CNN.Com: Gay supporters denied communion at Chicago Mass; Minnesota Catholics blocked at altar
It’s nice that people are standing up for the rights of others but I really think the Rainbow Sash movement stepped over the bounds. The Mass is for worship, not airing one’s political views. The Chicago cardinal had a right to order that they should be denied communion as it *IS* Church teaching that homosexuality is a sin. If you disagree so fundamentally with the teachings of the RCC, why are you trying to participate in the Eucharist? The priest did the right thing in blessing them but denying them the sacrament as he affirmed their presence there but stood up for his convictions and the convictions of the Church.
On the flip side, the laypeople in Minnesota went too far as it the priest’s decision and not theirs as to who receives the Body and Blood. Kneeling in front of people and preventing them from participating diminishes the authority of the priest.
Is there a link to the Minnesota article? Didn’t see one. Anyway, I agree.
It’s the second part of the article I linked.
my bad, I skimmed the rest of the article the first time and didn’t see it. I think the first situation was handled properly. The second one it seems that members of the congregation where trying to uphold the teachings of their faith and the local father didn’t want to cause a problem. When leadership doesn’t lead there is chaos.
The other issue is basically this: who has the *real* power over Communion, especially who can and can’t receive it? Scripturally (and Confessionally for us Lutherans) Communion is something *God* gives to us directly through those who administer the Sacrament. Those who administer the Sacrament are simply supposed to “follow orders” and not try to change what God has *directly* commanded, since to do otherwise would be trying to take the place of God. This means that trying to place *restrictions* on who may or may not receive Communion is actually *idolatry* itself. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Scriptures that says only perfect people or those who agree with denominational teachings may receive Communion: this is actually blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. (I Corinthians 11:27-29, the oft-cited passage for Closed Communion, actually refers to those who *misuse* the Sacrament for their own selfish purposes, instead of those who do not follow certain standards for Communion preparation, which is itself salvation by *works* rather than faith.) People who are *sinners* actually need the Sacrament more than anyone else.
Besides, maybe the Holy Spirit working through the Sacrament may actually cause the gay activists to *repent* of their sin? The point is, there are actually *better* ways to exercise discipline in the Church than trying to stop the work of the *Holy Spirit*.
Here is where the other word for the sacrament comes in handy: communion. To receive Communion in the Catholic Church means to make a sign of actual communion with not just Christ but the Church. To receive the sign of communion while not actually in communion with the Church is a deception and a manipulation.
Other Churches have a right to interpret it differently, but as long as the Catholic Church interprets the Eucharist as a sign of Communion, then those who receive it owe the respect of receiving it under the conditions laid out by the Church. Those who wish to receive under, say, Lutheran guidelines should receive in the Lutheran Church.