Denouncements of Fiducia Supplicans

[Stone]

Abp. Viganò: Bergoglio’s approval of blessings for homosexual ‘couples’ shows he is a servant of Satan
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has stated the Vatican’s newly approved blessings for homosexuals ‘couples’ shows that the ‘Bergoglian hierarchy’ are ‘servants of Satan and his most zealous allies.’



Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
don Elvir Tabaković, Can.Reg

Dec 21, 2023
(LifeSiteNews [emphasis mine]) — When the devil tries to persuade us to sin, he emphasizes the supposed good of the evil action he wants us to do, while overshadowing the aspects that are necessarily contrary to God’s commandments. He does not say to us: Sin and offend the Lord who died for you on the Cross, because he knows that a normal person does not want evil in itself, but that he usually does evil under the appearance of good.

This strategy of deception invariably recurs. To induce a mother to have an abortion, Satan does not ask her to be pleased with the killing of the child she is carrying, but to think about the consequences of pregnancy, the fact that she will lose her job, or that she is too young and inexperienced to raise and educate a child; and it almost seems that that mother, by making herself a murderer through infanticide, shows a sense of responsibility in wanting to spare the innocent creature a life without love. In order to convince a man into adultery, the tempting spirit shows him the supposed advantages of finding an outlet in an extramarital affair, all to the benefit of peace in the family. To urge a priest to accept the heretical deviations of his superiors, he emphasizes obedience to authority and the preservation of ecclesial communion.

These deceptions obviously serve to drag souls away from God, to erase grace in them, to stain them with sin, to obscure their conscience in such a way that the next fall is all the more casual the more serious it is. In a way, the action of the devil is expressed as the “Overton window,” making the offense against God less horrible, making us believe that the punishment that awaits us is less terrible, and the consequences of our guilt more acceptable.

The Lord is good: He forgives everyone, He whispers to us, taking care to keep us away from the thought of Christ’s Passion, from the fact that every blow of the scourge, every slap, every thorn stuck in His head, every nail driven into His flesh is the fruit of our sins. And then, if you give in to temptation, it’s not your fault, it’s your frailty. And once sunk, sin after sin, in the habit of evil and vice, the soul allows itself to be dragged lower and lower, until the devil’s request presents itself in all its horror: Rebel against God, reject Him, blaspheme Him, hate Him because He has deprived you of your right to happiness with oppressive precepts.

This, on closer inspection, is the recurring element in temptation, ever since Adam’s sin: to show evil under false appearances of good, and good as an annoying obstacle to the fulfillment of one’s rebellious will.

The Church, who is our Mother, knows well how dangerous it is for a Christian soul to ignore this infernal strategy. Confessors, spiritual directors, and preachers considered it essential to explain to the faithful how the devil acts, so that they might understand with their intellect the fraud of the evil one, so as to be able to oppose it with their will, aided in this by assiduity in prayer and frequent use of the sacraments. On the other hand, how could we imagine a mother who encourages her child not to progress in God’s love, and who reassures him that the Lord will grant him salvation unconditionally? What mother would witness the ruin of her child, without trying to warn him and even punish him, so that he understands the gravity of his actions and does not harm himself for eternity?

The delirious Declaration Fiducia Supplicans, recently published by the parody of the former Holy Office renamed the Dicastery, definitively pierces the veil of hypocrisy and deception of the Bergoglian hierarchy, showing these false shepherds for what they really are: servants of Satan and his most zealous allies, beginning with the usurper who sits – an abomination of desolation – on the Throne of Peter. The very incipit of the document sounds, like all those issued by Bergoglio, mocking and deceptive: because trust in God’s forgiveness without repentance is called the presumption of salvation without merit and is a sin against the Holy Spirit.

The false pastoral solicitude of Bergoglio and his courtiers with regard to adulterers, concubinaries, and sodomites should be denounced first of all by the presumed beneficiaries of the Vatican document, who are the first victims of sulphureous conciliar and synodal pharisaism. It is their immortal soul that is sacrificed to the woke idol, because on the day of the Particular Judgment they will discover that they have been deceived and betrayed by those who on Earth hold the authority of Christ. The fault that the Lord will accuse these unfortunate people of will not only concern the sins committed, but also and above all in having wanted to believe in a diabolical lie, in a fraud of false pastors – starting with Bergoglio and Tucho – that conscience had shown them as such. A lie that many members of the hierarchy want to believe, who hope sooner or later to be able to receive the same blessing together with their accomplices in vice, ratifying that sacrilegious and sinful lifestyle that they already practice, and with the ostentatious consent of Bergoglio.

The fact that Tucho Fernández’s declaration approved by Bergoglio reiterates that blessing an irregular couple ought not to seem like a form of wedding rite, and that marriage is only between a man and a woman, is part of the strategy of deception. For what is at issue here is not whether marriage can be contracted by two men or two women, but whether persons living in a gravely sinful state can merit, as an irregular couple, a blessing imparted by a deacon or a priest, with the sole precaution that it is not to give the impression of being a liturgical celebration.

The attention of the Vatican Sanhedrin is entirely directed to reassuring the Christian people that they have no intention of formalizing new forms of marriage, while the state of mortal sin and grave scandal of those who would receive such a blessing, and the danger of eternal damnation that weighs on those poor souls, is totally overlooked. Not to mention the social impact that this declaration will have on those who are not Catholic, and who thanks to it will consider themselves entitled to much worse excesses. One wonders whether, in this race to legitimize sodomy – obtained without going so far as to celebrate marriages between sodomites – there is a conflict of interest in those who propose it so insistently: it is as if rulers protected themselves with a legal shield against liability before imposing on the population an experimental gene serum about whose adverse effects they are not unaware.

There is no doubt about it: it is a rude awakening for the so-called conservatives, who find themselves blatantly mocked by Prefect Tucho, who worries that the blessing of a couple should not look like a marriage but has nothing to say about the intrinsic sinfulness of public concubinage and sodomy. The important thing is that the moderates – defenders of Vatican II – can consider themselves satisfied with that Jesuitical apostille (in this case that these spontaneous and non-ritual blessings are not a marriage) that is supposed to save the doctrine on the papacy while pushing souls to damn themselves.

For priests who do not agree to bless these unfortunate people, two paths are being prepared: the first, to be expelled from the parish or from the diocese ad nutum Pontificis; the second, to resign themselves to bartering their right to dissent in exchange for the recognition of the right of other confreres to approve; something already seen in the liturgical field with Summorum Pontificum. In short, Bergoglio’s operation is an outlet of the Faith, where you can find everything from the rites of pre-1955 Holy Week to LGBT “Eucharists,” as long as nothing is called into question about his “pontificate.”

Added to this is the scandal for Catholics, who, in the face of the horrors of the sect of Santa Marta, are tempted to embrace schism, or to abandon the Church. And again: with what bitterness and sense of disillusionment will those people regard Rome who, aware of their situation of objective irregularity, have sought and still seek with all their strength and with the grace of God not to sin and to live in conformity with the Commandments? How can those people feel who ask for a paternal voice that exhorts them to continue on the path of holiness, and not the ideological recognition of their vices that they know to be incompatible with natural morality?

Let us ask ourselves: what does Bergoglio want to achieve? Nothing good, nothing true, nothing holy. He does not want souls to be saved; he does not proclaim the Gospel opportunely, importunately to call souls to Christ; he does not show them the scourged and bloodied Savior to spur them on to change their lives. No. Bergoglio wants their damnation, as an infernal tribute to Satan and a brazen challenge to God.

But there is a more immediate and simple purpose to be achieved: to provoke Catholics to turn away from his church and leave him free to turn it into the concubine of the New World Order. Women priests, gay blessings, sexual and financial scandals, the immigration business, forced vaccination campaigns, gender ideology, neo-Malthusian environmentalism, the tyrannical management of power are the tools with which to scandalize the faithful, to disgust those who do not believe, to discredit the Church and the papacy. Whatever happens, Bergoglio has already achieved his goal, which is the premise for securing the consent of heretics and fornicators who recognize him as Pope, ousting any critical voice.

If this document, together with other more or less official pronouncements, really had as its purpose the good of adulterers, concubinaries, and sodomites, it should have pointed out to them the heroism of Christian witness, reminded them of the self-sacrifice that Our Lord asks of each one of us, and taught them to put their trust in God’s grace in order to overcome trials and live in conformity with His Will. On the contrary, he encourages them, blesses them as irregular, as if they were not; but at the same time he deprives them of marriage, and in this way admits that they are irregular. Bergoglio does not ask them to change their lives, but authorizes a grotesque farce in which two men or two women will be able to appear before a minister of God to be blessed, together with their relatives and friends, and then celebrate this sinful union with a banquet, the cutting of the cake, and gifts. But it’s not a wedding, let’s be clear…

I wonder what’s going to prevent this blessing from being imparted not to a couple, but to several people, in the name of polyamory; or to minors, in the name of the sexual freedom that the globalist elite is introducing through the U.N. and other subversive international organizations. Will it suffice to point out that the Church does not approve of polygamous unions and pedophilia to allow polygamists and pedophiles to be blessed? And why not extend this gimmick to those who practice bestiality? It would always be in the name of welcoming, integration, inclusiveness.

The same diabolical falsification is taking place for women priests. If, on the one hand, the Synod on Synodality did not address the ordination of women, on the other hand, a form of “non-ordained ministry” is already being planned that would allow them to preside over spurious celebrations under the pretext that there are no more priests and deacons. Also in this case, the faithful see on the altar a woman in an alb reading the Gospel, preaching, distributing Communion, just as a priest would do, but without being one. It is done with the Vatican footnote that it is a ministry that does not call into question the Catholic priesthood.

The hallmark of the conciliar and synodal church, of this sect of rebels and perverts, is falsehood and hypocrisy. Its purpose is intrinsically evil, because it takes away God’s honor, exposes souls to the danger of damnation, prevents them from doing good, and encourages them to do evil. Those in the Bergoglian church who continue to follow the doctrine and precepts of the Catholic Church are out of place and sooner or later will end up separating themselves from it or giving in.

The Catholic Church is the only ark through which the Lord has ordained the salvation and sanctification of mankind. Wherever what appears to be the church acts and works for mankind’s damnation, it is not the Church, but rather her blasphemous counterfeit. The same is true of the papacy, which providence willed as a bond of charity in truth, and not as an instrument to divide, scandalize, and damn souls.

[This is what Archbishop Lefebvre said many times, for example:

“What could be clearer? We must henceforth obey and be faithful to the Conciliar Church, no longer to the Catholic Church. Right there is our whole problem: we are suspended a divinis by the Conciliar Church, the Conciliar Church, to which we have no wish to belong! That Conciliar Church is a schismatic church because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship… The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or the faithful adhere to this new church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Reflections on his suspension a divinis, July 29, 1976) - The Catacombs]

I exhort all those who have been awarded the dignity of cardinal, my brothers in the episcopate, priests, clerics, and faithful to oppose most firmly this mad race towards the abyss to which a sect of renegade apostates would like to force us. I implore the bishops and ministers of God – by the Most Holy Wounds of Our Lord Jesus Christ – not only to raise their voices to defend the immutable teaching of the Church and to condemn deviations and heresies, under whatever appearance they may appear; but also to warn the faithful and prevent these sacrilegious blessings in their dioceses. The Lord will judge us on the basis of His holy law, and not on the pharisaic seductions of those who serve the enemy.


+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

December 20, 2023
Feria IV Quattuor Temporum Adventus

[Stone]

500 British Clergy Say No to Francis

gloria.tv | December 22, 2023

The prestigious British association "Confraternity of Catholic Clergy", representing over 500 clergy in England, Scotland and Wales, has issued a position paper against Francis' homosexualist scrawl "Fiducia Supplicans".

The priests explain to him that Catholic teaching is unchangeable. "On the basis of Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered'".

They see "no situation in which a blessing of a couple could be properly and adequately distinguished from a certain degree of approval" and it would inevitably lead to scandal [and worse: blasphemy].
The practice of such "blessings" would confuse the doctrine of marriage and human sexuality. The priests conclude that "such blessings are pastorally and practically inadmissible".

[Stone]

NB: Even Cardinal Müller, who cites Vatican II documents to refute this latest scandal, uses the word blasphemy, which is noticeably absent from the SSPX's soft rebuttal below.

 

Communiqué from the Superior General of the SSPX

SSPX | December 19, 2023


He who loves me keeps – and makes others keepers of – my commandments. [Not sure why the SSPX site does not capitalize words referring to Christ, this should read: He who loves Me keeps – and makes others keepers of – My commandments. - The Catacombs]

We are dismayed [Dismay is a term used when one doesn't get the dinner they ordered, hardly a forceful denunciation by the hierarchy of the SSPX! - The Catacombs] by the declaration Fiducia supplicans of the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the question of blessings for “couples in an irregular situation and couples of the same sex”. Especially since this document was signed by the Pope himself.

Although it purports to avoid any confusion between the blessing of such illegitimate unions and that of a marriage between a man and a woman, this declaration avoids neither confusion nor scandal: not only does it teach that a minister of the Church can call down God’s blessing on sinful unions, but by doing so, it actually reinforces these situations of sin.

The call for such a ‘blessing’ would consist only of asking for these people, in a non-liturgical framework, that “all that is true, good and humanly valuable in their lives and in their relationships be invested, healed and elevated by the presence of the Holy Ghost”.

But to make those who live in a fundamentally flawed union believe that the same could have any positive value is the worst kind of deception, and the most serious lack of charity towards these lost souls. It is wrong to imagine that there is anything good in a situation of public sin, and it is wrong to claim that God can bless couples living in such a situation.

Doubtless, every man can be helped by the prevenient mercy of God, and discover with confidence that he is called to convert in order to receive the salvation that God offers him. And Holy Church never refuses a blessing to sinners who legitimately ask for it: but then, this blessing has no other object than to help the soul to overcome sin in order to live in a state of grace.

Holy Church can therefore bless any individual, even a pagan. But never, in any way, can it bless a union that is sinful in itself, under the pretext of encouraging what is good in it.

When we bless a couple, we do not bless isolated individuals: we necessarily bless the relationship that unites them. However, we cannot redeem an intrinsically bad and scandalous reality.

Such encouragement to proceed pastorally with these blessings leads in practice, inexorably, to the systematic acceptance of situations incompatible with the moral law, whatever else is said.

This unfortunately corresponds to the assertions of Pope Francis, who defines as “superficial and naive” the attitude of those who force people to behave “in a way for which they are not yet mature, or of which they are not capable [1]”.

This idea, which no longer believes in the power of grace and rejects the cross, does not help anyone avoid sin. It replaces true forgiveness and true mercy with a sadly impotent amnesty. And only accelerates the loss of souls and the destruction of Catholic morality.

All the convoluted language and sophistical dressing up of the document of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith cannot hide the elementary and obvious reality of these blessings: they will do nothing more than reinforce these unions in their intrinsically sinful situation, and encourage others to follow them. This will merely be a substitute for Catholic marriage.

In fact, it manifests a profound lack of faith in the supernatural, in the grace of God and the strength of the cross to live in virtue, in purity and in charity, in accordance with the will of God.

It is a naturalistic and defeatist spirit that loosely aligns itself with the spirit of the world, the enemy of God. This is one more surrender and subjugation to the world, on the part of the liberal and modernist hierarchy, which since the Second Vatican Council has been at the service of the Revolution inside and outside the church.

May the Blessed Virgin Mary, guardian of faith and holiness, come to the aid of the Holy Church. May she especially protect those most exposed to this chaos: children, now forced to grow up in a new Babylon, without reference points or a guide that reminds them of the moral law.

Don Davide Pagliarani, Superior General
Menzingen, 19th December 2023


[1] Pope Francis, Interview with the Jesuits at Lisbon, 5th August 2023.

[Stone]

Polish Bishops: People in Same-Sex Relationships ‘Cannot Receive a Blessing’

Complicit Clergy [adapted] | December 21, 2023

December 21, 2023 from LifeSite News by Emily Mangiaracina

The Polish Bishops’ Conference clarified in a statement today that people who are in same-sex relationships “cannot receive a blessing” after the Vatican issued a contrary document approving blessings for same-sex couples.

“Since practicing sexual acts outside marriage, that is, outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open to the transmission of life, is always an offense against the will and wisdom of God expressed in the sixth commandment … people who are in such a relationship cannot receive a blessing. This applies in particular to people in same-sex relationships,” wrote Fr. Leszek Gęsiak, spokesman for the Polish Episcopal Conference, after consulting members of the conference’s Permanent Council.

On Monday, December 18, Pope Francis and Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández issued Fiducia Supplicans, which allows “blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex” in contradiction to the unchangeable Catholic teaching that the Church cannot bless sinful relationships.

The Declaration notably contradicts a Responsum regarding the blessing of same-sex unions published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) on February 22, 2021, which was approved by Pope Francis.

Fr. Gęsiak cited this Responsum, which was issued in response to the Dubiam, “Does the Church have the authority to bless same-sex unions?” The bishops’ conference spokesman noted that the CDF 2021 Responsum gave the answer, “negative.”

Continue reading at LifeSite News

[Stone]

Greek Catholic Ukrainians: “Blessing Cannot Contradict God’s Word”

gloria.tv | December 22, 2023

Francis’ recent homosex propaganda text interprets the meaning of “blessing” only in the Latin Church, not for Eastern Catholics, Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, head of the Greek Catholics in Ukraine and a personal friend of Francis, said in a statement on 22 December.

“According to the liturgical practice of our Church, the blessing of a priest or bishop is a liturgical gesture that cannot be separated from the rest of the content of the liturgical rites and reduced only to the circumstances and needs of private piety.”

Shevchuk adds that the concept of “blessing” means approval and permission. The priest's blessing has a catechetical dimension and “can in no way contradict” the teaching on marriage:

“Pastoral discernment urges us to avoid ambiguous gestures, expressions and concepts that would distort or misrepresent the word of God and the teaching of the Church.”
Picture: Sviatoslav Shevchuk © ugcc.u

[Stone]

Bishop Schneider on Fiducia Supplicans: “A Mockery of the Natural and Revealed Law of God”

The Remnant/Diane Montagna | December 22, 2023

As a strong and steady backlash to the Vatican’s declaration on blessings for same-sex couples continues to flow in from Catholic Bishops around the world, Bishop Athanasius Schneider is referring to the document as “a mockery of the natural and revealed law of God.”

In his first print interview since the December 18 release of  Fiducia supplicans by the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, the auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan contends the declaration “clearly, albeit cunningly, undermines the natural and revealed law of God regarding marriage and the meaning and exercise of human sexuality” and therefore “cannot be the expression of the Church’s authentic Magisterium and forfeits any binding authority.”

His Excellency also argues that the notion that “nothing has changed” with the new declaration, or that it only permits the blessing of individuals in irregular situations, and not the blessing of the irregular (or sinful) situation itself, is “pure sophistry, a lack of intellectual honesty, or ignorance.”

In this exclusive interview, Bishop Schneider discusses how diocesan bishops ought best to respond, what priests can do if asked for a “blessing” from a same-sex couple, and how parents can face difficulties involving their son or daughter with supernatural faith.

He also discusses how the College of Cardinals should respond, what effect the release of Fiducia supplicans might have on the next conclave, and the declaration’s curious assertion that “no further responses should be expected about possible ways to regulate details or practicalities regarding blessings of this type.”

“As anyone paying attention to the situation can see, the debate has only begun,” Bishop Schneider contends. “But perhaps creating a state of permanent debate, generalized uncertainty, and doctrinal and practical anarchy, was precisely its aim.”

Here is our interview with Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

Diane Montagna (DM): Your Excellency, what was your initial impression of Fiducia Supplicans: On the pastoral meaning of blessings, issued on December 18 by the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Manuel Fernández, and approved by Pope Francis?

Athanasius Schneider (AS): This document and its impudent use of pious words struck me as an artifice of Pharisaism and a mockery of the natural and revealed law of God. In applying Fiducia supplicans, St John the Baptist could have imparted a “spontaneous” and “pastoral blessing” to the irregular union of Herod and Herodias.


(DM): As Vatican News noted in its initial report, this is the first time the Congregation (now Dicastery) for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued a Declaration since then-CDF prefect Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger issued Dominus Iesus. What weight or authority does such a document have?

(AS): This document clearly, albeit cunningly, undermines the natural and revealed law of God regarding marriage and the meaning and exercise of human sexuality. Therefore, it cannot be the expression of the Church’s authentic Magisterium and forfeits any binding authority. For the authentic Magisterium “is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully” (Second Vatican Council, Dei Verbum, 10).


(DM): Is it true, as some have suggested, that Fiducia supplicans only allows the blessing of individuals in irregular situations, and not the blessing of the irregular situation itself, and that, in effect, “nothing has changed”?

(AS): This is pure sophistry, a lack of intellectual honesty, or ignorance. The document’s aim, as explicitly stated at the beginning, is to allow “the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples”. There is no need to issue a special magisterial document to bless an individual who truly repents of his or her adulterous infidelity (irregular situation) or homosexual lifestyle.

Would the Church issue a declaration permitting priests to publicly bless organized crime syndicates, prescinding from their criminal activities, to enhance “all that is true, good, and humanly valid” in the members’ lives? Fiducia supplicans is a great deception and goes against basic logic. One can aptly apply to its assertions the words which St. Athanasius used to describe the Semi-Arian bishops of his time: they “eternally wrap themselves in ambiguities and deceitful interpretations” (Ep. ad Episcopos Aegypti et Libyae).


(DM): How do you believe diocesan bishops should respond to Fiducia supplicans?

(AS): True Catholic bishops can only respond in one way: by determinedly rejecting the declaration, as it permits priests to perform an intrinsically immoral act by invoking God’s holy name — through a blessing — upon an objectively sinful situation that is known to the public. The swift response of bishops, who have prohibited their priests from blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples (e.g. the Archbishop of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan, the Head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the Bishops’ Conferences of Poland, Malawi, Zambia Ghana, Cameroon, and Zimbabwe) has been a source of great consolation and encouragement to many priests and Catholic faithful, as is the letter that the Cardinal President of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) sent to presidents of all local bishops’ conferences saying the “ambiguity of this declaration…lends itself to many interpretations and manipulations.”

I regard the statement of the Bishops of Cameroon, which rejects Fiducia supplicans and “formally prohibits” all blessings of same-sex couples in their dioceses, as among the finest statements made thus far.

Every bishop today should keep in mind the words of St. Gregory of Nazianzen, who also lived in a time of almost worldwide doctrinal confusion in the Church: “There is nothing to fear so much as fearing anything more than God and therefore committing betrayal in the service of the truth.” (Or. 6,20) and “We do not keep peace at the expense of truth, making concessions to gain a reputation for tolerance” (Or. 42,13).


(DM): What should a priest do if a same-sex couple in his parish, or in some other context, requests a “blessing”, and what would be a suitable response?

(AS): If a priest were asked for a “blessing” by a same-sex couple, he should gently and clearly explain to them why he cannot do it and admonish them with charity to change their lifestyle and end the sinful union, which offends God’s order of creation, is a cause of public scandal, promotes the godless gender ideology, and puts them in the near and constant occasion of sin. He could offer to meet with each of them separately, and during this meeting he could certainly bless the person, provided he or she is willing to seriously undertake a path of conversion. He might also remind them of these words of Our Lord: “What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?” (Mt. 16:26).


(DM): What if a bishop were to demand that priests in his diocese perform such a “blessing”?

(AS): On one occasion, St Hilary of Poitiers, who lived at a time of great upheaval and confusion in the Church, spoke these inspiring words: “May I always be an exile, if only the truth begins to be preached again!” (De syn., 78). A priest can never bless a same-sex couple; this is against the divine law, and he must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29) — in this case, even the Pope or his Bishop. A priest must be ready to lose everything rather than perform an act that offends God, such as blessing a couple in an objectively sinful union.

It is encouraging to see that groups of priests, as e.g. the British Confraternity of Catholic Clergy or the US Provincial Superior of the Marian Fathers of the Immaculate Conception, have publicly responded to the declaration saying that such “blessings” would inevitably lead to scandal and are “pastorally and practically inadmissible.”


(DM): What should parents do if their son or daughter were to ask them to be present at a “blessing” with their “partner” or threaten to end any relationship with them if they do not accept the “blessing”?

(AS): It is never morally licit to take part in an objectively evil action. Even if the son or daughter were to threaten to cut off all contact with the parents, they cannot yield, but should remember the words of Christ: “Whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Mt. 10:37).


(DM): Section III of the Fiducia supplicans cites Amoris Laetitia n. 304, which laid the foundation for AL 305, containing the controversial footnote 351 to open the door to Holy Communion for divorced Catholics in second “irregular” unions. What do you see as the relationship between this declaration and Amoris Laetitia? Is it simply the natural consequence of it?

(AS): Yes, it is natural consequence of the principle of moral relativism laid down in Amoris Laetitia under the guise of “discernment”. Amoris Laetitia, n. 304 wrongly reduces the ever-valid laws of God (given through the natural law and Divine Revelation) to mere rules and norms, like changeable human laws or “ideals”. By portraying a divine commandment, e.g. the Sixth Commandment, as an “ideal”, Amoris Laetitia abolishes de facto the absolute validity of God’s commandments. Amoris Laetitia may cite St. Thomas Aquinas, but it does so out of context and in a manner that contradicts his teaching on the absolute validity of the Sixth Commandment.


(DM): Fiducia supplicans (citing Amoris Laetitia n. 304) concludes by stating: “What has been said in this Declaration regarding the blessings of same-sex couples is sufficient to guide the prudent and fatherly discernment of ordained ministers in this regard. Thus, beyond the guidance provided above, no further responses should be expected about possible ways to regulate details or practicalities regarding blessings of this type.” Surely, Pope Francis and the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith cannot imagine there won’t be further debate—and pushback. What do you make of this?

(AS): Fiducia supplicans is a façade of sophistry, employs deceptive language, and provides considerable space for multiple interpretations and applications. As anyone paying attention to the situation can see, the debate has only begun. But perhaps creating a state of permanent debate, generalized uncertainty, and doctrinal and practical anarchy, was precisely its aim. St Gregory of Nazianzen’s description of the style and manner of many bishops of his day could aptly be applied here: “They are ambiguous in their faith, sticking to the age rather than the laws of God, swaying back and forth in their speech like ebb and flow” (Carm. 2, 12).


(DM): What effect do you believe this declaration is going to have on the Church and society more broadly?

(AS): The doctrinal and moral confusion and even anarchy that has reigned in society since the French Revolution, has now penetrated the life of the Church. Influential churchmen today are making every effort to adapt the doctrine and practice of the Church to the spirit of the age and whims of the powerful political elite. These words of St Gregory of Nazianzus are remarkably timely: “We see the sweet, beautiful source of our ancient faith unfortunately clouded by salty affluents, because there came into the Church people of wavering faith who think in a way that suits the powerful in the world” (Carm. 2, 11).

The Pope’s public approval of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples causes grave harm to the Church, and to the spiritual good and eternal salvation of souls. Accordingly, the Cardinals are obliged (also for the salvation of Pope Francis’ soul), to admonish him fraternally to rescind Fiducia supplicans.


(DM): What action, if any, do you suggest the Cardinals take in response to the Declaration?

(AS): The principal obligation of the College of the Cardinals is to advise the Roman Pontiff. The Pope’s public approval of blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples causes grave harm to the Church, and to the spiritual good and eternal salvation of souls. Accordingly, the Cardinals are obliged (also for the salvation of Pope Francis’ soul), to admonish him fraternally to rescind Fiducia supplicans. Such an admonition should first be made privately, and if unsuccessful, should be made publicly and without delay. The Cardinals should have no fear in doing so but should instead fear neglecting to do so. In the meantime, the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, ought to be commended for his clear response, on December 21, 2023, to Fiducia supplicans, in which he described the blessing of couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples as an “sacrilegious and blasphemous act.”


(DM): What effect do you believe this declaration might have on the next conclave?

(AS): Considering that Pope Francis has in practice started a process of abolishing the Sixth Commandment of God by means of a deeply cunning document disguised in pious words, a considerable number of the Cardinals, who still preserve a basic sense of supernatural faith in God’s Revelation and the perennial validity of His Commandments, would in the next conclave very likely avoid electing a Pope who, as cardinal, in some way supported the LGBT agenda.


(DM): How would you respond to Catholic clergy and faithful who say they don’t want to be in communion with a Pope who would approve such a document?

(AS): The Pope remains in his office, even if he permits or affirms things which harm the Faith or are ambiguous or erroneous. Even if a pope were to pronounce heresy in his daily magisterium, i.e. outside of ex-cathedra pronouncements, and outside a formal definitive teaching, he would not lose the papacy. There have been rare cases in the Church’s history when popes have done this (e.g., Pope Honorius I and Pope John XXII) and they did not lose their office. Nor was their pontificate declared invalid during their lifetime or after their death. The Church will remain always in the almighty hands of Christ, who will not permit that the gates of hell prevail against Her, for He has founded His Church upon the rock of Peter. The Church, also in this respect, is divine: that she can endure such Popes.


(DM): Your Excellency, is there anything you wish to add?

(AS): God permits these times of great crisis and confusion to purify our faith and our unshakeable hope in Him. In such times, we should avoid overly human solutions, which are often prompted by anger and frustration. We should resist the temptation to adopt the attitude: “Now we will take the situation into our own hands and resolve the problem of this pontificate ourselves”. Such attitudes are worldly and lack a supernatural perspective. We should let ourselves be guided by the words and example of the great Fathers of the Church who, like us, lived in troubled times. May the following words of St Hilary bring us comfort: “In the fourth watch of the night the Lord will come, and he will find the Church exhausted and buffeted about by the spirit of Antichrist and by all the world’s troubles. But the good Lord will immediately speak to them, drive away their fear, and say, ‘It is I,’ banishing their fear of a certain shipwreck with faith at his coming” (In Math. 14, 14).

[Stone]

Nearly 200 Spanish Priests Ask Francis To Annul His Erroneous Document

gloria.tv | January 6, 2024

Nearly 200 Spanish priests and over 7,000 faithful have signed a petition asking Francis to "annul" his pamphlet "Fiducia Supplicans".

They join many bishops who have already expressed their clear position on this "erroneous document" and want to "adhere to the revealed truth gathered in the Bible and in Tradition".

The signatories also denounce that "the [pseudo] blessing of couples in an irregular situation or [concubines] in homosexual unions, even in an extra-liturgical way, is contrary to God's plan".

Priests "cannot accept the recognition of this kind of blessing". As in previous unsuccessful petitions, they make their petition to Francis in a "filial" manner.

[Stone]

Priests, scholars ask Church leaders to request the Pope withdraw Fiducia Supplicans
'Never in the history of the Catholic Church has a document of the Roman Magisterium experienced such a strong rejection’ as Fiducia Supplicans.

Feb 2, 2024
(LifeSiteNews) — Today, the feast of Candlemas, some 90 clergymen, scholars, and authors are publishing a new statement that joins the chorus of those Catholic voices opposed to the papally approved Fiducia Supplicans, a document permitting blessings of homosexual couples and other couples in irregular unions. The signatories address the bishops and cardinals of the Catholic Church, asking them to forbid such blessings in their respective dioceses and to ask Pope Francis to withdraw the document altogether.

The authors point out that there has been a very strong reaction against this document issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and signed by Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, saying that “a relevant part of the world episcopate has practically rejected it, due to its evident break with Scripture and the Tradition of the Church.” Even cardinals such as Cardinal Robert Sarah and Cardinal Gerhard Müller have spoken up against this Vatican document.

The filial appeal argues against the document as follows:

Therefore, the concrete sign that is given with such blessing, in front of the whole world, is that “irregular couples,” extramarital and homosexual alike, according to the Catholic Church, would now be acceptable to God, precisely in the type of union that specifically configures them as couples. Nor does it make sense to separate “couple” from “union,” as card. Fernández has tried to do, since a couple is a couple because of the union that gives existence to it.

In light of the gravity of this new Vatican document, the signatories insist that bishops “definitely” are not to “remain silent, “since the scandal that has already occurred is serious and public, and if it is not stopped, it is bound to be more and more amplified.”

Among the signatories are numerous personalities known to LifeSite readers, such as Father Gerald Murray, Father Robert Sirico, Father Glen Tattersall, Deacon Nick Donnelly, Professor Claudio Pierantoni, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, Professor John Lamont, Professor Roberto de Mattei, Professor Anna Silvas, and Dr. Gerard van den Aardweg. Among journalists, there can be found Philip Lawler, his wife Leila, and Eric Sammons, as well as LifeSite’s own editor-in-chief, John-Henry Westen.

This filial appeal is being published simultaneously in multiple languages on websites such as Infovatikana.com (Spanish), Katholisches.info (German), Sandro Magister (Italian and French), Crisis Magazine, InfoCatólica, Edward Pentin, and more.

Priests, scholars, and public figures are still invited to add their own signature to this filial appeal. They can write to filialappeal@gmail.com by February 15. On February 17, an updated list will be published.

Please see here the full text of the Filial Appeal:

Filial Appeal

To all Cardinals and Bishops of the Catholic Church

Your Eminencies, Your Excellencies:

We, the undersigned Catholic priests, scholars, and authors, write to you on the occasion of the latest document published by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Fiducia Supplicans, which has caused so much scandal in the Church during this last Christmastime.

As is widely known, a relevant part of the world episcopate has practically rejected it, due to its evident break with Scripture and the Tradition of the Church. Twenty episcopal conferences, dozens of individual prelates, and even cardinals invested with the highest positions, such as Cardinal Müller and Cardinal Sarah, have expressed an unequivocal condemnatory judgment. So have also the UK, USA, and Australian Confraternities of Catholic Clergy. Never in the history of the Catholic Church has a document of the Roman Magisterium experienced such a strong rejection.

Indeed, despite its explicit reaffirmation of the traditional doctrine of the Church on Marriage, it turns out that the pastoral practice that the document allows is in direct opposition to it. So much so, that the document has been very favorably received by those few episcopates and prelates that for decades have been openly advocating a change in the doctrine on sexual morality. It is evident that the practical message that this new declaration transmits is much more in line with the program and ideas of those who want to change the doctrine, than with the doctrine itself that the document claims to keep intact.

The document effectively attempts to introduce a separation between doctrine and liturgy on the one hand, and pastoral practice on the other. But this is impossible: in fact, pastoral care, like all action, always presupposes a theory and, therefore, if pastoral care performs something that does not correspond to the doctrine, what is actually being proposed is a different doctrine.

The blessing of a couple (whether “liturgical” or “pastoral”) is, so to speak, a natural sign. The concrete gesture says something naturally, and therefore has a natural, immediate communicative effect, which cannot be artificially changed by the verbal caveats of the document. A blessing as such, in the universal language of humanity, always implies an approval of what is being blessed.

Therefore, the concrete sign that is given with such blessing, in front of the whole world, is that “irregular couples,” extramarital and homosexual alike, according to the Catholic Church, would now be acceptable to God, precisely in the type of union that specifically configures them as couples. Nor does it make sense to separate “couple” from “union,” as card. Fernández has tried to do, since a couple is a couple because of the union that gives existence to it.

The fact that other significant and accidental circumstances such as timing, location, or ornaments such as flowers and wedding clothes are excluded from the act does not change the nature of the act, since the central and essential gesture remains. Furthermore, we all know from experience what such “restrictions” are worth and how long they last.

The fact is that a priest is imparting a blessing on two people who present themselves as a couple, in the sexual sense, and precisely a couple defined by its objectively sinful relationship. Therefore—regardless of the intentions and interpretations of the document, or the explanations the priest may try to give—this action will be the visible and tangible sign of a different doctrine, which contradicts traditional doctrine.

Let us remember that the traditional doctrine on the subject must be considered infallible, since it is unequivocally confirmed by Scripture and Tradition, a universal and uninterrupted tradition, ubique et semper. And it must be remembered that this is a doctrine of natural law, which does not allow for any change.

In practice, the faithful will not even be aware of the subtle theoretical justifications introduced by the Declaration, much less those that were added in the recent clarification on the Declaration. The message that is effectively launched, and that the people of God, and the entire world, will inevitably register and are already registering is that: The Catholic Church has finally evolved, and now accepts homosexual unions, and, more generally, extramarital unions.

This situation fully justifies the decided rejection of so many episcopal conferences, so many prelates, so many scholars, and so many ordinary lay people. In this context, it is definitely not justifiable, especially for a cardinal or a bishop, to remain silent, since the scandal that has already occurred is serious and public, and if it is not stopped, it is bound to be more and more amplified. The threat does not become smaller but more serious, since the error comes from the Roman See, and is destined to scandalize all the faithful, and above all the little ones, the simple faithful who have no way of orienting and defending themselves in this confusion: “Whoever offends one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for him if a donkey’s millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the sea” (Mt 18,6).

The pastors and all those who have some responsibility in the Church have been constituted as sentinels: “If the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the horn, so that the people are not warned, and when the sword comes he kills one of them, he will perish because of him, but I will ask the watchman to account for his blood” (Ez.33,6).

In light of the above we fervently implore you to:

(1) Follow the brave example of so many brother bishops around the world: please forbid immediately the application of this document in your diocese.

(2) Please ask directly the Pope to urgently withdraw this unfortunate document, which is in contradiction with both Scripture and the universal and uninterrupted Tradition of the Church and which clearly produces a serious scandal.

In this difficult moment, a clear word of truth would be the best example of your faithful and courageous dedication to the people of God entrusted to you, a sign of fidelity to the true mission of the Papacy and at the same time the best help for the pope himself, an eloquent “fraternal correction,” which he urgently needs in this last and most critical period of his pontificate and probably of his life. If you act promptly, there is still some hope that he may rescue his pontificate and his own person from a stain that could otherwise weigh on him indelibly, not only in history, but in eternity.


Initial Signatories

Edmund P. Adamus, MA, Secretary to Commission of Inquiry into Discrimination Against Christians, UK

Wolfgang R. Ahrens, PhD Philosophy, Chile

Sergio González Arrieta, MA in Classics and History, Chile

Gil Bailie, Founder and President of the Cornerstone Forum

Dr Heinz-Lothar and Raphaela Barth, Bonn, Germany

Donna F. Bethell, JD, USA

Judie Brown, President, American Life League, Falmouth, Virginia

Dr Dr Sergio R. Castaño, CONICET, Argentina

Paweł Chmielewski, commentator for Polonia Christiana, Warsaw, Poland

Michelle Cretella, MD, USA

Edgardo J. Cruz Ramos, President, Una Voce Puerto Rico

Dr Tomasz Dekert, religious studies scholar, Rajbrot, Poland

Deacon Julian L. Delgado, MD 

Roberto de Mattei, historian, President of Lepanto Foundation, Rome, Italy

Deacon Nick Donnelly, MA, England

C. Joseph Doyle, Executive Director, Catholic Action League of Massachusetts

Rev. Angelo Luigi Fratus, Montfort Missionary, Zambia 

Rev. Stanisław Gibziński, Portsmouth Diocese, England

Corrado Gnerre, professor of theology and founder of Il cammino dei tre sentieri

Maria Guarini, author, Editor of Chiesa e postconcilio

Michael K. Hageböck, headmaster and journalist, Germany

Michael Hichborn, President of the Lepanto Institute, Virginia

Maike Hickson, PhD, Front Royal, VA

Prof. Dr.rer.nat. Dr.rer.pol. Rudolf Hilfer, Stuttgart, Germany

Rev. Joseph Illo, Pastor, Star of the Sea Parish, San Francisco, California

Marek Jurek, former Marshal of the Polish Parlament, Wólka Kozodawska, Poland

Bogusław Kiernicki, President, Saint Benedict Foundation, Dębogóra, Poland

Kacper Kita, publicist, international policy analyst, Poland

Rev. Donald Kloster, Lumen Christi Academy Principal, Pipe Creek, TX

Dr Dr Dr.med. Adorján F. Kovács, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Dr Thaddeus Kozinski, Memoria College 

Gabriele Kuby, sociologist and author, Prien am Chiemsee, Germany

Peter A. Kwasniewski, PhD, Lincoln, Nebraska

Dr John R. T. Lamont, D.Phil.

Philip F. Lawler, author, Editor of Catholic World News

Leila M. Lawler, author

Rev. Joseph Levine, Pastor, Holy Family Catholic Church, Burns, Oregon

Pedro L. Llera, director of educational centers, Gobiendes, Spain

Maria Madise, Managing Director, Voice of the Family, UK

Rev. Patrick H. Magee FLHF, Fall River, MA

Dr Regis Martin, professor of theology, Franciscan University Steubenville

Brian M. McCall, Orpha and Maurice Merrill Chair in Law, University of Oklahoma 

Deacon Eugene McGuirk, Front Royal, Virginia

Dr Justyna Melonowska, psychologist and philosopher, Warszawa, Poland

Rev. Cor Mennen, emeritus lecturer in Canon Law, Seminary of ‘s-Hertogenbosch

Dr Paweł Milcarek, Editor of Christianitas, Brwinów, Poland

Sebastian Morello, PhD, Senior Editor of The European Conservative

Rev. Alfredo Morselli, Italy

Rev. Gerald E. Murray, JCD, Pastor, Church of the Holy Family, New York, NY

Dina Nerozzi, MD, child psychiatrist and endocrinologist, former professor at the University of Rome

Doyen Nguyen, MD, STD, moral theologian, bioethicist, USA/Portugal

Rev. Daniel R. Nolan, FSSP, Littleton, CO 

Deacon Dr Bart Overman, Den Bosch, The Netherlands 

Michael Pakaluk, PhD, professor of ethics and social philosophy, Washington, DC

Gottfried Paschke, theologian, retired professor of mathematics, Bad Homburg, Germany

Paolo Pasqualucci, retired Professor of Philososophy, Faculty of Law, Perugia, Italy

Rod Pead, Editor, Christian Order, UK 

Dr Claudio Pierantoni, PhD History of Christianism, PhD Philosophy, Chile 

Rev. John A. Perricone, PhD, adjunct professor of philosophy, Iona College in New Rochelle, New York

Prof. Thomas Pink, emeritus professor of philosophy, King’s College, London

Rev. Andrew Pinsent, MA, Dphil, PhB, STB, PhL, PhD, FRSA, University of Oxford, UK

Tomasz Rowiński, historian of ideas, Editor of Christianitas, Grodzisk Mazowiecki, Poland

Anna Rist, retired professor of classics, Toronto, Canada

John Rist, PhD, retired professor of classics and early Chrisitian philosophy and theology

Luis Román, theologian and Catholic commentator, Florida

Jesse Romero, Catholic apologist, evangelist, author, Queen Creek, Arizona.

Eric Sammons, Editor, Crisis Magazine

Dr César Félix Sánchez Martínez, professor of philosophy, Universidad Nacional de San Agustín, Perú

Dr Tommaso Scandroglio, author, Italy

Wolfram Schrems, Mag. theol., Mag. phil., catechist, pro-life activist, Vienna, Austria

Dr Anna Silvas, specialist in Greek Fathers, retired adjunct, UNE, Australia

Rev. Robert Sirico, President, St. John Henry Newman Institute, Grand Rapids, Michigan

Dr Michael Sirilla, Professor of Theology, Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio

John Smeaton, Co-founder of Voice of the Family, UK

Rev. Tam X. Tran, S.T.L., Pastor of Our Lady of Vietnam Catholic Church, Silver Spring, Maryland

Rev. Glen Tattersall, Pastor of St. John Newman Parish, Melbourne, Australia

Inge M. Thürkauf, actress, journalist, pro-family public speaker, Germany

José Antonio Ureta, author, Paris, France

Aldo Maria Valli, writer, Rome, Italy

Dr Gerard van den Aardweg, author, psychologist and psychotherapist, The Netherlands

Christine de Marcellus Vollmer,  president of PROVIVE, ALAFA, Former Member of PAL, Venezuela.

Mathias von Gersdorff, author and pro-life activist, Frankfurt, Germany

Prof. Dr Berthold Wald, retired professor of philosophy, Münster, Germany

Dr Thomas Ward, President, John Paul II Academy of Human Life and the Family

Leonard P. Wessell, Dr.Phil., PhD, emeritus professor, German Studies, University of Colorado

John-Henry Westen, Co-founder and Editor-in-chief, LifeSiteNews

Elizabeth D. Wickham, PhD, Executive Director, Lifetree.org, Raleigh, North Carolina

Dr Timothy Williams, professor of French, Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio

Chilton Williamson, writer, former editor at National Review and Chronicles, Laramie, Wyoming

Dr Hubert Windisch, priest, retired professor of pastoral theology, Burglengenfeld, Germany

Deacon Timothy Woods, Huntington, Indiana

Elizabeth F. Yore, Esq., Founder of Yore Children, Chicago, Illinois

ATTENTION: Pastors, clergy, scholars, professors, doctors, and other qualified individuals may submit their signatures to this list in the next two weeks. Please provide your name, qualifications, position, and location by February 15th, to Thomasfilialappeal@gmail.com. A definitive list of cumulative signatories will then be published on February 17th.

READ: Leading Vatican theologian says Fiducia Supplicans is not part of the ‘authentic Magisterium’