Same-sex couple says priest denied them communion due to relationship

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Actually, this is something that they should have learned in high school at the latest, or in Church. I can’t imagine that the Catholic bride never heard of such a thing. Well, given the sad state of catechesis for several decades, maybe I can imagine it. But when moral education is lacking, one has the responsibility for self-education.

Being a young Catholic I’m not surprised surprised that someone who went through the dismal system we call catechesis is “somewhat” lacking in theological knowledge

 

[JimG]

Being a young Catholic I’m not surprised surprised that someone who went through the dismal system we call catechesis is “somewhat” lacking in theological knowledge

Yes. Well, to put it more bluntly, we send them to Catholic school for 12 years and they still don’t know right from wrong!

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Yes. Well, to put it more bluntly, we send them to Catholic school for 12 years and they still don’t know right from wrong!

The fact that most Catholic schools are basically somewhat better secular schools with a religion class tacked on as what seems to be an afterthought may have to do with it.

 

[Jeanne_S]

The fact that most Catholic schools are basically somewhat better secular schools with a religion class tacked on as what seems to be an afterthought may have to do with it.

Yep.

 

[ProVobis]

In the US amongst those raised Catholic at least half are quite ignorant of vast sections of Church teaching.

At least two types of ignorance: (1) where one just never hears (2) where no one listens. Can’t really fault the first kind, although we certainly can blame their teachers. The second involves shutting the ears off altogether. I hope they know how to explain that to their Creator on their Judgement Day.

 

[Nacho45]

Those darn heterosexuals are ruining our Church, we should telling them that fornication is intrinsically disordered and a moral evil out of love for their souls.

I understand your attempt of sarcasm, but it falls flat manly because fornication is being taught as a sin, or didn’t you know?

 

[Nacho45]

Being a young Catholic I’m not surprised surprised that someone who went through the dismal system we call catechesis is “somewhat” lacking in theological knowledge

I’m sure it could use improvement, but most “churches” have nothing. I have learned people get out of something what they want, nothing more. The training certainly can and should improve; however, some people will still ignore the parts they don’t like.

 

[Nacho45]

At least two types of ignorance: (1) where one just never hears (2) where no one listens. Can’t really fault the first kind, although we certainly can blame their teachers. The second involves shutting the ears off altogether. I hope they know how to explain that to their Creator on their Judgement Day.

After all, the answer to most questions is just a CCC away, or a priest, or the Internet, or …

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

I understand your attempt of sarcasm, but it falls flat manly because fornication is being taught as a sin, or didn’t you know?

Oh we do but we don’t. We don’t compare them to rapists, thieves and murderers, we don’t say they are behaving like animals, we don’t treat them like pariahs, we don’t treat them as pedophiles or monsters. Instead people treat it as a “minor slip up”, an “understandable mistake” and other things to belittle a mortal sin all because myriads see an action that they themselves may have done, or their spouse, or their children, or their siblings or their friends.

 

[GraceSofia]

Does it actually say somewhere that she is suing the church? I don’t get it, Did she not know? Are there Catholics that don’t know the church doctrine? Or, was she hiding it knowingly? I hope that isn’t the case, because, if I understand correctly, if she truly didn’t know and wasn’t hiding it, she didn’t hurt herself by taking communion, right? I wonder if she found an Epsicopal church to attend instead?

No, they are not suing the Church. They can’t, fortunately, otherwise I suspect they would love to bring coercion by the state into this. We don’t really know what they knew and what they didn’t, but it seems that they are dissenters. (Ms. Parker said she hopes that the priest might “open his eyes and fully receive the LGBT community into the church.” “We’re all God’s children, and we have every right to receive Communion,” she says. “Even the pope has said, ‘Who am I to judge?’”)

I had a discussion today with a bride-to-be who was horrified by the priest’s intention to test their knowledge, he planned to ask about Abraham and the Nicene Creed. She was furious and didn’t see what that “stupid Religious ed. stuff” has with her ability to get married and be a good Catholic wife and mother.

Also, a priest told her not to come to confession until she stops living as married with her boyfriend and she didn’t really see the point, but she took it as a sign not to go to confession until she is married. (But probably not even then because they will most likely be using NFP and see nothing wrong with that, the Church is just an old nag.)


That wasn’t an American, unfortunately it’s just as bad elsewhere, it might seem a little better from a distance.

:doh2: I wonder if the priest will eventually conclude he shouldn’t marry them.

Actually, this is something that they should have learned in high school at the latest, or in Church. I can’t imagine that the Catholic bride never heard of such a thing. Well, given the sad state of catechesis for several decades, maybe I can imagine it. But when moral education is lacking, one has the responsibility for self-education.

Yes. You can lead a horse to water…
I’m getting tired of people blaming everything on the state of catechesis. Maybe it’s the state of people’s hearts and minds and their openess to learning.

I have learned people get out of something what they want, nothing more.

True statement.

 

[Ms_Manners]

“Even the pope has said, ‘Who am I to judge?’”

And it’s sad what people have done with that statement, now every person who thinks the Church is out of its collective mind uses this to justify everything.

:doh2: I wonder if the priest will eventually conclude he shouldn’t marry them.

I doubt it.
Getting married has become a matter of getting married in a church, not in the Church, many just see a lovely building and a lovely tradition, and they actually get very agressive if you point out that it is much more than folklore to many people.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a priest refusing to marry someone, and people rarely take the side of priests who try to make an additional effort, it is seen as nagging and complicating.

 

[GraceSofia]

And it’s sad what people have done with that statement, now every person who thinks the Church is out of its collective mind uses this to justify everything.

Yes.

I doubt it.
Getting married has become a matter of getting married in a church, not in the Church, many just see a lovely building and a lovely tradition, and they actually get very agressive if you point out that it is much more than folklore to many people.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a priest refusing to marry someone, and people rarely take the side of priests who try to make an additional effort, it is seen as nagging and complicating.

Well, that’s too bad. That’s really bad.

I know of at least one couple who a Catholic priest refused to marry (because they complained to me about it, is how I know), but this is in Mediterranean Europe. But the man was divorced. I suppose even in the U.S. a Catholic priest would refuse to marry such a couple, wouldn’t he?

 

[markomalley]

No, they are not suing the Church. They can’t, fortunately, otherwise I suspect they would love to bring coercion by the state into this. We don’t really know what they knew and what they didn’t, but it seems that they are dissenters. (Ms. Parker said she hopes that the priest might “open his eyes and fully receive the LGBT community into the church.” “We’re all God’s children, and we have every right to receive Communion,” she says. “Even the pope has said, ‘Who am I to judge?’”)

(snip)

(snip)

Getting married has become a matter of getting married in a church, not in the Church, many just see a lovely building and a lovely tradition, and they actually get very agressive if you point out that it is much more than folklore to many people.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a priest refusing to marry someone, and people rarely take the side of priests who try to make an additional effort, it is seen as nagging and complicating.

Forcing the Church to simulate the Sacrament of Matrimony for sodomite marriage is the ultimate end goal. I wish to bring to mind this op-edTime from 2011, shortly after NY changed their laws:
Marriage without a church or temple wedding isn’t the real thing. Why can some people have all the bells and whistles in the church of their choice but not me? Of course, there have been and will be congregations and churches that allow gay men and lesbians to be married in their midst and to bless those unions, recognizing that God loves them just as much as Governor Andrew Cuomo does. But some rich and influential religious institutions [NB: Read that as the Catholic Church] **are not only free to continue to reject gay men and women as equal beneficiaries of all aspects of faith but will now also rally their congregants to reject politicians who are willing to abide with this extension of secular civil rights **— no matter how much acceptance there is of same-sex marriage elsewhere, no matter how many wedding announcements appear in the New York Times.
Never doubt that the ultimate agenda is to force the perversion of the Church’s teaching and to force their agenda upon Holy Mother Church.

In the words of Pope Francis (when he was still the Archbishop of Buenos Aires):
*Let us not be naive: it is not a simple political struggle; it is an intention [which is] destructive of the plan of God. It is not a mere legislative project (this is a mere instrument), but rather a “move” of the father of lies who wishes to confuse and deceive the children of God.
*

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Forcing the Church to simulate the Sacrament of Matrimony for sodomite marriage is the ultimate end goal. I wish to bring to mind this Time op-ed from 2011, shortly after NY changed their laws:
Marriage without a church or temple wedding isn’t the real thing. Why can some people have all the bells and whistles in the church of their choice but not me? Of course, there have been and will be congregations and churches that allow gay men and lesbians to be married in their midst and to bless those unions, recognizing that God loves them just as much as Governor Andrew Cuomo does. But some rich and influential religious institutions [NB: Read that as the Catholic Church] are not only free to continue to reject gay men and women as equal beneficiaries of all aspects of faith but will now also rally their congregants to reject politicians who are willing to abide with this extension of secular civil rights — no matter how much acceptance there is of same-sex marriage elsewhere, no matter how many wedding announcements appear in the New York Times.
Never doubt that the ultimate agenda is to force the perversion of the Church’s teaching and to force their agenda upon Holy Mother Church.

In the words of Pope Francis (when he was still the Archbishop of Buenos Aires):
Let us not be naive: it is not a simple political struggle; it is an intention [which is] destructive of the plan of God. It is not a mere legislative project (this is a mere instrument), but rather a “move” of the father of lies who wishes to confuse and deceive the children of God.

True enough.

But first, you have to invite the ‘vampire,’ into your home. And of course, hide the Crucifix, as it may offend him.

 

[GraceSofia]

Forcing the Church to simulate the Sacrament of Matrimony for sodomite marriage is the ultimate end goal. I wish to bring to mind this Time op-ed from 2011, shortly after NY changed their laws:
Marriage without a church or temple wedding isn’t the real thing. Why can some people have all the bells and whistles in the church of their choice but not me? Of course, there have been and will be congregations and churches that allow gay men and lesbians to be married in their midst and to bless those unions, recognizing that God loves them just as much as Governor Andrew Cuomo does. But some rich and influential religious institutions [NB: Read that as the Catholic Church] are not only free to continue to reject gay men and women as equal beneficiaries of all aspects of faith but will now also rally their congregants to reject politicians who are willing to abide with this extension of secular civil rights — no matter how much acceptance there is of same-sex marriage elsewhere, no matter how many wedding announcements appear in the New York Times.

Never doubt that the ultimate agenda is to force the perversion of the Church’s teaching and to force their agenda upon Holy Mother Church.

In the words of Pope Francis (when he was still the Archbishop of Buenos Aires):
Let us not be naive: it is not a simple political struggle; it is an intention [which is] destructive of the plan of God. It is not a mere legislative project (this is a mere instrument), but rather a “move” of the father of lies who wishes to confuse and deceive the children of God.

True. But they will never succeed. They don’t understand that the Catholic Church (and the Orthodox to an extent, although the Orthodox Church generally hasn’t made it onto the radar screens of the GLBT activists) is fundamentally different from the Protestant groups.

Which reminds me of this wonderful Archbishop Sheen quote:
*
"If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because he called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly, it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself. … "*

 

[petra22]

I understand your attempt of sarcasm, but it falls flat manly because fornication is being taught as a sin, or didn’t you know?

Saint Paul sure calls it a sin and advises the first Christians to stay far, far away from it.

 

[petra22]

After all, the answer to most questions is just a CCC away, or a priest, or the Internet, or …

or CAF!

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

Saint Paul sure calls it a sin and advises the first Christians to stay far, far away from it.

And yet how often do you hear about fornication being a sin as opposed to gay sex being a sin? You hear about the latter more than the former yet the former affects far more than the latter and so many don’t know that any nonvaginal sex (including oral) between a husband and a wife is sodomy just like gay sex.

 

[Cider]

And yet how often do you hear about fornication being a sin as opposed to gay sex being a sin? You hear about the latter more than the former yet the former affects far more than the latter and so many don’t know that any nonvaginal sex (including oral) between a husband and a wife is sodomy just like gay sex.

Oral sex among married people is not a sin, as long as it ends in the proper manner.

Additionally, the difference is the Church teaches that homosexuality is disordered, whereas a man and a woman may sin in having sex before marriage, sex between opposite sex couples is not by it’s nature disordered. It’s impossible for two people of the same sex to have sex as designed by the natural created order of God.

 

[markomalley]

And yet how often do you hear about fornication being a sin as opposed to gay sex being a sin? You hear about the latter more than the former yet the former affects far more than the latter and so many don’t know that any nonvaginal sex (including oral) between a husband and a wife is sodomy just like gay sex.

In my parish, it’s rare to hear anything other than “be nice”