Pope Francis has formally approved allowing priests to bless same-sex couples, with a new document explaining a radical change in Vatican policy by insisting that people seeking God’s love and mercy shouldn’t be subject to “an exhaustive moral analysis” to receive it.

The document from the Vatican’s doctrine office, released Monday, elaborates on a letter Francis sent to two conservative cardinals that was published in October. In that preliminary response, Francis suggested such blessings could be offered under some circumstances if they didn’t confuse the ritual with the sacrament of marriage.

The new document repeats that rationale and elaborates on it, reaffirming that marriage is a lifelong sacrament between a man and a woman. And it stresses that blessings should not be conferred at the same time as a civil union, using set rituals or even with the clothing and gestures that belong in a wedding.

But it says requests for such blessings should not be denied full stop. It offers an extensive definition of the term “blessing” in Scripture to insist that people seeking a transcendent relationship with God and looking for his love and mercy should not be subject to “an exhaustive moral analysis” as a precondition for receiving it.

  • rah@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    more equivalent legally

    This is a straw man. The pope’s decision is about a religious issue, not a legal issue.

    • Sanctus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Except married couples get legal benefits that actually matter in reality that same-sex couples don’t get. So its not a strawman. It is shit that actually happens to real people.

      • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        You don’t get legal beneficts from having a religious marriage. Only for a legal marriage, that is always possible unless your state is a behind hell hole

        • Izzgo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Furthermore, it has always been possible to get a religious wedding (certain churches only), even before it could be a legal marriage.

          • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Entirely depends on where you live. Where I do, that is illegal to the extent that it simply has no value. You just don’t show as married to the state, and you will get in a burocracy mess if you try to do ANYTHING as a couple

            • Izzgo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              The value would be, that church considers you married in the eyes of God, irrelevant of what human laws say. Not that I believe in any such god, but I remember gay people who got married in their Quaker church, and within their spiritual circle they were treated as married like any other married couple. Of course it didn’t count for anything in the secular world.

              • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Of course meant a civil value. Of course in the religion that marriage has been practiced tp it will have its own spiritual one.

      • rah@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Except married couples get legal benefits that actually matter in reality that same-sex couples don’t get.

        That’s not the case in the UK.

        So its not a strawman.

        It’s probably not the case where you live either.

        • Izzgo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          One clear legal benefit came up recently for me and my wife. She was in the hospital for several days. As her legal wife I was given certain medical information that would only go to next of kin. Before we got married we were not legal next of kin, and in fact that’s the reason we got married.

          • rah@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            me and my wife

            As her legal wife

            we got married

            You got married? In a religious ceremony in a Christian church? Or you had a civil ceremony and are now in a civil partnership?

            • Izzgo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              In the US where I live, a civil ceremony is a legal marriage, and that’s what we did, right at the courthouse. Previously we were in a domestic partnership, which required no ceremony just signing the papers, and gave us many of the legal rights of marriage. I’m not a Christian, nor a member of any major religion, so I would not avail myself of that type of religious ceremony anyway.