A priest and a lesbian walk into a bar . . .

Earlier this month, a news report stated that a Roman Catholic priest had been suspended from some of his duties because he refused to serve communion to a lesbian.

Well, there is much more to this story than was reported. Apparently, the lesbian used the occasion of her mother’s funeral to do her impersonation of Sandra Fluke.

In short, she deliberately violated the protocols of the Roman Catholic Mass in order to draw attention to her lesbian lifestyle, which is something that the Roman Catholic Church does not condone. Instead of conforming to established Catholic protocols pertaining to the Mass, the woman wanted Catholic officials to conform to her desires.  The only thing missing in this story is Gloria Allred.

Well, now the priest has given his side of the story. Once you have read it, you will – in the words of the great Paul Harvey – “know the rest of the story.”


*  *  *  *  *  *  *


In a related matter, plenty of people are expressing their support for the above-mentioned Catholic priest, including a homosexual man who is not Catholic. Sadly, another of the priest’s supporters used the occasion of the homosexual’s support to belittle Christians who are not members of the Roman Catholic Church.

Well, what that second person did is wrong.  If you are going to hijack another person’s story (the priest’s story in this case) in order to accuse non-Catholic Christians of not being Christians, then have the courage to do so on a website where Catholics and non-Catholics can debate in a neutral forum, such as Beliefnet or Debating Christianity.

A priest, a rabbi, and Sandra Fluke walk into a bar...
Mayor Emanuel Puts Himself in GOP Primary Race, Joins 'Republican War on Women' Lie
  • JWH

    I disagree with the Catholic Church’s attitude on gays and lesbians, but it is the Catholic Church’s right to hold those views.  It is also the Catholic Church’s right to withhold sacraments if it so chooses.  

    Beyond that … My first thought, even before the priest’s decision to go to the press, was that he was right to withhold communion if his understanding of the Church doctrine indicated he should do so.  

    As to the rest, it is an internal Catholic matter that does not concern me.

    • Although I am not Catholic, I understand the source of “the Catholic Church’s attitude on gays and lesbians.” It is a little something called the New Testament. What it says about homosexual behavior (not feelings) is a part of Christian theology.

      I don’t expect non-Christians to conform to Christian theology. I would, however, prefer that they at least acknowledge where the theology comes from. When people use the New Testament as a standard for determining right and wrong, they don’t have an “attitude”. Instead, they are simply conforming to the scriptural standards of their faith.

      The people with an “attitude” are those who want the flesh to be given whatever it wants, and thus, insist that others abandon the standards of their faith. The lesbian mentioned in my post has an “attitude”. Sandra Fluke has an “attitude”.

      • KenWD

        Well said.  

      • JWH

        Conspiracy Brother?  Is that you?

  • herddog505

    Do you suppose that a pack of democrats will stage another sham “hearing” so that this woman can whine to them about how nasty the Catholic Church is and how her rights are being violated and how she hands “friends” who suffer some sort of emotional trauma because they aren’t allowed to take Communion?


    I wonder if anybody has asked the well-known expert on Catholic theology, Nancy Pelosi, what she thinks of the priest’s decision?

    • 1crappie2

      Maybe Obama’s beloved Chicago ebonics strutting priest (name slipped my memory) can explain all this to Obama and the messiah’s (small “m”) worshippers) where is that jive-talking confused man these days anyway? Certainly he’s not a Cardinal Dolan advisor (thank you Lord)

  • The_Queen_of_France

    How soon till Eric Holder’s Department of “Justice” files a suit on this womyn’s behalf against the Catholic Church?

  • W

    Sorry for jumping subjects but I wonder why many in the MSMblogs, blogs are not having so many  write-ups, outrage and calling Obama an idiot for misquoting former President Rutherford B. Hayes and getting his history very wrong? http://now.msn.com/now/0315-obama-misquotes-rutherford-hayes.aspxhttp://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/03/rutherford-b-hayes-obama-telephone.htmlOh that right. That standard only applies to people like Palin who get slam even when she gets it right. Who should be held to a higher standard the President or a punditformer Governor?

    • Anyone with half a brain already understands that Obama is a slick-talking huckster who got everything he has handed to him.  Those who are convinced he is some sort of special genius are too stupid and/or evil to be persuaded.

      • Anyone with half a brain already understands that Obama is a slick-talking huckster who got everything he has handed to him.  

           In other words, *it’s not news* – just the same old Obama BS 

      • jb

         Those of with full brains know better, however.

        Had everything handed to him. Seriously? Growing up without a father in the 1960’s as half black? Graduating from Harvard Law, and then becoming a respected teacher at Columbia who’s so impressive he’s offered tenure before he’s 35?

        Do you know how hard it was for him to defeat Hillary – the amount of connections, money and pull she had?

        I don’t even know why I bother. I just wish you guys would actually look at facts for a single second before you spouted off. Sheesh.

        • 1crappie2

          Fairy tale I’m afraid. The Marxist in chief didn’t earn much, but love and funding, with doors held open for him from the left and a free ride all the way up to  to the White House. But you know that (read Brietbart for the story) but like the pro-abortion left, (abnd right) choice is more important than life (or truth)

          • jb

             If it’s a fairy tale, which of the above facts I stated aren’t true?

  •  This woman is a disgrace.  To use her own mother’s funeral to try to score some political points against her mother’s religion demonstrates a lack of moral character.

    If she had just kept her mouth shut, she would not have been refused the Eucharist.  Even if the priest saw you sin this morning, he has no idea whether you have confessed and been reconciled in the interim – this is also why people like Pelosi aren’t refused.  But if you are going to stick it in his face, of course he is going to refuse, he has no choice.  Typically he would bless you instead, making the sign of the cross with the host.

    • That is what I thought. The woman could have followed the standard protocols, but she deliberately made a scene, as if she was challenging the priest to do something that would make him look bad. Well, it worked, at least for a short while.

    • iwogisdead

      I’m still confused on why anyone who supports abortion (Democrats) are allowed to take communion. I understand confession, but wouldn’t a repudiation of the Democratic Party be required?

      •  They aren’t supposed to, but in most cases the priest has no way of knowing.  Especially in larger parishes, the person may have just left the confession booth and been reconciled.  You get the benefit of the doubt:  if you abuse that and receive communion when you are not entitled, God will deal with you later.

        • 1crappie2

          Unfortunately some priests agree with her -that Marxist element from the “spirit of Vatican II,” and those “peace priests” as well as the heritical “we’re all going to heaven” ones haven’t all been swept out by JPII or God yet. Maybe you missed that scandal at Notre Dame-Georgetown- and far too many on the USCCB -“BD” (Before Dolan).

      • jb

         Oh, some nonsense to do with Christ forgiving anyone and loving everyone.

    • jb

       OH, yes. Blame the victim. How dare she be offended that the alleged messenger of Christ’s mercy rejects and dismisses her in public, on the same day she’s trying to deal with putting her mother in the freakin’ dirt.

      May such a thing never happen to you, sincerely. But if something similar did happen to you, or someone you love, I guarantee you would have a more understanding outlook.

      • 1crappie2

        Compasson is so selective when it comes to God and His Church.
        It didn’t “happen ” to her, any more than an abortion just “happens to an innocent defensless pre-born. Maybe it was a good thing some would call it her”Choice”

        • jb

           I see. So a priest treating a woman awfully and publicly humiliating her on the saddest day of her life is fine, because other people do something you disagree with.

          How exactly does that follow? I’d love to see a flow chart of that, if you could.

          • jim_m

            Oh yes.  She was so heartbroken that she thought it appropriate to use the funeral as a stage to advance her agenda over the conserns of people who were actually grieving.

            I don’t care what you think of the validity of her position.  It was the inappropriate time and place to do this.  I suppose for the arrogant and insenstive left the feeling that they are invicibly right gives them carte balnche to offend and trample other people’s rights.

            Sorry, but the real world doesn’t work that way.  Perhaps you should get your heads out of your “reality based” community and come back to the world everyone else lives in. Stop crapping on everyone else and actually try to consider the feelngs and needs of others.

          • jb

            She was so heartbroken that she thought it appropriate to use the funeral as a stage to advance her agenda over the conserns of people who were actually grieving.

            “Advance her agenda” by telling people what a jerk the priest was?

            Wow, this is amazing. The priest isn’t “advancing his agenda” at all, right? But gosh, her not liking it and actually **saying this out loud** is horribly advancing her agenda.

            To what? Talk openly in public, even if it was about something a priest did??? The horrors!

            Sorry, I don’t think religious leaders have any more or less rights to their opinions than anyone else. If he treated her in a way she didn’t like, she has the absolute right to complain about it.

            I mean, talk about the “real world doesn’t work that way”.

            And how does pointing out that a priest crapped on her, make it **her** that’s crapping on people??

            And, “arrogant and insensitive”. That’s pretty funny in the context. The priest isn’t arrogant and insensitive for denying her communion and publicly humiliating her, when they’re at a funeral service for her **mother**?? But us “on the left” who think that she at least had a right to be mad about this, are “arrogant and insensitive”?

            Wow. Thanks for blowing my mind.

            You tell me – Jesus, who broke bread with prostitutes, tax collectors and sinners. What would he have done?

  • Since we’ve now settled that the priest was in the right and the woman was disrespectful to both the church and her own mother on the day of her funeral, and is presumably Obama-loving scum of the earth, let’s lighten this up a bit in the spirit of the title.

    A priest, a rabbi, and an atheist walk into a bar. 
    The bartender says, “Hey, is this some kind of joke?”

    A hot dog, a hamburger, and a baked potato walk into a bar. 
    The bartender says, “Sorry – we don’t serve food here.”

    A woman with a white bulldog on a leash walks into a bar. 
    The bartender says, “Hey, you can’t bring that pig in here!”
    The woman says, “It’s a dog, you idiot!”
    The bartender says, “I was talking to the dog.”

    • jb

       Since we’ve now settled that the priest was in the right and the woman
      was disrespectful to both the church and her own mother on the day of
      her funeral, and is presumably Obama-loving scum of the earth,


      That was actually funnier than the joke.

  • Julie Pascal

    In many churches everyone takes communion, no matter who or how old they are, and it’s all very informal.  Communion in those churches is not a *sacrament* because the church doesn’t have *any* sacraments.  I grew up in a conservative Lutheran church.   We had two sacraments: communion and baptism.  The Catholics have a number of additional sacraments.

    In the church I grew up in, visitors were only invited tentatively to participate in communion, and then only if they agreed completely with the doctrine of the church.  The pre-communion rituals were somber and contained warning after warning that this was serious stuff, and if you hadn’t asked for forgiveness and humbled yourself, that taking communion was a dire sin.

    Because a sacrament is different from a celebration or remembrance or act of obedience or something to do to be blessed.   And the theologians can argue all day about transubstantiation or whatever, but the bottom line is that if something is a sacrament it is sacred.   It involves a real, I’ll say “transaction”, by God to you.   You don’t lie about it.

    And if you are one of the many many many Christians or others who view someone else’s sacrament as merely an observance or celebration or remembrance or whatever… the only respectful thing to do is to *respectfully* not participate.

    • JWH

      I’m not Christian.  Atheist in fact, although my family belongs to a mainline Protestant denomination.  On those very rare occasions that I accompany my parents to church, I pointedly do not take the communion, even though the minister makes it clear that communion is open to anybody who was baptized in a Christian church (as I was as an infant).  I’m not Christian, so participating in the communion would be disrespectful to those who take it seriously.

      • 1crappie2

        Actually, The Catholic Church would probably view that as far more than “disrespectful” It would be the most serious of sins pointed directly against God. But your point was on the right track, thanks.

        • JWH

          Oh, yes, I’m certainly sure they would … but if I don’t believe in god, then sinning against that god is irrelevant to me. What is relevant to me is 1) respecting the beliefs of those around me and 2) being honest, but not pushy, about my own theology.

  • GarandFan

    Just another of those who “believe in tolerance”.  And WON’T TOLERATE another point of view.

    Remember back when gays and lesbians wanted ‘tolerance’?  Now they DEMAND acceptance. 

    • 1crappie2

      How soon before rejection of all other Judeo-Christian “lifestyles” as evil.

      From the high traffic of anti- social-con (code word for God) hatred on the most conservative web sites- it won’t be long before the most shovel ready jobs will be re-building the cataccombs for Christians to hide in.

      I’m not jesting in the least.

  • When it comes to religion, I’m like Ben Franklin in believing that I care not if a man worships one god or ten, as long as it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.  

    It is spiritually sickening to me to see people with obvious deal-breaking situations demand that a 2,000 year old institution abandon its foundational document and do what makes them, personally, feel good.  This woman demands that the priest sanctify her sin and consecrate it with the sacrament, which to the priest, would be feeding damnation to her soul.  She condemns herself, like the man who prays in public to praised of men that is spoken of in the New Testament.  The priest is a faithful servant.  Salvation via The Catholic Church is available for her, just not on her terms.

    • jb

       Whereas this priest, who has dedicated his life to bringing people the saving grace of Christ’s love and forgiveness no matter what their sins, chooses to publicly humiliate this woman on the worst day of her life.

      How dare people expect changes from institutions. How horrible of them.

  • RichFader

    A priest and a lesbian walk into a bar, and the bartender says, “Is it Episcopal General Convention time again, Rev?”

    • JWH

      Wherever you find four Episcopalians, you’ll always find a fifth.

  • mikegiles

    Am I missing something here? If you don’t want to conform to the beliefs and standards of the Catholic Church, why remain a Catholic? Are you so self involved that you think a two thousand year old institution is going to change, simply to please you?

    • jb

       Indeed. Why try and change any injustice? And why try and influence and change any community that has people you know and love?

      What a horrible person this woman is. I hope she’s happy that her daring to complain about her treatment is hurting God’s feelings something awful.

  • JWH
  • Patrick_A_NonnyMouse

    to jb:

    For the priest to give communion to a person he KNEW to be in a state of sin would be a COMPOUNDING of that sin.  Check out Ann Barnhardt’s explanation at barnhardt.biz (no permalink, you’ll have to scroll down to the March 4th entry “On the Lesbian being denied Communion”).  As Ann, a true Catholic warrior, notes: “…  They {the Enemy of the Church and his supporters} won’t be satisfied until every Catholic priest desecrates the
    Eucharist himself by attempting to force him to give the Eucharist to
    the enemies of Christ.”

    You don’t see a violation of “Catholic House Rules” as a sin.  OK, fine.  But Catholics do.  There are certain rules regarding the sacraments of the Church which they HAVE to follow; no ifs or buts, no leeway, no compromise.  If a self-proclaimed Catholic can’t live by those rules, he/she is free to find a religion that’s more accommodating and inclusive.   (Please note, I think this woman showed GREAT disrespect to her deceased mother by attempting this little publicity stunt at her mom’s funeral.) 

    • jb

      This separates into two arguments for me.

      1. Was the priest right to do this, according to the tenets of his religion?

      2. Was the woman right to be upset and say so, loudly?

      We can all differ as to point # 1. Theologians can discuss being in a “state” of sin vs. the innate sinfulness of all people until they die and finally find out for sure what’s on the other side of the Grim Reaper.

      But as to # 2, I think it’s pretty clear that this woman was offended unnecessarily in public, in the middle of grieving over the death of her MOTHER.

      So, yes, the Priest has every right to to his opinion in the conducting of his duties.

      And the woman has every right to be upset at her treatment.