A friend sent me a note with a link to an article on a Kansas City, MO, news site. I wrote on this a few days ago, but am just returning to it now.
The note from my friend included this (about the priest in question):
That is his first solo parish assignment. Ordained May 2011. Spent associate year at our Novus Ordo Parish.
The article (about the priest and lesbians):
Area same-sex couple denied Communion
An area woman was denied Communion at her mother’s funeral [So far this sounds like the Guarnizo case in Washington DC a couple years ago. HERE] last month after a priest new to her parish learned she was in a same-sex relationship.
Carol Parker and her partner of nearly 20 years, Josie Martin, live in the small town of Chula, Mo., and had been attending St. Columban Catholic Church in Chillicothe, Mo., for 12 years when Ms. Parker’s mother passed away on Dec. 26. The obituary listed Ms. Parker as a surviving daughter and also mentioned her partner.
Later that week, Ms. Parker received a call from Father Benjamin Kneib, informing her that she and Ms. Martin would not be allowed to receive Communion at the Dec. 30 funeral. [Unlike the Guarnizo Affair, this priest was not ambushed by lesbians in the sacristy immediately before Mass.]
“It was a shock to hear him say that,” Ms. Parker said. “I never expected that, especially at my mother’s funeral.” [Because your mother's funeral is ... what? Not Mass? The Church's teaching about being properly disposed to receive Communion, and the responsibility of the priest to avoid scandal and to instruct, etc., ceases to apply? If it would not be proper to receive at any ordinary Mass on some other day, why would be be okay to receive at the funeral Mass? Simply because of "emotions"? "Sentiment"?]
She added that at the funeral, most in attendance chose not to take Communion out of respect for her and Ms. Martin. [Out of "respect" for them?] Despite this show of solidarity, the women no longer feel welcome at the church and have begun visiting another an hour from their home. ["No longer feel welcome." sniff.]
“That was our faith community. It really took away a lot of things for us,” Ms. Parker said. “He (Father Kneib) would still like to see us there, but I don’t feel like I’m welcome if I can’t take part in the main focus of the Mass.” [Ehem... you can take part in the main focus of the Mass. You just can't receive Communion.]
[And we see more of their true colors.] She provided PROMO, a Kansas City-based advocacy organization for the LGBT community, with a Jan. 1 follow-up letter Father Kneib sent her in which he further explained his decision. [So, their goal is to force the priest, the Church, to say that it is okay for them to live in a scandalous relationship and still go to Communion. They don't care about what the Church teaches. They want it their way.] According to a press release from the organization, the letter stated that “having a same-sex attraction is not sinful in and of itself [True. It isn't sinful in itself. But it is a deviation from God's design.] … it is only when a person moves from attraction to willfully acting upon it that the situation becomes a sinful matter.” [True. So, what they are saying is that these two are living together... they are just room/house mates? Separate... you know...? Is that what they are saying?]
Father Kneib also apologized to Ms. Parker that the events that had transpired took place at the time of her mother’s funeral. When contacted by the News-Press, Father Kneib had no comment.
Ms. Parker said she hopes that the priest might “open his eyes and fully receive the LGBT community into the church.” [Because he is the one who is blind.]
“We’re all God’s children, and we have every right to receive Communion,” she says. [No, you do not have an unfettered right to receive Holy Communion. Particularly if there is risk of public scandal.... which they have now made plenty of.] “Even the pope has said, ‘Who am I to judge?’” [That phrase again. In no way can that phrase be taken as approval of the scandal caused by a known homosexual couple regularly receiving Communion. No. Way.]
I am going to back the priest on this.
Look. There is a possibility that these two women, lesbian attraction notwithstanding, are just housemates. Sure. That’s possible. But that is not what the rest of the world is going to assume. Thus, given that their relationship is know to people – at least well-enough known that Father learned about it, the priest did the right thing to contact them. Perhaps you could argue that he might have met with him ahead of time. Sure. There are any number of things he might have done differently. But he did reach out to them. More than once, it seems.
Also, this seems not to have been a “test case”, as I believe happened in Guarnizo Affair. I believe that in the case of Fr. Guarnizo, they set him up, hoping for some sort of confrontation, so that they could have a reason to whine to the press and hurt the Church.
LifeSite informs us that the priest is getting some blowback! I’m shocked!
On WOG Blog:
Fr. Kneib’s follow up letter to Parker stating that “having a same-sex attraction is not sinful in and of itself … it is only when a person moves from attraction to willfully acting upon it that the situation becomes a sinful matter,” was immediately taken to the local gay activist’s office. [Because they want to force the Church to their will. But there's more...]
In the letter, he also apologized that this had to happen at her mother’s funeral even though [NB] it was certainly not the priest’s fault that Parker neglected to confess this sin for 20 years. [Do I hear an "Amen!"?] Perhaps she is just poorly catechized [hah] but even that is hardly an excuse when the Church’s position on homosexuality is under constant scrutiny by the media in these days of advancing same-sex “rights”. Surely she could have picked up at least an inkling of the fact that her relationship is in violation of Catholic teaching on same-sex attraction. [Exactly.]