this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
430 points (100.0% liked)

World News

48356 readers
2118 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Catholic Church's approval of blessings of couples in same-sex relationships "will remain" under Pope Leo XIV, the head of the Vatican's doctrine office told an Italian reporter in a brief interview.

Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández made the statement in response to a question from a journalist for the Rome-based daily Il Messaggero as he left the Holy See Press Office on July 3.

Fernández's remarks are the clearest indication to date since Pope Leo's election of a likely continuation of Pope Francis' gay-blessings declaration. However, the impromptu interview falls short of an explicit, official statement from the Vatican.

Under Francis, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in December 2023 released a document entitled "Fiducia Supplicans: On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings," which opened the door to church blessings for couples in "irregular" situations, including same-sex relationships.

The document, signed by Fernández and his deputy Msgr. Armando Matteo, and approved by Pope Francis, stressed that such blessings could not take the form of a liturgical rite, and did not imply formal approval of "irregular" unions.

The blessings document generated considerable conservative backlash, and some critics of the late Pope Francis had expressed hope that Pope Leo would rescind or ignore it.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago

Gaymen 🙏

[–] [email protected] 42 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

Let us gay.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The blessings document generated considerable conservative backlash, and some critics of the late Pope Francis had expressed hope that Pope Leo would rescind or ignore it.

Conservatives as always doing a fantasticdemonstrating why they should be chronodeported 2 millennia back.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Are the American conservatives even following Vatican? Who gives a fuck about them? That's like British being upset about whatever pope says.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Jokes on them. I don’t even want to go to heaven unless I can suck a bag of dicks on the other side of the gates.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Sucking Dick Through The Pearly Gates would be a great name for an autobiography if you want to use it

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Gloryhole, gloryhole, hallelujah!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Or a good album title

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Depending on your interpretation of the Bible, you're at least minimum guaranteed marriage to Jesus. Revelations 19

But from my lay perspective there is not a passage in the Bible that says gay sex is worse than eating shellfish so do with that what you will. The thing Jesus actually mentions several times explicitly was adultery aka being unfaithful as in cheating. So as long as its consensual and your not wrecking houses.....

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Isn't Jesus already married to every Nun?

Also, just to note, there is a whole lot of talk about "sexual immorality"in the Bible, which is nearly universally translated to mean "homosexuality".

What the fuck does "sexual immorality" even mean? The only thing I can think of would be rape, but I sincerely doubt that was the intention.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Rape incest and pedophilia are the immoralities as written out in the Bible. Also lust to an extent.

Also, technically yes, all the nuns who have taken vows of Chastity are married to the church as are the pastors...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Rape, incest and pedophilia

Oh so kind of like when Lot's daughters raped him?

How did humanity arise from Adam and Eve without incest?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The Bible isn't always meant to be taken literally good luck trying to explain that to a Baptist though. (Jesus almost exclusively spoke in metaphors AKA parables ) The first part of Genesis is describing how early hominids became humans. Personally I like the idea that God is more of a 4th dimensional entity that time does not constrain in any form. Basically a mad scientist using what we call evolution to slowly shape and change his petri dish of a planet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Isn't it cool how you can just decide which parts are real and which ones aren't?

Edit: Also, it's kind of hard to call Adam and Eve "allegory" or whatever, when there's massive sections of the Old Testament dedicated to outlining their fucking bloodline...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Gotta get a pearl necklace to match the pearly gates!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

(Th)I(s) would kill a Victorian child.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago (5 children)

You will be shocked to learn that gays don't need a 'blessing' or the 'church'. We are quite happy (gay!!) without any of that.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There are gay members of the catholic church who would disagree with you. This is important to them.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There are also us gays who aren't members of the church, but really wish we could be (but won't, because of gestures wildly at the church with frantic, panicked eyes)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I don't understand, why would you want to be part of a group you trust so little?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Childhood indoctrination and abuse leading to guilt.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

I'm going to speak for them since I haven't seen a reply, so this is just an assumption and should be taken as such until they reply. But, there's plenty of positive aspects of local churches outside of faith. Many churches run community-based philanthropy efforts and provide a gathering space for members and nonmembers which is especially helpful in locations that don't have much in the way of things to do or other places to gather. Humans are social creatures and whether gay or not, the church is a large community.

Hell, no one trusts the Internet, but still comes back to participate.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

In almost every case it's because they were indoctrinated at an early age. Feels like child abuse to me, but since the vast majority of people are Christians in most countries, it's considered a-okay.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

why would you want to be if you are not already? honest question

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Spiritual tradition, for starters. I also feel deep connection to liturgical traditions, and there's a lot besides that I like about the RCC. I like that, generally, there's someone at the church at any given time, that the building doesn't stand empty for all but a few hours once per week. That I could go, and light a candle, and sit in contemplation, or speak with a priest. I like confession, I like a lot about the way the RCC functions. I just dislike the scandals, the bigotry, the, frankly, hatefulness that the church has proudly warn over the centuries. A big reason why I'm an Episcopalian is that it's progressive, while also being liturgical. There are more progressive churches like the MCC, but they're more congregational and remind me too much of the baptist churches I grew up in.

While it's probably not important for a lot of people, for me, having that line of demarcation between the sacred and the secular, the robes and the chalices and the incense and bells, the line that says "this is a sacred space, one for meditation, contemplation, prayer" is important. It allows me to leave behind a certain mindset and enter a new one. Regardless of our ideas behind religion and spirituality, humans have been doing ritual for thousands, and potentially millions, of years. There's a power behind it, even if it's just in our heads. Nobody in Christendom does ritual quite like the Catholics. The episcopalians are good at it, but only on Sunday morning, and as much as I love the tradition, it lacks a lot of the spiritual tradition, like intercession of saints and a Marian ideology that I also crave. Anglocatholics are pretty good for that, but they tend to be conservative and anti gay, and most of them have moved to the ACNA, a schismatic group founded against the ordination of women and gay men.

There's a lot to dislike about the RCC, and organized religion in general. I disagree with a huge chunk of it. The prohibition against marriage for priests has lead to so many problems. There's too much to list, from the way nuns are treated, the prohibitions against birth control, LGBTQ+ issues, abortion, surrogacy... There's a lot wrong with the institution. But I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater. It'll never happen, but I dream of a day when there's major reform within the Church.

I just want a hyper progressive RCC with a married trans woman pope :(

Edit to add:

Feel a bit like I've misrepresented myself, so to clarify: I'm an Episcopalian, but I'm also a nondualist Advaitin (Hindu). I am not your average viewer or really anyone's target audience, so don't extrapolate my comments to the larger religious/gay community. Haha.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm an Episcopalian, but I'm also a nondualist Advaitin (Hindu).

I'm no expert on Hinduism, so maybe I'm completely wrong here, but I feel like those two things are in direct conflict with one another.

You're breaking like 2 or 3 of the 10 commandments, right off the bat. Yahweh is very jealous.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Not really. There are nondualist traditions within Christianity. Meister Eckhart being the most well known. Nonduality isn't the worshipping of other gods before Yahweh, it's the belief that all that exists is within God. Panentheism isn't incompatible with Christianity, it's just a super niche trend within it, but with lots of historical precedent, even within large Christian organizations like the RCC. They never excommunicated Eckhart, and while he was controversial during his life, his thoughts on nonduality effectively forced the church to admit that it was not heresy.

Going beyond the RCC and into protestantism there is no unifying body to declare what is and isn't allowed, so basically, screw that, imma do what I want.

But if you're at all interested (not in a "Join us!" Way, more in an interesting historical knowledge way), there are tons of nondualist Christians, and I'd be happy to share.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Being a recovering catholic, from a country that is also recovering catholic, I cannot relate to most of your post.

I respect most faiths, but denounce all organized religion, "churches" if you will.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Yeah, there's a lot of damage the church has done. I don't support the RCC. I just wish the RCC could be progressive and keep the liturgical/tradition side of things. Total pipe dream

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 days ago

Apart from directly catholic gays, there are also gays in very catholic countries, where their lives are influenced heavily by catholic stances no matter whether they believe or not.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Sure but it does help with acceptance from the non-gay religious people

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Some want that and it's not your place to judge. Not to blow this out of proportion but I have to say the militant atheism on Lemmy feels like 4chan debates sometimes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

That's interesting, because I see a ton of apologetics on here in threads about religion. More than I used to see on reddit before I left a while back.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Seriously though. I'm all for bashing religion but it gets to a point with some people where it starts to detract from the subject at hand.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Sure, YOU may not need it but theres a large amount of people who this is extremely important to. It also helps with acceptance in catholic countries and communities. I'm all for being a card carrying atheist but I just don't feel like it's necessary in this situation.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Are these like normal blessings but rainbow?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

I don't care what the international child r*** ring has to say about the gays.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (3 children)

If I am going to choose between imaginary symbolic gestures I rather have G̵̡͖̜̊Ã̴̩̐͂̽Y̴͖̘̤̌́ ̷̨̦͍̜́͊ Ç̷̲̺͕̅͛̌̎͠U̶̟̦͎̼̎R̴̝͚̲̭̣͛̂̕Ś̴̲̼̟͚̈̅E̶̙̩͖͐̑̿̚S̷͈̺̐͆ 😈

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

How is this news? Magic isn't real and they still think the gays are icky, let's not imagine meaningful progress where none exists.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Perfection is the enemy of progress.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Lack of progress is also an enemy of progress.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

I mean, sometimes. But this is still like a... few decades behind. This is like white people not saying the n-word in public anymore. That's technically better than before, but still woefully behind. The Catholic Church is never going to be on the forefront of real progress.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

How is this news?

Because something new that plenty of people care about happened? Like, I do think it's ridiculous but there are more than a billion Catholic people out there who do care what this guy says.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

In the future, when we're transcendent tentacled robofurries doing poly in virtual space, on drugs (think Yivo from Futurama), we will look back in confusion at why so many people hate homosexuality so much. Like... don't they have other things to worry about?

Or humanity will be all dead, I guess.

And I'm talking about the mega conservatives protesting this; at least the Vatican is baby stepping and trying to minimize their cruelty.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

"exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to the generation of children"

load more comments
view more: next ›