←back to thread

First American pope elected and will be known as Pope Leo XIV

(www.cnn.com)
606 points saikatsg | 1 comments | 08 May 25 16:30 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
nickthegreek ◴[08 May 25 17:22 UTC] No.43928638[source]▶
"Whereas Francis said, “Who am I to judge?” when asked about gay clerics, Cardinal Prevost has expressed less welcoming views to L.G.B.T.Q. people.

In a 2012 address to bishops, he lamented that Western news media and popular culture fostered “sympathy for beliefs and practices that are at odds with the gospel.” He cited the “homosexual lifestyle” and “alternative families comprised of same-sex partners and their adopted children.”"

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/02/world/americas/pope-candi...

replies(15): >>43928744 #>>43928820 #>>43928830 #>>43928904 #>>43928911 #>>43928948 #>>43929020 #>>43929030 #>>43929239 #>>43929343 #>>43929708 #>>43929793 #>>43929936 #>>43929957 #>>43931844 #
sepositus ◴[08 May 25 17:40 UTC] No.43928911[source]▶
Curious, do you think he's wrong that it's at odds with what was taught by the apostles? It's obviously unpopular, but I have yet to see a convincing argument (based in the teachings of the Bible) that promotes same-sex marriages.

If I were in his position, and part of my duty is to interpret and lead via "the holy scriptures," then I would probably want to be as accurate as possible.

replies(13): >>43928988 #>>43929022 #>>43929079 #>>43929106 #>>43929271 #>>43929309 #>>43929328 #>>43929364 #>>43929430 #>>43929877 #>>43930031 #>>43930845 #>>43931821 #
breadwinner ◴[08 May 25 17:45 UTC] No.43928988[source]▶
> my duty is to interpret and lead via "the holy scriptures"

Said scriptures also says that a woman can be sold to her rapist after he violates her. I think a more modern interpretation would not be a bad idea.

replies(5): >>43929036 #>>43929041 #>>43929115 #>>43929288 #>>43930673 #
sepositus ◴[08 May 25 17:48 UTC] No.43929041[source]▶
What do you mean? There are plenty of "modern" interpretations. New scholarly commentaries come out almost every year. My point is that, among these, the prevailing assumption continues to be one that doesn't support same-sex marriages in the church.

What is lacking, from my perspective, are scholarly interpretations that swing the discussion the other way. The best I've seen simply just exclude the problematic scriptures which really isn't within the Catholic tradition (inerrancy of scripture and all).

contexnt: I've studied religions (and still follow the topic) and have a basic understanding of where things are, but take it with a grain of salt.

replies(2): >>43929188 #>>43930076 #
deeg ◴[08 May 25 19:06 UTC] No.43930076[source]▶
For much of Christian history the Bible was largely interpreted as being pro slavery and against interracial marriage. Most people now disagree with those interpretations. There is growing support for LGBT within the church. Here's one example https://thomasjayoord.com/index.php/blog/archives/introducin...
replies(1): >>43935010 #
1. selfhoster11 ◴[09 May 25 09:00 UTC] No.43935010[source]▶
The Bible doesn't even have the concept of race as we understand it today, because that concept is a very recent invention (to my understanding). Anyone using it to support anti-interracial marriage positions would be doing so anachronistically, rendering their own claim invalid.