There has been much talk recently about blessings, and of course, the Blessing Problem Child, Fiducia Supplicans. (FS)
(If you would like an overview of the document and subsequent…discussion, the Wikipedia article is useful.)
I was a little surprised to see that I had never written about FC. I’m not sure why. Perhaps because when it was issued, I was weary of everything that had been emanating from Rome for years by that point. Come to think of it, I’m sure that’s it.
As the issue bubbles up again, perhaps about to come to a boil, I’ll just point this out.
Those who justify FS at every level say that it’s fine, fine, fine, because it’s not blessing a couple as a couple, but the individuals in their journey, and so on. It’s just like the blessing at the end of Mass! Todos!
If it’s just like the blessing at the end of Mass or any gathering, why is it necessary?
The point is also made by defenders and, of course, by the document itself, that this type of blessing doesn’t infer approval of the status quo of the relationship, but could be seen as a prayer for God’s assistance in helping the couple (or…more?) grow in God’s grace towards more conformity with his will. Sick, doctors, etc.
Well, guess what?
You, as a person struggling with any sin or situation, can go to anyone, including a priest, and say, “I’m struggling with this. Can you pray for me? Can we pray together that God might give me strength, courage, and grace and that I might be open to it?”
You can do those things. You can offer that prayer for yourself and for others. But that is different from a blessing, which indeed does infer God’s approval, not just of the people involved and their intrinsic goodness as his beloved children, but of the situation.
More knowledgeable people than I–called theologians, of which I am not one–have parsed this.
In short. If the FS blessing is no different from the ways we’re blessed in general at Mass, no matter who we are, then it wasn’t necessary.
If the purpose of these “blessings” is to specifically help people who are aware of their distance from the mind of Christ find the courage and grace to change and be more open to God’s will, well, that’s not the purpose of a blessing. There are other forms of prayer for that.
No, it’s obvious to anyone that the purpose of FS was to utilize–we might even say weaponize–the Church’s nuanced thinking on the workings of grace in human life and the awareness of God’s presence in every situation to recognize homosexual relationships as a good and establish space for them in the life of the Church.
That’s it. It’s pretty simple, and it is very obvious.
And as I said on X the other day, in regard to the Holy Father’s continual invocation of “unity”:
… before we go much further down this road–of Germans, the SSPX, ecumenism and everything–we need a refresher from Church leadership on what “unity” actually is, what breaks it and why, and one that addresses us as intelligent human beings who not only can process basic logic, but also have pretty good situational awareness of the present moment. That is – we can see and hear just fine.
That is to say, in this context: How about some forthrightness on this matter? For once?
And yes, FS could be abrogated. If Summorum Pontificum can be tossed, so can this.
(Editor’s note: This post first appeared on the “Charlotte Was Both” site and is reposted here, in slightly different form, with kind permission of the author.)
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.
Considering the papal visit to continental Africa, the kissing Cardinal Fernandez should simply announce that both he and FC have outlived their shelf life (a “couple”!), and kiss off Rome and go back to Argentina. Save the pope the janitorial embarrassment. Restore perennial Church unity for Africa annd all those other hierarchies that blew the whistle on FC.
FS
Ah, thank you! Late night.
Excellent.
Thank you, A.W.
Beautiful. Thank you Amy. Let’s hope and pray the Pope does something more than talk about unity.
THANK YOU!!!
“The arguments for Fiducia Supplicans continue to make no sense whatsoever.”
Very true. Excellent article.
“Excellent article.”
Except for this statement:
“If Summorum Pontificum can be tossed, so can this.”
Summorum Pontificum is consistent with The Teaching Magisterium of The Catholic Church, grounded in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture; whereas Fiducia Supplicans denies The Teaching Magisterium Of The Catholic Church, grounded in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, obviously due to the fact that it denies Catholic Teaching regarding Faith and Morals and has no authority, except perhaps for those who have remained Baptized Catholics who have been permitted to remain physically in Christ’s Church while denying The Divinity Of The Word Of God, but rather have created their own counterfeit magisterium , this error being illuminated and thus becoming obvious due to The Catholic Church’s True Magisterial Teaching, that was in The Beginning, Is Now,And Forever Will Be. It is that difference that makes all the difference.
“For The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might make known new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the Revelation, the Deposit of Faith, delivered through the Apostles. ”
Therein lies the crux of the matter. The erroneous counterfeit magisterium that is attempting to subsist within The One Body Of Christ is being illuminated by The Deposit of Faith.
If you remove this erroneous afterthought , If Summorum Pontificum can be tossed, so can this”, you will have an excellent article, Amy, consistent with your first premise regarding The Deposit Of Faith Christ Has Entrusted To His Church For The Salvation Of Souls🙏✝️💕🌹
Analogy in defense of Fiducia Supplicans is invalid when a universal blessing is compared to a specification of persons. And in this instance blessing of persons who practice contested, disordered sexual behavior.
Of course the tossing of Summorum Pontificum underscores an agenda. To date there doesn’t appear that Leo XVI is going to dramatically change course from his predecessor except in style and finish. Unity will continue to be an irresolvable challenge.
“To date there doesn’t appear that Leo XVI is going to dramatically change”. Leo [XVI] has yet to be elected and may never be so we’re instead compelled to respond to Leo XIV.
If the blessing is not intended for “a couple,” but for the individuals “on their journey,” how’s this for a solution? When the individuals making up a couple of whatever irregular variety approach a priest for a blessing, the priest simply says to Member A, “Have a seat while I bless Member B.” When that blessing is finished, he says to Member B, “Have a seat while I bless Member A.” (I’m only partly kidding.) Sure, it’ll take a little longer, but we’re faced with eternity.
The abbreviation for Fiducia should be FS not “FC”? The abbreviation for Traditionis would be TC.
I suppose SP is abbreviation for Summorum Pontificum?
The preaching of the Gospel is what falls upon everyone and is its own type of blessing flowing from the Redemption. As in Johan where the message of repentance was for the whole of the people Jews and non-Jews and the animals too that had to bespeak this reality. And you just can’t substitute for the preaching; in fact this underlies the Jonah narrative where the prophet was running away from mission on the one hand and then on the other hand despairing of the meaning of his life having done some of the work now “looking for his blessing”.
Jonah 2:9
Jonah 3:6
Jonah 4:8
3rd para. 2nd sentence, Jonah not “Johan”
Yes. Thanks for the correction. We’ve updated the essay for clarity.
Amy has it pithily right. If SP (Summorum Pontificum) can be abrogated, so can “FC” (otherwise known as Fiducia Supplicans or FS). This is gold:
“… before we go much further down this road–of Germans, the SSPX, ecumenism and everything–we need a refresher from Church leadership on what “unity” actually is, what breaks it and why, and one that addresses us as intelligent human beings who not only can process basic logic, but also have pretty good situational awareness of the present moment. That is – we can see and hear just fine.”
Beaulieu has it right too. Cardinal KissMe has reached shelf life expiry. Though coded LGBQT+++/Minus Unity, we know what it means, and we recognize the smell.
What a great declaration of reality by Any Welborn. We can see and hear and think just fine, your excellencies, and your FS is, simply put, better understood as “BS.”
In other words:
The Good Shepherd calls us to be Sheep, NOT CATTLE.
“May the Lord bless you and keep you.
May the Lord make his face shine on you and be gracious to you.
May the Lord turn his face toward you and give you peace.
And may Almighty God bless you, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Amen.”
The blessing Father Martin bestows upon those who are SSA per his Facebook. Not much different than you would read on a greeting card. Certainly not implying “acceptance” of sin. Not worth division in the Church.
You obviously are not at all familiar with the vile ministry of Fr. James Martin, SCH. Please do your homework before posting. You are defending the indefensible.
FS can be tossed because it subverts Catholic morality.
SP can’t be tossed because, as explicitly declared by Pope Benedict XVI, what was recognized as sacred by Catholics for centuries cannot be suddenly prohibited by the authors of FS.
Clear and candid: FS is a rupture, SP is root and branch of the living vine.
It is worse than a theological rapture, it is a total destruction of primary attachment (mother – child) which holds the Creation together:
“I am quite convinced that homosexuality and blessing of homosexual couples must be examined against the natural outcome of a marriage, children. There is no problem with blessing a homosexual person and there is a huge problem (of impossibility) with blessing a homosexual couple. Why is it so? – Because a homosexual couple, even if they do not intend to “create” children, have this option now, latent within their “family”, just like any heterosexual couple have it, no matter what their fertility. Hence, when the Church blesses them, it inevitably blesses that latent possibility.
From here it follows that the Church now blesses the process of children being “artificially created” to satisfy the needs of their homosexual “parents” and all that entails. That is, the Church now blesses the practice of taking children away from their true fathers and mothers. That their normal personal development is being compromised is also being blessed by the Church – all that while teaching about a family that can be only a union of a man and a woman and about the indispensability of such a family for properly bringing up children, including their spiritual development, with the Holy Family given as an example. Surrogacy, while being specifically condemned by the Pope recently, is also now being blessed in the blessing of homosexual couples, so as the IVF, prohibited in other cases. The Church now blesses a cancellation of the natural rights given to children (and their biological parents) by God or of the normality as such based upon the evolution of humankind, the primal rights and normality given to any member of our species, to be conceived by their parents, to be borne by their parents, to be attached to them or, if some tragedy happens, to be attached to a father’s or mother’s figure – all this while preaching the theology of the natural family as a symbol of the love of God for humanity, the dignity and rights of human beings made in the image of God (including children) and so on.”
https://orthodox-christian-icons.com/abomination-of-desolation.html
An addition to the quote (previous comment) from the paper I wrote a year ago. If we step back and look at the whole picture with its latest development, the new “S of S” document pushing an acceptance of homosexual marriage within the Church, we will see the enduring vector of abandonment which is contrary to the vector of attachment = the vector of God.
First, we had child sexual abuse which was covered by Church authorities – that was an active abandonment of the victims of abuse, children. Children were treated as soulless tools for self-gratification of “fathers” – hence a God-ordered attachment of father to a child was blasphemed, made into a perversion, in effect incest. Since it often happened in proximity to an altar, that sign was thoroughly diabolical and recognized as such by many.
This vector of perversion/abandonment could be reversed when the truth came to the light, via a sincere repentance of the whole Church, clergy and laity. It did not happen; instead, victims were often offered a deal, to be silent in exchange for money paid. Most importantly, there was a glaring lack of empathy with victims, especially among the Church’s hierarchy. Instead, there was palpable narcissistic entitlement and the lack of remorse. Narcissism is not just a psychological disorder – it is a spiritual sickness, a demonic pride being the most prominent symptom. I think I do not need to elaborate how the vector of a demonic pride/lack of empathy is contrary to Christ/God. “Who cares about them” has been conveyed by the lack of empathy and still is being conveyed (take the case of Rupnik). It is a vector into hell, and it went on.
The next stage was a logical consequence of a non-repentance: the Church which abuses and abandons its own children then accepted and promoted “the new communion”, the vaccines developed with the usage of the stem cells of the aborted human fetuses. The Church neither argued nor demanded ethical vaccines (which were in making as well); instead, it proclaimed that it is sin not to partake the abortion-tainted vaccines and banned those who refused from Mass = Holy Communion. Thus, partaking in the fruit of a modern sacrifice of children was made a condition for receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. That was another oblique blasphemy, the result of the enduring vector of a lack of empathy/abandonment, now of aborted children whose existence the Church chose to play down or ignore. If the Church demanded the ethical vaccine and proposed a repentance and reparation for the abortion-tainted vaccines (even if some partook them), the vector a utilization of human beings = the vector of abandonment would be stopped.
The next stage, now: after “the new communion” we have a new marital rite of a new marriage which is a perversion of a normal marriage. Because homosexual couples cannot procreate on their own but have to get “an aid” of the opposite sex, the children for such couples are “made”. The extreme case of that making are two homosexual men “buying” a womb (extreme because in a case of two lesbians a child usually has a biological mother who is crucial for the first three years of development). Thus, the primary and the most important attachment, mother – child is being denied and abolished, for the good of a couple of two men” who feel entitled to do what they wish.
Please note that all three stages demand a sacrifice of children “for the good of others”: 1) turned into sex tools for fathers’ sexual gratification, 2) turned into a vaccine for the good health of others and, finally, 3) turned into dolls so the homosexual “families” would be complete. Those are the stages of the new creation, upside down, which the Church must bless to give it a diabolical life.