Pope apologises after using the term ****ness to describe gay men

[K218b]

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis apologized Tuesday after he was quoted using a vulgar and derogatory term about gay men to reaffirm the Catholic Church’s ban on gay priests.

The ruckus that ensued underscored how the church’s official teaching about homosexuality often bumps up against the unacknowledged reality that there are plenty of gay men in the priesthood, and plenty of LGBTQ+ Catholics who want to be fully part of the life and sacraments of the church.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni issued a statement acknowledging the media storm that erupted about Francis’ comments, which were delivered behind closed doors

Not surprising as the Catholic Church claims that everyone is accepted to be part of the Church and there is plenty of room for everyone unless you're gay and want to become a priest. The Pope was actually referring to the ban that has been put in place to prevent homosexual men from becoming priests.

The Pope apologised for using this 'offensive' and 'vulgar' term but we all know he did it under pressure and to be politicallly correct. He and many others in the clergy believe that ****s (according to them) shouldn't become priests.

In line with the tradition of the church and the Christian dogma that regards homosexuality as a very serious sin. I could go for longer but let's not provoke the Christian audience.

If homosexuality is a barrier in becoming part of the clergy what about the kingdom of God? Are you not going to heaven because you happen to be homosexual? It's a rhetorical question but I am sure it can be literally made and there could be a number of people who see homosexuality as a sin with severe consequences.

https://apnews.com/article/pope-gay-prie...8a45afd32c
https://www.voanews.com/a/pope-apologize...29899.html

[Maxmars]

I can't wait to see how the activist media 'virtue signals' their way through this.

Oh wait... on second thought, I'd rather not know anymore.

Whatever, the show must go on.

Their spiritual tradition refuses the behavior that defines a lifestyle.

And some guy born five generations ago used a term we now deem "inappropriate," get over it.

[K218b]

I can't wait to see how the activist media 'virtue signals' their way through this.

Oh wait... on second thought, I'd rather not know anymore.

Whatever, the show must go on.

Their spiritual tradition refuses the behavior that defines a lifestyle.

And some guy born five generations ago used a term we now deem "inappropriate," get over it.

When it comes to revisionism things have been getting worse in the last few decades. Adding the amount of political correctness and at the end you won't be able to use any words and you will need to sanitize your language and your thoughts.

[Maxmars]

I agree, it's a purposefully crafted impediment to speech... now why would anyone want to impede speech?

[VulcanWerks]

Another way I read the comment is that they’re starting to crack - can’t keep the facade up any longer and this slip is a sign of fatigue.

I don’t really have a dog in this fight though; I’m not offended by speech, I’m not catholic and I don’t hate gay people.

[K218b]

Another way I read the comment is that they’re starting to crack - can’t keep the facade up any longer and this slip is a sign of fatigue.

I don’t really have a dog in this fight though; I’m not offended by speech, I’m not catholic and I don’t hate gay people.

Me too. I am not Catholic and I am not religious either.
I don't care about someone's sexual orientation.

The Church on the other hand cares a lot and homosexuality is considered to be a serious sin. Practising homosexuality can cost you much and you could lose your place in paradise.

---

I agree, it's a purposefully crafted impediment to speech... now why would anyone want to impede speech?

Controlling the language is a great tool to push narratives or to direct the way people should think and act. Language is a very powerful tool after all but clearly I am against political correctness and any attempts to dictate what words should be used must be resisted.

[K218b]

https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatica...talk-about

I still don't believe his apology is genuine and I don't blame him. He has his views and this is what it is.

[Maxmars]

https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatica...talk-about

I still don't believe his apology is genuine and I don't blame him. He has his views and this is what it is.

I, for one don't believe in making someone suffer over things like this.  

The media, and those others who worship "social scoring" however, do.

They have the stage, so reporting will always reflect their projected image of the world.  It's appalling to me that few ever notice the image forming about their 'choices' of what to make a fuss over.

Also, there are many religions who profess or proscribe things which people disagree with (or will, or had in the past.)  Shall we make a tally?  Or might that be embarrassing?

[K218b]

I, for one don't believe in making someone suffer over things like this.  

The media, and those others who worship "social scoring" however, do.

They have the stage, so reporting will always reflect their projected image of the world.  It's appalling to me that few ever notice the image forming about their 'choices' of what to make a fuss over.

Also, there are many religions who profess or proscribe things which people disagree with (or will, or had in the past.)  Shall we make a tally?  Or might that be embarrassing?

This is what I think too and I don't know why they get to concentrate on these issues and to choose what to report and what not to report. It's true religious dogma prescribes things that are very unpleasant such as stoning people to death for apostasy or stoning women to death for adultery. With the exception of some journalists the rest don't concentrate on more serious issues in relation to religion and how people practice it all over the world or the various attrocities committed in the name of invisible deities.