Rejection of Same-Sex Blessings Continues

Progressives Point to a Serious Insufficiency

In Switzerland, the criticism is harsh. Thus, the spokesperson for the Catholic Church in the canton of Zurich, Simon Spengler, affirms that the Fiducia supplicans Declaration “drips with homophobia.” And he adds: “If I were a gay man and I lived with my friend, I wouldn’t care about this third-class blessing.”

But he sees the positive: “The fact is that what was prohibited just yesterday is valid today. The clear recognition by the supreme authority is that the teaching of the Church is not rigid and immutable, but that it is alive, and can evolve and adapt.”

The president of the Swiss League of Catholic Women, Simone Curau-Aepli, welcomes the opening of the blessing for same-sex couples, but she sees it as a “second-class blessing.” She regrets that “people who love each other” are put in an inferior category.

As for deacon Roger Seuret, he affirms that “homosexuality is given by God: the Catholic Church unfortunately does not recognize this.”

Cardinal Müller's Commentary

In a lengthy analysis sent to various media outlets, the German cardinal dismantles the DDF Declaration. He rejects the alleged doctrinal development of Cardinal Manuel Fernandez, because the text contradicts a magisterial declaration that is not three years old.

Fiducia supplicans (FS) intends to go beyond the understanding of previous blessings and invents a category of non-liturgical blessings, specific to popular piety, he explains. There would thus be three levels: prayers linked to the sacraments, the sacramentals of the Roman Ritual, and the new blessings of FS, “pastoral blessings,” which could apply not only to people in a state of sin, but also to things, places, and circumstances contrary to Catholic doctrine.

Cardinal Müller notes that the object of this new blessing, applied to irregular or same-sex couples, is not only the couple, but the sinful relationship itself. However, “God cannot send his grace on a relationship which is directly opposed to Him, and which cannot be ordered in a direction which is favorable to Him.”

The German prelate concludes that a faithful Catholic cannot accept the teaching of FS, nor can a priest bless these illegitimate unions, and that a bishop has the duty to ensure that such blessings are not performed in his diocese.

The Polish Episcopate

The spokesman for the Polish Bishops' Conference (KEP) made a statement on Fiducia supplicans. He points out the “many doubts of the faithful” in Poland after the publication of Fiducia supplicans (FS). He notes that the Church's teaching on marriage is not modified in any way and that FS concerns the understanding of the word “blessing.”

Then the commentary resolutely opposes FS: “Since the practice of sexual acts outside marriage, i.e. outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open to the transmission of life, is always an offense to the will and wisdom of God expressed in the Sixth Commandment, persons who are in such a relationship cannot receive the blessing. In particular, this applies to people in same-sex relationships.”

The text justifies its position by citing the Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of February 22, 2021 “approved by Pope Francis”: “The presence of positive elements in these unions, which in themselves deserve recognition and appreciation, cannot, however, justify them and thus make them a legitimate object of ecclesiastical blessing, since these elements serve a union which is not oriented according to the design of the Creator.”

He cites yet another passage from the same Responsum: “The blessing of homosexual unions cannot be considered licit, since it would be an imitation or an analogical reference to the nuptial blessing invoked on a man and a woman united by the sacrament of marriage, but ‘there is no reason to compare or suppose an analogy, even remote, between homosexual unions and God's design for marriage and the family’ (Amoris laetitia, n. 251).”

The spokesman’s statement concludes: “In other words, it is virtually impossible to avoid confusion and scandal in this case.” On the other hand, still according to the Responsum: “It is not excluded [to] give a blessing to individuals with homosexual inclinations and who manifest the desire to live in fidelity to the revealed plan of God as it is taught by the Church.”

Finally, the point is carefully driven home: “These are therefore single people living in total abstinence. However, in order to avoid any confusion about the approval of homosexual unions, this blessing must be practiced privately, outside the liturgy and without any analogy with sacramental rites.”

This latest intervention is, in a certain respect, the strongest that has been published by an episcopal conference, because it clearly reframes the text of the DDF and does not simply leave it aside or ask not to apply it.