Concerning the Declaration “Fiducia supplicans” (Supplicating trust)
Original text in Croatian, posted 9. January 2024
French translation
German translation
Italian translation
The declaration Fiducia supplicans on the pastoral meaning of blessings was published by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith on 18 December 2023. It is the first statement by the same institution after the declaration Dominus Iesus on the unicity and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Church, published on 6 August 2000.
The Creator’s blessing
How was it from the beginning?
»God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it’« (Genesis 1:27-28).
From this biblical sentence one can discern the action and intention of God:
Firstly, in the beginning God created mankind, as male and female, in his own image, breathing into them a soul with reason and free will.
Secondly, he blessed them as a complementary married couple with a specific purpose in life.
Thirdly, the purpose is fruitfulness, the reproduction of humankind, populating and subjecting the land under their control with the awareness that it is God’s land.
Fourthly, everything that is contrary to that creative plan, is not the image of God, has no purpose and goal of God and therefore does not have God’s blessing either.
What happened over time?
Sodomy
The name comes from Sodom, which with Gomorrah is connected, are neighbouring cities where the Dead Sea is found today, located between Israel, Palestine and Jordan. These cities are an example of sexual perversion called sodomy. The Bible describes their wickedness and their destruction by fiery sulphur rain with the story of Abraham’s cousin Lot and his family: his wife and two daughters, and how he had already “wiped out from the earth” through the flood, all the people of that time in that part of the world, except the righteous Noah, because every thought in man’s mind was “only evil” (Genesis 6:5-7), just as he scattered the people of the Babylonian city who wanted to reach the sky with a tower through their arrogance (Genesis 11:1-8).
Old Testament
Sodomy is considered an ungodly shame = nefandum flagitium, in moral theology. Why? Because Sodom allowed every kind of sin against human nature as created, legislated, and blessed by God.
According to the oral and written traditions that reached the final redaction of the Pentateuch of Moses, we read in Genesis: “Now the inhabitants of Sodom were very wicked in the sins they committed against the Lord” (13:13). What exactly the sin of the Sodomites consisted of is not described here, but from this wording: “very wicked”, it can obviously be concluded that there are no sins that they did not commit against God’s law and order, that is, against human nature or common sense as works of God. It’s as if it were enough to say “Sodom” and you would immediately know what’s going on.
In the same book of Genesis, God, who appears with two angels in human form, tells Abraham: “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great, and their sin so grave” (18:20). However, it has not yet been determined precisely what made the sin of Sodom “so grave”. Abraham dares to intercede with God for the Sodomites starting from the number fifty downwards. Each time God promises him that he will not destroy Sodom if there are enough inhabitants who are not infected with the Sodom virus. And if Abraham had gone lower than ten, it is likely that the Lord would have mercifully responded to Abraham’s request, for the sake of his friend Abraham. But there were not even ten of them, only Lot’s family of four.
The book of Genesis in chapter 19 reveals the specific crime and punishment of Sodom. When the two mentioned angels came before Sodom, they found Lot at the entrance to the city, and he hosted them in his house.
Then »all the townsmen of Sodom, both young and old – all the people to the last man – closed in on the house. They called to Lot and said to him: ‘Where are the men who came to your house tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have intimacies with them’« (Genesis 19:4-5).
Here, the sinful practice of the Sodomites is explicitly spoken of, that men sin against men in a carnal, unnatural way. The people of Sodom would have even abused two angels of God in their Sodomic perversions.
The book of Leviticus, dating from the 13th century B.C., strictly prohibits:
»You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination« (18:22).
This same Old Testament Jewish Law, further on prescribes:
»If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives« (Lev 20:13).
And here is the punishment on the citizens of Sodom. After Lot was saved,
the Lord »rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah [from the Lord out of heaven]. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil« (Genesis 19:24-25).
The sin against human nature shown in these four mentioned places consists in this:
– that the inhabitants of Sodom were “very wicked”, “themselves sinners against the Lord”, i.e. against his creation, moral order and law;
– that their sin is “so grave”, i.e. unbearable, which kills not only the soul, but also the body;
– that such a sin is a true “abomination”, i.e. the abomination of desolation in the realm of life; and
– that such a sin is such a “heinous act” that deserves the death penalty, moreover, all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were also destroyed. This is similar to when a man dies infected by an epidemic, and all his clothes and house are burned!
“The precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is clear, enlightening the eyes” (Ps 19:8). Human iniquity only weakens the soul and makes the ignorant go mad!
What this is about therefore, are terrible crimes against human nature as created and blessed by God and ordained by him to be respected and served, while not going against it. God created and determined humankind as male and female, he endowed them with the natural ability to give birth and raise children as complementary beings, to maintain life on earth. And over time, people turned God’s order upside down and decided on their own that man with man, woman with woman, sin and annul God’s creative project, their task and associated blessing. God ordained that a woman give birth and as a mother lovingly raise her children, but some people have turned God’s order upside down and promote as few births as possible or that they themselves will eugenically determine how many will be born and which ones will be the right ones.
New Testament
In his inaugural sermon in Galilee, the first words spoken by the Lord Jesus were: “Repent and believe in the Gospel!” (Mk 1:15). The basic message of Jesus is: conversion from all evil that destroys, and complete faith in the Gospel that saves! That is the good news of Jesus.
The Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans mentions unnatural passions that have been activated both among men and among women:
»Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity« (Romans 1:26-27).
The inspired apostle declares that “practicing homosexuals” will not see the kingdom of God:
»Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God« (1 Cor 6:9-10).
In the same list, with regard to the violation of God’s order, Paul includes both “adulterers” and “robbers”! These “practicing homosexuals” are not only defilers of boys.
In these two places, the apostle uses the most severe terms for these abuses of both male and female persons: who substitute natural communion with unnatural deviation. Not only do perverts and sodomites not receive God’s blessing, but also they will not inherit the kingdom of God. Can there be any greater penalty?
Patristic era
Numerous Church fathers in their commentaries on the mentioned biblical texts refer to the wickedness of Sodom and their punishments. Here are just two examples:
Tertullian says: »But all the other frenzies of passions – impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes – beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not offenses, but monstrosities«.[1]
Augustine likewise says: »Similarly, offenses against nature are everywhere and at all times to be held in detestation and should be punished. Such offenses, for example, were those of the Sodomites; and, even if all nations should commit them, they would all be judged guilty of the same crime by the divine law, which has not made men so that they should ever abuse one another in that way«.[2]
Selected Teachings and Interpretations
The Jesuits of the 17th century. In 1612, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, Claudio Acquaviva (1543-1615), (who was elected general of the Order in 1581 and served as superior for 34 years until his death), condemned the moral position that held that some light pleasure in deliberately sought sexual desires does not involve mortal sin. Not only did he oblige the Jesuits to obey that teaching under the threat of excommunication, but he imposed on them the obligation to reveal the names of those Jesuits who violated even the spirit of the decree.[3] The decision was sealed then, that no sin against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments had lightness or smallness of matter – parvitas materiae, especially not in the area of sodomy. One should notice that such a rigorous view did not apply to any other commandment of God.
The Second Vatican Council does not explicitly mention the words: homosexuality or same sex in any of its documents.
The Declaration Persona humana, on some issues of sexual ethics, published in 1975 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and signed by the Prefect Card. Franjo Šeper and the Secretary Archbishop Jérôme Hammer, previously “approved and confirmed” by Pope Paul VI, states:
»… according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God«.[4]
When man does not keep God’s law, then he is condemned to keep man’s unlawful law.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, of 1992, with the introductory apostolic constitution Fidei depositum of Pope John Paul II, prepared under the leadership of the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Card. Joseph Ratzinger, states that the “sin of Sodom” is among the five sins that cry out to heaven.[5] The Catechism mentions homosexuality in several places, usually with these qualifications:
that same-sex relationships cannot be approved under any circumstances[6];
that these are grave sins[7];
that homosexual persons, who have an intrinsically disordered tendency, can come closer to Christian perfection through their efforts, struggle, prayer, and sacraments,[8] and that in this sense the Church should help them to free them from their sinful state.
Veritatis splendor, of 1993, the encyclical of Pope John Paul II, mentions the concept of homosexuality only once:
»…on the basis of a naturalistic understanding of the sexual act that contraception, direct sterilization, autoeroticism, pre-marital sexual relations, homosexual relations and artificial insemination were condemned as morally unacceptable«.[9]
The “naturalistic” concept is that strange theological understanding according to which some variable human behaviors are attributed an invariable character. This is what some “Catholic” theologians say that the Catholic Church teaches, according to the encyclical! “They say that man, as a rational being, not only can, but actually should freely determine the meaning of his behavior”. He should be his own moral standard, regardless of God’s law!
Quaesitum – Responsum. To the Question: “Does the Church have the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same-sex?” – The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2021 provided a Response, signed by the Prefect, Card. Luis Ladaria, a Jesuit, and the Secretary, Archbishop Giacomo Morandi, who informed and received authorization its publishing by Pope Francis, which proclaims this traditional truth:
»…the Church does not have, and cannot have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex«.[10]
The definition is understandable and unquestionable, it does not need new clarifications and responses, unless the terms: “power”, “blessing” and “same-sex unions” mean something completely different.
The Belgian bishops have been practicing some “blessings” of homosexual communities for years, as reported by Bishop Johann Bony of Antwerp, a delegate to the 5th General Assembly of the Synod, which was held in Frankfurt from March 9th to 11th, 2023. The bishop said that the Belgian bishops were previously on an official visit to the Vatican from November 21st to 26th, 2022, and that the Pope, during their audience of November 25th, approved the “blessing of homosexual couples” if all the bishops agreed with it. All 11 Belgian bishops agree with this, says the prelate of Antwerp, with the exception that the French-speaking bishops have the same texts in French and not in Flemish.[11]
Fiducia supplicans, of 2023. We now come to the Declaration on the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings, which without prior consultation with the cardinals and bishops who are members of the Dicastery, was compiled by the new head of the Doctrine of the Faith, Card. Victor Manuel Fernandez, and co-signed by the Secretary, Mons. Armando Matteo, upon returning Ex audientia from Pope Francis on December 18th, and subsequently published.
In a strict liturgical sense, blessings require that what is being blessed be in accordance with the will of God as expressed in the teachings of the Church.[12] The Lord Jesus, on leaving this world, raised his hands and blessed his disciples. And while he was blessing them, he parted from them and was taken up to heaven. The disciples returned to Jerusalem and blessed God all the time in the Temple (Cf. Lk 24:50-53). Here, Jesus gives his divine blessing to the apostles in a descending sense and the apostles in an ascending sense bless God, i.e. they praise him, thank him for all the work of redemption.[13]
Under subtitle III of the Declaration, numbers 31 to 41 deal with “Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex”. The statement tries in every way to distinguish the difference between the sacramental blessing of a married couple that follows the Church formula and ceremony, from a “blessing” of an irregular or same-sex “couple” that does not follow any formula or ceremony. In other words, a “pastoral”, informal, unformulated, non-ritual, spontaneous, accidental, incidental, momentary “blessing” differs from a “liturgical” sacramental, ritual, formulated, prescribed blessing. The key to the theme is ambiguous in that such irregular “couples” and same-sex “couples” are given a “blessing” in a “church” context and by an ordained official of the “church”. The term “couple” is mentioned as if dealing with a legal “couple”, even if two signs of the cross were made on two persons. And the same words “blessing” and “ordained minister” are attributed to two different realities, with different meanings.
We all know that in no area of life does there exist more ambiguity, various allusions, double-meanings, deliberate intrusions, double standards, multi-layered concepts, double messages than in the area of sexuality, referring to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments of God, in conversations, the media, films and even in caricatures. The evangelists being serious men did not write down any ambiguous jokes about Jesus, and it can be assumed that some may have been conjured up by the corrupt Pharisees and Sadducees. Why do we need to introduce confusion and at the same time say: there is confusion here, watch out for confusion. We highlight here only a thought from the Statement:
»For this reason, one should neither provide for nor promote a ritual for the blessings of couples in an irregular situation. At the same time, one should not prevent or prohibit the Church’s closeness to people in every situation in which they might seek God’s help through a simple blessing. In a brief prayer preceding this spontaneous blessing, the ordained minister could ask that the individuals have peace, health, a spirit of patience, dialogue, and mutual assistance – but also God’s light and strength to be able to fulfil his will completely«.[14]
Let’s try to break down the given point:
Firstly, everything is written in the conditional form, hence, in no way obligatory.
Secondly, it should neither provide nor promote a “ceremonial blessings of couples” in irregular situations. Here then arises an even greater optionality and at the same time a contradiction in the phrase “ritual for the blessing of couples”. The contradiction is now expanding.
Thirdly, the Church should not be prevented or forbidden to approach them with an ordained minister to pray for peace, health, the spirit of patience, dialogue, “mutual assistance”.
Fourthly, prayers are to be made for God’s light and strength so that these “couples” can completely fulfil the will of God and accompany them as individuals with a “spontaneous blessing” of a few seconds, while they remain unrepentant and unconverted “couples” in adulterous or Sodomic lawlessness.
A rational believer would then ask: if everything is in the conditional form, and if the Church should neither promote nor not promote, the “rite” of “blessing” of such “couples”, and the Church should neither prohibit nor forbid closeness through an “ordained” minister, how can we hope that these “couples” in irregular situations of persistent adultery or persistent same-sex relationships will completely fulfil the will of God without any conditions and signs of repentance on their part and a departure from unnatural lawlessness and sin?
In no. 41, the Declaration says that apart from the indications presented, no other answers should be expected from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith of possible ways to standardize details or on practical aspects with regard to blessings of this kind.
However, as quickly as two weeks later, after a flood of declarations started appearing from individual Bishops’ Conferences and other church organizations and persons, the need to issue a special press release became apparent.
The Press Release concerning the reception of Fiducia supplicans, 4 January 2024. The Dicastery here introduces the practice of interpreting its Declaration with a new document, a Press Release, published on 4 January 2024, i.e., 16 days after the Declaration, providing a catechesis on the pastoral blessing of irregular and same-sex couples. Why? Because:
– a certain number of Bishops’ Conferences of the world, each in its own way, refused to accept the pastoral “blessing” of adulterous and homosexual “couples”;
– an even greater number of individual cardinals and bishops, each in their own way, rationally and morally criticized individual points of the Declaration;
– a considerable number of individual priests, monks, and lay persons, each in their own way, distanced themselves from the Declaration, and
– several Catholic associations declared that they are not in favour of such a Declaration.[15] From all the above-mentioned criticisms, an enduring question arises: Who is seeking this kind of confusion in the Church of God with its existing bi-millennial doctrinal clarity? That of mixing the unity of the Church with schism? Orthodoxy with heresy? Healthy biblical and traditional nourishment with that which is unnecessary?
A thought regarding the content and time of the “blessing” from the Press Release of the Dicastery should be highlighted:
»In this case, the priest can recite a simple prayer like this: ‘Lord, look at these children of yours, grant them health, work, peace and mutual help. Free them from everything that contradicts your Gospel and allow them to live according to your will. Amen’. Then it concludes with the sign of the cross on each of the two persons. We are talking about something that lasts about 10 or 15 seconds. Does it make sense to deny these kinds of blessings to these two people who ask for them?«[16] asks the Cardinal Prefect together with the Secretary, this time with no Ex audientia.
Does this mean:
Firstly, when a stable “sodomic couple” comes to a priest and confidently asks him (fiducia supplicans) for a “blessing”, and the priest prays the above-formulated prayer individually over one and the other homosexual to help each other, for Jesus to free them from everything that contradicts the Gospel, that they live according to God’s will, and yet they persistently continue to live as a “sodomic couple”?
Secondly, if a priest makes the sign of the cross or “blessing” over homosexuals individually, who do not recognize an unnatural sin as a sin and thus sin against the Holy Spirit, without repenting and without converting, is not the priest then exposed to the general opinion that he is “blessing” the sinful union of same-sex persons?
Thirdly, if the priest finishes it all quickly, in 10-15 seconds according to the above prayer formula, can such a spontaneous “blessing” which is not a blessing, but is a blessing, be denied to individuals who live in an unnatural state of sin? All the recommendations of the Press Release are based on the principle of contradiction, because from the moment of creation and then redemption up until the present times, such a simple and spontaneous “blessing” of an irregular adulterous “couple” and a same-sex “couple” has always been considered a sacrilegious, sinful counterattack to God’s blessing of the first created married couple, as male and female (Genesis 1:28), for the sake of bearing children and mutually assisting each other in life.
Conclusion
Pastor aeternus, the dogmatic constitution on the Church of Christ of the First Vatican Council, in 1870, precisely determines the ministry of Peter’s successors:
»For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that they might disclose a new doctrine by his revelation, but rather, that, with his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully explain the revelation or deposit of faith that was handed down through the Apostles«.[17]
Therefore, we believe that the Bishop of Rome, the Supreme Pontiff, keeps before his eyes the thought that the Lord Jesus said to Peter at the Last Supper – and through Peter to his successors – Peter, “I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers!” (Luke 22:32). In faith, truth and charity.
We believe that the Holy Father loves Jesus more than others, as the Lord asks and expects from Peter (John 21:15-17), and from his successors. And at the same time, the resurrected Jesus commands Peter every time to feed his lambs and sheep, i.e. to be the shepherd of Jesus’ flock.
We believe that the Holy Father can invalidate the Declaration of 18 December 2023 and the Press Release of 4 January 2024; documents that have been convincingly demonstrated in these last three weeks – as both legally and liturgically, morally and dogmatically – at the world church level, imbued with ambiguity, double-meanings and contradictions, which has never been a characteristic of the teachings of the Catholic Church.
We believe that the Holy Father, through the action of the Holy Spirit, will find a way to “religiously guard and faithfully present the revelation, or deposit of faith, received from the apostles”, and resolutely invalidate the mentioned documents, because “from the beginning it was not so” (Mt 19:8), nor have there been throughout the entire history of the Catholic Church until the 21st century, ambiguous documents, filled with such juggling between natural legal marriage and irregular “couples” and unnatural same-sex unions. The word of the Apostle remains: “God is not mocked” (Gal 6:7).
[1] Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 220), Christian author, De Pudicitia – On modesty, 4: Reliquas autem libidinum furias impias et in corpora et in sexus ultra iura naturae non modo limine, verum omni ecclesiae tecto submovemus, quia non sunt delicta, sed monstra.
[2] St. Augustine (354 – 430), Doctor of the Church, Confessiones – Confessions, III,8,15: Itaque flagitia quae sunt contra naturam, ubique ac semper detestanda atque punienda sunt, qualia Sodomitarum fuerunt. Quae si omnes gentes facerent, eodem criminis reatu divina lege tenerentur, quae non sic fecit homines ut se illo uterentur modo.
[3] Patrick Boyle (1932 – 2022), American Jesuit, Parvitas Materiae in Sexto in Contemporary Catholic Thought (Lanham, University Press of America, 1987), pp. 14-16. The General’s decree was destined for the Jesuit Order but it had an influence on a wider group of faithful thanks to the Jesuit professors.
[4] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Persona humana – The Human Person, Declaration of 29 December 1975., N. 8. All of N. 8 is dedicated to the problem of homosexuality, which is mentioned in 7 places:
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_it.html
[5] The Catechism of the Catholic Church, N. 1867. The remaining “sins that cry to heaven”: The blood of Abel, The cry of the people oppressed in Egypt, The cry of the foreigner, The widow, and the orphan, injustice to the wage earner.
[6] CCC, N. 2357.
[7] CCC, N. 2396
[8] CCC, N. 2358-2359.
[9] John Paul II, The Splendor of the Truth – An Encyclical written only to the brothers in the episcopate, 6 August 1993, N. 47.
[10] The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Responsum – Response, 22 February 2021. Published 15 March 2021.
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2021/03/15/0157/00330.html#ita
[11] See the following web-link which provides other links: https://lanuovabq.it/it/benedizioni-gay-i-vescovi-si-ribellano-e-guerra-delle-pastorali
[12] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Fiducia supplicans [FS] – Supplicant Trust, Declaration, 18 December 2023., N. 9. The Declaration contains 45 numbers, 31 notes of which 20 refer to the teachings of Pope Francis.
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/231218b.html
[13] FS, N. 18.
[14] FS, N. 38.
[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_opponents_of_Fiducia_supplicans
[16] Press Release concerning the reception of Fiducia supplicans, 4 January 2024., N. 5 –
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20240104_comunicato-fiducia-supplicans_en.html
[17] DS, br. 3070. Neque enim Petri successoribus Spiritus Sanctus promissus est, ut eo revelante novam doctrinam patefacerent, sed ut, eo assistente, traditam per Apostolos revelationem seu fidei depositum sancte custodirent et fideliter exponerent.
