Culture The AP Interview: Pope says homosexuality not a crime - He still calls it a sin. Hey pope, remind me again, what are the wages of sin?

The AP Interview: Pope says homosexuality not a crime
Associated Press (archive.ph)
By Nicole Winfield
2023-01-25 13:23:52GMT

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis criticized laws that criminalize homosexuality as “unjust,” saying God loves all his children just as they are and called on Catholic bishops who support the laws to welcome LGBTQ people into the church.

“Being homosexual isn’t a crime,” Francis said during an exclusive interview Tuesday with The Associated Press.

Francis acknowledged that Catholic bishops in some parts of the world support laws that criminalize homosexuality or discriminate against the LGBTQ community, and he himself referred to the issue in terms of “sin.” But he attributed such attitudes to cultural backgrounds, and said bishops in particular need to undergo a process of change to recognize the dignity of everyone.

“These bishops have to have a process of conversion,” he said, adding that they should apply “tenderness, please, as God has for each one of us.”

Francis’ comments are the first uttered by a pope about such laws, but they are consistent with his overall approach to the LGBTQ community and belief that the Catholic Church should welcome everyone and not discriminate.

Some 67 countries or jurisdictions worldwide criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity, 11 of which can or do impose the death penalty, according to The Human Dignity Trust, which works to end such laws. Experts say even where the laws are not enforced, they contribute to harassment, stigmatization and violence against LGBTQ people.

In the U.S., more than a dozen states still have anti-sodomy laws on the books, despite a 2003 Supreme Court ruling declaring them unconstitutional. Gay rights advocates say the antiquated laws are used to harass homosexuals, and point to new legislation, such as the “Don’t say gay” law in Florida, which forbids instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade, as evidence of continued efforts to marginalize LGBTQ people.


The United Nations has repeatedly called for an end to laws criminalizing homosexuality outright, saying they violate rights to privacy and freedom from discrimination and are a breach of countries’ obligations under international law to protect the human rights of all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Declaring such laws “unjust,” Francis said the Catholic Church can and should work to put an end to them. “It must do this. It must do this,” he said.

Francis quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church in saying gay people must be welcomed and respected, and should not be marginalized or discriminated against.

“We are all children of God, and God loves us as we are and for the strength that each of us fights for our dignity,” Francis said, speaking to the AP in the Vatican hotel where he lives.

Francis’ remarks come ahead of a trip to Africa, where such laws are common as they are in the Middle East. Many date from British colonial times or are inspired by Islamic law. Some Catholic bishops have strongly upheld them as consistent with Vatican teaching, while others have called for them to be overturned as a violation of basic human dignity.

In 2019, Francis had been expected to issue a statement opposing criminalization of homosexuality during a meeting with human rights groups that conducted research into the effects of such laws and so-called “conversion therapies.”

In the end, after word of the audience leaked, the pope didn’t meet with the groups. Instead, the Vatican No. 2 did and reaffirmed “the dignity of every human person and against every form of violence.”

There was no indication that Francis spoke out about such laws now because his more conservative predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, recently died. The issue had never been raised in an interview, but Francis willingly responded, citing even the statistics about the number of countries where homosexuality is criminalized.

On Tuesday, Francis said there needed to be a distinction between a crime and a sin with regard to homosexuality.

“It’s not a crime. Yes, but it’s a sin,” he said. “Fine, but first let’s distinguish between a sin and a crime.”

“It’s also a sin to lack charity with one another,” he added.

Catholic teaching holds that while gay people must be treated with respect, homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered.” Francis has not changed that teaching, but he has made reaching out to the LGBTQ community a hallmark of his papacy.

Starting with his famous 2013 declaration, “Who am I to judge?” — when he was asked about a purportedly gay priest — Francis has gone on to minister repeatedly and publicly to the gay and trans community. As archbishop of Buenos Aires, he favored granting legal protections to same-sex couples as an alternative to endorsing gay marriage, which Catholic doctrine forbids.

Despite such outreach, Francis was criticized by the Catholic LGBTQ community for a 2021 decree from the Vatican’s doctrine office that said the church cannot bless same-sex unions.

In 2008, the Vatican declined to sign onto a U.N. declaration that called for the decriminalization of homosexuality, complaining the text went beyond the original scope. In a statement at the time, the Vatican urged countries to avoid “unjust discrimination” against gay people and end penalties against them.

 
For example 47% of practicing Catholics vote democrat in US elections, only 19% of practicing protestants vote democrat. For one reason or another the Catholics in the US are more likely to vote for the pro abortion and pro LGBT party

Catholic ethnics in big cities traditionally voted Democrat, and a lot of them remained staunch Dems even when they moved out to the suburbs.
 
Pope Francis is a Marxist. His influences are big names in Liberation Theology, which is essentially a thin layer of Catholicism wrapped around a Marxist pill, the way you wrap one in bacon for a dog. All those stories you used to hear about the nuns and priests being killed in South America in the 80's-- those were Liberation Theologists. They were communist revolutionaries in church garb. Four of them were literally appointed to senior posts in the Sandanista government. Francis has also been pals with Klaus Schwab since before either were well-known.
 
I find it hard to be charitable with Pope Francis. He's constantly saying something seemingly heretical or scandalous which the media then in turn embellish, and his PR people then take about a week to set the record straight.

This is probably why we've never had a Jesuit pope before.
 
Pope clarifies homosexuality and sin comments in note
Associated Press (archive.ph)
By Nicole Winfield
2023-01-28 09:10:07GMT

ROME (AP) — Pope Francis has clarified his recent comments about homosexuality and sin, saying he was merely referring to official Catholic moral teaching that teaches that any sexual act outside of marriage is a sin.

And in a note Friday, Francis recalled that even that black-and-white teaching is subject to circumstances that might eliminate the sin altogether.

Francis first made the comments in an interview Jan. 24 with The Associated Press, in which he declared that laws criminalizing homosexuality were “unjust” and that “being homosexual is not a crime.”

As he often does, Francis then imagined a conversation with someone who raised the matter of the church’s official teaching, which states that homosexual acts are sinful, or “intrinsically disordered.”

“Fine, but first let’s distinguish between a sin and a crime,” Francis said in the pretend conversation. “It’s also a sin to lack charity with one another.”

His comments calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality were hailed by LGBTQ advocates as a milestone that would help end harassment and violence against LGBTQ persons. But his reference to “sin” raised questions about whether he believed that merely being gay was itself a sin.

The Rev. James Martin, an American Jesuit who runs the U.S.-based Outreach ministry for LGBTQ Catholics, asked Francis for clarification and printed the pope’s handwritten response on the Outreach website late Friday.

In his note, Francis reaffirmed that homosexuality “is not a crime,” and said he spoke out “in order to stress that criminalization is neither good nor just.”

“When I said it is a sin, I was simply referring to Catholic moral teaching, which says that every sexual act outside of marriage is a sin,” Francis wrote in Spanish, underlining the final phrase.

But in a nod to his case-by-case approach to pastoral ministry, Francis noted that even that teaching is subject to consideration of the circumstances, “which may decrease or eliminate fault.”

He acknowledged he could have been clearer in his comments to the AP. But he said he was using “natural and conversational language” in the interview that didn’t call for precise definitions.

“As you can see, I was repeating something in general. I should have said: ‘It is a sin, as is any sexual act outside of marriage.’ This is to speak of ‘the matter’ of sin, but we know well that Catholic morality not only takes into consideration the matter, but also evaluates freedom and intention; and this, for every kind of sin,” he said.

Some 67 countries or jurisdictions worldwide criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity, 11 of which can or do impose the death penalty, according to The Human Dignity Trust, which works to end such laws. Experts say even where the laws are not enforced, they contribute to harassment, stigmatization and violence against LGBTQ people.

Catholic teaching forbids gay marriage, holding that the sacrament of marriage is a lifelong bond between a man and a woman. It reserves intercourse for married couples while forbidding artificial contraception.

In his decade-long pontificate, Francis has upheld that teaching but has made outreach to LGBTQ people a priority. He has stressed a more merciful approach to applying church doctrine, to accompany people rather than judge them.
 
That seems pretty consistent, honestly. There's lots of sins that pretty much all Christians wouldn't want to enforce via the legal system, but still believe are bad ideas.
From an outsider looking in, this isn't too bad or woke or whatever, though an actual Catholic could probably give better information than me.
That's about right. Even Aquinas said something of the nature of seeking out prostitutes is a sin but it's fairly unrealistic to expect people to stop going to prostitutes and fornicating in general. At best, you have to quite honest with them that such deeds are sinful and going to lead them to hell. I honestly don't see the problem with this. Yes, sodomy (when actively practiced) is a mortal sin, but if some dude is just attracted to other dudes (or chick to other chicks or he/she has gender dysphoria) and they actively avoid the temptation to give into their sin , they aren't bad people because of it. They are just as fallen as you and I. We should tell gays and lesbians not to sin ourselves, not expect the government (a system known for fucking up and being extremely inefficient and malicious) to do it. This shit is why despite being very right leaning, I will never identify with a lot of right leaning causes. They may be right a lot of the time but they lack the basic sense of nuance people on the left also lack.
 
That's about right. Even Aquinas said something of the nature of seeking out prostitutes is a sin but it's fairly unrealistic to expect people to stop going to prostitutes and fornicating in general. At best, you have to quite honest with them that such deeds are sinful and going to lead them to hell. I honestly don't see the problem with this. Yes, sodomy (when actively practiced) is a mortal sin, but if some dude is just attracted to other dudes (or chick to other chicks or he/she has gender dysphoria) and they actively avoid the temptation to give into their sin , they aren't bad people because of it. They are just as fallen as you and I. We should tell gays and lesbians not to sin ourselves, not expect the government (a system known for fucking up and being extremely inefficient and malicious) to do it. This shit is why despite being very right leaning, I will never identify with a lot of right leaning causes. They may be right a lot of the time but they lack the basic sense of nuance people on the left also lack.
People get kind of shocked when they realize that Catholics have spent the last like 2000 years really thinking through this shit.
But back to the point, the discussion on the definition of marriage and wanting to outlaw gays is very different, and conflating the two maliciously has been going on forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NevskyProspekt
That's about right. Even Aquinas said something of the nature of seeking out prostitutes is a sin but it's fairly unrealistic to expect people to stop going to prostitutes and fornicating in general. At best, you have to quite honest with them that such deeds are sinful and going to lead them to hell. I honestly don't see the problem with this. Yes, sodomy (when actively practiced) is a mortal sin, but if some dude is just attracted to other dudes (or chick to other chicks or he/she has gender dysphoria) and they actively avoid the temptation to give into their sin , they aren't bad people because of it. They are just as fallen as you and I. We should tell gays and lesbians not to sin ourselves, not expect the government (a system known for fucking up and being extremely inefficient and malicious) to do it. This shit is why despite being very right leaning, I will never identify with a lot of right leaning causes. They may be right a lot of the time but they lack the basic sense of nuance people on the left also lack.
Thomas Aquinas is plainly in favour of even the death penalty for the act of sodomy. On that matter he said:
[A] special kind of deformity whereby the venereal act is rendered unbecoming ... may occur in two ways: First, through being contrary to right reason, and this is common to all lustful vices; secondly, because, in addition, it is contrary to the natural order of the venereal act as becoming to the human race: and this is called the unnatural vice .. .[i.e.] copulation with an undue sex, male with male, or female with female... and this is called the vice of sodomy.
Further, "vices against nature are also against God":
Just as the ordering of right reason proceeds from man, so the order of nature is from God Himself: wherefore in sins contrary to nature, whereby the very order of nature is violated, an injury is done to God, the Author of nature.
And he then quotes Augustine's Confessions:
Those foul offenses that are against nature should be everywhere and at all times detested and punished, such as were those of the people of Sodom, which should all nations commit, they should all stand guilty of the same crime, by the law of God which hath not so made men that they should so abuse one another.
All the while he says on the topic of the death penalty that "by sinning man departs from the order of reason, and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, in so far as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts," and that, "although it be evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserve his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast." Generally, death penalty is to be avoided but where it may be for the common good, by deterring others and by allowing to criminal to repent for instance, it would be charitable and lawful to kill.
Granted, laws against homosexuality as opposed to sodomy would be unjust since they are based on a modern fiction, the concept of sexual orientation, which is absent from Scripture and the teachings of the Church, which only recognizes the deed of sodomy. However, I do not think that is what's at play here. Pope Francis is incongruous with his own tradition and his own church. He is not even just speaking against the death penalty for sodomy (hasn't the Catholic Church recently changed their doctrine to be against the death penalty?) but all criminalization of sodomy in general, and calling for it to be stopped, with bishops needing to be reeducated, which I must imagine is blatantly in opposition to firmly established Catholic teaching.
 
Thomas Aquinas is plainly in favour of even the death penalty for the act of sodomy. On that matter he said:

Further, "vices against nature are also against God":

And he then quotes Augustine's Confessions:

All the while he says on the topic of the death penalty that "by sinning man departs from the order of reason, and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, in so far as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts," and that, "although it be evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserve his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast." Generally, death penalty is to be avoided but where it may be for the common good, by deterring others and by allowing to criminal to repent for instance, it would be charitable and lawful to kill.
Granted, laws against homosexuality as opposed to sodomy would be unjust since they are based on a modern fiction, the concept of sexual orientation, which is absent from Scripture and the teachings of the Church, which only recognizes the deed of sodomy. However, I do not think that is what's at play here. Pope Francis is incongruous with his own tradition and his own church. He is not even just speaking against the death penalty for sodomy (hasn't the Catholic Church recently changed their doctrine to be against the death penalty?) but all criminalization of sodomy in general, and calling for it to be stopped, with bishops needing to be reeducated, which I must imagine is blatantly in opposition to firmly established Catholic teaching.
That's actually very fair. I don't think men or women with SSA are bad people, but sodomy is objectively against natural law and really it ought to have more serious penances associated with them versus even really basic fornication. Peen is meant for vageen in order to make babyeen (or at least ordered to that end in addition to the unitive aspesct of sex). My biggest problem now is how would you enforce it? The only way I could come up with actually prosecuting sodomy are extreme acts of penance, like wearing tattered clothes and living in the woods for months at a time or self-flagellation.

Anyways, what I'm thinking Pope Francis is trying to say is that people with SSA are still people at the end of the day, but I don't agree with him trying to get rid of anti-sodomy laws (which I'm frankly not even sure he's trying to do or not because he's a really bad speaker. He never makes himself very clear like JPII or even Benedict did. Add that to the typical journo spin and you really get this weird picture of "what the fuck is this man really saying?"). Criminalizing anti-homosexuality laws is very uncharitable, but you know, laws are built upon the natural law and it's fucked up if he unironically is trying to get rid of anti-sodomy laws. I don't think they deserve the death penalty, but I do think they ought to be a bit seeious in prder to stop reoffending.

Also, with the death penalty thing, from what I read on Edward Feser's blog, Pope Francis didn't actually get rid of it per se. He just got rid of all mentions of it in the catechism and has made non ex cathedra (so theologically non-binding) personal statements on how it isn't just, even though that's not the case really. Pope Francis is reallt just very bad at being clear. I don't if it's a culture thing with him being Argintenean or it's a personal thing, but he's one of the least eleoquent wordsmiths I have seen. Even though I have a mildly negative opinion of him, I can genuinely see why people don't like him a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ITK
That's actually very fair. I don't think men or women with SSA are bad people, but sodomy is objectively against natural law and really it ought to have more serious penances associated with them versus even really basic fornication. Peen is meant for vageen in order to make babyeen (or at least ordered to that end in addition to the unitive aspesct of sex). My biggest problem now is how would you enforce it? The only way I could come up with actually prosecuting sodomy are extreme acts of penance, like wearing tattered clothes and living in the woods for months at a time or self-flagellation.

Anyways, what I'm thinking Pope Francis is trying to say is that people with SSA are still people at the end of the day, but I don't agree with him trying to get rid of anti-sodomy laws (which I'm frankly not even sure he's trying to do or not because he's a really bad speaker. He never makes himself very clear like JPII or even Benedict did. Add that to the typical journo spin and you really get this weird picture of "what the fuck is this man really saying?"). Criminalizing anti-homosexuality laws is very uncharitable, but you know, laws are built upon the natural law and it's fucked up if he unironically is trying to get rid of anti-sodomy laws. I don't think they deserve the death penalty, but I do think they ought to be a bit seeious in prder to stop reoffending.

Also, with the death penalty thing, from what I read on Edward Feser's blog, Pope Francis didn't actually get rid of it per se. He just got rid of all mentions of it in the catechism and has made non ex cathedra (so theologically non-binding) personal statements on how it isn't just, even though that's not the case really. Pope Francis is reallt just very bad at being clear. I don't if it's a culture thing with him being Argintenean or it's a personal thing, but he's one of the least eleoquent wordsmiths I have seen. Even though I have a mildly negative opinion of him, I can genuinely see why people don't like him a lot.
I think it would be wildly uncharitable to in the modern West criminlize sodomy with death as the penalty, since doers of such acts genuinely think there is nothing wrong with it and virtually the whole of society is with them on that. This cannot at all be compared with someone committing sodomy in, say, the Middle Ages, where sodomy was universally reviled, on par with how we still see something like beastiality. Such as person would knowingly transgress social norms to an extreme level, and is therefore much more culpable. Homosexuals today are deluded and ignorant of the nature of their acts to a much greater extent than those buggerers of the past, and should therefore be seen moreso with pity and compassion rather than righteous indignation (although both are valid in all periods and circumstances). Besides the culture is unchristian so there's no real reason in crying for the state to punish them. I think there should really be a sort of universal amnesty for them and all efforts should be direct towards enlightening and rehabilitating them for the ultimate purpose of saving as many sorry souls walking the road to perdition as possible, like the Lord saving the woman taken in adultary from stoning so that he may say: go, and sin no more. Obviously, though, in modern societies where the case is that sodomy actually still is a fringe and highly stigmatized deviance, and the law reflects that, removing those laws will only lead to greater normalization of such acts, which is a poison on the body politic, yadda yadda you get me.

Like I tried to view Francis' words charitably and I know the media loves to distort the sayings of the Popes, but this really seems explicit: anti-sodomy laws are unjust, the Church must work to put it to an end, and bishops who support such laws need to be "converted". Does the fact that he says this non ex cathedra mean that you can just ignore it, or how does that work?
 
I have gathered that Benedict's book is basically just a rehash of what has been known for a long time - a lot of seminaries are gatekeeping celebate hetros out so to run gay clubs of sorts. Which is retarded now in the age of globohomo. Why go through the shit of being a pedo sky daddy priest when you can be an out and about degen fucking kids as a school teacher of gay rights activist and get asspats for it because THAT'S DIFFERENT.

It does beg the question, if this is really what he wrote, why did he wait until he was dead to say anything about it or better yet, do anything about it?
 
Back