"Anti-Vatican?"

We received a note from a student parishioners here at St. Thomas. One line just made me angry. In Part, it read, "I was often troubled by homilies I heard at your church, mostly from Fr. Miller, hearing anti-traditional Catholic sentiments and even ANTI-VATICAN sentiments at times..." I publish my homilies on this website and on our parish website and this is the first time anyone has ever alleged that I'm anti-Vatican. Now, admittedly, the man admits that he has a myopic vision of church since he is from the diocese of Peoria. Would you believe that he requests a "return to a more traditional Catholic service and a focus on the entire faith, not a selected version of it?" So, we are supposed to celebrate the holy mass (a MUCH more catholic term than "service, by the way. Protestants have services. We have mass/liturgy/eucharist.) like he wants it to be done in the diocese of Peoria so that we can focus on the entire faith, not a selected version of it.

But, aside from the proof that what the current generation of students needs is a class in logic, I came to a stark realization while reading this. I'm offended that someone thinks I'm not squarely on the side of the Vatican. And, I think that the bias of this kid is easily shown by the fact that he thinks my pastor is more traditional/conservative than I am. I'm not sure what his measuring stick is but he needs a new one.

But, is it a bad thing that I want to be identified with the (so called) conservatives? Is it bad that, of all the things I've been called in three years of priesthood, the two terms that have been most hurtful were "anti-traditional" and "anti-vatican"?

Am I getting old and grumpy?

Why is is that when I read sentences like "Members of Parish church design committees sometimes suggest that the tabernacle makes the church Catholic; not, apparently, the Catholics assembled there nor the Catholic liturgy celebrated there" it makes me so angry that I could just spit blood? I read this sentence in a publication recently and I couldn't help but ask myself, "Is it possible for a catholic to think that the tabernacle AND the people AND the liturgy are all important?

What does Vatican II say that we might want to focus on? Doesn't it stress that God is present in the people and the priest but pre-eminantly in the eucharist?

Why do I feel like Charlie Brown running towards the football that Peppermint Patty is holding whenever I start to read these articles?

Get ready for the circus

The rumor is that Pope Benedict's new encyclical (his first one, really) will be out this week, perhaps on Friday. The opponents of Benedict have been looking for a reason to hate him since he was elevated. They tried to make the issue with the document about homosexuals in seminary but it wasn't really from him and some of them even noticed a bit of reticence on the part of Benedict in his signature. This new document is undeniably a statement that is his and, I am afraid, will be the ultimate oppertunity for them to make quasi-intellictual arguments to prove that the Holy Father, the successor of Peter, is "closed minded", "mean spirited", etc. So, here's a challenge to the church. Read the document before you read the commentaries. Let the pope make the point before Andrew Greeley says how mean he is