The Catholic Weekly 10 April 2022

catholicweekly.com.au 2 NEWS 10, April, 2022 Call 02 9649 6423 or visit www.catholiccemeteries.com.au Consecrated lawns and chapels Sydney’s only Catholic crematorium Monthly mass for the Repose of Souls Funeral directors available for a Catholic service Bereavement pastoral care Serving the Catholic community for over 150 years MEMBERS OF the Plenary Council must “tailor our ex- pectations” in anticipation of “the inevitable disappoint- ment and disillusionment” that will follow the Second As- sembly in July, Fr David Ran- son, the Secretary of the Ple- nary Council, has told the Australasian Catholic Coali- tion for Church Reform. “Many thousands of people have posted their own aspi- rations, and their own hopes, to the mast of this Plenary,” Fr Ranson told participants of the ACCCR webinar “The Ple- nary and the People”. “Our Plenary Council, can- not by its nature, rhythm and purpose address the breadth and depths of those expecta- tions. “So my fear really is around the inevitable disappoint- ment and disillusionment that might occur. Responding to this dis- appointment will be a “criti- cal” task for the post-Plenary Church, he said. Fr Ranson, also Vicar-Gen- eral of the Diocese of Broken Bay, said the Plenary Coun- cil has faced three “inherent difficulties” during its time, singling out in particular “am- biguity as to whether we are engaged in a synod or a ple- nary”. It would have been better to hold a more open-end- ed national Synod, and to follow that with a Plena- ry Council “that reflected the outcome of the Synod and determined its prac- tical, pastoral, legislative outcomes for the regional Church – which is why one holds a Plenary”. He also said the Plenary agenda posed a “question and challenge” insofar as “we said at the beginning that everything can be on the ta- ble”. “Well, clearly, there is a lot Plenary: curb your enthusiasm that can’t be on the table,” Fr Ranson said. The Plenary Council may have benefited from begin- ning with an agenda, rather than a “blank page”, he added. “We’ve sought to form an agenda out of a national lis- tening exercise rather than begin with an agenda that en- ters into a national exercise of listening.” The COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and the war in Ukraine have also left people fragile, vulnerable, tired and disengaged with the Plenary process. Fr Ranson said he hoped that the Plenary Council may yet surprise the Church, even though it would likely result in “something quite limited”. He encouraged partici- pants of the ACCCR webinar to “tailor our expectations”, in part by thinking of the Plena- ry as part of a “wider impetus that is afoot”. Members need to look for local ways to “implement syn- odality” and avoid “beating our heads up against a brick wall”, Fr Ranson said. He also told ACCCR partic- ipants to form or join inten- tional communities or new ecclesial movements if their local parishes were not serv- ing their needs. “If we keep our eyes purely on the community that bears his name yes, we will be very disappointed at times, over- whelmed at times by its fra- gility, its sinfulness, its inade- quacies,” he said. The ACCCR has been the most consistent voice calling for the Plenary Council to be a vehicle for wide-ranging church reform. While Fr Ranson’s re- marks were received well by the ACCCR organisers and speakers, who called them “realistic”, several participants posted their frustrations in the online chat thread. Participant “Dr Peter Sch- neider” wrote “’Taylor [sic] our expectations?’ … really David? We will go nowhere if we don’t raise our expecta- tions.” “Justin Stanwix” disagreed that the Plenary was a guar- anteed disappointment: “But we have waited 4 YEARS. NOT just a beginning. “Only half has occurred. Will we not allow the Writing Groups to suggest and allow the Spirit to have its influence on the next Assembly[?]” Others were more accept- ing, with “Mary O’Shannassy” thanking Fr Ranson “for your very grounded and real con- tribution”. Emeritus Professor John Warhurst, one of the lead- ing voices in the reforming party of the Plenary Council, gave thanks to Fr Ranson and made some closing remarks. “In these grand occasions we need to push the bound- aries as hard as we can,” he said. “Push the envelope if you like, within the structures we’ve been given.” Professor Warhurst said that lay people need to “keep the conversation going, be aware and to press the au- thorities that the whole pro- cess needs to be more trans- parent.” He said more transparency would have helped members “as they got tired, and as they got depressed, and as they dealt with the challenges of daily life”. Feedback from members on the Plenary Council’s working drafts was due on 4 February, and the proposi- tions will now be finalised by the drafting committee. Plenary facilitator Lana Turvey-Collins wrote in the latest edition of PlenaryPost that Second Assembly pro- gram and final version of the propositions on which mem- bers will vote, will be released in June. EDITORIAL P21 I n this edition News Movies, books Archbishop’s homily Editorial & Letters 1-11 8-9 21 24-25 EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Michael Kenny (02) 9390 5348 EDITOR Peter Rosengren (02) 9390 5400 REPORTERS Marilyn Rodrigues (02) 9390 5410 Debbie Cramsie (02) 9390 5396 Adam Wesselinoff (02) 9390 5400 SUBSCRIPTIONS Rita Ng (02) 9390 5411 ADVERTISING AND MARKETING Steve Richards (02) 9390 5404 Katie Clarke (02) 9390 5402 DESIGNERS Renate Cassis Mathew De Sousa Our story begins in 1839 with the Australasian Chronicle, continuing with the Freeman’s Journal in 1850. Level 13, Polding Centre, 133 Liverpool Street, Sydney, NSW 2000. Phone (02) 9390 5400 | Vol 73, No 5229 The Catholic Weekly is published by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney ABN 60 471 267 587 and is printed by Spotpress Pty Ltd, 24-26 Lilian Fowler Place, Marrickville NSW 2204. DOWNLOAD THE OUR FAITH OUR WORKS APP Your one-stop location for Mass and Confession times, spiritual reflections and meditations, podcasts, local Catholic news, the Go Make Disciples mission plan, and much more. To download the app visit ourfaithourworks.org/app or scan the QR Code. I have a lot of compassion for the Russian Ortho- dox Church because, like everything else in Russia, it is under the thumb of the government. To ex- plain this simply, I sometimes say that if Putin says something on Tuesday, the Russian Patriarch has to say the same thing on Wednesday but just put- ting the word ‘God’ into the sentence.” Fr David Nazar SJ, provincial of the Jesuits in Ukraine from 2002 to 2015, rector of the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome QUOTABLE ¾ Adam Wesselinoff PMpaves way for destruction of embryos FROM P1 “I do not see evidence that this consultation has happened.” Australia’s Catholic Bishops Conference had urged parlia- mentarians in an inquiry sub- mission to scrap the bill or at least pause it, citing safety and ethical concerns and a lack of evidence that the proposed technique is effective. Bishop Richard Umbers, the Bishops’ delegate for life, said the bill presented an under- standable emotional appeal but with grave consequences. “The passage of the bill is very disappointing particu- larly as no amendments were passed,” he said. “We appre- ciate the deep desire for par- ents who are carriers to avoid passing mitochondrial disease on to their children but the cre- ation of three-parent embryos is the wrong way to go about it. “TheAustralianDepartment of Health has stated that nei- ther the risks for a child born nor the long-term effects on future generations are under- stood. “The parliament should fo- cus on research that respects life fromconception rather than risky treatments that presup- pose an entire industry of IVF.” EthicistMargaret Somerville said the debate had raised se- rious questions that needed to be answered, even if lawmak- ers approached this with the best of medically therapeutic intentions. “Even if doing it with the very best of intentions to save awful suffering in a human person, is it inherently wrong to alter the genome of human embryo? Is it designing a hu- man person? And is making an alteration that will be inherited by all of that embryo’s future, children when they have chil- dren, is that inherentlywrong?” she said. “If you can say that any of those things are inherently wrong, that’s the end of the dis- cussion, it means it is unethical to do this.”