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

[prodromos]

The Orthodox have already caved on marriage, not on blessing homosexual unions, but on divorce and remarriage. You can have up to three marriages I think and it's OK with them.

You conflate remarriage with divorce, when the most common reason a person remarries is after the death of their spouse. Even then, it is rare that a bishop would permit a third marriage.

 

[IcyChain]

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.

I see. And people who left the Church because of her teaching on contraception are victims of St. Paul VI?

Your conclusion is based on the assumption that Pope Francis is wrong. But again another possibility is that you are wrong.

Have you actually read the document yet or are you still basing your conclusions on ABC News?

 

[IcyChain]

You conflate remarriage with divorce, when the most common reason a person remarries is after the death of their spouse. Even then, it is rare that a bishop would permit a third marriage.

I thought it was the case that Orthodox allowed people who are divorced to be remarried. Is that not the case? I don't think the divorce is necessarily the theological problem from the Catholic perspective, it is allowing those who have divorced to remarry.

 

[IcyChain]

These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love.

I think this is an important point in the document. People who have committed grave sins and are not in a state of grace receive God's grace before repenting and turning away from their sins. To conclude otherwise is to fall into a sort of pelagianism whereby the person becomes "worthy" of God's grace or "worthy" of a blessing by repenting and turning away from sin. But the fact of the matter is that a person in a homosexual relationship (or a person in any other sort of a sinful state) must receive God's grace in order to repent and turn away from his sin. If God sees it fit to give grace to the unrepentant sinner, on what ground can a blessing be denied? The main concern here is one of scandal - we do not want the blessing to be perceived (either by the couple themselves or by the public) as a legitimization or approval of the sinful activity. Here, the circumstances in which a blessing would be permissible and in which they should be avoided seem to be a matter of prudence, which is why the document forbids blessings in certain contexts where that sort of scandal may be likely to occur.

 

[chevyontheriver]

You conflate remarriage with divorce, when the most common reason a person remarries is after the death of their spouse. Even then, it is rare that a bishop would permit a third marriage.

No, I do not conflate the two. Besides, Catholics see no problem with someone remarrying after the death of a spouse. Canon law allows it. Except of course in the case of a married priest (who would have married first and become a priest second - we do have some of those) who cannot marry again.

 

[IcyChain]

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.

Yeah trads love that example from the Bible. Protestants also use it routinely to attack the authority of the pope. It is in the Trad/Protestant playbook right along with Honorius, Liberius, Vigilius and all the rest.

Paul confronted Peter because Peter was acting inconsistently with what he taught. Peter was being a hypocrite. That is not a broad license for a lay-person to challenge the authority of the Pope to teach or to challenge what the pope has taught.

And as far as the document being a muddy mess - have you even read the document yet? Your previous conclusions were based on ABC News.

 

[narnia59]

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

This.

They are essentially bearing false witness against the Pope and the Church. They are not portraying what he's said accurately at all and the document is very clear that church teaching remains unchanged.

We need to make sure we don't do the same.

 

[Michie]

No, Pope Francis Did Not Approve Blessings For Same-Sex Unions

Corporate media outlets are running salacious headlines that Pope Francis is now allowing 'priests to bless same-sex relationships.'

thefederalist.com

 

[Michie]

OSV News) — A new declaration from the Vatican on pastoral blessings does not change the Catholic Church’s teaching on marriage, Catholic experts told OSV News, but seeks to extend the church’s accompaniment to those in irregular situations.

On Dec. 18, the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith released the formal declaration “Fiducia Supplicans“ (“Supplicating Trust”), subtitled “On the pastoral meaning of blessings.”

The text was approved by Pope Francis that same day during an audience with dicastery prefect Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández.

In his introductory note to the document, Cardinal Fernández said his office had, over the past few years, repeatedly received questions about priestly blessings for same-sex or other unmarried couples in irregular situations. He wrote that the need for a fuller explanation of blessings became apparent after Pope Francis responded to the “dubia” or questions posed by several cardinals in a letter released in early October.

Church teaching on marriage hasn’t changed​

Continued below.

Experts: Vatican declaration on blessings walks a fine line on marriage, pastoral care

A new declaration from the Vatican on pastoral blessings does not change the Church's teaching on marriage, Catholic experts told OSV News.

www.oursundayvisitor.com

 

[Michie]

Doctrinal dicastery explains how, when gay couples can be blessed

The Vatican offered a narrow set of conditions under which a priest or deacon could give a blessing to a same-sex or other unmarried couple, making it clear ...

www.usccb.org

 

[Michie]

Fr. James Martin is really having a heyday on X about this whole thing.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I donno.

Church teaching on marriage hasn’t changed​

Fr. James Martin is really having a heyday on X about this whole thing.

How do these two statements exist in the same universe?

 

[Michie]

I donno.



How do these two statements exist in the same universe?

I think we all knew Martin would take this and run with it.

 

[Michie]

US Bishops: Vatican Declaration on Blessings Does Not Change Church Teaching on Marriage

USCCB reiterates that marriage is between a man and a woman in new statement.

www.ncregister.com

 

[LizaMarie]

I agree that the Church is a hospital for sinners, and I understand what the Pope is trying to do, but this is causing confusion most especially among my non-Catholic friends. I understand we want to reach out to those that need Christ most,(I'm thinking of the movie Jesus Revolution where Chuck Smith's church reached out to the dirty hated hippies and drug takers. I know how despised they were among the older generation I was in middle school at the time., late 60's My Dad hated hippies.)But blessing homosexual couples sends a message to me that the relationship is being blessed, not just the people involved who need Christ. Of course we are all sinners, and homosexuality is no worse than other sexual sin outside of a man/woman marriage. And frankly although I'm married to a divorced man I believe marriage is for life and have wondered about second marriages while the first spouse is still living.
I doubt my husband's and my marriage would be blessed, at all, not unless my husband were to achieve a decree of nullity.
We were told we could not enter the Church unless: We separated, lived as brother and sister or my husband got a decree of nullity.
The first one we did not want to do as we had young children, I would have been willing to do the second my husband would not.
And the third is intimidating for many people.

 

[RileyG]

I think we all knew Martin would take this and run with it.

He is leading so many people astray. Prayer for Fr. Martin.

 

[Wolseley]

Watching all of this unfold, along with everything else that's going on in the world today, makes me understand on a new level what drove the Desert Fathers into the desert to begin with.....

 

[RileyG]

Watching all of this unfold, along with everything else that's going on in the world today, makes me understand on a new level what drove the Desert Fathers into the desert to begin with.....

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[LizaMarie]

I understand that. I was born Episcopalian. Some years ago, the NY dioceses decided that ordaining gay priests was an okay thing to do. My grandparents helped found the local assembly. My mother has a stained glass window dedicated to her. Our local membership wanted to leave but could not take over the building they built and paid for. What a shame. We consider going over to the Anglican church. It's sad to see the church I grew up in fall like this.

Yes. I belonged to an ELCA church many years ago that I loved(laised LCMS.) had to leave after the '91 statement on abortion(pro-choice) and have watched with sadness the increasing falling away(IMO) from the gospel.

 

[RileyG]

Yes. I belonged to an ELCA church many years ago that I loved(laised LCMS.) had to leave after the '91 statement on abortion(pro-choice) and have watched with sadness the increasing falling away(IMO) from the gospel.

Sadly, you can say that about the PCUSA and UMC becoming more liberal over time. The ELCA isn't alone on this.