Excommunicating MP's

Try as I might, I can’t seem to escape the fact that Religion is increasingly part of our politics. I could choose not to post about it – but that doesn’t make it less of a problem. In the past I have trained my fire on Federal Health Minister Tony Abbott, but increasingly I see that to make an impact I have to look further up the chain. If I’m to cure our society of this gangrene, I need to take off the whole limb.

With that said, the source of many of the “In the name of Christ” edicts handed down in Australia (and in NSW particularly) is the Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, George Pell. In general, Pell has a hard time keeping out of the public eye and is outspoken on the role Catholicism should play in our society, but he has been particularly vocal of late. Pell has steadfastly maintained an opposition to homosexuality (even when challenged personally by his gay cousin), is against the ordination of women and has tied global warming to an unhappy God. More recently, he was accused of sexually abusing a 12-year-old boy at a Catholic youth camp in 1961, revealing an attitude to child abuse that I find alarming. At best, he was passive in response to child abuse cases brought before him, though accusations of his role in cover-ups abound. His ambivalence on this issue is emphasised by his assertion that "abortion is a worse moral scandal than priests sexually abusing young people". A remarkable statement from the Church’s moral leader in NSW.

Earlier this month Pell piped up with his plan to require Catholic School principles to swear an oath to uphold the moral teaching of the Church. According to catholic news, the oath demands "religious submission of intellect and will" on questions of faith and morals - even if these are inferred but not defined by the pope and his bishops - and an acceptance that everything solemnly taught by church tradition is divinely inspired. This would be applicable both to their personal lives and in their interactions with, and pastoral care of, their students. His plan would most obviously affect the issues of homosexuality, birth control and abortion – topical to us all, but most pressing to teenagers forming their sexual identity. However, this obvious attempt to brainwash a generation of young people isn’t my biggest criticism of Pell – parents can easily choose a public (indoctrination free) education.

By far the greater evil is Pell’s unveiled attempt to influence Australian politics by appealing to (and threatening) Catholic parliamentarians. Yesterday, Pell pressured NSW MP’s to vote against stem cell legislation that would lift a ban on therapeutic cloning, bringing the state into line with the Federal law. He stated that there could be “consequences” for those voting for the bill, the implication being that they could be refused communion, or even excommunicated. How medieval. Thankfully, a conscience vote allowed the bill to pass 65 votes to 26 – despite the archbishop’s threats.

Members of Federal Liberal have been quick to defend Pell’s right to voice his opinion, including his protégé (and preferred page boy) Abbott, the PM and hand puppet Joe Hockey. However, Emergency Services Minister Nathan Rees was amongst the most vocal opponents, suggesting: “I think he's got three options: he can apologise; he can run for parliament; or he can invite further comparisons with that serial boofhead, [Sheik Taj Aldin al-hilali]”. In this Administrations view, the Archbishop should pipe down. He should be made to face a proper investigation surrounding his tacit acceptance of child abuse – but overall the position of Catholic Archbishop should put back in its place. Tend to your flock George, and leave the rest of us alone.