Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. When my son was 10 years old, he fronted up for Communion as the family did every Sunday only to be denied by the priest.
   He came back to his seat, white in the face and told me. I asked the priest after Mass why he had refused the boy Communion - his response was that the boy and his friend had been talking during the consecration.
   My thoughts were if the priest had been concentrating on the consecration he should not have noticed the boys talking.
   Under Canon Law were the boys committing 'grave sin' by talking during a sacred part of the Mass - would they have understood, at that age, just how important it was to be respectful during this time?
   This matter and incidences of lack of respect and courtesy to our family from the clergy have not dented my beliefs, although I have become very cynical towards many of the professed members of our Church.
   I find I can rely on my lay friends for help and comfort during times of distress.

   Posted By: Pat

2. This is a good opportunity to remind everyone that the strict requirements for refusing Holy Communion, including manifest grave sin, do not apply to those who choose to kneel for Communion.
   Whether the priest likes it or not, he cannot use refusal of Holy Communion as punishment.
   In fact, a priest who will not be corrected in this matter is to be punished, 'not excluding suspension'. This was communicated to priests in Australia some years ago, but some priests have forgotten.
   Cardinal Arinze has spoken on this matter also.

   Posted By: TC

3. Pat: That incident you described is appalling, and I hope some loving priest will jump on this website and extend their apologies on behalf of his brother priest.
   As someone active in the Church, I am sorry that your family had to experience that kind of insult. It is not the heart of who we should be as Church.
   Sadly, I have witnessed incidents like this, too.
   They are so life changing ... and damaging.
   Thank God, we put our trust in God first, and human beings second.

   Posted By: Cathy

4. It is so important to be pastorally sensitive.
   How many people have left the church because of such incidents as this gay woman or Pat's story?
   And then we claim people are not faithful. We kick them out and complain they are not coming.
   What would God say? Would God really mind if one person took communion when others think she shouldn't?
   These are more than just theory or issues. They are people!

   Posted By: Paul

5. This sounds like relativism, trying to wiggle out of actually standing up for the Church’s teaching, and in reality to defend the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist.
   Either the Church's teachings on the Holy Eucharist are true or they are not. They don't change with circumstance.
   It is a sacrilege, a grave wrong, to receive Holy Communion if one is not in a state of grace, ie conscious of unconfessed (and unabsolved) serious sin ('mortal' sin because it kills the life of grace in the soul).
   If a person has made a conscious decision to reject the Church’s teaching and engage in grave sin, for example through a ‘life style choice’ they can’t just expect to present themselves for Holy Communion - in fact that is a denial of reality.
   To quote from Cardinal Burke on this issue – “... the denial of Holy Communion ... in reality, it plainly articulates the responsibility of the minister of Holy Communion, ordinary or extraordinary, to deny Holy Communion to those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin. ... but there are other cases in which Holy Communion must be denied, apart from any imposition or declaration of a canonical penalty, in order to respect the holiness of the Sacrament, to safeguard the salvation of the soul of the party presenting himself to receive Holy Communion, and to avoid scandal.”
   

   Posted By: Peter in Canberra

6. I think that Pat might be mistaken. Perhaps stirring the possums?
   I would find it very difficult to believe any priest (that was in his right mind) proffering such an explanation for excluding a child from Holy Communion.

   Posted By: Brent Egan

7. Brent: Public refusal of Communion can be regarded as scandalous, and to cause a scandal is in breach of canon law as every fule kno.
   I've not witnessed this, but have heard a few stories over the years as to why clergy have taken it upon themselves to deny Communion: one that I recall involved a couple in a country town who had had the temerity to attend a wedding at the local C of E shack, and (close to home) a priest who took it upon himself to institute a dress code i.e no trouser-clad women to present themselves at the altar rails.
   Luckily that did not last long, as a formal submission was made to the local bishop.
   To Pat: If you don't mind my asking, how long ago and where did this occur and did you consider taking the matter further?

   Posted By: JR, Sydney

8. J.R.: It happened 40 years ago - in those days you prayed and paid and didn't rock the boat!
   I didn't realise I could take it further.
   Some of the things our family has experienced from clergy have only hardened my belief that they are merely human, like me, can make mistakes, and will be judged eventually on their actions.

   Posted By: Pat

9. Paul: Refusing somebody Communion until after he confesses his mortal sin is not &kicking him out of the Church.
   On the contrary, it is inviting him into the fullness of communion with Christ and His Church, by receiving Him worthily rather than endangering his soul still further by receiving Communion whilst not in a state of grace.
   The denial of Communion is for his own spiritual protection. And anyone who is deliberately living in an ongoing state of mortally sinful activity has already placed himself outside of the Church.
   It's interesting that the gay lobby is trying to blow up this particular incident to portray the Church as having some sort of animus against gays or lesbians.
   No doubt if the woman was deliberately living in an ongoing state of mortally sinful heterosexual activity, and had blatantly and flagrantly introduced her extra-marital male sexual partner to the priest immediately before Mass, he would in exactly the same manner have no option but to refuse her Communion if she dared to front up and ask for it.
   

   Posted By: Peter G

10. Peter G: You are assuming too much.
    'Blatantly and flagrantly'? I hardly think so.
    Unless a priest is fully conversant with the exact nature of a couple's sexual life (or lack thereof) then he is no way obliged to make a public scandal and deny Communion at the altar rails.
    Mind you, there is always the possibility that a cleric might behave scandalously out of fear that a local zealot might dob him in to the bishop for giving Communion to a notorious sinner.
    Pat, I am nearly 60 and know all about the 'pray,pay and obey' stuff, and by 1972 there were more than a few who said their piece and stayed put in the pews.
    As for hardening of beliefs as to the shortcomings of some of the priestly caste, what you have expressed is common sense.
    Time has rolled on and clergy are now being judged and found wanting by the laity in more ways than one.

    Posted By: JR, Sydney

11. JR: I assume nothing, except that the original report is accurate.
    It plainly says the woman was denied communion only “after introducing her lesbian partner to the priest before Mass“!
    Further evidence for the fact that the woman deliberately intended this as a publicity stunt to attack Catholicism, is shown by her subsequent behaviour, when even after Church officials humoured her demands, she further demanded that the priest be sacked.
    Her agenda seems to be to try to bully the Church into denying the fact that sexual activity between people of the same sex is a mortal sin.
    Of course the Church never can and never will do this.

    Posted By: Peter G

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Vatican susceptible to money laundering, says US

   The United States Department of State has added the Vatican to a list of 67 countries that could be potentially susceptible to money-laundering, the Vatican Insider reports.

2. Constant noise detracts from prayer: Pope

   The constant noise that accompanies modern life is an enemy of God's word being heard in prayer, Pope Benedict said, according to the Catholic News Agency.

3. Hackers take down Vatican website

   A hacker group called Anonymous has taken down the Vatican's website, saying it was targeting the "corrupt" Church, a day after a high-profile bust of the group's alleged leaders, reports AFP on AdelaideNow.

4. US college drops priest over support for women's ordination

   A priest's contract at a Jesuit-run Boston College in Massachussetts has been terminated because of his insistence that women should be allowed to enter the priesthood, said a report on  ucanews.com.

5. Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury to pray together

   Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams will pray together with Pope Benedict in a rare gesture of unity on Saturday, reports AFP on Google News.