by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

It has already been nearly 10 hours since the press conference and still the entire conference has not been reported or transcribed. What is being reported are two responses.

Property Right-Civil Unions for any two persons

The first is his response to Question 5. Here in the Original Italian, Il Sismografo has the text:

And Diana Montagna a working translation into English:

From his responses it is clear that he is not talking about civil marriages or unions for those in sexual relationships, but property rights unions. In certain societies friends are excluded from being at the bedside or managing the affairs of an invalid. That this civil recognition can be misused is one thing, that it is in its own right neither good nor evil, is another. If we outlawed everything that can be used for evil, most things would be outlawed. The Papal charism protects against wrong teaching, but not against imprudence.

Diana Montagna has imposed her own meaning on the text, in an act of journalistic dishonesty. If a text “seems to imply” something, not because of what is said, but because in your mind it does, then you must honestly admit that you are prejudiced to find something where it does not exist. By explicitly referring to elderly people, he is clarifying that he is speaking about property rights and medical rights agreements, which are not pretexted on the basis of sexual unions or mutual affection. Pope Benedict XVI said that when such unions are conceived for such relationships, then Catholics must oppose them.

Death Penalty for Sodomites

Global News recorded and transmitted the entire response of Pope Francis regarding Sodomites, in its original Italian:

His remarks were made in regard to 50/51 nations, i. e. the nations with Islamic Law, for the most part. He speaks of the case of legal systems which impose the death penalty for persons. He says nothing about death penalty for acts. He states that the former is unjust. Which is obvious, because Saint Thomas says, a man is judged a sinner for his acts, not his habits.

In no Christian legal system has there ever been a death penalty for sodomites. For the sin of sodomy, yes, but not for sodomites per se.

So the reports in Reuters and New York Times are pure inventions, in their attempt to construe his words as speaking against any criminal penalty for acts of sodomy.

The Papal Charism only protects what is actually said. It does not protect what is said against misinterpretation or lack of clarity. There is the famous case of Pope Honorius I, who said Christ had one willing (unicus animus). In the Greek version of his letter it was translated as one will (unica voluntas), and condemned by an Ecumenical Council. He did not utter a heresy, because the Divine Will and Human will in Christ are in perfect unison and harmony, each in its respective spheres. But this case does show, what to expect from the Papal Charism working in a man who wants to speak to an audience which he fears or wants to please.

Accepting the Petrine Munus does not make you a saint. John XII was a notorious adulterer, and died at the hand of a husband who had had enough. But no one today denies John XII was the true pope. So we ought not expect anyone elected to lose his prejudices, personal grudges, or even political view points. This is why it is a sin to idolize the Pope and to attribute his personal sins to the Church. Both are excesses.