Easter celebration A.D. 2022 soft porn star sings for Pope Francis

[Jayne]

He is a kid parroting the "wisdom" of the world, that gender is a choice, fluid and irrelevant because "love is love".   It is all evil nonsense and very well may be demonic in origin.  The fact that he was considered an ideal performer for a Vatican youth event pretty much sums up what is wrong with Rome.  It is disturbing that the organizers had such poor judgment.

None of this means that Blanco has a homosexual orientation or relationships or is a "soft porn star" or should be described as such.  In order to write clearly and accurately one needs to use terms with the proper meanings, not throw words around to get emotional reactions.  I'm not saying Blanco or the organizers did something right.  I'm saying the article in the OP was poor journalism. 

To answer the question, I do not listen to pop music or endorse it.  There is nothing that I wrote that suggests that I would.  You seem to like jumping to conclusions about people. 

And I don't think you understand the agenda of the church allowing themselves to be infiltrated by secular influences.

I don't think you understand anything that I have written in this thread.

[josh987654321]

I am sure that virtually everyone on this forum, including myself, agrees with that.  But "Vatican has Inappropriate Secular Musician at Youth Event"  is not an exciting enough headline.  Who would read that?

I agree.

I also don't agree with sensational headlines at the expense of accuracy. As for this headline, I don't think it's entirely inaccurate considering a lot of secular pop music leans that way anyway whether they know it or not IMO.

God Bless

[Jayne]

I am sure that virtually everyone on this forum, including myself, agrees with that.  But "Vatican has Inappropriate Secular Musician at Youth Event"  is not an exciting enough headline.  Who would read that?

I agree.

I also don't agree with sensational headlines at the expense of accuracy. As for this headline, I don't think it's entirely inaccurate considering a lot of secular pop music leans that way anyway whether they know it or not IMO.

Secular pop music is typically sexualized to point where there is a fine line between it and soft porn.  That is a perfectly reasonably point to make and something that people should become aware of.  But it is misleading to use the term "soft porn star" interchangeably with "secular pop musician".  They have different connotations and implications. 

I'm glad that I found the Life Site News article on this subject.  It did not sacrifice accuracy or good journalism, but still managed to convey the immorality involved and the wrongness of the situation.

[Michael Wilson]

Andy:

My post is directed at Catholic Church.

This is all wrong; the Catholic Church is the immaculate bride of Christ, "without spot or wrinkle". However here on earth the Church is composed of saints and sinners. If we criticize the sinful or scandalous actions of her members, we do not attribute those actions to the Church or her teachings, but to the failure of those members to live up to those teachings.

[andy]

Andy:

My post is directed at Catholic Church.

This is all wrong; the Catholic Church is the immaculate bride of Christ, "without spot or wrinkle". However here on earth the Church is composed of saints and sinners. If we criticize the sinful or scandalous actions of her members, we do not attribute those actions to the Church or her teachings, but to the failure of those members to live up to those teachings.

From the catechism:

Code Select Expand


Q. What is the Catholic Church?
A. The Catholic Church is the Union or Congregation of all the baptized who, still living
on earth, profess the same Faith and the same Law of Jesus Christ, participate in the same
Sacraments, and obey their lawful Pastors, particularly the Roman Pontiff


[Michael Wilson]

Andy,
your response is not to the point. A Catholic cannot criticize the Catholic Church.

[andy]

Andy,
your response is not to the point. A Catholic cannot criticize the Catholic Church.

It seems to me that you put someone else's words in my mouth a bit. My initial "enjoy" comment was somewhat sarcastic troubling emotion directed at the Church. Where else I can go with my distress if not to the Church? I do not even have words to describe it let alone criticize in any meaningful way. Emotions are morally neutral.

Yes, per definition from the catechism, the Church is the Union. And yes, that Union in itself is immaculate. Do you endorse the fact that the highest ranks of Church hierarchy actively and publicly mock that Union on the levels never seen before?

[Michael Wilson]

Andy, in reference to "putting someone else's words in my (your) mouth"

Jayne,
First of all, I do not attempt to judge this poor guy here at all. But do yourself a favor and google images for "Mahmood Blanco" before posting things like that.
My post is directed at Catholic Church.

So those are your words.

Yes, per definition from the catechism, the Church is the Union. And yes, that Union in itself is immaculate. Do you endorse the fact that the highest ranks of Church hierarchy actively and publicly mock that Union on the levels never seen before?

Of course not; I agree that there is some very distressing things happening in the Church at the very highest levels. Your criticisms nonetheless should be directed not "at the Church"; but at members of the Church  whose words and actions are bringing harm to souls. In other words, those who are acting against the Church and her mission i.e. The sanctification and salvation of souls. The "Judases" of our day have to be denounced and condemned; not "the Church".

[andy]

Where did I write "I criticize Catholic Church"? Or what in this thread would be perceived as a criticism?

By the way, do you consider Jorge Mario Bergoglio a catholic, or a member of that Union?

[Michael Wilson]

Where did I write "I criticize Catholic Church"? Or what in this thread would be perceived as a criticism?

By the way, do you consider Jorge Mario Bergoglio a catholic, or a member of that Union?

The Title of this thread was questioned as to its appropriateness by another poster; you then responded with "my post is directed at Catholic Church".
re. "Jeorge Begoglio member of Catholic Church"? No.

[andy]

Where did I write "I criticize Catholic Church"? Or what in this thread would be perceived as a criticism?

The Title of this thread was questioned as to its appropriateness by another poster; you then responded with "my post is directed at Catholic Church".

The subject just states the fact. I explained my motivation already.

[andy]

do you consider Jorge Mario Bergoglio a catholic, or a member of that Union?

"Jeorge Begoglio member of Catholic Church"? No.

Who gave you the authority to decide if s specific person is member of the Union, it is of the Catholic Church?

[Jayne]

do you consider Jorge Mario Bergoglio a catholic, or a member of that Union?

"Jeorge Begoglio member of Catholic Church"? No.

Who gave you the authority to decide if s specific person is member of the Union, it is of the Catholic Church?

If you don't think that people have the authority to form opinions on this matter then you should not ask people for their opinions on it.  Was it some sort of trick question?

[Michael Wilson]

Andy,

The subject just states the fact. I explained my motivation already.

Your motivations I am certain are excellent. I just don't understand how statement "my post is directed at Catholic Church"
squares with your criticism of Pope Francis hosting a "soft porn star.."?
The next sequence is just as puzzling:
Q.

By the way, do you consider Jorge Mario Bergoglio a catholic, or a member of that Union?

R."No"

Who gave you the authority to decide if s specific person is member of the Union, it is of the Catholic Church?

????
It isn't my consideration of Pope Francis' status in the Catholic Church that is at issue here; rather your criticism of his hosting a performance by a singer of notorious immoral behavior. So why are you trying to "turn the tables"?

[andy]

Andy,

The subject just states the fact. I explained my motivation already.

Your motivations I am certain are excellent. I just don't understand how statement "my post is directed at Catholic Church"
squares with your criticism of Pope Francis hosting a "soft porn star.."?
The next sequence is just as puzzling:
Q.

By the way, do you consider Jorge Mario Bergoglio a catholic, or a member of that Union?

R."No"

Who gave you the authority to decide if s specific person is member of the Union, it is of the Catholic Church?

????
It isn't my consideration of Pope Francis' status in the Catholic Church that is at issue here; rather your criticism of his hosting a performance by a singer of notorious immoral behavior. So why are you trying to "turn the tables"?

We do not know if His Holiness Pope Francis was aware of the guest. Technically speaking.

You effectively excommunicated (in your mind) Jeorge Begoglio from the Union while having neither authority nor jurisdiction to do so.

I am not trying to turn tables in the discussion. It just struck me the same error of personalism in both cases leads to weird conclusions.