Priest Suspended for denouncing Abortion and Homosexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter nice2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
My heart goes out to this priest. How terrible sad and troubling. My prayers are with him and all involved in this matter.
 
This is a horrible thing to happen. We have had a similar thing happen to a young priest
here in our diocese.
Will be praying for these priests and for others who are having similar problems.
 
He says that homosexuals ought not to receive the Eucharist. But homosexuality is not a sin itself. It’s only if you act upon it that it becomes sin.

From the Catechism
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
 
I was so mad when I first read this!

This priest was doing what all priests should be doing, TELLING THE TRUTH about immorality and sin! Shame on the diocese for treating him this way!

GRRRR…:mad: 😦
 
I believe the priest in question said the homosexual LIFESTYLE was a sin as well as abortion.

My question is…Where in the world in our Holy Father when a priest is removed or other wise silenced for teaching God’s word? Can the pope not bring the bishop in for a “talk” or something?

I Love God, I believe that the Holy Catholic Church was founded by Jesus on the rock of Peter(our first pope) and I will always be a faithfilled Catholic,but I must admit that some bishops makes this very difficult for me,maybe that is what the devil intends though, devide and concure if you will.

:thumbsup:I read the last chapter of the book though,Jesus (and us) WIN!!!

Just gotta pray for all the Faithful priests and pray even harder for the bishops
 
He says that homosexuals ought not to receive the Eucharist. But homosexuality is not a sin itself. It’s only if you act upon it that it becomes sin.

From the Catechism
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
There’s been some conflicting reports, but I think most people would agree that if he said the above (homosexuals can’t receive the Eucharist even if they’re being chaste) than the Priest is in the wrong.
 
There’s been some conflicting reports, but I think most people would agree that if he said the above (homosexuals can’t receive the Eucharist even if they’re being chaste) than the Priest is in the wrong.
Yeah, if he truly said that then I would see reason for people to be upset.
 
There’s been some conflicting reports, but I think most people would agree that if he said the above (homosexuals can’t receive the Eucharist even if they’re being chaste) than the Priest is in the wrong.
In other words, the Priest is saying once that person(homosexual) becomes Catholic…such as go to RCIA classes etc. He/she is then allowed to receive the Eucharist. Is’nt that is how our religion stands now that no one who is NOT Catholic CANNOT receive the Eucharist…unless he is on his dying bed.

I see nothing wrong with the Priest saying they are not to receive the Eucharist…they must first become Roman Catholic and avoid that way of sinning no longer.
 
I’d like to hear both sides of the story, including reading (and better hearing) the priest’s homily.
 
I do wish someone had the exact words he said in his sermon so we could really know what went on that day and his wording.
He gave a quote to the CBC (much more reliable than the Lifesite news website) that said this:
“We have to try to fight [homosexuality],** destroy it**, or do our best to invite people to change their life”

That word “destroy” is disturbing.
If, according to the catechism, a gay person is meant to be “called to chastity” as their way to “approach Christina perfection”…then, which is it? Are they called to chastity for a purpose, or are we supposed to “destroy” it?

If he did say that homosexuals in general should not receive the Eucharist, then according to the Catholic Church…he’s wrong about that and should not be saying that…
As another poster said–it’s not the state of being gay that is supposed to be a sin, but the “acting out of it”…
I mean, there are gay Catholic priests out there! Not only do they receive the Eurcharist, but they administer it!

And anybody who is not in “a state of grace” and has “sinned” is not supposed to receive the Eucharist, right? So he’s just stating the obvious if he did say that a practicing, “non-repentant”, gay person is not supposed to receive it, right? (I keep asking for confirmation because I am not certain of all the specific rules…)

And even if someone has indeed “sinned”…if they’ve gone to confession before the communion service, then he or she can indeed receive the Eucharist, right? Whatever that sin may be?
Meaning…if a person cheated on their heterosexual spouse or had a SSA experience…they are able to confess and repent, etc, and then receive the Eucharist, yes?

So even if a homosexual person did have a sexual experience, then confessed it…he technically can still receive the Eurcharist as far as I understand it… ?

It sounds like this priest went overboard in what he was trying to say and worded it wrongly and in doing so, spoke wrongly…
Sorry, but I disagree. The Priest was correct in saying that a Homosexual who consistly and continuely do homosexual acts should NOT receive the Eucharist. The Bishop was wrong for suspending the Priest. This Priest did NOT go overboard in speaking the truth. He did nothing wrong but spoke the truth. Unfortunately the truth hurts, especially to those who do such acts. 🙂
 
Sorry, but I disagree. The Priest was correct in saying that a Homosexual who consistly and continuely do homosexual acts should NOT receive the Eucharist. The Bishop was wrong for suspending the Priest. This Priest did NOT go overboard in speaking the truth. He did nothing wrong but spoke the truth. Unfortunately the truth hurts, especially to those who do such acts. 🙂
We don’t know exactly what the priest said; at the moment our only source is an agenda-driven website.

That said, what you say is wrong on so many levels I’m not sure where to start. But I’ll attempt to do so with this. All of us, and I mean all of us are manifestly stubborn in sin. Without exception. By your understanding, none of us would ever be admissible to the Eucharist. And this makes a mockery of God’s infinite grace and mercy available at all times to all of us as often as we need it.

Let’s remove the word “homosexual” from the discussion for a moment. Let’s replace it with, oh, say an alcoholic who gets into a barroom brawl every Friday night. Nobody will argue with the “truth” that getting drunk is evil and a “grave disorder”. Nobody will argue with the “truth” that beating the snot out of someone every Friday night is gravely disordered.

However, if the alcoholic regrets his act and drags himself to confession before Mass, with a firm purpose of amendment, and asks for forgiveness, he WILL be forgiven, and absolved. Even if by next Friday his resolve crumbles and he starts all over again. Is he notorious? Yes. Does he cause scandal? Yes. Is he sinning mortally? Probably not, but only his confessor can say for sure. But he sure as heck can confess, get absolution, and go up to communion on Sunday and nobody has the right to deny him.

Now we, and this particular priest, simply do not know what inner struggles a homosexual is going through with his (or her) condition. We do not know if that person goes regularly to confession trying to overcome their sin, but fails occasionally or even repeatedly. All I can say for sure is that we all struggle with stubborn, habitual sin, and that we have to charitably, assume that the homosexual who turns up in the communion line has in fact received absolution before Mass, or is working with a good solid confessor to overcome his sin, on a regular basis.

Speaking the truth, if it is not done charitably and with love, is not Truth at all because that is not what Jesus taught. Yes He forgave the adulteress and told her to stop sinning. But He did forgive her, and we are taught to forgive how many times exactly? Seventy times seven, i.e. infinitely. Yes it is truthful to say that homosexual acts are sinful, just as it is to say that stealing, lying, cheating, and beating someone up in a bar are sinful, and it is truthful to say that the homosexual lobby is tempting people into a dead-end. But it is wrong to lump all people with same-sex attraction into the category of people unfit for the Eucharist, just as it is wrong to lump all people with alcoholism into the category of people unfit for the Eucharist just because some of them have not been able to master their addiction.

Calling someone to chastity implies fostering real transformative healing into that person, something that fear-mongering, anger, and spite have proven time and again to be of limited, if any, value. It implies understanding the current state of the sinner, putting him on a path of transformation, and making effort and progress. God rewards the effort. Trust me He will reward a promiscuous homosexual more for abstaining once, than for someone who doesn’t face that temptation never committing homosexual acts. He asks that we try our best; nobody can be perfect. But with effort, a good honest and charitable confessor willing to work with a penitent, the alcoholic may eventually end up at AA and sober up for the rest of his life, and the person guilty of sexual sin may be convinced to give up a life of promiscuity and if necessary seek psychological help to do so.

But every journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step as the saying goes, and for a sinner, that first step of recognizing that God calls us to something greater is a joy to be encouraged no matter the state in life of the penitent. The Eucharist should not be withheld as a punishment, but rather, held out as not only a reward but an important component of obtaining God’s healing grace; it is when we are worthy of it least, that we need it most.
 
We don’t know exactly what the priest said; at the moment our only source is an agenda-driven website.

That said, what you say is wrong on so many levels I’m not sure where to start. But I’ll attempt to do so with this. All of us, and I mean all of us are manifestly stubborn in sin. Without exception. By your understanding, none of us would ever be admissible to the Eucharist. And this makes a mockery of God’s infinite grace and mercy available at all times to all of us as often as we need it.

Let’s remove the word “homosexual” from the discussion for a moment. Let’s replace it with, oh, say an alcoholic who gets into a barroom brawl every Friday night. Nobody will argue with the “truth” that getting drunk is evil and a “grave disorder”. Nobody will argue with the “truth” that beating the snot out of someone every Friday night is gravely disordered.

However, if the alcoholic regrets his act and drags himself to confession before Mass, with a firm purpose of amendment, and asks for forgiveness, he WILL be forgiven, and absolved. Even if by next Friday his resolve crumbles and he starts all over again. Is he notorious? Yes. Does he cause scandal? Yes. Is he sinning mortally? Probably not, but only his confessor can say for sure. But he sure as heck can confess, get absolution, and go up to communion on Sunday and nobody has the right to deny him.

Now we, and this particular priest, simply do not know what inner struggles a homosexual is going through with his (or her) condition. We do not know if that person goes regularly to confession trying to overcome their sin, but fails occasionally or even repeatedly. All I can say for sure is that we all struggle with stubborn, habitual sin, and that we have to charitably, assume that the homosexual who turns up in the communion line has in fact received absolution before Mass, or is working with a good solid confessor to overcome his sin, on a regular basis.

Speaking the truth, if it is not done charitably and with love, is not Truth at all because that is not what Jesus taught. Yes He forgave the adulteress and told her to stop sinning. But He did forgive her, and we are taught to forgive how many times exactly? Seventy times seven, i.e. infinitely. Yes it is truthful to say that homosexual acts are sinful, just as it is to say that stealing, lying, cheating, and beating someone up in a bar are sinful, and it is truthful to say that the homosexual lobby is tempting people into a dead-end. But it is wrong to lump all people with same-sex attraction into the category of people unfit for the Eucharist, just as it is wrong to lump all people with alcoholism into the category of people unfit for the Eucharist just because some of them have not been able to master their addiction.

Calling someone to chastity implies fostering real transformative healing into that person, something that fear-mongering, anger, and spite have proven time and again to be of limited, if any, value. It implies understanding the current state of the sinner, putting him on a path of transformation, and making effort and progress. God rewards the effort. Trust me He will reward a promiscuous homosexual more for abstaining once, than for someone who doesn’t face that temptation never committing homosexual acts. He asks that we try our best; nobody can be perfect. But with effort, a good honest and charitable confessor willing to work with a penitent, the alcoholic may eventually end up at AA and sober up for the rest of his life, and the person guilty of sexual sin may be convinced to give up a life of promiscuity and if necessary seek psychological help to do so.

But every journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step as the saying goes, and for a sinner, that first step of recognizing that God calls us to something greater is a joy to be encouraged no matter the state in life of the penitent. The Eucharist should not be withheld as a punishment, but rather, held out as not only a reward but an important component of obtaining God’s healing grace; it is when we are worthy of it least, that we need it most.
I repeat again. I still disagree.

The Priest was correct in saying that a Homosexual who consistly and continuely do homosexual acts should NOT receive the Eucharist. The Bishop was wrong for suspending the Priest. This Priest did NOT go overboard in speaking the truth. He did nothing wrong but spoke the truth. Unfortunately the truth hurts, especially to those who do such acts.
 
I repeat again. I still disagree.

The Priest was correct in saying that a Homosexual who consistly and continuely do homosexual acts should NOT receive the Eucharist. The Bishop was wrong for suspending the Priest. This Priest did NOT go overboard in speaking the truth. He did nothing wrong but spoke the truth. Unfortunately the truth hurts, especially to those who do such acts.
Why just limit it to homosexuality?

If you regularly endanger people’s lives by speeding, then you should be denied the Eucharist as well. While we’re at it throw in folks who cheat on their taxes, have troubles with masturbation, drink too much, eat too much, are guilty of calumny, gamble, etc. I can tell you that if we applied your thinking to all sin, the line to communion would be awfully short on Sunday.

In any case you’re making a comment on the bishop’s actions on very limited information. Like I said I would like to read or preferably hear the homily before pronouncing who was right or wrong in this specific case.
 
I repeat again. I still disagree.

The Priest was correct in saying that a Homosexual who consistly and continuely do homosexual acts should NOT receive the Eucharist. The Bishop was wrong for suspending the Priest. This Priest did NOT go overboard in speaking the truth. He did nothing wrong but spoke the truth. Unfortunately the truth hurts, especially to those who do such acts.
In the article it says one of the members of the parish council was upset and called for his suspension…an open homosexual… He also spoke out against cohabitation.

His bishop said that nothing the priest said was outside Church teaching…it just lacked a “pastoral” approach.

Sounds like there was a lot going on there and the priest got fed up. I say God Bless him for telling the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top