Pope Francis allows priests to bless same-sex couples (not marriage)

[metis]

The Fed.gov is a Democrat institution. They don't indict themselves.

It's both, as the Pubs have the majority in the House.

It's still a mystery to me how so many Pubs support a twice-impeached insurrectionist; a frequent adulterer; a "pathological liar" as Lindsey Graham once called him; someone who says he can do anything under the Constitution; a man who brags that he can "grope women by the pu**y"; etc. Which branch of Christianity would ever endorse such a person-- and yet mullions did and do?

 

[Colt]

It's both, as the Pubs have the majority in the House.

It's still a mystery to me how so many Pubs support a twice-impeached insurrectionist; a frequent adulterer; a "pathological liar" as Lindsey Graham once called him; someone who says he can do anything under the Constitution; a man who brags that he can "grope women by the pu**y"; etc. Which branch of Christianity would ever endorse such a person-- and yet mullions did and do?

I agree, it's puzzling. I do wonder though if its more an issue of fear of opposing Trump than any support? No other (R) comes close to Trumps numbers, he may be the candidate and will lose to Biden.

 

[Soandso]

a man who brags that he can "grope women by the pu**y"; etc

It never ceases to amaze me how many people lie about Trump due to their trump derangement syndrome. Fake news indeed!

He bragged about GRABBING women by their pu**y, not groping. Don't get it twisted

 

[IndigoChild5559]

ROME (AP) — Pope Francis formally approved letting Catholic priests bless same-sex couples, the Vatican announced Monday, a radical shift in policy that aimed at making the church more inclusive while maintaining its strict ban on gay marriage.

But while the Vatican statement was heralded by some as a step toward breaking down discrimination in the Catholic Church, some LGBTQ+ advocates warned it underscored the church’s idea that gay couples remain inferior to heterosexual partnerships.

The document from the Vatican’s doctrine office elaborates on a letter Francis sent to two conservative cardinals that was published in October. In that preliminary response, Francis suggested such blessings could be offered under some circumstances if the blessings weren’t confused with the ritual of marriage.

My comment: Baby steps, but they're still steps. Your comments?

Let me start off by saying it is not my intent to comment one way or the other about whether gay sex is a sin. Catholics have every right to decide their own beliefs. If they want to say gay sex isa sin, that is their right. If they want to say gay sex is not a sin, that is their right.

Rather, what I would like to address is this talking out of both sides of their mouths, especially Pope Francis. You cannot say something is a sin and then turn around and bless it. It makes no sense. This decision is simply going to cause Catholics a lot of consternation. Many will be angry and rightly so. The Pope has an obligation to be crystal clear about what behavior are acceptable and unacceptable for Catholics, and he is not. It is his greatest weakness.

He should either come out and say "Hey folks, I know in the past that we have always said gay sex is wrong, but we are overturning that. Its not a sin." OR he should not be instructing priests to bless what he believes to be a sin.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Let me start off by saying it is not my intent to comment one way or the other about whether gay sex is a sin. Catholics have every right to decide their own beliefs. If they want to say gay sex isa sin, that is their right. If they want to say gay sex is not a sin, that is their right.

Rather, what I would like to address is this talking out of both sides of their mouths, especially Pope Francis. You cannot say something is a sin and then turn around and bless it. It makes no sense. This decision is simply going to cause Catholics a lot of consternation. Many will be angry and rightly so. The Pope has an obligation to be crystal clear about what behavior are acceptable and unacceptable for Catholics, and he is not. It is his greatest weakness.

He should either come out and say "Hey folks, I know in the past that we have always said gay sex is wrong, but we are overturning that. Its not a sin." OR he should not be instructing priests to bless what he believes to be a sin.

I can't be sure -- sometimes the language and logic of these sorts of pronouncements is convoluted and difficult to penetrate -- but I think you are missing something.

I think (I could be wrong) that Pope Francis and the Dicastery are trying to separate the sin from the sinner -- that while we may not be able to bless the sin, we accept that the sinner is a mere human like the rest of us, and therefore in need of the grace of blessing. Sort of "God knows what you are doing, but God knows who you are -- and who you are is precious to God."

Sorry, I may be reading too much in. I'm not, after all, any sort of a Christian.

But I also have to say that I, as a Humanist, also recognize the complexity of our human nature -- that we are a eusocial species with the capacity to default. Our very nature as humans makes it impossible for us to be what our social orientation directs us to be, when our capacity for default for self-interest and self-preservation works against it. It may well be this that drove the early Christians to conceive of "original sin." They are attempting to describe, in a somewhat more primitive way, what I just explained above.

And therefore, I think that the Church under Francis is making a small but important step forward.

 

[LuisDantas]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people lie about Trump due to their trump derangement syndrome. Fake news indeed!

He bragged about GRABBING women by their pu**y, not groping. Don't get it twisted

Well, that is entirely different... no, wait. It is not.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people lie about Trump due to their trump derangement syndrome. Fake news indeed!

He bragged about GRABBING women by their pu**y, not groping. Don't get it twisted

Well, that is entirely different... no, wait. It is not.

Do you think we should ask @Soandso to describe the difference -- in lurid detail?

 

[Soandso]

Do you think we should ask @Soandso to describe the difference -- in lurid detail?

Would you look at the time? Time for me to be anywhere else than here right now! BYYYyyyyeeee...... *Poof*

 

[Wu Wei]

ROME (AP) — Pope Francis formally approved letting Catholic priests bless same-sex couples, the Vatican announced Monday, a radical shift in policy that aimed at making the church more inclusive while maintaining its strict ban on gay marriage.

But while the Vatican statement was heralded by some as a step toward breaking down discrimination in the Catholic Church, some LGBTQ+ advocates warned it underscored the church’s idea that gay couples remain inferior to heterosexual partnerships.

The document from the Vatican’s doctrine office elaborates on a letter Francis sent to two conservative cardinals that was published in October. In that preliminary response, Francis suggested such blessings could be offered under some circumstances if the blessings weren’t confused with the ritual of marriage.

My comment: Baby steps, but they're still steps. Your comments?

Actually, no he didn’t

Pope Francis Did Not Just Authorize Priests to Bless Same-Sex Unions

COMMENTARY: Anyone who claims that the Fiducia Supplicans authorizes blessings of same-sex unions has not read the declaration or is intentionally misinterpreting it.

www.ncregister.com

 

[danieldemol]

Actually, no he didn’t

Pope Francis Did Not Just Authorize Priests to Bless Same-Sex Unions

COMMENTARY: Anyone who claims that the Fiducia Supplicans authorizes blessings of same-sex unions has not read the declaration or is intentionally misinterpreting it.

www.ncregister.com

I believe the OP was about blessing the couples, not the unions themselves.

 

[metis]

I agree, it's puzzling. I do wonder though if its more an issue of fear of opposing Trump than any support? No other (R) comes close to Trumps numbers, he may be the candidate and will lose to Biden.

I certainly hope you're right for the country's sake.

 

[metis]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people lie about Trump due to their trump derangement syndrome. Fake news indeed!

He bragged about GRABBING women by their pu**y, not groping. Don't get it twisted

And there's a real difference?

IMO, basic Judeo-Christian and/or humanitarian morals are important, and Trump and so many of his defenders certainly don't seem to buy into them.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Actually, no he didn’t

Pope Francis Did Not Just Authorize Priests to Bless Same-Sex Unions

COMMENTARY: Anyone who claims that the Fiducia Supplicans authorizes blessings of same-sex unions has not read the declaration or is intentionally misinterpreting it.

www.ncregister.com

I believe the OP was about blessing the couples, not the unions themselves.

@danieldemol, you got it right. The title of the thread itself says "couples," not "unions." It's the people involved who can receive blessings, not their relationship.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Would that be the same Christ who told sinners that it is better to lose a limb than to risk one's soul by sin? The same Christ who said that he will cast his enemies into the outer darkness? It is interesting how people tend to omit that aspect of Christ when they talk about what being "Christlike" means.

Who are Christ's enemies? And it sounds like a personal choice to make to lose a limb rather than sin. In other words, the Church should treat all "sinners" (everyone, right?) somewhat equally. If a person who is a thief, murderer, rapist, covets another person's spouse, cheats on their spouse, takes the last cookie in the jar, works on Sunday, etc. can be blessed, why exclude homosexuals?

Note I don't believe homosexuality is a sin.

 

[Soandso]

And there's a real difference?

Ehhh... You know, I'm tempted to write some kind of smart comeback and crack jokes, but the topic is just too grim to joke about even for me. Sexual assault is sexual assault, and using one's wealth and power to get away with it and then brag about it is beyond gross

IMO, basic Judeo-Christian and/or humanitarian morals are important, and Trump and so many of his defenders certainly don't seem to buy into them.

Sure they do; when it's convenient. The moral high ground is easy to take when your standards are down in the mud and you're perfectly ok living with cognitive dissonance at every turn. Just look at the things MAGA says when confronted with Trump's gross and anti-christian behavior; "Well, David wasn't perfect either but he chosen by God to lead."

I think one of the biggest differences between David and Trump is that David actually acknowledged his bad behavior and sought god's forgiveness and tried to make things right. Trump could never admit that he's ever done anything wrong and shifts the blame elsewhere constantly or just straight up lies to avoid accountability for his behavior. They couldn't be more different

 

[ppp]

Who are Christ's enemies? And it sounds like a personal choice to make to lose a limb rather than sin. In other words, the Church should treat all "sinners" (everyone, right?) somewhat equally. If a person who is a thief, murderer, rapist, covets another person's spouse, cheats on their spouse, takes the last cookie in the jar, works on Sunday, etc. can be blessed, why exclude homosexuals?

Note I don't believe homosexuality is a sin.

You think they should treat a rapist and someone who covets somewhat equally?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

You think they should treat a rapist and someone who covets somewhat equally?

Personally, no, but if the church is going to take the stance that we are all sinners who need redemption, and that redemption is in the church, then it stands to reason that excluding one group based on something that doesn't actually hurt anyone when other things that do cause harm are not excluded seems to go against a fundamental philosophy: That all sinners can be redeemed through Christ.

 

[pearl]

The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith announced this in a declaration issued Dec. 18 by distinguishing clearly between “ritual and liturgical blessings” that are given in the reception of a sacrament and “blessings,” spontaneous ones, that are given outside this situation in a wider pastoral perspective that have long been part of popular piety.

In an introduction to the text, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, explains that the declaration “offers a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective.” In other words, the new document, approved by the pope with his signature, distinguishes between different types of blessings and opens the way for blessings to be given to couples in irregular situations but insists that they are not formulated as rites and do not lead to confusion.


Today’s declaration goes beyond the document issued on Feb. 22, 2021, which prohibited blessings of same-sex couples because it looked at such blessings only as “ritual and liturgical blessings,” and not in the broader pastoral context of other types of blessing.

“One must also avoid the risk of reducing the meaning of blessings to this point of view alone,” the document states, “for it would lead us to expect the same moral conditions for a simple blessing that are called for in the reception of the sacraments. Such a risk requires that we broaden this perspective further.” Indeed, it said, “there is the danger that a pastoral gesture that is so beloved and widespread will be subjected to too many moral prerequisites, which, under the claim of control, could overshadow the unconditional power of God’s love that forms the basis for the gesture of blessing.” Precisely in this regard, it said, “Pope Francis urged us not to ‘lose pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes’ and to avoid being ‘judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.’”

Pope Francis allows blessings of couples in same-sex relationships

In a new Vatican document, Pope Francis opened the door for ‘blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples.’

www.americamagazine.org

 

[Muffled]

I don't believe I can understand how it does any good to bless a person under a curse.

 

[Muffled]

Nice to see the Vatican is moving in the right direction.

I believe it lost its way a long time ago.