Proposal 1: 2005

Status

ARC policies are formulated and endorsed by the financial members and implemented through a Secretariat elected at an AGM

• Approve 56
• With Reservation 4
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 2

Proposal 2: 2005

Financial members vote on policy issues at an AGM or by sending in absentee votes

• Approve 53
• With Reservation 5
• Not Approve 2
• Abstain 2

Proposal 3: 2005

One member of the Secretariat is appointed as an external ARC spokesperson. Other ARC members can speak externally in a private capacity only

 

• Approve 48
• With Reservation 10
• Not Approve 2
• Abstain 2

Proposal 4: 2005

Each Secretariat will act on a consensus model – No one is in charge, all are in charge

• Approve 48
• With Reservation 10
• Not Approve 2
• Abstain 2

Proposal 5: 2005

Each ARC Secretariat will call ARC Campfires/Conferences and General Meetings

• Approve 59
• With Reservation 0
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 3

Proposal 1: 2005

The Church is all its people and the Holy Spirit indwells and informs all

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 1
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 4

Proposal 2: 2005

People are longing for a stronger, more visible Christian emphasis on love, not law.

• Approve 59
• With Reservation 1
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 2

Proposal 3: 2005

Hierarchical Church structures need to be reformed to let us all own our church.

• Approve 55
• With Reservation 5
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 2

Proposal 4: 2005

Central control dominated by one culture delivers injustices.

• Approve 54
• With Reservation 3
• Not Approve 3
• Abstain 2

Proposal 4: 2005

Central control dominated by one culture delivers injustices.

• Approve 54
• With Reservation 3
• Not Approve 3
• Abstain 2

Proposal 5: 2005

The Church should encourage modern scientific investigation as integral to God’s evolving universe.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 1
• Not Approve 1
• Abstain 1

Proposal 6: 2005

It is important that the people elect their own Bishops

• Approve 42
• With Reservation 16
• Not Approve 3
• Abstain 1

Proposal 7: 2005

It is important that the people participate in decisions to set up, amalgamate or close Parishes

• Approve 56
• With Reservation 4
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 2

Proposal 8: 2005

It is important that the people participate in major building/financial decisions.

• Approve 51
• With Reservation 9
• Not Approve 1
• Abstain 1

Proposal 9: 2005

It is important that people who are elected to Church Councils participate in the decision making.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 4
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 1

Proposal 1: 2005

The principle of an informed conscience must always be respected.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 5
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 0

Proposal 2: 2005

All Catholics, female and male, should have equal opportunity to assume responsibilities in the Church.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 2
• Not Approve 2
• Abstain 0

Proposal 3: 2005

Freedom of speech and enquiry applies in the Church as much as in secular society.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 5
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 0

Proposal 4: 2005

Let the Church follow Jesus in his embrace of all who are suffering discrimination.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 4
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 1

Proposal 1: 2005

Liturgy should reflect the culture and modes of expression of local communities.

• Approve 54
• With Reservation 6
• Not Approve 0
• Abstain 2

Proposal 2: 2005

The Third Rite of Reconciliation should be re-introduced.

• Approve 54
• With Reservation 4
• Not Approve 1
• Abstain 3

Proposal 3: 2005

Criteria for Ordination should be reviewed.

• Approve 57
• With Reservation 4
• Not Approve 1
• Abstain 2

Proposal 4: 2005

Inclusive language should be adopted in all liturgical texts.

• Approve 53
• With Reservation 7
• Not Approve 1
• Abstain 2

Proposal 1: 2006

Some traditional Church teaching on sexuality needs re-examining in the light of more recent research

• Yes 57
• No 0
• Discussible 2
• Abstain 1

Proposal 2: 2006

Masturbation is a mortal sin’

• Yes 3
• No 54
• Discussible 3
• Abstain 3

Proposal 3: 2006

Homosexuality is a natural state for some

• Yes 52
• No 1
• Discussible 7
• Abstain 0

Proposal 4: 2006

An essential purp[ose of sacramental marriage is mutual comfort and support

• Yes 54
• No 2
• Discussible 4
• Abstain 0

Proposal 5: 2006

The use of condoms in marriage is a mortal sin

• Yes 3
• No 53
• Discussible 3
• Abstain 1

Proposal 1:

ARC policies are formulated and endorsed by the financial members and implemented through a Secretariat elected at an AGM.

• No.: Strike out financial. Some people can't pay/no alienation of anyone
• No. 56: How are policies endorsed?

Proposal 2:

Financial members vote on policy issues at an AGM or by sending in absentee votes.

• No.:10 Would much prefer consensus on policy
• No. 12: Approval of absentee voting forms sentout prior to the AGM
• No. 37: I'd rather have more pressure on coming to meetings
• No. 56: I do not go to AGM's
• No. 60: But please excuse me as a new arrival

Proposal 3:

One member of the Secretariat is appointed as an external ARC spokesperson. Other ARC members can speak externally in a private capacity only.

• No. 12: There should be a second spokesperson available if the first is away or not available
• No. 24: Counted and voted upon by Chairperson
• No. 33: Appoint a deputy external ARC spokesperson to speak publically in case No. 1 is not available
• No. 34: Perhaps more than one (2?) are needed in case one is not available
• No. 35: Would that be on all issues? Maybe needs to be on basis of expertise and availablity. But I agree. It should only be with Secretariat approval
• No. 36: Not sure why this is recommended
• No. 48: Sometimes there can be specific circumstances
• No. 62: On contentious or obviously divided issues, suggest views/endorsement of Secretariat be sought before going public

Proposal 4:

Each Secretariat will act on a consensus model – No one is in charge, all are in charge.

• No. 2: As long as a two-thirds majority allows you to make a decision. Don't be tied up by just one person or a tiny majority
• No. 7: With emphasis and education responsibility of All
• No. 14: "No one is in charge, all are in charge" does not reflect meaning of consensus
• No. 26: Could lead to confusion if no specified leader
• No. 30: Sometimes you need someone in charge
• No. 31: What is consensus? 8-1? 7-2? or 9-0?
• No. 48: As above but consultation should resolve
• No. 62: Can this really work effectively?

Proposal 5:

Each ARC Secretariat will call ARC Campfires/Conferences and General Meetings

• No reservations

Proposal 1:

The Church is all its people.

• Not absolute of catholicism
• motherhood statement". In terms of "is" the Church cannot be anything else

Proposal 2:

People are longing for a stronger, more visible Christian emphasis on love, Not law.

• can't really speak for "people"

Proposal 3:

Hierarchical Church structures need to be reformed to let us all own our Church.

• No. 2: As long as this does not preclude decision-making
• No. 12: Begin sentence with "Some"
• No. 14: Begin with "Hierarchical/Patriarchal:
• No. 47: But how, without chaos?
• No. 50: "own"? Applies to smaller churches, I would think

Proposal 4:

Central control dominated by one culture delivers injustices.

• No. 2: A meaningless proposition
• No. 12: Not clear meaning! In a mono-cultural small community or society injustice need not necessarily follow
• No. 14: "one culture" needs clarification/better expression
• No. 27: Not necessarily always the case
• No. 50: I probably agree but meaning needs clarification
• No. 55: Is it thought a mix of cultures would deliver justice? Or compromise? Too broad to fit one of the options

Proposal 5:

The Church should encourage modern scientific in investigation as integral to God’s evolving universe.

• No. 6: Would Not ********(illegible word) "modern science", whatever is meant by that, as emphasis on contemporary knowledge scholarship
• No. 55: Depending on the purpose, and the independence of scientists involved

Proposal 6:

It is important that the people elect their own Bishops.

• No. 6: They have campaigns, a la Presidency/PM?
• No. 7: After a process of being well informed
• No. 10: It is also important that members do not carry the day, for a Bishop cannot work without the full support of his clergy
• No. 14: People could elect "popular" person not one "qualified". Needs clarification. Could present as in Proposal 7
• No. 27: The people who elect need to be informed
• No. 28: Information re candidates needed
• No. 33: People to include clergy and religious
• No. 38: Could be too much like voting in NRMA Directors. Too little is known of candidates.
• No. 41: Difficult to know how parisioners would know would-be candidates
• No. 42: How could this work?
• No. 43: I would be happy to have an interim electoral college of proportionate members from deaneries representing laity and priests
• No. 45: Do not need bishops!
• No. 46: The leadership qualities of the bishop need to be scrutinised
• No. 48: What if people are given biased information e.g. censorship/controls through local pressure groups?
• No. 50: I would probably agree for smaller local or national churches but not for international churches
• No. 50: Depending on process

Proposal 7:

It is important that the people participate in decisions to set up, amalgamate or close Parishes.

• No. 24: Participating members should increase
• No. 28: Final decision needs to be made otherwise another talkfest
• No. 60: If adequate preparation be given to people
• No. 62: Through participation of elected Parish Pastoral Councils NOT practical to seek participation of everyone

Proposal 8:

It is important that the people participate in major building/financial decisions.

• No. 6: Need to see how could implement
• No. 8: People with competence to do so
• No. 14: It is important. Be definite - people are to participate. It is our money!!
• No. 28: Final decisions need to be made - otherwise talkfest
• No. 31: An accountable financial committee to be delegated
• No. 41: Committee would need to be appointed to make decisions
• No. 62: Again - through elected Parish Pastoral Councils

Proposal 9:

It is important that people who are elected to Church Councils participate in the decision making.

• No. 14: They do now. But PP's have legal rights over which laity have no power.Should be PP's to have legal rights with people
• No. 28: Who elects Council?
• No. 52: Replace "participate" with "have a deliberative voice"

Proposal 1:

The principle of an informed conscience must always be respected.

• No. 4: If they have expertise in the field.
• No. 26: The principle of the primacy of an informed conscience must always be respected.
• No. 28: Most Catholics not concerned about informing their consciences.
• No. 44: No need for "an". Statement is universal.
• No. 56: There is absolute good and evil.

Proposal 2:

All Catholics, female and male, should have equal opportunity to assume responsibilities in the Church.

• No. 2: What does this proposition mean? What responsibilities?
• No. 24: The injustice to existing ******(illegible) priests should be dealt with first.
• No. 50: An oversimplified statement

Proposal 3:

Freedom of speech and enquiry applies in the Church as much as in secular society.

• No. 2: Surely within the context of the Church's belief?
• No. 12: It should apply more visibly in the Church (as the City of God) than in any secular society. The Church should be a "light to the nations", a model of freedom and justice.
• No. 14: Be specific - "Australian" secular society.
• No. 24: So many clergy and nuns and lay people continuously hurt others by "Participating"
• No.47: Freedom of speech and enquiry should apply in the Church etc.

Proposal 1:

Liturgy should reflect the culture and modes of expression of local communities.

• No. 6: Communities are heterogeneous and this needs to be part of expression.
• No. 14: Should have regard to tradition.
• No. 23: Where local culture conflicts with Christian values or meaning?
• No. 36: The liturgy around the world is always home.
• No. 38: Within reason and faith symbols
• No. 55: Reserve judgement. Could become rather amorphous depending on definition of local community and whether you include communities within a community.
• No. 60: Some communities are stuck in the Good Old days

Proposal 2:

The Third Rite of reconciliation should be re-introduced.

• No. 10: It's already there. Restrictions on its use are what should be modified.
• No. 35: More correctly - "Should be expanded to include..."
• No. 50: Has this rite been suppressed?

Proposal 3:

Criteria for Ordination should be reviewed.

• No. 61: But not as being done in U.S.A.

Proposal 4:

Inclusive language should be adopted in all liturgical texts.

• No. 4: Sometimes can trivialise the content.
• No. 14: Add "based on Australian English". To be linked to Australian English (NotUSA/UK etc) - big cultural difference
• No. 22: It is up to the particular community to decide this. No discrimination should exist if one particular group wishes not to use exclusive language and stick with traditional language. Possibly different versions of liturgical texts should exist in order to cater for this?
• No. 26: This, of course, refers to texts that are not specifically male or female
• No. 28: Care here - preserve the literary purity
• No. 36: It can dumb down the text
• No. 50: Questions the "all". Needs further exploration
• No. 55: Haven't a strong opinion one way or the other. Neither approve or disapprove