Conduct a Keyword Search of this complete site and visit my main index

'Liberal Catholic Bias' about the Catholic Church and its teachings presented at Mary Mackillop Place in North Sydney.

Before I would recommend anyone to visit the Museum section of Mackillop Place, I must, in justice, and in the interest of truth, convey some elements of the experience, which betray the 'liberal' spirit of its creators and are, in my opinion, not worthy of a Catholic Museum - especially as the centre is the official public memorial of Blessed Mary Mackillop, and implicitly represents the Catholic Church and its teachings, particularly for school groups and children who visit.

The following 'items' are particularly problematic.

Saints Alive

• This Section 2 of the tour features an interactive multimedia presentation of selected saints. Click on the button below the screens of Saints Joseph, Joan, Elizabeth Seton and Francis and they speak with you via a monitor. St. Joan's dialogue mocks the Church's inability to make up its mind with regards to her sainthood. St. Seton's dialogue presents the thought of those who would attack the Church in matters of celibacy. The saint's character implies that a married person, who is a woman and who has children (and is therefore not celibate) is less worthy of the title of sainthood. The Seton character sarcastically comments on the 'three strikes' she should have had - as a mother, as a married person, and as a woman - which (it is implied) would have counted in the decision to declare her a saint. Yet, these had nothing to do with the CHurch's decision to declare Mary 'Blessed'. The producers are appealing to stereotypical anti-catholic rhetoric and this is sad!
• Part of the purpose of this section of the tour is to highlight the patronage titles of some saints which were based more on fiction rather than truth. This is fair enough, when it is taught by unbiased teachers, who understand and place such teaching in the context of Church teaching on infallibility and the difference between official Church teaching and matters dealing with legend and folklore etc. But, to use the Mary Mackillop Place venue to mock the titles given to some saints over the centuries - knowing that (1) the primary recipients of this message are children and their teachers, likely to be uneducated in matters of Church Faith and History, and (2) that what is spoken is only alluded to out of context, - is, to me, pedagogically unsound.
• Also, some script on the wall in this section seeks to inform students about 'saints' in general. The gist is that any ordinary person can become a saint. I respect the sentiment and it is a valid one to make. One does not need to necessarily experience those experiences similar to the mystic saints to be a saint. We can all become saints just by living our ordinary daily Christian lives. However, in seeking to create a more balanced view of sainthood, the rhetoric, especially within the context of this whole section of the tour, down plays the mystical element in the lives of saints. In my experience, removing the supernatural from our faith has detrimental effects on students and it also implies a lack of faith on the part of the teacher, rather than a desire to reflect true church teaching. It is the supernatural, even within the 'natural' that really appeals to students. The lives of the saints (and I am not speaking of legend here) are in fact filled with the supernatural as well. (In fact, other sections of the tour even speak of these in Mary Mackillop's own life).
• In order to make saints even more feasible for young students, saints are compared to ordinary heroes. A question is posed to students near a screen shot of Elvis Presley (surrounded by beautiful women, clearly not there because of his 'saintly' qualities) taken from one of his Hawaiian movies. "Can you imagine [a] St. Elvis?" A halo surrounds Elvis' head. The implication is obvious. I question whether the association is appropriate. The information in Mary Mackillop place generally makes it clear that there are certain virtues which make a saint. Yet, in this section, the most 'hip' and technoligically 'cool' section, the 'saintly virtues' could be the same as being a Hollywood Star!
• Finally in this section, a very common liberal attitude is visible. The idea that all religions and spiritual forms are on an equal footing has become commonplace today, especially through the New Age movement and the influence of Eastern religions. Unfortunately many Catholics are prone to this as well, despite Church teaching to the contrary, which speaks of 'elements of truth' in other faiths but the 'fullness of truth' which dwells in the Catholic Church, as well as the unique teachings of Jesus Christ and his revelation of the true nature of the true God. The information on the wall states, when referring to 'all religious holy people', that "…all are both wholly human and have privileged contact with the Divine." May I ask, if this is true, then why did God the Son choose to undergo excruciating pain and death on a cross, if any way to God is possible and 'holy'?

Sections dealing with the initial ex-communication of Mary Mackillop by Bishop Sheil and her subsequent reinstatement in the Church before the bishop's death.

• It is well known that Mary Mackillop was unjustly ex-communicated by her bishop and that this was rightly lifted before the Bishop's death. Clearly, he had made an error despite his office as Bishop. Often, the errors of church 'men' in particular are expanded upon throughout the tour and museum. It is clear that the creators of the Museum have a particular dislike of Church 'men' (even though, in fairness, the Pope of the time who supported Mary Mackillop is presented well). Section 6, entitled, "Excommuniation!" sees a clothed mannequin representing the Bishop Sheil passing judgment on Mary Mackillop. Even I got scared as I watched it! Bishop Sheil moves and brings his crozier smashing down into the ground!! Yes, very dramatic …but is it necessary? I know that if I were a child and came out of the museum, I certainly wouldn't like Bishops very much. I would consider all of them sexist, incapable of making a sound decision. Perhaps my sceptical attitude would be better understood once I explain what is recounted in a glass casing near a plaque called " The Excommunicated" (where the story of a number of ex-communicated people in Church History is told, even though they are unrelated to the story of Mary Mackillop). The passage reads, " The Church is as capable of error as the most ignorant or most learned among us". Again, this is true, but only if what is meant by that is the personal judgment of the members of the Church, who, like everyone, can make errors - and not the infallibility of the Pope (and the official teaching Magisterium) in matters of faith and morals. There is a big distinction. Some how, given the tone of ALL the information presented at Mary Makillop Place, I don't think the creators wish to highlight this distinction. Rather, whether consciously or not, they give the impression that the process for making saints has only become a valid one in our enlightened latter 20^th Century, but since the Church can make errors (without qualifying what type of errors) there is no reason to think that the Church could also be making an error in canonising Mary Mackillop in due course!

Back to Mary MacKillop Place