Lesbian Couple in Wyo. Denied Communion

[Amelia]

Lesbian Couple in Wyo. Denied Communion

By KATHLEEN MILLER

Associated Press Writer

Apr 5, 2007

GILLETTE, Wyo. (AP) -- Leah Vader and Lynne Huskinson, a lesbian couple who got married in Canada last August, sent a letter recently to their state legislator decrying a Wyoming bill that would deny recognition of same-sex marriages. The lawmaker read the letter on the floor of the Legislature.

Soon after, the local paper interviewed the couple on Ash Wednesday and ran a story and pictures of them with ash on their foreheads, a mark of their Roman Catholic faith.

It wasn't long after that that the couple received a notice from their parish church telling them they have been barred from receiving Communion.

"If all this stuff hadn't hit the newspaper, it wouldn't have been any different than before - nobody would have known about it," said the couple's parish priest at St. Matthew's, the Rev. Cliff Jacobson. "The sin is one thing. It's a very different thing to go public with that sin."

Catholics deemed sinners in the eyes of the church are sometimes taken aside and privately advised not to take Communion. But Cheyenne Bishop David Ricken, gay Catholic organizations and a national church spokeswoman said they could not recall any previous instance of a U.S. bishop denying the sacrament to a gay couple in writing.

Now Huskinson and Vader say they are struggling to reconcile their devotion to the church with their devotion to each other.

"You spend half your time defending your gayness to Catholics," Vader said, "and the other half of your time defending your Catholicism to gays."

The couple, who regularly attended Mass and took Communion, have not been back to St. Matthew's since they received the letter a month and a half ago. Vader said they did not want to make a scene.

The 46-year-old newlyweds - Vader is a supervisor at a recycling center, Huskinson a coal miner - ran afoul of a sort of don't-ask-don't-tell policy on the church's part.

"I told my wife in good conscience that if I had known those ladies, and we'd have been having a beer, I'd have just told them to keep everything to themselves," parish music director John Chick said. He added that once news like this hits the papers, "someone's forced to deal with it now, aren't they?"

The parish priest said that after the couple put their engagement and marriage announcements in the local paper, he ran reminders of the church's teachings in the parish bulletin as a warning.

After the Ash Wednesday story, the priest sent this letter: "It is with a heavy heart, in obedience to the instruction of Bishop David Ricken, that I must inform you that, because of your union and your public advocacy of same-sex unions, that you are unable to receive Communion."

The bishop said the couple's sex life constitutes a grave sin, "and the fact that it became so public, that was their choice."

Last fall, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops overwhelmingly approved new guidelines that say parishes should welcome gays while telling them to be celibate because the church considers their sexuality "disordered." The bishops said that anyone who knowingly persists in sinful behavior, such as gay sex or using artificial contraception, should refrain from taking Communion.

Professor Carl Raschke, chairman of religious studies at the University of Denver, said of the Cheyenne bishop's decision: "It's no more surprising that the Catholic Church would deny Communion to an openly gay couple than a Muslim mosque would deny access to somebody who ate pork."

Sister Mary Ann Walsh, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the church allows local bishops to handle decisions on who may take Communion, so there is no record of how many have been barred from receiving the sacrament.

Walsh said most cases she has heard of involved public figures. During the 2004 presidential campaign, the St. Louis archbishop Raymond Burke said he would deny Communion to John Kerry, a Catholic who supports abortion rights.

Vader said the couple never made any secret of their relationship. She pointed to statuettes of two kissing Dutch girls in front of their single-wide trailer home. She also said that the couple posed for a church directory family photo with Vader's children from a previous marriage, and that the church has sent mail to both of them at the same address for years.

Huskinson questioned why Catholics having premarital sex and using birth control are not barred from receiving Communion, too. But the parish priest said the difference is this: The other Catholics are "not going around broadcasting, `Hey I'm having sex outside of marriage' or `I'm using birth control.'"

[olger]

"The 46-year-old newlyweds.."

gag

[Dr. Shane]

Isn't it nice to belong to a church that practices open communion? Jesus allow Judas to participate in the last supper. I don't see that we have a right to deny anyone communion.

Now church discipline is another matter. I think if the same thing were to happen in an Adventist church, the two would be subject to being disfellowshipped. But, evenso, they would still be allowed to take part in communion.

[olger]

"I think if the same thing were to happen in an Adventist church, the two would be subject to being disfellowshipped."

I certainly hope so.

[Neil D]

Quote:

"I think if the same thing were to happen in an Adventist church, the two would be subject to being disfellowshipped."

I certainly hope so.

Hmmmmmmm.........

You know, I think that all conservatives need to be disfellowshipped. They are always putting people down, and they are not showing love when they are publically exclusive....How can you be showing love when you are publically exclusive??? They gossip sooo much, and tell others the rights and wrongs of others and yet forget to look at themselves and moderate thier responses...They can not even live up to thier own standards.... Man, what a bunch of people that show the unloving attitude toward others.....

I wonder what Jesus would've said.....

John 13:35 (New International Version)

By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

[/TIC]

Please note as the above does not necessarily reflect the views of the writer, but rather to show that one can not exclude one group of peoples without excluding another group, and problably one that hits a bit closer to home....

[Dr. Shane]

Disfellowshipping done properly is an act of love. To ignore or accept the sin is not an act of love but an act of cowardice. That is not to say all disfellowshipping is done in love as it should be. Sadly Satan normally has us at one of the two extremes, running people out of the church or letting sin remain unrebuked.

[olger]

"You know, I think that all conservatives need to be disfellowshipped. They are always putting people down, and they are not showing love when they are publically exclusive....How can you be showing love when you are publically exclusive??? They gossip sooo much, and tell others the rights and wrongs of others and yet forget to look at themselves and moderate thier responses...They can not even live up to thier own standards.... Man, what a bunch of people that show the unloving attitude toward others....."

:)

[Taylor]

:)

But it is true that many conservatives and liberals both need to be kinder and not gossip. :)

[there buster]

They sent a letter to the legislature, and they were interviewed in the local paper.

I've been interviewed, and I know how it happens. If they hadn't wanted to be interviewed it wouldn't have happened.

They were photographed with ash on their foreheads, bringing their religion to the fore.

They left the local priest with no choice.

From their perspective, it was a no lose situation. Either they got communion, and thus tacit approval of their arrangement, or they would be denied, and could claim victim status.

Since they forced the issue, they have no justification for complaining.

[Woody]

Disfellowshipping done properly is an act of love. To ignore or accept the sin is not an act of love but an act of cowardice. That is not to say all disfellowshipping is done in love as it should be. Sadly Satan normally has us at one of the two extremes, running people out of the church or letting sin remain unrebuked.

I agree that we should point out sin and learn from mistakes. WE are not to judge the sinner ... just the sin. We are ALL sinners. So if we have to disfellowship sinners ... I will be the first to volunteer.

The rebuke should come from God. He is the judge. Not us.

Sorry ... there is NOTHING loving about disfellowshipping no matter how you do it. I consider it the greatest of sins.

Shane the fact that you sin ... is in no way saying that the church condones your sin. In fact the preacher speaks weekly about condemning the sins you commit. He just doesn't condemn you personally. Is that what you are asking for?

[lazarus]

I suspect this is Redwood hyperbole but anyway......

To disfellowship someone can be an act of love simply because its an act of discipline. Of course Redwood you would agree that to discipline a child can be an act of love.

Too often, however, church discipline, the way its generally practiced often makes matters worse and makes it hard for individuals to come back to the church.

I think I would have done the same as this priest.

[Liz]

Quote:

"I told my wife in good conscience that if I had known those ladies, and we'd have been having a beer, I'd have just told them to keep everything to themselves," parish music director John Chick said. He added that once news like this hits the papers, "someone's forced to deal with it now, aren't they?"

I liked this part, where the parish music director would be having beer with them while discusssing how to get around the church policy.

Liz

[Dr. Shane]

I have seen disfellowshipping done in a loving manner which resulted in the sinner repenting and returning to the church. Once was the case of my mother and the other was the case of my sister-in-law (which I didn't think was necessary).

Disfellowshipping is not to be done for ordinary sin but for cases when the sinner is in open rebellion. For example, if I struggle with the sin of uncontrolled anger and the county takes my children away for child abuse. If when counseled about the issue by the church I justify my actions and refuse to admit I am in the wrong, then the church should take actions to disfellowship me. If however, I admit I have a problem and submit to counseling or whatever treatment is available, then the church should not disfellowship me.

[olger]

But it is true that many conservatives and liberals both need to be kinder and not gossip.

Yes indeed.

[olger]

[quote=Redwood

The rebuke should come from God. He is the judge. Not us.

Sorry ... there is NOTHING loving about disfellowshipping no matter how you do it. I consider it the greatest of sins.

[Woody]

As you probably know Olger ... I don't believe in membership period. Therefore we should not be put in the postion of judging David Koresh. But ... for the answer that you want ... NO I would not disfellowship or sit in judgment of anyone.

We think we can make the church pure by kicking out those who we deem sinners. I am sorry but we can't. We are all sinners. The wheat and the tares are to grow together until the Harvest. They are to have the full advantage of the sun. Ellen White says that the tares are clearly identified as sinners. But we are not to separate ourselves from them.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

I suspect this is Redwood hyperbole but anyway......

To disfellowship someone can be an act of love simply because its an act of discipline. Of course Redwood you would agree that to discipline a child can be an act of love.

Too often' date=' however, church discipline, the way its generally practiced often makes matters worse and makes it hard for individuals to come back to the church.

I think I would have done the same as this priest.[/quote']

Discipline comes from God ... the only fair and rightful judge of our lives and our hearts. He is our Father. Our fellow members may be our brothers and sisters ... but discipline is not the job of siblings. It is the job of the parents.

[olger]

I for one, am grateful that our church had the alacrity to to disfellowship David Koresh!

This statement is puzzling. "We think we can make the church pure by kicking out those who we deem sinners. I am sorry but we can't. We are all sinners. The wheat and the tares are to grow together until the Harvest. They are to have the full advantage of the sun. Ellen White says that the tares are clearly identified as sinners. But we are not to separate ourselves from them."

Questions for you:

1) If "we are all sinners" and "the tares are clearly identified as sinners" then who is the wheat? Your attempt to classify the entire bride of Christ as tares is no doubt praiseworthy, but regretfully however you fail to explain how universal statements of sinhhood (my word) can simultaneously result in purity. Jesus is not coming back to marry a whore (strong word). He is coming back to marry a pure bride.

2) I agree that wholesale expunging of people is not profitable, but you & I must still account for the injunction of the Lord to hold our members accountable. I need it. You need it. The difference between us is that you seem to have purchased the "don't judge motif" from a world that is passing away. The Boible clearly tells us to not only discern, but to confront in love. In love. That is the key that you may be missing. It is possible and mandatory to "carefront" people whose lives bring public dishonor to the Lord. The Body of Christ has a Biblical obligation to serve in love, ever regarding the words of Paul in Galatians 6:1. Love must be firm at times. Do you have children?

3) Paul tells us to "judge" those inside the church (1 Cor. 5:12), and leave the outsiders to God. "Therefore put away from yourselves that wicked person." This is what the church did in the case of David Koresh, and you come along and condemn them for it. The church was completely in the right. Their conscience is clear. God is still good.

all the best,

olger

[Woody]

Like I have said ... the untimate in my mind is to not have membership. The issue with Koresh is an issue because we have membership. The real answer is to NOT have membership.

[olger]

Like I have said ... the untimate in my mind is to not have membership. The issue with Koresh is an issue because we have membership. The real answer is to NOT have membership.

o...k. I will accept your opinion. There is a "free church" in California that has no rules, no members, no standards and no requirements. I ate next to one of their "pastors" in 2003 (he was shacking up with a divorced girl I went to school with).

Onward to better things,

olger

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

We think we can make the church pure by kicking out those who we deem sinners.

No, that is not why we disfellowship anyone. Discipline is a means Christ gave the church to drawback to Him backsliding members. The purpose of church discipline is that. It is to draw the rebellious sinner back into a saving relationship with Christ. It has nothing whatsoever to do with making the church pure.

[Woody]

Quote:

We think we can make the church pure by kicking out those who we deem sinners.

No, that is not why we disfellowship anyone. Discipline is a means Christ gave the church to drawback to Him backsliding members. The purpose of church discipline is that. It is to draw the rebellious sinner back into a saving relationship with Christ. It has nothing whatsoever to do with making the church pure.

Church Manual page 160 ... " Sin and sinners in the church must be promptly dealt with, that others may not be contaminated. Truth and purity require that we make more thorough work to cleanse the camp from Achans. Let those in responsible positions not suffer sin in a brother. Show him that he must either put away his sins or be separated from the church". 5T 147

“God holds His people, as a body, responsible for the sins existing in individuals among them. If the leaders of the church neglect to diligently search out the sins which bring the displeasure of God upon the body, they become responsible for these sins.” 3T 269

Church Manual page 162 ... "In cases of flagrant violation of the law of God, which have brought public reproach upon the cause, the church may deem it necessary even through a sincere confession has been made, to disfellowship the member to protect its fair name and its Christian standards ... The church cannot afford to deal lightly with such sins, nor permit personal considerations to affect its actions. It must register its decisive and emphatic disapproval of the sins of fornication, adultry, all acts of moral indiscretion, and other grievous sins".

Sounds to me like "making the church PURE".

[Dr. Shane]

I don't read it that way. Perhaps because my mother was disfellowshipped when I was young and I saw the process from that time to when she was later rebaptised. Done correctly, church discipline will endear the sinner to the church even more.

[Taylor]

I think church discipline can be done effectively. It is rarely done in that manner perhaps in the USA but I have seen it done a time or two in the USA and for sure oversease.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

In cases of flagrant violation of the law of God, which have brought public reproach upon the cause, the church may deem it necessary even through a sincere confession has been made, to disfellowship the member to protect its fair name and its Christian standards ...

This was the case with my sister-in-law. She was disfellowshipped after she became pregnant out of wedlock. They told her she was being disfellowshipped because the father of the child was also being disfellowshipped and they couldn't just disfellowship one of them. She was rebaptized a couple of months after she was disfellowshipped and the same church that disfellowshipped her gave her a baby shower.