The height of clericalism is that a priest or extraordinary minister of Holy Communion decides who should and shouldn’t receive Holy Communion. No, the one receiving Holy Communion makes that decision to the salvation or damnation of their soul. The Church’s ministers are not dictators of a nanny church.
But read this from the Jesuit publication America:
Priests should think twice before denying Communion to Catholics in same-sex unions.
Consider this situation. A woman, who self-identifies as a lesbian and who has entered a civil marriage with another woman, presents herself for Holy Communion. Her priest is aware of her marriage. Should he share the sacrament with her? Much depends on how that priest sees himself. Is he a pass-giver or a gate-keeper? A pass-giver, who most likely is of a certain age and with a more liberal attitude, inclines to “just give” the sacraments to people upon request. If pressed to provide a theological justification, he may point to inclusivity and mercy—both of which have a firm foundation in the Gospel. A gate-keeper worries about the integrity of the sacraments, the connection with genuine commitment and the danger of scandal. These concerns are also well-founded in the Gospel.
Do you see the inherent clericalism here. It on hinges on the priest to decide who is to receive Holy Communion. Why not the person presenting herself? Does she not know what sin is? Does she not know what the Church teaches? Does she not have a Catechism of the Catholic Church?
She should know what the Church teaches to be sin and the distinctions between mortal and venial sin.
She should know that if she is in a state of manifest and public mortal sin, knows that it is a sin and continues to sin with full consent of the will and with forethought and planning, then she should not present herself for Holy Communion. The burden of sin is on her and a sacrilegious Holy Communion is her sin and digs the hole of possible damnation deeper.
Why should the priest at the moment of Holy Communion have to say to her, like the soup nazi in Seinfeld, NO HOLY COMMUNION FOR YOU!
Yes, the clergy and catechists have a responsibility to teach the CCC and canon law! A bishop, priest or deacon can catechize their congregations during Mass on who should refrain from receiving Holy Communion.
But the communicant should know better either to the detriment or health of their salvation!
9 comments:
There are rare occasions when I do not give communion to someone who has come forward.
Either 1) they are obviously underage and just aping what they see others do, which is kind of endearing, or 2) they are obviously not Catholic and have no idea how to receive. When they hear "The Body of Christ," there is no reaction of any kind - no "Amen," no extended hands or open mouth, just a blank stare. I ask, "Are you Catholic?" and they respond, "No," and I then quickly give them a blessing and motion for them to return to the pew.
In these cases it is not "clericalism" that underlies my decision. In both cases, the person presenting him/herself ror communion doesn't know what the Church teaches, they do not have a Catechism of the Catholic Church, they don't know distinctions between venial and mortal sin, and they have no concept of possible damnation. Nor should the priest or anyone else expect such.
Of course I agree with you. If we know someone isn’t a Catholic and they know not that they should not receive (double negative?) then the priest should not offer them Holy Communion but a blessing. But like you, I am in the minority as a priest distributing Holy Communion. Lay ministers don’t often make distinctions and give Holy Communion anyway.
But of course, your well catechized Catholics who know what mortal sin is, especially mortal sin codified by a civil marriage certificate that is opposed to the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony should know that living in sin in this public fashion is a sin against God and a mockery of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. They should know better than to present themselves for Holy Communion. The onus is on them.
But if they are poking you and the Church, not to mention Almighty God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as it concerns the Magisterium of LGBTQetc ideologies, then yes, deny them Holy Communion but discreetly. Do you teach your lay ministers to do the same?
I guess some priests would give Holy Communion to Al Capone
One should not assume in this day and age that every Catholic knows what they should know. Then of course, there are those who know well enough but don't care. In addition, there are the cases Father Kavanaugh mentions. It should frequently be reiterated that it is the Body and Blood of Christ one receives when presenting for Holy Communion. An addendum to the homily would not hurt; after all, the Holy Eucharist is the source and summit of our Catholic Faith. Perhaps little booklets
at the Church entrance prominently displayed and tactfully written entitled : "Who can receive the Eucharist?".
Hear is a reason for denying "catholic" Joe Biden Holy Communion. What say you Father Kavanaugh?
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 19, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – President Joe Biden’s administration overturned restrictions on Friday relating to federal funding of the use of fetal tissue – body parts of aborted babies – for experimental purposes. The policy reverses a ban put in place by former President Donald Trump limiting federal funding for such research.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Sounds like you voted for intrinsic evil!
Biden should have been denied LONG AGO! Along with Teddy Kennedy, Chris Dodd, Ed Markey, Mario Cuomo, Andrew Cuomo----please feel free to add some names of pro-choice politicians! Thankfully Dick Durbin of Illinois is not allowed to receive communion in his Illinois diocese, but whenever he recants his pro-choice views, the door is open....
For some reason, this made me think of Ash Wednesday when mothers with babies in their arms expect the priest, deacon or lay minister to put ashes on their babies' foreheads while saying, "Repent and believe in the Gospel" or "Remember you are dust and to dust you shall return". Really? It should not be allowed to impose ashes on any child who has not yet made their first Penance. It's hard to believe some parents can be so clueless....more so that many clergy and lay ministers go along with it.
For some reason this reminded me also of Ash Wednesday when many mothers with their babies in their arms want the clergy or minister to impose ashes on the babies' foreheads while saying the formula "Repent and believe in the Gospel" or "Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return". Really? Are those mothers that clueless? What's worse is the clergy or ministers who want to "be pastoral" and go along with the charade. There should be a liturgical law that ashes can be imposed only after a person has received First Penance.
Your reaction reminds me of this...
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2021/04/church-sends-divorced-lesbian-letter-saying-shell-shunned-community-unless-repents/?utm_source=LGBTQ+Nation+Subscribers&utm_campaign=5e3134856a-20210422_LGBTQ_Nation_Daily_Brief&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c4eab596bd-5e3134856a-432439416
Post a Comment