This interview was done by the Jesuit highest official magazine in Rome. The equivalent to that in America is the Jesuit magazine - "America". In this link they publish the full interview translated into English. ============================================================================================================== http://www.americamagazine.org/pope-interview I mention to Pope Francis that there are Christians who live in situations that are irregular for the church or in complex situations that represent open wounds. I mention the divorced and remarried, same-sex couples and other difficult situations. What kind of pastoral work can we do in these cases? What kinds of tools can we use? “We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person. A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. “A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. ============================================= He spins a simple question on morals "do you approve of homosexuality" - dealing with sin - not "Joe the homosexual" -- into the notion that to condemn sin is to declare that Joe is not a person or that Joe should not exist. Where is he going with this nonsense? Who is supposed to fall for that shell game? Why is he even going down that road given that his church is not supposed to approve of that sin?