Of same-sex blessings and the Vatican

One of the abiding lessons people in high profile positions learn is that the more emotion or fear that surrounds an issue, the more important it is to be very clear about what you are saying and, if possible, preface a larger statement with the bounds of what is being proposed. So, for example, should you be the wife of a soldier on deployment or a parent of an elementary school child, a phone call might start with, "There's nothing wrong, Mrs. Piddlesworth. We just needed to contact you about the Christmas party." The same mental process that says one should walk carefully on an iced over driveway is enacted for similarly dangerously slippery topics of discussion.

There is an entire lexicon of words that are perfectly harmless, but are not used as they might cause offense to the unlettered. Find me an article boasting usage of such phrases as niggardly tipping, taking the best feck of a year to finish a task, or open-mouthed mastication in public and I will guess that it was used to shock or outrage and not for the purposes of clarity. When you want to get your point across, you need to be clear, concise, and repetitive because upset people hear very little of what you say. People looking to be upset will take scissors to your sentences and turn your perfectly ordinary holiday party invitation into a kidnapping plot. 

So, just days before our Lord's Nativity it apparently seemed fit for the Vatican to release Fiducia Supplicans (a “Declaration on the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings"), which is "a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective." Never has the word innovative been less welcome than in a religious context. In sports or retail or the restaurant business, innovation is a welcome opportunity to get attention and thereby increase sales. In Orthodox circles the very word innovation is a pejorative and for good reason; modernity is a bilious, miasmatic morass that should be wiped off your feet before entering the narthex, not a bracing roborative to be taken daily along with holy water and a handful of vitamins. No one goes to church and thinks, "You know what this place needs? Whatever is trending on TikTok or the top ten singles from Spotify or maybe a lesson in manners from Philadelphia Eagles fans." Innovation the dicasterial declaration purports to offer and innovation it certainly provides.

It does such wrapped with a lot of parchment paper and very thick slices of panis quadratus. Much as one who orders a sandwich and laments that it is two parts bread and not even one part meat, the declaration will fill one up on commentary and leave little room for actual guidance. To my reading, this is the single slice of bologna worth reading.

III Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex

31. 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. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love. 

It is clear here that the blessing is not given to a single person struggling with an issue, but of two people being acknowledged as in a relationship that the Church should desire to "mature." The phrase "ever-increasing dimension of the divine love" assumes that God's love is actively in need of growth. 

The worldwide response has been profound. There's a lot of shock, outrage, and lots of excitement. Even such normally reasonable outlets like the National Catholic Register have put out articles like "Pope Francis Did Not Just Authorize Priests to Bless Same-Sex Unions," which strain credulity. Still others have taken this as carte blanche to get busy blessing any and all same-sex couples (see Bishops welcome Vatican declaration on the blessing of homosexual couples from the bishops of the Catholic Church in Germany).

For those that believe this document was written to provide clarity, it has done anything but that (no few people have declared that the declaration was in fact written to obscure on purpose). Those that see the current pontificate to be an extended effort to kick at the foundations of the Church are even more sure that this is a Jesuit plot. He is after all laicizing opposing voices, forbidding the traditional mass, permitting transgendered individuals to be godparents, and constantly taking swipes at large, faithful Catholic families. Those that want Rome to be more progressive are rejoicing that this is an important next step in expanding the embrace of the Church to include even more people who have historically been ostracized. Those outside the Catholic Church are equal parts celebrating the "backwards" Church finally "getting it" while others are mocking this as yet another sign of the slow, continuous, and completely avoidable downfall of Rome.

My final thought here is that this declaration attempts to put two things together that should never come into contact. The first is spontaneity. The document wants to enable clergy "to perform blessings spontaneously" as long as no one is trying to mimic a wedding. There can't be rings, flowers, or any of the other things that smack of the liturgical. The second is support. The document also wants to "avoid any form of confusion or scandal, when the prayer of blessing is requested by a couple in an irregular situation." When two people of the same sex come up to the priest and ask for a blessing, what are they asking for? Would any cleric in his right mind ask few questions and simply say a prayer over two people in such a situation? Wouldn't he want to set up a time to talk to these people and make sure he knows what they are asking for, that they know what he can offer, and come to some consensus first? How does someone affirm spontaneously and pastorally at the same time? It is for the very reason that this is new - that it is an innovation - that these extemporaneous engagements will lead to the very confusion and scandal it hopes to avoid.