From the spasmodic reactions of hysterical homosexualists and their abettors, you would think that the chancery personnel in the Diocese of Madison were clubbing babies… no, that wouldn’t be so bad…. baby seals … no, gay baby seals and eating their beating hearts … while cranking up sinful air conditioning…. in October… in Wisconsin.
And then denying them funerals.
However, what the Diocese of Madison has suggested to pastors of parishes in regard to funerals for manifest sinners (which includes homosexual couples) is entirely consistent with the Church’s laws. Moreover, what was sent out to the priests of the diocese – including a Judas – was judicious, prudent and pastoral to a fault.
Here is canonist Ed Peters on the matter from his exceptionally helpful blog In The Light Of The Law:
A note on Madison’s funeral policy
One might be willing to have an informed and dispassionate discussion (that pretty much rules out the internet) [most of the internet] about whether Canon 1184, (which in mildly obtuse terms denies ecclesiastical funeral rites to “manifest sinners who cannot be granted ecclesiastical funerals without public scandal of the faithful”) reflects a good understanding of what ecclesiastical funerals do and don’t accomplish for the dead and their familiars*, [a matter for legitimate discussion] or about whether these points are generally correctly understood by the faithful, [I’m pretty sure they aren’t – but this is now a “teaching moment”.] but about whether persons who enter civil “same-sex marriage” qualify as “manifest sinners” under canon law, no, that is simply not a question. [Marriages are public matters. Homosexual unions that ape marriages are scandalous.]
Analysis of the terms used in Canon 1184 essentially tracks that used to understand Canon 915 and, as has been demonstrated many times, persons who enter “same-sex marriage” plainly manifest their opposition to crucial and infallible Church teaching that restricts marriage to one man and one woman. [OBVIOUS.] The positions taken by Springfield IL Bp. Paprocki and by the Diocese of Madison, restricting funerals in such cases and outlining possible exceptions to those restrictions, are thoroughly consistent with the canon law of the Catholic Church. + + + [BAM… drop the keyboard!]
* “I should like to interject a comforting remark at this stage. It should not be forgotten that [even] an error in this matter of denying Christian burial has none of the consequences that could arise from a refusal to grant the sacraments. This law is purely of the external forum, and the external state of the soul is in no way determined by it. Where the reception of the sacraments may mean the difference between salvation and damnation, Christian burial cannot decide the eternal status of a soul which is already before God, and beyond the power of the Church either to save or to condemn.” Charles Kerin, “Christian Burial Problems” The Jurist 15 (1955) 252-282, at 262.