something I posted in GD and wanted to share

[arely staircase]

I don' know haow to cut and paste from my phone but here is the link.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3952906

[NYC_SKP]

1. You wrote, "He is moving the roman church toward Christ's one commandment"

And I agree!

he is moving the roman church toward Christ's one commandment.

Faster than i would have ever imagined a Roman Bishop in my lifetime. I am an Episcopalian. We bless same sex unions. We are basically catholic liturgically but quite protestant (in a very liberal way) theologically. This Bishop's words and actions are very intriguing to us because they signal a possible (I pray) a full communion of holy sacraments between our churches. To outsiders they may seem only words. But words from the Bishop of Rome are important and encouraging when they focus on social justice and turn the roman church's focus away from unChrist-like homophobia.

[arely staircase]

2. thanks. for the text nt

[hrmjustin]

3. I have to say I like him. I hope he moves the church to be more inclusive. Time will tell and we

won't really know till after his pontificate.

I will also say I hope he will be more than words.

[arely staircase]

4. + 1 nt

[Humanist_Activist]

5. Since its a rebuttal of my post, do you have any evidence for your post...

or are you just relying on faith?

[arely staircase]

7. I am relying on he man's words and deeds as well as faith. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

8. His deeds will dissapoint you then.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/24/pope-francis-excommunicates-priest-greg-reynolds_n_3983059.html

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

"The letter, a copy of which NCR obtained and translated, accuses Reynolds of heresy (Canon 751) and determined he incurred latae sententiae excommunication for throwing away the consecrated host or retaining it “for a sacrilegious purpose” (Canon 1367). It also referenced Canon 1369 (speaking publicly against church teaching) in its review of the case. “Pope Francis, Supreme Pontiff having heard the presentation of this Congregation concerning the grave reason for action … of [Fr. Greg Reynolds] of the Archdiocese of Melbourne, all the preceding actions to be taken having been followed, with a final and unappealable decision and subject to no recourse, has decreed dismissal from the clerical state is to be imposed on said priest for the good of the Church,” read the document, signed by Archbishop Gerhard Muller, prefect for the congregation, and his secretary, Jesuit Archbishop Luis Ladaria. Excommunication refers to the severest measure of censure for Catholics and forbids an individual from participation in any eucharistic celebration or other worship ceremonies; the reception or celebration of sacraments; and holding any ecclesiastical or governing role in the church. The document, dated May 31 — coincidentally Reynolds’ 60th birthday — provided no reason for the excommunication. However, a separate letter sent Friday from Hart to his archdiocesan priests indicated Reynolds’ support of women’s ordination was a primary reason. “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,” [Melbourne Archbishop Denis] Hart wrote. But Reynolds said he believes the excommunication also resulted from his support of the gay community. He told NCR that in the last two years, he has attended rallies in Melbourne advocating same-sex marriage and has officiated at mass weddings of gay couples on the steps of Parliament — “all unofficial of course.”"

[arely staircase]

9. given your DU handle I assume

anything short of him renouncing his belief in God will disappoint you.

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Except that this isn't about *me*, it's about people being suckered by an act.

I fear for my fellow humans, being taken in by such self-important mammals.

He is no better, no different. The former pope was so judgmental against gay people that yes, Francis seems like a breath of fresh air, but he's really just representing a return to the mainstream, centrist, old catholic anti-gay dogma.

He's just not doing the extra credit homophobia that Ratzinger was so enthusiastic about.

His words, and deeds are public record. The nuns leaked his letter about how same-sex couples adopting children was discriminatory against children.

Please see him for what he is, by his words and deeds, not by his PR. Ratzinger was surprised on stage by a cute little kid too...

[arely staircase]

12. time will tell

Daniel O'Connel and the Catholic Association don't seem too pleased with him. That is a good sign.

[Humanist_Activist]

14. Daniel O'Connel and his Catholic Association was an 18th century Irish Catholic...

emancipation group that disbanded in the same century. I found The Catholic Association, an American theocratic group here: http://www.thecatholicassociation.org/tca-blog

I don't know where you think they aren't too pleased with Pope Francis, seems like they are more lamenting the media misconstruing the Pope's words.

[arely staircase]

35. lol

Donohue and his bunch. Sorry. Sometimes my circuits get crossed. I had been reading up on Conservative catholcism in America and ..well there you go. This happens more and more as I get busier while getting older.

Good catch.

God's Peace to you (not meant as snark)

[rug]

6. A good post.

[cbayer]

11. Very nicely said and I tend to agree with you.

There are those that refuse to see or acknowledge that there might be an opportunity for real change here. It won't matter what you say to them. Their blinders practically cover their eyes.

[Humanist_Activist]

13. What fucking change? What I see are people supporting a homophobic, misogynistic, man based on...

literally nothing but hot air and contrary to that man's words and deeds.

I wouldn't have a problem with this normally, if this man wasn't the fucking Pope, the head of a very influential organization that does damage and attempts to do damage to millions around the world.

What do you hope will change? The Catechism of the Catholic fucking Church? Good fucking luck with that, this Pope, just like the two before him, supports it wholeheartedly.

[cbayer]

15. Thanks for making my point for me.

[Humanist_Activist]

16. So instead of presenting evidence of this man's change of heart, you try to win rhetorical points?

You do realize the real world actually operates on something other than wishes, right?

[cbayer]

17. No, I live in a totally fantasy based world where words sometimes

lead to actions. I try to keep an open mind and stay optimistic. It's pretty nice here.

[Humanist_Activist]

18. But his words are words of a conservative Catholic...

the fact that he actually articulates the homophobic Catechism of the Catholic Church, which apparently people were unaware of the contents of, he's all of the sudden a "reformer". I'm sorry, but that is just naive.

At best, at the most optimistic, rather than substantive change, we may see a change in tone, but I still don't get this optimism you have for an open homophobe, a person who campaigned against civil rights, to change his stripes.

Until he pulls a George Wallace on us, this all means nothing, and I don't think he will.

[cbayer]

19. Some of the words I have heard him say I have not heard any Pope before him say.

I'm not going to defend the Catholic church. I have massive problems with so many of their positions and even more problems with their recent history.

I never called him a "reformer" but I am heartened by some of what he has said. And I think it more accurately reflects to attitudes of catholics in general. I see that as a good thing.

Nothing wrong with optimism, imo. He, like me, has held positions in the past that he appears to be reassessing.

I'm willing to give him a chance at this point, but my expectations are measured and not all that high.

[Humanist_Activist]

20. He is reaffirming, not reassessing those positions, what evidence do you have...

for any of the claims in your post?

Like I said, a change in tone isn't a change in substance, and he's just as conservative as the last two Popes.

[cbayer]

21. A change in tone is not a change in substance, but that doesn't make it completely

meaningless.

He has made some statements about GLBT people, women, the poor that lead me to believe that he is not as conservative as the last two popes.

They are not revolutionary statements, but, as you say, a change in tone.

Like I said, I'm willing to give him a chance. If you are not, that's fine. Neither of our perspectives will change the outcome, I feel sure.

[Humanist_Activist]

22. The statements he made about LGBT people were lifted straight out of the Catechism...

so isn't a change in tone. The statements on the poor is the same thing, both are established Catholic doctrine and/or practice. The change in tone are his statements on a change in focus for the Church, but then again, it still fully funds fights against civil rights for LGBT people, against contraceptive usage, etc. Until that changes, his tone doesn't matter, now does it?

[cbayer]

23. It matters to me, and, more importantly, it matters to a lot of catholics.

Your not seeing it doesn't make it not exist. Many others are hearing something that feels new and positive to them.

You may be right. Nothing of substance may change, but that is yet to be seen.

In the meantime, I'm going to give him props when he says something that resonates with me and criticize when he says or does something I disagree with.

Pretty much like I do with most people.

[Humanist_Activist]

24. Problem is, I see the opposite, quite literally, when he said that...

he wouldn't judge celibate, homosexual priests, the media literally went apeshit saying the Pope said the Church shouldn't judge gay people, something he did NOT say. What he did was a mild reversal of Benedict, but Pope Benedict was criticized for the policy he instituted because it violated Church doctrine.

But in the same statement that Francis made, he criticized the political "gay lobby" and the activities they do. In other words, he likes his gays in the closet and, most of all, celibate, regardless of their vocation, which is again, in keeping with Church teaching.

Yet, all people focus on is the false headline saying the Pope won't judge gay people, its a sad farce.

[cbayer]

26. I agree that this didn't go very far and there has been some contradictory messages.

But his hands are tied in terms of how far he can go. The forces against him are monumental, as I am sure you know, and I am not going to add to them at this time.

[Humanist_Activist]

27. Uhm, what? Did he tie his hands himself?

He was elected by conservative cardinals in the Vatican, the "forces" against him are mostly non-existent, unless you are talking about radical traditionalists, who are pre-Vatican II loonies who are excommunicated from the church.

[cbayer]

29. I have wondered if they really expected him to change the tone or not.

I am guessing that they did not.

Anyway, I'm going to continue to watch and wait. I am not going to start a fan club, but I am going to continue to be cautiously optimistic, even if that annoys some people, lol.

Nice talking to you HA.

[trotsky]

42. Yeah, lol.

What annoys people is not your "cautious" optimism, but your vilification of those who don't share it - while simultaneously admitting their skepticism is justified! If you truly value communication, dialog, and understanding each other, you aren't giving any indication of being serious about it.

[okasha]

43. Francis could consecrate a lesbian cardinal tomorrow,

with her partner serving the Eucharist, and the same people who always deny any possibility of change in the RCC would still be shouting that the Pope is the new boss, same as the old boss, a homophobe, a misogynist, a hater of kittens and puppies.

That won't change. Ever.

[trotsky]

28. WTF?

"Neither of our perspectives will change the outcome, I feel sure."

"The forces against him are monumental, as I am sure you know, and I am not going to add to them at this time."

Those two statements of yours are directly contradictory. No wonder you struggle to be taken seriously, and get so frustrated with people who can defend their positions against your confusing attempts to argue.

[arely staircase]

45. these are not the sentiments I have ever heard from the Bishop of Rome

http://irasciblemusings.com/pope-francis-most-controversial-quotes/

I stand by my thesis: this bishop is moving the Roman Church toward Christ's one commandment.

[arely staircase]

33. That is my position exactly.

I have never called him a reformer nor would I based on his statements thus far. But John Paul II and Ratzinger are the only Bishops of Rome in my memory. They never made statements anywhere near what this new Bishop has made. I have hope and some faith that the man means it. And in a Church like the Roman Catholic or Episcopal Church, words spoken by Bishops mean things. I have liberal Roman Catholic friends who already feel more free to speak up for gay rights because of the Bishop's statetents. Atheists, agnostics or even orher Christians of non-apostolic
succession Churches dontoften understand that. The man's
words have already strengthened the Faith and resolve of my Liberal Roman Mass friends and quite intrigued me and other catholics (small c) within the Anglican Communion.

[cbayer]

36. Episcopalians have set a great example of how a church can

adapt and evolve.

I have many GLBT friends who were raised Catholic but now attend Episcopal churches. But they would like to go back to the Catholic church.

While I understand that many are very skeptical that this is not more than PR, I'm feeling more optimistic than that. His personal actions have even seemed very different - staying in the regular quarters, speaking directly with people and with the press.

We shall see, but so far so good.

[trotsky]

38. Yes, many are skeptical.

It's perfectly justified, and why your harsh criticism of the skeptics (claiming they have "blinders" on, etc.) is especially harmful and divisive. Stop doing that. Stop attacking, stop dividing. Can you do that?

[cleanhippie]

40. Finally you admit it!

Maybe there IS a god!

[trotsky]

25. As you yourself have acknowledged, our positions here on the pope will have no affect on anything.

So why are you so intent on judging others who don't share your position?

[arely staircase]

34. no i just posted upthread how they have in post 33 nt

[trotsky]

37. Great, continue to argue with the person who said it!

Wasn't me.

[arely staircase]

39. I rhink you actualy mistakenly replied to me

Thus my reply to tou. Don't know but that is my observation on rhe whole thing.

happy halloween.
AS

[trotsky]

41. My post #25 is a reply to #11, which was written by cbayer. n/t

[arely staircase]

31. thank you.

Hi cbayer!

[cbayer]

32. Hello arely staircase!

Glad you posted this here.

[Bradical79]

44. I'm skeptical of how much he will really change

He seems like he will be a good pope, and is interested in more closely following the words attributed Christ. I'm not confident though that a man elected to that political position will suddenly turn a 180 on church doctrine regarding women's rights, homosexuals, and other destructive viewpoints that have been part of that institution for over 1000 years.

[arely staircase]

46. that is legitimate scepticism nt