The Catholic News Agency published the English-translated transcript of the interview that Pope Francis had with Corriere Della Sera earlier today. The questions seem to be only loosely related to each other. What has raised the eyebrows of many in the blogosphere and elsewhere is this exchange:
"(CDS) Many nations have regulated civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?"
"(PF) Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify
civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by
the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as
ensuring health care. It is about pacts of cohabitating of various
natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One
needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety." (end snippet)
The real head-scratcher for me is the last sentence. "Evaluate them"?? Anybody with two brain neurons that fire in syncopation understands what is meant by the term "civil union". Whether heterosexual or homosexual, the crux of these unions is sexual relations outside of marriage. We are talking of acts that are, objectively speaking, mortal sins. Any "evaluation" of these is a fait-accompli in light of the Sixth Commandment. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not rocket science. Under no circumstances can the Church support, or even just tolerate, these situations for they will endanger the souls of those embroiled in these situations and cause great scandal for countless others who will be swayed by the bad example. Here are true words of wisdom from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI detailing why homosexual unions can never be tolerated, much less recognized by the Church.
LifesiteNews has an analysis of this interview. It calls this response of the Pope's "carefully guarded". Perhaps this is a question that required only a plain, simple answer. Of course the question was worded disingenuously. His Holiness could have taken the question "is it a path the Church can understand?" and restated it to say "when will the nations understand the path that Jesus Christ, through His Church, has indicated to be the only path?" Instead, we get convoluted gobblygook where a simple, truthful response would have brought crystalline clarity.
Dare I suggest that His Holiness give up these interviews for Lent?