I have been associated with the parish going back
to its inception in 1972. Ted Kennedy had become a friend
and a mentor. I think it is important to understand
that he was not just anyone. He had a sense of affirmation
that endeared him to people and in particular the indigenous
people. He gave them a sense of belonging and a location
where they believed they had a right to be. What is
happening now is that they feel betrayed in such a way
that the lifeline given them has been swept away. They
are bewildered. They feel betrayed. They had had a parish
priest who had made the effort to understand something
of their culture. He in turn has been betrayed by a
clergy who have been imposed on the community. Those
clergy in turn have made no effort to understand what
enculturation is about and what are the genuine needs
of a people. Aboriginal values are unable to get a hearing.
This runs contrary to the teachings of the Church, especially
since Vatican II where there is an incredible emphasis
on living with and respecting the culture and the tradition
of the people entrusted to them. The aboriginal values
had got a fair hearing before the advent of the successors
of Ted. Kennedy. Now that has been denied. This can
be shown in a legion of ways. Refusing an aboriginal
child communion, taking down of icons that respected
an aboriginal presence, putting an expensive carpet
in a position of prominence and a dais as well and disregarding
the work being done by the community to alleviate the
plight of the aborigines. These are but a few examples.
You talk about the shortage of the clergy. Why then
have two priests working with such a small congregation?
Surely they could be used more productively elsewhere
with an ideology suitable to the way they view life.
The spirit of this community has been here for decades.
People have come from near and far to be in attendance.
This is a church and a community where they feel at
home. They have a deep sense of belonging and for them
this is their local church. Why attempt to demolish
a sense of community by replacing it with something
alien to their faith? There have been several priests
who have offered to say the Sunday masses at St. Vincent's
and who share the same Gospel values. Why are they not
allowed to celebrate? One has the impression that this
has all been decided beforehand. Even the previous appointment
was never discussed. The MSCs knew that the priest that
they selected was not appropriate. Why was the appointment
made?
However the biggest and the most serious problem is
what the Neo-Cats offer in terms of a theology and a
spirituality. From what has been observed in both words
and actions they propagate that the only path to follow
is the way of the Neo-Catechumenate. Their sense of
exclusiveness and divisiveness run contrary to the basic
structure of a Catholic parish. Their fundamental message
is nothing less than the spirit of Jansenism with its
emphasis on self doubt, the eminent nature of sin, a
sense of our own incompetency and emptiness and the
negation of our own beliefs. It must be remembered that
Jansenism was condemned and in turn recognised as a
heresy by Pope Clement XI.
by John Hill |