Blogger Priest

Individual priests should not have to say what the Magisterium and the entire Church should insist upon, and yet we have entered a strange new land where absurdity rings true, and sin is excused in private if not in public. Therefore, echoing the Scriptures, the catechism, and the legacy of the saints, let me affirm that the Church cannot directly bless or affirm sin. There should be no confusion about the covenant of marriage as strictly between one man and one woman in a bond to be maintained until “death do they part.”  While the clergy can bless congregations and individual sinners; they give scandal should they specially bless couples who come before them in either adulterous or same-sex unions outside the sacrament.  Despite the recent declaration Fiducia supplicans from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, as a priest of the Church, I cannot extend blessings over such couples.  It is my conviction, with a fully informed conscience, that any such requests for these novel blessings must be denied for the good of souls. Given just opposition around the world, it is my hope and prayer that the declaration will be retracted, and that Cardinal Fernández will be removed as the prefect who authored the egregious document. He has quickly and utterly lost any semblance of credibility among orthodox believers. I fully concur with Cardinal Müller who has characterized the possibility of these errant blessings as both “impossible” and as “blasphemy.” Not only has ambiguity and scandal been fermented for the faithful; the deviation from biblical truth has caused incalculable damage within legitimate ecumenical outreach with non-Catholic Bible Christians.

It is true that the declaration reaffirms Church teaching about marriage and sexual-relations as exclusive to male-female couples.  But what the text states in principle it then undermines or takes back in terms of praxis. An explication for conditions to allow what cannot be permitted quickly strays into rhetorical incoherence— we are told the blessings must be private, unscheduled, not in sacred space or chapels, and not in fancy-dress clothes.  What moral difference does any of this make? None! Even informal or pastoral blessings are liturgical because the agents are clergy! We are told that these are individual blessings and not benedictions over same-sex unions; however, those coming forward are specifically seeking these types of blessings and validations over their bonds and lifestyles.  The given rationale trespasses from the dubious to the deceptive.

While I take exception to the statement that “an informal blessing” could be extended to those cohabiting in a homosexual relationship, the document does give an escape clause that I would enact in that these blessings “should only be given if there is no risk of causing confusion about the Church’s doctrine on sexual morality, including the nature of marriage.” It is my estimation, as a pastor of souls, that such blessings would not only risk but always CAUSE such confusion.  Thus, they cannot in practice be conducted by me or anyone. Note that those excited about such blessings are on the record saying that they are an important “first step.” These dissenters, for that is what they are, routinely schedule these blessings, photograph them, and then publicize the whole mess for the media. Proscriptions for the blessings are violated with impunity. What are we to make of the fact that there is little in the way of rebuke from lawful authority for doing all this? Indeed, those who criticize are judged as harsh and ideological.  I would simply use the word, “faithful.”

Filed under: Uncategorized |