Priest who denied communion to lesbian suspended

[Deacon Lance]

Which puts the responsibility of guarding the chalice on the layman, not the priest.

It is anyways.  Priests are not clairvoyant, a person can go through the motions and be unprepared and receive unworthily.  It is ultimately on their souls.

Neither does the Greek church. But don't think that Greek priests aren't capable of turning away folks who have not properly prepared themselves. I've been around.

Indeed, they may turn properly prepared folks away simply because they don't know them.

[scamandrius]

Everyone seems to be ragging on the priest.  This woman had no business presenting herself because she's not even a practicing Catholic!  The Eucharist isn't given out except to the faithful. The Eucharist is not some outreach means to those who are not members of the body.

http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Screen-shot-2012-03-07-at-1.16.45-PM.png

[Jetavan]

Everyone seems to be ragging on the priest.  This woman had no business presenting herself because she's not even a practicing Catholic!  The Eucharist isn't given out except to the faithful.

Well, that depends.

[LBK]

Which puts the responsibility of guarding the chalice on the layman, not the priest.

It is anyways.  Priests are not clairvoyant, a person can go through the motions and be unprepared and receive unworthily.  It is ultimately on their souls.

Neither does the Greek church. But don't think that Greek priests aren't capable of turning away folks who have not properly prepared themselves. I've been around.

Indeed, they may turn properly prepared folks away simply because they don't know them.

More sophistry from Dcn Lance. Why am I not surprised?

[MyMapleStory]

I don't see how the priest did not do the right thing. This woman was a practicing homosexual who was under a very grave sin. We are told not to take of the Eucharist unworthily and she should have known she was doing wrong in trying to take it. I believe also this woman is a practicing Bhudist. THe priest was perfectly reasonable in not giving her communion.

[Νεκτάριος]

We are pastoral, not legalistic. 

In theory that is nice, but in reality my life in the MP is far, far more legalistic than my youth in the Catholic Church. 

In general Deacon Lance is saying that the onus is one the communicant to prepare.  This is only logical and practical - in large parishes it simply isn't possible for a priest to intimately know every person.  You claim the Orthodox Church is so high and mighty for protecting the sacrament - if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

[LBK]

if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

Ask the Fathers, saints and hymnographers who compiled the services for second and third marriages, and who allowed them into the liturgical deposit of the Church.

[Νεκτάριος]

if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

Ask the Fathers, saints and hymnographers who compiled the services for second and third marriages, and who allowed them into the liturgical deposit of the Church.

And Catholics say the same about their practices. 

[katherine 2001]

We are pastoral, not legalistic. 

In theory that is nice, but in reality my life in the MP is far, far more legalistic than my youth in the Catholic Church. 

In general Deacon Lance is saying that the onus is one the communicant to prepare.  This is only logical and practical - in large parishes it simply isn't possible for a priest to intimately know every person.  You claim the Orthodox Church is so high and mighty for protecting the sacrament - if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

With all due respect, the RC gives annulments and pretends there was no marriage, even when there are children involved and it makes those children illegitimate.  At least the Orthodox are honest enough to admit that there was a marriage and not that anyone at the wedding must have dreamed it.

[Νεκτάριος]

We are pastoral, not legalistic. 

In theory that is nice, but in reality my life in the MP is far, far more legalistic than my youth in the Catholic Church. 

In general Deacon Lance is saying that the onus is one the communicant to prepare.  This is only logical and practical - in large parishes it simply isn't possible for a priest to intimately know every person.  You claim the Orthodox Church is so high and mighty for protecting the sacrament - if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

With all due respect, the RC gives annulments and pretends there was no marriage, even when there are children involved and it makes those children illegitimate.  At least the Orthodox are honest enough to admit that there was a marriage and not that anyone at the wedding must have dreamed it.

Such is a modern abuse mostly isolated to North America. 

My point is that LBK (and other Orthodox) have no leg to stand on when they criticize the Catholic Church for not guarding the sanctity of the sacraments when the Orthodox Church directly contradicts the very words of Christ.  The best part was LBK's justification - the development of doctrine!  If we're going to disagree with the Catholic Church, let's do so for valid theological reasons (Papal Infallibility, filioque and such) rather than petty squabbles over incidentals. 

[ialmisry]

if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

Ask the Fathers, saints and hymnographers who compiled the services for second and third marriages, and who allowed them into the liturgical deposit of the Church.

And Catholics say the same about their practices. 

What Fathers and saints dreamed up the corban factory/marriage tribunals?

[ialmisry]

We are pastoral, not legalistic. 

In theory that is nice, but in reality my life in the MP is far, far more legalistic than my youth in the Catholic Church. 

In general Deacon Lance is saying that the onus is one the communicant to prepare.  This is only logical and practical - in large parishes it simply isn't possible for a priest to intimately know every person.  You claim the Orthodox Church is so high and mighty for protecting the sacrament - if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

"What you loose on earth will be loose in heave"?

When a priest marries someone divorced from a faithful spouse, he is flouting the Orthodox Church.  When the corban factory annulls a marriage, it is following the Vatican.

[stanley123]

I don't see how the priest did not do the right thing. This woman was a practicing homosexual who was under a very grave sin. We are told not to take of the Eucharist unworthily and she should have known she was doing wrong in trying to take it. I believe also this woman is a practicing Bhudist. THe priest was perfectly reasonable in not giving her communion.

That's right. And she was public about her Buddhism, writing papers professing belief in Buddha.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

[Ortho_cat]

maybe he gave her a penance to abstain from eucharist for a period of time...we may not have all there is to the story here...

[GiC]

Wouldn't the issue come down to whether homosexuality is subject to latae sententiae or ferendae sententiae excommunication? I don't know enough about Latin canon law to know which category it falls under, but if it falls under latae sententiae excommunication then the priest is justified, otherwise, until such time as an ecclesiastical court is convened and she is convicted, he would not be justified in refusing communion. For better or worse, Latin canon law is much more cut and dry than Orthodox canon law.

But, in either case, I think his refusal to bury this woman's mother because of objections over her (not her mother's) lifestyle would earn stern reproach in both the Orthodox and Catholic churches...an Orthodox bishop would have likely responded in the same manner.

[Νεκτάριος]

But, in either case, I think his refusal to bury this woman's mother because of objections over her (not her mother's) lifestyle would earn stern reproach in both the Orthodox and Catholic churches...an Orthodox bishop would have likely responded in the same manner.

I thought he cancelled attending the burial due to a migraine.  I get migraines - it is entirely possible to get one suddenly and be complete incapacitated.  The stress of the event could easily trigger one. 

[orthonorm]

I get migraines - it is entirely possible to get one suddenly and be complete incapacitated. 

Have you considered this?

http://thepaleodiet.com/

[Νεκτάριος]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

Exactly.  If Deacon Lance affirmed the divinity of Christ, certain posters here would disagree with him out of principle.  Furthermore it would be clear proof of UGCC plot to sheep steal from the Orthodox.  

[Νεκτάριος]

I get migraines - it is entirely possible to get one suddenly and be complete incapacitated. 

Have you considered this?

http://thepaleodiet.com/

 

[Deacon Lance]

With all due respect, the RC gives annulments and pretends there was no marriage, even when there are children involved and it makes those children illegitimate.  At least the Orthodox are honest enough to admit that there was a marriage and not that anyone at the wedding must have dreamed it.

It does no such thing.  A declartion of nullity is the judgement that states because of a defect in form or intent a valid sacramental marriage did not take place.  It is not saying a legal or natural marriage did not take place.  A declaration of nullity does not make children illegitimate.  

Can. 1137 Children who are conceived or born of a valid or of a putative marriage are legitimate.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P43.HTM

[elijahmaria]

LOL!

I'm certain the person doesn't need to be investigated, however, I think a heartfelt confession wouldn't hurt.

Afterall, aren't' we taught that the Sacraments are a privilege and not a right?

You are right in theory. In practice though, and for reasons that have little to do with Christianity people perceived to be gay will suffer closer scrutiny in than most other categories of sinners, in most, I would say, Orthodox settings.

But isn't that what gays do? Scrutiny? It's like the opposite of mutiny, when like all the sailors get along. And we know sailor is just seamen for gay.

O what ghastly puns perceived!!...or is that conceived...no no...not that way...

[orthonorm]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

I thought the same thing about his being reasonable and all. I didn't realize he was Catholic at the time though.

I amend my previous thoughts.

[NicholasMyra]

With all due respect, the RC gives annulments and pretends there was no marriage, even when there are children involved and it makes those children illegitimate.  At least the Orthodox are honest enough to admit that there was a marriage and not that anyone at the wedding must have dreamed it.

Such is a modern abuse mostly isolated to North America. 

I'll have to disagree with you here.

Maybe it was uncommon among peasants and serfs in Europe. Nobility on the other hand...

[orthonorm]

With all due respect, the RC gives annulments and pretends there was no marriage, even when there are children involved and it makes those children illegitimate.  At least the Orthodox are honest enough to admit that there was a marriage and not that anyone at the wedding must have dreamed it.

Such is a modern abuse mostly isolated to North America. 

I'll have to disagree with you here.

Maybe it was uncommon among peasants and serfs in Europe. Nobility on the other hand...

Peasants aren't noble? I thought you were Orthodox!

ROCOR Rousseau: The Noble Peasant.

How to convince middle class white people to style themselves in selected accouterment of the pre-Communist and Capitalist Eastern European poor.

[Deacon Lance]

A thank you to my Orthodox brethren.  I strive to be reasoned, fair-minded, and respectful in my posts.  It is nice that some people notice.

[orthonorm]

A thank you to my Orthodox brethren.  I strive to be reasoned, fair-minded, and respectful in my posts.  It is nice that some people notice.

If you want to be noticed for something, that is the WRONG to go about it.

See the following for reading about how to get attention:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=4153;sa=showPosts

[Michael L]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

Actually if he were an Orthodox Deacon he might get more disagreement for he would be expected to know that the Orthodox Priest is ordered by his Bishop at his ordination to Guard the Eucharist and not rely on the faithful to guard it for him.

From the Ordination Service of a Priest:

After the consecration of the Eucharist, the bishop places the body of Christ into the new priest's hands with the following admonition:

Bishop: Receive this Divine Trust, and guard it until the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, at which time He will demand It from you.

I commend the priest for his Orthodox approach to guarding Body of Christ. His suspension over the matter just proves again that Orthodoxy and Roman Catholic are far from being the same Church...so much for the too lungs theory.

[ignatius]

Grace and Peace,

Let's just be real... there are very large factions in the Roman Catholic Church that do not uphold Catholic Moral Positions on these matter and simply lack the will to resist the liberal social movements sweeping through the West.

I'm ex-Catholic and I know this first hand.

[Deacon Lance]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

Actually if he were an Orthodox Deacon he might get more disagreement for he would be expected to know that the Orthodox Priest is ordered by his Bishop at his ordination to Guard the Eucharist and not rely on the faithful to guard it for him.

From the Ordination Service of a Priest:

After the consecration of the Eucharist, the bishop places the body of Christ into the new priest's hands with the following admonition:

Bishop: Receive this Divine Trust, and guard it until the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, at which time He will demand It from you.

I commend the priest for his Orthodox approach to guarding Body of Christ. His suspension over the matter just proves again that Orthodoxy and Roman Catholic are far from being the same Church...so much for the too lungs theory.

My Church uses the same rite.  I wonder however if the author intened that admonition to be more for the priest to guard against his own unworthiness.  The Holy Gifts are medicine for the sinner not rewards for the perfect.

[ignatius]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

Actually if he were an Orthodox Deacon he might get more disagreement for he would be expected to know that the Orthodox Priest is ordered by his Bishop at his ordination to Guard the Eucharist and not rely on the faithful to guard it for him.

From the Ordination Service of a Priest:

After the consecration of the Eucharist, the bishop places the body of Christ into the new priest's hands with the following admonition:

Bishop: Receive this Divine Trust, and guard it until the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, at which time He will demand It from you.

I commend the priest for his Orthodox approach to guarding Body of Christ. His suspension over the matter just proves again that Orthodoxy and Roman Catholic are far from being the same Church...so much for the too lungs theory.

My Church uses the same rite.  I wonder however if the author intened that admonition to be more for the priest to guard against his own unworthiness.  The Holy Gifts are medicine for the sinner not rewards for the perfect.

I dare say that St. Paul would have trouble with your rationalization here.

[Deacon Lance]

Grace and Peace,

Let's just be real... there are very large factions in the Roman Catholic Church that do not uphold Catholic Moral Positions on these matter and simply lack the will to resist the liberal social movements sweeping through the West.

I'm ex-Catholic and I know this first hand.

I would go one further and say some actively aid them but I don't think that is the case here.

[username!]

We don't know the details....but, lets just say that he "knew" that the deceased woman's daughter was a lesbian....and here she is before him, with her partner....and approaches for communion.  Is he just supposed to give it to her?

This is just another reason to have people go to Holy Confession before going to Holy Communion.  It would have given the priest a chance to "council her in private".

This way the priest also knows who is who, and who is approaching the Holy Gifts.  

My parish tradition is we Confess prior to going to Holy Communion.  This way when our priest notices an "unknown" face approaching, he quietly speaks to them, lifts the chalice for them to kiss, and has them move on.  Nobody except the person immediately behind them realizes the person didn't receive the Holy Gifts.

I went to an RC funeral last year (coworkers family member)....and for their Communion most of my coworkers went up too.  I know some are Catholic...but, then there was this one Baptist man...who happily went up and with a smirk on his face coming back up the aisle munching on the wafer...with a huge grin.  "Good cookie".

I know that priest didn't know who these people were.  But, he did in fact, give the Holy Gifts to a "non-believer".  This man thought it was all a joke.  While not RC, it still hurt me to see it happen.

So, I believe the priest has every right to withhold Communion.  It's his responsibility to safeguard the Gifts.

He could have gave her a blessing instead of not obeying his bishop OR she could have gone to the lay person handing out the bread.  Sounds like both parties may have had ulterior motives.  They should call it a draw and move on.

[username!]

We are pastoral, not legalistic. 

In theory that is nice, but in reality my life in the MP is far, far more legalistic than my youth in the Catholic Church. 

In general Deacon Lance is saying that the onus is one the communicant to prepare.  This is only logical and practical - in large parishes it simply isn't possible for a priest to intimately know every person.  You claim the Orthodox Church is so high and mighty for protecting the sacrament - if the Orthodox Church cares so deeply about the sanctity of sacraments why does it allow divorce and remarriage in direct contradiction to the words of Christ? 

You go!  I don't know if people realise that some RCC are huge, like 10,000 plus people huge.  Even the smaller town RCC here have membership that compares to some Orthodox jurisdictions.

[username!]

LBK

You are failing to distinguish between a priest to refusing Communion to one whom he has postively identified as obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin and refusing it based on a hunch or worse rumor.

Refusing Communion in the Catholic Church is a big deal because by doing so the priest is proclaiming the person in a state of mortal sin and/or excommunication.  In the Orthodox Church one can be refused simply because the priest doesn't know you.

 Wrong or right in Orthodox minds what the RCC does on this is really their business.  He should have buried her mother and not let the family sit there when they needed the priest to be there to help them grieve and bury their beloved departed.

Remember this parish is near Washington DC.

[Deacon Lance]

Frankly, I find the positions set forth by Deacon Lance to be most reasonable. I do not think that he is any more legalistic than anybody else who has posted on this thread. If he were a Deacon in the Orthodox Church, I doubt that he would have incurred the same degree of disagreement.

Actually if he were an Orthodox Deacon he might get more disagreement for he would be expected to know that the Orthodox Priest is ordered by his Bishop at his ordination to Guard the Eucharist and not rely on the faithful to guard it for him.

From the Ordination Service of a Priest:

After the consecration of the Eucharist, the bishop places the body of Christ into the new priest's hands with the following admonition:

Bishop: Receive this Divine Trust, and guard it until the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, at which time He will demand It from you.

I commend the priest for his Orthodox approach to guarding Body of Christ. His suspension over the matter just proves again that Orthodoxy and Roman Catholic are far from being the same Church...so much for the too lungs theory.

My Church uses the same rite.  I wonder however if the author intened that admonition to be more for the priest to guard against his own unworthiness.  The Holy Gifts are medicine for the sinner not rewards for the perfect.

I dare say that St. Paul would have trouble with your rationalization here.

Read the Liturgy.  For example these from the Liturgy of St. Basil the Great:

Lord, our God, You created us and brought us into this life. You have shown us the way to salvation and have bestowed upon us the revelation of heavenly mysteries. You have appointed us to this service by the power of Your Holy Spirit. Grant, therefore, O Lord that we may be accepted as servants of Your new Covenant and ministers of Your holy mysteries. Accept us as we draw near to Your holy altar, according to the multitude of Your mercy, that we may be worthy to offer You this spiritual sacrifice without the shedding of blood, for our sins and for the transgressions of Your people. Grant that, having accepted this sacrifice upon Your holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, You may in return send down upon us the grace of Your Holy Spirit. Look upon us, O God, and consider our worship; and accept it as You accepted the gifts of Abel, the sacrifices of Noah, the burnt offerings of Abraham, the priestly offices of Moses and Aaron, and the peace offerings of Samuel. As You accepted this true worship from Your holy apostles, accept also in Your goodness, O Lord, these gifts from the hands of us sinners, that being deemed worthy to serve at Your holy altar without blame., we may obtain the reward of the faithful stewards on the fearful day of Your just judgment.

Therefore, most holy Master, we also, Your sinful and unworthy servants, whom You have made worthy to serve at Your holy altar, not because of our own righteousness (for we have not done anything good upon the earth), but because of Your mercy and compassion, which You have so richly poured upon us, we dare to approach Your holy altar, and bring forth the symbols of the holy Body and Blood of Your Christ. We pray to You and call upon You, O Holy of Holies, that by the favor of Your goodness, Your Holy Spirit may come upon us and upon the gifts here presented, to bless, sanctify, and make this bread to be the precious Body of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ.

http://www.goarch.org/chapel/liturgical_texts/basil

[stanley123]

With all due respect, the RC gives annulments and pretends there was no marriage, even when there are children involved and it makes those children illegitimate.  At least the Orthodox are honest enough to admit that there was a marriage and not that anyone at the wedding must have dreamed it.

It does no such thing.  A declartion of nullity is the judgement that states because of a defect in form or intent a valid sacramental marriage did not take place.  It is not saying a legal or natural marriage did not take place.  A declaration of nullity does not make children illegitimate.  

Can. 1137 Children who are conceived or born of a valid or of a putative marriage are legitimate.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P43.HTM

Oh. So children of a putative marriage are legitimate, even if the assumption that there was ever a marriage was a false one? There have been cases where a couple have never been married, but it is assumed by their friends and aquaintances that they were married. So even though they have never been legally married, according to you, their children are legitimate, because it is a putative marriage?
This seems contrary to the common definition of illegitimacy.

[stanley123]

Grace and Peace,

Let's just be real... there are very large factions in the Roman Catholic Church that do not uphold Catholic Moral Positions on these matter and simply lack the will to resist the liberal social movements sweeping through the West.

I'm ex-Catholic and I know this first hand.

But are those who do not uphold Catholic moral positions correct, or was the priest correct in denying the Sacrament to a lesbian activist who publically announces that she is a Buddhist?

[dzheremi]

Of course the priest is correct. If he is suspended for some other matter, that's one thing, but he is absolutely right to deny this woman the Eucharist. What the worst do or don't do (no matter how many they are) is not to be used as a cudgel against those who are serious and committed to their faith and its teachings.

[Νεκτάριος]

Why does legitimacy matter?  Are we back in the middle ages?

[katherine 2001]

So it is no longer a sin to have sex outside of marriage?  If a marriage is annulled and they were never married, then the children were conceived by having sex outside of marriage correct?

[Νεκτάριος]

So it is no longer a sin to have sex outside of marriage?  If a marriage is annulled and they were never married, then the children were conceived by having sex outside of marriage correct?

So what?  Again, I ask is this the middle ages?   

[primuspilus]

He should have buried her mother and not let the family sit there when they needed the priest to be there to help them grieve and bury their beloved departed.

Yeah, the priest should not have excused himself, however he was right in denying the eucharist.

Let's just be real... there are very large factions in the Roman Catholic Church that do not uphold Catholic Moral Positions on these matter and simply lack the will to resist the liberal social movements sweeping through the West

Look how the Episcopal Church has fared thanks to this agenda. It really is a cancer.

PP

[stanley123]

Why does legitimacy matter?  Are we back in the middle ages?

What is wrong with the Middle Ages? Aren't moral values supposed to pass on unchanged from one generation to the next? Take for example the sin of idolatry or worship of strange gods. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

[Jason.Wike]

So it is no longer a sin to have sex outside of marriage?  If a marriage is annulled and they were never married, then the children were conceived by having sex outside of marriage correct?

So what?  Again, I ask is this the middle ages?   

Because ours is so much better?

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics > Topic: Priest who denied communion to lesbian suspended