Pulse
21 December 2023
On 18 December 2023, the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith published a Declaration entitled Fiducia Supplicans (‘Supplicating Trust’), and subtitled ‘On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings.’ The document was signed by Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, the Prefect of the Dicastery, and Father Armando Matteo, the Dicastery’s Secretary.
To understand why the Dicastery has issued this Declaration, which provides a way for same-sex couples to receive the Church’s blessings, we must take a quick glance at recent events.
On February 2021, the Dicastery, which was headed then by Cardinal Luis Ladaria, issued a Responsum in answer to the question ‘Does the Church have the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex?’
The Responsum categorically states that ‘the blessing of homosexual unions cannot be considered licit’ because ‘there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and the family.’
News reports suggest that Pope Francis was unhappy with the position taken by the Responsum.
On 1 July 2023, Pope Francis announced that Cardinal Ladaria’s mandate had concluded and thanked him for his service as Prefect. The Pope appointed as Ladaria’s successor, Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández, a fellow Argentinian and prolific author, well-known for his progressive views.
The Declaration seeks to ‘clarify’ the 2021 statement, and in the process open the door for same-sex couples to receive blessings by making a distinction between liturgical or ritualised blessing and simple blessing, while preserving the Church’s doctrine on marriage.
In the run-up to the October Synod of Bishops on Synodality, Pope Francis responded to a set of dubia or ‘doubts’, submitted by five conservative cardinals over the vexing issues of women’s ordination to the priesthood and the blessing of same-sex unions.
In his response, the Pope continued to uphold the prohibition against women’s ordination. But on the issue of the blessing of same-sex couples, the pontiff indicated some openness to allowing such blessings to be conferred on a case-to-case basis, as long as the act of blessing is not confused with the sacrament of marriage.
Archbishop Fernández states that the Pope’s responses to the dubia had provided ‘important clarifications’ and was ‘a decisive element for the work of the dicastery.’
THEOLOGY OF BLESSING
The Declaration provides a lengthy discussion on the theology of blessing based on the Roman Catholic tradition.
It is not my purpose to offer a (Protestant) critique of the Roman Catholic doctrine in this article. However, some basic understanding may be helpful as we review the proposals made in the Declaration.
According to Roman Catholic theology, a blessing is not a sacrament but a sacramental. Sacraments are outward signs which bestow grace on those who receive them in a worthy manner. On the other hand, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, sacramentals
… are sacred signs which bear a resemblance to the sacraments. They signify effects, particularly of a spiritual nature, which are obtained through the intercession of the Church. By them, men are disposed to receive the chief effect of the sacraments, and various occasions in life are rendered holy.
Put simply, sacramentals are the special prayers of the Church which prepare the person to receive grace and to co-operate with it.
In its discussion on the blessing of same-sex couples, the Declaration begins by underscoring the emphasis that Pope Francis had made in his response to the dubia, that such blessings must not be confused with the sacrament of marriage. Thus, it states categorically that:
… rites and prayers that could create confusion between what constitutes marriage – which is the exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to the generation of children – and what contradicts it is inadmissible. This conviction is grounded in the perennial Catholic doctrine of marriage; it is only in this context that sexual relations find their natural, proper, and fully human meaning. The Church’s doctrine on this point remains firm.
That said, the Declaration goes on to describe different kinds of blessings and their meanings. Once again, this is done in response to Pope Francis’ ‘invitation’ to ‘broaden and enrich the meaning of blessings.’
Most significantly, the Declaration makes the distinction between liturgical (or ritualised) blessing and simple blessing.
‘From a strictly liturgical point of view’, it states, ‘a blessing requires that which is blessed be conformed to God’s will, as expressed in the teachings of the Church.’ It adds:
For this reason, since the Church has always considered only those sexual relations that are lived out within marriage to be morally licit, the Church does not have the power to confer its liturgical blessing when that would somehow offer a form of moral legitimacy to a union that presumes to be a marriage or to an extra-marital sexual practice.
However, apart from liturgical blessings, there are also what the Declaration calls ‘simple blessings.’
Basically, simple blessings are distinguished from liturgical blessings (especially in the sacrament of marriage) in that they do not make the same moral demands on their recipients. The Declaration states:
One must not avoid the risk of reducing the meaning of blessings to this point of view alone [referring to liturgical blessings], for it would lead us to expect the same moral conditions for a simple blessing that are called for in the reception of the sacraments.
For the Pontiff, the conferring of simple blessings is important if the church is not to ‘lose pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes’ and if she is not to be a forbidding judge ‘who only deny, reject, and exclude.’
This distinction, between liturgical blessings and simple blessings, that the Declaration makes – a distinction which is absent in the Responsum – gives the Dicastery the latitude to justify the blessing of couples in ‘irregular situations’ and same-sex couples.
Thus, the Declaration states:
Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.
The Declaration does not elaborate on what it means by ‘couples “in irregular situations”’ or provide examples. Does this term refer to, for instance, a couple in an adulterous relationship? Or a man in a consensual incestual relationship with his adult daughter? Are priests free to bless these couples without requiring them to repent?
A RADICAL DOCTRINAL SHIFT
What are we to make of this document?
The events that led to the publication of the Declaration should alert us to the fact that this document cannot be properly understood apart from its immediate context.
The purpose of the Declaration, it seems to me, is not merely to rehearse the Church’s established doctrine of blessings and its pastoral applications. Fiducia supplicans seeks to redress aspects of the Responsum which sits uneasily with the Pope, which he deems to be too dogmatic and prohibitive.
In addition, it should be noted that the Declaration is published less than three months after Pope Francis had indicated to the five Cardinals that the blessing of same-sex couples might be possible.
The main agenda of Fiducia supplicans is to present a theology of blessings that could include the blessing of couples in ‘irregular situations’, and couples of the same sex. It is to introduce a practice that is unprecedented in the Roman Catholic Church.
We must therefore recognise the Declaration for what it is. We must resist the temptation to paper over its controversial proposals. The Declaration signals a radical shift in the doctrine and practice of the Roman Catholic Church.
Thus, Section Three (‘Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex’) is the centrepiece of the Declaration. The rest of the document is purposed to serve this Section by providing the requisite theological and pastoral framework and justifications for the proposals it makes.
We must also be clear that the Declaration is not talking about the blessing of individuals. Its focus is on the blessings of couples. Couples in ‘irregular situations,’ and couples of the same sex. To bless these couples in this way is surely also to bless their union.
The radical nature of the Declaration is well understood by the pro-LGBTQ faction in the Roman Catholic Church, which has responded with much enthusiasm and excitement. In an article in the Jesuit magazine America, Fr James Martin S.J., the magazine’s editor, calls it ‘a major first step’, and a ‘dramatic shift’ from the position taken by the Dicastery’s 2021 document.
Fr. Martin disagrees with those who try to soften the impact of the Declaration by arguing that it has not changed anything and will not do so. ‘But a great deal has changed’, he writes.
Before this document was issued, there was no permission for bishops, priests and deacons to bless couples in same-sex unions in any setting. This document establishes, with some limitations, that they can.
So, what the Declaration has done is that it has made the blessing of same-sex couples an act which the Vatican now officially sanctions. As Fr. Martin has again baldly put it:
The change here is that these blessings are now officially sanctioned by the Vatican. Today, with some limitations, I can perform a public blessing of a same-sex couple. Yesterday, I could not.
Furthermore, the Declaration allows the Church to bless these couples as couples in their current relationships – without requiring repentance. It does this by categorising such blessings as ‘simple blessings’ and in the name of pastoral sensitivity. The document states:
There is the danger that a pastoral gesture that is so beloved and widespread will be subjected to too many moral prerequisites, which, under the claim of control, could overshadow the unconditional power of God’s love that forms the basis for the gesture of blessing.
The Declaration seems to suggest that blessings should be given unconditionally. This, however, does not take into consideration the fact that Scripture teaches otherwise, that the reception of blessing is conditioned on repentance. Thus, in 2 Chronicles 7:14, we read:
If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.
The Declaration places much emphasis on conferring blessing on those who earnestly seek God, but totally ignores the requirement for repentance.
By blessing the couple in a sinful relationship without requiring repentance, by refusing to say ‘go and sin no more’ (John 8:11), the Church is or is seen to be affirming or at least condoning the sinful relationship of the couple.
CONCLUSION
There is a sense in which the publication of a document like Fiducia supplicans by the Dicastery did not come as a total surprise. For some time now, Catholic bishops in some jurisdictions have been pushing hard for the blessing of same-sex unions.
In March this year, Catholic bishops in Germany voted to approve plans to put same-sex blessings into effect. In September, several priests in Cologne conducted a public blessing of same-sex couples against the orders of their conservative diocesan bishop. Also in September, the Catholic bishops in Belgium published guidelines which included the blessing of same-sex couples, while distinguishing such blessings from the sacrament of marriage.
The Declaration was published in part to address and contain these developments, and to prevent them from venturing too far from traditional practices.
But it is also reasonable to say that Fiducia supplicans reflects the theological and pastoral sensibilities of their chief architects: Pope Francis and Cardinal Fernández. It is inconceivable for such a document to have seen the light of day during the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
Fr. Martin has rightly described the Declaration as ‘the first major step’. There is some anticipation that the door that this document has left ajar could allow other liberal ideologies to invade the Church.
The Declaration may indeed be ‘the first major step’. But to this Protestant theologian (a ‘separated brethren’), it is a major step in the wrong direction!
Dr Roland Chia is Chew Hock Hin Professor at Trinity Theological College (Singapore) and Theological and Research Advisor of the Ethos Institute for Public Christianity.