Fr Kennedy To Mount Legal Challenge

[cappie]

Sacked St Mary's South Brisbane administrator, Fr Peter Kennedy says his lawyers will this week challenge his dismissal in the civil courts unless Brisbane Archbishop John Bathersby, who had earlier received a bomb threat, reverses his decision.

The Australian reports Fr Kennedy will this week continue his fight against the Brisbane diocese in the civil courts unless he is reinstated, after he rejected mediation talks and conducted Sunday Mass for more than 1,500 parishioners at St Mary's church.

Fr Ken Howell, Dean of St Stephen's Cathedral and a liturgy expert assigned to temporarily replace Australia's first sacked Catholic priest, had intended to celebrate Mass.

But police advised against it, and Fr Howell stayed away from the church amid fears of unrest, possibly violence, after a letter containing a bomb threat and a mention of St Mary's church was allegedly sent to Archbishop Bathersby last Friday.

The Australian says it understands that lawyers for Father Kennedy will send a letter to Archbishop Bathersby demanding that he back down from sacking the parish priest or they will challenge the decision of the Brisbane diocese in the civil courts.

Central to their claim is the allegation that Archbishop Bathersby breached canon law by failing to give Fr Kennedy enough time to defend himself against allegations that he was conducting services that were "not in communion" with the Church.

The letter follows the failure of an ex-parte application in the Supreme Court to block his sacking late on Friday night.

Yesterday's hour long service was a celebration in defiance, with Fr Kennedy leading the Mass in prayer and hymns, including the protest song We Shall Not be Moved, before imploring Archbishop Bathersby to visit the church.

"It is sad he is not here today because if he was here, he couldn't possibly move against this community," Father Kennedy told the service.

"We are a Vatican II community - at least, we try to be." Earlier, Archbishop Bathersby had said an independent mediator would most likely be called in to solve the impasse.

"The Church is fully entitled to have this decree obeyed and to have its ownership of the St Mary's church respected," he said.

"In this difficult situation, I believe a sensible next step would be to have an experienced, independent and eminent mediator meet with the Archdiocese and Fr Kennedy to attempt to achieve a peaceful and dignified outcome to the current impasse."

But Fr Kennedy said any mediation should include the church community.

"If the archbishop wants to mediate, he has to mediate with the community," Fr Kennedy told reporters.

"He has unjustly sacked me and in sacking me he has sacked the community."

Fr Kennedy said he had invited the Archbishop to Mass.

"It's sad the Archbishop is not here because if he was he could not turn away from this community," Fr Kennedy told the parish on Sunday morning.

He rejected the idea of a parish member resorting to bomb threats, saying no one wanted a confrontation but rather understanding.

Mixed reactions
Elsewhere, the Sunshine Coast Daily reported that Catholics have mixed feelings over the sacking of controversial Brisbane priest Peter Kennedy, but are united in sharing the pain of the dispute.

Stella Maris Catholic Church parish priest Fr Joe Duffy said Archbishop Bathersby had no choice but to remove Fr Kennedy.

But the North Coast Dean of the Catholic Church, Fr John Dobson, refused to back the Church's actions.

Fr Duffy said he understood Archbishop Bathersby had to protect the "purity of doctrine in his diocese".

He said he had spoken to many of his parishioners and while there was support for some of the controversial practices Fr Kennedy had implemented, most parishioners supported the archbishop.

"The Catholics of this parish have great loyalty towards their archbishop and regard him as a profoundly spiritual man," he said.

"As one parishioner said, 'He's the only archbishop that would tolerate this kind of behaviour (for so long).' "

Fr Duffy said some of the practices at St Mary's parish were generally supported by Catholics across the country, namely its concern for the poor and the sharing of ministries.

"But because of the in your face attitudes that are emanating from St Mary's, it's difficult...it puts us in a difficult situation," he said.

Fr Dobson said there was support within his parish for both Fr Kennedy and the Church but most people he had spoken to were simply saddened it had got to this stage.

When asked if the Church had done the right thing, he said, "That's a very complex question.

"Most people are concerned about the pain and hurt that's being developed.

Parishioner found peace with Fr Peter

But St Mary's parishioner Katie O'Dea, who delivered the homily at her daughter's baptism in December, said the church ground was most sacred because it was a space of inclusion, the Brisbane Times says.

At her Stafford Heights home, Ms O'Dea told the Sun-Herald Father Kennedy, who was present at the birth of her third daughter, Sinead, had empowered her as a mother and a Catholic woman.

"The opportunity to talk to my people, in my Catholic Church, about the job I believe I do best - being the best mother I can be - felt like a chance for me to live Jesus' message," Ms O'Dea said.

"I felt a great sense of peace and joy at Sinead's initiation into the Church, through my involvement."

Ms O'Dea has shared, from the altar, the story of her pregnancy and Sinead's birth with the congregation. "This is the reason that St Mary's is so popular, it gives people a real connection with others who go out of their way to love them and support them on their journey," she said.

The O'Deas and others have been told their baptisms will not be recognised because of Fr Kennedy's departures from traditional rites. Archbishop Bathersby first raised concerns with Fr Kennedy over his baptismal formula in 2004.

This month the archbishop declared that baptisms performed using the words, "I baptise you in the name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer," as Fr Kennedy did, were invalid.

Ms O'Dea, whose four children were baptised at St Mary's, said she was insulted and annoyed at the archbishop's remarks.

"My children all identify with St Mary's as their place of belonging, where people have watched them grow with a keen interest," she said.

Fr Kennedy asked his critics to look to the founder of Christianity.

"People who are not part of our community will make judgements about us because of our so called unorthodox behaviour," he said.

"But we can take heart from the words of Jesus himself, who was judged harshly for his unorthodox behaviour: 'By their fruits you will know them'."

[url="http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25092631-2702,00.html"]http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...31-2702,00.html[/url]

[Slappo]

So sad.... so far from the truth...

[cmotherofpirl]

If the good archbishop had concerns over baptisms in 2004, what took him so long? There could be hundreds of baptisms by now.

[MithLuin]

I was wondering about the baptism issue - I thought as long as you got the formula right and used water, it would be a valid sacrament. I mean, allowing the mother to give a homily or reflection or whatever is off-base, but the baby would still be baptized.

...If he'd gotten the words right. When there is so much emphasis on being baptized in the name of Jesus, it does seem rather important not to leave his name out of the formula!

I really don't see how the civil law is going to issue a judgement based on an alleged breach in canon law. It's not like the priest got 'fired' - he's still part of the diocese, just getting his assignment revoked. Then there is that whole vow of obedience issue....

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='MithLuin' post='1788766' date='Feb 22 2009, 10:13 PM']I was wondering about the baptism issue - I thought as long as you got the formula right and used water, it would be a valid sacrament. I mean, allowing the mother to give a homily or reflection or whatever is off-base, but the baby would still be baptized.

...If he'd gotten the words right. When there is so much emphasis on being baptized in the name of Jesus, it does seem rather important not to leave his name out of the formula!

I really don't see how the civil law is going to issue a judgement based on an alleged breach in canon law. It's not like the priest got 'fired' - he's still part of the diocese, just getting his assignment revoked. Then there is that whole vow of obedience issue....[/quote]

There is another requirement for Baptism. Which the intention of the person baptizing, clearly the person baptizing rejects the Church.

[CatherineM]

The North Coast Dean who didn't back up his Archbishop should get the sack immediately as a Dean.

Where did they get the idea that ministering to the poor means we have to water down our message? Jesus came especially for the disenfranchised, and they deserve the fullness of his message.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1788777' date='Feb 22 2009, 10:22 PM']There is another requirement for Baptism. Which the intention of the person baptizing, clearly the person baptizing rejects the Church.[/quote]
Father doesn't think he is rejecting the Church at all.

[Church Punk]

"But we can take heart from the words of Jesus himself, who was judged harshly for his unorthodox behavior: 'By their fruits you will know them'."

Yes indeed , by their fruits we do know them alright, complete disobedience, preaching contrariety to the faith, promoting things devistating to the faith. These fruits speak quite clearly.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1788764' date='Feb 22 2009, 08:11 PM']If the good archbishop had concerns over baptisms in 2004, what took him so long? There could be hundreds of baptisms by now.[/quote]
If i were him, I would have done everything I could to resolve it without having to fire him.
The Archbishop probably saw the cult of personality around Fr. Kennedy and realized that reforming him would be far more beneficial than throwing him out.
I imagine this didn't come out of the blue for anybody.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='cappie' post='1788740' date='Feb 23 2009, 01:47 AM']Central to their claim is the allegation that Archbishop Bathersby breached canon law by failing to give Fr Kennedy enough time to defend himself against allegations that he was conducting services that were "not in communion" with the Church.[/quote]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the Archbishop given Fr Kennedy plenty of time to change his ways before sacking him? I mean, this has been going on for a while, right?

[quote name='MithLuin' post='1788766' date='Feb 23 2009, 02:13 AM']I really don't see how the civil law is going to issue a judgement based on an alleged breach in canon law. It's not like the priest got 'fired' - he's still part of the diocese, just getting his assignment revoked. Then there is that whole vow of obedience issue....[/quote]
I know! If anything, it seems like the court could find that Fr Kennedy is to blame for breaking his vow of obedience.

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1788780' date='Feb 23 2009, 02:25 AM']Where did they get the idea that ministering to the poor means we have to water down our message? Jesus came especially for the disenfranchised, and they deserve the fullness of his message.[/quote]
I agree with you completely.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
what's really sad is that if this guy was a bishop, then you know there would be a split (schism?) in the church. this priest is already leading people into a split.

[Didacus]

[quote]This month the archbishop declared that baptisms performed using the words, "I baptise you in the name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer," as Fr Kennedy did, were invalid.[/quote]

What the?

Why in blazes would he want to change Father, Son and Hoply Spirit to that? I just don't see a reasoning here, or is it just me?

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1789324' date='Feb 23 2009, 11:44 AM']What the?

Why in blazes would he want to change Father, Son and Hoply Spirit to that? I just don't see a reasoning here, or is it just me?[/quote]

It's new age carp. They want to make sure that those who have been smashed by paternalistic hierarchies don't feel left out in church. The Catholic Church is apparently responsible for every person who was ever abused by their father, step father, etc., or who lost out in a job to a male or had a male boss, or male teacher who gave them a bad grade.

The want to take the church that is open to everyone who wishes true conversion, and twist it until it can be open to every ism except the truth.

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1789318' date='Feb 23 2009, 10:34 AM']+J.M.J.+
what's really sad is that if this guy was a bishop, then you know there would be a split (schism?) in the church. this priest is already leading people into a split. [/quote]

Chasm. A deep, dark chasm.

[Aloysius]

his baptisms were invalid because he changed the formula. had he used the correct formula, water, and merely "intended to do as the Church does" whether or not he correctly understood what it is that the Church does, it would've been valid.

The Archdiocese ought to excommunicate him and then get a restraining order against him, and have him arrested for trespessing if he attempts to set foot on diocesan property again. He can make a phone call to the Archbishop if he wishes to reconcile.

Is there any legal ground for this? The government of Australia had better not think it has authority over the employment of priests by an Archdiocese. Should we not have religious freedom? Is it not inherent to the priest's contract to follow the Catholic Faith and that he can be "fired" if he doesn't? There had better not be any legal grounds for this, it would destroy the Church.