home
RSS
Bishop: Pope was 'on a high' during gay remarks
Cardinal Timothy Dolan in Rome before the conclave in Rome that elected Pope Francis.
July 31st, 2013
05:53 PM ET

Bishop: Pope was 'on a high' during gay remarks

By Daniel Burke, CNN

(CNN) - The nation's leading Roman Catholic archbishop said Wednesday that Pope Francis was "on a high" from his first international trip as pontiff when he said "Who am I to judge?" gays and lesbians.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, who traveled last week to Brazil with the pope for World Youth Day, said the massive turnout - estimates ran as high as 3 million - and ecstatic crowds likely gave Francis hope that he would "revive the church on his home continent of Latin America."

Francis was the archbishop of Buenos Aires in Argentina from 1998 until his papal election in March.

"The pope was visibly `on a high' from his first international pastoral visit in Rio," Dolan said. "Understandably so. Because I was there with him, I can verify that the superlatives being used — `oceanic' crowds, `frenzied' welcomes, `inspirational, heartfelt' words — are not exaggerations at all."

On the plane from Brazil back to Rome on Monday, the pope gave an 80-minute press conference in which he addressed a number of controversial issues for the Catholic Church, including homosexuality, the ordination of women and scandals involving a so-called "gay lobby" at the Vatican.

Regarding gay priests, Francis said, “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”

READ MORE: Pope Francis on gays: `Who am I to judge?'

The remarks were read by some as a rejection of previous church policy, including a 2005 directive that barred men with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" from the priesthood.

Not so, Dolan said on Wednesday in a blog post.

"No change in church teaching here . . . or no intended `correction' to a more `dour' approach by his predecessors," said Dolan.

In fact, the archbishop continued, Francis does not have the power to change church doctrine.

"Catholics know that the pope, like all of us, is a servant of the truth of the Gospel, not a crafter. Doctrine is a given; it is settled, inherited, faithfully passed on. That’s his duty, and he’s sure doing it well."

As archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Dolan is widely considered the most powerful Catholic official in the country. He was also part of the conclave that elected Francis.

Since the pope's comments on Monday, conservatives have framed them as a change in tone, not substance, noting that Francis quoted from the Catholic Catechism and would hardly announced a change in doctrine during an impromptu press conference.

CNN Vatican analyst John Allen noted, however, that "at a certain point, tone becomes substance if it’s seen as revitalizing the prospects of the church."

READ MORE: How Pope Francis is revolutionizing the church

Rather than a change in doctrine, the pope's "brief remarks were about mercy," Dolan said.

"The church considers unjust discrimination against any homosexual a sin," the archbishop said, adding that "homosexual acts, which are contrary to Revelation...can always be healed by God's mercy."

"And when God’s mercy is sought, it is always given, the sin wiped away and forgotten; because of this, nobody — not the Pope, not a bishop, not a priest — can judge another!"

Other church-watchers noted, however, that Francis himself cited a previous pope while dismissing the possibility of women's ordination during the same airplane press conference.

"By saying that John Paul II had `definitively…closed the door to women priests,' Francis was himself pointing to the fact that popes determine church law," wrote blogger Mark Silk at Religion News Service. 

Dolan closed his blog post by lamenting that so much media coverage has concentrated on "these weary issues" rather than "the noble themes that ran through Copacabana Beach," where World Youth Day was held.

- CNN Religion Editor

Filed under: Catholic Church • Gay rights • Homosexuality • Pope Francis

soundoff (930 Responses)
  1. Reality

    Then there is this to contemplate:

    JC's family and friends had it right 2000 years ago ( Mark 3: 21 "And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.")

    Said passage is one of the few judged to be authentic by most contemporary NT scholars. e.g. See Professor Ludemann's conclusion in his book, Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 24 and p. 694.

    Actually, Jesus was a bit "touched". After all he thought he spoke to Satan, thought he changed water into wine, thought he raised Lazarus from the dead etc. In today's world, said Jesus would be declared legally insane.

    Or did P, M, M, L and J simply make him into a first century magic-man via their epistles and gospels of semi-fiction? Many contemporary NT experts after thorough analyses of all the scriptures go with the latter magic-man conclusion with J's gospel being mostly fiction.

    Obviously, today's followers of Paul et al's "magic-man" are also a bit on the odd side believing in all the Christian mumbo jumbo about bodies resurrecting, and exorcisms, and miracles, and "magic-man atonement, and infallible, old, European/Utah/Argentine/NY white men, and 24/7 body/blood sacrifices followed by consumption of said sacrifices. Yummy!!!!

    So why do we really care what a first century CE, illiterate, long-dead, preacher/magic man would do or say?

    August 1, 2013 at 8:20 am |
    • dogmandg

      From the article: "Catholics know that the pope, like all of us, is a servant of the truth of the Gospel, not a crafter."

      Fact: The gospels say nothing about gays, one way or the other. Jesus is silent on this issue.

      August 1, 2013 at 8:29 am |
      • Mike

        Lol. Jesus didn't write any of it so nobody knows anything for sure. And even if he did say something, so what? At the time he was a nobody. Only after he was brought to godly status later by power hungry men was anything really written. And Jesus didn't write it.

        August 1, 2013 at 9:15 am |
    • @@

      Considering that since then nations, empires, royalty, common folk all have used him for inspiration both in the past and today, I say quite a lot. Only a fool dismisses would dismiss the impact of JC and his followers and under estimate them. The same can be said for all religions seeing how the vast majority of the population in this world believes in some deity or holy man.

      August 1, 2013 at 8:53 am |
    • Chris K

      That the authors of the Gospels, and the whole of the New Testament were persecuted, enslaved, poisoned, and murdered for their belief and testimony would make one wonder why they would create such an immaculate and inerrant "magic-man" story if it was, in fact, "make believe." That the authours would lead readers on such counter-cultural tale (i.e. women having a place at all in the stories was very counter-cultural) in an effort to fool the masses of their day is, in and of itself, puzzling. That you would cite NT scholars who would suppose that the whole of the story is made up, and not cite any resources or even names to such scholars is, well, typical of someone that hasn't a clue what they are talking about.

      August 1, 2013 at 9:06 am |
      • Reality

        Comments based on the following references.

        o 1. Historical Jesus Theories, earlychristianwritings.com/theories.htm – the names of many of the contemporary historical Jesus scholars and the ti-tles of their over 100 books on the subject.

        2. Early Christian Writings, earlychristianwritings.com/
        – a list of early Christian doc-uments to include the year of publication–

        30-60 CE Passion Narrative
        40-80 Lost Sayings Gospel Q
        50-60 1 Thessalonians
        50-60 Philippians
        50-60 Galatians
        50-60 1 Corinthians
        50-60 2 Corinthians
        50-60 Romans
        50-60 Philemon
        50-80 Colossians
        50-90 Signs Gospel
        50-95 Book of Hebrews
        50-120 Didache
        50-140 Gospel of Thomas
        50-140 Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel
        50-200 Sophia of Jesus Christ
        65-80 Gospel of Mark
        70-100 Epistle of James
        70-120 Egerton Gospel
        70-160 Gospel of Peter
        70-160 Secret Mark
        70-200 Fayyum Fragment
        70-200 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
        73-200 Mara Bar Serapion
        80-100 2 Thessalonians
        80-100 Ephesians
        80-100 Gospel of Matthew
        80-110 1 Peter
        80-120 Epistle of Barnabas
        80-130 Gospel of Luke
        80-130 Acts of the Apostles
        80-140 1 Clement
        80-150 Gospel of the Egyptians
        80-150 Gospel of the Hebrews
        80-250 Christian Sibyllines
        90-95 Apocalypse of John
        90-120 Gospel of John
        90-120 1 John
        90-120 2 John
        90-120 3 John
        90-120 Epistle of Jude
        93 Flavius Josephus
        100-150 1 Timothy
        100-150 2 Timothy
        100-150 T-itus
        100-150 Apocalypse of Peter
        100-150 Secret Book of James
        100-150 Preaching of Peter
        100-160 Gospel of the Ebionites
        100-160 Gospel of the Nazoreans
        100-160 Shepherd of Hermas
        100-160 2 Peter

         4. Jesus Database, http://www.faithfutures.o-rg/JDB/intro.html –"The JESUS DATABASE is an online a-nnotated inventory of the traditions concerning the life and teachings of Jesus that have survived from the first three centuries of the Common Era. It includes both canonical and extra-canonical materials, and is not limited to the traditions found within the Christian New Testament."
        5. Josephus on Jesus mtio.com/articles/bis-sar24.htm
        6. The Jesus Seminar, http://en.wikipedia.o-rg/wiki/Jesus_Seminar
        7. http://www.biblicalartifacts.com/items/785509/item785509biblicalartifacts.html – books on the health and illness during the time of the NT
        8. Economics in First Century Palestine, K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998.
        9.The Gn-ostic Jesus
        (Part One in a Two-Part Series on A-ncient and Modern G-nosticism)
        by Douglas Gro-othuis: http://www.equip.o-rg/articles/g-nosticism-and-the-g-nostic-jesus/
        10. The interpretation of the Bible in the Church, Pontifical Biblical Commission
        Presented on March 18, 1994
        ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCINTER.HTM#2
        11. The Jesus Database- newer site:
        wiki.faithfutures.o-rg/index.php?t-itle=Jesus_Database
        12. Jesus Database with the example of S-u-pper and Eucharist:
        faithfutures.o-rg/JDB/jdb016.html
        13. Josephus on Jesus by Paul Maier:
        mtio.com/articles/bis-sar24.htm
        13. http://www.textweek.com/mtlk/jesus.htmm- Historical Jesus Studies
        14. The Greek New Testament: laparola.net/greco/
        15. D-iseases in the Bible:
        http://books.google.com/books/about/The_d-iseases_of_the_Bible.html?id=C1YZAAAAYAAJ

        16. Religion on Line (6000 articles on the history of religion, churches, theologies,
        theologians, ethics, etc.
        religion-online.o-rg/

         17. The New Testament Gateway – Internet NT ntgateway.com/
        18. Writing the New Testament- e-xisting copies, o-ral tradition etc.
        ntgateway.com/
        19. JD Crossan's c-onclusions about the a-uthencity of most of the NT based on the above plus the c-onclusions of other NT e-xege-tes in the last 200 years:
        http://wiki.faithfutures.o-rg/index.p-hp?t-itle=Crossan_Inventory
        20. Early Jewish Writings- Josephus and his books by t-itle with the complete translated work in English :earlyjewishwritings.com/josephus.html
        21. Luke and Josephus- was there a c-onnection?
        in-fidels.o-rg/library/modern/richard_carrier/lukeandjosephus.html
        22. NT and beyond time line:
        pbs.o-rg/empires/pe-terandpaul/history/timeline/
        23. St. Paul's Time line with discussion of important events:
        harvardhouse.com/prophetictech/new/pauls_life.htm
        24. See http://www.amazon.com for a list of JD Crossan's books and those of the other Jesus Seminarians: Reviews of said books are included and selected pages can now be viewed on Amazon. Some books can be found on-line at Google Books.
        25. Father Edward Schillebeeckx's words of wisdom as found in his books.
        27. The books of the following : Professors Gerd Ludemann, Marcus Borg, Paula Fredriksen, Elaine Pagels, Karen Armstrong and Bishop NT Wright.
        28. Father Raymond Brown's An Introduction to the New Testament, Doubleday, NY, 1977, 878 pages, with Nihil obstat and Imprimatur.
        29. Luke Timothy Johnson's book The Real Jesus

        August 1, 2013 at 11:09 am |
  2. FG

    I think if there was any mis-interpretation of the Pope's comments, the Pope himself would make the statement clearer. He doesn't need someone to interpret for him.

    Maybe Cardinal Dolan regrets not being the chosen one?

    August 1, 2013 at 7:52 am |
  3. Plato

    Excommunicate this clown. He probably fondled boys when he was the pastor of a local parish.

    August 1, 2013 at 7:30 am |
  4. John Tucker

    Who is this person that speaks for God AND the Pope in his own church?

    August 1, 2013 at 5:38 am |
  5. NooYawkah

    Let me guess. It was Angel Dust. HA! Good one, NooYawkah. High five!

    August 1, 2013 at 5:27 am |
  6. Bootyfunk

    yes, the pope wasn't in his right mind...
    we don't want you to think he was being tolerant or anything.

    August 1, 2013 at 4:08 am |
  7. brian

    Much ado about nothing.

    August 1, 2013 at 2:55 am |
  8. Jim Bob Jones

    How is what the Pope said any different than what is in the Catechism of the Catholic Church? How is Dolan's reiteration of what is part of standard Church teaching considered contrary to what the Pope said? How is this news?

    It's not.

    August 1, 2013 at 2:18 am |
  9. Alabama Joe

    It is so sad that the post-eminence Mr. Dolan would dare to put his own spin on the Pope's words. He is no better than his interpretation of the media spin on the same words. As with most bishops and cardinals, they are just preaching to an empty choir and have no empathy for the poor souls of the world. They only seek to justify their own lofty positions and convince everyone that their way is the only way to achieve grace and forgiveness of sins.

    August 1, 2013 at 2:13 am |
    • ppony

      I agree Alabama Joe. I used to really like Mr. Dolan, but it seems like he and the like clergy simply aren't getting WHY this Pope is fast becoming one of the most loved in history. I do NOT like Dolan putting that spin on what Francis said. Who is HE to interpret any more than the rest of us. I think the clergy are missing the point of this Pope. He's FINALLY walking the walk and embodying the love Jesus taught. It's no wonder Christians are reviled by many these days, they learned from clergy how much "better" they are than everyone else and thusly have lost what Jesus was. I hope this Pope continues to shake things up!!!

      August 1, 2013 at 11:57 am |
  10. piesha

    Religion is the politics of faith. Dolan, the Pope, they are politicians. Their sad, tired, destructive ideas are on the way out. Men like Dolan have the face of Satan. He knows all the answers, he's seen the videos, nothing is uncertain with him. He is a liar and a bully.

    August 1, 2013 at 2:09 am |
  11. Tracy

    Nothing to see here people....move along....move along....

    August 1, 2013 at 1:47 am |
  12. Harry

    Timothy Dolan is a joke. He wants to be pope but he didn't get it. The pope was high and mis-spoke. Give me a break.

    August 1, 2013 at 1:41 am |
    • Jim Bob Jones

      Dolan didn't say the Pope misspoke. He just reiterated what the Church has taught regarding gay folks for decades. Well-catechized Catholics know this and it's not news to them. The media blew this WAY up, because they are neither informed nor neutral in their reporting. They created a spin so we'd all be talking about it . . . even if the discussion is about an inaccuracy.

      August 1, 2013 at 1:49 am |
  13. Exceptional Joe

    And once again the Church is Re-Writing the Bible so that people stop pointing out how bigoted and inaccurate the useless 2000 year old book, actually is.

    August 1, 2013 at 1:31 am |
    • Jim Bob Jones

      Can you explain the "rewriting" comment?

      August 1, 2013 at 1:32 am |
  14. AnnieMee

    I do appreciate Bishop Dolan's comments. He is a pleasant, clear communicator. I've noticed that the News Media would love to take the Pope's comments and run with them... which it seems is exactly what they did do. As Bishop Dolan said, it's about mercy and caring. (Not about a change in policy). It's refreshing that Pope Francis has such a kind heart.

    August 1, 2013 at 1:30 am |
  15. Jim Bob Jones

    @LinCA

    You said, "It is just as reasonable to believe in gods as it is to believe in the Tooth Fairy. The cosmological argument is bunk. You are still free to hold those beliefs, but they are yours alone."

    No. We are talking about causality, not random fiction. Can you present some evidence to support your assertion that the cosmological argument is bunk? It does not conflict with our understanding of the natural world.

    You said, "You implied that it is acceptable to discriminate against gays based on your delusion. It isn't."

    No. You jumped to that conclusion. The only thing you know for sure is that you have no idea what I think about gay people.

    You said, "Infantile beliefs deserve no respect. I'll respect your right to hold them, though. Fair enough?"

    Degrading comments do not strengthen your argument.

    August 1, 2013 at 1:00 am |
    • LinCA

      @Jim Bob Jones

      You said, "No. We are talking about causality, not random fiction. Can you present some evidence to support your assertion that the cosmological argument is bunk? It does not conflict with our understanding of the natural world."
      The argument as a claim for the existence of a god falls apart as it doesn't establish that there is such a creature. It is also not a given that there must have been a cause, external to the universe.

      You said, "No. You jumped to that conclusion. The only thing you know for sure is that you have no idea what I think about gay people."
      You were supporting Dolan's position and talking about restricting behavior. It was abundantly clear what you were advocating.

      You said, "Degrading comments do not strengthen your argument."
      If you don't want your beliefs ridiculed, you shouldn't hold ridiculous beliefs, or at least not display them publicly.

      August 1, 2013 at 1:13 am |
      • Jim Bob Jones

        @LinCA

        Whatever created the universe is God. The creator, by definition, is the most powerful "thing" in existence. And with regard to causality, that is the basis for the argument. As I mentioned before, if something is able to spontaneously come into existence out of nothing, wouldn't we see that in the everyday world? Wouldn't there be empirical evidence of this happening?

        Again, regarding what I believe about gay people, you don't know. You are jumping to a conclusion based on a general stereotype about Catholics or those who support Dolan. This point really isn't worth "arguing," because your argument is based on a guess.

        Again, you are missing the point. Making fun of my beliefs does not lend any credence to your argument. You keep saying insulting things as if you are arguing a legitimate point, but you are not supporting or strengthening your argument. You're just speaking in circles.

        August 1, 2013 at 1:29 am |
        • LinCA

          @Jim Bob Jones

          You said, "Whatever created the universe is God. The creator, by definition, is the most powerful "thing" in existence."
          So, you're just a deist then? Not tied to a christan god, or any of the specific gods invented by man?

          You said, "As I mentioned before, if something is able to spontaneously come into existence out of nothing, wouldn't we see that in the everyday world? Wouldn't there be empirical evidence of this happening?"
          We do. Not on a scale that humans can easily observe, but at a quantum level, matter, energy and even space comes from nothing. Most disappear again within the Planck time, some don't.

          You said, "Again, regarding what I believe about gay people, you don't know. You are jumping to a conclusion based on a general stereotype about Catholics or those who support Dolan."
          No, it was based on your implied support for Dolan's bigotry against gays. Dolan's bigotry is based on his catholicism.

          You said, "This point really isn't worth "arguing," because your argument is based on a guess."
          So you support equal rights for gays and you abhor discrimination based on sexual orientation?

          You said, "Making fun of my beliefs does not lend any credence to your argument."
          Your argument, if it is based on a belief in a god such as the christian one, is irrational, because a belief in such a creature is irrational.

          You said, "You keep saying insulting things as if you are arguing a legitimate point, but you are not supporting or strengthening your argument."
          How would you "discuss" anything with someone who believes in the Tooth Fairy and judges others based on that belief?

          August 1, 2013 at 2:17 am |
    • Observer

      Jim Bob Jones,

      Even if it turns out that there was some form of intelligent design, that certainly doesn't prove God exists. The universe could have been created by Zeus or a committee of zombies or the Three Stooges or an infinite number of other possibilities.

      August 1, 2013 at 1:16 am |
      • Jim Bob Jones

        @Observer

        You said, "Even if it turns out that there was some form of intelligent design, that certainly doesn't prove God exists. The universe could have been created by Zeus or a committee of zombies or the Three Stooges or an infinite number of other possibilities."

        Actually, it does. Whatever created the universe is God.

        August 1, 2013 at 1:21 am |
        • Observer

          Jim Bob Jones,

          You have ZERO proof. As I said, there are an infinite number of possibilities IF there actually was intelligent design. Wishful thinking doesn't make any PROOF.

          August 1, 2013 at 1:50 am |
        • Jim Bob Jones

          @Observer

          No, there are not an infinite number of possibilities. There is one possibility. An all-powerful, intelligent consciousness that has the power to create from nothing. Last time I checked, a committee of zombies couldn't do that nor could the three stooges.

          August 1, 2013 at 1:53 am |
        • Observer

          Jim Bob Jones

          @Observer

          "last time I checked, a committee of zombies couldn't do that nor could the three stooges."

          And what is your proof that they don't exist? Same for Zeus.

          This should be interesting since there is FAR more proof that the Three Stooges existed than that God exists..

          August 1, 2013 at 1:56 am |
        • Jim Bob Jones

          @Observer

          We are not talking about whether or not zombies or Zeus or the three stooges exist. We are talking about what is capable of creating the everything out of nothing. There is no empirical evidence to suggest any of the aforementioned could do that.

          Whatever the creator is, it has to be unbound by space and time, infinite and all powerful. The creator, whatever it is, is God.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:09 am |
        • Colin

          Jim Bob Jones. Why is it that the Universe could not have either been eternal and never created or have arisen bya non-divine cause?

          Second, even if you assume some divine being did create all 400,000,000,000 known galaxies, each with an average of 100,000,000,000 stars and planets, how do you get from there to that creator being anything like the Judeo Christian God and to humans surviving their own physical deaths? Join those dots for me.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:16 am |
        • Observer

          Jim Bob Jones,

          That Creator might be the "God" that Albert Einstein thought of. Or maybe the God that Thomas Jefferson thought of. There is no proof that it's the same "God" that you imagine.

          You have offered ZERO proof that the universe wasn't the work of Zeus or a committee of zombies or the Three Stooges. You can't prove the negative just like atheists can't prove the negative about God. That's why you need to offer some POSITIVE proof which you can't do.
          .

          August 1, 2013 at 2:18 am |
        • Jim Bob Jones

          @Colin
          You asked, "Why is it that the Universe could not have either been eternal and never created or have arisen bya non-divine cause?" – Kalām cosmological argument (There's a good YouTube video that can explain it much more concisely than me typing out the answer.)

          You said, "Second, even if you assume some divine being did create all 400,000,000,000 known galaxies, each with an average of 100,000,000,000 stars and planets, how do you get from there to that creator being anything like the Judeo Christian God and to humans surviving their own physical deaths? Join those dots for me."

          I'm not sure I understand your question, but I'll give it a shot. I do believe that God created everything and it is no leap for me to believe God is the God I know. Here's the basic reason: I believe God has revealed himself to humanity in ways we can understand. (Biblically, through the natural world, etc . . . ) I believe that God has given us as much understanding of Him as we are able to grasp at this point in time. I also believe that when we finally go to heaven, we will understand everything with absolute truth and clarity. My understanding of God is limited, because I am human. Whatever God is, I only have a sliver of understanding about Him.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:26 am |
        • Observer

          Jim Bob Jones,

          Everyone is certainly free to have their own BELIEFS, but too often those beliefs result in hypocrites using them to deny others equal rights. The hypocritical putting down of gays is a prime example.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:31 am |
        • Jim Bob Jones

          @Observer

          You said: "That Creator might be the "God" that Albert Einstein thought of. Or maybe the God that Thomas Jefferson thought of. There is no proof that it's the same "God" that you imagine."

          I AGREE. That doesn't matter, though. My IDEA of what God is isn't the point.

          You said, "You have offered ZERO proof that the universe wasn't the work of Zeus or a committee of zombies or the Three Stooges. You can't prove the negative just like atheists can't prove the negative about God. That's why you need to offer some POSITIVE proof which you can't do."

          You missed the point. I am saying that it is reasonable to believe in God, because of the following:

          1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

          2. The universe began to exist.

          3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

          I am not telling you WHO God is. I'm saying it is not unreasonable to believe in God, because science supports the premises and the conclusion.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:32 am |
        • Observer

          "1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

          2. The universe began to exist.

          3. Therefore, the universe has a cause."

          So:

          If God exists, he must have a creator/cause. So who created God?

          August 1, 2013 at 2:38 am |
        • Jim Bob Jones

          @Observer

          YOU SAID:
          "1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

          2. The universe began to exist.

          3. Therefore, the universe has a cause."

          So:

          If God exists, he must have a creator/cause. So who created God?

          As I have mentioned before in other posts and you may have missed it . . . based on the argument above, the creator or cause would have to be uncaused, eternal, changeless, timeless, and immaterial. Moreover, it would have to be a personal agent who freely elects to create an effect in time.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:53 am |
        • Just the Facts Ma'am...

          " the creator or cause would have to be uncaused, eternal, changeless, timeless, and immaterial." If God can be eternal, then so could the universe itself.

          "Whatever created the universe is God." Not if the universe has always existed in some form or another, it's energy changing from matter to dark matter in an endless mobius strip of existence.

          "Moreover, it would have to be a personal agent who freely elects to create an effect in time." That is a giant leap of illogical and is pure opinion with no basis in reality.

          If you use logic to claim that the complex universe must have been created by a more complex being then you MUST keep using the same logic when you arrive at your conclusion of "God did it" because for God to do it he must by definition be more complex than us and if our complexity somehow proved Gods existence then his complexity should prove to you that God also has a creator, and that creator has a creator. You cannot attempt to use reason and logic to get you half way there and then abandon both when they become inconvenient.

          August 1, 2013 at 3:47 am |
      • Colin

        I have heard the argument before and it begs the question. It is pregnant with contradictory reasoning. It says, essentially, everything must have a cause and then declares that god did not have a cause. That makes god an unnecessary add on. Why not just say the Universe never had a cause.

        You said "I do believe that God created everything and it is no leap for me to believe God is the God I know."

        You must accept that that is an assumption on your part driven by the faith you have. A Hindu, Buddhist or Muslim can, with equal validity, leap to their own particular god.

        So we are left in the situation where there is no reason to jump to a god in the first palce and that attributing to that god the personalities our faith dictates is nothing more than an expression of our culture. Ever wondered why God is so obsessed with Greco-Roman Jews and never mentioned the rest of the 200 million people (Australian Aboriginals, Sub-Saharan Africans, Amero-Indians etc.) then alive? Did God make the Jews or did the Jews make God?

        August 1, 2013 at 2:35 am |
        • Jim Bob Jones

          @Collin

          There have been many theories suggesting a universe that has existed without beginning, but those theories have not stood up with the test of time and empirical evidence.

          Theories like Hawking's model are based more on the imaginary than the empirical. We can't even see evidence to support it, yet we give it more credence than a more elegant model like the Kalam Cosmological model.

          Who I believe God to be, is not part of the argument. Who I believe God to be is irrelevant and may turn out to be different than my current understanding or perception. Maybe the Muslim's are right, maybe the Jews, maybe Hindis . . . it is likely we are all wrong. But, again, THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE AT HAND.

          August 1, 2013 at 2:47 am |
        • Colin

          You said "There have been many theories suggesting a universe that has existed without beginning, but those theories have not stood up with the test of time and empirical evidence." Why not? What empiracle evidence refutes the idea of an eternal and/or non-divine Universe?

          You said "Theories like Hawking's model are based more on the imaginary than the empirical. We can't even see evidence to support it, yet we give it more credence than a more elegant model like the Kalam Cosmological model."

          Not so. You have no evidence of a divinely inspired Universe, but just assumed it based on contradictory logic. On the other hand, the law of the conservation of mass-energy strongly suggests there was no start to the Universe. Finally, there is nothing "elegant" about the the Kalam Cosmological model, it is flawed – as I pointed out.

          You said, "Who I believe God to be is irrelevant and may turn out to be different than my current understanding or perception. Maybe the Muslim's are right, maybe the Jews, maybe Hindis . . . it is likely we are all wrong. But, again, THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE AT HAND."

          Yes, the validity of your leap of faith is the very thing we are discussing.

          As to your comment Maybe the Muslim's are right, maybe the Jews, maybe Hindis . . . it is likely we are all wrong."

          I guess you are an agnostic then? One cannot accept that all culture's gods have equal validity and that they may all be wrong but then contradict oneself and say only their god is the real one.

          August 1, 2013 at 3:00 am |
        • FKell

          Actually, the Muslims, Jews, and Christians all believe in the same God. They just believe He has done different things and laid down different laws to them. All of them will trace their God back to the God of Abraham. And they have been killing each other ever since due to their different interpretations...

          August 1, 2013 at 3:30 am |
  16. KellyinBoston

    This is interesting–Does Dolan get to tell Pope Francis what he MEANT when Pope Francis made public comments? Is Dolan the Wizard of Oz? He's big enough for the role (maybe not smart enough).

    August 1, 2013 at 12:58 am |
    • Jim Bob Jones

      To be fair, any informed Catholic could have said the same things that Dolan did. It's standard teaching. It's part of the Catechism. What the Pope said does not contradict the teachings of the Church.

      August 1, 2013 at 1:03 am |
    • Kanja

      Just as the Pope dosen't get to define what Jesus said when he spoke his message, seems like he's contradicting not only the verses of the new testament but his own words.

      August 1, 2013 at 2:01 am |
  17. Steve

    Soon ALL ( All but the one true faith! ) of this worlds religions will be destroyed by the "Kings" ( political establishment ) of the earth! God will put this into their hearts to do so! Rev 17: 16 & 17
    So What should anyone associated w the church do???
    The answer is provided w an invitation, found at Revelation 18:4.... GET OUT OF HER!!!!

    August 1, 2013 at 12:49 am |
    • Stevie Yay

      Get out of her what????

      August 1, 2013 at 12:55 am |
      • Aaron

        Her butt?

        August 1, 2013 at 7:54 am |
    • Truth Prevails :-)

      Do you fail to comprehend how horrible that makes your god appear? Although most (5 billion people) are not worried and until you can provide evidence that your god said anything or even existed without using the bible, there is not reason to worry.

      August 1, 2013 at 7:58 am |
  18. Michael

    There's nothing as bitter as a nelly old queen who didn't get the crown.

    August 1, 2013 at 12:43 am |
    • joey

      lol

      August 1, 2013 at 8:04 am |
  19. Tc

    So many comments from people without any education on religion, Catholicism, God, or Christianity. The Pope's words are for all people, but have an impact on believers who care about these issues. If you don't like the Pope, or you think God is the tooth fairy, why does your inner self find it relevant to defend your own worthless doctrine. Nobody cares that you're an atheist, get over it. Not believing in something is as irrelevant as convincing others to believe. And for non Catholic Christians, the Pope scares you because he is part of a tradition and history that dates back to the death of Jesus. Your Protestant offspring of the true Christian church is 500 years old, with new denominations opening up daily. And finally, the Pope has a huge influence to the world, not just the little world you call home and pretend millions of other suffering people are irrelevant.

    August 1, 2013 at 12:40 am |
  20. fumota68

    pope was high on crack. or he'll come out pretty soon, whatever he says won't change the truth, he is a nobody

    August 1, 2013 at 12:27 am |
    • M.R.

      Livered mollusks. Attack!

      August 1, 2013 at 12:34 am |
    • Phelix Unger

      To you he may be a nobody, as you may be to others, but when he speaks a billion plus listen. Francis named himself after another Francis and will try and do good works, perhaps not done in centuries. I was born and raised a catholic. A time came when I didn't think a god would need others to state his business, I mean isn't he or she a god. I may have changed the way I see the world, and no longer follow others over a cliff like lemmings, but I still respect a person right to have faith. To do less would be a step backwards for the world we live in, there is already enough hatred in the world without me adding to it.

      August 1, 2013 at 12:43 am |
    • Phelix Unger

      To you he may be a nobody, as you may be to others, but when he speaks a billion plus listen. Francis named himself after another Francis and will try and do good works, perhaps not done in centuries. I was born and raised a catholic. A time came when I didn't think a god would need others to state his business, I mean isn't he or she a god. I may have changed the way I see the world, and no longer follow others over a cliff like lemmings, but I still respect a person right to have faith. To do less would be a step backwards for the world we live in, there is already enough hatred in the world without me adding to it.

      August 1, 2013 at 12:43 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.