity.

[el_bryanto]

14. You assume this action was done entirely cynically - which given your hatred of Pope Francis

makes sense. But others clearly believe that he does genuinely want to help the poor.

Also as for your title, when did he say it? Is it possible that he has evolved since then? Again, I know you hatred of Pope Francis will not allow you to see him as a human being, capable of change, but others might believe he's grown since he said that - particularly if it was a while back.

Bryant

[sabrina 1]

84. Pope Francis actually has defended the rights of Gay and Women (who support abortion) Catholics

to be part of the Catholic Church against the demands of the Far Right 'Christians' here in the US, telling them that they should 'stop obsessing over Gays and Abortion' and start behaving like Christians'. He stated that it is not for them or for him, 'to judge others' making it clear to them that they have no right to determine who should be given communion and who should not.

Notice how those who hate the pope never mention his defense of the right of Gays and Women who support abortion be members of the Catholic Church.

Some people are happier with the status quo, which he is quickly changing, so they can continue to rail against religion or whatever it is they are used to railing against.

This President took a very long time to change his views, and he doesn't even have the excuse of belonging to a centuries old church, he lived here, as a Democrat, all of his life. So yes, it is possible that the pope made those statements in the past and has realized that it was wrong of him to do so. His admonition to Right Wing Christians at least shows he is willing to protect their right to belong to the church he is now head of.

[Are_grits_groceries]

31. I have come to the conclusion

that Pope Benedict is more satisfactory to some than Pope Francis. No matter what Pope Francis does that is diametrically opposed to Benedict, conservative Catholics, and others, he is intensely flamed. I have read more vicious posts about him since he has been Pope than about Benedict when he was Pope.

Pope Francis has quite unexpectedly attacked the 1%, the Church bling, trickle-down economics, the singular focus on social abortion and other social issues among other targets. This seems to have shaken up both those who have supported the Catholic Church's conservative bent as well as those who criticized it. He cannot be pigeonholed as either/or unless one takes a completely black and white view of him. If he doesn't make 100% of the changes that people want immediately, he is seen as no better than Pope Benedict. It was much easier to deal with Benedict because he was so reprehensible across the board.

It appears that anyone chosen as Pope must immediately make drastic changes to Church doctrine that's been set for hundreds of years. They must also immediately(or within their first 9 months) hold a tribunal or council to oust every pedophile no matter that who they are or what has happened has been obscured by Bishops, Archbishops, and Popes before them. In addition, they must help every homeless person in Rome before they dare to bless a statue of the homeless lest that be seen as hypocrisy.

I am gay. Am I satisfied at all with the Pope's stance on the LGBT community on many issues, ordination of women, birth control and abortion? No. If he is to be really seen as a true force for change he has to do more than utter phrases and not be as harsh as his predecessors.

It would appear to me that Pope Francis chose as his first major issue to deal with is the plight of the poor. If there has been a consistent message that he has had, it has been his constant demand that the Church change it's focus to helping the least, the last, and the lost. Making major doctrinal changes(or even trying to) would obscure that effort in an uproar of unprecedented magnitude.

The Catholic Church is not disappearing. The Pope and the Church hold sway with millions. He is denounced for only making outward gestures. There is no recognition that they do mean something to many. He cannot reach out and make whole every homeless person in every country. What he can do is voice his support for others to help them and make gestures that are seen by many as embracing the homeless. That is no small thing.

I am conflicted about Pope Francis too. I want him to jerk the arc of justice down much harder to help others. That he seems to have begun to add his weight to pulling on this arc feels like a small effort. In 9 months he has managed to find that arc and begin to pull. I want him to begin to pull that arc for all.

He won't be Pope forever. There will be another elected and at some point another who is as conservative as Benedict was. That will be a much more familiar persona to deal with. Then we can all drop back into the age old stances of complete opposition to The Church. That seems to be a much more comfortable position for many on both sides of the equation.

As it is, Pope Francis has afflicted those who support The Church, those who have opposed it, and all people in between. They are all less comfortable for different reasons. That is reason enough to celebrate him in some ways. His presence has made everybody begin to truly confront many moral issues.

Pope Francis is also forcing everbody to see the least, the last, and the lost. They are the great moral failure that all of us share. By holding them up in the bright light, Pope Francis has made them the center of his universe. That forces all to look and truly see them. That's not a small insignificant change.

[AtheistCrusader]

37. You are seeing these opposition posts because of the sheer volume of positive press posted

here on DU about every noise this pope utters.

He takes a hard line on poverty. Great. That's helpful. Not unexpected, or a reach for him, being a Jesuit. But that's just one issue.


This pope has been very successful in his charm offensive, largely due to his economic opinions, and in dropping the seemingly hypocritical riches and trappings of the former pope. The gold throne. The shoes. The cars, etc. He's made some nice overtures on one issue. But that is just one issue. There are a host of related human rights issues that still need tackling, and his statements prior to becoming pope, and his now apparent silence on those issues, are most unhelpful in that regard.

But I disagree with your premise that the church will not disappear. I sincerely hope, in my lifetime, that it does. And I think it will.

[theHandpuppet]

54. I must take issue with you on one point

You wrote, "He takes a hard line on poverty."

Since some 70% of the world's poor are women and children, I would say that unless and until Francis embraces the full equality of women, including but not limited to reproduction rights, contraception and abortion, he's a long way from truly tackling many of root causes of poverty around the globe. Promoting the use of condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS would also go a long way to relieve the suffering and poverty of millions.
Some folks at DU (not you) seem incredibly talented at the skill of compartmentalization. They talk about poverty and homelessness as if it is or can be completely divorced from the issues I mentioned above. Well, it can't. For instance, some 40% of homeless youth are GLBT and after life on the streets, many of those are HIV positive.
Similarly, would so many here be able to overlook Francis' "flaws" if he were an unabashed racist at the head of a powerful church that openly promoted and practiced racism? But since we're only talking misogyny and homophobia here, that makes it okay?
I gladly support you for taking a stand against those who would embrace a bigot, but don't let anyone silence your arguments by crying out "poverty!" in response to every post. Francis and the church cannot conduct a battle against poverty unless and until they recognize that their own policies are a major impediment towards winning that war.

[AtheistCrusader]

56. I agree, family planning is key to eliminating poverty.

I did talk about the economic aspects of family planning, even same sex marriage and adoption, down thread. it just didn't make it into that post.

Having too many children directly links people to poverty. So too, for medical issues as a result of infectious diseases, easily prevented with simple tools like condoms. And again via economic opportunity stifled by discrimination against, for instance, sexual identity.

All of these issues are linked via economic/poverty means.

[idwiyo]

61. I am sorry, but you can't deal with the "plight of the poor" without dealing with... birth control!

Or without dealing with disease prevention. Like HIV. Which neatly takes us right back to... CONDOMS & birth control!

One of the most heinous lies perpetuated by RCC for years was and still IS that 'condoms are ineffective for prevention of HIV/STDs'.

The 'protector of the poor' had 9 months already to maybe try to, kind of you know, DO something about perpetuating that lie, no? Isn't his shtick to 'alleviate the poverty'? He is not stupid, nor is he ignorant. He just doesn't give a shit about poor when it comes to 'help the poor' vs dogma.

[Drahthaardogs]

79. I too am confused why anyone assumes the Pope is there to "change" the Church.

He is certainly cannot. He does not have the authority. The Catholic Church is NOT going to ordain women any time soon. No Pope is going to come out and say they really think gay marriage is a good idea. No Pope is going to be pro-choice. As a Pope, you pretty much must be loyal to the Magisterium. That being said, it sure is a breath of fresh air to hear a Pope endorse unions and fair labor, speak out on behalf of the poor, openly say that they cannot judge gay people, and denounce trickle down economics. In addition, while not advocating for women priests (like I stated, loyalty to the Magisterium is required), he has stated women need a larger role in the Church.

I grew up with the Jesuits, so social justice, Labour, etc. were kind of what I was used to. I find Pope Francis to be a step in the right direction. I just do not understand why those vilify him so vehemently. Rome was NOT built in a day.

[loyalsister]

3. but...

poverty and homelessness are a result of moral failings. Challenging that RW assumption is pretty jarring for them.

Is it possible that he can shake up the republican Christian constituency that has been voting against their economic interests? If some people wake up to the fact that John Boehner, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, & co. are following an ideology that runs counter to what the Pope professes as Catholicism and Christianity in general, I think it's very possible that there could be some momentum that favors liberalism.

[SidDithers]

6. I sure am glad that Francis has eliminated homelessness in Rome...

Good job, Pope!

Sid

[ucrdem]

7. Good then you can rec this one too:

Pope Francis Reportedly Leaving Vatican at Night to Minister to Homeless of Rome Anonymously
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024125268

[TexasProgresive]

8. He invited 3 homeless men to his birthday party yesterday.

Well I guess a link is appropriate-edited to add:
http://ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chronicles/pope-celebrates-birthday-having-breakfast-mass-homeless-men
?itok=nbTULrTu

snip-As part of a low-key celebration of his 77th birthday, Pope Francis had breakfast with three people who live on the streets near the Vatican*. A small dog belonging to one of the homeless men was also on the guest list.

snip-The pope invited the men to have breakfast with him in the residence dining room, where they talked and shared a few laughs.

One of the men told the pope, "It's worthwhile being a vagrant because you get to meet the pope," the paper said.

[freshwest]

76. Francis is comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. An ubuntu quality. n/t

[sabrina 1]

12. Do you think he should go back to the old ways of Republican Catholics like Santorum and

ignore the poor and t he homeless? He sure is pissing off all the 'right' people which means he's doing something right.

[Grateful for Hope]

80. Exactly right.

[MannyGoldstein]

20. Student homelessness hits record high

Student homelessness hits record high

Probably Pope Francis' fault.

But the TPP should help out.

Rah.

[LanternWaste]

29. Almost as dramatic as your own achievements...

Almost as dramatic as your own achievements...

[Vashta Nerada]

11. Oh. How cute. More sensationalistic Pope crap.

[el_bryanto]

15. Yeah - it's terrible how not everybody agrees with a few anti-Catholic cranks at DU

Wouldn't it be a better DU if everybody hated the Pope the way you do?

Bryant

[Vashta Nerada]

17. It would be nice if people didn't kiss his ass.

Because he's no liberal.

I'll post this again because people here don't get it:

Pope Francis is a conservative who is anti-gay marriage and anti-gay adoption. He has described same-sex marriage as the work of the devil and a “destructive attack on God’s plan.” He has also said that gay adoption is a form of discrimination against children.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/13/pope-francis-gay-marriage-anti_n_2869221.html

But he helps the homeless. He's supposed to. He's a goddamn religious leader.

[el_bryanto]

19. Yes - why don't people agree with your hatred of Pope Francis?

I mean you've told them - and yet they steadfastly refuse to see things in the simple black and white terms you lay out. It's almost as if they think the Pope is a complex human being instead of the cartoonish villain he really is.

Bryant

[Vashta Nerada]

21. Yeah, forget about the treatment of gay people and women.

He photo-ops with the poor and drives a car with 973450837458347 miles on it.

[el_bryanto]

22. Exactly - they should forget his photo ops with the poor and his many positive statements

and instead focus on 20 year old quotes about homosexuals.

Or alternatively they could look at him as a complete human being who has some negative traits and some positive ones.

Nah, screw it - that's too much work. Easier to just think of him as a villain, open and shut.

Bryant

[Vashta Nerada]

23. Republicans are just humans with flaws.

We should just forget about how they treat gays and women.

[el_bryanto]

25. You know what's a really great arguing techique

Repeating yourself and then putting in a rolled eye smiley. I mean that really convinces me.

Nobody is asking you to forget anything. Just consider the whole package - and yes that would apply to Republicans to. Today's crop doesn't have anything positive about them, that I can think of off the top of my head, but if they did do something positive, than yes we should applaud that.

But you go ahead an argue for your simplistic black and white worldview based on hatred. You don't seem to be convincing that many people, even here at DU.

Bryant

[Vashta Nerada]

26. It's your technique.

"Well the pope has his flaws". If you put it that way, then Republicans have their flaws too. Many republicans help the poor and give to charities. But you still wouldn't vote for them, would you?

So what makes the pope so goddamn special?

[el_bryanto]

27. That's what's called projection - when you project your flaws on another person

If you weren't blinded by hatred, you would see that Pope Francis is different for a couple of reasons.

1) he's saying things no republican would ever say, critiques about the capitalist state that just aren't part of the discussion, even among some Democrats.

2) he's the head of a traditionally extremely conservative organization, which exercises global influence (if not power). Changing the tone of the Roman Catholic Church is a big deal; if he succeeds. And so far he seems to be moving in the right direction.

Bryant

[Vashta Nerada]

32. Post #30 might be enlightening for you.

[el_bryanto]

33. Not really.

[sabrina 1]

83. Yes and he has admonished right wing members of his own church for judging gays and women and told

them to stop obsessing over other people and focus on what they are supposed to be focusing on.

It was just thrilling to see him direct those remarks, at our very own Right Wing 'Christians' who like you, USE women and gays for political purposes, which he knows and has now made it very difficult for them to do.

And btw, as a woman I am sick to death of women being used this way. We are capable of dealing with our own issues and lives without your help, thank you.

There are plenty of Gay and Women Catholics who will not be driven from the Catholic Church, I know many of them.

You need not worry about them, they are strong and committed people and now they have a powerful advocate against the vicious right wing who would throw them out of the church if they could. THIS Pope says 'no, they are loved by God and who are we to judge anyone'.

It's pretty odd that people who claim to care so much about women and gays are attacking this pope for Protecting their rights against the Hypocritical Right Wing Demands to kick them out of the Church they choose to belong to.

What is it you want? Did you want him to AGREE with the Right Wingers who, up to now, were able to make these demands without fear?

He has stopped them in their tracks and THAT is why your opinion is so much in the minority.

[ucrdem]

24. Huffpo link goes to a TMZ link with a headline linked to itself but no story.

TMZ.

[Vashta Nerada]

30. More links.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/cardinal_bergoglio_hits_out_at_same-sex_marriage

The Pope (when he was Cardinal) on gay marriage issue in Argentina:

He wrote: “In the coming weeks, the Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family…At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”

Another one: http://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/pope-francis-brings-lessons-of-argentinas-marriage-fight-to

Let’s not be naive: This is not a simple political fight; it is a destructive proposal to God’s plan. This is not a mere legislative proposal (that’s just it’s form), but a move by the father of lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God… Let’s look to St. Joseph, Mary, and the Child to ask fervently that they defend the Argentine family in this moment… May they support, defend, and accompany us in this war of God.

Another one: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/pope-francis-was-often-quiet-on-argentine-sex-abuse-cases-as-archbishop/2013/03/18/26e7eca4-8ff6-11e2-9cfd-36d6c9b5d7ad_story.html

Yet in the years after Grassi’s conviction, Bergoglio — now Pope Francis — has declined to meet with the victim of the priest’s crimes or the victims of other predations by clergy under his leadership. He did not offer personal apologies or financial restitution, even in cases in which the crimes were denounced by other members of the church and the offending priests were sent to jail.

Oh, and this little "gem": http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/09/27/pope-francis-excommunicates-australian-priest/

An Australian priest who supports the ordination of women has been excommunicated by Pope Francis.

In the first such excommunication since the new pontiff took office Fr Greg Reynolds was dismissed in a letter from the Archbishop of Melbourne Denis Hart, which stated that “the decision by Pope Francis to dismiss Fr Reynolds from the clerical state and to declare his automatic excommunication has been made because of his public teaching on the ordination of women contrary to the teaching of the Church and his public celebration of the Eucharist when he did not hold faculties to act publicly as a priest.”

Archbishop Hart also told other priests in the archdiocese by letter that Fr Reynolds’s excommunication was “because of his public teaching on the ordination of women”, which are grounds for automatic excommunication.

Fr Reynolds is also a supporter of same-sex marriage and has attended rallies in favour of changing the definition of marriage. He has even reportedly presided at same-sex ceremonies.

emphasis mine

But Francis is only a flawed human being and his helping of the poor far outweighs his homophobia, treatment of child sex abuse victims, and women.

[ucrdem]

34. Better, fresher links:

Monday:

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?"

http://www.advocate.com/year-review/2013/12/16/advocates-person-year-pope-francis

September 19:

The pope’s statements are like rain on a parched land for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Catholics and their supporters. . . . Pope Francis has sent a clear signal that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and organizations like the Knights of Columbus need to end their multimillion dollar campaign to marginalize LGBT people in the church and the wider society and commit themselves to gaining a deeper understanding of the lives, beliefs and ministries of LGBT people, their families and their friends.

http://equally-blessed.org/release/popes-words-rain-parched-land-lgbt-catholics-and-their-supporters

And let's not forget:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024188051

p.s. TMZ . . .

[Vashta Nerada]

41. Yes.

That's why the Pope excommunicated a pastor who was performing gay marriages just this past August.

What a swell guy.

[ucrdem]

45. Excommunication isn't execution,

it means he needs to find a different denomination. There are probably several that will welcome him. I don't know the particulars but Catholic priests normally have to study several years in a seminary before ordination so this one should have known full well what to expect.

[AtheistCrusader]

57. At least he didn't get the Giordano Bruno treatment.

[Vashta Nerada]

58. What you fail to realize

Is that pastor was excommunicated by the current pope for performing same sex marriages and for supporting the view that women should hold more prominent positions in the church.

[idwiyo]

62. Why should HE find a different denomination? He is a Catholic, that is his denomination.

He also just happen to be one of the many who don't see any conflict between their faith and treatment of women.

Just like Father Roberto Francisco Daniel doesn't see any conflict with GLBTQ Catholics and Equal Rights:

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/04/30/brazil-catholic-priest-excommunicated-after-resigning-over-church-opposition-to-homosexuality/

Or Father José Nicolás Alessio, excomunicated for exactly the same sin as Father Roberto Francisco Daniel:

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/04/13/argentina-catholic-priest-expelled-from-church-for-supporting-equal-marriage/


Are they not good enough to be Catholics because they stood up against bigotry?

[ucrdem]

66. Depends on the circumstances.

Hard to tell the full situation from a couple of lines in a newspaper, but it appears in the Australian case at least there's more going on than just these marriages, which in any case would be problematic on all kinds of levels, as marriages are legal as well as ecclesiastical contracts and governed by numerous statutes in both courts as you probably know. How is such a service supposed to be recorded and registered and under whose legal authority, for example? It gets to be a problem. The legislation has to change first or they simply aren't legal, however well intentioned they might be.

[idwiyo]

67. Actually Australian case is VERY clear, there is no ambiguity in the description.

Here, I'll highlight it for you:

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/09/27/pope-francis-excommunicates-australian-priest/

An Australian priest who supports the ordination of women has been excommunicated by Pope Francis.

In the first such excommunication since the new pontiff took office Fr Greg Reynolds was dismissed in a letter from the Archbishop of Melbourne Denis Hart, which stated that “the decision by Pope Francis to dismiss Fr Reynolds from the clerical state and to declare his automatic excommunication has been made because of his public teaching on the ordination of women contrary to the teaching of the Church and his public celebration of the Eucharist when he did not hold faculties to act publicly as a priest.”

As to other two priests, both were excommunicated in 2013. Same-sex marriages are legal in Brazil & Argentina, and were legal long before both priests were excommunicated.

Here is a quote from my post above, notice the dates when the articles were published in the body of the links:

Just like Father Roberto Francisco Daniel doesn't see any conflict with GLBTQ Catholics and Equal Rights:

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/04/30/brazil-catholic-priest-excommunicated-after-resigning-over-church-opposition-to-homosexuality/

Or Father José Nicolás Alessio, excomunicated for exactly the same sin as Father Roberto Francisco Daniel:

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/04/13/argentina-catholic-priest-expelled-from-church-for-supporting-equal-marriage/

Below are links for articles on same-sex marriage in Brazil & Argentina:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Brazil

Same-sex unions have been legally recognized in Brazil since 2004. Same-sex marriage has been a right of all same-sex couples to access since May 14, 2013 due to a sweeping Federal Court ruling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Argentina

Same-sex marriage in Argentina has been legal since July 22, 2010.

Argentina was the first country in Latin America and the second in the Americas to allow same-sex marriage nationwide.[1] It was the tenth country worldwide to allow same-sex marriage.[2]

[ucrdem]

68. No it really isn't.

For example what exactly does "public celebration of the Eucharist when he did not hold faculties to act publicly as a priest" mean? And I'd rather not hear whatever nonsense explanation you pull out of your ear next but I don't suppose that will stop you from waving it around anyway.

[idwiyo]

69. Why don't you elaborate on "nonsense explanations"? You were shown facts confirming

that all 3 Catholic priests from 3 different countries were excommunicated because they actually support Equal Rights. Something that present pope clearly doesn't support, as evidenced by excommunications.

Edited to add for clarity:

Clearly you didn't bother to read the article about Australian priest, otherwise you would have noticed this:

Archbishop Hart also told other priests in the archdiocese by letter that Fr Reynolds’s excommunication was “because of his public teaching on the ordination of women”, which are grounds for automatic excommunication.

That's not my "nonsense explanation", that's Archbishop's Hart explanation.

[ucrdem]

70. Let's see, "Excommunicated priest: I did not give Communion to a dog"

Excommunicated Australian priest Greg Reynolds says he never gave holy Communion to a dog, an assertion backed by the Melbourne archbishop.

"I did not give a consecrated host to any dog or any animal and never would," Reynolds told NCR in a Sept. 24 email.

(snip)

When Reynolds resigned from active ministry in August 2011, he founded a community called Inclusive Catholics. In an August 2012 story about Reynolds and the community, an Australian newspaper reported that a dog had received Communion at one of their liturgies, although it did not identify Reynolds as the distributor.

According to The Age, a first-time visitor to the group's Mass, held in a southeast Melbourne suburb, arrived late along with his German shepherd. When the paten with the Eucharist circulated through the room, the man took a host, broke off a piece and gave it to his dog.

http://ncronline.org/news/excommunicated-australian-priest-i-did-not-give-communion-dog

See? I knew there was more to it. Oh and you're welcome.

[idwiyo]

71. Are you disputing Archbishop's explanation of the reason for excomunication?

Here are the quotes, from the article you didn't even bother to read (otherwise you would have known what second reason is exactly, without guessing):

In the first such excommunication since the new pontiff took office Fr Greg Reynolds was dismissed in a letter from the Archbishop of Melbourne Denis Hart, which stated that “the decision by Pope Francis to dismiss Fr Reynolds from the clerical state and to declare his automatic excommunication has been made because of his public teaching on the ordination of women contrary to the teaching of the Church and his public celebration of the Eucharist when he did not hold faculties to act publicly as a priest.”

Archbishop Hart also told other priests in the archdiocese by letter that Fr Reynolds’s excommunication was “because of his public teaching on the ordination of women”, which are grounds for automatic excommunication.

As I am not sure if you can find what "his public celebration of the Eucharist when he did not hold faculties to act publicly as a priest" means (as per admission in your post above), here is the relevant part of the article for you:

In August 2011 Fr Reynolds resigned his position as a priest at two rural parishes and, after Archbishop Hart removed his priestly faculties, he founded Inclusive Catholics, a pro-female ordination and gay marriage group.

Priestly faculties:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faculty_%28instrument%29

A faculty is a legal instrument or warrant in canon law, especially a judicial or quasi-judicial warrant from an ecclesiastical court or tribunal.

In the Roman Catholic Church, it is "the authority, privilege, or permission, to perform an act or function. In a broad sense, a faculty is a certain power, whether based on one's own right, or received as a favour from another, of validly or lawfully doing some action."[1] The most common use of the term is in the context of 'priestly faculties', which is the permission given to a priest by his diocesan bishop or religious superior, legally permitting him to perform the Sacraments. Normally, a priest's faculties only permit him to celebrate within his own diocese or religious institute.

And just in case, your post above:

[ucrdem]

73. Read what I posted. He was saying mass without authorization.

The dog business getting in the papers was probably the last straw.

[idwiyo]

74. The link in your post does not contradict the reason for excommunication.

That would be the one Archbishop Hart provided in his letter, unless you dispute his explanation because you know something he didn't?

[ucrdem]

77. Read the part I posted, specifically this:

When Reynolds resigned from active ministry in August 2011, he founded a community called Inclusive Catholics. In an August 2012 story about Reynolds and the community, an Australian newspaper reported that a dog had received Communion at one of their liturgies, although it did not identify Reynolds as the distributor.

According to the letter from Rome he was booted for sacrilege and heresy. A specific reason isn't given. If Reynolds wanted to say mass, he shouldn't have resigned. Once he did, he needed permission. It's not like theosophy where anybody can say anything anywhere and call it a service. And a priest holding bogus masses and giving communion to dogs is sacrilegious, sorry.

The stuff about gay marriage is coming from his archbishop, who evidently had taken a dislike that was no doubt mutual. Well, you take a gamble when you flaunt the rules and sometime you lose. It's unfortunate but the rules are not exactly mysterious and if Reynolds didn't want to follow them he probably shouldn't have become a priest.

[idwiyo]

78. Read the article YOU posted. It states that Archbishop Hart explained the reasons in his letter.

You link: http://ncronline.org/news/excommunicated-australian-priest-i-did-not-give-communion-dog

According to Hart -- in a letter to his priests and also a statement to NCR -- the decisions to remove Reynolds from the clerical state and excommunicate him came "because of his public teaching on the ordination of women contrary to the teaching of the church and his public celebration of the Eucharist when he did not hold faculties to act publicly as a priest."

This exactly the same reasons as in the article I was using:



Do you dispute the Archbishop's explanation?
Do you know something he didn't?
Are you accusing him of misrepresenting the actual reason(s) for excommunication?

Which one is it?

[AtheistCrusader]

42. So, he's advanced to the 'Separate But Equal' stage of caving in to equal treatment/civil rights?

Well, that's progress, in a 1950-60's sort of way.

[Le Taz Hot]

35. Recognizing good works in this Pope

hardly equals "kissing his ass."

[Vashta Nerada]

38. People here put posts like "I love this Pope" and drivel like that.

That's more than "recognizing good works" in this Pope.

[daleanime]

49. Yeah, its easy to argue that people are responding with too much affection for this pope....

but we're desperate for progress of any sort and even his most fawning fans seem to acknowledge his faults. So is it really that bad? Remember, the old pope is still available.

[Grateful for Hope]

81. Can we bring the old pope back?

Very good point.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. I don't hate the pope. I hate the dogmatic baggage this religion brings to the table.

Change the faith, and I stop bothering posting about it, because it won't matter.

Not sure that's logistically possible, but it's an option to try.

[el_bryanto]

46. Yes - if only those Catholics would all disappear. Than we'd be better off.

And then maybe we can get rid of the rest of the Christians, Muslims, Jews and on down the list.

Bryant

[AtheistCrusader]

48. Nice try, captain strawman, but that's not what I said.

I said change the faith, not disappear the people.

If your faith includes institutionalized discrimination against women, same sex marriage, medical decisions, contraception/family planning, etc, your faith sucks. I exhort people who are members of those faiths to reform their existing faith, or re-identify with a more progressive faith. I rarely even push non-faith as an option, to be honest.

And suggesting I would want them to disappear or, in the connotation of your 'get rid of', actually disappearing people, meaning, getting RID of them, is simply a smear, but you won't retract it, so whatever.

[el_bryanto]

50. Your Nick is Atheist Crusader - forgive for assume that meant you wanted to Crusade

on behalf of Atheism. You are familiar with what the Crusades were aren't you? Religious wars of extermination between Christians and Muslims (mostly instigated by the Christians in one of their darker periods).

Bryant

[AtheistCrusader]

51. My username is not relevant to your attempt to pin me with a strawman.

It is a nickname a friend gave me, due to my dogged support for non-theism, or for the firewall between public office/law, and religion. It was more than a little tongue-in-cheek.

Now that that's settled, let's get back to your smear that is in no way justified by anything I just posted.

[el_bryanto]

52. Laughs - ok - I apologize for this so called Smear

I do find your comments about reforming a religion a bit odd, when you get a Pope who seems to want to make some reforms, and yet he's condemned by a few DU Cranks for not fixing everything immediately.

Bryant

[AtheistCrusader]

55. It's a matter of perspective.

He seems more in line with John Paul II, who campaigned heavily on economic justice as well. Ratzinger was, in my view, an aberration, who only serves to distort the contrast of social policy by Francis today. Francis hasn't moved on any of the issues that John established over his nearly three-decade stint as pope. When Francis starts allowing female priests, at least verbally supports same-sex marriage, whether or not the church as a whole moves on it, starts supporting family planning/condoms, etc, then I will be surprised.

Otherwise, this has all the appearances of a continuation of JPII, briefly interrupted by a hard-liner in the form of Ratzinger.

[Vashta Nerada]

59. Thank you.

I've been saying that all along.

But I'm just a hater and a crank.

[el_bryanto]

63. So would you say that the angry responses to positive statements by this Pope

are more a reflection of general disdain for Catholicism?

Bryant

[AtheistCrusader]

64. Toward any institution that purports to convey revealed truth from metaphysical sources

that are at their root discriminatory, sexist, etc. Absolutely. But also for Francis as an individual for things he personally has said, for instance in opposition to a POLITICIAL legalization of same sex marriage in Argentina.

If his goal was only to tell members of his faith that same sex marriage is not allowed, I could look the other way, because membership in his faith is elective at the individual level. His opposition to legalization at the national level for non-members of his faith is inexcusable, and not something I can overlook, no matter what good he may be doing in other areas.

Same for contraceptives. If it only applied to members, fine, do your thing. But they seek to impose it on others. To ban things like abortion for all people.

Depredations against society as a whole that I will not, and can not overlook.

Catholicism is by no means alone in this regard. AND it can be reformed. If, as an entity, it wants to, and possesses the leadership.

[ucrdem]

16. "Darkness is cheap, and Scrooge liked it."

[idwiyo]

28. Awww, isn't that great! So much easier than actually do something about homeless...

Of wait! He had a breakfast with homeless!!!! That alone miraculously got all homeless place to live! Yes! Really! It did!
Never mind that pope is a homophobic forced-birther... Ignore that! Statue! Breakfast! YAY!

[el_bryanto]

47. Another example of irrational Pope Hatred so uncommon here at DU

But it must be very frustrating to note how few of your fellow DUers follow your irrational hatred of Pope Francis.

Bryant

[idwiyo]

53. It's irrational to despise hypocrites, homophobic forced-birthers, and protectors of paedophilia?

I thought it would make me a hypocrite if I excused bigotry for a few pretty words, no?

Also, why would you think I should be "frustrated"? Sad that so many people chose to ignore bigotry when it suits them, Yes. Frustrated? No.

[el_bryanto]

60. You are right that many people choose to ignore bigotry when it suits them. nt

[Recursion]

39. It's almost like Francis has read the Gospel

Seriously. Where were popes like this for... oh... the past 1000 years or so?

[AtheistCrusader]

43. He's a Jesuit.

This behavior is not unexpected for him. It only seems wildly strange in the light of the actions of the previous pope, a hard-right pope, way right of center. Francis is a moderate, but seems like such a change for the better, only in contrast to Ratzinger.

If Ratzinger hadn't occurred at all, and we compared Francis to the previous pope, the contrast would be much less shocking. It would seem a mild evolution.

That's how hard-right Ratzinger was.

Edit: Excuse me, a Jesuit AND a Franciscan. These inform his opinion of the poor in explicit, very thorough/extreme importance terms.

[Recursion]

44. I agree on that.

JPII was much more liberal than the Benedictine interpretation of him wants him to be.

[liberal_at_heart]

65. great statue. I'm so glad to see the Pope concentrate on the sick, disabled, and poor.

[Kingofalldems]

72. I guarantee the freepers and cave boys hate him

He's OK with me.

[freshwest]

75. The sculpture and the blessing brought tears to my eyes. The USA needs to heed this message now...

Last edited Wed Dec 18, 2013, 11:18 PM - Edit history (1)

There is no compassion without love and acceptance. The right has been 'doing it wrong.' Time to put them out to pasture.

[Grateful for Hope]

82. Yes, absolutely.

Great post.