Is the Declaration regarding the blessings of same-sex couples sufficient to guide the prudent and fatherly discernment of ordained ministers ?
According to Reuters, this “ruling is bound to be opposed by conservatives, who already criticised the pope when he made his initial comments on the subject in October. Ulrich L. Lehner, a professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame in the United States, said the new guidance from the doctrinal office ‘invites misunderstanding and will sow confusion.’ Voicing concern that some bishops would use it as a pretext to do what is explicitly forbidden, the professor added, ‘it is, and I hate to say it, an invitation to schism.'”
Meanwhile, Reuters also noted the support for the statement from those who wish to “use it as a pretext to do what is explicitly forbidden.” For instance, “Father James Martin, a prominent American Jesuit priest who ministers to the LGBT community…said…that ‘along with many priests, I will now be delighted to bless my friends in same-sex unions.'”
Think an advocate like Father Martin will avoid giving those blessings without any of the “clothing, gestures or words that are proper to a wedding?”
Attorney John Bursch, writing for the National Catholic Register, believes that Priests like Father Martin would NEVER deviate from the Pope’s directions. He believes the Statement is not “the supposed authorization of blessings for same-sex unions…that’s not what the document says at all. If anything, the document could be understood to encourage blessings so that same-sex-attracted individuals (or any individual in what the document calls an ‘irregular’ relationship) will be encouraged to live out God’s plan for human sexuality rather than their own… the Church contemplates the possibility of blessing individual persons in irregular relationships to call them to holiness.”
Yes, you read that right – Bursch believes that gay couples asking for a blessing from a Catholic Priest are not seeking an endorsement of their same sex relationship, but are actually asking for the strength to follow the Church’s teachings on homosexual relationships, and dedicate their life to chastity.
If that’s really what Bursch believes, then he has spoken with too many same sex couples. In fact, Reuters quotes a couple who have a more conventional view of the Church’s statement on blessings, one more in keeping with the fears of more conservative Catholics: “Martin Hardwick and Andrew Gibb of Manchester, England, who are married and have been together 41 years, said the move was long overdue. ‘You know if Jesus said love was love, then love is love, isn’t it?’ Hardwick said. ‘It’s about time,’ Gibb added.”
As a point of clarification for the reader, at no time did Jesus say “love is love.”
Breitbart has a particularly dark view of the new statement; “’Such blessings are meant for everyone; no one is to be excluded from them,’ the text states. By extension, since a blessing can now be ‘offered to all without requiring anything,’ one must suppose that sweatshops, drug cartels, prostitution rings, abortion clinics, and child pornography studios should not be denied a blessing if they request one.”
In regard to these concerns, it is not unfair to ask what the Church means by “irregular relationships.” Does this ambiguous phrase contemplate a pedophile seeking a blessing while in a relationship with someone under the age of consent? What about more outlandish relationships? Is a Priest now encouraged to bless someone in love with their Sheep?
In general, “(o)utlets across Catholic media, from the progressive America Magazine to the conservative Catholic Herald , drew the same conclusion from the response: that Pope Francis had provided wiggle room for ‘pastoral prudence’ in offering blessings for same-sex unions. Countless commentators and LGBTQ activist groups reacted similarly, including the controversial New Ways Ministry , which went so far as to thank the pontiff for the ‘allowance for pastoral ministers to bless same-gender couples.'”
This, then, is the very heart of the problem with the Church’s new position on blessings. Clearly, Pope Francis has given a tacit wink and a nod to Priests who wish to make some “official” acknowledgment of gay marriage, in their capacity as Priests, while claiming their blessing is “unofficial,” and that there is no change to Church doctrine regarding homosexuality.
Much as with the declaration regarding transgender participation in Church rites such as weddings and baptisms, the Pope’s desire for secular progressive change affects and colors his pronouncements regarding long-established Church doctrine, resulting in confusion for the faithful and internally inconsistent declarations.
As Peter Laffin states in the Washington Examiner, “it’s possible that Pope Francis did not intend to ‘signal openness to blessings for gay couples’…It’s also possible that he did intend to signal a change. As ever, Pope Francis’s intentions are difficult to divine. The Vatican’s refusal to issue a correction to the global media’s collective interpretation of the comments can itself be read in numerous ways: as callous indifference toward the spiritual formation of the faithful, as excessively slow reaction speed, or as evidence that no correction is necessary…Faithful Catholics would do well to pray for the Pope, as always, and for clear teaching on the moral issues of the day. Now more than ever, the faithful need the Church to instruct and lead with coherence and resolve.”
Judge Wilson served on the bench in NYC
Photo: Pixabay