Dear Friends

Critiques, questions and criticisms started to flow before the Plenary Council’s First Assembly was finished! They ranged from the laudatory to the damning. Consider this comment: “I have left the First Assembly of the Plenary Council optimistic that change is coming. What that looks like is unclear… But the Show is moving and the collective imagination has been ignited”. And this one: “The Plenary Council has been a masterclass in avoiding the real problems in the Catholic Church…the Plenary Council organisers, either consciously or unconsciously, used the process to side-step the issues they wanted excluded”.

Naturally, opinions differ. It was however an historic occasion: only the fifth Plenary Council in Australia’s history, the first since 1938 and markedly different to the previous ones. Three things stood out for me. The first, people with different viewpoints, priorities and experiences of Church met and spoke together. Pope Francis has been encouraging us to encounter, listen and dialogue. I believe we did; were opinions changed? I’m not sure, but the encounter was certainly respectful. The second was that anyone was free to speak on any issue. No-one was restricted or closed down. Interventions were wide-ranging: the ordination of women, accent acquisition programmes for overseas born priests, regular Diocesan Synods, greater Eucharistic adoration for young people, review of the Church’s teaching on human sexuality, and so many more. The only restriction was the three minute time limit, which was essential. The third was that some issues emerged as critical, with a common acknowledgement that they must be addressed: greater recognition of women in the Church, transparent Church governance, solidarity with First Nations Australians, the suffering of those wounded by the Church. Admittedly, there are huge differences in how best to address these key issues. This will be the challenge for the next Assembly.

At the heart of our differences and polarities is one fundamental question: ‘what type of Church do we truly and deeply desire’? Will we be an exclusive one, comprised of those who are doctrinally ‘pure’, content with the traditional style of operating, or will we be an expansive Church, welcoming divergent views and lifestyles, and learning from contemporary society and culture? We know that the first Christians faced the same challenge. Was the Church to be confined to Jewish practice or was it open to Gentiles who didn’t accept those traditions? The Council of Jerusalem chose the latter and consequently the Church spread rapidly.

In the recent launching of the Synodal journey, Pope Francis identified three risks. The first, formalism: the Synod could be an extraordinary event, but only externally. He insists that it must achieve more than simply creating a good image. The second is intellectualism: it could become a “kind of study group, offering learned but abstract approaches … far removed from the reality…and concrete life of communities around the world”. The third risk is complacency, the attitude that says: “’We have always done it this way’…and it is better not to change. That expression – “We have always done it that way” – is poison for the life of the Church”. These are strong warnings. Our Church and Plenary Council need to ensure we don’t fall into these traps. Change must occur. Risks have to be taken. How else can we be faithful to the mission of Jesus Christ today in Australia and the world?

Come, Holy Spirit! You inspire new tongues and place words of life on our lips: keep us from becoming a “museum Church”, beautiful but mute, with much past and little future. Come among us, so that in this synodal experience we will not lose our enthusiasm, dilute the power of prophecy, or descend into useless and unproductive discussions. Come, Spirit of love, open our hearts to hear your voice! Come, Holy Spirit of holiness, renew the holy and faithful People of God! Come, Creator Spirit, renew the face of the earth”!

To the Pope’s prayer, we say: Amen.