Lesbian Wants Priest Removed After She Was Denied Communion at Her Mother’s Funeral
- Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:16am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Rev. Marcel Guarnizo
Barbara Johnson and her family are calling for Rev. Marcel Guarnizo of St. John Neumann Catholic Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland, to be removed from his ministry. The family is making bold proclamations after Guarnizo reportedly denied Johnson, 51, communion at her mother’s funeral on Saturday.
Johnson, a lesbian, was joined at the church by her partner to celebrate her mother’s life. Just before the service, Guarnizo apparently learned about her sexuality and relationship. Then, during the service, when Johnson stood up to receive communion, the priest openly denied her.
“He put his hand over the body of Christ and looked at me and said, ‘I can’t give you Communion because you live with a woman, and in the eyes of the church, that is a sin,’” she explained following the incident.
When he refused her, Johnson said she was shocked and stood in front of him, thinking that he’d change his mind.
“I just stood there, in shock. I was grieving, crying,” she explained. “My mother’s body was behind me, and all I wanted to do was provide for her, and the final thing was to make a beautiful funeral, and here I was letting her down because there was a scene.”
But Johnson, 51, and her family claim that Guarnizo’s offending actions went above and beyond the communion he purportedly refused to offer her. They claim that the priest left the altar when Johnson gave her eulogy and that he didn’t show up at the burial and declined to find a priest to replace him.
In a letter she penned to the priest, Johnson made her disgust and frustration known. She wrote, in part:
“You brought your politics, not your God into that Church yesterday, and you will pay dearly on the day of judgment for judging me.”
“I will pray for your soul, but first I will do everything in my power to see that you are removed from parish life so that you will not be permitted to harm any more families.”
Barbara Johnson (Image Credit: WUSA9)
The Washington, D.C. Archdiocese claims that the priest’s actions go against “policy.” Although the church has not officially commented to media, this statement was made in a brief note that was released on the matter. The Archdiocese plans to investigate the incident.
“Any issues regarding the suitability of an individual to receive communion should be addressed by the priest with that person in a private, pastoral setting,” the statement also read.
Johnson’s family, though, says they aren’t looking to use the incident to criticize the Catholic Church as a whole.
“We agreed this is not a discussion about gay rights or about the teachings of the Catholic Church,” her brother, Larry Johnson, said. “We’re not in this to Catholic-bash. That’s the farthest thing from our minds.”
(H/T: Washington Post)
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 703 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 543 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 360 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 357 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 360 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 276 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (611)
Dougral Supports Israel
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:53amJohnson should take some time to understand the Catholic faith she purports to believe instead of treating Communion as a right or part of a social affair. Perhaps then she would understand why she was denied Communion.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:12am.
Report Post »She did not read the manual. Obama will have Holder look into this as a Hate Crime. I’m serrious, they’ll use this to attack, it’s another way to help Topple the Church……………
Seasoldier
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:21amThe priest was absolutely correct in this case and thank God for granting him the courage to defend the Blessed Sacrament rather than give in to the fad of the day. We need more priests like him and we need more Catholics and other Christians to stand up to the tyranny of the Socialist Culture of Death that is being forced upon us. The complaining woman in this case clearly does not hold the belief in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament that is required for reception of Holy Communion. Therefore, she was not only not properly disposed for reception of Communion, she was attempting to commit a most grave sacrilege. The priest not only did not have the right to permit her to receive Holy Communion, he had the obligation to refuse. We need to pray for this woman and for everyone immersed in the Culture of Death.
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:48amWe’re becoming China–the government will try to control faith and we will have to get together in an underground unless we MAKE CHANGES NOW AND GET RID OF THE SOCIALISTS/COMMUNISTS!
Report Post »Maibus
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:48amAll Jesus asked for was to stop sinning and repent. If you don’t then you are not living in grace. You cannot have communion in such a state because your sin is acting like a canyon between you and God. Jesus can do much but you have to accept and repent.
Report Post »BELIEVER N CHRIST
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:51amYOU DO NOT NEED A PRIEST FOR COMMUMION…jeez people quit putting these men on pedestals. the lady should have known the rules that you weren‘t and shouldn’t even try to get in line…she said at the end their faith is shaken..why….go home and have communion
little big man
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:56amI have a question for all you church experts. Can you tell me why the Catholic Church had my father get my mother to sign a paper that said in the eyes of the church me, and my sister did not exist? So he could have his new kids with his new wife baptized.
Report Post »To this day it boggles my mind why the church would do this.
midwesthippie
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:10am…and how much did the catholic church have to spend to defend it’s pedophiles?
Report Post »encinom
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:15amThis is further evidence that the Church no longer cares about the people, it cares about the corrupt institution only.
Its fools like this priest and the Bishops taht are killing the American Church, the flock is leaving because of the attitude of the leadership.
CMDR6
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:18amencinom….go choke on your own vomit and quit making us see it……
Report Post »I sent an email of encouragement and support to the good priest. Here is the contact info for the church if you care to do the same. I am confident that he will be going through some cr_p in the coming weeks and months! Let him know you support his stand.
Contact us at – info@saintjohnneumann.org or 301-977-5492
Ruler4You
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:32amJust a thought Trench Liquor , why not just go to the TL church right down the street? They already have a religious dogma that has been compromised for your deception.
Trying to change the dogma of another church for your own ego seems a bit, well, stupid.
Report Post »proudinfidel54
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:32amWhat is needed now is a saturation of letters in support of this Preist, It is refreshing to see someone stand up for their beliefs, Not only Catholics but people of every Christian faith should let the Hierarchy know how they feel, It is time to put these sinners in their place for openly defying God and not repenting of their sins. Besides, aren’t you suppose to go to confession before communion???
Report Post »REPUBLICANGIRLPA
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:35amLeviticus 18 says it all. Homosexuality is a sin against God. If you truly believe in Christ as Lord and Saviour, you would not continually throw in his face your sexual preference. And yes, it is a choice you make to be homosexual. This woman needs prayers to change her ways and become right in God’s eyes.
Report Post »brknhrt
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:53amAfter all the grief and shame Barbara caused her mother, if the mother was a believing Catholic, she should not have even showed up for the funeral.
Report Post »robert
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:03am“Lesbian Wants Priest Removed After She Was Denied Communion at Her Mother’s Funeral”
Too bad, isn‘t it that she doesn’t want cured? Pitiful in fact. The healing process would encourage her to quit acting and dressing like a man, which is an artificial personality based in a mental disorder.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:07am@CMDR6
Should have sent the Priest an altar, they are always looking for some of those.
The Priests job at a funeral mass is in part to comfort the mourning, the fact that he allowed his personal politics to interfer shows he has shouldn’t be a priest. Its time for the Catholic layity to demand a say in the Church, clealy the old men have lost their way.
biohazard23
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:07amBarbara Johnson = Pat
There is a resemblance, eh? Just sayin’….
Report Post »db321
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:33amIf you think Johnson is upset now – wait until she meets Jesus – and Jesus says to her “you confess to be Christian,” but I don’t know you.
Some Catholics, and Christian think it OK to go to Church on Saturday and then sin like hell Mon – Sat.
A vote for Obama is a vote against God. You will be judged!
Report Post »brother_ed
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:40amThe Catholic Church is not a club where the members get to vote on the rules.
Regardless of your personal views as to the correctness of their doctrine, they are allowed to enforce their views among their members.
One cannot expect to take a ‘cafeteria approach’ to a church’s doctrine. There are rules (commandments) and breaking them carries consequences.
If you don’t like the doctrine, do the church a favor and purge yourself from it, but don’t attack the church.
Report Post »JimL
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:48amlittle BIG Man: sacramental marriage (annulled) and civil marriage (valid).
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:03pmencinom
You got Bible verses to back up your claims.
i am not catholic, but there is doctrine and standards to the way in which they carry out a funeral, a wedding, baptism….. They do not change their doctrine to coincide with the heathen.
Why dont you take your religious gumby routine over to the middle east and sell your philosophy to the good muslims. Tell them how they need to bend and change their ways of worship to fit your humanist rules of pleasing all. See how long your keep your head.
Report Post »altops
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:08pmThe Bible say nothing about denying communion on any grounds, it does say however “whoso ever partakes unworthily is guilty of the blood and body of Christ” So if someone wants to be guilty they are allowed to do so freely. Perhaps she know her lifestyle is a sin and judges herself accordingly which is what communion is about , self judgement lest ye be judged. communion is for all who understand it.
Report Post »000degrees
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:13pmThis world and God’s world are at odds and you must decide to which you will abide by. Forgiveness is available to all but the evil ways of this world must be left behind.
Report Post »FNTM
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:33pmWhen is the revolution beginning? Religions MUST join in abortions with the day after pill; lesbians/gays MUST receive Holy Communion; they MUST be ‘married’; Afganistan soldiers burning (Miltary’s most respected way of destroying our flag) Koran MUST be put on trial; we MUST support those too darn lazy to work; we MUST provide free health and retirement to those in congress who are ruining our country and we MUST have Obamacare and pay taxes; we MUST not smoke within however many yards of imaginary people; we MUST not be fat for fear of offending Michelle and ones like her; we MUST be nuts to put up with this crap!
Report Post »Who would Jesus bomb?
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:41pmI always wondered what became of “Pat” on SNL.
Report Post »yiska8
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:52pmThis woman while I’m sorry for the loss of her mother, in all religious/spiritual decency and respect should have remained seated. You are openly gay and show up with your lesbian partner, so it’s like spitting on the faith. What did she expect? Maybe some priests are still repulsed by this behavior. I know, what an ancient feeling for a faithful, dutiful man of the cloth to be repulsed!! Sin is sin. We all do it. Only God is truly good and perfect, but to blatantly show up and “expect” to receive Communion at a Catholic Church when you are trying so hard to look like a man, was her choice. The priest was obviously holding up the teachings and faith. I don’t know that he should have left the service and not gone forward with the service entirely, but I understand that he was trying to hold up the doctrine of faith. I was surprised to hear this story with the Church having become so excruciatingly liberal that a priest denied Communion! To the woman wishing for the priest to lose his position, NEWSFLASH, homosexuality is not normal or natural. A lot of priests who do their duty and uphold the faith purely have had to deal with the pedophile scandal that has plagued the church for decades. They have been mocked and stereotyped and the Church blasphemied,weakened, attacked by our own President and government in addition in recent months. Enough.
Report Post »FL_Catholic
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:00pmI’m guessing that she is not a regular church-goer – otherwise, how could she not be well aware of the Church’s long-standing teaching about, not just practicing homosexual activities, but cohabitating while engaged in sexual relations (i.e., adultery)?
The priest could have handled this a bit better – maybe tell her beforehand (having learned that before the service) or ask her to step outside the Communion line and discuss after Mass.
But he did uphold the teachings of the Church as he should have.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:14pmEncinom syas: “the flock is leaving because of the attitude of the leadership” Yea buddy, that Bible is as out of date as that crusty old Constitution. We should write a new one that makes everyone happy.
Report Post »B_rad
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:23pmSince I’m not Catholic, I admit to being somewhat ignorant of all of the laws governing taking and receiving communion in the Catholic Church. Many of you in this thread seem to suggest that the priest is supposed to deny sinners communion. Is that true? At least one post suggests otherwise. I admire and respect people of strong faith and I would never intentionally do anything to demean their beliefs, but this priest’s actions seem a bit extreme to me. I understand his, and the church’s position that homosexuality is a sin, but it’s not the only one. In fact it didn’t make it into the top ten. We are ALL sinners and we must all ask to be forgiven for those sins. Wouldn’t this priest have been better serving his purpose to ask to speak to this woman after the ceremony or set up a meeting at a later time to speak to her of her sins? To refuse any sinner communion would suggest none can receive communion. Perhaps they can after confession? How can this man possibly know the state of her faith, her sin, or her confession without having had a single conversation with her? This is the very definition of prejudice and it seems out of whack with the teachings of Christianity. To reiterate, if it is in Catholic doctrine to refuse communion to a known or unrepentant sinner, I guess I can understand his actions, but it would still seem to me he was acting on no personal knowledge, only what he was told, and that simply cannot be proper Catholic behavior. Thoughts?
Report Post »4truth2all
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:24pmYo Mod:
Careful, your morality is showing…
Report Post »CMDR6
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:24pmencinom…….I asked you nicely to stop vomiting your garbage but you insist on spewing it out in these comments. Although I may agree with your point that part of the job is consoling the grieving, his #1 job is serving the King of Kings, the Lord Jesus. Apparently you are ignorant and have not read the many versus, both old and new testament, calling homosexuality a sin, just as fornication and adultery. This is NOT politics, this is eternal, life or death. God gave us the choice and she seemed to have chosen the path to hers. I am glad the Priest has shown which one he chose too, and it absolutely was not to please you or the people in the pews. I truly pity you and pray that one day your eyes will be opened to the truth.
Report Post »SageInWaiting
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:37pmIf you read LEV 20, it’s “ABOMINATION”, not “OBAMAS NATION.” Words DO count. I pray for your sake you get it right. …and if you don’t like what an organization stands for, don’t be so narcissistic to think they must bow to you. Accept it and move on.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:39pmCMDR6
I generally never side with folks that ride around in a steel box, but that was very well said. Thanks,
Report Post »nelbert
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:41pmIt‘s curious that there are several people who have made comments that support the priest’s actions as being in keeping with the tenets of Catholicism, yet they paradoxically ignore that the D.C. Archdiocese claims that the priest’s actions go against policy.
At the risk of ruffling any feathers, I believe the D.C. Archdiocese probably has a better handle on what is Catholic policy than any random handful of Blaze readers.
Report Post »SageInWaiting
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:43pm(Previous comment in agreement with you, @DSI… Comment was in to “Ms” Johnson.)
Report Post »bastone
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:51pmi wonder if any of the priests that commited crimes aginest children held communion during the same period?
Report Post »Jesus….save me from your followers
yiska8
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:54pm@B_rad
Report Post »Why this woman thought she had a right to receive Communion is bizarre. This priest was made aware of the family and who they were, he understood the woman to be a lesbian with her partner in the pew with her, that was more than enough to not allow for the sacrament to be given. There’s no sin in their presence within the Church, everyone I’ve ever known who was not Catholic has always been welcome at ours, but they had to remain seated when the Eucharist was being given. While denying Communion may come off as extreme to some, it may seem this way because it’s rarely ever done ,at least that I’ve heard of in some time. It was the priest‘s call and he’ll have to explain in detail to the archdiocese of his city, but he was within his right to do so in my opinion. Even if you were baptized Catholic and made your Holy Communion and Confirmation as a Catholic, if you choose to live the gay lifestyle openly or not, you should not receive communion or really have any of the sacraments, but that too may be left up to the priest. The nerve it took to simply expect to receive Communion by this woman is more than enough to understand how warped our society had become. I hope the priest comes forward with his side because he may have offered pastoral counseling for her grief and her lifestyle.We’ll have to wait and see.
proudinfidel54
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:56pmEncinom, talk about mixing politics with faith, it is not politics to take a moral stand against this abomination, this is the core value of Christianity. Sin is Sin not political correctness, Wake Up!!! Oh Yeah DB321,if you think being excluded from communion is bad, What do you think Jesus will do if she doesn’t repent of this sin??? iin fact repentence is not what she wants , it is acceptance, Now the political Correct want everyone to ignore their beliefs and go against God’s Word so they can join in all the raindeer games…
Report Post »CMDR6
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:04pmbastone……it is amazing how people like you seem to wan to point to the failings on one person(s) and credit the guilt on another. Exactly the opposite of Jesus. He took on the failings of all of us even though he did not. This priet is STANDING up agianst the sins of the world, and we should salute him and support him. The bible says that those in leadership positions are held to a higher standard and I believe that those priests that stayed in the office of the priest and committed any of the sex crimes of the like we have heard will meet with justice when they meet God. What that justice will be is up to God and I fully trust that justice will be dealt. Remember, even those “evil pedophiles” can repent and be restored in the kingdom. Heck, He saved me
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:08pmENCINOM: “The Priests job at a funeral mass is in part to comfort the mourning, the fact that he allowed his personal politics to interfer shows he has shouldn’t be a priest. Its time for the Catholic layity to demand a say in the Church, clealy the old men have lost their way.”
Politics has nothing to do with it. It is the doctrine of the church he is upholding. If this woman doesn’t agree with it then she should go to a church who supports her debauchery. It is not the old men who have lost there way, it is this woman who has chosen the lifestyle of the wicked.
Report Post »Hollywood
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:25pmBeloved,remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, that there will be mockers in the last days,who will walk after their own ungodly lusts[Jude 18 paraphrased]. They will be given up to their depravity,and unnatural lusts, and die in their inquity.They are but filthy dreamers,defiling their flesh,speaking evil of that which is good.They speak eveil of good things,which they know NOT,but are as brute beasts,corrupting themselves.
Report Post »I will pray for her deliverance from the darkness of satan,as I hope others will.
Maranatha
saltwater
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:39pmThe priest was totally right in refusing to give the Eucharist to an active lesbian. According to Canon Law, the woman is in a constant scandalus state. and is not entitled to receive the Sacraments of the Catholic Church. The DC archbishop is wrong to say anything against the priest. Too bad there are not more priests who will deny the Eucharist to anyone known to be a scandal to the Church.
Report Post »catholic crusader
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:48pmI agree. But the only problem (for the priest) is that he’ll likely be reprimanded by Archbishop Wuerl for violating his “policy” but obeying Canon Law. I’ve previously written to the Archbishop requesting that he prevent pro-abortion catholic politicians (and there are many) from preventing themselves for communion in his archdiocese. His weak “policy” is to deny them communion only if all of the following conditions are met: their home bishop has met with them, denied them communion and written to him requesting that he (Wuerl) do the same. I hope the recent attacks on the Church have united and strengthened these shepherds, but time will tell. Tolerance is not and never has been a virtue.
Report Post »TSUNAMI-22
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:02pm@ BELIEVER N CHRIST
YOU DO NOT NEED A PRIEST FOR COMMUMION…jeez people quit putting these men on pedestals. the lady should have known the rules that you weren‘t and shouldn’t even try to get in line…she said at the end their faith is shaken.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The only thing that was shaken from this person was the fact that she thought she could get away with something politically sensitive and was denied.
I applaud the priest.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:04pm@ModerationIsBest….I don’t kneel before any priest. I kneel before the body and blood of my savior Jesus Christ.
Report Post »B_rad
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:33pm@Ysika8, Thanks for your response, that clears it up a bit for me, but I still have to wonder how Christ-like it is to deny someone something holy with no personal knowledge of the alleged sins. This priest took gossip and acted upon it without questioning the woman himself. As I said, if it is Catholic law to deny communion to sinners, shouldn’t he have personal knowledge of the sin the person is being accused of, especially before confronting her at her own mother’s funeral in plain view of everyone there? How could he have known that she hadn‘t repented and confessed and become a good Catholic in the wake of her mother’s death? How many others did he give communion to that he had no idea of how they live their lives or how they practice their faiths? He took gossip from one or more people and acted on it with no prior conversation with the woman in question. It was tacky at best, and downright unChristian at worst.
Report Post »My own experience with communion comes from a non-Catholic church where they invite everyone to receive. Had I been in attendance at this funeral, being ignorant of Catholic law, I would have assumed the same standard. Does the priest give instruction on who can and cannot receive communion prior to offering it?
deeberj
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:40pmlittlebigman – for the same reason my 13 yr old marriage which produced two children was called null and void – we didn’t marry in the Catholic church so it was annulled so my ex could marry a good Catholic instead of a protestant like me.
I don’t agree with everything the Catholic church does, but under our consitution they should have freedom to practice their religion and this birth control thing is saying the consitution doesn’t count. I‘m for freedom of religion even if I don’t agree with that religion.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:04pmAgree.
It’s really only a matter of time (a small one, at that) before the gay rites hacks begin demanding that churches give them religious marriage ceremonies, or else.
These people (Look! See? He’s using that term! What a racist-bigot-sexist-homophobe!) can’t tell the difference between civil rights and religious rites, and it’s up to us -the religious- to stand up and be counted on these issues, NOW, not later.
Report Post »KPEdwards
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:18pmMany people seem to be saying, oh the lady should have just not gone up.
First, in the same exact token, I really think the priest should have gone over to her and explained his moral convictions. Instead, I think he caused a scene that could have been avoided. He started giving out communion (sorry if that is an incorrect phrasing) knowing full well he was going to refuse her. Just be a grown up and explain to her beforehand.
Report Post »Secondly, it sounds like there was more than just refusing communion – in that he just left the altar during the eulogy, and didn’t show up for the burial. Whether or not you think he was morally right in performing or refusing to perform an action, he was acting like a schmuck.
I‘m not sure if that’s removal worthy, but that’s not my call. It’s up to the parish or the church or whoever. It doesn’t affect me one way or the other. So frankly, I couldn’t care less which course they decide on.
AvengerK
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:32pmThis is why I don’t support homosexual marriage. The spiteful, litigious nature of militant homosexuals and their insistance that everyone buy their fantasy of wanting to be “normal”. The priest has every right under the tenets of the church to refuse communion to the lesbian. She’s not repentent of her sins, she wallows in them and flaunts them then wants the church to participate in her fantasies. The same thing will happen if homosexual marriage is recognized nationally. These homosexuals will begin suing churches that refuse to marry them using “discrimination” as the premise. I have no pity for Johnson. She should know the church would never offer her communion no matter what the occasion without her genuinely being repentent of the sin. In typical angry homosexual fashion…she seeks to destory this man’s career because he chose conscience and the tenets of his church over her fantasies. She will not win this. I love the phony piety..”I’ll pray for your soul…but first I’ll destroy your life”. This is why I don’t want to see national recognition of homosexual marriage. They will cite “discrimination” and litigate the church (or anyone else resisting them) relentlessly.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:34pmENCIDIOT….how about the people care about the church? Nah..that‘s beyond you isn’ it? The lesbian could find one of those “new agey” churches that caters to homosexuals if she really wanted to. Or she should know better than to ask for communion as an open and unrepentent homosexual. Is this all beyond you champ?
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:45pmB-RAD…communion is an absolution of sins before God. It’s derived from the last supper itself where Christ celebrated Passover with the disciples before creating the new covenant for the forgiveness of sins. In communion you ask for the absolution of your sins (through the prayers of the priest). Well clearly, a practicing and very open lesbian isn’t asking for anything approaching forgiveness of her sins before the church and God/G-d. This priest was right, he exercised the tenets of the Catholic church as difficult as it was for him in an occasion like that. You have to remember, you love God above all things in Christianity. Even though you honor thy father and mother and your wife it’s God above them. This priest could not offer communion to an unrepentent lesbian even during a funeral. It’s a tough call but the right one nonetheless.
Report Post »richardwagener
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:53pmThe priest did right. Thank you Father for having the courage to do so. Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong. Christ said woe to those who call evil good and good evil. Contrary to the woman’s statement that God would condemn the priest, the priest will be rewarded. The world in many cases has gone to the devil and anything goes. God is the same today as He was yesterday and as He always will be. Thank God for priests like this. – Richard C. Wagener.
Report Post »TBIR
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 5:00pmWonder if this Priest refused to serve all the liers in the building or the lustful or greedy or did he just single out this women and her “sin” i swear you jesus folk are such hypocrites. God said sin is sin
Report Post »WeDontNeedNoSteenkinBadges12
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 5:05pm“Lesbian Wants Priest Removed After She Was Denied Communion at Her Mother’s Funeral”
Eeeew! Now I must wash my eyes from looking at TheBlaze today! Don’t you TheBlaze know to flush the toilet paper TOO after you finish wiping?
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 5:06pmLiberal idiots and atheists have a difficult time understanding the church and the believer. Christians know they are flawed. We’re human. We have our fallibilities, our weaknesses. I know I’m a flawed and very imperfect Christian. Liberals and athesists would call me a hypocrite for this. I have much to answer for before my God when my time comes. But throughout all this, I love my God above all things and I want his forgiveness. I want to be a better Christian and I work at it. The Church keeps the tenets of the Christian faith in the mind of the believer. It also exalts Christ and God as King of the Universe and redeemer of mankind all we have to do is accept him. But to the liberal and the atheist these are laughable things that are to be scorned, mocked, eradicated or stretched beyond recognition as in the case of this lesbian. God is a forgiving God…all she has to do is ask for it and mean it.
Report Post »JohnnyMidknight
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:00pm@ REPUBLICANGIRLPA
{Quote: Leviticus 18 says it all. Homosexuality is a sin against God. If you truly believe in Christ as Lord and Saviour, you would not continually throw in his face your sexual preference.]
Actually this is debatable. It really depends on the Church. Some theorize that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant and brought about a New Covenant. The old rules do not apply.
Some Christians theorize that the Rules that were only for Jews are not to be followed. Thus only the Rules for proselytes in the Torah and Noachide Laws apply to Gentiles. Among these is the teaching of the Apostle Paul.
Then some like you, that feel the New Covenant goes hand in hand with the Old Covenant.
Not to mention that the Torah only prohibits a man lying with another man. It in now way sets laws for lesbianism. However, Jewish law prohibits it based on Leviticus 18:3, “After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do; and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do; neither shall ye walk in their statutes.”
This was a common doing in Egypt. Also, Jewish law does not look to the act of lesbian sex as adultery. Nor does it withhold a women from services offered by the priesthood. http://www.jewfaq.org/sex.htm
However, each Church has the right to set their own rules.
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:26pmCan Jesus forgive the unrepentant sinner? NO! Should he be removed as well? Looks like it according to this one lesbian woman who demands all the trappings of religion then wants to treat it like she’s in the work place when she gets denied. We sure have come a long long way from just plain common and good sense.
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:31pm“You brought your politics, not your God into that Church yesterday, and you will pay dearly on the day of judgment for judging me.”
Wow? HIS Politics Huh? What about yours? You’ll pray for him! Thats great! Who will pray for you? I guess she needs no one to point out that she is in fact a sinner as we all are. When the preacher man says these things and that we are all sinners most nod their heads in agreement and say (admit) amen to that brother. She apparantly cannot do that! OK! Thats fine! But to make an indictment against him for expressing his disgust by leaving her alone without so much as a comment! Thats not even a direct insult. You sin and stay in your sin and call it good, I believe God does turn his back on you until you come to terms with your state and repent and he receives you with open arms and full of love.
Report Post »XScramblerX
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:40pm@ENCINOM
I know that your attitude is……I want something for nothing….
I don’t want to work, but I want the luxuries of a working class citizen.
I don’t want to pay my fair share so I think the rich should pay more.
I don’t want to live a Christians life but I want to receive Communion.
GET A LIFE YOU LEECH!!
Report Post »Piece of crap troll!
ChuckJ
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:57pmIt is funny people blame Christians for what is written in the Bible. The Bible is the Word of God not the ideas of man. The priest isn’t making this stuff up off the top of his head. If this woman was taking the offering then she is supposed to be a “Christian”, right? So I guess she missed all the scriptures talking about her sexual prefrences. Don’t kill the messenger. Try reading the book and discovering your own sin. Then pray for yourslf so you can understand the scriptures. I do hope the mother passed knew the Lord and is living in His kingdom.
Report Post »Katydidnt
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:05pmOk there are several things involved in receiving communion in Catholic Church. 1. You need to be a Catholic is not just the Body and Blood of Christ but also an acceptance of the community of believers and the beliefs. People who are not eligible to receive communion can none the less get in line cross their arms over their chests and receive a blessing instead. This was done at my aunt’s funeral. 2. If you are a Catholic you need to be free of serious sin. Confession is usually offered the on Saturday. It is offensive an hypocritical to say I believe in God but don’t want to repent of my sins. “Why do you say, “Lord, Lord and not do what I say?”" Smaller sins are covered by a confession said just before recieving. “Lord, I am not worthy, but just say the word and I will be healed.” There is also a general confession at the beginning of Mass. What the archbishop is referring to, is the priest should have talked to her privately instead of doing this publically, but there may not have been time, or he may have explained as most do and she ignored him.
Report Post »Katydidnt
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:15pmAlso about the eulogy. Eulogies are not allowed during a Catholic Mass of the Resurrection. They are for the viewing or wake that takes place before. The priest probably left, not wanting to get into it again with her by stopping her. Again this should have been explained to her beforehand, the priest either didn’t or she ignored him. Why he wasn’t at the gravesite, he could have had a call to go to the hospital or another appointment that he had to get to because the funeral went longer than planned because of the eulogies. He could have just been so upset with her going against everything he had told her, he didn’t want to create a scene. I doubt that would be the case, because they are used to putting up with a lot. My best guess is he is a single priest with a big parish of people who need him. He was attending to the living.
Report Post »yiska8
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:13pm@B_Rad
No the priest does not give instruction. Any practicing Catholic would know that being a lesbian would prohibit you from receiving Eucharist. Even before Eucharist or the breaking of the bread,the prayers are said and we respond,” Lord I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.” We are basically giving glory to the Lord for his sacrifice and having Jesus’ word become flesh. It’s like medicine for the individual taking it. It symbolizes forgiveness and the strength to fight sin in our daily lives, but we must acknowledge it and stop committing the sin. It was obvious to the priest that she was an openly gay woman and probably didn’t think she would show such blasphemy by showing up with her girlfriend openly to a Catholic funeral! Common sense or respect was not shown by this woman. Even if you haven’t been to mass in a while, how can one think that living openly as a homosexual is perfectly fine with the Church??? She’s making it political. The priest may have seemed harsh to some by his actions, but it’s refreshing to see a priest with the strength to say NO. He could privately spoke to her, but the minute he realized she was actually going to have the huzpah to expect the holy sacrament, he did what he had to do.
Here’s some links if you got the time to check them out.
Report Post »http://catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/Mass.htm#Eucharist
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/who-can-receive-communion
Freedom from liberals
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:28pmI looked at the picture and asked myself what’s up with this dude? Then I read the caption. LOL for Christ sakes.
I think Encicom stated it best: “to interfer shows he has shouldn’t be a priest” How profound. I’m not sure if his style is that of Thoreau or Emerson.
Report Post »StCharles777
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:38pmcommunion is the taking of the body of CHRIST and HIS blood, openly gay and even non belivers should not take communion. nuf said
Report Post »TXPilot
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:59pmLady, if you want to be taken seriously, stop trying to look like Drew Carey.
Report Post »Brooke Lorren
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 1:13amThe Bible says that in Bible times, God has even killed people that took communion unworthily.
I’m not a Catholic, but they have special beliefs about communion. I won‘t take it at their church because I don’t have the same beliefs as them. It‘s respectful to not try to impose your own beliefs into someone else’s religious ceremony.
Report Post »Stop_Ignorance
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 6:54amNote sure if my comment posted, so I’m trying it here: These comments are a sick joke, right? Any Catholic who has actually read the Bible would know that Jesus came to replace the Old Law, and would therefore never quote Leviticus when trying to legitimize an argument. Additionally, according to the Catholic Catechism, homosexuality is not a choice in nearly all cases, so please do not insult an entire community with such an ignorant statement. If you wish to prove the Church wrong, go ahead and choose to be gay for a little bit, and maybe they’ll change their teachings. It’s mind-boggling really, we have LGBT kids killing themselves in shame; you‘d think they’d choose death if they could simply choose to be straight? Are you really claiming to know more about homosexuality than a gay individual? Additionally, the catechism dictates that “they must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” Lastly, the Church – yes, the very Church – came out and said what this priest did was wrong, and the situation was handled incorrectly. Why is any other opinion then held valid? If the maker of policy says you’re wrong about said policy, then you’re wrong – simple as that. Please, I’m a Republican, but I’m also a human. Stop making the right wing sound so hateful with your meaningless drivel, calling other humans savages and perverts; they’re braver than any of us for having to deal with the
Report Post »Stop_Ignorance
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 6:57amAlso, I should probably let you guys know that the Catholic Church officially teaches that being gay, whether openly or not, is not a sin. Have sex with someone of the same gender is, but no more severe than oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, adultery, etc.
Report Post »cessna152
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 10:17amIn the infamous words of Austin Powers “That’s a man ,baby”….I think?
BTW, the Priest was correct. This is a religious ceremony and not a mockery of Christ. The Priest will not aid in the mockery of Jesus and neither would I.
Psalm 118:8 (NLT)
It is better to trust the Lord
than to put confidence in people.
You’ll never win an “argument” with God. Eternity is a LONG time to pay…..
Report Post »goahead.makemyday
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 10:48amI agree with JOHNNYMIDKNIGHT.
Report Post »It all depends on your church. While I believe Jesus came to fulfill the law not alter or change it. I know that some people believe other wise. And the priest didn’t start the commotion it was the woman(?), after he told her he couldn’t then explained she just stood there. Holding up the entire ceremony, I don‘t know about Catholic funerals since I’m not Catholic. However, the priest leaving during the eulogies, and not showing up at the grave side. Is only said by the woman(?). I know that sometimes they will have a different minister do the graveside than the one who did the funeral. Maybe this is what was supposed to happen, remember They‘re the ones who said he didn’t make an attempt to get another priest not the priest himself. Whenever I see something along these lines of a homosexual suing or making a fuss because somebody did or didn’t do something I expect 50% lies 30% media swinging 10% fluff 5% misunderstanding and only 5% truth.
Ayla_me
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 1:09pmI agree. I was raised Catholic, and I believe that the Priest is the front-line of defence, so to speak, on keeping the Church pure, and calling its people to a True Walk. Yes, I believe that the priest ought ot have discussed this in private, prior to the Mass. I had a “situation” in which (1) I “had” to get married, and (2) my husband-to-be did not impress the Priest as someone who was committed to marraige. The Father and I discussed it, and I would marry with a J.P. , but my daughter would be allowed baptism, and I would be allowed communion, as I had completely repented by then, of my sexual, and other sins. More priest ought ot “Shepherd” their flock more closely and deny those who would openly mock the Lord’s treachings, as unworthy of communion, unless they truly repented and turned from their wicked ways….and YES, the Church HAS the right to judge, because it is imperitive that SOMEONE step up and loudly proclaim, “This is not right according to our beliefs!” Oh that ALL ministers, pastors, rabbis, reverends, etc would (privately to the specific people) condemn the sin in their churches and synogogues. Maybe this is the key to our present downfall?
Report Post »PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 1:13pmIn the Catholic church communion is a sacrament and catholics go to confession and repent for any sins committed prior to taking holy communion. Since being a ***** is pretty much considered sinful I would suggest she was out of line. Which makes me wonder how Pelosi, Biden and the rest of the evil liberal can get away with even saying they are catholic without being Ex- Communicated from the church. If the Catholic church wants to be rightous it should take a good look at the face these corrupted people are puting out for the public to see as “catholic”. Hypocrites and liars are not a good face for this religion to stand with.
Report Post »Ayla_me
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 1:26pmHowever, I am wondering why the Priest in this case would not attend to the burial ceremony, and why he left the altar at the point of this woman’s eulogy for her mother. I can completely understand him not giving her Communion, but was the mother also a blatant sinner?? Shouldn’t the mother have been honored with a priest in attendance? If he couldn’t handle it at such a late point int he proceedings (Did he know of the deceased? >He ought to haveOne cannot be held responsible for the actions of one’s grown children[freewill]<) If he felt he could not carry on…he ought to have called in another priest. This is NOT acceptable to me, as it stands. The mother is NOT responsible for the actions of her grown child. It is the Priest's RESPONSEBILTY to come to KNOW who is in their parish and what they are like, where they stand with God, etc. Was the mother some kind of sinner that SHE deserved this treatment from the priest?? I think not. The whole situation ought ot have been handled much more descreet. I am sorry for this woman in what was an unacceptable situation at a funeral. However, such things happen, and I hate that this should make national news. Keep it private between you and the diocese, please. I pray that you will find proper resolution.
Report Post »PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 1:28pm@Little Big Man: In the Catholic Church, When your marriage is blessed, you are married until you die. If you are married without having your marriage blessed (civil service) you are living in sin and the catholic church will not baptize your children unless you have the marriage blessed. The only way to get re-married, if the other is still alive, is to get an annulment from the Pope. The Catholic church takes the sacrament of marriage very seriously. Both must be Catholic to be married in the church or religious training is required before marriage, you must also pledge to raise your children in the Catholic church.
Report Post »rayaboomboom
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 1:52pmI was raised Catholic and attended parochial school. This was all fine until I realized I was gay and my church was not accepting of me. I was taught that I was made in the image of Jesus Christ and that God’s love was unconditional. I still believe that and not wanting to be a hypocrite any longer I joined the Episcopal Church where all are welcome and exemplify God’s unconditional love. I am not angry w/the Catholic Church and I understand their position. It is not my position, so I left.
Report Post »MYHEROISRON
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 3:16pmI get it! Yer dog ugly and that is why you are a lesbian! Fine! Now please get back into the closet so I don’t have to look at you anymore! Geez …
Report Post »BarackStalin
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 3:36pmWho gave this priest the right to make his own decisions and control his own actions?
Aren‘t this nice lady’s feelings important enough to change a 2000 year old belief?
Someone needs to be jailed for a hate crime. That will make people think twice about bringing their religious beliefs into a church where they clearly don’t belong.
Report Post »Adamu
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 3:37pmWhat would Jesus do???? You KNOW he would have given her communion. You know it in your black heart. ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Stop the hate.
Report Post »FormerLib
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 4:39pmMaybe she just thinks it’s a snack.
Report Post »ILUVJESUS
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 7:48pmDoggrel. You are so right. You can see where this is going, a multimillion dollar lawsuit!
Report Post »Does this woman attend that church? Is she a member? If she was this issue and the doctrine of the church could have been discussed before hand. That would have been better for everyone.
P
ArizonaMom3
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 8:36pmCMDR6
Report Post »Thanks for the contact info
indy1
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:52amThe Tyranny of the 2%. The cornholers and lesbians expect Christians to accommodate their sinful lifestyle.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:15amWell yes, right on. They have been told they are special; special laws, special bars, special everything. Isn’t this why we have Unitarians? Maryland is chocked full of special interests and the average people are now a minority. Maryland and the vast majority of it’s people are paying for the liberal mindset for two generations. Reap it and pay for it.
Report Post »zhq01
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:27amHow is this accomodating her “sinful” lifestyle? How many priests have given communion to while in their spare time molesting little boys? I grew up in Catholic school and had many Catholic priests for teachers. They are human beings who sin, some of them commit sins against innocent children and no one else in the Catholic Church judges them (or did at the time). IF she wants to receive communion, that’s between her and God. It is not his place to judge. Anyone can hand out communion wafers, it doesn’t have to be a priest who thinks it proper to sit in judgement.
Report Post »Miss Anne
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:32amLesbians lead a degenerate lifestyle, and that is considered sinful. Look at this freak! A normal woman would not leave the house looking like a man! Please give me the PayPal for this father’s church-I would like to make a donation.
Report Post »RonmeyPaulBotsrOdd
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:05pmIt is a sin for a priest to knowing give communion to someone that is living sinful. In fact, a priest should not even knowingly absolve your sins after hearing the same sins in confession 3 times or more. Interestingly, those that bash the Catholic Church via past pedophilia issues neglect to see the church corruption by gays and how it led to the molestations. There is a change within the church that is already forcing out gay priests and one day – will force Pelosi types out via excommunication. It will take time to change the culture that has been so corrupted over the last 60 years.
Report Post »That being said – a fallen priest deserves more respect from any of us that believe in Christ. A priest is tempted/challenged far more than any one of us on a daily basis. Imagine the win for Satan when a priest (insert your religious leader) falls and cannot get back up.
yiska8
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:05pmIt never ends with these people. They have even tried to get San Fernando Cathedral, here in San Antonio to accept tham as openly gay and still allow them the full sacrements that all Catholics are given!! They have even protested in front of the church from time to time. I don’t know what became of it, but I hope the local archdiocese doesn’t cave. UNBELIEVABLE. No wait, I’m wrong, in King Obama’s Caliphate empire, it is believable and a pre-requisite to mock people of faith and faith in general, unless you’re praying toward Mecca.
Report Post »Tri-ox
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:52amAnother radical, obnoxious lesbian who thinks it’s all about “her”.
Report Post »Apple Bite
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:49amyou mean ‘Hym’
Report Post »stopthespending
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:51amAmen to that, Large and in charge!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Report Post »riverdog1
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:09pmso if she was a heterosexual woman but admitted she used birth control she wouldn’t get communion either?
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:51amBut it’s part and parcel of Christian/Catholic dogma to judge, discriminate again, and marginalize everyone they don’t like. Gays are just one facet of that dogma.
hi
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:10amGod loves everyone but hates sin. Homosexuality is a sin. Try a Bible church to know how much God loves you. God can help to overcome addiction. Everyone in church is a sinner and no particular sin is singled out. We are saved by God’s grace by believing in Christ.
Report Post »lel2007
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:14amYes, the Catholic Church is in the business of discriminating. Discriminating between good and evil, right and wrong, Church Law and civil law. A Catholic priest will deny one the Host only if he knows the person is an unrepentant sinner. The explanation – ‘I can’t give you Communion because you live with a woman, and in the eyes of the church, that is a sin.’ was a reasonable explanation. Expecting the Catholic Church to change to accommodate Barbara Johnson is a tad unreasonable. Barbara should consider changing to a more accommodating religion.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:18amLEZ HP
Report Post »I usually enjoy and agree with most of your posts, but here we don’t see eye to eye. You want the Catholic Church to change. Why should they bow and cower to special interests when you can go Unitarian and not change them? To be Catholic, you used to have to be Catholic. Where is the Rainbow Coalition of Cair at on this?
hi
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:23amPS I know you don’t think of what you are doing as sin. Just come to the Bible church to know God’s love. Remember everyone there is a sinner and is in different stages of their walk with Christ. so, yes, the ones who dabble may judge. BUt, the ones who really know Christ, read the Bible, pray, and attempt to follow His instructions will show love,joy,peace, patience,kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self control.
Report Post »hobbitfellow
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:30amPardon me, but didn’t you just make a judgment? Of course Christianity makes distinctions between good evil. And if this woman purports to be a Catholic, why would she expect the communed at a Catholic altar. I don‘t think it likely that she doesn’t know the position of the Catholic church regarding homosexuality, and shame on her for intentionally using her own mother’s funeral to make a scene. She wants to blame the priest, but she‘s the one who knew her church’s position and showed up at the altar anyway, in defiance of that position, then pretends to be surprised, hurt and offended when she was not communed. I am not Catholic, but I applaud the priest who had the moral courage and conviction to stand his ground.
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:33am“Liking” or “not liking” is not the point, LOVE is, and in LOVE this SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN HANDLED PUBLICLY as Church directives explain.
Unknown to this specific priest, this person might no longer be in an active sexual relationship that would barr reception of Communion and through the Sacrament of Reconciliation in the Catholic Church, may be back in full Communion within the Church. However, even after confession, if she does not INTEND to stop the sin, going to confession only for THIS PUBLIC RECEPTION of the Lord’s Body and Blood, she’s has not had a “proper” reception of the Sacrament of Reconciliation and therefore loads, “sin upon sin” by receiving the Body and Blood “in a sinful state,” making her still sinful in the eyes of the Church (and to my belief, with God who still LOVES HER very much and wants more for her).
The definition of “sin” seems to be a movable object with some people. However, in the Bible, sin is obvious both within the OT and NT. Since Jesus “completed the Law,” we no longer have to stone those who don’t obey the law, and Jesus specifically “modified” some of the OT laws, but not all! The Catholic Church has followed Jesus and the Apostles teaching from the beginning (within human ability and understanding). The teaching on same-sex relationships has not changed in 2000 years, however, individual liberal bishops and priest as “interpreted” teachings as they, personally wished and have misled many!
LOVE THE SINNER,
Report Post »angelcat
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:37amIt has nothing to do with “don’t like” and everything about the fact that no one is supposed to take Communion when in a state of mortal sin. A practicing homosexual is in a state of mortal sin. If this woman is truly a Catholic, she knew the rules and that a priest cannot give Communion to someone he KNOWS is in the state of mortal sin. She had no right to expect she would be exempt from this rule.
Report Post »sawbuck
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:39amL.P.H.P
Report Post »Didn’t Maryland just give GAYS the right to marry..?
Hmm. I guess it wasn’t about constitutional-equal-rights after all…
The real agenda is sticking its ugly head up…
I’m guessing the gay community is going to be upset with her ,
for pulling the trigger to early ,on the next step to their “agenda” ..
Wanting to “convert” our Churches/Christians into excepting this perversion ,
as a “sinless life style” .
4truth2all
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:50amWait till she stands in front of Christ and He denies her, is she then going to want Jesus removed for His hateful judging of her ….!!!
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:52amFinal line of previous reply post should have read:
LOVE THE SINNER, HATE THE SIN!
Report Post »AndiAndiAndi
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:46amYou are wrong. The Priest shouldn’t have covered the sacrament because when you take the sacrament it is in remembrance of the covenants you made with God. So the woman who attempted to take the sacrament was wrong also. She was only going to take the sacrament to look good for the people who were at the funeral. She had a long time lesbian relationship and no intention of ending it for biblical purposes. The End.
Report Post »proudinfidel54
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:51amHollow Points, All of your Big Words are simply subterfuge, the fact of the matter is Homosexuallity is sin plain and simple, and you must repent of sin, not try and get everybody to accept it.
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:58am@ Soup Sandwich:
I don’t hear any Catholics, even Catholic church leadership, espousing the infallibility of the Copernican model of the universe anymore. I guess the Catholic Church CAN, in fact, change… when it has to… when it has no other choice but to.
Biddle
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:59amHI is on to something. And I am jealous. Because I am a self righteous Christian. Yet, according to the bible, my sin is as bad as the next, even if it may seem “less” offensive to God. Those of us who claim to be Christians and then speak like dragons all day need to get reaquainted with grace.
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:00am@ Hi:
Is that they best Witnessing you can do, by way of just exhorting me to attend your particular denomination’s house of worship of your magical sky daddy?
FNTM
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:36pm@Lesbian – that is what religion has always been about. You just figuring out that you are supposed to follow their advice and does that surprise you?
Report Post »Chamber
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:06pmSo, the church has to change to accomodate gays and lesbians? Well, they don’t like adulterers, liars, cheats, murderers, drunkards and many other evil works either. But the church does offer forgiveness in the name of Jesus Christ. And that is available to us all!
Report Post »hi
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:23pmYou don’t have to come to my particular church. YOur post was directed at Christians and Catholics. Just read the gospel of John and ask God to reveal himself to you if He is real.
Report Post »PaxInVeritate
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:19pm@HILLBILLYINNY
“Johnson, a lesbian, was joined at the church by her partner to celebrate her mother’s life. Just before the service, Guarnizo apparently learned about her sexuality and relationship. Then, during the service, when Johnson stood up to receive communion, the priest openly denied her.”
Doesn’t sound like a penitent. His action during communion was correct.
Report Post »PaxInVeritate
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:29pm@LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS
Report Post »The structure and function of the Solar System and Universe has very little, if anything, to do with matters of Faith. Infallibility has and only will be used to elucidate the relationship between Creator and Humanity. God can not go against Himself. What is offensive to Him remains offensive.
Think_First
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:09pmWow you are one angry woman. Guess what. So is the rest of the world, but I still refuse to give up my freedom of religion, or accept a forced change by non believers on a Church they despise. If you hate it so much, avoid it, but let us all practice how we see fit. You don’t see me chasing you around demanding that you change your beliefs. Frankly, it wouldn’t be worth my time, so why are you waisting yours on this. Not your church so really not your business.
Report Post »Think_First
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 3:34pmLesbian Packing Hollow Points
But it’s part and parcel of Christian/Catholic dogma to judge, discriminate again, and marginalize everyone they don’t like. Gays are just one facet of that dogma.
Report Post »__________________________________________________________________________________
I came back to this comment because I owe you an apology. Instead of raging at your biased and fearful remarks about me, (I took it personal because I am Christian) I should have tried to understand your point. So you are saying you feel discriminated against and marginalized by the Christian faiths as a whole. Well I didn’t help that any did I? I am sorry. I do not hate anyone for being gay, but I feel seriously under attack for being Christian. We Christians are humans, too. Some of us are kinder than others. I was enraged because I felt like I was being dehumanized by your remarks, and I want the freedom to have my own choice in values, religion and lifestyle just like you do. Lately, everything I love is under attack. I let my fear get the best of me, and it was inexcusable. I still believe that religions should have the right to decide how they believe and what they expect from their followers, but I do not hold any anger towards you for feeling otherwise. I know and care about all people. I hope you can find peace, happiness and love in your life. I wish there was an easy solution to this trouble, but there isn’t any. I look forward to hearing your remarks in the future,
Dismayed Veteran
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:49amA celibate homosexual is not committing a sin. A homosexual who is sexually active with another homosexual is living in a state of mortal sin. A Catholic priest who knows this is duty bound not to administer the sacrament of communion. A Catholic who knowingly attempts to obtain communion will in a state of sin continues to commit a mortal sin.
Report Post »DTOM_Jericho (Creator vindicator)
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:00amRome is the beast and “jesus” is the image of the beast. “Mortal” sin? LOL!! Man-made doctrine. “jesus” was/is Jewish and not catholic. As a catholic; one is a pagan and worships anti-messiah and wears the mark of the beast (rome’s “holy” days).
Report Post »TyrannyNoMore
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:48amDTOM……You are so, so wrong ! Islam is the the Anti-Christ the image of which is the Koran (666)
Report Post »Google 666 and the Koran and see what you get ! There are dozens of Bible passages that point to mohamed as the false prophet of end times.
PPMStudios
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:21am@ TyrannyNoMore
“Dozens of Bible passages that point to Mohammad”? Really? Mohammad didn’t even have his first vision/encounter until around 610AD. Even Revelations we written way before that!
Report Post »proudinfidel54
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:17pmPPMSTUDIOS, When are people like yourself going to realise that the Bible is the word of God and as such is not limited to time restraints as mortal man is. Surely God knew Mohammid before he was in the womb just as he knew all things Past Present and Future because He is omnipotent, Omnipresent, and omniscient. Your argument is based on human understanding. By the way the Bible authenticates itself through the prophesies that it fulfills
Report Post »PPMStudios
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:50pm@ PROUDINFIDEL54
“When are people like you….” Seriously? What a pompous and arrogant thing to say. Don’t be stupid. I fully understand the omnipotence of God.
I will make a presumption and assume you can comprehend the written word. What was said was “Mohammad” (spelled incorrectly by the way), was pointed to in the Bible”.
So it isn’t okay to respond the way I did but, YOU and TyrannyNoMore can offer YOUR interpretation of who the Bible is referring to when they’re UNNAMED ?? Wow! What incredible powers of insight you have!!
Report Post »edmundburk
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:43pmDTOM-another ex-catholic evengelical bigot?
Report Post »hi
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:49amIt’s coming! As soon as they get marriage rights, they will try to force the church to marry them. Their motive will be to close down the church. It was never about marriage.
Report Post »NewMan
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:47amI’m not catholic, but I say “kudos” to the priest for standing firm in his beliefs when the whole world wants to compromise theirs. Not sure I agree with him not showing up at the burial and not finding a priest to replace him, but I’m sorry – the communion is holy no matter what church you belong to. The priest would have to answer to God if he offered it to someone living in known and unrepented sin. Furthermore, he probably did the lesbian a huge favor by not giving it to her. The Bible says “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” – 1 Cor. 11:29
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:15amI agree in principle, but who doesn’t live in sin? I suppose there is a point that people should be repentive, but look at all the Catholics that unrepentantly differ in other doctrine and still receive communion. Like women who have abortions, or even use contraceptives for instance…
Report Post »USACommoner
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:59amHow do we know the priest didn’t TRY to find a replacement and no one wanted to accept it for the same reason…? When you join a club or organization, you are essentially agreeing to THEIR by-laws. If the rules go against what YOU believe in, you should probably find another club is all I‘m sayin’.
Report Post »Female
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:42amTT,
True Catholics actually don’t take Communion in known sin, they leave the church and either are no longer “practicing Catholics”, join a church like Episcopal, compromised Baptist, Unitarian, Charismatic, Non-denominational, or Nobody Cares enough about eachothers souls to exhort or rebuke them Church. Also, the Catholics have this Sacrament called Confession, which endows the Priest to forgive sins even as grave as any of the 10 Commandants; which to Catholics, also, covers abortion.
However, there are some which will take Communion in an active state of sin, which will bring judgement upon themselves. A priest is absolutely forbidden from giving Communion, if sin is known to be present and actively, openly defiantly lived, as in the case with this woman(?).
Btw: I was raised Catholic. I do not attend due to some doctrinal issues but do admire and defend her, as I would all churches which preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. And as the Catholic Church continues to be the strongest part of the Churches to stand for righteousness and against sin in these dark times. I am honestly thinking of returning.
Problem for me are those BIG statues and Jesus still on the cross, just has always scared and still creeps me out! The stations of the cross are okay for meditation, memory and grounding for the suffering Jesus endured. And I am not good at repetative praying, I get sleepy–so, I choose to pray away for now, at least.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:45amFemale,
You seem fairly knowledgeable! I respect that. I suggest you lose all your prejudices and legitimately try to understand Scripture on its own face value. You may find that some things you understand to be true really are not.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:14pmFemale, I pray you return to the church. God bless…
Report Post »Female
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 11:52amTT,
I now know you like Baptist flavored churches. I did not intend to appear prejudice stating “compromised Baptist”. I actually was referring to a specific group of churches which split from the Southern Baptist in a desire to water down the Word and be more liberal in regards to abortion and homosexuals. I go to the scriptures and see a lot of stuff going on in every church which doesn’t bare-up or is just as bad as the pharisees and religious tyranny of Jesus’s time. Just because I seem supportive of some stuff doesn’t mean I am drinking the koolaid. Check out the methods of Jesus to the churches.
I believe the flavors (opinions) served in churches are like spices which more often bring out the qualities of the meat. And it is the manifestation of division by parts with each member a portion of a cell, thereby providing only part of the information to the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 13, especially verse 9-12
I believe there is a way in which Jesus spoke and looked at people in sin which was speaking the truth in love and humility which resulted in repentence, hope, and following Him.
Finally, 13:13 ” And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Report Post »SoundStride
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:46amIt was just her fishy breath maybe try a mint Pat.
Report Post »SoundStride
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:45amA lot of people say, “What’s that?” It’s Pat!
Report Post »A lot of people ask, “Who’s he? Or she?”
A ma’am or a sir, accept him or her
or whatever it might be.
It’s time for androgyny.
Here comes Pat!
Beachbaby
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:41amMake no mistake God will deny her too. If she wants a free for all. join the muslims. Oh wait…
Report Post »Red1492
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:48amThere are quite a few posters on the Blaze who claim to know god’s mind and thought process. You’re so sure about what god will do to her? Religious folk are the most hateful I’ve ever seen. You all would prefer communion be given to a murderer than anyone who is gay. While I don’t agree with the priests actions, he has the right to do so. I think it‘s just crappy that he chose to humiliate a grieving daughter at her mother’s funeral.
Report Post »zhq01
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:23amI‘m sure am glad you know exactly what’s on God’s mind and what he will do on her day of judgement. I sort of wonder why we even need God if you already have all of his knowledge and wisdom?
Report Post »The ultimate arrogance is thinking that one know‘s God’s will.
Chamber
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:48pmRed1492. The priest chose to humiliate her? How about her responsibility in all this? She could have gone up at communion time with her arms crossed in front of her throat, signifing that she did not wish to receive. I’m sure the priest would have given her a blessing to help at such a sadful time.
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:06pmZHQO1: “I‘m sure am glad you know exactly what’s on God’s mind and what he will do on her day of judgement. I sort of wonder why we even need God if you already have all of his knowledge and wisdom?
The ultimate arrogance is thinking that one know‘s God’s will.
The statements made are from the people who know what the Bible has to say about it. That is how we know God’s will. That is why we are given God’s Word so we might live according to it. It is not our laws, it is God’s law and we are only informing you of it. Either we belive what the Bible says and abide by it, or we don’t and suffer the consequences of it.
Report Post »janedough1
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:41amOnce again, we are not to pretend that sin is righteousness in order to “not judge.” Judge not that ye be not judged does not mean that I am to pretend murder is righteous, or that rape is righteous, or that any other sin is righteous in order to get into heaven myself. If God wanted us to pretend evil was good, He wouldn’t be God. Judge not that ye be not judged means that I don’t get to withhold salvation from you, because your sins are worse than mine. Any day you want, Ms. Johnson, you can accept Christs gift of salvation and repent, and I’m not to judge you too bad of a sinner to be worthy of it, because I’m a sinner too. But that doesn’t mean that I pretend my sins are really righteous, or that your sins are really righteous. None of us gets to heaven without repenting and turning from our wicked ways.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:52amAmen JANE! When did Biblical “judge not” become not exercising “discretion” or use our God-given minds?
Why would this women even WANT to take communion when she clearly disagrees with God’s word?
Report Post »RightUnite
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:40amOh well… She can always change denomination….. Maybe she should convert to Islam… Oh wait.. They kill you for that, don’t they??
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:49amUnitarian is Catholic Light, right?
Report Post »Female
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:37am“On July 14, 2009, the Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops voted that “any ordained ministry” is open to gay men and lesbians.[”
She should have respected the Catholic Church and planned a duel service. The catholic part for and in memory of her mother and invited a Episcopalian priest to minister her communion.
I believe the Catholic Priest was absolutely correct in his duties to the Holy Sacrament.
Report Post »USACommoner
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:08amRight on. I work in the education field and I’ve discovered that when people say someone is not “user friendly”, it’s because that someone is enforcing the rules. Some people just don’t like to be made to follow rules. Obviously, the rules only apply to everyone ELSE…
Report Post »RightThinking1
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:39pmActually, even the Unitarians don’t know what they are.
Report Post »DallyWama
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:39amHe should have just denied her for being a hideous looking creature. It would have saved him the trouble.
Report Post »magadog
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:46pmI’d hit it…no really…2“ x 4”…monkey wrench…
Report Post »RedMage
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:38amSometimes people insist on being publicly humiliated so they can scream and cry about it. I hope the Church stands firmly behind the priest and doesn’t let her get away with this nonsense. She knew when she presented herself for communion that she shouldn’t be doing it unless she had repented and made a firm committment to God to change her sinful ways.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:51amLiberals will use absolutely any occasion to make a political point, even their mother’s funeral.
Report Post »KathleenElsie
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:15pmI believe that she and her girlfriend came in with the intention of causing scandal. What she got was a lesson on the Catholic Faith.
Report Post »Jenny Lind
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:37amThis was not a priest’s politics, it was his faith and I sure hope they do not replace him. He took a stand for what he believs and what God, not politics says. We are to love sinners, but we don’t have to go against our faith to give sacraments we deem holy to those who choose to live against the will of God. I aplaud him for having the courage to stand. The funeral was given for her mother, not her.
Report Post »sandy21957
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:47amShe should have known better than to try to take the Communion. She was “pushing the envelope.” Don’t believe for a minute their feigned indignation or surprise. Shame on them.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:37amObama will need to make communion a “human right” now so that nobody will be denied “access” to it.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:36am“Priest Wants Lesbian Removed for Perversion.”
I’ll side with the priest against devolution any day.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:21amWow. On Feb 29, 2012, Jerky said something I agree with. Wow.
Report Post »What if it were at a Temple?
gingirl67
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:36ami have to agree with the Priest.. There are churches that have gay views.. she should attend there.. no one can or any govt can tell any church how they should practice their beliefs.. you should attend a church that agrees with your beliefs..I am on the Priests side..
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:40am” no one can or any govt can tell any church how they should practice their beliefs.”
Report Post »Tell that to Obama, he didn’t get the memo.
ShadowPlacebo
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:35amThey left out the part where she probably was kissing and touching up on her ‘partner’ in front of the church. A priest would never deny anybody communion, especially those who sin as they need it.
Report Post »AJAYW
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:46amYepper that is just what they all do –In Your Face- Good for him
She should of had a lesbian funeral for her mother, I’m sure that is what her mother would have wanted.
Report Post »TEARS FOR AMERICA
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:32amRev. Guarnizo stood for the Word of God and if he continues to stand on the Truth, God will receive him with joy, no matter what this lesbian tries to do to him…they are right, it has nothing to do with the Catholic Church but what does God’s Word really say about homosexuality…you read it.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:31amThat Bob Johnson guy looks tough.
Good for the Padre. Sucks being in the liberal bastion of MD and have someone remind you of the way things should be. Go to CAIR for some support Bob. And providing comfort for someone that gave up the oxygen habit is moot.
Report Post »RightThinking1
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:37pmBad behavior has consequences. She has brought it on herself. Kudos to the priest.
Report Post »Grasshopper42
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:31amTransubstantiation? Riiiiiight . . .
Report Post »Trebuchet
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:42amEinstien came to the conclusion that it was entirely possible.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:24amPossible? Lol…It surely is not biblical though…Jesus also said He was the door, light, truth, a shepherd, and a vine. Why is it foot washing is not a sacrament in the Catholic church? Better read John chapter 13! If you cannot recognize an analogy in the Last Supper then you cannot recognize it here either, in fact, Jesus ORDERS you to wash each other’s feet:
John 13:14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.
John 13:15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
So who’s feet have YOU washed lately?
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:05amThe evening before he was crucified, Jesus and the apostles shared a meal. At the Last Supper Jesus very plainly explained to the apostles how he wanted them to worship:[H]e took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after supper, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Lk 22:19-20)
Report Post »These words must have been quite enlightening to the apostles, as they finally understood what Jesus meant when he said, “[H]e who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day” (Jn 6:54).
The apostles also understood in Jesus’ words both the authority and the commandment to “do” perpetually in worship what Jesus had just instituted: the Eucharist.
The Day of Obligation
The apostles went on to teach others this sacred, God-instituted form of worship. This is evident is Paul’s words to the Church at Corinth: For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:06amIn the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. (1 Cor 11:23-26)
Report Post »Paul was not at the Last Supper, so he undoubtedly received this from the Lord through the other apostles. And in this passage we read that he has already delivered it himself to the Church at Corinth.
Scripture reveals that the Eucharist was celebrated on Sundays: “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread . . .” (Acts 20:7). That the celebration took place on Sunday makes sense because Jesus was resurrected on that day (Mk 16:9).
Down through history, the Church Fathers attest that the Eucharist has been the constant and most sacred form of authentic Christian worship. In the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the Catholic Church continues this form of worship and obliges Catholics to participate.
The authority to oblige Catholics in such a way was endowed to the Church by Jesus himself. He said first to Peter and later to all of the apostles, “whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, 18:18).
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:07amThe Church has always recognized in these words the authority to enact disciplinary laws which the faithful must follow. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains:
Report Post »The power to “bind and loose” connotes the authority to absolve sins, to pronounce doctrinal judgments, and to make disciplinary decisions in the Church. Jesus entrusted this authority to the Church through the ministry of the apostles and in particular through the ministry of Peter . . . (CCC 553, emphasis added)
Today the obligation to attend the Mass is found in the Code of Canon Law: “Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation . . . On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass” (CIC 1246 §1–1247).
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:07amNot long ago, Rick Warren announced, “We’re adding the Lord’s Supper . . . to 4:30 pm and 6:30 pm Sunday evening services every week!”
Report Post »Some people have wondered whether “the Lord’s Supper” at Saddleback Church is the authentic Eucharist. The answer is no. The power and authority to consecrate the Eucharist has never been available to just anyone; it has always been necessary to be appointed by one of the apostles or their successors. Luke provides evidence of this: “[T]hey [Paul and Barnabas, in this case] had appointed elders for them in every church . . .” (Acts 14:23). As does Paul: “This is why I left you [Titus] in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you . . .” (Ti 1:5).
The term “elders” in these passages is translated from the Greek word presbyterous, from which we derive the English word priest. It is clear in the passages just cited that priests were necessarily appointed in every Church. In part, this was for the valid consecration of the Eucharist.
Since megachurches like Saddleback Church do not have priests ordained by successors of the apostles (i.e., Catholic bishops), they do not have the power or the authority necessary to consecrate the Eucharist changing its substance into the body and blood of Jesus.
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:10amAlso, I’m not aware of any megachurches that recognize the life-giving presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, for Catholics the “source and summit” of the faith. In describing its Lord’s Supper, Saddleback Church’s Web site states: “The elements of bread and wine or juice are symbols of Christ’s broken body and shed blood.”
Report Post »There is no comparison between a modern megachurch worship service— however entertaining it might be—and the Eucharist instituted by Jesus. A person should never mistake such megachurch worship as any sort of alternative to the Mass. And, if he’s a Catholic, he must never neglect his obligation to participate in the Mass.
If a Catholic wishes to indulge in megachurch worship, and he can do so without endangering his own faith or scandalizing others, he is not explicitly forbidden from doing so. Even so, he cannot licitly participate in a megachurch communion service. This is forbidden by the Code of Canon Law: “Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone . . . ”.
The bottom line is this: Jesus didn’t instruct the apostles to perpetuate megachurch-style worship services, nor did he indicate that such worship would be life-giving. But he did institute the Eucharist, commanded the apostles to perpetuate it, and promised life to those who participate in it. Don’t we owe it to him to worship as he commande
Female
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:12amTroll,
Communion is a sacrament because JESUS ordained it.
“23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat;[a] this is My body which is broken[b] for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.”
1Corinthians 11:23-26
PROBLEM:
27″ Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood[d] of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner[e] eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s[f] body. 30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep. 31 For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world. ”
Original context was greedy eating, how much more should it apply to sexual sin of Romans 1.
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:21amDo we really “eat Jesus”? Don‘t the words of consecration call only for a symbolic interpretation of eating and drinking of Christ’s body and blood instead of a literal one?
Not according to the understanding of the Catholic or Orthodox Churches, and not according to the practice of Christianity for 1,500 years.
Report Post »The New Testament Greek in Mark 14:22, Matthew 26:26, and Luke 22:19 reads this way—transliterated, of course, into English characters: ” Touto estin to soma mou. ” (The very earliest account of the words of consecration in 1 Corinthians 11:24 is slightly different. Paul has it as: ” Touto mou estin to soma. ” In either case, the translation (as opposed to transliteration) is “This is my body.”
Philologists tell us that the verb estin can mean “is really” or “is figuratively.” But Paul’s discussion of the Last Supper clearly reflects his belief that the Presence is real, not figurative. Paul’s discourse may antedate the earliest Gospels by as much as eight years. It is hardly likely, in view of that, that Matthew or Mark meant estin to be taken figuratively.
Furthermore, the Greek word for body used in John 6:52-58 is sarx, which means quite specifically and only “physical flesh.” The Aramaic scholars I have spoken to tell me that sarx is as close as you can get in Greek to the Aramaic bisra, which Jesus himself used.
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:27amEven more evidence from the very earliest Church comes from Ignatius of Antioch. I had to go back to my Greek version of him—somewhat more tattered than it was in 1953 when I first got it. Ignatius wrote about A.D. 110, 10 years or so after the death of John. He’s speaking here about “certain people” who were beginning to hold to “heterodox opinions” that he deemed “contrary to the mind of God”—strong language for the personal disciple of the last apostle. As nearly as I can come to it, Ignatius says: “These people abstain from the Eucharist as well as from prayer because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again from the dead” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 6:2).
Report Post »Ignatius was taught by John himself, and the apostolic succession in this case extends to more than the laying on of hands. I find it unlikely to the point of impossibility to believe that Ignatius would hold to a doctrine antithetical to what he had been taught by the Beloved Disciple.
When we consider the language used by John, a literal interpretation—however disturbing—becomes even more obvious. In John 6:50-53 we see various forms of the Greek verb phago, “eating.” However, after the Jews begin to express incredulity at the idea of eating Christ’s flesh, the language begins to intensify.
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:29amAfter the Jews begin to express incredulity at the idea of eating Christ’s flesh, the language begins to intensify.
Report Post »In verse 54, John begins to use trogo instead of phago.
Trogo is a decidedly more graphic term, meaning “to chew on” or to “gnaw on”—as when an animal is ripping apart its prey.
trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:43amBy Faith! Wow!
You and Female both present your cases nicely. But read my post again. Jesus did indeed say, “This is my body…This is my blood…Do this in remembrance of me…” That is why we have Lord’s Supper, an ordinance like Baptism. It is an observance, a remembrance. But in order to make the argument for transubstantiation you have to address ALL of Christ’s “I Am” statements. Your problem is you are trying to turn Lord’s Supper into an obligation of salvation. You do not understand that Jesus’ words of John 6:54 WAS AN ANALOGY! You are no different than the Jews that Jesus had stumped during this exchange!
John 6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
Jesus is the LIVING bread and water! By accepting Him you are eating and drinking of Him.
As far as apostolic succession…There is no such thing. Jesus is our priest, we ALL have a direct line to God through Him. THAT is what the Bible teaches. Your priest has no more special authority than I do. You can go on believing in your hocus pocus, it is your right. I know real church history and the reasons why the Catholic church does what they do. In fact, we can learn a lot about how the first churches observed Lord‘s Supper through Paul’s epistles.
Neither of you answered my other question either, whose feet have you washed lately?
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:30amI have not washed anyone’s feet lately, but then again, I have not consecrated the Eucharist either.
If you want to see feet washing, then go to a Catholic Church on Holy Thursday.
No such thing as apostolic succession? Jesus breathed on them and said whatever you bind on earth will be bond in Heaven…the apostles in turn breathed on others and said the same…the same process happens to this day.
If John 6:54 was an analogy as you claim, then why did Jesus let so many walk away and not say so? Paul’s epistles support Catholic teachings.
I am not asking you to believe as Catholic do, I was only explaining why we believe what we believe.
Report Post »How can we know Jesus is really present in the Eucharist? http://youtu.be/XI8ZFDY0YLw
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:03pm“Your problem is you are trying to turn Lord’s Supper into an obligation of salvation”
This is not a problem so much as it is a continuation of 2,000 years of church teaching. It is clear from the Bible that Jesus says to do this, it is also clear that the Apostles understood it this way and continued to do so (Biblical evidence as well as historical evidence)
In reference to your “I am” criteria. Jesus never said: I am a door, no seriously, I am a big wooden door, I’m not kidding, I am a wooden door with a brass knob and you must pass through me to enter heaven.
Report Post »I’m paraphrasing of course.
But He did say: Eat my flesh, no really eat my physical body, you must gnaw on my flesh to have eternal life.
trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:51pm?
John 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
That is EXACTLY what Jesus said. You enter in the same as you drink of the living water. By trusting in Him. That is all. You can cherry-pick all the verses you like and make them mean something they do not but if the context does not follow then it is not scriptural. It is no trick to twist Scripture, the skill comes in interpreting correctly.
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:09pmtrolltrainer
John 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
That is EXACTLY what Jesus said. You enter in the same as you drink of the living water. By trusting in Him. That is all. You can cherry-pick all the verses you like and make them mean something they do not but if the context does not follow then it is not scriptural. It is no trick to twist Scripture, the skill comes in interpreting correctly.
Obviously I gave you more credit for comprehension skills than I should have.
Report Post »In my previous post, I was comparing the two statements as to reinforce the context. As the Jews and others left him for saying you must eat his flesh and drink his blood, Jesus’ explanation becomes more accelerated and more graphic. Sorry if that was not clear.
Jesus is the door we must enter…we both agree on that
We must drink the living water…we both(?) agree on that
Since you believe the Bible is the sole rule of faith (a claim found nowhere in the Bible) and you also claim Jesus was speaking in an analogy when he said eat my flesh, (also not supported Biblically) Let’s also include apostolic succession (which is Biblically supported) But I’m cherry picking and twisting scripture?
trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:53pmsigh…
So you are a Jesus eater…Which is a whole other story (literally…)
Whatever…The Jews did not leave because Jesus said to eat him, sola scriptura is implied throughout the Bible and is, as a matter of course, only common sense. Likewise, apostolic succession is nowhere implied in the Bible, you can only get this impression through drastic twisting of Scripture and the ignoring of most of Christ’s message and reason for even being here in the first place. Everywhere throughout the NT it is stated over and over again that you are saved through faith in Jesus Christ. Nothing else. Faith without works is indeed dead, but works come THROUGH faith, they do not provide salvation. Jesus died once on the cross for ALL sin. Catholics make a mockery of that clear fact. I was raised Catholic, my parents remain Catholic. Jesus is NOT still on the cross, He has risen! And through Him, and Him only, I have eternal life by claiming Him as my Savior. End of story. I need no other man to intercede for me, Jesus Christ is my intercessor. Baptizing babies only makes wet babies. Baptism of adults, through their clear and conscience acceptance of Christ, is merely a public expression of their faith. The church you go to does not save you. The pope is a man who puts his pants (bathrobe?) on one leg at a time like the rest of us….
I could go on…Why bother. The Bible is clear on these matters, you have a religion…Good luck with it…
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:10pmYou chose to disrespect the will of God, then Yes I am a Jesus eater.
Report Post »The Jews and many others left him because they would not accept His requirement to eat of His flesh (you keep saying Jews, you’re not anti-Semitic are you)
Sola Scritura is not written nor implied. Common sense tells us if Jesus wanted everything written down, he would have said to. Can you show me where Jesus said “write this down”? Cause he didn’t, He said to go and preach. This is both oral and works based. Two things you will not accept, because they counter your false believes.
Jesus to Peter He would build his church. Peter and the apostles were chosen to guide this church. Or do you want to believe Jesus built His church on a rock and left no one in charge. That would justify your, I don’t need a religion to be religious doctrine.
So works is nothing. Then you believe as Luther did. I can be a sinner all I want, because nothing I do matters as long as I believe.
Jesus died once on the cross for all sins…you finally got one right
If you were raised Catholic, then why are you so ignorant about the faith?
(I’ll let you search for it, you need practice reading the Bibile) Biblical references in ACTS for baptizing entire households. Or were there only adults allowed in the household back then
Clear and concise acceptance of Christ…yea, Catholics call it Confirmation
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:11pmThe Pope is a man who puts his pants on one leg at a time…you got another one right
Report Post »I have a religion…you are on a roll. I have the religion built with the guidance of the Holy Spirit at the request of Jesus. You have your personal interpretation of a Bible re-written by Luther 1500 years later. Good luck with your Church of ME
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:28pmCatholic use the crucifix as a tool to remind us what Jesus did for mankind.
Report Post »NO CROSS, NO CROWN
There is no resurrection, no salvation without the cross.
But not just a cross of wood, the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus on that cross
Will you not stand at the foot of the cross with Jesus’ mother?
Why do you need to rush to Easter and not reflect on Good Friday?
trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 5:17pmHeh, you assume much about me and you are wrong! I know more about YOUR theology than you do! You also assume things from Scripture…Acts 16:31 does not mention children. But it does not matter because nowhere in the NT do we read about anyone being baptized until they are born again. Heck, even Jesus tells Nicodemus in John 3 that in order to be saved he must be born again.
The saddest part about your faith is it is clear as day where it got corrupted. Government married religion and your church was born. When the disciples asked Jesus who was the greatest Jesus did not say, “why Peter is who I will place in charge.” In fact, what was Peter in charge of in Acts? James ran the church in Jerusalem. Jesus said the least will be first in the Kingdom of God. Peter was held in no more esteem than anyone else. So no, the Catholic church did not start with Peter. There is no mention of a pope in the Bible. Did Jesus build the church on Peter? Yes! And on John and Paul and every believer since the day of Pentecost mentioned in Acts. No need to read things in that are not there.
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 5:56pmI assume? You base your entire dialogue on what you think Catholics believe. Yet as the late Archbishop Fulton Sheen once said, “There are not even 100 people in this country who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they think the Catholic Church to be.”
When did I say Acts 16:31 mentioned children? I said HOUSEHOLD
So you admit it is not me you have a problem with, it is Jesus you have problems with, because He didn’t do things as you would have. No wonder you belong to the Church of ME
No mention of he Pope in the Bible, well isn’t that interesting. There is no mention of the Bible in the Bible.
So you do believe Jesus built His church on Peter. But the church wasn’t perfected until you came along to correct all the Catholic mistakes.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:08pmNo, my problem is actually with you. You claim you are a Catholic yet you do not even understand your own theology. To top that off you are arrogant in your ignorance. I have followed your other conversation in this article and I have to say I find you amusing.
I do not hate Catholics or the Catholic church. I see it for what it is and I know there are a great many sincere Catholics who are true believers. I doubt you are, your fruit seems rotten to me, but that is simply opinion. You seem hateful to those who are trying to have a dialogue with you, but in itself that may just be your personality.
What is this “church of ME” you are using in both these conversations? I never claimed I was non-denominational. I happen to be a Baptist, but that in itself is meaningless, I am simply a Bible-believing Christian. Me perfect the church? Lol, is that the Baptist church I happen to belong to or the Body of Christ to which you are referring? If you mean the church to which I belong…well sir, it surely aint perfect. We recognize that. Do you recognize that about your church?
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:14pmYou write:
“When did I say Acts 16:31 mentioned children? I said HOUSEHOLD”
Thank you! What Paul was saying is that by believing on Jesus Christ everyone in the household could be saved. And they went and spoke to everyone in that household about Jesus Christ and they were all born again and baptized that day. So nowhere here is there any basis for a belief that baptizing babies will save them or do anything except make them wet. In order to be saved you must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:20pmI love how you Catholic hater always claim victim status when someone points out your errors.
You come on this website and spread lies and half truths about the Catholic Church and now I am mean and arrogant. Pathetically typical.
The Church of Me is what I like to call people like you who have nothing better to do but attack the Catholic Church. You take scripture out of context. You pick a passage here and a passage there that you think proves your point, then accuse me of doing that. You want to believe what you see, what you read. Not what is there. Not what has been believed since the time of Jesus, just what you accept as true is true. That is the Church of ME
Answer me this, why is it so necessary to your faith that I and other Catholic see our religion as false? You know nothing about being Catholic yet you presume to lecture me on what it is I believe and where I went wrong. Why do you seek to seperate and devide fellow Christians, who disagree with your personal view. Why attack Catholics and not the 30,000+ other Christian denominations.
Report Post »I don’t know why. I can’t read your mind like you think you can read mine.
by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:23pmSo you are telling me, a household in those days had no children.
I want to make sure. No children in a household?
Report Post »by faith
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:27pmBaptist? Oh lets discuss the errors of the Baptist.
No. I don’t do that. That is your area of expertise.
I tremble in the presence of such a great Christian.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:38pmROFL!
You ARE intense! Let me see if I can address everything here.
I do not hate Catholics…Nor Mormons…Nor anyone else really. I try not to hate, Jesus frowns on that. But when you are wrong I will tell you, as I have done here. Nowhere does the Bible say that the communion host turns into Jesus Christ or that eating it will save you. You simply interpret Scripture wrongly and I have shown you how by examining Jesus’ other “I am” statements. Sorry your theology does not permit you to see truth.
Okay…What lies or half-truths have I spread about Catholicism? That you believe in transubstantiation? Infant baptism? apostolic succession? Do you not believe these things? You are certainly arguing for them. What lies have I spread? Show me.
As far as taking Scripture out of context, please show me where I have done this? We may disagree in the interpretation of Scripture, and I can respect that while we discuss/argue about it, but instead of just throwing mud why don’t you show me where I am going wrong as I have tried to show you where your interpretation fails.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:45pmIt is not necessary to my faith to prove you wrong. It seems to me you are the one who is getting bent out of shape and disparaging your brothers and sisters in Christ. If you insist on arguing your Catholic traditions with me then I am going to try and show you why I think you are wrong. I will do this with any Christians, you should see the discussions I have with Calvinists, Arminians, and charismatics. I enjoy discussing theology.
Do ALL households have children? We are not told specifically in Acts that there were any children involved, however, it does clearly state that ALL the house believed in God:
Acts 16:32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
Acts 16:34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.
This would definitely imply there were no infants, but in any case, you cannot use this to prove infant baptism.
Great Christian? You really are a piece of work, aren’t you. Mean and nasty…
I think I am done here. If you are not a true believer then there really is no point in further discussing this. If you are a born again Christian and a part of the Body of Christ as I am then I do not want to further offend you. Go in peace.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:32pmI felt it necessary to come back and say one more thing:
I went to page 5 or 6 or whatever it is and read the conversation By Faith had with SonofThunder. SOT was wrong from the first post and that may have contributed to some of the things said here. I understand. Sometimes, when it feels like our back is to the wall and we defend our faith against aggressive haters we tend to lash out ourselves. I know it happens to me. I am sorry that some people have the atitude SOT had in those posts. I do not feel that way. I disagree with Catholicism but I will not trash the faith. By Faith, I am sorry if I upset you. I disagree with you but I do respect you.
Go in peace my brother,
In Christ
Report Post »Female
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:46pmTroll trainer and By Faith, you two have been very busy here.
I am really not certain about transubstantiation, or a literal miracle taking place which is a Catholic doctrine. GOD is great and once the bread and wine are consumed, if a miracle occurs to them that believe, I can only hope it is true. I know, when I as a Catholic receive Communion, it has always had a different sense of holiness and reverence. I am willing to believe, and I do miss it.
One of the things, I heartily agree with is the frequency that the Catholics do the LORD’s Supper and that, they are open and serving everyday. I often joke about when we get to Heaven: Catholics eat everyday, Baptist once a month, some churches will be quarterly, and others as “The Spirit” moves. Really, we can be so proud, foolish and divisive.
My other pet issue is when churches fear the wine will cause an alcoholic to stumble and give juice. Please where is their faith? I went to a Pentacostal church which served white grape juice because they were afraid the other would stain their carpets! Oh, please!!!! Yikes!!!!
Report Post »Female
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:11pmTrolltrainer,
I respect that you have endured much and I don’t find you to be a hater. So, I will answer your question:
The last time I offered to wash somebodies feet was during a time I was attending a Baptist trained Charismatic type Church. We, as a body were instructed to pray and fast for our congregation and leadership. During this time, I felt lead by the Holy Spirit to suggest to the leader of the women’s Bible study, we invite the Pastor in to have his feet washed. It was very difficult for me to make the suggestion and my flesh and mind were just screaming, “NO, inside myself, as a woman to even suggest or offer such a thing. But a new thought came up from my inner most being regarding the amount of traveling the Pastor had done prior to becoming our Pastor, and where Mary washed Jesus’ feet with her tears. She agreed and we inquired to the Pastor, who said,
“No”
Flat out and no explaination. So, I have offered to wash anothers feet and I offered more then once (4x) but was shut down and treated with a “who do you think you are look and attitude”. I discovered, the leaders are the ones who don’t like this ordinance. So, once I offered, afterwards, I was treated with suspicion by those I offered to wash.
So, by now, you have guessed, I just don’t fit anywhere; but I do love GOD with all my heart, I love and believe His WORD, and I love Jesus’s bride, The Church or Body of Believers.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:44pmJust so you know, I am not into footwashing. I can see it being a beautiful ceremony for churches that believe it and I see nothing wrong with it, but I have never participated in this. It was used as an example.
I believe in the ordinances of baptism (full immersion for those who make an informed decision to follow Christ) and Lord’s Supper, which is simply a remembrance of what Christ did for us. I once belonged to a church that anointed the sick with oil…
You should not give up on finding a group of believers that can help you on your walk and also allow you to serve and in turn be served. Corporate worship is an important part of a Christian’s life, but their personal relationship with the Lord is what matters.
As far as “what church?” goes, I am partial to Baptist, Independent or Southern but these churches can vary, especially regionally. I can also suggest Bible churches and the Alliance churches. All are biblically based and believe in an inerrant Bible. Or you can just try them till you find the right fit. Of course you should have a good idea of the theology you believe before you do this. I believe there are a few essential core doctrine that you must believe to consider yourself a Christian, but outside that, I for one believe God celebrates our diversity. Keeps things interesting.
Report Post »Female
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:46pmAs I said, I really don’t fit into any church. I believe there are many things right on about each Church of the Body of Christ but as time has past (2000+ yrs), divisions have occurred, doctrines have been developed that are kind of well–distortions of the text (purposely drinking poison or playing with snakes) some much less obvious, then there are heresies (once saved always saved and gifts of Holy Spirit aren’t for today), plus some of the garments, others are the traditions of man taking precedence over the Word especially of Jesus, of course, there are some with great shows of entertainment; and the spots-wrinkles of the sinfulness of the body such as divisiveness, personal ambition, jealous, treachory, lying, adultry, perversions, compromises, hypocracy, blindness, self righteousness, finger pointing, pointing out others and not seeing personal errors, and of course, PRIDE!
I have been in many pews for years of many denominations, which I really think should be spell demon-a-tions. I leave in search of that which I hunger and thirst for in the Bible. I get grieved and in a lot of trouble at church for asking questions. So, now I just share my faith and love for God, with people I meet and what my friends call the highways and byways. I have Christians over or go to their houses and we discuss scripture. I wait, as I have in the past for HIM to surround me with believers from where HE wants me to go.
Blessings and mercy, to you!
Report Post »by faith
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 10:04amWhere to start. It might help if you were not so dishonest about what you have posted. And stop trying to play the innocent victim. You started with doors, washing feet and transubstantiation. I gave you several Bible verses with Greek and Aramaic translation to provide you with the Catholic reason for believing in transubstantiation. Your response was I am wrong for 2 reasons, one I am misinterpreting scripture and two I didn’t answer you “I am” criteria. Then you proceed to tell me you as a non-Catholic know more about my faith than I do.
Report Post »Half truths, You claim “Jesus ORDERS you to was others feet” and Catholics don’t do that. Jesus told the Apostles to wash feet and I have seen many feet washing ceremonies in the Catholic Church.
Read your first post. Your passive aggressive attempt to belittle Catholics is very obvious. Transubstantiation is “Lol” You offer no other dialogue on the topic and then switch to you infantile “door” argument. The next line is not a continuation, no again you switch to feet washing.
I respond with a thorough explanation of the Catholic position on transubstantiation. Your response? “in order to make the argument for transubstantiation you have to address ALL of Christ’s “I Am” statements”.
by faith
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 10:04amYou claim John 6:54 WAS AN ANALOGY, and the attack apostolic succession. And again with the feet. Of course, I assume you think none of what you posted is in any way condescending or arrogant. No, because you use a passive aggressive tone and lots of capital letters.
Report Post »I then explain the feet washing and try to answer your apostolic succession tangent. I even posted: “I am not asking you to believe as Catholic do, I was only explaining why we believe what we believe.” Then I give you an analogy of the “I am “ criteria to show you the difference between I am a door and Eat my Flesh. Your response “?” You obviously didn’t understand. I gave you more credit to understand than I should half. Your response (again with the capital letters) and you accuse me of cherry picking and twisting scripture.
In my next post I even said “Sorry if that was not clear” Then I point out 2 different points we agree on. Then show you how you cherry pick scripture but accuse me of doing the same.
Your response? “Sigh…” and then you call me a “Jesus eater” . You claim I am arrogant and mean spirited?
Do I really have to show you where you are taking Scripture out of context? I mean isn’t it self-evident? You say Jesus command to eat His body and drink His blood is and analogy.
by faith
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 10:04amDo I really have to show you where you are taking Scripture out of context? I mean isn’t it self-evident? You say Jesus command to eat His body and drink His blood is and analogy.
Report Post »You claim it is not necessary to your faith to prove me wrong, yet in none of your post do you focus on where we agree, none of your posts are an attempt to unify. All I see are attacks on the Catholic faith based you your personal interpretation of the Bible. For you to be right, I must be wrong.
You can’t stay on one topic; infant baptism is a historical fact. But you can’t find it in the Bible, so it doesn’t exist. Entire households were baptized in ACTS. I ask you one simple question about that? Is it not possible that some of these households included children? Your response “Do ALL households have children?” I never said ALL had children but I assume some did. I also explained to you Catholics have infant baptism and confirmation. You quote Acts 16 and “definitely see no infants” How? He and all his were baptized. Then they ate meat. How is that “definite”?
I believe the Catholic Church is the Fullness of Faith. All religions and even “non-religions” have truth. I see religion this way, why eat at McDonalds when you can eat at Ruth Chris? You can be filled with the sustenance you need to live at both, but one has more to offer.
by faith
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 10:05amI was typing this while re-reading our post. (2 Screens) and now I come you your apology. That is probably your most accurate post. If you spend much time on this site, you see dozens of irrational, illiterate attacks on the Catholic Church. I apologize if my vitriol was directed at you in error.
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:28amGood for the Priest.
No, you obese troll YOU brought your politics into church. Communion is not the buffet at Deny’s, something Johnson appears to have spent a lot of time at.
Report Post »Tea Party Animal
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:26amGo into a church, abide by the rules…..gotta a problem with that? Go have a funeral at a bar!
Report Post »lgccac
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:25amThat’s a woman?
Report Post »The_Almighty_Creestof
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:30amIt’s Pat!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lit1cSptJw
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:34amShe’s fighting it but, yes that’s a woman.
Report Post »bigspike
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:41pmit’s the love child of Rachel Maddow and Rosanne Barr/Arnold/Whatever
Report Post »deloclem
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:35pmYeah, looks like a young Michael Moore!
Report Post »