As Catholic historian and former Jesuit Peter de Rosa writes in the 'Vicars of Christ: The Darkside of the Papacy' (Crown Publishers, 1988), p. 427, "Popes had mistresses of fifteen years of age, were guilty of incest and sexual perversions of every sort, had innumerable children, were murdered in the very act of adultery [by jealous husbands who found them in bed with their wives]... In the old Catholic phrase, why be holier than the pope?"
Popes fought with one another, excommunicated one another, and sometimes even killed each other. It is difficult to find even a few among the popes after the fifth century who exhibited the basic Christian virtues until the modern era. Their lives as recorded in the Catholic Encyclopedia read like an unbelievable soap opera of lust, madness, mayhem, and murder. You should read one of the earlier copies sometime. Pay special attention to the preserved documents, and their recitation by many historians, revealing the depths of papal depravity.
So thank goodness for the reform popes that finally arose reforming much of the wild sinful worldly abuses amongst the clergy (though they obviously went too far with the inquisitions and such) right?
Read my previous post. I can respect what you say regarding the pope giving a human answer but the problem is that he's given it as pope from the papal office. If a lay person had made the comment, it wouldn't have bothered me. The reason it did is because the Catholic Church has a raging sexual immorality problem amongst its clergy.
So when you look at that problem and all of the people whose lives and spirituality has and is being damaged by sexually immoral priests as the context for the pope's statement: it's a really negative statement to make. Instead of taking the opportunity to lead reform of the problem, we see him making statements that open the door wider for more of it to occur.
There's nothing wrong with standing around admiring a painting but there is something wrong in standing around admiring a painting in a house that's on fire with people at risk in it. And what would you think of people who stand around encouraging the person admiring the painting rather than putting out the fire. That's you friend. You're that guy.
Did Jesus have three fingers pointing back at him whenever he pointed to a religious leader in judgment? What about Paul and the other apostles when they did it? Read through the New Testament. They all did it frequently and with good reason.
If salt has lost it's saltiness, what good is it. When a material number of Catholic religious leaders are engaging in gross sexual immorality, it makes no sense for the pope to make statements like this. Reform is needed and it's needed now.
The man is the first pope in centuries, or ever, to step up and say,"who am I to judge" this statement has rattled the catholic church, its the first time any pope has ever stated himself to be fallen human like the rest of us, and not try to stand in a position of superiority...The man washes peoples feet in the streets knowing he might get shot doin it, moved out of the pope palace into a apartment with the rest of the vatican community, and placed himself in a position of being no one special...It wasent a political statement, it was an honest reflection of the gospels as far as I can tell...If you took the entire non orthodox community (us), and consolidated it as one church, and drew the attention to it, that gets drawn to the Catholic church, I wonder how much dirty laundry we would find? ...I think they have the first good man in the drivers seat they have ever had. And Im sure not going to be judging him for that...PS, He wasent advocating child molestation in any way, or the acting out of any lustful desires which everyone has to battle...He said "If someone is gay, who searches for the Lord and has goodwill, who am I to judge?” Never heard that come out of the mouth of a Pope before...always remember about those 3 fingers pointing back at you as you point to someone in judgment...
