Roma Locuta Est

December 18, 2023 (Steven O’Reilly) – Today the DDF released a document titled Fiducia Supplicans, On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings.  This new DDF document now offers “the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex,” something hitherto prohibited by Rome (cf Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to a dubium regarding the blessing of the unions of persons of the same sex, 15.03.2021).  Other writers and podcasters have commented on the document throughout the day, so I’ll just try to add a few quick thoughts on the document and its ramifications.

Fiducia Supplicans will undoubtedly be considered yet another black mark on the memory of this pontificate. Now, in an effort to defend this document, the Francisapologists or ‘popesplainers‘ will no doubt rely on the fact that the new Vatican document does say that the ‘form’ of the blessings for individuals in same sex relationships “should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage” (cf Fiducia Supplicans 31). So, the document in its first few sections appears to be consistent with past teaching. However, the assurances that confusion should be avoided are hollow when we consider how those bishops and priests, who are friendly to same sex unions, will implement sections of the document such as the following:

38. For this reason, one should neither provide for nor promote a ritual for the blessings of couples in an irregular situation. At the same time, one should not prevent or prohibit the Church’s closeness to people in every situation in which they might seek God’s help through a simple blessing. In a brief prayer preceding this spontaneous blessing, the ordained minister could ask that the individuals have peace, health, a spirit of patience, dialogue, and mutual assistance—but also God’s light and strength to be able to fulfill his will completely.

(Fiducia Supplicans)

Above, Fiducia Supplicans suggests that a “brief prayer” might ask God to grant the same-sex individuals “peace, health, a spirit of patience, dialogue, and mutual assistance—but also God’s light and strength to be able to fulfill his will completely.”  Well a “brief” prayer that even says this much will undoubtedly lead a same-sex couple, and anyone witnessing the blessing, to believing that God and His Church approve of their relationship!  A spirit of “patience“, “dialogue“, and “mutual assistance” are all elements associated with marital relationships between a man and a woman. How can anyone think that the Church is not blessing the same-sex relationship if such language is used, as suggested by FS 38?

But this is just one of the flaws of this document.  It is internally self-contradictory.  Section 31, in the case of same sex couples, speaks of “a blessing that descends from God upon those who…do not claim a legitimation of their own status.”  Presumably, “status” meaning individuals being in an irregular, objectively sinful union (i.e., same sex or adulterous). This seems to admit their relationship is not legitimate.  Yet, in section 38, as cited above, the priest asks God to strengthen the elements of the same relationship, such as “peace, healthy, spirit of patience, dialogue, and mutual assistance — and for God to grant the light and strength to fulfill his will.”

Beyond being an internal contradiction it is also a contradiction with other guidance of the DDF under Pope Francis, which in 2023 stated in part:

Among the liturgical actions of the Church, the sacramentals have a singular importance: “These are sacred signs that resemble the sacraments: they signify effects, particularly of a spiritual kind, which are obtained through the Church’s intercession. By them men are disposed to receive the chief effect of the sacraments, and various occasions of life are sanctified”^[3]. The Catechism of the Catholic Church specifies, then, that “sacramentals do not confer the grace of the Holy Spirit in the way that the sacraments do, but by the Church’s prayer, they prepare us to receive grace and dispose us to cooperate with it” (#1670).

Blessings belong to the category of the sacramentals, whereby the Church “calls us to praise God, encourages us to implore his protection, and exhorts us to seek his mercy by our holiness of life”^[4]. In addition, they “have been established as a kind of imitation of the sacraments, blessings are signs above all of spiritual effects that are achieved through the Church’s intercession”^[5].

Consequently, in order to conform with the nature of sacramentals, when a blessing is invoked on particular human relationships, in addition to the right intention of those who participate, it is necessary that what is blessed be objectively and positively ordered to receive and express grace, according to the designs of God inscribed in creation, and fully revealed by Christ the Lord. Therefore, only those realities which are in themselves ordered to serve those ends are congruent with the essence of the blessing imparted by the Church.

For this reason, it is not licit to impart a blessing on relationships, or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage (i.e., outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open in itself to the transmission of life), as is the case of the unions between persons of the same sex^[6]. The presence in such relationships of positive elements, which are in themselves to be valued and appreciated, cannot justify these relationships and render them legitimate objects of an ecclesial blessing, since the positive elements exist within the context of a union not ordered to the Creator’s plan.

Furthermore, since blessings on persons are in relationship with the sacraments, the blessing of homosexual unions cannot be considered licit. This is because they would constitute a certain imitation or analogue of the nuptial blessing^[7] invoked on the man and woman united in the sacrament of Matrimony, while in fact “there are absolutely no grounds for considering

(Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to a dubium regarding the blessing of the unions of persons of the same sex, March 15, 2021)

Thus, we see, as but one example, the DDF in 2021 stated the presence in same sex relationships of “positive elements…cannot justify these relationship and render them legitimate objects of eccesial blessings, since the positive elements exist within the context of a union not ordered to the Creator’s plan.”  Note, the blessing is impossible “since the positive elements exist within the context of a union not ordered to the Creator’s plan.” Yet, Fiducia Supplicans suggests a prayer for God’s aid for these seemingly “positive elements” of a relationship, e.g., “peace”, “health”, “spirit of patience”, “dialogue,” and “mutual assistance.”  And as the same DDF guidance of 2021 stated, God “does not and cannot bless sin.”

Implications of Fiducia Supplicans

The effect of the recent document and its guidance would appear to put all local ordinaries on the hot seat.  With Traditiones Custodes, the local bishop ‘only’ had to deal with a relatively small group of Catholics who prefer the Latin Mass.  However, with Fiducia Supplicans, bishops will undoubtedly be inundated with many “irregular couples” — divorced and remarried couples, and same-sex couples — demanding these blessings. But with this flood of demands, the bishops will also be confronted with the reality that a significant number of their priests will absolutely refuse to provide any such blessings.

Up until now, the majority of the Catholic faithful have been generally unaware of the many controversies swirling around the pontificate of Pope Francis.  However, this situation will quickly come to end, as Catholics come face to face with the reality that homosexual relationships will be potentially blessed in their parishes and dioceses, by their priests and bishops. Bishops will quickly be confronted by rebellious priests, and irate parishioners.  Will bishops cancel priests who refuse to do such blessings?  Will angry parishioners cut back on donations?  Bishops who generally eschew any and all hints of controversy have been tossed a live hand grenade by Pope Francis.  I don’t believe this will be particularly appreciated.

Certainly, there will be priests and bishops who go along and “bless” same sex couples, and other irregular relationships.  But there will be those who absolutely and rightfully refuse to do so. Does Francis intend to discipline and remove those who won’t?  It is quite possible he will be creating more Bishop Stricklands who oppose his policy.  A recent Pillar article on Fiducia Supplicans stated (emphasis added):

Meanwhile, sources close to several African bishops told The Pillar that the episcopate there is “in a state of shock” and “appalled” by the notion that same sex couples could present themselves for any kind of blessing of their relationship.

(Source: What ‘Fiducia supplicans’ declares about papal power, The Pillar, Ed Condon)

As noted before, up until now, the controversial policies of Pope Francis have generally been under the radar for the wider majority of faithful Catholics who do not follow papal documents (e.g., Amoris Laetitia), or who are not directly impacted by the pope’s decisions against Latin mass communities.  However, Fiducia Supplicans is poised to change all that.  Pope Francis is now on the verge of splitting the Church, just as he ‘prophesied’ years ago.

Who knows, but it might well be that Fiducia Supplicans backfires on Pope Francis. While I am not holding my breath, but if bishops are confronted with specter of confronting and dealing with ‘rebellious’ priests, and angry Catholics in their dioceses, many may opt to simply ignore the guidance. They may just hope to wait out the time left to Pope Francis and his pontificate. That is probably the path of least resistance for them, and thus the preferred option.

However, other bishops, such as the African bishops, may now judge that their prior policy of silence toward Francis is now no longer viable. In which case, they may join their voices to those of other critics of Francis (e.g., Cardinals Burke, Müller, Brandmuller, Sarah, Bishop Schneider, Bishop Strickland) discussed in prior articles (see What to Do in the Case of a Potentially Heretical Pope and Dubium: ‘Are you a heretic, yes or no?’). This would be a welcome development in the ongoing crisis in the Church. We may not have to wait long to see what happens.

Steven O’Reilly is a graduate of the University of Dallas and the Georgia Institute of Technology. A former intelligence officer, he and his wife, Margaret, live near Atlanta. He has written apologetic articles, and is author of Book I of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms; and of Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. (Follow on twitter at @fidelispia for updates). He asks for your prayers for his intentions.  He can be contacted at StevenOReilly@AOL.com  or StevenOReilly@ProtonMail.com (or follow on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA or on GETTR, TruthSocial, or Gab: @StevenOReilly).