He was right to deny her.It's called religious freedom.And religious freedom trumps special rights for homosexuals.She /He should have had a memorial elsewhere with a minister from from a fake/deviant church officiate!

Wow!! you speak like a true Christian.

The priest was within his rights to refuse communion to her. That being said, he was also abrogating his responsibility to minister to those who are suffering.

Labeling an entire group on an incident with one is harsh, immature and just sad. My cousin was in a hospital where she was left soaking in a pool of blood because none of the nurses or staff cared to check on how her IV or whatever needle thing they put in her was. By your logic all nurses and staff are careless people?

It is not okay to be denied to your mother's funeral. It is not. It has nothing to do with being gay or straight.

Yes, freedom of worship trumps her views. Try eating a pig in a Muslim place of worship.

Yes she had every right to be there but there are requirements for being in a state to receive communion. I would not have received communion during my second two marriages because according to canon law they weren't valid ( previous marriage in church) It is the churches right to set the rules for sacraments and if she was raised Catholic she should know that. Especially since before she made her first communion she was told them.

Hypocritical is another person that can't tell where the Jewish bible ends and the new testament begins. Leviticus is Jewish dietary laws not christian law. I know in the new testament Christ says no foods are unclean all you chapter and verse types are free to tag the verse in here.

another person that can't tell where the Jewish bible ends and the new testament begins. Leviticus is Jewish dietary laws not christian law. I know in the new testament Christ says no foods are unclean all you chapter and verse types are free to tag the verse in here.

Then why does EVERY Christian quote Leviticus when discussing their hatred of homosexuals?

A lot of armchair quarterbacks here pretending to know the stance of the Catholic Church on this.

For the record: The Catholic Church does not condemn the individual but condemns the act. The woman and her partner were not engaged in the act in the church. For all the priest knows - they could have been celibate and not engaging in any sexual acts. Regardless - according to canon law a priest may not prevent someone from receiving communion under these circumstances. The priest was out of line with his own Church's code of law.

As far a I understand it, the highly-respected Christian saint, St. Augustine, taught that if a person feels that s/he is facing a forced choice between following one's conscience and following Church policy, then s/he SHOULD follow her/his own conscience. So if the daughter judged herself to be in a 'state of grace', then she is authorized to seek Holy Communion. On the other hand, by the same Augustinian standard, if the priest's conscience says to himself that the woman is living in a 'state of mortal sin', then I guess that he is authorized to refuse her Communion (even if his decision is in conflict with the Church's policy as indicated by the archdiocesan spokesperson). The article does not indicate if the priest there asked the woman about details of her active sex life, so it seems that he even made a rash leap of judgement to decide about what "sins" were committed in private.

As I read the New Testament Scriptures, it seems pretty clear that Jesus pissed off some of the formal Jewish leaders around Jerusalem during His adult life, sometimes by associating with "sinful" folk like prostitutes or tax collectors or those "unclean" from birth with a physical or mental malady, sometimes by the actions of Him or His disciples on Sabbath (e.g. picking corn for sustenance, or 'working' a miracle healing). Jesus's loving treatment of such people appears IMO in stark contrast to the way this priest treated this grieving woman!

If you wish to recieve the sacraments in a Catholic Church you must be in a state of grace. She wasn't. She should have known better. Why should she be allowed to make her own rules?? The rest was indeed difficult. But she brought this on herself.

Gotta love the BULL$H!T headlines from BSNBC. This article isn't as much about the fact that she was denied communion (she knew she would but tried anyway) as it was about her being disappointed about the treatment of her mother. But of course BSNBC wouldn't have gotten the readership if it hadn't used such an inflammatroy headline.

The priest woould have denied her communion any time - not just at her mother's funeral. But of course "special" people want "special" considerations at "special" events. She is pi$$ed because the priest stuck to the tenets of the church.

I'll start by saying that I am not Catholic, but there's something that I don't understand. Did not Jesus Himself minister to prostitutes, theives and sinners? Was His goodness and grace not put "out there" for all to accept?

How can one be expected to atone for his/her sins (or shortcomings, or failures...whatever term you want to use), if a member of the clergy refuses to minister to that poor soul?

We have people dying in tornadoes and houses being destroyed. Why is a story like this making the news? The Priest did the right thing. By the way, folks need to read Romans chapter one beginning at about verse 18 on and 1 Corinthians chapter 6 beginning around verse 8 on. Pretty clear. God has not changed his opinion about perverted person from the Old Testament to the New Testament. He still hates the sin.

The article stated the Priest said-

"I cannot give you Communion because you are with a woman, and in the eyes of the church, that is a sin."

I have to wonder how many people that were at the service and received Communion were an Adulterer, had disrespected their parents, stole something or any other sin sense their last confession.

If he's going to refuse it to one "sinner" he has to refuse it to all.

Let's all think about it, non of us are truly worthy because we all have sinned. But it is not for man to judge us either.

Two women in a loving, committed relationship that consensual = burning in Hell and free reign to beat people over the head with what you view as sin, even when they're in grieving over a dead family member. However! Seeing how many altar boys can turn around and touch their toes = just awwwright. Oh you, Catholic Church, you just so silly...

NC-492358

A priest gets a woman pregnant, don't kick him out but send him to Asia?

The church knowingly hires homosexuals to work for them, yet condemns them?

The Church knowingly breaking its own rules is hypocritical.

Just wondering, does the priest ask the heterosexual catholic couples if they engage in oral sex while determining if they are in a state of "grace" ? I may be wrong but isn't oral sex against the tenets of Catholicism too ?

I agree that the guy was insensative, but if you are gay, or believe that gay people should have any sort of rights, or believe that gays actually do go to heaven and that being gay is not a sin, you are simply not a Catholic. Please stop trying to be.

Also, if you believe that it is ok to take birth control pills, or give blow jobs, if you believe that sex before marriage is ok, you are not a Catholic. Please stop trying to be.

That being said, try Pastafarian. Everyone is welcome, and we have a beer volcano in our Heaven!

Not sure on the actual Catholic cannon law... some here suggest he may technically be in violation.

Either way, it was still a d*** move. Not very "Christ-like". But then again, we are talking about an organization that relocates child molesters to avoid the negative fallout... so what do you expect?

I have to wonder, he denied her communion because he views her lifestyle as a "sin". Did he give communion to any of those "sinning" women who are using birth-control? If there were any married women in the mass, who did not have 20 kids, I'm guessing he did. Looks like priesty-boy has difficulty sticking to his religious rules. All those "sinners" using birth-control and getting communion... absurd.

That being said, try Pastafarian. Everyone is welcome, and we have a beer volcano in our Heaven!

SOLD!

Well, clearly the woman was at fault. I mean really! There is a word for a person like her. Specifically any person that believes in freedom, enlightenment, tolerance, love and respect and also believes in human-based religion (i.e. churches). Such a person upon reflection and introspection can only come to the conclusion that they are stupid. Just massively stupid. People, any religious person out there has exactly one following: a following of one person, themselves. Every yahoo idiot in the world that believes in preaching his understanding to others is an ignorant egotist. They come to their enlightment by 'interpreting' the scripture and then demonize anybody else who has a different 'interpretation'. My fairy tale is stronger than your fairy tale. How many times do we have to hear religious leaders or followers say: Well, you aren't a real christian, you aren't a real muslim, you aren't a real catholic, you aren't a real ... !!! What's real is what you believe, not what somebody else tells you to believe.

The freedom to explore, compare and practice religious philosophy is wonderful for individuals and humanity at large, but churches all churches stand against religious freedom, just like this priest did. They have too or they would become irrelevant. Churches are simply natures way of allowing wolves to fleece sheep. Once the sheep realize they don't need the wolves, it's all over.

This breaks my heart. Jesus was able to forgive. I pray for more tolerance in this World for my children's sake.

This is just another excuse to sue the church..... Ms. Johnson stated she was raised catholic, so she clearing knows the rules yet her actions continued..... Since Father Guarnizo had knowledge of her relationship he had the responsibility to follow church policy.....

Another blow to the loss of credibility for the Catholic Church, and Christians in general.

Thankfully, the Christians I grew up with paid attention to other parts of the Bible, too. Not just the ones they liked.

This is what happens when you replace your spirituality with the most absurd pieces of text found in a 2000 year old mythology book.

Since gluttony is also a sin, does the priest refuse communion to the obese?

My feeling is that everything the priest did was wrong. I appreciate that the church itself apologized. That said and listening to all parties with regard to who should receive communion. The church says we are born with sin, hence baptism. We live with sin every single day, all of us. A thought could be sin. To criticize is a sin. To think your thoughts or idea are better than another's is a sin. To judge is a sin! No one has the right to judge another person. For ever criticism a person has on another someone has a criticism on them. My take, and I was raised Catholic (went to Catholic grammar and high schools and a Jesuit University), is that either all should receive or no one should receive. Believe me when I tell you there are many priests who believe the same thing. To say you have to be in good grace with God would require a person to receive confession moments before receiving communion and hope they didn't have a thought in their head somewhere in between. Practice a faith, be good to others, treat others with respect and if there is a God and we have to answer to him let it be with the knowledge that we lived our lives with compassion and respect and with the hope we did not do harm of any kind to anyone. That is what Jesus (God) preached.

It's a sad situation but rather pointing your finger to the priest being a hypocrite and judgmental is un called for. He is doing his job and believe it or not he is doing right for this woman. Receiving communion is something much deeper than felt good Catholic practice. You have to be in the state of grace to receive it, if you are not living a life that is in communion with the teaching of the church then you are defiling yourself if so choose to receive the Body of Christ. She could participate to received a blessing instead, if she would of have studied her catechism then this should of not been an issue. Sadly many claims to be Catholic but lead a life far from being one...Christianity is not a free for all, it is a life marked with a lot of sacrifices to the road to Holiness. God loves all that's why he called us all to conversion, practicing a life of holiness according to his ways not ours...it is called obedience...

The priest was right to save her from committing the sin of sacrilege...this time but as she acknowledged, she's had communion from the church before while knowingly being in what the church considers a mortal sin.

Mr India, I don't recall oral sex by married heterosexuals mentioned in the Bible as being a sin. Read the bible not the tenets of Catholicism and if you are particular interested in what's allowed for married heterosexuals, try reading Song of Solomon.

i'm sorry for her loss and i hope that she will find comfort in this time of grief, but according to scripture (1 cor 11:27-29), anyone who takes communion in an unworthy manner brings judgment upon themselves. and since homosexuality is considered a sin according to scripture (1 cor 6:9; rom 1:26-27), the priest was actually looking out for her. so no matter how many disagree with this, it won't change the stance of the scriptural text.

Who's the bigger dirtbag? The priest who was cruel to a woman in her time of need or the woman who tried to turn her own mother's funeral into a political statement? Personally, I don't think I need to waste any sympathy on either of them.

As much as I feel the policies of the Catholic Church are wrong I see a lot of hypocrites on this board who see freedom of religion as a one-way street. You can't criticize those that think the church should influence politics and then turn around and say the gov't should dictate the policies of the church.

I myself have been denied communion at a Catholic service because I myself am episcopalian. I was told by my family at my own Catholic grandmother's funeral not to approach the altar at all. And I had to respect that. Hell, I've been asked to perform at Catholic Churches in Europe and I wasn't allowed to receive communion. I may not agree with it but I still showed respect for the religion.

The communion aside, someone paid for that priest to run the service. It should be up to the family how many eulogies, songs, prayers, etc... are recited. In addition, if being onsite at the burial was part of the cost then that priest should have showed his a$$ at the cemetery. There is a big difference between following Catholic dogma and just being insensitive and hateful. The priest was within his right to refuse communion, but that is where the line should have been drawn.

When the Catholic church decides to stop giving communion to Gingrich for his repeated remarriages, when the Catholic church decides to stop giving communion to Santorum because of his support for capital punishment, when Schwarzengger is publically reprimanded for adultery and criticized for taking communion while he was not in a state of grace . . . then we'll talk.

The point is that there are smarmy little rules for things like this--a person can be gay, but as long as the person is a closet gay and confesses every week with the full intent of changing (but just doesn't get around to it because s/he is "weak"), then that person is "in a state of grace." If a man is sexually abusing his own daughter, but confesses it each week and is "weak," then he too can be in a state of grace--the Catholic church defrocked a priest who testified against such a man but allowed known child abusers to stay in the priesthood because the "confessed" and "committed themselves to change."

One does not actually know that lesbians are having sex--there is no Catholic tenet against two women living together and loving one another (or we wouldn't have convents). The issue is with them having sex with one another--and unless the Catholic priest knows for a fact what the two do in the bedroom, it's really none of his business. In fact, as far as this priest knows, the woman confesses her misdeeds each week and vows to try and be celibate (and may even mean it). One does not know what is between this woman and her confessor--and the priest, not being her confessor, has no business talking in public about what she might or might not be doing.

There are women in that congregation who are using birth control, and their husbands know about it--are they denied communion? There are divorced people in that congregation--are they denied communion? There are conservative politicians who are open about their support for both the death penalty and "futile care" laws, are they denied communion? These things are private misdeeds or known public misdeeds, but we don't see priests denying communion publicly to anyone other than those who support reproductive freedom or who are gay. And we sure as heck don't see them using a person's funeral as a platform for making public statements about political issues.

Let he without sin take communion

oohh, wait....

I'm Roman Catholic and find this priests behavior despicable. It was the a funeral service, the priest should have shown some human decency not bigoted religious dogma.

The Archdiosese of his area apparently has a policy to allow for communion in this situation. If the attending priest does not support those policies, he should move to another church. I would make the assumption that she didn't foresee a problem with being able to participate in communion because the article states that she said that she's always received communion before (probably not in this particular church though).

In my opinion, the priest was making a statement because it wasn't one specific occurrence during the funeral, it was multiple. Those stating communion is only for those in a state of "grace". Jesus says, "Let those without sin cast the first stone". Most people, Christian and non Christians alike know that quote. If more Christians quoted that teaching and actedon it as often as those choosing to spout which sin is which and point fingers, we'd have a much better world. We are all sinners according to Jesus' teachings. Some people are just better at hiding it.

Denver Bill

Seems to me this priest can't even live by what his faith teaches.

You might be the last person People should consult on what the Bible says.

Nina-1770132

If you wish to recieve the sacraments in a Catholic Church you must be in a state of grace. She wasn't.

And you know that how?

By the way, if "you must be in a state of grace" to receive sacraments in the catholic church, then how can unbaptized people, including babies, receive baptism? They're not in a "state of grace." How can people with "mortal sins" receive confession? They're not in a "state of grace."

DB

If you're going to quote me, at least make sure it's my statement you're quoting. You might be the last person anyone should consult on what anybody says.

Its nice to know that for all the people defending the priest in this Newsvine thread, none are actually practicing Christians.

I want to take the religious context out of this for a second. (I know that's not really possible but bear with me.) Why do people want to join "social clubs" where they are obviously not wanted because they don't want to follow the rules of the club and then once they do join the club they expect the club to bend over backwards to make the rules accomodate them? So let's say you and a group of your friends has a lunch club. The rules are that each time out a different person pays. Someone comes up to the group and says to them that this new person will be joining the club whether you like it or not and oh, by the way, they aren't paying now or ever. How would you feel about that? Now put the religious context back in and factor in the strength of religious beliefs. I guess what I'm asking is that if a person isn't wanted in that church why wouldn't they just go start their own church? And don't give me any crap about expenses etc. Anyone can start a church for free, they just might not have a building. The building isn't the church, the spirit it carries is.

I wonder if the priest really came down with a headache like the article says. If he was just saying that so he didn't have to complete the funeral then he lied which is also a sin. I was raised catholic and went to 8 yrs of catholic school. The communion service of the mass is beautiful. Christ would not have denied her. He died for everyone. We are all sinners, including the priests. Just because he followed the rules of the church doesn't mean Christ made the rule. She has every right to be upset.

MrIndia

should we start in on the stupidity of the Hindu religion?....it couild be fun , like eating beef is fun....

It never ceases to amaze me how un-christ like, how, in fact, un-christian so many loudly professing "christians" are, including this priest.

They are fakes, charlatans, and hypocrites and christ has advised them that they are on there way to hell.

truthlogic: I'm sorry, but your argument in 1.2 does not wash, for one simple reason: the priest was NOT within his rights, under canon law, to deny the sacrament in this case. In fact, he has totally failed in his pastoral duties, and should be subject (and I'm confident, WILL be subject) to discipline from the archdiocese. The priest did not have firm proof that the woman had been placed under excommunication by a valid authority, per Canon Law 915, and the priest had not formally notified the woman in advance that her being in a state of sin (active homosexual relationship - and even there, he would need proof that it was sexually active, most likely via confession) would result in denial of the sacrament. Not having followed the proper procedures, the priest is the one responsible for the ensuing scandal, and is subject to discipline.

And of course, there are many priests who would focus more on the relationship between the woman and Christ, and not the woman and her partner. This priest obviously has some pretty serious hang-ups. It makes me question whether or not he is suitable for parish work. We'll have to see what happens from here.

Oh, and one last thing: how many adulterers has this individual denied the sacrament to? That one made the big 10, not just the little 635. Hmmmm?

beanathome: brilliantly put!

Faith is one thing, religion quite another. I never cease to be amazed at the hypocrisy of people speaking about religion. I'm sure I'll draw some haters here, but I'm referring to the various versions of what people call "Christian" here more so than any others. I can't remember the last time a Jewish person came to my door to tell me about a better way to live my life, for instance.

You - and everyone - is entitled to believe what you'd like to believe and have faith in whatever god you want to. You - and everyone - are free to participate in any religion you so chose. That's your own business, and no one else's. But, when someone proselytizes or evangelizes that their belief is the One True Belief, that's when they need to shut up, sit down and be quiet.

So very true about The Rules of the Catholic church and just how many "sinners" are allowed to just skate by. If there is a God, I just wonder what good ol' St. Peter gets to do when they meet him at the pearly gates.

Perhaps the Priest believed he was doing exactly as he was expected to do. It's just sad that it ended up further traumatizing a woman already dealing with grief. I remember the Priest at my grandmother's funeral. She was a devout Catholic and attended Mass at the same church more than once every week for many, many years. The Priest kept referring to her by her given name which no one, anywhere, had referred to her by since she'd been a school girl. Nice to know just how caring the Church can be in a time of suffering for grieving family.

Whatever.

Harry Blank - I am a beef eating hindu ....so go right ahead and make fun of hinduism all you want.

I believe in god. I believe in spirituality. I know right from wrong. But i don't live my life based upon the edicts of any damn religion. Religion is man made and it reflects the insecurities and prejudices of the men who created it - Ergo - Thou shalt have no other god before me - As if the all powerful creator of the universe could be insecure enough to care about who you pray to.

Religion is stupid. It is the single greatest source of all evil and most sufferings in this world since time immemorial.

Besides - what is your point ? That hinduism is stupid so you - a chrstian - can be stupid too. Does hindu stupidity somehow validates your own stupidity ?

I noticed some posters commenting on Christ's behavior and certain biblical references. While some of you are correct, the majority are incorrect. To the facts then:

1) Today's Christian believer does not live by the laws of the old testament, but by the rules of the new testament. The ten commandments are however, eternally to be obeyed by all.

2) The declaration that homosexuality is sinful is not only in the old testament, but the new testament also. Please see 1 Timothy Chapter 1, specifically 1 Timothy 1:9-10.

3) Yes, Jesus would have had great compassion for this woman, but as he did with the woman at the well and the woman accused of adultery he would have admonished her for her sins and instructed her to go and sin no more.

When making negative remarks about the bible (number 1 selling book in history) or Christian doctrine or the behavior of Christ please get your facts right or keep your remarks to yourself. Because when you post inaccurate garbage or hate you not only spread falsehoods and rumors, but you make yourself appear ignorant as well.

@Realist Actually, half-wit, if you know half as much about the bible as you pretend to, you know that the translation resulting in the reference to homosexuality in 1 Timothy is controversial AT BEST.

What a dimwit.

Footnote to post #1.70. Christian doctrine not to be confused with church doctrine. Two totally different subjects.

f N Sug: ----- Before you set yourself up as an expert in the Catholic religion, I suggest you learn something about it. Had Father learned of her lesbianism through confession he could not have and would not have therefore denied her communion on that basis. Some other basis, perhaps, but not that one, because of the seal of confession.

I see you are not above name calling MarkC and you want to be taken seriously also I'm guessing. As so many people these days you want everything to go both ways for you.

Wow, the lack of Christian principles and compassion in all these people who call themselves Christians is simply mind-boggling. These behaviors and close-minded attitudes go against what Jesus preached. Oh wait, I forgot - he only meant all those things about turning the other cheek, and he who is without sin casting the first stone for straight people.

Makes me ashamed to call myself Christian and be lumped in with the lot of you.

OH....waaaah....booooohoooooo.....

My wife was denied at her fathers, and mothers funerals because she is divorced from her first husband who tried to choke her to death......

I almost forgot...there's always a REASON that non-practicing Christians use when pretending to be practicing.

Don't really care that people aren't practicing. Just the faking.

Well if you can't find peace with the deceased and with your God without having to eat some holy cracker, then you don't know eternity at all. It isn't a gay/straight issue at all. It's simply an issue where you guys all need to wake up and realize that the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes. Christianity is the greatest con job the world has ever known. And the con continues as long as believers are willing to give. It's money for the asking.

I for one am sick and tired of letting the freeloaders who profit from government subsidies in the name of any religion. I think that we should abolish all non-profit status for religious organizations. Churches and religious organizations are businesses. They have agendas, and they acquire money towards achieving those ends. And if the Supreme Court of the United States of America decided that Corporations can be considered people, then it seems to me that Churches should be considered people too. And all people should be paying taxes. Hasn't that been the Republican message for all these months?

Level the playing field. Eliminate all tax breaks for non-profits.

Truett, what a terribly sad situation. I'm sorry that cruelty was perpetuated on your wife.

There are many tenets of the Catholic faith I do not pretend to understand . . . in fact, I'd have to say that's true about most faiths.

In this situation, however, it is my strong belief that this priest was in the wrong. It was not up to him to know the woman's heart or her state of grace (since he wasn't her confessor). Even a priest shouldn't come between a congregant and God in this situation. He didn't have the knowledge, so he shouldn't have pretended that he did, just to play out his own political agenda.

And even if he thought he knew her state of grace, he still shouldn't have stopped her from taking communion, as she could have repented and been forgiven while walking down the aisle to take communion.

The priest was following his own conscience, not anyone else's. Realistically, he should have stepped aside in favor of another clergyman who was sympathetic to the deceased's daughter, and it is unfortunate that he did not do so. However, there is a broad range of thought about this situation within the Catholic Church, and demanding that everyone subscribe to the most liberal view is as bad as the priest taking a public stand at a funeral.

She has a right to be gay and the priest has a right to religious freedom. Sometimes these rights will cross at a negative point. Let’s be blunt shall we. Under the doctrine of the Catholic Church it would have been a sin for the priest to offer communion to a person unrepentantly living in sin. The priest had no choice to refuse. Now I can assume that the woman grew up in the church and would have known this. The decent thing for her to do would to have not sought a communion she knew she was not entitled too and that the priest could not give her.

To me this is clearly a staged event. Shame on this woman for using her mother’s death in such a dishonorable way.

I'm a practising Christian. My pastor doesn't care if you're gay straight white black yada yada yada. All he wants is you to hear the Word.

We don't "pray the gay" away, that's ludicrous.

Catholics are whackjobs anyways. All you have to do is read the news to see how hypocritical their priests are.

Pretty sure when Jesus said to love the little children, he did NOT mean in a pedophile sort of way. I'm looking at you priestboy.

why is it that many people now days feel that they can impose their ways & their will on others. The Priest was well within his rights as the spiritual leader of that church to deny her communion based on the TENETS OF THE CHURCH! IT doesn't matter how she feels about it. You know liberals harp on "separation of church & state" well this is a CHURCH issue not a state issue. Could the priest have handled things a little differently? (i.e. reading of the second eulogy with him walking out, & him not showing up at the cemetery.) yes. However again this is a church issue decided by the church, not the state, nor by the opinions of others who don't agree with the tenets of the Catholic Church.

First of all, the church doesn't say being gay is a sin, ACTIVE homosexuality is a form of fornication, which is a sin (1 Cor 6:9) Attraction to the same sex isn't a sin, active homosexuality is a sin because it abuses what our reproductive organs were made for. ( sorry if you think a gay couple is reproductive, that's just not science. A child has a right to a mother and father. A child is not a commodity to justify the homosexual lifestyle.)

Secondly, the priest is obligated to deny her Communion. In fact, he is doing it for her own spiritual well being because to receive Communion in sin is a sin itself. To demand Communion is like demanding a Muslim to deny Allah or kill a pig for you. It's not a constitutional right to receive Communion.

Thirdly, this isn't specific to gays, anyone who is in any type of mortal sin isn't to receive Communion. The Church isn't a "straight only" "pray away the gay" club, it was meant for sinners, not to sin, but to be free of sin. Didn't Jesus save the adulteress from death? John 8 1:11. Yes He did.

62kid

First of all, the church doesn't say being gay is a sin, ACTIVE homosexuality is a form of fornication, which is a sin (1 Cor 6:9) Attraction to the same sex isn't a sin, active homosexuality is a sin because it abuses what our reproductive organs were made for. ( sorry if you think a gay couple is reproductive, that's just not science. A child has a right to a mother and father. A child is not a commodity to justify the homosexual lifestyle.)

Secondly, the priest is obligated to deny her Communion. In fact, he is doing it for her own spiritual well being because to receive Communion in sin is a sin itself. To demand Communion is like demanding a Muslim to deny Allah or kill a pig for you. It's not a constitutional right to receive Communion.

Thirdly, this isn't specific to gays, anyone who is in any type of mortal sin isn't to receive Communion. The Church isn't a "straight only" "pray away the gay" club, it was meant for sinners, not to sin, but to be free of sin. Didn't Jesus save the adulteress from death? John 8 1:11. Yes He did.

First, how do you, or the priest, know that the daughter was "engaging in homosexual activity," which the Catholic church considers a "sin?" Did the priest see it? Did you? No one knows what their personal life is like. And don't say: "oh, come on - she's a lesbian living with another lesbian; of course they were..." If the priest, or you, can provide proof of that, go ahead. As for children being considered a commodity, you're right. Straight couples have them for that reason all the time, including Catholic ones. They want to feel "fulfilled." Children don't exist to make anyone feel fulfilled. They're not major household appliances. While some gay couples may use medical procedures to conceive a child, the vast majority have children via adoption, and they take into their homes special needs children at a much higher rate than straight couples do (it's true - go ahead and google the research). Straight couples, including Catholic ones, use dip-and-dish "medical" procedures far more than gay couples do. When was the last time you heard a Catholic priest deny communion to one of those couples? I've never heard of it.

Secondly, the priest - once again - had no idea what the daughter's private life is like. He only knew she's a lesbian and lived with another one. Simply based upon what she is, he denied her communion, and that goes against church teaching which you yourself have affirmed - you said it's not a sin to be gay, just a sin to have sex. And don't forget, the daughter has stated that she is a practicing Catholic (with a few other things mixed in, but I've never met a Catholic, even a "devout" one, who doesn't do that) and has received communion regularly. This was the first - and only time - this has happened to her (and at her mother's funeral, no less).

Thirdly, it's nonsense to say "this isn't specific to gays." The majority of Catholic couples, including those who are regular, go-to-mass-every-Sunday-and-holyday-of-obligation, ones practice contraception. I'm sure there are quite a few other "sins" that the majority of regular mass-going/communion-receiving Catholics are doing when they go up to receive the host. If priests really followed the the teaching of the church, they would have to deny the vast majority of those waiting in line from receiving the host and wine but they don't. Why? Because even they "know," they don't know. Probably at least three out of four married adults (and quite a few, if not most, single ones) who come marching up with their hands out have done something again and again which should bar them from communion, but the priest places the host in their hands. What this all comes down to is the priest being selective, and he bases his selection upon his homophobic bigotry. And bigotry is also a sin, so he should be the last one receiving communion. When was the last time you saw a priest say mass and then refuse to receive communion because he's in a "state of sin?" I'll bet you've never seen it. No one has.

Moderator -- why was my comment collapsed? There's nothing offensive in it, unless you think it's offensive to express a strong opinion. It criticised the priest, but not other participants in the vine. Here it is in its entirety. Judge for yourselves.

'We're not talking "special rights" here, "truthlogic." (Wow, there's a certain irony in that name.) We're talking being treated with decency and compassion. Seems to me this priest can't even live by what his faith teaches. Seems like the priest is the "deviant," as you want to call it.'

Sawyer, and others,

In my experience, comments get collapsed after a certain number of people "report it" as no value, inflammatory, advertising. It is an automatic thing. Any post that gets enough no value or inflammatory flags will be collapsed by newsvine (the community) The moderators don't go through and pick out every post that is "inflammatory." The moderators come into play if you call someone a name or are violating one of the code of honor. Occasionally on a topic as controversial as this, the moderators do go back through and uncollapse (restore) comments that are not offensive but that about half of the group disagrees with. That is why you should only mark as inflammatory something that is truly inflammatory. Not something that you disagree with. But it is people on both sides that continue to mark as inflammatory something that they disagree with that causes posts to be collapsed. Some viners probably know that it will collapse people of the opposite opinion, and others probably don't.

This Priest 100% correct. Communion is for believers. She is an openly practicing homosexual. She should not receive communion. I spent over a decade away from the church and I never took communion because I wasn't a practicing Christian. Some people are too dense to realize their sin separates them from God.

Please all Christians send a letter to this priest supporting his actions. I guarantee the gay community will and he's under a lot of pressure right now. I sent mine this morning. When good men who do nothing evil reigns. If you sit aside and don't get involved evil, gay agenda, will triumph not only here but in a community near you.

I do sympathize with her, it is hard to think clearly when you lose someone dear to you. The woman should have met with the priest, PRIOR to the funeral. If she had, she would have known what to expect and then either chosen to go along with the policies or had the funeral elsewhere. Since her mother was a parishioner, the priest had NO RIGHT to refuse to go the burial, that is HIS JOB; no matter what his opinion of the daughter and her lifestyle. To go into a church and expect them to conform to her belief system, was at best, foolish.

Blonde - you are absolutely correct on all counts. I add to that "his job" is also to be compassionate, which he obviously wasn't. How can we reach a lost and dying world when we act like he did?

She, as a practicing lesbian, is not in good standing with the Roman Catholic Church and she knows that. This is just another four-year-old type tantrum. It's demented grandstanding attention-seeking behavior. I have been refused communion in a Roman Catholic church merely because my membership is in the PC(USA). It is their right to refuse communion to her and to me and I have better decency and politeness than to make a public specatcle of their decision in their church. She chose to have the priest to make it the most public denial she could manage just to get what she wanted. A mosque or a synagogue wouldn't let me bring a ham sandwich through the door either and would certainly treat me differently than one of their practicing members whether or not I had the ham sandwich. She's an angry woman wanting to create the biggest confrontation she can. Well, too bad. Until the pope decides differently, they have every right to not serve her communion in a Roman Catholic institution.

That's BS. She went with her partner for loving support during a difficult time. How can you say she brought her lifestyle? Did she show up with a political sign? The priest had no right to admonish her at that time - it's inappropriate during a funeral service. Even the archbishop disagrees with you.

I don't get that she went in with a big "I'm here I'm queer get used to it" stance. From this article the priest denied her without her making a spectacle.

She brought her partner of TWENTY YEARS to help her grieve for her mother at her funeral.

Was she not supposed to attend her mothers funeral, simply because she's gay????

Yes she specifically choose that church to start problems, not because her mother went to that church. Yes, it's her fault for being gay, not the churches fault for rigidly sticking to a book of fairy tales while over looking other sinners in their lot, which I am sure include single, un wed mothers and men who sleep around.

Immoral lol. Only the gays are immoral, because heterosexuals get to go into a box, confess the terrible things they did, then get a "get out of hell" free card. This is why I am not religious nor ever could be.

It seems from the statements Ms Johnson made in the article above that she regularly attends a different Catholic Church and has yet to be treated the way she was treated by Father Marcel. I don't see how Ms Johnson was trying to create a confrontation with this priest, and that the Archdiocese that has jurisdiction over Father Marcel apologized says volumes about the spiritual competence of Father Marcel.

Perhaps you and I read different articles.

No, she went to her mother's funeral to grieve her mother's death, or maybe you don't think she had a "right" to do that? I suppose you think she should have just stayed home that day? You and that so-called priest are the epitome of exactly everything that is wrong with this nation and society. You are a bunch of intolerant, judgmental, hypocrites. YOU and your ilk, left unchecked, will be the downfall of this great nation. But I have news for you. You are in the minority. People all across America are finally seeing your bigotry and hatred for what it is. Your day has come and gone, so you and that "priest" can go crawl under a rock and live out the rest of your miserable days.

I have to agree with you on this one. I don't believe the things that Judaism teaches, so I don't go to Jewish temples and synagogues insisting that they treat me the same way a fully indoctrinated Jew would be treated.

Something else a little interesting is that by saying "you will pay dearly on the day of judgment" one would be judging per se. So basically, you judged me and that's bad, so I'm gonna judge you back. Two wrongs making a right?

Ace,

She could attend her mother's funeral, she just couldn't recieve communion. Not sure on the Eulogy count. However, whether we like it or not, that priest has the right to deny her communion. I'd say he was being extremely petty over-all. However, he was within his rights.

"She used her mothers funeral to make a political statement" She was trying to honor and respect her mother by giving her a proper funeral in the church she regularly attended. No where is it mentioned that she was trying to promote her lifestyle or its acceptance, nor does this article even hint at the idea she "knew she was creating a confrontation with the church"

ComradeChaos, please, please, please dont make your own assumptions about what people "know" or dont know or what there motives are from an article on an event that you were not apart of.

Dear Comrade, How dare you!!!!! This woman was not there to cause a confrontation, but to morn and bury her mother. Who cares what her "Lifestyle" is. She was remembering another life. This was about her Mother. This priest was not only wrong, but was an a$$ about. He should be removed. It is not now or has it ever been his place to judge !!!!! He is not GOD. This is another glaring example of a mere mortal trying to play GOD. This is another reason "Normal" people like me Leave the Catholic Church.

WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!!!!

goodforgood
- I think what Comrade was saying was that she knowingly walked into a place that considers her lifestyle a sin. She should have expected a response like this. My Step-daughter is gay, I hosted her civil union in my back yard. I can guarantee that she would not have been offended. She would have just chalked it up as what it is....not being allowed to participate in a spiritual ritual because those overseeing the ritual do not believe that people are born gay.

Umm, no, Ms. Johnson did NOT "bring her lifestyle to the church". She was not there explaining her sexual orientation, nor advertising it, nor talking about it. She was there to mourn the death of her mother. Instead, she was judged and ridiculed by a "man of God".

This is a prime example of how churches and religion in this country have changed. They now have very little to do with the word of God. Instead, they have simply become an outlet for particular groups to advance their agenda. This is why churches and religion no longer command any respect.

The reading of the eulogies should have been allowed, and the priest should not have acted condescendingly to her, but he had every right not to allow her Communion, as she is living in sin. There was wrong on both sides of this issue.

Try eating a pig in a Muslim place of worship.

Good thing it wasn't a mosque her mother attended.

Whether he made a public statement or not isn't what she is complaining about she wants dispensation to break rules that even heterosexuals have to follow. Every divorced and remarried Catholic is in the same boat. I knew when I remarried I wouldn't be in a state of grace on Sunday so I didn't put my priest in that position. All other worship services were open to me, the priest drove 25 miles at midnight to baptize our child when my Lutheren husband called and said the infant was sick.

This must have been HORRIBLE for her.

I was raised in Catholic church/school.

I am not sure the priest had to allow her to receive.

I just keep thinking that his actions wer not very "christian". the expression "What would Jesus do?" comes to mind right away as I read this. I think modern churches are far removed from real Christianity.

I do feel for her as I am very comforted by receiving at church and I am quite sure that I would have wanted to do so at my Mom's funeral.

No, she brought her partner to MOTHER'S funeral - you know, the person who is there for you when this major and incredibly hard event happens. Are you SO blinded by politics that you can't even acknowledge simple love between people? The time to talk to someone about their perceived lifestyle is not a parents funeral.

Friartuck1950, I wish I could vote your comment up more than once.

Joe, PhoenixAz, read the article... the entire article and then comment, please. You too, lonereb. I bet if the denying of communion was the only issue, it would have been taken with a grain of salt. This priest, more or less harassed this woman and ruined the funeral for many.

I am not a religious person, I am an agnostic. Of everything I have ever read in the bible, the lesson that I take most to heart is

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He
that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

I spurred a dialog - which is good.

Joe, Phoenix, AZ got it right.

If you are a true Catholic, and I mean true.. you can not be gay and be true to your faithit stands against homosexuality. To ask for communion weather it is at a funeral or a Sunday service is not your right because you are not true to your faith. I think the priest did his job in defending the practice of his faith and religion. Unfortunately feelings got hurt.

The priest did the right thing in denying her communion. He did her a favor. Anyone who eats communion is subject to punishment by God. 1 Corinthinan 11: 26 -30 states:

²⁶ For every time you eat this bread and drink this cup, you are announcing the Lord’s death until he comes again. ²⁷ So anyone who eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord unworthily is guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. ²⁸ That is why you should examine yourself before eating the bread and drinking the cup. ²⁹ For if you eat the bread or drink the cup without honoring the body of Christ, you are eating and drinking God’s judgment upon yourself. ³⁰ That is why many of you are weak and sick and some have even died.

This again just proves the fact, that gays won't stop at just being wanting to be married in terms of the law. They want to infiltrate the church to prove to others that they are acceptable to God. If this woman was really a christian( which I doubt), she would have left behind her lesbianism a long time ago. Romans 6: 1-2 states:

¹ Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace? ² Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it?

Unhappy,

Oh yeah? What about the core belief of Christianity that we are all sinners? This pillar of faith is often conspicuously overlooked by individuals of your ilk.

If you have attended even one mass in your life (which I doubt), you know that Catholics acknowledge that we are sinners, and that we all are unworthy take communion, RIGHT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY TAKE COMMUNION. Using your logic (and the priest's as well presumably) nobody could receive communion, with the exception of Christ Himself.

In the end, this priest, like you, Unhappy, was trying to take a political point, and cloak it in bad theology. Both you and he should be ashamed of yourselves. And while you're at it, repent your sins, which clearly are greater than your limited grasp of theology has given you the ability to comprehend.

Oh yeah? What about the core belief of Christianity that we are all sinners? This pillar of faith is often conspicuously overlooked by individuals of your ilk.

If you have attended even one mass in your life (which I doubt), you know that Catholics acknowledge that we are sinners, and that we all are unworthy take communion, RIGHT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY TAKE COMMUNION. Using your logic (and the priest's as well presumably) nobody could receive communion, with the exception of Christ Himself.

Iamevilhomer: Perhaps that is why there is so much fault with the members of the Catholic church. None of you take the words of the bible seriously. Knowing what to do and not doing it is sin. (James 4:17). Did this woman intend to stop her homosexuality? If not, it does no good to ask God for forgiveness, take the communion, only to return back to her lifestyle. Let me reiterate Romans 6: 1-3 again.

¹ Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace? ² Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? ³ Or have you forgotten that when we were joined with Christ Jesus in baptism, we joined him in his death?

Unhappy,

Based on your above statements, I guess that you must follow every single law in Exodus and Leviticus, right? Otherwise, you would be a hypocrite. And a troll.

One poster stated=

Was she not supposed to attend her mothers funeral, simply because she's gay????

If her mother was such a devote catholic, just maybe she didn't want her there and she just came anyway. You know the mind set of the gay community, well they have to accept me the way I am. Well not everyone has too accept the way someones lifestyle choices and that really is the way it is! Hence the cousin giving the eulogy instead of the daughter!

Just like my son, when he basically announced he was on the fruity side of life. I choose not to have anymore too do with him either. Can't believe this fool kid still keeps trying to write me and to have some kind of relationship with him, not going to happen. I'm making a clear choice as well and it should be respected just like they want respect for their choice.

When you decide you're going to live a certain lifestyle and some disagree with that type of lifestyle don't be so surprised when it may cost you some personal relationships with others. Hey don't worry be happy!

She seems to have most definitely use this for her soapbox on her beliefs even if it doesn't co-exsist with the churches.

Who said anything about not judging others? Scripture calls us to condemn sin when we see it. So if we see a murder, we are not to "judge" the murderer?

WTF does this poor lesbian have to do with a murderer? Jesus also said to stop pulling splinters out of your neighbors eyes and get the log out of your own. I guess you overlooked that part.

Actually, one of the roles of the "priests" is to hear confession (ie judging a person). The priest ends up being a judge before god.

Also, I'm not Catholic.

The poor lesbian was not worthy to receive communion, which, we as Catholics believe is the real and true body of Christ, because she was in an unrepentant state of sin ( which she demonstrated by bringing her partner with her). As Catholics we have a right to determine who is and is not in a state of grace (the priest that is) which she demonstrated publicly to the rest of the congregation by having her partner in attendance with her. No she did not have the right to receive Holy Communion period not matter what the circumstances.

Why should she have rights within the church that were rightly denied me for 30 years? I knew I was living in sin. I knew I was not in a state of grace and I would not receive my Lord when I was not worthy.

bohnmann...confession has nothing to do with judgement by a priest. Confession (as a Catholic sacrament) is about absolution - not judgement.

@Bill C-2406980 Christ taught compassion and forgives and to NOT judge others. Seems you missed that lesson that day.

It seems to me that every single Catholic who has posted in these comments so far has added to the impressions of most thinking modern people that their church belongs back in the Middle Ages.

Then again, if she is a reasonable person capable of thinking for herself, maybe they're right -- she should have known better than having anything to do with their church.

The Maitre,

And yet they tell the person to say 5 Hail Marys and 3 Our Fathers (penance or punishment). That is judging in any sense of the word. It is about the person confessing receiving forgiveness and it goes through the priest.

Didn't Jesus himself say, let he who is without sin cast the first stone?

Bill C-2406980

By your logic and that of the priest's no one should receive communion, ever. Why? He refused to give her communion because she is a lesbian and and because being one is apparently a sin. However we are taught we are all sinners. There for following that logic you both must believe no one is worthy of receiving the host.

Other-wise you are either both hypocrites or have to admit this was wrong. Which is it?

Catholics believe that communion is the body of Christ and there are rules that apply to receiving communion, giving communion, and storing communion. That's why if you attend a Catholic mass, you will notice not all Catholics at mass receive communion. If she went to Catholic school she should have been aware of the rules. However, the priest could have handled the situation much more tactfully and compassionately. Probably about time for him to retire.

Okay I can argue both sides of this and Longing does a good explanation of the Catholic side. I knew I would see all the "no judging" people out on here as well. Funny that so many people know all the "judge not" verses and forgiveness verses, but don't know the "abomination" verses.

THAT is not my point though. What I do not understand is why this is National news. Oh that's right, someone said No to a gay person and that is not allowed.

No wonder the catholic church numbers are down - it is basically a cult of medieval tenets. How sad for the daughter - yet, she should have known that man would not comfort her. She should have put in for buying an Indulgence - the pope brought that practice back now - she could buy her stairway to heaven. Bet they even take Master Card.

End tax exempt status for ALL religious organizations.

This woman is not in a state of Grace, which means she is out of communion with Christ and His Church and therefore cannot receive Holy Communion. Period.

1 Corinthians 11:23-29

²³ For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, ²⁴ and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” ²⁵ In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” ²⁶ For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

²⁷ So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. ²⁸ Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. ²⁹ For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.

While the Priest could have been more gentle, I'm glad he stood firm. This sense of entitlement that is a secular value has no place in receiving the Holy Eucharist when you are not even a faithful Catholic. She said she was Catholic, but had other beliefs too. WHATEVER! If you love the Lord Jesus Christ with all your heart, then you know He is the only way to Salvation. We Catholics will not bend on our faith and morals no matter what. You can bring pressure against us by whatever means and you will never change us. We have outlasted every dictator, President, King or Government who tried to bring pressure against us. You will fail, because Christ promised that the Catholic Church, His Church founded on the Holy Apostles, would never fail and the gates of Hell will never prevail. Pax!

Longingforthemiddle-2357573

Well all I know is the prayer you give before you receive common is supposed to absolve you of sin before receiving the host. There is no rule written or told to a catholic saying you can not receive communion in this case.

And yet, they estimate that 98% of catholic women DO USE birth control. Man, communion lines must be really quick these days.

It just seems to me that many of you have hit the nail on the head. We are all sinners. Even the priest is a sinner and if he thinks that he is not then I wouldn't want him leading all the other sinners. God's grace has and will save many of us sinners - but compassion was clearly lacking from this priest and I don't think that Christ would feel that this was the way to deal with the situation - Christ would have shown His love for her in her time of need...

Krestov, you couldn't be more incorrect. Communion has no power over your sin. It is a memorial to the Great Price that Christ has already paid for us on Calvary. If you partake of Communion, You are showing the Lord's Death until He comes. That's it, no salvation in Communion.

I wonder what this man is like during his sermons when several babies begin to cry. Does this man shout out to his flock, "damn, these children of God are interrupting the word of God! I will not tolerate such abnormal behavior within my church."

Celtchick50 said:

"You are another reason I am an Atheist."

Here and all the time I thought Atheists didn't believe there is a God. Didn't know it had anything to do with the lives of Christians and how they chose to live them. Learn something new everyday.

The Law of the Catholic Church on this subject is clear: Canon 915 "Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion."

(The emphasis is mine) - The woman is a known practicing homosexual. Being homosexual is not a sin, but acting on the homosexual impulses is. She brought her partner to the funeral. She should have know not to come for communion. The priest should have handled the situation better, but he was required by the law of the Catholic Church to not give her communion.

The Archdiocese apologized for the priest's lack of pastoral sensitivity, not for his actions concerning adherence to Church Law. I think the woman should likewise apologize to the Church for creating a condition that caused scandal, because she should have known better (she claims to have gone to Catholic Schools).

The priest was right to save her from committing the sin of sacrilege this time. But as she acknowledged, she's had communion from the church before while knowingly (and apparently unrepentently) being in what the church considers a mortal sin.

My condolences to that woman, at the loss of her mother. I know when my mother died I was devastated and took a dark road from which I'm still recovering. Having said that, a church is about following rules, if you break the rules then you suffer the consequences, if you don't like it get out and find a church whose rules you can follow, Again I know because my mother was deeply religious and even though I was baptized into her religion I soon left because I couldn't follow those rules. I hope this woman moves on... God bess you.

Krestov,

If you have committed a venial sin, then you may present yourself to communion. With a mortal sin, like being in a gay partnership, you may not present yourself for communion. Read the scripture above and now reference the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

A Catholic in a State of Mortal Sin Must Not Receive
Communion:
"ANYONE WHO IS AWARE OF HAVING COMMITED A MORTAL SIN
MUST NOT RECEIVE HOLY COMMUNION, even if he experiences deep contrition, without
having first received sacramental absolution, unless he has a grave reason for
receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession"
(Paragraph 1457 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church; emphasis
added).
--The Church charges anyone who has not yet received
confession for a mortal sin to abstain from the Eucharist.

The Lesbian woman is public with her sin, and should do herself a favor and go to confession and seek true repentance from this immoral lifestyle and live a chaste life if she wants to inherit the Kingdom of God. Period. Pax.

Priest denied me Communion at mom's funeral because I'm gay!

Okay, here is my question. Does she normally attend the Catholic Church and if so, does she normally get to receive communion?

My guess is no and no. Therefore she is using the death of her Mother to grand stand for lesbian rights. Because she knows the Catholic chruches stance on this and she knew it going in.

Do you think Neut takes communion even though he married a woman he was having an affair with, twice???? Oh, they open arms for the kinds of people with cash but everybody else must be out!

Freedom of religion works both ways, If what you believe is in any way different than the church of your choice, you would be wise to keep looking until you find a church that believes the way you do. They do not have to conform to your beliefs and they do not have to conform to yours. would we want it any other way?

She was committing a sacralige; the priest had a duty to deny her. The sacralige is worse than being a lesbian and she must know this being a so-called catholic.

Who said anything about not judging others?

I believe his name was Jesus. Get your head out of Leviticus and read the Gospels.

Although I agree she should not be allowed to take communion while living in a state of unrepentant sin, I think the priest should have treated her with respect, if for no other reason, out of respect for her parents who attended there for years. He also should have taken her aside to explain she would not be allowed to participate to save face for everyone involved. I am not Catholic so I am not aware of all of their teachings and rules. I do know my church teaches us to abhor the sin, not the sinner. Jesus always showed compassion when dealing with sinners. We are supposed to model his behavior in everything we do. That is what "Christian" means.

Longing,

The priest was being an ignorant prick and he is not the arbiter of who is in a state of sin. An individual could have made a good Act of Contrition prior to Communion and I am not even sure her relationship is a mortal sin. Unless the priest has absolute knowledge of a mortal sin being committed and living with someone of the same sex is not a sin there is no basis to deny communion. If a priest denied every married woman practicing birth control there would be damn few women getting communion. No teenage boys and most other males could not pass the maturbation test and I don't know of any Diocese who suggests priests humiliate the families of the deceased. I have been to numerous funerals where gay family members spoke and received communion and I have been at funerals of openly gay people who were not denied the sacrements. This guy was just being a dick.

jkh

I'm a Protestant who married a Catholic in a Protestance church over 35 years ago. When my husband and I moved to a new city, I called the Priest of the nearby Catholic parish to ask if I could participate in Communion since I wasn't a Catholic, he said "yes, no one here will judge you". The elderly Priest (in his late 60's) was well ahead of his time. I spoke with him about being on birth control for endometriosis, and once again he said that was not a sin. The priest died long ago now and we left the Catholic church. My condolensces to you and your family. My advice to you is to find a Parish in which you and your partner are accepted.

WWJD?? Jesus would have told the women to sin no more. Jesus and the Catholic Church loves every person on earth and that is why we share the Gospel with them so they can be saved.

If you lead a sinful life, which is clearly against God, then you may not present yourself for communion. Yes, everyone is a sinner, but only some sins can send you to Hell. Some sins are mortal, especially sins of the flesh. She has chosen the sins of the flesh over God. She has a choice, and God is all merciful and all loving but His justice is perfect and He will honor your decision to live in sin or live for Him. You choose. God doesn't send you to Hell, rather he honors your wish to be sepparate from Him. Her lifestyle completely sepparates her from God. If she dies in this state, and not in the friendship of God, she will not go to Heaven.

Our choices on Earth matter, and our actions show reveal the faith we have or don't have. We are saved by Grace through faith working in Love. If you don't put God first in your life and become totally sold out to Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and repent of your sins, then you will send yourself to Hell. Hell is real, and I will pray she will come back into communion with our Lord who loves this woman and all sinners alike. When a woman like this turns her life away from the flesh and walks towards God and His will for her life, he will show her such love and compassion she has never experienced before. For God is more happier about the one sheep who comes back to the herd than the 99 that always did His will. We are all equal in God's eyes and He doesn't want anyone to perish. REPENT AND BE SAVED!

'My mother loved the Catholic Church ... If she loved it, it was good'

Then the problem is what? You know the rules of the church and they are expected to change them because you want them to? The church your Mother loved does not agree with your lifestyle choice. I am sorry, but that is a fact.

As usual most are missing the true point. We are talking about religion, not Christ's word. Every religion has their do's and don'ts and if you are not willing to abide by them, how can you call yourself a memeber of that flock.

I am Roman Catholic ... well, raised that way and I do hold many of their ideals and do's and don'ts to heart. However, I lead a Christian life, I do not go to church regularly, I do not like the fact it takes people 10 minutes to say halleluia and Amen. A typical mass has 65 minutes of repitition and 10 minutes of true word in gospel and talk from the priest. Should be the other way around but then again, I do not make the rules.

SO, how can so many people criticize, object, place demands, and bring in public opinion into the Catholic religion ... NOT YOUR BUSINESS. Get over it. Try criticizing other religions, they will NOT be forgiving to your words. HOw does your thoughts and values stack up? Ya know something, I do not care. Not my place. Leave this alone and stop humoring some fool EDITOR who has nothing to do but pick out fools in the news who need or want more attention.

Priests are people, too. No more, no less. I've had the opportunity to get to know many through a monastary. Some were very kind, sincere and seemed to "get" what it means to be a follower of Christ....others were almost infantile, ( selfish and perverse.)

It is a shame that this woman did not have the former to attend to her, this story would have ended alot differently.

The love of Christ was not shown through this priest, but then again...this doesn't shock me one bit, having seen what some priests are capable of.

Fbikerchick.

If there is no old testament, then there is no need for the New Testatment.

The new testamant does not accept continuing in sin.

The priest was insensitive, and undiplomatic. And arguably should have to answer to the archbishop for that. But he also was right to deny communion. I could see it in this woman's first quote here in the article. Once Mass is celebrated, in the eyes of Catholics, it isn't bread and wine. Anyone who doesn't believe that ought to respect the Church's beliefs, and not try to receive it - just because you want to do what everyone else is doing.

It's not something you do just to be social at church.

Even practicing Catholics will at times not go up to take communion. They want to get to confession before they do. For instance, if you miss a Sunday or a holy day of obligation, you aren't supposed to take communion until you go to confession.

don't we all just LOVE religious IDIOCY when applied to a funeral. Glad I'm atheist

I dont want anyone coming to my church and peeing in my baptismal water either.

In a way, trying to demand the Church change its thinking on this (hasn't happened in 2000 years) is being rather silly. Even rather 'ugly American'ish.

How many of us would go into a mosque and loudly suggest, "Hey, you know what? You guys ought to face West. There's a beautiful sunset."

Not everybody does their things the way you'd like them to do their things. Sorry if that bothers you.

And yet Catholics always spout this bullshlt... "Hate the sin, love the sinner." Hypocrites!

I guess there was no love for Ms. Johnson in church that day.

As for "being in a state of grace to receive communion"...I am not a practicing catholic, in fact, I'm not a catholic at all, but every time I have to go to a church function, be it a Wedding, Funeral etc, I go up and receive communion...and I am still here, alive and kicking azz!

Lol, storm, what did you expect? Flames would come out of the host, like you were the Germans in an Indiana Jones movie oopening the Ark of Covenant?

I don't mind that people are speaking out against the church on this, but the church is just that, a church. They have strange ways of doing things, it is what it is.

People who don't like the churches rules, are under no obligation to be a member of the church, after awhile, when enough people are no longer a member, then it will cease to exist.

so what's all the hubbub about?

She should of slapped the cup out of his hand..

I hope that all of her family members find peace. Yet at the same time, I wish she had told the priest point blank to take a flying hike. If she has ever in her lifetime paid any sort of contribution to a catholic organization, I hope she pubicly comes forward and requests a refund in full. Perhaps in golden goblets if that is what the they have spent her money (if any) on. The priest who refused her communion is not a man of the God that I understand and perceive. He's simply a man. Frankly a judgmental man working for a judgemental organization. There are many other religious organizations and yes gasp christian ones who would wholeheartedly embrace this woman just who she is as a child of God. I hope she has the bravery to turn her back on that man and his entire belief system and finds a more all encompassing, compassionate and accepting organization. I suppose that mans "flock of sheep" will continue to bleat in unison to his and the vatican's judgements. Its hardly what I deem christian love and acceptance. Shes well rid of him.

Interesting about these grave sins, I read into it, yes it is man who has decided how to label these sin and it is yet again man who has selected which to follow and which not to follow.

Again if Jesus can kneel before the sinners and tell us whomever is without sin may cast the first stone, then this priest has no more right to decide this course of action.

I find it interesting how the catholic church seems to enjoy the right to reclassify, list and decide what is a moral sin and what is not and also what law to follow and what not.

I shake my head at the hypocrisy of it all, if you are a Christian just be a Christian and worry about your own soul and not the state of others just like the bible says.

I am a Roman Catholic, although lapsed for the last 18 years since my priest literally turned his back to me after mass the first Sunday after I invited my abusive, alcoholic husband to leave; it might have made me a bad Catholic, but at least I am a live Catholic. Father Guarnizo's actions seem to have nothing to do with the Churchs' beliefs, but, his own ideologies; since I recall that there are churches that actually support gay and lesbian life styles. These places of worship seem to understand that in this modern world everyone needs support and a place to feel welcomed by God's love.

Ms. Johnson according to the article attended parochial schools, and her mother attended St. Johns, it is no small wonder Ms. Johnson chose this church to bring her comfort in her time of grief. Father Guarnizo's behavior towards Ms. Johnson was anything but Christian. No matter what Ms. Johnson's relationship with her mother was, it must have been heart wrenching to be saying her last good-bye; to be dealing with a bigot and hypocrite's behavior at the same time is beyond reprehensible. I do feel as though Ms. Johnson is doing the right thing in asking for Father Guarnizo to be replaced. At a moment in time when a person needs the love and support of the church and its representatives the last thing you should be receiving is heartlessness.

Gues if she had been a child molesting priest, then she would have been allowed. Glad I am not Catholic.

She should just go find another church! Who in their right mind would want to be a part of such a hateful group anyways. One other thing, if God is as powerful as they say, don't you believe he can make his own decisions?

For all those who claim that she is not worthy of receiving the Holy Sacrament, remember what we say at each mass before receiving communion, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed." Don't be so blinded by your own sense of self-righteousness.

We don't have the priest's side of the story so we really don't know precisely how the rejection was expressed. But, to be absolutely correct, being gay is not a bar to receiving communion. It is being in a homosexual relationship that is the bar. And, to be precise, anyone known to be living in sin FOR WHATEVER REASON ought to be denied communion. Of course it takes more guts to turn away say a Mafia Don than your garden variety schlub but the priest's actions were entirely appropriate, at least in respect to the communion issue.

My suggestion to this woman is to either find another church or confom her behavior to her current church's expectations. She may not be able to change her sexual orientation but she can cease her sinful behavior...and it is the church that defines what is and what is not sinful behavior. If she doesn't understand that, she really hasn't a clue as to how religions work.

And the debate continues between the pharisees, and the saducees.

The priest did the right thing in denying her communion. He did her a favor. Anyone who eats communion is subject to punishment by God. 1 Corinthinan 11: 26 -30 states:

²⁶ For every time you eat this bread and drink this cup, you are announcing the Lord’s death until he comes again. ²⁷ So anyone who eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord unworthily is guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. ²⁸ That is why you should examine yourself before eating the bread and drinking the cup. ²⁹ For if you eat the bread or drink the cup without honoring the body of Christ, you are eating and drinking God’s judgment upon yourself. ³⁰ That is why many of you are weak and sick and some have even died.

This again just proves the fact, that gays won't stop at just wanting to be married in terms of the law. They WANT to infiltrate the church to prove to others that their lifestyles are acceptable to God. If this woman was really a christian( which I doubt), she would have left behind her lesbianism a long time ago. Romans 6: 1-2 states:

¹ Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace? ² Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it?

"Lifestyle choice?" Since when did inborn qualities become "lifestyle choices?" Next they're going to tell me that black people only have dark skin because they chose to be born with it...

Tell you what, do you want to know what a REAL lifestyle choice is? Choosing to hate people because of how they were born.

Cincinnati Rick: I'm quite sure you won't agree however in your words "the church defines what is and what is not sinful behavior". churches are just brick and mortar built by men. Flawed men. Sinful men. Sinful men who define sin and who grant themselves communion but deny others based on their human definition. However youre right. She should find another church and dump the one one with the priest who quite frankly I find more sinful than she due to his behavior. You said another church wouldn't find her behavior sinful and at the same time said she could change her sinful behavior. Isn't that a bit of a nonsensical contradiction. I suppose nonsensical could also be reutilized as hypocritical in this sense.

I bet you that he would give communion to divorce folks, oow folks, but not this woman.

The first post by Memory was collapsed. Why ?? I saw nothing wrong with that at all??

Justathought: I am not a Catholic or even a theist of any sort. But only small minds get fixated on the very imperfect human beings that subscribe to a religious faith or staff its institutions. To judge any institution by the failings of its adherents is illogical.

Imagine the outcry if one proposed judging the Civil Rights movement by the plagiarism and philandering
of ML King Jr. And yet the hypocrisy of judging the Catholic Church in the same fashion is entirely acceptable among the self-proclaimed "enlightened."

There is no illogic or contradiction in positing her choice:

1) find a church that does not find her behavior sinful, OR

2) change her behavior to conform to her current church's expectations (NOTE: it is the Behavior that she has a choice about rather than the sexual oreintation, which, ostensibly she does not have a choice about).

"Lifestyle choice?" Since when did inborn qualities become "lifestyle choices?" Next they're going to tell me that black people only have dark skin because they chose to be born with it...

No, Toasty. Being born with dark skin is something a person cannot change. I should know. But since you don't know, I suggest you refrain from using that as an example. Unless of course, you are assuming that because people are born with dark skin, they are somehow not capable of accepting God's laws?

Oh, please, all you liberal, non-church-going folks! This is a matter of doctrine within the church, that you MAY NOT receive the body and blood of Christ while living in or practicing open sin. Get over it.

Just pointing out that if you condemn gays for being born gay, you'd most likely condemn blacks for being born black, Unhappy. You can't choose you sexual orientation any more than you can your skin color. That's just basic medical fact.

Now, I understand why you'd WANT sexual orientation to be a choice (it makes you look like Nazis when you attack people for it), but you can't just refuse to accept reality just because it makes you look bad.

Chester, the book has a fairy tale about a guy living in a whale for crying out loud... Besides, I was talking about the reality that sexual orientation is inborn and immutable. There was nothing about the bible in my comment.

I seriously hope you didn't post that reply just to give him an excuse not to respond to my comment.

Just pointing out that if you condemn gays for being born gay, you'd most likely condemn blacks for being born black, Unhappy. You can't choose you sexual orientation any more than you can your skin color. That's just basic medical fact.

Really, Toasty. I didn't get to choose my dark skin color, but I do get to choose whether or not I obey God. For you to say that its not a choice is wrong. I can choose whether to indulge certain emotions or not. I can choose whether or not to sleep with my own sex or that of the opposite. I can choose how vocal I am on that respect, just like that woman chose to go to a church and cause a problem. She could have chosen to leave her lifestyle behind for one day to attend her mother's funeral. She chose to do it that way, because she didn't care about her mother's funeral, but about herself.

No Unhappy, for me to say it is not a choice is medically accurate. You can oppose the rights of others based on how they were born all you like, but you need to admit that you're doing it solely because of something they have no control over. This isn't a "lifestyle," it's an inborn orientation, and if you insist otherwise I'm going to have to ask you to present your peer-reviewed medical evidence supporting your assertion.

Actually, it's more common than just that, kraussk. Catholics are encouraged to not take communion if they have any doubts about needing to get to confession. If they missed the last weekend's Mass, they shouldn't take communion. It's pretty common to see Catholics just not get up and go to the line. It's less common but still all Catholics have seen the alternative - go up to the priest with arms crossed in front of you. The priest will understand you aren't taking communion, but will say a quick blessing... then on to the next in line.

Frequently parishes will remind guests that, while welcome, they shouldn't take communion - especially during Easter and Christmas Masses, when a lot of non-Catholics and lapsed Catholics attend Masses.

As for what this priest said to this woman, we only have her word on it. But remember the priest talked with her before the funeral, and her mother was in that parish. He probably would know if she is non-practicing or just not a Catholic. I can bet she isn't, by her reference to bread and wine. Catholics don't believe it is bread and wine. If it was, then anyone could have some. (Actually from what I heard, satanists don't believe that either, as every parish has stories of people trying to get eucharists out of the church, presumably for their black masses, or whatever you call their ceremonies.)

I'm sure a lot of people take communion who, in the Church's view, shouldn't. The priest or eucharistic server doesn't know everyone, etc. But if the priest knows that someone isn't a practicing Catholic, he will do the exact same thing this one did - though hopefully not in the cold manner this woman said.

man man man....tears are in my eyes for her. i'm thinking how a situation like that would be had my catholic mother died. would i be so disrespected because my boyfriend and i live together? her mother would be crushed by this and it was a disrespect to her also...knowing her faith and contributions to the church were in the end meaningless to this priest.

my preacher always always stresses, "the quickest way to hell is to be judging somebody". i think the bible states there will be people in heaven that are thought not to be there and some thought to be there will not be.

"Who said anything about not judging others?" Really?. That's pretty funny. Because his name was Jesus (judge not, lest thee be judged).

You know, one of the better indicators that just maybe the Church is onto something pretty real can be found on these boards, lol.

I don't like the Elks. Moose clubs, either. They strike as silly, even dumb. It doesn't bother me in the least that they exist, and people are loyal members of those clubs. If my mother - wait, guess that doesn't work - if my father wanted to have his funeral at the Elks, and while there the club members told me I couldn't take part in the secret handshakes or wear a hat with antlers, I wouldn't have any problem with that whatsoever. None. I can't imagine any of us would. I imagine all of us would respectfully abide by their wishes, and when it was over, leave to go grieve as we saw fit.

Yet when it comes to the Catholic Church...

This isn't a "lifestyle," it's an inborn orientation, and if you insist otherwise I'm going to have to ask you to present your peer-reviewed medical evidence supporting your assertion.

Look at DSM-IV codes, preferably the ones for gender identity issues. I know they removed homosexuality from this list, but as you can see below, her lesbianism would still be labeled as a medical illness. ( These are just a few. I couldn't fit the entire list here).

• 625.8 Female hypoactive sexual desire disorder due to... [indicate the general medical condition]
• 608.89 Male hypoactive sexual desire disorder due to... [indicate the general medical condition]
• 302.71 Hypoactive sexual desire disorder
• 302.79 Sexual aversion disorder
• 302.72 Female sexual arousal disorder
• 625.8 Other female sexual dysfunction due to... [indicate the general medical condition]
• 608.89 Other male sexual dysfunction due to... [indicate the general medical condition]
• 302.70 Sexual dysfunction NOS
• 302.4 Exhibitionism
• 302.81 Fetishism
• 302.3 Transvestic fetishism
• 302.9 Paraphilia NOS (not otherwise specified)

Gender identity disorders

• Gender identity disorder
  • 302.6 Gender identity disorder NOS
• 302.9 Sexual disorder NOS

The list could go on and on.

Homosexuality goes against the tenets of the Catholic faith - that a Priest denied communion to a lesbian is not surprising - what is surprising is that so many of your hypocrites expects a church that has survived over 2,000 years with tenets in place to suddenly give up its basic tenets to accommodate our depraved, sick, drugged out, murderous, child molesting American society

Actually, Ternan, that's not true. The Church doesn't have any doctrine against homosexuality. It's homosexual sex they say is a no no. Actually, push comes to shove, the Church's view that any sex not open to the possibility of procreation is bad. I think they see procreation as a gift from God, and to use the procreative act in a recreational way is disrespecting that gift. A little out of my lane here, but I don't think there's anything saying a homosexual fling is any worse than a drunken one-nighter between opposite genders.

The priest did her a favor.

1. Catholics believe that communion is actually the body of Jesus Christ.

2. Jesus Christ was a man.

3. The woman is a lesbian.

4. Why would a lesbian want a man in her mouth?

Just sayin'

victor...

it seems you do not know the meaning of that teaching

"What is surprising is that so many of your hypocrites expects a church that has survived over 2,000 years with tenets in place to suddenly give up its basic tenets to accommodate our depraved, sick, drugged out, murderous, child molesting American society"

Why shouldn't they? They certainly gave up their basic tenets to accomodate their thousands of depraved, sick child molesting priests.

Shake, glad I didn't read that in the morning, because I might have spit coffee with that one, lol.

I'm guessing you didn't actually look those "disorders" up, Unhappy... You might want to. Half of them aren't disorders, and the other half still have nothing to do with sexual orientation being a choice.

paul---

you would not be worried because you are not an elk...problem is the daughter is a catholic

It's not a completely invalid point, Mark. They certainly do appear hypocritical in one sense. But remember (and not excusing the priests who did things like that), the worst thing that happened to this lesbian at Mass was that she wasn't given a eucharist (which she seems not to believe in anyway).

You'd think for most of us, the worst part of that day would be saying goodbye to a mother. For her, it was encountering a priest with a hand over the eucharist.

Anyway, you can say they've lost their authority to maintain 2,000 year old tenets, and that's fine. But they don't agree, and apparently neither do their members. My question is why do you care so much? I mean, sure, caring about any youths who were abused - that's something hopefully we all still have within us. But why do you care who they do and don't administer eucharist to?

That's the part that makes me wonder if there isn't more going on here than meets the eye. This level of dislike for the Catholic Church doesn't jive with something so many claim isn't a part of their lives. Mormonism, for instance, isn't a part of my life. I can't go into their temples? Okay. Islam isn't a part of my life. I can't go to Mecca? Okay. That doesn't burn at me, the way Catholicism seems to burn at a lot of people posting here.

Ternan:

My goodness! When you look at "Amerrican society", are those the only aspects of American society that you (choose to) see? You describe only the worst aspects of society, and the traits you describe are not the basic fabric of America, nor are they limited to American society.
I hope you feel better soon.

She is, chartsweb? I must have read the article too quickly. Then, she should know the rules, and not be shocked by them like she seemed to be. And, if she really was Catholic, she wouldn't say something like, "when the bread and wine was passed around..."

Why shouldn't they? They certainly gave up their basic tenets to accomodate their thousands of depraved, sick child molesting priests.

Mark C: You are correct. They shouldn't have done that. And as priests, they will be judged by a stricter standard. James 3:1:

Dear brothers and sisters, not many of you should become teachers in the church, for we who teach will be judged more strictly.

But that is no reason for you to judge the entire Church on the basis of a few individuals, unless you are trying to use that as an excuse not to turn to God? If so, God won't accept that excuse either.

The priest was, I observe, technically within his *rights* to do what he did. This shouldn't become a legal issue. The bigger picture is, this is exactly how the church will give up its power. Bit by bit, one more arseh*le priest will be exclusionary, and one by one, perfectly decent people will realize this church is no place for perfectly decent people, but only for authoritarian, hide-bound, inflexible, judgmental tyrants. It's a huge shame that so many perfectly decent people have to find out the hard way, and go through so much pain in the process.

This Priest needs to read his Bible.

Yes, Bible treaches us homosexuality is a sin. The Bible also teaches us that one sin is not better or worse than another sin. Bible also teaches us that we are all sinners. Accordingly, this Priest should deny himself and everyone else communion based on his philosophy.

Christ came and died for us while we were still sinners. He did not wait for us to clean up our act, nor did he say this salvation is for one group of people and not another. As long as we confess our sins to God and accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior (while we are still sinners,) Jesus forgives us and we are reunited with God.

A woman who lives with another woman-- a lesbian-- is not good enough to have communion at her mother's funeral. Then the priest "gets a migraine" and can't do the burial. Yet the Catholic church thinks it is OK for the priests to molest young boys? Talk about being hypocritical! Thank God I don't have to put up with that crap!

And the Catholics are hell bent on telling people that they can't use contraceptives or birth control? They can stay the he11 out of my uterus. NEUTER THE WHOLE DURN MESS OF THEM!

Ternan::: "Homosexuality goes against the tenents of the Catholic faith". Yet it is OK with the Catholic faith for the priests to molest young boys? A priest is allowed by the church to shove his hoohaw in a young man's arse? I guess that is OK in their eyes-- and in yours. Holy smoke, how two-faced the Catholic Church is! I am not a catholic and for sure I would leave the church if I were. I don't put my faith in a two-faced priest or religion.

Hey Father - Jesus would not have done what you did. What words among those that Jesus is said to have spoken would lead you to believe that He wouldn't have offered her comfort for the loss of her mother? And if questioned, you know He would have answered in a manner consistent with His record of love and compassion. The woman lost her mother. The judgment at that point is not yours to make. It is His, is it not, in His own good time?

Denied communion? Is that all?

My mother was excommunicated for divorcing her practicing homosexual husband. Isn't that a mixed message?

Homosexuality is NOT a choice and there was nothing Christ-like in the way the priest treated this woman.

I wonder how much the congregations would shrink if all the homosexuals stopped going to church?

Unhappy-1583758

I would you step well away from whether being gay is a choice or not, your ignorance of human sexulaity and human genetics shines though rather harshly.

Simple fact she is nothing but a militant earthen mound to hold back water who is using this to attack the church. Just looking for her 15 min of fame, she did this knowing before hand that she would not receive communion when she got up there but went anyway. I just don't get people like her who expect others to bend to her way of thinking, who go into churches or religious groups and demand that they change to fit something completely contrary to their beliefs, why do they do these things.

She does not have a right to communion and knew before hand that she was not going to be able to receive it, along with the priest stating what he did before they started to pass it out, but she got up anyway just to force the issue, so she would have a reason to complain and start some touble.

Don't start none there won't be none.

One other thing I just love all the atheist trying to say what the church or priest should or shouldn't do or have done in this case, it's none of your business. Personally he should have said at the top of his voice that just because her mother was a practicing catholic does not mean you get a free pass on communion because you are a practicing lesbian GET OUT OF LINE NO COMMUNION FOR YOU.

I do not believe that being gay is a sin. Some churches have said "Being gay is OK as long as you don't 'act on it'" and to them I say "WTF?"

I was raised Catholic but left the church years ago, and I count myself well rid of it.

Hey Sally could you please explain your action for the suspension above? I never knew the word "delusional" was a bad word. It kind of goes in line like for example: Man has delusional behavior due to excessive drug use.

Please explain?

Im still waiting on your explaination here. Or do you want me to call a constitutional rights lawyer.

thenight,

It wasn't the which words were being used, it was how the words were being used. Calling someone delusional is against code of honor rule number 1. It was a personal attack against someone else.

Why not? Christians cherry pick the parts of the bible they believe everyday.

good: Really? Please provide me an example. Remember, we are taught to interpet scripture in light of all scripture. So don't some Old Testament verse and say "see Christians don't believe that."

That's convenient. So ignore a giant section of the holy book? Is that including or not including the 10 commandments?

How 'bout "love your neighbor as you love yourself"? That doesn't apply here because.......

Bill -- do you eat rare (or even medium rare) steaks?

The conclusion is that we today are not to eat blood, because Jesus shed His blood for us.

The point is not that there must be not one drop of blood in the meat we eat. It would be impossible to remove every corpuscle. The point is that we are not to deliberately eat blood for the sake of eating blood as a food. Reasonable precautions are to be used to remove the blood, draining it from the animal, "pouring it out." This is to be done at the time the animal is killed; and it is done in slaughtering animals today. Cooking meat also tends to cook out the blood.

Note further that, contrary to Jehovah's Witness' doctrine, nothing here prevents taking blood transfusions. What is condemned is eating blood as a food, not taking it intravenously as a medicine to save lives in time of emergency. The Scriptures and all people recognize the difference between eating or drinking something as a food for nourishment or pleasure, as compared to taking the same thing for medical treatment (see 1 Tim. 5:23).

If you want to pick on Catholics about picking apart the bible read all 73 books first.

How 'bout "love your neighbor as you love yourself"? That doesn't apply here because.......

... Because scriptures on communion clearly state that you should not take it if you are in conflict with another person AND shouldn't take it unworthily - that is, with willful sin in your life.

See Romans 1, Acts 21:25 and Acts 15:20, which implies the standards for sexual immorality as defined in the OT since it specifies the only parts of the OT gentiles were to observe.

You have to take biblical teaching in totality and not pick on the little that you know and prefer.

Beth, that passage is about the PRACTICE of eating blood in pagan rituals practiced by the peoples who had been in Canaan.

Furthermore, Acts 15:20 specifies with clarity the only parts of the OT gentiles were to observe. You can guess the whole issue of eating blood is NOT on that list. Sorry.

Yes - the Islamofascists will stone them to death - first the Jews, then the gays, then the other non-believers.

Mortal Sin only gets you denial of communion until you repent (and raps on the knuckles by the nuns in the good old days).

BillC: dont be surprised, the bible says that unbelievers will mock the things of God, but dont be surprised beacause the bible also says that God is not mocked, whatsoever a man soeth, that shall he also reap, and btw, just giving an opinion about something does not make one a hater. And it also says that they will twist the scriptures to their own destruction. And while I am on the subject the bible says that the wisdom of man is foolishness with God. God Bless you.

Bill this is common. They are called cafeteria Catholics (Christians). They take the part of the dogma and doctrine they like and forget about the rest.

For example (on the Catholic side of things):

The Church proclaimed in a papal encyclical that birth control and any sexual activity not for procreation was sinful. So no masturbation, no birth control, can't even pull out. How many Catholics do you think abide by this proclamation?

The Church's stance is that you must attend church on all holy days of obligation (feasts) and on a weekly basis. How many people call themselves Catholic and only grace the doors of a church on Easter, Christmas and for weddings?

On the Christian end of things: their savior & god gave them a direct command to love one another as he loved them. How many Christians choose who they are going to love and hate the rest? The most basic rule and from god himself they can't follow.

The Catholic Church denies me communion with my Lord and Savior because I am Protestant and not Catholic. At the Catholic church a MAN decides who may commune with Jesus. WWJD?

Bill, your statement, "So don't some Old Testament verse and say "see Christians don't believe that."" , is a prime example of the hypocrisy of many Christians. Choosing to ignore or enforce various "rules" set in the Old Testament - especially The book of Leviticus - is a prime example of cherry picking by modern day Christians. The Old Testament is also where 95% of religious based arguments condemning homosexuality and equality are based. With regard to the New Testament, any argument that the New Testament condemns homosexuality outright, is false. Many people assume that certain verses specifically state that homosexuality is a sin, but it is simply that - an assumption. To quote an article by William O. Walker of the Westar Institute (a non-profit research and educational institute dedicated to the advancement of religious literacy), "There is not a single Greek word or phrase in the entire New Testament that should be translated into English as “homosexual” or “homosexuality.” In fact, the very notion of “homosexuality”—like that of “heterosexuality,” “bisexuality,” and even “sexual orientation”—is essentially a modern concept that would simply have been unintelligible to the New Testament writers. The word “homosexuality” came into use only in the latter part of the nineteenth century, and, as New Testament scholar Victor Paul Furnish notes, it and related terms “presume an understanding of human sexuality that was possible only with the advent of modern psychological and sociological analysis.” In other words, “The ancient writers . . . were operating without the vaguest conception of what we have learned to call ‘sexual orientation’.”

oy - vay -- You made my point perfectly ... thank you! You see, there is always a "reason" for not following what you don't want to follow.

The operational phrase here should be, " what would Jesus do?" Jesus taught of love, compassion, and spiritual transformation, not hating gay people. In fact he lost patience with institutional religion, the Pharisees. I am Catholic and believe what that priest did was horrible.

Let's see how about in the old testiment they say it is OK to own as slaves people from a land you conquered. It's OK to have a mistress and a wife. It's a sin to eat shellfish. That children should be put to death for disrespecting their parents. All of these and more are in the bible but they are ignored. So-called Christians always pick and choose sections of the bible that fit their prejudices and bigotry.

When you ask them about those passages of the bible they claim they don't pertain to our modern times. LOL Either they believe and practice everything the bible says or they be total hypocrites and pick and choose what they like from it.

Christians are the worst people at following the bible.

Suseq1591

"just giving an opinion about something does not make one a hater"

I agree. It just exposes the hater.

"I cannot give you Communion because you are with a woman, and in the eyes of the church, that is a sin."

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Bill C-2406980

Here is one you are breaking right now: Arguments about the law (TITUS 3:9), or does this one not count, not that you can answer because you would be arguing against the law and therefore picking and choosing laws you follow. Talk about a catch 22 for you!

The Priest was well within his responsibilities to the church, the people, and to God. He did not refuse her participation or an extension of compassion. He simply followed the principles and beliefs of the Holy Sacrament. Communion is a extremely Holy expression of Christ's love for His body. In the Catholic Church, there are ordinances. If you don't agree with them, sorry...But that's the great thing about The separation of church and state. Now that it is implemented, you can't have your cake and eat it too! Sorry if some take offense, the Jews took offense took with Jesus and crucified Him! I can live with offense from people, but not with offense from my Lord. I wouldn't serve Holy Communion to a practicing Homo sexual either, I'd minister to them, and love them with the love of Christ, but the God I serve says its wrong and an abomination to Him. So I guess, she'll have to be offended...I admire men and women who stand by their convictions....the disciples' convictions cost them their lives...List me with them anytime!

Sandy,

Let's see how about in the old testiment they say it is OK to own as slaves people from a land you conquered. It's OK to have a mistress and a wife. It's a sin to eat shellfish. That children should be put to death for disrespecting their parents. All of these and more are in the bible but they are ignored. So-called Christians always pick and choose sections of the bible that fit their prejudices and bigotry.

When you ask them about those passages of the bible they claim they don't pertain to our modern times. LOL Either they believe and practice everything the bible says or they be total hypocrites and pick and choose what they like from it.

Christians are the worst people at following the bible.

Christians don't follow the Mosaic law because Jesus gave us the New and Everlasting Covenant - the law Jesus gave is found throughout the New Testament.

Their mistake was thinking the church will handle the service with dignity! As usuall they showed real class again, but the flock will forgive them again like the raping of the children

the law Jesus gave is found throughout the New Testament.

And he never mentions homosexuality anywhere. He does have a lot to say about not judging others, though.

MY mythical supreme entity sky daddy can lick YOUR mythical supreme entity sky daddy...

Preacher, well said. So much of what we are reading in reaction to this event, as it is portrayed by Ms. Johnson, is political rather than moral commentary. I feel great empathy for the loss of a parent, having experienced this myself, and the priest might have managed the issue more sensitively. However, attempting to partake of Holy Communion as a practicing lesbian is contrary to the laws of the Church, and the priest owes a duty to enforce those standards. I ache for Ms. Johnson's pain, yet I cannot find fault in the act of denying Communion, only, perhaps, in the manner it was done. In my own church, when I have lived outside the bounds of doctrine and fellowship, I have been advised and counseled that it would be inappropriate, even a severe breach of my duty to Christ, to partake unworthily. I agree with this, rather than feel slighted, because it is what I believe.

preacher...

if he gave her an extention of compassion what was it...because i do not see it.

also please let me know what church you preach at as i would not want to step foot in it.

Here is one you are breaking right now: Arguments about the law (TITUS 3:9), or does this one not count, not that you can answer because you would be arguing against the law and therefore picking and choosing laws you follow. Talk about a catch 22 for you!

Krestov: Apparently you are not familiar with Titus 1:9-10 which states:

⁹ He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. ¹⁰ For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. ( meaning Old testament Law)

If you want to pick on Catholics about picking apart the bible read all 73 books first.

I've read all 66 books of the Bible at least 3 times as well as the redacted books and I know that 99% of Christians know almost nothing about their own religion, especially regarding the mysteries and that that is why so many self-proclaimed Christians are some of the most arrogant, hateful, judgmental, ignorant and un-Christ-like people on the planet.

This is a very difficult situation. As humans it is so easy to judge everyone else. Jesus teaches us to hate the sin, but not the sinner. Some of us call ourselves Christians, but we tend to decide which Christian laws we are going to follow and which ones we are going to ignore. Are we really Christians? This goes to both the priest and the daughter of the deceased. As a priest, you should know better. To the daughter, as a Christian, you cannot be a lesbian. We have free will given to us by God. Just because the flesh tells me to do something doesn't mean I have to do it. I'll pray for both parties to get the wisdom to they need to understand their sins. Most people blame and attack the church everytime they hear a story like this. It not the churches rules, Jesus was the one who made the rules. As Christians we just have to follow them to the best of our abilities.

Jesus teaches us to hate the sin, but not the sinner.

By saying this you are assuming that being gay is a sin.

As a Christian, you cannot be a lesbian.

This should be filed under the "WTF?" category.

WWJD?

Jesus would probably say "All your rules and regulations have nothing to do with what I taught. So stop it already."

Tina,

Bingo.

No it is the Kingdom of God on earth!!!

Nevertheless, it was important to this woman. The validity issue wasn't her issue. Don't use other people's concerns as a platform for your own.

Kingdom of God on earth

Huh? This priest is a representative of the church and condemns a woman for having a fondness for women. Yet he holds in the high esteem male members of his own organization that have a fondness for males. Do the pedophilic priests receive communion ever and who administers it to them?

That's quite a kingdumb.

If the actions of this priest constitute what we can expect in "the Kingdom of God" I want no part of it. I was taught that one of the worst sins is the "damning" of others to hell. It saddens me to think that others want me in hell. I might not be a very good Christian, but I don't wish others harm. By denying her communion..he assumes she is destined for hell and prohibits her from the Bread of Life, thus damning her. Noone should ever assume another person is doomed. At the moment she got up for communion she may have said a sincere act of contrition and was therebye in a state of grace. Aloso ..it is not the priests job to judge ( even in the confessional) God forgives the sin, the priest is only a mediator or instrument of the inward grace. All sacraments are outward signs of inward grace

I try to not let one fool ruin everything for me. As with everything there are good things and bad things. My relationship with God is just between me and God. I might go to church for guidance, but church leaders are human too and may have conflicting interests and personal hangups. I do agree some should remove themselves for the situation if they can't handle being tolerant and Christ like in their behaviors. Ask yourself "what would Jesus do" and it doesn't sound like he wold be judging this woman during the funeral of her mother. Maybe he should have had someone else perform the service.

"And? It's the Catholic Church. An archaic organization representing an archaic set of superstitions."

Thank you, BMOC. These people, including the pope, are living in an era long gone.

Hypocrites is putting it a bit mildly. And it is alright to molest young children, right?

It appears to me that most "Christians", these days, wouldn't recognize Jesus, the Christ, if he ran 'em over in the crosswalk. Heard this one?: "Religion; What crimes have been commited in thy name!" Trust me, you don't wanna' go there.

Signed: A recovered Catholic (and Irish, the worst kind).

I think most atheists would not recognize Christ as well. Christ did not come for those who already knew God, but for those who did not know. As much as Jesus talked about " turning the other cheek", he was very specific on how you are to treat the house of God.

The choice is on the receiver of the communion, they have to make the choice as to whether they are in a state of grace or not and accept the consequences. It is not the priest's role to ever deny someone communion.

So the church can deny a woman who had a child out of wedlock communion, the church can deny a many who killed someone regardless of the situation communion and so on? If that was ACTUALLY the case, I'd be on the Church's side. WHY do I have this little pit in my stomach that the church likes to overlook certain sins and sinners as opposed to others?

Inadaze,

Yes, the church can deny a woman who had a child out of wedlock (until she does her "penance"). Not catholic, but that is the way it works in my church. You are requested not to take the "communion" when you are working through a "bigger" sin. It is just maybe a little more obvious that someone is a practicing gay as opposed to something like unwed sex or coveting etc.

That is wrong if the priest knows you are not in a state of grace divorced/remarried it would be sacriledge for him to give you communion. For that reason I never put my priest in that position.

You can talk to them about changing but it has to be based on holy scripture not personal preferences or point of view.

Inadaze, you have to remember how repentance figures in. You can commit all kinds of sin but are you repentant. I don't get the sense this woman was "repentant" about living a life that church deemed unacceptable.

I don't mind so much when I'm denied communion...it's when they start throwing holy water on you and saying, "I cast you out! Unclean spirit! The power of Christ compels you!"

...maybe that just happens to me.

I don't get the sense this woman was "repentant" about living a life that church deemed unacceptable.

And when did YOU become God, with the power to determine whether you have a "sense" of real repentance?

Sounds like someone is in direct violation of God's Law... "judge not, lest ye be judged". And not only that, you are taking it upon yourself to be God and determine whether someone is truly repentant. I only wish I could be present to watch when God judges you for these outright violations of his law. You better start getting your excuses ready... spin baby, spin.

Always love hearing christians explain how one sin is "bigger" than another(usually their vice).

James 2:10 "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

Gotta love the Pious people who don't even know their own holy book.

lost - and it's really bad if your head starts rotating on your shoulders, too. OUT! OUT DAMMED SPOT!

Mongo LIKE candy...

sin is a religious concept - unfortunately, many things have morphed into "sinful" status. Is it a "sin" to cheat on taxes? Do infants have as much fun in infancy as adults have in adultery? I thought the examples of homosexuality in the buy-bull were "male on male" and didn't mention "female on female".

Back when people were, in general, illiterate, the Catholic Church held a captive audience. Even today you will not find a copy of the Holy Bible at any pew in a Catholic Church. Unfortunately it seems that the only way to get to Heaven (and Christ) is thru a man (Matthew 28:51) that many affectionately refer to as "Father" (Matther 23:9). The Catholic church in all of its glory still stands between man and Jesus (salvation). If you are a Catholic, you are totally dependent upon the Church to either allow or deny your communion with Jesus. As a Protestant, I find this to be really bizarre.

The Catholic church is full of hypocrites. This priest would not officiate at her mother's burial but I sure bet he would officiate at one of his many pedophile buddy's funerals. Gay sex is wrong between two consenting adults but it is not wrong when a male priest rapes a boy which has happened thousands of times and has consistently been covered up by the Catholic church. My friend's father killed himself because he could not take the pain anymore of the terminal cancer he was suffering from. His priest refused to officiate at his funeral because he told her her father was already in hell. She quit the church that day. I wonder if any of these priests think that Jesus would have acted in such a manner. This is a classic example of what is wrong with organized religion.

I was just thinking of the woman that this story is about and whether she would read these comments. I don't know if she will but,if so, I am so sorry for what you had to go through. I know that my friend is still traumatized by what her priest did about her father even though it was so many years ago. She still cries about it. Please don't let this vile person affect your ability to deal with your grief or let him make your grief worse than what it is now. You are in the right and he is wrong. I hope you can find peace and strength.

She is a practicing Catholic, she goes to a different church. And it is up to the recipient to decide if they are eligible for Communion. He has no idea when the last time she went to confession was because he isn't her priest. He was being a jerk.

No, Communion for Catholics is for those who have not commited a "mortal sin" which they haven't yet confessed in penance. Mortal sins are such as murder, abortion, birth control contraception, adultery, etc. I do not know that her sexual orientation is defined as a "mortal sin" in the Catholic Church, and even if it is, the priest should not be refusing her communion as he has no idea whether or not she is "in a state of grace". But this priest, like many others these days, seemed hell bent on making sure this woman suffered more during her mother's funeral than she would've already suffered. What a sad excuse for a "Catholic" this priest is.

Enough - Even if she went to confession, in order to be forgiven for your sins, you have to truely be sorry for them and make an attempt to change in order to not sin again. If she is an open lesbian, she is not making an attempt to change her sin and therefore, the confession was not valid and the priest was in the right.

So if she is a member of a different church what is the big deal about not being served communion at her mother's church? Just because you belong to a church isn't carte blanche to every church rite.

When is the last time some of you tried to attend marriage and funeral services at an LSD church? If you haven't paid your dues and aren't carrying your card with this weeks stamp of approval you won't get into the service at all.

I wonder if that JERK of a priest has a PET alter boy that he PLAYS with after services!!

Model RR man::: Good post! No, GREAT post!!

Yes, beating people up is the right answer here.

Probably because you are athiest scum destined for hell!

You actually believe in hell? Are you a child?

Careful, your caveman is showing. I believe the Catholic teachings are also against violence, so i guess that leaves you out too.

You'll know how real it is when you get there!

Your name is "truthlogic." Oh, the irony. You can't even spell athEIst either.

Deny me rights at my own parent's funeral, and I'd beat the sh!t out of you too. You won't be able to hide behind your little cross then.

Ranman87 - I think you used the work "rights" incorrectly.

The Bible is rife with murder, rape, misogyny, torture, pedophilia, massive violence, etc. However, when you bring that up to the fantasy-living religious folks, they either come up with some bizarre explanations that mean nothing, or they just run away from it. Watch and see how many write in and say that none of that is in their Bible!

Yes I believe in hell I see it around me everyday.

Morons threatening to beat up Priests; that's the answer you come up with. Take your medication, and shut up.

That's why I would abandon the practice of communion at funerals. There is too great an opportunity for nonbelievers to be in attendance who couldn't take communion. That would break the sense of unity in mourning or remembering the deceased without regard to faith. Such is not practical when you think about it from an outsider's point of view.

Celtchick- is hate speech bad only when people different from you do it or do you hold yourself to the same standard? Because your comment wreaks of disdain and bigotry.

Not attractive, definitely not inclusive or affirming.

I find it interesting that suddenly because some homo, ( determined in the womb? ), gets her feelings hurt, separation of church and state is no longer an issue. Talk about Hypocrite. Like some one else already said, if she was raised catholic then she should have known better than to even stand and approach the alter for communion. NO ONE DENIED HER ANY RIGHTS. I do agree the priest was kind of a penis though

The Bible is very clear on who should be excepted and who should not be excepted at communion. Howevery all people should be treated with respect. I also believe the daughter knew the rules of the church and she should respect them as well. We are instructed to love the sinner, but hate the sin!

hell is a religious creation made by fools for the production of fear in other fools. Except that we know that the earth has a hot liquid core, there would be no rationality for it at all. Similarly "heaven" as an "up" concept has zero credibility as well. When the concept was "invented" the earth was flat, at the center of the universe and otherwise unencumbered by science as we now know it.

Anyway - the church can do as it pleases. They are under no restriction to placate anyone's feelings. Mackerel snappers are particularly adept at trying to assert that their way is the ONLY way (even when people flip them a quick middle finger)

@Canary, that one is even better than RETdod's earlier one. Not appropriate but funny none the less.

Oy Vay, I am not a bigot, and I don't care if you are different than me; I welcome people who are different. What I don't welcome is people just like you who judge others constantly while claiming to be such good Christians, yet you break your own bible laws every single day. Then you want to tell me how to live, how I should vote, what I should believe in, make crucial decisions based on fantasy, and cram crazy and nonsensical beliefs down my throat at every turn. And what I wrote about your bible (which I have read, but most of you have not) is not hate speech-- it's the TRUTH about what is in your book!! As just as I pointed out, religious people can't accept the truth about their beliefs, what's in their book in black and white, or even live in reality.

...there were hundreds of medical studies done proving that sexual orientation is NOT genetic, then there was one study done that said it is genetic.

What makes the hundreds of studies wrong & the one study right? The media?

@ComradeChaos

Why are you discussing studies, if you are not homosexual than you have no context for argument. The media certainly didn't make me gay nor did I choose a life of torment by ignorant heterosexuals. If I did not choose this life, wouldn't the defacto only leave one option...genetics.

I am sick of the religious right trying to explain my life away by stating that being gay is a choice.

It's only disturbing when you don't know the rules. In their church (even in protestant church) communion is not for everyone, not even believers under certain circumstances. Communion is still communion whether it's a funeral or a regular worship mass.

Methinks, if this woman grew up Catholic she likely knew to expect to be refused. Her outrage under the circumstance should be taken with a grain of salt.

Did he kick her out? no Did he say she couldn't speak or did he just say she couldn't receive communion.?

If you read the letter from the Archdiocese, it neither confirms nor denies the that priest was following doctrine or precedent.

The Catholic tradition does not allow for a eulogy at the funeral Mass. Many pastors allow a SHORT eulogy or remarks by a family member, but the instructions on how to conduct a funeral mass do not. Asking for TWO eulogies is unusual. The traditional place for such activities in the Catholic tradition is at the vigil service the evening before the funeral.

I would start with the Vatican. Sorry, just trolling!

Just stop going. My kid has been Catholic,Episcopel, Wiccan and now Presbyterian. A journey to her Father.

Not to excuse wrong doings by individuals inside the Catholic Church that we have all heard about, but the Catholic Church through it's charities feed millions of people; their hospitals provide care even if you are poor. What have you done to help those less fortunate lately?

The office of the local bishop can help you with removing your name from the Catholic Church's members.

Communion is not a charity. The Church has every right to make it's own policies. If you don't like it, leave.

Trooper: christian charity means christian LOVE. Christ Jesus preached LOVE. He lived love. love, love, love, love, love,love,love,love,love,lovelove, ........Priest does not have love in his heart. I dont like it. I am not Catholic -any church any denomination that does not practise LOVE is NOT following the big three: LOVE God, LOVE each other, Love yourself. Never mind all the made up rules and regulations-LOVE........

Idiot. It isn't a "lifestyle choice" as you moronic bigots like to call it.

BTW, did your priest molest you?

Why is it the religious people on here can't spell anything? Is it really hard to discern between "knew" and "new"?

And this has nothing to do with the Constitution, you dolt. It has to do something with respecting a grieving person. A funeral is not the time to show your homophobia off and bitch about church doctrine.

The only thing that surprised me was the fact that it didn't have it as a Baptist or Pentecostal church, because that crap is right up their alley.

So Ranman the church should bend over backwards because her sin is the flavor of the day. They didn't back down for me and if they had I would never have come back because there would have been nothing worth coming back for.

Sorry Bob, Gotta play my BS card. Science keeps telling me that black holes exist too. But they just can't seem to prove it. By the way do you know how many people say that god, any god does not exist and yet they believe in ghosts. hhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I suppose those left-handed people made the "left-handed lifestyle choice."

Toasty and Bob, you continue to spout about some scientific medical evidence that being gay is genetic. I've heard and read about some experiments but none are conclusive or say that it's fact. So why should we believe in your theory, anymore than we should believe in a God. Just because you keep repeating the same crap we should accept your opinion ? If your right then a lot of homosexuals are choosing hetro lifestyles or that gene would have died out long ago. Or, maybe its just a homo conspiracy to mingle with the "Breeders" to keep it in the pool.

Actually, homosexuals DO reproduce. It happens when they get married and have kids while trying to "pray the gay away." In this way, the genetic trait is passed on. It appears to be recessive and so not expressed in every generation. Additionally, many homosexual couples are reproducing with the help of a surrogate or donor.

Actually, homosexuals DO reproduce. It happens when they get married and have kids while trying to "pray the gay away." In this way, the genetic trait is passed on. It appears to be recessive and so not expressed in every generation. Additionally, many homosexual couples are reproducing with the help of a surrogate or donor.

Ok, several things here for the science illiterate.... First, for some guy, not all traits have to be expressed in an individual to be passed down to further generations.... think recessive traits... this should have been covered in a very basic biology class. Second, not all traits that you have are passed on through your genes in the very simple way you think (we're talking like barely 4th grade biology here which we've kind of advanced beyond in the past century...). Many of them come from modifications of your DNA (DNA-methylation and other chromatin modifications), RNA changes from such genes (alternate splicing), RNA expression levels, and protein modifications (post translational modifications) which happen long after you are born and may not be present in your parents. Such things do not have to be expressed in an individual for them to be expressed in a child of that individual. Also, such things can be affected by environmental aspects which are not present for the parents. Third, developmental hormones present in the womb greatly affects the development of the brain which very likely plays a role in sexual orientation. Finally, black holes... really.... you may as well just not believe in our current model of gravity. I mean... if you actually had a better alternate theory about what types of objects can exert such a gravitational force, or a theory about what type of subatomic forces could counter such a large gravitational force, then maybe your comment would have some substance.... Yes, we may not have a complete working theory of how a black hole behaves in every physical situation... but to say they don't exist... well that just shows a complete lack of understanding of anything to do with physics. What's even worse is that, despite your lack of knowledge in both subjects, you still post garbage passed off as logical reasoning from how you think physics and biology work....

.

For Bob and Toasty. Left handed example doesn't work well because there are numerous cases of a person left handed being trained to be right handed so that's probably a bad analogy. Also, trying to state that there is no choice whatsoever in homosexuality is a very far reaching conclusion from the scant amount of knowledge we actually have about what may be the root cause of this particular trait. There are very likely both genetic traits and other biological forces (see above for examples of non-canonical and non-genetic biological forces) that shift an individual towards homosexuality or heterosexuality. But, such forces completely negating the choice aspect for this trait is not a conclusion that we can really draw from current studies. Yes, there is a large environmental and genetic factor, but to get to the point of actually saying it's completely determined outside of choice would require first identifying what is the actual cause. Here's an example for you. Take a bi-sexual individual that decides they will only sleep with members of the same sex. They are homosexual but may decide to change this at some point down the road. You also have examples of homosexual individuals deciding they are bisexual, then going back to homosexual some time later. Now, that's not to say that someone that discovers that they are gay, can suddenly decide to not be gay. There may be a level of homosexuality such that choice is far too low to be a variable and, for that person, it is solely a biological trait. This same thing can be the case for heterosexuality as well. What this research does say is that this trait is far to complex to be able to state definitively if there is a choice or not and if that choice is present in all individuals with such a trait.

So, in summary, this research says that there is very likely a large biological component regarding whether an individual is gay or straight or somewhere in between. One can even say that this research shows a greater weighting of biology when compared to choice. But, whether or not that large biological component is able to negate every aspect of choice in all cases, is not currently answerable and will likely not be answerable any time soon. Additionally, most research out there covers gay men. There is far less studies and research on lesbians to back any claims made.

There is a reason why I don't like analogies to skin color. Skin color is a far more simple trait. When trying to compare sexuality to skin color, it's like you're trying to compare what determines eye color to what determines your likelihood of living past 80. One is a very simple set of variables, the other... not so much.

People really need to stop trying to think of traits as one or the other....that is very very rarely the case. Almost every single trait that you can name isn't one or the other, it's a spectrum. This is especially true with regards to preference related traits. When you think of traits as one or the other, you can't really explain much if any of the variability present in the population. However, when you start thinking of them as a spectrum, you get a much better idea of how evidence for seemingly contradictory things is present. Is being gay a choice or is being gay biological? If you insist that it's either one or the other than you can't really resolve all of the evidence. However, if you think of it a continuous trait, which can be present at varying levels in a group of people, now it's very easy to see how evidence exists for both positions.

Doggy, they're trained to use their right hand, not be right-handed. I was taught to be able to fire a rifle with my left hand in an emergency, but that doesn't make me ambidextrous.

It pains me to no end to have to "Out" Barbara Johnson on this one. She is being entirely disingenuous throught this whole ordeal. She has made up half of the story and has used her own mother's death as a platform to attack the Church she left years ago. Barbara is more Buddhist than any form of Christian, gay or not, the porr priest was set up, not permitted to have a discussion with Barbara before the service. He was accosted by Barbara's lover before the Mass and was informed that they would go to Communion and he had "better not screw it up". Barbara Johnson is a liar and you all were duped by her. This wsa a coordinated and planned attack against the Church by a hate-filled woman who has had an ax to grind against the Church she left to practice Buddhism a very long time ago. She was denied Communion not because she is gay, but because she does not share the faith in the Eucharist which is required to receive it. Catholic priests, the last to ever reveal the sins of others, are the first to have their sins, even merely perceived ones, shouted out from the rooftops!

Shame on you Barbara. You know who this is. We are no longer friends, I supported your rights, now I'm ashamed that I bought into your lies. If your sexuality is more important to you than faith, fine, that's your choice. But quit blaming everyone else in the world for your choices. You have used your mother's death in a way that is horrible and shameful. This poor priest did nothing wrong. He is know to be a kind and pius man who has never done anything but preach the Gospel faithfully. If you don't share his views, again, fine, but shut up and go your own way. Stop trying to make a political point at the expense of a good man.

Lastly, Rev. Barry Knestout, the Secretary for ArchBishop Wuerl is also a good man, pius and sincere. I'm saddened to see that he fell into Barbara's trap as well. Back your priest who did the right thing. If he became ill, then that's human. I bet Barbara's mother is rolling around in her grave in shame at her daughter's deceit and venom.

It struck me that she could've easily attended the funeral and declined communion if she wasn't looking to create a stir. In my experience, no one makes you get up and receive communion. If you don't get up and line up, it doesn't cause a problem. If people's minds and hearts are really in the right place, they aren't busy looking around to see who all is doing what all anyway, they're concentrating on the Eucharist.

Toasty, they are trained to actually be other handed. You may be able to use your left hand to do particular things but that's not what I'm talking about when I say trained to be other handed. When you are fully trained to be a different hand then what you were born with, it actually causes neurological changes in the brain. If you decided to start using your left hand for everything and never used your right hand again, many parts of your brain that used to behave as left handed would start behaving as right handed. Handedness is actually a far more malleable trait than people are aware. It's much more malleable when compared to sexual orientation. That's why it's a bad analogy. You may be born right handed. That doesn't mean you cannot decide to change to left handed.

@Doggysaywhat

Like I said.....Theory, faith that the numbers adding up prove the theory as correct. I never said I didn't think black holes might exist, what I said is there is no proof they exist. So you can take your smarter than me attitude and put it wherever you keep your B.S.. Illiterate ? So I point out that science doesn't really have all the answers and your closed little mind calls me science illiterate. Well actually your science (LESSON ?) didn't tell me anything that I didn't already know. So as I said before you can spout theory all day and as loud as you want, but till there's tangible evidence it's just theory, not fact. Oh, by the way, have you ever noticed the grammatic simularity of the words; theoretical and theological, wonder why that is ?

Some guy... No... I called you science illiterate because you didn't even bother to understand the very basics of how traits can and are passed down from one generation to the next, before you started posting about it. Second, if you actually did know anything at all about science, you would know that nothing can every be completely proven 100%. But, not believing that it exists despite the fact that all evidence currently known points to it because we don't have all the evidence possibly available is plain stupid. That's what makes you science illiterate. You don't understand how scientific theories are generated, used, or improved.

Also, there was plenty of knowledge in my post that you didn't know with regards to how traits can be expressed. You didn't know them because you believed that a genetic traits must be expressed in parents to be expressed in offspring. So, if you already knew that, why would possibly make your posting? I suspect that you know very very little regarding genetics, biology, physics or any science realm for that matter.

Finally, from your last post, this is the best evidence yet that you are science illiterate. When a scientist gives you a theory and it's accepted in the scientific community, that theory is an explanation of why things are the way they are. This explanation takes into account all of the evidence currently available and all of this evidence supports this theory the best. You're trying to draw a similarity between the lay person's definition of a theory and the science definition of theory. This is a common mistake of the science illiterate. You try to claim that because a scientist calls it a theory that it's not really a fact and there's not really tangible evidence for it. This is false. In a scientific theory all of the tangible evidence available is best explained by that theory. This theory is then used until another one better explains all available evidence. This theory also makes predictions regarding future events which are then tested to either support the theory or shoot it down. Theories that survive such testing are good theories.

P.S. ical is the suffix belonging to a noun. Your problem is you don't understand the meaning of the noun that ical is attached too. Again, showing science illiteracy.

How is that discrimination? If your church preaches (correctly) that homosexuality is a sin, and that in order to be in the pulpit you have to repent for your sins, and you refuse to do so, how is that discrimination? It is no more discriminating then saying "we don't allow athiests to be pastors." If you don't support the basic tenets of the faith, then you should not be leading the flock.

You cannot change the true Word of God.Which clearly defines homosexuality a sin.The church should be and so far,is still constitutionally protected from all of you liberal athiests blinded to the truth!

Does the "Word of God" not also say you shouldn't spend your time as a priest molesting children?

The pedophile coddling ex-nazi pope has NO RIGHT to lecture ANYONE on morality.

Bob et al --- You either do know or should know (and I'm pulling for the former) that Pedophilia priests are in the minority (a SMALL) minority. Not that those who offend should not be held to account for their own sins! OF COURSE, THEY SHOULD BE! But innocent priests should not be painted with your broad brush of shame. Do you have any idea how extremely painful is this unfair blanket condemnation to the men who are not guilty? Do you have any idea how many little boys---and girls---have been denied normal, non-sexual affection because the priests have been afraid. BTW, please explain to me exactly how the subject of child sexual abuse---true or not---figures in with the subject of the right or wrong way to treat an adult lesbian.

The Catholic Church cannot change is right. How do you think all the other denominations started? Some group of people didn't like the teachings of the church. Sorry if we haven't changed the teachings since 400 AD with all the splinter groups Why would you think we would change for you? And if we did there would be no Catholic church. Morality and canon law is not and never will be a democratic process. This Catholic likes it that way. What is religion worth if it changes to meet society's whims? Nothing.

The Catholic Church should not have to change. It's your choice to be a member or not. If you can't live in accordance with their teachings go to another Church. The problem we have today is that the Gay and Lesbian Agenda folks think the entire world has to make them feel special and accepted. No we don't! If you're gay or lesbian I don't care; that's you life, but don't expect that it is some how your right that I have to agree with or accept it as normal. The majority have rights too.

The problem we have today is that the catholic organization is getting tax exempt status when it dithers in everybody's business. End tax exempt status for all religious organizations.

lonereb

"The Catholic Church cannot change is right"

"Sorry if we haven't changed the teachings since 400AD..."

Just off the top of my head - in my 14 years of Catholic education I was taught : Priests could marry until the Tenth Century, Heliocentric theory is now accepted (the sun does NOT revolve around the earth) (sorry about that, Galileo), Mary Magdalen is no longer a whore, I'm pretty sure they don't teach that torture is still acceptable, The Pope was not infallible until one hundred fifty years ago . . . .

"What is religion worth if it changrs to meet society's whims? Nothing.".

One might ask, in general, What IS religion worth?

The Catholic Church has every right to deny her communion. Why is this big news? To drum up sympathy for lesbians?

She's setting the stage for false outrage.

Maybe you need to work on your reading comprehension:

"We only allow one eulogy," Guarnizo informed them, despite the fact that the church’s music director had told them otherwise...

It's clear that Rev. Guarnizo was not applying "the rules" equally. He judged Barbara Johnson and applied a different rule to her than he does to others. Christ is the only judge and he is no respecter of persons. The Rev should work on trying to truly live the example that was Christ's life.

Gandhi said it best:
I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

You're a reading comprehension!

DVG

Gandhi also said

A 'No' uttered from the deepest conviction is better than a 'Yes' merely uttered to please, or worse, to avoid trouble.

The memorial service for my mother was cleared with the priest not the music director.

BM - I'm pretty sure her outrage is real, not false.

Gandhi called it right.

Ah but for it to be a GOOD confession you must be sorry for your sin and resolve to sin no more. It isn't a dry cleaner for the soul to be used and abused.

Because you're a homosexual, or because you committed sodomy? The latter is a sin and requires a good confession.

If the sex was bad would OK confession work.