Pope’s Directive on Same-Sex Blessings Emphasizes Persons, Not Unions, Theologians Say

[Michie]

Theologians who have studied the Pope’s response told the Register that immediate media reactions miss the mark and don’t accurately capture what the Pope did — and didn’t — say.

VATICAN CITY — In the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 2 publication of a text from Pope Francis responding to questions about same-sex blessings, media sought to portray the Pope’s message as a radical break from Church teaching and practice.

“Pope Francis opens possibility for blessing same-sex unions,” declared ABC News, running with a headline that was typical of how mainstream media described the Pope’s responses to dubia submitted by five cardinals earlier in the summer.

However, theologians who have studied the Pope’s response told the Register that these immediate media reactions miss the mark and don’t accurately capture what the Pope did — and didn’t — say.

One central critique: that the Pope’s focus was not on same-sex unions, but instead on same-sex-attracted persons who may be in some kind of same-sex relationship. In fact, although the question the Pope was responding to explicitly referred to “blessing same-sex unions,” the Pope’s response never spoke of “unions.” Instead, the Pope wrote of possible blessings for “one or more persons,” a subtle but significant distinction, theologians told the Register.

Continued below.

Pope’s Directive on Same-Sex Blessings Emphasizes Persons, Not Unions, Theologians Say

Theologians who have studied the Pope’s response told the Register that immediate media reactions miss the mark and don’t accurately capture what the Pope did — and didn’t — say.

www.ncregister.com

 

[fide]

How many lawyers do you need to understand the Pope's theology/morality?
Answer: one Lawyer, if you want only one opinion.

 

[Michie]

How many lawyers do you need to understand the Pope's theology/morality?
Answer: one Lawyer, if you want only one opinion.

I wonder if he clarified for Whoopi’s Goldberg when she went to visit him yesterday and congratulate him for this?

 

[fide]

I wonder if he clarified for Whoopi’s Goldberg when she went to visit him yesterday and congratulate him for this?

Listening to what I've heard from her before, she seems her own best source for truth.

 

[Michie]

Listening to what I've heard from her before, she seems her own best source for truth.

But do you he accepted her congrats without word and let her continue to think that is what he is doing?

 

[fide]

But do you he accepted her congrats without word and let her continue to think that is what he is doing?

I hate to think that he is pleased she heard him that way; I hope he will correct her publicly and soon. But we will see what time reveals.

 

[mourningdove~]

There are so many weird and distorted headlines and stories out there right now ... about the pope ... the things he has said, or not.
I think it makes no difference what Whoopi says. Persons will hear what they want to hear, or be confused, or both.

I think the confusion is intentional, and not about to end anytime soon.
So, I don't look for it to.

 

[fide]

There are so many weird and distorted headlines and stories out there right now ... about the pope ... the things he has said, or not.
I think it makes no difference what Whoopi says. Persons will hear what they want to hear, or be confused, or both.

I think the confusion is intentional, and not about to end anytime soon.
So, I don't look for it to.

For his sake, I hope his heart is not corrupted. The Lord warns of the time of "abomination in the Holy Place". It may be near. It may be upon us! We must take these things very, very seriously if we take our Lord seriously, because He has warned us. In Him we are safe, no matter what.

 

[mourningdove~]

For his sake, I hope his heart is not corrupted. The Lord warns of the time of "abomination in the Holy Place". It may be near. It may be upon us! We must take these things very, very seriously if we take our Lord seriously, because He has warned us. In Him we are safe, no matter what.

Amen.
That is what the Lord continues to show me at this time in human history ... that no matter what, we are safe in Him.

One of the good things about the current pope is that the confusion his words and behaviors tend to generate have forced me to dig deeply and begin researching Church history.

I fully realize now that I did not come back to the Church I knew as a Catholic child in the late 50's/60's. At moments, it is heartbreaking to see the things that have changed and are happening. But even back then, these changes were already in motion. I just didn't know it, as a child.

I spent the last 2 days reading Taylor Marshall's book "Infiltration". I didn't think I would like it, but I could barely put the book down till I finished it. So, I've read his detailed narrative of Church history, and do believe I better understand now some of the things that have happened, and the goals Pope Francis is working towards accomplishing. I am much less confused.

This morning, in the special consoling way that only the Lord can do, my pre-ordered copy of Bishop Schneider's latest book "Credo" arrived early. As long as a faithful remnant remains in the Church, I see hope for it and for all of us. But ultimately, our hope is in the Lord, whether we see it or not.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

It's interesting to me on how conservatives don't trust what the mainstream media reports, except
when it fits their own hatred of Pope Francis, then to them, it's absolutely true.

 

[fide]

It's interesting to me on how conservatives don't trust what the mainstream media reports, except
when it fits their own hatred of Pope Francis, then to them, it's absolutely true.

The Lord commends the angel of the church at Ephesus not for their love, which was lacking, but their hate - not of persons but of works:

Rev 2:6 Yet this you have, you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

On this verse Augustine commented (I paraphrase) - we are called to love perfectly, as God loves, and we are called to hate perfectly, as God hates.

And to all He says,

Rev 2:7 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

It is not good, Jim, to be an enabler of unrighteous works of men no matter what office he holds. The Church belongs to no man; some are entrusted with greater responsibility than others, and "Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required" (Lk 12:48)

 

[Iuxta Crucem Lacrimosa]

It's interesting to me on how conservatives don't trust what the mainstream media reports, except
when it fits their own hatred of Pope Francis, then to them, it's absolutely true.

I see no hatred in this thread, only anxiety and doubt (concerning the vicar of St. Peter). Why do you feel the need to label the opinions of others as hatred, when other interpretations are far more viable?

 

[Michie]

I see no hatred in this thread, only anxiety and doubt (concerning the vicar of St. Peter). Why do you feel the need to label the opinions of others as hatred, when other interpretations are far more viable?

Hi! You must be new. (Or maybe not?) I seen Oslo and have been wondering about a poster from Oslo. Anyway, welcome to Christian Forums.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I see no hatred in this thread, only anxiety and doubt (concerning the vicar of St. Peter). Why do you feel the need to label the opinions of others as hatred, when other interpretations are far more viable?

You must be new and haven't followed the threads here.

Anti-Pope Francis threads and replies are the norm along with distrust of the mainstream media, except when
they report anything negative about Pope Francis.

 

[Iuxta Crucem Lacrimosa]

I’m old news to this forum, and just stopping by to check in with some old friends. This forum seems to have crashed hard in recent years. I thought it might’ve been a bit revitalized by the closure of CAF, but CF still seems so slow, at least the OBOB branch of the forums.
Does Anhelyna still post frequently at the board or is she gone too?
Good to se y’all in this thread, and I mean that sincerely, even you Jim
I kind of outed you on purpose as we’ve been in disagreement since 2010 or so
#CAF

Good to see you’re all alive and well. Is this board still a pimpong table of pro/anti Francis discussions in general?

 

[Michie]

I’m old news to this forum, and just stopping by to check in with some old friends. This forum seems to have crashed hard in recent years. I thought it might’ve been a bit revitalized by the closure of CAF, but CF still seems so slow, at least the OBOB branch of the forums.
Does Anhelyna still post frequently at the board or is she gone too?
Good to se y’all in this thread, and I mean that sincerely, even you Jim
I kind of outed you on purpose as we’ve been in disagreement since 2010 or so
#CAF

Good to see you’re all alive and well. Is this board still a pimpong table of pro/anti Francis discussions in general?

Yeah @Anhelyna still posts here. Pretty much the same stuff here but much slower but that goes for CF in general. I hope all is well with you. I wondered whatever became of you! Nice to see you again!

 

[Iuxta Crucem Lacrimosa]

I thought my choice of nickname would reveal my identity. I feel that Stabat Mater has ran its course as a nickname, that and the fact that I cannot, for the life of me, seem to remember my former password
Anyways, good to se you’re alive and well

 

[Anhelyna]

Oh - I'm still around though less active than I was - this dratted pandemic has done a LOT of damage to folk just by restricting what social interaction we could have

 

[fide]

I’m old news to this forum, and just stopping by to check in with some old friends. This forum seems to have crashed hard in recent years. I thought it might’ve been a bit revitalized by the closure of CAF, but CF still seems so slow, at least the OBOB branch of the forums.
Does Anhelyna still post frequently at the board or is she gone too?
Good to se y’all in this thread, and I mean that sincerely, even you Jim
I kind of outed you on purpose as we’ve been in disagreement since 2010 or so
#CAF

Good to see you’re all alive and well. Is this board still a pimpong table of pro/anti Francis discussions in general?

What were/are you looking for in a forum, Iuxta Crucem Lacrimosa? This Pope has brought a cross of many tears to many faithful Catholics - these last few years of his reign have been no "fun game" - pingpong or otherwise.

 

[chevyontheriver]

However, theologians who have studied the Pope’s response told the Register that these immediate media reactions miss the mark and don’t accurately capture what the Pope did — and didn’t — say.

One central critique: that the Pope’s focus was not on same-sex unions, but instead on same-sex-attracted persons who may be in some kind of same-sex relationship. In fact, although the question the Pope was responding to explicitly referred to “blessing same-sex unions,” the Pope’s response never spoke of “unions.” Instead, the Pope wrote of possible blessings for “one or more persons,” a subtle but significant distinction, theologians told the Register.

The subtle distinction, I can sorta see it maybe. But it went way over the heads of the mainstream media and probably goes way over the head of those in the Church itching to bless sodomy. It's too subtle. It is that little pinhole that will allow a 767 to fly through it. Sure people can be blessed. Even multiple people at one time. But what will be done is blessing two people engaged in sodomy and the interpretation will be that it is the sodomy being blessed. One could argue that technically nobody is blessing sodomy but that would be a very uphill battle to wage when everybody being blessed or attending the blessing and the reception can't tell the difference between that and a wedding. This is part of the reason cardinal Zen has called Francis' words 'pastorally untenable'. Cardinal Zen Calls Pope Francis’ ‘Dubia’ Response on Same-Sex Blessings ‘Pastorally Untenable’

The reason I think the subtle distinction is a distinction without a difference outside of the words pope Francis wrote is that the cardinals pope Francis has appointed are clear enough that Catholic moral teaching needs to be changed with respect to sodomy. In the end, those folks will handle the cases of bold bishops who object to blessing sodomy and the various blessers of immorality that will inevitably think they have a divine right to do so. How does cardinal Hollerich rule? Cardinal McElroy? They have already telegraphed their intentions. All it needs is for them to follow through and not be stopped by pope Francis. Pope Francis maintains a dubious distinction of not officially teaching moral heresy and some particular parts of the Church get to bless sodomy for a few years until the Gospel can again intrude.

Here is what the CDF, before they lost their marbles, had to say about the matter just a few short years ago: Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to a dubium regarding the blessing of the unions of persons of the same sex

TO THE QUESTION PROPOSED:
Does the Church have the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex?

RESPONSE:
Negative.