Pope Francis ok with Same Sex Unions?

[reddogs]

This cant be right, there must be some misunderstanding, or has the Pope really done this?

"Pope suggests blessings for same-sex unions may be possible

VATICAN CITY ? Pope Francis has suggested there could be ways to bless same-sex unions, responding to five conservative cardinals who challenged him to affirm church teaching on homosexuality ahead of a big meeting where LGBTQ+ Catholics are on the agenda.

The Vatican on Monday published a letter Francis wrote to the cardinals on July 11 after receiving a list of five questions, or "dubia," from them a day earlier. In it, Francis suggests that such blessings could be studied if they didn't confuse the blessing with sacramental marriage.

New Ways Ministry, which advocates for LGBTQ+ Catholics, said the letter "significantly advances" efforts to make LGBTQ+ Catholics welcomed in the church and "one big straw towards breaking the camel's back" in their marginalization."

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203...ings-for-same-sex-unions-may-be-possible

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/02/world/francis-same-sex-unions-intl-latam/index.html

The pope just opened the door to blessing same-sex couples. This nun secretly blessed one more than 15 years ago.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...e-sex-unions-catholic-priests-rcna118525

 

[reddogs]

Well now he is defending it, took me a while to find the report AGAIN as the search engines either block it or is it was possible the news sources are using the old, DONT ASK DONT TELL, idea to hide or not report it at all.

"ROME, Jan 15 (Reuters) - Pope Francis on Sunday defended a landmark decision approving blessings for same-sex couples, suggesting that those in the Catholic Church who have resisted it have jumped to "ugly conclusions" because they do not understand it. In a television interview, Francis made his first public comments since the Dec. 18 declaration sparked widespread debate in the Church, with bishops in some countries, particularly in Africa, refusing to let their priests implement it.
"Sometimes decisions are not accepted, but in most cases when decisions are not accepted, it is because they are not understood," Francis said in response to a specific question about the December declaration.

"The danger is that if I don't like something and I put it (the opposition) in my heart, I become a resistance and jump to ugly conclusions," he said during a link from his Vatican residence with the "Che Tempo Che Fa" program on Italy's Channel 9.
This is what happened with these latest decisions on blessings for all," he said, referring to the declaration known by its Latin title Fiducia Supplicans (Supplicating Trust). It was issued by the Vatican's doctrinal department and approved by him.

Since the original declaration, the Vatican has been at pains to stress that the blessings did not amount to an approval of gay sex and should not be seen as anything remotely equivalent to the sacrament of marriage for heterosexual couples.

But even a clarification earlier this month from the Vatican's doctrinal department did not sway bishops in Africa, where in some countries same-sex activity can lead to prison or even the death penalty.

They issued a letter last week saying the December declaration had caused "unrest in the minds of many" and could not be applied because of the continent's cultural context.

Some bishops in France told their priests they could bless gay individuals but not couples.

The Church teaches that gay sex is sinful and disordered and people with same-sex attractions should try to be chaste and the pope appeared to be alluding to this is his response.

"The Lord blesses everyone," Francis said. "But then people have to enter into a dialogue with the blessing of the Lord and see the path that the Lord proposes. We (the Church) have to take them by the hand and lead them along that path and not condemn them from the start".

Since his election in 2013, Francis has tried to make the Church, with its 1.35 billion members, more welcoming to LGBT people, without changing moral doctrine."

https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...ion-says-it-is-misunderstood-2024-01-15/

 

[PloverWing]

For reference, here is the statement Fiducia Supplicans from the Vatican: Declaration Fiducia Supplicans On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings (18 December 2023) . Section III, Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex, is the most relevant section.

 

[Lost4words]

Lots of controversy around the document.

I am against it myself even though it states the church are not blessing the sin, only the sinners.

It is causing rifts. It should never have been written. No need for this 'special' blessing as every 'individual' can receive a blessing.

Fr Martin has a pic of himself blessing a gay couple holding hands!!! This is NOT what the blessing is all about or supposed to be done!

Jesus told the adulterer to go, and sin no more. He didnt give a blessing and say carry on sinning!!!

 

[reddogs]

Lots of controversy around the document.

I am against it myself even though it states the church are not blessing the sin, only the sinners.

It is causing rifts. It should never have been written. No need for this 'special' blessing as every 'individual' can receive a blessing.

Fr Martin has a pic of himself blessing a gay couple holding hands!!! This is NOT what the blessing is all about or supposed to be done!

Jesus told the adulterer to go, and sin no more. He didnt give a blessing and say carry on sinning!!!

The American Indians had a word for it, forked tongue or basically to 'speak in a dishonest way that is meant to deceive people'. I think we are seeing it in full display...

 

[Kokavkrystallos]

2 John 9-11
"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

God speed is a type of blessing, usually given at parting or for someone travelling: as in "fare well"
So here it says if someone isn't abiding in the doctrine of Christ, don't even bid them godspeed or farewell, because you're a partaker in their evil deeds.

Now lets break it down:
Leviticus 18:22
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
There's a distinction with this sin: God calls it abomination. And it's not just reserved to Old Testament judgment.

Romans 1:26-27,
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Here it's obvious it's talking about homosexuality, "same sex unions", and they are called vile affections, unseemly, and error.

Romans 1:32 should be a sobering verse to anyone who supports this: "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

1 Corinthians 6:9-10,
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

"Abusers of themselves with mankind" is in Greek "arsenokoites" = men who bed with other men; male with male intercourse. It's quite clear those who do such things will NOT inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:8-11,
"But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust."

Here "them that defile themselves with mankind" is also "arsenokoites" We see they are put in same category with lawless, disobedient, ungodly, sinners, unholy, and profane, and that such things are contrary to sound doctrine.

Jude 7,
"Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."

We see again the seriousness of this sin: the cities given over to it are an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Bottom line: you cannot "bless" in any way, someone who is partaking in this abomination. They should rather be convicted of their sin, told to repent, and prayed for deliverance from their sins.

 

[Buzzard3]

I am against it myself even though it states the church are not blessing the sin, only the sinners

Unsurprisingly, the Declaration doesn't explain how a priest can bless a same-sex couple without blessing the sin. Are we to believe that the same-sex couple have a chaste relationship? LOL.

Even if the same-sex couple is celibate (as unlikely as that is), the priest is blessing a relationship that the Church teaches is "objectively disordered" (CCC #2358), in which case, the blessing itself is objectively disordered.

 

[Lost4words]

Unsurprisingly, the Declaration doesn't explain how a priest can bless a same-sex couple without blessing the sin. Are we to believe that the same-sex couple have a chaste relationship? LOL.

Even if the same-sex couple is celibate (as unlikely as that is), the priest is blessing a relationship that the Church teaches is "objectively disordered" (CCC #2358), in which case, the blessing itself is objectively disordered.

The documents doesnt say the priest is to bless the couple. But individually.

It is a confusing document. One that need never have been written.

A priest has always been able to bless individuals...

 

[Buzzard3]

The documents doesnt say the priest is to bless the couple. But individually.

Really? Have you read it?

What does the word "couples" mean in the following quote from Fiducia Supplicans?

III. Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex

31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex

 

[Buzzard3]

Fr Martin has a pic of himself blessing a gay couple holding hands!!! This is NOT what the blessing is all about or supposed to be done!

On the contrary, Fr. Martin is doing precisely what Fiducia Supplicans allows.

 

[Lost4words]

On the contrary, Fr. Martin is doing precisely what Fiducia Supplicans allows.

I am against the document. It should never have been published.

 

[RileyG]

I am against the document. It should never have been published.

I agree.

On a side note, Fr. Martin is only leading people astray.

 

[Lost4words]

I agree.

On a side note, Fr. Martin is only leading people astray.

I agree, as are some other too...

God bless and protect His church

 

[reddogs]

Looks like there is resistance from some true believers...
'Some Catholic bishops reject Pope’s stance on blessings for same-sex couples. Others are confused
In an extraordinary pushback against Pope Francis, some Catholic bishops in Africa, Poland and elsewhere say they will not implement the new Vatican policy allowing blessings for same-sex couples.

Others downplayed the policy approved this week by Francis as merely reaffirming the Vatican’s long-standing teaching about marriage being only a union between a man and a woman.

The reactions show how polarizing the issue remains and how Francis’ decade-long effort to make the church a more welcoming place for the LGBTQ+ community continues to spark resistance among traditionalist and conservative Catholic leaders...."

Some Catholic bishops reject Pope's stance on blessings for same-sex couples. Others are confused

Some Catholic bishops say they will not follow the Vatican’s new direction on allowing blessings for same-sex couples.

apnews.com

 

[chevyontheriver]

Looks like there is resistance from some true believers...
'Some Catholic bishops reject Pope’s stance on blessings for same-sex couples. Others are confused
In an extraordinary pushback against Pope Francis, some Catholic bishops in Africa, Poland and elsewhere say they will not implement the new Vatican policy allowing blessings for same-sex couples.

Others downplayed the policy approved this week by Francis as merely reaffirming the Vatican’s long-standing teaching about marriage being only a union between a man and a woman.

The reactions show how polarizing the issue remains and how Francis’ decade-long effort to make the church a more welcoming place for the LGBTQ+ community continues to spark resistance among traditionalist and conservative Catholic leaders...."

Some Catholic bishops reject Pope's stance on blessings for same-sex couples. Others are confused

Some Catholic bishops say they will not follow the Vatican’s new direction on allowing blessings for same-sex couples.

apnews.com

This report, if anything, minimizes the resistance. Almost every bishop in Africa has said no, same in Poland, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine. There are individual bishops resisting in every continent but Antarctica. Many theologians as well. And at least four notable cardinals, Burke, Muller, Sarah, and Zen.

Some bishops will be afraid to get the Strickland treatment, where a conservative bishop was removed for no apparent reason, something pope Francis resists doing for friends of his found to be abusers.

Some cardinals will be afraid to get the Burke treatment, where a conservative retired cardinal has his below market rate Rome apartment taken away. Pope Francis considers cardinal Burke to be dangerous but seems loyal to cardinal Fernandez, whose earlier works of inappropriate contentography were hidden and not put on his CV.

All told more than a thousand of the about six thousand bishops have said ‘no’. A few have endorsed it whole heartedly. More have tried to say this changes nothing. Most have been very quiet about it. But it’s not something they can stay quiet about. Resistance is growing.