Pope approves blessings for same-sex couples if they don't resemble marriage

[Wolseley]

Let me guess. The sins that you commit fall into the former category and the sins that others commit fall into the latter category? Rather convenient isn't it?

No. Sin is sin. My sins (and I have plenty) are just as dire as anyone else's. I'm not saying their sins are worse than mine. I'm not saying mine are worse than theirs. All I'm saying is that if you stubbornly cling to a sin rather than trying the best you can to avoid repeating it, then you are in error. I'm not happy when I commit sins. I apologize to God, I go to confession, and try with might and main to not commit the sins again. What I *don't* do is say to God, "Well, I can't give this sin up; I don't want to. So if You could just bless me anyway in spite of it, I'd appreciate it, because I have no intentions of giving it up."

You see the difference? You're trying to paint me as judgmental. I'm not trying to be judgmental. I'm trying to point out that sin, any sin, my sin, their sin, your sin, separates us from God, and refusing to repent from a sin, any sin, is spiritually destructive.

But let's take the people who "stubbornly hang on to their pet sins" (whether it be homosexual acts, adult-videos, fornication, lying, rash-judgment or a thousand other things). There are plenty of people at Mass with an adult-video on their cell-phone for all I know. Should these people be asked to leave Mass before the blessing? Should all the couples who are living together outside of wedlock be asked to leave? Should everyone be asked to take a fidelity test and undergo an mental examination to determine their true disposition towards sin before receiving a blessing? I think you see the problem here.

No, I don't see the problem here, because I never advocated that anybody should leave Mass before a blessing---you did. All I'm saying is that nobody who is in a state of sin should expect any special approval for their errors. If I enter a church in a state of sin, I listen to the homily, I sing the hymns, and yes, I even receive the blessing, although I don't expect to gain any advantage from it until I have gone to confession and am cleansed of my sin. Again: what I don't do is walk up to the priest after Mass and say, "Hey, Father, I'm having sex three days a week with my neighbor's 16-year old daughter; do you think you could give us a blessing sometime?"

Let me guess again - when other people commit sins they sow tares in their heart, and when you sin there are no tares being sown?

And you have guessed wrong again. When I commit a sin, I am just as guilty as anyone else who commits a sin. All I'm doing is not asking for special dispensation for my pet sins to be accepted or legitimized. See above. I am not trying to justify myself. We are all guilty. What we should not be doing is trying to justify certain sins instead of trying to avoid all sin.

I do not think it is proper to assume that in all situations in which someone is involved in a homosexual relationship - that this cannot be a sin that they are struggling against. That this cannot be a situation that they view as a sin and would like to rectify with the grace of God.

Sexual sin is like drug addiction. It's not easy to kick. But anyone in a sexual addiction, be it homosexuality, polygamy, pornography, whatever, should be actively trying, all the time, to kick that sin. That's all I'm saying. If you don't try to kick it, then you're still in a state of sin. If you give up trying to kick it, then you're weak, which is not necessarily sinful, but it does indicate that you should be seeking some serious spiritual help. God knows everyone's mind and heart; whom He decides is worthy of forgiveness based on their disposition is above my pay grade. It's God's business, and I am satisfied to let God tend to it.

For the sins that we commit we want the benefit of the doubt that it is something that we are struggling against, but for others we should assume that it is something that they stubbornly hang-on to in defiance of the church, so it seems. Again, rather convenient.

You're accusing me of formulating things that are the furthest things from my mind. Again, see above. I don't know how to get that across to you.

Certainly there are people who stubbornly hang on in defiance of the Church and there are people who struggle against sin

*BINGO*! And that's all I've been saying!

but the world is not so black-and-white that we can automatically conclude who is in what category merely based upon the category of sin that one engages in.

I never said that they could. All I'm saying is that if you are in a state of sin, you shouldn't be looking for a priest to give you blessing for it.

 

[Chrystal-J]

Who knows? He may even give you a blessing at this rate.

 

[RileyG]

No sin is being blessed or celebrated. The media is again misinterpreting Pope Francis.

 

[RileyG]

I made one comment a few months ago about how I was looking to go back East, and for a couple of months I have been doing just that. I'm done with Rome. Completely unjustifiable at this point.

Don't leave the Church Christ himself founded. HE promised the gates of hell would never prevail.

Blessings

 

[IcyChain]

What I *don't* do is say to God, "Well, I can't give tis sin up; I don't want to. So if You could just bless me anyway in spite of it, I'd appreciate it, because I have no intentions of giving it up."

Agree, but I would not say that all people in a homosexual relationship necessarily fall into the "I don't want to give this sin up" category. That is what I thought you were implying by your response to me. I mean, there was a stage in my life where I watched adult movies. I knew it was wrong. I wanted give them up. But I still kept them at my house and I watched them. It's not always easy for people to walk away from sin even though they have the desire to. I can see that being the case with certain sinful romantic relationships

You see the difference? You're trying to paint me as judgmental. I'm not trying to be judgmental. I'm trying to point out that sin, any sin, my sin, their sin, your sin, separates us from God, and refusing to repent from a sin, any sin, is spiritually destructive.

You are right. I did think you were being judgmental but now I understand your position better. My apologies.

No, I don't see the problem here, because I never advocated that anybody should leave Mass before a blessing---you did. All I'm saying is that nobody who is in a state of sin should expect any special approval for their errors. If I enter a church in a state of sin, I listen to the homily, I sing the hymns, and yes, I even receive the blessing, although I don't expect to gain any advantage from it until I have gone to confession and am cleansed of my sin. Again: what I don't do is walk up to the priest after Mass and say, "Hey, Father, I'm having sex three days a week with my neighbor's 16-year old daughter; do you think you could give us a blessing sometime?"

And you have guessed wrong again. When I commit a sin, I am just as guilty as anyone else who commits a sin. All I'm doing is not asking for special dispensation for my pet sins to be accepted or legitimized. See above. I am not trying to justify myself. We are all guilty. What we should not be doing is trying to justify certain sins instead of trying to avoid all sin.

. . .

I never said that they could. All I'm saying is that if you are in a state of sin, you shouldn't be looking for a priest to give you blessing for it.

Well, I don't think that asking for a blessing necessarily equates to asking for one's sins to be accepted or legitimized. The purpose could be to receive grace to live a more faithful life, as paragraph 40 of the document appears to suggest. We can understand this in the case of the individual who asks for a blessing. It's not as if he wants the priest to bless his watching of adult videos. I think the concept is a more difficult to apply in the context of a couple asking for a blessing. But at least as far as I understand it, the priest is not blessing the homosexual-relationship of the couple any more so than he is blessing the individual watching the adult movie. I think it's kind of case-by-case situation. I mean, if I walked up there with a T-shirt that read "I am watching adult movies, please bless it" or I walked up there with another man and we were both wearing T-shirts that read "We are gay please bless our sodomy" I do not think a blessing would be proper in either case, of course. But other situations may not be so clear-cut. . .

 

[Wolseley]

Agree, but I would not say that all people in a homosexual relationship necessarily fall into the "I don't want to give this sin up" category. That is what I thought you were implying by your response to me. I mean, there was a stage in my life where I watched adult movies. I knew it was wrong. I wanted give them up. But I still kept them at my house and I watched them. It's not always easy for people to walk away from sin even though they have the desire to. I can see that being the case with certain sinful romantic relationships

You are right. I did think you were being judgmental but now I understand your position better. My apologies.

. . .

Well, I don't think that asking for a blessing necessarily equates to asking for one's sins to be accepted or legitimized. The purpose could be to receive grace to live a more faithful life, as paragraph 40 of the document appears to suggest. We can understand this in the case of the individual who asks for a blessing. It's not as if he wants the priest to bless his watching of adult videos. I think the concept is a more difficult to apply in the context of a couple asking for a blessing. But at least as far as I understand it, the priest is not blessing the homosexual-relationship of the couple any more so than he is blessing the individual watching the adult movie. I think it's kind of case-by-case situation. I mean, if I walked up there with a T-shirt that read "I am watching adult movies, please bless it" or I walked up there with another man and we were both wearing T-shirts that read "We are gay please bless our sodomy" I do not think a blessing would be proper in either case, of course. But other situations may not be so clear-cut. . .

I'm glad we finally found common ground.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Did Pope Francis change Catholic teaching on gay marriage?

The short answer is no, Pope Francis didn’t change Church teaching on gay marriage. So what’s everyone talking about? Read about the new Vatican document.

www.oursundayvisitor.com

The new declaration advances Pope Francis’ theology of accompaniment by which people are led to a deeper relationship with Christ and his Church. The declaration teaches, “To seek a blessing in the Church is to acknowledge that the life of the Church springs from the womb of God’s mercy and helps us to move forward, to live better, and to respond to the Lord’s will” (No. 20). There is no person, the declaration insists, who should be excluded from this kind of prayer.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I just wish the terms homosexuals etc could have been excluded.
But I think the possibility certain Bishops playing it down just wanted some license...?
Now whether or not they now have the ability to help people go chaste - remains to be seen.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I am not calling the SSPX sedevacantists. They are Catholics in more or less good standing.

I knew there were talks...
So they're with Pope Francis?

 

[chevyontheriver]

I knew there were talks...
So they're with Pope Francis?

They are recognizing Francis as pope.

 

[chevyontheriver]

One other possibility: the pope is right and you are wrong.

Which pope? This one? The last one? The one before him? A long string of popes before them? There is a Magisterium of Francis and there is a Magisterium of all the popes combined before pope Francis. They differ. Is pope Francis' version of the Magisterium the one we follow now just because he's the current guy? And all the rest wastebasketed?

 

[FaithT]

Which pope? This one? The last one? The one before him? A long string of popes before them? There is a Magisterium of Francis and there is a Magisterium of all the popes combined before pope Francis. They differ. Is pope Francis' version of the Magisterium the one we follow now just because he's the current guy? And all the rest wastebasketed?

I have a question. Isn’t the Holy Spirit supposed to lead the voting for the new pope? Isn’t the one chosen supposed to be who the Holy Spirit chose? If so, how can we be questioning him?

 

[Gnarwhal]

Distinction without a difference. We WILL be seeing Catholic weddings in all but name, where they have a very traditional looking wedding for two men or two women or two of other sexualities. It was already approved in Belgium and already being done in Germany. This will be seen as permission no matter how 'clarified' it is. The only import of it will be so we can have a loophole so we don't have to say the pope is 'actually' teaching heresy yet. It's a big green light but we can understand it as a red light still if we want to.

Sure but those Belgian and German priests were already renegades anyway. The only reason they're not excommunicated right now is because the pope and hierarchy are backwards and aiming their guns at the wrong targets. If (big IF) we get an orthodox pope again that will change pretty quick.

But you're right about the optics. All the mainstream media outlets are running with it, boldly and egregiously declaring that the pope changed church teaching. I don't envy the priests who will be exhausted from explaining this millions of times.

 

[RileyG]

Love the sinner, hate the sin. Nothing has changed.

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Don't leave the Church Christ himself founded. HE promised the gates of hell would never prevail.

Blessings

I fear I already did that and I was wrong. I'm simply going back home. And I hate that for this forum because I adore so many of you in OBOB, but you've all welcomed me for over a decade ni matter where I've been. I'm praying for all of you more so than ever right now. For me this isn't a hard decision. For so many of you, this means so much more and is so much harder.

 

[RileyG]

I fear I already did that and I was wrong. I'm simply going back home. And I hate that for this forum because I adore so many of you in OBOB, but you've all welcomed me for over a decade ni matter where I've been. I'm praying for all of you more so than ever right now. For me this isn't a hard decision. For so many of you, this means so much more and is so much harder.

May God bless you abundantly

 

[chevyontheriver]

I have a question. Isn’t the Holy Spirit supposed to lead the voting for the new pope? Isn’t the one chosen supposed to be who the Holy Spirit chose? If so, how can we be questioning him?

No. Cardinal Ratzinger had a teaching on this very point just before he was elected pope. The election of a pope is NOT infallible. The Holy Spirit pick does not necessarily get elected because the majority of cardinal electors may not be tuned into the Holy Spirit. Thus there have been some bad popes elected, about ten really bad ones. More have been great and good and saintly, so the average is pretty good. But by no means were all of them decent. Some were scoundrels. Some were poor to middling.

We can question him like Paul questioned and confronted Peter over Peter failing to eat with gentile Christians. Peter was pope but Paul was right. Catherine of Sienna stood up to the pope at Avignon and told him to return to Rome. Popes are not protected from sin, nor much else except the the Holy Spirit will stop a pope from an official act of heretical teaching. This new document isn't a heretical teaching per se, but it is a muddy mess that other people will use to justify sin.

Pope Francis has been fraternally corrected now several times. He ignores it and the people who offered him correction are demoted. Most recently cardinal Burke, before him bishop Strickland, before him a few others.

It behooves cardinals to be righteous and prayerful people who listen for the Holy Spirit so they can pick well. It behooves us to pray and fast for the Church so we can have a general attitude of receptivity to the Holy Spirit. We are in a crisis in the Church. The old center is collapsing. The German bishops are heading into schism and they will bring others with them. We may have a schism on the other side too as those pope Francis has punished for their attendance at the Latin Mass are feeling pushed out. Pope Francis has made a mess. Hagan lio. He is not immune from questioning or criticism. Oh, but he needs our prayers first and foremost.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I fear I already did that and I was wrong. I'm simply going back home. And I hate that for this forum because I adore so many of you in OBOB, but you've all welcomed me for over a decade ni matter where I've been. I'm praying for all of you more so than ever right now. For me this isn't a hard decision. For so many of you, this means so much more and is so much harder.

Another victim of pope Francis.

I hear so many people who seriously thought about becoming Catholic in the days of John Paul and Benedict that put their plans on hold with pope Francis. Argh!

Don't be a stranger. This too may pass.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Another victim of pope Francis.

I hear so many people who seriously thought about becoming Catholic in the days of John Paul and Benedict that put their plans on hold with pope Francis. Argh!

Don't be a stranger. This too may pass.

Saints did not regard the Pope in matters of personal opinion and as Pope Francis knows, he cannot change teachings.

Nothing has changed except 'people' can be blessed. I saw no where as of yet that the union is being blessed.
BUT the same thing the media always does.
Take something and over inflate it til it is in principle the story but in content very indistinct from the root.

You are correct, priests will be exhausted.
but we stay.


The entire world is in crisis.
And I pray.
I wait til what was actually said is in writing.
Which is frustrating because I read earlier that the statement left 5 questions, but it was not decisively stated which led to questions that are unanswered.

 

[IcyChain]

Which pope? This one? The last one? The one before him? A long string of popes before them? There is a Magisterium of Francis and there is a Magisterium of all the popes combined before pope Francis. They differ. Is pope Francis' version of the Magisterium the one we follow now just because he's the current guy? And all the rest wastebasketed?

Another possibility: Pope Francis and the popes before him are both correct, and your conclusion that their teachings contradict each other is wrong.

It's not much different from Protestants who say "I follow the Bible, not the Catholic Church because it contradicts the Bible." The Protestant's conclusion that there is a contradiction is what is in error, not the Catholic Church or the Bible.