At 10:43  15/06/98 +1000, Nathan Nettleton wrote:
>I think this queston is sufficiently related to liturgy to be asked here, but
>feel free to flame me if you disagree. 
>
>It is probably the Roman catholics among you who are best placed to answer
my question.
>
>Here in Melbourne our Catholic brothers and sisters have a fairly new
>archbishop who is of extremely conservative persuasion. He has recently
>decreed that openly homosexual people will not be served at the Eucharist on
>the grounds that they are willingly defying the church's teaching. <snip>
>
>Homosexuality is not the first issue he has taken such a stand on. He has also
>refused people communion because they were not Catholics. I am told he even
>refused to serve one of our former prime ministers at a state funeral for a
>prominent Catholic politician.
>
>My question is not about the rights or wrongs of his view of homosexuality,
>but whether he actually has the right to do what he did. My understanding was
>that a priest could not invite to the table those who weren't Catholic or
>didn't meet the criteria according to the church's teaching, but that if
>someone presented to receive the elements, he couldn't refuse them unless they
>had been formally excommunicated. <snip>
>
>The effect of his ruling appears to be that homosexuals may be served
>communion as long as they don't announce that they question the church's
>teaching. Those who publicize their dissent, whether homosexual or not, are
>"excommunicated" on the spot. It is thereby the questioning that is seen to be
>the sin, not the sexual practice.
>
>How do others read this situation? Has he gone beyond his powers or not?
>
>Peace and hope,
>
>Nathan
>
>_____________________________________
>Nathan Nettleton
>Pastor, South Yarra Community Baptist Church
>Melbourne, Australia
>[log in to unmask]
>
>       I would say he is on debatable ground in his rulings on homosexuals
- but as to giving communion to non-Catholics - the Church here is quite
clear - this cannot ordinarily be done unless a special dispensation is
given in individual cases by the local ordinary.  Here in the diocese of
Hamilton Canada this occurs so far as I know only for wedding Masses, and
only after the non-Catholic partner has shown a 'catholic' understanding of
the Eucharist.
        In situations where one (i.e., the priest) does not know whether the
person presenting him or herself for communion is eligible, (and there are
reasons other than homosexuality) the assumption must be made that the
person is: Holy communion is after all an 'honour' society -catholics,
whether Roman or otherwise have never to my knowledge used tokens, as for
example, the Church of Scotland or Presbyterians did ordinarily in the last
century. 
        The issue with homosexuality is not restricted to homosexuality I
would hope - but to unrepentant sinners - who of course _should_ not be
admitted to communion.

Ted Smith
Edward (Ted) Smith              "Tradition refuses to submit to the small
Ph.D. candidate                  and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely 
Dept. of History                 happen to be walking around"- Chesterton
University of Guelph            
Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
[log in to unmask]






%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%