Denver Newsroom, Oct 21, 2020 / 06:49 pm (CNA).-
“Francesco,” a newly released documentary on the life and ministry of Pope Francis, has made global headlines, because the film contains a scene in which Pope Francis calls for the passage of civil union laws for same-sex couples.
Some activists and media reports have suggested that Pope Francis has changed Catholic teaching by his remarks. Among many Catholics, the pope’s comments have raised questions about what the pope really said, what it means, and what the Church teaches about civil unions and marriage. CNA looks at those questions.
What did Pope Francis say about civil unions?
During a segment of “Francesco” which discussed Pope Francis’ pastoral care of Catholics who identify as LGBT, the pope made two distinct comments.
He said first that: “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it.”
While the pope did not elaborate on the meaning of those remarks in the video, Pope Francis has spoken before to encourage parents and relatives not to ostracize or shun children who have identified as LGBT. This seems to be the sense in which the pope spoke about the right of people to be a part of the family.
Some have suggested that when Pope Francis spoke about a “right to a family,” the pope was offering a kind of tacit endorsement of adoption by same-sex couples. But the pope has previously spoken against such adoptions, saying that through them children are “deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God,” and saying that “every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help them shape their identity.”
On civil unions, the pope said that: “What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered.”
“I stood up for that,” Pope Francis added, apparently in reference to his proposal to brother bishops, during a 2010 debate in Argentina over gay marriage, that accepting civil unions might be a way to prevent the passage of same-sex marriage laws in the country.
What did Pope Francis say about gay marriage?
Nothing. The topic of gay marriage was not discussed in the documentary. In his ministry, Pope Francis has frequently affirmed the doctrinal teaching of the Catholic Church that marriage is a lifelong partnership between one man and one woman.
While Pope Francis has frequently encouraged a welcoming disposition to Catholics who identify as LGBT, the pope has also said that “marriage is between a man and a woman,” amd said that “the family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage,” and that efforts to redefine marriage “threaten to disfigure God’s plan for creation.”
Why are the pope’s comments about civil unions a big deal?
While Pope Francis has previously discussed civil unions, he has not explicitly endorsed the idea in public before. While the context of his quotes in the documentary is not fully revealed, and it is possible the pope added qualifications not seen on camera, an endorsement of civil unions for same-sex couples is a very different approach for a pope, one that represents a departure from the position of his two immediate predecessors on the issue.
In 2003, in a document approved by Pope John Paul II and written by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who became Pope Benedict XVI, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith taught that “respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.”
Even if civil unions might be chosen by people other than same-sex couples, like siblings or committed friends, the CDF said that homosexual relationships would be “foreseen and approved by the law,” and that civil unions “would obscure certain basic moral values and cause a devaluation of the institution of marriage.”
“Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity,” the document concluded.
The 2003 CDF document contains doctrinal truth, and the positions of John Paul II and Benedict XVI on how best to apply the Church’s doctrinal teaching to policy questions regarding the civil oversight and regulation of marriage. While those positions are consistent with the long-standing discipline of the Church on the issue, they are not themselves regarded as articles of faith.
Some people have said what the pope taught is heresy. Is that true?
No. The pope’s remarks did not deny or call into question any doctrinal truth that Catholics must hold or believe. In fact, the pope has frequently affirmed the Church’s doctrinal teaching regarding marriage.
The pope’s apparent call for civil union legislation, which seems to be different from the position expressed by the CDF in 2003, has been taken to represent a departure from a long-standing moral judgment that Church leaders have taught supports and upholds the truth. The CDF document said that civil union laws give tacit consent to homosexual behavior; while the pope expressed support for civil unions, he has spoken in his pontificate about the immorality of homosexual acts.
It is also important to note that a documentary interview is not a forum for official papal teaching. The pope’s remarks were not presented in their fullness, and no transcript has been presented, so unless the Vatican offers additional clarity, they need to be taken in light of the limited information available about them.
We have same-sex marriage in this country. Why is anyone talking about civil unions?
There are 29 countries in the world that legally recognize same-sex “marriage.” Most of them are in Europe, North America, or South America. But in other parts of the world, the debate over the definition of marriage is just getting started. In parts of Latin America, for example, the redefinition of marriage is not a settled political topic, and Catholic political activists there have opposed moves to normalize civil union legislation.
Opponents of civil unions say they are usually a bridge to same-sex marriage legislation, and marriage campaigners in some countries have said they are concerned that LGBT lobbyists will use the pope’s words in the documentary to advance a pathway to same-sex marriage.
What does the Church teach about homosexuality?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that those who identify as LGBT “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”
The Catechism elaborates that homosexual inclinations are “objectively disordered,” homosexual acts are “contrary to the natural law,” and those who identify as lesbian and gay, like all people, are called to the virtue of chastity.
Are Catholics bound to agree with the pope on civil unions?
Pope Francis’ statements in “Francesco” do not constitute formal papal teaching. While the pope’s affirmation of the dignity of all people and his call for respect of all people are rooted in Catholic teaching, Catholics are not obliged to support a legislative or policy position because of the pope’s comments in a documentary.
Some bishops have expressed that they are awaiting further clarity on the pope’s comments from the Vatican, while one explained that: “While Church teaching on marriage is clear and irreformable, the conversation must continue about the best ways to reverence the dignity of those in same–sex relationships so that they are not subject to any unjust discrimination.”
[…]
Having addressed this specific report earlier at, “Pope Francis: Partisans have used Benedict XVI’s death ‘to serve their own interests’”, this comment addresses Pope Francis’ 2013 in flight comment repeated by him here that, “If a person with homosexual tendencies is a believer, seeks God, who am I to judge him? This is what I said on that trip”.
Accompaniment by priest, or God of the struggling homosexual is a good thing. Conditionally. That is if the priest emulates God, revealed to us in Christ drawing the penitent away from actions that Francis admits are gravely sinful and under no circumstances permissible.
It’s clear then that same sex attraction, homosexual tendencies are not [always] sinful. Nonetheless, it’s also true that homosexual tendency and acts can be voluntary, a willful perversion. That is why the Church must resist this administration’s intent to cultivate in our youth a homosexual oriented mentality. Bad sexual behavior can be learned and adopted especially by the young and vulnerable, addressed here by Susan Ciancio “The sexualization of children”. We’re not hearing much if anything from the Vatican on this far reaching moral dilemma. That said, the statement “Who am I to judge” has a context to which we have to make a prudent judgment.
Assignments to the Casa Marta, Synod on Synodality, Vatican communications of an active homosexual, advocates for normalizing homosexuality. Both the Synod on Synodality with Card Hollerich SJ relator, the Pontifical Academy for Life Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia president are assigned homosexual advocates [John Finnis recently assigned, member Card Willem Eijk both doctrinally orthodox to the Pontifical Academy may be simply window dressing when the entire direction of the Church is considered]. Add the Card Coccopalmerio Vatican residence homosexual scandal, Francis’ reinstatement of defrocked child rapist Fr Inzoli speak a different story to the Pope’s explanation of Who am I to judge.
Some of us want to love this pope are taken by his compassionate overtures. The visible moral sea change transforming the Church into an accommodation of the gravely sinful, of perverse behavior makes that a split of sorrowful compassion salted by strong rejection.
Never emphasizes the justice part of that same coin and only drudgingly and barely reiterates the Catechism.
How many active homosexuals have you brought back to Christ, Pope Francis?
God’s accompaniment is never for the legalization of anyone’s sins. Calling on God’s Holy Name for such things breaks all the Commandments starting with the 2nd; but as Pope, the 1st!
You can not uphold anyone’s dignity by “legalizing homosexual civil union”. It is the opposite, by doing such a thing you degrade and demean everyone altogether and offend God gravely.
“The pope reiterated what he said on his return flight from Brazil in 2013: “If a person with homosexual tendencies is a believer, seeks God, who am I to judge him? This is what I said on that trip.”
“EWTN is SATAN!” my priest screamed in his homily. My Priest was really going off on how EWTN was ‘Satan’, for their comments on Pope Francis’, “Who Am I To Judge”. So I started a page, with a poll, to discuss just who Pope Francis, can’t or can, judge. I invited my Priest to the page to help us discuss.
Priest Judges EWTN as Satan for Their Comments on Pope Francis’ “Who Am I To Judge”
https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/catholics-only-priest-judges-ewtn-as-satan-for-their-co mments-on-pope-francis%E2%80%99-%E2%80%9Cwho-am-i-to-judge%E2%80%9D.250177/
I do not hear the enormous, horrible, Catholic issue of child molester priests being discussed in Pope Francis’ “Synod on Synodality”. Is Pope Francis and his Vatican Gay Lobby trying to slide in the decriminalization of man-boy-lover Priests molesting children, when he says ‘Who am I to Judge’? Yes, respect the human dignity of man-boy-lovers, but please Pope Francis make sure the world knows child molesting is a grave sin and heinous crime!
P.S. We have a new Awesome Priest now.
Well, the theological arguments are needed to understand the elements that make for the gravity of the dilemma. Although, the cat is now out of the gunnysack [an ordinary bag is too small for this cat]. What with His Holiness allegedly telling Spanish clergy no need to hold back absolution if the penitent refuses to repent, otherwise openly broadcasting that no one should be denied the Eucharist, that the only requisite is the garment of faith. Will Martin Luther be next up for canonization?
Would it be better for Papa to interpret scripture rather that presenting his own point of view? If we care for the eternal soul of one who is misguided, we are obliged to speak the truth in love. We all have our besetting sins, yet God finds the sin of homosexuality egregious.
Romans 1:26-27 For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; And the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Unfounded response to ungodly behaviour helps no one.
We read: “The pope reiterated what he said on his return flight from Brazil in 2013: “If a person with homosexual tendencies is a believer, seeks God, who am I to judge him? This is what I said on that trip.”
Indeed, the pope simply repeats the original ambiguity–the off-the-cuff remark about a particular “him,” conflated with silence on universal moral truth; the failure to distinguish between accompaniment and accommodation.
Nine years of non-dialogue. With no apologies for another repetition, this again from Veritatis Splendor:
“A separation, or even an opposition [!], is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid and general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final decision [no longer a ‘moral judgment’!] about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions [!] contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept [thou shalt not!]” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 56).
Who in the media is asking the Pope questions about the many Christians being persecuted and killed in Nigeria? Why does every press engagement devolve to the same topic?
I hate the way the press constantly distorts the Holy Father’s views. If they would ask him the right questions on the right topics his brilliance, orthodoxy and sanctity would shine forth. He has, for example, been very clear in condemning Islamic violence against Christians in Nigeria when given the opportunity. Or he has at least condemned some kind of violence against someone or something. Anyway, it’s all the media’s fault!
First, this pontificate is almost a decade in. If you are correct (and I don’t think you are), one would have to question the Pope’s/Vatican’s choice of media outlets. But, really, isn’t ten years enough time to find a way to consistently express matters with clarity and cohesion?
Secondly, a truly brilliant man would be able to take even distorted or leading questions and respond (again) with clarity and cohesion. So…there’s that.
Very painful load of sarcasm from Tony. Might be a Babylon Bee journalist.
If so, he got me! Heh.
This comment is intended to be sarcastic, right? Brilliance, orthodoxy, and sanctity are not qualities people associate with Francis, not even on his best days, which are sadly quite rare.
Perhaps I should give up sarcasm for Lent. No, my comment was not intended to be taken literally. Like someone else I can think of, I have been guilty of spreading confusion.
Pope Francis’in-flight pressers are not helpful, let’s say. Why does he keep playing the secular media’s games?
Like the word “inclusion,” the term “accompanies” should be dropped from the vocabulary of those who take their relationship with Christ seriously. God does not accompany us anywhere. He convicts us of sin and calls us to repent and believe. It’s that simple, and it’s perfectly clear. “Accompanying” people is leftist code for accommodating sin, a response that clearly violates biblical teaching and the catechism.
There’s nothing wrong, per se, with the word “accompanies”. The problem (or part of the problem) is that it is a such neutral word. Far, far better are the exact, clear words found in the first paragraph of the CCC:
Created…draws close….calls…sent his Son….invites. These are words that demand our response, just as Christ’s words—”Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand”—demand a response. But the language of faux synodality is banal, neutral, and far too conversational. It certainly isn’t biblical.
Good points, and a neutral word can be bent in all kinds of directions to suit people’s agendas. I’m thankful that God speaks clearly and directly to us. He doesn’t mince words, but He always tells us the truth.
God is all powerful. Accompanies the weak and the strong on their brief common journey forward.