APRIL 2013
Topic: How is Australian Society
changing? Speakers: Patty Fawkner and Peter
Hancock.
Annette Milross
welcomed visitors to our first session of the year. 2013 marks the 50th anniversary of
two historical events. In August 1963,
Martin Luther King delivered his “I have a dream” speech Pope John Paul opened
the second Vatican Council October 1962.
The theme of SIP this year is “I have a dream” and we are is to looking
back over those 50 years and also to
look at what is happening in our world today and ask “How much of the dream of those two men has
actually come about?”
Our first speaker
tonight is Sister Patty Fawkner. Patty
is a Good Samaritan nun. She is a former
educator with formal qualifications in Arts, Education, Theology and
Spirituality.
Patty Fawkner sgs
How
is Australian Society changing, easy. In
15 minutes, not so easy!
Sarah
is a member of my community and I’m well and truly old enough to be her
mother. She was telling me what happens
when one of her four nieces aged 6 – 12 is naughty. No being sent to her room, no banning from
television, no physical punishment – the trifecta of punishments in my day. No, her father disables the internet
connection on her iPod!
Can
you imagine a family of 8? And can you
imagine a family of 8 today having just one phone? That’s what we had and thought ourselves
lucky at that. No such thing as an iPod
or internet, and if we’d heard of anyone talking about Wifi, we might have thought
it was the name of the neighbourhood dog!
The screen is one of the key icons of
the contemporary world – be it on iPhone, iPod, iPad, computer, video games,
television, cinema or digital camera.
In
a break we check our phones for the next text message or email. Look at people
on the train, couples dining in restaurants – seemingly more connected to their
device than their partner!
If
the screen is the icon, what might the currency be? One commentator said the key form of currency
today is the economy not of money or property but attention. In the “Attention
Economy” everyone is vying for our attention. We’re bombarded on our multiple screens with
advertising campaigns, messages, whatever.
24/7
(and the term wasn’t used 50 years ago) we’re constantly available, constantly
“connected”, and it blurs the demarcation between work and leisure. How easy to check work email when I’m away on
holiday. We’re more connected, yet more
distracted and over-stimulated, becoming more isolated and disconnected from a
deeper presence to myself and each other.
However,
technology isn’t the greatest change in the last 50 years. The biggest shift in
Australian society, the most significant sign of the times is the different way we think because we
live in times that are called postmodern.
“Postmodernism”, a concept not easily defined, is a slippery term used
by various disciplines from philosophy, art and literature to talk about
trends. Its greatest influence is not in design, as in postmodern architecture,
but in how we think. And I’d like to
look at how a few of these postmodern thinking traits influence change in our
Society.
Postmodernism
is typified by mistrust – mistrust of traditional authority and institutions.
Politicians, police, the church, sporting bodies, banks, the military, have all
been found wanting and, in many instances, corrupt. Individuals have been shielded by
institutions – Lance Armstrong, Father Gerry Ridsdale (serial paedophile in the
Ballarat Diocese), Eddie Obeid. We were so much more trusting in the 60’s and
isn’t that one of the reasons that acknowledging and addressing sexual abuse in
the church has taken so long? Unfortunately, there are some people who mistrust
any politician, any priest merely because they are politician or priest.
We want
to trust our sporting heroes and our leaders but we feel such betrayal if they
prove not to be worthy of our trust.
It’s easier to trust Black Caviar than it is some jockeys. We used to
give authority figures incredible status, now we give that same status to
celebrities, some of whom get status simply because they are – a celebrity.
As
a wet-behind-the-ears Novice in 1970 I was caught up in the excitement of
seeing Pope Paul VI, and twice travelled huge distances to see Pope John Paul
II. This January I was doing some work
in Rome I had the opportunity to go to St Peter’s Square for the Pope’s Sunday
blessing. I didn’t need to do that and
chose to go around the corner to the Vatican Museum. Of course I was somewhat disappointed when
Benedict XVI resigned a few weeks later. I have to go back to Rome in
June. I just might mosey on over to St
Peter’s Square to get a glimpse of Pope Francis. What I’m getting at is that my own approach
to authority figures has changed markedly.
It might be called growing up!
The
emergence of postmodernism gives rise to many other isms in our consciousness.
We recognise now many things we just didn’t see 50 years ago. Perhaps we
recognised racism and the beginnings of multiculturalism, but we weren’t as
aware of sexism, ageism, militarism and clericalism.
Another
postmodern characteristic is that there is no absolute nor impartial truth, and
institutions which claim a monopoly on truth are seriously suspect. We were
much more accepting of truths promulgated, for example by our churches 50 years
ago but Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae
Vitae in 1968 was a game changer.
Reaction to the encyclical was so strong that it produced the first
crack in Catholics’ unquestioning acceptance of church authority. No longer
were Catholics content to “pay, pray and obey.”
In
the postmodern era, truth is relative, atheism is back in fashion, morality is
personal. New Age spiritual seekers are notoriously eclectic – a bit from this
tradition here, a tad from that tradition there. Each person is free to develop their own
private code of ethics without the need to follow traditional or institutional
values. Forget about “My Kitchen Rules”.
In the postmodern world my opinion rules. And everyone’s expressing it on their own
blog.
Consider how the pill has changed thinking and behaviour in the last 50 years. It’s
been a key factor in what might be described as a “loosening of society”, another sign of our times. Since the pill was introduced women are
starting a family much later and having fewer children, often without marrying
and the divorce rate has climbed.
Co-habitation has outstripped marriage just as civil ceremonies have
outstripped church weddings. My sister
has made a very good business as a marriage celebrant, thank you very much.
In
the late 60’s my brother travelled overseas and became engaged to another
Aussie traveller. He made the mistake of
telling my parents that they were living together. When they came home, no
co-habiting in the Fawkner household. I remember the chilly reception they
received by my parents. Now my sister allows her 19 year old son’s girlfriend
to sleep over with him. The times were,
are and ever will be a’changing.
A
key aspect of the “loosening of society” is the growing acceptance of gay-rights
and the push for gay-marriage. When I
first joined the Good Sams we knew we were to avoid, what was rather quaintly
called “particular friendships”. In my naiveté
I didn’t recognise the sexual overtones of that till later.
Today
it seems that we’re saturated by a highly sexualised world. We see the visualisation of sex in
advertising. Driving down Parramatta
Road recently I saw the re-emergence of those ugly huge yellow billboards
advertising longer love-making with a nasal spray! We see the sexualisation, some would say
“pornification” of young children especially pre-pubescent girls.
The
role of women has changed markedly
in the past 50 years. Think about work.
Up until 1966 once a woman was married she could not be employed in the public
service. My sisters and I fitted the
classic female employment stereotypes.
Between us we had one nurse, two secretaries and one teacher. One of my
nieces is a lawyer another is in the army, another is doing wonderfully in
marketing.
Our
postmodern world is reflected in the title of the best-selling book by Thomas Friedman, Hot, Flat, and
Crowded. A hot,
flat and crowded world is another sign of our times and the sign that our
planet is seriously stressed, is perilously at risk.
All
this change, rapid change doesn’t come without cost. Social researcher Hugh
Mackay argues that the human psyche is not prepared for such rapid change many
in Australian society feel out of control making people feel helpless.
Mackay
says that we respond to this rapid change in two ways. We can retreat and become politically and
socially disengaged. With an upcoming
Federal election will the majority carefully examine policies? I wonder. I think many will be more influenced by the
ten second sound bight – that’s if they bother to watch or listen to any
news. I met the owner of a coffee shop
in Merimbula who was extremely proud of the fact that she had not seen nor listened
to any news in ten years!
Hugh
MacKay says that a second response to huge and rapid change is for people to
focus on what they can control. He
says that’s why many Australians are obsessed with the domestic arena, with
renovations and lifestyle. We’re safer
with that kind of change. Check the
ratings for The Block, Masterchef, and other lifestyle programs.
And
we can control our borders. We can decide who comes to our
country. Mackay sees mandatory
sentencing and border control as symptoms of people wanting to be ordered, in
control, wanting to remain the same, and hugely resisting change.
I
have simply dipped into our postmodern world and pulled out some signs of the
times that I see. Recapping I recognise:
1.
the screen
2.
the attention economy
3.
we are thinking differently
4.
we don’t have the same blind faith in institutions
5.
truth is relative, morality is personal and my
opinion rules
6.
the loosening of society
7.
the role of women
8.
a hot, flat and crowded planet
9.
rapid and unrelenting change leading to
disengagement and the desire to control.
Now, they are just some of the changes I see. I’m sure each of you could come up with your
own list and I look forward to discussing that list with you.
Our second speaker
tonight is Brother Peter Hancock. Peter
is a Christian Brother. He is an educator
who has spent his professional life in the school and the university. He has spent his life in many countries and
has a good knowledge of the world and is still quite involved with young
university students.
Peter Hancock cfc
I
am an old teacher and I cannot stop being a teacher. I can’t help it. My grandfather and my mother were both
teachers before me. I would like to take
a couple of issues that have occurred to me. One issue concerning me is: What
do kids of today make of the significant changes that have occurred in the last
fifty years.
I was a novice a couple of years before
Vatican 11, when we students were surreptitiously reading all the new
theologies, like Schillebecks, Rahner, Orsy.
We were reading them while appearing to be listening to getting pretty
boring scholastic theology lectures. We
were even reading the Catholic existentialist Gabriel Marcel.
Later
as a teacher, I used to say to my students when I was correcting their papers:
“If you can’t say it simply then you are not on top of your subject.”
So
tonight I say to myself :“If it’s not simple then I don’t understand it, not to
mention my audience’s chances of understanding me.
We
each look at things and reflect on them from different perspectives,
perspectives we have grown up with from family and student days and
beyond. As I get older I can see I am
now looking at things through categories of what I have had to come to –
psychology, anthropology and spirituality.
Last
time I was invited to speak here the topic was: “Is there a conflict between
Science and Religion?” I don’t know how
we would have answered that question fifty years ago. Fifty years ago our religion and our
spirituality was considered opposed to or different from the logic of the
scientists and the rationalists. We had faith as a way of knowing. There was some danger in that thinking. When we were warned when we went to
University not to do certain subjects such as philosophy and psychology because
of the risks to our religious, we had to later learn for emerging theologies of
Incarnation, that there was no conflict, no real dichotomy. I am thrilled today to see that respected
scientists in all fields of inquiry are able to say things close to what
current theologians are saying: The new Cosmology calls theologians to explore
a bigger God and to see scientists
correcting their former doctrines of evolution and naming “mystery” and such
spiritual terms they can share with theologians. The latest discovery the space
is “dark matter” and holds the universe together, sounds a close parallel to
the theologians’ exploration of the presence of the Holy Spirit everywhere in
creation.
So
when I was talking to novices in recent
years I found myself asking them:“Where do you think Our Lady’s body is up to
now if she died 2000 years ago when she was assumed into Heaven?”
Images
have to change now and with the help of current developments in studies of the
historical Jesus and his culture, we are learning a lot more about Jesus’ own
use of images to help us face the Mystery of God. His parables are mostly not
allegories, but make is think about ourselves and God; they call us to Mystery
and conversion.
I
often light heartedly complain that in the text of the Apostles’ Creed’s text
we say: “I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy
Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,
died and was buried……” All of the life and teachings of Jesus, the presence of
God among us, in a comma! A new Creed will be rich in statements summing up
what we are learning from the biblical scholars about Jesus in his time. The
universal Christ of the scriptures and human
faith history will be “seen” in the creation. And sensed in human creativity
and integrity, especially in manifestations of love of the human heart.
How
does our religion and our symbols measure up to today’s reality? Our scientists
can somewhat awed and reverential in the face of nature. They are quite able to say: “This is how we
understand what we see for now, but remain open to future natural revelations
(findings).” Realistic theologians are
probably saying “We ought to try to create images and word explanations about a
bigger God.”
The
theologians and scientists can now face mystery. What do the kids make of that? Pastors, parents, teachers catechistsmight
ask ourselves if we give kids enough time to think and reflect and face the mystery of life and faith? Do they always have to know answers to pass
exams ? In a modern classroom kids learn
with internal school assessments find that they are actually competing with one
another, which tends to stifle group sharing and enquiry. Do we think we have to sign on to the
doctrines or the creed or otherwise be thought to be not loyal or worthy
members? Lately some bishops have
pressured teachers to take oaths about their beliefs to be recognised (and
paid).
I can deal with mystery. I can be curious. I don’t have to be right all the time. All this orthodoxy and catechism should be
the less important thing we should look at.
I have a worry that this orthodoxy and catechism is the first thing. Karl Rahner said that “the Christian of the
future will be a mystic or he will not exist at all.” The people who ponder mystery, the prophets
of the Old Testament, the people who were mystics, a lot of whom were women,
through the ages saw more deeply; than
we do they see more than we see. People
such as Richard Rohr, Michael Leunig, poets, artists perhaps are popular
mystics. They are not orthodox. You have
to have a lot of faith in mystery, a great faith in risk taking to put that
colour on the canvas, to take that first step.
Like that architect who boldly takes that step to challenge the norm or
that artistic person who goes ahead, risks and then prepares to pay the price
of not being understood for a hundred years.
They may be the prophets. I wonder how much creativity is encouraged,
even in what is arguably one of the most enlightened education systems in the
world. We have an extraordinary
dedicated and open education system.
One of the educational pillars
developing in the last fifty years is the concept of intelligence. I was brought
up in the years of IQ. Intelligence
Quotion was tool devised by the
Americans to help ex-soldiers prepare for fast track learning and
employment. It was used to match them to
training pathways according to how innately gifted they were in handling number
and word. But IQ was appropriate for its
task, but was generalized to give my generation’s career guidance counsellors a
practical base for advice. But of course it was culture based. Now we recognise many different types of
intelligence. Emotional intelligence became a popular criterion for general guidance. How
aware are you of the emotional component of yourself, others and the climate of
the group? You can be quite bright in an
academic discipline of books and specialized forums but if you haven’t got a
clue about how people feel, if you cannot relate to people you cannot fit into
teamwork tasks or helping professions very well, for example. You cannot even be a leader or a manager
today according to recent MBA course outlines.
What is interesting to me is
that more recently psychologists have finally faced up to the examination of
the spiritual domain in human life.
There is great consoling potential future here. The concept of spiritual intelligence
suggests that every human being has the innate potential for spiritual growth,
as do the other intelligences hint at potential abilities for growth.
Maybe we pastors, parents,
teachers and catechists should relax about our tests and catechism for a while,
aware that the light and power of the Spirit is available in every human heart,
to be freed and nurtured. Right before us among the children and youth
themselves
Discussion
Several people commented and asked questions.
Topics covered the philosophical concept of Truth,
Authority, Trust, Fear, Mystics, the American Dream, Gun control, Media and
Social Control, reactions of the generations, e.g Gen X and Y. The spiritual intelligence of children was
mentioned as well as the openness of children to mystery. Post modern Religion, especially the Catholic
Religion is seen, by many in the community as being “on the nose.” Did we bring this on ourselves by being so
“right?” Has the fact that we are better
educated than we were fifty years ago had an influence on our trust in our
beliefs? The geopolitics of emotion is a
key issue. The West is riven with the
emotion of fear. Asia is alive with hope.
The Middle East has a feeling of humiliation. Africa feels hopeless. Trust in authority has been replaced by trust
in technology. We trust machines, not
people. The Church has not moved with the
times. (Note what Pope John said about
the Council) Americans have their
“Dream” that everyone can “make it” and that somehow their dream is being
thwarted. Americans are lucky because
their constitution trusts people to use their guns intelligently, not like
other peoples who do not get this trust.
Americans are obsessed with the rights of the individual. Media is driving fear and fear is being used
for social control. Bad news sells in
the media. No-one is interested in the
good news. There is drama in reporting
on what “might” happen. Much hope in
Pope Francis. Individualism versus
interdependence. The espousal of
“causes” such as Amnesty International, etc by young people.
MAY 2013
Topic: Being Young – What is
changing? Speakers: Anthony Steel and Olivia
Fricot.
Kevin Grant welcomed
visitors to our second session of the year.
2013 marks the 50th anniversary of two historical
events. In August 1963, Martin Luther
King delivered his “I have a dream” speech, Pope John Paul opened the second
Vatican Council October 1962. The theme
of SIP this year is “I have a dream” and we are is to looking back over those
50 years and also to look at what is
happening in our world today and ask
“How much of the dream of those two men has actually come about?”
Anthony Steel
Anthony has spent a lifetime in education and
is still teaching. He has a long
experience in working with young people and currently teaches theology and the
core curriculum at Australian Catholic University, Strathfield.
Your theme for the year is “I have a dream.” Reflecting on
this I was reminded that in sacred
scripture the prophet Joel says:
“And afterward, I will
pour out my spirit on all people. Your
sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young
men will see visions. Even on my
servants, both men and women, I will pour out my spirit in those days…” Joel: 28 – 29
I grew up in the 1950’s and 60’s. I moved round quite a bit. I started in Auburn, ended up in a
god-forsaken place called Wallerawang, ten miles west of Lithgow and then moved
back to Mt Druitt so you have an idea of the socio-economic background I came
from. I If you were to read the signs of the times there were a number of
different areas where growing up was very different from what it is for
Olivia. In the 1950’s and 60’s, families
were very different. There were usually
Mums and Dads and two or three or even ten kids and it was fairly stable. Divorce or separation was a real stigma and
blended families were quite unusual. I
remember when we went to live at Wallerawang; my father had left the family and
left my mother with three boys. I was the only kid in my Catholic school that
came from a separated family, and I was so ashamed of that. In most families, Dad was the bread winner
and Mum stayed at home and made the house.
In those times
society was a very conservative, very monocultural. We were still in the era of the “White
Australia” Policy. Respect for authority
was still quite strong. Social mores
were quite Victorian. We were very
prudish. We were very concerned about
correct etiquette. Gayness was not
spoken of or if it was it was very prerogative and we didn’t know what
lesbianism was.
There was an increasing abundance of the sort of material
excesses we have come to see today, clothing and the plethora of things. I got my bike when I was ten and my first
watch when I was twelve. Now when you
ask a kid what they want for Christmas and they are five, they give you this
list of technological gadgets that we would have never thought of.
Employment was
abundant and most kids left school to go to work or apprenticeship. University was for the elite and there were
plenty of jobs to pick from. My first
job was with the Taxation Department but only for a short time and then I went
to work for the Department of Mines and Explosives as it then was. I finished one job on the Thursday, went
looking and had the next job on the next Tuesday. I wasn’t worried about whether I would have a
job. Many people stayed in jobs for
thirty, forty and fifty years.
Communication in particular, telephones. When I was in
3rd grade there was one boy in my class who had a telephone
in his home and we thought he was pretty rich.
Do you remember if you wanted to place a trunk call, you had to ring the
exchange and how amazing it was when we got STD, (I don’t mean that kind of
STD) but Subscriber Trunk Dialling. You
could ring Melbourne yourself. And what
about when we got ISD, International Subscriber Dialling. How amazing!
The world came into reach for us.
Today you can have thousands of friends.
You can be a “twit” if you “twitter or tweet” (I’m not quite sure what
the correct verbs are there) and whereas we would wait four or five days for
the newsreels to come on the kangaroo route to get the news from London;
now like that, be in Boston for a
bombing. The world is smaller and we have become virtual travelers.
How many of you owned a car in the 1950’s? I live in a block of flats that was built in
the 1960’s. There are eight units. There are three car parking spaces. The advent of the car was really significant
because it meant that we were no longer locked into our local community. We could move. We could go places.
Do you remember that if you applied for a job or if you
wanted a baby baptised or if you wanted to get married, you had to have a
signature or a reference from the parish priest of the parish of your
domicile. So, if you lived in Sutherland
and you didn’t like the pastor and you went along to Cronulla you didn’t have a
parish. Which brings me to religion.
I grew up in an era of sectarianism. I didn’t really believe that Protestants were
really Christians. I remember taking a
dare to run up and push open the door of the Anglican Church. Not do anything, not say anything, just run
up and open the door and then run away because I was probably going to get
nabbed by those “dangerous”
Protestants. We didn’t know anything
about Islam or Buddhism. We lived in a
really prescriptive Catholic culture and, in fact for some of us, we lived in a
Catholic ghetto. We mixed with one
another, YCS, YCW, and CYO. How many
marriages came from the CYO and the dances and the tennis and the
football? Mixed marriages were frowned
on. If you were going to do that you can
get married but out in the sacristy thank you very much.
We went to Catholic schools and in something that is not well
known, the Australian bishops in one of their meetings (I think it was in the
1940’s) actually passed a law that if you had children and you had the means to
send them to a Catholic school but you sent them to a public school then you
were excommunicated. If that’s not a
ghetto mentality I’m not sure what is.
We had stringent codes of behaviour - we didn’t eat meat on Fridays with
the threat of being sent to Hell. We
fasted. We had lots of Catholic prayers
and devotions – the rosary, the
Memorare, the Angelus, St Jude, St Anthony, lots of piety. We believed that we were “it”.
We prayed for the
conversion of Russia at the end of Mass.
Either we weren’t heard or God was asleep when we were praying. There were lots of visible Catholic symbols.
There were big institutions like St Bernard’s -
Catholic High School, St Margaret Mary’s Hospital for Women. Catholics were in the public arena in a big
way. If you came to a Catholic home two
things you would find, a Crucifix, the twin Sacred Heart pictures on the
wall. We saw priests in cassocks,
brothers and nuns in habits. In that
time we lived in an era of clericalism, of putting priests and religious on
pedestals, of “the clerical club” and
the denial of forms of sexual abuse and other forms of abuse which we now know
were quite rampant.
By the 1960’s the world was beginning to change and so was
the Church. At the end of World War II
we got this optimism that the war to end all wars, the second one, was over and
we were on the road to peace We began making babies in abundance and that,
combined with the beginning of the influx of immigrants saw the birth of
multiculturalism Australia which brought with it a necessary broadening of our
perceptions of the world and the realization that not everyone saw things as we
thought, not everybody approached life as we did. There were also new horizons. Sputnik was launched in 1959. Within a period of ten years we went from
being totally grounded on this Earth to walking on the Moon. Ten years – that’s amazing! All of a sudden we weren’t caught up on this
Earth, we could go beyond.
The 1960’s also saw the emergence of the challenge of
authority. Up until the 60’s we accepted
authority, believed authority and sometimes put up with pretty corrupt
authority. How many times have you heard
of the local sergeant picking up a young fellow, giving him a hiding and
sending him home? We accepted that. All of a sudden we started to say, “no”. “Why should I accept what you think?” “Why should I do what you say?”
The sexual revolution came and part of that was triggered by
technology – the pill. Party of it was
also this liberation from authority. And the expectation that we would have
social stability and certainty became eroded.
In that context and this is where I have argument with the ultra
conservatives, the church experienced Vatican II - 1963 to 1965. For me Vatican II became the most influential
event in my life. I was still in school
at the time.
I can remember the changes and you will have heard some of
what Pope John XXIII said when he opened that council. I’m not going to read all of it but let me
introduce a couple of things:
“Present indications
are that the human family is on the threshold of a new era. We must recognise here the hand of God, who,
as the years roll by, is ever directing man’s efforts, whether they realise it
or not, towards the fulfillment of the inscrutable designs of His providence… Extracts from
Pope John XXIII- Address at the Opening of Vatican Council II – 11 October 1962.” And then “In the daily exercise of Our pastoral office it sometimes happens that
We hear certain opinions which disturb Us – opinions expressed by people who,
though fired with a commendable zeal for religion, are lacking in sufficient
prudence and judgment in their evaluation of events. They can see nothing but calamity and
disaster in the present state of the world.
They say over and over that this modern age of ours, in comparison with
past ages, is definitely deteriorating.
One would think from their attitude that history, that great teacher of
life, had taught them nothing. They seem
to imagine that in the days of the earlier councils everything was as it should
be so far as doctrine and morality were concerned. “We
feel(John XXIII feels) that We must disagree with those prophets of doom, who
are always forecasting worse disasters, as though the end of the world were at
hand.” Extracts
from Pope John XXIII- Address at the Opening of Vatican Council II – 11 October
1962.”
John XXIII threw open the windows of the Church and he
invited us to see the world in his eyes; to see the Church not here for
itself but to be the sacrament of
salvation for the world. Not to serve
ourselves but to bring salvation to the world. Vatican II opened to me great
optimism and if you haven’t dipped into the documents of Vatican II, I would
really love to commend to you the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church and the
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World. Even though they are fifty years old the
voice of the Spirit of God comes through
them still. I would also recommend this
translation (I don’t get any royalties) by Austin Flannery, “Vatican II”
because it is written in inclusive language.
For me new possibilities were associated with growing
up. Unfortunately we are growing older
and those possibilities have been progressively shut down. But the Church goes on. And the challenge for
us is to continue to believe in the dream we have, the dream of God’s presence
in our world, in and through the church, which is called to be the sacrament of
salvation for the world.
Olivia Fricot
Olivia is a twenty
year old third year uni student studying for a double degree of Arts and Law at
the University of New South Wales.
For as long as I can remember, I've been a Catholic. l've
spent nearly all of the Sunday mornings or nights of my life at church. My
school life was spent at St John Bosco Primary and College, where my education was coloured with
the teachings of the church. I've
memorised the prayers, had weird oils poured over me, eaten the bread, drunk the wine - it's pretty safe to say that when it comes
to Catholicism, I've had a thorough experience.
I haven’t always been a willing participant, as my parents could probably tell you, but I’ve mostly settled my differences
with the church and have returned on my own terms.
Growing up Catholic is all I have ever known. I couldn't
tell you what it felt like to grow up in say a Buddhist family or an atheist family. Yet in our
ever changing world, experiences like those are becoming more and more common and
my experience suddenly isn't really the norm. I don't think this is a bad
thing, just a sign that the world is getting bigger. As a young person. there are so many
different ways of life all clamoring for my attention and it's sometimes hard to figure
out exactly which one I'm going to choose and how I’m going to live. As of right now,
I’m living a lifestyle which makes me happy and which also just happens to involve being
a Catholic. These days it's become quite uncommon to hear the words “young” and “Attends church
willingly" in the same sentence. Yet, here I am, talking to you all about
it as easily as I would the latest episode of Doctor Who. It’s natural to me, but it hasn’t always been
like this.
I used to find church to be dull and painfully irrelevant to
my life. I could think of a thousand things I'd rather be doing on a Sunday morning than
going to church and listening to one old guy act holier-than-thou and pretty
much lord it over all the half awake parishioners – I could be sleeping in! After gradually growing sick of all the Sunday shenanigans through my early teens, getting a casual
job at a bakery near Engadine pool when I was fifteen gave me the perfect excuse
to stop going to mass.
This happened to be the very same year that Sydney was
hosting World Youth Day, an event which i somehow managed to avoid. While most of my,
friends were off praising the Lord and joining the youth group Antioch and other such
nonsense, I was busy being a “normal” teenager, working, hanging out with non-church friends and
studying for my school certificate exams. The thought of picking up my faith and
actually doing something with it just didn't cross my mind. I didn't want to join Antioch even though most of my friends had, and I was getting pretty sick: and
tired of hearing about how it was. It even go to the point where I felt a little excluded from my school group.
Funnily enough, what essentially drew me back to the church
was a need for friendship Rather than God. I eventually came to realise that I had
very few friends who weren't people I went to school with. Alarmed by this sudden
ttrealisation, started looking around for a solution to this worrying problem. Enter the
parish youth group Antioch, a place where 16-24 year olds eould chillout with Jesus every
Sunday night singing songs, listening to talks not unlike this one and reflecting in
prayer. Spurrred on by the prospect of getting a bit out of my comfort zone. I tagged along on one Sunday night. I figured that I’d meet new people, who
hopefully weren’t total church nuts and if God entered the equation at all,
then great! Well, He did. ln a pretty important way. I began seeing the world
through His eyes as a place where everyone could live in harmony. While God didn't enter into every aspect of
my life, I had a pretty good relationship with Him - I still do. He's there for
me if I need him (and even in times when I think I don't) and he gives my life
a kind of purpose and stability which I don't necessarily find anywhere else.
I keep pretty quiet about my faith life, not wanting to be that person who is a ruthless evangeliser and,who pushes their religion down other
people's throats. I didn't really talk about it at all, even at school. Let me tell you that a
Catholic school can sometimes be the loneliest place for a practising catholic. ln a class of
thirty odd people, maybe four or five would actually attend mass regularly because the
whole concept of practising was so uncool it was practically social suicide. I wish I
could say that I was loud and proud about my faith during my later years of high school
but I would be lying. I kept it pretty hush hush that I went to mass and, shock horror, went
to a youth group! Not that being in with the so called popular kids at school was very
important to me, , it just wasn't worth the hassle of being called a "god
freak" in every Studies of Religion class. It was pretty much just like when Jesus told Peter that he
would deny him three times by the time the rooster crowed the next morning. Except this
time it wasn't Peter doing the denying, it was me. And it wasn't a rooster, it was the
school bell.
Thankfully, the world outside high school was much more
receptive to my faith decisions. People were much more accepting and grown up and
I could actually talk about my faith to whoever was interested. lt didn't take me
long though to figure out that some people, a lot of people, weren't happy with the church
at all. Groups of people were facing mass marginalization not only from the rest of
society but from the institution which once held so much sway - the Church.
I had a lot of problems with the church as a young teenager.
I still do, to be perfectly honest with you. Just like I have problems with the way the
government handles certain issues. But do I go out and start a riot because they're
thinking of cutting university funding? No. Just like I wouldn't start a riot in the middle
of mass because the Church condemns the ordination of women as priests. lt's
just not a constructive way to evoke any kind of change. But by that token, to just stand by and
not question the choices that the Church makes on behalf of us lay people is simply
something that I ean't do. When I was younger, I didn't have the knowledge and ability to
properly articulate how I felt about the church's choices about things like sex, marriage
and science. I feel that I do now, whether it's because of entering the world beyond high
school and actually interacting with different people or because it was just a
part of maturing as a human being. I have experienced society as it currently stands
today yet I wonder if the Church has at all sometimes. The concept of things like
homosexuality or contraception aren't so taboo anymore but you wouldn't know it if you walked into
a Sunday morning service.
I'm a big believer in change, particularly where the church
is concerned. I've mentioned that I attend the youth group Antioch, where we have two
symbols. We have the rose, symbolising growth, maturity and change - exactly the kind
of things we should be aspiring to in our faith. But we also have the rock - cold,
unmoving rock, symbolising stubbornness and a reluctance to grow. We want to go from
being a rock to a rose. lt's a pretty solid metaphor and one that I think extends much
further than one small parish youth group. Unfortunately, to me it seems that the church
has become a rock where it was once a rose.
Our entire faith is based on the teachings and actions of
one guy, Jesus of Nazareth, who completely rocked the boat when it came to faith. For
his time, he was a radical and not everybody liked what he had to say, to the point
where he was sentenced to death for it. But what was this radical, worth-dying-for
message? Surely it was something huge and groundbreaking?
No, it was love. Pure and simple. Love one another as I have
loved you.
Let's look at it another way. Accept one another as I have
accepted you. What does this mean? lt doesn't mean that you have to go out and march for
the rights of women to become priests or anything like that. lt just means that you
understand that there's an issue which another person has. lt may not be your personal
issue but you just need to accept that people do not all fit in the same social,
cultural, religious or sexual mould. Where one significant institution such as the Church still
maintains that there is only one mould, it is the right mould and we won't permit or indulge
anything that doesn't fit into that mould...well then there's a problem because the Church is
not following Jesus' example.
Acceptance of others... this is the message we should be
perpetrating. I'm so perplexed when I see how stagnant the Church has become in this
respect and I feel that it's greatly off-putting to young people who don't identify as
Catholic. We cling to outdated ways of moderating our behaviour that sometimes doesn't
allow our own human nature to breathe. Jesus was both fully human and fully divine but
we're not. We're only human. I'm not
saying that we should all go out and explore our sexual orientation or go on the pill or whatever. Nor do I think that every single
sermon should be about one of these taboo issues. I just think that we need to encourage
more discussion about things like sexuality, medication and the things which our Church
does wrong. Because it does do things wrong. I think the Church can find a way to say
for example that "No, we don't think that sex before marriage should occur but neither do
we think that pre-marital celibacy is the only way to be a Christian." lt doesn't
mean that every single young Catholic is suddenly going to run off and sleep with their
partner or with a lot of different people, it just gives them the space to sit back and think
about it, to think about how they can best live their life and serve God. lt gives them
the chance to make an informed choice and I think it helps us to be more open to
change. We should establish a system that is encouraging and welcoming of difference,
without being pushy or in-your-face- something worthy of Christ himself. We can't just
stick our heads in the sand and pretend that these things aren't there, or that they
don't happen.
Young people today can be quite hostile towards the concept
of organised religion, which I think is an issue of miscommunication on both sides.
They're both trying so hard to get their message across to the other than nobody can
hear what the other is saying.
This is really disappointing because there is a huge
potential to encourage people to find themselves in faith, if that's where they want to go.
There is an incredible youth culture that's growing within the church right now as we
speak, one that's much much bigger than Antioch. I mean, we have World Youth Day, a
global event which is specifically designed for celebrating the faith shared by
young Catholics. And these young people embody everything that is new and changing in
the world. We know more about the world now. We understand science and nature. We've
grown up with new technologies and medicines that can really impact the way we
live our life. We've grown up knowing people who are just a little bit different,
people who maybe aren't heterosexual or people who aren't interested in getting
married or having children at all.
And I am actually really keen to see this new younger
generation pass through the church but at the same time I feel a bit apprehensive. I see
the risk of the older generation not being able to relate to these young people.
Change is a hard thing to accept when you've been living and practicing in one
particular way for so long, which is why I think communication and education are so important and
not just when you're young. I think forums like this one are a great idea and we
should have more of them.
The thing l'm trying to say is, I don't want there to be an
enormous gap between the younger and older generations. lt's why I'm here speaking to
you tonight. lf there's something about the world that an older parishioner is
uncomfortable with or doesn't know much about, they should just ask one of us. We young
people are a vastly under-utilised intellectual and emotional resource. There's more
going on in our heads than just what appears on our Facebook newsfeed and we have a lot
to say these days. We just want to share these things with other people.
Communication is a huge part of this process of reuniting the young and the old but also in
reuniting Christians and non- Christians.
We should all get the ball rolling if we're going to see any
kind of responsiveness from the Church to the current social state of the world. I
firmly believe that there is still a place for the Church in this world and I hope that if the
Church bends a little and accepts the new changes which young people care about, then
there's going to be a bright future ahead of us. Don Humphrey
Comments from the meeting:
- How am I going to live in
the future.
- There are lots of people
interested in the Church today.
- There is a need for
community in the Church. The
institutional Church does not accept that people come from many stages of
life. People question where the
Church is taking them.
- What does happiness mean?
- If the Church wasn’t there
would people miss it?
- Cardinal Pell says that
the Church is not an institution.
There are institutions in it.
- We now have some
freedom. We are responsible.
- Are there message for our
educational institutions?
- The Bible is not a book
for children.
- The Church provides some
certainty.
- The Church provides some
community.
