PopeWatch: Schadenfreude

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Share on delicious
Delicious
Share on digg
Digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

 

PopeWatch2-199x300-199x300

 

PopeWatch couldn’t resist a glance at the coverage of The National Catholic Reporter of the meeting between the Pope and Kim Davis:

 

Davis told the magazine that Francis said to her, “Thank you for your courage.”

“I said, ‘Thank you, Holy Father,'” Davis reportedly said. “I had asked a monsignor earlier what was the proper way to greet the pope, and whether it would be appropriate for me to embrace him, and I had been told it would be OK to hug him. So I hugged him, and he hugged me back.

“It was an extraordinary moment. ‘Stay strong,’ he said to me. Then he gave me a rosary as a gift, and he gave one also to my husband, Joe. I broke into tears. I was deeply moved.

“Then he said to me, ‘Please pray for me.’ And I said to him, ‘Please pray for me also, Holy Father.’ And he assured me that he would pray for me.”

Inside the Vatican editor Robert Moynihan, who has covered the Vatican for years, said Davis recounted the meeting to him shortly after it took place.

The meeting would seem to be a stunning coda to the pope’s visit, which may be one reason why the Vatican on Wednesday seemed eager to avoid engaging it further.

It was only after repeated requests that the Vatican offered a response. In an email in Italian to Vatican journalists, Vatican spokesman Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi wrote, “I do not deny that a meeting may have taken place, but I do not have comments to add.” (NCR’s translation.)

Staver said the Vatican had promised to release photos of the pope and Davis on Wednesday.

 

Go here to read the rest.  The reaction of the NCR readers to this story was priceless:

 

I couldn’t agree more! This morning’s news of his covert meeting with Davis cut deep with betrayal. I understand that the Church isn’t anywhere near a the point of accepting the LGBT Faithful but, pathetically, so many of us mistakenly hung our hopes on the fact that, because he openly refused to aggressively chase us away, we felt it might be possible that we could be welcomed back some day. At the moment, those hopes have been shattered. Like neglected or abused children on our best behavior, we longed for even the smallest sign of our worth but instead, he kicked dirt into our eyes.

More to explorer

Synodal Heresy 2.0

    Once Again Down Heresy Lane With Jorge Déjà vu all over again. One may replace whatever one wishes for the

Saint of the Day Quote: Saint Gerard Majella

Here the will of God is done, as God wills, and as long as God wills. Saint Gerard Majella

PopeWatch: Mammon

Christ constantly warned about the evils of Mammon, doubtless because He foresaw incidents like this: This latest scandal also leads to the

18 Comments

  1. Agreed. The reactions are funny.
    When news broke about this story I was elated for Kim. She walked through the flames and to have PF acknowledge her love for Truth was very appropriate.

    The disgruntled might wish to review the causes and effects of disobedience under God. The rainbow is not the homosexual’s victory flag. It’s God’s sign that he loves us and a reminder that obidence to Nature’s Law is paramount. Disobedience to HIS law is death of spirit and body.

    Thank God Pope Francis recognized Kim.

  2. A non-Catholic fights the battle, led in no small part by Catholic politicians.

    God doesn’t follow man’s rubrics does He?

  3. DonL.
    Please tell me, because of my short term memory loss, who the Catholic politicians were / are?

    In the case of sarcasm disregard this comment. Thank you.

  4. “God doesn’t follow man’s rubrics does he?”
    -Don L.

    God’s Holy word describes the laying down of two men an “abomination.”
    All adultery is worthy of damnation too.
    Is God contrary to God?
    Does his word change?
    He is the same yesterday, today and forever.
    His word is Truth.

  5. My goof. I neglected to say they were on the opposition side in the battle–those “Catholics” like Pelosi and Biden etc.

  6. Cool beans!

    The Catholic Biden’s and Pelosi’s need help.
    Somehow someway they need to review the teaching CCC on abortion. More prayer’s I suppose.

    God bless you Don L.

  7. The story implies the meeting was set up by the Vatican; but also, as one of the NCR commentators notes, Francis no doubt had a pretty good idea of what was going on. My fantasy is that this was in part a payback for the Administration’s dismissal of Church complaints that the White House reception was being turned into a freak show.

    In any case, the Pope behaved exactly as he should; and I feel better about the Holy Father now than I did during last week’s endless apotheosis.

  8. “I do not deny that a meeting may have taken place, but I do not have comments to add.”
    Poor Fr Lombardi so often puts me in mind of Talleyrand’s quip, « La parole a été donnée à l’homme pour déguiser sa pensée » – Man was given speech to disguise his thoughts

  9. What are the takeaways from the Kim meets Pope episode?
    1. Pope attempts to conceal a good act and will not admit it happened as if doing something good was bad.
    2. News is leaked and some of his gay supporters have hissy fit thinking he has gone wobbly on approval of SSM.
    3. Now we know reason for concealment of good act by Pope: failure to carry out perceived or implied campaign pledge of being gay friendly.

  10. One thing that really really upsets National[not] Catholic[not] Reporter[not] readers is that the Pope gave Kim and her husband rosaries – the weapon of choice, when used on “full auto” with “heat seeking” beads, against the likes of those at Not X 3. Say the rosary and return to God and America will come out of this and again will be God’s Country. Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas

  11. And of course now there is a “clarification” coming from the Vatican. The Pope didn’t mean it-just cuz he met with her does not mean that he supports her position.
    .
    Someone is not telling the truth–either Kim Davis et al, or the Pope/Vatican.
    .
    Unfortunately, I am not sure who is the liar here.

  12. The LBGTs and secularists must be so devastated. An agnostic facebook friend posted this on Saturday “What an honor to have this Pope on American soil. You don’t have to be Catholic (which I’m not) to appreciate the message of love, peace, humility, religious and sexual freedom. What a refreshing change from the spewing of vitriol, judgement, selfishness and divisiveness. He should be an example to everyone.” Yes, sexual freedom.
    That is the impression that the pope is leaving. Hard to understand. But I get my friend’s post, because she ended up unfriending me, saying that I’m part of the vitriolic group… all because I click “like” on pro-life things and they all show up in her newsfeed.

  13. How is Francis responsible for willful misreadings like that of your agnostic facebook unfriend?

  14. To defend someone’s right, indeed, their duty to follow their conscience is not to necessarily to agree with them.

    One recalls the well-know episode of Napoléon’s marriage to Marie-Louise, Archduchess of Austria. Cardinal della Somaglia told M. Emery, Supérieur of St. Sulpice and a notable moral theologian that he could not attend without wounding his conscience. M. Emery told him that, in that case, he should on no account do so, for any consideration whatsoever. It transpired that M. Emery had been consulted by a number of the other 18 cardinals, then in Paris, and he had told them he thought they could attend the ceremony with a clear conscience.
    In response to a letter from Cardinal Fesch, the Emperor’s uncle, M. Emery explained this apparent inconsistency. He personally saw no harm in attending, but he had given his advice to Cardinal della Somaglia on the basis that one should never act against one’s own conscience, even if it were erroneous [qu’on ne devait jamais, agir contre sa conscience, même erronée].
    As M. Emery explained, “Not that inconveniences could authorise an assistance that was illicit, but these inconveniences are the strongest reason [une raison très-forte] to consider the more attentively whether it is possible, whether assisting is really illicit and whether the conscience one has formed on that subject is not, perhaps, an erroneous conscience.”
    In the event Cardinal della Somaglia kept to his view, contrary to M. Emery, and did not attend the marriage ceremony.

  15. I don’t see how it’s a willful misreading. It’s her impression of him, and the impression of him by all the LBGTQs. and now they’re sad because he met with Kim Davis. They’re all confused. Everywhere you look, people are confused by what he says & does.

  16. “They’re all confused. ”
    yes- confusion and obfuscation .
    But we can’t fall victim to it. We are coming up on the Feast of OL’s Rosary Victory. As Guy says, ” heat seeking beads”. As bishop Olmstead says, ” into the breach!”

Comments are closed.