George,
Thankyou for your long and thoughtful response – but I do continue in failing to understand the very idea of ‘Papal Infallibility'. Your comparison of this 'infallibility' with ‘Australian Law’ should take into account the British based concept of common law and its relation to equity law – i.e. the common law can adapt to new circumstances, or to quote Charles Dickens, “If the law supposes that… the law is a ass – an idiot”.

Now, I do accept the Catholic Church offers far more than mere dogma but an intransigence within an hierarchical magisterium finds change difficult and above all, is most reluctant to admit its teachings have been wrong and need to change. Despite his great intellectual power, Ratzinger seems ‘enslaved’ to an establishment which ‘compells’ him to write a document entitled Dominus Iesus (2000). This states that other than the Catholic faith, all religions, and indeed Christian denominations, are "defective". The take-home message is that the Anglican Church, for example, is not a proper church, and the Archbishop of Canterbury is a mere layperson of dubious baptism. David f, however, has given us the good example of Pope John XXIII, whose warm hearted nature and unique personality was exceptionally above the norm. The most momentous act of his pontificate was his decision to call an ecumenical council of the Universal Church, the first since 1870 and only the twenty-first in the Church's 2,000-year history – not even Sellick is able to ‘stoop’ to such ecumenism.

George Pell unreservedly backs John Bathersby, acting on the logic of an institution. Unless you follow that particular logic and defend the Pope, defend the key doctrine, take action against priests who are more and more looking like Protestants, or not even Protestants - unless you do that, the fear is, you've lost your institution altogether. An interesting read is, ‘Archbishop Pell and the Banning of Tomorrow’s Catholic’ (http://morwoodm.homestead.com/files/tc2.htm) - this shows the dilemma of ‘spirit’ vs dogma.

“The essential feature of Catholic Christianity is its teaching about freedom of informed conscience”- and Father Kennedy shows himself to be quite ‘informed’.

Isn't this exciting?

Bathersby, cleary little more than an auld-fart doing what he is told by his Opus Dei chums, is up against a real threat.

But what I can't understand, is why any woman, why any gay person, why any Indigenous person, or homeless... the list gets longer, would bother to have anything at all to do with the RC church, even with this priest and his more reasonable approach to life-on-Earth.

Whatever they do in St. Mary's could be conducted outside the corrupt framework of any Church, never mind the Christian edifice/artifice.

Why bother with Popes at all?

Why bother with Bathersby?

Why bother pretending God has anything to do with any of this?

Although, purely for the trouble it would cause Bathersby and the Pope, I'm rather hoping there will be a sit-in there and a lock-out of the poor sap who has been told to 'spread some love' there for the Vatican.

Good on yers Father Kennedy... keep up the good work.

I listened to Mike Huckabee this morning and he put the present generations confusion about principles very simply. The Catholic Church is not a democracy but a theocracy where the Pope is final authority so why expect it to be run on democratic lines. The Catholic Church is not the Kingdom of God so why expect it to put Jesus on the throne when the Pope is their head. The principle of sowing and reaping belong to the kingdom of God and are not changed by what we think or expect is why if you always do what you have always done you always git what you always got. If you expect a different outcome without a paradyne shift you are doomed to disapointment. Today we penalise right behaviour and reward wrong behaviour. Penalties Discourage Rewards Encourage. Spare the rod and
spoil the child. Train up a child in the way he should go and he will never depart from it. No training and you have a wild child. Not rocket science but I hope it gives some thought to chew on

romany, i wouldn't know what to do with an ally. i'll definitely watch my step!

reida, that was a fascinating link. obviously just one side of the story, and a story i can't understand in detail. but a wild story. of course, the writer left out the most important question: was pell's language polite?

"practice of creativity and love that is the secret of the success"

As any group will know, if every member undertakes the "practice of creativity" then, irrespective of how much 'love' there is (and should be amongst members) you do not get a unified outcome.

Think of it like your local community band. Regardless of how skilled the musicians might be (or how hopeless!) you just can't let everyone play in whatever key or time signature they want, unless you just want noise. Sure, everyone is participating and doing what they want, but the 'harmony' is not real.

Fr Kennedy is like those parents who leave their kids on 42nd Street - Anything goes! Are the youth of today better off for this lack of parental discipline? Maybe, maybe not?

This is a case of ego overcoming common sense. If Fr K and his flock didn't see him as "Special K' and just towed the line on certain fundamentals of ritual and practice, then the right wing forces would have not been able to make a case. This is an example of not only being left of field, but, having left the field.

As a member of . Marys community, I have read these views with interest. I have been raised Catholic, but long ago realised that many of the Catholic man-made rules are rubbish. At St. Marys there are a community who are Christ centred. This dispute is about power and obedience to a man-made set of rules, and whether the Catholic church power brokers are able to allow individual communities to develop that are relevant to modern thinking and society. The answer to date is NO.