Cardinal Pell bans free speech and makes the Church look ridiculous

Almost everywhere there is some new furore involving the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell.

Last week's offering involves the Cardinal banning the lay church group, Australian Reforming Catholics, from holding their annual conference, or “campfire”, at MacKillop Place in North Sydney, or indeed on any Catholic land.

Pell also banned two Sydney priests from appearing as speakers, on the basis that they would be giving comfort to a dissenting group who would be promoting teachings not in accord with Catholic belief.

There are one or two observations that may be made. 

Thankfully the days when the educated elite in the Church made a distinction between the knowledge they were permitted to have, and that permissible to the “Great Unwashed” are over.

Since the second Vatican Council there has been an increasing emphasis on education, discussion and collaboration between priest and people. Indeed the exhortation to the people that their “full, active participation” was called for has largely been realised in terms of discussion: lenten groups, social justice groups, prayer and spirituality groups, adult education and other tertiary education.

This is what Australian Reforming Catholics are seeking to do. They have organised a conference at which lay people, clergy, and the religious will meet to exchange views, knowledge and wisdom in conversation and prayer.

According to Canon Law, the faithful not only have the right but the obligation to meet for the discernment of their views in the light of tradition. Canon 212 (3) reads thus:

They have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters, which concern the good of the Church. They have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ's faithful, but in doing so they must always respect the integrity of faith and morals, show due reverence to the Pastors and take into account both the common good and the dignity of individuals.

Australian Reforming Catholics have had the event and speakers organised for months. They have assembled speakers who are genuinely eminent in their fields: the Columbian ecologist, Fr Cyril Hally; the scripture scholar, Dr John N Collins; Sr Susan Connelly, rsj, justice advocate; Rev. Dr Gerald Gleeson, moral theologian and Michael B Kelly, theologian, among them.

This is a group of lay, ordained and religious people who are knowledgeable and competent. This is no ratbag group.

Canon Law recognises the wisdom of encouraging pious organisations from the grassroots. Such organisations nurture faith because they bring faith and surrounding questions to the forefront of our human concerns. Such organisations are clearly evangelical in their ultimate purpose.

To that end, Canon 215 reads:

Christ's faithful may freely establish and direct associations, which serve charitable or pious purposes or which foster the Christian vocation in the world, and they may hold meetings to pursue these purposes by common effort.

If such pious organisations have internal disagreements, or, shock horror, a collective and unanimous “disagreement” with an official Church teaching (not that we would know this, as the ARC conference has yet to occur), the problem is exactly what?

Because: Christ's faithful are at liberty to make known their needs, especially their spiritual needs, and their wishes to the Pastors of the Church. (Canon Law 212(2))

The Church says this. This is enshrined in the Law of the Church. Unless discussion is permitted and indeed encouraged - possibly even funded and facilitated by the hierarchical Church (there's an idea) how might the faithful be able to discern their spiritual needs, in order to make these known to their Pastors?

The fact is that the Cardinal has made the Church look ridiculous. In this heavy-handed and badly thought out decision, Cardinal Pell has called into question the credibility of the Roman Catholic Church in the wider society. If the Church is not permitted to hold discussions freely in a Catholic setting, aided by Catholic clergy, on matters of Catholic interest, just why would Australian society listen to us when we have something to say on a social, political, ecological or justice question? Or perhaps a question relating to higher education?

However Cardinal Pell does tolerate “dissent”. The website Super Flumina, has this to say about George Pell:

When he was Archbishop of Melbourne, George Pell wrote an article in the Melbourne Catholic journal Kairos (June 28-July 5, 1998) in which he said inter alia: “It is certainly true that Our Lord is not physically present” in the Eucharist. He went on to say that the Sacred Scriptures “contain historical and scientific errors and misunderstandings.” These two statements are, each of them, contrary to the Church's clear teaching.

Australian Reforming Catholics has never questioned Cardinal Pell's orthodoxy, yet they have been subject to the current action. Super Flumina remains undisturbed by episcopal interference. And rightly so.

Australian Reforming Catholics aren't members of a political party seeking to hold meetings at some one else's branch office. They aren't even here to “pray, pay and obey”.

Catholics are a pilgrim people on a journey, seeking to help God bring about the Kingdom. That is the will of the Holy Spirit. And there is nothing George Cardinal Pell can do to stop it.