Hmmm...should we look for frodobaggins??? Lolz

Actually only Catholics can receive, and they need to be repentant.

That's cool, but if that's the case then he shouldn't be serving anybody communion, including himself. To deny anybody communion based on "sin", gay or straight is foul as hell.

Not Catholic, but I don't think the Church "permits" that. I think what you're seeing is priests doing it on their own and risking reprimand from their bishops.

Not defending the priest, but to be fair to the Catholic viewpoint, Communion is not being denied on the basis of "sin." From the Church's viewpoint, it's being denied on the basis of lack of repentance and of living in a way that endorses the sin as though it were not sin.

Disclaimer: Not a Catholic

Wouldn't the woman have known she would be refused communion? It couldn't have been a surprise to her that living in a state of unrepentence (according to Catholic teaching) would disqualify her.

And is it possible that the priest didn't come to the burial to avoid more confrontation?

The priest was in a no win situation. He either upholds the doctrines he has promised to uphold or he does something that he knows he is not supposed to do. Yes, he should have handled it differently, but I suspect there may be more to this story than is being told.

There are two sides to every story and the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.

Who may receive communion in the Roman Catholic church?
 

To quote from one of my favorite sites, http://www.catholic.com/tracts/who-c...eive-communion

"The Church sets out specific guidelines regarding how we should prepare ourselves to receive the Lord’s body and blood in Communion. To receive Communion worthily, you must be 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. "

It sounds as if the daughter was not qualified to receive. If she was raised Catholic she should have known that. That said, I think the priest should have simply delivered a blessing and gone on without making a scene.

As to why most other Christians are not able to take RC communion:

"Scripture is clear that partaking of the Eucharist is among the highest signs of Christian unity: "Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread" (1 Cor. 10:17). For this reason, it is normally impossible for non-Catholic Christians to receive Holy Communion, for to do so would be to proclaim a unity to exist that, regrettably, does not.
Another reason that many non-Catholics may not ordinarily receive Communion is for their own protection, since many reject the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Scripture warns that it is very dangerous for one not believing in the Real Presence to receive Communion: "For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died" (1 Cor. 11:29–30).

It is very uncommon for individuals who present themselves for communion to be refused. However, the woman should have known that it was inappropriate for her to do so as she was living a lifestyle contrary to Church beliefs and thus not "in communion" with the Church. The act of receiving communion represents that a person is accepting of all Church teachings. In this situation, the woman could have instead presented herself for a blessing, as anyone is welcome to do. I do agree that this is quite an upsetting situation, but the priest probably felt that he was protecting the woman by not giving her communion.

It could be that she attends a different parish where her priest is fine with it. This is true in my mother's parish.

If people didn't take communion due to not following Church beliefs, few would be taking communion or at least where I live. How many parishioners have premarital sex? use birth control? Have been divorced?


I could rant about this for about the next four hours. I'm going to stop myself here.

According to the Church, the rule is that people in such situations are to refrain from communion. I'm not saying everyone actually follows that rule.

The second wouldn't be something that everybody would know and it's possible the third as well. In fact from what I understand according to my spiritual director who is a nun, the fact that homosexuals are homosexual isn't the issue, but the extramarital sex is the issue.

This is very helpful. Even though as a Protestant I might not agree with this teaching, I understand it and can see why the priest would not serve her communion.

This is what I mean by two sides to every story. People will read this story and see "someone gay being discriminated against and humiliated" not "priest faithfully executing his responsibilities to protect the soul of another."

What of all the heterosexual couples who are "living in sin".

Your spiritual advisor is correct. A quote from americancatholics.org: The Priest is actually fulfilling his duties as he sees fit. He did so poorly and caused a lot more damage than good most likely. I am just sick and tired of seeing actions similar to this in the Church. If anyone wants to read the article I quoted it talks of how it can be embarrassing the ignorance that is present and how the Church should be compassionate. Just let me know and I will link it.

Unless the priest has been spying on their bedroom, how would he know? He doesn't. He doesn't know the nature of their living arrangement or what they do sexually. How does the church define sex anyway? If it is intercourse, then Lesbians aren't doing it.

The reality is, most Catholics who are taking communion aren't truly eligible for all the reasons mentioned above.. pre-marital or extra-marital sex, using birth control, having lustful thoughts, not having gone to confession since their last mortal sin, etc. Divorce itself is not a problem though.. not until you have sex with someone else or marry someone else. You can be divorced and chaste and still be in the good graces of the Church.

I'd be interested in knowing what you are basing your knowledge that MOST Catholics are, at any given mass, not eligible. The state of an individual's soul would be, it seems to me, difficult to know. That whole "judge not lest ye be judged" thing - yeah. Even if you are aware of someone having done something which might render him/her ineligible you do not know if they went to confession right before mass for a mortal sin, and of course there is the confession that is a part of the mass. So even if someone came to mass ineligible, he/she could confess during the mass and thus be eligible by the time came to take communion.

It is only when actions are flagrantly in violation of church teaching that priests would be in a position to deny communion. So, if the daughter was presenting herself with her partner as a romantic couple the priest wouldn't have to "spy" on her. There have been a couple of cases covered in the media recently of homosexuals working in Catholic schools who had to resign upon announcing they were marrying their partners.

eta - Is communion routinely given at Catholic funerals? I was Anglican/Episcopalian until a few years ago and haven't been to a Catholic funeral.

Catholic here. As others stated, the priest should have discussed this with the daughter in private before the funeral. If she handled the arrangements, she probably met with the priest to discuss whether to have Mass, the music, and the readings. He could have discussed it with her then. Or before the funeral Mass. Even if he totally botched that and refused her at communion, his disrespect for her mother (who the Mass was being celebrated for) and her as a person and grieving daughter by leaving while she delivered the eulogy/remarks (and yes, I have been at Catholic funeral masses where someone other than the priest delivered remarks, in addition to his eulogy) is chickencrap. And to then not show up for the burial? Craven. Although funeral masses allow closure for those who have been left behind by the dearly departed, it is still about the recently deceased.