This whole business is bad, from top to bottom. Whether Fiducia supplicans was intended as a sop to Germans hell-bent on synodalizing the Catholic Church’s understanding of sexual morality, or as part of the larger “paradigm shift” envisioned by Pope Francis’s recent motu proprio, Ad theologiam promovendam, or just as an exercise of official pastoral solicitude, the pope’s attempt to foist the blessing of gay couples on the whole Church has been a massive cock-up, right from the start.
The official line from the US and Canadian bishops was lukewarm, but whole conferences in the global south roundly rejected the document and a few even stated—in words—their refusal to implement it, while the largest non-Latin ritual Church sui iuris on the planet said they’d have none of it and pilloried the document along with its theological plant.
There’s no chalking the appearance of cold reception to loud-mouthed trads on the internet this time, either. The enthusiastic supporters of the top-down measure were outliers and usual suspects from Western jurisdictions facing demographic winter, while the strongest opposition comes from the fastest growing quarters of the Church. If anything, the talk of resistance is only the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
Is there any fixing it?
The answer to that depends on how much Francis is willing to give up in the short term, and how little the worldwide resistance to Fiducia supplicans will press.
Pope Francis could try to deal with the crisis by spinning it into a success story for synodality based on the benchmarks of healthy decentralization and culturally appropriate adaption of core teaching. The downside to such an approach is that it will show bishops how to get away with flouting Roman authority. Francis is utterly committed to the idea that synodality—whatever it is or may be—can work only when it is not just cum Petro but also sub Petro, i.e., not only “with Peter” but “under Peter” in the order of things. So, that’s not likely to cut ice.
Pope Francis could try to force the issue, but that would run the risk of turning bishops’ reluctance into recalcitrance. It would almost certainly both solidify and galvanize opposition. Francis doesn’t want a fight with these guys. He has refused to play hardball with the Germans and their ersatz “synodal way” spielierien, so a donnybrook with the global south over a marginal issue will leave everyone wondering why them and why now?
What’s the big deal, anyway?
In group dynamics, bickering quickly takes on a logic of its own. This is true among children squabbling in a playroom or schoolyard. It holds for grown-ups in boardrooms or faculty senates or cabinet meetings. If you’re wondering whether it holds for prelates, well, maybe ask Arius?
The original cause of the bickering is often forgotten so quickly and so completely that recovering it will often be very costly and resolving it fruitless, and that’s when it is even possible to recover the original cause of the bickering at all.
Many of the 5,000 words of Fiducia supplicans are spent in articulating what the document doesn’t say or mean to say, what it doesn’t mean to do. It doesn’t change Church teaching on marriage; it doesn’t countenance the blessing of irregular unions per se; it doesn’t mean to convey any sort of approval for concubinage or homosexual simulacra of conjugal relationships.
The only reason for spilling so much ink to say what the thing doesn’t do or allow is because the author foresaw that it does or allows something that looks an awful lot like what he says it doesn’t.
Pretending that people who aren’t buying it are being deliberately obtuse or that they’re the ones ginning up controversy, well, it may do well in Chi-Town, but it won’t play in Peoria.
One way out
In the crisis that the publication of Fiducia supplicans has precipitated, nobody can win. Everybody stands to lose.
The key to keeping a crisis from becoming a catastrophe is in both sides being willing to let the other guy save face.
The way to do that is to treat Fiducia supplicans as a sort of theological “white paper”—a reflection put together by policy wonks—and memory-hole it.
Pope Francis didn’t write the paper, he only approved it. The document itself disposes nothing. It is a declaration—a species of formal statement—from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, rather than a law.
Fiducia supplicans offers a novel theological understanding of what blessings are and how they may work or be made to work in difficult pastoral situations. As such, it really does offer food for thought. Let people kick the tires a little—or a lot—and maybe even test-drive it, or not. Never mind that nobody needed a DDF document to tell them they could bless people either singly or together or in groups.
“[Y]our task also implies a special care to verify that the documents of your own Dicastery and of the others have an adequate theological support, are coherent with the rich humus of the perennial teaching of the Church and at the same time take into account the recent Magisterium,” Pope Francis wrote in his letter to the new-ish prefect of the DDF.
“Differing currents of thought in philosophy, theology, and pastoral practice,” Pope Francis wrote in the same letter—quoting his own Evangelii gaudium, “if open to being reconciled by the Spirit in respect and love, can enable the Church to grow.”
Those sound like they are words for a conversation.
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.
The enthusiastic supporters of the top-down measure were outliers and usual suspects from Western jurisdictions facing demographic winter, while the strongest opposition comes from the fastest growing quarters of the Church.
The usual pattern that follows the introduction of dissent, heterodoxy, or heresy.
I listened to 2 members of the African clergy discussing this & one stated: “We’re not idiots.” They’re not fooled.
I don’t believe the powers that be in Rome actually think Africans are idiots but they do seem to take their goodwill for granted. Scandalizing & disrespecting the fastest growing global center of Catholic population is not a good policy.
The new Age which this generation has been transferred into is the visual separation of Wheat and Chaff. Separation is never pretty when unity and harmony are thought the better existential destination. That is why this new Age of Salvation History is difficult to adjust to experiencing in real time. However, God who is patient, loving and just desires all His children to execute KNOWINGLY their divine gift of Free Will. We are our own judges at the final judgment. It is in this Age we will decide who our God or gods truly are to us. It is this free will choice we will embrace at our final judgment…our OWN thoughts actions AND INACTIONS. Silence in the face of soul destroying teaching is an act of free will. We are all players on the field, none of us are mere spectators.
Yes, Father. We should never forget that we were each put in these strange times for a reason. We have a job to do.
Why don’t you believe they believe they are idiots when many prelates in Rome have a long history of characterizing African prelates in precisely those words?
And is it not in the nature of beliveing in the silly notion of progress to inspire conceit and elitist condescension?
Many of the 5,000 words of Fiducia supplicans are spent in articulating what the document doesn’t say or mean to say, what it doesn’t mean to do. It doesn’t change Church teaching on marriage; it doesn’t countenance the blessing of irregular unions per se; it doesn’t mean to convey any sort of approval for concubinage or homosexual simulacra of conjugal relationships.
And there would be no point in doing unless one had good reason to expect others to take the “do’s” behind those “doesn’ts” as your meaning.
The intention to save face implies at least a tone of regret; but, in the case of Pope Francis, it implies a tome of regret that is simply non-existent. He has squirmed with delight at every seed of confusion personally sown, at every harmful appointment he has personally made. This pontificate will be remembered for all the wrong reasons. He wanted to be the Pope of surprises but he modelled himself on very predictable, Marxist-Peronist, latin liberal theologians; vindictive political animals each and every one of them.
Yes, Mr. Moss: Marxist. Destroy the strength of the nuclear family and the strength to resist if gone. He has no fear of the Word of God, and no compassion for those who are in such a state of sin; instead he is encouraging them to so live to their own physical, and ultimately eternal, destruction.
Absolutely in incorrect.
I’ll put my money on the Latin Mass communities. Jesus never left that Mass. It’s obvious when you attend. Deo gratias!
Hello Mr. Mark,
I prefer the TLM also but Our Lord hasn’t left any Catholic Tabernacle that I’m aware of. The distractions that can occur at NO Masses are truly regrettable but Jesus is there non the less. Sometimes you have to wonder if other folks are aware of His Presence at Mass. Their behaviors don’t always indicate that.
I attended Christmas Eve Mass with family at our diocesan cathedral. The level of pre-Mass chattering in the pews was really amazing. Someone asked over the microphone that we spend the next 10 minutes in silent prayer. That lasted 2-3 minutes & the chattering ramped up again until the organ began playing.
I understand that people are happy to see each other on Christmas Eve but for goodness sakes…
Mark – Your 12/27 @5:26
Due to my increasing age I find it increasingly more difficult to attend the Latin Mass 55 miles away, but yours is a good point.
My reaction to Fiducia Supplicans? I ignore it, just as I would imagine many of us do at this point with everything this Pope either says or does.
Besides – If Fr. Martin LOVES it – What more need be said?
Amen.
Let Bergoglio and Tucho hang out there on their synodal limb.
Let them soak up every bit of the opprobrium.
Let them stew in the mess they made.
They seem to be slow learners.
Resist until they take it down … every single word, all 5,000 of them.
We read: “In the crisis that the publication of Fiducia supplicans has precipitated, nobody can win. Everybody stands to lose.”
Or, everyone can win. What would that look like?
Well, because of the full-scale “crisis,” Cardinal Fernandez could humbly step down from his apparently solitary roost. Could he submit his retirement paper (in less than 5,000 words), or his red hat (as Cardinal Marx once attempted), or both?
This as a courageous mid-course correction for bringing the Church “to its knees,” but very much in the wrong way.
Could he simply discover that he has betrayed the “rich humus” of the Deposit of Faith, and then even apologize for breaking the already long leash Francis has given him? Could he become a long-forgotten model of ecclesial forthrightness, and of maturity in accord with the stature of Jesus Christ? Could he show himself a model for all of the millions of “irregular” cases possibly misled and seeking, otherwise, to be mainstreamed within a shifted paradigm? Could he disavow the “smoke of Satan” and the insidious agenda of AntiChrist?
And, could he make the kind of restitution for damages done—as was formerly expected of any ordinary penitent seeking reconciliation for scandals of much lesser magnitude? Reconciliation (!) partly with the “concrete” membership of the Church founded not by any illuminati, but by the incarnate Jesus Christ? Simply showing the rest of us imperfect souls in a fallen world–transparency and the Way?
At this very moment of crisis, is the Holy Spirit actually very much at work–poised to “write straight with crooked lines”?
On our knees, could Cardinal Fernandez–and all of us–appeal through a favorite devotion of Pope Francis: “Mary, the Undoer of Knots.”
Peter, we can hope for these things, and surely the Holy Spirit could facilitate them. The catch is that the Holy Spirit respects our free will and won’t force Tucho or Francis to do anything. Personally, I believe Jesus himself could appear, stand at the foots of their beds and beg them to amend their ways, with tears flowing down His beautiful cheeks and blood flowing from His precious wounds – to absolutely no avail. These men’s hearts are poisoned with PRIDE and garbage theology.
And while we’re at it…what about the next Synod and the next conclave? And beyond?
About which, FIRST, will the front-runner synodalists now insist that they NOT be flattered into being part of a stacked deck? And, for example, will Cardinal Muller be given more than a three-minute slot to turn the lights on? Will Courage International replace rainbow poster-child Fr. Jiminey Cricket Martin, SJ? Will the “sociological and cultural foundational shift” Cardinal Hollerich remove his thumb from the scale?
And, SECOND, of the so-called Francis-cardinals, will they decide that the next conclave should NOT be a demonstration of tribal nepotism and, instead, vote as if their own salvation depended upon making their decision wisely?
And, THIRD, in future decades will the legacy devolved on Pope Francis’s watch be remembered as was Pope Honorius I, later by the Third Council of Constantinople (A.D. 680)? Honorius and Francis: a backwardist “tradition” (!) of strange bedfellows from the keyboard of ghost-writer Fernandez. Fiducia supplicans: a third-option stowaway/non-blessing alongside/outside of the authentic blessings of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.
What now. This document will go into the dumpster along with the rest of the papacy of Mr. George Bergoglio.
His name is Pope Francis.
His name is Jorge Mario Bergoglio. His assumed title is “Pope Francis”.
He has squandered the Chair of St. Peter, treating it as a personal soapbox to spout his impulsive thinking and cruel vendettas. He no longer deserves the title because he no longer has moral authority. By his own devices he has lost the flock’s attention and obedience. Those things are earned and almost impossible to regain once lost. And he has only himself to blame. There is only one thing left to do: resign in disgrace.
Mr. Lugo, speak for yourself.
There is absolutely no possibility of any sort of “conversation” with Bergoglio and his cabal about Fiducia supplicans. The papal Declaration, presented as the official magisterium of the Catholic Church, has now destroyed ecumenical relations with Russian Orthodoxy.
Yesterday Russian Orthodox Archbishop Hilarion stated bluntly: “After Bergoglio’s Fiducia supplicans, we can no longer hope for future unity between the Russian Orthodox and the Vatican. Francis’ actions ‘will create new lines of separation’. Hilarion says he was surprised by the decision to ‘bless’ homosexual couples because he has ‘always considered the Roman Catholic Church to be a beacon of traditional Christianity.”
https://gloria.tv/post/UU6zmAnrvHtV2vnEaeca7JM7a
We’ll see if the Holy Spirit pulls a rabbit out of a hat at the next conclave. Maybe the next Pope finds a way to put a tourniquet on some of the critical wounds inflicted by Francis and Tucho. If not – if the next pope is Francis 2.0, all bets are off and a massive fracture could be the result. I’m most worried by the prospect of the cardinals selecting a bureaucrat whom they erroneously believe can repair the ship by trying to please everyone. That outcome would fit the modern paradigm and would also demoralize the faithful further. The Church needs someone in the chair of Peter who actually loves her, and loves Christ, rather than a God made in his own warped self- image as Francis does. I don’t see how the genie of Fiducia Supplicans is ever coaxed back into the bottle except by an incredibly brilliant and orthodox pope. This document will function as a slow acting poison in the life of the Church for the foreseeable future.
Right. If the goal of Francis and friends has been to rid Catholicism of rigid pre-VCII ideologues and pre-Franciscan ‘magisteriums,’ they may well achieve some measure of success. Benedict XVI’s prophetic remnant of a church may then follow, but how long the church must hang on the cross while poison drips from a sponge of Peter’s successor is the question.
I believe Mr. Altieri is naive in viewpoints on the human activity in the Vatican. Also of great absence is the complete lack of Satan’s influence about the human activity in the Vatican, as well. The fact that Mr. Altieri doesn’t even allude to the incredible all out hellish assault on our Lord’s Holy Bride here on earth. In a word, “politics’. Just another episode of progressives vs traditionalist in the church, it seems the author is saying, and it’s nothing to be concerned about because the Holy Spirit find a way for all to compromise and come together now. Really? Is that what we are to resign ourselves to in the midst of this evil?
Come Lord Jesus
I have no disagreements with the Popes positions. Laity according to Vatican II should be included as Vatican II stated the common priesthood should not be considered second class. Open dialogue should be welcome with consideration in the Tradition of the Catholic church. It is not hard to understand the Magisterium of the Pope in 2021 where he said same sex couple unions cannot be blessed. The key word is unions. The Vatican has explicitly told that to the German Synodal way. Individual blessings are different than blessings in a union as has been stated. The Pope has not contradicted himself for as when people enter the Catholic church and go to confession they say Bless me Father for i have sinned.
You haven’t read the document. It explicitly says that it approves blessings for homosexual couples.
From what I’ve read it appears to do both things at once: blessing “couples” & individuals.
Smoke & mirrors.
No, Armando. The key word is not ‘union.’
The key word is ‘sin.’
And Tucho and Bergoglio say it even less often than they say, ‘Jesus.’
And aren’t we all sinners? Go to confession and say Bless my father for I have sinned. That’s what reconciliation is all about.
After ascertaining the sincerity of the penitent, the priest prompts an act of contrition then facilitates Christ’s forgiveness and blesses him/her with penance. It is a person fully restored to Christ, His Church and baptismal promises that is blessed. If a person dupes a priest into giving a blessing when they are in mortal sin then no blessing actually takes place. Sinners can ask to be prayed for but the Sacrament of Confession is everything and well worth the battle with pride to commit wholeheartedly to.
There is no middle ground here. Francis has been hard-lining and alienating the faithful and the issues this garbage? We’ve been pope-splaining for over 10 years and are exhausted and deeply offended. Sowing confusion in the Church is evil. This will have vile reverberations for decades.
Spot on, Rachel.
Archbishop Chaput is in complete agreement with you about the evil of sowing confusion in the Church. His recent article (The Cost of “Making a Mess”) asserts that “teaching evil is never excusable…is not of God.”
A kindly written article that is charitable to Bergoglio and his entourage. Allowing another to save face is often beneficial WHEN there is a desire from both parties to cease with the conflict. I have lost faith in Bergoglio; he seems more of an autocrat and a bully in his dealings with those that disagree with him.
I think it would be best if I just continue to pray for the welfare of his soul and await a brighter day with a new pope who at least appreciates and acknowledges Church doctrine.
I think the strategy of papering over a Vatican declaration that encourages the blessing of evil circumstances is a terrible idea. The Church needs to face squarely the truth about what has happened during the course of this pontificate, which at every turn has sought to undermine Catholic teaching. We have gotten to this point because of decades of papering over. We need to have it out.
While the length of this commentary is less than Pope Francis’s (yes, it’s his…his name is on it) 5,000 words on the topic, it’s still far too many to simply PROpose that everyone work together to just sweep under the rug the mess Fiducia Supplicans has EXposed. Peter screwed up in far fewer words when he said in Matthew 16: 22-23 – “And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, be it far from thee, this shall not be unto thee.” To which Jesus did NOT PROpose sweeping it under the rug to “let the guy save face” because sometimes things are important enough to be dealt with directly. And so he said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men.” Fiducia Supplicans likewise is important enough to be dealt with directly. Adults need to act like adults and when they are wrong to stand up and be held accountable just as Peter was. 10 years into the implementation of Francis’s HAGAN LIO (Make A Mess) plan – the underside of the carpet is full. Time to stop trying to sweep more under there just so that the top folks at Casa Santa Marta can “save face”.
This writer, Mr. Altieri, writes in this article: “In the crisis that the publication of Fiducia supplicans has precipitated, nobody can win. Everybody stands to lose.”
Um, is that really true?
To me, Fiducia Supplicans is a gigantic and landmark win for those inside and outside the Church who wish to spread transgender ideology and the whole LBGTQ agenda and anti-family agenda.
Fiducia Supplicans is a devastating defeat for those who want traditonal Catholic mora doctrine (which includes traditional Catholic Social Doctrine) to be respected and followed in families and in society.
Fiducia Supplicans is a devastating defeat for those who want to protect our children from transgender ideology, LGBTQ ideology, and the Sexual Revolution as a whole.
With Fiducia Supplicans, sin is no longer sin in the Catholic Church. Fiducia Supplicans provides a rationale for rationalizing each and every sin, whether committed by a Mafia hit man, violent Antifa anarchist, embezzler, or pedophile.
What a victory for the forces of Darkness!
What a loss for children of Light!
What good can come from all this soft-pedaling of the unprecedent, historical catastrophe of Fiducia Supplicans?
Well said, Frank. You’re right.
This is an inflection point for the Church Jesus founded.
Bergoglio has been doing his best to undermine her teachings and her traditions from the day he was elected.
Blessing or Benediction come from the Latin words “Bene” (Good) and “Dicta” (Word). A Good Word cannot be pronounced over what that is intrinsically evil and/or wants to remain in evil with no real repentance whatsoever. That word, REPENTANCE, should have been present firmly and with no ambiguities in every single one of the 45 paragraphs in Fiducia Supplicans, and that would have made it legitimate instead of poisonous, not just for the Church but especially for those that it intends to bless.
The word “COUPLES” is present 4 times. That makes it a Short Black Mass where sin is falsely blessed and Satan is honored, poisoning not just the people but especially the Priest. Fiducia Supplicans, as written, is a devious form of self-poisoning and self-cursing and must be flatly rejected.
“In the crisis that the publication of Fiducia supplicans has precipitated, nobody can win. Everybody stands to lose” (Altieri). “If open to being reconciled by the Spirit in respect and love, can enable the Church to grow” (Francis I). Placed in apposition we may agree with Chris Altieri and with Pope Francis. That is if the loss defined by Altieri is success from the perspective of Pope Francis.
As has become increasingly legible during this pontificate the anomaly of failure, accusations of incoherence, childish bumbling and worse are consistent with a pattern of crafted messaging which dilutes the permanence of orthodoxy by engaging the faithful in counter response fatigue resulting in anger, despondent questioning of Church and faith, the weak in acquiescence, the reversion of orthodox practice to heterodox. It behooves us to be aware of this and avoid being entirely drawn into this circular contest. We have the irrefutable words of Christ and his Apostles.
WE can dare hope for the next Pope to flatly reverse pronouncements like these. However, given that Frances has stacked the hierarchy with men who hold his same political leanings, that may not be a possibility. It would appear this pope values popularity more than church orthodoxy and that is unfortunate. That can be seen in his overly warm greetings to Biden, Pelosi and Whoopie Goldberg, all of whom publicly support acts such as abortion and homosexuality and transgender actions. There was not even a hint of disapproval for their lack of orthodoxy when they met, although both Biden and Pelosi are Catholic and the opportunity to privately reprimand them was there. Its a mystery why he even felt a need to speak out in support of “irregular (sexual) relationships” with this pronouncement, when such people comprise a minority of the population, and whose actions are still considered sinful. His time would have been better spent disciplining the liberal German Bishops, stopping the synods and supporting orthodox catholic teaching.And clear damage done to church reunification it would seem. Very damagine to the church.
Dear Editor,
Pope Francis’s recent Church document “Fiducia Supplicans” (Asking for Something Humbly) announced that priests and Catholic laity could bless gay couples he was clear in stating that this is not a sacramental union but a call to all of us to embrace the outcasts in our midst as Jesus did. When a non-Jew (Gentile), a tax collector, a Samaritan woman, a Roman soldier approached him, he blessed them and called them to a closer union with God. No where in the Gospel does Jesus speak of homosexuality but read his Words carefully and see for yourself what and who he does condemn. Leviticus condemns homosexuality, but it also condemns hundreds of other acts that we no longer consider reasonable. Once again, read them for yourself.
Our Holy Father is being persecuted for urging us to bless two 70-year-old women, who pledged a lifetime of love and faithfulness to each other, in sickness and in health until death do they part. Two young men requesting a blessing so that they can A bishop can bless pigs, chickens, and tractors on the feast of St. Francis of Assisi, but not two Catholics who are seeking God’s grace. As Pope Francis stated, “who am I to judge?”
When a Jesuit priest asked Pope Francis “How are you?” he stunned him with his answer. “Still alive, even though some people want me to die.” Some Catholics believe that our Holy Father is ruining our Church, others believe he is opening the doors of grace to include those who previously were considered outcasts. He washed the feet of Muslim men on Holy Thursday, he met with trans persons and told them that they could become good Godparents.
Pope Francis humbly said, “I deserve attacks and insults because I am a sinner, but the Church does not deserve these attacks. I go ahead, not because I want to start a revolution. I do what I feel I must do. It takes a lot of patience, prayer, and a lot of charity.” Pope Francis comes to us from South America, and like his namesake, he brings a fresh perspective of what it means to be humble, shunned, and disdained. I am amazed at how many firmly believe without any ounce of humility that they have an inside road on where the Holy Spirit is leading us beyond our Holy Father. I love our Church in all our brokenness, beauty, and humility and will continue to worship and serve all God’s people, especially the least among us.
Gary U. Behrman, PhD, M.Div, MSW, LCSW
I enjoy Tradition; it assists in knowing the difference between right and wrong. It clarifies the moral shades of both light and dark. How do I know the Holy Spirit’s promptings? It is not too difficult on this topic – I just look at the teachings of scripture and Tradition for the last 2,000 years and I know exactly what the Spirit is teaching today.
I don’t have itching ears for a new doctrine or a new teaching. I reject that entire premise and I do it with the full support of scriptural teaching. Yes, we should evangelize the world, but we do it in the same manner today as did Jesus and his chosen apostles and disciples – Come to the house of the Lord. Repent and be baptized.
A+
The conclusion: “Pope Francis comes to us from South America, and like his namesake, he brings a fresh perspective of what it means to be humble, shunned, and disdained.”
Which is both touching and irrelevant. Of the prostitute, did Christ bless her in her new life, or did he bless the sexually mingled friendships of her past? Does the pope hide behind his, yes, humble self-accusations rather than discerning his responsibilities as a consistent teacher of The Way?
Apart from your examples of “two seventy-year-old women” and “two young men” and “pigs, chickens and tractors,” the consequence of persistent ambiguity is that poster-child Fr. James Martin, without correction, crows and oinks to the world that there is no limit to his blessing of the homosexual lifestyle.
Some troglodytes simply object to the Church being ANNEXED to a culture of homosexuality, sequential bigamy, and cohabitation—and still other “irregular” situations like polygamy, incest and even bestiality. (A man’s best friend is his dog!) And, why no mention here of the more traditional sheep? Even rape as evidence of at least partial and “unilateral outreach”?
In the real world can the priest really laser-target the non-blessing to only the friendship? How to unscramble the two eggs of friendship (con)fused with sexual “union,” “couples,” or whatever? Hyperbole, here? Butt, isn’t it equitable to inclusively (!) add more examples to your narrow selection—so as to welcome all peripheries?
Humbly submitted as a shunned and disdained sinner in full union with our Pope Francis. Yes, “the Church does not deserve these attacks.”
The Holy Spirit grants his grace and gifts to all the baptized, and his virtues and gifts grow within a person who grows in His sanctifying grace. A little catechetical training and much love prove this foundational fact of Catholicism not only as speculative but also as experiential knowledge.
Francis has no dibs on the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit gifts all who keep the commandments. He graces all who sacrifice and strive for the sake of virtue. The sensus fidelium flourishes and abides outside Francis’ ability to lead and to rule. Truth, justice, and the common good are known to those who seek Him.
Pigs, chickens, and tractors are not rationally gifted. Yet even beasts and machines do not act against their nature. Human persons with embodied souls have so little respect for their own God-given nature that they stoop to acts unnatural.
Finally, not every day is St. Francis’ Feast Day, and not all priests relish dung in the sanctuary.
Mr. Behrman, unlike you, my educational level is more akin to that of St. Joseph rather than Isaac Newton. But for your seemingly impressive list of degrees, you overlooked the two most important requirements Jesus Himself demanded of all sinners – repentance and conversion. If a soul is not open to radical change, regardless of the specifics of their sin, there is no pathway open in that soul for God and His grace to enter.
What nonsensical sophistry, “Gary Urban Behrman, PhD, M.Div, MSW, LCSW.” By the way, my degrees are J.C.D., J.D., J.C.L., S.T.B., M.A. (Oxon.), B.A. (Oxon.), and A.B.
“what nonsensical sophistry” is not a mature response in a civil argument. If you disagree with Gary Urban Behrman, address the actual points he makes. And leave out the disrespect about how he signs his name.
Well, Maria, in a world lacking in humor, yours truly thoroughly enjoyed Paul’s rejoinder.
But, also taking your side of the banter, the “actual point” for which you inquireth is the presumptuousness of other alphabet-people tribalized as LGBTQI+.
Dr. Gary,
Our Lord clearly spelled out in scripture what constitutes a marriage. He didn’t feel required to list what marriage can not consist of.
And there is no possibility of flaws in the premises of your narrative and characterizations? There is no possibility of sinful pride in seeking to validate non-repentant in-your-face social movements seeking to advance sexual deviancy by pretending it is something akin to what is not deviant? Even when it is advanced by a bitter sanctimonious high prelate quick to relativize God’s immutable natural law, given to us as immutable because God knows even better than we how often we deceive ourselves? When sober minds give thought to such things as to why a benevolent God gave His people thousands of years of guidance, a non-evil God was not lying. And when a sexual movement comprised of those whose understanding of their sexuality is so infused with systematic deception it necessarily extends to corruptions of thought that deny the humanity of the unborn to where 99 percent of homosexuals support abortion. Who are the real outcasts, and who are their victimizers?
Pope Francis may be from Argentina but he is mostly Italian/European in his thinking. His championing of the “peripheries” seems to be a little questionable in the wake of FS.
Yes, Gilberta. I don’t think people consider that European element enough. Argentina has a huge number of European immigrants & they bring their cultures along with them.
The best place for every sinner is in Church listening to the Word of God. People change when they listen to the Word of God—-I know I did. God wants us to fill His Churches so people can listen to the Word of God—that is the tool God gave us to change the world.
See also Carl Trueman in First Things, Dec. 28, especially the last paragraph.
Be careful, Gilberta,
Trueman is a good commentator on a variety of issues, but he is also a dedicated defender of Martin Luther, wrongly believing that Luther was justified in breaking from the Church. Trueman also supports Sola Scriptura and accuses the Catholic Church of acting against the Bible in many respects, which made it necessary for the Reformation to take place. From this premise, Trueman has repeatedly made the false claim that Protestants continue to protect Scripture against Catholic errors, which is total rubbish and highly insulting to Catholics.
In the article you recommend, Trueman makes a few good observations, but in classic Trueman fashion, he also presents another bogus promotion of Luther by insultingly aligning him with many current Catholics who are dissatisfied with Fiducia Supplicans. Per Trueman, he posits that Catholics may be experiencing a crisis of conscience ‘just like Luther’ allegedly did in his opposition to Church teaching. Totally Ridiculous. This comparison cannot be justified in any way, but it’s pure Trueman who continues to rewrite and spin history to promote his form of heretical Protestantism, even though he also criticizes fellow Protestants from time to time, but not his preferred form of Protestantism in and of itself.
Regardless of any good insights that Trueman provides, always keep in mind that he often does this while also proselytizing on behalf of Protestantism that includes some cheap and historically false shots at the Catholic Church.
“Differing currents of thought in philosophy, theology, and pastoral practice,” Pope Francis wrote in the same letter—quoting his own Evangelii gaudium, “if open to being reconciled by the Spirit in respect and love, can enable the Church to grow.”
Those sound like they are words for a conversation, you say Mr. Altieri.
No they aren’t. These stupid words are a pretext for enabling open-ended sophistry than can lead to any moral evil, including the mass murder produced by such things as Marxist tyranny and the abortion industry, and other crimes against humanity, which this pontificate has indirectly and, at times, very directly supported. Only an evil mind would “respect and love” the death dealing moral relativism this pontificate has promoted, and with the shameless audacity to always insist on calling it the work of what it likes to refer to as “the Spirit”.
“Differing currents” implies that one view of morality is as valid as any other, no matter how you insult God by bypassing the reality that God alone is the author of all truth and that we create no truth at all, which is why truth, all truth, is immutable, something the low faith or completely faithless ideologue at the top, in his hysterical frustration to remake the Church and the world in his own image, continues to call people of real faith, without a trace of secular ideologies, which are always predicated on truth as a human creation, faithless ideologues, oblivious to the reality that he continues to act like the personification of a faithless ideologue, especially as he warns against affirmations of God’s own doctrinal truth as “narcissistic elitism” but cannot see any vanity in its rejection.
I have had the grace not to be scandalized after the publication of FS, even though there was some hesitation in the days that followed. Nevertheless, I feel a tightness in my heart for everything I hear and read against Pope Francis. My faith is firm and strong because my ideal is St. Joseph, the obedient one. That’s why I take refuge in the shadow of his wings with the prayer of the heart.
My thoughts are fixed on Jesus, and I find myself crying, like Anatolij, the protagonist of the film “Ostrov,” for the sins of my youth and for those committed in the world. But often, I cry for the Holy Mother Church, divided and oppressed but renewed with the blood of the martyrs killed for the sake of the Gospel.
In these times, the oppression of the enemy rages. An enemy playing on two fronts, the joyful libertinism of the West, the fruit of the dictatorship of relativism, and the nationalism of the East, the fruit of the senseless pride of the “third Rome.” More and more violent and drunk with the blood of the innocent, starting from the maternal womb, the enemy of human nature craves to take power as soon as possible to erase Christian faith from the face of the earth.
The Madonna of Medjugorje, in her February message, urged us to follow her Son on the way of Calvary. It is an invitation to the entire Church to relive the Passion of Jesus before participating in His Resurrection. It is a necessary step, and blessed are those who, embracing the Cross, follow Jesus to the end. There is no other way to be Christians than to relive the life of Jesus Christ within us.
I always thank the publisher who publishes my letters, even if they are a bit solitary. It is a sign of the magnanimity of the American people, the only ones, along with the South of the world, still speaking of God and Jesus, not removing them from public dialogue, institutions, schools, and the media, as my beloved and seemingly hopeless Europe has done.
This is too pensive and commoded paolo. The Lord said do not weep for Him.
Please explain the Pope’s statement. Be clear: We welcome all sinners to church to be close to the Word of God. We want them to stop sinning and turn to God’s path. But the Eucharist is for those not in grave sin & trying to “sin no more” We should bless all who are sincerely trying to stop sinning to help them along that path. We should not bless those intending to keep sinning with no repentance. Would we bless an abortion clinic? An assassin planning their next murder? A bigamist planning to marry a third wife? We should try to help sinners to stop sinning– not bless them as if they are on the right path and have no need to change.
I suspect that PF needs to be reminded of what he said.
Having memory issues myself, I wonder if PF has ever been tested for dementia?
Now it’s time to send those German bishops packing….
Mrs. Cracker above – Yes, I believe Argentina has the most European-descended population of any South American country. However, I believe that today its Catholicism is mostly of the cultural variation (i.e. the modern European flavour). This explains a lot of Francis’ outlook.
The Pillar recently ran an article on the two main approaches in the Church today, which they call accommodation versus evangelization. I found this article very insightful.
I am one of the devoted Catholic member from Africa, I have been following up on the many responses from Fiducia Supplicans, mostly through Youtube videos, and now I have accessed this website. There are overwhelming comments against the implementation of this so called fiducia supplicans. Personally, fiducia supplicans has greately hurt my faith as a Catholic, our bishops in my country have greately rejected it and one single bishop has publicly torned apart the document, his speech has restored my faith.
Without wasting time, there seems to be many people as of the comments from different sources indicating that this declaration is publicly rejected, my question to you fellow commentators on this news is? Where do you think our Holy father and all those around him, supporting the implementation of this document take their powers and strengths? Dont they think they are spliting the church? As of this page, the writer in many paragraphs is just defending implying that fiducia is a total blasphemy. What is our pope going to do with us the aggrieved christians by this fiducia? Really, this is degenerating church growth especially in Africa.
Without delay, many people from different sources indicate that this declaration is publicly rejected. My question to fellow commentators on this news is: Where do you think our Holy Father and all those supporting the implementation of this document derive their powers and strengths? Don’t they think they are dividing the church? Refencing this page, the writer in many paragraphs is defending, implying that Fiducia is a total blasphemy. What is our pope going to do with us, the aggrieved Christians affected by this Fiducia? This is seriously hindering church growth, especially in Africa.