The Pope ... share your thoughts.

[saevel25]

Of course.

More details coming on this... but apparently the meeting was arranged by the Papal Nuncio, who is a cultural conservative. Who knows what the Pope was told even though he is fairly conservative in his private and public beliefs -- he does not judge but he does not agree with gay marriage. And then they talk about conscientious objectors -- well, she can object by voicing her protest but still execute her job.

The whole premi behind a conscientious objector is not to do that action you are required to do because it violates your faith.

Here are the questions I want answered by the Pope

2) Does signing a government legal document violate her ability to exercise her religious beliefs?

No one is saying she can't pray. No one is saying she can't be catholic. No one is saying she can't go to church. In my opinion doing her job doesn't violate any ability of her's to exercise her ability to be a Catholic.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJH999

Despite this talk of him being a "cool" pope, it might be important to mention that he's still The Pope. He still has anti-gay, anti-abortion, and anti-women, and anti-contraceptive views.

Not to mention his meeting with Kim Davis today.

Well, the Pope is closely connected to God if he met with Davis today.

The meeting was last week.

Wish he hadn't done that ... lost confidence in the God Guy now. One can disapprove of gay marriage and still do their elected job. She has gotten more than her deserved 15 minutes ... her and Ahmed, the clockmaker... another overblown...

Did the meeting really happen?   Can someone point to any evidence, a selfie maybe?

[Mr. Desmond]

The whole premi behind a conscientious objector is not to do that action you are required to do because it violates your faith.

Here are the questions I want answered by the Pope

2) Does signing a government legal document violate her ability to exercise her religious beliefs?

No one is saying she can't pray. No one is saying she can't be catholic. No one is saying she can't go to church. In my opinion doing her job doesn't violate any ability of her's to exercise her ability to be a Catholic.

She's not Catholic.

But her parents are...

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Of course.

More details coming on this... but apparently the meeting was arranged by the Papal Nuncio, who is a cultural conservative. Who knows what the Pope was told even though he is fairly conservative in his private and public beliefs -- he does not judge but he does not agree with gay marriage. And then they talk about conscientious objectors -- well, she can object by voicing her protest but still execute her job.

The whole premise behind a conscientious objector is not to do that action you are required to do because it violates your faith.

Here are the questions I want answered by the Pope

2) Does signing a government legal document violate her ability to exercise her religious beliefs?

No one is saying she can't pray. No one is saying she can't be catholic. No one is saying she can't go to church . In my opinion doing her job doesn't violate any ability of her's to exercise her ability to be a Catholic.

She's an Apostolic Christian , and I sort of agree with your statement that performing her duties to uphold the law does not appear to violate her faith. It depends.

On civil disobedience:

Not too many people think it is that cut and dry, but . . .http://www.directionjournal.org/15/1/christian-and-civil-disobedience.html

Here's the current Papal interpretation. . ." It is the “human right” of government officials to say they cannot discharge duties that they believe go against their conscience "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/09/28/pope-francis-conscientious-objection-is-a-human-right-even-for-government-workers/

Quote:

It is the “human right” of government officials to say they cannot discharge duties that they believe go against their conscience, Pope Francis told reporters aboard the papal flight back to Rome on Monday.

“I can’t have in mind all cases that can exist about conscience objection,” the pope told reporters on the plane. “But, yes, I can say the conscientious objection is a right that is a part of every human right. It is a right.

“And if a person does not allow others to be a conscientious objector, he denies a right.”

[ Pope Francis challenges Americans to live up to nation’s ideals ]

The pontiff made his remarks on his return flight from the United States, in response to a question from ABC’s Terry Moran, who mentioned issuing marriage licenses to gay couples as an example.

It was unclear if the pope knew of Kim Davis , the Kentucky clerk who earlier this year refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Davis, an Apostolic Christian, argued that granting a license to a gay couple would violate her religious beliefs . Davis was held in contempt and jailed for five days .

“Conscientious objection must enter into every juridical structure because it is a right, a human right,” the pope said. “Otherwise we would end up in a situation where we select what is a right, saying ‘this right that has merit, this one does not.’ It is a human right.”

[ Legally, ‘God’s authority’ is a tough issue ]

When asked specifically if he was including government workers in his response, Pope Francis responded: “It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right. It is a human right.”

Within the quotes, there are links to other issues that are of concern by the Pope. . .they are somewhat linked to the general feeling of moral decay that is happening in this country and might shed some light on his interpretation of this case.

My personal thoughts on this are somewhat murky, I am not sure if the literal interpretation prevents one from approving some government documents. The law approves gay marriage, so it is the duty of a civil servant to uphold that law.

Quote:

In His Parable of the Good Samaritan , Jesus made the point that we should extend our Christian love to all people of the world, regardless of race, religion, nationality or any other artificial distinction . We must practice that Christian love even toward our enemies! ( Matthew 5:43-48 )

Quote:

No one is perfect; we are all sinners in one way or another ( Romans 3:23 , 1 John 1:8 ). Living a moral life means taking responsibility for controlling our own behavior. If we say or even think we are better than people we consider to be "sinners," we are guilty of the sin of self-righteousness. It is not our right to look down on, criticize, judge, condemn, or try to control other people. Judgment is to be left to God. Jesus said,

Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbor's eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye. (NRSV, Matthew 7:1-5)

This does not deny the right of governments to maintain law and order and collect taxes. Jesus and other New Testament leaders supported the authority of civil governments ( Matthew 22:15-22 , Romans 13:1-7 ).

Bible references: Proverbs 26:12 , Isaiah 5:21 , Matthew 7:1-5 , 9:10-13 , 18:10 , Luke 6:32-42 , 7:36-50 , 18:9-14 , John 8:1-8 , Romans 2:1-4 , 3:23 , 14:1 , 14:10-12 , 1 Corinthians 4:5 , 13:1-7 , 16:14 , Galatians 6:1-3 , James 2:12-13 , 4:11-12 , 1 John 1:8

My questions have to do with her intentions, and the answers would lend me either to support her or to not support her stance:

Are her acts of civil disobedience stemming from a personal belief that she is morally superior to the people she is denying their rights in accordance to the law?

Is she using her own interpretation of the Bible?

[rkim291968]

Per the article - https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-real-story-behind-the-1269547693457462.html, the above story of Pope & Kim meeting was false.  

[Mr. Desmond]

Per the article - https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-real-story-behind-the-1269547693457462.html, the above story of Pope & Kim meeting was false.  

Yes, read the NYT version this morning... So Kim Davis not only can't do her job but is delusional?

[rkim291968]

Yes, read the NYT version this morning... So Kim Davis not only can't do her job but is delusional?

Apparently.    I doubted the report from the beginning given how closely Pope's every move was covered by multitude of media.   If the reported meeting ever took place, it would have been very much covered.     The report also didn't jibe with Pope's persona, behavior pattern, etc..  

BTW, if I refuse to do my job, and order my subordinates to do the same for any reason (religious or otherwise), I would have been fired at my work. 

[Michael Fritz]

She's an Apostolic Christian ,

Lihu,

A point of clarification: The article you link to on Wikipedia describes the Apostolic Christian Church, a "family" of Anabaptist-based denominations with no congregations in Kentucky, and no relationship to Kim Davis or Pentecostal Christianity. Kim Davis is a member of Solid Rock Apostolic Church in Morehead, Kentucky, a Pentecostal church. There are significant differences between Anabaptist and Pentecostal doctrines, beliefs, and practice.

[Gator Hazard]

I am no Catholic nor Christian.   I am not religious at all.  But ever since Pope Francis became a pope, I have nothing but the admiration and respect for him.   I love the guy although I disagree with some of his points.   If  more leaders (religious, political, business) are like him, we will be living in a better world.   My 2 cents, feel free to share yours.

Pretty much share your sentiment.  I don't agree with him on some issues but all in all he seems to be a good dude and seems to want to make some changes to help bring the Catholic Church out of the Dark Ages.

 

The whole premi behind a conscientious objector is not to do that action you are required to do because it violates your faith.

 

Here are the questions I want answered by the Pope

 

2) Does signing a government legal document violate her ability to exercise her religious beliefs?

 

No one is saying she can't pray. No one is saying she can't be catholic. No one is saying she can't go to church. In my opinion doing her job doesn't violate any ability of her's to exercise her ability to be a Catholic.

I agree with this.  She is in a government job, if her religious views are in contradiction with it, she needs to get a different job.  I also believe that the US Government should not be able to mandate that a Catholic run organization (or any religious org) that provides health care should have to provide birth control to their employees. This is different than my view on the Catholic Church and birth control, I think they need to get with the times.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Gator Hazard

[Lihu]

Lihu,

A point of clarification: The article you link to on Wikipedia describes the Apostolic Christian Church, a "family" of Anabaptist-based denominations with no congregations in Kentucky, and no relationship to Kim Davis or Pentecostal Christianity. Kim Davis is a member of Solid Rock Apostolic Church in Morehead, Kentucky, a Pentecostal church. There are significant differences between Anabaptist and Pentecostal doctrines, beliefs, and practice.

Thank you for the clarification.

[saevel25]

Pretty much share your sentiment.  I don't agree with him on some issues but all in all he seems to be a good dude and seems to want to make some changes to help bring the Catholic Church out of the Dark Ages.

Pope John Paul II modernized the church a lot. I wouldn't say they are in the dark ages. 

[Gator Hazard]

Pope John Paul II modernized the church a lot. I wouldn't say they are in the dark ages. 

Agreed, it was an over exaggeration to make a point even if some of their rules are still in that era (no female priests, priests not allowed to marry).

[saevel25]

Agreed, it was an over exaggeration to make a point even if some of their rules are still in that era (no female priests, priests not allowed to marry).

That isn't dark age stuff. Though I agree that there should be female priests. It doesn't bother me they don't allow priests to marry. 

[boogielicious]

Agreed, it was an over exaggeration to make a point even if some of their rules are still in that era (no female priests, priests not allowed to marry).

That isn't dark age stuff. Though I agree that there should be female priests. It doesn't bother me they don't allow priests to marry. 

I am catholic and I agree about women priests. However, the catholic church does accept Evolution and the Big Bang as scientific fact, which is encouraging. I would like the church and this Pope to change their stance on LGBT completely and birth control. Encouraging birth control would go a long, long way to preventing abortions and disease spread. For me, the birth control position is in the dark ages.

[rkim291968]

 

I am catholic and I agree about women priests. However, the catholic church does accept Evolution and the Big Bang as scientific fact, which is encouraging. I would like the church and this Pope to change their stance on LGBT completely and birth control. Encouraging birth control would go a long, long way to preventing abortions and disease spread. For me, the birth control position is in the dark ages.

I agree and will throw another reason ... population explosion.  The earth is too small to support ever increasing world population, now up to 7.3B people.   If the Pope is truly concerned about the env, birth control (not to be confused with abortion) should be in his agenda. 

Edited October 9, 2015 by rkim291968

[saevel25]

I am catholic and I agree about women priests. However, the catholic church does accept Evolution and the Big Bang as scientific fact, which is encouraging. I would like the church and this Pope to change their stance on LGBT completely and birth control. Encouraging birth control would go a long, long way to preventing abortions and disease spread. For me, the birth control position is in the dark ages.

I understand the morning after pill. The church's stance on life at conception will always work against that one. I am not sure about "The Pill" which basically just uses hormones to shut down a woman's ability to get pregnant. The use of condoms or other forms of barriers should be allowed. 

I think the church's stance on LGBT should be one of the following,
1) God created a person to be gay. Science has proven homosexuality is genetic. Though that does beg the question if God made them that way then why does the Church outright ban homosexuality. Oh well that is off topic ;) 
2) Sexual acts performed by homosexuality is a sin. Just like certain sexual acts performed by straight people are a sin. No way around that.
3) A person can be a practicing Catholic if you abstain from the acts of homosexuality that are a sin. 
4) The Church should distance themselves from government issued marriage documents and promote them to be changed to Civil Unions. 

In the end there will never be 100% acceptance of homosexuality. This way I can see them saying you can love a man, but the acts performed in the sexual aspect of the relationship are a sin. As with any other sin, to be a practicing Catholic you must abstain from those actions. If you sin you are suppose to abstain from communion till you do penance. I think that is the compromise that Catholic church can take that doesn't fully outright ostracized those gays who want to be Catholic. Yet Catholic gays need to realize the Church does have some hard line stances they will not budge from. In the end, if you just stop judging them gays as evil and love them as Jesus would have then you will make them feel more accepted. In the end they might be more willing to understand why you have these views against.
 

I agree and will throw another reason ... population explosion.  The earth is too small to support ever increasing world population, now up to 7.3B people.   If the Pope is truly concerned about the env, birth control (not to be confused with abortion) should be in his agenda. 

The population of the world has a good shot at tapering off. The primary reason being that as countries develop they go towards the less children per family western USA model. 

http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/

 

 

 

[rkim291968]

 

 

The population of the world has a good shot at tapering off. The primary reason being that as countries develop they go towards the less children per family western USA model. 

http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/

 

 

 

The problem is there are large number of nations without a chance of becoming a developed nation any time soon.   They are almost all of Africa, good part of Middle East & Asia, some Europe.  Only a few countries can get out of the depth of 3rd world to become a developed nation over the last 4 decades.   We have a long way to go before the population growth plateaus, I am afraid.

[natureboy]

Yep, I like the message.

 

It's about time.

 

Let's not forget climate change.

 

He could have gone easier on capitalism, which history has shown requires gentle regulation to make certain the system, like any system, is not abused.

I guess you are a climate change skeptic. But if it's occurring, I think he considers it critical to a great many (even majority) of his flock who would be severely impacted by rising sea levels and more sever storms as the poor tend to live in poor housing and are often in coastal areas vulnerable to cyclones (Phillipines esp).

Sometimes capitalism requires even assertive bordering on rough regulation when markets are severely imbalanced or there are very bad / irresponsible actors mucking about <financial crisis>. I would guess that his message is more against consumerism and single-minded acquisition of wealth / power / success as the 'new religion' leading to a lack of moral center in a culture. I would think he'd see Buffett / Gates foundation work as positive models of how to both pursue wealth and do some good.

To me he seems like a good man. Thoughtful, humble, and empathetic.