The priests side of the story

[WarriorAngel]

Priest: removal from ministry was tied to communion incident :: Catholic News Agency (CNA)


Honestly i think we ought to RESPOND to the Church to let him return ...

May the Lord have mercy.

 

[WarriorAngel]

.

 

[Michie]

Question-
Was this priest's Bishop the one that was for gay marriage?

I can't remember. I thought I read something about that awhile back.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I dont recall that. I might have missed it.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

I knew there was another side to this story, I mentioned that in my previous responses to the initial article. The story did not feel complete. I do believe this Priest and I don't always take a Priest's word.

I feel this Woman and her girlfriend both had chips on their shoulders. This is my intuitive opinion only.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I knew there was another side to this story, I mentioned that in my previous responses to the initial article. The story did not feel complete. I do believe this Priest and I don't always take a Priest's word.

I feel this Woman and her girlfriend both had chips on their shoulders. This is my intuitive opinion only.

I was waiting to hear the priest's side and from what I can tell, I agree with your initial observation. Of course, something may still present itself and change our opinions though it is unlikely.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

I was waiting to hear the priest's side and from what I can tell, I agree with your initial observation. Of course, something may still present itself and change our opinions though it is unlikely.

Agreed.

 

[Michie]

Fr. Guarnizo's statement shows that he misunderstands Church law, and confirms my sense that he erred and needs correction...
Fr. Marcel Guarnizo’s statement evidences misunderstandings of several aspects of Catholic law on the administration of holy Communion and confirms my sense that Guarnizo erred in withholding holy Communion in this case. Regarding those errors, I believe that he, and those inclined to support or even imitate him, need correction.

 

[WarriorAngel]

According to canon law - the priest is the one who operates on giving the Eucharist and may with hold it due to knowing a sin.

In the face of Canonshttp://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3.HTM 843, and 916, Canon 915 indeed authorizes withholding Communion from those who (a) obstinately, (b) persevere in (c) manifest (d') grave (d'') sin. Or in the case of canon 916 do have the opportunity to confess.

Having a lover in itself is mortal sin, having a lesbian lover is still a mortal sin.

Sorry again i disagree with the ppl who are trying to twist canon law to say something it does not.
She was not penitent. She was not looking for confession. She was in sin and made no moves to leave that sin.

 

[BabyChristian22]

There was no reason for her to go to the media other than the whole thing being a setup.

 

[Jasma]

She also claimed not only lesbianism, but she also claims Buddhism as her faith, so why would she be shocked when she presents herself for Communion and be denied. You are right, BabyChristian22, it was just a terrible set up. Another diversion tactic.

Barbara Johnson Owes Mother and Catholic Church an Apology | ALL.org

 

[MikeK]

Please share the points, if any, that you think the Canon Lawyer Michie linked to erred on. Thanks!

According to canon law - the priest is the one who operates on giving the Eucharist and may with hold it due to knowing a sin.

In the face of Canonshttp://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3.HTM 843, and 916, Canon 915 indeed authorizes withholding Communion from those who (a) obstinately, (b) persevere in (c) manifest (d') grave (d'') sin. Or in the case of canon 916 do have the opportunity to confess.

Having a lover in itself is mortal sin, having a lesbian lover is still a mortal sin.

Sorry again i disagree with the ppl who are trying to twist canon law to say something it does not.
She was not penitent. She was not looking for confession. She was in sin and made no moves to leave that sin.

 

[WarriorAngel]

It need only be known to the priest of the mortal sin.
He does not need to know...

There was apparently no mention of Johnson’s possible lesbian activism, her cohabitation status (if any),

She introduced a lesbian lover and left. There was no move for penance. There was no desire to end the lover status. Lover is quite distinct. It does not carry a subjective term of misunderstanding nor is it a double entendre.
It is unmistakably a term used to suggest there is sex involved.

Sex outside of a heterosexual marriage is a mortal sin, no matter who it is.

This blogger is reaching - and mistaken.

 

[MikeK]

The person that you call "this blogger" is a Canon Lawyer. Do you know what that is?

Be very careful.

It need only be known to the priest of the mortal sin.
He does not need to know...



She introduced a lesbian lover and left. There was no move for penance. There was no desire to end the lover status. Lover is quite distinct. It does not carry a subjective term of misunderstanding nor is it a double entendre.
It is unmistakably a term used to suggest there is sex involved.

Sex outside of a heterosexual marriage is a mortal sin, no matter who it is.

This blogger is reaching - and mistaken.

 

[Chany]

The priest erred because he was making a snap judgement call on a woman he literally met for the first time and all he had to go off was the word "lover".

First off, the priest would have to assume "lover" equated to "sex". He can't assume things. Assuming guilt, even off of good evidence, is not allowed.

Second, the sin also has to be public. The priest had no knowledge of the family beforehand. Maybe the woman never revealed her relationship outside of her immediate family. Maybe the woman just started dating a few days before the funeral and no one except her nearest knew about it. We know now that it is public, but the priest didn't know back then.

 

[Brooklyn Knight]

This is like somebody accused of murder...and the suspect says that they aren't a murderer but rather a rapist and a drunk.

Communion is offered to practicing Catholics, not practicing Buddhists. A fact that was come to be known later-on, but that fact alone should have watered down anyone upset with the priest, and should have made her complaint about not receiving communion dead.

Let's not make lover ambiguous. If somebody introduces their lover to you, the first thought that'll pop into your head is that they do the forbidden dance under the sheets. Honestly, when is lover used that doesn't mean sexual partner?

 

[Chany]

This is like somebody accused of murder...and the suspect says that they aren't a murderer but rather a rapist and a drunk.

Communion is offered to practicing Catholics, not practicing Buddhists. A fact that was come to be known later-on, but that fact alone should have watered down anyone upset with the priest, and should have made her complaint about not receiving communion dead.

Let's not make lover ambiguous. If somebody introduces their lover to you, the first thought that'll pop into your head is that they do the forbidden dance under the sheets. Honestly, when is lover used that doesn't mean sexual partner?

Uh, yeah, it doesn't water it down. The priest did not know at the time she was Buddhist, or she had a thing against the Church; he literally met her at the funeral.

Not saying lover does not point to it, but
a) there's always the slight possibility it doesn't
b) the public aspect of it was unknown

 

[Brooklyn Knight]

Uh, yeah, it doesn't water it down. The priest did not know at the time she was Buddhist, or she had a thing against the Church; he literally met her at the funeral.

Honestly, think about it. She complained she didn't receive communion...and it's revealed later that she is a Buddhist. So...what's there to complain?

Not saying lover does not point to it, but
a) there's always the slight possibility it doesn't
b) the public aspect of it was unknown

What, girlfriend slip her mind? I have a girlfriend and I don't introduce her as my lover. I wouldn't do so especially in front of a priest.

 

[MikeK]

Honestly, think about it. She complained she didn't receive communion...and it's revealed later that she is a Buddhist. So...what's there to complain?

What, girlfriend slip her mind? I have a girlfriend and I don't introduce her as my lover. I wouldn't do so especially in front of a priest.

Nothing about the woman is relevant to the Priest's actions, we know she was in the wrong....but we ought not expect much from Buddhist lesbians. Only what the Priest knew at the time matters. If he acted wrongly, and it looks like he did, he should be corrected. We should expect a lot of our Priests.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Nothing about the woman is relevant to the Priest's actions, we know she was in the wrong....but we ought not expect much from Buddhist lesbians. Only what the Priest knew at the time matters. If he acted wrongly, and it looks like he did, he should be corrected. We should expect a lot of our Priests.

Priests do have a greater responsibility. But, it does seem that even a priest cannot always be above reproach. While I agree that the priest did not have sufficient reason, from a perfectly canonical standpoint, the decision was not necessarily so inappropriate to warrant such stiff penalties. If this was not so scandalizing to the Church I believe the Bishop would have advised only with out removing any faculties. But, with the great attention the media is giving this, it was a move to protect the Church from scandalization and so the priest will have to be persecuted for his role to a far greater extent to protect the Church, a sacrifice I hope many priests would be willing to make.

As to this woman... she obviousy was looking for a fight and both her and her lover wanted a battle with the Catholic Church and this poor priest was the unsuspecting victim IMO. This woman and her lover are in the wrong in many ways and it bothers me that the media is biased towards those doing wrong and starting this whole affair. Not o mention that it is getting so much media attention, which shows an anti-Catholic bias IMO.

So, I do agree with you MikeK and think your position is accurate. I just wish our news media was more objective and honest in their reporting. I think news has a responsibility to everyone to be honest and truthful and not biased so as to scandalize intentionally any one or any group simply because they disagree with them. I may be wrong but I suspect you agree?