CaSPA 2018: Workshop with Frank Brennan, “What does it mean to be a Catholic Leader in Australia today and how do we cope with stepping into new frontiers”

Responses to a Q and A session—

• The celebrate clergy is still playing catchup on matters of sexuality and fertility.
• How do priests cope with issues like IVF? Some bishops continue to talk about objective, moral disorder, rather than life-affirming decisions made in good conscience.
• There should be respectful learning and respectful disagreement.
• It isn’t logical to jump from church ethical teachings to public policy – it’s nonsensical and does violence to basic principles like subsidiarity.
• The bishops saying things are morally wrong will not cut it in the public forum – and the challenges are coming thick and fast. Euthanasia will probably be the next area of public policy where church teaching will come into conflict with legislation.
• The refugee issue is a case in point for those who want to bring faith into the public debate. There needs to be a recognition of the possible: it is inevitable that both parties will maintain the boats ban, even though we have the facilities to stop the boards; but we should press for a humanitarian approach to those on Nauru and those 20,000 waiting for final processing.

To survive as a community, we have to take our sacramental life more seriously. Importing priests is a futile stopgap. Where we have missed the bus – on celibacy and gender-equality – is where we show ourselves unfit for purpose. We have probably missed the board. Either we will becoming increasingly distant from the sacraments, or we will be forced to gather together in small groups like the first Catholics in Australia or like the Early Church.

The future of constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples?

• It will never happen while Pearson and Turnbull lead their sides – a total breakdown of trust. Interestingly, the most pro-active PM was Keating, who would not countenance a referendum. The current proposal could become a one-line bill of rights and actually serve as a source of active discrimination. Post- the expert panel’s dismissal of the Gillard proposals, the debate is now around the possible. The search for a democratic voice, particularly to Parliament – ATSIC without a function. Should this be set up by statute and then proposed for constitutional recognition? More chance than vice versa. Rejection would be very damaging. But there must be respectful dialogue that recognises the yearnings of indigenous peoples and the constitutional realities.

• We are a church and not a lobby. We should have focused on the care of all concerned and not the outcome.
• Religious freedoms is a real question but it is separate and distinct from various moral questions like the recognition of marriage equality.

Act in solidarity: they can’t sack you all.

Don’t underestimate the level of support for movement in the church.