Did Pope Francis Allow Priests to Bless Same-Sex Relationships?

[TrainedLogosmotion]

 

[budoslavic]

Full text

@rightscholar: I know this new declaration may seem like crumbs from the table for many gay Catholics, but despite all its qualifications and restrictions this document—which is beautifully written, btw—represents the Church opening its arms to same-sex couples.
...
@tylerrowley: It actually does the exact opposite. It reaffirms for the 1,000th time that “same sex couples” are in a state of sin, can never be a “couple” and that marriage will always be one man+one woman. The pro-sodomy lobby knows that this was a huge defeat for their anti-Catholic agenda.
...
@rightscholar: The Church did not need to publish an exquisitely nuanced declaration in order to maintain the status quo. The declaration represents a modest but very real pastoral change that reflects a larger shift in the understanding of the Church regarding homosexuality and gay couples.
...
@SteveSkojec: When @rightscholar and I are on the exact same page making the exact same assessment, you can take that convergence to the bank.

For two people who disagree as much as we do to see this the same way, parallax error becomes a non-issue.
....
@Joeinblack: Exactly

The Holy Father and +Fernandez put priests in an impossible position.

I’ve talked to three or four clergy today who already were fielding calls from couples in irregular marriages and/or gay couples to set up their blessing.

So, we end up being called reactionary conservatives, homophobes, hateful priests or disobedient to the holy father. Whatever label they use for us, we become the reason they no longer practice the Faith.

We become the story they tell people about that bad priest.

All because Rome decided to do something that isn’t doing something that is really doing something.

Merry Christmas, faithful priests.

 

[budoslavic]

The Gay Persecution of Pastors Has Begun. It Will Only Get Worse, Thanks to Pope Francis​

Well, that was quick. I wrote some 48 hours ago that Pope Francis had intentionally opened the floodgates of abuse against faithful Catholics — especially pastors — with the Vatican’s recent document directing priests to bless homosexual relationships in church. (Yes, the document was cleverly phrased, with just enough wiggle room to permit Catholic Scientologists to hypnotize themselves into thinking that the pope had not betrayed us. But nobody’s really fooled.)

And lo and behold, it’s already happening. No, not yet the tsunami of litigation targeting faithful priests who refuse to sprinkle holy water on sodomy. Those briefs are already being drawn up, however, in the white shoe law firms that serve the LGBTQMYNAMEISLEGION juggernaut. They will appear in due time, against carefully targeted clergy, with the same strategic direction as the suits against Christian bakers and wedding planners. And the bishops in charge of those priests will be given the option of firing those priests — kicking them to the curb with no salary, no pension, no place to live — as the price of dodging those lawsuits. Thus Francis the Machiavellian can use the shock troops of Sodom to purge the Church.

Outsourcing Persecution to the Public
But we aren’t there yet. That’s the wholesale persecution, which eventually will include criminal charges of violating gay couples’ “civil rights” from the same Justice Department that’s already infiltrating traditional Catholic churches in Virginia.

For now, what we’re seeing is retail, volunteer, grassroots persecution by individual homosexuals of priests whom they suspect of holding to biblical morality. See this X post by a popular, solid priest:


Count on prosperous, childless, troubled gay activists to make it a part-time job to call parish after parish, compiling hit lists of Crimethink pastors to target. Given that we’ve seen multiple violent acts by unhinged transgender zealots (“tranissaries,” Revolver News calls them), don’t be too sure that physical mayhem is off the table. You see, Pope Francis stripped away the standard defense that faithful pastors could always use against made-up charges of “hate” — the fact that rejecting same-sex coupling is required by our religion. It no longer is. Now the targets can be personalized, isolated, and hunted wolf-pack style. Like lambs cut off from the flock.

We have entered an intolerant age, where “liberals” no longer even mouth half-understood slogans embracing liberty. They straight up demand conformity, groupthink, and kowtowing before their idols.

Caesar’s Court Dwarf
This sort of thing has happened before, of course. And there have always been Christian leaders ready and willing to serve as Caesar’s court dwarf, Mammon’s prancing jester, or the well-paid vicar of Sodom. Perhaps the last such instance that anyone even bothers to remember and disapprove of occurred in the 1930s, when the vast majority of Protestant leaders in Germany confronted the rise of Jew-hating violent paganism with … silence. Or hearty sermons decrying the evils of Soviet Communism, and “decadent” individualism. Or any evil, really, apart from the ones the Nazis were stuffing down everyone’s throats.

Just so today, we’ll find progressive Christians willing to courageously condemn white racism, “patriarchy,” Christian Nationalism, fossil fuels, the nuclear family, and every imperfect thing that Caesar happens to sneer at. They just won’t touch the third rail by criticizing what those now in power are saying and making us do. Such Christians have a nice biblical slogan ready to hand which I hope they start using: “We have no king but Caesar!” (John 19:15)

https://stream.org/the-gay-persecut...t-will-only-get-worse-thanks-to-pope-francis/

 

[budoslavic]

One has to wonder why Fr. James Martin chose a specific gay couple for a photo-op.

Edit.

 

[Wutang]

I read through Fiducia Supplicans, linked to here:

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/...c_ddf_doc_20231218_fiducia-supplicans_en.html

The document made it clear that blessings can't be given in the context of a sacrament and that it can't be done with the context of a civil secular ceremony as well. Also, none of the words used nor any of the ornaments such as the clothes wore can be made to give the appearances that the blessing is being done in the context of any marital ceremony, whether it be sacramental or secular. However, these parts caught my eye since I had read the document after reading the news story of James Martin performing blessings

31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit.

32. Indeed, the grace of God works in the lives of those who do not claim to be righteous but who acknowledge themselves humbly as sinners, like everyone else. This grace can orient everything according to the mysterious and unpredictable designs of God.

The couple that came to James Martin for a blessing didn't seem to be recognizing their own sin or in need of help for their sexual sin. There's a difference between someone who is an alcoholic but recognizes his flaw and even if in his weakness he continues to indulge, still is struggling and is seeking a blessing for God's help in his sin and an alcoholic who asks for a priest to bless his alcoholism because hey, he was just 'born that way', and it would be unloving to ask someone to change something that he has an inclination towards. The gay couple asking for the blessing resembles the latter alcoholic rater than the former one.

There's also the issue of how the blessing is being conferred to a same-sex couple as a couple rather them individually. I don't see how this doesn't imply that the coupling between the two men or two women is being sanctioned. There's a Catholic philosopher that covered this in a blog post:

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2023/12/the-scandal-of-fiducia-supplicans.html

Some have claimed that Fiducia Supplicans merely authorizes blessing the individuals who make up the couple, not the couple itself. But the document explicitly and repeatedly speaks of blessing couples, not merely the individuals in the couple. Moreover, the 2021 document already explicitly said that individuals could be blessed. So there would be no need for the new document, and in particular nothing in it that counts as “innovative” or as “a real development,” without the reference to “couples,” specifically.

The bottom line is that blessing “couples” in the 2023 document amounts to “blessing people qua in a relationship.” And the 2021 document’s prohibition on blessing “relationships” is obviously just a way of prohibiting “blessing people qua in a relationship.” The differences in phraseology between the documents are merely verbal. Perhaps the new document uses the words it does in the hope of avoiding a contradiction. The point, though, is that it does not in fact avoid a contradiction, given the way terms like “couple,” “relationship,” and the like are actually used when describing romantic and sexual situations. Nor are there any special theological usages in play here, for the relevant terms have none.

...


So, it is, in my judgement, sheer sophistry to deny that Fiducia Supplicans permits the blessing of couples in same-sex and other irregular relationships, and to deny that this contradicts the 2021 document.

...the new document makes the Church’s current policy incoherent. On the one hand, the Document insists that there is no doctrinal change at all, and that there is no change entails that the Church can no more acknowledge the acceptability of same-sex and other irregular “couples” today than it has in the past. On the other hand, to bless such couples as couples (and not merely as individuals) implies that their being a couple is in some way acceptable (and not merely that they are accepted as individuals). It “tends to acknowledge their unions as such,” which the 2021 document forbade.

It cannot reasonably be denied that, given all of this context, the Declaration has the implicature that the Church is now at least in part conceding the criticisms of those who reject her teaching, and that she now in some way approves of certain same-sex and other “irregular” arrangements (such as those involving fornication and invalid marriages). It cannot fail to send that message whether or not it was the message intended. And it does so regardless of all the silly wrangling over the meaning of “couple,” and whether or not one could somehow cobble together a strained reading that reconciles the new document with the 2021 document. Even if the Declaration is not strictly heretical, it is manifestly “prone to cause scandal,” “badly expressed,” and “ambiguous.”

It is worth adding that we are only seeing the beginning of the implications of this development. There is nothing special about “couples,” after all. Hence there is no reason in principle why the logic of the Declaration should rule out blessings for “throuples” or even larger polyamorous “unions,” or for organizations like the pro-abortion Catholics for Choice. How could it? Members of such groups would also claim that there is much “that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships,” and that by the very act of asking for a blessing, they are “expressing a petition for God’s assistance, a plea to live better, and confidence in a Father who can help us live better.” Why should they be denied, if same-sex and other “irregular” “couples” are not to be denied?

 

[Samseau]

In summary, the Pope said it is okay to bless "couples" but not "relationships," which is a distinction without a difference. The Pope is engaging in total sophistry by denying anything is changing while trying to give room for the LGBT faction to grow within the Church, and soon many Catholic churches will be dating pools for many gay men.

Pray for the Catholic Church. They will suffer much in the coming century.

 

[staddlelateen]

I haven’t had a chance to read this full thread, so I apologize if it has already been covered.

A future pope will judge Francis appropriately, as has been the case in the past. As the Italians say: skinny pope, fat pope. Those in North America have a short memory, but this isn’t the first time the Catholic Church has been through a crisis.

If you haven’t done already, find a TLM, pray your rosary, attend confession regularly, and attend the holy sacrifice of the Mass at least once per week. I spent this beautiful season in Mass, and as always, every Mass was packed with large and beautiful families.

There are saints in heaven who wish they were alive with us, so they could suffer for Christ during this time period. How blessed we are to be chosen to fight so valiantly for Holy Mother Church!

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

In summary, the Pope said it is okay to bless "couples" but not "relationships," which is a distinction without a difference. The Pope is engaging in total sophistry by denying anything is changing while trying to give room for the LGBT faction to grow within the Church, and soon many Catholic churches will be dating pools for many gay men.

Pray for the Catholic Church. They will suffer much in the coming century.

If I were a catholic, I would draw a hard line in the sand (which is not something you can do with the Pope) rather than jumping through hoops to reconcile his leftism with where the church has traditionally stood on these issues. His strategy of remaking the church in his leftist image is slow and gradual, slower than even more leftist catholic authorities would like. It is the same strategy that the left has used to lead many "Protestant" churches into apostasy. Did God really say? Is the Bible really the Word of God? Is it really sinful to be gay?

 

[Genealogist]

A future pope will judge Francis appropriately, as has been the case in the past. As the Italians say: skinny pope, fat pope. Those in North America have a short memory, but this isn’t the first time the Catholic Church has been through a crisis.

That's not how Catholicism works. The attitude of appealing to the future in order to reject the present ecclesiastical authority was condemned by Pope Leo XIII, and seconded by St. Pius X. Either way, if Francis is the pope, then he is the proximate rule of Faith and you must obey him in teaching, governance, discipline, and legislation - period.

 

[Rax Moscow]

Rome has created enough ambiguity and wriggle room in this missive to allow the MSM to run with a "Catholic blessings for gay couples" story. Perhaps the motive is to test the waters in the reaction of clergy worldwide ahead of the Synod on Synodality reconvening next year. If the push back is too widespread and strong, that indicates to the change agents that next year might be too early to implement a full Woke program of reforms.

This seems to be the most reasonable explanation.
As posted before, the biggest issue is with CONTEXT, not with the actual church position.

Imagine, for example, if a church leader focused every day on Jewish people, praying for them, visiting them at the wailing wall, bowing and saying prayers to them as they walked by in their yarmalukes, and in every public speech he mentioned Jews.

Nothing wrong with that, right? The Jewish people clearly do need to repent and come to God. But the underlying message such an action takes is that Jews are the most important mission of the church, and indeed they are the most important people in the world, and we should all focus on saving their souls.

When in reality, it's much more accurate to view them as demons (while still making a place to accept them should they repent their ways and truly join the church, though not in the surreptitious and subversive Converso way they are famous for doing).

The *context* of continued focusing on gay people is that they should be the focus of the church, when in reality they are a (small but growing) group of sinners that is no more important than the rest of us dealing with our own (often private) sins.

Wow, what an active thread this has been. I guess there are few protestants in this forum, but the country is by far majority Protestant, and I've heard relatively little criticism when the Protestants went much farther than this document, and chose to fly anal flags on their buildings, and marry men together in their chapels.

I think this shows the level of devotion that Catholics and Orthodox have. As Pete Quinones pointed out recently, this is not all bad. The men entering the priesthood today (similar to those who are passionately discussing this particular topic here) are far more masculine, strong, and serious than seen in many years, so these actions may very well be pushing the people to a more conservative position (you can see the great interest in Latin Mass, which had all but died away post-Vatican 2).

 

[Vas Incrementum]

We have had an African priest in our parish for about a year now. There's nothing striking about how he conducts Mass, other than that he doesn't showboat in his homilies, but keeps them short and scriptural. Although he's very much a product of Vatican 2, he is fundamentally a prayerful and thoughtful Catholic and, more importantly, he's not tainted by liberalism (our other priests are). Consequently if he's hearing confessions, I prefer him over the other priests. And he's the only one who has ever called for me make restitution as a penance.

In the comments of the video below, somebody calls for the next pope to be African. I will not argue against that.

 

[Matsufubu]

Looking from the outside, a black-and-white issue has been turned into a debate. This is how you boil the frog.

 

[Get2choppaaa]

We have had an African priest in our parish for about a year now. There's nothing striking about how he conducts Mass, other than that he doesn't showboat in his homilies, but keeps them short and scriptural. Although he's very much a product of Vatican 2, he is fundamentally a prayerful and thoughtful Catholic and, more importantly, he's not tainted by liberalism (our other priests are). Consequently if he's hearing confessions, I prefer him over the other priests. And he's the only one who has ever called for me make restitution as a penance.

In the comments of the video below, somebody calls for the next pope to be African. I will not argue against that.

Yes because they don't tolerate those who eat da Poo Poo

 

[TruthTeller]

We have had an African priest in our parish for about a year now. There's nothing striking about how he conducts Mass, other than that he doesn't showboat in his homilies, but keeps them short and scriptural. Although he's very much a product of Vatican 2, he is fundamentally a prayerful and thoughtful Catholic and, more importantly, he's not tainted by liberalism (our other priests are). Consequently if he's hearing confessions, I prefer him over the other priests. And he's the only one who has ever called for me make restitution as a penance.

These African priests are telling it like it is. Priests do bless anyone who asks. The entire declaration by the Pope is devious and sneaky in and of itself because he is planting and perpetuating a mind virus into people that the gay lifestyle is acceptable and the future. Making them MORE of a focus for the church and clergy!! He is creating diversity and inclusion with this decree. Sneaky but strategic move.

Now as Christian’s we don’t officially or shouldn’t hate anyone, the point is to help turn the person away from sin and towards repentance.

 

[Острог]

The Church does not change.

 

[Острог]

The Latin Protestant church is simply crashing down under the weight of it's heresy. The only thing that matters now is Truth. Are you interested in Truth above all else or are you going to cope yourself into oblivion trying to desparately cling on to the mountain of lies? What will make you change your mind? Where's the line? Will you keep lying to yourself when Rome introduces female deacons? After which will come female priests, gay marriages, gay female priests marrying homo couples etc. They are coming, they will come. The church in Rome will collapse and only the Orthodox will remain. Those who are believers will flock to it for one last stand against the Devil. The rest will remain in Rome out of stupor and ignorance to their downfall.

https://player.fm/series/jaysanalys...on-trent-horn-michael-lofton-refuted-jay-dyer

 

[Vas Incrementum]

The Latin Protestant church is simply crashing down under the weight of it's heresy. The only thing that matters now is Truth. Are you interested in Truth above all else or are you going to cope yourself into oblivion trying to desparately cling on to the mountain of lies? What will make you change your mind? Where's the line? Will you lie to yourself when Rome introduces female deacons? After which will come female priests, gay marriages, gay female priests marrying homo couples? They are coming, they will come. The church in Rome will collapse and only the Orthodox will remain. Those who are believers will flock to it for one last stand against the Devil. The rest will remain in Rome out of stupor and ignorance to their downfall. This is how I see it. It's sad but true.

https://player.fm/series/jaysanalys...on-trent-horn-michael-lofton-refuted-jay-dyer

After reading the populist hopium in the Trump thread and now more Catholic bashing from you, a persistent offender, I believe I'm done here. It's giving me sinful thoughts and I said I'd leave if that happened. I told admin this would be the outcome if these sorts of pile on invitation threads were going to be allowed. I even fanned the flames myself, knowing it was inevitable when mods let this thread stand, that this interdenominational experiment wasn't going to work. Shame is all I can say.

 

[Острог]

After reading the populist hopium in the Trump thread and now more Catholic bashing from you, a persistent offender, I believe I'm done here. It's giving me sinful thoughts and I said I'd leave if that happened. I told admin this would be the outcome if these sorts of pile on invitation threads were going to be allowed. I even fanned the flames myself, knowing it was inevitable when mods let this thread stand, that this interdenominational experiment wasn't going to work. Shame is all I can say.

If stating the facts is bashing then I can't help you. It's not my fault the Pope accepts sodom. Besides you already have a dedicated safe space where you don't have to refute anything I say.

 

[Aboulia]

In summary, the Pope said it is okay to bless "couples" but not "relationships," which is a distinction without a difference. The Pope is engaging in total sophistry by denying anything is changing while trying to give room for the LGBT faction to grow within the Church, and soon many Catholic churches will be dating pools for many gay men.

Well, maybe they can join the Greeks then,

https://russian-faith.com/road-hell-n7563

It's best not to criticise others without cleaning up first what exists in our own churches.

If stating the facts is bashing then I can't help you and besides you already have a dedicated echo chamber free from Pope critique where I can't post in.

You can "state facts" without being hostile and using rhetorical terms like "Latin Protestants". @Vas Incrementum is correct in this, and he's asked a few times in this thread for it to stop. Part of being able to get along with others is to value the fact that the other person is made in the image of God, which means that they're able to choose what they believe in, and live with whatever that entails. Do you ever try to rip apart left leaning family members at Christmas dinner? If not, why not? Or have you already alienated those in the family who believe differently around you?

 

[Острог]

You can "state facts" without being hostile and using rhetorical terms like "Latin Protestants". @Vas Incrementum is correct in this, and he's asked a few times in this thread for it to stop. Part of being able to get along with others is to value the fact that the other person is made in the image of God, which means that they're able to choose what they believe in, and live with whatever that entails. Do you ever try to rip apart left leaning family members at Christmas dinner? If not, why not? Or have you already alienated those in the family who believe differently around you?

You expect me to put aside my faith. If anything I find your post rhetorical and hostile.