Former Jesuit priest known for his peace activism dies at age 78: Catholic Review 19 January 2012

WASHINGTON – Father William R. Callahan, a leading activist for peace and social justice, died July 5 at Community Hospice in Washington of complications from Parkinson’s disease. He was 78.

The priest, a former Jesuit, also was known as an outspoken critic of church teaching on homosexuality and women’s ordination.

In 1979, he was ordered by the Jesuits’ superior general to stop speaking out in favor of women’s ordination. Ten years later, he was dismissed from the order but remained a priest. At the time, he told Catholic News Service that he was not given a reason for the dismissal.

A memorial service for Father Callahan was to be celebrated July 10 at the Thomas Stone Elementary School in Mount Rainier, Md., near the Quixote Center, a national Catholic justice and peace office which he co-founded in 1976 with Dolly Pomerleau and co-directed until last year.

The priest, diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 1996, donated his body to Georgetown University Medical School for study of the disease.

Loretto Sister Maureen Fiedler, a friend and colleague of Father Callahan for 35 years, told CNS in an e-mail July 7 that the priest “lived Gospel values and Ignatian values; he gave without counting the cost.”

“Tens of thousands of people were touched by his generosity, inspired by his passion for justice and delighted with his willingness to laugh in the midst of struggle. He dreamed a lot of seemingly ‘impossible dreams’ and made them come true,” said Sister Fiedler, host and creator of “Interfaith Voices,” a religion news magazine featured on public radio.

Jesuit Father Jim Hug, president of the Center of Concern in Washington, wrote in the group’s July online newsletter that “the Catholic justice community lost an extraordinary friend and companion” with Father Callahan’s death.”

“His spirit will surely continue the work,” he added.

Father Callahan was born in Scituate, Mass. He joined the Jesuits in 1948 at age 17 and was a member of the order’s New England province. Ordained in 1965, he became a nationally known speaker on social justice issues in the 1970s. An advocate for peace and justice in Nicaragua, he was critical of U.S. involvement there.

In 1971, he was one of three Jesuits who founded the Center of Concern, a Washington-based think tank on economic development and social justice issues.

In 1975, he founded Priests for Equality, which advocated full equality of women in the church, including ordination to the priesthood. For 20 years, the group worked on developing a Bible with inclusive language, which was published in 2007.

Over the years, various ministries were developed at the Quixote Center. Some of these groups later became independent. Groups formed under Father Callahan’s direction included:

– New Ways Ministry, a program of pastoral service to homosexuals. (The organization receives no official church recognition or sponsorship.)

– Quest for Peace, which countered congressional appropriations of aid to the Nicaraguan contras with matching amounts of private humanitarian aid to the people of Nicaragua. The group shipped more than $227 million worth of food, medicine and other humanitarian aid.

– Catholics Speak Out, which objected to what participants described as authoritarianism in church government.

In 1979, Father Callahan was ordered by Father Pedro Arrupe, then the superior general of the Jesuits, to stop speaking out in favor of women’s ordination.

That same year, the Archdiocese of Washington withdrew his faculties to preach or hear confessions within the archdiocese.

Before papal trips to the United States in 1979 and 1987, Father Callahan organized protests against the style of church leadership exercised by the pope and perceived sexism within the church.

In 1990, the Vatican denied the priest’s appeal of his dismissal from the Jesuit order.

The priest wrote a book on contemporary spirituality called “Noisy Contemplation – Deep Prayer for Busy People,” which has sold more than 100,000 copies. The book encourages readers to pray even in the midst of noise and activism stressing that prayer does not require the silence of a monastery.

A description of the priest on the Quixote Center website said he was an avid organic gardener and a dedicated runner. Even when his disease was slowing his ability to walk, he ran the Army 10-mile race. He called himself the “Parkinson Turtle” and finished the course.

Father Callahan is survived by three brothers, Larry, John and Bob, and three sisters, Polly Alonso, Helen Demers and Christine DeVelis.

https://www.archbalt.org/former-jesuit-priest-known-for-his-peace-activism-dies-at-age-78/

Jesuit Made Deathbed Call For Women's Ordination: National Catholic Reporter - 23 March 2015

by Soli Sagado | National Catholic Reporter | 23 March 2015

Seven months after his death, a Jesuit priest's call for the ordination of women has been released in a video.

Jesuit Fr. William Brennan died Aug. 11, 2014, at age 94. But he had previously asked his friend Alice Iaquinta -- a woman ordained in the Roman Catholic Womenpriests movement -- to record him standing by his conviction that women are called to the priesthood. He asked that she wait to release the message until after he had received a proper Catholic burial.

Filmed from his hospital bed, the video, released by a Milwaukee local TV station March 7, reveals Brennan struggling between "espousing women's ordination … and the duty of obedience to the authority of my church," he said.

A screencap of Jesuit Fr. William Brennan's video on the website of WISN-TV in Milwaukee

"I would like to leave the impression that I'm not of the school of alienation," he said in the video. "I wish to be remembered as one who was basically pleading for equality of women in administrative and spiritual functions of holy Catholic church."

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, only men can be ordained to the priesthood, and attempting to ordain women would result in immediate excommunication.

When Brennan participated in 2012 in a liturgy with Janice Sevre-Duszynska, ordained through the Association of Roman Catholic Women Priests, the Milwaukee archdiocese and his Jesuit superiors sanctioned him. They forbade Brennan to practice his priestly faculties, attend public worship, speak to the media, leave Milwaukee without permission from superiors, and present himself as a Jesuit priest. Until the release of this video, Brennan had fulfilled those wishes.

"He was always exceedingly cautious in how he expressed himself," Iaquinta, who recorded his message, told NCR. "He always made sure to honor the obedience vow that he made and prefaced everything he said with an acknowledgement that he had made a vow of obedience to the Jesuits, and that he wasn't being disobedient, but he was also being obedient to his conscience."

In the video, Brennan credited his mother for his sympathy toward women's rights. He said that when his Jesuit brothers disputed women's ordination, he realized he "did not share their hostility," recalling his "childhood awareness" of his mother once being unable to vote.

"I want to make clear that I see it as a peaceful challenge for a compromise and recognition of women's roles in the church," he said. "I think this is a call of the Spirit."

Iaquinta said that while he fought hard for justice and for immigrants throughout his life, "it was the women's issue at the end that really disturbed him."

"He was fully cognitive -- his mind sharp as a tack [that day]," Iaquinta said. "He was not distressed or upset or afraid or nervous, but he said he felt so guilty. He said to me that day that he felt like a coward, that he felt he had not stood up when it counted and that he needed to stand up, even though he was flat on his back, before he died. He couldn't in good conscience leave this world without making this statement. This was not a grandstand play at the end."

https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/jesuit-made-deathbed-call-womens-ordination

Why Bishop Morris Was Sacked: Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ - 23 June 2014

[Note: In this address, Fr. Brennan discusses the situation of Australia’s Bishop William Morris who was forced into early retirement by the Vatican because of his suggestion to open dialogue about women’s ordination. Morris’s pastorally sensitive suggestion was made out of his concern for growing numbers of Catholics being deprived of the Eucharist due to priest shortages. Women’s Ordination Worldwide publicly stood in solidarity with Bishop Morris and issued this press release: WOW Supports Australia’s Bishop William Morris - May 25, 2011. 

Bishop Morris’s removal happened in the context of Cardinal Bernard Law being given a post in Rome (and thereby escaping prosecution in the USA for protecting pedophile priests). Running parallel to this was the news of two bishops named in Ireland’s Murphy Commission whose resignations were rejected by the Vatican. The Murphy Commission found that despite sexual abuse being 'endemic' in boys' institutions, the church hierarchy protected perpetrators and allowed them to take up new positions teaching other children after their original victims had been sworn to secrecy.]

____________________________________________

Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ

Frank Brennan launches Benedict, Me and the Cardinals Three by Bishop William Morris
Sydney on 23 June 2014.

I am delighted to be asked to participate in the launch of Bishop William Morris' book. Bill was bishop of Toowoomba for 18 years. This book is the story of his forced retirement at the insistence of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and at the instigation of three Roman curial cardinals all of whom have now left the Vatican, having passed retirement age. Naturally, we were not expecting any of those four to be with us this evening. Sadly Bill could not be with us either, being laid up in a hospital bed in wintry Queensland.

In the 1960s, I lived for five years in the Toowoomba diocese while attending Downlands College, a boarding school for boys conducted by the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. At that time, I had regularly to deny any relationship to the then Bishop of Toowoomba William Brennan who gave very long sermons on hot and cold days much to the displeasure of the Downlands students. I used to emerge from chapel rightly claiming to be from another branch of the family back there in the bog.

Some of the key priests who appear in Bill Morris' book also were educated at Downlands. The MSCs had a no nonsense style to them, enjoying their independence from the local bishop while being very dedicated to the pastoral care of people in the far flung country diocese and always attentive to the pastoral requests of the parish priests, a disproportionate number of whom went to Downlands.

I remember one MSC arriving unexpectedly at the school mid-year to teach French. It was just after Humanae Vitae and he had expressed some reservations while ministering south of the Tweed River.

One of the ex-Downlanders to appear in the book is Bill Morris' Vicar-General Peter Dorfield who, true to form as one of the world's most punctilious note takers, provided a detailed account to Bill about his unfortunate meeting with the papal visitator Archbishop Charles Chaput who came to the diocese for four days (including Anzac Day) in 2007 to report on the state of the diocese. Chaput told Dorfield that Morris was:

a good, humane and prayerful bishop but innocent and naïve and open to manipulation because of (his) great desire to see good in everyone, and that people had taken advantage of (his) goodness and trust. (He) had been captured, manipulated and misled by a so-called progressive group of priests in the diocese who were in fact 'running the diocese'; as a result of the actions of these priests, (he) had been led astray and now needed to recant, and in effect throw (himself) on the mercy of the Vatican authorities, promising a more orthodox and obedient future.

After discussing Bishop Morris' 2006 Advent Pastoral Letter, Chaput then raised the topic of 'outrageous liturgies' and then made 'a series of denigrating comments about different priests'. When Dorfield had the temerity to defend them, Chaput 'suggested it might be time for a new vicar-general because of (Dorfield's) perceived undue influence over (Morris) as a bishop and (Morris') personal inadequacies in theological practice'.

This gives you some of the flavour of the book. It contains accurate recollections of a sham process instituted in Rome to get rid of Bill Morris at any cost, and regardless of any particular charges.

Speaking with Peter Dorfield in preparation for tonight's launch, I asked him what are the key lessons now for the Church of Toowoomba. He reminded me that Christ's faithful in Toowoomba wanted nothing more than the truth. It is important to remember that William Morris was removed from office; he did not resign. He always displayed the highest pastoral integrity and paid the price for it.

He was the consummate team player who planned his pastoral strategies in close consultation with his presbyterate and the various consultative organs he set up in the diocese. As the people of Toowoomba continue to live faithful lives as Catholics, they still hold Bill in high esteem; meanwhile all the people in Rome are now gone. As Peter says, it was 'a poor decision based on poor advice'.

I first met Bill when he was Secretary to Archbishop Francis Rush, Archbishop of Brisbane and President of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference. Rush and his fellow Queensland bishops had appointed me prior to ordination as their Adviser on Aboriginal Affairs in the wake of controversy between the Queensland Church leaders and the colourful Sir Joh Bjelke Petersen in the lead up to the 1982 Commonwealth Games.

Even under Bishop Edward Kelly MSC, the Toowoomba presbyterate were quite engaged on justice issues. I remember spending a week motoring all the way out to Quilpie and back with Peter Dorfield to meet with each deanery to discuss Aboriginal rights.

In Toowoomba, we had a formal meeting at the bishop's house followed by a fine meal with silver table service. In Dalby we met at the presbytery and chatted over a meal. In Roma, we gathered on the presbytery verandah over a few beers. And out at Charleville, we had a muster by the river and a fine barbie. Pastoral style became more relaxed and theological niceties less relevant the further west you went.

I well recall attending Bill's episcopal ordination in Toowoomba in 1993. It was a very joyous and participative liturgy. Aboriginal Catholics played a central role. Darling Downs farmers presented some of their produce at the altar. Women were spotted on the sanctuary. The formal reading of the Latin papal bull was performed at an earlier ceremony much to the consternation of a handful of conservatives.

After the mass, the then papal nuncio Archbishop Brambilla called aside the MC who was the parish priest of Cunnamulla with a fairly layback style. His Grace detailed the 35 liturgical abuses which had occurred. The MC heard him out and then said, 'Yes, we must make sure we get it right next time.' All being well, and Bill avoiding further promotion, next time should have come around in just another 26 years.

Shortly after the ordination, I was conducting a day of prayer and reflection for the priests of the Wagga Diocese. I had been invited by their bishop William Brennan, the nephew of the William Brennan at whose feet I had sat as a school boy. After lunch, the bishop and I went for a stroll. I said how much I had enjoyed Bill Morris' episcopal ordination. He said with a smile, 'Actually, I prefer the Roman rite.' Even back then I suspect Bill Morris was a target for the temple police.

In 2010 I was honoured to deliver the Concannon Oration, the premier annual Catholic event for intellectual reflection on the faith in the Toowoomba diocese. I knew by this time that there was trouble brewing in Rome for Bill Morris. In the 2009 Spring issue of the priests' newsletter The Swag, Fr Jeff Scully, the parish priest of Quilpie and one time Roman classmate of Cardinal George Pell, had written with his characteristic light touch and humour:

How can a respected leader of a local church be investigated without ever finding the content of the report based on these investigations? Is this not unthinkable in this age of transparency and accountability? I kid you not, Archbishop Chaput's visit did nothing to increase respect for the way Rome's officials do business. After the Chaput visit, not many Toowoomba people were expecting to find in their mailboxes a wee note from Denver, Colorado, saying how much he enjoyed his visit to our part of the world, how enriching the experience had been for him, and how much he had learnt. Learning did not seem to be part of the exercise.

In the oration, I said, 'As far as we all know, the investigation is ongoing. Is it not time for the open conversation to commence? Is it not time for all of us learn new pastoral ways of being Church before new generations in country areas of Australia are completely denied access to the sacraments?' The MC for the evening was Patrick Nunan, one of Toowoomba's most respected solicitors. He had been school captain of Downlands in my first year there. At dinner, clergy and the legal profession discussed the appalling abuse of process which was occurring in Rome in relation to their bishop. We hatched a plan for putting the spotlight on the administrative abuses being orchestrated from Rome.

Speaking to Jeff Scully in preparation for this evening, Jeff was very upbeat about the new direction of our Church under the leadership of Pope Francis. He is confident that whistle-blowers and the disaffected temple police wouldn't get the same inside run in Rome now as they did when they set out to do in the bishop of Toowoomba. Jeff thinks Francis would have the good pastoral sense to refer the matter back to the Australian bishops' conference. He thinks the bishops would need to show some resolve either siding with the whistle-blowers or with their fellow bishop.

Jeff insists that Morris always took advice of his own clergy and his pastoral team. He was a servant of the servants of God who was welcomed and was welcoming from Toowoomba to Birdsville. Under Francis we can be sure that the local church is not just to be treated as a branch office of Rome Central. Jeff recalls how exemplary Morris was in dealing with child sexual abuse. You will recall that he asked Rome to delay his forced retirement until he could deal with the abuse crisis in a Toowoomba school where he had even had the foresight to engage a retired High Court judge to mediate the issue. Rome had other priorities preferring that the diocese be without a bishop while that matter was resolved.

It's been very difficult to work out why Bishop Morris was sacked. It's been a moving target. At first the concern seemed to be over the third rite of reconciliation and his failure to drop everything and come to Rome when Cardinal Arinze specified. Bill pointed out that he was due in Rome four months after the specified date, so surely things could wait until then. It seems that over time Bill had mended his ways on the third rite to comply with Rome's new strictures. So then there was his Advent pastoral letter of 2006.

We are left confused as to whether Morris was sacked chiefly for what he wrote in that letter, or for what was reported by Chaput in 2007, or for what was reported to Rome by those sometimes described as 'the temple police'. The offending section of his pastoral letter was:

Given our deeply held belief in the primacy of Eucharist for the identity, continuity and life of each parish community, we may well need to be much more open towards other options of ensuring that Eucharist may be celebrated. Several responses have been discussed internationally, nationally and locally

• ordaining married, single or widowed men who are chosen and endorsed by their local parish community

• welcoming former priests, married or single back to active ministry

• ordaining women, married or single

• recognising Anglican, Lutheran and Uniting Church Orders.

• While we continue to reflect carefully on these options we remain committed to actively promoting vocations to the current celibate male priesthood and open to inviting priests from overseas.

If he was sacked for what he wrote in his Advent letter about the possible ordination of women, married priests, and recognition of other orders 'Rome willing', there would have been no need for Archbishop Chaput later to make his visit and his report. And let's remember that Morris had published a clarification of his pastoral letter on his website saying:

In my Advent Pastoral Letter of 2006 I outlined some of the challenges facing the diocese into the future. In that letter I made reference to various options about ordination that were and are being talked about in various places, as part of an exercise in the further investigation of truth in these matters. Unfortunately some people seem to have interpreted that reference as suggesting that I was personally initiating options that are contrary to the doctrine and discipline of the Church. As a bishop I cannot and would not do that and I indicated this in the local media at the time.

But then again if he was sacked for matters detailed in Chaput's report, we are left wondering why Chaput being apprised of the Advent letter and having completed his visit would have told the Diocesan Chancellor Brian Sparksman how extraordinarily surprising it would be if Morris were to be sacked. As they drove back to Brisbane after the visitation, Chaput told Sparksman, 'I would be astonished if you were to lose your bishop.' The matter is a complete mess reflecting very poorly on a Church which prides itself on a Code of Canon law which provides for the protection of the rights of all Christ's faithful, including priests and bishops.

As Jeff Scully says, 'You wouldn't give Bill Morris full marks for preaching but you would give him 11/10 for teamwork.' If Pope Francis were to refer future complaints back to the bishops' conference, we could at least expect greater sensitivity to the pastoral needs and concerns which preoccupied Bishop Morris. There would still be the occasional outrider like Cardinal Pell who erroneously claimed when speaking to an American Catholic news agency that 'the diocese was divided quite badly and the bishop hasn't demonstrated that he's a team player'. That's quite a claim coming from an archbishop whose own auxiliary Geoffrey Robinson had cause to say, 'He's not a team player, he never has been.' I think part the problem has been that in our Church people have had in mind two separate teams. There is the Roman curia team, and there is the local church team. There are those like Cardinal Pell who have played with the Roman curia team providing exclusive avenues for reporting on the local team, and then there are those like Bishop Morris who have played with the local church team knowing little about the workings of the Roman team. One message of Francis is that it's time to bring both teams together, and the Roman team is not always right.

In Evangelii Gaudium, Francis says:

Here I repeat for the entire Church what I have often said to the priests and laity of Buenos Aires: I prefer a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rath­er than a Church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security. I do not want a Church concerned with being at the centre and which then ends by being caught up in a web of obsessions and procedures. If something should rightly disturb us and trouble our consciences, it is the fact that so many of our brothers and sisters are living without the strength, light and consolation born of friend­ship with Jesus Christ, without a community of faith to support them, without meaning and a goal in life. More than by fear of going astray, my hope is that we will be moved by the fear of remaining shut up within structures which give us a false sense of security, within rules which make us harsh judges, within habits which make us feel safe, while at our door people are starving and Jesus does not tire of saying to us: 'Give them something to eat' (Mk 6:37).

Bill Morris wanted to feed the people with the Eucharist all the way from Toowoomba to Birdsville.

Some of the most heartening remarks out of all this profoundly disheartening saga detailed by Bishop Morris have been the public affirmations of some of his fellow Queensland bishops. Ray Benjamin, the long retired bishop of Townsville, joined issue with some of the Catholic press in Australia labeling his brother bishop a heretic. Benjamin wrote:

I was distressed to read that The Record has associated Bishop Bill Morris with the ugly word 'heresy', especially coming from a publication which I have known and respected for many years. In what sense could he be demoted to such a level? His thoughts on women as priests, (shared with half the Bishops of the world) were always expressed in humble submission to the Church's authority. At no stage did he ever nominate or encourage any woman towards priesthood. Surely no heresy there. Regarding Bishop Bill's attitude to Non-Catholic clergy, we must not find ourselves transported back to the bitterness and name-calling of past centuries. Our Catholic attitude to other church communities has developed in many positive ways. Our Popes and senior Prelates have, for years now, been regularly visiting and sharing with their non-Catholic counterparts, in prayer, preaching and seeking the truth together. Why is Pope Benedict insisting on attending the upcoming Assisi Inter- Faith Conference, against the wishes of his 'safe' advisers? We have a whole Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, with a Cardinal at its head, urging all Catholics everywhere into ecumenical endeavours. Students for our Catholic Priesthood are studying Scripture at the feet of Protestant scholars. With the so-called 'mainstream' Churches we willingly share one-another's Baptisms and Marriages as sacred, binding, and life giving. In sixty-two years as a Catholic Priest and Bishop, after some early years of self righteous superiority (of which I am now a bit ashamed), I have come to accept that the vast majority of non-catholic pastors I meet are truly men of God, committed to a lifetime of humble service, responding not only to the 'vocation' of their communities, but equally responding to the urging of God's Holy Spirit. Who else will care for those waiting Christian communities? In our many ecumenical endeavours, for any Catholic to smile and offer the right hand of welcome and friendship to such good people, while keeping the left hand tightly behind our back, reminding us that they are, after all well-meaning heretics, would, I feel, be more heretical than anything Bishop Morris ever said or even imagined.

After attending the huge farewell mass for Bill Morris in Toowoomba, James Foley, bishop of Cairns wrote:

The reasons, the causes and the motivations for what has occurred may be known only unto God, Who alone may judge. Consistently and officially it has been stated that neither Bill's own integrity nor his pastoral effectiveness are questioned. The fruits — the proof — of this were palpably evident in Sunday's celebration. Now, after almost two decades attending episcopal testimonials and funerals, I have never witnessed so simple yet profound an outpouring of appreciation and love. As one of the other bishops there observed afterwards: The best way to go may be to get sacked!...Never have I been more struck than by the sincerity and depth of Faith at this recent Mass of Thanksgiving. The solid no-nonsense Catholic Faith of the people of the Toowoomba Diocese was un-self-consciously and un-pretentiously on display.

Bill’s book highlights especially through the process suggested by the group gathered for dinner after the Concannon Oration — a report commissioned from retired Justice William Carter and the subsequent canonical report by Fr. Ian Waters — that Bishop Morris was denied natural justice. As William Carter said at the Brisbane Launch, ‘Scripture abounds with references to justice and to our need to ‘act justly’ in our personal lives. Show me the law or doctrine which exempts the pope and the cardinals three from compliance with this same requirement in the circumstances of a case like this? This is why this book had to be written.’

In 2012 on the feast of St Benedict, I was back in the Toowoomba Cathedral for the episcopal ordination of Bill Morris's successor, Bob McGuckin. The presiding prelate was Archbishop Mark Coleridge. Coleridge was very severe in his homily. He said:

[T]here's one point in the Rule where Benedict abandons moderation and speaks with a quite untypical severity. He is describing the four kinds of monk, and he speaks approvingly of cenobites and hermits, both of whom live under the rule of an Abbot, one in community, the other in solitude. But then he lashes the free-wheelers he calls sarabaites and gyrovagues. These are the wandering monks who submit to no authority but their own and call holy whatever pleases them, moving from monastery to monastery and abusing hospitality to gratify their own desires at every turn. They are do-it-yourself monks who are a law unto themselves. In the terms we have heard in the Gospel of John, they do not remain in the love of Christ but stay imprisoned in the love of self which, according to St Benedict, is the way of perdition ...

If a Bishop fails to listen to the words of the Master, he will prove to be a law unto himself, every bit as bad as the wandering monks, or worse, since he is the shepherd of the flock.

Our own situation is different in many ways, but the Diocese of Toowoomba has known turbulence in recent times. St Benedict points the way forward — not just for the new Bishop but for the entire community of the Diocese. The way beyond all turbulence is a new listening to the voice of Christ at the heart of the Church, a new obedience to the Lord, which alone can guarantee that we remain in his love.

Many of us in that Cathedral felt assaulted and we thought the pulpit was being used to commit another wrong on the ever pastoral William Morris who sat there on the sanctuary, dignified, silent and condemned. These were the fading days of Benedict's papacy. Hopefully under the leadership of Pope Francis we will hear no more homilies like that from our church leaders in Australia, and we will treasure the pastoral insights of bishops like Bill Morris as well as the theological acumen of popes like Benedict at his best, spared the reckless lack of concern for justice and transparency shown by the three cardinals and some others on the Roman team who simply thought it was time to teach the Toowoomba team a lesson. Mind you, Benedict was well past his prime when he wrote to Morris that John Paul II 'has decided infallibly and irrevocably that the Church has not the right to ordain women to the priesthood'.

It is no longer appropriate for Church hierarchs to claim that notions of transparency, due process and natural justice are antithetical to the hierarchical nature of the Church or to the primacy of the papacy. The primacy is not to be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously; and defenders of the Church will want to go to great lengths to ensure that the papal office is not perceived to be exercised without sufficient regard to the circumstances and evidence of a case. For the Pope to be totally free in the appointment, transfer and removal of bishops, he and his flock have to be assured that his curial officials exercise their power to recommend appointment, transfer or removal in a just and transparent manner.

The laity, the religious, the presbyterate and the bishops in Australia are sure to have a heightened 21st century notion of justice, transparency, and due process. This heightened notion is a gift for the contemporary Church. As the present royal commission highlights, it is a precondition for the Church's continued institutional existence in this country. It is one of the works of the Spirit. It is not antithetical to the nature of the Church. Lumen Gentium puts it well:

Since the kingdom of Christ is not of this world the Church or people of God in establishing that kingdom takes nothing away from the temporal welfare of any people. On the contrary it fosters and takes to itself, insofar as they are good, the ability, riches and customs in which the genius of each people expresses itself. Taking them to itself it purifies, strengthens, elevates and ennobles them.

The Church of the 21st century should be the exemplar of due process, natural justice and transparency — purifying, strengthening, elevating and ennobling these riches and customs of contemporary Western societies which are the homes and social constructs for many of the faithful, including those most directly impacted by the decision to force the dismissal of Bishop Morris.

While there can be little useful reflection and critique of the final decision of Pope Benedict to force the early retirement of Bishop Morris, there is plenty of scope to review the processes and the evidence leading to the submission of the brief for dismissal provided by curial officials to the Holy Father.

I have followed the Morris saga closely. My one new insight from reading Bill's book is that he was sacked because he was too much a team player with his local church. By sacking their local leader, the Romans hoped to shatter the morale and direction of those who had planned the pastoral strategies of a country diocese stretched to the limits as a Eucharistic community soon to be deprived of priests in the Roman mould. I imagine it is still not possible for Pope Francis to apologise for the wrong done to Bishop Morris and the diocese of Toowoomba. The Roman Curia and its mindset would at least have that much of a hold over him. But wouldn't it be a grace for everyone, including those who perpetrated the wrong if he did? On your behalf, I do apologise to William Morris in the name of Christ's faithful here gathered immediately following the feast of Corpus Christi. I commend the book, urging you to buy it, and I commend the author to your prayers as he continues to minister as a bishop in good standing, convinced that 'the Church is at its best when it is most transparent, when the eyes of justice and the eyes of the Gospel are so clear that all rights are respected for individuals, no matter who they are in the community'.

______________________
At the time of writing, Frank Brennan SJ AO was professor of law at the Australian Catholic University and adjunct professor at the College of Law and the National Centre for Indigenous Studies, Australian National University.

Excerpt from Challenges and Opportunities for the Church in the 21st Century: Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ - 29 November 2015

Conference Panel, APTO Conference
University House, ANU, 29 November 2015

Opening the door for women in our churches

Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ

Mine is the Church of the west which is most behind in accommodating the place for women at the Eucharistic table. When asked about women's ordination in June 2013, Pope Francis replied, 'The Church has spoken and says no ... That door is closed.' The one consolation is that he used the image of a door and not a wall. At least a door can be opened if you have the key or if you are able to prise it with force over time.

Francis wrote in Evangelii Gaudium, 'The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion, but it can prove especially divisive if sacramental power is too closely identified with power in general.' It is even more divisive if those who reserve to themselves sacramental power determine that they alone can determine who has access to that power and legislate that the matter is not open for discussion. Given that the power to determine the teaching of the magisterium and the provisions of canon law is not a sacramental power, is there not a need to include women in the decision that the question is not open to discussion and in the contemporary quest for an answer to the question? Francis's position on this may be politic for the moment within the Vatican which has had a longtime preoccupation with shutting down the discussion, but the position is incoherent.

No one doubts the pastoral sensitivity of Pope Francis. But the Church will continue to suffer for as long as it does not engage in open, ongoing discussion and education about this issue. The official position is no longer comprehensible to most people of good will, and not even those at the very top of the hierarchy have a willingness or capacity to explain it.

The claim that the matter 'is not a question open to discussion' cannot be maintained unless sacramental power also includes the power to determine theology and the power to determine canon law. Ultimately the Pope's claim must be that only those possessed of sacramental power can determine the magisterium and canon law. Conceding for the moment the historic exclusion of women from the sacramental power of presidency at Eucharist, we need to determine if 'the possible role of women in decision-making in different areas of the Church's life' could include the power to contribute to theological discussion and the shaping of the magisterium and to canonical discussion about sanctions for participating in theological discussion on set topics such as the ordination of women. As Francis says, 'Demands that the legitimate rights of women be respected, based on the firm conviction that men and women are equal in dignity, present the Church with profound and challenging questions which cannot be lightly evaded.'

______________________

The complete text of this presentation is available at https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/challenges-and-opportunities-for-the-catholic-church-in-the-21st-century

Excerpt from Becoming a Church for Mission 2030: Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ - 17 May 2017

Closing keynote address at the Catholic Mission conference Mission: one heart many voices 2017

Sydney, 17 May 2017. Listen on Soundcloud

And as we know, we are all sinners, including the bishops and priests who walk with us, and the bishops and priests who judge us and abandon us.

We Catholics need to understand that over time the changes we make to how we teach and the changes we observe as the outcomes of teachings can even result in changes to what we actually teach. Those changes cannot come from individual bishops but they can be authorised by the pope, either with or without a council of bishops. I call to mind the pioneering work of the American jurist John T. Noonan who died last month. He wrote a book called The Church That Can and Cannot Change. In that book, he researched the fundamental change in church teaching over the years on matters such as usury, slavery and marriage. In his obituary of Noonan, the great moral theologian Charles Curran wrote:

Fr. Frank Brennan, sj

Noonan, in looking back on these changes and developments, notes that the process of change requires a complex constellation of forces. There is no readily available grid for determining how change occurs. Noonan agrees with Vatican II that change comes from the contemplation of believers, the experience of spiritual realities, and the preaching of the church. He wants to avoid the extremes of maintaining that no change can and should occur in what the church has consistently taught in the past on moral issues and the modernist approach that doctrine is only the projection of human needs. The great commandment of love of God and of neighbour, the great principles of justice and charity, continue to govern all development.

As the Church of 2030, we need to be more attentive to the contemplation of believers and our experience of spiritual realities, as well as the preaching of the church. At the royal commission, Bishop Vincent Long, himself a migrant, refugee and victim of sexual abuse in the Church told the commission: 'It's no secret that we have been operating, at least under the two previous pontificates, from what I'd describe as a perfect society model where there is a neat, almost divinely inspired, pecking order, and that pecking order is heavily tilted towards the ordained ... I think we really need to examine seriously that kind of model of Church where it promotes the superiority of the ordained and it facilitates that power imbalance between the ordained and the non-ordained, which in turn facilitates that attitude of clericalism.' We have been blessed to have Bishop Vincent address us at this conference.

A generation ago, it was fashionable in Catholic circles to parody some of us as cafeteria Catholics — those choosing only those teachings or practices which resonated with their desires or preferences. Those proffering the adverse judgments were usually satisfied of their orthodoxy and orthopraxis because they followed the liturgical rubrics attentively and affirmed papal teaching on the 'neuralgic issues': contraception, homosexuality, abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research, and the indissolubility of marriage. They also affirmed the papal decrees stating that ordination must forever be reserved to men, even claiming that such utterances were infallible. Francis has made it clear that most, if not all, of us can now be parodied as cafeteria Catholics, and that's because we are all sinners in need of God's mercy. Individually, we get only part of the picture; together we can complete the picture of God's grace in the world.

We in the west are all citizens of wealthy nation states which consume more than our fair share and maintain secure borders aimed at excluding those in need from obtaining the necessities of life. We are members of a Church which in our lifetime has failed to protect its most vulnerable members, children. We are the beneficiaries of an international economic order which cheats billions of the opportunities to achieve their human flourishing in community. We are all in need of forgiveness. There is none of us who can be excluded from God’s mercy. Francis says, 'There are two ways of thinking which recur throughout the Church's history: casting off and reinstating.' He is not one to cast off anyone too readily, and he is prepared to go to great lengths in trying to reinstate any individual who has fallen short of the ideal but who is seeking God's grace and mercy. He is adamant: 'No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!’

He says that a person can be living in God's grace while 'in an objective situation of sin', and that the sacraments, including the Eucharist might help, because the Eucharist 'is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak'. It's the sick and supplicant who need the doctor, not the well and the righteous. Speaking to the Bishops of the United States some of whom have been great warriors in the culture wars fearlessly declaring Catholic doctrine in the public square, Francis told them that 'we are promoters of the culture of encounter' and 'living sacraments of the embrace between God's riches and our poverty'. He heralded an altogether different approach: 'Harsh and divisive language does not befit the tongue of a pastor, it has no place in his heart. Although it may momentarily seem to win the day, only the enduring allure of goodness and love remains truly convincing'.

I must confess that Pope Francis is not the embodiment of everything I think the Church needs to be by 2030 if we are to return to being the people of God envisaged by Jesus and enlivened by the Spirit. When asked about women's ordination in June 2013, Pope Francis replied, 'The Church has spoken and says no ... That door is closed.' The one consolation is that he used the image of a door and not a wall. At least a door can be opened if you have the key or if you are able to prise it with force over time.

Francis wrote in Evangelii Gaudium, 'The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion, but it can prove especially divisive if sacramental power is too closely identified with power in general.' It is even more divisive if those who reserve to themselves sacramental power determine that they alone can determine who has access to that power and legislate that the matter is not open for discussion. Given that the power to determine both the teaching of the magisterium and the provisions of canon law is not a sacramental power, is there not a need to include women in the decision that the question is not open to discussion and in the contemporary quest for an answer to the question? Francis's position on this may be politic for the moment within the Vatican which has had a long-time preoccupation with shutting down the discussion, but the position is incoherent.

No one doubts the pastoral sensitivity of Pope Francis. But the Church will continue to suffer for as long as it does not engage in open, ongoing discussion and education about this issue. The official position is no longer comprehensible to most people of good will, and not even those at the very top of the hierarchy have a willingness or capacity to explain it.

The claim that the matter ‘is not a question open to discussion’ cannot be maintained unless sacramental power also includes the power to determine theology and the power to determine canon law. Ultimately the pope’s claim must be that only those possessed of sacramental power can determine the magisterium and canon law. Conceding for the moment the historical exclusion of women from the sacramental power of presidency at the Eucharist, we need to determine if ‘the possible role of women in decision making in different areas of the Church’s life could contribute the power to contribute to theological discussion and the shaping of the magisterium and to canonical discussion about sanctions for participating in theological discussion on set topics such as the ordination of women. As Francis says, ‘Demands that the legitimate rights of women be respected, based on the firm conviction that men and women are equal in dignity, present the Church with profound and challenging questions which cannot be lightly evaded.’

When I was a schoolboy, it was unimaginable that a woman be prime minister, governor-general or chief justice of Australia. These offices are now not only open to women. They have been occupied by women. As Church in 2030, we will have to provide a place at the table for all the baptised. We will have to extend our care and attention to all those in need, particularly the poor and our Mother Earth. We will have to be open to change — the change the comes by including the marginalised at the centre. Let's recall (Acts 6:1-7) that 'as the number of disciples continued to grow, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution. So the Twelve called together the community of the disciples and said, "It is not right for us to neglect the word of God to serve at table. Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, filled with the Spirit and wisdom, whom we shall appoint to this task, whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word." The proposal was acceptable to the whole community, so they chose' seven men all with Greek names. The disciples then laid hands on them. One of the them was Stephen who a short time later was stoned to death, and not for the way he was distributing the food. The early Christian community was more than able to adapt their structures, their ministries, and their roles to give everyone a place at the table, including the marginalised Hellenists who had been left out by the dominating Hebrews. The Church of 2030 will need to be equally adaptable providing a place at the table for the indigenous, for the refugee, for the victim of abuse, for the woman who sees the face of Christ in the hospitality of women and who feels the hands of Christ in the ministrations of women. Tradition, authority, and routine ritual need to be enfleshed and animated by the power of the Spirit which filled our hearts as we stood as one and applauded Bishop Long yesterday morning, as we sat spell-bound while Ginn Fourie opened our hearts to mercy and forgiveness, and as we witnessed Evelyn Parkin weep for Poor Fellow Our Country. Let's go forth on our mission of justice and mercy being the church for mission 2030. Thank you.

____________________________
The complete text of Fr. Brennan’s address is available at https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/becoming-a-church-for-mission-2030

Excerpt from Leading in Diverse Times : Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ - 16 July 2018

Tropical and Topical, 2018 National Catholic Principals' Conference

Cairns Convention Centre, 16 July 2018. Listen

. . .

Topical issues deserving our consideration

1. Women and the Church

Kristina Keneally was unapologetic in putting the place of women in our church front and centre. And so we should. How do we make our church credible in a world where human rights and the principle of non-discrimination are trumps? The Church's teachings on moral issues will maintain currency in the world in future only to the extent that the Church's own structures and actions reflect the rhetoric of human rights, and only to the extent that those rights are enjoyed by all within the Church. The place of women in our Church and the respect shown to laity when church fathers deliberate and pontificate are key indicators of the Church's capacity to be credible when agitating its distinctive perspective on the human rights challenges of the age.

Ours is the Church of the west which is most behind in accommodating the place for women at the Eucharistic table. When asked about women's ordination in June 2013, Pope Francis replied, 'The Church has spoken and says no. . . . That door is closed.' The one consolation is that he used the image of a door and not a wall. At least a door can be opened if you have the key or if you are able to prise it with force over time.

Francis wrote in Evangelii Gaudium, 'The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion, but it can prove especially divisive if sacramental power is too closely identified with power in general.' It is even more divisive if those who reserve to themselves sacramental power determine that they alone can determine who has access to that power and legislate that the matter is not open for discussion.  Given that the power to determine the teaching of the magisterium and the provisions of canon law is not a sacramental power, is there not a need to include women in the decision that the question is not open to discussion and in the contemporary quest for an answer to the question? Francis's position on this may be politic for the moment within the Vatican which has had a long-time preoccupation with shutting down the discussion, but the position is incoherent.

No one doubts the pastoral sensitivity of Pope Francis. But the Church will continue to suffer for as long as it does not engage in open, ongoing discussion and education about this issue. The official position is no longer comprehensible to most people of good will, and not even those at the very top of the hierarchy have a willingness or capacity to explain it. As school principals you know that gender inequality is no longer an option.

The claim that the matter 'is not a question open to discussion' cannot be maintained unless sacramental power also includes the power to determine theology and the power to determine canon law.  Ultimately the Pope's claim must be that only those possessed of sacramental power can determine the magisterium and canon law.  Conceding for the moment the historic exclusion of women from the sacramental power of presidency at Eucharist, we need to determine if 'the possible role of women in decision-making in different areas of the Church's life' could include the power to contribute to theological discussion and the shaping of the magisterium and to canonical discussion about sanctions for participating in theological discussion on set topics such as the ordination of women.  As Francis says, 'Demands that the legitimate rights of women be respected, based on the firm conviction that men and women are equal in dignity, present the Church with profound and challenging questions which cannot be lightly evaded.' If they continue to be evaded, the Church's credibility as an exemplar of human rights will be tarnished irreparably.

_______________

The complete text of this talk is available here: https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/leading-in-diverse-times

Finding Meaning In a Chaotic Changing World - Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ - John Wallis Memorial Lecture 07 May 2017

 [Note: Highlighting of text is our's.]
________________________________

John Wallis Memorial Lecture, Toowoomba, 7 May 2017

The last time I delivered a formal lecture here in Toowoomba was the 2010 Concannon Oration. I took the opportunity to reflect on the Vatican visitation by US Archbishop Chaput from Denver following upon Bishop William Morris's courageous and very pastoral Advent letter of 2006. I saluted Bishop Morris and the presbyterate and faithful of this diocese who had stood by him so resolutely in those difficult times. This is part of what I said at the time:

In that pastoral letter, your bishop pointed out that you would have just 19 active priests by 2014. Most would be old men, and they would be spending much of their time on the road. He outlined a list of pastoral responses to this decline in priests including: the third rite of reconciliation; the ordination of women and married men; welcoming former priests, married or single, back to active ministry; and recognising Anglican, Lutheran and Uniting Church orders. He indicated his willingness to pursue any option which Rome would allow. I was very troubled last year to read the account by Fr Jeff Scully in the Spring issue of The Swag, the national priests' newsletter, in which he noted: 'How can a respected leader of a local church be investigated without ever finding the content of the report based on these investigations? Is this not unthinkable in this age of transparency and accountability?'

I then asked my own questions: ‘Is it not time for the open conversation to commence? Is it not time for all of us to learn new pastoral ways of being Church before new generations in country areas of Australia are completely denied access to the sacraments?’

I was pleased to return to the diocese on the occasion of the installation of your new bishop and to stand and pray in solidarity with you all as you contemplated the injustice done to William Morris, as exposed by the expert and professional reports done by retired Supreme Court judge William Carter and the canon lawyer Fr Ian Waters. Two years ago, I published a little book entitled The People's Quest for Leadership in Church and State. Having noted how the royal commission found no fault in the processes of Bishop Morris in dealing with abuse issues, I wrote: 'The Australian Church needs pastoral down to earth bishops like Morris who have been proved to 'get it' when it comes to dealing pastorally and professionally with child sexual abuse. His reinstatement would send a clear heartening message to all those committed to child protection.' How good it would be were Pope Francis to apologise to William Morris for his shoddy treatment by Vatican curial officials.

I had the great honour of delivering the John Wallis Memorial Lectures in Hobart and Launceston in October 2013 just after the election of Pope Francis. On that occasion just seven months into the new papacy, I spoke on Pope Francis and Australia's Social Justice Agenda. The John Wallis Foundation continues the mission of the Missionary Sisters of Service, 'seeking to make a difference to people by creating opportunities for personal and spiritual formation, building community, developing leadership, working for social and eco-justice, co-operating with people of goodwill from various faiths and cultures for building up vital harmonious communities'. John Wallis would be well pleased. When a young theology student in Melbourne I got to know John's priest brother Brian. I had the privilege of occasionally meeting John who struck me as a very humble, spiritual priest grounded in the daily concerns of faith and survival of ordinary Australians. He had an infectious smile and a very gentle face. I think he would be well pleased that we are now gathered in Toowoomba to honour his memory and to recall the wonderful contribution made by the Missionary Sisters of Service here in this far flung diocese. I presume that many of you resonate with Martin Flanagan's observation in the 2012 Wallis Lecture:

I never 'got' the Roman Catholic church — I never got its costumes and rituals. In particular, I never got how the Vatican, a centrepiece of medieval European pomp and privilege, saw itself as the mouthpiece of the itinerant Jewish rebel I read about in the gospels. Having said that, I need to add that as an adult I keep meeting Catholics who excite me and, as someone who gets asked to speak in lots of schools, I have often noted a special energy in Catholic schools, one that seems to derive from their emphasis on social justice. It's as if there is a Catholic spirit in the world that exists independently of the leadership of the Catholic church — that spirit to me is like an old welcoming ghost I run into now and then.

Francis is pointing the way to many more people 'getting' the Roman Catholic Church — even people who thought it was well beyond their interest or concern. He is helping us to find meaning in a chaotic/changing world, even amidst the mess of our Church in the wake of the royal commission.

Francis is theologically orthodox, politically conservative, comfortable in his own skin, infectiously pastoral, and truly committed to the poor. Of late, most thinking Catholics engaged in the world have wondered how you could possibly be theologically orthodox and infectiously pastoral at the one time, how you could be politically conservative and still have a commitment to the poor, how you could be comfortable in your own skin — at ease in Church and in the public square, equally comfortable and uncomfortable in conversation with fawning devotees and hostile critics. Think only of Francis's remark during the press conference on the plane on the way back from World Youth Day in 2013: 'If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge him?' Gone are the days of rainbow sashes outside Cathedrals and threats of communion bans.

As Francis says in the lengthy interview he did for the Jesuit journal La Civilta Cattolica early in his papacy: 'We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner, preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are 'socially wounded' because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them.' In that interview he recalled:

A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: 'Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?' We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.

Here is a pope who is not just about creating wiggle room or watering down the teachings of the Church. No, he wants to admit honestly to the world that we hold in tension definitive teachings and pastoral yearnings — held together coherently only by mercy and forgiveness. I was pleased to hear the new bishop of Townsville Tim Harris at his episcopal ordination last week when speaking about Pope Francis say: 'Under him, the teachings of the Church don't change. But how we teach and apply them does. As a bishop, I can only teach what the Church teaches and I believe in that teaching. But if any of you fail, my friends, to live up to that teaching, I won't abandon you, I will do what I can to accompany you, something that I would hope every single priest of this diocese is already doing in his ministry. Our church needs to be known not for its predetermined sanctions and judgments, but how it walks gently and compassionately with the sinner in order to heal the sin.' And as we know, we are all sinners, including the bishops and priests who walk with us, and the bishops and priests who judge us and abandon us.

We Catholics need to understand that over time the changes we make to how we teach and the changes we observe as the outcomes of teachings can result in changes to what we actually teach. Those changes cannot come from individual bishops but they can be authorised by the pope, either with or without a council of bishops. I call to mind the pioneering work of the American jurist John T Noonan who died last month. I was privileged to meet Noonan over dinner a couple of times in the US in recent years. He was one of the great Catholic thinkers in the US. Prior to the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968, he wrote a definitive book on contraception. In recent years he wrote a book called The Church That Can and Cannot Change. The great moral theologian Charles Curran wrote an obituary on Noonan in the National Catholic Reporter. Fr Curran has incurred the wrath of the Vatican big time for his own writings. After the Christian Ethics conference in Miami one year, I gave Curran a lift to the airport and asked him how he maintained his joy and inner freedom. He replied, 'Once they've dropped the atomic bomb on you, there's nothing more they can do to you.' Here is part of what Curran wrote reflecting on the life of Noonan:

Noonan, in looking back on these changes and developments, notes that the process of change requires a complex constellation of forces. There is no readily available grid for determining how change occurs. Noonan agrees with Vatican II that change comes from the contemplation of believers, the experience of spiritual realities, and the preaching of the church. He wants to avoid the extremes of maintaining that no change can and should occur in what the church has consistently taught in the past on moral issues and the modernist approach that doctrine is only the projection of human needs. The great commandment of love of God and of neighbour, the great principles of justice and charity, continue to govern all development.

At the royal commission, one of Australia's newest bishops, Vincent Long, himself a migrant, refugee and victim of sexual abuse in the Church told the commission:

The thing the church needs most today is the ability to heal wounds and to warm the hearts of the faithful; it needs nearness, proximity. I see the church as a field hospital after battle. It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars! You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything else. Heal the wounds, heal the wounds ... And you have to start from the ground up.

In his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, Francis writes: 'Frequently, we act as arbiters of grace rather than its facilitators. But the Church is not a tollhouse; it is the house of the Father, where there is a place for everyone, with all their problems.' More recently in Amoris Laetitia, he repeats the image of the field hospital and complements it with other images: 'The Church must accompany with attention and care the weakest of her children, who show signs of a wounded and troubled love, by restoring in them hope and confidence, like the beacon of a lighthouse in a port or a torch carried among the people to enlighten those who have lost their way or who are in the midst of a storm'. He then goes on to insist that mercy must be the hallmark of all we say and do: 'Mercy is the very foundation of the Church's life. All of her pastoral activity should be caught up in the tenderness which she shows to believers; nothing in her preaching and her witness to the world can be lacking in mercy.'

There is no way that Francis wants to abandon the ideals and the commitment to truth and justice so well exemplified by his predecessors John Paul II and Benedict. He embodies Paul's statement to the Colossians: 'And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.' (Col:3:14) He commissions us to risk and envision our Catholic services by planning and acting with love and goodness, espousing ideals, affirming truth and a commitment to justice, and seeking grace and mercy in the mess and complexity of our world, in the reality of the market place, and in the lives of ordinary people.

Let there be no mistake about the depth and width of the chasm between our present pope and some of those bishops who waged the culture wars in times past as Pope John Paul's most loyal storm troopers. This is now playing out in Rome and will be an ongoing tension in our Church for at least another generation or two. Speaking last September to the Bishops of the United States, some of whom went to the barricades in times past declaring that they would refuse to give communion to a Catholic presidential candidate who dared contemplate the appointment of a Supreme Court justice not opposed to overruling the Supreme Court's earlier pro-abortion decisions, Francis said:

I know that you face many challenges and that the field in which you sow is unyielding, and that there is always the temptation to give in to fear, to lick one's wounds, to think back on bygone times and to devise harsh responses to fierce opposition. And yet we are promoters of the culture of encounter. We are living sacraments of the embrace between God's riches and our poverty. We are witnesses of the abasement and the condescension of God who anticipates in love our every response. For this, harsh and divisive language does not befit the tongue of a pastor, it has no place in his heart; although it may momentarily seem to win the day, only the enduring allure of goodness and love remains truly convincing.

In November 2016, four elderly Cardinals who were in the peak of their powers during the previous two papacies took the unprecedented step of publishing their concerns about Pope Francis's teachings quite rightly pointing out that some of the things being said by Francis are irreconcilable or at least inconsistent with previous clear statements by Pope John Paul II.

Cardinals Brandmuller (who previously chaired the Pontifical Committee of Historical Sciences), Burke (who previously headed the Church's most supreme court), Caffarra, erstwhile archbishop of Bologna, and Meisner, erstwhile archbishop of Cologne think Francis is seriously in error when he teaches about mercy and justice, right and wrong, and the place of conscience.

With the benefit of hindsight, we can now say that back in 1993, Pope John Paul II went too far in stipulating one and only one way of moral reasoning in the Catholic tradition. This way had strong appeal for the present dissentients. Pope Francis does not even refer to John Paul's detailed 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor. Invoking Veritatis Splendor, the four cardinals insist that there are absolute moral norms which prohibit intrinsically evil acts which are binding without exception. Circumstances and intention cannot transform these acts. There are objective situations of grave habitual sin. They are insistent that Veritatis Splendor both excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and emphasises that conscience can never be authorised to legitimate exceptions to moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts.

Just to give one comparison of the divergent thinking between John Paul II and Francis. In Veritatis Splendor, John Paul II writes:

Conscience is not an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what is good and what is evil. Rather there is profoundly imprinted upon it a principle of obedience vis-à-vis the objective norm which establishes and conditions the correspondence of its decisions with the commands and prohibitions which are at the basis of human behaviour.

You will appreciate that it's this sort of thinking which underlies the Church's ban on Catholic health providers assisting even married couples with IVF. It's this sort of reasoning which was invoked to stop the Sisters of Charity in Sydney from setting up a supervised injecting room aimed at harm minimisation for long time drug users.

Francis has an altogether different approach in Amoris Laetitia:

Individual conscience needs to be better incorporated into the Church's praxis ….. Naturally, every effort should be made to encourage the development of an enlightened conscience, formed and guided by the responsible and serious discernment of one's pastor, and to encourage an ever greater trust in God's grace. Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one's limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal

It's only the legalists who will be able to resolve this conflict to their satisfaction by saying that John Paul's statement is contained in an encyclical while Francis's plea is only in an apostolic exhortation. No doubt, John Paul II was a pope and a world leader for his time. So too, Francis is a pope and a world leader for our time. John Paul would not have the same 'cut through' today as pope as he had when the Berlin Wall came down and when he was appointing muscular bishops who thrived on the culture wars. Francis has named the chasm. And the dissenting cardinals have highlighted how deep and wide it is. This chasm opens new possibilities and new risks for those of us wanting to show mercy and love to those who most need it.

Francis says that a person can be living in God's grace while 'in an objective situation of sin', and that the sacraments, including the Eucharist might help, because the Eucharist 'is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak'. It's the sick and supplicant who need the doctor, not the well and the righteous.

In his 2013 La Civilta Cattolica interview, Pope Francis explained:

We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time. The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church's pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently. Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus. We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow.

If we are honest with ourselves, many of us have wondered how we can maintain our Christian faith and our commitment to the Catholic Church in the wake of the sexual abuse crisis and the many judgmental utterances about sexuality and reproduction — the Church that has spoken longest and loudest about sex in all its modalities seems to be one of the social institutions most needing to get its own house in order in relation to trust, fidelity, love, respect and human dignity. The royal commission hearings have left us with heavy hearts especially about some of our Australian church leadership before 1996 but we do have a spring in our step that our present Pope, together with rigorous, independent legal processes (even in the face of much media pre-judgment) and local church commitments to transparency and solicitous care of victims, including the establishment of the Truth Justice and Healing Council, provide us with the structures and leadership necessary for 'cooperation, openness, full disclosure and justice for victims and survivors'. The chief Christian paradox is that we are lowly sinners who dare to profess the highest ideals, and that sometimes we cannot do it on our own — we need the help of our critics and the State. Our greatest possibilities are born of the promise of forgiveness and redemption, the hope of new life emerging from suffering and even death. Out of our past failings and our present shame can come future promise and hope.

When I finished my schooling at Downlands College Toowoomba in 1970, the world seemed a fairly secure and predictable place. Yes, we Australians were involved in the Vietnam War, and the Cold War was an ever present reality. And university students were protesting in many cities through the western world. But those of us who did well at school were assured Commonwealth scholarships and free university education. Those who wanted apprenticeships could find them. Those who wanted a job were assured employment. There had not been a change of government in Canberra for more than a generation.

Almost five decades on, things are looking very different as I return to Toowoomba, visiting in my new role as CEO of Catholic Social Services Australia. Social policy is being dumbed down by both sides of politics in the western world. In an age of 'budget repair', it is just a sidebar to economic policy which is a contest of ideas about how best to grow the size of the pie thereby providing a slice for 'the deserving poor' without having to redistribute too much of the pie, while 'the undeserving poor' drop off the edge as they would have anyway. For those of us committed to social justice, the so-called 'undeserving poor' should be the litmus test of our commitment to the human dignity of all persons. We believe human dignity is innate; it is not acquired by displaying socially attractive attributes like employability.

New government initiatives such as community home care packages and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) are a real challenge to those of us who profess a preferential option for the poor, wanting to fill the gaps which other providers leave untouched so that coverage might be truly universal. We now find that we are having to advertise ourselves, having to engage in economies of scale, having to give each client value for money, thus having less discretionary income to allocate to the poorest of the poor. Instead of tendering for service contracts, we are being invited to the table by government to co-design packages which match government objectives. We are less able to cross-subsidise to the benefit of those least able to pay. The margin for mission is not what it once was. The business case is dictating that we abandon some of our neediest clients, or is it?

There is less public trust in our major political parties which used be the primary spaces for negotiating and effecting the compromises necessary in any democracy committed to the right balance between the popular will and the recognition of the due rights and entitlements of all citizens. These compromises are now effected through back room deals with the increasing Senate cross bench with its plurality of philosophies, or at least a variety of self-interested claims. We turn over prime ministers more rapidly than we do cars or white goods.

Our Church has a credibility problem in the public square and a transmission and translation problem with the young. The findings of the royal commission have been devastating and shocking. Our church has a declining pool of clergy from the worshipping community. Overseas clergy, unlike their predecessors, are not drawn primarily from migrant communities already strongly represented in the Australian Church. These new clergy often come from cultures where the 'clericalist' mind-set is even more tight than it was in Australia in the 1950s. We rightly face increased political insistence on compliance with government regulation regardless of church special pleading. Our structures are clunky and outdated. We continue to tolerate, accept and even theologise the ongoing failure to give women their place at the table. Any young girls sitting in our pews now know from experience that a woman can be governor-general, prime minister or chief justice. All three options were unimaginable in Australia when I was a boy at Downlands.

The Brexit vote, the election of Donald Trump, and the re-emergence of One Nation all point to public disaffection with the status quo. But they don't point to practical answers making our world once again a secure and predictable place. We need to rediscover our trust in institutions and leaders.

On Tuesday evening, Treasurer Scott Morrison will deliver the first Budget of the narrowly re-elected Turnbull Coalition Government. Part the cost of the double dissolution election last July has been creation of a Senate with the largest, most diverse group of crossbenchers ever to sit on the red benches. This will make the passage of any new Budget contested measures difficult, particularly given the Prime Minister's vulnerability on his right flank, and the Labor Party's propensity to mimic the Opposition tactics adopted previously by Tony Abbott. The government needs to create a clear narrative as to how it will achieve equitable and sustainable growth through this Budget. Writing in The Monthly on 'The rise and stall of Malcolm Turnbull', Laura Tingle observes: 'While budgets don't have the punching power they once had to change the political narrative, this year's looms as a crucial opportunity for the prime minister and his government to make people take a second look at them.'

The federal Budget is not merely an economic statement. It is a social compact. It declares the government's priorities and displays the government's vision for Australia. Or at least, it should. We have never taxed as highly as the Scandinavians. We have never provided the same comprehensive suite of social services and hole-proof social welfare net as the Scandinavians. We have never taxed as lowly as the Americans. We have never relied so heavily as have the Americans on private philanthropy to meet the needs of the homeless on the streets. The strain on our health, education and social services is now showing. But there is no appetite in the major political parties for increased taxation. So, increased services in one sector need to be matched by savings in another. Submarines don't come free.

Part of this government's vision includes 'budget repair', 'jobs and growth' accompanied by corporate tax cuts, more affordable housing, a 'priority investment approach' to welfare reform, and a new model for education funding: 'Gonski 2.0'. However, the vision has been clouded by failures in community consultation, mixed messages in the 24/7 media cycle, and the complexity of compromises which need to be cut with Senate crossbenchers holding a variety of philosophies and agendas. The latest instance is last week's announcement of the school funding changes. No matter what the merits of the changes, it was stupid to announce a new ten-year funding plan without any consultation with the administrators of the Catholic education system, the second largest system in the country, educating 20 per cent of the school age population. Any government wanting to fund a first-rate education system needs to consider issues of equity, sustainability, choice and independence. Those issues will be seen to be properly weighted only after real consultation with all players. Government cannot just deliver the right answer with a media statement.

Government has a legitimate interest in reducing reliance on welfare assistance and in streamlining the provision of welfare services. But it must be done through respectful consultation with welfare providers and welfare recipients. Reform is not assisted by demonising recipients or sidelining long term providers. Government has every right to insist that recipients do what they can to get a job and to pursue training. But government has a duty to provide what's needed for basic sustenance when a person through no fault of their own cannot find a job or undertake training. Government has every right to insist that welfare providers be as efficient as possible, adapting to the modern approaches to welfare reform, including client-based funding and the priority investment approach. But government has the duty to continue block funding for the provision of services for the benefit of those citizens who cannot avail themselves of the new reforms. Think only of people with disabilities in remote parts of Australia trying to access services through the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It just can't be done without block funding being maintained for providers out back. The National Party should understand that.

Since the Global Financial Crisis, Australian governments of both persuasions have argued for and implemented policies to reduce our national debt and to return the Budget to surplus. Every Budget for the last decade has produced a deficit, with governments of both political persuasions espousing the desirability of a return to surplus. Since 2014 both the Abbott and Turnbull Governments have implemented a raft of measures which have saved billions of dollars from important areas of social services as well as welfare and family payments. These measures have unfairly placed the burden of 'budget repair' on those least able to cope. The government has promoted a divide between the 'lifters and leaners', between those who deserve and don't deserve our support. The poor and vulnerable are not the cause of our current economic circumstances; they are the main victims.

It's difficult to demonstrate our national commitment to mutual respect, equality and the fair go when we have so many families and children still living below the poverty line, when we have 105,000 Australians homeless on Budget night, when we have 250,000 Australians per annum seeking the services of homelessness agencies, when we have 200,000 households on the waiting list for affordable housing, and when so many of our young people are locked out of the job market, while having to survive on the inadequate NewStart allowance of $535.60 per fortnight.

This year's Budget is an opportunity for government to commit itself to mutual respect, equality and a fair go for the present generation of 'haves' and 'have nots', and for future generations whose financial burdens will be eased should the deficit be reduced and should growth be sustained. The balance is not readily found when the Prime Minister's leadership is fragile in his own party room, when the spirit of cooperation between government and opposition is lacking, and when the Senate cross bench is so fractious. Here's hoping.

The language of Catholic Social Teaching (CST) must always be prophetic, pedagogical and practical. CST is not just words. It's reflected in words, actions and structures. One of the credibility problems for our Church today is that we proclaim a message of justice, inclusion, and non-discrimination within a structure which is sexist and without sufficient theological coherence or scriptural warrant and which has been grossly neglectful of the best interests of the most vulnerable — abused children. CST provides us with ideas, feeds our imaginations, fires our passions, underpins our conversations, and animates our celebrations in relation to faith and justice — belief in a loving God and solidarity with our fellow human beings. Being Catholic, we respond as community, not as atomised individuals. Our responses are marked by service and ritual, informed by tradition and authority, as well as reflection on lived experience.

Our credibility as Church has been enhanced with Pope Francis. We see in him many of the finest aspects of our presently battered and ageing Church. In the end we will only be as credible in the public square as we are credible with each other — pilgrims on the way who take radically seriously Jesus and his call, together with our varied life experiences and authentic reflections on those experiences. We will only be credible as an institution if we and especially our leaders are seen to be attentive and respectful to the competencies and insights of others. Our Church is presently a strained, outdated social institution with an exclusively male hierarchy and clergy. But it is also the privileged locus for us to be called to the banquet of the Lord sharing theology and sacrament which have sustained the hearts and minds of similar pilgrims for two millennia. Last month, Francis Sullivan, the CEO of the Truth, Justice and Healing Council when addressing a large meeting of Concerned Catholics in Canberra said:

Our time to be imaginative and open to the promptings of the Spirit has well and truly arrived. Let us take up the challenge of Pope Francis and be a Church that is engaged, inclusive and messy. A Church that listens before speaking, understands before judging and seeks to be relevant rather than set apart.

Thank God for Pope Francis who is showing us the way, helping us to find meaning in our changing and chaotic world, putting a fresh spring in the step of all those Catholics holding in tension the prophetic and the practical, the theological and the humanist, the tradition and the contemporary reality. In the tradition of the Missionary Sisters of Service, let's commit ourselves afresh to serving the poor and proclaiming with joy the presence of the Risen Lord in our midst.

________________________________

Frank Brennan SJ is the CEO of Catholic Social Services Australia.

Greater Transparency Will Evolve the Church - Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ - 24 May 2012

Text is from Fr Frank Brennan SJ's address 'Re-imagining the Mission — A Pilgrimage of Faith Catholic Education Sandhurst Conference 2012: A Pilgrimage of Faith, presented 24 May 2012 at Catholic College Bendigo.

[Note 1: highlighting of text is our’s.]

[Note 2: In his address, Fr. Brennan references Australia’s Bishop William Morris. Bishop Morris was forced into early retirement by the Vatican because of his suggestion to open dialogue about women’s ordination. Morris’s pastorally sensitive suggestion was made out of his concern for growing numbers of Catholics being deprived of the Eucharist due to priest shortages. Women’s Ordination Worldwide publicly stood in solidarity with Bishop Morris and issued this press release: WOW Supports Australia’s Bishop William Morris - May 25, 2011. 

Bishop Morris’s removal happened in the context of Cardinal Bernard Law being given a post in Rome (and thereby escaping prosecution in the USA for protecting pedophile priests). Running parallel to this was the news of two bishops named in Ireland’s Murphy Commission whose resignations were rejected by the Vatican. The Murphy Commission found that despite sexual abuse being 'endemic' in boys' institutions, the church hierarchy protected perpetrators and allowed them to take up new positions teaching other children after their original victims had been sworn to secrecy.

__________________________________

Keynote Address, Sandhurst Catholic Education Conference 

We acknowledge the traditional custodians of this land, the Jaara people, and pay respect to their elders, past and present. We commit to working alongside Aboriginal people for reconciliation and justice.

Eight years I was here when your beloved Joe Grech had been your bishop for just three years. He was still fresh and full of energy. He was yet to show his compassion and commitment to refugees and asylum seekers which became his national contribution to the life of the Australian Church and society. Today I am with you in company with your new bishop Les Tomlinson and I join with you in praying that he will have a long, fresh and energised time as Bishop of Sandhurst.

2012 marks the 50th Anniversary of the beginning of the Second Vatican Council and the Strike for State Aid in Goulburn NSW in July 1962, both very significant events in the development of Catholic Education. We are invited to take these days to reimagine our mission on our pilgrimage of faith. Thanks for doing me the honour of opening the proceedings.

Catholic education and social justice

In the wake of the Gonski Review coming 50 years after the Goulburn Strike, I will offer only two observations on school funding, asking that there be a fair go for all children no matter what class of school their parents might choose for them.

First, I am one of those Australians who is not helped when told by one protagonist of an argument that funding is inequitable when one makes reference to the funds provided by only one level of government. In a federation like Australia, the equity of funding arrangements can be judged only by considering the taxpayer funding received from all levels of government.

Second, funding arrangements need to take in to account the heavy lifting done by different schools and networks of schools in providing education services to the neediest students including those with acute learning difficulties and those from families where parents have both few resources and little motivation for providing for the education of their children. There is much talk at the moment about residualisation of some state schools which are left to do the heavy lifting especially for children who just do not fit anywhere else in the education system. Schools which perform this heavy lifting deserve a higher level of funding. I make no attempt to quantify what that level should be.

When I studied philosophy more than 30 years ago, the guru on justice was Harvard professor John Rawls who wrote a book A Theory of Justice. He was in the social contract mould, proposing a simple thought experiment. Imagine everyone is placed behind a veil of ignorance where they do not know what their attributes, interests or place in society will be. In this Original Position, people would then choose a list of suitable arrangements to which they would be bound or to which they would voluntarily comply. Everyone would be entitled to the same list of basic liberties. The key offices in society would be open to everyone without discrimination. The unequal distribution of goods and opportunities would be justified in so far as it assisted the worst off in society to be better off than they would have been if no unequal distribution were permitted. For 30 years, social philosophers made their mark by agreeing or disagreeing with Rawls.

The philosopher Amatya Sen who won the Nobel Peace Prize for Economics recently published a book The Idea of Justice. He gives a simple example of three children and a flute. Bob is very poor and would like to have the flute because he has nothing else to play with. Carla made the flute and wants to keep it. Anne is the only one of the three children who knows how to play the flute and she plays it beautifully bringing pleasure to all who hear her. Who has the best claim on the flute? Sen tells us that the economic egalitarian would give it to Bob. The libertarian would insist that Carla retain the fruits of her labour. Most Australians without a second thought would simply assert, 'Carla made it; it's hers; the rest should stop complaining; if they want a flute they should make their own!' The utilitarian hedonist would give it to Anne. Fortunately we have more than one flute to appropriate for education in Australia. The resources are divisible. What are the relevant considerations when it comes to distributing the education dollar? Education for the poorest? Education for those who would most profit by it? Education for those who can afford it? These are real tensions for all of us making judgments on formulae for the allocation of scarce education resources.

Vatican II and Catholic Education 50 years On

In 2004 when addressing the Sandhurst Diocesan Education Conference, I asked, 'What Do Our Students Rightly Ask of Us, the Church who are Many Parts, One Body?' I gave nine answers:

1. Take us beyond our comfort zones

2. Help us to count our blessings without feeling guilty

3. Assure us that the balance holds

4. Trust us and teach us to form and inform our consciences as we decide how to act, how to relate, and how to love

5. Inspire us and console us that there is such a thing as truth

6. Provide us with the tools to critique our society

7. Invite us to participate in a Church that speaks to us of life, love, mystery, suffering, death and hope

8. Teach us to engage in respectful dialogue in our Church and in our society

9. Put everything in the context of love I think our students are still asking the same things of us.

Back then I copped a little flak from some of our church leaders for daring to insist on the need for teachers to trust their students and to teach them to form and inform their consciences and to their consciences be true. Just as it is too simplistic to equate following one's conscience with doing what one feels like, so it is too simplistic to equate it with doing what Father, the Bishops or the Holy Father has to say. I am quite unapologetic in according primacy to the formed and informed conscience of the individual. Any Catholic taking their faith and church membership seriously will be very attentive to the teaching office of the hierarchy, especially the Pope. But at the end of the day, all of us, whether lay or cleric will have to act according to our conscience before God.

In the last month, the Canadian and US Bishops Conferences have issued lengthy pastoral letters on freedom of conscience and religion. Suffice to say, bishops cannot lecture to governments about freedom of conscience unless they also concede to the laity the same freedom within the Church. The Canadian bishops have neatly summarised the challenge to parents and teachers re-imagining the mission of the Church 50 years after Vatican II. They say:

Families and schools are the primary places of formation where young people receive a correct understanding of what is entailed in the right to freedom of conscience and religion. Parents and educators have an especially important task to fulfill in forming the consciences of the next generation in respect for their brothers and sisters of different religions. Their constant challenge is to develop in children a conscience that is truly upright and free: one that can choose what is truly good and right and thus reject what is evil. They have the duty of helping young people conform their conscience to the truth of the moral law and to live in conformity with that truth.

Among the human and Christian virtues acquired in the family, certain ones in particular prepare today's youth to resist the attacks on freedom of conscience that they will inevitably encounter: courage, justice, prudence, and perseverance. This formative work also entails forming citizens ready to call to account any person or institution that would intrude upon their right to freedom of conscience or religion.

My parish

On Sunday I was so bold as to announce to the parishioners in Canberra where I say mass regularly that I would be addressing you in Sandhurst today on the 50th anniversary of Vatican II. I asked their advice. Being north of the Murray, many of them did not know where Sandhurst was so I explained that I would be coming to Bendigo.

The overwhelming reaction of the parishioners was one of delight and thanks that they had the opportunity to speak their minds in an atmosphere of trust and acceptance which is the Church. Some thought I was being brave in allowing people to speak their minds. It does not take courage, only trust that the Spirit is alive and active amongst the People of God. Let me share with you some of their thoughts.

1. Sometimes I think the laity have just been too lazy, not taking up the challenges and opportunities. Other times, I think the clergy have been too anxious to hang on to power and control. 50 years on, maybe this is the action of the Spirit as we move backwards and forwards with this movement.

2. Being a Catholic primary school principal, I know that primary schools are the face of the modern Church. Everyone wants their children educated at a Catholic primary school. Our schools are bursting at the seams. But the parents don't necessarily want to be involved with the Church. There are none of our children here at the regular parish mass. But their parents will be delighted to turn up in droves for first communion and confirmation. The problem is that we are not able to make the liturgy relevant to them. We have a confirmation mass coming up and we are not even allowed to change the reading of the day even though it talks about sex and things that have no relevance to the children.

3. My concern is with our young people. They have lost their way. The church is not there for them. Our liturgies are too boring for young people. I and most of my siblings still go to mass. But none of my four children do. I am a good parent. Liturgies can be inspirational for young people, and more liturgies should be directed at them.

4. The Church must not let the government take over all the welfare services telling us how to do things. Some things we know best how to do. The churches should co-operate more together to help those in need.

5. In 1988, our then archbishop made a commitment to reconciliation and we have celebrated Reconciliation Sunday ever since. This has been a great boost for the diocese. How welcome for us to be asked. A church with no room for Bishop Bill Morris or Paul Collins is hardly going to be able to fulfil the mission of today's gospel: 'Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole of creation.' Rather than Vatican II, I think we risk going back to Vatican I.

6. It is time for the women to stand up, and it is time for women to be given their rightful place in the Church. Other Churches have done it. Why can't we? The Church's position and treatment of women is now counter-cultural and has no theological explanation. When the priests are running out, why don't we women take part? Do they think we are not good enough?

7. The new translation of the mass is a disgrace. It's a wonder that any of us still come.

8. My daughter in law is REC at a large Catholic school. She swears like a trooper, hardly goes to mass, and has more spirituality than any one else I know. Why can't we just let them find God in their own way?

9. We might have read the Vatican II documents when they came out but we haven't really looked at them since. I remember a priest telling us that it would be like the new grass growing. It would first be cut down but then it would shoot again. I guess after 50 years we are just at the stage of the grass being cut down for the first time. We'll have to wait and see what grows back.

Looking back 50 years

In 1962, I moved from the Brigidine Convent at Indooroopilly in Brisbane to St Joseph's College, Nudgee Junior, under the care of the Christian Brothers. I was an impressionable eight-year-old and was in grade 3. I well recall one of the brothers taking the class up to the top floor of the school. We gathered outside the chapel in front of the large portrait of our Lady of Perpetual Succour. Brother told us that there were very significant events occurring in Rome. Pope John had convened a Vatican Council. We were instructed to pray for all the bishops because this council would affect the future of the church. I have no real recollection of the prayers we offered, and thus am not in a position to say whether or not they were answered. But like you, I know that things have changed very significantly in the Church and in the world since that group of eight-year-old boys offered prayer and supplication.

50 years on, we gather to celebrate as Catholics, confident that the gifts of the Spirit will assist us in proclaiming the Good News to each other, to our fellow believers, and to our fellow citizens no matter what their religious beliefs or none. Let's recall that it was the week of Christian Unity in 1959 when John XXIII gathered with a small selection of his cardinals in the Benedictine chapterhouse beside the Basilica of Saint Paul-Outside-the-Walls when he said, 'I am prompted to open my mind and heart to you, because of this feast of the Conversion of St Paul. I want to tell you frankly about several points of planned pastoral activity which have emerged in my thoughts because of my brief three months here within these church circles in Rome. In doing so, I am thinking of the care of the souls of the faithful in these modern times.'

The great historian of Vatican II from the 'Bologna School', Giuseppe Alberigo, recalls that Roncalli upon election as Pope and on choosing the name John emphasised his commitment to being a good pastor consistent with Jesus' discourse in John 10 on the Good Shepherd. Roncalli said, 'The other human qualities — knowledge, shrewdness, diplomatic tact, organisational abilities — can help the Pope to carry out his office, but they can in no way substitute for his task as a pastor'.

There at St Pauls Outside the Walls, the new Pope said:

I am saddened when people forget the place of God in their lives and pursue earthly goods, as though they were an end in themselves. I think, in fact, that this blind pursuit of the things of this world emerges from the power of darkness, not from the light of the Gospels, and it is enabled by modern technology. All of this weakens the energy of the spirit and generally leads to divisions, spiritual decline, and moral failure. As a priest, and now as the shepherd of the Church, I am troubled and aroused by this tendency in modern life and this makes me determined to recall certain ancient practices of the church in order to stem the tide of this decline. Throughout the history of the Church, such renewal has always yielded wonderful results. It produces greater clarity of thought, solidarity of religious unity, and abundant spiritual riches in people's lives.

Then 'trembling with a bit of emotion', he announced his intention to hold a diocesan Synod for Rome, and an ecumenical Council of the universal Church, as well as an aggiornamento (bringing up to date) of the code of Canon Law. He thought such initiatives would not only produce 'great enlightenment for all Christian people' but also 'a renewed invitation to our separated sisters and brothers so that all may follow us in their search for unity and grace.' What's happened to our ecumenical spirit?

He spoke of 'bringing the modern world into contact with the vivifying and perennial energies of the Gospel'. And this is the invitation to you, the Church of Sandhurst, fifty years on. John O'Malley SJ, the finest contemporary historian of Vatican II writing in the English language has provided us with 'a simple litany' of the changes in church style indicated by the council's vocabulary: 'from commands to invitations, from laws to ideals, from threats to persuasion, from coercion to conscience, from monologue to conversation, from ruling to serving, from withdrawn to integrated, from vertical and top-down to horizontal, from exclusion to inclusion, from hostility to friendship, from static to changing, from passive acceptance to active engagement, from prescriptive to principled, from defiant to open-ended, from behaviour modification to conversion of heart, from the dictates of law to the dictates of conscience, from external conformity to the joyful pursuit of holiness.'

I am one who welcomes these changes. I am not one of those Catholics so wedded to the continuity of the tradition as to think that nothing happened at Vatican II, and that we should be back to business as usual as we were when those eight year old boys gathered with the Christian Brother around the portrait of Our Lady of Perpetual Succour.

Contemporary faith

Most of you who are parents or grandparents wonder how any practice of the Faith is to be handed on credibly to your children and grandchildren. You know that the younger generations are more impressed by actions than by words, and that talk of justice rings hollow with them unless there are structures in place to ensure justice is done, and that talk of God's love rings false unless it is lived through deeds and witnessed by a real sense of transcendence and respect for every person's human dignity elevating the believer above the materialism and power of the world. If our faith is to be handed on to the coming generations, we need to be sure that we the Church are not an obstacle but rather a bridge for bringing the modern world into contact with the vivifying and perennial energies of the gospel.

The Czech theologian Tomas Halik sees the Church as the community and the institution which helps to instill a person's original, untested, unreflective faith. It is also the privileged space for the person whose original faith is shaken by life to come to a 'second wind faith' which is at home with paradox, engaged with the world, and accepting of inevitable Church shortcomings. The crisis and severance of faith can have various causes: 'It can be some traumatic disillusionment with those who imparted to us our original faith, or it can be a private drama, in which our original trust and certainties are eclipsed, or just simply a change of circumstances and 'mental climate'.' Teilhard de Chardin thought Christianity was in its infancy. Many contemporary thinkers assert that it is obsolete and its time has expired. Halik thinks both may be mistaken. 'Maybe our Christianity is actually going through its midlife crisis — a time of lethargy and drowsiness.'

Halik quotes Joseph Ratzinger's conversation with the journalist Peter Seewald published under the title 'God and the World'. The present Pope holds that faith is not like some mathematical formula that can be rationally demonstrated apart from the experiment of life: 'The truth of Jesus' word cannot be tested in terms of theory. The truth of what God says here involves the whole person, the experiment of life. It can only become clear for me if I truly give myself up to the will of God. This will of the creator is not something foreign to me, something external, but is the basis of my own being.' Halik posits God himself placing the 'metaphysical disquiet' of the need to seek meaning within the human heart. God responds to this questioning with His Revelation. We then respond in faith with an act of trust and self-surrender 'to that divine sharing, the Word, wherein God gives Himself.'

Halik is not one for the certainties of the Catechism or the latest Vatican declaration. The certainty of doctrine and submissiveness to religious authority are no substitute for facing the hard reality of true religious experience. This well connected cleric in good Vatican standing proclaims, 'The religion that is now disappearing has tried to eliminate paradoxes from our experience of reality; the faith we are maturing toward, a paschal faith, teaches us to live with paradoxes.'

Hope, paradox and reconciliation

In Spe Salvi, his last encyclical, Pope Benedict says: 'Redemption is offered to us in the sense that we have been given hope, trustworthy hope, by virtue of which we can face our present: the present, even if it is arduous, can be lived and accepted if it leads towards a goal, if we can be sure of this goal, and if this goal is great enough to justify the effort of the journey.'

Just two weeks ago, I was travelling around the Catholic parish of Khompong Thom in Cambodia in company with the parish priest, Thai Jesuit Fr Jub Phoktavi, and Director of UCAN News, Australian Jesuit Fr Michael Kelly. As we drove through the village of Prek Sbeuv, Jub matter-of-factly pointed to Pol Pot's old house. It is an unremarkable house, and if tourists happened to be this far off the beaten track they would have little idea that this was the residence of one of the world's greatest war criminals. I thought back to 1987 when I met a Khmer leader in the Site Two refugee camp on the Thai Cambodian border. I asked him if he could ever imagine a return to government in Cambodia. He looked very sad as he told me how the Khmer Rouge had killed most of his immediate family. He could not trust the Khmer Rouge again. I had the sense that he would find it hard to trust any of his fellow Cambodians ever again in rebuilding his nation from such ruins. Reconciliation was a fashionable textbook concept. Twenty five years later, there is a certain routine to life in Cambodia, though poverty in the villages is widespread and government corruption legendary. The previous evening I had been asked to address a multi-faith group of NGO and Church workers on faith, justice and public policy.

What could I, a Catholic priest from Australia, say about such matters in a largely Buddhist country devastated by genocide? Whether Christian, Buddhist, or Muslim, faith is about my having, owning and reflecting on a belief system which allows me to live fully with the paradoxes and conflicts of life and death, good and evil, beauty and suffering. It is only fundamentalists who are able to live as if these paradoxes are not real, as if they do not impinge on our sense of self and on our considered actions every day.

By embracing these paradoxes and confronting these conflicts, the person of faith whether inspired by Jesus, Mohammed, or Buddha is able to live an engaged life of faith. I am able to commit myself to others, in love and in justice. I am able to be open to reconciling, or at least being reconciled to, the previously irreconcilable. I am able to accord dignity to all others in the human family, no matter what their distinguishing marks, and regardless of their competencies, achievements or potentialities. I am able to surrender myself to that which is beyond what I know through my senses. I am able to commit myself to the stewardship of all creation.

Some guideposts for re-imagining the mission

We need to foster our contemporary sense of the transcendent and openness to the other, the world and culture which are not all bad. We need to be attentive to the arts and culture, open to ecumenical and interfaith dialogue and mutual learning.

We need to be credible in agitating for justice and dignity for all, espousing not just equality and non-discrimination, but also the common good and the public interest, with a particular eye to the voiceless and those whose claims on us do not enjoy fad status.

We need to celebrate liturgy which animates us for life and mission — being faithful to the routine of life including weekly Eucharist and daily prayer, being sufficiently educated in our faith and familiar with liturgy to celebrate the big events and sacramental moments of life, attentive to our local cultural reality and part of a universal Church which both incorporates and transcends all cultures. The clunky new translation provides us all with a real challenge, particularly when celebrating marriages and funerals when very few in the congregation know the responses.

Given the shortage of priests and religious in the contemporary Australian church as compared with the situation 50 years ago, we need to provide more resources and opportunities to the laity wanting to perform the mission in Christ's name — lay organisations, public juridic persons, volunteering, better structured opportunities for part time commitment to the apostolate, and provision by religious orders for young people wanting to make a commitment for a few years before marriage and life and work in civic service. The greatest challenge is providing a place in the Church for young women wanting to contribute to the mission. When I stood at that portrait of Our Lady of Perpetual Succour 50 years ago, there were almost 15,000 women religious in the Australian Church. Today there are less than 6,000 and their median age is 74. Only 6% of them are under 50.

When I joined the Jesuits in 1975, almost half the women religious were aged under 50. I caused alarm with some of my fellow Jesuits last year when I gave an interview to The Good Weekend saying: 'I wouldn't be a priest if I was 21 today. I am one of the last generations of Irish Catholics whose families made it professionally and were comfortable with the church. I love being a Jesuit but I can't honestly say I would join now. My religious faith has remained rock solid, but there are times when I feel really cheesed off with the institutional church, which sometimes treats its lay members and non-members in a too-patronising fashion.' From here on, it is essential that you the laity affirm and live out the reality that you are the hands, feet, heart, and mind of Christ in the contemporary world and in the contemporary Church. And you need to encourage your children to consider the call to priesthood and, given the later age of marrying and the longer life expectancy, to consider dedicating a couple of years to full time church service before marriage and again after retirement from full time paid employment.

We need to reform our church structures to be more aligned with contemporary notions of justice and due process. While preparing this address, I came across a blog reporting on the dismissal this week of Bishop Francesco Micciché from Sicily who is said to have misappropriated diocesan funds. He claims not to have had access to the report of the Vatican visitation which inquired into his financial transactions. The blog reported that another bishop had been 'toowoombed'. In the case Bishop Morris from Toowoomba, we know there was absolutely no suggestion of financial or other impropriety. A year ago, the Australian bishops told us: 'We appreciate that Bishop Morris' human qualities were never in question; nor is there any doubt about the contribution he has made to the life of the Church in Toowoomba and beyond. The Pope's decision was not a denial of the personal and pastoral gifts that Bishop Morris has brought to the episcopal ministry. ... We are hopeful that Bishop Morris will continue to serve the Church in other ways in the years ahead.'

When Bishop Morris went to Rome to meet in person with the Cardinal Leaders of the three relevant Congregations (Cardinals Re, Arinze and Levada), with Archbishop Philip Wilson present in support on 19 January 2008, Cardinal Re wrote:

Bishop Morris is a person of integrity in morals, a man of good will and other gifts. He can continue to do much good, but the right role for him is not that of Diocesan Bishop of Toowoomba.

He should be given another assignment, with special duties. With this in mind, the Holy Father asks the Metropolitan Archbishop of Brisbane and the President of the ACBC to help find the most appropriate responsibility in which Bishop Morris can continue to effectively serve the Church elsewhere in Australia, while obviously being assured of financial security for a suitable living.

Now that a new Archbishop has been appointed in Brisbane and a new bishop appointed in Toowoomba, let's hope that Bishop Morris might be given an appropriate episcopal task to which to dedicate his splendid pastoral gifts.

The process for dealing with Bishop Morris has been a disgrace. The people of Toowoomba still don't know why he was sacked, and we are all still waiting for a public credible explanation of the reasons for his dismissal. Are we really to believe that it was for having the temerity to point out that people overseas are talking about women's ordination? Fr Jack Mahoney SJ, a former principal of Heythrop College and author of the highly acclaimed The Making of Moral Theology: A Study of the Roman Catholic Theology, has just published a new book Christianity in Evolution in which he says things like: 'Dispensing with the idea that Christian priesthood involves ordaining a man to act 'in the person of Christ' by offering his atoning sacrifice to God removes whatever ground there was for restricting ordination to the priesthood to men and for excluding women.' One of the most respected pastoral theologians in the English Church is Professor Nicholas Lash from Cambridge. He writes in a recent issue of The Tablet: 'When, for example, Pope John Paul II announced that the Church had no authority to ordain women to the presbyterate, and that the matter was not to be further discussed, two questions immediately came to mind: first, how does he know? (that is to say: what were the warrants, historical and doctrinal, for his assertion?); secondly, what theological note should be attached to his assertion? In view of the fact that, so far as I know, the question has never, in the Church's history, come up for serious and close consideration, that note cannot be very high up the scale. From which it follows that his further instruction that we must not discuss it lacks good grounds.' All Bishop Morris said in his pastoral letter of 2006 was that people overseas were talking about this sort of thing. They were, they are, and they will be. So why the need to sack not the theological agitators but the occasional pastoral bishop who merely points out that these things are being discussed? These issues are being discussed by people who love the Church and care passionately for its future.

You will recall that the Vatican appointed the American Archbishop Charles Chaput to conduct the formal visitation of the Toowoomba Diocese. Bishop Morris remains adamant that Chaput never shared with him the proposed contents of his report. Archbishop Chaput is adamant that he did. Five months after Chaput submitted his report, Morris was presented with an unsigned list of grievances from the Vatican. Seeking a way forward in charity and in truth, on 4 April 2012, I told ABC Radio National:

So from here in order to clear the air one thing that would be possible is Archbishop Chaput could provide Bishop Morris with the detail of what he says he discussed with Bishop Morris in Toowoomba and specifically, he would be able to provide a list of the matters of concern and we would be able to see whether they tallied with the matters that were then listed in the unsigned, anonymous document of September of 2007.

The specific list of allegations included amongst other things a demonstrably false statement namely that no priests had been ordained in the last eight years. Well four had been ordained. It also contained the false statement that deacons were being used to replace priests. There were no deacons in the diocese. Now there is no way that Chaput could have provided that information so after the Vatican had Chaput's report they were still proceeding with a list of allegations against Morris which were inaccurate and therefore could not have been drawn from Chaput's report.

Bishop Morris did write at considerable length to Archbishop Chaput, and in a highly respectful and fraternal tone. On 16 April 2012, Archbishop Chaput responded. To be fair to Chaput, I will quote his breath taking response in full:

Bishop Morris, your imagination is in 'over-drive'. I did share everything with you. I did not keep any notes after sending the report to Rome. How would I — or anyone — ever respond to your questions from memory? You are involved in an exercise of self-justification that is obscuring the truth and good reason. I will pray for you.

This is what still passes for due process and pastoral care in the Roman Church. As Christ's faithful we have to insist on something better. And with greater transparency, we will get something better. Of course, we must continue to show due deference and respect to our bishops, our shepherds, but when they abuse even their own like this, we should ask for better, in Christ's name.

As Catholics, we accept that the Pope ultimately has full authority to appoint, transfer or dismiss bishops. Therefore any person recommending an appointment, transfer or dismissal to the Pope is obliged to act in a manner such that the ultimate action of the Pope could not be or be seen to be capricious, arbitrary, or prejudiced. Any person recommending a dismissal must accord due process and natural justice; otherwise their denial of same will infect the Pope's action. Why could Archbishop Chaput not simply have reviewed his report, repeating to Morris the key points, especially given that he claims to have already shared everything? Why would he not do what he could to refresh Bishop Morris's memory, bringing satisfaction to all those concerned that Morris has been denied natural justice?

Pope Benedict commenced his encyclical Caritas in Veritate with the words:

Charity in truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity.

Charity in truth should also be the principal driving force behind all dealings with each other within our Church. If only we were more committed to charity and truth, we the members of Christ's faithful would be able to be more trusting of Vatican moves in relation to Bishop Morris, in relation to the women religious in the USA, in relation to the Girl Scouts in the USA, and in relation to theological training in the Church in Ireland. If only we were more committed to charity and truth, we would have been so much better in confronting the horror of child sexual abuse within our Church. Fr Kevin Dillon from Geelong recently asked, 'If Christ was lying in this Church bleeding, would we say, 'Can we afford to heal him?' Well, Christ is in this church, bleeding. Not from wounds inflicted from Roman soldiers but from wounds inflicted from within. Victims first; true justice; genuine compassion.'

Conclusion

If we as the People of God rejoicing in the name 'Catholic' are to bring the modern world into contact with the vivifying and perennial energies of the gospel, we need to ensure that our Church is an exemplar of the noblest values espoused by people of all faiths and none. We need to recommit ourselves to charity, justice and truth both within our own structures when dealing with each other, and in all our dealings with those outside the membership of our Church, especially those who differ with us conscientiously about the moral challenges of the Age. We need to examine afresh our belief in 'a love or compassion which is unconditional — that is, not based on what you the recipient have made of yourself — or as one based on what you are most profoundly, a being in the image of God'. The Canadian Catholic philosopher Charles Taylor sums up the challenge as 'a difficult discernment, trying to see what in modern culture reflects its furthering of the Gospel, and what (in modern culture reflects) its refusal of the transcendent'. Thus exercised, we might bring even the young into engagement 'with the vivifying and perennial energies of the gospel'.

Re-imagining our mission amongst the young in our care, let's take to heart Pope Benedict's observations in Spe Salvi:

We need the greater and lesser hopes that keep us going day by day. But these are not enough without the great hope, which must surpass everything else. This great hope can only be God, who encompasses the whole of reality and who can bestow upon us what we, by ourselves, cannot attain. The fact that it comes to us as a gift is actually part of hope. God is the foundation of hope: not any god, but the God who has a human face and who has loved us to the end, each one of us and humanity in its entirety. His Kingdom is not an imaginary hereafter, situated in a future that will never arrive; his Kingdom is present wherever he is loved and wherever his love reaches us. His love alone gives us the possibility of soberly persevering day by day, without ceasing to be spurred on by hope, in a world which by its very nature is imperfect. His love is at the same time our guarantee of the existence of what we only vaguely sense and which nevertheless, in our deepest self, we await: a life that is 'truly' life.

If we offer our students anything less, they will be rightly disappointed by a Church they perceive to be marked by hollow rhetoric, empty sacramentality, and authoritarian tradition. As teachers and pastors to the young, I invite you to be bold and confident in proclaiming the love in your hearts, the hope in each other, and the faith in our Church. Thanks for your witness and commitment thus far. I hope and pray that you will be energised during these days together so that you might 'go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole of creation.'

______________________

Text is from Fr Frank Brennan SJ's address 'Re-imagining the Mission — A Pilgrimage of Faith Catholic Education Sandhurst Conference 2012: A Pilgrimage of Faith, presented 24 May 2012 at Catholic College Bendigo.

Father Frank Brennan calls on Catholic Church to again consider female priests as he prepares to leave Canberra - 27 June 2019

by Megan Doherty | The Canberra Times| June 27, 2019

Catholic leader Father Frank Brennan, on the cusp of his departure from Canberra, says the Church "remains at a crossroads between life and death", calling for it to allow women priests and predicting a Religious Discrimination Act will be introduced by the Morrison government.

Father Brennan's departure means the heart of the Jesuit community in Canberra, Xavier House in Yarralumla, will close and the property put on the market.

Father Brennan, 65, will finish his role as chief executive officer of Catholic Social Services Australia in Canberra to become rector of Newman College at the University of Melbourne.

"The Jesuit order, we've had a presence in Canberra for the last 51 years but sadly the time has come. I'm the last one to leave," he said.

Giving a wide-ranging farewell speech at the Australian Centre for Christianity and Culture in Barton on Wednesday night, Father Brennan expressed his fears for the future of the Catholic Church unless it engaged in more open dialogue on issues such as women priests.

"I've long been a supporter of the idea of women being priests," he said.

"We live in a society where I look at my own family history, my own mother was one of the first women doctors at the Mater Hospital in Brisbane, my four sisters are all competent professionals and my nieces not only imagine but they've known a woman prime minister, a woman governor-general, a woman chief justice.

"So the need for the Church to adapt and ensure equality for everyone, I think, is essential."

At Wednesday's forum for Concerned Catholics of Canberra Goulburn, Father Brennan referred to Pope Francis' view that a church that lost its humility and stopped listening to others "loses her youth and turns into a museum".

Yet that thinking did not extend to speaking about women priests.

"The official position is no longer comprehensible to most people of good will, and not even those at the very top of the hierarchy have a willingness or capacity to explain it," Father Brennan said.

Father Brennan has lived in Canberra permanently for 11 years but been a fixture on the political scene for nearly 20 years, prominent in Aboriginal reconciliation and native title debates.

"Over the last 30 years or so, I've had good access to Parliament House, good access to the press gallery. I'll miss some of that but I'll be turning 66 next year and the opportunity to [be] living life with 250 students at the University of Melbourne who might be a bit wondering about the world and what the Catholic faith is about, was too good to resist," he said.

He chaired the National Human Rights Consultation Committee established by the Rudd Government in 2008.

And most recently, he sat on the expert panel for the religious freedom review set up in 2017 by then prime minister Malcolm Turnbull.

Father Brennan said the recommendations to come from the review never went anywhere, because some appeased the conservative arm of the Liberal Party and others the more progressive members.

But he believed that would change and the Morrison government would enact a "responsible" Religious Discrimination Act.

Father Brennan maintained the fiasco around sacked rugby player Israel Folau was not a case of religious freedom.

"I have studiously avoided the issue because I don't think it has anything to do with freedom of religion, I think it's all to do with freedom of contract and I've been somewhat amused by the number of people who have pontificated about the issue," he said.

"Suffice to say, he and Rugby Australia have the best lawyers in Australia. They were locked in a room for three days behind closed doors and they couldn't reach a breakthrough, which tells me as a lawyer, it must be a very vague contract. So it's an issue about what's in his contract, not about freedom of religion."

Father Brennan was also awaiting the outcome of Cardinal George Pell's appeal against his sexual abuse conviction, saying the priest was either "a paedophile or the biggest scapegoat the country has known".

"Perhaps Cardinal Pell is a paedophile who has effectively groomed the Church as an institution all the way to the top. But then again, perhaps he is not a paedophile and it has reached the stage in Australia that 12 of his fellow citizens were prepared to convict him of offences beyond reasonable doubt despite all manner of improbabilities because they don't trust him or our Church, no matter what we say or do," Father Brennan said.

He added: "I believe in two systems - I believe in the Catholic Church and I believe in the Australian legal system. And let's hope the legal system gets it right".

Father Brennan said he would be leaving Canberra later this year and the Jesuits would be selling their property on Empire Circuit, Yarralumla.

"I think it'll go on the market sooner rather than later and given it's in the heart of the embassy belt, 200 metres from the US embassy, I would think some of the embassies might be interested in it," he said.

Father Brennan's departure means the heart of the Jesuit community in Canberra, Xavier House in Yarralumla, will close and the property put on the market.

Father Brennan, 65, will finish his role as chief executive officer of Catholic Social Services Australia in Canberra to become rector of Newman College at the University of Melbourne.

"The Jesuit order, we've had a presence in Canberra for the last 51 years but sadly the time has come. I'm the last one to leave," he said.

Women and Francis: This Time in the Church by Fr Frank Brennan SJ - Camino Address November 2013

By Fr Frank Brennan, Jesuit Priest and Human Rights Lawyer, Australia,

From `This Time in the Church` : Camino Address November 12, 2013 Sydney Australia. The full document can be accessed at  http://eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=38484

 The greatest challenge is providing a place in the Church for women wanting to contribute to the mission.  It is high time to put institutional flesh on the bones of Pope Francis’s unassailable claim stated in the sentence which was unwittingly omitted from the America version of the La Civilta Cattolica interview: “It is necessary to broaden the opportunities for a stronger presence of women in the Church.”  He then went on to say:

Fr. Frank Brennan, SJ

The woman is essential for the church. Mary, a woman, is more important than the bishops. I say this because we must not confuse the function with the dignity. We must therefore investigate further the role of women in the church. We have to work harder to develop a profound theology of the woman. Only by making this step will it be possible to better reflect on their function within the church. The feminine genius is needed wherever we make important decisions. The challenge today is this: to think about the specific place of women also in those places where the authority of the church is exercised for various areas of the church.

 If we are to continue to justify anything less than full participation at all levels of leadership and service for women in the Roman Catholic Church, we must provide coherent scriptural and theological warrant for the ongoing discrimination or exclusion.  Authoritative declarations prohibiting discussion from hereon will only undermine the authority of the speaker and of the enforcers.  

 Let’s recall that the 17 member Pontifical Biblical Commission concluded unanimously 37 years ago: “It does not seem that the New Testament by itself alone will permit us to settle in a clear way and once and for all the problem of the possible accession of women to the presbyterate.”  The minority of five members of that Commission thought that “in the scriptures there are sufficient indications to exclude this possibility, considering that the sacraments of eucharist and reconciliation have a special link with the person of Christ and therefore with the male hierarchy, as borne out by the New Testament”.  The majority of twelve members of that Commission wondered “if the church hierarchy, entrusted with the sacramental economy, would be able to entrust the ministries of eucharist and reconciliation to women in light of circumstances, without going against Christ's original intentions”.  

 Admittedly, biblical interpretation is not a numbers game.  But come on Francis, it’s time for change.  I know you have said the door is closed.  But the door rather than the wall was a good image for you to choose.  A door can be opened.  It might still need a little prising and a lot of prayer, especially as your two predecessors attempted to close the door more firmly with more authoritative pronouncements than had previously been made.  

 It is regrettable that the complete 1976 report of the Pontifical Biblical Commission has still never been released.  We were left dependent on leaks of some of the material, though of course we know that the leaks were accurate.  What we have “is not really an official or finished document but the unofficially leaked portions of sections of the Commission’s deliberations”.   None other than Raymond E Brown SS was a member of the Commission back then.  He is the co-author of the entry in the New Jerome Biblical Commentary which states: “Reportedly, PBC member scholars voted 17-0 that the NT does not settle the question in a clear way, once for all; 12-5 that neither Scripture nor Christ’s plan alone excluded the possibility.”  It would be a good start for the Vatican now to publish the complete 1976 report and record of deliberations of the Commission, and for Pope Francis to ask the Commission for an update on recent scriptural studies which shed light on the “the role of women in the Bible in the course of research being carried out to determine the place that can be given to women today in the church” and “whether or not women can be ordained to the priestly ministry”.  

We cannot be credible as a Church claiming that we are committed “to broaden the opportunities for a stronger presence of women in the Church” unless we tackle this issue of women’s ordination afresh, starting with the scriptural base and limitations (if any) on future action.  Many of us Catholics see no theological objection to the ordination of women.  Some of us suspect that the incidence of child sexual abuse and institutional cover-ups would be much less if women were included at all levels of the hierarchy.  If a future pope were to determine that women could be ordained, we would not think him guilty of theological error.  We see an increasing symmetry between scriptural warrant and the social reality of the Church in the Modern World.  

 The continued official suppression of the complete 1976 report and the failure by recent popes to address the ambiguities raised by the Commission renders contingent Pope John Paul II’s declaration of 1994 “that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful”.  One can affirm the consistency of the Tradition and the Magisterium ordaining only men for millennia, while being open to the ordination of women in future.  What has been taught definitively by one Pope is not necessarily infallible.  As Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger did assert that this teaching had been “set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium”, but thankfully not even he repeated this claim as Pope.  It is not a claim which has been made by the preponderance of bishops and theologians.  

 Canon lawyer Ladislas Orsy SJ claims that this category of “definitive” teaching is a novel category in our Church’s panoply of titles.  He says, “This new category of definitive teaching has not emerged from the crucible of an ecumenical council, nor is it the result of a thorough consultation among the bishops, nor has it been the fruit of critical debates among theologians.”  Though such teaching should be received with respect, Orsy says, “Yet, as of now, we do not have a full comprehension of its place in our Tradition.  It represents a new development that demands a considered response from the part of the episcopate and the community of theologians.”  

 We can continue to be good Catholics while entertaining the thought and offering the prayer that Pope John Paul II’s self-proclaimed “definitive” teaching against the ordination of women will not be the last word in our Church.  If the Vatican’s curial response continues to be that Pope John Paul II taught infallibly on this issue, many Catholics will sadly conclude that Pope Francis’s inspiring remarks about women in the Church are an idle pipedream.  

 A consistent exclusive practice does not preclude an inclusive development if that development is consistent with the possibilities left open by Scripture.  For the moment the door is firmly and definitively closed, and it will be until this Pope or one of his successors decides, perhaps even definitively, that there is scriptural warrant for opening it, given that in Jesus’ time it was not closed and locked shut, just left ajar, while some women, like their male counterparts, were recorded as having been there at the door performing a variety of ministries, making “a positive collaboration in service to the Christian communities”.  Let’s pray

Father Sosa ‘dreams’ of a Society of Jesus that ‘builds a future full of hope’ - America - 05 December 2019

Father Sosa ‘dreams’ of a Society of Jesus that ‘builds a future full of hope’

by Gerard O’Connell | America | December 5, 2019

“We Jesuits are people of hope; we believe another world is possible,” Arturo Sosa, S.J., the superior general of the Society of Jesus, told journalists at an end-of-year reception at the Jesuit Curia in Rome on Dec. 4.

Jesuit Father Arturo Sosa Abascal (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

Greeting some 20 reporters in the Arrupe Hall of the Jesuit Curia, Father Sosa reflected on what the Jesuits have been doing over the past year and the significance of the mission Pope Francis has given to the Society when he confirmed the four universal apostolic preferences that are to permeate and inspire the work of Jesuits worldwide over the next 10 years.

The Venezuelan-born head of the Jesuits said that in his travels on all continents he has witnessed “the existence of so much frustration among so many people” in the face of “the inequality and poverty” in today’s world, together with “the forced movement of persons” who are either displaced in their home countries or forced to be refugees and “the difficulty” so many people have “to live in freedom and democracy.”

He spoke of how the Society of Jesus is responding to some of those challenges today, not alone but “as part of that movement of peoples toward a future where every human being and all peoples can live with dignity, security” and be able “to develop their cultural creativity and seek to reach their dreams.”

He said his “dream” for the Society of Jesus “is that it collaborates more and more to build a future full of hope.”

He recalled that Jesuits worldwide have laid the groundwork for this challenging work when they engaged in a two-year process of discernment and identified four universal apostolic preferences that Pope Francis subsequently “confirmed” as the road map to guide and inspire all their activities over the next decade: To show the way to God through discernment and the spiritual exercises; to walk with the poor, the outcasts of the world, those whose dignity has been violated, in a mission of reconciliation and justice; to accompany young people in the creation of a hope-filled future; and to collaborate in the care of our common home.

In that discernment process, he said, “we opened ourselves to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit” seeking “to be guided and sent on mission.” He explained that “discernment is not a method for taking decisions, nor for the exercise of strategic planning,” such as is done by big corporations or N.G.O.s, rather it is “founded in our faith that the world has a very high potential, that the grace of God is at work in people, that the Holy Spirit is present in human history and can guide us in contributing to renew the face of the earth.”

He noted that “for the first time in the history of the Jesuit order” this “process of discernment” involved not only the Jesuits but also “the women and men who are engaged with them” in the different apostolic works, “including non-Christians and the followers of other religions.”

“The Society of Jesus was born to serve the mission of Christ in the church under the Roman Pontiff,” he said, “it receives its mission from the pope as mediator of the will of God for us.”

He revealed that on his visits to Jesuit communities on the different continents he discovered that not only the Jesuits but also the women and men engaged in mission with them “recognize” that “the indications” given by the four universal apostolic preferences “have come at the right moment” and are “the fruit of the Spirit” and “a mission of the Spirit received from the church” that will “inspire our way of living, and whatever we do.”

Father Sosa emphasized that these four preferences “cannot be separated from one another, but, like the fingers of a hand, they work well if they move together.” Furthermore, Jesuits will make these preferences a reality when they work “in collaboration” with one another and “with others.”

By implementing the four universal apostolic preferences, he said, “the Society of Jesus deepens its commitment to the full realization of the orientations of the Second Vatican Council that Pope Francis has put at the center of his Petrine ministry.”

He emphasized moreover that all this has to be seen “in terms of service to people and to Christ, in the mission that the church has received from Christ to serve the world.”

Father Sosa, who is the first Latin American to lead the Society of Jesus, then outlined some of the ways in which Jesuits can make the universal apostolic preferences a reality in the life of the church over the next decade.

He said it will seek to provide “instruments” for “a discerning leadership” in order to contribute to “the strengthening of a synodal church.” It will do this by offering courses, grounded on the Spiritual Exercises as well as the social and other sciences, to Vatican officials, superiors general, key persons in the church, including lay women and men and to the worldwide “Ignatian family.” He also emphasized the great need to educate lay people for the political world and to educate politicians, too.

Father Sosa advocated giving women “managerial/decision-making roles” in the church, separating this from the question of priestly ordination.

In this context, responding to a question that recalled how in a talk in March 2017 he had called for giving fuller participation to women in the life of the church, Father Sosa repeated that wish and said that while it is “a complex question” and also related to the role of women in society, he advocated giving women “managerial/decision-making roles” in the church, while separating this from the question of priestly ordination. He noted that today, for example, the majority of Jesuit schools and universities “are in the hands of women,” a development that has happened over the past 30 years.

He said the Society of Jesus will also seek to respond to “the concrete requests of Pope Francis” in support of his work for the renewal of the church and its structures, just as it did by giving him the Spanish-born Juan Antonio Guerrero, S.J., to serve as prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy.

Responding to a reporter’s question, he said that he asked the pope not to make Father Guerrero a bishop because the role of prefect is a task for a limited period, five or 10 years, whereas the sacrament of episcopal ordination is for life. Moreover, he said he believes there are roles in the Vatican that do not require the sacrament of orders and should not be linked to it. This is one of them, he argued, as is the role of prefect of the Vatican dicastery for communications, which is today held by a layman.

Father Sosa declared that Jesuits would seek to work in “partnership” and in “networks,” collaborating with others in the different areas of mission, as it is doing in the nine countries of the Amazon region through the Pan-Amazonian Network, known as Repam.

Father Sosa said the Jesuits would continue to develop their engagement in the ecumenical and interreligious field so as “to re-establish the role of religions in humanizing our world so that we open evermore to transcendence, to life, not to conflict.”

He stressed the crucially important educational role Jesuits are playing and will continue to play through their schools and universities, and he envisaged greater networking in order to have “a global impact.”

All this, he said, involves the Gospel-inspired dimensions of “faith, social justice and reconciliation of people with God, with each other and with nature.” This was highlighted in a very clear way, he said, at the recent celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Secretariat for Social Justice and Ecology, which was started by Pedro Arrupe, S.J., who led Society of Jesus from 1965 to 1983.

He recalled that such work has led to martyrdom, not only for Jesuits but also for women and men who work with them, as happened 30 years ago at the University of Central America in El Salvador and which “showed the power of hope and of life over the power of evil and the power of the devil that still exists as a force that seeks to destroy our efforts.” He added that “the devil throws himself in the way across God’s plan and the work of salvation done in Christ.”

Father Sosa reaffirmed that over the next decade the Jesuits would continue in their commitment to assist migrants, refugees and displaced persons “as a concrete expression of our faith that leads us to open a future of hope.”

He acknowledged that this work could indeed entail martyrdom in the future as it has done in recent times in South Sudan and Syria “but that fear cannot stop me sending people to such apostolic works; though we don’t seek to be martyrs, we seek to serve.”

All the above, he said, is “our response to the cry of the poor and of the earth that we hear so clearly.” Father Sosa, who has made himself available to journalists many times since his election as superior general on Oct. 14, 2016, concluding his address by inviting the journalists present “to listen to the cry of the world today and to make it heard.”
_________________
Gerard O’Connell is America’s Vatican correspondent.

Stirring the Waters: Making the Impossible Possible - Arturo Sosa SJ - March 8, 2017 The Vatican

I would like to thank Voices of Faith and the Jesuit Refugee Service for inviting me to celebrate International Women’s Day with you and all of those gathered here today.

I take this opportunity to show my gratitude to the women who will be speaking today, women making a difference in their families and communities, especially in the most remote corners of the world. These are difficult times in our world, and we need to stand and work together as women and men of faith.

As you know, the global theme for this year’s celebration of International Women’s Day is Be Bold for Change. Here in Vatican City, physically at the center of the church, Voices of Faith and JRS seek to be Making the Impossible Possible. Especially here in Rome, that is a bold change! I would like to reflect on what making the impossible possible means to me as the leader of the Society of Jesus, as a citizen of the world, and as a member of the Catholic Church. We need to have the faith that gives the audacity to seek the impossible, as nothing is impossible for God. The faith of Mary that opened her heart as a woman to the possibility of something new: to become the Mother of God’s son.

JRS: Resilience

As you may be aware, I come from Latin America, a continent with millions of displaced people. With almost 7 million, Colombia has the largest number of internally displaced people in the world, and a disproportionate number of them are women and children. I served at the border between Colombia and my native Venezuela for 10 years. I have seen first-hand the suffering of those forced to abandon everything to save their lives.

In Colombia, for example, women and girls are among the most vulnerable due to widespread violence caused by decades of conflict. They are exposed to armed recruitment and are likely to fall victim to one form of exploitation or another, ranging from modern day slavery, to survival sex and human trafficking. Many of them flee to neighboring countries in search of safety, and often find themselves on their own in efforts to sustain their families.

I have also witnessed women’s resilience. Despite this traumatic reality, women often find their way to not just surviving, but also overcoming all the difficulties of exile and forced migration. Resilience is what enables us to move forward and think of the future. Resilience is essential for making the impossible possible. Let me offer an example.

At the Venezuelan-Colombian border, the Jesuit Refugee Service has been present for more than ten years. During this time, JRS has brought refugee women from Colombia together by using their artistic expression as a starting point for rediscovering resilience.

While expressing themselves creatively through art, women also share their experiences and create a network of support to improve their psychosocial well-being. This healing environment is a place for listening and coming together—in other words, resilience. Resilience empowers women and ultimately results in hope and the possibility of reconciliation with the past, with those who have harmed them, and with those where they now live. Reconciliation requires courage, and too often, even in 2017, women’s courage, women’s resilience, is unrecognized and undervalued.

By building human connections resilience reknits the communal fabric. Some may say such resilience is impossible to discover: JRS and Voices of Faith say otherwise.

The World: Collaboration

As a member of the human community, each of us is likely appalled at the situation of our world. Human displacement has hit an all-time high, representing incredible human suffering around the world. Ongoing conflicts are at the root of most of this forced exile.There are more than 65 million forcibly displaced among us: one in every 113 people globally is now an asylum-seeker, an internally displaced person, or a refugee.

We have to think about the ways that we, as the human community can respond. I cannot put enough emphasis on this need for collaboration between women and men. I believe that only together we can achieve what today seems impossible: a humanity reconciled in justice, living in peace in a common house well kept, where there is room for everyone because we recognize that we are sisters and brothers, son and daughters of the same God who is Mother and Father of us all. We need to collaborate, support and learn from one another. It already seems impossible to imagine peace in places like Central African Republic, or South Sudan, or Colombia. Can we have the audacity to dream that women and men working together will bring peace to these countries? I think these impossibilities can come closer to reality if women play a greater role in the conversation.

I am not surprised that Angela Merkel has been the most courageous and visionary leader in Europe during this time of phenomenal forced migration. She had the compassion to look at those who were in need, and the vison to see that they would make a contribution to Germany and Europe. Another extraordinary leader is Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the President of Liberia. Through her single-minded dedication and vision, she has brought peace and reconciliation to her war-torn country in a way that most men thought would be impossible.

At the same time, the widespread reality is that women are not paid for the work they do, or are paid less than men for the same work. In the West, women earn on average 70 cents for each dollar or Euro a man earns. The gap grows larger in developing areas of the world Many of us are looking at the world through the prism of xenophobia and narrowmindedness these days, a prism which seems to feed on discord and marginalization. In the Jesuit magazine America, political commentator Cokie Roberts, the daughter of two former members of the US Congress, puts the reality succinctly: “...Congress needs more women. Then maybe, just maybe, Washington would work again.”

We can listen carefully to the experience of women in the public sphere, hear how they work together, and be inspired by their courage. These are stories of doing the impossible.

The Catholic Church: inclusion

The role of women in the church can be, and has been, described in many ways: keepers of the faith, the backbone of the Church, the image of Mary alive among us. We Jesuits are deeply aware of the roles that women play in our ministries: lay and religious women serve as presidents and headmistresses, retreat center directors, teachers, and every possible role one can think of. As you probably know, the Spiritual Exercises, the foundation of Jesuit spirituality, were first developed by St. Ignatius of Loyola before the Jesuits were founded. Our spirituality is open to all, women and men that want to become women and men with others and for others.

In the broader church, there are contrary currents about the role of women at this time. As stated by Pope Francis, women play a fundamental role in passing on the faith and are a daily source of strength in a society that carries this faith forward and renews it. Church teaching certainly promotes the role of the women within the family, but it also stresses the need for their contribution in the Church and in public life. It draws upon the text of Genesis, which speaks of men and women created in the image of God and the prophetic praxis of Jesus in his relationship with women.

Pope Francis has been quite outspoken about women in making decisions and holding responsibilities in the church. He has also created a "Study Commission on the Women’s Diaconate” to explore the history and role of women in this church structure.

But if we are honest, we acknowledge that the fullness of women’s participation in the church has not yet arrived. That inclusion, which would bring the gifts of resilience and collaboration even more deeply into the church, remains stymied on many fronts. One aspect has been mentioned by the Pope: we have to work harder to develop a profound theology of women. I would add that an ecclesiology...the study of the church...that includes women is equally needed if women’s roles are to be included as they should.

Indeed, the inclusion of women in the Church is a creative way to promote the necessary changes in it. A theology and an ecclesiology of women should change the image, the concept and the structures of the Church. Should push the Church to become the People of God, as was proclaimed by the Second Vatican Council. Women’s creativity can open new ways of being a Christian community of disciples, men and women together, witnesses and preachers of the Good. News. But perhaps more importantly, the inclusion of women will also be an outcome of the key concerns of the Pope. By bringing Vatican II to life and incorporating the poor into our church, Francis is giving women’s voices more opportunity to speak and be counted. No one is more resilient that women building and supporting the church in the poorest parts of our world.

In his efforts against clericalism and the elitism and sexism that come with it, the Pope seeks to open our future to voices outside of the Vatican, to bring the experience of the world into forming that future. The opposite of clericalism is collaboration, working together as baptized daughters and sons of God.

These efforts have begun the process of deeper inclusion of women into the core of the Church. As challenging as the refugee crisis or other world issues are, to some of us, this might be truly, the impossible. St. Francis of Assisi himself said: “Start by doing what is necessary, then what is possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible.”

In that spirit, we are here today to listen to Voices of Faith, to hear stories of resilience, collaboration and inclusion. We have more than started. We will not stop.

Thank you very much.

Jesuits Pledge to Work for Women's Rights - The Washington Post, March 23, 1995

By Paula Butturini | The Washington Post

March 23, 1995

The Society of Jesus, Roman Catholicism's most prominent and powerful religious order, concluded its first general meeting in more than a decade today by passing a landmark document on women's rights in the church and society.

After three months of discussion aimed at charting a course for the 23,000-member male order in the new millennium, delegates from around the globe committed the Jesuits to worldwide solidarity with women and acknowledged having been part of a longtime tradition "that has offended against women."

"We are conscious of the damage to the People of God brought about by the alienation of women in some cultures who no longer feel at home in the church, and who are not able with integrity to transmit Catholic values to their families, friends and colleagues," the document said.

"We Jesuits first ask God for the grace of conversion. We have been part of a civil and ecclesial tradition that has offended against women. And, like many men, we have a tendency to convince ourselves that there is no problem. However unwillingly, we have often been complicit in a form of clericalism which has reinforced male domination with an ostensibly divine sanction. We wish . . . to do what we can to change this regrettable situation."

While Pope John Paul II was not a participant in the meetings, delegates said he and other top Vatican officials were kept apprised of major documents, including the one on women, and raised no objections.

The Jesuit order is best known for a commitment to intellectual life, mission work and social justice for the poor. The 28 Jesuit-run colleges and universities in the United States, which include Georgetown University, have a reputation for intellectual rigor and for instilling concern for the underprivileged. However, some critics have complained that they cater to the educated elite.

As vocations to the religious life have declined in the United States, there has been tension over whether to emphasize the academic or the social justice work, Christopher Kauffman, a professor of church history at Catholic University of America, said today.

The meeting, officially known as a "general congregation," only the eighth of its kind in the order's four centuries, brought more than 200 delegates to Rome in an effort to refocus the Jesuit sense of mission as the year 2000 approaches.

The meeting has approved 22 documents, key among them measures seeking to establish a Jesuit partnership with the Catholic laity and to deepen links between faith and the fight for social justice, delegates said. The document on women, however, was the major surprise since the issue had not been cited in preparations for the meeting. "Jesuits coming here didn't expect this document," said the Rev. Stephen Sundberg, attending as head of the Jesuits' Oregon province.

The document calls discrimination against women "a universal reality," and it seeks to paint the issue diversely, as it might be seen by women in the industrial West, rural Africa or the Indian subcontinent. It urges all Jesuits to listen "carefully and courageously" to the experience of women and "to align themselves in solidarity with women."

"There is no substitute for such listening," said a late working draft, which officials said was approved with minimal rewording in the closing hours of the meeting. "Without listening, action in this area, no matter how well-intentioned, is likely to bypass the real concerns of women and to confirm male condescension and reinforce male dominance."

The document stresses that practical ways of acting in solidarity would differ from place to place and from culture to culture, but that certain universal ground rules apply. These include explicit teaching of the essential equality of women and men, especially in Jesuit schools and universities, and support for liberation movements for women that oppose their exploitation and encourage their entry into political and social life.

Citing female circumcision, dowry deaths and the murder of unwanted female infants in some parts of the world, it calls on Jesuits to pay "specific attention to the phenomenon of violence against women." It also urges the use of appropriately inclusive language in speech and official documents as well as the promotion of women's education and "genuine involvement" of women in Jesuit ministries.

The document does not directly address the controversial issue of whether women should be ordained to the priesthood. In what could be interpreted as a reference to the subject, however, it notes that "it may be anticipated that some other questions about the role of women in civil and ecclesial society will undoubtedly mature over time." It declares that "Jesuits hope to participate in clarifying" these issues and says that the "changes of sensibilities which this involves will inevitably have implications for church teaching and practice."

The document contained little if any of the preachy pronouncements that have often marked documents on women issued by the Vatican. It is more practical than theological; there is no mention of Mary or of virgin martyrs or of any of the standard female symbols often employed in church documents relating to women. The 34th General Congregation was only the eighth such meeting called to review and direct the general work of the society since the order was founded in 1540. The 26 others were to elect new superiors general.

______
Staff writer Laurie Goodstein in Washington contributed to this report.

Jesuits Vow to Fight for Social Justice, Equality of Women - Los Angeles Times, March 23, 1995

By WILLIAM D. MONTALBANO

March 23, 1995 | TIMES STAFF WRITER

VATICAN CITY — 

The Jesuits, the largest and most influential order of Catholic priests, pledged Wednesday to strengthen their commitment to social justice, reaching out to women and other lay Catholics.

A series of documents climaxing a three-month international congress outlined activist Jesuit missions in a gamut of social and educational areas, but was careful not to place the 23,000-member order at odds with Vatican dogma.

“A congress that can outline the ‘re-activization’ of our mission with such realism demonstrates that the Society of Jesus is healthy,” Jesuit Father General Peter-Hans Kolvenbach told reporters.

The 223 delegates to the 34th general congregation of the articulate and often outspoken order reaffirmed a Jesuit commitment to “a radical life of faith that finds expression in the promotion of justice for all.”

“We have recovered for our contemporary mission the centrality of working in solidarity with the poor,” says a statement of mission after the Jesuits’ first international congress since 1983.

Pope John Paul II has in the past chastised the Jesuits for their often political involvement in lay movements and parties fighting for social justice and human rights.

Wednesday’s document on women was one of the strongest to issue from the congress, in which Jesuits from Europe, the United States and Canada were outnumbered by brethren from Asia, Africa and Latin America for the first time since St. Ignatius of Loyola founded the order in 1540.

Denouncing the historic “unjust treatment and exploitation of women” in which Jesuits often were witting accomplices, the document pledges to fight to make “essential equality of women a lived reality.”

The document makes no claim for priesthood for women. It says the Jesuits “will listen carefully and courageously to the experience of women . . . to align themselves in solidarity” with them.

Solving the Mystery of Decree 14: Jesuits and the Situation of Women in Church and Civil Society

by Margo J. Heydt | September 15, 2015

Conversations on Jesuit Higher Education www.conversationsmagazine.org

As a Protestant feminist social work professor at a Jesuit University in the heartland for almost 20 years, Decree 14 has presented a mystery to me from my first encounter with it in 2003.  I was asked to assist an administrator with some diversity issues related to the showing of Vagina Monologues on campus and searched the internet for anything related to Jesuits and women.  What to my surprise came up?  Decree 14 from the Jesuits 34th General Congregation.  At the time, this short 1995 document did not turn out to be as helpful as I had hoped.  But the finding kept nagging at me. 

Decree 14 is a solidly feminist document apologizing in writing to women for Jesuit oppression of women and calling for Jesuits to actively listen to women’s experiences in order to act in solidarity with women.  It states, in part:

The dominance of men in their relationship with women has found expression in many ways. It has included discrimination against women in educational opportunities, the disproportionate burden they are called upon to bear in family life, paying them a lesser wage for the same work, limiting their access to positions of influence when admitted to public life and, sadly but only too frequently, outright violence against women themselves. . . . . Church social teaching, especially within the last ten years, has reacted strongly against this continuing discrimination and prejudice.

From my perspective, words like these did not seem to be a document that would emanate from an international Catholic order of religious men with approval from the Vatican. It also did not seem that the decree, which was almost ten years old at the time, was very well known.

The disconnect between the existence of Decree 14 and some of the ongoing struggles related to women’s issues on Jesuit and other Catholic university campuses made me “curiouser and curiouser,” in the words of Alice in Wonderland.  A few years later, I was fortunate enough to be a faculty member on an Ignatian pilgrimage through Spain from the birth place of Ignatius of Loyola to the apartment where he died in Rome.  Learning more history about the Jesuits and women through this and other endeavors only contributed to this curiosity.  Ultimately, I was awarded a Xavier University Jesuit Fellowship Sabbatical to solve the mystery of the “W” questions:  I wanted to know who wrote what, when, where, and how did it move through the Jesuit General Congregation to be issued as a Jesuit decree.  From my first reading of the decree, my gut told me that women were involved in this process somehow and somewhere, but I could not imagine how that could happen ever, much less in 1995. And then there was the question of why this came about.

Starting with the “who” question was more challenging than anticipated.  None of the Jesuits on the Xavier campus had attended GC 34 or had any idea about who was involved with the Decree. But Ken Overberg, S.J., provided some leads to other Jesuits who “might know something.” Simultaneously, upon discovering that the Jesuit archives in Rome would not be available, a research librarian finally located the information in a National Catholic Reporter of March 31, 1995 that boldly announced “Jesuits Pledge Solidarity with Women” and named the chair of the subcommittee of the GC Justice Commission.  Amazingly, all three primary Jesuit authors of Decree 14 were located, alive and well and still Jesuits. I interviewed all three in person as well as others who were engaged in the GC 34 process.

The three main co-authors came to the assembly in Rome from Ireland, Australia, and the USA and are still in those locations today.  Gerry O’Hanlon, S.J., in Dublin is credited by the others as driving the Decree 14 bus.  Patrick Howell, S.J., in Seattle and Bill Uren, S.J., in Melbourne served as co-editors and supporting cast members. The link between Decree 14 and Vatican II comes from the Signs of the Times lay persons groups that developed in various parts of the world due to Vatican II’s increased emphasis on the role of lay persons in the church.  Gerry credits Phil Harnett, SJ, with bringing Signs of the Times groups to Ireland from South America.  Within some Signs of the Times groups in Ireland, Gerry O’Hanlon reports beginning to listen to women’s concerns. But Gerry admits he did not listen enough, at first. 

In 1991, Gerry and three Irish co-authors published a booklet, Solidarity, based on the Irish Signs of the Times seminars to engage Jesuits and lay colleagues to come together to “read the signs of the times.”  During 1991-1994, several women participating in those groups challenged the authors of the booklet about why no women’s issues were included even though they had been discussed. Two of those strong women’s voices belonged to Cathy Molloy and Edel O’Kennedy, who pointedly asked why there was no talk about solidarity with women.  Engaging in the writing of a second edition of the booklet incorporating solidarity with women prompted Gerry, who was one of the two delegates from Ireland to GC 34, to strongly urge the official assembly of the 223 Jesuits from 80 countries for consideration of the role of women. Five other Jesuit provinces in the preliminary meetings leading up to the Congregation had also urged consideration of justice for women in the church.

And, my gut was right. These men working on the sub commission on women decided that, as men, they should not presume to write a document concerning women without women’s voices.  All three told me that they did not know of any other General Congregation at which anyone outside the assembly had been consulted on any commission, much less women religious or women lay persons. Cathy Molloy and Edel O’Kennedy of Ireland as well as Sister Helen Clarke of Australia and others were asked for their input on some of the ten drafts of Decree 14.   

My research thus far solved Decree 14’s mystery of who, what, when, where, and how. But, as the 20th anniversary of the document is marked, it still seems to collect dust on the shelf.  Some events and writing occurred immediately after the Congregation in 1995 and then again in the United States on the tenth anniversary. But little else appears to be known about its contributions or effects. My lingering question now has become: what needs to happen for that to change? My hope is that dusting off Decree 14 can contribute to that change. The following conversion statement from Decree 14 can become an empowering call to action for women and men to work towards change:

In response, we Jesuits first ask God for the grace of conversion. We have been part of a civil and ecclesial tradition that has offended against women. And, like many men, we have a tendency to convince ourselves that there is no problem. However unwittingly, we have often contributed to a form of clericalism which has reinforced male domination with an ostensibly divine sanction. By making this declaration we wish to react personally and collectively, and do what we can to change this regrettable situation.

Decree 14 should be widely shared among lay persons as well as in theology, women’s studies, and other classes in which social justice issues and religion are a part. As more attention is paid to Decree 14, it can be used to influence policy and procedures in many settings, as alluded to in the decree:  

It would be idle to pretend that all the answers to the issues surrounding a new, more just relationship between women and men have been found, or are satisfactory to all. In particular, it may be anticipated that some other questions about the role of women in civil and ecclesial society will undoubtedly mature over time... In this context we ask Jesuits to live, as always, with the tension involved in being faithful to the teachings of the Church and at the same time trying to read accurately the signs of the times.

Now, on the 20th anniversary of Decree 14, would be a good time to advance these recommendations.

Decree 14, GC 34 is available on many sites.  Here’s one: http://www.sjweb.info/documents/sjs/docs/Dr%2014_ENG.pdf

Dr. Margo J. Heydt is Chairperson and Associate Professor in the Department of Social Work of Xavier University in Cincinnati. She received the MSW from West Virginia University, and the Women’s Studies Certificate and the Ed.D. in counseling from the University of Cincinnati.

http://www.conversationsmagazine.org/web-features/2015/12/27/solving-the-mystery-of-decree-14-jesuits-and-the-situation-of-women-in-church-and-civil-society

Decree 14: Jesuits and the Situation of Women in Church and Civil Society, General Congregation 34 (1995)

In 1995, the Jesuits made a collective call to resolve the situation of women in the Catholic Church. Decree 14: Jesuits and the Situation of Women in Church and Civil Society, General Congregation 34 (1995) is worth reading. It is in many ways a beautiful document filled with excellent intentions. Sad that now — years later — the situation has not changed much for women in the Church.

__________________________________________________________________

In 1996, The Society of Jesus, otherwise known as the Jesuits, issued a decree on Jesuits and the Situation of Women in Church and Civil Society. In many ways a beautiful document, it’s beauty evokes sadness in that so many years later, so little has been done.

The decree was issued as part of the results of their 34th General Congregation (GC) held in Rome in 1995. 202 delegates were in attendance. The assembly was convoked by Superior General Peter-Hans Kolvenbach at a time when, according to The New York Times, Jesuits were “enjoying a relaxation of tensions with the Vatican but grappling with the question of how to pursue the order’s mission of faith and social justice with a declining number of priests.” (The numbers of Jesuits worldwide had decreased from some 36,000 at the time of the 31st General Congregation in 1965-66 to less than 20,000 at the time of the 34th General Congregation.)

The delegates issued 26 decrees at the 34th GC. Most decrees fell into five categories (Our Mission, Aspects of Jesuit Life for Mission, In the Church, Dimensions and Particular Sectors of Our Mission, and Organization and Governance). The delegates also approved an introductory and a concluding decree.

According to delegates, the 34th GC took place as the Catholic Church “reacted strongly against” the “continuing discrimination and prejudice” against women. In the decree on women (part of the ‘In the Church’ category), delegates argue for a need for the Society of Jesus to “join with inter-church and inter-religious groups in order to advance” a change to the situation. They admit that because “we have been part of a civil and ecclesial tradition that has offended against women” there is a need to “react personally and collectively, and do what we can to change this regrettable situation.” The suggested “ways forward” include invitations for “all Jesuits to listen carefully and courageously to the experience of women” and for “all Jesuits, as individuals and through their institutions, to align themselves in solidarity with women.”

Decree 14. JESUITS AND THE SITUATION OF WOMEN IN CHURCH AND CIVIL SOCIETY

Introduction

1. General Congregation 33 made a brief mention of the "unjust treatment and exploitation of women."1 It was part of a list of injustices in a context of new needs and situations which Jesuits were called to address in the implementation of our mission. We wish to consider this question more specifically and substantially on this occasion. This is principally because, assisted by the general rise in consciousness concerning this issue, we are more aware than previously that it is indeed a central concern of any contemporary mission which seeks to integrate faith and justice. It has a universal dimension in that it involves men and women everywhere. To an increasing extent it cuts across barriers of class and culture. It is of personal concern to those who work with us in our mission, especially lay and religious women.

The Situation

2. The dominance of men in their relationship with women has found expression in many ways. It has included discrimination against women in educational opportunities, the disproportionate burden they are called upon to bear in family life, paying them a lesser wage for the same work, limiting their access to positions of influence when admitted to public life and, sadly but only too frequently, outright violence against women themselves. In some parts of the world, this violence still includes female circumcision, dowry deaths and the murder of unwanted infant girls. Women are commonly treated as objects in advertising and in the media. In extreme cases, for example in promoting international sex tourism, they are regarded as commodities to be trafficked.

3. This situation, however, has begun to change, chiefly because of the critical awakening and courageous protest of women themselves. But many men, too, have joined women in rejecting attitudes which offend against the dignity of men and women alike. Nonetheless, we still have with us the legacy of systematic discrimination against women. It is embedded within the economic, social, political, religious and even linguistic structures of our societies. It is often part of an even deeper cultural prejudice and stereotype. Many women, indeed, feel that men have been slow to recognize the full humanity of women. They often experience a defensive reaction from men when they draw attention to this blindness.

4. The prejudice against women, to be sure, assumes different forms in different cultures. Sensitivity is needed to avoid using any one, simple, measurement of what counts as discrimination. But it is nonetheless a universal reality. Further, in many parts of the world, women already cruelly disadvantaged because of war, poverty, migration or race, often suffer a double disadvantage precisely because they are women. There is a "feminization of poverty" and a distinctive "feminine face of oppression."

The Church addresses the situation

5. Church social teaching, especially within the last ten years, has reacted strongly against this continuing discrimination and prejudice. Pope John Paul II in particular, has called upon all men and women of good will, especially Catholics, to make the essential equality of women a lived reality. This is a genuine "sign of the times."2 We need to join with inter-church and interreligious groups in order to advance this social transformation.

6. Church teaching certainly promotes the role of women within the family, but it also stresses the need for their contribution in the Church and in public life. It draws upon the text of Genesis, which speaks of men and women created in the image of God (Gn 1:27) and the prophetic praxis of Jesus in his relationship with women. These sources call us to change our attitudes and work for a change of structures. The original plan of God was for a loving relationship of respect, mutuality and equality between men and women, and we are called to fulfil this plan. The tone of this ecclesial reflection on Scripture makes it clear that there is an urgency in the challenge to translate theory into practice not only outside, but also within, the Church itself.

The role and responsibility of Jesuits

7. The Society of Jesus accepts this challenge and our responsibility for doing what we can as men and as a male religious order. We do not pretend or claim to speak for women. However, we do speak out of what we have learned from women about ourselves and our relationship with them.

8. In making this response we are being faithful, in the changed consciousness of our times, to our mission: the service of faith, of which the promotion of justice is an absolute requirement. We respond, too, out of the acknowledgement of our own limited but significant influence as Jesuits and as male religious within the Church. We are conscious of the damage to the People of God brought about in some cultures by the alienation of women who no longer feel at home in the Church, and who are not able with integrity to transmit Catholic values to their families, friends and colleagues.

Conversion

9. In response, we Jesuits first ask God for the grace of conversion. We have been part of a civil and ecclesial tradition that has offended against women. And, like many men, we have a tendency to convince ourselves that there is no problem. However unwittingly, we have often contributed to a form of clericalism which has reinforced male domination with an ostensibly divine sanction. By making this declaration we wish to react personally and collectively, and do what we can to change this regrettable situation.

Appreciation

10. We know that the nurturing of our own faith and much of our own ministry would be greatly diminished without the dedication, generosity, and joy that women bring to the schools, parishes, and other fields in which we labour together. This is particularly true of the work of lay and religious women among the urban and rural poor, often in extremely difficult and challenging situations. In addition, many religious congregations of women have adopted the Spiritual Exercises and our Jesuit Constitutions as the basis for their own spirituality and governance, becoming an extended Ignatian family. Religious and lay women have in recent years become expert in giving the Spiritual Exercises. As retreat directors, especially of the Exercises in daily life, they have enriched the Ignatian tradition, and our own understanding of ourselves and of our ministry. Many women have helped to reshape our theological tradition in a way that has liberated both men and women. We wish to express our appreciation for this generous contribution of women, and hope that this mutuality in ministry might continue and flourish.

Ways forward

11. We wish to specify more concretely at least some ways in which Jesuits may better respond to this challenge to our lives and mission. We do not presume that there is any one model of male-female relationship to be recommended, much less imposed, throughout the world or even within a given culture. Rather we note the need for a real delicacy in our response. We must be careful not to interfere in a way that alienates the culture; rather we must endeavour to facilitate a more organic process of change. We should be particularly sensitive to adopt a pedagogy that does not drive a further wedge between men and women who in certain circumstances are already under great pressure from other divisive cultural or socio-economic forces.

12. In the first place, we invite all Jesuits to listen carefully and courageously to the experience of women. Many women feel that men simply do not listen to them. There is no substitute for such listening. More than anything else it will bring about change. Without listening, action in this area, no matter how well-intentioned, is likely to by-pass the real concerns of women and to confirm male condescension and reinforce male dominance. Listening, in a spirit of partnership and equality, is the most practical response we can make, and is the foundation for our mutual partnership to reform unjust structures.

13. Secondly, we invite all Jesuits, as individuals and through their institutions, to align themselves in solidarity with women. The practical ways of doing this will vary from place to place and from culture to culture, but many examples come readily to mind:

13.1 —explicit teaching of the essential equality of women and men in Jesuit ministries, especially in schools, colleges and universities;

13.2 — support for liberation movements which oppose the exploitation of women and encourage their entry into political and social life;

13.3 — specific attention to the phenomenon of violence against women;

13.4 — appropriate presence of women in Jesuit ministries and institutions, not excluding the ministry of formation;

13.5 — genuine involvement of women in consultation and decision-making in our Jesuit ministries;

13.6 — respectful cooperation with our female colleagues in shared projects;

13.7 — use of appropriately inclusive language in speech and official documents;

13.8 — promotion of the education of women and, in particular, the elimination of all forms of illegitimate discrimination between boys and girls in the educational process. Many of these, we are happy to say, are already being practised in different parts of the world. We confirm their value, and recommend a more universal implementation as appropriate.

14. It would be idle to pretend that all the answers to the issues surrounding a new, more just relationship between women and men have been found, or are satisfactory to all. In particular, it may be anticipated that some other questions about the role of women in civil and ecclesial society will undoubtedly mature over time. Through committed and persevering research, through exposure to different cultures and through reflection on experience, Jesuits hope to participate in clarifying these questions and in advancing the underlying issues of justice. The change of sensibilities which this involves will inevitably have implications for Church teaching and practice. In this context we ask Jesuits to live, as always, with the tension involved in being faithful to the teachings of the Church and at the same time trying to read accurately the signs of the times.

Conclusion

15. The Society gives thanks for all that has already been achieved through the often costly struggle for a more just relationship between women and men. We thank women for the lead they have given, and continue to give. In particular, we thank women religious, with whom we feel a special bond, and who have been pioneers in so many ways in their unique contribution to the mission of faith and justice. We are grateful, too, for what the Society and individual Jesuits have contributed to this new relationship, which is a source of great enrichment for both men and women.

16. Above all we want to commit the Society in a more formal and explicit way to regard this solidarity with women as integral to our mission. In this way we hope that the whole Society will regard this work for reconciliation between women and men in all its forms as integral to its interpretation of Decree 4 of GC 32 for our times. We know that a reflective and sustained commitment to bring about this respectful reconciliation can flow only from our God of love and justice who reconciles all and promises a world in which "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28)

————————————

1 GC 33, D 1, n. 48.

2 John Paul II, Apostolic letter Mulieris Dignitatem and Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici; Message for the World Day of Peace, 1 January 1995.

Original Source (English translation):

Jesuit Life & Mission Today: The Decrees & Accompanying Documents of the 31st–35th General Congregations of the Society of Jesus, ed. John W. Padberg. St. Louis, Mo.: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 2009, General Congregation 34, Decree 14, “Jesuits and the Situation of Women in Church and Civil Society,” pg. 615–619 [361–384].