Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Francis Shocks Liberals on Same-Sex “Marriage”
Crisis Magazine ^ | January 23, 2015 | PAUL KENGOR

Posted on 01/23/2015 2:45:00 PM PST by NYer

Pope-Francis with President Benigno Aquino III of Philippines at presidential palace in Manila january 16 (CNS photo : Paul Haring)

In his trip to the Philippines, Pope Francis once again defended marriage, and he again edged closer to a firm, unequivocal papal statement against same-sex “marriage.” As Francis clearly continues to carefully move in that direction, liberals, both secular and non-secular, non-Catholic and Catholic, are going to feel a severe sense of betrayal and grave disappointment, contrary to the most optimistic expectations they’ve eagerly imposed upon their first “gay-marriage” pope.

Before considering what Francis said last week, I want to back up and reiterate related points I made in a piece posted here a few weeks ago, which created a backlash among some readers who thought me at best naïve and at worst a complete fool.

My piece was on liberals’ love of Pope Francis on gay issues. Being driven as they are by emotion, they easily construed his kind and tolerant words toward gays as a certain coming embrace of gay marriage. For a liberal, A must always lead to B and then to Z, with nothing in between. I argued that they are deceiving themselves, a duping of their own doing. I laid out various Francis’ statements affirming traditional-Biblical-natural marriage, as well as his extremely strong remarks back in Argentina, where he declared same-sex “marriage” a diabolical effort of “the Father of Lies” to “destroy God’s plan … and deceive the children of God.” He said then—only four years ago—that gay “marriage” discriminates against children “in advance,” depriving them of “their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God.” At stake, said Cardinal Bergoglio, was “the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts” and the very survival of the human family, with Satan at work.

I noted that if one actually pauses and does a little research, examining each of Pope Francis’ many comments on marriage, one finds an obvious consistency that has never wavered from Church teaching. It’s only his language and tone that has changed.

I further noted the increasing number of statements from Francis in recent months, including widely unreported remarks just after the synod, when he remonstrated “that the family is hit, that the family is knocked and that the family is debased.… Can everything be called a family? How … much relativism there is in the concept of the Sacrament of Marriage!” He complained: “What they are proposing is not marriage, it is an association, but it is not marriage! It is necessary to say things very clearly and we must say this!” The Holy Father condemned the “new forms, totally destructive” of marriage.

He was equally strong in his address to the “Humanum” conference, where he affirmed that “family is a family,” and that such is an “anthropological fact” that “can’t be qualified by ideological notions.”

I concluded by noting that “gay-marriage” liberals are setting up themselves for a major letdown as Francis inevitably further affirms his opposition to same-sex “marriage.” I added that when it becomes painfully clear to them that Francis isn’t what they expected, the Holy Father shouldn’t expect any charity from them. All hell could break loose.

As noted, some fellow orthodox Catholic readers of that piece were shocked at my alleged naïveté. They disputed my thinking on Francis from all sorts of angles. I would urge them to keep their eye on the ball that I tossed out. My focus was and is same-sex “marriage.” And that brings me back to the pope’s remarks in the Philippines.

In the Philippines last week, Francis stated unequivocally that the family is being threatened by relativistic “powerful forces” that are looking to “disfigure God’s plan for creation” and to “redefine the very institution of marriage.” He denounced what he called the “ideological colonization of the family.” To cite the larger quotation reported by Catholic News Agency, the pope warned against increasing efforts “to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life,” and against “powerful forces which threaten to disfigure God’s plan for creation and betray the very values which have inspired and shaped all that is best in your culture.”

Bear in mind, when this particular pope speaks of “powerful forces,” he is very likely including what he considers satanic ones.

In short, Francis was clearly referring to the most obvious attempt to redefine marriage: same-sex “marriage.” This was understood even by the liberal, secular, mainstream media. Here are just a few examples:

MSNBC ran the headline, “Pope Francis suggests gay marriage threatens traditional families.” Its opening line stated: “In a reference to gay marriage, Pope Francis on Friday warned against an ideological colonization of the family.”

Reuters opened with this: “Pope Francis on Friday warned against an ‘ideological colonization of the family,’ a reference to gay marriage around the world.”

The UK’s left-leaning Independent likewise had no trouble interpreting the pontiff’s words, running the headline, “Pope Francis warns that same-sex marriage ‘threatens the family’ and ‘disfigures God’s plan for creation.’” Of course, Francis never used the words “same-sex marriage,” but there’s no question what he meant, and the Independent knew it.

Reporter Ben Smith at The Daily Signal wrote that “the pope reaffirmed his commitment to traditional marriage, speaking to the crowd about his concern for the ‘ideological colonization of the family,’ which many took as a swipe at gay marriage. The Vatican later confirmed that marriage was on the pope’s mind.” Smith concluded his piece: “Last October, during the Synod of bishops, many progressive church-watchers were hopeful for a more liberal church. They believed Francis would support friendlier language toward gays.”

Of course, it’s typical of liberalism that one cannot be seen as “friendly” toward gays unless accepting the entire gay agenda on marriage, and thereby rejecting one’s Church’s sacred teachings. Such is the binary, simple universe of the liberal mind, never as nuanced and sophisticated as prideful liberals insist.

I believe we can expect more of this from Pope Francis, especially with the synod on the family in Philadelphia this fall. And when we do, there will be hell to pay from “same-sex-marriage” fanatics who had fully convinced themselves that he is one of them, and will thus convince themselves (remember, they are driven by emotion) that he has lied to them.

Francis’ statements on marriage seem to be following a preconceived plan. On that, one of the most insightful assessments comes from Austen Ivereigh, who has written a book on Francis called The Great Reformer. He points to the role of Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises in forming Jorge Bergoglio’s thinking and unlocking the mystery of Francis’ papacy. He states of Francis: 

He absorbed at a very deep level St. Ignatius’ rules for distinguishing the action of the Holy Spirit from spiritual motions that come from the devil, which often come disguised in angelic form.

He discerned, in the move to create same-sex “marriage” in Argentina in 2010, precisely that kind of temptation: In the name of “good” things, such as dignity and equality, what the government was doing was destroying a child-centered institution based on an anthropological reality.

The Exercises are also key to understanding Francis’ reform of the Church.

St. Ignatius’ retreat is a four-week cycle. In Week I, you discover yourself to be a sinner, yet at the same time unconditionally loved and forgiven by God; in Week II, you choose to follow Christ, renouncing distractions and temptations, and commit to the truth taught by the Church. You’re able to get to Week II because of Week I; it’s the pattern of conversion. Yet, too often, we focus on the saving truth of the Church’s teaching while making it hard for people actually to experience that healing love.

What Francis is trying to do is get the Church to focus less on a Week II-type proclamation and more on Week I. It’s not an attempt to soften or dilute the Church’s teaching, but to fill it out—to show the part that too often gets skipped. Hence, his vision of the Church as a healer and a mother, not just a teacher. That’s the program of his pontificate.

I think that program may be exactly what we’re witnessing with the steady divulging of Francis’ position against same-sex “marriage.” It looks like he’s now moving through phase two of the program.

Unfortunately for this merciful pope, I fear we’ll also be witnessing some serious vituperation from his soon-to-be ex-friends on the liberal/progressive side of the aisle. I doubt they will give him the conversion to the faith and the truths of the Church that he was hoping for. Get ready for not only some further clarification from Francis on same-sex “marriage,” but for some real nastiness from the apostles of “tolerance.”

Editor’s note: In the image above is pictured Pope Francis and President Benigno Aquino III at the presidential palace in Manila, Philippines on January 16, 2015. (CNS Photo / Paul Haring)



TOPICS: Catholic; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: catholic; gays; homosexualagenda; pope; popefrancis; religiousleft; samesexmarriage; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: vladimir998

I never said his comments referred to support of same-sex “marriage”. The only thing the liberals picked up on were “who am I to judge”. They could have cared less what he was trying to say. And after the mass confusion he never clarified anything about Church doctrine on homosexuality. Then the debacle of the Synod of the Family, where Francis personally let stay in the final document words about homosexuals that was barely mentioned in the Synod and did not get enough votes to go in the final report. No Catholic can figure him out. It’s always typical Jesuit social justice talk coming from him and not much of anything else.


21 posted on 01/23/2015 3:51:36 PM PST by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Liberals discover that Pope Francis really wasn’t talking about anything more general than his work relationship with the curia when he said that. Hilarity ensues. Well, for us, anyway. For the liberals, not so much.
22 posted on 01/23/2015 3:52:54 PM PST by RichInOC ("Alles, was man ueber Abtreibung wissen muss, steht im 5. Gebot."--Schoenborn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I thought the pope was supposed to be God’s representative on earth ... I would think His views on immorality are constant and don’t evolve just because collections and attendance are down.


23 posted on 01/23/2015 3:59:53 PM PST by ChiefJayStrongbow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
"People need to learn to read!"

And to read the appropriate sources. The article pointed out distinct examples of the MSM distorting his words. EWTN and the Vatican website have full quotes and footage from which people may draw their own conclusions.

24 posted on 01/23/2015 4:27:36 PM PST by Grateful2God (And Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer

*8Reporter Ben Smith at The Daily Signal wrote that “the pope reaffirmed his commitment to traditional marriage, speaking to the crowd about his concern for the ‘ideological colonization of the family,’ which many took as a swipe at gay marriage. The Vatican later confirmed that marriage was on the pope’s mind.” **

Marriage between one man and one woman until death parts them.


25 posted on 01/23/2015 5:53:37 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“Never happened.”

Denial


26 posted on 01/23/2015 9:27:35 PM PST by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“Edged closer” why can’t he just say it and be done with it?


27 posted on 01/23/2015 9:42:07 PM PST by kalee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
Whoa! Idiots keep taking his comments out of context. His “Who am I to judge” never suggested that he supported gay marriage or anything else about the gay agenda. PERIOD! People need to learn to read!

Good advice, but wasted on many in the target audience. Way too many hear what they want to hear and read what they want to read in order to be able to maintain their pose of self-righteous outrage...many of them call it "sticking to their principles".

28 posted on 01/24/2015 3:54:10 AM PST by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
How do we know he's not being mistranslated?

The Semi-Official Catholic Internet Magisterium (SOCIM) will tell you.

29 posted on 01/24/2015 4:13:09 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Slambat

“Denial”

You can always try to prove me wrong. You’ll fail. But you can try.


30 posted on 01/24/2015 6:59:05 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212; Alex Murphy
The Semi-Official Catholic Internet Magisterium (SOCIM) will tell you.

Which one? The fallible one or the infallible one?

31 posted on 01/24/2015 7:12:02 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“You can always try to prove me wrong. You’ll fail. But you can try.”

I’m tired of doing it. If you would have been paying attention
lately you would know. If you were listing to Rush you would know.
If have been visiting FreeRepublic in the past year you would
know.
If you don’t know this, Sorry, your sorely uninformed.


32 posted on 01/24/2015 8:02:41 PM PST by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Slambat

“I’m tired of doing it.”

You’ve never done it.

“If you would have been paying attention
lately you would know.”

I pay attention and you’ve never done it.

“If you were listing to Rush you would know.”

I’m a Rush 24/7 member and listen every day.

“If have been visiting FreeRepublic in the past year you would know.”

I’m here every day.

“If you don’t know this, Sorry, your sorely uninformed.”

Clearly you’re the one who is misinformed.


33 posted on 01/25/2015 5:37:07 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I think it would be better for you to
live in your own self imposed ignorant
bliss. If what you say is true then you
are surely in total denial and there’s no
hope for you anyway. Good day.


34 posted on 01/25/2015 10:13:10 AM PST by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Slambat

“I think it would be better for you to live in your own self imposed ignorant bliss.”

I am very well informed. By your own standards I am. But you apparently can’t deal with that.

“If what you say is true then you are surely in total denial and there’s no hope for you anyway.”

Incredible. First, you said I had to fulfill certain pet requirements of yours to be judged as properly informed according to your standard. I, in fact, fulfill those requirements in spades. I, in fact, probably am better informed about things on the world stage then you ever will be. Yet, now you insist I “live in [my] own self imposed ignorant bliss”. And why? Apparently because your requirement list so massively backfired. Welcome to the real world. There are always people out there better informed than you. Don’t forget that.


35 posted on 01/25/2015 11:18:54 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson