It isn’t every day that the top papal lieutenant goes on the record to discuss something about which he’d just said there would be no further clarification, but that’s what just happened in an interview published by The Pillar with the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.
That’s one of the things that happened, at any rate, in connection with a story that has dominated headlines in both the Catholic and secular mainstream press all week.
Cardinal Víctor Manuel “Tucho” Fernández on Monday issued a declaration, Fiducia supplicans, permitting some sort of blessing for “couples in irregular unions” including same-sex couples who “spontaneously” ask for them.
The declaration made headlines instantly and continued to generate copy all week and into the weekend, both in the secular mainstream press and in Catholic circles.
Much of the secular reportage was passable and some of it was good, but most of the early headlines were hyperventilating and inaccurate, giving some leading Catholic figures occasion to accuse ill-informed secular outlets and agenda-driven Catholic mastheads of ginning up controversy.
Bishops, however, made it impossible to credit the “blame the media” line, when they began to issue their own statements in reaction to the document. Reaction from individual prelates and whole national conferences began coming in short order, and haven’t stopped.
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith—that’s The Thing That Used To Be The Pope’s “Doctrinal Watchdog”—formerly responsible for the needful but mostly humdrum work of guaranteeing that Vatican documents and Catholic theological publications meet minimum standards of orthodoxy, is the outfit Pope Francis tasked with producing Fiducia supplicans, a work of pastoral trailblazing and doctrinal innovation.
More precisely, Pope Francis entrusted the work to DDF’s newish prefect, Fernández, who had promised something in the way of blessings almost as soon as he was in his new billet.
Fiducia supplicans is crowded with caveats and brimming with qualifications, many very carefully drawn, over 5,000 words. It is evident that the declaration’s author and his commissioning principal both knew it would make waves. But it is unlikely either Fernandez or Pope Francis expected the tsunami of reaction that came in short order.
Some dioceses—mainly though not exclusively in western Europe—made a show of enthusiastically embracing the business, even though a facial reading of Fiducia would require many of them to halt plans for para-ritual blessings of gay unions or even roll back policies already articulated, for the implementation of which blessing formulae have already received at least preliminary local approval.
From other jurisdictions—many of them geographically located in the global south—the reception ranged from frigid to actively hostile, with several national bishops’ conferences flatly refusing to implement the declaration at all.
The cardinal-president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conference of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM), Fridolin Ambongo, issued a call mid-week for talks among African bishops with a view to preparing a unified “continental” response.
That is a politically fascinating development, since it came from a fellow who is a member of Pope Francis’s C9 “small council” of cardinal advisors. It raises the question whether Ambongo has deployed a temporizing measure in hope of allowing Francis to walk things back. Alternatively, he may have thrown in with his continental confreres in the episcopate, many of whom have already balked at Fiducia supplicans.
At least one Church sui iuris, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, basically said the declaration applies only for Latin-rite (Roman) Catholics and is null within Ukrainian Greek ritual jurisdiction. The UGCC statement, however, also strongly suggested reasons beyond the merely legal and jurisdictional for refusing to heed Fiducia supplicans.
“[T]he blessing of a priest always has an Evangelical and Catechetical dimension,” the statement from UGCC Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk reads, “and therefore can in no way contradict the teaching of the Catholic Church about the family as a faithful, indissoluble, and fruitful union of love between a man and a woman, which Our Lord Jesus Christ raised to the dignity of the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony.”
“Pastoral prudence urges us to avoid ambiguous gestures, expressions and concepts that would distort or misrepresent God’s word and the teaching of the Church,” Shevchuk writes.
That’s a judgment he can make for the Church he governs, but his language succinctly states reasons adduced by a great host of bishops from all around the world in response to the DDF declaration.
“For those who read the text serenely and without ideological prejudices,” Fernández told The Pillar in the email exchange published Saturday, “it is clear that there is no change in the doctrine on marriage and on the objective valuation of sexual acts outside the only [kind of] marriage which exists — male-female, exclusive, indissoluble, naturally open to the generation of new life.”
It’s nice to have the DDF prefect on record saying there isn’t any change in said points of doctrine, but the fact he had to say it itself makes it difficult to credit the idea that there is much clarity in either Fiducia’s particular propositions or the theological articulation it gives for them. Now, the practical realities facing both the DDF prefect and his principal are indeed daunting.
The purpose of Fiducia supplicans appears to have been twofold: It was to rein in bishops and bishops’ conferences that have already gone too far—think Belgium and Germany—and also encourage reticent bishops to loosen up. Fernández has now all but admitted in words that the attempt failed spectacularly on both counts.
“I recognize that the reception of these documents requires time, and a serene and prolonged reflection,” Fernández told The Pillar. “What is important is that these bishops’ conferences are not holding a doctrine different from that of the declaration signed by the pope,” he also said, “because it is the same doctrine as always.”
Regarding bishops’ conferences that have already approved quasi-ritual blessing formulae or are on their way toward approving them, Fernández said: “[T]his is inadmissible.”
“They should reformulate their proposal in that regard,” Fernández said.
Fernández also spoke of meetings upcoming between German bishops engaged in their own “synodal way” and various dicastery heads in Rome. Fernández also mentioned his own plans to visit Germany for “conversations” he believes will be “important.”
More broadly, “[W]e are currently discussing these issues with presidents of bishops’ conferences and with groups of bishops visiting the dicastery,” Fernández said. That sounds like the phones are busy both at DDF and in the Domus Sanctae Marthae where Pope Francis lives. It also sounds like Fiducia supplicans is on the agenda for bishops coming on their periodic ad limina visits. It also sounds like a prefect blindsided and flummoxed, temporizing and at some pains—not to say “desperate”—to make it look like he has a handle on things. It looks like a fellow trying to put lighting in a bottle, or at least closing a barn door after the horse has fled.
Lots of folks are asking why the consultation is only happening now? Frankly, it’s a good question. That the strongest resistance is coming largely from the global south and the developing world only reinforces the already powerful impression that Pope Francis’s solicitude for “the peripheries” is only so much talk.
Fernández, for his part, has staked a long and rocky row to hoe, insisting in the interview that bishops may not prohibit what the pope has permitted with Fiducia supplicans, especially since at least one national conference—Malawi—has already issued an explicit prohibition, in addition to the dioceses and conferences that have said they won’t be implementing it.
Pope Francis has put himself in an impossible situation. Popes do that, from time to time. It usually isn’t that big a deal. In the age of instant communications and 24-hour news cycles, however, a big enough crisis could put the implosion of a pontificate on display for the entire world, in real time. It may be too early to say whether that really is what we are seeing at present, but it is impossible to be sure we aren’t seeing it, and that is … bad enough.
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.
It is impossible to impart a blessing onto what is mortal sin. The two are diametrically opposed to one another.
For those in mortal sin (sodomy, adultery, fornication, etc), the remedy is repentance and the forgiveness earned for us by God’s Son, Jesus Christ, sacrificing His life for our sake.
Deacon, the document is quite clear that the relationship is not being approved by this blessing.
Anon,
The two people of the couple can be blessed separately and individually as Christians seeking friendship with God.
But they can not be blessed as individuals as a couple that seeks to lives in sodomy. In this case, the thing being blessed is mortal sin. Such a blessing is a blatant sacrilege.
Come Hither AND Anon! The dictionary is quite clear that ‘couple’ implies two persons or items together, acting similarly. Clearly the two things, acting similarly, are in relation to one another. Similarly, the word ‘trinity’ implies three persons acting in relationship to, with, through, for one another.
**Excerpt** From Oxford Language, online:
“NOUN
two individuals of the same sort considered together:
“a couple of girls were playing marbles”
a pair of partners in a dance or game.
two people who are married, engaged, or otherwise closely associated romantically or sexually:
“in three weeks the couple fell in love and became engaged” · “a honeymoon couple”
VERB
combine:
“a sense of hope is coupled with a palpable sense of loss”
connect (a railroad vehicle or a piece of equipment) to another:
“a cable is coupled up to one of the wheels”
(COUPLE UP)
join to form a pair:
“the beetles may couple up to form a pair”
mate or have sexual intercourse:
“as middle-class youth grew more tolerant of sex, they started to couple more often
ORIGIN
Middle English: from Old French cople (noun), copler (verb), from Latin copula (noun), copulare (verb), from co- ‘together’ + apere ‘fasten’. Compare with copula and copulate.” END EXCERPT.
NOTE specifically the origins of the word. COUPLE derives from the Latin ‘copulare,’ ‘Copulare’ translates to COPULATE.
And in scripture, the word “relations” means sexual intimacy.
So a priest can not bless a homosexual relationship because it is sin.
“ Mary said to the angel,
“How can this be,
since I have no relations with a man?”
And the angel said to her in reply,
“The Holy Spirit will come upon you,
and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.
Therefore the child to be born
will be called holy, the Son of God.
And the word became flesh.
Merry Christmas
If you choose to be gullible enough to think that the agenda of Mr. George Bergoglio is anything than what I stated, so be it. I would make reference to the photo uploaded by fellow Jesuit and comrade, James Martin, doing explicitly what I said.
From the NYT article on Martin and friends: “And then, with emotion evident on their faces, the three men hugged.”
AND further, “It was really nice,” Father Martin said on Tuesday, “to be able to do that publicly.”
Note also that Father Martin texted the pair and invited them to come over and get a blessing and their photos in the New York Times. So much for only giving the people what they deeply want and ask for.
And when you see your priest standing in the vestibule making the sign of the cross over two men or two women holding hands, you tell yourself that – more cognitive dissonance from the land of the NO Mass.
With all This controversy, Thanks God the document is “clear”, imagine if it was not.
A simple catholic seeing a priest bless 2 homosexual men together will not think of theology and word play. The poor faithful will simply think, “oh. the Church approves of them”.
Regardless of what the document says, it’s implementation would be a cause of scandal
The blessing of an individual is simply a petition to God, calling down supernatural grace from Heaven that is given for the physical and spiritual benefit of the person being blessed. However, when blessing a couple, such a blessing goes deeper in that it not only becomes affirmation and acknowledgement of their relationship, but is a petition to God for His affirmation and acknowledgement of said relationship. In a sacramental marriage, the blessing, affirmation and acknowledgement of the relationship are part of the ritual. One of the main objectives of marriage is for the couple to go forth and multiply. To even suggest a blessing on a couple who’s main objective in life is disordered pleasure derived from physical acts that not only reject the reality of begetting new life, but in and of themselves slap Almighty God in the face in mockery of all that is pure, chaste and holy.
Years ago, I read that the demons work hard to tempt homosexuals to commit the sin of sodomy. But, when the actual act commences, even the demons leave because the act is so hideous and vile that it is too much for even them to bear, ostensibly because they still retain some semblance of their primordial angelic nature.
The document might be clear (might) but the gesture is not. Many sensible people will see the blessing as a confirmation of the union.
Dear Popesplainer.
The operational plan is always the same. SAY orthodox things with enough clarity to avoid charges of heresy. Then add in enough studied ambiguity to give the leftists enough room to say heretical ACTS are ok now.
Here’s what this crew knows as do all manufacturers of media.
Nobody will read the document. What they will see is A- the headlines and B- the pictures of people like jimmy martin LGBTQ blessing a hand holding alphabet couple.
The actions do not match the words and the words are there to provide cover for him AND his popesplainers. Nothing more.
It is my very fallible opinion that the motives for popesplainers is either pollyanna like wishful thinking ostriches sticking their heads into the sand or blatantly evil word twisting that reminds us of what happened in the Garden.
Pope Francis says Christianity is for everyone.
We are all sinners. Sin is the Spanish word for lack, which means we are all coming from a sense of lack. We learn to compensate for the sense of lack by playing power games. We learn the games when we are children.
But, is homosexuality a lack? Is it learned or are homosexuals born that way? Can they be reprogrammed to become heterosexuals? if others try to reprogram them, is their sexuality repressed? If an emotion is repressed, it may work for a while but it comes out stronger sometime in the future. Were homosexuals created that way by God?
Isn’t a mortal sin based on the Seven Deadly Sins? They are based on the power games of Pride, Envy, Greed, Lust, Anger, Sloth and Gluttony. They are deadly because when the games are played, someone dies. Pride leads to wars. Envy leads to Genocides. Greed leads to massacres. Lust leads to slavery. Anger leads to terrorism. These are the games associated with revenge, and two of the games are based on weaving an illusion. “Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord!” The world leaders wage war, and in fact, today, there is war in Israel that is devolving as a genocide that is killing women and children, and it makes traveling to Bethlehem to celebrate the birth if Jesus impossible. Why is that OK? Is there a batter way to resolve disputes between nations?
The Seven Deadly Sins are based on three fears–loss, death and failure. Jesus of Nazareth, the Prince of Peace, said, “Be not afraid.”
The Sin of Gluttony compensates for a lack of compassion, and it leads to anorexia and diabetes. In God’s eyes, then, love between two men is not a mortal sin but diabetes is?
Over the centuries, misunderstandings have been introduced into the Catholic Church. It is time to start to unravel the misunderstandings. Where to start? How about with revenge. We can take on the Sins of the world. There are two crises that cannot be resolved from inside the Catholic Church because they are based on the Seven Deadly Sins–Sexual abuse by the priests and acts of terrorism as a result of the Crusades. How can the people who are supposed to teach and preach about these sins absolve themselves of the sins? It takes someone from outside the church to do that.
St. Malachy gave his prophecies about the remaining popes until the end of the church, and they were quite obvious until the death of Pope John Paul II. When the death of a pope occurs, the prophecies of St. Malachy are pulled out again, but how did Joseph Ratzinger fit as the Olive Pope? If he was the Olive Pope, isn’t Francis the last pope? Is he the in extremis pope that is responsible for the end of the church? He is coming up with polices that go against the traditional teachings of the church. Does he have the right to do that? s he collapsing the church and so people must stand up to defend the church against Pope Francis?
Be not afraid. There is a logical explanation for that, too.
There are always two popes at the end of the beginning of a cycle. At the beginning of the church, there were Peter and Jesus. One set the principles and the other was the application of the principles. These are the prophesied End Times. We are at the end of the old cycle and the beginning of the new cycle, and because change only occurs easily at the end or beginning of a cycle, this is a time of great changes. The Olive pope was chosen, not by the cardinals, but by God from among the prophets. That is what the prophecy meant about Peter. Pope Francis is the first pope of a new cycle, and he is setting the principles for the next 2000 years. He is making the church open to everyone. Expect changes, but not changes to the principles of Christianity. He is taking the principles of Christianity to the next level.
God’s law applies to every atom in the Universe. is based on seven principles that counter the Seven Deadly Sins. Equality, Liberty, Freedom, Compassion, Abundance, Capacity and Tolerance.
Religion has been considered a divisive influence on the world, but when we understand the principles of each of the religions, it unifies the world. Each of the seven major religions teaches one principle that is necessary to understand to create the life we want, but each one also plays a favorite power game. Christians wage war, and the principle that counters it is equality. People who are dragged into a war lack equality. The first requirement for conflict resolution is that both sides must be considered equal. Might is right is Middle Age thinking. When Christians wage war, Muslims stand in protest, which leads to a rise in terrorism, and the principle that counters terrorism is tolerance. People who are denied a voice in matters of grave concern must raise their voices to be heard, oftentimes to the point of violence. That draws in the Jews, who see themselves as victims. They play the game of Envy, which leads to genocide. Today, the land that is holy to all three religions is at war, genocide and terrorism.
If Christianity is for everyone, it is not that Christians must go out and make everyone else on the planet Christians. It is to teach the principles and stand on the principles that Jesus of Nazareth taught that create unity.
The judgment against homosexuals is so oppressive to them and the fear that is trigged in them is so terrifying that it triggered the creation of a virus–the HIV virus. Now that same-sex marriages are lawful, people are spontaneously triggering antibodies against the virus. They are being healed. To ban same-sex marriages will reinstate that fear and cause people to spiral down into the darkness. Pope Francis, by blessing homosexual unions, is bringing people into the Light.
Fact; The Crusades were formed to fight against the Muslim invasion & killing of Christianity in the Middle East, not the other way around. In fact, the main goal of Islam is to conquer the world & America and establish Sharia! Yes, the Jews are the victims and are fighting for their existence as they have been for centuries. The prophecy of the Jews has been coming true ever since they told Cesar that, ‘their blood would be on them and on their children’s children. Since then, they have been suffering at the hand of Almighty God. He is their Judge no us. Now they’re suffering under the hand of terrorism from Islam and the Muslim nations but so will we if we do not stand with Israel. Please study your ‘real truth’ of the Middle East and what you have learned in the fake institutions for the past six decades or more…most of all, pray for God to show you the Truth!
Karen, I’m attempting to understand your comments. I’m confused about the HIV reference. In Africa it’s affected men & women both & left behind thousands of orphans. Seeing HIV as a SSA affliction doesn’t represent the full scope of it’s global toll.
Goodwill amongst the Abrahamic religions is a worthy goal I agree, but Jews don’t just “see themselves as victims”, they have been victims in every sense of the word.
Thank you for taking the time to write this. What we know is that God is love. What God has created, we cannot toss aside. Who are we to shame or cast aside what God has created? He asks us to reach out to love our neighbor not to ostracize them. Our Pope said; “who am I to judge.” So Let love be. We should go further in effort to avoid segregating other humans; we need to change “them” to “us”. Our faith is as much their birthright as ours. Let our community show compassion, acceptance, and christanity as we wash the bitter taste of judgement from our lips and preach love, for love is love.
Imparting “Blessing” to those in “irregular relationships”? Isn’t the SSPX believed to be in an “irregular relationship” with Rome? If so, is this not the time and the setting for a BLESSING of the SSPX??? It’s well past time, no?
Regarding the SSPX, the term is “schism,” or “not in full communion with the Church,” not “irregular relationship.” They have incurred that sanction by their own action, so in turn only they can rescind that schism by their return to the obedience of faith and religious assent to the teachings of Vatican II especially about liturgical reforms and religious freedom.
incorrect. The society was never declared in schism by the church.
They were never in schism. The bishops were excommunicated, illegally mind you, which was corrected by Benedict XVI. Even Francis says there is nothing wrong with them.
Telling people they are in schism is spreading an error.
.
Sam and Nick: From now on, stop believing what SSPX members and symphatizers (including bishops who do not know any better) say about their schismatic status (think of jailed criminals always pleading their innocence!) As you Nick said: “stop spreading an error” and the dishonesty of the SSPX. Instead, listen, read, and follow what the Popes through the decades have maintained about the schism of the SSPX. Do not believe the hearsays but believe the documents. Read these following full quotations below.
1. Pope Paul VI’s letter to Archbishop Lefebvre on the (schism) withdrawal of canonical recognition from the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) June 29, 1975:
” … Our grief is even greater to note that the decision of the competent authority – although formulated very clearly, and fully justified, it may be said, by your refusal to modify your public and persistent opposition to the Second Vatican Council, to the post-conciliar reforms, and to the orientations to which the Pope himself is committed.
” Finally, the conclusions which [the Commission of Cardinals] proposed to Us, We made all and each of them Ours, and We personally ordered that they be immediately put into force.”
Source: PAUL VI, “Lettre de S. S. Le Pape Paul VI a Mgr. Lefebvre,” 29 June 1975, La Documentation Catholique, n. 1689, trans. in M. DAVIES, Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre, p. 113.
2. Pope St. John Paul II on SSPX schism in his Ecclesia Dei Adflicta, February 7, 1988:
” In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of CEASING THEIR SUPPORT IN ANY WAY FOR THAT MOVEMENT. Everyone should be aware that formal ADHERENCE TO THE SCHISM IS A GRAVE OFFENCE AGAINST GOD and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law.”
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei.html
3. Pope Benedict XVI in his Letter to the Bishops dated March 10, 2009::
“The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church.
“In order to make this clear once again: UNTIL THE DOCTRINAL QUESTIONS ARE CLARIFIED, THE SOCIETY HAS NO CANONICAL STATUS IN THE CHURCH, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church…
“This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially DOCTRINAL in nature and concern primarily THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL AND THE POST-CONCILIAR MAGISTERIUM OF THE POPES.
“The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society.
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
4. Pope Francis did give SSPX the faculty to hear confessions legally and validly, because it does not contradict Canon Law. There have always been exceptional circumstances or instances of necessity in which the Church recognizes as valid and licit the reception of sacraments from priests who may be immoral, schismatic, irreligious, laicized, or even non-Catholic, provided their denominations have sacramental confessions.
Canon 844 §2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.
Canon 976 Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present.
While Pope Francis’ gesture of mercy shows an important precedent — for the good of souls, the Church has the power to grant faculties even to priests who are not in good standing — it is nevertheless NOT AN APPROVAL OF THEM – not an approval of SSPX, or their situation.
5. Pope Francis in his letter Misericordia et Misera, November 20, 2916: “For the pastoral benefit of these faithful (who attend churches officiated by the SSPX ) and trusting in the good will of their priests to strive with God’s HELP FOR THE RECOVERY OF FULL COMMUNION IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, I have personally decided to extend this faculty beyond the Jubilee Year, until further provisions are made, lest anyone be deprived of the sacramental sign of reconciliation through the Church’s pardon.”
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_letters/documents/papa-francesco-lettera-ap_20161120_misericordia-et-misera.html
Very clearly, Pope Francis’ motu proprio shows there is still the need for SSPX “to recover full communion in the Catholic Church.” Therefore, Pope Benedict’s statement on SSPX’s non-canonical status in the Church still stands.
6. Pope Francis’ letter, dated July 16, 2021, that accompanies Traditionis Custodes, specifically mentioning SSPX to be in “schism.” Here’s the 2nd paragraph, fully quoted:
“Most people understand the motives that prompted St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI to allow the use of the Roman Missal, promulgated by St. Pius V and edited by St. John XXIII in 1962, for the Eucharistic Sacrifice. The faculty — granted by the indult of the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1984 and confirmed by St. John Paul II in the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei in 1988 — was above all MOTIVATED BY THE DESIRE TO FOSTER THE HEALING OF THE SCHISM WITH THE MOVEMENT OF MONS. LEFEBVRE. With the ecclesial intention of restoring the unity of the Church, the Bishops were thus asked to accept with generosity the “just aspirations” of the faithful who requested the use of that Missal.”
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/motu_proprio/documents/20210716-motu-proprio-traditionis-custodes.html
7. About the SSPX faculty to officiate in Catholic weddings (Letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith dated March 27, 2017). It states that with the diocese’s permission, an SSPX priest may officiate in a Catholic wedding but only if there is no diocesan or religious priest available, and the documents must be forwarded to the diocesan curia. It should be remembered, too, that in the sacrament of matrimony, the ministers are the couple themselves. A priest is only there to witness for the Church and receive the couple’s consent.
Other than those limited faculties, the sacraments of the SSPX, although valid, are not recognized by the Church because, as Pope Benedict XVI writes, the Society has no canonical status and no legitimate ministry in the Church.
8. Many people, including bishops, who say SSPX is not in schism or has reconciled with the Church, should be able to produce a document similar to Pope John Paul II’s letter welcoming the SSPX in Campos, Brazil (now the Union of St. John Mary Vianney) into the fold, otherwise they should not be believed. Here’s the link to Pope JPII letter:
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=4141
Just as a same sex couple is not in an, “irregular” relationship (implying that it could somehow become regularized), but a sinful one.
David dante said :”Other than those limited faculties, the sacraments of the SSPX, although valid, are not recognized by the Church because, as Pope Benedict XVI writes, the Society has no canonical status and no legitimate ministry in the Church.”
Firstly, ‘no canonical status’ doesn’t mean ‘schismatic’. You should know the difference. Secondly, Benedict never once said sspx is schismatic. Third, neither has Francis for that matter. Your capped example ONLY mentions Lefebvre NOT the society. Fourth,Lefebvre and the four were excommunicated in ’88 which was null and void by Benedict. Fifth, the sspx can and does say Mass and ANY catholic can have their Sunday obligation fulfilled by attending said Mass. Sixth, would the church allow Catholics to attend schismatic Masses like they were attending a russian orthodox Masses to fulfill their obligation?
“it is the same doctrine as always.” You can’t honestly claim continuity and innovation at the same time.
What on earth does “honesty” have to do with Sfiducia Supplicans or any practice promulgated by this pig headed pontificate?
Power, OK. Popularity, yes. Pandering, sure. But the pastoral Truth of Christ the Good Shepherd, nope.
O thou, God’s fool, who art so wise,
I presumed you had a keyboard software error…until I discovered the meaning of the word. I have much faith in you.
meiron, I couldn’t agree with you more.
Our beloved Fool is a glorious, insightful, surprising — and, yes, simple — contributor to these comment pages.
And thanks, too, for pointing out the Fool’s brilliant “typo.” Without your note, it would have gone right over my head.
I thank God for the likes of both of you. With Catholics like you on the watch, this bad-news Bergoglio bunch doesn’t stand a chance.
I have a curious question : does broadening or/ and innovating something implies a change on that same thing ?
Two men or two women cannot be considered a “couple,” period!
I agree that two people of the same sex cannot marry each other, but if they live together and consider themselves to be some sort of joined unit, are they not a couple? “Couple” is not a value term. I say my divorced and remarried best friend is married, even though I don’t think it is a true marriage.
How about if a man living with his pet goat and engaging in sex? Would they be a couple in the eyes of Mr. George Bergoglio?
Yes, and what about those who are minor attracted? Do we accompany and bless that? Where does it stop?
You are right on target Deacon. So then how about blessing two peds and their juveniles, three or five adults, a woman and a tree, etc, etc, this opening that Bergoglio has done is purely of the ‘evil one.’ As Venerable Sheen stated in the 1940’s that there would be two Catholic churches in the future; The Roman Catholic Church and the counter church, the ape catholic church of what we’ve been seeing for several year’s now…
The next conclave should think outside the box and give us Sviataslav the First. He might be too humble to take it, though but a person can dream.
I’m with you, Frank.
“I recognize that the reception of these documents requires time”….
Not much time is required when this papacy is “make a mess”
What’s gone through my thoughts is that the poor and marginalized devout folks are not the one’s being listened to. It’s the elite, trust fund babies, EU, UN, WHO, Soros funded foundations, etc.
The Church in places like Germany is in a managed decline. Much like the Anglican church in the UK. The way things are going the National Trust will be running the cathedrals.
I read that Malawi has only a quarter of the number of Catholics that Belgium does but they’ve ordained 2 times as many priests. Africa and Asia are where the Church and the global population are growing. The powers that be in the Vatican need to pay attention to that.
Money talks. The in-growth areas you mentioned will not get an audience until they have the money to do so. And I imagine about that time, that’s when they will enter their own decline.
It’s too bad the world runs on incentives/temptations of money, and the resulting jealousies and other undesirable side effects. Jesus obviously realized that, and they didn’t like his preaching on it.
Who’s to say Africans will not follow every other continent and become more open to LGBTQ+ people as the population becomes more educated? Where the continent is now is not much different from where other continents were 30-40 years ago.
Perhaps that depends on one’s definition of education? There’s a difference between academics & indoctrination.
What with the S on S and all, I guess they were too busy to pay attention to what’s going on in the Anglican world.
We read: “The cardinal-president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conference of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM), Fridolin Ambongo, issued a call mid-week for talks among African bishops with a view to preparing a unified ‘continental’ response.”
In the response, and in a continent challenged by expansive Islam, might the Symposium consider the similarity between RATIONALIZATION by the illuminati Fernandez in the Vatican and other insular rationalizations developed by fideistic Islamic scholars?
Two points:
FIRST, Islam accepts the term Trinity, but views the New Testament Scripture only through its lens of the Qur’an. So as to redefine this Unity as a pagan “triad,” consisting of God (not Father), the Son (not God), and the consort Mary. There is no Holy Spirit (Jn 14:15-17, 26; 16:12, 13, 17). Instead, the Greek term “Paraclete” (Holy Spirit) is substituted by Muslim commentators with their useful “Periclyte,” the Greek form of Ahmad or Muhammad. Christ foretells the coming of Muhammad! (Source below).
Word games…
SECOND, about word games/circular rationalizations, we read that in Feducia supplicans Fernandez quotes Francis’s documents some 65 times and the Scripture…zero (reported in a recent CWR thread). Since Fernandez has been the papal ghostwriter from the beginning, do we have here another foregone conclusion—embroidered with a rationalization?
We arrive at a “triad” of three options: is this embroidery incestuous plagiarism, or is it only solitary intellectual masturbation, or maybe simply a word game ‘splaining that a “blessing” by an ordained priest can morph into a non-blessing—and, enabling even sexual incest?
OR, in the interview does Fernandez pretend that he has answered the incisive critique offered by the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Muller? https://newdailycompass.com/en/mueller-blessings-for-gay-couples-are-blasphemous
(Source re Islamic scholarship: See especially Abdullah Yusuf Ali, “The Holy Qur’an: Text, Translation and Commentary;” Lahore: Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, 1983/1938, Qur’an surah 7:157, fn. 1127 on p. 388).
His Emenience, the Cardinal prefect, seriously insults our intelligence if he is concerned critics of his novel proposal and pastoral stance are in fact in òpposition to Catholic doctrine…in another age this prelate would be on trial for heresy. MARANATHA
With all their talk of flexibility and development and moving forward, it seems to me that Bergoglio and Tucho and Martin and company are really advocating relativism.
“Rigidity” and “backwardism” are just code words for inviolable moral standards, which they cannot abide.
These people want to promote subjectivism and destroy the Catholic Church as a coherent proponent of objective moral virtue.
And, while Mr. Altieri indicates that there does appear to be some pushback from our bishops — mostly in continents that are not Europe or North America — it’s strange that the entire Church’s hair isn’t on fire about having a pope who’s attempting to destroy the Church.
Mr. Brineyman,
You rightly and perceptibly observe the silent crickets coming from this part of the Body of Christ. Intentionality is now taking on new meaning for those in the pews. Rome’s intent on sewing confusion, weaking havoc and feigning righteous indignation, are concrete signs of the Evil Spirit and not the Spirit of the Lamb of God.
Again, Well said, Mr. Brineyman, well said.
Ahoooo and Merry Christmas and JCALAS!!
And now is it not time to reign in the Belgium and German bishops? It would surely make sense to do this now, at this time.
It’s too late for Bergolio and Fernandez. 476, 1527, 1943…You can’t open the gates of Rome to German barbarians and expect them to behave.
Only the “German barbarians”?
Oh, puleeze; how are we ever to have inclusive unity if the ubiquitous homosexual lifestyle is disallowed from ANNEXING both the secular nation-states and the ecclesial Catholic Church?
Why art thou so backwardist?” It’s meant to be, and the select members of the 21st-century Synod 2024 will be screened so as to make it so. Thusly doth history repeateth itself:
“For the Trojans themselves had drawn the horse into their fortress, and it stood there while they sat in council [synod] round it…” (Homer, the Iliad/Odyssey, 9th to 6th Century B.C.).
A celibate priest with little or no real life experience in sex, marriage or family issues is definitely not a reliable source of counsel authority.
Haven said that; I want to believe that our spiritually ordained ministers and leaders of faith are simply out of touch with God and the faithfuls.
These are serious mistakes that could break the Church as we know it
“A celibate priest with little or no real life experience in sex, marriage or family issues is definitely not a reliable source of counsel authority.”
Priests talk to people about those matters all the time – in Confession, in counseling – and priests have definitely had experience of family issues; after all, they have lived in families since childhood.
You might as well say that a priest who has not committed theft or murder is “not a reliable source of counsel authority” about stealing or murdering, or that a priest who has never run a business can’t give counsel to a person who is having concerns about running his business morally.
Mrs. Cracker above – Be assured that the Church in Belgium is pretty much an empty shell. Bishop Bondy of Antwerp (my birth province) has lately become the mouthpiece of the euthanasia lobby.
I’m so sorry to hear that Gilberta.
Sfiducia Supplican is simply an extension of Amoralist Laetitia. The pontificate of Pope Francis is year one of the new Church. If it is “God’s style” to tolerate concubinage, why not end our “rigid” ecclesial “preoccupation” with all “sins below the waist?”
Pope Francis promulgates pastoral heresy. The gift of infallibility does not protect the Church from the pontifical promotion of heteropraxy. The Pope’s idea of doctrinal development is to destroy dogma slowly through practice. Following his heretical heroes Martini, Hāring, Curran, et al., the moral teaching of the Church will crumble through mass adoption of sinful practices, like artificial contraception use.
Merry Christmas! The conception and birth of Christ conquered sin and death. Look at Him in the crèche.
And, confirmed by but also distinct from even legitimate “doctrinal development” is the concrete natural law.
About which, the inventive half-blessing of Fernandez is found wanting and half fast. Something like being half pregnant. Perhaps we should channel the wise King Solomon about half measures, here through Mark Twain’s runaway slave Jim–surely from the “periphery!”
So, about contrived half measures, what does the wholly free and fugitive Jim have to say about halfway stuff? Says he of the dispute over a child set before Solomon:
“De’ spute warn’t ’bout a half a chile, de ’spute was ’bout a whole chile; en de man dat think he kin settle a ’spute bout a whole chile wid a half a chile, doan’ know enough to come in out’n de rain” (The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, 1884).
Fernandez & Co., “come in out’n de rain.”
I am a life long practicing Catholic who has tried mightily to pass our precious faith on to my children and grandchildren. I am shocked by Fiducia. We Catholics must rally ourselves!!!
I am writing to my local bishop asking him not to implement Fiducia. I am writing to the Papal Nuncio in Washington, Christophe Pierre, and to the USCCB to protest. Do as I do!! Make your voices heard. Tell everyone you know to write. Do not leave the great megaphone to James Martin & Co.
Merry Christmas to All and Don’t Lose Hope.
Well said Francy.
“If you love me, keep my Commandments.”
This is the way.
Francy, you’ve convinced me that I too should send off a letter to my bishop and to the Nuncio as well. Thanks. Merry Christmas.
This may be, hopefully, a watershed moment where shepherds will now be less reticent in speaking up about some of the lunacy that comes from this pontiff and his parrots.
I continue to be confused. And I blame Francis for that. Stay with me. Up until Fiducia supplicans the following was true: The Church only recognized marriage as bettween a man and woman. There was no rite for blessing same-sex relationhips. Priests would often give blessings outside of church. Those priests never asked questions. “Father, please bless me.” And the priest said a few words with the sign of the cross. The priest never asked anything including “are you Catholic.” OK. Now we have Fiducia supplicans. What’s changed. As far as I can tell: nothing. The only thing I think may be going on is that Francis wanted to send a message to gay men and women that worthy to be blessed, but not your unions. I remain confused.
The Jesuits put up a full page ad in the New York Tmes to announce to the world and brag that they will now be blessing same sex unions. I sincerely think Fernandez and Pope Francis knowingly acted in a malicious matter by putting out the Fiducia Suplicans
A priest can bless a pet, he can also bless food or even bless an object. And Jesus said we should all bless those who curse us (Luke 6:28). So the priest can give a blessing to anyone who asks for one. But as the pope said, it has to be done in a way that is not giving even the slightest impression that their “union” is being blessed.
In reality, the majority of people reacting to the news have probably not read the document, and instead are either outraged, or cheering, depending what they hear in the media. It is the media that is making this into a scandal by presenting something that it is not.
Catholic media should be headlining the fact that the pope reaffirmed Catholic teaching, that the unions cannot be blessed. Instead, many in the Catholic media are doing a good job of spreading the false narrative that the Catholic Church now approves of and blesses same sex unions.
If good priests were wise, they would take advantage of imparting these blessings. What better chance would a priest have to speak to a same sex couple than if they themselves came to him? Priests should welcome these people, and proceed to explain verbatim what the pope said, namely that the Church cannot bless same-sex unions because it is sinful in the eyes of God, and then give them a blessing with the priest’s intention that their relationship be chaste. In other words, you can love your friends, and have special close relationships with them, just don’t have sexual intercourse with them, as such acts, as the pope has repeatedly explained, are strictly allowed between a mama and a woman married and open to life.
The media mob is simply setting up a false narrative scenario, and those who use the document to push the LGBT agenda, or to attack the pope because they already hate him, are only condemning themselves. God knows and sees everything..
My how naive you are! Yes a prelate/priest etc, etc can bless a single object like an animal, relics, a person, but NOT a couple who explicitly mocks God in a state of mortal sin like two Sodomites. A blessing of two Sodomites means; approval, permission, an order, a certain type of action, an affirmation, an acknowledgement that this Sin is permissible! The Church cannot & should not affirm people in their Sin. Trust me, the next step under this man who sits on the Chair of Peter or his predecessor will take it a step further and marry two Sodomites. God is Not Mocked and will spare no Mercy on what is coming in the near future.
I am confused as well. Has there ever been another time in history of the Catholic Church when a specific group of the layity were called out or honored above all other layity?
Typical. Altieri delivers a strong punch in his final lines. This pontificate, without episcopal backing, created a colossal and cosmic Catch-22. The 24-7 news cycle will surely cover Francis and friends’ enforcement attempts. It will also cover walk-backs. The heat and fire of Francis’ button could conflagrate and end in the ash can of ecclesial history, together with his name. Whether it will attract tourists or not is a question.
“In the age of instant communications and 24-hour news cycles, however, a big enough crisis could put the implosion of a pontificate on display for the entire world, in real time.” ~ C. Altieri
Last night’s LA Times internet headline: “Some Catholic bishops reject pope’s stance on blessings for same-sex couples. Others are confused.” The article noted the African bishops’ refusal to comply and noted that 25% of the world’s Catholics live in Africa.
Could the “Magisterium of Francis’ implode Arius’? God knows.
“It was then Saturday, and Arius was expecting to assemble with the church on the day following: but divine retribution overtook his daring criminalities. For going out of the imperial palace, attended by a crowd of Eusebian partisans like guards, he paraded proudly through the midst of the city, attracting the notice of all the people. As he approached the place called Constantine’s Forum, where the column of porphyry is erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized Arius, and with the terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine’s Forum, he hastened thither. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious hemorrhage, and the descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died. The scene of this catastrophe still is shown at Constantinople, as I have said, behind the shambles in the colonnade: and by persons going by pointing the finger at the place, there is a perpetual remembrance preserved of this extraordinary kind of death.” ~ Socrates (Scholasticus)
The Dicastery in Defense of Who’s Faith? Altieri establishes that the Dicastery for Defense of the Faith under papal appointee Card Tucho has been transformed into the Dicastery for the Defence of Apostate Twaddle.
Card Ambongo, younger and more liberal than most prelates in Africa, is Pope Francis’ frontman for his agenda to de Africanize Africa. Altieri’s guess is correct, a move to give Vat headquarters [Pope Francis, Card Tucho, Card Parolin] time to regroup.
Card Fernández is already scrambling to prevent implosion reproving bishops who’ve jumped the gun “approving quasi-ritual blessing formulae or are on their way toward approving them”. How? To “reformulate” the permissions. At that what we perceive as possible implosion may result in no more than disingenuous response to expected incoming fire. Clever these twaddlers.
We have it on the highest authority that we can judge a tree by its fruit. So what has been the fruit of Fiducia Supplicans so far? To get an idea navigate to website news.google.com and enter a search for
You will find headlines from publications around the world regarding FS and links to the articles.
Some articles will confirm the belief among those raised in vehemently anti-Catholic denominations that the Catholic Church is indeed the Whore of Babylon.
You will find articles that will cause Protestants considering becoming Catholic to forget about doing so.
You will find articles that will scandalize new Catholics who converted to Catholicism because its teaching remains the same regardless of the worldly thinking of the times.
You will find articles that describe a sharply divided Catholic Church in regards to fundamental doctrines.
You will find much more rotten fruit. Now you can judge the tree.
I suggest the following blessing for these “couples”: May almighty God grant you the grace to abandon your sinful ways and devote yourselves to Him alone. Amen.
The Pope with the leadership of the Vatican along with clerical support from Cardinals/Bishops (Cupich and others) and Fr. James Martin have now totally confused the laity. This so-called “blessing of “gay couples/individuals” “but is not approving of gay marriage” is nothing less than a total disregard of Church doctrine and teaching not to mention a denial of sinfulness. Yes, yes, we are all sinners, we are told and asked to reconcile with God through the Sacrament, not just get “blessed” by those who have been ordained. What are we the laity to think? To Do? Those who do not believe in Catholic doctrine love it, those of us who follow teaching of the Church and not the cafeteria version, we see the slippery slope this Pope and his followers seek. We are on track for a smaller Catholic Church as many within go the secular catholic church way….
All the talk in FS about being faithful to Catholic doctrine appears to me to be the sugar coating to the gay friendly poison pill.
We ask why God permits this ‘apostate twaddle’ to undermine the Church, structurally insofar as authority, and doctrinally going so far as to appear to supplant Christ? We may cite sacred scripture and the prophetic testimony of John, the oldest remaining and last of the original 12 Apostles in his final work when exiled by Domitian to Patmos, “Because they did not receive the love of the truth so that they might be saved, therefore God will send them the operation of error so that they believe a lie” (2 Thess 2 Ad 10). In consideration of this we have reason to strengthen our trust, our faith in God’s Word and to encourage our brothers that we may share in Christ’s glory.
AMEN Father..!
What a joyful thing to drop on Catholics just at the end of Advent and beginning of Christmas, where this nearly all which is talked about the entire time.
And, leaving a significant portion of Catholics now feeling Rome is anything but guided by the Holy Spirit as guarantor of orthodoxy and sure guide to salvation, and them now thinking Rome a fraud, and why bother with it at all.
On a positive note, it DOES help keep minds off the modern abuse of vigil Masses making a mockery of holy days set apart for God, and everyone able to get it all done last evening and today so that they can better forget all about Jesus on his birthday, and instead concentrate on what really matters.
Would that the USCCB (US Catholic Cowardly Bishops)have the same courage and responsibility as the African bishops. Come out from behind Bergoglio’s skirt, Your Excellencies. You wanted the tall hats? Well, act like men who stand for something more than your own careers and cocktails with the elite.
I can’t help it but must repeat a remark from someone else that “Fiducia Supplicans” sounds like a perfect name for one of the sisters of perpetual indulgence.
All Africa is aganist that document. 300 million of Catholics. It is not a problem of an isolate bishop…
Is it naive to take hope from the rejection of FS by “the peripheries”?
If a papal document containing nothing controversial such as Veterum Sapientia can be so thoroughly ignored, then this scandalous new one deserves to be even more thoroughly disregarded. Lord grant us clear and orthodox leaders for your Church, men who are lovers of tradition.
What failure is Altieri talking about here? This is rather a case of a tiny minority of a few isolated bishops around the world who are dissenting and rebelling against Pope Francis’ magisterial authority. They can be compared to those bishops who rebelled and dissented when St. Pope Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae. The ultra large majority of bishops globally are aligned with the Pope on this teaching declaration about blessings. The failure is in these bishops who fail as bishops here. They are so full of themselves they believe they know the doctrine of the Church better than Pope Francis. These bishops including not unexpectedly the Astana, Kazakhstan auxiliary bishop Athanasius Schneider make up these disloyal and disobedient anti-Francis Catholics who coordinate their efforts through the mass and social media in asserting their “more-Catholic-than-the-Pope” authority over Francis. These tiny minority of a few of bishops clearly have failed to properly exercise their teaching authority “with and under” the Pope, for “the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman pontiff, sucessor of Peter as its head” (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 22; also, Catechism of the Catholic Church 880-886).
“…a tiny minority of a few isolated bishops…”
Well, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC), as even Wikipedia knows, “is the second-largest particular church in the Catholic Church after the Latin Church.”
And then there is Africa. Puny.
Correction, not all African bishops but just a tiny minority of them. The Ukranian Greek Catholic Church here declared that they are not of the Latin Rite and so Fiducia Supplicans is not applicable to them. I see here this deplorable pattern of dishonesty on the part of anti-Francis or conservative Catholics to overblow the projection of and inflate their size and standing. A frequent example is the deceptive projection of Bishop Athansius Schneider by the implication of silence (about his credentials) as if he’s an ordinary bishop of a European or North American diocese when in fact he is only an auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhtan in the former Soviet Central Asia. In another case, the advocates of the old pre-Vatican II Mass hyper blowing their size when in fact before Traditionis Custodes (when general permission was rescinded and moved out of parish venues) Vetus Ordo Masses were held in only 1,700 out of the 225,000 parishes worldwide, or in the U.S. in only 700 out of the 18,000 parishes. Think of proportionality, or reality!
“I see here this deplorable pattern of dishonesty…”
Of course you do. I can write your stuff for you at this point. But your ability to read the sign of the times is, I think, less than stellar.
Yo, Deacon Dom,
About Bishop Schneider: “…only an auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan in the former Soviet Central Asia.”
What think ye about one Girogio Marengo, the new cardinal of Mongolia on the edge of historic China–and with a Catholic population of only 1,500 compared to Kazakhstan’s 125,000 (yes, in decline).
And then there’s the deep-roots sort of thing, since both Schneider and the cardinal trace back to the mere twelve apostles within a Roman Empire having a total population of four million (including slaves and foreigners). Which is to say that the Church as a whole was only 0.0003 percent of the total population. More since then. The mustard seed thingy. Of all the Church over the past 2,000 years (perhaps even a few in heaven!) not exactly insignificant company–G.K. Chesterton’s ‘democracy of the dead’.”
So much for the “proportionality” thingy. But, the solitary “Deacon Dom,” who is he, exactly?
What? DD says, “…as if he’s an ordinary bishop of a European or North American diocese when in fact he is only an auxiliary bishop…” What?
Sociologists would label it “bias,” that allusive preference or prejudice for bishops assigned to European or North American dioceses as being somehow higher in nature, intelligence, orthodoxy, ultramontanism, or pope-worship is despicable. Some would call is RACISM of an ungodly order. A bishop is a Bishop. One bishop only holds a specific and limited type of difference.
Perhaps a veil or hood clouds your ability to reason with prudential truth.
Yes. Puny, isolated Africa with the fastest growing Catholic population on the planet…
Pay no attention to those isolated bishops Deacon Dom.
🙂
BTW, the global south is not the periphery any more than Europe or USA. Actually, Pope Francis always talks of the existential periphery, and that surely applies to the global north.
The LGBTQ+ community is even more on the peripheries of the “global south” than it is in the northern hemisphere. Fiducia supplicans is spot on with the emphasis of his Holiness on reaching the periphery. That its implementation will be uneven is to be expected. Change is rarely universally accepted in the beginning. But there is no doubt this is the first step towards full acceptance of LGBTQ+ people in the church. Many will be uncomfortable at first. But over time, even the most primitive will not be threatened by it.
The Global South tries to ensure that certain behaviors remain peripheral. And that’s part of the reason they’re leading the world demographically while the decadent West is declining.