Here is Fr. Josiah Trenhams take ..and it's not very flattering.
Bottom line, affirming a homosexual relationship, ensures people walk further from chastity and repentance.
He likens it to:
No priest with would bless a man or his mistress. Or people living together in fornication (something I had to work through during the catechism period... by getting civilly married before the before baptism and then sacramental ceremony.)
I notice none of the Catholics in this thread have actually bothered to reply to a real authority, instead Catholics are busy debating laymen who still have much to learn. Conversely Fr. Trenham is a highly educated and respected Presbyter who represents his Bishop faithfully, he wouldn't be saying this on video if his Bishop did not approve of everything.
This means the Antiochian Church (2nd oldest Church in the world) is fully against this latest innovation by the heretical Popes, who have been heretics and law breakers since the original schism.
Personally I wish Catholics would have more concern and love for their Church. Because if I was Catholic I'd be up in arms about this, since I love my Church. I think Catholics who excuse evil do a great disservice to their Church, I don't see how or why it is loving not to call out evil when you see it.
At the same time, I do not necessarily subscribe to the idea that one should abandon his or her Church when it struggles, the struggle is part of salvation, Orthodox Churches have all had their own crosses to bear at times. From our perspective it is baffling when the Catholics do the "defend a lousy Pope at all costs" thing, the Orthodox have at times defrocked a bad Patriarch in the past.
We are no strangers to controversy within the clergy but at the end of the day the Bishops hold power. If a supermajority of Bishops decide against someone, even a Patriarch, that person can be stripped of power or even defrocked. This is true even within the Catholic Church, as it is clear from St. Ignatius and others that the Bishops are the highest vested authority. The point of Popes (Latin for Patriarch) is to help run the organization by having one esteemed man handle disputes or punish lawbreakers, especially between Bishops, but the idea they are beyond reproach or infallible is of course ridiculous.
I would just point out that the Apostle Peter himself was not infallible, for example see how Apostle Paul and others rejected his position that Christians needed to be circumcised. Anyone claiming to be at the seat of Peter (highly questionable for Rome to claim this seat, given that Peter was the Pope of
Jerusalem) is automatically fallible, just as St. Peter was.
The only infallible figure is Jesus Christ, and his guiding hand is always present at Holy Councils making them infallible. No where else is there any reasonable claim to infallibility.
