Posted on 05/27/2004 8:47:55 AM PDT by CatherineSiena
This Sunday at the Cathedral of St. Paul, a 1960s liberal anti-war activist turned orthodox church layman plans to stand literally in the way of gay Catholics and their supporters to prevent them from taking Holy Communion.
"I've never seen such an event unfold in a Catholic Mass, and I'm 50 years old,'' said Brian McNeill of Minneapolis, who helps organize the annual gay-rights presence at the Cathedral on Pentecost Sunday.
David Pence's plan has startled leaders of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.
It also shocked members of the Rainbow Sash Alliance in the Twin Cities, who have joined others in a worldwide movement the past several years by wearing sashes to Mass on Pentecost Sunday. They say they wear the sashes as a plea for "a conversion of heart'' toward the inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Catholics.
Pence hopes 10 to 20 Twin Cities men will join him in what he admits is an "extraordinary measure'' to "defend the Eucharist from being publicly attacked.''
He and an informal group called Ushers of the Eucharist plan to block the path of Rainbow Sash members when they come forward for Communion at the noon Mass. He said he is committed to nonviolence, not "tackling anyone.''
"At Catholic Charities, anybody who is hungry gets fed,'' said Pence, a radiation oncologist from Mankato who works in Minneapolis. "But the Eucharist isn't like that. The Eucharist is a restricted meal. The Church has always said you don't come to Communion unless you believe in Christianity the way the Catholic Church has transmitted the tradition.''
Although Rainbow Sash wearers have been denied Holy Communion in Australia and in some dioceses in the United States, they have not been barred at the Cathedral of St. Paul.
"I think it would be very disrespectful for any group to take it upon themselves to keep others from receiving Communion,'' said the Rev. Michael Skluzacek, rector of the Cathedral. "That is not anyone's judgment call except the archbishop.''
Archbishop Harry Flynn has said Rainbow Sash members will not be denied Communion, reserving such an action for "extreme'' circumstances.
"Church teaching dictates that the Blessed Sacrament should be received only by baptized Catholics who are in the state of grace,'' the archdiocese said in a statement to the Pioneer Press on Wednesday. "However, the determination of a person's spiritual readiness rests with the individual conscience and honesty of individual worshippers.''
Pence said he and like-minded Catholics believe donning the multicolored sash as a symbol during Communion is an act of public dissent that should disallow wearers from receiving the Eucharist.
Cardinal Francis George of Chicago on Tuesday instructed priests there not to give Communion to Rainbow Sash members this weekend. Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, D.C., previously issued the same ban.
"The people coming with the sash are openly proclaiming that homosexuality should be accepted in the Church,'' Pence said. "That isn't the Catholic position.
"If someone came up and said, 'I don't believe in the Trinity, or in the divinity of Christ,' one of the old heresies, or that abortion is a woman's right, that person also should not be incorporated into the Eucharist.''
In its statement, the archdiocese said it had "no intention of allowing one of the most sacred times in the Mass the reception of Holy Communion to turn into a battleground or to be the occasion for demonstrations or counter demonstrations.''
Pence said his actions will be "somewhat of a disruption, which I don't like. I think our Eucharist is sacred, but we're not disrupting it. They are disrupting it.''
McNeill, a Rainbow Sash organizer, was taken aback when he heard of the lay group's plan.
"Their presence will not prevent us from being there,'' he said. "Nothing ever would prevent us from walking up to Communion. This would be very new.''
Pence, 56, is a frequent speaker to Catholic parishes and a member of the Holy Name Society, which since the 13th century has sought to promote reverence and prayer while fighting blasphemy and heresy. He said he wants Sunday's actions to be an example of courage for bishops.
It is a battle few U.S. Catholic bishops have taken on in the debate over denying the Eucharist to pro-abortion politicians, a controversy fueled recently by the presidential candidacy of John Kerry.
Pence said the issue is unique to the Catholic Church and others with a "restricted Communion.''
"It is different than the Methodists, or those who say they have 'an open table, we welcome all.' That has never been the Catholic tradition. They're not breaking into a Unitarian church. They're not going to a place where Communion is open to everybody already. They're going to a place where Communion means something.''
An unrelated group, Catholics Against Sacrilege, also opposed to the Rainbow Sash movement, plans to say the rosary on the Cathedral steps beginning at 11:15 a.m. Sunday.
Flynn and Skluzacek will be involved in activities related to the ordination of six new priests in the archdiocese this weekend. Monsignor James Habiger will preside at the noon Mass at the Cathedral.
It seems from the article that these men will be using the non violent tactics from the rescue movement. How will some people be permitted to approach the altar and others not? When rescuers locked arms, no one could get through. How will some non public sinners be allowed to approach the altar?
I'm afraid the implementaion of this plan is nearly impossible without a physical altercation.
I guess I'd be inclined to pray the Rosary outside.
Interesting comment. I'm not a Roman Catholic, I'm an Episcopalian. Here's an excerpt from page 409 of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer:
Disciplinary Rubrics
If the priest knows that a person who is living a notoriously evil life intends to come to Communion, the priest shall speak to that person privately, and tell him that he may not come to the Holy Table until he has given clear proof of repentance and amendment of life.
The priest shall follow the same procedure with those who have done wrong to their neighbors and are a scandal to the other members of the congregation, not allowing such persons to receive Communion until they have made restitution for the wrong they have done, or have at least promised to do so.
When the priest sees that there is hatred between members of the congregation, he shall speak privately to each of them, telling them that they may not receive Communion until they have forgiven each other.
And if the person or persons on one side truly forgive the others and desire and promise to make up for their faults, but those on the other side refuse to forgive, the priest shall allow those who are penitent to come to Communion, but not those who are stubborn.
In all such cases, the priest is required to notify the bishop, within 14 days at the most, giving the reasons for refusing Communion.
So, in the ECUSA, while it is certainly desirable and according to Scripture that individuals examine their own hearts and determine their fitness for the Eucharist, it seems that the Priest also has the power to make such a determination. Is this Roman Catholic Archbishop telling me that he has less power, discretion or duty than an ECUSA priest? What are the RCC Canons on this?
Before someone points it out I ment "wear" not "where".
Unfortunately the bishops are not united on the import of the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, as usual. The non-canonical bishops' national conference, patterned after the American democratic principles has made this possible. It used to be that a bishop was the supreme head of his See, answerable only to the pope (and of course, to God).
There are bishops such as Mahony of L.A. who shamelessly has said "the homos are welcome to receive Communion in my church." The Rainbow Sash group mistakenly believes that by a show of force at the most solemn of Catholic rituals (the reception of Holy Communion, they would be bringing their cause to the negotiating table. See, they know what the Eucharist is: It is what will bring either outrage or compassion to their cause. They are appealing to the bleeding hearts!
Shame on those bishops who are going to support this mockery of Our Lord! They will merely compound the mortality of sin into sacrilege. Homosexuality, lesbianism: the sin of Sodom is a non-negotiable issue, and like abortion, it is one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance. The Catholic Church does not negotiate with terrorists, whether the rainbow kind or those who wilfully murder little babies in their mother's womb.
Mattheus
Very well said. The fact that the bishop does not forbid them is an indictment of him. As always, I question the motives of this type of bishop.
The main problem for the Homosexuals is caused by themselves and their Adoration of the Genitalia as the symbol of their lifestyle.
The Bishops are wrong in that there is no cohesion in their positions across the country, they should be speaking in one voice, not like Delicatessen Bishops.
They are sowing confusion.
Such action on the part of orthodox, faithful Catholics would not be necessary if the Bishops would obey Christ and his Vicar - and stand up for, defend, and preach the faith. Hmmmm......maybe good Catholics should "block access" in a similar manner if obviously gay priests are appointed to their parishes. ...."just say NO!".
Activism is alive and well in the Catholic Church!
From another thread:
1 Corinthians 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
Amen, AMEN!!
1Co 5:11
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1 Cor 5:11 is not suggesting that we should not eat with 'sinners'. This clearly applies only to people who claim to be Christians, while consistently engaging in serious moral transgressions.
Thanks for pointing this passage out. While it is certainly not Jesus' words or actions - it is a passage that supports excluding certain sinners from our tables.
It seems, then, that we are back to basing this debate on whether or not homosexuality is a "serious moral transgression"
While I can find passages (such as 1 Cor 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:10 and Romans 1:26-27) that refer to our topic, they seem to be hotly debated by scholars and clergy alike. It is difficult for me to discern which scholars and which religious leaders 'have it right'. What I personally do at times such as these is look at Jesus' words.
Can you help me one more time? I cannot find anywhere, any words spoken by Jesus condemning homosexuality. There are so many things he specifically points out - I am certain he would specifically mention homosexuality if it were immoral.
Perhaps just my ignorance of the scripture, though - please help me find where Jesus speaks out to condemn homosexuality
Thanks again!
Jesus is saying that he does not remove any law from the Torah, nor does he contradict any word of the prophets.
The issue with which you are struggling is complicated and it's natural to feel love for our earthly family, whatever their shortcomings. However the bigger concern in the matter of the Communion, is to ensure that the church appears spotless and holy when they come before the Lord to participate in this sacrament.
If you read the scriptures again, notice how Judas left the group before the Lord offered the wine and bread. The church is one loaf and it must be unleavened, untainted with sin. That's why it is important for every one to examine himself before he partakes.
If the sinners, who want to be Christians, ask for forgiveness, there is no reason why they can't have Communion. Think about this: If they had to choose between the Lord or their sin, which one are they choosing? As Christians they should be willing to forego that lifestyle choice,or at the least, remain celibate, which they can do with the help of the Holy Spirit.
I hope this explains some reasoning behind our position and thank you for the chance to post it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.