Openly same sex relationship and the Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter robdaddyf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

robdaddyf

Guest
Recently I discovered that a person in a same sex relationship (and open about it) is admitted to the Eucharist at a Parish I’ve attended. Any thoughts on what I can or should do about this?
 
I’ve noticed that many people have looked at this question…maybe nobody wants to touch it…but it would be helpful to me
 
Well obviously the first thing you should be doing is praying for all concerned. Secondly , if after searching your own conscience you feel in a position to discuss it with the Priest there then make an appointment to discuss it. He may not be aware or he may not be aware of the scandal of the situation. If after that you discover he is aware and is just not upholding church teaching or is actually promoting the opposite you can document your actions and observations and send a letter up the chain to the Bishop. You should cite your observations and be clear about the evidence. Are you entirely sure the relationship is open and known ? Cite the evidence you have for that in the letter. And then again pray.

I think you will find that withholding the Eucharist for sinners is the absolute last line in a string of things a Priest can do on a pastoral level and is the absolute last thing they would do . It’s extremely difficult. Most likely there are other sinners being admitted to the Eucharist and this is just the one that has come to your attention. The church does allow us the freedom to approach communion on our own examination of consciences.

You need to be honest. Are you ignoring the possible invalid marriages and other types of public sin and focusing on this one? So look deep before you engage the church on this. You’ll need the fortitude of a clear heart and conscience if you proceed.
 
I think you must talk to the person who is receiving, first and foremost, before approaching the priest.

And try, in charity, to explain to them that as long as they are disagreeing with clear church teaching (show them the catechism’s section on homosexuality for starters) then it is inappropriate for them to make a public profession of communion with the Church by receiving the Eucharist.

Which is what they are doing - hence it’s being called communion! They are, hopefully, aware that non-Catholics cannot receive communion either. They are not, after all, fully in communion, neither is this couple - why pretend that they are?
 
You need to be honest. Are you ignoring the possible invalid marriages and other types of public sin and focusing on this one? So look deep before you engage the church on this. You’ll need the fortitude of a clear heart and conscience if you proceed.
Click to expand...
I know of no invalid marriages nor any other public sin…though evil triumphs when good men say nothing. Of course I know that the sins that typically face everyone are still, as yet, facing everyone and everyone must work these things out…it is a process. But, as I am considering converting to Catholicism I find this reality more disturbing as open sin, grave sin can’t be passed off in any congregation claiming ties to the Catholic Church…this much I know.
 
robdaddyf said:
Recently I discovered that a person in a same sex relationship (and open about it) is admitted to the Eucharist at a Parish I’ve attended. Any thoughts on what I can or should do about this?
Click to expand...
Just tell the person it’s a mortal sin if he doesn’t know already. If he still receives Communion, then he’s just hurting himself and his salvation.
 
robdaddyf said:
Recently I discovered that a person in a same sex relationship (and open about it) is admitted to the Eucharist at a Parish I’ve attended. Any thoughts on what I can or should do about this?
Click to expand...
if you are not the pastor, nothing. If this person is not a child or someone for whose soul and religious formation you are responsible. nothing.

there is an ongoing thread on “laity usurping legitimate functions of the priesthood” here and on the traditional Catholic forum. One of those functions most being assumed by laity is the faculty to make judgements on matter for the confessional. We don’t have it. Priests do. this extends by the way to laity dictating to bishops who they will and will not allow to receive communion.

what is our reaction as a bystander? as it is always in cases where we observe an action by a fellow Christian that has the appearance of scandal. We make the most charitable possible interpretation of what we see. We assume that person, whom we claim to know is in a state of sin, has just confessed and is receiving worthily.
 
puzzleannie said:
if you are not the pastor, nothing. If this person is not a child or someone for whose soul and religious formation you are responsible. nothing.

.
Click to expand...
Except pray. 👍

If there is no aggregious public disrespect of Church teaching, and especially if the bishop doesn’t “enforce” canon law in this respect, this person won’t be denied communion. 🤷

When you think about it, is this really any more scandalous than a twice-married-without-annulment person receiving? Or two people living together without the benefit of marriage?
 
I do understand about usurping priestly functions, and I do not want to seem to be condoning that. I do, however, wish to point out that scandal is a SERIOUS sin. In fact, scandal can, if I understand it correctly, even be mortal sin in and of itself.

Though we do have a duty to be charitable, there is also a duty to be truthful. Would it not be appropriate to mention this situation to the priest on the chance that he is unaware of it? Certainly there are doubtless invalid marriages in the parish, and if that becomes known, then that, too, would be scandalous.

It is NOT right to approach the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin, and that does need to be proclaimed clearly and often. It is not “unkind” to deny the Eucharist to one in a state of mortal sin. It is, in fact, the charitable action, for otherwise the person in question is adding the sin of sacrilege to the others.
 
With most of the congregation lining up for Communion in the typical American parish while confession lines remain empty, I doubt the person in question is the only one who has received Communion in a state of mortal sin.
 
Why not just talk to the priest privately about the matter without naming names or pointing fingers. Priests are there to help guide you in all spiritual matters. You don’t have to name the “guilty” party or demand “correction” at first. Why not just talk to the priest and see what he says? Just say as a general matter of statement that you are concerned about a specific situation and without gettting into the details ask about the concern of a party or individual in an openly gay relationship that is freely receiving Communion and if that is something that is allowed. Just listen to what he has to say and go from there. Clarity before judgment.
I’m not saying that just because the priest doesn’t condemn it that sin is not wrong. He may have or hold an opinion contrary to the clear teaching of the Church, but to have more information with which to work will make your approach to the matter easier.
 
Seatuck said:
Well obviously the first thing you should be doing is praying for all concerned. Secondly , if after searching your own conscience you feel in a position to discuss it with the Priest there then make an appointment to discuss it. He may not be aware or he may not be aware of the scandal of the situation. If after that you discover he is aware and is just not upholding church teaching or is actually promoting the opposite you can document your actions and observations and send a letter up the chain to the Bishop. You should cite your observations and be clear about the evidence. Are you entirely sure the relationship is open and known ? Cite the evidence you have for that in the letter. And then again pray.

I think you will find that withholding the Eucharist for sinners is the absolute last line in a string of things a Priest can do on a pastoral level and is the absolute last thing they would do . It’s extremely difficult. Most likely there are other sinners being admitted to the Eucharist and this is just the one that has come to your attention. The church does allow us the freedom to approach communion on our own examination of consciences.

You need to be honest. Are you ignoring the possible invalid marriages and other types of public sin and focusing on this one? So look deep before you engage the church on this. You’ll need the fortitude of a clear heart and conscience if you proceed.
Click to expand...
Seatuck,

I respectfully disagree with you. Please read the following as it explains this issue better than I could ever do in my own words.

therealpresence.org/eucharst/holycom/denial.htm

This is an letter by Archbishop Raymond Leo Burke, Prefect, Apostolic Signatura (the highest judicial authority of the Catholic Church besides the Pope himself).

In this article Archbishop Burke explains in detail the Church’s thinking regarding denial of the Eucharist.

After you read this I think you will find that communion should be withheld in cases where there is public knowledge that the person obstinately persevers in manifest grave sin. I think it clearly sets forth the conditions and leaves no doubt that communion should be withheld. It also sets out how to accomplish this with as much charity as possible and to avoid conflict.

Personally, Catholic politicians, celebrities, other people with a high public profile and those that flaunt their sin in public should be notified by their priest/bishop not to present themselves for communion until they repent and make a public apology to undo the scandle they have caused.

St. Francis said it perfectly (lifted from the above letter),
Saint Francis of Assisi addressed the question of the indiscriminate distribution of Holy Communion in his Letter or Exhortation to the Clergy. Saint Francis, first of all, lamented the lack of care for the sacred vessels and sacred linens, which hold and touch the Body and Blood of Christ, on the part of the clergy, the ministers of Holy Communion. He, then, addressed their responsibility to attend to their own worthiness and to the right disposition of those who present themselves to receive. He declared:
Click to expand...
And besides, many clerics reserve the Blessed Sacrament in unsuitable places, or carry It about irreverently, or receive It unworthily, or give It to all-comers without distinction. [18]
With regard to the reception of Holy Communion, Saint Francis underlined two solemn moral obligations of the minister of Holy Communion: first, the obligation to be personally disposed to receive the Body and Blood of Christ worthily, and, second, the obligation to give Holy Communion with discretion, that is, with attention to those who, in a public way, have made themselves unworthy to receive the Sacrament.
Click to expand...
God Bless,

Iowa Mike
 
Sadly, that is very true. But sacrilege is not the only sin in question: scandal is also in question. For the record, I would find it equally scandalous for an invalidly married person or a cohabiting unmarried person to receive the Eucharist. There are grave sins which are open, and these present the question of scandal. Scandal is SERIOUS.

After all, many people think that a given action is “all right” and “not bad in the Church’s eyes” because others committing the same action are permitted to approach the Eucharist.
 
puzzleannie said:
if you are not the pastor, nothing. If this person is not a child or someone for whose soul and religious formation you are responsible. nothing.
Click to expand...
I with Annie on this one. 👍

This person is the priests responsibility.
 
robdaddyf said:
Recently I discovered that a person in a same sex relationship (and open about it) is admitted to the Eucharist at a Parish I’ve attended. Any thoughts on what I can or should do about this?
Click to expand...
I would let the pastor know and if no action is taken. They continue to receive in public, let the Bishop know.
 
This is a slippery slope to tread on. Judge not, lest you be judged. Unless you are a church lawyer, consider who Jesus routinely dined with.
 
dconklin said:
This is a slippery slope to tread on. Judge not, lest you be judged. Unless you are a church lawyer, consider who Jesus routinely dined with.
Click to expand...
Please read the link I posted earlier…I think it will change your thinking.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike
 
dconklin said:
Um, that is quite a document. I will try to read it tonight after the kids go to bed.
Click to expand...
Dave,

I think you will really enjoy it. You might want to Google Archbishop Burke because he is very outspoken and speaks from Catholic dogma, Aposolic Tradition and the Ordinary and Universal Magesterium

Enjoy,

God Bless,

Iowa Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top