A Maryland priest who denied Communion to a lesbian at her mother’s funeral last weekend has not received the full support of the Diocese of Washington, according to WUSA9. com. Diocesan officials said the priests should not have withheld Communion without talking to the woman privately. But the Rev. Marcel Guarnizo did not learn the woman was lesbian until a few minutes before the funeral. He had no choice but to openly refuse her once she placed him in this bind.

The lesbian, Barbara Johnson, says she is still angry because her mother’s funeral was ruined. I’m sure much more than her mother’s funeral was ruined by her daughter’s preference for voluntary sterility and girl love. Perhaps this priest expressed what her mother never could.

—- Comments —

Stewart Griffin writes:

Somebody claiming to have ‘first hand’ knowledge, responding to somebody being critical of the priest, comments on the situation:

Fr. Hayden, with all due respect, what gives you the right to comment (and criticize a fellow priest) on a situation that you have only heard second hand? Considering “you have been there yourself” you should know better. I happen to know “First hand” that Barbara went into the sacristy before the mass and introduced herself as a lesbian in an active lesbian relationship… introducing her partner as “her lover” (her words). She left the sacristy before Fr. could have the “private discussion” you talk about. Barbaras [sic] “Lover” blocked his way out of the sacristy when he attempted to speak with her further.

Before communion, Fr. clearly announced the “rules” for receiving communion to all present (as is common at most weddings and funerals). These “rules” have been consistent for ages and should be nothing new to Catholics… in a nutshell they consist of: you must be Catholic, in a state of grace, have made a good confession since your last mortal sin, believe in transubstantiation, observe the Eucharistic fast, and, finally, not be under an ecclesiastical censure such as excommunication. A mortal sin is any sin whose matter is grave and which has been committed willfully and with knowledge of its seriousness. Grave matter includes, but is not limited to, murder, receiving or participating in an abortion, homosexual acts, having sexual intercourse outside of marriage or being in an invalid marriage etc… After this announcement, Barbara decided to go up to receive the Eucharist anyways. Fr. discretely whispered to her that she could not receive… Whats the problem?

As per the so called “Eulogy”, it was described as such by Barbara and her ex sister in law (enough said). “Having been there yourself” Im sure you can imagine having to explaining the difference between a few short words of remembrance and a Eulogy to the daughter of the deceased (who clearly does not like you) before the funeral mass? Im sure you can also imagine how that person may not have liked what you had to say and stormed out of the sacristy not giving you the chance to have your “charitable talk”?

The only “misguided decisions” I see are 1) that Barbara insisted on receiving the Eucharist after it was made clear that she could not 2) that you and Deacon Greg are so quick to throw a fellow religious under the bus.

Dont you think there’s enough ill-informed finger pointing going around already Fr.?

DvS”

 Agnello writes:

“Barbara Johnson says she is still angry because her mother’s funeral was ruined.”

I am in positive awe of this statement. How is it possible that this person could regard her mother’s funeral Mass as being organized for her own benefit?

Being denied the opportunity to offer the grace of Communion worthily received for the repose of her Mother’s soul would certainly be a hardship; her admitted condition as a public and notorious sinner does not, however, oblige the celebrant to delay the Mass until such time as the deceased’s family is reconciled to the faith.

The time has come for Church to give up the attempt to explain her dogmatic teachings, as the modern, democratic, mind is simply incapable of distinguishing between explanation and debate or supplication.

The correct response from the Diocese of Washington is clear:

“Holy Mother Church, in her compassion, permits families of the deceased and other persons so disposed, to attend the Mass offered for the soul of a recently departed Christian.This generosity ought not lead to confusion in the minds of those so invited regarding the absolute and sovereign right and duty of the Church to determine her own communicating membership, a right which is justly claimed even by associations of merely human origin.

We are gravely saddened, particularly during this time, when the grace of participation in the Communion of the Saints ought be the hope and consolation of the believer, that Miss Johnson’s actions and, more, her attitudes and spiritual disposition, have placed her in a condition which precludes full participation in the Sacraments, and imperils her salvation. We urge and invite her most strongly to seek the restoration of full communion by means of the confessional, and we appeal to the faithful, most especially those in Miss Johnson’s family, to pray for her salvation.”

…and while I am dreaming…

Laura writes:

Wow, your recommended statement is excellent. Did you write that just now?

Agnello writes:

To answer ‘yes’ might be taken to imply I originated the thoughts thus expressed. I only composed these specific words. I used a simple technique: I imagined that I lived in a sane, rational world and wondered what one of the Apostles’ successors might say under such insane and irrational circumstances.

Laura writes:

They inspired you.

Please follow and like us: