Pope Francis and the Blessing of Same-Sex Couples: What Does it Mean?
On December 18th, the news that Pope Francis had granted permission to priests to bless same-sex couples was quick to make headlines. The BBC declared that it was “a significant advance for LGBT people in the Roman Catholic Church.” Despite this apparent step forward, it was also recognized that the official stance of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) on marriage has not changed. It still recognizes marriage to be between a man and a woman. The BBC was citing the Declaration Fiducia Supplicans: On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings, that was published on December 18th. The Declaration is an attempt to define blessings and their role in the Catholic Church, and to clarify how Francis’s move to grant blessings to same-sex couples does not contradict official Church teaching.
One can understand the perplexity of the situation. The Roman Catholic Church does not recognize same-sex unions and declares marriage to be between a man and a woman. Yet it desires to bless same-sex couples. What does that mean and how does it work? Fiducia Supplicans anticipates this very question: “It is precisely in this context that one can understand the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church’s perennial teaching on marriage.”
That is the objective, to understand how this is possible, because it is not intuitively clear. Indeed, it seems contradictory. The first order of business, then, is to understand what a blessing is according to the RCC. Blessings are an act of devotion, and “are external to the celebration of the Holy Eucharist and of the other sacraments.” Fiducia Supplicans offers this helpful description of blessings. They…
“lead us to grasp God’s presence in all the events of life and remind us that, even in the use of created things, human beings are invited to seek God, to love him, and to serve him faithfully. For this reason, blessings have as their recipients: people; objects of worship and devotion; sacred images; places of life, of work, and suffering; the fruits of the earth and human toil; and all created realities that refer back to the Creator, praising and blessing him by their beauty.
Indeed, blessings are celebrated by virtue of faith and are ordered to the praise of God and the spiritual benefit of his people. As the Book of Blessings explains, “so that this intent might become more apparent, by an ancient tradition, the formulas of blessing are primarily aimed at giving glory to God for his gifts, asking for his favors, and restraining the power of evil in the world.”
Blessings are primarily ordered to the praise of God and the spiritual benefit of his people. Therefore, as Fiducia Supplicans states: “From a strictly liturgical point of view, a blessing requires that what is blessed be conformed to God’s will, as expressed in the teachings of the Church. Furthermore, when it comes to blessings, the Church has the right and the duty to avoid any rite that might contradict this conviction or lead to confusion.” Same-sex unions are not accepted by the RCC. The official Church position is that such unions are wrong. Would it not reason, then, that blessing such unions contradicts that conviction and will inevitably lead to confusion?
To answer that question, Fiducia Supplicans states that: “Blessings are among the most widespread and evolving sacramentals.” In allowing for the blessing of same-sex couples, Pope Francis is inviting the church to “broaden and enrich the meaning of blessings.” In this regard, Pope Francis has encouraged the leadership of the RCC to not “lose pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes, and to avoid being judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.” For Pope Francis, blessings are of a pastoral nature. They do not require the same moral conditions as the official sacraments of the RCC. It is easier, therefore, to expand and broaden the nature and understanding of blessings and render them more “pastoral.” For Francis, “pastoral” means welcoming, inclusive, and non-judgmental.
Fiducia Supplicans’ understands this when it states: “Granted by God to human beings and bestowed by them on their neighbors, the blessing is transformed into inclusion, solidarity, and peacemaking. It is a positive message of comfort, care, and encouragement. The blessing expresses God’s merciful embrace and the Church’s motherhood, which invites the faithful to have the same feelings as God toward their brothers and sisters.” The opposite of pastoral is “fixed doctrinal and disciplinary schemes.” Rigid doctrine is not gracious and risks leading to “a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying.”
Pastoral charity rejects an objective analysis of a person and of his/her lifestyle. Instead, it embraces a subjective approach that acknowledges many attenuating circumstances that might not be immediately apparent and that would change one’s opinion of that person were it to be known. The Declaration states it this way: “pastoral charity requires us not to treat simply as ‘sinners’ those whose guilt or responsibility may be attenuated by various factors affecting subjective imputability.” In other words, pastoral charity shouldn’t call sin, sin. There might be understandable reasons for that sin. That is the danger of rigid doctrinal schemes. They lack grace and risk objectively recognizing sin for what it is.
A gracious, pastoral approach to behavior the RCC deems inappropriate is to highlight God’s love while ignoring his hatred of sin and the righteous outpouring of his wrath against it. Fiducia Supplicans states it this way: “We are more important to God than all the sins we can commit because he is father, he is mother, he is pure love, he has blessed us forever. And he will never stop blessing us… No one can be prevented from this act of giving thanks, and each person—even if he or she lives in situations that are not ordered to the Creator’s plan—possesses positive elements for which we can praise the Lord.” It is this logic that has been employed to justify blessing same-sex couples. “Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex…”
That progress made, the Declaration is quick to remind that “this blessing should never be imparted in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them.” Fiducia Supplicans is clear: “there is no intention to legitimize anything, but rather to open one’s life to God, to ask for his help to live better, and also to invoke the Holy Spirit so that the values of the Gospel may be lived with greater faithfulness…The Church is thus the sacrament of God’s infinite love. Therefore, even when a person’s relationship with God is clouded by sin, he can always ask for a blessing, stretching out his hand to God…In this way, what shines forth is the beauty of the saving love of God made manifest in Jesus Christ, who died and rose from the dead.”
An Evangelical assessment of Pope Francis’s move to bless same-sex couples, and Fiducia Supplicans’ attempt to make sense of it, brings to light several concerns. It is immediately clear that the “Roman” aspects of Roman Catholicism continue to collide with the “Catholic” aspects of Catholicism. The “Roman” church wants to maintain doctrinal clarity. The “Catholic” church wants to embrace all and desires doctrinal ambiguity and elasticity. It is clear Pope Francis advocates for the “Catholic” church, and undergirded by Vatican II, is doing his best to take more ground from the “Roman” church. The tug-of-war continues. It is also clear that the Pope’s move is in response to the current “Synodal” initiatives of the Church. “Radical inclusion” has been a recurring request of the Catholic faithful. This is an attempt to say “I hear you” and to give voice to them, while making no official changes to church doctrine.
Furthermore, this situation highlights the disastrous results that are inevitable when Scripture alone is not the authoritative voice for the church in all doctrinal matters. When the church moves outside of Scripture, man becomes the leading voice and God’s voice through his own Word becomes secondary and is overlooked, especially when it conflicts with man’s desires. There are many sources outside of the Bible that are useful for the church and for growing in an understanding of God and his Word, but it is Scripture alone that is the ultimate source of authority, and it is Scripture alone that ultimately brings clarity on matters of sin, repentance, grace, and redemption.
Fiducia Supplicans does not lack references to Scripture. What it lacks, however, is submission to the Scripture referenced. Instead of submitting to God’s Word, it submits to the words of Pope Francis and his teaching that we are all brothers and sisters, regardless of our theological and doctrinal confessions and convictions. It is interesting to note that unlike Francis’s writings, Fiducia Supplicans does mention sin and recognizes that we are sinners. It understands that sin must at least be acknowledged if the RCC is still willing to claim that same-sex unions are wrong. The problem, however, is that according to the Declaration, despite our sin God’s love and his grace will triumph. His love and grace always trumps our sin. That is true, but it requires a confession of sin and a repentant heart. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, it requires the willingness to turn away from sin and to die to self and its sinful desires. The Declaration fails on this point, and with this absent the RCC’s blessings risk assuming a relationship that is not there, namely a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. In such cases, the blessings are empty and of no value.
Fiducia Supplicans and post-Vatican II Roman Catholicism have great difficulty in proclaiming the righteous anger and wrath of God against sin. It occasionally mentions sin (only occasionally), but not God’s hatred of it. It views sin as a common human struggle, subjective in nature and based on attenuating circumstances, not as something that must be confessed, repented of, nailed to the cross, and turned away from. Only then will God’s love triumph over sin in our life. Otherwise, we remain objects of his righteous wrath.
Finally, it is clear that for Pope Francis and the RCC, being pastoral is synonymous with being theologically elastic. A true pastor is not rigid in his doctrinal and theological convictions but is open to seeing things differently. Life is complex, and complexity requires flexibility. The RCC is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman, but that is an example of doctrinal rigidity and does not factor in life’s complexity and any number of attenuating circumstances. Love is not rigid but considers and is open to blessing those with attenuating circumstances.
For the Evangelical, however, the opposite is true. Being pastoral is synonymous with doctrinal and theological clarity. It is that clarity that reorients and provides clear direction and stability amid life’s struggles and storms and amid life’s attenuating circumstances. A pastor loves by providing doctrinal clarity that comes from God’s inerrant Word.
Although it means nothing officially, the BBC is right; the Pope’s blessing of same-sex unions is a step in the right direction for the LGBT community. You can rest assured, however, that it will not be enough. Once that door is cracked open, it is a matter of time before it is pushed further open. This is why doctrinal clarity is a blessing for the church, and why it is necessary. Once it is abandoned and God’s Word alone ceases to provide the doctrinal parameters for the church, it is only a matter of time before theological confusion ensues. What we are seeing in the RCC is clear evidence of this.