Pope Francis at a meeting with priests from the Diocese of Rome in the Archbasilica of Saint John Lateran on Jan. 13, 2024. / Vatican Media
Rome Newsroom, Jan 15, 2024 / 09:37 am (CNA).
Pope Francis responded publicly to questions about the Vatican’s declaration on blessings for same-sex couples for the first time in a television interview on Sunday night.
In an appearance on an Italian talk show on Jan. 14, the 87-year-old pope was asked if he “felt alone” after the publication of Fiducia Supplicans was met with some resistance.
“Sometimes decisions are not accepted,” Pope Francis replied. “But in most cases, when you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.”
The pope underlined that “the Lord blesses everyone” and that a blessing is an invitation to enter into a conversation “to see what the road is that the Lord proposes to them.”
“The Lord blesses everyone who is capable of being baptized, that is, every person,” Francis repeated.
“But we are to take them by the hand and help them go down that road, not condemn them from the beginning,” he added. “And this is the pastoral work of the Church. This is very important work for confessors.”
The Vatican Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Dec. 18 declaration made it permissible for priests to offer non-liturgical blessings for couples in “irregular” situations, including same-sex couples, noting “that it offers a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings.”
Following widespread backlash from bishops’ conferences in Africa and Eastern Europe, and strong denouncements from some of the Church’s senior prelates, the Vatican’s doctrine office issued a five-page press release on Jan. 4 to provide clarification on the document, writing that its application will depend “on local contexts and the discernment of each diocesan bishop with his diocese.”
Speaking to the Italian program “Che Tempo Che Fa” via video link from his Vatican City residence, the pope said that when someone disagrees with a decision, they should express their concerns in “a fraternal discussion.”
“The danger is when I don’t like something and I set it in my heart, I become a resistance and come to ugly conclusions,” Pope Francis said. “This has happened with this last decision about blessing everyone.”
Pope Francis also responded to questions about the declaration on same-sex blessings during a closed-door meeting with 800 priests from the Diocese of Rome in the Archbasilica of Saint John Lateran on Saturday morning.
According to the Vatican-owned media outlet Vatican News, the pope said that the Church’s doctrine on the Sacrament of Marriage between a man and a woman has not changed and that “people are blessed, not sin.”
Other Italian media outlets, including the Italian news channel Sky TG24, reported that Pope Francis told the priests that an LGBT organization cannot be blessed, but people can always be blessed and that the declaration will not be implemented in Africa “because the culture does not accept it.”
Cardinal Angelo De Donatis, the vicar of Rome, told the Italian television channel Rai News 24: “Responding to requests from an African cardinal, the pontiff clarified the situation: the intention of the declaration is to bless people.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Mattheus (left) holds a photo of Carlo Acutis (right), whose prayers are attributed with the boy’s healing. / Campo Grande News
CNA Staff, Oct 12, 2021 / 08:30 am (CNA).
The beatification of Carlo Acutis took place Oct. 10, 2020 after a miracle attributed to his prayers and the grace of God. In Brazil, a boy named Mattheus was healed from a serious birth defect called an annular pancreas after he and his mother asked Acutis to pray for his healing.
Mattheus was born in 2009 with a serious condition that caused him difficulty eating and serious abdominal pain. He was unable to keep any food in his stomach, and vomited constantly.
By the time Mattheus was nearly four years old, he weighed only 20 pounds, and lived on a vitamin and protein shake, one of the few things his body could tolerate. He was not expected to live long.
His mother, Luciana Vianna, had spent years praying for his healing.
At the same time, a priest friend of the family, Fr. Marcelo Tenorio, learned online about the life of Carlo Acutis, and began praying for his beatification. In 2013 he obtained a relic from Carlo’s mother, and he invited Catholics to a Mass and prayer service in his parish, encouraging them to ask Acutis’ intercession for whatever healing they might need.
Mattheus’ mother heard about the prayer service. She decided she would ask Acutis to intercede for her son. In fact, in the days before the prayer service, Vianna made a novena for Acutis’ intercession, and explained to her son that they could ask Acutis to pray for his healing.
On the day of the prayer service, she took Mattheus and other family members to the parish.
Fr. Nicola Gori, the priest responsible for promoting Acutis’ sainthood cause, told Italian media what happened next:
“On October 12, 2013, seven years after Carlo’s death, a child, affected by a congenital malformation (annular pancreas), when it was his turn to touch the picture of the future blessed, expressed a singular wish, like a prayer: ‘I wish I could stop vomiting so much.’ Healing began immediately, to the point that the physiology of the organ in question changed,” Fr. Gori said.
On the way home from the Mass, Mattheus told his mother that he was already cured. At home, he asked for French fries, rice, beans, and steak – the favorite foods of his brothers.
He ate everything on his plate. He didn’t vomit. He ate normally the next day, and the next. Vianna took Mattheus to physicians, who were mystified by Mattheus’ healing.
Mattheus’ mother told Brazilian media she sees in the miracle an opportunity to evangelize.
“Before, I didn’t even use my cell phone, I was averse to technology. Carlo changed my way of thinking, he was known for talking about Jesus on the Internet, and I realized that my testimony would be a way to evangelize and give hope to other families. Today I understand that everything new can be good, if we use it for good, ” she told reporters.
A version of this story was first reported by ACI Digital, CNA’s Portugese-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA. This story was originally published on Oct. 10, 2020.
A view of the Vatican’s Sistine Chapel on Oct. 29, 2014. / Credit: Bohumil Petrik/CNA
CNA Staff, Apr 29, 2025 / 07:00 am (CNA).
Pope Francis, who died April 21 at age 88, was laid to rest at the Basilica of St. Mary Major following his funeral … […]
A view of the separation wall between Israel and the Palestinian Territories from behind a window in the Comboni Sisters’ house in East Jerusalem. / Credit: Marinella Bandini
Jerusalem, Feb 17, 2024 / 06:00 am (CNA).
The Comboni Sisters have been living on the border of East Jerusalem since 1967. Running along the border of their property is a wall, constructed by the Israelis in 2009, dividing the village of Bethany/al-Eizariya — renowned as the site of the resurrection of Lazarus. The sisters’ residence remains on the Israeli side, while the church and the tomb of Lazarus are on the Palestinian side, on the other side of the wall.
“For us, the passage from Scripture that says ‘in Christ the wall of separation between peoples has been broken down’ is very powerful [Eph 2:14], especially when there is a physical wall in front of us that clearly indicates this separation,” Sister Anna Maria Sgaramella, provincial councilor and coordinator of the Middle East Zone for the Comboni Sisters, told CNA.
Sister Anna Maria Sgaramella, provincial council and coordinator of the Middle East Zone for the Comboni Sisters. Credit: Marinella Bandini
Sgaramella arrived in Jerusalem for the first time on Sept. 26, 2000. The very next day, the second intifada — a major uprising by Palestinians against Israeli occupation — erupted. She witnessed the siege of the Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem, where she taught theology.
Later, she was transferred to Egypt, where in 2011, she witnessed the uprising known as the “Arab Spring.”
Since 2013, Sgaramella has permanently returned to Jerusalem and now faces another long and bloody conflict. “I have always been struck by the deep sense of hope and determination to move forward among the Palestinian people. With this war, I see it weaker; people are more exhausted,” she said.
A view of the separation wall between Israel and the Palestinian Territories from the terrace of the Comboni Sisters’ house in East Jerusalem. The wall, constructed by the Israelis in 2009, runs along the border of their property, dividing the village of Bethany/al-Eizariya in two, believed to be the site of the miracle of the raising of Lazarus. The sisters’ residence remains on the Israeli side, while the church and the tomb of Lazarus are on the other side of the wall. Credit: Marinella Bandini
There are currently six Comboni Sisters in Jerusalem and each is involved in a specific ministry. They usually come together for morning Mass and evening vespers as well as for meetings and reflection. Their community house is open to religious individuals seeking periods of study or discernment and serves as a center of spirituality for both the congregation and the local Church. The sisters host educational workshops and spiritual exercises as well as welcome pilgrims.
The Comboni Sisters in Jerusalem in a recent photo at the Jordan River. The Comboni Sisters’ community in Jerusalem currently consists of six sisters and each is involved in a specific ministry. Credit: Photo courtesy of Sister Anna Maria Sgaramella
Sgaramella shared with CNA what it’s like to live on the border.
“With the construction of the wall, we found ourselves in the middle, between Palestinians and Israelis,” she explained. “The Palestinians attempt to bypass the wall — especially to pray at the Dome of the Rock — while the Israelis try to repel them in an endless game.”
“Being in the middle is a physical position that has also become a spiritual one,” Sgaramella continued. “We had to reflect and decided to ‘stay in the middle,’ between these two peoples, to serve as a bridge between them. By placing ourselves in the middle, we listen to the injustice faced by the Palestinians and also to the fears of Israeli families.”
For this reason, the religious community has chosen to maintain a small presence in the Palestinian area. Two sisters reside in an apartment beyond the wall, about 100 feet from the Comboni Sisters’ residence.
The exterior of the Comboni Sisters’ house in East Jerusalem where the Comboni Sisters have been living since 1967. Credit: Marinella Bandini
“We desired to stay and share the lives of those people and accompany the small remaining Christian community there. Every time they need to reach the community, they have to travel 18 kilometers [about 11 miles] passing through the Israeli checkpoint,” Sgaramella explained.
The sisters do not do this simply in the spirit of altruism, explained Sgaramella, who is also involved in ecumenical and interreligious dialogue. “We understood from the beginning that being in the middle comes at a cost. It often means getting hit from both sides. On one hand, there are stones and Molotov cocktails from the Palestinians that land on our property; on the other hand, we are under the smoke of tear gas launched in response by the Israelis,” she said.
One incident happened the night of Oct. 6, just hours before the Hamas attack on Israel. Some Molotov cocktails landed on the synthetic grass in the part of the property that houses the kindergarten, causing a fire — the signs of which are still visible today. The fire destroyed the grass, playground equipment, and blackened the recently painted wall.
The exterior of the kindergarten, housed on the Comboni Sisters’ property. In the background is the separation wall that was erected on the edge of the Comboni Sisters’ property in 2009.
The kindergarten is a work that the Comboni Sisters have been carrying out since their arrival and today it serves as an important point of connection with the surrounding community. This significance has grown, especially after the construction of the wall.
“The presence of the kindergarten has never been questioned, neither with the wall nor with the war,” said Sgaramella, who is the director. The kindergarten is attended by approximately 40 children, all of whom are Muslims, divided into two classes. Formally, it is under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Ministry of Education. “It is a project that meets the needs of the people; furthermore, episodes of violence never occur during the day when the children are present,” she added.
Sister Anna Maria Sgaramella of the Comboni Sisters talks with the children in one of the kindergarten classes hosted at their home in East Jerusalem. The presence of the kindergarten has never been questioned, said Sgaramella, the director. Credit: Marinella Bandini
Every morning, the children begin with a prayer. “We tell the parents right from the start,” Sgaramella explained. “It’s a prayer of thanksgiving for what God has created, for the day, for life, a blessing for parents, neighbors, friends, and also for children who suffer. We pray for peace in the world and in this country.”
Regarding the families, she shared: “There is great trust and respect. They usually choose to send their children here, especially for moral education and English-language instruction.”
Most of the children come from East Jerusalem, but some also come from al-Eizariya. One of the two teachers, Nihal Hashmime, who is also the vice director, has to pass through the checkpoint every day to get to work.
“With the war,” the sister told CNA, “we faced some educational challenges because initially, some children were absent. The work we do with them is to impart certain values, such as peace, friendship, love, and respect for differences.”
Play is also an important aspect. “Children here do not find toy weapons, and they are not allowed to bring them from home,” Sgaramella said.
“Our attempt in education and all other activities is to break down this wall that leads to seeing the other as an enemy,” Sgaramella said. “Sometimes it is difficult to recognize the universality of salvation. We know that Jesus died for everyone, but in certain conflict-ridden contexts, it is challenging to acknowledge the other as a brother. Personally, the field of teaching theology provides me with the space to build bridges among believers. Because in every religion, there are sincere believers seeking truth.”
Two problems here…
First, that to bless everyone is categorically different than to bless “irregular” COUPLES as such. On this point of “resistance” (meaning moral affirmation) the pope gives every appearance of being deaf in one ear.
And the second, is the broadly erased difference between mere “decisions” and “moral judgments”:
“A separation, or even an opposition [!], is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid and general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final DECISION [no longer a ‘MORAL JUDGMENT’!] about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions [!] contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept [‘thou shalt not…’]” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 56).
Relevant & cogent ecclesiology, dear Peter D. Beaulieu.
And let’s not forget to correct the anti-Apostolicity of this brazen papal public misrepresentation of the LORD, who told us:
“Then He [Christ in Glory] will say to those on his left:
‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil & his angels.'”
Those who willfully misrepresent Christ’s teaching in life are in danger of hearing that most terrible of all commands when they die.
Ever looking to hear & lovingly obey King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty
This is a spiritual delusion, a pride under a mask of false humility. Usually, it is close to impossible to deal with people imprisoned by that kind of delusion because they build very thick psychological defenses which protect them from the truth about themselves. Clearly, Pope Francis is driven by the deep-seated need to be perceived as “nice”, “merciful”, “the humblest” and so on. He already outdone Christ in that quest. Our Lord called some people “brood of wipers” instead of running after them and blessing them. Who knows, perhaps he threw away an opportunity to convert them… to Himself.
Here is the point. Our Lord came to do the will of His Father and this is why He did not care about being perceived as “nice”. Being the Truth He simply said and acted the truth. Unlike Christ, PF is driven only by his own will – hence his delusion. He is focused on himself. Do not be fooled – when a priest twists the divine revelation and says “it is out of mercy” he does it not for a sinner’s sake but for his own sake, for the purpose of being perceived as “merciful” resulting from a deep-seated emotional need to be liked. But how can he know what is truly good for a sinner if he, in his insatiable desire to be liked, pushed God aside?
Hence, when PF speaks about blessings of the homosexual couples, he thinks about his “good”, not theirs. Their good would be the truth about what God said on that matter and quiet compassionate pastoral work with them (as it has been in the Church). A priest who says “unfortunately this is a sin, I sympathize, let us work on stopping it and ask God’s blessing and help” does not sound “nice” to the world but he is genuinely good. He does not speak on his own authority and this is why he does not care about where he is being liked or not. A priest who says “come as you are, you are welcome, it is all good, let me bless you as a couple” is nice and fluffy indeed because he speaks on his own authority. The first priest obeys God, the second obeys himself.
A well worded response from His Holiness on the resistance to the blessing of those living in sin. We shouldn’t condemn from the start, rather we should take them by the hand to discern where and how God would take them. Although the direction is not a mystery. That’s where the disagreement lies. And why they’re “strong denouncements” from some senior prelates.
What apparently compels rejection of the blessing, which is a form of affirmation, is the overall diminution of rules, the commandments to convert our lives in imitation of Christ. A softer welcoming approach does indeed resemble Christ’s response to sinners, eating with them, spending hours in their company feeding them spiritually with extreme kindness, and with firmness never leaving his sheep in doubt. When the revealed Word is manipulated and diluted, we’re giving them something other. What the world perceives are the vexing calibre of Vatican appointments, the trend toward secular values. Omission of a call to repent. Warmth and good will is manifest in spiritual substance, not in cloudiness.
A blessing is acknowledgment of some good in the person blessed, not simply that they are God’s creation as alluded to by Francis, rather that they express a willingness to become more likened unto the goodness of Christ.
PS: Pope Francis in his “defense” employs the patterns of communication typical of toxic families. They are all about control, via:
– making extremely general statements (“sometimes decisions are not accepted”)
– never addressing concrete points raised by the opponents
– vague murky language
– veiled accusations of the opponents in “badness” (“ugly conclusions”, an attempt to shame) instead of addressing their arguments (in this case instead of making a solid theological argument).
I will provide just one example of untruth achieved by those methods, in this case by a generalization:
“Sometimes decisions are not accepted,” Pope Francis replied. “But in most cases, when you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.”
Indeed, sometimes the decisions are not accepted. The general statement above used to “excuse” not a smooth process of an implementation of ‘FS’. However, it is not true that a rejection of a decision is caused by the lack of understanding “in most cases” because the lack of understanding can be overcome, by one who made a decision, via engaging in an open and honest discussion. He explains the decision clearly so those who did not understand can accept it. Most often however a decision is not accepted because it is understood correctly and deemed as wrong = unacceptable. This is precisely what happened with ‘FS’.
When you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.
Insulting and patronizing.
Trying to slip FS through by making it a matter of ethnic/cultural acceptance is devious.
See Jeff Mirus, Catholic Culture.
“When you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.
Insulting and patronizing.”
You are right, it is in fact a manifestation of an entitlement. The true meaning of PF’s offence with “non-understanding” is “You did not understand ME, how dare you to think I can propose something bad!” Thus, he does not bother to explain his “theological idea” because the issue is not about theology but about HIS “goodness” = HIM being rejected. By definition all he does is for the greater good; to reject his actions means to doubt his goodness.
Therefore, in the person of Pope Francis the Church has a huge metaphysical problem. “No one is good, only God.”
Two problems here…
First, that to bless everyone is categorically different than to bless “irregular” COUPLES as such. On this point of “resistance” (meaning moral affirmation) the pope gives every appearance of being deaf in one ear.
And the second, is the broadly erased difference between mere “decisions” and “moral judgments”:
“A separation, or even an opposition [!], is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid and general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final DECISION [no longer a ‘MORAL JUDGMENT’!] about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions [!] contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept [‘thou shalt not…’]” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 56).
Relevant & cogent ecclesiology, dear Peter D. Beaulieu.
And let’s not forget to correct the anti-Apostolicity of this brazen papal public misrepresentation of the LORD, who told us:
“Then He [Christ in Glory] will say to those on his left:
‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil & his angels.'”
Those who willfully misrepresent Christ’s teaching in life are in danger of hearing that most terrible of all commands when they die.
Ever looking to hear & lovingly obey King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty
This is a spiritual delusion, a pride under a mask of false humility. Usually, it is close to impossible to deal with people imprisoned by that kind of delusion because they build very thick psychological defenses which protect them from the truth about themselves. Clearly, Pope Francis is driven by the deep-seated need to be perceived as “nice”, “merciful”, “the humblest” and so on. He already outdone Christ in that quest. Our Lord called some people “brood of wipers” instead of running after them and blessing them. Who knows, perhaps he threw away an opportunity to convert them… to Himself.
Here is the point. Our Lord came to do the will of His Father and this is why He did not care about being perceived as “nice”. Being the Truth He simply said and acted the truth. Unlike Christ, PF is driven only by his own will – hence his delusion. He is focused on himself. Do not be fooled – when a priest twists the divine revelation and says “it is out of mercy” he does it not for a sinner’s sake but for his own sake, for the purpose of being perceived as “merciful” resulting from a deep-seated emotional need to be liked. But how can he know what is truly good for a sinner if he, in his insatiable desire to be liked, pushed God aside?
Hence, when PF speaks about blessings of the homosexual couples, he thinks about his “good”, not theirs. Their good would be the truth about what God said on that matter and quiet compassionate pastoral work with them (as it has been in the Church). A priest who says “unfortunately this is a sin, I sympathize, let us work on stopping it and ask God’s blessing and help” does not sound “nice” to the world but he is genuinely good. He does not speak on his own authority and this is why he does not care about where he is being liked or not. A priest who says “come as you are, you are welcome, it is all good, let me bless you as a couple” is nice and fluffy indeed because he speaks on his own authority. The first priest obeys God, the second obeys himself.
A well worded response from His Holiness on the resistance to the blessing of those living in sin. We shouldn’t condemn from the start, rather we should take them by the hand to discern where and how God would take them. Although the direction is not a mystery. That’s where the disagreement lies. And why they’re “strong denouncements” from some senior prelates.
What apparently compels rejection of the blessing, which is a form of affirmation, is the overall diminution of rules, the commandments to convert our lives in imitation of Christ. A softer welcoming approach does indeed resemble Christ’s response to sinners, eating with them, spending hours in their company feeding them spiritually with extreme kindness, and with firmness never leaving his sheep in doubt. When the revealed Word is manipulated and diluted, we’re giving them something other. What the world perceives are the vexing calibre of Vatican appointments, the trend toward secular values. Omission of a call to repent. Warmth and good will is manifest in spiritual substance, not in cloudiness.
A blessing is acknowledgment of some good in the person blessed, not simply that they are God’s creation as alluded to by Francis, rather that they express a willingness to become more likened unto the goodness of Christ.
PS: Pope Francis in his “defense” employs the patterns of communication typical of toxic families. They are all about control, via:
– making extremely general statements (“sometimes decisions are not accepted”)
– never addressing concrete points raised by the opponents
– vague murky language
– veiled accusations of the opponents in “badness” (“ugly conclusions”, an attempt to shame) instead of addressing their arguments (in this case instead of making a solid theological argument).
I will provide just one example of untruth achieved by those methods, in this case by a generalization:
“Sometimes decisions are not accepted,” Pope Francis replied. “But in most cases, when you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.”
Indeed, sometimes the decisions are not accepted. The general statement above used to “excuse” not a smooth process of an implementation of ‘FS’. However, it is not true that a rejection of a decision is caused by the lack of understanding “in most cases” because the lack of understanding can be overcome, by one who made a decision, via engaging in an open and honest discussion. He explains the decision clearly so those who did not understand can accept it. Most often however a decision is not accepted because it is understood correctly and deemed as wrong = unacceptable. This is precisely what happened with ‘FS’.
When you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.
Insulting and patronizing.
Trying to slip FS through by making it a matter of ethnic/cultural acceptance is devious.
See Jeff Mirus, Catholic Culture.
“When you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.
Insulting and patronizing.”
You are right, it is in fact a manifestation of an entitlement. The true meaning of PF’s offence with “non-understanding” is “You did not understand ME, how dare you to think I can propose something bad!” Thus, he does not bother to explain his “theological idea” because the issue is not about theology but about HIS “goodness” = HIM being rejected. By definition all he does is for the greater good; to reject his actions means to doubt his goodness.
Therefore, in the person of Pope Francis the Church has a huge metaphysical problem. “No one is good, only God.”
The Lord does not commit sacrileges, nor lead that, against His own sacramentals.