On December 18, 2023 Pope Francis through the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith—the Church office in charge of teaching the doctrine of faith and morals—issued a Declaration (a Church document that provides an authoritative statement) on the nature and practice of blessing couples in irregular married states and same-sex couples. As with anything dealing with homosexuality and religion, a fire storm is certain to erupt. It did. And continues. The media has had a field day, misinforming what the document says, and Catholic polemicists, both those on the left who desire approval of same-sex unions and on the right who go hyperbolic at any inference of liberality, have also been out with either a misinformed understanding of the document or a strawman argument of a distorted understanding, sowing seeds of discontent and frankly scandal. I am going to present a defense of Fiducia Supplicans (FS). It may take more than one post.
First, if you wish you can read FS here. There is an English translation tab if the document does not pop up in English.
Second, the context.
Part of the controversy began back in 2016 with Pope Francis’ publication of Amoris laetitia (The Joy of Love), an Exhortation on how to pastor to families. One of the subjects it took up was in how to deal with families of irregular marriages. There was an ambiguity perceived in whether sacraments could be offered to those in a divorced and remarried state. Some bishops questioned what Pope Francis intended, and so a back and forth went on for several years until Pope Francis published in 2021 an official response called the Dubio. One of five questions in the Dubio concerned the blessing of same-sex couples, and Pope Francis in response agreed it was not allowed, but his response in turn was further questioned. FS was a final clarification on this one question of blessings of people in irregular marriages and same-sex relationships. Succinctly, could people in such conditions receive a blessing? It required the explanation of what a blessing is, on what can and cannot be blessed, and how to pastorally administer such blessings.
Also as part of the context, the Bishops in Germany and Belgium were not only blessing persons in sinful relationships, but advocating for the blessing of same-sex unions. The bishops in both those countries—and perhaps in other European countries likely to join them—were willing to schismatically separate from the Catholic Church over this issue.
###
Summary of FS:
The document is written by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect (that is, head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith) and signed by Pope Francis. Though written by Fernández, it carries the full weight of the Papal office, and therefore Magisterial.
The
document is a “Declaration,” and has 45 numbered paragraphs plus five
unnumbered at the beginning under the heading of “Presentation,” which I would
take as providing the context. Besides
the context, which I have already summarized above, there are three important
sentences in the third unnumbered paragraph:
“The value of this document, however, is 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, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective. Such theological reflection, based on the pastoral vision of Pope Francis, implies a real development from what has been said about blessings in the Magisterium and the official texts of the Church. This explains why this text has taken on the typology of a “Declaration.”
This makes the claim of a doctrinal development in the understanding of blessings, something new in the 2000 plus years of the Magisterium. I do expand a little on this post below.
FS is then divided
into an “Introduction” (three paragraphs) and four parts. The four parts are titled:
I.
The Blessing in the Sacrament of Marriage (par. 4-6)
II.
The Meaning of the Various Blessings (par. 7-30) which is further subdivided:
a. The Liturgical Meaning of the
Rites of Blessing (par. 9-13)
b. Blessings in Sacred Scripture
(par. 14-19)
c. A Theological-Pastoral
Understanding of Blessings (par. 20-30)
III.
Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex
(par. 31-41)
IV. The Church is the Sacrament of God’s Infinite Love (par. 42-45)
Like most (if not all?) papal documents, the title is taken from the first few words. In this case, Fiducia Supplicans comes from the first three words of the first sentence, “The supplicating trust of the faithful People of God receives the gift of blessing that flows from the Heart of Christ through his Church.” The division and subdivision titles are self-explanatory. It takes the reader through the Sacrament of Marriage—what it is and what it is not. It goes on to outline what it means to liturgically bless, especially of marriage, a short discourse on the blessings within sacred scripture, and the distinction between the different types of blessings. It goes to outline when and how blessings of couples in irregular situations and those with same-sex attraction. It sums up with an expansion of the very first sentence, of how blessings flow from the love of God through the Church.
I must admit I have always wondered what a blessing actually is, and we get a beautiful explanation in the first thirty paragraphs. The distinctions between blessings will come out below.
In hindsight, I’m also seeing the significance of the title Fiducia Suppicans, “The Supplicating Trust.” Definition of supplication: “the action of asking or begging for something earnestly or humbly.” This is at the heart of the declaration. Those who approach for a blessing are approaching in supplication, begging out of humility and earnestness. There is an act of seriousness and honesty to those that humbly beg for a blessing. If they are in earnest, they are not trying to “sucker” the church for an affirmation of their lifestyle.
The gist of the Declaration is that blessings come in several types. The Church cannot change the nature of marriage being between a man and a woman, and re-emphasizes this Magisterial teaching. It states that the Church does not approve of blessings of irregular and same-sex unions, nor of affirming such sinful situations, but it does approve of couples to receive a blessing that imparts grace. This is the sticking point with the critics, they insist there is no distinction between a blessing that affirms (say a marriage) and one that imparts grace to give strength or improve (say a soldier going off to battle). Any blessing is an affirmation. As I will show, this is just wrong and FS clearly says it is wrong.
The following is my defense of FS, mostly through a give and take on a conservative political (not specifically religious) Social Media site called Ricochet. Participants in the discussion were not all Catholics. I’m only going to include my comments and only include other people’s comments when my response requires the context of what I’m responding to. There may be a disjuncture from one paragraph to the next in my comments, but that is because I’m jumping from one comment to another without providing the dialogue. If I did include it all, this would be a huge post.
I will say I was the solitary defender of the document, and, frankly, frequently received what I’ll characterize as hostile scourges. This is a sensitive subject, and conservative veterans of the culture war (which I am one too) are not pre-disposed to accept what amounts to a small liberalizing step. This may be a liberalizing step but it’s also a line in the sand to the limit of same-sex coupling. It offers a pastoral embrace of the sinner—refusing to alienate—while teaching the sin is not acceptable.
I started defending FS from the charges it was heretical, which it is clearly not, but in doing so I grew to appreciate it, and think it wise.
###
OB
Comment:
How does the Church bless “couples in irregular situations” without expressly condoning the sexual activity that forms the basis of the “irregular” union?
My
Response:
Did you read the document? Did anybody here read the document? Read the document. It does no such thing. The document lays out what exactly is a blessing, why anyone can receive a blessing, why in no way affirms sin, and the intentions of those seeking a blessing. It’s only ten pages or so long. Catholics have an obligation to read it, especially if they are going to spread erroneous claims.
My
first reaction was similar. If an irregular couple (referring to more
than just homosexuals; divorced and remarried are also irregular without
nullity of previous marriage) approaches for a blessing isn’t that a de facto
acceptance of the situation. The document clearly says no. From
paragraph 31:
In such cases, a blessing
may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the
invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing
themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation
of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid
in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the
presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication
that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what
classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature
and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their
imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in
the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love.
Anyone understanding this Magisterium – and the opening paragraphs indicate that this now is Magisterium – approaching for such a blessing will have to understand what their disordered lifestyle is and seek to overcome it. A gay couple will have to feel a sense of compunction that may actually do more for them to seek freedom than to if no blessing, or even individual blessing.
Can’t this be abused? Well yeah, everything can be abused. What if the recipients of the blessing lie? So? If someone holds back a mortal sin during the sacrament of confession, is that a flaw in the sacrament or an abuse by the sinner, which is a sin in itself? If someone intentionally receives communion at Mass having a mortal sin on their soul, is that a flaw in the sacrament or a further sin by the sinner? If one takes a rosary and uses it to pray to satan, is that a flaw in the sacramental or a flaw in the sinner? There is nothing different here with these blessings.
This
document is actually intended to repudiate the German bishops who want to give
such blessings to gay unions – that is the union itself. It clearly
denies them the right to do so.
Finally I bless people all the time. If I bless you, am I affirming any sin you committed? If someone blesses me for helping them in the afternoon, is that affirming any sin I committed in the morning. Of course not.
And confirmed by the more conservative National Catholic Register: “Vatican Says Priests Can Bless Same-Sex Couples Without Condoning Their Lifestyles“.
###
I have come to realize that one must be very selective in the media one listens to when it comes to Catholic news. There is a hermeneutic by which Church documents and the pope are spun. The secular media have no understanding of Catholic issues. The radical liberal Catholics want to push the Church into what is heresy. The radical conservative media want to refuse to accept any developments (and development in Catholicism has a very specific meaning, and no it does not mean refuting any past doctrine) that have arisen. You have to find good conservative Catholic resources to understand what is doctrinal. There is an industry out there that has cropped up that distorts what comes out of the Vatican.
My
recent discovery of Michael Lofton’s podcast, “Reason and Theology,” has been a
blessing to me. Lofton is an expert on the history of the Magisterium,
all the way from the apostles to today. If you don’t want to read the ten
page document, here Lofton walks you through the document, paragraph by
paragraph, almost sentence by sentence. It’s a little over an hour.
The last twenty minutes is his opining, which you can skip. If you want
to make a good faith effort to at least understand the Holy Father, you should
at least watch this hour.
No it is not lawyerly. It’s theological, and I guess you don’t read many papal documents. This is way clearer than most.
Well, theologians speak in a particular language. You want to read difficult church writings, read St. Augustine. It will make your head spin. This papal document is about as clear as it gets. Other than a few Latin terms, it is completely straightforward.
OB
Comment:
Sum up the message in a
sentence.
The recitations of existing doctrine on marriage comprise a repeated assertion that nothing has changed which would not be required unless something did. To say clearly that it is not a formal endorsement of same-sex marriage is not a defense against the claim that it is in fact an approved means to present a tacit acceptance of same-sex relationships. It is that tacit acceptance as I discussed in my previous comment that is the novation being buried under the verbiage.
My
Response:
From
Paragraph 39:
39. In any case, precisely to avoid any form of confusion or scandal, when the prayer of blessing is requested by a couple in an irregular situation, even though it is expressed outside the rites prescribed by the liturgical books, this blessing should never be imparted in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them. Nor can it be performed with any clothing, gestures, or words that are proper to a wedding. The same applies when the blessing is requested by a same-sex couple.
I don’t know how it could be clearer. And that’s not the only place he states it. At some point it’s you who refuse to accept the words written on the page.
###
SW Comment:
The document clearly says no. From paragraph 31:
You left out the most
important part of paragraph 31 Manny, the first sentence:
Within the horizon
outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular
situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be
fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the
blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.
These are not individual blessings, they are blessings for couples.
My
Response:
If you’re implying that I
was hiding a key sentence, well you didn’t read my comment that you took the
quote from. Further below I address it head on:
Anyone understanding this
Magisterium – and the opening paragraphs indicate that this now is Magisterium
– approaching for such a blessing will have to understand what their disordered
lifestyle is and seek to overcome it. A gay couple will have to feel a sense of
compunction that may actually do more for them to seek freedom than to if no
blessing, or even individual blessing.
And did you even read the
sentence you said I left out? Here’s the key part of the sentence: “the
form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid
producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.”
Have you counted how many paragraphs contain a reference to it not applying to marriage? Of the 45 paragraphs, nine paragraphs contain a reference to it not applying or implying any form of acceptance of gay marriage. 9 out of 45, a full 20% spends indicates what you claim it doesn’t.
###
SA Comment:
Manny:
Anyone understanding this Magisterium – and the opening paragraphs indicate
that this now is Magisterium . . .
Meaning that it’s infallible according to Catholic theology?
My
Response:
Yes, I believe so,
From the third paragraph,
unnumbered introducing the document:
The value of this document, however, is 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, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective. Such theological reflection, based on the pastoral vision of Pope Francis, implies a real development from what has been said about blessings in the Magisterium and the official texts of the Church. This explains why this text has taken on the typology of a “Declaration.”
Apparently no document in the 2000 years of Church Magisterium has there been an explanation of what a blessing actually is, what it does, and under what circumstances it can be given. This is the first.
I
found the explanation on the nature of blessings fascinating. It was
something I had always wondered about.
End of Part 1. Part 2 can be found here.
