Blessing Gay Couples? What Does it Mean? | Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ส.ค. 2024
- On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings and Same Sex Couples. Father gives his analysis and opinion of Fiducia Supplicans.
🟣 Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): mattfradd.loca...
📖 Fr. Pine's Book: bit.ly/3lEsP8F
🖥️ Website: pintswithaquin...
🟢 Rumble: rumble.com/c/p...
👕 Merch: shop.pintswith...
🚫 FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: www.strive21.com/
🔵 Facebook: / mattfradd
📸 Instagram: / mattfradd
We get a small kick back from affiliate links
![ว้าว!ลุงบีมแบกทองมารับขวัญหลานกันยกบ้าน [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.49 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Osihq1OAs-4/mqdefault.jpg)
I can only speak as a struggling Catholic single person trying to stay chaste for 30 years living the teachings of the Church and Christ. Homosexuals who become a couple have given up the fight. Its a very humiliating road to fall and get up and hope people and God will forgive me. I told a priest once that i am a very weak soul and he told me to say the Rosary and i will get stronger. Sure enough, the Blessed Mother took me by the hand and i can say thanks to her intercessory prayers i am a much more chaste person. Its a long road to peace but i would tell homosexuals that the Blessed Mother is waiting for them to seek her help.
You've chosen the path of moral courage, (one of the sorrowful mysteries of the rosary).
Please don't label yourself a homosexusl. You are a brother-in-Christ. You can choose to live habits that are holy. You do not have to start your journey with the negative label of homosexual. That is too hard of a path to go.
You are fucking delusional !😅
@@IONov990 Soren Kierkegaard wrote, "When you label me, you negate me." He was a profoundly Christian-thinker in that he recognized the trouble of our age when we abandon Christianity. We pursue a firm-footing in identity outside of Christianity, which does not end well for anyone. Christ is the only way we can hide and find ourselves. Any label whether politcially, sexually, socially, economically, is bound to fail and end in smoke. That is why SSA-afflicted people should realize that they are not "homosexuals" at bottom..
Our beautiful Blessed Mother is always ready to help us.
Protestant friend here, Grace and peace to my Catholic friends wrestling with this. ❤
Thank you. Truly. You are a friend❤
Please read my comment. God bless.
@@katehaven9374please read my comment. God bless.
Thank you friend. God bless and may the Lord be with you always!
Thanks for oyur concern...but we are not wrestling with this issue. We know the age-old teaching of the Catholic Church despite people from inside trying to destroy it.
Our children dont read documents, but they will see two men holding hands receiving a blessing as a "couple. "
So true 💔
they will see a thing happening that happened spontaneously and they weren't there for?
It’s one thing to tolerate evil and another to bless it. Pretty simple.
This is why God gives children parents to explain things they don't understand.
Why can't two guys be a couple?
Lord deliver me from my anxieties, loneliness, troubles, and pain this Christmas. As a single mom it can be hard to have everything on your shoulders. Both of my sons are autistic. I’m raising them with strength and courage, despite the challenges I face. I keep faith in you Lord even as I struggle to pay rent every month, and as I struggle to buy groceries. Every month is a battle. Lord restore my health living with heart disease and lupus has been difficult on me. Jesus please help me to find strength when I am weak, hope when I am struggling, and peace in the midst of chaos. Amen. 🙏🏾 ❤
did you not take a test to see if you carried the autistic gene? or your partner
Is there a church in your area that operates a single mom home? In Florida, the Florida Baptist church has one in a 4 cities.
Child of God -- I will pray for you. Life is a struggle for so many. But know without doubt that Christ is there. Will make a 9 day novena for you. God Bless.
I’ll pray for you. ❤
I will be praying for you.
🙏🏼🙏🏼❤️🙏🏼🙏🏼
Cardinal Muller on FS: “It is true that Cardinal Fernandez, in later statements to Infovaticana, said that it is not the union that is blessed, but the couple. However, this is emptying a word of its meaning, since what defines a couple as couple is precisely their being a union.-Blessing a reality that is contrary to creation is not only impossible, it is blasphemy.”
So, when you use the phrase "a couple of times", it should be pressumed you mean those times are in a sexual union and not that they're two instances of time. Right? Just trying to keep your logic consistent here.
My 😮 English language is complex. A couple of times is not the same as a couple. What makes two people a couple is a romantic relationship between them. Or you wrote a dictionary to redefine a couple? The document doesn't say a couple of times, it says a couple. Either your English is bad, you are feigning ignorance or simply being a hypocrite, i think you have walked the wrong lane, with all due respect.
@@sistafila “with all due respect” rings hollow considering what you wrote immediately preceding it.
@@josealzaibar5274 well reading the context, same sex couple. the nature is clearly of a sexual nature. the actuality of what is going proves this is heretical and blasphemous.
@@whitevortex8323 Imagine you had a young couple (male, female, unmarried) approach a priest after mass and ask for a blessing. Should the preist refuse them because they are a couple therefore they must be having prematital sex? A "couple" implies some sort of romantic relationship but does not indicate a sexual relationship. Otherwise whenever we are discussing any unmarried couple we are telling them they are in sin. This has nothing to say about the scandal that could be caused by these blessings, but the take of "couple=sexual relationship" doesn't make sense.
Remember: a blessing to "Go and sin no more" is also given in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This is the blessing that should be given to the couple. Maybe the only blessing.
Highly likely the people looking for this "blessing" of same sex couples are the same not going to confession.
@@jasong7128That’s what they want
@@jasong7128uselessly judgemental. The document poise the accent on the pastoral need to accept a request for a blessing as a request for God's mercy and an aknowledgement of the Church as a dispensary of such mercy, making it an intrinsic act of faith.
Also, the Pastor can't presume the good will of the postulant; firmly reminding that a blessing CANNOT BE IMPARTED on things that are against God, the document reminds also priests that ANY MAN LOOKING FOR GOD'S MERCY IS WORTHY OF BLESSING, and can't possibly be, as a person, against the will of God.
“Go and sin no more” are the recorded words of Savior.
The priest can indeed judge intent as it is a GAY COUPLE COMING FOR THE BLESSING
At first I was content to jump on the whole “Francis didn’t mean that, people are just misinterpreting him” bandwagon, but it became clear pretty quickly that that wasn’t the case. Obedience doesn’t require you to gaslight yourself and shut your eyes to the truth. As a former seminarian, I feel bad for all these priests and bishops who have to defend a document that they know is BS-that’s the sad part of the priesthood, a lot of politics.
The reality of a situation can sometimes be hidden from our eyes. The Holy Spirit see the big picture of the truth of each person's heart. The Media takes small pictures to make money. Trust God. Trust His vicar in spiritual matters, and pray that the full desire of God for all peoples will come to fruition soon.
Jesus I trust in You.
I anticpate more mental gymnastics. It is shocking how many have fallen for this skullduggery.
They think we're stupid.
Sad. But true.
I agree....just spent 30min looking at comments on Pope Marshall's podcast and 99% have fallen for his skullduggery...thank God for Fr Greg😇😇😇😇😇😇😇😇😇😇
@@declancooney1029yeah because this pontificate has been utterly joyful, not one scandal, no alliances with communist China, no angry outbursts, no attacks on tradition, no glorification of abortion activists while simultaneously saying abortion is like hiring a hitman. The list goes on, but, hey, he isnt causing a mess here, oh wait, that's what he said he would do. By blaming this on Taylor Marshall is both puerile and embarrassing. Attack the claim and the bona fides of those making the claims. I'd bet you fell for the Covid too, and blamed Taylor Marshall.
I think the legacy of this papacy will be confusion.
In recent years as a divorced man of a 30 year marriage, now in the annulment process, I struggled with a loving but premature and sometimes sinful relationship with another woman. She and I SEPARATELY and by the grace of God drug ourselves to confession repeatedly until we put our lives properly into a state of chastity, again thanks to God and several holy priests. This is our faith. The beautiful Sacrament of Reconciliation ALREADY EXISTS precisely for this purpose.
In a similar way, the Holy Father could prescribe and reiterate this for similarly afflicted same sex attracted people and he could make it CLEAR, but he has not. Lord, have mercy. May we see through this evil and stay true to our Lord and his Church.
Do you think at any point the situation would have been expedited by you and your mistress approaching a priest together on the side and together asking for a blessing for strength to do the right thing? Do you think that in the blessing there could have been something even morr powerful than separately visiting the confessional? Or perhapd this blessing over you both might have been a supplement to your continuing separate confessions? I think it could have possibly been. Perhaps to "drive the point home" even further that you both were bound or tied togther in a sinful knot?
First of all the document is very clear if one reads it carefully. The person should always seek blessing no matter the state if their intentions are true. Second, it is counterproductive to slap people in the face for seeking forgiveness of their sins. In fact, anyone who does this sins even more gravely because of condemnation of brothers and sisters and opposing the magisterium.
Fake annulment fake confession
Yes, the SACRAMENT of penance exists for one of the purported purposes of this political document whose title translates to "TRUST ME, BRO!". Cardinal Müller's response to the document was very good in addressing this and the other purported purposes. The invention of a third type of benediction, past the sacramental type, past the ad hoc type as found in the Rituale, unto what they call the "pastoral" type, is invented only to bendicir que es malo: an adulterous couple, an homosexual couple, an abortion clinic, a mafia. It's not a benediction, it's a malediction, coming forth like an angel of darkness disguised as an angel of light. I recognise my shepherd's voice and he comes in by the gate, not by any other way.
I absolutely think if you were blessed as a couple you would still be struggling with that sin. But I also think you would never have gone as a couple because you knew it wasn't the correct thing to do. However, the men James Martin blessed, are married and do not see themselves as living against the Gospel. So this is blessing the couple who opening live in sin, therefore it is blessing sin.
Father I have sinned. I have no intention to repent. Bless me so I may go and continue sinning.
You can already get in the communion line in mortal sin, cross your arms, and receive a blessing from the priest. Should the priest audit you instead?
@@AndrewDolder That is an individual, not a couple.
Blessings are not exclusive to individuals. The priest blesses the entire congregation at each Mass.
@@roboboy731 The congregation is not a couple. Individuals are not couples.
In the photo, these two men are a "married" couple, holding hands, and could be considered advocates for the lifestyle. They are not being blessed as individuals nor as a congregation and they have no intention of changing their lifestyle. St. Paul said this unrepentant activity bars one from heaven.
Its also a state of public sin and scandal. A priest with knowledge of this can deny communion.
No matter how you try and defend/interpret this doctrine- it has “opened” the door and there’s no closing it! We’re not stupid! Check in with James Martin!
Are you aware that, until this document, a priest could bless anyone anywhere/when/how he wanted?
There were no restrictions.
Now, with this document, there are specific restrictions on where/when/how he can bless certain people. They closed some doors on stuff like what was going on in Germany, for example.
Doors were closed, no new doors were opened.
Yet people are so bought into this narrative that Pope Francis is evil, that they are totally blind to what should have been a day of victory. They are addicted to fake news.
Fr Martin disobeyed the document right off the bat. He created a scandal. That's 100% on him, not the document itself. The channel Reason and Theology has a lot of content including someone simply reading the document with no commentary. Have a listen. Also, understand that this is a magisterial document which we as catholics owe submission of mind and heart to. We have a moral responsibility to interpret it in continuity with the Catholic faith (which Fr. Martin seems not to have done). It's also a grave sin to see the document through the lens of evil suspicion and doubt (like those in Catholic media that claim it's deliberately ambiguous.) It's the moral responsibility of every Catholic to defend this document against fake news about it.
EXACTLY! And both Francis and Fernandez know this.
In a few years, someone will ask how the Catholic Church approved gay marriage??, someone will answer: it all started with the approval of the blessing for gay couples.

Martin is actively disobeying the document as he disobeys the bible itself.
Please don’t whitewash this like the USCCB and Bishop Barron. The truth is apparent to anyone paying attention.
And what is the truth?
I have read it, and I don’t think it needs white-washing. I can nitpick on some of the wording, but the truth is, it is uncompromising.
@@jimmu2008Absolutely
Just read the document
@@mr.fordnite1909that it explicitly allows for the blessings of same sex “couples”
And that the insistence that by “couples” he really meant “individuals” is dishonest.
The very act of extending one’s hands over a couple and blessing them gives the impression of blessing the relationship itself - regardless of intention.
Fair enough. But would it be okay in your mind to have the same blessing (possibly wording it like: Lord, give this Man the courage and Faith to separate from his partner, Steve, and for him to live a life of chastity you have Called him to." And then repeat it over Steve?
If the same blessing verbally was given over them at the same time, would that make a difference?
@@tessbabcock8169 If they come as a couple to be blessed, their intention is to have their relationship blessed. They have no intention of breaking up. What you are describing is a prayer for them not a blessing. It’s a fine prayer & may be helpful, if they are willing to cooperate with God’s grace. Priests have always been able to pray with people (and couples) and bless anyone as an individual. FS is talking about blessing them as romantic couples (while intending to bless them as persons) not simply praying with them. “Father, will you give us a blessing?” isn’t the same as “Father, will you pray for us?”
Oh God help us, the leaders of the church has lost the sense of sin.
all???????????????? maybe the laity?? maybe you as well??
@@declancooney1029she isn't wrong to think this kind of blessing inappropriate.
Thats a dumb thing to say.
The witnesses are coming
Can I go up for a "BLESSING" with my mistress???
I put this on a Fr. Goring video and I think it is appropriate to repeat it here. While it is poignant to examine a single step it is also appropriate to pay attention to the general direction of that step. When we don't practice that due diligence, a few decades fly by and before you know it you have evil people legitimizing evil things. The phrase "well that's not a big deal it's just a small thing it won't lead anywhere" has been uttered a million times since the 60's. And so here we are in a world miles from where we once were because we ceded those miles an inch at a time with that very phrase on our lips.
Slippery slope is not a valid argument. Many people think it is, but it is not. "You can not bless sin." This has been repeated over and over again by faithful clergy who have validated this document. Thr laity should be on watch, yes, but we must give the benefit of the doubt always and not be tempted towards suspicion which leads to scandal.
Agreed And what it is with those foul pink vestments for the third Sunday of Advent Gaudet Sunday. Is it the church’s rainbow flag?
@@pamh5441 🙄 🤦♂️ Good grief. They are rose vestments, not pink. The rose color symbolizes joy and rejoicing as we anticipate the coming of Christ. It reminds us that even in times of penance and preparation, we have cause to rejoice. It’s a centuries old tradition.
Red and blue mixed together make purple, the somber color of lent and advent. The more blue in the color, the more somber. More red in the purple color is a brightening of the somberness. White symbolizes joy, so they add white to the reddish purple, and get rose.
I get your point, but we have immutable doctrine which restrains how far things can progress. While things have changed and developed much in recent decades, it has never resulted in the contradiction of the church’s own moral teaching.
Remember when Obama justified legalising same sex marriage? He said "love is love"
But today we see men destŕøying female sports, children transitioning, more wild pride parades, sêx taught to children in schools, etc...
Give them am inch, they'll grab a mile
Look, the issue that people have with this document is not that it raises the theoretical limitations and possibilities of a particular kind of blessing. There is a debatable live option there. But to speak authoritatively about this now intentionally creates confusion in an already confused culture. This does nothing to curb the German bishops. They are celebrating the document as an incremental movement towards their position and, affectively, they are absolutely correct. Within 48 hours of the document's promulgation you have pics of James Martin blessing men in major US publications, and he is NOT being disciplined either by his bishop or the pope. This document is tailor made to create a free-for-all in terms of how pastors will approach same-sex unions, while faithful Catholics are left with the thankless task of defending the Church's teaching which is "technically" correct. This is the very definition of the sin of scandal.
I agree, user-sw9bo. One of the more disgracefuf aspects of this sorry business is that the document expresses the intention to provide no further explanations. 'What I have written, I have written' is the line adopted. The whole effect is as if a shepherd has led a flock of sheep and young lambs onto a cliff top that has been suffering from subsidence, and has then blithely walked away, leaving them to gambol aand stray wholly as they please.
You're the first person I've seen who talked about the sin of scandal. I didn't know how to put into words how significant this issue was, and "the sin of scandal" sums it up perfectly.
Are they going to address the pope’s new comments about rigid ideologies?
The Pope’s vague statements are a real stumbling block for the conversion of many people.
This is modernism.
Proud ‘rigid’ here.
I’m in the process of converting. And this has given me pause and that breaks my heart. I love the Catholic Church. My heart and soul have been blessed and nourished these past months. I know I want the sacramental faith but now I wonder if EO is my only route. I am watching closely. And praying.
@@LizCanKnit Find where Catholicism is being lived, taught and loved free of the modernist errors.
@@LizCanKnit The eastern schismatics are not free of this either.
In 2022, the Greeks had a well publicized baptism of the children of a well known sodomite couple.
"U.S. Orthodox Christians are much more accepting of homosexuality than are Orthodox Christians in Central and Eastern Europe and Ethiopia. About half of U.S. Orthodox Christians (54%) said same-sex marriage should be legal in a 2014 survey, similar to the share of Americans overall who took that position in that year (53%)
According to Pew Research, on whether homosexuality should be accepted by society, Orthodox went from 48% agreement in 2007 to 62% in 2014.
Keep in mind that those statistics are almost 10 years old.
“The fact is that a blessing has an objective reality of its own and thus cannot be redefined at will to fit a subjective intention that is contrary to the nature of a blessing.”
-Cardinal Muller on FS
I honestly don't care what he thinks, isn't listening to the pope better?
Sadly, Cardinal Muller is in error, which is indeed a rarity. He says in his response (regarding pastoral blessings): "They could be applied not only to persons in sin, as in “ritual” blessings, but also to things, places, or circumstances that are contrary to the Gospel." However, there is apparently no indication in FS that pastoral blessings apply to anything but persons, so his assumption that one could now bless "abortion clinics "is false.
Such a ‘blessing’ causes a number of questions. What is a homosexual couple seeking by asking for a blessing? What is the Church offering in response? What is the Holy Spirit called for and what is exactly being blessed? What is a spiritual purpose of such a ‘blessing’ and what sort of a particular help it intends to provide?
Love and acceptance can make miracles of soul transformation, and Pope Francis' vision on the same-sex unions seems to be about love and acceptance. Yet, the same-sex couple blessing would make sense if the Church dumps viewing the same-sex relationship per ser as a sin. Without that, such a 'blessing' appears conflicting and self-contradictory.
Faithfully yours,
bishop Vincent Berg.
I invite you to meditate on 1 Corinthians 10:25-31. St. Paul speaks of eating with non-believers. He says that if they invite you to eat with them, you should eat with them, asking no questions for conscience' sake. However, if they tell you that it is meant as a sacrifice to idols, then you should refuse to eat with them, as your eating with them will validate the idol sacrifice in their eyes. I apply this to any friendly meeting or act of charity. If somebody asks for money, you should give them money. If somebody asks for food, you feed them. You should not concern yourself with the potential dark secrets of the receiving person's heart. If two people (a couple) come to you and appear to be repentant of their ways, and to grow closer to the will of God, then you should provide the blessing. It is only if they say that they wish their sinful relationship to be blessed that you should reserve the blessing.
To bless the couple only gives the couple the idea of their union being accepted and blessed, which is a false impression. They now feel empowered to claim whatever they think they should get now on. That document feeds greed. Pride will be the issue.
Here are the two principle issues I can see:
1.) The issue of the intent of the couple. If they seek legitimation of their union, then a blessing ought not to be given. But that would require some interrogation often to determine which goes against the spirit of spontaneity FS seems to envisage.
2.) The potential for scandal. If the blessing is done in public in view of other faithful who are aware of the relationship of the couple, there could be scandal. So a solution would be to do them by appointment in the privacy of the rectory where there might also be the possibility of conversation and catechisis. However, this also would go against the spontaneous nature of the blessing.
The solution to both is to do what FS says and assume good will of the couple and if they have bad intentions, oh well, that's on them (don't ask, don't tell). And the scandal if done freely this way would be unavoidable, but could be addressed perhaps through catechisis via homilies or other communications to the faithful in the parish or diocese to explain why the blessings are limit and are not blessing the sinful aspects of those couples.
Though to clarify, I do believe these blessings could happen in lots of circumstances where the Priest is aware they are not seeking legitimation and the risk of scandal is little to none.
@@ififif2022 Read Cardinal Fernandez's interview with the Pillar. The only legitimate blessing according to the Vatican would be to ask for God's help in healing their relationship so it's no longer disordered. He's not attempting to introduce a quasi-marriage for same sex couples.
@@erric288prudence must always be exercised with ANY blessing. That’s not exhaustive moral examination. We don’t bless a rosary in a closed box, or a doctors abortion instruments, or a pet that has killed a 4-year old, if we know those things.
Why is it necessary to explain this? Why is a Vatican document causing such confusion? Aren’t Vatican officials capable of writing a clear document that can’t get misinterpreted?? Now in Germany bishops taking this to the next level why?
The Vatican should be crystal clear in its Doctrine. The realities of Sin is not the place to be vague and pharisiacal. A Doctrine that requires a lawyer to interpret it is worthless. Vigano has the right of it. This document and those that wrote it are trying to compromise with Sin, and thus serve Satan.
The document is clear, people are just playing dumb. The same people who say the bible doesnt condemn sodomy twist the document as well. Does the bible cause confusion?
No, their documents always seem to be wordy and unclear
“God cannot send his grace upon a relationship that is directly opposed to him and cannot be ordered toward him. Sexual intercourse outside of marriage, cannot bring people closer to God and therefore cannot open itself to God's blessing. Therefore, if this blessing were given, its only effect would be to confuse the people who receive it or who attend it. They would think that God has blessed what He cannot bless. This “pastoral” blessing would be neither pastoral nor a blessing”
-Cardinal Muller on FS
That seems spot on to me.
@@barryjackson1401 Yep. The term we do not hear anymore is Scandalizing the Faithful.
Thanks, Carlos. Cardinal Muller's response is so clear and truthful.
Amen, thank you!
In a few years, someone will ask how the Catholic Church approved gay marriage??, someone will answer: it all started with the approval of the blessing for gay couples.
Why does the COUPLE need a blessing? Why not just bless individuals? This is what makes it so confusing and teenagers are now saying “the pope says homosexuality is something to be blessed by the Church”.
LGBT couples should be blessed
“It is claimed that there are “positive elements” in the (sinful) relationships and that these can be blessed, but these positive elements (for example, that one helps the other in an illness) are secondary to the relationship itself-whose defining characteristic is the sharing of sexual activity-and these elements do not change the nature of this relationship, which in no case can be directed towards God”
-Cardinal Muller on FS
Why was it brought to the fore in the first place?
Even the appearance of the individuals as a ''couple'' is a scandal towards those of the faithful and weak faith. As long as they are together, regardless of sexual activity, they have to be separate. They need to remove the occasion of sin.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. In many sins, if not all, there are elements of good. For example, if I rob a bank while brandishing a firearm, it's a good thing that I didn't fire it and kill someone. But the fact that I never shot it while robbing the bank is not something to be praised or blessed, because that good act was in service of the robbery, namely a quicker and cleaner escape.
Another example. When someone lies, there are elements of truth embedded in the lie. (That's how lies work. The truthful elements are used to setup and service the lie.) But it would be wrong to praise the liar for the truthful parts of his speech.
Respectfully, with the grammar and context of the sentence you're referring to, I think "relationships" in that usage refers to relationships plural, as in friends, family, etc. of those individuals up to the relationship the two individuals have with each other, which, regardless of the illicit nature of their union, a relationship (knowing each other, a spirit of friendship, etc.) exists. Even if it didn't mean that, asking that the positive elements of a relationship be "enriched, healed, and elevated" is calling for those elements to, well... grow, and be properly formed. In other words, this snippet is not blessing the relationship as in the union, but is asking that the two individuals would re-orient their sinful relationship toward the good and away from the "imperfections and frailties."
If you're interested. Cardinal Fernandez did an interview with The Pillar that was just released today, titled: "Cardinal Fernández: Same-sex blessing ‘does not validate or justify anything.’"
Charity towards incorrect marriage and homosexuals are two wildly different things. This is getting obnoxious and I am actually getting angry.
So… if I was attracted to another man, being a married woman, I could get a blessing with this other man ? I mean it wouldn’t be “same sex”, but it in reality is the same thing.
No u would have to be honest to the wife first and be who God made u
I just wish they hadn't released it right before Christmas. It's demoralizing to those of us attempting to live according to the church's teachings.
In a few years, someone will ask how the Catholic Church approved gay marriage??, someone will answer: it all started with the approval of the blessing for gay couples.

@@signumcrucis71spreading fear and confusion isnt helping.
@@thelonelysponge5029 Now telling the truth is called spreading fear?!?!
I am Catholic and work within the church, and I am 100% in agreement with the majority of Bishops who will not give blessings to validate sinful relationships.
This Pope has been turning the Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church into another LGBTIQ Socialist party. It's a shame!
@@signumcrucis71 It is necessary for salvation to submit to the roman pontiff. The protestants don't, but thats because they dont know any better. Do you know who else disagrees with Rome? The Eastern Orthodox, are they completely good in their doctrines? They reject submission to the roman pontiff, and some reject important issues.
Do you know who else is a bishop who rejected the papcy? Thomas Cranmer, who was an archbishop who became a protestant and broke away from Rome.
I honestly don't care who you are. If you spread lies about the Holy Father for the sake of your traditions, then are you any better than the Pharisees?
If you're catholic, that honestly makes things worse. A protestant? I understand, but a Catholic? Who gave you the authority to judge the pope?
Are you seriously telling me that 2000 years of church history went down the drain because of one pope? If so, please don't look at the medival papacy.
Go to confession my friend, it isnt too late.
who cares what man made church's say
The only blessing that has always been offered begins when they say, "Bless me Father for I have sinned . . ."
Thank you!!! I’ve been saying this to everyone! There’s no other way!
That’s actually nowhere in the Rite of the Sacrament of Penance.
@@mgtfoss Thats the norm for how you begin a confession…
It's not in the Rite to say those specific words. We just were taught to say them. Not saying it's bad.@@RGWerd83
that is Reconciliation(sacrament of Confession)
Father, you do know whole bishops conferences are condemning this around the world, right? Right?
Good thing it's not a vote.
But yes, there are some bishops out there that are confused about the document still.
@@nealkriestererwho benefitted from this and how
@nealkriesterer only people confused are those saying blessing same sex couples is not blessing sin....
@@Metanoia000the father of confusion benefited handsomely from this.
@@nealkriestererGreat! I'm bringing tarots cards and a ouija board to be blessed after Mass tomorrow. It isn't a sacramental blessing after all and in no way affirms my occult practices...
This didn’t do anything except make it more confusing.
I agree 💯 Jeff
not really, love is simple
It seems to me that if two homosexuals approach a priest for a blessing, they should be invited separately to the confessional and dealt with as individual souls before God.
It should begin and end in the confessional to protect the individuals, the priest and not give scandal.
We know where this is coming from and where they want to take it.
Exactly. Repentance should be the first intention
The African bishops aren’t fooled.
They know exactly what the document is trying to do.
take your meds
The African Bishops may very well be grossly homophobic as Africa is notoriously homophobic.
@@yvonetubla7682 cry more satanist
Are we expected to believe that Fiducia Supplicans will not make teaching the value of chastity to the young 10,000 times more difficult?
Clarity comes from above, confusion comes from below. The wording of this document is such that it allows priests like Father Martin to bless, not just the two men standing in front of him, but also that third entity that is the relationship between these two men. If you don't think that this is true, just listen to Father Martin's joy-filled comments of what he's now "allowed" to do that he couldn't do before.
Or just read the document, it's perfectly clear. Your anger should be at Martin, not the document
Exactly!
Yet to see discipline against james martin
Martin is just playing dumb. The document says you have to avoid scandal, and also that its for the penitent. He proceeds to bless '''married''' impenitent gays and do it for the media(scandal).
You can take notice of all the hype. I can see why people are confused and hurt. I thought it was ambiguous listening to people who I thought should know. Than I read it for myself. A lot of the confusion left, I must admit that I have only read it once. All I ask please read for yourself, I believe it's fairly easy to understand
All the pope had to do is use the word " repentance ", and there would be no confusion. I suspect the ambiguity is quite intentional and am very disappointed. The church IS divided and its sad. Yes, ive read it and its word salad in a time where we need simple clarity
The doc says its for the repentant - ''Indeed, the grace of God works in the lives of those who do not claim to be righteous but who acknowledge themselves humbly as sinners, like everyone else.'' and admit they need spiritual help ''recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help''.
People have to read it with calm. Also the Cardinal said in a following interview: That they "may be purified of everything that does not respond to the Gospel". Its a blessing to purify the gay (or whatever disordered relation) away.
Can a “non-liturgical” blessing be given to a same-sex couple whose relationship includes sexual activity with no intention of stopping? Simple question. Yes or No. No double-talk, no ambiguous roundabout statements. Had the document made it EXPLICITLY clear, in no uncertain terms, that no blessing of any kind can be given to a same-sex couple engaged in sexual behavior, there would not be such a negative reaction to the document. And what is a same-sex “couple”. Roommates? Come on. We all know what it means.
Yes, I pray for God to especially bless those who are furthest from him
These are the people who need it the most. And all human beings are worthy of a blessing. A homosexual union is not worthy of being blessed but those engaging in homosexual behavior, need that blessing actually.
@@milpormilunmillon if one falls into sin, there's the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Upon repentance, God forgives, the priest gives absolution in the name if the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. There's the blessing.
Yes.
It's already happened.
@trapd00rspider Christianity is a demanding faith. Those who don't like what Christ taught don't get to be married in his buildings, and they don't deserve special blessings.
Giving in to activists' demands is both stupid and morally wrong.
I am done with the double speak. This is pure evil. The church just sprinted not walked out of the closet. In the name of The Father, The Son, and the Holly Spirit help us convince people that what their eyes and ears are perceiving is not true.
The fact they want to remain a “couple” means they do not want to repent and avoid the near occasion of sin. I’m a never married woman who fell into serious sin many times, but by repenting over and over, reconciling with God through the Sacraments of his Church, Avoiding the Near Occasion of Sin, growing closer to Mother Mary in prayer (Rosary and Mother of Perpetual Help Devotion), I’ve grown in Chastity and the other virtues. Traditional Catholic practices work - that is what popes and bishops need to promote instead wasting time on the bologna many of them been putting out for about 60 years.
If there is a way to bless a gay couple without offending God and causing scandal then perhaps you should do one of these blessings to show us how its done.
Good question! Yes, it can be done (though, granted, the great majority of priests eager to offer blessings to gay couples won't stick to the letter of the law and will instead commit a mortal sin in the process). It is acceptable for a priest to bless a gay couples if he includes the phrase: "And may the Lord grant you the grace to support one another in celibate chastity and the rejection of all worldly ideology." Their reaction will tell you whether or not they really are hoping to grow in Christian perfection (a stipulation presumed in FS) vs. seeking validation for their sinful lifestyle (which will usually be the case). --Counsel from a Dominican priest.
Interesting and excellent point. Let’s have Bishop Barron blessing a few adulterous and same-sex couples on livestream. As long as it’s non-liturgical and nobody is wearing a tuxedo or exchanging rings.
They cannot remain a couple period. It scandalizes the weak in faith who will view their relationship as ''normal.''
@@teresaa96289 that's why no one of prominence will perform one of these blessings. Because there is no way to do it without causing scandal
@@Kirin2022 I think one has to be wilfully blind to believe that is what FS is aiming at. Regardless of what it's aiming at, the result will be a free-for-all where different priests implement it in different, even contradictory ways. The text explicitly says it is not appropriate to legislate for everything, and that the pastoral wisdom of priests should be sufficient to determine how and in what circumstances these blessings should take place. Surely if there was a risk of committing mortal sin on the part of the priest, SURELY, SURELY, it would be the duty of the teaching Church to flag that up???
We know what marriage is. And we know the Church is not changing the definition of marriage. Please don’t insult our intelligence. The problem is that we have priests like Fr. James Martin blessing a “married” couple. They’re literally holding hands. They have a social media presence AS a sexual couple. Where’s the fruit meet for repentance here? Are we not to be penitent in seeking these blessings? If we are seeking a blessing to live according to God’s will, why are priests like Martin blessing a couple who obviously have no intention of changing their relationship. This is a problem. We aren’t blessing a car here. Stop the shenanigans.
And what do the errors of Fr. James Martin have to do with the document that explicitly prohibits priests from doing precisely what he has done?
@@Psyrus88 Absolutely ZERO discipline from the Vatican.
There are plenty of people committing all kinds of sin who don't currently have any intention of stopping, who seek out a blessing, heterosexual sinners, liars, cheaters, thieves. Animals get blessed, inanimate objects get blessed, so what's your point?
@@jacobrodriguez7771Why are you seeking a blessing if you have no intention to stop sinning? Are you playing with God’s mercy?
@@Psyrus88because it seems obvious that the document is intended to give cover to him and others that will do the same. Will he be punished or sanctioned? We all know the answer is no. Why did the Church even bother with this document? The only people who are clamoring for “clarity” around blessing homosexuality are those who openly oppose the Churches teaching, like Fr Martin.
It's shocking that clergy can't see how clearly the
POPE is AFFIRMING the blessing of the same sex couples. Utterly shocking😢
These so-called “Novus Ordo conservative” priests really are a danger to souls. I’m unsubscribing from everyone of them.
Bye
why is love shocking?
Homophobics are a danger to the soul@@ryanhilliard1620
@pastorbri you mean genetic sexual attraction? Or polygamy? Or is it a poliamary or minor attracted love?
Blessing couples but not the union is nothing more than cheap sophistry.
Luke 6:44 “For every tree is known by its fruit.”
All I need to see it Fr. Martin blessing his openly disordered friends to know what this was all about.
Yes. He is clearly distorting what the document says😢😢😢. However he also distorts Holy Scripture to his own destruction (should we criticize Scripture).
No this is why they write it so vaguely, this is purposely evil
“There are Forces right now
in the Vatican that DON’T WANT
THE TRUTH of The Gospel.
They want to change it.
They want to ignore it.”
{Bishop Joseph Strickland, 2023}
Fr.MArtin and crew would say the bible is pro gay. Is the bible a bad tree?
They are just warming people up to the Idea of accepting homosexuality, soon enough they will be a change in doctrine they will say homosexuality's not a sin.
Exactly. This is “just the tip”. Only the willfully blind don’t see this coming. As soon as secular “Gay Marriage” was imposed on the USA by the SCOTUS, anyone with eyes open knew these people would be beating at the doors of our Church to sanctify their demonic practices.
In a few years, someone will ask how the Catholic Church approved gay marriage??, someone will answer: it all started with the approval of the blessing for gay couples.
It's literally in the document that there will never be gay '''marriage''' and that the Church cant bless sinful unions.
@@zenuno6936 who do they think they are fooling they are just playing along with the current narrative, God does not bless unrepented people this is not biblical this is rebelling against God.
but it isn't a sin, homophobia is
This declaration document is "self-contradictory" and ambiguous in some sections!
It's intentional to confuse the flock! Confusion is from the devil not from God.
Muller's recent document is seen as self-contradictory by some
Most people confused didnt even read the document, they saw the fake news headlines and called it a day.
But the document does not call for “chastity and virtue,” and anyone paying attention knows that was never the intention. Frankly, I have lost all respect for the otherwise “conservative” priests who are falling all over themselves to try to “explain” what the document is and isn’t saying. Those of us who are neither stupid nor duplicitous know exactly what was intended by this, and photos of priests “blessing” married men - as are now making the rounds - confirm what this was all about from the beginning. Thanks to those bishops who have frankly said “no!” And to all those others trying to rationalize this, please just shut up!
Thank you, Father, for your efforts to examine the document in a faithful and charitable way. I am trying so hard to not dissent from the magisterium on this, but I can’t help but feel that this document is in some way blessing sin. Archbishop Fernandez apparently just released a clarification stating that the “couple” not the “union” is blessed (I have not read this response but have seen it reported, I could therefore be mistaken). I can’t understand this distinction. I feel that this is sophistry. I want to be faithful, but am increasingly feeling that I have to choose between God’s word and the teaching of the magisterium. Pray for me.
Can I bring tarots cards and a ouija board to be blessed, you know, out of accompaniment? No? But, it isn’t a sacramental blessing after all… Please use some logic.
Here is a quick explanation.
Until two days ago (with this document) a priest could bless anyone anywhere/when they wanted.
Now, with this document, there are restrictions on blessing certain people in some situations. Previously, it was up to the priest, now some doors have been closed. No new doors have been opened.
Ironically, this is a victory - it utterly refutes the German bishops for example - but the world is so addicted to fake news that they are blind to it and instead think it's a loss.
The word "couple" was used in the document to make it clear they were not referring to blessing unions. The situation being, what if two people in a nonmarital relationship come up to a priest and ask for a blessing to better themselves. How do you refer to these two?
In translating the document to English, they chose the word "couple" which I think is probably the best choice they could have gone with. For example - union is from the word "unus" meaning one. Couple usually refers to two or more things, for example "there's a couple of spoons on the table."
Hope this helps and God's blessing be upon you today
I feel your pain
@@nealkriestererI think two people who use each other sexually, because they are a couple or union(doesn't matter) should be called to repentance. And not just get a blessing, because this can lead to confusion for the couple themselves and for the people who see this
@@honest-fanboycan we stop acknowledging them as a legitimate couple in any fashion like we have been for the past 2023 years?
This makes me very sad. I was raised in the evangelical branch of the Quakers. We like many Protestant groups went through a division over sexuality with a gradual pollution of our belief and practice in this area. Modernists scream, “Love and grace!”and demand that doctrine bow to modern cultural norms. I began turning toward the Catholic Church looking for an unmovable foundation, not more lukewarm equivocation and compromise.
Hold fast to Our Lord’s Promise: The gates of hell will not PREVAIL!❤
Then
This shows that papal supremacy is not the way to go when the Pope himself is straying from Tradition. You could always consider the Orthodox Church, the true continuation of the Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Chris, which is the last bulwark against secular and liberal attacks.
@@georgesaguelton5751my best friend is orthodox. I’ve got no issue really with orthodoxy however, to act like there’s no issues in orthodoxy is simply untrue. The Russian church leader has a lot of issues, Constantinople stirred up Ukrainian church issues prior to the war for political reasons, etc. At this point all of the orthodox churches aren’t even in communion with each other. It certainly isn’t perfect. Again, no issue with orthodoxy but it’s easy to feign being a bulwark in the West when most people have little knowledge of what is or isn’t happening (or has happened previously) in the East.
The cardinal said in an interview the blessing is to purify the gay away: that they 'may be purified of everything that does not respond to the Gospel and the will of God'
Just like we can bless the sick for healing, we can bless the spiritually sick who want healing. Those who dont consider themselves penitent do not apply to the conditions of these blessings as the document states.
From about 20:24 on, Fr begins wiping the sweat from his brow, reducing eye contact, shifting in his seat, and using weak or qualifying language trying to explain “so what is it exactly that we are blessing?” That’s the entire issue and that it causes so much discomfort and requires thousands of words to try to set up and explain says it all. Truth does not come with stress and contortion
I’m convinced more than ever that these so-called “conservative” Novus Ordo priests really are a danger to souls. I’ve unsubscribed from every one of them.
This is absolutely the heart of the issue - how will my 4 year old view this??
There’s a very clear division between the sacramentally married ‘couples’ opinion on this, and the priestly vocations view on this right now.
As legitimately married ‘couples’, we see this side of the issue much more acutely than a priest ever can, we are looking out more for the good of our own family units, and the priests are looking more at the ‘entire flock’ - they’re bewildered how we can’t see ‘why there’s nothing wrong’ with the document (Just “Read the document”), and we’re bewildered why they can’t see how this is a direct attack against our own families and children….
There’s what the document actually says, then there’s ‘the spirit of the document’ that says way more!
Simply put - this allows for any ‘irregular couple’ to come forward TOGETHER for a blessing! That is the problem.
Read the release from the Ukranian Catholic Church - point number 4 hits the nail on the head, and I think those of us opposed to this document see it very much through that lens.
Wait until your 4 year old finds out that the priest blesses everyone at the end of mass!
Or that The Pope and bishops often walk through crowds blessing people indiscriminately.
Or that you can go to communion in a state of sin and receive a blessing.
Or that if you go to Confession, and you don't repent, instead of absolving you the priest is supposed to give you a blessing instead. Even though you don't repent!
Anyway, if your 4 year old is confused about something, take the opportunity to educate them.
@nealkriesterer - I’ve already had a lot of discussions with people on this topic - I’m probably going to stop discussing it soon, but someone asked what I’d do if one of my own 5 kids became an ‘irregular’ couple, would I also deny them a Blessing and prevent them the graces of growing closer to God?
Here’s my response:
Some of our closest friends have this EXACT issue - I’m not ignorant to the facts. The answer is yes, I’d encourage my child to seek out a blessing alone (not holding hands with the one they intend to keep sinning with). This applies to whether their ‘irregular’ relationship involves them fornicating as a heterosexual, or otherwise. I fought hard to keep my virginity and purity as a young man. Chastity is a fight for all, and I don’t condone illicitly using one’s sexuality- in ALL its forms.
Go to confession and rid oneself of mortal sin with a strong resolve to sin no more… and receive a blessing in a way that is not raising scandal.
I also wouldn’t go have an affair, and hold hands with my ‘new love’ and expect to stand before a priest hand in hand and receive a blessing in that circumstance. IT’S WRONG.
@@nealkriesterer also, my wife and I homeschool our kids… we’re well aware of the importance of properly educating our children in the faith and this IS the reason we are a homeschooling family.
That's all great, and everything you're saying lines up with the document released 2 days ago. It goes to great lengths to make sure the priest knows not to give out blessings in a way that may confuse people.
@@Prohortico Maybe you should stop to consider that priests spend more *years* in formation than you? Otherwise, nobody cares about your opinion, this is the Catholic Church, not a Protestant church.
James Martin scheduled a blessing and invited a photographer from The NY Times! How is that spontaneous?
I can’t believe where even having to discuss this and trying to rationalize this horrible decision, what dose the bible say, what dose our LORD our father say, not the Catechism, Sodomy is not intercourse, and Sodomy is a sin
The document says such relations are sinful.
Father your a Dominican ask yourself how do you think our Holy Father St Dominic would read this? Our beloved St Thomas Aquinas?
Do you think they’d agree? Pray on that.
Let us also consider continuity of the Church what would St Paul say? Think about that read Roman’s and think about that some more
The thing I don’t get, is if this document doesn’t change anything, or add anything new, why release a multi page document if it changes nothing?
I think part of the context of this is in relation to the German Bishops
wow, great statement
German bishops wanted to bless the relationship itself, this doc came to say the relation is sinful and can never get a blessing of condoning, they can only be blessed for healing. As the CArdinal said in an interview: That they "may be purified of everything that does not respond to the Gospel".
@@zenuno6936 Again, that was already known! So why release a document that supposedly states what was already in the Bible and in the catechism?
@@garystewart9211 Doctrines are always known yet Luther and company still choose to ignore them and on account of that the Church does a council of Trent to restate and clarify the Truths.
Similarly this document is a restatement that sin cant be blessed because some people are trying to bless sin. If the german bishops persist, now they should be excommunicated. They dont really have any excuse now.
Just ask yourself this one question: If a man and woman goes up to a Priest and says, "Hi Father, I'm John and this is my mistress 'Divine', could you give us a blessing together?" The Priest knows John is married to a woman named Jenny. What should the Priest do? If you say bless them, then you agree with Francis' document. If you say the priest should decline, then you are against Francis' document and aligned with tradition.
Everything was fine with what Fr. Pine said as pertaining to single person blessings, what he didn't really address is what the document actually said pertaining to couples, which implies blessing their relationship as well. A blessing of a couple is not a blessing of individuals. To positively bless a couple, the relationship between them has to be a proper relationship. Otherwise, at best, you're blessing the near occasion of sin which a Priest can't do, and at worse you're blessing sin itself which a Priest also can't do. If a Priest refuses to ask and clarify the relationship, then he's being negligent with the power of God given to him by his station in the Church, and he will pay for his negligence. The same is true with Priest's who are negligent against the Body and Blood of Christ by passing out the Eucharist to people they know are living in unrepentant mortal sin (i.e. Joe Biden & Nancy Pelosi via their material support of abortion.) It's essentially the same thing. And all involved are guilty of a grave sin against the Lord/God. Priests have the responsibility of discernment of the faculties they have been granted by the Church/God. James Martin blessing gay couples privately, and now publically, is just such an offense to God.
I tend to agree with you. However, if the priest's blessing is something like "May you turn away from sin and become righteous in the eyes of the Lord" then that's more palatable, although I would question why one would confer that blessing on a couple instead of separately on the individuals. The act is ambiguous - if not in reality, then certainly in perception. Regarding Martin, that he is allowed to perform such blessings without rebuke is tacit endorsement, which adds further confusion and ambiguity. God's grace upon all!
Hi, Anomic.
What you say is true as far as it goes, but you haven't partitioned the space, and so the effect of your message is guilty of the fault of which you accuse Fiducia Supplicans. Priests are fathers, not bureaucrats, and their mission is to bring God's grace to the places that will otherwise be inaccessible to grace. Certainly a priest should refuse the blessing, or better evangelise to dispose to the blessing, to such a couple as you describe.. There are myriad other situations which the typical layman never encounters. The layman should give thanks that he is spared the encounter with the dark world of the mystery of evil more than is part of his lot, but he should not assume that his limited exposure and imagination accounts for the range of reality. There are those in very dark places who seek some improvement in their lives and relationships without knowing or understanding, let alone being able to act according to, what constitutes the good. For such, God gently and progressively accompanies them in taking the baby steps which progressively conform their lives to grace. Along the way, what there is of good in their disordered relationships can participate in the progressive response to grace. As the face of Christ in the world Who came not to condemn but to save, the priest, who cannot yet offer them any of adequate catechesis, sacramental confession, sacramental communion, or liturgical blessing, can give them the thimbleful of actual grace in a non-liturgical blessing that they at this stage are able to receive.
Here’s my question, why are we now letting James Martin to do this? I’ve seen him in all the thumbnails in regards to this topic and We’ve now punished frank pavone, Joe Strickland, and Raymond Burke for criticising the pope but James Martin has been spreading this heretical crap for yrs now. Why does he get to still be a priest and actually bless gay “couples”?
Martin is doing the opposite of what the document calls for. Blessing the sin of impenitent sinners instead of a blessing for healing for repentant sinners. He will get his due in the day of the Lord in case he evades justice while he is alive.
Your just,talking in circles and not answering any questions
No he laid this out quite well.
As a Dominican, I know you could have spoke much better to the nature of this Declaration. St. Thomas, your Spiritual Father in Education, is not being used regardless of the Church and Popes view of his teachings as the Common Doctor of the Church. You took the path of least resistance. That has made many a river, and man, crooked in thought. You have a duty.
Because his interpretation doesn't fit yours?
Bro come on. Fr did a good job
No, because I’m a Dominican too. And he is educated much better than I.
He did not use the tools given to him to speak Truth, meaning the Truth, the whole…and full… Truth is our motto. He seems to have neglected what he knows and should have said.
In a few years, someone will ask how the Catholic Church approved gay marriage??, someone will answer: it all started with the approval of the blessing for gay couples.

@@signumcrucis71 the church will Never approve gay marriage. It will simply and can simply never happen.
So if homosexual relationships are intrinsically evil how can there be anything good in the relationship to be blessed?? It’s just wrong, plain and simple
Wow. Thank you for walking the tightrope on this one Fr. Pine, explained in charity and objectivity.
Father, thank you for your perspective, wisdom and deep insight in the reading of the Document. You help me to look at it in a different light.
Don’t worry you guys, I’m sure Pope Francis will respond quickly and decisively with vague statements and censoring another traditionalist clergyman! You just gotta submit to the Pope and his workings with ✨The Holy Spirit ™ ✨ Stay prayed up! - Sponsored by the Hallow app
Joking about this is not funny and makes the situation worse. The Church remains and has remained THE ONLY Church for millennia despite the bad popes and situations it has dealt with. The Holy Spirit IS working in the Church DESPITE the evil that people within the Church do. DO NOT downplay that fact anymore; you are doing just that in this comment.
lol based
Sounds like you know better than he does…. Whenever there is a controversy in the church I’ll be sure to ask you for your opinion rather than the popes or the bishops. 😂
I thought you said “stay sprayed up” like with holy water, like when couples get blessed. Stay sprayed up my friends.
How dare you know your faith? We aren't to follow anyone into sin, even a bishop, but you're not allowed to know and maintain the faith to make that decision.
Fr. Pine, thank you and God bless you for taking on this challenging issue with grace and wisdom, indeed prudence. ✝️🙏
Dear God please bless Ur flock keep Ur bride the holy church safe on the rock of Peter truly is Ur church the good Shepard Jesus protect us l beg u it's getting scary listening to so much confusion l ll stay in my own truth help of God what my parents thought me lm one of his flock God keep me safe as all Ur children amen
It means HERESY.
Blessing a Sinful 'union'.
What's next?...adult and child (who gives consent).
Whoever said that the sinful union is being blessed? Clearly you did not bother to read the document.
@@freda7961Oh right, it’s a “couple” being blessed and not a “union” as if that makes a difference
@@freda7961
Don't be such an arrogant toss-pot.
I read it, the difference is... I understood it.
@@patricka.crawley6572 Who is more arrogant: you, claiming to know better than the DDF and the Pope (and even throwing extremely strong words like “heresy”), or me, indirectly suggesting that you read the document? The document itself explicitly states that the union is morally unacceptable, cannot be legitimized, and is not the object of the blessing. You’re too hung up on the use of the term “couple.” Have you looked into the dictionary meaning of “couple”?
@@Alex-hq6rh There’s an ocean of difference between the two. The dictionary substantially defines “couple” as two PEOPLE in a relationship or in association with each other. It refers to the individuals, not the relationship or the association itself. This contrasts with “union,” which is substantially defined as the association formed by people, or the act or fact of being joined. In the case of “union,” the focus is on the association or relationship itself, not the individuals constituting it. Therefore, when we speak of a “couple,” we're specifically referring to the persons involved.
• “It seems to me that when you start kissing with the tongue it is very possible to lose control, and you want to take hold of your hottie, you lose respect. But it’s also on her, if she knows what she wants…”
• “The penetrating kiss is when you suck and slurp with the lips. The penetrating kiss is when you stick in your tongue. Watch out for teeth.”
• “My boyfriend gets a hard mouth when he kisses me. He hasn’t yet learned how to loosen his lips. Lovely!” -Cardinal Fernández in his book “Heal Me With Your Mouth”
Wut?
Please give context so people understand what this is, who wrote it, and Francis' relationship to him.
@@JenniferoftheSeaGoogle is your friend.
He is quoting people there.
You have his own defense here:
.
"Dear friends and friends,
I sincerely appreciate the greetings and prayers of so many of you who have written to me through this medium, by mail and by different ways, in addition to the phone calls. I've been overwhelmed with so much sibling affection for almost three days now.
.
On the other hand, there are also groups against Francisco who are enraged, and who even use unethical means to harm me. For example, years ago they refer to a book of mine that no longer exists, which talked about the kiss. I was inspired by a phrase from the time of the Church Fathers who said incarnation was like a kiss from God to mankind..
.
At that time I was very young, I was a priest, and I was trying to reach the young people. So I figured I'd write a catechis for them based on what the kiss means. I wrote this catechesis with the participation of a group of young people who gave me ideas, phrases, poems, etc.
.
Well, what these extreme groups do is say, "Look at the low quality this theologian has, look at the foolishness he wrote, look at the low standard he has." I've been humiliated with quotes from that book for years.
.
But a catechesis for a youth group is not a Theology book, there is a big difference in literary gender. A catechesis from a priest for the boyfriends of a youth group cannot be asked to be a Theology textbook.
.
And I am proud to have been that young priest who was busy reaching out to everyone using the most diverse languages. That's why when the Pope talks about my resume he mentions that I was dean of the Faculty of Theology, but at the same time he says that I was a priest of "Santa Teresita". Because for him it's important that a theologian gets in the mud and tries to use simple language that reaches everyone.
.
I also have high-level books, I wrote several articles in the magazine "Angelicum" or in the "Nouvelle Revue Theologique", for example, texts that perhaps few understand. But the work of a theologian is not limited to those texts.
.
Worse yet, as these attacks come from Catholics in America, and they don't know Spanish, they translate one of the poems in the book wrongly. Translate the word "witch" as "whore". But the book says "witch". You have no right to change my words. Seems like they have no ethics for this, and it's not the first time they've done it to me.
.
In the end, they will continue to say many things, and they will ally with anyone to attack Francisco for appointing me. But those who have known me closely know who I am. Thank you for the trust and love always.
.
I don't do this to defend myself. I have endured these moves many times and the storm will pass. But I make it clear to prevent any of you from feeling confused or suffering from these and other accusations, but above all I do so that you do not intend to harm Francis."
.
Why can't each person be blessed individually? If I approached a priest with a friend for a blessing I would expect each of us to have an individual blessing as we would be individuals. I do not understand all this about blessings. We are blessed in confession and at the end of every Mass. In my experience if a person was travelling abroad or about to undergo surgery, usually this was faced with confession and attending Mass if possible. The only blessings I have experienced are religious objects being blessed and I was blessed for a safe delivery of a baby.
Since the document states its a requirement to be supplicant, penitent, open to healing, and the Cardinal said in a following interview 'That they may be purified of everything that does not respond to the Gospel', meaning, purify the gay away, then only a pair that meets such conditions could get the blessings, but its quite rare that a pair repents and becomes penitent at the same time, so the majority of times the person wanting healing would be alone.
It’s simple you can bless but divorced from the word couples. It is a change when you incorporate couples.
Pope Francis is awful. Catholics keep having to cover for him. He either needs to stop talking or get a spokesman who can filter out the questionable things he says.
that's quite a bit of pope-splaining to what is an extremely confusing and contradictory declaration.
I have been thinking about this alot and I think one point of confusion comes from my understanding of the parable of the prodical son. The Father says the son was dead and is now alive again. I always interpretted the moment of being made alive again as the returning home to the Father. I always thought this was Found through the confessional sacrament. I guess in the context of that parable are we now offering blessings to people who are Spiritually dead? Who are not planning to return to the Father yet? Are these people God is blessing on the cusp of conversion or are they happy living in the Sin? I just dont see where this concept fits into my understanding of the Sacramental system.
The prodigal son was REPENTANT.
The blessings are for "actual grace" not "sanctifying" grace. That is where your confusion is coming from. Read paragraphs 2000-2002 of the CCC. God bless.
The document specifically specifics that the couples must be begging God for help (FS 31), so they are explicitly on the path back to the Father.
@@jonathanstensberg Then why not tell them the times for Confession? Simce they are involved in a grave sin unto death and they already reveal this to the Priest by presenting themselves to him as such. The confession part should be a simple. The only reason I can think of to avoid confession at that point is because your really not ready to return to the Fsther just yet.
Prodigal Son had consequences (without any blessing) before he came to a decision, then he had
to travel to get home.
Spiritually alive or dead is a matter beyond any human.
Salve Regina, ora pro nobis
Ave, Ave Christus Rex
Amenn
I get saying hello to Mary but why say hello to Jesus too? Shouldn't you like pray to Him instead?
@Originalongrace that means, "Mary Pray for us, Christ is King" I understood it to be the response to the opening prayer.
You can bless a gay couple as long as you're blessing a couple of gays and not the gay couple. See, it's super clear.
Refer to 1 Corinthians Chapter 5 verses 1 - 2, where St. Paul is castigating the church at Corinth for putting up with a man who is sleeping with "his father's wife". He calls this an act of sexual immorality "that is not tolerated even among pagans..." They are instructed to remove this man from the congregation. He also calls them (the Corinth church) arrogant. If this act is sexual immorality, then by Pope Francis' human reasoning, St. Paul should have blessed him, not kick him out of the church! From my perspective, regarding this same-sex "blessing", if one has to go through linguistic gyrations and mental gymnastics to explain it, then maybe something is wrong with the so-called Fiducia Supplicans itself. Yes, we should love our friends and family who suffer from same-sex attraction, but we should not love them to hell.
Catholics: Protestantism is so confusing because they don’t have the papacy!
Also Catholics: we need video after video going through and explaining a new statement by the pope
Jokes aside, I love you my brothers and sisters ❤
The Roman system of papal supremacy and infallible magisterium goes against Scripture and Tradition.
Pray for us as we pray for you. I'm not unsympathetic to faithful Protestants who have watched this kind of thing play out in their own congregation. But on the other hand, Prots can just find another church or denomination. We Catholics have just watched our entire church get hijacked by the Vatican. Whilst many of us don't have a problem with occasional Protestant church visits or Bible studies with our Protestant bros, we don't have any other church (with the possible exception of Orthodoxy) that closely aligns with our beliefs of how the ancient Christian faith should be preserved and practiced (i.e. the Eucharist, communion of all saints, confession, apostolic succession, etc.).
Proverbs 26 verse 19
Is one who deceives their neighbor and says, 'I was only joking!'
Let us invite all sinners to conversion and bless them, not just gay couples! Let us bless individual persons, not relationships, since only persons can repent and believe! This is my synodical response to a very sad situation!
In my parish our priest blesses irregular married couples when they are going to travel and they are blessed as a couple. What in your oppinion is wrong with blessing a husban and wife together? They know they cannot receive absolution because they are in this irregular marriage but that doesnt prevent them nor is God prevented from blessing them when they ask their priest for his blessing.
In the context of FS, couple vs union is a distinction without a difference. Also all blessings are ultimately "liturgical". This widens the gap between doctrine and praxis.
Redefining language is always a disturbing trend.
Is anyone praying for Fr James Martin? I think we should channel our frustration, grief, anger into prayer directed to those who in any way skew, misinterpret or deny the Truth.
Thank you Father for a calm,thoughtful analysis.Well done.It's still immensely troubling to me and,I'm sure ,all sincere ,devout catholics.Many good priests will be,unfairly put to the test because of this in the coming months.Bless YOU and have a joyful Christmas .
When a couple seeks blessings, they bring their relationship along. No way will the holy Spirit be a part of such deception. This pope is wrong. Simple.
Why does this feel like I was sucked into an office with a used car salesman trying to tell me how all of the fine print really is a great deal? He seems so nice, but something isn't right.
'couples in irregular situations'
...Man and child is irregular.
I doubt that Fr James Martin is forming anybody in virtue!
I just started RCIA and this coming from the Pope has seriously made me question my choice. I've seen what a small acquiescence leads to eventually.
Same, but im fine with the pope, since I believe history and scripture demonstrates that the gates of hell wont overcome the church. Many converts to catholicism left the church after the pope made an ex chadrea statement about Mary, these converts never submitted their intellects to the pope. Cardinal Newman recorded this I think.
Don't become Catholic unless you are willing to submit to the Roman Pontiff.
I am honestly disappointed with many catholics who are misunderstanding the pope and who are causing fear.
I have yet to start RCIA but have been on the verge of doing so and i agree. I'm taking a step back and seeing what comes of this. Feels like we are in the end times, honestly.
Take heart from the resistance of bishops in Africa to this document. A bad Pope does not invalidate the Church, we've had far worse in history and have survived. That being said, it would be accurate to say that if the Church caves on the issue of blessing sin, it would demonstrate that this is not the Church which Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against...
I never thought I'd say this one day. But as much as it pains me, I have to admit: the SSPX was right about Pope Francis.
They’re not
If they said that he’s a future saint, full of kindness and having a heart after God’s own heart, then yes they’re right!
@@jesseholthaus8357 Future saint? You think Saint Peter or Saint Gregory the Great would write a document like that about blessing gay "couples"? What's wrong with people nowadays!
The SSPX hold onto the schismatic position that a true pope can teach heresy to the Church and remain pope. But that means the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church. It's a schismatic position. The truth is that Francis is not the pope. He teaches heresy which means he is not a Catholic. The chair of St. Peter is vacant.
St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Doctor of the Church: "If ever a pope, as a private person, should fall into heresy, he would at once fall from the Pontificate."
St. Francis De Sales, Doctor of the Church: "Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church…"
Pope Leo XIII, Satish Cognitum: "If anyone holds to a single one of these [heresies] he is not a Catholic" … "No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church."
I recommend watching the videos at vaticancatholic [dot] com.
I appreciate your thoughtful reflections, Fr Pine. God bless you.
The perceived meaning of 'blessing' the same sex couple is more confusing to the lay people while the clergy are conflicted. The Church must be clear about the truth.
The best blessing that can be given to any of the partners who make up a sinful couple is the blessing that accompanies absolution granted to each partner individually who sincerely repents and immediately gives up being in a sinful relationship in order to walk more righteously with the Lord. A priest who bypasses this first and greatest responsibility to specifically lead sinful people to repentance in order to provide only a generic blessing however it may be construed is derelict in his duty to save souls.
In Fiducia Supplicans, where is the specific call for each partner of a sinful union to repent, immediately give up their sinful relationship, and seek the awesome blessing that accompanies absolution? Can't find it, even between the lines? The most important blessing the Church can grant to each of the partners of any same sex or other "irregular union," and it is nowhere to be found in a document on blessing people in ongoing sinful relationships. Why? And what does this reveal?
There is nothing in this document that changes anything blessings could’ve been given to these individuals now previously, and in the future without this document. This document changes the way we practice our faith. It can’t change our faith.
The fact that it causes confusion and would cause confusion was, and had to be known by those who generated and published the document, shame on them on them
Just ask “what aspect of your life do you want blessed?” Then decide if it’s appropriate.
When something like this comes up, I find it helpful to go to Jesus's words about blessing- "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you; Bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." It's freeing that God asks us to bless anyone, anything, any action, even if it's by nature an enemy of God.
The struggle is when we confuse a blessing with an affirmation. A blessing doesn't mean that something is okay. It says "Jesus, please enter into this person's life. I trust you." God takes it from there.
Sometimes, that means God puts up a bunch of hurdles to keep someone from sinning. Sometimes God chooses to "hand him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord."
Sometimes blessing someone is like doing something good for your enemy, "for by doing this you will heap burning coals on his head.”
where are your accusers, then neither do I accuse you, go and sin no more
Yep, absolutely! @@josephcioppa1943
Thank you for bringing up this point! This helps a lot!
🎉Great share!
Many who will seek these blessings will be doing so to affirm them in their sins, not as an acknowledgment of their need for God to bless their futures.
Always happy to see a video in which Fr Pine decides to...o-pine on an issue.
If they would be clear when they realise these documents there would not be a problem.
I must admit as someome on the cusp of conversion this has made me take a step back.
How could the Pope if guided by the Holy Spirit, make such a grave mistake. We can make as many videos deeply dissecting this as we want, but we KNOW where this will lead if the Pope doesnt quickly clarify and honestly, take back, what he has said. Its a baby step towards full blown gay marriage in the Church and deep down we all know this.
That goes against everything ive learned about the papacy. Is any of it even true? Or should i just take my pick of a local protestant church instead who strongly abides by biblical teachings? God help me. 🙏
Nothing has changed. The Pope approved a document which offers some pastoral guidance on how to give blessings in a way to avoid causing scandal, to individuals who are living in a state of sin. The document reiterates the unchangeable Catholic doctrine on marriage, by clarifying that any kind of blessing given should not lead to confusion or scandal as to what the church has always believed. The document isn’t that bad. Jesus didn’t promise the Pope would be good at PR, and unfortunately the media will twist this story to push their narrative. Popes are sinners too. Popes come and go. All we can do is weather the storm with Jesus at the helm. Trust in Jesus and the timeless truths of the Catholic Church.
@misbehavens respectfully i totally disagree. The inclusion of the word "couple" cannot be ignored. Period. I've watched so many videos where they just skate by that word expecting us not to take note.
Jesus Said Go And Sin No More. Go And Sin No More . Go And Sin No More. Go And Sin No More. Go And Sin No More. God Will Bless Sinners , But Never Bless Sodomy , Father Pine , The Blessing Should Be Go And Sin No More , That’s What Jesus Said… And Yet There Are Those Who Refuse To Accept This Command. 23.12.2023. Dublin.
This was so helpful Fr. Gregory - thank you for sharing your thoughts.
I might be an unpopular opinion here, but I genuinely like that the border for what to bless is put between couple (ok) and union (not ok). A blessing for "couple" recognizes the relation between the two, which in this case may includes a sinful component (sexual union outside of legitimate marriage) but hopefully also includes many virtuous components as well (to care for the other person in sickness and during disasters, to love the other in spite of disputes, to share the "daily bread", to plan the future according to what is best for both, to learn how to make the other person smile and laugh when is sad, become a real member of the other person's family and friends - to take them as ones own family and friends, and many more).
It is very important to me, that the church is able to recognize the good things in relationship and not to be dismissive. The relationship in these couples is not the sin, it includes the sin, but usually also gives ways to love and be loved and to do virtuous deeds. When somebody says that they should stop to be a couple, it sound like they should end the relationship not just the sex, which would mean to end even the other (rightful) means of love. And that is very destructive for a person to force him/her to give up rightful means to love and be loved.
On the other hand couple is not necessary a union. So when the couple is blessed and the union is not, sex is still considered sinful because it should be an expression of union which is clearly not the case here.
Then what is the right conversion for such couple? Be single? Chaste couple? Other? Well that's when we go to the particularities and complexity of human life and we should be slow to give general concrete rules here. Personally, I see the document, among other things, is non-explicitly bringing the idea of chaste couples more on the light as possibility. What else would blessing the couple but not a union mean?
So God went from destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, to now blessing gay marriages. Makes sense.
The question we need to ask is would Jesus approve of this text
Is this going to be another popesplaining episode you have been doing?
Francis is making it increasingly harder to be a fence sitter. He is also making it increasingly difficult to believe that he has papal authority.
It’s another Catholic episode how about you get on board, and agree with what the Church says. It’s what we all should be doing according to the Catechism.
Catholic: I'm with the pope.
Protestant: I protest against the pope.
Choose carefully.
@@AndrewDolder If Francis is the pope, sodomite couples getting blessed is OK.
@axileus9327 Well, he failed.
If you're part of a same-sex 'couple' and you wish to pursue God, the first thing you need to do is stop being a couple. it's not that hard to understand. if any blessing you're hoping to obtain isn't ordered to that end, you're just asking for approval.
Thank you Brother. I’m not Catholic but am a follower of Christ. For me the document is complex and lengthy. I suppose it has to be. So, unless I’m mistaken, it says bless the sinner but not the sin. The object is not to cause a sinner (which we all are) to continue sinning but to encourage the sinner towards chastity and a Godly life. Correct me if I’m wrong please.
I can agree to such..That's what I got from reading the declaration..
Don’t have to correct you because you nailed it.
@axileus9327 we are all disordered, all sinners. The point of the blessing is to help the couple to live Gods will. They need grace to get away from the sin. They come to the priest not to validate their union but to ask for a blessing to live in accord with Gods will. Document says the union can’t be blessed or that a blessing of a couple does not approve or validate their union.
Wink, wink, nod, nod.................listen to what I say, not what I mean. The OBJECT (of the heretic pope and his cohorts) is to water down and ultimately discard the definition of sin, particularly any comment on the James Martin ("supposed") sin.
So, yeah, you're wrong.
I think you got it. If the media hadn’t gone crazy day 1, I don’t think this would have been so poorly received. Without what’s happening in Germany, and in the Church of England, I doubt this document would’ve been written, though.