As Mike pointed out in the comment section of the previous post, Catholic News Agency was the source of the mistranslation of the pope’s words concerning the pregnant woman that he mentioned during his in-flight press conference.
The text read:
I met a woman some months ago in a parish who was pregnant with her eighth child, who had had seven C-sections…
I was able to get in touch with the director of CNA, Alejandro Bermúdez, who has always treated me kindly even after they decided to stop publishing my columns, and he’s had the necessary corrections made. The transcript now reads:
I reproached a woman some months ago in a parish because she was pregnant with her eighth child, after having had seven C-sections…
There’s no telling how often that initial text has been quoted up to this point, but hopefully those who relied on it as evidence that the pope didn’t treat the woman as harshly as the actual quote indicates will become aware of the revision and adjust their own commentary accordingly.
In any case, the correction has been made. So, let’s give credit where credit is due.
Thanks for this information, Louie.
There is no getting around this. We also could think about this complete betrayal of the woman’s confidence. Unless she came up to Poor Francis at a cocktail party, after having had a few, and babbled excitedly about her babies, and her C-sections, in sort of a boozy/boastful way??? The whole world knows about this mother and what an irresponsible hag she must be. Hey, we may see a lawsuit coming for defamation! Get Chis Ferrara on the phone!
You know, I wonder what I would have talked about with Pius X had I had the good fortune to be right in front of him? Methinks I would have been on my knees, kissing his ring and asking him for a blessing, teary-eyed with humility and gratitude. I don’t think it would have occurred to me – BECAUSE OF WHO HE WAS – to actually talk about my various medical treatments. And he would have murmured a gentle word or two, and passed on. Poor Francis brings all this onto his own head.
Modern heretics teach that ‘god is in all of us.’ What, was Jorge standing behind the pillar when this ‘spirit’ was passed out?
Like many, I’m torn between thinking Poor Francis is a voluble fool, or a calculating, heresy-teaching, very, very ‘modern’ theologian wanna-be.
Sr. Lucy tells us that NOTHING cannot be solved by praying the Rosary. It took many decades to rid the Church of the Arian heresy. We better get going.
This brings back a memory of St. Therese the Little Flower. She recounts her audience with the Pope when her father took her to Rome. She was instructed, as were all in the audience, to kiss the Pope’s ring, SAY NOTHING, and move on (she actually did talk to him and this caused quite a stir). Ah, the good ole days.
Could I assume that she was still reprimanded for placing her trust in God? If so, I’m not impressed!
Don’t we see the damage that NFP has done? Now, according to most Catholics and even the pope there is are excuses to have recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children. It is even now your responsibility to do so. No generous ,open to life, virtuous, sacrificial Catholic couple is spared from this vulgar trivialization of their loyalty to God”s law on sexual purity and the primary purpose of marriage. And it is because of this pernicious sacrilegious method of NFP that has been promoted in our Holy Mother Church by these fraudulent so called “Catholics” that NFP has been so successful in opening the floodgates to give the stamp of approval to the sexual rot and confusion in our parishes.
I completely agree with Anastasia. Natural family planning has the same goal as artificial methods except without chemicals. Both frustrate the act. If couples are.foo sick or financially strapped they can practice periodic .abstinence without charts and temps. Disabled couples and those separated by war face this every day.
Dear Mary Regina,
It is encouraging to see your defense against NFP. I am hoping by your the term periodic continence you mean complete abstinence from conjugal relations until the couple are ready for more children.
For those who might need to hear the Traditional Church teaching that clearly is against the liberal new NFP meaning of marriage which separates the primary purpose of procreation and education of children for God’s glory from it’s secondary purpose of unity of the couple. Which, by the way, the second purpose of unity is subordinate to primary purpose of marriage.
Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii: And now, Venerable Brethren, We shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. Forst consideration is due the offspring, which many have the aydacity to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrsting the marital act. …No reason, however grave, may be put forward by anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate it’s natural power and purpose, sin against nature, and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious …any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against God.
I was accused of being “disrespectful” to Pope Francis when I made the comment, “Stop talking period, Holy Father!” on another website. I explained to the offended person that PF has gotten into the bad habit of making shooting off of the hip comments that denigrate Catholic piety. I told him the Holy Father should stick to public statements that are covered by his infallibility on faith and morals. When he makes these other statements, he causes unnecessary scandal and confusion.
Anastasia and Mary Regina, thank you for your very clear comments on NFP. A Catholic journalist named Randy Engel has written a short book called “John Paul II and the ‘Theology of the Body’ – A Study in Modernism.”
I think, and she writes convincingly, that this novelty developed by John Paul II over many years (inspired by his unfortunate modernism) is the beginning of the end of true Catholic marriage. This short book can be purchased for download on Randy Engel’s site.
It all sounds so Catholic, eh? Just give up sex for a week or so each month, and all will be well – no kids unless they are truly wanted, or can be tolerated. This is a very slippery slope. When JPII developed his so-called theology of the body (no such thing!) he continued that evil belief that man must have sex whenever he feels the need because this is his ‘nature.’ It’s all ‘dignity of the human person’ and our ‘experiences’ – over Truth.
That is a prime feature of all modernism – man’s nature. Man’s supernatural nature is left far behind. This leads to the drive to bring sex into the kindergarden, and into nursing homes!!!!! This all leads us poor women, and now men, to stay young no matter the cost. Dyed hair, bleached teeth, push-up bras, daily workouts at the gym, sexy clothes for toddlers and on and on.
Do I sound like a reactionary old crab? Perhaps, but the deeper I dig into perennial Catholic Teaching I see that when true human nature was known it was protected from corruption, there was innocence in childhood, modesty in women (and men) and a recognition that towards the middle-old age our sexual faculties rested from their ‘natural’ labour. We have divorced our bodies from this God-given nature, and sadly follow Adam and Eve into its rupture.
It seems the neo-Catholic is guided largely by the desires of his subconscious; thus the constant proliferation of such beneficial “mistranslations” over the years (now into high-gear to cover for our cantankerous & confusing hippie-pope).
Are not old crabs lovely too?