Vatican adamant in denouncing same-sex unions - Latest Updates

Trending

Tuesday, March 16, 2021

Vatican adamant in denouncing same-sex unions

In a combative statement approved by Pope Francis, the Vatican affirmed that would not bless same-sex unions. 

The statement which was issued on Monday continues to broaden the gap between the church and the LGBTQ community.

The Holy See described same-sex unions as sinful, arguing that they “cannot be recognized as objectively ordered” to God’s plans. 

According to the Vatican, a same-sex union is a choice. 

Its top doctrinal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, wrote in the statement, “The blessing of homosexual unions cannot be considered licit. God does not and cannot bless sin.”

The note was approved by Pope Francis, who has frequently been praised for his welcoming tone towards LGBTQ people both within and outside the Church. 

Millions of gay and lesbian Catholics around the world are bound to be disappointed by the decision as some Catholics had hoped the institution would modernize its approach to homosexuality.

According to the Vatican's statement, gays and lesbians, as individuals, may receive a blessing if they live according to Church teaching.

“The negative judgment on the blessing of unions of persons of the same sex does not imply a judgment on persons," the Vatican emphasized in a commentary provided with the Monday statement. 

Questions from pastors and the faithful on the matter instigated the response. 

Last year when Pope Francis gave an interview for a documentary, it seemed that he had advocated for civil union laws for same-sex couples. 

“Homosexual people have a right to be in a family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out or be made miserable over it,” the Pope said, adding: “What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered,” he noted. 

However, the Vatican quickly retreated from Pope's remarks, arguing that they had been taken out of context and did not indicate a change in doctrine.

No comments:

Post a Comment