Pope Francis greets pilgrims at his general audience on Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024, at the Paul VI Audience Hall at the Vatican. (Credit: Vatican Media)
Pope Francis this week again defended the Vatican’s controversial document authorizing blessings for same-sex couples, with the Holy Father arguing that humans “must all respect each other” and stating that blessings should be extended to “everyone.”
The pope’s comments come from an exclusive Italian-language interview he gave to the Italian weekly print periodical Credere, which will be available in newsstands across Italy on Thursday.
When asked by editor Father Vincenzo Vitale about Fiducia Supplicans — the December document published by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) that authorized nonliturgical blessings for same-sex couples and others in “irregular situations” — the pope said that “the gravest sins … are those that disguise themselves with a more ‘angelic’ appearance.”
“No one is scandalized if I give a blessing to an entrepreneur who perhaps exploits people: and this is a very serious sin,” the Holy Father said. “Whereas they are scandalized if I give it to a homosexual … This is hypocrisy! We must all respect each other. Everyone.”
“I don’t bless a ‘homosexual marriage,’” the pope said. “I bless two people who love each other and I also ask them to pray for me.”
“Always in confessions, when these situations arrive, homosexual people, remarried people, I always pray and bless,” he continued. “The blessing is not to be denied to anyone. Everyone, everyone. Mind you, I am talking about people: those who are capable of receiving baptism,” Francis continued.
Pope Francis has come to the defense of the document several times since its publication. In a Jan. 26 audience with members of the DDF, the pope said that “moral perfection” isn’t a requirement for receiving a blessing.
The intent of the blessings, the pope said at the time, is “to concretely show the closeness of the Lord and of the Church to all those who, finding themselves in different situations, ask help to carry on — sometimes to begin — a journey of faith.”
Answering questions regarding Fiducia Supplicans, the pope said that “the Lord blesses everyone who is capable of being baptized, that is, every person.”
“But we are to take them by the hand and help them go down that road, not condemn them from the beginning,” he told the network. “And this is the pastoral work of the Church. This is very important work for confessors.”
The pope’s comments at Credere come amid continuing controversy over Fiducia Supplicans, which has been met with widespread criticism and concern centered on how it might be misconstrued. Backlash has come particularly from Church leaders in Africa and Eastern Europe.
Credere, which is part of the San Paolo Editorial Group and available only in print, was established on the occasion of the election of Pope Francis in 2013.
It is distributed throughout Italy with a weekly circulation of 60,000 copies and 200,000 readers, the Italian daily newspaper La Stampa reported.
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.
Vatican City, Oct 2, 2017 / 05:00 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The September 19 re-establishment of the Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for Science on the Family and Marriage is a good object lesson in the modus operandi of Pope Francis. It offers observers some helpful lessons about the Roman Pontiff’s leadership style.
The John Paul II Pontifical Institute, founded by the late Polish Pope, whom Pope Francis calls the “Pope of the Family”, has developed as well-respected institution in theological circles. It is known to foster and promote theological discussions on family and marriage issues at twelve campuses around the world.
The institute’s work was mentioned in the 2014 Synod on the Family’s instrumentum laboris – its working document. It is worth noting, however, that no professors of the institute were invited to serve as theological experts to the 2014 Synod.
Fr. José Granados, however, who is one of the institute’s most prominent faculty members, was included among the participants of the 2015 Synod.
Nevertheless, some have suggested the institute seems to have been sidelined under Pope Francis.
The appointment of Archbishop Paglia as Grand Chancellor of the institute, together with the appointment of Professor Pierangelo Sequeri as its president, were interpreted as a shift away from the institute’s ordinary approach, which some speculated the Pope considered too traditional.
With the motu proprio refounding the institute, Pope Francis apparently wanted dispel any perception that he had sidelined the institute.
Speaking with journalists Sep. 20, Sequeri remarked twice that “the Pope renews an institute that was considered sidelined, and involves the same professors of the institute in this renewal.”
The institute’s new direction will not take shape until its statutes are drafted. It is possible that some faculty members will be involved in the drafting process. The Pope, however, gave clear indication of his intentions in the motu proprio.
According to Archbishop Paglia, the new institute will broaden its focus to include history, economics, and other social sciences.The social science focus will include a new endowed chair, to be named for Gaudium et Spes, the Second Vatican Council’s pastoral constitution on the Church in the modern world.
However, much remains uncertain about the institute’s future. Nothing is known about how the new statutes will be developed, nor if the institute’s present professors will be invited to stay on.
So how can the establishment of this new theological institute can give clues about Pope Francis’ modus operandi?
First of all, it is clear that Pope Francis wants to make every reform very personal. He issued a motu proprio to renew a Pontifical Institute, an unusually involved step that might ordinarily be delegated, which seems intended to connect his desired reforms to his name and to his authority.
Likewise, this reform follows his pattern: all the others reforms he has enacted in the Curia have begun with a motu proprio or a chirograph.
In general, the Pope has left the details to be determined after announcing his intentions – discussion of the statutes of the new dicasteries has typically come after his announcements.
He has done the same with the new John Paul II Theological Institute. He issued a motu proprio, setting the direction, and he left the discussion of statutes, which govern the practical details of reform, to others.
A second characteristic of Pope Francis’ leadership style is that he likes to do reform “in the making.”
What does this mean? A response to the question can be provided by Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Evangelii gaudium.
In the exhortation, the Pope stressed that “giving priority to time means being concerned about initiating processes rather than possessing spaces”, and so “what we need, then, is to give priority to actions which generate new processes in society and engage other persons and groups who can develop them to the point where they bear fruit in significant historical events. Without anxiety, but with clear convictions and tenacity.”
The Pope begins reforms, and then he waits for things to organically move in the direction for which he is calling.
Finally, it is an old saying in leadership that “people are policy.” Pope Francis seems to approach personnel decisions uniquely. Rather than firing people, the Roman Pontiff prefers to add new people or new groups to decision-making processes, in order to rebalance the general discussion.
At the renewed John Paul II Institute, it seems unlikely that the Pope will dismiss the full professors, who are hired into tenured positions. Instead, he will add to the faculty new chairs on different topics in order to broaden the conversation.
And then, if history is a good predictor, he will wait to see what happens next.
Fr. Richard Cassidy, professor of Sacred Scripture at Sacred Heart Major Seminary, dresses in Roman prisoner garb as he holds a copy of his newest book, “A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians.” Fr. Cassidy’s eighth scholarly work, the book explores the subversive nature of St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, which the apostle wrote from behind bars in a Roman prison cell. / Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
Detroit, Mich., Apr 30, 2022 / 08:00 am (CNA).
It was a tough decision for Rick Cassidy as he began graduate studies at the University of Michigan in mid-1960s. Would he take the course on Imperial Rome, because of his love of history, or the course History of Slavery, because of his deep concern for social justice?
The Dearborn native chose the course on slavery. The insights he acquired have helped to guide Fr. Richard Cassidy’s scholarly work for three decades, including his latest work, “A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians“ (Herder & Herder, 2020).
Paul’s letter, composed in chains and secreted out of his Roman jail cell, is intentionally “counter-slavery” argues Father Cassidy, professor of Sacred Scripture at Sacred Heart Major Seminary since 2004, as well as “counter-emperor.” At its core, Philippians is an underground epistle that subverts the Roman power structure and the “lordship pretensions of Nero.” Reviewers praise the “distinctive thesis” of Father’s groundbreaking work as “fresh and illuminating,” making for “fascinating reading.”
This is Father Cassidy’s seventh book that examines the influence of Roman rule on the writers of the New Testament, and his eighth book overall. He returned to Ann Arbor on a rainy afternoon in late June to discuss his newest work.
Dan Gallio: St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians is most known for its soaring declaration of the divinity Christ, before whom one day “every knee must bend,” and “every tongue proclaim” his universal lordship (2:6-11).
Your new book presents a unique argument: Paul’s letter is primarily a “subversive” document of resistance against the Roman Empire—particularly against emperor worship and slavery. How did you arrive at this against-the-grain interpretation?
“A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians” (Herder & Herder, 2020) is Fr. Cassidy’s eighth book and a follow-up on his 2001 work, “Paul in Chains: Roman Imprisonment and the Letters of St. Paul”. Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
Father Cassidy: These insights were the result of long hours with the text, spending a lot of prayer time for guidance, as to Paul’s situation.
The issue of slavery came into play strongly. I now saw that Jesus was executed as a violator of Roman sovereignty, condemned by Pilate, executed under Emperor Tiberius—and that this was the slave’s form of death. This is a crucial point.
In regards to the two topics you mention, I had the intuition that the Letter to the Philippians was “counter-emperor cult” and “counter-slavery.” First, the self emptying of Christ from on high—descending downward into human form, downward, downward to the point of the slave’s death on a Roman cross—and then you have St. Paul’s wonderful words in chapter 2, verses 9-11.
My insight was that there is going to be a redressing of what has happened. Because of the great faithfulness of Jesus Christ, the Father intervenes and begins the lifting up, the ascending of Christ, where the Father exalts Jesus and bestows upon him “the name above every other name.”
So I can now speak about this famous passage in terms of a kind of “drama”: four scenes that represent the descent of Jesus, and four scenes that represent his ascent, akin to a medieval passion play. The Father intervenes on Christ’s behalf, conferring upon him the name of “Lord.” Now all of creation, including the emperor, the governor, the imperial personnel, are all subject to Jesus. They have to prostrate themselves before the name of Jesus.
DG: So, essentially, Philippians is subversive because it makes a political statement as much as a theological one.
FC: Yes, but for some, it is a great privilege to genuflect at the name of Jesus. This includes slaves! Paul had integrated slaves into his community in Philippi. They were empowered now to proclaim the name of Jesus, standing alongside free men and women. They are standing alongside the Roman imperial power structure, all involved in the same process of bowing before Christ and proclaiming his name.
A security guard at Sacred Heart Major Seminary helps Fr. Cassidy don his “prisoner’s clothing” for a photo shoot promoting Fr. Cassidy’s latest book, “A Roman Commentary on St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians,” which details Paul’s experience behind bars and the conditions under which he wrote his Letter to the Philippians. Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
And that name is “Lord.” Jesus is being acclaimed as Lord, and not the emperor, to the glory of God the Father. This is the decisive element of Philippians 2:6-11, blended together in this one passage.
DG: You provide a forty-four-page introduction to the social situation of the Roman colony of Philippi. Why did you feel such an informative but lengthy introduction was necessary to support your thesis?
FC: I had to establish that conditions at Philippi mirror conditions at Rome. This is important. Philippi was like “Little Rome.” When Paul is speaking of conditions at Philippi, his is also experiencing the same oppressive conditions at Rome as a chained prisoner. I had to establish that emperor worship was everywhere, in Philippi’s renowned amphitheater, in the streets, in public artifacts. That is why I had to go into an extensive introduction to set the stage of what Paul is doing in his letter.
DG: Your appendices are extensive, too, like bookends to the introduction, driving the thesis home again using illustrations.
FC: There is one illustration of a monument where slaves are chained, and a slave trader is proclaiming his prowess as a slave trader. This monument to the degradation of slavery was at a city adjacent to Philippi. Paul almost certainly passed by it on his way to and from Philippi. It was discovered back in the 1930s and almost destroyed in the war by Nazi bombings.
DG: Paul is sometimes criticized by revisionist commentators for not rejecting the institution of slavery in his letters. Is your book an answer to these critics?
FC: Paul’s approach to slavery is complicated. There are some letters where he seems to envision the imminent return of Christ. Possibly he minimized the importance of slaves being freed in these letters. However, in Philippians, his final letter before his death, he addresses the issue definitively. It is very undermining of slavery.
I intended to de-establish the idea that Paul acquiesced to slavery. He did not acquiesce. The laudatory prepublication comments by scholars make me think the book will have a decisive role in re-imaging Paul.
Against a prevailing notion that St. Paul “acquiesced” to the idea of slavery in his writings, Fr. Cassidy’s book aims to counter the idea by showing how St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians actually served a subversive purpose in a Roman empire dominated by emperor worship and tight controls. Valaurian Waller | Detroit Catholic
DG: Back to Philippians 2:6-11. Why do you maintain this passage is not a hymn or baptismal catechesis, as is customarily believed, but is an original composition of Paul? Is this position another example of your counter exegesis?
FC: This is not some other preexisting hymn. No! This is fresh imaging. Visceral imaging. This is intensity from identifying with Christ as the “slave crucified.” No one else could have composed this passage. And Paul could not have composed this passage until he was in Roman chains and could see the threat posed against Jesus by the counterfeit claims that Emperor Nero is Lord.
DG: It’s almost like the passage is “supra-inspired,” that he would get such an original insight while in such dreadful circumstances.
FC: Correct. And there is a real question as to how this letter could be transmitted from prison, with the security and censorship. In garments? In pottery? It is possible the original written letter was confiscated. So how is Paul is getting his subversive thoughts past the Roman guards?
I suggest in my book that Paul was drilling his associates, Timothy and Epaphroditus, to memorize his letter, given the role of memory in early Christian life.
DG: With your busy teaching and pastoral duties, where to you find the motivation and energy to produce such a thoroughly researched, and beautifully written, work of scholarship?
FC: It’s Spirit driven!
DG: Is the Spirit driving you to another book?
FC: I would say so. After a book comes to publication, there is always a kind of mellowing period. So right now I have not identified the next project. I am appreciating the graces I have received from this book, and trusting that the same Spirit who has shepherded me through this sequence will still stand by me, guiding me forward.
“I don’t bless a homosexual marriage, I bless two people who love each other and I also ask them to pray for me.” Ruffled at our hypocrisy, His Holiness sticks to his guns. Righteous indignation or moral schizophrenia?
Exploitive entrepreneurs, what about them he queries? Why the difference hypocrites? After all Francis suggests, these are loving people. Isn’t that all that matters? We can put aside disordered behavior, called an abomination that transgresses natural law, behavior Christ identifies unworthy of heaven.
Nonetheless, Francis’ logic follows that we should knowingly bless any and all sinners for their friendships, confirm the love they have for eachother, and ask them to pray for us. Surely novel and paradigmatic.
Once upon a time, public sinners were required to do public penance before their sins were absolved and they received sacramental grace -blessing public sinners without confession and penance is the ultimate “hypocrisy”.
Michael, there has to be at least a manifest desire or interest to repent. The priest can bless the good intent of a prospective penitent. My comment above is sarcasm, in the event it was misunderstood.
We read: “Pope Francis this week again defended the Vatican’s controversial document authorizing blessings for same-sex couples [!], with the Holy Father arguing that humans [persons as such?] ‘must all respect each other’ and stating that blessings should be extended to ‘everyone’.”
Everyone as in Every One? Working both sides of the street, he equates blessing of individual “persons” with blessing not of persons but of “couples.” Case in point:
“Always in confessions [individuals?], when these situations arrive, homosexual people, remarried people, I always pray and bless,” he continued. “The blessing [so now it IS a sacramental blessing?] is not to be denied to anyone [as in Any One?] Everyone, everyone [as in Every One?]. Mind you, I am talking about people: those [individual persons?] who are capable of receiving baptism” Francis continued [say what?].
As in blessing every prostitute and her pimp. Or every wifebeater committed to continuing with wifebeating and his submissive wife. wiWhat could be wrong with any of this?
It is now long witnessed how leftists in the secular and ostensibly “religious” realms level accusations against those who resist their deconstructionism with charges that perfectly characterize themselves.
Hypocrisy indeed…his lack of self awareness goes over the boarder into mental disorder. Should anyone regard that as disrespectful it could be said that it provides him some pity. After all, it could just be bold nefariousness.
I’ve often thought that mental illness could be the most charitable interpretation in his case, but the episodes of mendacity are too calculating in their cynical manipulation. He is both a Peronist and an admirer of the late Cdl. Martini by his own admission. He has denied the bedrock faith principle of immutable truth many times. I hoped he would finally get a wakeup call from this FS arrogance launched just before Christmas, which placed a damper on the joy of the season for millions. Nope. It was launched one day after his birthday in the tradition of tyrants where particularly autocratic measures are performed to honor the dictator. I believe he is as bad as he seems.
“I believe he [PF] is as bad as he seems.”
You are not alone, dear Edward, in that godly discernment.
The alarm bells are waking up many a faithful & discerning Catholic. Even some of the episcopal hierarchy are opening their eyes to the anti-Apostolic pronouncements. Praise God, they’ll do more than just play politics and will organize themselves to do something constructive to keep the core truths of Catholicism intact until we have a godly Pope again.
It won’t be long for our LORD Jesus Christ promised to be with us to the end of time.
I am pleased to pope-splain you to yourself: “The Pontiff is NOT blessing a gay marriage, he’s only means that he is just spontaneously blessing people united in the sexually abusive act of sodomy. And he would likewise spontaneously bless any two people (two for now) who were united in other kinds of sexually abusive behavior. These other kinds will include for example “polyamorous unions,” which blessings had to be set aside for later promotion at subsequent “synods,” even though the Pontiff was pleased to see thst they were given explicit mention in his Synod working documents.”
And a final passing note regarding unwarranted fesrs of hypocrisy, because in our prevailing post-Christian, neo-pagan cult, it is impossible to be hypocritical, because hypocrisy is defined as “the tribute vice pays to virtue.” Now that Christian virtue is officially passe in Rome, there is no reason for anyone in leadership to pretend to give it homage.
No hypocrisy is possible anymore. A new PR jargon is in order.
The Pope made a false parallel. He’s reported as saying that “I don’t bless a ‘homosexual marriage. . . I bless two people who love each other.”
He then makes a false parallel by saying that this is no different than blessing an entrepreneur who may exploit people. The problem is that the entrepreneur who is receiving the blessing is not even remotely in the act of exploiting anyone at the moment that he’s being blessed.
However, would the Pope bless the entrepreneur while he’s in his office either exploiting people or about to exploit people? The context is critical.
Francis’ answer to Credere also appears to misrepresent both Fiducia Supplicans and the opposition which it has received. In the preview of his answers provided to the press, the Pope presents a scenario of blessing an individual on his own, whilst Fiducia Supplicans expressly speaks about the blessing of “couples.”
His complaint has already been swiftly criticized by clergy and lay commentators as being a “straw man” argument, for he was defending a form of blessing – of an individual on his own – which no one was opposing.
Years ago, I read that the demons do everything they can to incite man to sin, but when it comes to the sin of sodomy, the act is so heinous, that once it commences, even the demons leave because, by their angelic nature, it is too revolting to behold or endure.
PF, Biblical scholar that he is, consistently overlooks the recorded fact that God Himself nuked two cities off the face of the earth on account of this sin. I beg God have mercy on him.
The scandal is not in giving a blessing to a “homosexual” – it is in giving one to a same-sex “couple” jointly, so as to give the impression that their “relationship” / “marriage” / “union” is being blessed.
I hate to bring this up but what of 3 people who say they love each other? Love is love…
A family member used to work with offenders in a correctional facility . Child molesters stated that they loved their victims and offered them real affection that had been lacking in the child’s family. Usually broken families.
Once you stray from a biblical perspective, almost anything can be rationalized.
Totally legitimate point. What if a “minor attracted adult” and a minor are involved in a consensual “loving”relationship? Would they be blessed as a couple? If not, why not?
The Pope keeps trotting out the straw man argument that, “moral perfection” is not required. It’s a thinly veiled shot at his favorite targets of castigation, those “rigid, legalistic, backwardist” Catholics who still bother with moral theology. This straw man appeals to people’s fallen sensibilities which chafe at being called to holiness and dealing honestly with their sins. However, as others have pointed out, a blessing of the kind described in Fiducia Supplicans, for a morally perfect person, would be a pointless gift. This pope is a theological and philosophical lightweight (at best) and a dissembler (at worst). I literally avoid hearing or reading anything he says anymore. It causes the opposite of edification.
Correction Francis: To not be scandalized by blessing gay couples is to be morally and spiritually bankrupt. At least it’s clear where Francis stands now.
Does this come under the same category as «blessing» armies, tanks, battleships and other weaponry or car parks, supermarkets and small furry animals?
I’m sure there is blessing for almost anything.
Familiarity breeds etc.
This hypocrisy highlighted by Pope Francis here is what most of us Catholics unknowingly have as a gap in considering bedroom sins from boardroom sins, the sexual sins from the social sins. Most of us have an unbalanced and faulty moral focus which most often only see sexual sins but are blind to social sins. The bedroom sins (or virtues) but not the boardroom sins (or virtues) of peoples are singularly focused upon so much and made the gauge of one’s Catholicity. Who is deemed worthy and deserving or not to receive the sacraments, here about blessings, is measured by the bedroom sins or virtues. The faithful, full and whole Catholic view entails a balanced complementarity of both these concerns: the sexual and the social sins and virtues. To be focused only on one makes the moral compass defective and incomplete. We find this neglected element of social justice in our Catholic faith dramatically contrasted as a reminder in the prophet Isaiah’s declaration that “the Lord is a God of justice” (Isaiah 30:18). On this matter, the prophet’s message from God stands out about making sure that our concern for the propriety of our spiritual life, prayer and liturgical worship (for example, Vetus Ordo or Novus Ordo?) is significantly lesser compared to God’s primary requirement as to whether we have fulfilled social justice (that is giving active care and voice to and in helping the lost, the least, and the last) first before offering our praises and worship to God: “When you spread out your hands, I will close my eyes to you; Though you pray the more, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood! Wash yourselves clean! Put away your misdeeds from before my eyes; cease doing evil; learn to do good. Make justice your aim: redress the wronged, hear the orphan’s plea, defend the widow” (Isaiah 1:15-17).
Very kindly intended but wildly heretical equivocations, dear ‘DD’.
Sadly, the intention in seeking a blessing is to show everyone in the Church & the world that their sinful homosexual coupling is not illicit at all; for GOD’s commandments & 2,000 years of Christian moral theology are actually misinformed!
By blessing them, PF, CF, JM and accomplices are simply sealing the terrible eternal fate of the unrepentant, God-despising homosexual sinners whilst – accompanied by their apologists – themselves slipping into the devil’s trap.
Hardly a pretty fate for disobedient clerics & lay, and stark evidence of God’s Justice to those Catholics & other Christians devoted to hearing and obeying our LORD Jesus Christ & His Apostles.
As has been said again & again, no financiers ever present themselves for a blessing as corporate sinners. The analogy is specious.
Ever seeking to hear & obey King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty
Those orphans, in today’s society, are primarily children from broken homes (sorry “blended family”), whose parents either never married, or divorced, or have had a succession of boyfriends/girlfriends.
That is what sexual sins do to children. And it is sufficiently widespread that it accounts for over 50% of children in our society. Sexual abuse of minors accounts for over 25%. I think you’ll be hard pressed to find a similarly harmful “boardroom sins” at such high rates in our society. Even the abuse of illegal immigrants here is primarily “bedroom”, not “boardroom”. At what percentage do “bedroom sins” become important enough to merit primary attention?
Athanasius above (7:10) – “minor attracted adult” –
Get with it, Athanasius. It’s Minor Attracted Person (MAP) and it’s aleady a thing. Born that way, dontcha know.
There are those who are aware that they are sinners like everyone else and resolve to work at overcoming their sinfulness. Blessing such people does not signal the Church’s approval of their sinfulness.
There are also those who are resolved to continue engaging in sinful activity with another and the two of them wrongly desire that the Church appear to legitimize that sinful activity by blessing them. Bergoglio is happy to aid and abet them in scandalizing the faithful in this way.
And Pilate said to the Pontiff Francis: ‘I have heard it reported that this Jesus, whom some of your co-religionists say is The Son of God, has given a public sermon, commanding that even if a man looks at a woman lustfully, he has committed adultery with her in his heart. And his apostle called Paul has written a letter to members of your Church, saying that our subjects who practice fornication and sodomy will not be permitted to enter this new kingdom ruled by this Jesus of yours. What do you say about this?’
And the Pontiff Francis said in reply: “We have no king bur Caesar.”
Discovering something is wrong and pointing it out, is not “being scandalized that reveals hypocrisy”. Attaching the description “disguised as angelic” to somehow prove that the worst of sins is at work and is discoverable and should be sought among the revelation, is an undue derision, not shown to be applicable, misrepresenting further what should have our attention. Such statements made in a disembodied way with no actual general pathology are inflammatory and degrading of everyone.
‘ The prophet Joel inspires us with words rich in pathos:
>> Between the vestibule and the altar let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep and say, “Spare thy people O Lord, make not thy heritage a reproach.” <<
This priestly intercession is a service to which all of us are called. It belongs to our baptismal covenant. By that covenant we open our hearts to pray with tears for the Body of Christ in all its members, so many of whom suffer outrage. we ask that our compassion may fan embers of hope into a living fire, to shed light within us and about us. '
– Bishop Erik Varden, O.C.S.O. – in MAGNIFICAT, Vol. 25, No. 12, February 14 2024 Meditation of the Day
“I don’t bless a homosexual marriage, I bless two people who love each other and I also ask them to pray for me.” Ruffled at our hypocrisy, His Holiness sticks to his guns. Righteous indignation or moral schizophrenia?
Exploitive entrepreneurs, what about them he queries? Why the difference hypocrites? After all Francis suggests, these are loving people. Isn’t that all that matters? We can put aside disordered behavior, called an abomination that transgresses natural law, behavior Christ identifies unworthy of heaven.
Nonetheless, Francis’ logic follows that we should knowingly bless any and all sinners for their friendships, confirm the love they have for eachother, and ask them to pray for us. Surely novel and paradigmatic.
“Righteous indignation or moral schizophrenia?”
Rhetorical question?
Yes. The comment is a satire.
Once upon a time, public sinners were required to do public penance before their sins were absolved and they received sacramental grace -blessing public sinners without confession and penance is the ultimate “hypocrisy”.
Michael, there has to be at least a manifest desire or interest to repent. The priest can bless the good intent of a prospective penitent. My comment above is sarcasm, in the event it was misunderstood.
Exactly!
We read: “Pope Francis this week again defended the Vatican’s controversial document authorizing blessings for same-sex couples [!], with the Holy Father arguing that humans [persons as such?] ‘must all respect each other’ and stating that blessings should be extended to ‘everyone’.”
Everyone as in Every One? Working both sides of the street, he equates blessing of individual “persons” with blessing not of persons but of “couples.” Case in point:
“Always in confessions [individuals?], when these situations arrive, homosexual people, remarried people, I always pray and bless,” he continued. “The blessing [so now it IS a sacramental blessing?] is not to be denied to anyone [as in Any One?] Everyone, everyone [as in Every One?]. Mind you, I am talking about people: those [individual persons?] who are capable of receiving baptism” Francis continued [say what?].
As in blessing every prostitute and her pimp. Or every wifebeater committed to continuing with wifebeating and his submissive wife. wiWhat could be wrong with any of this?
It is now long witnessed how leftists in the secular and ostensibly “religious” realms level accusations against those who resist their deconstructionism with charges that perfectly characterize themselves.
Hypocrisy indeed…his lack of self awareness goes over the boarder into mental disorder. Should anyone regard that as disrespectful it could be said that it provides him some pity. After all, it could just be bold nefariousness.
I’ve often thought that mental illness could be the most charitable interpretation in his case, but the episodes of mendacity are too calculating in their cynical manipulation. He is both a Peronist and an admirer of the late Cdl. Martini by his own admission. He has denied the bedrock faith principle of immutable truth many times. I hoped he would finally get a wakeup call from this FS arrogance launched just before Christmas, which placed a damper on the joy of the season for millions. Nope. It was launched one day after his birthday in the tradition of tyrants where particularly autocratic measures are performed to honor the dictator. I believe he is as bad as he seems.
“I believe he [PF] is as bad as he seems.”
You are not alone, dear Edward, in that godly discernment.
The alarm bells are waking up many a faithful & discerning Catholic. Even some of the episcopal hierarchy are opening their eyes to the anti-Apostolic pronouncements. Praise God, they’ll do more than just play politics and will organize themselves to do something constructive to keep the core truths of Catholicism intact until we have a godly Pope again.
It won’t be long for our LORD Jesus Christ promised to be with us to the end of time.
Dr. Rice, Please email me. Doing research on RCism. You seem lije a serious guy. JeffreyLahman@gmail.com
The only problem with “blessing” a couple an extramarital sexual relationship is that this is not a Christian practice.
God is love. Sin is not love. To call sin love is a lie, and the father of lies is Satan.
1 John 4:8, John 8:44, Matthew 16:23
Dear Pontiff Francis:
I am pleased to pope-splain you to yourself: “The Pontiff is NOT blessing a gay marriage, he’s only means that he is just spontaneously blessing people united in the sexually abusive act of sodomy. And he would likewise spontaneously bless any two people (two for now) who were united in other kinds of sexually abusive behavior. These other kinds will include for example “polyamorous unions,” which blessings had to be set aside for later promotion at subsequent “synods,” even though the Pontiff was pleased to see thst they were given explicit mention in his Synod working documents.”
And a final passing note regarding unwarranted fesrs of hypocrisy, because in our prevailing post-Christian, neo-pagan cult, it is impossible to be hypocritical, because hypocrisy is defined as “the tribute vice pays to virtue.” Now that Christian virtue is officially passe in Rome, there is no reason for anyone in leadership to pretend to give it homage.
No hypocrisy is possible anymore. A new PR jargon is in order.
Nicely done, Chris in Maryland.
The one standard that leftists like Bergoglio always fail to live up to is their own.
Sorry. Can’t get past the title.
Lord help us.
The Pope made a false parallel. He’s reported as saying that “I don’t bless a ‘homosexual marriage. . . I bless two people who love each other.”
He then makes a false parallel by saying that this is no different than blessing an entrepreneur who may exploit people. The problem is that the entrepreneur who is receiving the blessing is not even remotely in the act of exploiting anyone at the moment that he’s being blessed.
However, would the Pope bless the entrepreneur while he’s in his office either exploiting people or about to exploit people? The context is critical.
Right-on, dear Steve.
No financier presents themselves for a blessing on the basis that they are engaged in sin.
One witnesses shared:
Francis’ answer to Credere also appears to misrepresent both Fiducia Supplicans and the opposition which it has received. In the preview of his answers provided to the press, the Pope presents a scenario of blessing an individual on his own, whilst Fiducia Supplicans expressly speaks about the blessing of “couples.”
His complaint has already been swiftly criticized by clergy and lay commentators as being a “straw man” argument, for he was defending a form of blessing – of an individual on his own – which no one was opposing.
Years ago, I read that the demons do everything they can to incite man to sin, but when it comes to the sin of sodomy, the act is so heinous, that once it commences, even the demons leave because, by their angelic nature, it is too revolting to behold or endure.
PF, Biblical scholar that he is, consistently overlooks the recorded fact that God Himself nuked two cities off the face of the earth on account of this sin. I beg God have mercy on him.
The scandal is not in giving a blessing to a “homosexual” – it is in giving one to a same-sex “couple” jointly, so as to give the impression that their “relationship” / “marriage” / “union” is being blessed.
Re ‘I bless two people who [think / presume they] love each other’ – some may wonder if the [‘old-fashioned’] reference to ‘two’ is simply the thin end of the wedge for (say) https://www.yahoo.com/news/meet-people-quads-foursome-relationships-223200950.html
See the string of comments that I posted below the article at https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/02/01/living-with-same-sex-attraction-in-the-aftermath-of-fs/ to reflect on possible ways to tone down the confusion.
Recommended reading – “I Made a Promise to God” by Regis Martin about Fr. Fessio of Ignatius Press in Today’s Crisis Magazine stop.
For which Jesuit do you have more respect?
I hate to bring this up but what of 3 people who say they love each other? Love is love…
A family member used to work with offenders in a correctional facility . Child molesters stated that they loved their victims and offered them real affection that had been lacking in the child’s family. Usually broken families.
Once you stray from a biblical perspective, almost anything can be rationalized.
Totally legitimate point. What if a “minor attracted adult” and a minor are involved in a consensual “loving”relationship? Would they be blessed as a couple? If not, why not?
Well, speaking of judgmental hypocrites. I just don’t pay attention anymore to his pronouncements and pretzel logic.
As the song says,”give me some of that ole time religion…”
Amen.
It’s good enough for me.
🙂
Walter Brennan as Pastor Rosier Pile, earnestly sang it in Sergeant York while converting Alvin.
The Pope keeps trotting out the straw man argument that, “moral perfection” is not required. It’s a thinly veiled shot at his favorite targets of castigation, those “rigid, legalistic, backwardist” Catholics who still bother with moral theology. This straw man appeals to people’s fallen sensibilities which chafe at being called to holiness and dealing honestly with their sins. However, as others have pointed out, a blessing of the kind described in Fiducia Supplicans, for a morally perfect person, would be a pointless gift. This pope is a theological and philosophical lightweight (at best) and a dissembler (at worst). I literally avoid hearing or reading anything he says anymore. It causes the opposite of edification.
here is a very good witness from:
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/02/07/hypocrisy-and-same-sex-blessings/
Correction Francis: To not be scandalized by blessing gay couples is to be morally and spiritually bankrupt. At least it’s clear where Francis stands now.
Pope Francis in the past has denied blessing to the Mafia…..
Does this come under the same category as «blessing» armies, tanks, battleships and other weaponry or car parks, supermarkets and small furry animals?
I’m sure there is blessing for almost anything.
Familiarity breeds etc.
This hypocrisy highlighted by Pope Francis here is what most of us Catholics unknowingly have as a gap in considering bedroom sins from boardroom sins, the sexual sins from the social sins. Most of us have an unbalanced and faulty moral focus which most often only see sexual sins but are blind to social sins. The bedroom sins (or virtues) but not the boardroom sins (or virtues) of peoples are singularly focused upon so much and made the gauge of one’s Catholicity. Who is deemed worthy and deserving or not to receive the sacraments, here about blessings, is measured by the bedroom sins or virtues. The faithful, full and whole Catholic view entails a balanced complementarity of both these concerns: the sexual and the social sins and virtues. To be focused only on one makes the moral compass defective and incomplete. We find this neglected element of social justice in our Catholic faith dramatically contrasted as a reminder in the prophet Isaiah’s declaration that “the Lord is a God of justice” (Isaiah 30:18). On this matter, the prophet’s message from God stands out about making sure that our concern for the propriety of our spiritual life, prayer and liturgical worship (for example, Vetus Ordo or Novus Ordo?) is significantly lesser compared to God’s primary requirement as to whether we have fulfilled social justice (that is giving active care and voice to and in helping the lost, the least, and the last) first before offering our praises and worship to God: “When you spread out your hands, I will close my eyes to you; Though you pray the more, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood! Wash yourselves clean! Put away your misdeeds from before my eyes; cease doing evil; learn to do good. Make justice your aim: redress the wronged, hear the orphan’s plea, defend the widow” (Isaiah 1:15-17).
Very kindly intended but wildly heretical equivocations, dear ‘DD’.
Sadly, the intention in seeking a blessing is to show everyone in the Church & the world that their sinful homosexual coupling is not illicit at all; for GOD’s commandments & 2,000 years of Christian moral theology are actually misinformed!
By blessing them, PF, CF, JM and accomplices are simply sealing the terrible eternal fate of the unrepentant, God-despising homosexual sinners whilst – accompanied by their apologists – themselves slipping into the devil’s trap.
Hardly a pretty fate for disobedient clerics & lay, and stark evidence of God’s Justice to those Catholics & other Christians devoted to hearing and obeying our LORD Jesus Christ & His Apostles.
As has been said again & again, no financiers ever present themselves for a blessing as corporate sinners. The analogy is specious.
Ever seeking to hear & obey King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty
Deacon Dom!
How can you possibly talk about what “most of us Catholics” do or don’t believe?
Who are you to judge? You’ve never even seen or talked to the people you’re spouting these nasty comments about.
Your compulsive pope-splaining, even in the face of unprecedented Bergoglian heterodoxy, has resulted in you becoming a rigid, judgmental ideologue.
If your lashing out in this way is a fruit of this papacy, then I’m afraid it is not one derived of the Holy Spirit.
Those orphans, in today’s society, are primarily children from broken homes (sorry “blended family”), whose parents either never married, or divorced, or have had a succession of boyfriends/girlfriends.
That is what sexual sins do to children. And it is sufficiently widespread that it accounts for over 50% of children in our society. Sexual abuse of minors accounts for over 25%. I think you’ll be hard pressed to find a similarly harmful “boardroom sins” at such high rates in our society. Even the abuse of illegal immigrants here is primarily “bedroom”, not “boardroom”. At what percentage do “bedroom sins” become important enough to merit primary attention?
Athanasius above (7:10) – “minor attracted adult” –
Get with it, Athanasius. It’s Minor Attracted Person (MAP) and it’s aleady a thing. Born that way, dontcha know.
So you’re saying that that’s an acceptable lifestyle?
Deacon Dom,
There are “bedroom” sins of the natural sort. and those that are unnatural. Scripture has plenty of strong words to say about those also.
Recommended reading – Linda Gray -‘I’m glad a Priest never blessed my irregular unions’ – Today – Crisis Magazine.
EVERYONE is welcome in Christ’s House – but it’s HIS House so He makes the rules.
There are those who are aware that they are sinners like everyone else and resolve to work at overcoming their sinfulness. Blessing such people does not signal the Church’s approval of their sinfulness.
There are also those who are resolved to continue engaging in sinful activity with another and the two of them wrongly desire that the Church appear to legitimize that sinful activity by blessing them. Bergoglio is happy to aid and abet them in scandalizing the faithful in this way.
And Pilate said to the Pontiff Francis: ‘I have heard it reported that this Jesus, whom some of your co-religionists say is The Son of God, has given a public sermon, commanding that even if a man looks at a woman lustfully, he has committed adultery with her in his heart. And his apostle called Paul has written a letter to members of your Church, saying that our subjects who practice fornication and sodomy will not be permitted to enter this new kingdom ruled by this Jesus of yours. What do you say about this?’
And the Pontiff Francis said in reply: “We have no king bur Caesar.”
Discovering something is wrong and pointing it out, is not “being scandalized that reveals hypocrisy”. Attaching the description “disguised as angelic” to somehow prove that the worst of sins is at work and is discoverable and should be sought among the revelation, is an undue derision, not shown to be applicable, misrepresenting further what should have our attention. Such statements made in a disembodied way with no actual general pathology are inflammatory and degrading of everyone.
‘ The prophet Joel inspires us with words rich in pathos:
>> Between the vestibule and the altar let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep and say, “Spare thy people O Lord, make not thy heritage a reproach.” <<
This priestly intercession is a service to which all of us are called. It belongs to our baptismal covenant. By that covenant we open our hearts to pray with tears for the Body of Christ in all its members, so many of whom suffer outrage. we ask that our compassion may fan embers of hope into a living fire, to shed light within us and about us. '
– Bishop Erik Varden, O.C.S.O. – in MAGNIFICAT, Vol. 25, No. 12, February 14 2024 Meditation of the Day
https://aleteia.org/daily-prayer/wednesday-february-14-2/daily-meditation-1/