Based on various news reports the Vatican is claiming that the Pope’s meeting with Kim Davis was more of a meet and greet than any affirmation of support for her position or actions. It is fascinating that with as much effort as was put into making this a positive, non-divisive visit to the US that someone in the Vatican bureaucracy would actually have the balls to box the Pope in like this.
Who’s getting whacked for setting this up?
I’ve been wondering the same. More specifically, whether the nunciature was actually snookered by some anti-LGBT operative, a right wing politician perhaps. Any clues who was the connection between the nunciature and Davis’s people? Or any indication there was nobody between them and the nunciature thought this up on their own?
Hey astro, sorry, I thought I was aware enough of the news, and when I reread my response I realized I should have read your links. Thanks for them. There is stuff specifically very on point (as of course you would know).
In the first link it sounds more like Davis’s people (or at least Staver, the lawyer) started it:
Staver said Vatican officials reached out to his offices before the pope landed in the United States and confirmed the meeting on Wednesday evening. […] “By that point, he had already [agreed to meet] with Kim Davis,” Staver said.
But in the second link there are really clear statements from the people directly involved that completely contradict each other:
“This was a private meeting initiated by the Vatican,” Mr. Staver said. “My contacts were Vatican officials in the United States. And I was informed the request came directly from the pontiff.” […] “Who brought her in? The nuncio,” said Father Rosica, who is working with the Vatican’s media office in advance of a major meeting of bishops that begins this weekend. “The Nunciature was able to bring in donors, benefactors.”
So, there’s a plot in here somewhere, and the story of who punked the Pope, and perhaps of the cover up, is rapidly unfolding.
(my bolding)
Funnily enough, if they were to read a Bible, they might get a quite similar feeling…
I must be missing something here. Why is this a “fiasco”? The Pope meets with all sorts of people, who he agrees with and disagrees with, without it having to be conidsered either an endorsement or a condemnation.
Because the Davis consort started pushing the story immediately as if it were the Pope giving her his blessing to stay strong, and keep up the good fight.
To be honest, I don’t consider being one in a group of 20 that’s ushered into a room where the pontiff is where everyone says “hello” to him and he returns a friendly greeting and maybe a sentence or two of inspiring words before either the Pope or the group is ushered out anywhere in the same neighborhood as a “private audience with the Pope.”
That’s because you’re not a lawyer or County Clerk with an agenda.
Are we sure the pope himself is even aware of the controversy? Maybe it’s all being handled by his underlings without them informing him of anything.
Yes, but why should anyone in the Vatican care about what “the Davis consort” says, as long as the neither the Pope nor anyone who speaks for him said it? I agree with Tim R. Mortiss in not seeing any fiasco or need for punishment.
Find the guilty party and send them to minister to ebola patients in West Africa. Then issue a Papal Bull condemning Davis and her ilk as agents of chaos and disorder. Also the AntiChrist.
Few people get an audience with the Pope so calling it a “meet and greet” is a bit of a misnomer. Seeing her was not an accident and he just tossed out a priest for having a boyfriend so the line in the sand didn’t move much if any.
She was one of several dozen people there to briefly meet him before he left. It literally was a meet and greet.
This article points the finger toward Archbishop Carlo Vigano.
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-real-story-behind-the-1269547693457462.html
The statement Friday (also linked to in my link above) was approved by the Pope.
And the statement was immediately followed by sacking a gay priest. Not for sexually abusing children mind you but for having a boyfriend. So… You can take his words to the bank or his deeds. Your choice. Personally I didn’t see any stripes changing last week.
Would the priest be allowed to have a girlfriend? Isn’t having sexual domestic partner a firing offense period in the Roman Catholic Church unless it’s the rare scenario where a Priest became ordained after he had a family?
Heck, I met with the Pope myself. It was John Paul II, in 2000, in St. Peter’s Square, and I was one of about nine thousand people in attendance at his weekly address. But I would hardly claim that it amounted to Il Pappa endorsing any of my personal perversions.
Probably not considering there are married priests. Don’t know. Really don’t care. Just pointing out the obvious. If someone has an audience with the Pope it’s not an accident.
Davis did not have an “audience” with the Pope, any more than my sister did with John Paul II twenty years ago when, during a U.N. concert at which my then-pregnant sister conducted a choir, he actually blessed her belly. (We’re Jewish, btw.) There were plenty of others in that line, just as Davis was among a batch of others who were in the room, shook hands, and were given rosaries as parting gifts.
(My sister got the better of the deals, IMHO; my now-19-year-old niece is definitely a blessing! 
And since Davis is, of course, the type of Christian who normally considers Catholics “idol-worshippers” – although her parents are Catholics – I believe she gave away her icky Pope-tainted rosary to them. PopeSwag isn’t worth keeping, but lying about the extent of her meeting w/him is totally kosher.)
Meanwhile, according to the Vatican, the only person who actually had an official audience with the Pope was one of Francis’s former students… and the student’s same-sex partner of 19 years.
So I’d say Francis’s obvious openness toward this student (who says the Pope’s never given him a moment’s grief over his being gay) speaks much more loudly than kicking out a supposed-to-be-celibate priest, no matter whom the guy was shtupping.
There’s an interesting article in Esquire that also points to Vigano. Seems there are still Pope Benedict loyalists who are not happy with this new Pope:
And this is where Vigano comes in.
The man is a real player within the institutional church. He first came to prominence as a whistleblower during one of the several investigations of the Vatican Bank, which may be what got him exiled to this godless Republic in the first place.
Despite that fact, Vigano is well-known to be a Ratzinger loyalist and he always has been a cultural conservative, particularly on the issue of marriage equality. In April, in a move that was unprecedented, Vigano got involved with an anti-marriage equality march in Washington sponsored by the National Association For Marriage. (And, mirabile dictu, as we say around Castel Gandolfo at happy hour, one of the speakers at this rally was Mat Staver, who happens now to be Kim Davis’s lawyer.)
In short, Vigano, a Ratzinger loyalist, who has been conspicuous and publicly involved in the same cause as Kim Davis and her legal team, arranges a meeting with Davis that the legal team uses to its great public advantage.
Because they are currently on a rather big PR kick. And because it’s very possible that the person who did it did it intentionally out of dislike of the Pope’s new policies, knowing it would cause problems.
This isn’t quite the same as meeting 9000 people, BTW. She was specifically invited, and was 1 of 20 deemed special enough to warrant a meeting.
Really, the meeting was more of a PR thing itself.