[GOP_Party_Animal]

Do you think the Apostle Paul was out of line to criticize the Apostle Peter?

Here again, differentiate between criticizing the Pope, and holding the Catholic Church accountable for his absurd statements. Bigots see what they want in his ambiguous proclamations (the confusion serves his purposes) and use those statements to bolster their hatred for the Church.

Do you deny the bishop of Rome has the authority to change what the church of Rome is allowed to do ?

Yes, and any Catholic worth his salt will tell you that a Pope cannot change fundamental Church teaching. Yes, Francis would like to declare a gay union a marriage. He has shown he would also remove all stigma from divorce too. The best he can do is create confusion and encourage defacto changes. He's a horrible leader and will have to answer for what he's done.

[af_vet_1981]

Here again, differentiate between criticizing the Pope, and holding the Catholic Church accountable for his absurd statements.

Is that like criticizing the High Priest in Jerusalem and holding the Jews accountable for the Roman crucifixion of the Messiah ?

Does a pope have the power to demote those who disagree with him, promote those who agree, and rewrite the Catechism ?

Who gets to define "Church teaching" if not the pope and cardinals ? If a bishop protests (cue Bishop Strickland for example), he can be silenced or removed. The bishops are rather quiet now, are they not ? Has EWTN or Catholic Answers protested ?

[af_vet_1981]

Blessing Same-Sex Couples: a CA Roundtable The latest bombshell from Rome has the whole Church talking. Here's what we think.


This week, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) published the declaration Fiducia Supplicans (FS), which reflects on the theology of blessing and, for the first time, sanctions clerical blessings of same-sex couples and mixed-sex couples in irregular unions. This has sparked no little controversy, particularly since that same dicastery ruled out, with the pope’s approval, the possibility of any such blessings just two years ago. The implications of the change are complex and far-reaching. In this Catholic Answers Roundtable, we offer perspectives from Catholic Answers staff on this text and what it means.

• Trent Horn, apologist This document, in principle, is orthodox, because it speaks of sinners seeking “spontaneous” blessings in order to live better lives, which is not a problem. But something can be technically true and yet confuse people and lead to scandal if it is uttered without qualification.
  
  
• Drew Belsky, content editor Catholics undergoing a crisis of confidence after Fiducia Supplicans are in good company—or at least I hope so, because they’re in my company.
  
  It’s not the first time. I remember feeling pierced when Amoris Laetitia came out—this when someone close to me, in whose spiritual good I was very much invested, had just finished several years of grueling work to repair an “irregular” adulterous situation. A big part of that long restoration involved forgoing Communion, every Sunday, for years. I read Amoris and thought, aggrieved, Why this heroic work? Why bother?
  
  
  
  
• Karlo Broussard, apologist Fiducia Supplicans has caused quite a stir. As always, there’s a need for clarity. So let’s begin with a distinction.
  
  As many have noted, it’s one thing for a priest to bless an immoral relationship, whether it involves people of the opposite sex or same sex, and it’s another thing to give a “simple blessing” (38) to persons who happen to be living in such immorality. The former seeks to legitimize the relationship itself. The latter implores God to give the actual graces needed for the couple to live in accord with God’s will.
  
  
  Cy Kellett, host, Catholic Answers Live I have been traveling more than usual the last two months, visiting parishes in various places around the country, and, of course, I get to talk with Catholics every day on the radio.
  
  With this experience in mind, I must admit, I wince a little whenever Pope Francis makes the news. He once asked young people to go make a mess, and the man follows his own advice. Although I believe there is some method to his mess-making—he clearly believes that Christianity is in a kind of doldrums and needs to be aroused to face new challenges amidst new realities—I also think that his method involves “creative destruction.”
  
  He imposes heavy burdens. He must know that his actions will create immense noise and confusion, and yet he asks the faithful to remain sanguine despite it all.
  
  Is that fair?
  
  At every talk I give, I meet people who are at their wits‘ end with Francis and people who are at their wits‘ end with those who oppose Francis. Everybody seems on edge. This isn’t helping.
  
  Fiducia Supplicans, in my view, is basically correct in its approach to blessings—if what it’s saying is that Pope Francis wants people to receive the blessings of the Church without priests actually blessing sinful unions. But it will take a generation, at least, for the Church to work through all the creative interpretations and abuses that will now follow.
  
  
  
• So we are left with a painful puzzle to faithful Catholics: why would Rome cause scandal? Did it not know what consequences FS would produce? Or were these consequences known—and assented to beforehand—as something good? Are they unaware of the moral context—widespread acceptance of unchaste same-sex relationships—into which FS would land?
  
  One telltale sign (and not of the Holy Spirit): the word repent is noticeably absent from the document. Oremus.