“We are not angry with the Dean and we are not angry with Archbishop Bathersby – I mean they are who they are and we are who we are I guess, and I am who I am.”

- Fr Peter Kennedy,

ABC Local, 17 Feb ’09

Readers will note the use of the royal plural above; and of the divine singular. At time of writing, events are moving quickly at St Mary’s, with no doubt further drama in the offing. The media provide the story as it unfolds, though the media tend to overlook key questions, such as: Are St Mary’s and Fr Kennedy Catholic? Or, are St Mary’s and Fr Kennedy something else? This issue of Lepanto examines key events and issues concerning the controversy at St Mary’s, with a view to providing some real insight into what is going on.

It’s been a long time coming

The long-running saga of the dysfunctional and rebellious Catholic parish of St Mary’s, South Brisbane features regularly in the pages of Lepanto. Readers will recall the baptismal formulae used at St Mary’s, ruled invalid by the Vatican in 2004; the ambiguous, tendentious eucharistic liturgies; the blessing of illicit unions; the disregard for Christian faith and morals; the promotion of “interfaith” practices as if they were validly Catholic or Christian; the installation of a Buddhist statue in the sanctuary; the use of a consecrated Catholic church for purposes of entertainment and the partisan politicisation of a Catholic parish.

St Mary’s has for some time characterized itself not as a Catholic parish but as the “St Mary’s Catholic Community”. It is well known, of course, that the congregation of St Mary’s is not a typical, local parish congregation. Rather, the congregation is as much one comprised of disaffected elements gathered from across the archdiocese, including members of religious orders and, one way or another, employees of the Church, non-Catholics and non-Christians. Reforming such a hard core, disaffected group will be highly problematic. Almost certainly, the wiser approach will be to re-establish St Mary’s as a normal, local parish. That could take some doing …

Grounds for Intervention

Brisbane Catholics have complained to Archbishop Bathersby about St Mary’s over the years. Some have also taken the issue to Rome. Yet, it was not until shortly after the Pope’s visit to Australia for World Youth Day that the archbishop, by letter dated 22 August 2008, was moved to intervene in a serious way. As he acted, the terminology he used sounded robustly Catholic and, for that matter, Roman. The archbishop specified four matters wherein St Mary’s had broken communion with the Church:

The matter of Faith: the Triune God; Is Jesus Christ accepted at St Mary’s as the Son of God or “just another holy person like Buddha or Mohammed?”; the primacy of worship over action;

The matter of Liturgy: uncertainty re validity of baptism; the rules for validity of marriage; the use of eucharistic prayers selected at random;

The matter of Governance: Fr Terry Fitzpatrick’s attaching of himself to St Mary’s; St Mary’s refusal to acknowledge any difference between ordained and non-ordained membership; St Mary’s tendency to congregationalism in governance and culture;

The matter of Authority: the authority of the Church and its Magisterium; the Apostolic tradition.

The archbishop also gave Fr Kennedy some timely advice, “A Buddhist statue in a Catholic Church or sanctuary just does not make sense … only extreme recklessness would place a Buddhist statue in a Christian Church. No matter where that takes place there is every possibility it would arouse angry feelings, particularly with Christians from different religious cultures.”

The archbishop also wrote: “In reality St Mary’s South Brisbane has taken a Roman Catholic parish and established its own brand of religion. Undoubtedly it does good, it promotes a strong sense of community, opens its doors to all who wish to come, but its own style of worship and sacramental practice can hardly be described as Roman Catholic. As such it is out of communion with the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane and the Universal Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome.”

Seeing but not Perceiving

At times, the archbishop has ventured into the media to explain his position. As he said to ABC Radio National’s Stephen Crittenden on 27 August 2008,

“What I was conscious of was certainly the attitude towards the social justice matters over there. But apart from that I didn’t really know much about it, and certainly some of the things which came to light with the letters that were written overseas to Rome, certainly were a surprise to me. I did think that there was a certain laxity about the liturgy, but I didn’t know to what extent. And that certainly was a revelation to me.”

Clearly, the archbishop had not been reading Lepanto and the other media which had covered St Mary’s, nor it seems the letters that had been sent to him. In fact, given the long running controversy at St Mary’s and the interest shown by the media, it is a matter of surprise to hear that the archbishop should have had such limited awareness of what was going on at St Mary’s.

In the matter of lack of interest at least, the archbishop appears to have shown a significant measure of consistency - and not just in relation to St Mary’s. Those who have complained to him over the years have a certain familiarity with the questions of his awareness and interest. Among the issues which have gone un-addressed or insufficiently attended to for extended periods may be mentioned:

The New Age Womenspace centre at Kedron, involving Sisters of Mercy and the Presentation order. Womenspace has been the subject of numerous media reports, including feature articles in The Courier-Mail. It is business-as-usual at Womenspace to this day.

Earth Link, another New Age operation run by the Sisters of Mercy, which has twice in recent years been covered by the nationally prominent and respected Catholic journal AD2000.

The New Age “Human Search for God” shrine, which was removed from St Stephen’s Cathedral in 2005 following lengthy controversy, only to be relocated in the nearby Francis Rush Centre, a location apparently considered less vulnerable to potential canon law action.

The factors common to the above and to the St Mary’s situation are: complaints to the archbishop; public and media controversy; and long delayed or inadequate responses or inaction. The pathology is one of a persistent failure of responsibility and accountability. None of the above problems could have emerged or been sustained had a proper regime of archdiocesan supervision been in place.

There is also another common factor. All the controversies mentioned - Womenspace, Earth Link, the former Cathedral “shrine” and St Mary’s - have involved New Age and gnostic implications of one kind or another.

Recognizing and Naming

In this respect, the record of written communication between the archbishop and Fr Kennedy of St Mary’s is as remarkable for what it does not say as for what it does say. It is almost as if the dispute with Fr Kennedy were concerned with technical issues of theology and adherence to Church law and did not somehow concern a parish or a “community” which had in a thorough-going way embraced New Age gnosticism.

That the St Mary’s “community” - the People’s Republic of St Mary’s, if you like - had in a fundamental way embraced New Age gnosticism is beyond question. The evidence is everywhere - in the language of the liturgy, the hymns being used, the books being sold in St Mary’s, homilists’ notes, the groups and “regular meetings” being hosted, the celebration of the sacraments, etc. Space does not here permit a full analysis of St Mary’s and its New Age, gnostic character. Suffice it to say that the relevant Vatican document on the New Age is “Jesus Christ, The Bearer of the Water of Life: A Christian reflection on the ‘New Age’”, published in February 2003. Interested readers can find the document on the Vatican website.

It is almost as if Fr Kennedy set out to implement New Age gnosticism as outlined in this Vatican document, page by page, so strongly does the evidence of the record of St Mary’s correlate with the description of New Age gnosticism in “Jesus Christ, The Bearer of the Water of Life”. The document provides the following by way of definition:

“Gnosis: in a generic sense, it is a form of knowledge that is not intellectual, but visionary or mystical, thought to be revealed and capable of joining the human being to the divine mystery. In the first centuries of Christianity, the Fathers of the Church struggled against gnosticism, inasmuch as it was at odds with faith. Some see a rebirth of gnostic ideas in much New Age thinking, and some authors connected with New Age actually quote early gnosticism. However, the greater emphasis in New Age on monism and even pantheism or panentheism encourages some to use the term neo-gnosticism to distinguish New Age gnosis from ancient gnosticism.”

In neglecting to mention the New Age and (neo-)gnosticism in relation to St Mary’s, the archbishop has simply maintained his long standing practice of neglecting to name and deal with the New Age generally in the archdiocese - and that in an archdiocese notorious for its many and various manifestations of the New Age. In the archdiocese of Brisbane, New Age gnosticism is truly the elephant in the room – unnameable yet frequently seen and a topic to be avoided at any price.

To recognize and name New Age gnosticism at St Mary’s would be to recognize and name it elsewhere in the archdiocese. To recognize and name it would be to teach against it, and to clearly distinguish and differentiate this amorphous counterfeit faith from Christianity and Catholicism. Cleaning out the stables at St Mary’s will, however, require recognition and naming of the problem, even perhaps some kind of “truth commission”. As they say, how can we ultimately have reconciliation without truth?

A Crafty Ambiguity

Another key aspect of the story is the way a certain lack of specificity and a crafty ambiguity have been employed to camouflage the New Age, gnostic character of St Mary’s. Indeed, it seems that Fr Kennedy has come out into the open with clear and explicit New Age, neo-gnostic statements on the public record only subsequent to his realisation that the game was over.

In his letter of 22 August 2008, the archbishop had asked a direct question: “At St Mary’s is Jesus Christ accepted as Lord and Saviour, Son of God, or is Jesus regarded as just another Holy person like Buddha or Mohammed? Certainly in such circumstances the placing of a Buddhist statue in a Christian Church is extremely confusing.”

Fr Kennedy’s answer came in his letter of 30 November and it appears evasive: “You asked about our position on the Trinity and other dogma. As we have already said, we cannot state the exact beliefs of every community member, moreover we believe this is a question that is not asked of other parishes. We can say, however, that prayers within our liturgies reflect a Triune God and our prayers are enthusiastically expressed by the community. Like other churchgoing Catholics, many believe without question in the Triune God whereas others struggle with the concept, and some may even reject it. We do not ask people to sign a pledge or nominate to which ‘team’ they belong.”

Belling the Cat …

Fr Kennedy’s blunt responses on his lack of belief in heaven and hell were given to Richard Fidler of ABC Radio on 27 January 2009:

Richard Fidler: “Do you still think there is a hell, now?”

Fr Kennedy: “No, not at all. The Pope does. (laughs)

But, um, no.”

Richard Fidler: “Do you think there is a heaven?”

Fr Kennedy: “No.”

With no heaven and no hell, little room remains for the kind of Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour, Son of God, that Christians and Catholics believe in. With what is now on the public record, the questions associated with the sacramental practice at St Mary’s can be seen in a clearer, more revealing light. It would seem that many masses and baptisms were invalid. The ambiguity in the wording of the St Mary’s “eucharistic liturgies” appears calculating and opportunistic. The continuing intransigence in St Mary’s over the words of baptism can also now be seen as in all likelihood cynical - and as fully justifying the stand taken by the Vatican in 2004.

Perhaps no factor is as revealing of the mindset of St Mary’s and its shepherd Fr Kennedy as the books on sale inside the Church. Lepanto’s commentary on the New Age content of the books - often simply quoting New Age writers themselves - appears in the accompanying “Guide to the St Mary’s Bookshelf”. Reading the guide will show how St Mary’s has not lacked for material promoting New Age belief and speculation, indeed, superstition. As you read about the books, remember that the New Age, gnostic spirit which informs them also informs the St Mary’s liturgies, baptisms, newsletters, groups and meetings. More on these in another issue. Also, note the significant content from well known New Age gurus such as Eckhart Tolle and ‘Sailor Bob” Adamson and the absence of authentic Catholic material.

At One with the Universe

Perhaps a final word should be given to Fr Kennedy. Below is another excerpt from his 27 January 2009 interview with ABC Radio’s Richard Fidler:

Richard Fidler: “Do you think there is an afterlife?”

Fr Kennedy: “… I personally think that, that life is such an incredible mystery... Is there..an afterlife? Well.. I just think there is an incredible mystery of life itself. What it is, I don’t know. I have no idea. I tend to think though that ah -and this is probably not very good Catholic doctrine - that um the personality that I am, that I appear to be, if you like, the personality.. after all the personality that’s developed, is what, it’s really my story, it’s how my story has shaped me, my personality, what I have inherited from my parents and the living of life.. I think that personality will actually die..”

Richard Fidler: “And something of that will actually remain?”

Fr Kennedy: “Remain? Yes. Who I truly am, my essential nature … the mystics talk like this .. Not that I am a mystic, unfortunately; I wish I was. But all the mystics of the great religions talk like this, talk about the oneness, and science talks about it today too; it talks about consciousness, talks about awareness, consciousness. Like, who was that… There is a philosopher, Quentin de Quincey, and he talks about consciousness going right down into the deepest, right down into the merest atoms, like there is a consciousness that the world is sacred, nature is sacred and the human species as part of that, is sacred. So who I truly am is, is, like it really is quite radical really, it’s that consciousness, that awareness, that spirituality, that, you know it’s the God thing, call it spirit, call it soul.”

Fr Kennedy’s kind of radical “oneness”, as expressed above, appears to represent a world view or cosmology in which we are all “God”, the Christian God no longer being seen as separate from and above the universe. This, of course, is both an effective denial of the core Christian understanding of the Trinity and Jesus Christ as well as a classic statement of New Age perspective, more than a little reminiscent in fact of the views of the dismissed American Dominican Fr Matthew Fox and his New Age, Goddess-friendly, effectively pagan “creation spirituality”.

Should Fr Kennedy have an interest in further clarifying his position or in responding, Lepanto is prepared to print whatever he may have to say.

- Tim Pemble-Smith