Comments on: HOMILY by Joan Mooney ST MARY IN EXILE January 23rd-24th 2010

By: Nintendo 3DS Screen Protective Filter

Nintendo 3DS Screen Protective Filter — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:29:17 +0000

Great write-up, I am a regular visitor of one’s web site, maintain the nice operation and I am going to be a regular visitor for a long time.

By: Christine

Christine — Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:37:32 +0000

Great writing! I want you to follow up on this topic =D Chris reputation repair

By: Michelle Walker

Michelle Walker — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 05:03:45 +0000

Bravo Joan Mooney – bravo!!!

I flited down to the comments before reading this sermon and saw the line – “no wonder the church disallows women priests” At first I felt affronted, then I laughed a bit sadly, then I got on with it and read the sermon.

As a female Civil Engineer and Manager – I have often reflected on the contribution of women in the business world. In general I have observed certain traits to be more comment in women than in men. In general I have noticed that women tend to listen. In general I have noted that women seek to understand and share that understanding. Unfortunately in business where hesitation is read as uncertainty and hence weakness this approach does not always get results. I have observed that womens voices are not heard because they are too busy listening and not pushing themselves to the front of the pack.

In many cultures listening and reflection is an integral part of the business process. In any event it certainly should be at the centre of any religious / spiritual community.

Women priests? I dont like our chances any time soon, but certainly I believe our gender could offer a lot to the priesthood. In light of current events in the Church what is more urgently required than listening, reflecting and seeking to understand. Less of the old handing down of directions, more listening to the people, listening to communities. Only then can wisdom prevail and can we find our way forward.

By: Ingerid Meagher

Ingerid Meagher — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 04:19:25 +0000

Shar Ryan was privileged to receive not one but two replies from the Archbishop. I wrote a letter that set out my family’s ties and experiences with the Catholic Church. The reverberations are still felt today, 3 generations later. My letter also spoke of the delight and the hope I found at St Mary’s – a delight at finding an open, honest, progressive, inclusive church and where one experienced hope for the future of the church. In fact my last sentence (naively) read: “The Church hierarchy would have done well to allow St Mary’s South Brisbane to be a trail blazer, a shiny example of a Church into the 21st century.”

I never received so much as an acknowledgement of my letter in which, after all, I bared a family history which hitherto had been rather private. I would have been happy knowing the letter had been received and read. In the circumstances a response might have been an impossibility considering the deluge of correspondence at the time.

By: Perry Mason

Perry Mason — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:34:35 +0000

I say that the bishop dismissed the priest, not the congregation, because that is objectively, publicly, what happened. You have said that the bishop adopted a dismissive manner towards the congregation. You obviously feel strongly about that, and I am not in any position to make a comment on it. I’m left wondering, however, after several posts here, what exactly was the nature of the consultation and engagement you sought. Was it over any matter that the bishop might have had authority to grant?
I also wonder why it seems to concern you so much that people are leaving the church. If someone leaves the church, assuming they have thought about it and not just drifted away, it must be because they fundamentally disagree with church teaching. Isn’t it a Good Thing that people leave a false belief system to strike out on their own or join a group which is closer to the truth?
Coming back to my original observation on ‘injustice’, I have not seen anything posted here to show that an injustice has been perpetrated. People have found the church to be inadequate for them and walked away. It happens all the time.

By: John

John — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 11:14:58 +0000

Perry how is it that you can say the congregation was not dismissed, when it was never consulted with, even after repeated attempts to initiate consultation with Archbishop John, was there ever an investigation into the claims brought against St Mary’s? In what other areas of society would this process occur? Is the church its people? Why is it that so few of those baptized and raised in Catholicism no longer adhere to it? Could it be said that the church has dismissed them also in it’s unwillingness to engage with them? Possibly this congregation followed Peter and Terry, not blindly but as people with sight, capable of seeing clearly the predicament of the church in this time and possibly the congregation given that lack of engagement had no option but to move, irrespective of Peter and Terry’s actions.

By: Perry Mason

Perry Mason — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 04:41:06 +0000

With regard to the Great Dismissal, it is well worth remembering that it was not the congregation who were dismissed but the parish priest Peter Kennedy. Some people went with him – that was their choice. They also had the choice of staying and welcoming and working with the new parish priest (as happens routinely in other parishes).
It has been said that more or better communication might have led to a compromise outcome. I think that is a furphy. We now know that Peter Kennedy was a closet atheist masquerading as a catholic priest. The only ‘compromise’ possible was one that would have allowed him to continue the deception for a while longer.

By: Shar Ryan

Shar Ryan — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:23:57 +0000

Perry we did not see how our community could continue to exist and grow within the CC when we, the people in the pews, were not recognised in the process. I wrote about a dozen letters to Archbishop Bathersby and received only two replies. One was the pro forma letter to all who wrote early in the piece which unfortunately suggested that we were not people of prayer. The second came after I wrote a letter trying to explain that many of us were looking for more in our relationship with God than we found in the local churches. I added a ps Last week Brendan and I celebrated our Golden Wedding ……..celebrating over 60 years as committed Christians and Catholics.. Yes I got a reply – a certificate congratulating us on celebrating our Golden Wedding.
In one I urged the need for prayer together – perhaps two or three of us with the Archbishop and a couple people of his choice. As I explained – not prayer for our (or his) desired outcome but the prayer of listening to the God within us all with the desire to reach an understanding of each others attitudes and thus opening up the possibility of agreement. I even had the temerity to offer to visit Wynburg with this in mind.
This lack of consultation with the community was certainly difficult to understand.

By: Perry Mason

Perry Mason — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:30:53 +0000

John, I’m sure you understand I was having a dig at those who cry ‘foul!’, ‘unjust!’ with one breath and ‘how liberating!’ with the next. Those who chose to walk away with Peter Kennedy and haven’t come back to St Mary’s are presumably happy where they are.

Following on from Peter Kennedy’s talk at Rockhampton, might we now see a ‘homily’ where somebody has the decency to apologise to the Bishop and acknowledge that Kennedy’s dismisal as parish priest was in no way ‘unjust’ but one hundred percent fair and reasonable?

Those who wal

By: John

John — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:45:14 +0000

Do the ‘all concerned’ include those baptized, reared and educated within Catholicism and is the outcome of their ceasing to practice and to adhere to Catholicism considered a happy outcome also!