Sunday, June 26, 2016

Pope doesn't just want an apology from gays - he wants forgiveness

Hey look. Yet more betrayal.

I'm sure this is okay. After all, the sins of particular religious are the sins of the entire Church. The sins of individual LGBT people - even organizations representing 'LGBT interests' - are not sins at all, but cries for help, and do not reflect upon the 'LGBT community' in any way.

So, while the Church is being attacked, savaged, and legislated out of not just the public life, but its own private institutions throughout the West, the Pope's leadership is to say: "Apologize to the people who are savaging you."

Oh, and to top it off, "Some priests were concerned with what I've done and turned to Benedict to help, but he told them off. Hahaha!"

I'd ask for pardon for my saying 'Fuck this pope', but I don't need any pardon for saying it.

Edit: Just to put this in perspective.


They're owed an apology, because the Church has offended them.

13 comments:

Son of Ya'Kov said...

So Benedict should fuck himself?


Ratzinger: Avoid Criticizing Church in “Mass Media”

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/06/ratzinger-avoid-criticizing-church-in-mass-media.html

BTW there is no grudge between us. In principle or practice I couldn't be friends with someone who told my Father "Yachov the Older" to fuck off anymore then my spiritual father & if one of my biological brothers told our father to "fuck off" I would not speak to him till he reconciled.

So our friendship is ended. But your hatred of the Holy Faith is just beginning. I seen this all before, in your view you take a proud stand of "principle" against the Holy Father & it will end in apostasy and Schism. Rod Dreher or Joe Dippolitto or Gerry Madatics. It will all be the same.

You have been warned. Outside the Catholic Church there is no Salvation.

Crude said...

So Benedict should fuck himself?

Actually, that's funny Ben. Because as near as I can tell... Benedict is agreeing with me, not you.

Who's criticizing the Church in the Mass Media? It sure ain't me. I'm a nobody on a blog.

You know who is? Pope Francis.

BTW there is no grudge between us. In principle or practice I couldn't be friends with someone who told my Father "Yachov the Older" to fuck off anymore then my spiritual father & if one of my biological brothers told our father to "fuck off" I would not speak to him till he reconciled.

What if your father was being a tremendous asshole and derelict in his duties, while condemning your brother for complaining?

So our friendship is ended. But your hatred of the Holy Faith is just beginning. I seen this all before, in your view you take a proud stand of "principle" against the Holy Father & it will end in apostasy and Schism.

It won't, but that does lead me to ask. What does Francis think of apostates and schismatics? Last I checked, the Pope had largely kind words for atheists, protestants, the irreligious and more.

That's the weird thing. I've had people use this line on me before - this whole 'You're sounding like a protestant!' bit. But what, is that an insult? Does the Pope think it's an insult?

I am Catholic, but I am not one out of quivering fear of the Pope. I am one because of the Church. This is a Pope who openly tolerates defiance of Church teaching and leadership, and if he ultimately reconciles the SSPX to the Church - while they STILL reject V2 and the Novus Ordo, no less - I look forward to seeing how people justify that.

You have been warned. Outside the Catholic Church there is no Salvation.

Care to think how Francis interprets that line?

Oh, and by the way Ben. I still consider you a friend. I don't need that to be a two-way street.

But I will not attempt to defend this Pope's mistakes while he gloats about how he shut out conservative critics, and he demoralizes the faithful even further.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

>.. Benedict is agreeing with me, not you.

Of course and we all know Great Britain voted to stay in the EU and the moon landings are fake.

Crude said...

Of course

Benedict: Keep criticisms of the church out of mass media.

Francis: Goes on mass media, says the church should apologize to LGBT people.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

So if I see the Queen wear a crown and I take it from her head and put it on my head..before the MI5 drags me away I can excuse myself from arrest for treason or theft by saying "Hey she was wearing it? Why not me?".

Crude said...

Ben, it's not my fault your example blew up in your face. If you want to add a big ol' asterix of 'No look it's totally acceptable to criticize the church in Mass Media if you're pope though, it's totally immoral and imprudent for you but not him!' feel free so I can just laugh.

Oh, and of course, Marx did the same thing and the Pope gave it a thumbs up.

Oh wait, those LGBT organizations did so too and they weren't criticized.

Geez Ben, it really seems as if 'don't criticize the Church in public' is a rule Francis has tossed.

Mr. Green said...

The sins of individual LGBT people - even organizations representing 'LGBT interests' -

I'm not thrilled, but do you have other links — I don't see where he said "organizations" or "not sins at all". Are you referring to other statements he's made?

[...] but I don't need any pardon for saying it.

Well, that's just rude.

Crude said...

I'm not thrilled, but do you have other links

I'm regurgitating the nonsense-logic that is thrown around and will now be thrown around with even greater gusto, owing to the pope's words.

Well, that's just rude.

If more were rude, the Pope may apologize. That is, apparently, how this works.

Mr. Green said...

I'm regurgitating the nonsense-logic that is thrown around and will now be thrown around with even greater gusto, owing to the pope's words.

Ah, I should've got that. I was expecting something worse, and then when I dug up the transcript, it was basically the same thing he's said before, which is technically all correct. Then, I admit, I got a bit discouraged, because it's the same thing he's said before. I still can't get too worked up over it, though, because — as you and I have both said before — folks who aren't interested in what the Church really teaches don't need an excuse to get it wrong, they will regardless. (I did notice however that the Yahoo link you gave above actually correctly identified the distinction between sin and sinner — rather shocking to see in a secular news source!)

If more were rude, the Pope may apologize. That is, apparently, how this works.

It's (fallen) human nature to think that apologies are due, but only directed to oneself. To be fair, in context Francis referred to committing an actual offence against someone (and he even actually clarified that it was not the Church as an institution that needs to forgive, but individual Christians who have committed actual offences) — not the modern sense of "offended" as in "anything I decide I don't like". Of course, that's not going to stop anyone from interpreting it that way, but I do wonder whether the same (mis)understanding of the term applies in Italian.

Crude said...

It's (fallen) human nature to think that apologies are due, but only directed to oneself.

Who says he owes one to me? There's a lot of people who are discouraged, demoralized, sickened by these actions - and, for that matter, by the actions of bishops and priests who constantly betrayed them.

More to the point - others screamed offense, and were given apologies. I do as I am instructed to, implicitly. And further, it's also due to fallen human nature to think that one must apologize, when one has done nothing wrong. Being a miserable fucking wretch isn't holy either.

Of course, that's not going to stop anyone from interpreting it that way, but I do wonder whether the same (mis)understanding of the term applies in Italian.

It's demoralizing that the go-to explanation for this Pope is that he's really kind of an idiot, and has no idea how to communicate. His entire papacy is one long bit of misunderstanding, start to finish, and requires careful parsing. In fact, as Lombardi shows, sometimes even what he -literally said- isn't what he meant, and transcripts have to be changed after the fact.

I wonder how people would react to quasi-sedes saying that Benedict never meant to resign, and it was all a big misunderstanding. Benedict is the Pope still, you know. You have to know latin to realize it, but...

Mr. Green said...

And further, it's also due to fallen human nature to think that one must apologize, when one has done nothing wrong.

This is true.

It's demoralizing that the go-to explanation for this Pope is that he's really kind of an idiot, and has no idea how to communicate.

Well, one of us must be. My lip doesn't need stitches, I'm not insulted to misery, I don't feel betrayed — there must be a reason. Am I too thick to understand? Too insensitive? Is it just a fluke that somehow I see the good or middling stuff but not the really bad stuff?
And isn't bad communication the go-to condemnation of the Pope in the first place? (Well, other than conspiracy theories that he's doing it all deliberately to attack the Church from the inside.)

I wonder how people would react to quasi-sedes saying that Benedict never meant to resign, and it was all a big misunderstanding. Benedict is the Pope still, you know. You have to know latin to realize it, but...

First thing I'd ask is to see the Latin...

Crude said...

Well, one of us must be. My lip doesn't need stitches, I'm not insulted to misery, I don't feel betrayed — there must be a reason. Am I too thick to understand? Too insensitive? Is it just a fluke that somehow I see the good or middling stuff but not the really bad stuff?

Honestly? Maybe you are. Or maybe you just don't give a shit about any of this anyway.

And isn't bad communication the go-to condemnation of the Pope in the first place?

It's the go-to defense. When we have this many 'miscommunications' - very evident ones - it starts to become more and more clear that either the Pope is counting on the plausible deniability that comes with claims of 'miscommunication', or he just plain doesn't care what he says or how it's taken anyway. Neither is a very encouraging situation.

There's always a third option: he is incredibly stupid. You can say 'Ah, but there's a fourth: he's well-meaning and totally orthodox, and he means to uphold orthodoxy and communicate it well, but all of us - at this point, the majority of people who are paying attention - are failing to comprehend him. It is our failing, not his.' It's not going to work.

First thing I'd ask is to see the Latin...

And they can give it to you, and you can both argue about it forever. The point is that if someone is willing to bend words and 'explain' endlessly, they can in fact make that argument. No matter what Benedict himself says. "Explanations" are endless. They aren't convincing, but they are endless. And they will tell you, at every turn, that you're wrong, stubborn, and quite possibly evil for failing to believe them.

Care to spend a few weeks enduring that and tell me how it feels?

Mr. Green said...

Maybe you are. Or maybe you just don't give a shit about any of this anyway.

I can understand where individual complaints come from (even the ones I think are wrong), I just don't see how it adds up. Pope Francis says more "ordinary", non-controversial stuff than not, he's even said nice things about the SSPX.

either the Pope is counting on the plausible deniability that comes with claims of 'miscommunication', or he just plain doesn't care what he says or how it's taken anyway.

But if this is a cunning plan on his part to do it all deliberately — then it still isn't working very well, so either way he's not the greatest communicator.

The point is that if someone is willing to bend words and 'explain' endlessly, they can in fact make that argument. "Explanations" are endless.

Certainly, and that goes both ways. At the end of the day, I can only interpret things as best I can based on what I know.