|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Are LGBT people routinely denied Communion in the Church of England?
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
Re the OP, I would be very surprised to find a con evo CofE church 'refusing communion' to LGBT people, simply because, usually, communion isn't so important (indeed, as I've said elsewhere, I attended St Helens Bishopsgate weekly for 2 years without seeing a single communion), and there isn't the same idea of 'being in communion', or as using communion as an indicator of fellowship. Because who would care?
Rather, the way of indicating breach of fellowship would be in the form of quiet words after the service, or, in extreme forms, being asked to leave cell groups etc.
In the con evo CofE churches that I have had communion at (eg St Aldates Oxford), there are no checks before one is given communion, as to sexuality, whether one is confirmed, whatever. The only question would be if an LGBT couple were being openly couply. That might be an issue, but I am not sure (though I do not know) if they would be refused or just 'quiet-word'ed after, and it would probably be a similar stance if the couple were straight but unmarried.
So I think Leo's famous 'examples' must be on the FiF end - I think it would sound too quaint to a Reform-ist.
Finally, since we all seem to be doing tiresome 'speaking as' arguments here, I would probably class myself as a bi man, and am perfectly happy to have entirely straight people telling me what they think. My straight Bible teacher will openly criticise same-sex behaviour, as he would a great many other traits in me, all of which are 'part of me' but I do not wish to encourage. I often disagree with him but I can understand why he says it. Having said this, I get that it is a lot lot easier to be a bi man (who on balance prefers women) than entirely gay, which I appreciate must be exceptionally difficult, so I make no comment on that.
I only use the 'speaking as' argument because a straight person will never experience church (or anything else) as an LGBTQ+ person. Straight people are welcome to have opinions but they're opinions rather than lived experiences. It's like how I as a white person am not going to experience church as a non-white person, so it'd be a bit strange and pointless for my experience to be counted regarding that.
Re FiF churches, they're usually fine for gay men at least.
Prayer Book evangelicals might be more strict about refusing Communion, but they're also rather rare in the first place.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
iamchristianhearmeroar
Shipmate
# 15483
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
I attended St Helens Bishopsgate weekly for 2 years without seeing a single communion
You may well have elaborated on this on another thread, but does St Helens not celebrate Communion *at all*?!
--------------------
My blog: http://alastairnewman.wordpress.com/
Posts: 642 | From: London, UK | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
iamchristianhearmeroar
Shipmate
# 15483
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
I attended St Helens Bishopsgate weekly for 2 years without seeing a single communion
You may well have elaborated on this on another thread, but does St Helens not celebrate Communion *at all*?!
--------------------
My blog: http://alastairnewman.wordpress.com/
Posts: 642 | From: London, UK | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ButchCassidy
Shipmate
# 11147
|
Posted
iamchristianhearmeroar: I couldn't say as to "ever ever ever" - I only ever attended the 6pm congregation and they might do them in the morning (though the two are definitely separate, full services with different congregations, rather than a MoTR main service + evensong combo). It does seem a bit surprising now, looking back. I think its so little on the radar of many evos (certainly me) that it didn't really occur to me at the time.
Posts: 104 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Coffee Cup
Shipmate
# 13506
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
iamchristianhearmeroar: I couldn't say as to "ever ever ever" - I only ever attended the 6pm congregation and they might do them in the morning (though the two are definitely separate, full services with different congregations, rather than a MoTR main service + evensong combo). It does seem a bit surprising now, looking back. I think its so little on the radar of many evos (certainly me) that it didn't really occur to me at the time.
The autumn termcard (pdf warning) suggests that at the '6pm talk' does not have a communion service at all. The morning and mid-afternoon services have a once-a-month timetable. I'm a little surprised, but not stunned.
Posts: 66 | From: UK | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
The trouble with only giving opinions on our own 'lived experience' is that it might not give us much to say at all, and probably even less that'll be of interest to anyone else! My own experience of church doesn't seem to fit neatly into any of the categories that are routinely recognised, and that's certainly the case on the Ship.
Anyway, the answer to the OP seems to be no, which most people here will presumably consider to be a good thing, even if it leaves many other challenges and disagreements still to be faced regarding churches and sexuality.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The trouble with only giving opinions on our own 'lived experience' is that it might not give us much to say at all, and probably even less that'll be of interest to anyone else! My own experience of church doesn't seem to fit neatly into any of the categories that are routinely recognised, and that's certainly the case on the Ship.
Anyway, the answer to the OP seems to be no, which most people here will presumably consider to be a good thing, even if it leaves many other challenges and disagreements still to be faced regarding churches and sexuality.
Sooo...only straight white men have views interesting to others? I'm not talking about lived experiences regarding everything, just when it's regarding groups facing oppression (eg LGBTQ people, people of colour, disabled people etc).
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Jade Constable
Okay, so what do YOU think? My point was that we need more diversity, which I think would actually benefit a whole lot of people, including myself, as well as LGBTQ folk. And if the CofE, in all its grand complexity, can't supply such diversity then it needs to come from elsewhere. But you seem not to approve of that idea. I'm not sure why.
(As it happens I wouldn't say I was 100% straight, but it doesn't really make much difference in the grand scheme of things. I am a person of colour.)
[ 01. October 2013, 12:52: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Sooo...only straight white men have views interesting to others?
Straight white men are as entitled to views as anyone else.
I don't buy the whole black-and-white divide-and-rule world view that is implicit in that question, whereby the world is divided on any given issue or point of difference into two camps; one is identified with "privilege", is worthy only of abuse, and cannot possibly say anything interesting to others, except maybe to be twisted into condemning themselves; meanwhile the other camp cannot possibly do anything wrong, and the less that's known about them the better, as their reality will then present fewer challenges to the theories underlying this world view. It seems to lead all too quickly to nasty bigotry and hate-filled speech that would send the speaker into a fluster of outrage, were it only inverted in direction.
The most anomalous bit is the passion that underlies the divide-and-rule world view. It doesn't seem to occur to them that people are fundamentally kind, and as a default position don't give a damn about race or sex or sexual orientation: these are a total irrelevance. Yes, you will get people who haven't really thought about something saying stupid ill-thought-out things, but that is not the same as malice at all. But to those who feel passionately about these issues, the world is full of witches.
And one can't help but feel that some people have a deep-seated need to find something to protest against.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Jade
I think that in your first sentence you've misinterpreted what Svitlana is saying. I think you're also in danger of excluding the experience of people who are not directly affected by a behaviour but who witness it, are challenged by it, or find themsleves in a situation affected by it. Surely these people have something valid to say as well - after all, equality is everybody's business, isn't it?
[ 01. October 2013, 12:53: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pommie Mick
Shipmate
# 12794
|
Posted
VDMA, I tip my hat to your for your faithfulness and courage.
Our Lord tells us we must put him front and centre in our lives, which is a tough call if we take it seriously. All that gets in the way, whether it is our wealth, our ties to family or indeed our sexual impulses or any other idol must be set aside.
Everything must be subordinate to our faith - every aspect of our identity must be of a lower priority than our faith, and be open to transformation by God.
This is not only an issue for those of our brothers and sisters with a homosexual orientation, but also heterosexuals. Us heterosexuals also need to lift our game.
Posts: 185 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
I wonder what the Bishop of London has to say about there not being Communion at least every Sunday.
In view of the depths of SHB's collective pocket, probably not very much at all!
[ 01. October 2013, 15:01: Message edited by: Jolly Jape ]
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
The practice or the statement? Could be either. And whichever it is, it being reported only means that the person reporting it thinks it's unusual.
Well, how about this? quote:
I am an evangelical Anglican. I moved to a large town in Northern Ireland, and after a time began going to my local Church of Ireland church in 2000. .... it was not long before I was in a healing service and she was praying the dark things out of the church, “anything that is not of You” and whilst praying in agreement with this I did consider that I might be one of those dark things. That night she asked me to come down to the church on Monday evening as “some of us would like to talk to you”. “Some of us” I thought would be three or four of her closest parishioners but in fact turned out to be eight plus her and two more would have been there except they had prior engagements (one was a 17 year old boy!). Lamb to the slaughter……… And I guess that was what Jesus did when he went to Jerusalem, which is I guess why I went there that night. The folk were in tears. I was very upset too. I did love them and they did love me, after all.
She told me how wrong it was that I had gone for communion with my partner not long before that: “You put me in a terrible position”. People told me Satan had veiled my eyes, that Scripture was black and white, that the Bible says….., that it was an affront to see me worship God. And it was made clear that I would not be welcome at the Lord’s table again.....When I was told that I wasn’t welcome to receive communion anymore I called a halt and said I would leave.
source
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
A very disturbing story, and one of behaviour which I would say is both unChristian and unAnglican. But I'm not sure how it relates to my earlier comment.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Ew. It makes my skin crawl to think of that crazy bitch rector reaming that poor woman and then having the gall to give her a big hug and a blessing.
That is a real "ick factor" for me. :shudder:
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
leo
That's a really dreadful experience. I'm surprised that the minister was so sure of herself in barring someone from Communion. Is it as easy as that? Maybe it was in Northern Ireland in those days.
The other thing that surprises me is that the evangelical newcomer had travelled so far up the lay leadership hierarchy without having picked up any awareness of evangelical taboos, or at least an awareness that not all evangelicals are alike. If Anglicanism can befuddle its own people this way it's hardly surprising that 'outsiders' get confused!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
A very disturbing story, and one of behaviour which I would say is both unChristian and unAnglican. But I'm not sure how it relates to my earlier comment.
You suggested that the report about the Irish dean was 'unusual' so I have another example which might suggest it isn't.
No I didn't. I said that the fact that it was being reported suggested that the person reporting it thought it was unusual.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pommie Mick
Shipmate
# 12794
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
" We heterosexuals..."
And?
Posts: 185 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
iamchristianhearmeroar: I couldn't say as to "ever ever ever" - I only ever attended the 6pm congregation and they might do them in the morning (though the two are definitely separate, full services with different congregations, rather than a MoTR main service + evensong combo). It does seem a bit surprising now, looking back. I think its so little on the radar of many evos (certainly me) that it didn't really occur to me at the time.
I'm surprised by that. I also attend an evo parish in London - although I found St Helens to be far too right wing for me - and every service including the 6 PM has communion once a month, except the 9 AM which has it each week.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ButchCassidy
Shipmate
# 11147
|
Posted
Once a week! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
It might be a Conservative evo vs Charismatic evo thing? I think that All Souls Langham Place (the other Central London evo student church) do once a month.
Similarly, in Oxford, I never had communion at the evening congo at the conservative St Ebbe's (though to be fair I didn't attend that often so can't guarantee that) but did see it occasionally at the charismatic St Aldate's. The preacher would always give an apology for the formality of the (CW) words before the eucharistic prayer :-) Good days!
iamchristianhearmeroar: as said by Jolly Jape, I dare say SHB could live with the disfavour of the Bishop of London. They've cut off their parish share before, doubtless they could do it again..
Posts: 104 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
A very disturbing story, and one of behaviour which I would say is both unChristian and unAnglican. But I'm not sure how it relates to my earlier comment.
You suggested that the report about the Irish dean was 'unusual' so I have another example which might suggest it isn't.
No I didn't. I said that the fact that it was being reported suggested that the person reporting it thought it was unusual.
Sorry to have misinterpreted.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Perhaps I wasn't being very clear. Head is a bit muzzy at the moment.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Jade Constable
Okay, so what do YOU think? My point was that we need more diversity, which I think would actually benefit a whole lot of people, including myself, as well as LGBTQ folk. And if the CofE, in all its grand complexity, can't supply such diversity then it needs to come from elsewhere. But you seem not to approve of that idea. I'm not sure why.
(As it happens I wouldn't say I was 100% straight, but it doesn't really make much difference in the grand scheme of things. I am a person of colour.)
I know you're a person of colour, I was responding to the idea that those with lived experiences might not be as interesting to others. That's not really the point. I agree with your point about diversity, but to get there we have to actually listen to the people being excluded, rather than paternalism. THAT is why lived experiences are important. There is a Lady Bountiful approach to diversity from some quarters, and it's a really dangerous approach to equality - since it doesn't provide real equality at all.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Sooo...only straight white men have views interesting to others?
Straight white men are as entitled to views as anyone else.
I don't buy the whole black-and-white divide-and-rule world view that is implicit in that question, whereby the world is divided on any given issue or point of difference into two camps; one is identified with "privilege", is worthy only of abuse, and cannot possibly say anything interesting to others, except maybe to be twisted into condemning themselves; meanwhile the other camp cannot possibly do anything wrong, and the less that's known about them the better, as their reality will then present fewer challenges to the theories underlying this world view. It seems to lead all too quickly to nasty bigotry and hate-filled speech that would send the speaker into a fluster of outrage, were it only inverted in direction.
The most anomalous bit is the passion that underlies the divide-and-rule world view. It doesn't seem to occur to them that people are fundamentally kind, and as a default position don't give a damn about race or sex or sexual orientation: these are a total irrelevance. Yes, you will get people who haven't really thought about something saying stupid ill-thought-out things, but that is not the same as malice at all. But to those who feel passionately about these issues, the world is full of witches.
And one can't help but feel that some people have a deep-seated need to find something to protest against.
I don't think that people with privilege are only deserving of abuse. Most people have privilege of some kind - it's about being aware of said privilege and how it gives you a 'leg up' in life, and that there are people without that benefit. That's all. The character assassination you just provided of people who are aware of privilege's existence is rather more abusive than that.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Jade
I think that in your first sentence you've misinterpreted what Svitlana is saying. I think you're also in danger of excluding the experience of people who are not directly affected by a behaviour but who witness it, are challenged by it, or find themsleves in a situation affected by it. Surely these people have something valid to say as well - after all, equality is everybody's business, isn't it?
People who aren't directly affected have a duty to listen to those who are, before anything else. THEN have an opinion, otherwise any opinion is just guesswork. And before you say that this is obvious, given how often those who are directly affected aren't listened to but are 'helped' by people who have no idea of the reality of their situation, it's not obvious to everyone.
I'm not saying those not directly affected shouldn't have any opinion at all, but their opinions should be based on what those who are affected actually go through. Listen first.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Listen, sure; and observe, and think about the effect that it's having on you. Don't presume to speak for other people but don't be afraid to speak for yourself.
[ 02. October 2013, 15:03: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Listen, sure; and observe, and think about the effect that it's having on you. Don't presume to speak for other people but don't be afraid to speak for yourself.
Agreed with all of that.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Jade
I'm not sure where I've failed to listen, but if you think I'm speaking without listening, then I'm sorry.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Yes; if my vicar had refused me communion in those circumstances I could have complained to the bishop and the bishop would probably have done something about it (even if it was just wagging his finger at the vicar and saying 'Tut, tut.') LGBT people cannot expect the same level of support; if they are refused communion the bishop is likely to back the priest's decision.
I would disagree entirely-- I cannot think of a place in Canada where this would be the case. I knew of one instance where a communicant was discouraged on this account and the bishop came down like a ton of bricks on the foolish cleric.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Well, you're in Canada, Augustine; I'm in England. There are quite a few bishops over here who disapprove of LGBT people expressing their sexuality, to judge by the 'official' C of E response to the government consultation on same-sex marriage. I don't actually know of my own experience whether these bishops would support a priest who refuses communion to gay parishioners, and if I have overstated my case then I apologise.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
No need to apologize to me, as we are simply comparing different perspectives. CoE has some very strict procedures for refusing communion, as there are precedents for canon law proceedings on this issue, but others will have more on-the-ground knowledge than I.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
There are a small (and diminishing number) of parishes that might do this in the U.S.
Despite the TEC's liberal reputation, and the exodus of many conservative churches during "the troubles" following VGR's consecration, there are still a contingent of churches where openly gay people are unwelcome and might be denied communion if their sexual orientation were known to the priest. I can think of a few in Dallas, TX, where I lived briefly, where this is the case. It's likely in such cases that the priest may have the support of the bishop should someone complain.
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
hugorune
Apprentice
# 17793
|
Posted
Is there any solid Biblical case for denying communion on the basis of a person's sin? I'm really not sure there is one. I've come across the argument that homosexuals sin 'deliberately' and thus should not participate in the sacraments (or, by implication, receive God's grace) but I don't believe that the church is right to make this judgement, and then restrict communion on this basis. It comes down to an intent to exclude.
Declared vested interest, I'm gay (although celibate by circumstance), but I really don't know if my opinion would be different otherwise.
--------------------
“A proud man is always looking down on things and people; and, of course, as long as you are looking down, you cannot see something that is above you.”
C.S. Lewis - Mere Christianity
Posts: 47 | From: Melbourne | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hugorune:
Is there any solid Biblical case for denying communion on the basis of a person's sin? I'm really not sure there is one. I've come across the argument that homosexuals sin 'deliberately' and thus should not participate in the sacraments (or, by implication, receive God's grace) but I don't believe that the church is right to make this judgement, and then restrict communion on this basis. It comes down to an intent to exclude.
Declared vested interest, I'm gay (although celibate by circumstance), but I really don't know if my opinion would be different otherwise.
Yes in the sense of sin causing a division within a group of believers.
As for the intent to exclude - if the church doesn't have the right then who does? Perhaps it's better that the church has the responsibility to exclude.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by hugorune:
Is there any solid Biblical case for denying communion on the basis of a person's sin? I'm really not sure there is one. I've come across the argument that homosexuals sin 'deliberately' and thus should not participate in the sacraments (or, by implication, receive God's grace) but I don't believe that the church is right to make this judgement, and then restrict communion on this basis. It comes down to an intent to exclude.
Declared vested interest, I'm gay (although celibate by circumstance), but I really don't know if my opinion would be different otherwise.
Yes in the sense of sin causing a division within a group of believers.
As for the intent to exclude - if the church doesn't have the right then who does? Perhaps it's better that the church has the responsibility to exclude.
To my mind, it is those with the intention to exclude who create the division. It is that act which attempts to divide the house of God against itself.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Not so long ago, there were regular attempts by a group of gay men and their mothers to attend Mass at the RC cathedral here. All in the group would wear a rainbow sash. The Cardinal ordered that they be excluded.
I think he was correct - their attendance was to make a political statement, rather than properly to participate in the service. Any thoughts?
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
3rdFooter
Shipmate
# 9751
|
Posted
I might deny communion to any group that expected me to deny communion to another group they didn't like.
(I am aware of the potential logical challenges of this position)
--------------------
3F - Shunter in the sidings of God's Kingdom
Posts: 602 | From: outskirts of Babylon | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liturgylover
Shipmate
# 15711
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
Once a week!
It might be a Conservative evo vs Charismatic evo thing? I think that All Souls Langham Place (the other Central London evo student church) do once a month.
Weekly at 8am, once a month at main morning services (9.30 and 11.30), once a month at evening service.
I am gay and Anglo-Catholic but quite a peripatetic worshipper and have never heard of communion being denied, though most of my experience is London-based, or in country towns.
Posts: 452 | From: North London | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
quote:
...their attendance was to make a political statement, rather than properly to participate in the service. Any thoughts?
ISTM that the Cardinal's decision to exclude them was also a political statement, unless he requires people sporting the emblems of political groups he agrees with to leave too.
[ 09. November 2013, 23:36: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
ISTM that the Cardinal's decision to exclude them was also a political statement, unless he requires people sporting the emblems of political groups he agrees with to leave too.
Not sure what other political groups you could be referring to.
These people were there to be turned away, not to attend worship. They wanted the publicity.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Starlight
Shipmate
# 12651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
These people were there to be turned away, not to attend worship. They wanted the publicity.
News flash: LGBT people do not "want" to be discriminated against. Your suggestion that discrimination against them was justified because they "wanted" it makes me feel sick. I've heard that type of justification before - from rapists.
I am not surprised they wanted publicity regarding the fact that they were being discriminated against. People who are mistreated often want it to be made public, in order to have it stop. This is not because they are troublemakers who simply crave publicity for its own ends, but because they hope that by drawing attention to the evil, malice, and injustice that this will help stop it.
The cardinal was one hundred percent wrong to deny them communion. To my mind it's just the same as if he'd denied communion to black people, or to left handers. It's arbitrary exclusion and evil.
Posts: 745 | From: NZ | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
They were not there to worship - none was known at the cathedral or a local parish. They were there as they were to be excluded and to get publicity.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Possibly, but it sounds as if it was badly mishandled.
If it was solely a publicity stunt, how did they end up as confirmed members of the church in the first place ? If they weren't confirmed RCs they wouldn't have been able to participate in communion anyway.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Exactly, Doublethink. They may have been confirmed at some stage, but none was known as a practising member of a church.
Perhaps the Cardinal could have handled things better, but it's a bit hard when 50 or so show up on the Cathedral steps with a friendly TV crew in tow.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
So if they were confirmed they had at some point been a member of the church, no?
And the fact that they weren't recognised suggests that they at some point have stopped attending church? So we could posit that they may well feel as if they've been turned away, and we could guess that that could have been because of the preaching of the RC Church against homosexuality from the fact that they were wearing rainbow scarves.
So the RC Church publicly turning them away was enacting the pain they'd already felt. And that's being dismissed as a publicity stunt and those hurting* are being dismissed by the attitudes around? And that demonstrates the love of Christ as exhibited by this church?
Does that sound a reasonable way of describing this action?
* anger can be an outward sign of inward pain, anger is one of the great disguiser emotions
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Gee D: quote:
Not sure what other political groups you could be referring to.
Well, I don't know much about Australian politics but I would hazard a guess that the Cardinal approves of the Family First Party. Certainly their policies on sexuality and same-sex parenting seem to agree with current RC teaching.
If I am wrong, I'm sure an Australian will be along to correct me in a minute.
They may have dug a hole for the Cardinal to fall into, but he didn't just fall; he jumped in with both feet and began digging. Enthusiastically.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
I was disciplined by a con-evo (non CoE) church for being a dyke (and therefore being sexually immoral) and removed from membership many years ago. It bothered me a lot at the time and to some extent bothers me still.
When I first started attending a theologically conservative AC church I was open with the priest and he had no issue with me becoming a regular (several times a week) communicant.
It became an issue when I decided I wished to swim the Tiber. I spent a lot of time and prayer thinking about it. The RC church teaches that being in a gay relationship is sinful. After much thought and not a little heartbreak I decided that I couldn't join a church whose beliefs I couldn't follow. I therefore made a decision that I would be celibate for the rest of my life. Big decision when you're in your mid thirties. As it has turned out it hasn't been a massive issue for me up til now. Yes, I miss the potential companionship of having a partner but that is weighed up against the cognitive dissonance of either lying to God by being in a relationship and receiving the Eucharist or not receiving it.
Please believe me when I say that this is a personal decision I've made in the circumstances where I'm at. I have no right or desire to dictate to anyone else what decisions they make in their relationship with God, the church and everyone else.
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
