Married gay man denied communion at mother's funeral in Amite 'very surprising,' official says

[MtnDwellar]

Rev. Marcel Guarnizo denied communion to a lesbian woman at her mother’s funeral.
He was first removed from the diocese of Washington DC and then later defrocked.

 

[cjforJesus]

I’m confused by the bishop’s apology. It seems to present more questions than it answers. Personally I think the priest did the right thing. Not only did the man marry another man, which he had to know was against church teaching, but kind of thumbed his nose at the church by acting against what he knows to be right.

abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/priest-who-denied-lesbian-communion-at-mothers-funeral-placed-on-leave/

As I said in another post,the lines are being drawn and it will be bishop against bishop and cardinal against cardinal. There are MANY within the Catholic church who not only see nothing wrong with active homosexual relationships,but see HOly Communon simply as a sign of uity.Now now that homosexually active people can be legally joined in the eyes of the US law it just adds fuel to the fire.
We will see many more cases as the homosexual agenda progresses and they seek to change Church teachings.

 

[EIF5A]

Rev. Marcel Guarnizo denied communion to a lesbian woman at her mother’s funeral.
He was first removed from the diocese of Washington DC and then later defrocked.

According to this article, he was defrocked for intimidating behavior toward parish staff and others.

I was not there at this funeral. But if the priest made the point across (no communion for active gays and lesbians) in a compassionate manner, would all of this have been prevented?

 

[cjforJesus]

Rev. Marcel Guarnizo denied communion to a lesbian woman at her mother’s funeral.
He was first removed from the diocese of Washington DC and then later defrocked.

You were mentioning this as I was composing my own post. I believe they are the same incident and more of these will occur,
A gay Catholic couple in Canada serve as Eucharistic ministers I read somewhere and the rationale is that the priest cannot judge them as being in a state of sin.
I think they claim to be chaste but that does not mean they do not engage in sodomy.

 

[St_Francis]

Rev. Marcel Guarnizo denied communion to a lesbian woman at her mother’s funeral.
He was first removed from the diocese of Washington DC and then later defrocked.

He does not seem to have been laicized (the Catholic term for what others call defrocking); his faculties were suspended which means he is not permitted to do certain things that priests do, like offer Mass publically or hear Confessions.

 

[EIF5A]

abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/priest-who-denied-lesbian-communion-at-mothers-funeral-placed-on-leave/

As I said in another post,the lines are being drawn and it will be bishop against bishop and cardinal against cardinal. There are MANY within the Catholic church who not only see nothing wrong with active homosexual relationships,but see HOly Communon simply as a sign of uity.Now now that homosexually active people can be legally joined in the eyes of the US law it just adds fuel to the fire.
We will see many more cases as the homosexual agenda progresses and they seek to change Church teachings.

But why would bishops and cardinals, who have years of theological studies and know Church history, allow Communion when the Vatican specifically says No?

 

[Peter_Plato]

Rev. Marcel Guarnizo denied communion to a lesbian woman at her mother’s funeral.
He was first removed from the diocese of Washington DC and then later defrocked.

Could you provide some evidence that he was “defrocked?” My understanding is that he was not even suspended, but placed on “administrative leave.”

canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/bp-knestouts-march-9-letter-on-fr-guarnizo/

Given that he was a visiting priest ordained in Moscow, Russia, though originally from the U.S., the “leave” simply means he is not permitted to undertake some priestly functions in the diocese - those that would have been permitted by the “visiting priest” agreement with the diocese in Russia.

Perhaps you have more recent information in this, but prime sources are required before your claim is taken as stated.

 

[cjforJesus]

According to this article, he was defrocked for intimidating behavior toward parish staff and others.

I was not there at this funeral. But if the priest made the point across (no communion for active gays and lesbians) in a compassionate manner, would all of this have been prevented?

This incident occurred in 2012 and I believe many more are to come or are just ignored.
I was not there either and I do not know if these lesbians were in a state of mortal sin or not,but a great deal who identify as gay do engage in some form of mutual masturbation.

 

[dans0622]

Naturally, pastoral prudence would strongly suggest the avoidance of instances of public denial of Holy Communion. Pastors must strive to explain to the concerned faithful the true ecclesial sense of the norm, in such a way that they would be able to understand it or at least respect it. In those situations, however, in which these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible, the minister of Communion must refuse to distribute it to those who are publicly unworthy. They are to do this with extreme charity, and are to look for the opportune moment to explain the reasons that required the refusal. They must, however, do this with firmness, conscious of the value that such signs of strength have for the good of the Church and of souls.

For this quote and more, see: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20000706_declaration_en.html

 

[cjforJesus]

But why would bishops and cardinals, who have years of theological studies and know Church history, allow Communion when the Vatican specifically says No?

Good question.

 

[St_Francis]

This has nothing to do with the demands of secularists. It’s a matter of common sense and charity. The pastor obviously knew that the son of the deceased was married and could have taken him aside before the service and explained that he would not let him have the Eucharist. It’s quite obvious that this was a political statement that failed - yes, the pastor made his statement, but it has backfired on him. It was cruel.

However, we do not know why he didn’t do so. Perhaps it was too crowded or the priest was unable to draw him aside for a private conversation. Maybe the priest just assumed that a lapsed Catholic would know better; or that a homosexual man in a SSM might have heard somewhere that the Catholic Church does not believe that the same should receive the Eucharist.

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

This has nothing to do with the demands of secularists. It’s a matter of common sense and charity. The pastor obviously knew that the son of the deceased was married and could have taken him aside before the service and explained that he would not let him have the Eucharist. It’s quite obvious that this was a political statement that failed - yes, the pastor made his statement, but it has backfired on him. It was cruel.

The quote you responded to had to do with the media reporting and portrayal of this occurrence. By the information contained in the article the person denied communion essentially should have known better but it seems that despite that they still went to receive with expectation. Also the priest did not make any political statement, he was doing his job as expected. The Bishop was making a political statement with his apology and if it has not already, it will as it appears to be scandalizing.

 

[Indiana_Rocky]

According to this article, he was defrocked for intimidating behavior toward parish staff and others.

I was not there at this funeral. But if the priest made the point across (no communion for active gays and lesbians) in a compassionate manner, would all of this have been prevented?

It’s not clear in the article what sort of direction was given before or during Mass. It also does not say what the Bishop and Archbishop apologized for. I wish there was clarification about whether they apologized for the manner in which communion was refused or that he was refused communion in the first place. There is only the statement from the spokesperson which seems to indicate that a priest can never deny someone the Eucharist.

 

[marymary1975]

My priest repeatedly says that he is responsible for all souls in his parish. So if the priest gives communion to someone in a gay “marriage,” which means no repentance or promise not to sin again, then not only is the sin on the homosexual, but it’s also on the priest. It is the priest’s job to guard the Eucharist- why is the tabernacle locked? To prevent stealing.

If all the Methodists in town wanted to receive the Eucharist, the priest would not allow until they were properly disposed. This is no different.

Agree. The priest did the right thing. Is sad that the bishops did not stand up for the priest.

 

[ARSpade]

But why would bishops and cardinals, who have years of theological studies and know Church history, allow Communion when the Vatican specifically says No?

They Vatican and Christ have been saying “no” to “remarried” people for 2000 years and many bishops and cardinals are against that.

 

[marymary1975]

This has nothing to do with the demands of secularists. It’s a matter of common sense and charity. The pastor obviously knew that the son of the deceased was married and could have taken him aside before the service and explained that he would not let him have the Eucharist. It’s quite obvious that this was a political statement that failed - yes, the pastor made his statement, but it has backfired on him. It was cruel.

The priest did not do any political statement. The priest did his job. It is his duty to prevent sacrilege if he knows it is going to happen. Communion is not a prize or something that is given to everybody. In all case the one making the political statement is the gay who on top of going to communion demands an apology as if he was entitled to something.

 

[DeniseNY]

I think he meant the priest should have told the man beforehand that Communion would not be allowed.

I think it’s a reasonable expectation on the part of priests to think that Catholics who present themselves in the communion line know (and will honor) the rules for receiving.

 

[R_H_Benson]

Im curious to see how more things like this will be handled after the Sybod in October. Will it officially be condoned? Will it be more rampant?

We must pray fervently to the Blessed Mother that it will not be, and furthermore that REAL pastoral solutions that **do not compromise doctrine **will be discussed.

 

[EIF5A]

We must pray fervently to the Blessed Mother that it will not be, and furthermore that REAL pastoral solutions that **do not compromise doctrine **will be discussed.

Has a synod in the past ever taught something against doctrine? Or they had to rescind?

 

[cjforJesus]

Has a synod in the past ever taught something against doctrine? Or they had to rescind?

The synod is not about changing dogma or doctrine.That cannot be done.
It does point to some conflicts within the Church that must be resolved.
I fail to understand though why an openly gay person would expect to receive a Sacrament.
This deluded man seemed to think it would join him to his deceased mother.
I have no idea how he came up with that especially since he claims he is a lapsed Catholic with some basic education.