I AM the priest referred to in liturgy columnist Elizabeth Harrington’s comments (CL 28/10/07) regarding a vestment featured in a photograph on the front page of the Geelong Advertiser, following the AFL premiership victory of the Geelong Football Club in late September.
As was correctly pointed out in last week’s edition of the Leader, the occasion to which she referred was an ecumenical service, not a Mass.
Nor was the chasuble worn during the service. Rather it was light-heartedly placed over me by others at the conclusion of a most prayerful service attended by a full (600-plus) congregation.
The columnist wrote that it may have been a “well-meaning attempt to be ‘relevant'”.
Well, yes, it was most “relevant”, as the premiership brought enormous joy to thousands of Geelong residents and supporters, many of whom carry severe daily burdens of all kinds, and they thanked God for this long-awaited happiness.
This was not simply a celebration of a football premiership – it was a celebration of a city and a community.
Those are some of “the facts” not included in the column, written after receiving a phone call from someone whose identity is unknown to me and who had never taken the trouble to contact me to clarify the background of the supposedly “offending” photograph.
While some readers may think my annoyance at the column is making a mountain out of a molehill, the publication of the comments highlights a major area of difficulty for many of the aging and diminishing number of priests who are daily called upon to carry heavier liturgical, pastoral and administrative burdens.
The escapades of self-appointed “liturgical police” who take it upon themselves to advise either Church authorities or public media, such as The Catholic Leader, of perceived liturgical transgressions without first taking their difficulty to the priest concerned is a continuing source of burdensome irritation to many priests, even the more conservative (like me!).
These informants” bask in their anonymity, and too often authorities and media give such tactics totally unjustified credibility by undertaking comment or corrective action which fail to follow any proper process of determining “the facts of the case” pertinent to the legitimacy or otherwise of the complaint.
Many, if not most, priests in Australia today are undertaking increasing pastoral responsibility – in my case, two parishes, three hospitals and five schools.
The possibility that such “liturgical police” should be given untested credibility, whether by the Catholic press or by Church authorities, adds yet another unnecessary burden to us all.
FR KEVIN DILLON
PARISH PRIEST,
St Mary of the Angels Basilica,
Geelong, Vic
