Posted on 01/13/2009 6:50:29 AM PST by NYer
MAVERICK priest Father Peter Kennedy says he will lead a breakaway congregation if Brisbane's catholic Archbishop forces him to leave St Mary's Church.
There are fears that exclusion from the historic South Brisbane property will be the final act in a long-running dispute that has reached the Vatican. The dispute has attracted national and international attention because it represents the battle between conservative and less traditional forces within the Catholic Church.
There are more Roman Catholics in Australia than any other religious group. Each week, St Mary's attracts large congregations while many more orthodox Catholic parishes struggle to fill pews. In a rare and exclusive interview, Father Kennedy said he was determined to carry on. "The reality is that, if we are excluded from this church, the Trades and Labor Council have already offered us their place just down the road," he said. "I will continue. Our community will continue down there. We get 800 to 900 people coming every week. It's a vibrant, alive mass with people from all over the city."
St Mary's is known for its unconventional Catholic practices - allowing women to preach, blessing homosexual couples and recognising with ritual the traditional sovereignty of the indigenous people of the area. The latest round in the battle was sparked by a complaint direct to the Vatican in August from an aggrieved church-goer.
Brisbane Archbishop John Bathersby accused the parish of operating outside the accepted practices of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged Father Kennedy to fall in line or face closure. The parishioners responded to the accusations but - in a follow-up letter to Father Kennedy, dated December 22 - Archbishop Bathersby said: "St Mary's has not yet adequately given proof of its communion with the Archdiocese of Brisbane and the Roman Catholic Church."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
*snort* :-)
moved to 11 - more fun time with you!
LOL! What's going on in the seminaries? Sheesh.
Asked what Jesus Christ would make of the controversy, Father Kennedy replied: "Well, Jesus always stood with the poor, the broken and the oppressed. Jesus was not a Christian. He was a Jew. And he certainly wasn't a Catholic and he didn't start the Catholic Church. He didn't start any church.
Fr. Kennedy appears to be a heretic. He certainly denies the obvious in Scripture. Perhaps he doesn't listen when his ladies proclaim the Gospel. Perhaps he just skips certain readings.
Bravo.
This is precisely what The Church has been battling and dealing with for centuries. The liberals main goal is destruction and demolishment. The latter won't happen but they are putting up a fierce battle nonetheless.
You are absolutely right that it all changed after Vatican II. My mom was catechised in Vatican I, I was a child in 2nd grade when Vatican II happened. When it changed from latin, it all got a lot less mysterious.
Maybe the catechists were really confused for my 13 years. Or maybe I always had trouble believing that my friend was going to hell because she wasn’t a Catholic.
Father Kennedy said leadership selection in the Catholic Church was "a very incestuous process and it starts from Rome", adding it would never change "until the people regain the right to elect their bishops".
The people never had the right to elect their bishops ... Fr. Kennedy has a very distorted idea of Church history. Does Fr. Kennedy also think that doctrine should be put to the vote?
Why are you protesting the authority of the Catholic Church? Isn’t that what PROTESTants do?
"Most of the people who come here are what we call 'recovering Catholics'.
Hmmmm .... yes. The term refers to those who reject one or more matters of Catholic doctrine, usually regarding sexual morality. A better term for them would be heretics or schismatics. Apostates, even, in some cases.
Jesus' "Great Commission" to his (all male Apostles) was to "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
1) Jesus gave this great commission and teaching authority to his Apostles.
2) Jesus chose only males as His Apostles. He could have chosen women (He is God, after all), but He didn't.
3) Bishops (and to a lesser extent, priests) are successors to the Apostles.
4) Male bishops have Apostolic teaching authority (that extends down to priests to a lesser degree).
5) Therefore, the Church concludes that only priests have the authority to preach (/teach) during Mass.
I think the main goal of liberals is not necessarily destruction but corruption. It must show that everything people judge good and virtuous is, underneath, a seething pool of corruption so people won’t try to recreate that good and virtuous thing at a future date. Therefore, it infiltrates organizations such as the Catholic Church and then argues that the entire church is as corrupt as its infiltrators. Every misstep by the target organization is trumpeted as a sign of corruption throughout the organization. It is, to me, somewhat analogous to Machievelli’s advice to usurpers to kill the royal family so there will be no one to rally around later when conditions get bad. They do want to destroy the Catholic Church but not before they convince people it is a mercy killing. In no way do they want it to stand for truth and virtue, even in memory. The Church has its work cut out for it. Beware of mercy manipulated.
Father Kennedy described the Catholic church as being "caught in doctrine and dogma still".
Oh, yes, that dreadful doctrine and dogma. Yes, Fr. Kennedy, Catholic believe certain things. It's what makes us Catholic. You're NOT free to make it up as you go along, and still be a Catholic. If you can't handle the doctrine and dogma, go elsewhere. Calling yourself "Catholic" is dishonest.
What changed was the "pastoral counseling" that the leaders in the Church inflicted on the faithful, not the Doctrines. As you probably have seen, many left the Church after wards because it was no longer recognizable as it was previously. "Why" was always the question I had during the entire time I went through the RCIA 10 years ago. I never got a straight answer out of them.
You bring up an excellent point. Vatican II is completely contradictory to what was established infallibly in Vatican I, the Council of Trent, the Council of Florence, and the Council of Constantine. Nothing was pronounced infallibly as doctrine in Vatican II, Paul VI made this clear.
Yet, the result was a rampant overtake by liberalism, communism, and yes, freemasonry (A. Bugnini, the "author" of the novus ordo liturgy, was found to have freemasonry ties by Paul VI, and was dealt with accordingly.) Many Bishops spoke out in protest, but they were the in the minority. The damage, however was done, as Paul VI himself acknowledged, "The Smoke of Satan has entererd the Sanctuary."
All I can say, and wish for you, Jilliane, is do your reading. Pray your Rosary daily. Read everything you can about how the history of the Church evolved. Including past councils, what was pronounced, the heresies (the Aryan heresies lasted for 400 years!), and what has transpired. Truth never changes, not from day 1 after Christ established our Church. When we have priests, bishops, ect...today preach what is directly contradictory to what was always held as Truth as established by Christ's established Church on earth, then what have we?
May God bless you and keep you.
You know, the claim by some misguided souls that women don’t have any real power in the Catholic Church is really amusing to me. Ask all the Teresa’s that come to mind. Let’s see, there’s the Doctors of the Church, Mother Teresa, hmmm.
Mother Angelica comes to mind, boy she never backed down from what she wanted to accomplish, did she.
What does “That says a lot” mean? Women who feel the need to speak, speak. Women who do not feel led to speak are quiet. Are you suggesting that the women who speak at mass do NOT feel the need to speak? Then why are they there?
Heck, go look at an Italian or Irish mother involved with a Catholic school or parish! Formally, it may seem as if they lack power, but God help anyone who crosses them!
The Church does not teach that people are going to hell if they are not Catholic.
Did you have ANY catechesis?
Hubbard & Mahony Countdown to Retirement
Clark's retirement comes several months before Hubbard. Let's both pray that Pope Benedict XVI is still with us. From what I understand, the Vatican has a very thick dossier on Hubbard. No doubt, the same is true for Clark.
jilliane,
I’m not trying to be mean, but your questions and points are, well, lacking may be the nicest way to put it:
“What’s wrong with women preaching?”
Banned by scripture. A longer answer might be more satisfying, but I doubt it.
“Is that ‘liberal’ ideology?
Yes. It is UNBIBLICAL and liberal theology.
“Why can’t priests marry?”
Because they take a vow not to.
“Priests used to be able to marry...”
No. Seminarians could marry. Not priests. Once ordained, they couldn’t marry.
“In fact, there is a loophole; a married protestant minister who converts to Catholicism may become an ordained priest.”
Not a loophole. That’s an entirely different rule for an entirely different situation. And notice HE HAS TO BE MARRIED BEFORE ORDINATION too. He can’t marry AFTER ordination.
“If the church allowed priests to marry, many good priests who’ve been excommunicated would never have left and would be still serving the good work of the Catholic church.”
So we’re supposed to allow men to violate vows as if they didn’t matter?
“The convent affiliated with our school has 32 nuns left in their community with over 100 bedrooms.”
When did it go liberal?
“Most are senior citizens. Women have changed in the last 500 years in case the vatican hasn’t noticed.”
Women have not changed at all - they still have two legs, two arms, two eyes, etc. Society has changed. The possibilities for women have increased.
“Why can’t a Catholic nun be married and be recognized? It would be mission work.”
What? If being a nun means being unmarried, then being married means you can’t be a nun. How could a man be a monk and be married and actually living with his wife?
Thirteen years of Catholic education? Are you sure?
Again, I know that sounds mean, but the liberalness, and lack of logic in your post simply stuns me. Seriously, I’m not trying to be mean.
Hearsay on my part, but keep an eye out for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.