During two one hour appearances in the court, Father Michael Gatt told the jury that the Catholic Church did not condone abortion and it was not acceptable for any reason. On the other hand, Fr Gatt said, 'to condone is one thing, but to forgive is another. The Catholic Church forgives abortion and these are two different things."

He told defence counsel that if someone asked him if she could have an abortion the answer would be no.

However she would be forgiven if she asked for forgiveness after having an abortion.

Asked if he had ever not forgiven anyone who had asked for forgiveness, Fr Gatt said "Never."

Father Gatt’s sudden appearance at the Supreme Court came in the wake of the woman’s earlier court reference to having sought reconciliation with the Church at the time of her son’s first communion, but claiming to have received a refusal from a priest, who allegedly said abortion was "unacceptable, inexcusable and unforgivable."

The court’s suppression of the woman’s name, as well as that of the doctor in question, meant that Fr Gatt was totally oblivious that he was the priest being cited last week in national media reports of the case.

He was shocked last weekend when defence counsel approached him as the named priest and asking him if he would appear.

Even at this point Fr Gatt was refused any details as to the woman’s identity, only that it referred to his time as chaplain to the RAAF Pearce base. Before he left for Melbourne Fr Gatt was at a loss as to which of the many people he met there might be the person in question.

He said he accepted the invitation to appear in court not only so that his own position was made clear but also that of the Catholic Church.

In Melbourne on Monday when he heard the woman’s name Fr Gatt immediately recognised the family, recalling that he baptised one of their children, and later telling the court that he had no recollection of ever having discussed abortion with them in 1986 as claimed.

After Tuesday’s court proceedings Fr Gatt had what he described as a favourable meeting with the woman and her father.

She apologised and told the priest that it was never her intention to tell lies but merely to recount to the court what she recalls hearing at the time. She still wishes to consider Fr Gatt her friend.

The case proceeds on the claim by the 41 year old woman that 11 years ago following insemination with wrong sperm due to a nurse’s error at a Richmond clinic, a doctor allegedly advised her to have an abortion or she would not be allowed into an infertility programme again.

The woman had the abortion and later had children by donor insemination.