Pope Francis Allows Clergy to Bless Same-Sex Couples

[The Barbarian]

The point seems to be that the old Magisterium has been replaced with a new one. You know, limited shelf life.

Let's take a look at the Catechism...

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

It's been there as long as I remember. Maybe not compatible with "newspeak." But there it is.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Let's take a look at the Catechism...

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

It's been there as long as I remember. Maybe not compatible with "newspeak." But there it is.

At least this hasn’t been changed … yet. But are homosexual persons still called to chastity, despite the CCC when their ‘couplings’ are now blessed according to FS?

 

[The Barbarian]

At least this hasn’t been changed … yet. But are homosexual persons still called to chastity, despite the CCC when their ‘couplings’ are now blessed according to FS?

The persons can be given a blessing but not the coupling, according to The Church. Which pretty much fits the traditional Catechism statement, doesn't it?

 

[chevyontheriver]

The persons can be given a blessing but not the coupling, according to The Church. Which pretty much fits the traditional Catechism statement, doesn't it?

You gotta go back and read the words in FS. I think I agree with you in what you THINK the document says. But the document specifies blessing couples.

 

[chevyontheriver]

What about "underlining that these are blessings without a liturgical format which neither approve nor justify the situation in which these people find themselves.” do you not understand?

Non-liturgical blessings? Even a blessing before meals is liturgical, even if informal, even if by a lay person. Non-liturgical blessings are an invention of Cardinal Fernandez for this very possibility of blessing the unblessable. And the UGCC is rightly calling foul because blessings ARE liturgical.

And as to blessings that do not approve or justify situations then why not bless the business partnership of two hit men?

 

[dzheremi]

It's the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church but of course, they are relying on medical, genetic, and biological findings.

Why would any church of any type rely on "medical, genetic, and biological findings" and not revelation from God, as that is the same way we've come by anything else that we know to be true? Aren't Christian churches supposed to be placed to affirm Christianity, not whatever the latest "medical, genetic, and biological findings" are? Science constantly changes in order to push the boundaries of demonstrable knowledge in its myriad of academic guises; traditional Christianity, on the other hand, tell us that guidance comes through the Holy Spirit Who came upon the gathered assembly at Pentecost just as surely as He descends upon the precious gifts upon the altar during our liturgies. If you would rather follow the pop-science websites like Science.org, that's on you, but it seems a bit weird to claim that this is what the RCC does. Does the Vatican document in question cite Science, as you have? If it does, I missed that when I read it over.

If what you state is really the view of the Roman Catholic Church, then It has clearly been corrupted by the 'social gospel' niceties and secular ethos that earlier consumed other types of churches (e.g., most-to-all mainline churches), banishing the truth from their missions and sermons in favor of conforming themselves to the world. Lord have mercy.

 

[The Barbarian]

Why would any church of any type rely on "medical, genetic, and biological findings" and not revelation from God, as that is the same way we've come by anything else that we know to be true?

Since God doesn't tell us how homosexuality happens, we have to use the gifts He gave us to find out.

Aren't Christian churches supposed to be placed to affirm Christianity, not whatever the latest "medical, genetic, and biological findings" are?

Well, reality does matter, yes. Notice that science doesn't say that such behavior is not a sin; it merely gives us some understanding of the way that particular propensity to sin comes about.

Science constantly changes in order to push the boundaries of demonstrable knowledge in its myriad of academic guises;

For example, science once thought that homosexuality might be no more than a learned behavior. And later, we found that was wrong. Notice that The Church had indicated this, before science demonstrated it.

traditional Christianity, on the other hand, tell us that guidance comes through the Holy Spirit Who came upon the gathered assembly at Pentecost just as surely as He descends upon the precious gifts upon the altar during our liturgies.

The Holy Spirit didn't discuss the causes of homosexuality. I think the big issue here, is that it arouses some people more than other sins. But that's not something we can blame on God.

If you would rather follow the pop-science websites like Science.org, that's on you,

I just notice that the best information we have is nicely aligned with the Catechism...
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained...
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

Does the Vatican document in question cite Science, as you have?

See above.

If what you state is really the view of the Roman Catholic Church, then It has clearly been corrupted by the 'social gospel' niceties and secular ethos that earlier consumed other types of churches (e.g., most-to-all mainline churches), banishing the truth from their missions and sermons in favor of conforming themselves to the world.

Jesus was the Founder of the "hate the sin, love the sinner" philosophy. I find that it works just fine for me. But then I don't consider my sins to be nicer than those of other people.

I really wish other people could handle it His way.

 

[The Barbarian]

Non-liturgical blessings? Even a blessing before meals is liturgical, even if informal, even if by a lay person. Non-liturgical blessings are an invention of Cardinal Fernandez for this very possibility of blessing the unblessable. And the UGCC is rightly calling foul because blessings ARE liturgical.

Catholic liturgy means the whole complex of official liturgical worship, including all the rites, ceremonies, prayers, and sacraments of the Church. Private blessings and devotions are not liturgy. So if a priest offers a blessing to you in a time of difficulty, that doesn't have to be liturgical.

 

[The Barbarian]

And this seems to be wandering off into increasingly fine hair-splitting about how much respect or concern afforded to sinners is acceptable.

Luke 7:34 The Son of man is come eating and drinking: and you say: Behold a man that is a glutton and a drinker of wine, a friend of publicans and sinners.

And I'll let that be my last contribution.

 

[dzheremi]

Since God doesn't tell us how homosexuality happens, we have to use the gifts He gave us to find out.

We have to find out how homosexuality happens?

Well, reality does matter, yes. Notice that science doesn't say that such behavior is not a sin; it merely gives us some understanding of the way that particular propensity to sin comes about.

Which is great for when you want to redefine it into something that people are, in complete contradiction to traditional Christian anthropology.

Not that that's what's going on here, though! We can tell it's not because the people who don't see how this contradicts what the RCC was saying only a few years ago (not about the 'origins' of homosexuality, which I am only today learning from this thread is apparently something that your church needs to find, but rather whether or not it is within the church's capacity to bless homosexual couples) keep telling us that it's not.

For example, science once thought that homosexuality might be no more than a learned behavior. And later, we found that was wrong. Notice that The Church had indicated this, before science demonstrated it.

Did 'we' find out that that was wrong? Or is it kind of necessary to maintain a distinction between what people do and what they are in order to have the stance that having the proclivity towards homosexuality is not inherently sinful, but acting on that proclivity (e.g., coupling up) is? (Which I could've sworn is also somewhere in the CCC, though maybe not in those exact words.)

The Holy Spirit didn't discuss the causes of homosexuality.

So your catechism will apparently do so instead, with help from Science magazine/website?

I think the big issue here, is that it arouses some people more than other sins.

I think you're right, if you mean by "arouses" that it causes people to try to bring it before the Church to be blessed, precipitating a future full of nothing but more of the same incoherence and "the sky is green because the Pope wrote that it is" kind of thinking among those Catholics who will do anything they can to make the puzzle pieces fit together.

But that's not something we can blame on God.

I wouldn't blame anything on God -- especially not the mess that currently exists in the RCC about this, since that mess is clearly not from God.

Jesus was the Founder of the "hate the sin, love the sinner" philosophy.

Yep. Not the "Pretend like there are huge exceptions to what we ourselves were telling people we believed before last Thursday, but at the same time nothing has changed" philosophy.

I find that it works just fine for me.

Uh huh. Sorry, rest of the Catholics in the entire world, but this is all fine according to western post-everything thinking, so you're just gonna have to get on board with it if you want to be a good Catholic. Otherwise you're apparently considering that your sins are 'nicer' than those of other people.

I really wish other people could handle it His way.

You mean the way that you are handling it by accepting this and pretending that it all lines up?

 

[chevyontheriver]

Catholic liturgy means the whole complex of official liturgical worship, including all the rites, ceremonies, prayers, and sacraments of the Church. Private blessings and devotions are not liturgy. So if a priest offers a blessing to you in a time of difficulty, that doesn't have to be liturgical.

Sez who?

 

[zippy2006]

Uh huh. Sorry, rest of the Catholics in the entire world, but this is all fine according to western post-everything thinking, so you're just gonna have to get on board with it if you want to be a good Catholic. Otherwise you're apparently considering that your sins are 'nicer' than those of other people.

Yep.

The Catholic Church does not teach that people are "born gay." It's unfortunate that @The Barbarian misrepresents Catholicism in such stark ways, but I think at this point forum-goers recognize his lack of credibility in these matters.

Here is a right-leaning Catholic publication noting, among other things, that even the science does not support Barbarian's progressive ideology: The ‘Born Gay’ Myth: When Ideology Masquerades as Science.

When I was in college, it was actually thought to be a mental disorder. But that's no longer a realistic idea. The evidence seems pretty clear that it's not a decision.

"It's not a decision, therefore it can't be a mental disorder" (Contrapositive: If it is a mental disorder, then it is chosen) These are the sorts of logical fallacies that make regular appearances in The Barbarian's posts.

 

[RileyG]

No one is born gay. I believe a lot of it happens due to abuse, trauma, or neglect.

 

[Euthymios]

No one is born gay. I believe a lot of it happens due to abuse, trauma, or neglect.

That's right. I've studied this topic and looked at the scientific literature. There is no scientific or medical evidence showing that people are born gay. All the studies show that bad parenting, lack in religious formation, and childhood trauma create homosexuals.

 

[Euthymios]

"It's not a decision, therefore it can't be a mental disorder" (Contrapositive: If it is a mental disorder, then it is chosen) These are the sorts of logical fallacies that make regular appearances in The Barbarian's posts.

Schizophrenia, Bipolar, OCD, etc, are not choices, but they are real illnesses. Homosexuality was considered a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association until 1973. It was only removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1987, due to spurious arguments and politics.

 

[Euthymios]

Chastity or heterosexual marriage.

The canons of the early church forbid homosexuals from becoming monastics (I can try to find the specific canon if anyone cares). It did not expressly say “homosexual” but rather used a phrase along the lines of “those who abhorr womankind.”

I would like to see that canon, if it's referring to homosexuals. This would preclude a lot of modern Orthodox monastics with homosexual backgrounds, like Fr. Seraphim Rose, Fr. Herman Podmoshensky, Fr. Panteleimon of HOCNA, and Bishop Sergios Black.

 

[RileyG]

That's right. I've studied this topic and looked at the scientific literature. There is no scientific or medical evidence showing that people are born gay. All the studies show that bad parenting, lack in religious formation, and childhood trauma create homosexuals.

Not surprising at all.

 

[Euthymios]

As a side note, even if I granted for the sake of argument that people are born gay, that doesn't make homosexuality right, anymore than being born blind or deaf make them right. To assume otherwise would commit the Naturalistic Fallacy, also known as the is-ought fallacy. It assumes that what is, ought to be. The truth is that we are all born with corrupted natures and need healing and restoration through Christ. But the good news is that all the in-depth studies do not show a "gay gene" or any evidence that people are born that way.

 

[The Liturgist]

I would like to see that canon, if it's referring to homosexuals. This would preclude a lot of modern Orthodox monastics with homosexual backgrounds, like Fr. Seraphim Rose, Fr. Herman Podmoshensky, Fr. Panteleimon of HOCNA, and Bishop Sergios Black.

It would not preclude Fr. Seraphim Rose or any other former homosexual who had repented. The sins committed by Fr. Seraphim Rose were washed away in the waters of Baptism.

Consider also on this note that St. Moses the Black was a highwayman and a murderer before being baptized, and ultimately became the priest and hegumen of a monastery which was itself murdered by robbers. And he is properly venerated as a saint. Therefore it is entirely inappropriate to suggest, in the absence of evidence, that Fr. Seraphim Rose continued to sin by committing arsenokoetia with other men after his baptism.

In the case of Panteleimon, he was the Hegumen of a Greek Orthodoc monastery that was the epicenter of a community of traditional Greek churches under ROCOR, but when he was accused of sexual harassment of novice monks, and ROCOR immediately began investigating, he took the Greek churches out of canonical Orthodoxy and reorganized them into HOCNA, a schismatic Old Calendarist jurisdiction, but eventually the truth came to light and he resigned, although Holy Transfiguration Monastery has unfortunately to my knowledge not re-established itself under the omophorion of ROCOR, probably because people have falsely accused ROCOR of ecumenism* since it reunited with the MP.

*i do not regard ecumenical dialogue as a sin as long as the Orthodox faith is not compromised, which would not be ecumenism but rather syncretism. The MP did a superb job with dialogue under His Eminence Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral, who resigned in 2022 as head of the Department of External Church Relations but remains the Metropolitan of Budapest, and is also a gifted composer, having composed new works of classical non-liturgical sacred music, including a set of variations on one of Bach’s cantatas, and who has also helped to restore and recreate the ancient Znamenny Chant once dominant in the Russian church.

 

[The Liturgist]

I don’t know about that. I am not convinced people are born homosexual, rather, I suspect it is a mental disorder acquired situationally, like sociopathy.

Just so you know @Euthymios and @dzheremi I made this argument back in post 301. I also wish to associate myself fully with your stated opinions on the nature of homosexuality as a voluntary sin, in disagreement with some members advocating Fiducia Supplicans. But if it is involuntary, it is still something to be repented of, and we know that it can be repented of, because of people like blessed Fr. Seraphim Rose of Platina who were delivered of it in the course of baptism or chrismation into Holy Orthodoxy.