This session of 40 Days for Life will conclude a week from tomorrow. At the beginning of this session several weeks ago, in Germantown MD, Father Marcel Guarnizo of St John Neumann Church in Gaithersburg delivered an address at the Kick-Off Rally. He addressed the obligation (not option but obligation) for all Christians to combat the evil of abortion. It is important to note that this particular 40 Days location is at the Germantown location of Leroy Carhart, and the church where Fr Guarnizo delivered this address is literally around the corner from the mill. Watch Father's address below. Click here if you cannot see embedded video.
This man is not a man of the Lord Jesus Christ. He performed my mother's funeral mass today and he was an embarrassment to the Church. He lost his place, spoke harshly, dropped his cell phone on the altar and refused to accompany my mother's body to her final resting place at the cemetary. This man brings shame on the name of our Lord.
ReplyDeleteJust off the cuff - I have difficulty believing that Fr Guarnizo would bring a cell phone to the altar, let alone drop it.
DeleteWe need to have a mass protest against this HYPOCRITE! He is one of these reactionary evangelical zealots who believe the pulpit is a place to condemn others and control public policy. He needs to be reminded of the gospel of John 8:1-11 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4 they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5 Now din the Law Moses commanded us eto stone such women. So what do you say?” 6 This they said fto test him, gthat they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, h“Let him who is without sin among you ibe the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10 Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11 She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, j“Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
DeleteThank you for for leaving those last few words in the quote. Most liberals tend to "omit" those. Was there intention to "sin no more"?
DeleteMoreover, my friend, our priests do their jobs when they preach about the complete moral teaching of the Church - even when that teaching has implications for public policy. Get used to it, and realize that no little protest will change God's truth one iota, your delusions to the contrary.
If you are the lesbian in the story, and you know the Catholic Church's stance on your lesbian lifestyle, then why did you present yourself for Holy Communion? It would seem to me that you only did it to yourself.
DeleteThis is outrageous, In claiming to be upholding the Catechism, Fr Guarnizo is displaying woeful ignorance ot it, on at least three counts. (See http://queeringthechurch.com/2012/02/28/in-denying-communion-at-mothers-funeral-priest-contravened-the-catechism/ for an explanation)
DeleteIf acting contrary to the Catechism is necessarily sinful, then by his own standards he is himself in sin. That is why he needs to apologize. The theory of confession states that not only must we repent and confess our sins – but also that for absolution, we must make reparation to those we have injured. The hurt in this case cannot be undone – the least that will suffice is a public apology.
"Moreover, my friend, our priests do their jobs when they preach about the complete moral teaching of the Church" Really? What did the mother do to deserve the priest refusing to accompany the body and say the last prayers at the grave? Was that doing his "job"? That was his duty irrespective of the "sin" of the daughter. And to the Wash Catholic I am a lesbian, I am still a Catholic because I refuse to let The Catholic church judge my conscience, only God has that right. But it is getting harder to remain one with this kind of application of so called Christian values.
DeleteYou might find it harder due to your ongoing sinful lifestyle. Do yourself a favor - one that will count for eternity. Quit that lifestyle and get yourself to Confession. You'll be glad you did.
DeleteMr Weldon, I should take as an authority on the Catholic Catechism a website named "queering the church"? Thank you for a hearty laugh!
DeleteI used to believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy, but I came to my senses. I watched Catholics protest outside of a woman's clinic as a woman sobbingly walked past to have a procedure to remove her stillborn child before it killed her. You blast others with this message of hate and yet you ask for others to be courteous and respectful to you?
ReplyDeleteIf this is true, then you must be able to give specifics? Most women do not go into an abortion clinic for this. They would go to a hospital.
DeleteThis priest, told a young man recently, at his mother's funeral "I cannot give you communion because you live with a woman and that is a sin according to the church", then covered the bowl containing the host and turned him away. On top of that, as the young man was delivering his eulogy, the priest walked off and told the director he was sick and he couldn't complete the job.
ReplyDeleteNo disrespect to the persons on this site. All & complete disrespect to Father Marcel Guarnico. I spit on you.
Assuming that the young man was indeed engaged in that situation and it was known to Father Guarnizo, Father did what he had to do. It would not have been Father's option to deny him Holy Communion, but his solemn obligation, under Church law (Canon 915) to do so. Had the young man received, he would have committed yet another mortal sin, that of making a sacriledgeous Holy Communion. If you don't understand that, a cause of that may be refusal to accept the Church's moral teachings and/or the setting oneself up as their own moral authority. With all due respect to the bereaved, that cannot happen in a Catholic Church, lest everyone involved (including the bereaved) be ill-served by a misrepresentation of the Sacrament, which would be to the eternal detriment of all.
DeleteSo, question. When all those priests across the US were raping boys AND giving/getting Holy Communion, what is that called? Where is the Church law that permits that?
DeleteBoth deplorable, my friend. The tragic presence of one does not justify the presence of the other. You types who want us to refashion Church law will NOT be getting away with that red herring ever again. Get used to it.
DeleteYou know, Avi, if a person professes to be "Catholic," then that person should adhere to the precepts of the Faith. To receive Holy Communion unworthily is to sin against Christ Himself. If someone's lifestyle is not in conformity with the precepts of the Faith, that person should not present him(her)self for reception of the Body and Blood of the Lord. The man living in an intimate relationship with a woman who is not his wife is living that non-conforming lifestyle, considered sinful by the Catholic Church.
DeleteCommunion with Christ in His Body and Blood means putting into practice what He has taught us. Serious sin against God or against neighbor makes one unworthy to receive Holy Communion until the sin has been confessed with a firm purpose of amendment to not repeat the sin and forgiveness has been received through the Sacrament of Penance.
If one who has not repented approaches to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist, then he(she) is to be admonished and denied Holy Communion. In other words, the Church cannot remain silent and indifferent to a public offense against the Body and Blood of Christ. Presenting himself for Holy Communion was a PUBLIC OFFENSE against the Body and Blood of Christ. Fr. Guarnizo was entirely correct is refusing him.
What would Jesus do?
ReplyDeleteInsist upon repentance. Read the Gospels! It's there!
DeleteA general comment about these comments..
ReplyDeleteFirst, as a blogger, I have tools that enable me to determine what posts are being read, when they're being read. I can even tell how the reader comes to get onto those pages.
It is no accident that since these two comments were submitted, that well over 100 looks were taken at this page (in less than 24 hours). The readers were obviously instructed to google "Father Marcel Guarnizo". These hits come from not all over the US, but also from Trinidad, England, Austrilia and other countries. I doubt all these people attended the funeral in question - so what impelled them to examine this page? Coincidence? Right!!
How do you sleep at night? Seriously. The man is just the embodiment of evil.
Deletehttp://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/q6gks/can_we_please_get_this_guy_fired/
DeleteTo my other readers - please take a look at that link to get a flavor of some of the progressive reactionary thinking. Several of them do understand that Catholics may abide by their own beliefs and that we don't have to compromise the truth.
DeleteI've since learned that the person denied Communion posted the episode on their Facebook page. An image (names redacted) was posted to that reddit link above. Therefore I now assume that rather than hints to google Father's name, that Facebook readers took it on themselves to do so.
DeleteWhat brought people to this page is OUTRAGE that this fucking bigot priest abused a woman who was mourning the death of her mother. DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT A MAJORITY OF HUMAN BEINGS WOULD SYMPATHIZE WITH YOU AND YOUR FUCKING GAY-BASHING CHURCH OVER WHAT THIS FUCKING BIGOT PRIEST DID? GET A GRIP YOU STUPID ASSHOLE!
DeleteMy anonymous friend, Father "abused" no one. I've got news for you. You do NOT define what constitutes "abuse", "sin", "truth", etc. I think deep down you know that; thus all the empty bravado and bombast with the all-caps and repeated use of profanities. You think that by adopting an air of "outrage" and yes, self-righteousness that you can cow us into silence. Nope! Ain't workin'! Oh yes, you're angry, but it's the anger of those who crucified Our Lord. It's the same anger that caused an enraged mob to stone Stephen the First Martyr. It's the anger of one shown the error of his/her ways and not wanting to see it. It's blind rage. I suggest you and your fellow liberals/atheists/whatever cease that anger and turn to Our Lord in repentance, lest you waste more of your life and jeopardize your eternal salvation.
DeleteGod Bless, Fr. Guarnizo. Heard about this episode. He did the correct thing.
ReplyDeleteFr. Guarnizo speaks Truth. How I wish a talk like this was given in every church across America.
ReplyDeleteWe always have to remember Satan hates Truth. He likes to hide his Evil deeds in darkness and does not like them to be exposed to the Light.
Thank you Fr. Guarnizo for not being afraid to speak out in this age when Satan sems to be redoubling his efforts to prowl aboute the world seeking the ruin of souls.
Thank the Lord for priests like Fr Guarnizo. For standing up for what is right the full force the gaystapoo willl now come down on him. We need to pray for him.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Fr. Marcel Guarnizo, for your witness of courageous love for the Church and its members. I'm very sorry for this person's loss. It's very difficult. I lost my own mother just over a year ago. I'm also saddened that this person either somehow did not know they weren't supposed to receive Holy Communion or thought they would be allowed to side-step the Church's teaching in the situation, even on the occasion of the deeply sorrowful loss of a loved one. And I'm sorry this person would use the actions of a priest having the courage to do what he should to say they will never step foot in a Catholic Church again. When we walk away, the Catholic Church will always welcome us back. When we're willing to embrace the fullness of the Catholic faith, all of her teachings (not just the ones we like) the Church instituted by Christ himself over 2000 years ago stands with open arms. It's our choice, our free choice. May more priests have the courage to stand up, lovingly, for the Truth, for our sakes. I hope this person and others responding with bitterness will be open to taking the opportunity to speak to a priest about this situation in which the Church's instruction has never wavered. We all have an obligation to be informed and not ignorant; seek to know, not dig in our heels insistently.
ReplyDeleteThe church does not condemn people for being homosexual, only engaging in homosexual acts. So you are telling me that you want the church to call out and accuse people of engaging in homosexual acts and deny them communion because of it. The church has no proof. It is on the conscience of the individual - not the Church.
DeleteRegardless of the rightness or wrongness of her actions, that priest could have privately prayed on her behalf that she was acting in full conscience.
Imagine if we start accusing other people of crimes and denying them communion, what will become of this Church!? I had a friend who was denied a job with a church and communion because the priest, through heresay, heard that she was living out of wedlock with a man. Unfortunately, the statement was untrue, and the priest acted without proof or compassion. The priest did not even ask her if this had happened.
It's deplorable. Do not tell me he is defending the truth. Bullocks! He is defending a romantic and simplified version of Catholic orthodoxy, because we cannot handle the ambiguities and uncertainties of life that we are faced with. And then we call is faith.
#2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust
discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
#2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
Mr Warren, did you read all the accounts of what happened (not just Huffington and Washington Post)? The woman introduced both herself and "her lover" - her words! - to the priest. She herself provided proof of the sinful relationship and acts and she herself engaged in no ambiguity whatsoever. She was not acting in accordance with #2359, as you cite.
DeleteThe whole funeral thing is found here: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/02/26/priest-walks-out-of-womans-funeral-because-of-her-gay-daughter/
ReplyDeleteThe part that in my book proves it all a lie, and a false attack on the good Father is where they say, "To add insult to injury, Fr. Guarnizo left the altar when she delivered her eulogy to her mother. When the funeral was finished he informed the funeral director that he could not go to the gravesite to deliver the final blessing because he was sick."
Um, eulogies are not allowed at Catholic Mass.
If this is true, then we need more priests like Fr. Guarnizo. AD MULTOS ANNOS!
ReplyDeleteHow are any of you or Fr. Guarnizo in a position to judge what is in the heart of the presenting communicant? How does anyone know the dialog between them and God. Should not mercy, compassion and the presumption that the person is at peace with God, be anyone's first reactions? Do we not trust God to be the judge - without the need for our uncharitable intervention?
ReplyDeletemt
It is not Father's job to judge the heart, but to look at the actions. Before the ceremony, the daughter and partner introduced themselves as "lovers". By the way, since you wax indignant about "judging what's in the heart", how do you presume to judge what you call "uncharitable intervention"? Hmmmm?
DeleteTo: AnonymousFeb 26, 2012 09:30 PM
ReplyDeleteIt is vey simple to notice the difference between you and Fr. Guarnizo. Your language is VERY offensive. The priest is protecting the holiness of Almighty God by denying communion to someone who has chosen a path of unholiness. Your language is profaning one who brings us the Body and Blood of Christ. It shows whom you are following, Satan himself.
I beg you to repent and turn to Jesus who is waiting for you with open arms.
Thank God for priest like Fr. Guarnizo , and to the person who asked what would Jesus do? I will tell you, he would say "Go and sin no more."
ReplyDeleteSo, who here believes they know more about Church Doctrine than the Archdiocese of Washington? Evidently all of you, since the Archdiocese in fact stated that his actions were indeed, AGAINST CHURCH POLICY. But hey, don't let your Leaders word on their policies change your mind.
ReplyDeleteThank you for this comment. I don't think you realize how helpful you are!
DeleteTo all the archdiocesan folks monitoring this blog - do you see the sort of bad example you are setting? These folks who sympathize with the gay lifestyle are taking false and dangerous comfort from what you did to Father Guarnizo! Nice going, Your Excellencies!
1) First of all, if Fr. Guarnizo is even minimally efficacious as a parish priest, he knows Catholics in his parish who have been divorced and remarried without annulment, couples who are living together without marriage, and married Catholics who practice contraception. Unless he denies the Eucharist to all of them, and other so-called 'sinners', he is obviously picking and choosing which 'sinners' he will deny communion to, and that is a very slippery slope. There is grave reason for many to suspect this was a select act of discrimination, not an act of conscience.
ReplyDelete2) There are several very important examples of the Pharisees making an idolatry out of 'The Law' and in every instance Jesus directly questions and challenges them, so no one is out of line questioning Fr. Guarnizo. When the Pharisees criticize Jesus for his actions that supposedly violate the law, Jesus clearly acts and speaks in favor of pastoral ministry overriding religious rules, and expresses anger at the Pharisees for being so blind to seeing this, or having a 'withered' faith as well. Denying the Eucharist to a woman on the day of her mother's funeral so that Fr. Guarnizo can technically observe a selectively-applied 'law'? Scripture speaks to this, and not in his favor.
3) The issue of religious hypocrisy is in fact relevant. There are examples of full or complicit knowledge of priests who committed sexual abuse, and numerous bishops and monsignors allowed those priests to both celebrate and receive the Eucharist, as well as practice ministry...you must be able to imagine why the public is inflamed at what gets publicly censored and what doesn't. The level of hypocrisy is completely relevant. And anyone who has ever spent time in parish ministry has certainly come to know priests, both heterosexual and homosexual, who do not keep the vow of celibacy. I've run into them myself with their partners of both sexes. And then seen them on Sunday as presiders. As long as that issue continues to be covered up, and no one addresses the hypocrisy fully, one can imagine why the extremely selective use of the serious act of denying the Eucharist is outraging.
4) Let's play this out for a minute. So some of you and your posters are SO confident you know the mind and judgment of God, you can't ever possibly imagine the Church evolving away from this position on homosexuality? And yet, the Church has evolved past many, many things it previously allowed or even endorsed, including anti-Semitism, war, slavery, the death penalty, certain saints, teenage seminaries, indulgences and corrupt dispensation practices...and at that time, people were sure they had the spiritual high ground.
Playing this out to the ultimate judgement, are we so sure God is going to agree with you on who the sinner is... the gay woman in a relationship who cared for her mother, or the priest who denied a daughter communion at her mother's funeral? What's going to happen if the woman stays in her relationship? God will say she chose hell and damnation? Really? Here's hoping that God's judgment and mind are far more just and compassionate than His followers.
5) The not-so-veiled attempts to go back to a pre-Vatican II theology and practice in themselves are disobedient. There is an extremely serious problem with Catholics in this country who confuse their political taste for conservatism with biblical and church mandate, and use a very small lens with very select reading to do so. For example, several of the sites listed on here that consider themselves 'pro-life' actually specifically address only the life issue of abortion, when obviously the U.S. Bishops have asked us to expand that issue to include helping the poor systematically, countering the death penalty, etc. This sounds like disobedience or willful ignorance to me. So again, hypocrisy and arrogance.
Most people don't flout their sins and almost dare the priest to act. Theology has not changed simply because God hasn't changed. Now I know this might knock your socks off, but you really don't have a clue about these matters - do you admit that possibility?
DeleteI do admit I may not have the full answers that will be lay only in mystery. However, I find it typical that you would presume lack of intelligence. And your implied insult hardly seems like an act of Christian charity.
DeleteActually, I'm a Catholic theology professor of over 25 years, both well-versed in Scripture and Church morality. Which I'm sure causes shivers down your readers' spines. What it actually reveals is the depth and width of religious philosophy and debate. To your point that "Theology has not changed simply because God hasn't changed." Well, first of all, you are presuming to know the mind of God and not take into account the imperfect human partnership that goes into forming man-made Church laws. Secondly, actually theology has changed within the Church many, many times, particularly in the areas I've mentioned above. When people make such statements as yours, it is usually a very, very selective reading of Church teaching and practice which is used as a defense for human prejudice and preference.
Perhaps it wasn't God's mind that needed changing. As I'm sure you've read, the Archbishop has rightly issued an apology. "Flout?" "Flout" and "flaunt" are well-documented as code words used to describe homophobia. To be honest, your select use of those terms in this day and age is what really "knocks my socks off."
There's a saying that "some things are so stupid only an intellectual would believe them". You say you're a Catholic theology professor for 25 years and then propose (in your 4th statement) that the Church will "evolve" from its teachings on homosexuality? That's utter nonsense.
DeleteWhat would Jesus do? He would love the woman with His whole Heart, and forgive her for any sin....But then He would add as He did in Scripture. "Go and sin no more".
ReplyDeleteWe are either with Him of against Him not my words but His. Catholics will continue to support the Gospel of Jesus Christ for all eternity.
It is sad that if the Catholic Church is to maintain its moral compass, it must be consistent with regards to abortion, homosexuality, contraception, gay marriage, etc.
ReplyDeleteShe being a Catholic, Not, especially when she adheres to a lifestyle and a belief in another religion, Buddhism which is diametrically opposed and abhorrent to the Official Doctrines as determined by the Magisterium of Catholic Church.
This was a set up from the get go and the Catholic Church and the priest were the pawns. She had an agenda. She was so filled with pride that she felt compelled to dictate to the priest and to the Church, her own distorted and evil views on what should be the acceptable doctrine within the Catholic Church. The priest is shepherd who is entrusted to guard his flock from ravenous wolves who try to enter. He was in a no win situation. The fact that she knowingly went to the national press afterwards, was for the sole intended purpose to cast further aspersions upon the Catholic Church knowing that she would have the politically correct, public opinion, on her side.
If she dislike the doctrines of the Catholic Church in regard to homosexuality than she should have made arrangements elsewhere that were more accommodating to her beliefs.
The fact that she knowingly flaunted openly her Lesbian lover in front of the priest and other members of the Catholic Community in a state of rebellion and sin, and wanted to participated in Holy Communion which in a sense desecrated the Host, a mortal sin, then it would be the obligation of the priest to prevent such a sacrilege from being committed as he would be a willing and knowingly participant in the commission of her sin if he allowed her to receive Holy Communion.
Justin Martyr. Christian apologist, 110 - 165 AD stated:
"And let those who are not found living as He taught, be understood to be no Christians, even though they profess with the lip the precepts of Christ; for not those who make profession, but those who do the works, shall be saved, according to His word"
It is clear she rejects the Church's teaching in this area and wallows in her sin with her life partner.
If anything, the insensitive person is not the priest but her. The priest is the spiritual authority and shepherd of his parish. He has a duty and responsibility to insure that the faithful administration and adherence to correct doctrine and procedures as promulgated by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church are carried out.
She should with all humility, should have talked to the priest as her spiritual authority and advisor and explained to him her situation and beliefs and asked him if he would allow her to receive Holy Communion based on her statements.
St. Paul stated in Corinthians that a little leaven will spoil the whole batch when the church allowed sin to fester among its members. In fact, if you read the writings of the early church Fathers - these men of faith who were not only taught by the apostles but appointed by the apostles into their positions of authority - the standard practice would remove such a person from their church congregation who openly and defiantly lived a lifestyle of immorality. They would not allow this person back into the church until those in authority had observed repentance over a period of time on the part of the person removed.
1 Cor 5:1-12 1 peter 4:17
Pope Benedict XVI in his recent Lenten address talked about the dangers of moral relativism.
The priest should be promoted to a Bishop for actually enforcing Catholic Doctrine with his church.
A research conducted by Pew Research Center stated that only 5% of Catholics show any accountability to Church leaders and to Catholic Doctrine. The lowest number of all Christian denominations.
I would worry more about offending God then a person who rejects the tenets of her faith!
Upon hearing of this priest's actions (he seems to believe he is holier than Thou), I am ashamed to admit that I am a practicing Catholic.
ReplyDeleteHe's just obeying Church law. Is that what you really call "holier than thou"?
DeleteThank God for Father Guarnizo! He did the Catholic thing. Unfortunately, so many of the ecclesiastical hierarchy of today received such a poor training in the Novus Ordo seminaries after Vatican II that now they do things such as reprimand a priest for doing what a Catholic priest is required by Church law to do! And that woman was obviously setting him up, daring him with that little act before Mass of introducing herself and her "lover".
ReplyDelete