Saturday, 24 June 2017

NO CATHOLIC FUNERALS FOR GAY PEOPLE!





Robert Shine,New Ways Ministry

An Illinois bishop has released guidelines about same-gender marriages that may greatly restrict participation in his diocese’s parishes by people in such marriages
Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield issued his “Same-Sex Marriage Policies Decree 6-12-2017” earlier this month, which instructs lesbian and gay Catholics along with pastoral ministers on several aspects of ecclesial life.
Addressing the sacraments, Paprocki said people in same-gender marriages should neither seek to receive nor be admitted to Holy Communion because their relationships are of an “objectively immoral nature.” Most strikingly, the bishop decreed about funeral rites:
“Unless they have given some signs of repentance before their death, deceased persons who had lived openly in a same-sex marriage giving public scandal to the faithful are to be deprived of ecclesiastical funeral rites. In case of doubt, the proper pastor or parochial administrator is to consult the local ordinary [bishop], whose judgment is to be followed (cf. c. 1184).”
Further restrictions on people in same-gender marriages include the following prohibitions:
  • “[They] are not to serve in a public liturgical ministry, including but not limited to reader and extraordinary minister of Holy Communion”;
  • “[They may] not serve as a sponsor for the Sacraments of Baptism or Confirmation”;
  • “[They are] not to be admitted to the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (RCIA) or receive the Sacrament of Confirmation unless he or she has withdrawn from the objectively immoral relationship”.
Paprocki’s decree also includes restrictions for pastoral ministers. No church worker, acting in a professional capacity, may participate in same-gender weddings. No church properties may host such weddings, and the bishop even forbids “items dedicated or blessed for use in Catholic worship” from being used in such ceremonies. Church personnel are also forbidden to bless same-gender marriages.
Pastors are further instructed to accept children whose parents are in a same-gender marriage for the Sacraments of Initiation, though pastors must use “due discretion in determining the appropriateness of the public celebration of the baptism.” Likewise, such children are to be admitted to Catholic schools and religious education, but the family “must agree to abide by the Family School Agreement.” To read more about that Agreement, which is LGBT-negative, click here.
Finally, the bishop threatened pastoral ministers that a “culpable violation of any of these norms can be punished with a just penalty.”
This Decree is not entirely novel. Philadelphia’s Archbishop Charles Chaput sought last summer to bar LGBT people from both Communion and liturgical ministries in his restrictive pastoral guidelines. Elsewhere, Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit and former Archbishop John Myers of Newark both told LGBT Catholics and their allies not receive Communion. What is notable about Paprocki’s guidelines is its treatment of funeral rites and threat of punishment for pastoral ministers.
The Decree is also not Bishop Paprocki’s first damaging act against LGBT people and their families. Last year, he implicitly criticized Chicago’s Archbishop Blase Cupich for suggesting that reception of Communion is to be determined by each person according to their conscience. When Illinois passed marriage equality in 2013, Paprocki held a public exorcism because of the law, and had previously suggested that supporters of marriage equality should be disciplined like children.
Beside the obvious pastoral insensitivity, there are a few other things wrong with Paprocki’s new guidelines. In canon law, Canon 1184, which the bishop referenced in regard to funeral rites, says restrictions on such rites should be imposed on “notorious apostates, heretics, and schismatics,” those persons who are cremated for “reasons contrary to Christian faith,” and “manifest sinners” whose funerals would be publicly scandalous.
It is discrimination to target LGBT people when, in a certain sense, all Catholics could be deemed “manifest sinners.” Who among us, including Bishop Paprocki, does not publicly sin at different moments? Yet, funeral rites are not denied to Catholics who pay employees an unjust wage, publicly advocate for the death penalty, or deny climate change.
It is cruel to suggest that people who have, by the dictates of their conscience, entered into same-gender marriages should uniformly be equated with apostates and heretics.
Secondly, threatening Catholic pastoral workers with a “just penalty” is improper for someone who is to be a loving shepherd for the diocese. It borders on spiritual abuse to tell pastoral ministers and LGBT Catholics that, should they adhere to a most fundamental church teaching and follow their properly formed consciences, they could be punished by ecclesiastical authorities.
In a moment when a growing number of church leaders, led by Pope Francis, are opening doors to LGBT people and their families, it is tragic that Bishop Paprocki has chosen to act so harmfully. Despite his claims, it is the Decree itself which is the real scandal in this incident.
PAT SAYS:

What planet are people like Popriki living on?

The traditional Catholic understanding of a funeral is that it is a ceremony to pray for the deceased and their eternal salvation. 

If it is sinful to have a same sex union - as Poproki is suggesting - is it not more important that gay people are prayed for than anyone else.

Plus it is huge hypocrisy given that so many Catholic priests and bishops are living promiscuous gay lifestyles in the US, in the Vatican and around the world?

I am sure that there are plenty of clerical scandals in Poprocki's own diocese.

His instructions amounts to blatant homophobia and questions whether or not he is really a "Christian" at all!

80 comments:

  1. My gay funeral will be FABULOUS and hosted in my Parish Church

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why is the Church obsessed with Gay people in committed loving relationships. Why is there never a word about heterosexual couples 'co-habiting' and who continue against church teaching to have children outside of 'wedlock'. Will they also be denied a Church funeral?

    A rule for one and a rule for another

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bishop Pat, this man is one of the useless ****** I sometimes refer to. Men like him are destroying the Body of Christ by casting God in their own image. And it is not just these men who are causing untold damage: it is those, too, who contribute financially to them and offer any kind of moral support.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'd love to have a little look at his internet browsing history... Might be most revealing!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I completely see the reason for his decree - banning gays from churches will prevent the embarrassment caused when tbe priest realises he's encountered one of the congregation the night before, in a truck stop.
    Paprocki's own mentality comes out very clearly - and he's seriously immature and incondiderate of others, distrusring of his ministers, wildly controlling, and the complete absence of compassion suggests that all his relations may lack emotional warmth. Perfect bishop material!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha ha ha Brilliance and wit. Perfect bedfellows (in a manner of speaking).

      Delete
  6. I guess the number of Episcopalians is set to rise in that diocese.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lady told me that one Sunday her Episcopal parish's parking lot was overflowing with cars. Most were of disenchanted Catholics. Her priest told them that while he welcomed them he thought they should not run away from their own problems. The Episcopal church was full of controversies too. All was not perfect in Episcopalandia.

      Most followed his advice.

      Delete
  7. The lady doth protest too much. I'd say that Bishop can't get enough of it God luv em

    ReplyDelete
  8. Cardinal Keith O'Brien was one of the loudest opponents of gay people - publicly. He was forbidden from attending the last conclave.

    Archbishop John Nienstedt was a vociferous opponent of gay liberation - publicly. As an auxiliary in Detroit, he cancelled Dignity Masses. In St Paul's-Minneapolis he opposed same-sex marriage. While he was still in office in 2014 it was announced he was under a non-criminal investigation by his diocese for "sexual misconduct with men." (The nuncio at the time Carlo Maria Vigano ordered Nienstedt's auxiliaries to destroy evidence. Nienstedt resigned in 2015.

    In both cases the public adoption of a hard line in relation to gay people failed to deflect attention from their own lifestyles.

    Paprocki rebuked Cardinal Cupich of Chicago who is a man in the style of Pope Francis, for his position on the role of conscience and the reception of Communion in the case of gay people.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Edmond Grace, an Irish Jesuit has written the following under the title "The marriage referendum: why I voted yes"

    http://www.jesuit.ie/blog/guest-blogger/the-marriage-referendum-why-i-voted-yes/

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rubbish and unjust attitude by the Bishop. Time for the public to show 2 fingers. You also point out that the alleged activity of some clergy is being ignored.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I guess this new edict would apply to the many Queens reading and contributing to this blog. Hypocrisy abounds. If you don't like it then arrange your funeral elsewhere - simple. Stop using the Church as a menu to pick and choose from

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ooh get her

      Delete
    2. Menu to pick and choose from? Are you braindead? Those bastardos you idolize have been picking and choosing among Jesus' teachings since shortly after he took off for the celestial heights.

      Grow up, idiot. Those bastardos set the example others are now following. They have no grounds whatever for whining self-pity.

      Delete
    3. I have read the big catechism. I used to be a secular Carmelite and know a bit about prayer. The section on prayer is excellent. I have been married for 43 years and know a little about sex. The section on sexuality is bad and deeply damaging. The church should keep to it's specialist subject. Celibates should be very careful when they go outside their expertise.

      Delete
    4. Yeah sure,..and what about you? Gonna try Mastermind or what?

      Delete
    5. So you have advice for celibates? - - Remind us again Jane, what did you say your two areas of expertise were? - -

      Delete
    6. I would not dream of advising celibates.

      Delete
    7. Good--a result!

      Delete
    8. Margaret, you too are good at picking and choosing what teachings of Jesus suit you. You choose to interpret literally one part of the Sermon on the Mount on killing and interpret as not to be taken literally where Jesus warned those who call their bros/sis "fool" that they will answer for it in hellfire.

      Delete
    9. Jesus used the word 'fools!' of the Pharisees (Luke 11). If it's morally ok for JC to use it, then it is morally ok for everyone else.

      You're obviously not well versed in Scripture, are you?

      Delete
    10. No it is not! He is God! He makes the rules! WE KEEP THEM! How can God go to hell??? And He explicitly said if you call your brother a fool, you will answer for it in hell fire. So Maggie, you really need to cool your jets and tame your wicked old tongue, dont' you?

      Delete
    11. What an utterly absurd and pathetic piece of nonsense, Magna Carta!

      Our Lord Jesus Christ can call "fools" whomsoever deserves it! And when God calls you a "fool", then you know you are in deep deep trouble!

      God is not bound by morality because He is incapable of wrongdoing/sin. God is the Author of Morality which is for sinful creatures, like you and I, so that we live good lives and do not offend God, who is All-Holy and infinitely perfect.

      By your words, you show yourself as lacking any awareness of the Absolute Sovereignty of Almighty God.

      The Lord Jesus Christ, by telling us we will answer in hellfire for calling another person a fool, is strictly forbidding the contemptuous and abusive scorn you exhibit often towards your brothers and sisters. Have a word with yourself - as they say.

      Delete
    12. I've had this conversation with one or both of you morons before. You're obviously incapable of learning, or you're taking the piss. Either way, faic off, the pair of you.😆

      Delete
    13. You couldn't answer their arguments then and you still can't, sure you can't, bastardo Carter? Fack away aff yerself.

      Delete
    14. Please exegete, then, MC, what Jesus meant when He said, "if you call your brother a fool you shall answer for it in hell fire". If it's not to be taken literally, what does it mean? Why did Jesus say it?

      Delete
    15. Wow! You actually used the singular, 'bastardo' instead of the plural, 'bastardos'. And here was I thinking such an obvious moron as you wouldn't have a clue. Must have been pot luck, musn't it. Yes, of course it was.😆

      Delete
    16. 13:59, one final remark on the drivel you posted: if God 'is incapable of wrongdoing/sin', then he is a prisoner of his nature and is neither free nor able to exercise freewill. Such a god could not, therefore, have personhood, for he could not be a person. And yet, Christian theology expresses not singular, but trinitarian personhood of divinity.

      Where did you study theology? No! Wait!. You didn't study theology, did you?

      Do yourself a favour: when you so obviously don't know what you are talking about, remain silent.

      Delete
    17. No Maggie, you're doing it wrong. Jesus is both fully God *and* fully man so both coexist at once. You are reducing the fullness of his divinity.
      What you're saying is Arianism.

      Delete
    18. You wouldn't know what Arianism means, pet.

      By the way, the incarnate Christ came to be tempted in order to claim victory over evil. But for this to happen, there had to be the real possibility that God himself, in the person of his son, could be tempted to sin. Otherwise, temptation here just wouldn't have been temptation, now would it? As Peter says, 'he was tempted in every way that we are, but without sin'. This doesn't mean, sweetheart, that he couldn't sin, but that he CHOSE not to sin. And, crucially, that he had the strength (divine strength) to make these choices daily.

      Oh, dear! All of this is going right over your little student's head, isn't it?

      Delete
    19. Oh, sweetheart! Your word, 'co-exist', is theologically incorrect here (it implies ontological separateness rather than fusion); in fact, it is heretical.

      (Oh, how I love schooling the ignorant. And boy! Are you ignorant?😆)

      Delete
    20. That quotation is from Hebrews, not Peter.

      Delete
  12. Just ignore him. He's an idiot. More than likely a homosexual himself and can't accept himself. Could also be acting out secretly like O'Brien, et al. King Canute comes to mind. Priests and people of that diocese should just ignore the jerk and tell to shove his "penalties" up his ass.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 10.12 Your the classic contributor that I refer to. If you don't like it you know what to do. Put up or shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I thought you'd like him. You may disagree with his teaching but at least he is consistent. Your big complaint against the Irish church is that they are hypocrites, at least this bishop is consistent.

    ReplyDelete
  15. How arrogant! Who would want to join at church which is so nasty and daming. Shame on him!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Perhaps I could add to 10.09 s comment and say the church is not a restaurant and as far as I know apart from the last supper Jesus never stuck rigidly to a menu

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good to know you never stuck rigidly to the Priesthood let alone a menu. In future don't add on to any of my contributions (10.09).

      Delete
    2. Sorry mate, you are deluding yourself to imagine you can decide who responds to you contributions - such as they are - and who can't.

      That's not the way blogs operate.

      Delete
    3. 10.09 I didn't know you cared but you must agree anonymous is a common surname. Would you prefer not to reply to my comments. I can live with that

      Delete
  17. "You're the classic contributor.." is the correct form.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And single quotation marks are the correct form. The two full stops you put after the word 'contributor' are an invention of your own. Don't tell me that 'we' have decided to use double quotation marks, because that means you are correcting others' spelling and punctuation while arbitrarily making up your own.
      Pat, I suspect that this 'contributor' is one of your detractors, trying to make it look as if the people around you are barmy.

      Delete
    2. As a completely different poster, I say the 'contributer' -is not at all making people look barmy.. they can manage that very well by themselves--in your case anyway, ha ha ha! Best laugh I got all day

      Delete
    3. @14:04
      "Contributor.." is the correct form

      Delete
  18. I agree with 11.06, the Bishop has proven to be sincere and consistent unlike others who make it up as they go along. People making up their own rules and being all things to all people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'People making up their own rules and being all things to all people.' I never cease to boggle at how many commentors on this blog can cognitively function despite obviously being braindead. The neurological textbooks will have to be urgently revised.

      11:46, you have described, to a tee, the very people you so clearly idolize: Roman Catholic bishops. From the early centuries of the Church, these Christ-betraying ****** have made up their own 'rules' in a spirit of compromise with the world and for their own convenience and security from the 'cross'.

      Delete
    2. 'People making up their own rules and being all things to all people.' I never cease to boggle at how many commentors on this blog can cognitively function despite obviously being braindead. The neurological textbooks will have to be urgently revised.

      11:46, you have described, to a tee, the very people you so clearly idolize: Roman Catholic bishops. From the early centuries of the Church, these Christ-betraying ****** have made up their own 'rules' in a spirit of compromise with the world and for their own convenience and security from the 'cross'.

      Delete
  19. Paprocki held a service of exorcism which he called

    “Prayers of Supplication and Exorcism in Reparation for the Sin of Same-Sex Marriage.”

    In announcing the event, he called gay marriage a tool of the devil designed to confuse and destroy families.

    Shades of bishops mentioned above.

    ReplyDelete
  20. What an incredible load or comments. There seems an inability to accept that this Bishop is acting in good conscience and is providing clear guidance for his diocese. Comments like ;I'd love to see his internet browsing history' tell us far more about the person posting than about the bishop.
    Gay people will just have to accept that no matter what piece of paper the state is prepared to issue them with their situation before God is objectively immoral and can never be sanctioned by the church. That is not to say that individuals can sometimes repent, and they will always be welcomed. So leave the good bishop alone, he is ministering according to the mind of the church.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The "situation" of the Roman Catholic institution in far more immoral that the situation of most gay people.

      The RC thing is a tool and a cooperator over Evil in so many ways!

      Delete
    2. How do you know he's acting 'in good conscience'? Has he told you? Are you he? Or is your imagination taking you for a walk?

      Acting in good conscience is no guarantee of acting morally, you ass. Paul the Apostle believed he acted in good conscience when he oversaw the stoning of Stephen. (Paul's defence before the Herodian king, Agrippa, actually implies that he was involved in other such killings.)

      Paul repented of his murderous past. Will this American asshole repent of his? ( Yes, 'murderous past', because he will murder the faith of some, perhaps many.)

      Delete
    3. Yes his 'exorcism' proves his true perspective, which is to invalidate gays, it is NOT to affirm Catholic teaching.
      His only consistency in this diatribe is consistently to say 'no no no no, or be punished'.
      No attempt to educate the consciences of his clergy and laity in the light of Catholic teaching, just a telling off. He is treating his flock like school children and acting like the oldest boy in the school who has been made a prefect.
      The problem with this decree is not that he is acting in accordance with Catholic orthodoxy but that it shows his attitude to his flock and his idea of his role.
      Perhaps at the very least he could get some advice on how to publish stuff without coming across as a little Hitler.

      Delete
  21. After fifteen years as Bishop of Springfield, Daniel Ryan resigned on October 19, 1999.[2] In 2002 there were new allegations that Ryan had solicited sex from a teenaged boy in 1984, but the Sangamon County state's attorney could not prosecute because the statute of limitations had expired.[3] Having continued to administer Confirmation and celebrate Mass, he voluntarily agreed to suspend his public ministry.[4] In 2006 an investigative report declared that Ryan "engaged in improper sexual conduct and used his office to conceal his activities" and fostered "a culture of secrecy...that discouraged faithful priests from coming forward with information about misconduct" by other clergy in the diocese.[7]He resided at a senior living facility inNaperville, Illinois.[4] Ryan died on December 31, 2015.[8]

    ReplyDelete
  22. Did Paprocki refuse him a Christian burial?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "There were no immediate plans for a funeral Mass. Ryan donated his body to science, a source confirmed."

      Poproki did pray for God's mercy on Bishop Ryan.

      Delete
  23. What is wrong with Fr Michael Dempsey who has been assistant chaplain at the RVH? He has been in hospital there for the past 11 months very ill. We were asked to pray for him at the Clonard Novena. When people asked if they could visit him we were told that because of the nature of his illness no visitors were allowed. He has been a good chaplain to all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is a truly wonderful gentleman, who faithfully lives out the Redemptorist Charism. God grant him a speedy recovery.

      Delete
  24. Pat would it be possible to find out where is Right Rev Cuthbert Madden abbot of Ampleforth. I know there was some scandels at ampleforth being investigated at the end of 2016. We heard in April no further action was being taken. So where is the Abbot. I was at an Ordination in Ampleforth earlier in the month , he wasnt there , an ordination is probaly one of the biggest events in the abbey and he was missing still. the Prior of the abbey stood in place. So where is he? where is he hiding? there was at a time mentioned he was a bishop in waiting for a diocese , is this now gone/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dom Cuthbert has stepped aside from his duties while the police investigate allegations of sexual abuse, which he denies. It is a point of fact though that since 1996 three Ampleforth monks and a lay teacher have convicted of sex offences.

      Delete
    2. Last November, the North Yorkshire Constabulory announced that no action was to be taken in regard to the Abbot of Ampleforth.

      Delete
  25. Bishop Pat, any further news from Galway and Clonfert Re: Byrnes and Geraghty

    ReplyDelete
  26. Any word on the priest in the De La Salle Case? And what the action taken was?

    The dogs in the street know about the Cork religious order guy where no action was taken. Like Paprocki, his profile is ultra-Catholic. And like O'Brien, the skeletons are already out of the cupboard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He now resides in a building that houses a secondary school.

      Delete
    2. Is that fact concealed from the school authorities - board, headteacher, parents council?

      Delete
    3. Around the time of the appointment a number of anonymous letters were sent concerning this matter. They were sent to the school principal, his superiors and the local bishop amount others.

      Delete
    4. Nulty appointed him curate of the local parish with his provincials approval, which of course means interaction with the parish schools.

      Delete
    5. That wouldn't happen to be the same secondary college that had a peado headmaster would it?

      Delete
    6. The very same.
      Joke: what does a religous order do when they get a complaint from a secondery school about one of their priest's?
      They send him to live in a secondery school!
      O wait that's not actually funny.

      Delete
  27. what stipend do you normally get to say a mass

    ReplyDelete
  28. And what did you eat for your breakfast and when did you last change your.. Not that we'd dream of being too personal and intrusive of course!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hopefully, we'll soon get back to the serious business of... scandal.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Obviously this news item is a fake: the real Springfield doesn't have a cathedral - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield_(The_Simpsons)
    Perhaps the fallout from the nuclear reactor has gone to this man's head?

    ReplyDelete
  31. At this point in life....death.... it doesn't really matter if me or you has a Catholic funeral
    We are dead at this stage....nothing matters anymore
    Funerals are all about money...wouldn't you agree ??????????

    ReplyDelete
  32. Pat, any word on the priest in the De La Salle affair?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Just a few years ago, the actions of this Bishop wouldn't have raised an eyebrow inside or outside the Church because that is what it teaches. When did the teaching change? It didn't. God bless him. (EL)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Catechetically, 'the Church' teaches absolutely none of the things you stupidly claimed.

      Where does it teach that gay people should be denied Catholic burial?

      Where does it teach that gay people should not be allowed to read liturgically at Mass?

      Where does it teach that gay people should both be denied reception of the Eucharist and the dispensing of it?

      And so on.

      These prohibitions are purely the expression of one man's vindictiveness (and, quite possibly, an indicator of his own closeted, self-loathing homosexuality ).

      Delete
  34. What planet is this Bishop Paprocki living on. 50% of the priests are gay anyway. He's best described as a sad individual. Unfortunately his position will harm and hurt many people and some will take their own lives.

    ReplyDelete