... The Vatican said on Monday in a landmark ruling approved by Pope Francis that Roman Catholic priests can administer blessings to same-sex couples as long as they are not part of regular Church rituals or liturgies.

... A document from the Vatican's doctrinal office said such blessings would not legitimise irregular situations but be a sign that God welcomes all...

...It should in no way be confused with the sacrament of heterosexual marriage...

This is gaywashing at best, but it still sounds like blatant homophobia.

[–] flooppoolf@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I hate the Catholic Church as an organization but have always wanted to get married inside a traditional Mexican Catholic Church as they are some of the most beautiful works of art created and have years of history embedded into their very walls.

I’m sure many house evils unspoken, but many have served their community in spectacular ways. (I am particularly speaking of rural and coastal Mexico)

This makes it a little closer for those gay boys that still hold the church close to them, to be a little more part of it. It doesn’t really affect the gay boys that don’t participate. I think it’s cool that they’ve acknowledged gay marriage and that they’re wishing the best for the couples.

[–] SHamblingSHapes@lemmy.one 6 points 11 months ago

No change to "not a sin to be gay, it is a sin to have gay sex". Add on that gay couples are now officially "irregular".

Wow, great strides there. (👈sarcasm)

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

The Catholics are going to be in a difficult place as gayness becomes more normal. It's quickly becoming self-evident that homosexual relationships are not immoral at all. That's probably going to accelerate over the next few decades.

So the church should probably do more than just this to accept gay people, but they can't. Catholic rulings set by ecumenical councils or by the pope (in such a way as to invoke papal infallibility) can't be changed. It's like if the US constitution could only be amended if the amendments didn't contradict or repeal any existing text.

So if the church says "no homo, and that's final," then they can't go back and change it to "just a little homo, as a treat." It's hard to find an exact citation, but I'm pretty sure they've already said "no homo" enough to make it official, so there's no going back from that. Unless they also retract infallibility.