Benedicto XVI visita al retirado Cardenal Clancy en su ruta a la Vigilia
Jul 19, 2008
Antes de asistir a la vigilia eucarística con los jóvenes, el Papa Benedicto XVI ha visitado al Cardenal Bede Clancy, Arzobispo Emérito de Sydney.
Sydney, 19 Jul. 08 / 05:13 am (ACI).- El Pontífice hizo una parada en la casa de San José en Randwick –dirigida por las Pequeñas hermanas de los pobres– en su camino a la Vigilia nocturna en Randwick Racecource la noche del sábado.
Un vocero de la JMJ 2008 dijo que el Papa Benedicto XVI visitó además a Mons. William Brennan y Mons. William Murray, ambos obispos retirados.
El Cardenal Clancy, de 84 años, fue el séptimo Arzobispo de Sydney desde 1983 hasta 2001.
El Papa Benedicto XVI se encontró además con Rosemarie Goldie, una mujer de 92 años, nacida en Sydney, y antigua Subsecretaria del Pontificio Consejo para los Laicos, la primera mujer en tener tan importante cargo en el Vaticano.
El Pontífice habló además con varios sacerdotes retirados que se encontraban en esta casa en una visita que duró alrededor de 20 minutos. Parece que todos ellos quedaron contentísimos con la visita del Papa, dijo el vocero de la JMJ.
Cardinal Clancy Seeks Ad Ban
Apr 05, 2005
Australian Catholic Bishops Conference President Cardinal Edward Clancy, has sought the withdrawal of a controversial TV commercial featuring a priest in a confessional.
(Catholic Weekly, 3/6/99) In a letter to Tooheys brewer Lion Nathan, he said: "As presented, it depicts a priest breaking the seal of the confessional by revealing names. This is deeply insulting to Catholic priests who hold the seal of confidentiality absolutely sacred."
"We are surprised that a major public corporation would behave in a way that takes so little regard of the religious sensitivities of a large section of the population and continue with this advertisement in the face of the complaints that have been made," he continued.
But Tooheys brewer Lion Nathan managing director, Mr Walter Bugno, replied that the advertisement would not be withdrawn as several independent bodies found that it did not contravene the advertising code, and market research had shown the advertisement had been well received by the Australian public.
Homily at Requiem Mass for Pope John Paul II
Apr 05, 2005
Little did either of us know then that within a few months he would be elected Pope, Tuesday 5 April 2005.
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,
I well remember my first meeting with Pope John Paul. It was before he became Pope. I was travelling in Poland, a guest of the priests of the Society of Christ. In Krakow we were invited to dine with the Archbishop, Archbishop Karol Wojtyla. What impressed me immediately was the quiet strength that emanated from him. Here was a man physically powerful, not particularly tall, but broad of shoulder, whose clear blue eyes looked directly into ones own and suggested other strengths as well. Little did either of us know then that within a few months he would be elected Pope. The years that followed would demonstrate just how true my first impressions were.
But of course the Church and the world were soon to learn that the new Pope's strength was backed up by other remarkable attributes. He was a man of formidable intellect - without doubt, one of the greatest intellects of our time. This was manifested throughout his pontificate in his capacity for understanding with extraordinary perceptiveness the most complex questions and events of both the Church and the wider world. He had a profound sense of history, and played a significant role in world events of his own time. The fall of Communism in the USSR provided just one example of his influence. He was a man of great vision. At all times, however, it was as "Peter" that he manifested his interest and his influence.
His was always in substance a pastoral approach.
No Pope ever filled the role of first teacher in the Church more comprehensively than did Pope John Paul. By both the written and the spoken word he addressed every conceivable subject of significance for the Universal Church of his day. He travelled far and wide, tirelessly proclaiming the Gospel and applying its truth and wisdom to local situations. In a world rife with injustice and discrimination and the consequent misery for millions of people, the central theme of his teaching was consistently the dignity of every person. His teaching will be both a challenge and a guide to individuals and to nations for years to come. At a time when basic Christian belief and behaviour was (and is) under concerted attack by the forces of secularism, the Pope stood firm, and courageously spoke out in defence of Christian morality, giving leadership to Christians everywhere. Great courage was another of the Pope's exceptional attributes.
It would take more time than we have now just to list the accomplishments of Pope John Paul in their entirety. He was indefatigable in his work for world peace, for Christian unity, for reform within the Church. The instruction and encouragement of youth throughout the world made a special claim on his time and energy. His ability to relate to the young was extraordinary. And he still found time to prepare us for the new millenium. It is worthy of special note that his pontificate as a whole was a call to "be not afraid" and to face the future with limitless hope. It is to be remembered, too, that for virtually all of his pontificate he suffered from ill-health and a series of physical ailments that began with the attempt on his life in the piazza outside St. Peter's Basilica in 1981.
Pope John Paul was profoundly prayerful. I had an opportunity to witness this at close quarters while travelling throughout Australia with him when he made his pastoral visit in 1986. Even in the popemobile he prayed constantly, and the cheering crowds - though he responded to them warmly - did not appear to distract him from his communing with God. Over the years many were privileged to see and be deeply moved by the devotion with which he celebrated his morning Mass. His day always began and ended with prolonged periods of prayer before the Blessed Sacrament.
One might expect that a man so prayerful, of such academic brilliance, and with so many heavy responsibilities on his shoulders, would be at all times remote and preoccupied. On the contrary, nothing gave him more pleasure than mixing with people at their level and showing his affection and understanding for young and old alike. His sense of fun surfaced frequently at these times. He always seemed uplifted and rejuvenated following such occasions, whether in the Paul VI auditorium in Rome or in some far-flung parish in South America or in Africa. He treated bishops and priests as brothers and readily extended to them his hospitality. Even on the busiest of days, as, e.g., during Synods in Rome, instead of seizing the opportunity for a little respite and solitude, he would have as many join him at lunch as his table could accommodate. I frequently enjoyed that hospitality and never ceased to be amazed at how relaxed he was, indulging in good humoured banter with those present, and in a variety of different languages. His facility with languages was, of course, yet another of his great talents.
Some have labelled Pope John Paul as rigidly conservative, reactionary, and out of touch. Given his firm stand on so many issues, it was inevitable that he would provoke opposition, but only those with their own axes to grind could possibly describe him in such terms. He had played a significant role in the Second Vatican Council, and was thoroughly imbued with its spirit. He was a good listener. Nothing better illustrated his humility and his willingness to listen than his invitation to Christians of all denominations to suggest how he might better exercise his Petrine ministry.
Few, if any popes have had greater impact on the Church of their day than did he. He did not, however, achieve all his goals. At his death, world peace seems more unattainable than ever, relations with the Jews are still something less than fraternal, the obstacles to Christian unity are still stubbornly in place, and renewal within the Church still has a long way to go. A lesser man would have gone to his grave deeply disappointed. But such words cannot be used of Pope John Paul. To the end, his hope was unassailable, and his resignation to the unfathomable judgments of God was complete. He was ever mindful that Christ's "failure" on Calvary was followed by the triumph of the resurrection. He himself spent his final heroic days governing the Church from the cross.
There will be many different assessments of the Pope's pontificate. History, however, will take its time - as it always does - in forming its final judgment. I have no doubt that it will find Pope John Paul one of the outstanding Popes of all time. He will be ranked with those Greats of the Church's history, Leo and Gregory, and, like them, will be gratefully remembered and revered for ages to come.
It has been our privilege to live in the pontificate of Pope John Paul II.
Death, however, comes to us all - to popes no less than to others - death and judgment and eternity. Every one of us is created for eternal happiness, and to behold the face of God. Life is a preparation for death. With St. Paul, Pope John Paul always looked beyond the material and the temporal to the deeper realities and to the eternal glory waiting on the passing troubles and outer decay of this present world. None realized better than he that"when the tent that we live in on earth is folded up, there is a house built by God for us ... not made by human hands". We are confident that, in the terms of St. John's apocalyptic vision, Pope John Paul's name has already been inscribed in the book of life, and he has been judged on its record of his faithful and extraordinary service. Like St. Peter, be has demonstrated his great love for his Saviour, taken the utmost care of the Lord's flock, and given God glory in his death even as he did in his life. There seems to be in this evening's Gospel an uncanny relevance to Pope John Paul.
Confident though we be that the Holy Father has claimed his eternal reward, he himself, aware of the awesome responsibilities of his calling, and of his own human condition, would earnestly beg of us our prayers - indeed has begged of us our prayers. He has a claim on our prayers.
Therefore, with hearts filled with gratitude for his selfless ministry, his encouragement and inspiration, we pray for his eternal repose. May Christ Our Saviour embrace him, take him by the hand, and usher him to paradise.
+ Edward Cardinal Clancy
Archbishop Emeritus of Sydney
Some Thoughts on Church Dialogue
Feb 19, 2005
„I have been labouring the down-side of dialogue in and by the Church. I would not wish to deny, however, that a great deal of good dialogue has taken place at a variety of levels, and that much has been achieved.“ By Edward Cardinal Clancy.
(catalyst-for-renewal.com.au, September 26, 2003) George Weigel, in his book Witness to Hope, speaks of the Second Vatican Council under the heading. The Gamble of Vatican II. He writes: "He (Pope John XXIII) envisioned an open conversation in which the world's bishops would relive the experience of Christ's apostles at Pentecost. The Second Vatican Council, in the Pope's mind, would renew Christian faith as a vibrant way of life; it would engage modernity in dialogue; it would issue no condemnations; it would try to give voice again to the pure message of the Gospel. It would, in the now-famous phrase, open the Church's windows to the modern world". (p.154).
The Pope certainly had the highest hopes for his Council, and given the forces at work in the world at the time, it is not unreasonable to refer to it as a gamble. But, be that as it may, the calling of the Council was in fact an act of great faith on the part of Pope John.
There were many in the Curia who were vehemently opposed to the idea. Engagement with the modern secularist world was probably the cause of greatest concern among the Council' s opponents, and forty years on, it is a matter of debate as to whether the Church or the world holds the initiative. Many, I think, would put the world well ahead.
Whether it was recognised at the time or not, it was inevitable that to enter into dialogue with the world was to invite dialogue within the Church itself. Dialogue has been proceeding on both fronts throughout these forty years.
As a general assessment, one would have to say that the quality of much of the dialogue in both cases has been disappointing. I do not restrict my remarks to structured or organised dialogue. Such is the climate today that virtually anything that is said or written publicly about the Church is a contribution to a Church-wide dialogue.
Dialogue involves both speaking and listening – and with an open mind in both of these activities. At the very least it also requires of each party respect for the other.
Where the Church is concerned it requires more – it requires love - love of God, love for the Church, and love for one another.
Dialogue is perhaps easiest between equals, but dialogue does not always take place between equals. For example, dialogue between a father and son is authentic and potentially fruitful only if the son acknowledges – as the bottom line, so to speak – the father's authority and greater experience. That does not mean that the father is necessarily, and a priori, right in any given issue, but the recognition of his status will have an important bearing on the tone and the prospects of the dialogue. It goes without saying that all dialogue should be conducted according to the conventions of elementary courtesy.
The Holy Father has led the way in the Church's dialogue with the secular world, and in doing so has set the example for all who would participate in dialogue. One by one he has taken up every issue over which the Church and the world are in dispute, providing a calm and closely reasoned explanation of the Church' s position, and inviting a response in kind from those who would speak for the world.
He has readily acknowledged the errors of the Church in the past, and apologised on behalf of those who in the Church' s name have wronged others. The world, unfortunately, has been unwilling to take up the Pope's challenge. A rock-hard secularist ideology has not been open to dialogue.
Pope John Paul has adopted the same approach towards dialogue within the Church. It is claimed, however, that at a certain point, he put the brakes on post-conciliar developments among the People of God, and inhibited the thinking of that time in favour of a more conservative and centralised stance. This was, and still is, interpreted as a retreat to a pre-conciliar outlook.
What is generally not mentioned in this context is that excesses of all kinds, both in theory and in practice, had been taking place throughout the Church. The excesses were claimed to be "in the spirit of the Council", and some, feeling that we had moved on beyond Vatican II, were now calling for Vatican III!
I believe that the Pope did certainly put the brakes on, and with good reason, but nobody with any knowledge of his thinking could accuse him of being pre-conciliar.
The Pope, however, is not the only one to speak authoritatively from inside the walls of the Vatican. Indeed, the various Pontifical Congregations, Councils, etc., have provided the official voices on most occasions, and have from time to time entered into dialogue without prejudice to their authority.
Not without reason, these have frequently been criticised for their failure to meet the canons of true dialogue, and a great deal of frustration has resulted.
We need to recognise, however, the difficulties that these bodies face. Firstly, they cannot of themselves pronounce the last word – that always rests with the Holy Father.
Secondly, they have been issuing decrees and pronouncing judgments without fear of contradiction from the rank and file within the Church for 2000 years, and against that historical background true dialogue is a very difficult art to master.
Thirdly, they have to speak from the perspective of a universal Church with a billion members and countless different cultures
And fourthly, their dialogue partners frequently fail to recognise and appropriately respect their unique status and authority.
There has been fault on both sides. Rome has sometimes betrayed an apparent insensitivity to concerns within the wider Church. And of course entrenched mentalities foreign to the spirit of dialogue are to be found everywhere.
The freedom of all the people of God, even of the lowliest station in life, to voice their perceptions about the Church is one of the welcome features of the post-conciliar Church. However, there are pitfalls and much learning still to be done in order to facilitate fruitful dialogue.
There are many whose outspoken criticism of the Church is not motivated by love for the Church, but by resentment over some Church teaching that touches them personally, as, for example, the Church' s teaching on the indissolubility of a valid marriage, or on contraception. Others are driven by particular ideologies such as the ordination of women, a married clergy, or inter-Communion.
Some such issues may well be legitimate subjects for dialogue, but they need to be set in a broader context that makes the good of the Church the focus of the discussion.
Then there are those who get carried away by one or other of the modern theologians – a Kung, a Gutierrez, or a Ruether – and propose visions of the Church that ignore the boundaries set by authentic ecclesiology and the Church' s Tradition. If we venture into deep theological waters, we need to know how to swim. And – to change the metaphor – we should always keep our emotions on the short leash of reason.
I have been labouring the down-side of dialogue in and by the Church. I would not wish to deny, however, that a great deal of good dialogue has taken place at a variety of levels, and that much has been achieved.
The Church has certainly set up structures for dialogue. Notable among these is the Synod of Bishops, about which, however, there is much dissatisfaction. This is partly due to the immense complexity of a dialogue that involves so many people, from so many different parts of the world, to be conducted in a very limited time-frame. Most, however, would complain that there is excessive "management" of Synod discussions and resolutions.
It is also appropriate here to point out that dialogue is more than an exchange of ideas – it also involves a mutual analysis of those ideas.
There are other structures, too, at the local level, such as parish councils. Some such councils function very well, others not so well, and the reasons, in most cases, are readily identifiable.
Dialogue is a new experience for the Church, and it is going to take a long time to establish the right structures and to use them effectively.
Appropriate structures, however, are not the complete answer, and are no substitute for the inadequacies of the dialogue mentality.
I have already mentioned the need for a genuine love of the Church, and a caring that reaches beyond ones own personal problems and difficulties. An adequate knowledge of the Church's teaching and claims about itself is also necessary. Knowledge can be expected to grow with the dialogue (if properly conducted), but an effort should be made to acquire sufficient knowledge at the very outset if one expects the dialogue to be fruitful and constructive. Dialogue conducted on the basis of avoidable misunderstanding or ignorance is, at best, a waste of time.
Some exercises in dialogue treat the Church as if it were a (commercial) company, and the dialogue participants its shareholders – a far cry from the concept of the Mystical Body. We are all called to be perfect, to be Christ-like, and it is remarkable just how many paragraphs of the New Testament writings are devoted explicitly to driving that message home.
Christ founded his Church to assist us in the work of personal salvation and in promoting the salvation of the world. This thought should be uppermost in our minds whenever we engage in dialogue, whether within the Church, or with our separated brothers and sisters of other faiths or traditions. All our dialogue should be clearly characterised by those three great theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity, and should be accompanied by fervent prayer.
At the time of the Council it was freely said that it takes one hundred years for an ecumenical council to bear its ultimate fruit. I do not think that any of us really believed it at the time. Looking about us forty years later, it seems much more credible.
Much has been achieved – and we should not underestimate it – but we still have a long way to go before we realise Pope John's hopes for the Gospel to become a vibrant way of life for all the world, and for all to hear the pure message of the Gospel in the teaching of the Council.
Towards that end, however, we must continue to work and pray, entrusting ourselves to the unfailing guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Christmas Peace Among Ethnic Groups
Feb 19, 2005
Cardinal Edward Clancy of Sydney appealed for harmony among Australia's many ethnic groups in maintaining a still fragile peace in the week before Christmas as a sign of the peace brought by Christ's birth.
(CWN, Dec. 18, 1996) SYDNEY - Cardinal Clancy warned that self-interest, greed, and racism among the 69 identifiable ethnic groups threatened the fabric of Australian society. "Our aboriginal brothers and sisters are still grossly disadvantaged, East Timorese and other refugees are denied elementary compassion, and ill-conceived controversy threatens the stability of our multi-cultural family," Cardinal Clancy said.
"Jesus Christ came into our world offering salvation, unity, and peace. He made himself the brother of us all ... irrespective of race, color or culture...," he said. "May this Christmas witness a re-commitment on the part of us all to that unity in diversity seeded long ago in a stable in Bethlehem."
Australia has witnessed a record number of complaints of racial discrimination in recent months as a four-month long debate over increasing numbers of mainly poor immigrants from other Asian nations divided the nation between the descendants of British colonizers and more recent arrivals.
Interview with the outgoing archbishop of Sydney Edward Bede Cardinal Clancy
Feb 13, 2005
If you had one last things to say to the Church, what would you say? I think, I don't know how one could crystallise it, but a recommitment, a total recommitment to the faith. By that I mean there's a lot are committed to it, but selectively. I think we need a total commitment to the faith and to the authority of the Holy Father. I think that's really what I would wish for the Church.
(Sunday Nights With John Cleary, 01/04/2001) Dorothy: As you will hear, we are talking with Cardinal Clancy right next to St Mary's Cathedral as the journos mingle and move away after the big press conference. Good to have your company, Joe Gelonesi and the Reverend Dorothy McRae-McMahon with you. First up, a special conversation with the outgoing Archbishop of Sydney, His Eminence Cardinal Edward Bede Clancy.
JOE GELONESI: Cardinal Clancy, welcome to the Sunday Program.
CARDINAL CLANCY: Thank you very much for having me here.
JOE GELONESI: You've had a long life as a leader in the Australian Church; what will be your most precious memory of that time?
CARDINAL CLANCY: I suppose my most precious would be my first mass. I was some years in the seminary preparing for that day, and I remember still very clearly every moment of that day and the first mass, and I think that would remain my most cherished memory. There have been other memories along the way that might compete with it: my first parish was Belmore, and I enjoyed my couple of years there very much, and it's full of memories, memories of people particularly. So I could go on, there are many, many happy memories.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: You always were and still are a sort of people person, aren't you? I read somewhere that you were born in Lithgow, is that right?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Born in Lithgow, yes, as was Archbishop Don Robinson, we were both born in Lithgow. Oh yes, I suppose one of the great frustrations about being a bishop is that in the course of all the years, 27 in all that I have been a bishop, one makes acquaintance with so many people that one gets to really know very few. You're moving on all the time from place to place, and you really don't have the opportunity of developing a close relationship with people as one normally would.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Yes I suppose having such a big responsibility in the Church there'd be a certain boundary on relationships in some ways, quite apart from the time.
CARDINAL CLANCY: Well boundaries set by the nature of the work itself, you're on the move, going from place to place, you don't have time apart from anything else, to spend very much with others, and develop the sort of friendships that normally would develop. I have many friends, but in comparison with the number of people that I've worked with and met over the years, they're rather few. And I feel rather guilty about that; people have been very kind to me and been very friendly in every way, I just don't get time to develop that friendship. Oftentimes I don't write letters when I should, and visit them when I should. I hope in retirement I might be able to make up a bit of lost ground.
JOE GELONESI: You've been with the Church through times of great change; what would you say have been the key changes in the Church in that time?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Well the key change has been a change of attitude. That goes right across the spectrum, and it's a change of attitude not only in the Church but in society generally. The philosophy of the individualism is very pronounced in society today, and that's a mixture, it's not all bad, it's not all good. It certainly I think, is good insofar as it gives to people today a greater sense of their own autonomy, their own worth, their own individualism. At the same time it too often results in a rejection of any other authority in their lives, and I think we all have authorities that we should pay attention to, whether they be parents or teachers or bishops or popes or whatever, even prime ministers. I think beneficial individualism has its limits, and I think individualism in the world today has not been to the overall benefit of people, Christians, Catholics, in their relationship with their religious obligations.
JOE GELONESI: Can you see that changing at all? Can you see that the times that we're in, taking a turn and going more towards a time of perhaps obligation authority, responsibility?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Yes, I don't think you can ever turn the clock backwards. I mean history doesn't really repeat itself in that sense. But I adopt the pendulum theory in history, and I think the pendulum will swing back to a greater acknowledgement of the influence of others in our lives, and of our obligations to others and the limits of our own freedom in order that it might be a genuine freedom. So there will be a certain swing back I would expect, that's not a reversion to those days where authority was absolute, where authority was authoritarianism really, and obedience became a Uriah Heap kind of a response.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Talking of history, I'd often thought that the Catholic Church, because of its history in this country, has a special connection with average struggling sort of people; it's never really been seen as the establishment Church. Do you think that the Church has learned things from that relationship it would have to pass on in terms of our understanding of the Australian people and our culture?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Oh well it's true. I mean historically it's true. A lot of the first Catholics were convicts, and they had no rights, and it was many years before they were allowed to have a priest to celebrate mass. They were the labouring class, the struggling class, that's a historical fact. And so it's out of that environment, out of that matrix as it were, that the Church grew, and continues to carry features I think that derive from that time. For many, many years almost all the members of the Labor Party were Catholics, all the members of the Liberal Party were of some other religion. But that's gone now. So things are changing and have changed a lot. But I think that the Church does continue to benefit from its origins and to remain perhaps closer to the ordinary average person than do many other religious traditions.
JOE GELONESI: Do you think the Australian Churches are moving together?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Oh yes. When I come to think of my childhood, although I was very fortunate, I lived in an area where there was a great relationship between the various Churches. My Dad was a schoolteacher and in a country school we were all religions, but all, not only the children but the families got on very well, and it was very good to be brought up in that way. But one had snatches of the kind of bigotry and prejudice that existed even in those days. And elsewhere of course, that sort of tension remained even more pronounced. And we weren't, as Catholics, permitted to go into non-Catholic Churches or attend weddings or even funerals of our own family oftentimes. Looking back on it now it just seems so inconceivable, so incredible. But that was the kind of attitude that prevailed, not just among Catholics but people of other Christian traditions too. How that's changed, I mean that's changed radically and I have enjoyed a very good relationship with the Church leaders here in Sydney, other Church leader, my counterparts, and ecumenical gatherings, praying together, this has become part and parcel of life today. We have a long way to go, mind you, and if you scratch beneath the surface you'll still find a deal of bigotry and prejudice. But we should take heart from the fact that we have travelled so far, and there is a real burning desire I think, in the hearts of most Christians for that unity to be achieved eventually.
JOE GELONESI: Yes, the idea that the Church should enter into dialogue and listen and get involved with the more perhaps democratic undertow that has been unleashed through Vatican II. I wonder how much of that can be done in a Church that also still needs to stick to its basic tenets, to stick to doctrine obviously, and to stick to a way of looking at the world which for so many now must seem distant, because we seem to be so free of - going back to an earlier conversation - of obligation and rites and rituals. That tension there, how do you see that?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Well I think that really fruitful dialogue and the exchange of ideas can only take place when the two terms of the dialogue know what their position is and are very sound in it, and arguing from a firm position. If in either case you're just arguing from an amorphous kind of a philosophy that is excessively inflexible and will move with the slightest breeze, I mean you can't get a fruitful dialogue out of that. I think the more clear cut your position is, the better the dialogue, providing always that you have an open mind, and are ready to hear criticisms and hear arguments that may be counter to the position that you hold. But unless you hold a definite convinced position, I think the dialogue suffers and falls in a heap.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Given that point of view, how do you feel about some Catholics who, in their anxiety about perhaps movement for change in the Church, take on a sort of policing role, reporting people and so on, watching over what priests are doing and so on. You know, there is a small group there doing that; what do you feel about that?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Oh yes, I think that's not to be encouraged. Understandable perhaps; security means an awful lot to people. Security is one of the greatest needs of people I think, and there is no area, no institution where they can find that security as they can in the Church. And when the security or the position of the Church and their own security are threatened, they react, not always reasonably, and I think I can understand why then they try to remedy that by taking those measures that they do. I think it's understandable, but I don't think it's to be encouraged, and in the long run I don't think it achieves anything useful.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: I suppose the whole Church in this very rapidly changing era, finds it difficult to find that line between holding a very firm ground and allowing the edge of dialogue. I mean for example do you feel that you could talk to us a bit about your experience with the Synod of Rome and the meeting of the Australian bishops there? What did you come away feeling about that?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Well I came away feeling that our brethren in Rome didn't fully understand the situation in real life as we have it here. I would think that this group that you speak about did exercise an undue influence in forming opinions and convictions over there. I think that was the big shortcoming at that meeting. Nonetheless it was not a fruitless meeting by any means, and it was quite a, I think, quite a significant step towards dialogue between our Roman authorities and the other bishops. That's after centuries of fairly authoritarian regulation from those various congregations in Rome, it's not easy to effect really a genuine dialogue, but I think that was quite a move in the right direction. We are held together very much by basic convictions and truths that are proper to the Catholic Church. We can, for that reason, debate a difference on, but it doesn't mean that we fragment. I think that solid basis on which we work and which we argue, prevents any kind of ultimate fragmentation.
JOE GELONESI: Do you think there's been a misunderstanding of the way we do things in Australia? I mean we have a particular democratic way of operating, it's a particularly Australian way, obviously it undergirds everything, all institutions, including the Church. Do you think the authorities may have misunderstood that?
CARDINAL CLANCY: I think so, but I'm always hesitant to use the word 'democratic' about the Church. It's a political term; the Church is, well the Scriptures themselves don't attempt to define the Church, they describe it by various methods and so on, and illustrations. But I think, and the word was used more than once in the dialogue actually, 'egalitarianism', there's a certain Australian egalitarianism that other people often misread and misunderstand, and also an openness, a sense of inner freedom that one often doesn't very often find in other peoples, to the extent that one finds it among Australians. To an outsider, we might often feel to speak to and treat our superiors with a shocking informality that suggests total disobedience and adverse reaction, whereas we can be very open and informal, but at the basis of it all, there remains a great fidelity to those who are in legitimate authority.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Yes, you can have a sort of healthy irreverence, but nevertheless a respect that lies under it. That is often hard for people to understand when they see it. It is different.
CARDINAL CLANCY: It is different, and we might speak very frankly about what we see as shortcomings or faults or failures to perceive various matters in our superiors, but our commitment to them in obedience remains quite firm, and that's much better I think, than the sort of person who bows and scrapes and is quite worshipful almost even of the person in authority.
JOE GELONESI: Are you saddened by the decline in numbers of young men wanting to take on the vocation?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Oh I am of course, and that reflects the community generally. I've always said that you can't blame young people. Young people are the children of the generations in which they live, and the shortage of vocations, while it's attributable to a whole range of causes, but not least is it attributable I think to the quality, of the inadequate quality of the faith in the community generally. I think it's true to say that - and this is speaking generally, it's not picking out any individual people because some people are just beyond criticism really in their fidelity, and it doesn't follow that their children are going to become priests - but speaking generally, I think any community that finds itself short of priests has to look at itself and see, now where am I failing, where are we failing. And I think that plus the fact that families today are so small. You know, when I became a priest it was normal to have five or six children in the family, that was very common, and many more in many cases. But now it's down to about two, say, and cut that in half again because one's bound to be a girl, and then the one boy left who's often steered into his father's profession or business and so on. So in a way it's not surprising that we have a shortage of vocations, but over and above all that I think there would be more vocations and will be more vocations when we finally improve the quality of our faith and commitment as a community.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Do you see the spires on the cathedral as one of your great legacies?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Well I see it as one of the great events of the time that I've spent here as a bishop, I don't count it as my legacy. A lot of people contributed to the completion of those spires. When I first came here I had a shopping list of things that I wanted to do. The spires did figure there, but they were a hope more than anything else. But as things turned out, they were built.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: What do you feel when you see them, and what do they mean to you?
CARDINAL CLANCY: They mean many things. They mean I think that Sydney has come of age in a way. You go around the great cities of Europe and they've all got spires, and they add something very distinctive to the city. And this is such a beautiful environment here with the Botanical Gardens and the Domain and so on, the spires just seem to enhance the natural environment and they seem to declare that Yes, we're a city that's come to age, and they can look over their shoulders at all those big secular monuments, commercial monuments that are around, and I think that's a good balance too in today's world.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Changing the subject entirely and going back to your retirement: you've mentioned catching up with letter-writing and so on, but have you got other things that you have in mind that you can now do, you've got time to do in your retirement?
CARDINAL CLANCY: One of the neglects over my lifetime is I've never really nourished other skills, or hobbies. I think I'm a workaholic of the worst sort, somehow or other. I've been totally devoted to the life and responsibilities first of a priest then of a bishop, so that I've never really taken up other hobbies or developed other skills. So that's probably going to be one problem I'll have to deal with when I retire.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Do you have something in mind, some skill?
CARDINAL CLANCY: Yes, work mainly. I'll continue to be helpful insofar as I can in the archdiocese, in supplying parishes and so on, where help is needed. I've told people I'm going to do lots of things, like I'm going to learn to play the piano, and I'm going to master the computer, I'm going to relearn my Hebrew and Greek, a whole host of things. But it's a pipe dream of course, I'll never do it.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: If you had one last things to say to the Church, what would you say?
CARDINAL CLANCY: I think, I don't know how one could crystallise it, but a recommitment, a total recommitment to the faith. By that I mean there's a lot are committed to it, but selectively. I think we need a total commitment to the faith and to the authority of the Holy Father. I think that's really what I would wish for the Church.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: And if you had a word for the community, what would you want to say to us as the community, even the community of Sydney, say.
CARDINAL CLANCY: Well I would say much the same thing I think. Be true to whatever Christian tradition you belong, treat it with the seriousness that it merits. I mentioned earlier that my Dad was a country schoolteacher; at the end of every year he'd give some good advice, and he said, 'And don't forget to go to your Church on Sundays, doesn't matter what Church you belong to, don't fail to go to Church.' He was a kind of ecumenist before his time I think.
JOE GELONESI: Cardinal Clancy, thank you for being on The Sunday Night Program, and we do wish you all the very, very best with the projects for your future, particularly in your retirement.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Especially the time for the piano. And the painting.
CARDINAL CLANCY: Thank you very much. Thank you for inviting me onto the program. I listen to it quite frequently and thank you for the good wishes for my retirement. You've stiffened my resolve to learn the piano and to take up portrait painting or something of that nature.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Excellent.
CARDINAL CLANCY: Thank you.
DOROTHY MCRAE MCMAHON: Thank you.
JOE GELONESI: The retiring Archbishop of Sydney, His Eminence Cardinal Edward Clancy, speaking to us last week at St Mary's Cathedral in Sydney.
Benedicto XVI visita al retirado Cardenal Clancy en su ruta a la Vigilia
Cardinal Clancy Seeks Ad Ban