Cardinal Approves Blessing of Same-Sex Unions


#143

THANK YOU for saying that. Would we let our loved one take poison or run intentionally into traffic or stop eating and starve themselves. NO any of these could kill their body. So WHY would we want someone we love to do something that kills their soul?

I would say the EXACT same instruction for a heterosexual couple I dearly love who are living together and having sexual relations without marriage. They are “killing” their souls.


#144

[quote=“BlackFriar, post:136, topic:470678”]
Homosexuals in civil unions may well be getting to heaven before good Catholic sacramental marriages where partners do not actually love each other but are only together because of their vows.
[/quote]Hi BlackFriar,
I don’t think that’s a fair comparison. The Sacramental marriage like your example may merit a crown at this time in history. As individuals I would think it possible.


#145

What truth of divine Catholic faith exactly has the Cardinal denied?
He has not denied that homosexual acts are gravely disordered unless I overlooked something.

Please provide a quote from the Cardinal …


#146

Choosing to keep one’s vows is love, deep love and not superficial.


#147

The fact that Cardinal Marx ( who just happens to be one of Pope Frances senior advisors) made these statements is disturbing enough. But about a month ago, Bishop Franz-Josef Bode of Osnabruck Germany made the exact same statements. (Something wrong with the German municipal water supply???) My question is, where is the Pope on this? Why the silence? I have an enormous problem with the fact that these prelates can make these scandalous remarks publicly with absolutely zero repercussions. His silence on this only exacerbates this situation. The RCC of late is skating on thin ice!


#148

did the Cardinal not say that it is possible to bless a homosexual union?:

Karin Wendlinger: So you really could imagine a way to bless homosexual couples in the Catholic Church?
Cardinal Marx: Yes; however, there are no general solutions. That would not be right, I think. It’s about pastoral care for individual cases, and that applies in other areas, as well, which we cannot regulate, where we have no sets of rules. That does not mean that nothing happens.

Wouldn’t that mean, based on his comment, that under certain circumstances these couples can be blessed? Isn’t this an approval of their “marriage”?


#149

CAN’T comment


#150

If he did how is that denying the teaching that homosexual acts are gravely disordered?

Does that also mean Pope Francis is a heretic for allowing some of the remarried to continue to cohabit for the sake of the children? To say nothing of giving Communion to some of them.


#151

But BlackFriar, would you say* it is morally permissible to bless a type of marriage God did not ordain? That is the question. They may not be committing homosexual acts, but if that is the case, then why have their marriage blessed?


#152

Well when you can answer a straight forward question to clarify your assertions then I will be in a position to answer yours.


#153

How can one bless a gravely disordered relationship without giving at least tacit approval? Giving tacit approval, or willfully turning a blind eye, is equivalent to denying the teaching.


#154

fine, instead of talking about homosexual acts. lets talk about homosexual marriage. I do not know if the Cardinal said anything about accepting homosexual acts, that is uncertain. But what i do know and showed you is, that he is willing to bless couples living in a type of marriage unknown to God’s laws. So, please answer my question, if you can:

would you say it is morally permissible to bless a type of marriage God did not ordain Without scandalizing the faithful into thinking the Priest or Church accepts their form of union?

Would you also agree that by saying yes to blessing homosexual couples, it shows that this relationship can in fact not be disordered?


#155

Blessing. Benediction . Literally to say good words about a thing, to point out it’s goodness in God’s eyes.


#156

Well isn’t that exactly the issue if people want to assert he is a heretic.
If he didn’t deny the Church’s clear teaching that homosexual acts are gravely disordered then there is nothing to get upset and “heretical” over.


#157

How is Magisterial toleration some remarriages for the sake of the children even unto Communion any different? The answer is steering you in the face…the problem seems to be you may not like what you see.


#158

That’s strange, you certainly felt you could, and rather extremely so, above.


#160

Do you understand what you are saying.
(a) The Church does not consider same sex unions as equivalent to heterosexual “marriage”.
(b) Same sex unions are a recent phenomenon so I don’t know what you mean by “homosexual marriage was never inline with the Church”. What in fact was never “inline” are “homosexual acts”.
The Cardinal has never denied this.
© Re “Also, the divorced and remarried were once inline with the Church” what does that mean?
The remarried were largely excommunicated in the US until more recent times and certainly never allowed Communion under any circumstances. It was considered publically sinful but tolerated…as it is again now for specific reasons.

Hence if particular cases of remarriage can now be discerned as suitable for continuance, even unto Communion for some, then the Cardinal surely appears at first pass justified in raising a discussion re a blessing - as happens for 2nd marriages in the ancient Eastern Catholic tradition.

Regardless, the Cardinal is not denying that remarriages and homosexual acts are disordered.


#161

and the floodgates open.


#162

i should clarify, the people who are now divorced were once in an acceptable marriage (as in the good graces of the Church), they have options to either separate (divorce) physically and not commit adultery and still be able to receive communion because they are still technically married. The remarried are a case by case i guess. This is different in the homosexual case. The homosexual couple are not in any marriage because marriage can only be between a man and a woman, and therefore the toleration of remarriages are not the same as homosexual marriages, because one is an actual union God created (man and woman), with adultery being the sinful aspect of it. The other (homosexual) was not what God created, because that is not how God intended marriage to be. Therefore blessing a union that is not even unitive in the way God created man and woman to be in, is something i cant see being acceptable

What i should have said, and i apologize for giving you that comment, which basically did nothing but confuse the heck out of you and didn’t help my case, which i also would like to detract, is something different. What i should of said is i find confusing that if you agree that homosexual marriages should be blessed then that would mean all other “marriages” like polygamy could in theory be blessed. The question is, what does this blessing signify? Acceptance of their lifestyle?


#163

I am unsure if you are on the same track as myself.
Committed, caring and loyal relationships that are given legal status and rights by means of a civil union are not marriage relationships. therefore they are not intrinsically about sexual acts.
Just as adoption is not about sex. God-parent relationships are not about sex. Continental relationships of patronage are not about sex, guilds/apprentice-ships are not about sex, fealty vows are not about sex. Tolerated remarriages for the sake of the children are not about sex.

But they are all institutions for creating legal caring “families” and doing their best in an imperfect world. That is a good thing despite the imperfections in every familial situation.

What the possible blessing of such worthy affine relationships has to do with formally and obstinately denying the Church’s teaching on the disordered nature of homosexual acts, fellatio, mutual mast., warfare, fornication, incest etc etc that may happen in any family relationships I really do not see.

What i should have said, and i apologize for giving you that comment, which basically did nothing but confuse the heck out of you and didn’t help my case, which i also would like to detract, is something different.

All good.

The question is, what does this blessing signify? Acceptance of their lifestyle?

Yes, this is really where the discussion needs to go methinks.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.