Is the blessing of same-sex unions in any way compatible with Catholic teaching?

[JanetM]

The Catholic Church is certainly not the Anglican Church, but taking the latter's justification of the blessing of same-sex unions, likening it to the blessing of any friendship and charitably assuming a bond of chastity, is there any opening through which the Church might take an official stand to licitly bless same-sex unions?

I'm a little concerned by the statement of the Vatican's new doctrinal chief that "if a blessing is given in such a way that it does not cause that confusion [about the Church's position on marriage], it will have to be analyzed and confirmed." I know that he has affirmed the truth that marriage is between a man and woman, and I know also that talking about blessing same-sex unions is very different from actually implementing it.

However, if things were to get that far, is it possible for the Church to formally bless same-sex unions under any circumstances?

Or is it in the realm of "not possible," the way we say that it is impossible for the Church ever to conduct same-sex marriages or to approve of abortion or admit women into the priesthood or to deny the Eucharistic Presence?

I'm feeling a little conflicted and a little confused here because I'd think that the Church should never bless same-sex unions, but I'm almost not so sure anymore... Am I missing something? Is there an actual technical opening for this?

[Doom]

No

[Essential Sacrifice]

Let me reiterate what Doom has just said to you ... NO. love the sinner hate the sin but in no way condone via your love for the sinner.

[Kage_ar]

No

[Vern Humphrey]

However, if things were to get that far, is it possible for the Church to formally bless same-sex unions under any circumstances?

Same-sex unions are inherently sinful. How could they be blessed?

[JanetM]

However, if things were to get that far, is it possible for the Church to formally bless same-sex unions under any circumstances?

Same-sex unions are inherently sinful. How could they be blessed?

That's what I would have thought, which is why I'm confused about why the Vatican's doctrinal chief seems to be putting it up for discussion in his statement that "if a blessing is given in such a way that it does not cause that confusion [about the Church's position on marriage], it will have to be analyzed and confirmed."

Could the argument for blessing these unions be framed such that a blessing could be formally sanctioned? Could the Catholic Church take a position similar to that of the Anglicans and assume that they are blessing a chaste bond of friendship?

I'm feeling fairly reassured by the responses so far, but sometimes I think I'm going crazy. And while certain that the Church will not change her stand on same-sex "marriage," I'm feeling less sure that the issue of blessings can't be twisted somehow to accommodate these same-sex unions.

[Kage_ar]

The result of "analyzing" would result in the finding that such could not be done.

This speaker is not speaking ex cathedra, is not impeccable, is simply giving an opinion.

[Signum Crucis]

"...a chaste bond of friendship." So what happens in the Anglican Church when those "chaste friends" no longer wish to be "friends"?

[JanetM]

"...a chaste bond of friendship." So what happens in the Anglican Church when those "chaste friends" no longer wish to be "friends"?

Once they've received the blessing (a.k.a. approval), they probably go on to say that just as there is nothing unchaste in the love between a married man and woman, there is nothing unchaste in the monogamous and unselfish love between same-sex couples.

I'm still worried though that the whole issue can't be twisted at all to approve blessing same-sex unions.

Walk through this thought process with me a bit:
1) As Catholics, we must be charitable;
2) In charity, we must assume the best of everyone and not make rash judgements;
3) Being charitable and refraining from assuming others' wrongdoing without evidence, we should believe when a same-sex couple claims that they live together in deep affection for one another but are otherwise in a non-sexual relationship in accordance with the laws of the Church;
4) As Catholics, we believe in the power of prayer and blessings;
5) As Catholics, we should offer the same-sex couple all the spiritual support they need to continue to live chastely;
6) If a same-sex couple comes forward to make, say, a vow of chastity together, this vow will be strengthened through the prayers and blessings of the Church...

In short, the Church should bless same-sex couples who are sincere and committed to chastity to aid them in that purpose...

So, you see, I'm still worried things can't be twisted...

[zeno]

Give me an example of another friendship that is routinely blessed by the Church please.

[Signum Crucis]

And why can't they simply be chaste friends without the Church's blessing? Why is that a requirement, if not to simulate marriage?

[JanetM]

Give me an example of another friendship that is routinely blessed by the Church please.

There isn't another routine example, but the blessing of friendships in general isn't contrary to the Church either. Though the blessing of friendships may not be commonly done, it can be done without violating God's laws. The next argument, however, is that it should be no different when it comes to blessing same-sex friendships/unions that claim to be chaste.

[JanetM]

And why can't they simply be chaste friends without the Church's blessing? Why is that a requirement, if not to simulate marriage?

They might argue that a priest would not scruple if approached by an expedition asking for a blessing before climbing Mount Everest, by a group of students before exams, by young people before discerning for the consecrated life, by friends before setting up a private business... basically by any other group of people asking for a blessing prior to a serious undertaking.

So why not blessings for a same-sex couple undertaking the challenge of chastity?

[zeno]

Give me an example of another friendship that is routinely blessed by the Church please.

There isn't another routine example, but the blessing of friendships in general isn't contrary to the Church either. Though the blessing of friendships may not be commonly done, it can be done without violating God's laws. The next argument, however, is that it should be no different when it comes to blessing same-sex friendships/unions that claim to be chaste.

Inventing a special new routine for a specific scenario seems a bit unreasonable, doesn't it?

[zeno]

And why can't they simply be chaste friends without the Church's blessing? Why is that a requirement, if not to simulate marriage?

They might argue that a priest would not scruple if approached by an expedition asking for a blessing before climbing Mount Everest, by a group of students before exams, by young people before discerning for the consecrated life, by friends before setting up a private business... basically by any other group of people asking for a blessing prior to a serious undertaking.

So why not blessings for a same-sex couple undertaking the challenge of chastity?

Ok you are changing the question here. No longer is it being suggested that the friendship is being blessed, now it's the individuals for a particular virtue. All unmarried people are called to celibacy. What justification would there be for singling out two individuals?

[Vern Humphrey]

In short, the Church should bless same-sex couples who are sincere and committed to chastity to aid them in that purpose...

So, you see, I'm still worried things can't be twisted...

Why "should?" What moral imperative is there for this "blessing?"

[JanetM]

Give me an example of another friendship that is routinely blessed by the Church please.

There isn't another routine example, but the blessing of friendships in general isn't contrary to the Church either. Though the blessing of friendships may not be commonly done, it can be done without violating God's laws. The next argument, however, is that it should be no different when it comes to blessing same-sex friendships/unions that claim to be chaste.

Inventing a special new routine for a specific scenario seems a bit unreasonable, doesn't it?

I would agree that a special new routine is unreasonable, but informal blessings of this sort are sufficiently bad. The blessings of same-sex unions (all informal) have so far all been in defiance against Rome. However, what I am concerned about is the Catholic Church claiming that such a blessing could be licit depending on the supposed moral intentions of the same-sex couple, regardless of whether the blessing is formal or informal.

[JanetM]

They might argue that a priest would not scruple if approached by an expedition asking for a blessing before climbing Mount Everest, by a group of students before exams, by young people before discerning for the consecrated life, by friends before setting up a private business... basically by any other group of people asking for a blessing prior to a serious undertaking.

So why not blessings for a same-sex couple undertaking the challenge of chastity?

Ok you are changing the question here. No longer is it being suggested that the friendship is being blessed, now it's the individuals for a particular virtue. All unmarried people are called to celibacy. What justification would there be for singling out two individuals?

It could be friendship being blessed. It could be a special intention for a particular virtue being blessed. It could be any aspect of a same-sex union being blessed. I am testing Archbishop Fernández's suggestion that a blessing could be "given in such a way that it does not cause that confusion [about the Church's position on marriage]." I don't like it at all personally, but I'm testing if it holds any water.

In the case of informal blessings, no justification is necessary; they only need approach the priest.

For a formal blessing to be officially formulated with or without ceremony, a sizeable population requesting or "in need" could be one justification.
I am absolutely certain I am making a lot of false equivalencies as the Devil's advocate here, but to make yet another, the USCCB has a published Prayer for Our Troops to bless the soldiers being deployed, and the reason why such a prayer/blessing has been formally composed is that there is a significant population in need of it.

At present, all blessings on same-sex unions have been illicit, but I wonder if the Vatican is working to pave the way for these blessings to potentially become licit.

[JanetM]

In short, the Church should bless same-sex couples who are sincere and committed to chastity to aid them in that purpose...

So, you see, I'm still worried things can't be twisted...

Why "should?" What moral imperative is there for this "blessing?"

"Could" would be the better word to use... the Church could bless same-sex couples who are sincere and committed to chastity to aid them in that purpose...

By the way, only playing the Devil's advocate here...

[zeno]

There isn't another routine example, but the blessing of friendships in general isn't contrary to the Church either. Though the blessing of friendships may not be commonly done, it can be done without violating God's laws. The next argument, however, is that it should be no different when it comes to blessing same-sex friendships/unions that claim to be chaste.

Inventing a special new routine for a specific scenario seems a bit unreasonable, doesn't it?

I would agree that a special new routine is unreasonable, but informal blessings of this sort are sufficiently bad. The blessings of same-sex unions (all informal) have so far all been in defiance against Rome. However, what I am concerned about is the Catholic Church claiming that such a blessing could be licit depending on the supposed moral intentions of the same-sex couple, regardless of whether the blessing is formal or informal.

Ok, first of all "the Catholic Church" is not making any such claim, as has already been pointed out.

Yes, it is possible that people who want to push something of the sort could use the kind of mental gymnastics you have been performing to make some sort of policy statement that could be open to abusive interpretations. Have you met the "Spirit of Vatican II" yet? Such a thing would indeed be scandalous, but we should not be surprised or shaken by it. Jesus himself warned us that there would be people who create scandal, but we should not allow ourselves to become scandalized by them. My advice is to focus on seeking peace in Christ and cultivating a deeper relationship with Him. Pray for all those in positions to be responsible for these things, but don't allow them to distract you from what is really important.