Priest who denied Holy Communion to lesbian placed on leave [CWN]

[LemonAndLime]

Based on what? If you have been on CAF a while you have seen lots of threads about denying Communion to pro-abortion politicians and activists as well as those who are divorced and remarried without annullment and those who are not Catholic. In all of those cases, most of the posters here choose the side of denying Communion to those not properly disposed. What sin (publically acknowledged as this one was) do you think would be getting a “pass”?

Did I say it would get a pass?

I think the willingness to overlook the Priest’s unprofessionalism and large support come from the fact he denied communion to someone who is a pet hate on this forum. A homosexual.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

It was hardly a private notice. It was a letter sent to all the area priests and read at at least some Masses.

It was not a statement released directly to the media, however. The nature of it requires that all the area priests know the content, so they didn’t invite him to participate in sacramental duties.

His statement wasn’t a private letter to the vicar general, bishop or cardinal. It was released directly to the media, for the purposes of public dissemination.

I find the public in-fighting to be far and away the worst part of all these scandals. The sense that there is something to be gained by garnering sympathy from the faithful at the expense of the heirarchy.

 

[hudson]

Did I say it would get a pass?

I think the willingness to overlook the Priest’s unprofessionalism and large support come from the fact he denied communion to someone who is a pet hate on this forum. A homosexual.

Please show some respect for a Priest, thanks. People who are Buddhist should not present themselves for communion in a Catholic Church. People who are actively acting on their same sex attractions and are unrepentant should not present themselves for communion. If they flaunt this disordered act to the Priest, they should be denied the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord.

 

[Robertanthony]

The issue is that so many Catholics live in sin, i.e. open cohabitation. Has anyone ever denied communion to one of these?

Ok, then let everyone, worthy or not, partake and drink their own condemnation. And if an anti-clerical figure shows up in the communion line to make a public affront and ridicule the Eucharist, why deny him? The priest was actually doing the lesbian woman a huge, huge favor, although his intention was probably 1st and foremost to prevent a sacrilege against the Lord.

Lemonandlime, please get over your victim mentality, stop taking things personally, it’s not about you and it’s not about me (I too am in an irregular situation that keeps me from taking communion “lest I drink my own condemnation”.)

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Please show some respect for a Priest, thanks. **People who are Buddhist should not present themselves for communion in a Catholic Church. ** People who are actively acting on their same sex attractions and are unrepentant should not present themselves for communion. If they flaunt this disordered act to the Priest, they should be denied the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord.

This is the thing that I have never understood. If you don’t believe what the church teaches, why do you even want to bother going up for communion?

So it’s her mother’s funeral, but I’m guessing that she and her partner are not regular Sunday Mass goers, so communion should not be important to them.

There is obviously great power in the Eucharist to draw people, but they just cannot over their pride and entrenched sin in order to receive with a proper disposition. I have trouble enough, and I do go to Mass every Sunday!

 

[Armyvet007]

I think the responses on this thread, and the level of sympathy with the Priest, would be completely different if he refused communion to someone who had commited a different sin.

Not really.

 

[Church_Man]

Christ would do the same ss the priest
If she came seeking forgivenness. The priest would have forgiven her.

Christ gave forgiveness when it. was sought with the advice to avoid future sin. He certainly rebuked many of the less contrite
sometimes in a much more forcefull way
Than this priest.

The Biblical stories where Jesus interacted with sinners, as far as I know, He showed love, compassion, forgiveness, mercy, as well as welcomed and accepted them. (Zachaeus; the woman at the well; the woman caught in adultery; the woman who anointed Jesus’ feet; tax collectors; public sinners; etc).

The only acceptations were:

Some Pharisees who were religious hypocrites, that Jesus called snakes and vipers and

Money changers and merchants in the Temple (who were there because Religious Leaders allowed them there) who were cheating people.

Jesus got in trouble because he “dined with sinners and tax collectors” and challenged the religious authorities because they were more concerned about following the law than loving their neighbor.

Jesus calls us to be loving, kind, compassionate and merciful, especially to the grieving. (Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted). As followers of Jesus, that’s our job - to offer the love of Christ to those who mourn.

 

[Robertanthony]

This is the thing that I have never understood. If you don’t believe what the church teaches, why do you even want to bother going up for communion?

So it’s her mother’s funeral, but I’m guessing that she and her partner are not regular Sunday Mass goers, so communion should not be important to them.

There is obviously great power in the Eucharist to draw people, but they just cannot over their pride and entrenched sin in order to receive with a proper disposition. I have trouble enough, and I do go to Mass every Sunday!

Very good point. Of course, unless they can’t stand being denied something they feel they’re entitled to and/or want to make a statement and/or get the Priest into hot water.

I had quite a few relational issues growing up where I actually craved being cherished and accepted, belonging, so I can relate to the torment that being plagued with ssa often entails, the cry from deep, deep inside to be loved and accepted. I think a lot of the extravagant stuff we see from homosexuals is a desperate way of saying they exist. BUT the Church is crystal-clear, taking communion with a serious sin on one’s soul is not a good idea. If I can settle for spiritual communion and not feel offended or left out, why can’t they?

 

[Nec5]

This is the thing that I have never understood. If you don’t believe what the church teaches, why do you even want to bother going up for communion?

Because evil always wants to be accepted and acknowledged as truth.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Please show some respect for a Priest, thanks. People who are Buddhist should not present themselves for communion in a Catholic Church. People who are actively acting on their same sex attractions and are unrepentant should not present themselves for communion. If they flaunt this disordered act to the Priest, they should be denied the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord.

Again, the Priest did the wrong thing by “storming off” without finishing the funeral. Showing respect does not mean I cannot criticise.

People seem to forget about that but seem to think the issue is just about refusing communion.

 

[JReducation]

There is an unfortunate thing happening here. Father G is being held up as a faithful priest, because he withheld Holy Communion from a lesbian woman and the Cardinal is being thrown under the buss.

Let’s look at Cardinal Wuerl’s profile. All of this can be found on the internet, if anyone wants to look for the Cardinal’s resume.

1. The media itself, in 1988, called him “The Zero Tolerance Bishop”. He investigated every allegation of sexual abuse in his diocese. He had every guilty priest laicized and reported to the police. He even took a case to Pope John Paul when the tribunal ruled in favor of the priest and then Bishop Wuerl was certain that he was guilty. The Holy See ruled that he was guilty and the priest was laicized.
2. He took on the District of Columbia when the City Council voted for gay marriage and passed anti-discrimination laws. The Cardinal threatened that he would close every Catholic adoption and foster care agency in Washington. He did as he promised. The Archdiocese of Washington extends into to southern counties in Maryland. I’m not sure that they closed in Maryland, maybe so. I don’t believe that he has suddenly become so “gay couple friendly”
3. He has pastoral concerns as to how to apply the law. He has no objections to the moral position of the Church. There is a big difference. He spearheaded the question to the Holy See on how to apply the law and what was the author’s intent after the famous 50 page document from the Signatura. The answer has not come back. We all know that the Church moves slowly on things that it does not consider an emergency. He has not challenged the law, he has asked for practical guidelines. Until such time as they come back, a bishop is free to make his own guidelines. That is legal and moral.
4. He serves on the Sacred Congregation for the Clergy and the Sacred Congregation for the Faith. The man is not only a bishop, but he is a scholar.
5. He is the only non-bishop who was allowed into the papal conclave when Bl. John Paul was elected. That’s how much he was trusted by the College of Cardinals.
6. It was the Vicar General who put Fr. G on leave. The Vicar General has the canonical authority to do this, as does the Chancellor. The bishop of the diocese must be informed after the fact. He can uphold or retract the action.
7. There is no mention in the Vicar General’s statement about the refusal to administer Holy Communion. The statement refers to reports of ugly behavior on the part of Fr. G toward people after the fact. Whether Fr. G was ugly to people or not, we don’t know. He says that he was not and that this is all about the Communion issue. That’s his position. It’s not Gospel. The Vicar General does not say that the reports are Gospel either. He says that the priest is on administrative leave until the investigation is complete.
8. The Archdiocese of Washington does not have any obligation to run an investigation on this matter. If they really wanted to get rid of Fr. G, they could have done so very legally and without anyone knowing. Fr. G is a guest in the Archdiocese. All that the Vicar General has to do is call his bishop and request that the bishop recall him home. He does not even have to give the bishop an explanation as to why he’s making such a request. Fr. G himself admits that the Cardinal is not his bishop. There is no obligation on the part of the Cardinal to give him the benefit of the doubt and have an investigation. The Catholic Church does not operate that way. If someone in authority has a problem with you and you’re not their responsibility, they send you home, no questions asked. The Holy See itself can’t stop that from happening, unless the priest was placed there by the Pope or it’s dangerous to go home. In which case, I would deal with my host privately, not in the press.

Given the Cardinal’s record for his service to the Church, it’s really unfair to say that a “faithful priest is being persecuted.” What about a faithful Cardinal? Is he not being persecuted?

Does his Vicar General not have the right to investigate a complaint?

Were Father’s rights violated? Was Father suspended? Was Father sent back to his bishop? Could they have ignored the concerns and shipped him home? Could the Cardinal, as a member of the Congregation for the Clergy have requested that the man’s bishop suspend him? The answer to that is, affirmative. The Sacred Congregation could have been asked to intervene with Fr. G’s Ordinary.

None of these tragedies have happened. There is an administrative leave, pending the results of an investigation. No one has said that Father is guilty. Even Father himself does not say that he has been found guilty of anything. He says that he believes the the reason is the communion issue. He has not been told this. Until he’s told this as a fact, it is his belief. He’s entitled to his belief. That does not make him a martyr. If he were unjustly punished, that would be wrong.

He has choices. He can wait out the investigation or he can go home to his bishop. He is not a priest of the Archdiocese. Therefore, canonically, he has no right to a position in any ministry outside of his diocese, nor does he have an obligation to hang around either. He can blow it off and go home. It sounds like he’s willing wait for the outcome, why can’t we, before we throw another good priest under the bus?

Fraternally,

Br.JR, OSF

 

[hudson]

Again, the Priest did the wrong thing by “storming off” without finishing the funeral. Showing respect does not mean I cannot criticise.

People seem to forget about that but seem to think the issue is just about refusing communion.

Did you read the article? He had a migraine…Unless you are saying he is lying. If so, once again I ask you to show respect to this Priest. Many of us are showing respect to the Bishop, you do the same for the Priest.

 

[jen_fla]

Again, the Priest did the wrong thing by “storming off” without finishing the funeral. Showing respect does not mean I cannot criticise.

People seem to forget about that but seem to think the issue is just about refusing communion.

he stated he had a migraine that was very severe. he also took the time to make sure another Priest took his place at the actual burial site.

please read this:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/priest-removal-from-ministry-was-tied-to-communion-incident/

During the two eulogies (nearly 25 minutes long), I quietly slipped for some minutes into the sacristy lavatory to recover from the migraine that was coming on. I never walked out on Mrs. Loetta Johnson’s funeral and the liturgy was carried out with the same reverence and care that I celebrate every Mass. I finished the Mass and accompanied the body of the deceased in formal procession to the hearse, which was headed to the cemetery. I am subject to occasional severe migraines, and because the pain at that point was becoming disabling, I communicated to our funeral director that I was incapacitated and he arranged one of my brother priests to be present at the cemetery to preside over the rite of burial. Furthermore as the testimony of the priest that was at the cemetery conveys, he was present when the Johnson family arrived, and in fact mentioned that being called to cover the burial rite is quite normal, as many priests for reasons much less significant than mine (rush hour traffic for example) do not make the voyage to the cemetery. He routinely covers for them. This change in plans, was also invisible to the rest of the entourage. Regrets and information about my incapacitating migraine were duly conveyed to the Johnson family.

 

[jen_fla]

This is the thing that I have never understood. If you don’t believe what the church teaches, why do you even want to bother going up for communion?

exactly!

 

[Church_Man]

The last time I checked the Eucharist in the Catholic Church is considered the Body and Blood of Christ. This has been the practice for 2000 years. My wife and daughter could not recieve the Eucharist until after they were confirmed.
Are you saying the Body and Blood of Christ should just be given out regardless? Do you yourself beleive it is the Body and Blood of Christ?

Do I believe that it is the Body of Blood of Christ? Absolutely.

But as much as I believe in the real presence, I also believe, to the core of my being, that Jesus is loving, compassionate, forgiving, merciful and welcoming. Why this priest didn’t meet with the family and be a pastoral presence to a grieving daughter before the funeral … I don’t know.

What I do know is that funerals can be a tremendous opportunity to welcome the hurting and sinners back into the loving arms of Jesus. I’m not sure that seconds before receiving Eucharist is the time to publicly humiliate a grieving daughter.

Evidently, Fr. G has come to realize this, because he has publicly apologized, as well as his bishop.

As Christians, we really need to learn how to be more compassionate.

 

[True_Mass]

To what end is he defending himself? Suppose someone lied about you and went to the press. After a media blitz public opinion is that you are a hateful bigot and a homophobe and your reputation is ruined. Are you going to be silent? This is a matter of justice. The man has a right to his good name and an obligation to set the record straight and publicly stand up to the smears and intimidation of the gay lobby.

He can “function” in every diocese but DC who has basically kicked him out for doing his job.
The problem in this country is that we’ve gotten used to the idea that priests who actually do the right thing deserve to be sold out by their bishop, be personally and professionally ruined and then fade away. Cardinal Wuerl is the one who should have been defending this man in the media. A good bishop protects his priests against the slanderers, he doesn’t issue apologies to the slanderers then discipline his priest.

How can Father “function” if he does nothing? Work in the shadows as the “bigot priest” forbidden to defend himself? This priest is out there every week protesting George Tiller’s protege aborting 9 month old babies in the womb. He’s on the front lines every week. He’s changed women’s minds and saved lives. He’s had death threats. The pro-aborts want to shut him down. This priest was the first to be ordained in Russia after the Iron Curtain fell. What has Cardinal Wuerl done? Does he care that the most diabolical abortionist in the planet now has a priest opponent less able to effectively stop him?

This was not a run of the mill story. Individual priests are not internationally disparaged, slandered, lied about, hated, threatened, targeted, smeared and the object of scorn every day.

Where is your proof Father “leaked” his suspension? If you have none please take it back.

Nobody has argued over who is more “orthodox” in the media regarding this matter. As if one could be more or less orthodox. You either are or you aren’t. Father is. He holds the Faith at all times at great personal cost to himself. Not just when it seems convenient.

 

[Corki]

Did I say it would get a pass?

I think the willingness to overlook the Priest’s unprofessionalism and large support come from the fact he denied communion to someone who is a pet hate on this forum. A homosexual.

You said that the priest’s supporters would react differently - which I understood to mean support for the communicant. Sorry if I misinterpreted.

I wouldn’t call it a “pet hate.” However, with those trying to force the Church and Catholics to accept the homosexual lifestyle, it is a current hot button. Mostly because of people like Ms. Johnson and the Rainbow Sash crew who try to force the issue. Of the publically lived sinful lifestyles, it is the most threatening at this moment in time.

 

[Hokomai]

I have no views on the rights and wrongs of this, other than to say that the church should be free to make and enforce its own rules as a private organisation.

However, I am the only one has noticed how well the priest in question writes? His letter of defence is a masterpiece of clarity and careful, systematic elucidation of his point of view. He expresses himself without a hint of distress, and says nothing about his own emotions. He is purely focused on the facts of the matter at hand. I wonder what his sermons are like?

 

[Maundy]

This is the second incident recently of a priest being suspended for criticizing homosexuals. In September the Catholic Diocese of Bathurst, New Brunswick removed an elderly priest, 85-year-old Fr. Donat Gionet from active ministry after he caused a storm of controversy by denouncing homosexuality, cohabitation, and abortion in an August homily.

lifesitenews.com/news/elderly-canadian-priest-suspended-for-denouncing-abortion-homosexuality/

This seems to be standard procedure and it’s not surprising seeing as a large number of “Catholic” Bishops in North America are card carrying members of the homosexual mafia.

Here is a little background on Cardinal Wuerl from Randy Engel who has been tracking these homosexuals in the Church hierarchy for years
newengelpublishing.com/pages/New-Oxford-Review.html

I think we need to support this priest in every way we can and we should also protest these so-called bishops who are persecuting him.

 

[maryjk]

We are conditioned to want to know all the details of every incident. Reality TV and 24 hour news have made us all gossip-hounds. I disagree that the church needs to feed this desire for information we don’t have the right to know. There are other ways of counteracting sensationalistic news.