Now here’s some real vandalism against a church, but you won’t hear it called a hate crime or get national attention because of the vandals’ motives: The vandals were pro-abortion.
Vandals spray-painted a statue of the Virgin Mary outside a Cambridge church this weekend and put a crown made of coat hangers on her head. The statue sits between the church and rectory, where it has been for more than 20 years. Near it is a plaque reading, “In loving memory of the unborn victims of abortion,” which was placed by a local Knights of Columbus council. The vandalism, which also included “Get yr religion off our lives!” spray-painted on the driveway in front of the church, occurred sometime during the day on Saturday.
Ah yes, the tolerant and loving blue-state left. But I just don’t understand it: I thought only right-wing Christians were full of hate; after all we’re homophobes and woman-haters.
Now hereomment_id>21902
sgandt@earthlink.net
4.156.27.85
2004-11-29 22:18:48
2004-11-30 02:18:48
“‘If anything, we tend to be more of a progressive church,’ said Collins.”
How about that. The good Father is dumbstruck by this ghastly hate crime because the parish is on the “progressive” side.
Want to prevent this from happening again, Padre? Isn’t the solution clear? Capitulate completely to the demands of the hatemongers! Don’t bother with this half-a**ed “more of a progressive church” crap. You’ll only get both sides shooting at you that way. Better to join the hate criminals and prevent the costly vandalism and put up with the slings and arrows coming from the reactionary right-wing preconciliar nutcases, don’t you think?
I mean, you don’t want to have to get up in front of your parishioners and ask them to shell out to correct vandalism you could have prevented by making the “right” decision in the first place, do you?
Where is the Bishop when these heretical statements are made. Can’t he get quoted and the offenders duly rebuked?
OK, I like to hope.
People like to quote some scripture passages but apparently are ignorant of others, apparently. We are not supposed to participate OR CONDONE sins silently. I wish people would read scripture……
I still don’t see why folks are blaming the parishioners—or even the pastor—for the desecration of a statue of Our Lady, dedicated to the massacre of unborn babies. It’s astounding to me.
Once again the so-called “orthodox” folks are doing far more harm than good. And it’s pretty sad that the “power of the blog” proponents take the secular press as their gospel.
…reactionary right-wing preconciliar nutcases???? Wow, there’s some charity for you.
I wasn’t aware one had to be a reactionary right-wing preconciliar nutcase to think abortion was a problem…..
Interesting comment. Wanna explain further??
Well I would have that it was self explanatory. Its a pretty simple question. However if I need to be break it down into even more simplistic terms to help you grasp it…
Dom doesn’t say more vandalism. He says here’s some real vandalism. The suggestion being that what happened to the Cathedral of St Paul wasn’t “really vandalism”. I wanted to find out if that was what was meant. I could be wrong in that interpretation.
See I would find it absolutely appalling that anyone might suggest that what happened at the Cathedral wasn’t vandalism.
Thus the question.
Dom,
“Now hereyperbole.
Kelly,
I don’t think anyone’s blaming the priest or the parishioners for the vandalism. But I do think the priest’s attitude is problematic. Rather than confront the evil of the vandals’ attitude, he’s implying that if only they knew that the parish was sympathetic to their viewpoint, they wouldn’t have attacked them. Whether the parish really is sympathetic to the viewpoint, the priest is implying it is. And since it’s his own words I don’t have to take the secular press’s words for as gospel.
Michigancatholic –
Dom’s right – I was using satire and hyperbole. I tend to go overboard when I get on a roll, which I think I did here, and I apologize for any misunderstanding that resulted from my off-the-leash rant.
And you’re absolutely right – one certainly doesn’t have to be a “reactionary right wing preconciliar nutcase” to be pro-life.
Only conservative people commit hate crimes…like the six fascists in Wisconsin apparently….the hunters……but liberal activists don’t do hate crimes….no way………it must have been a bunch of right-wingers dressed and acting like libs that did this…yeah….how else can you explain it….I mean it’s such an acourant parish……BTW I wonder if the church will be exorcised??
au courant.
…like the six fascists in Wisconsin apparently…the hunters…
I’m assuming sarcasm, Peter…? But I still don’t understand your comment.
While the facts in this case are still murky, apparently it was an argument about a tree stand and trespassing on private land. Racial epithets may have been employed as well.
All six killed were Catholics. The shooter is Hmong. He may also be Catholic, as many of the Hmong here in Wisconsin are.
I doubt that the conservative, liberal or fascist labels entered into it. It sounds like it began as a verbal exchange that provoked a reaction out of all proportion – the systematic hunting down and shooting of six people, some in the back…
“Sounds like some serious poo-ing to me.”
Quite the contrary. I admit my initial reaction to the St. Paul story was scepticism about the allegation that the damage ran to thousands of dollars. More reading has persuaded me that damage costing that much is perfectly plausible. But if that much damage was caused, then I think it’s reasonable to be sceptical about the claim that it was caused by trads performing an “exorcism” or a “reconsecration.” Those rituals simply don’t cause that kind of damage.
“I admit my initial reaction to the St. Paul story was scepticism about the allegation that the damage ran to thousands of dollars.”
Hence the statement about poo-pooing.
“But if that much damage was caused, then I think itATA[
Dissidents might bother to spread a bunch of oil around and then frame someone. Probably this needs to be checked further. I’m still skeptical.
“Dissidents might bother to spread a bunch of oil around and then frame someone.”
Nice conspiracy theory…..reminds me of a “hanging chad” issue in 2000. It is totally ludicrous to think that, unless you are just being difficult.
Cam
BTW, what did those people want to ment_date>2004-12-01 12:19:03
2004-12-01 16:19:03
Ah, yes. Bishop ressentiment is alive and well. Very productive.
That’s because many times their sentiment toward us is less than decent as demonstrated in myriad ways—the child abuse thing, the lack of proper teaching, the disobedience to Rome, etc. etc.
They have done this to themselves, Bryan. We would like to respect them and look up to them, if only they would “let us.” It’s really sick when you think about it.
They have done this to themselves, Bryan. We would like to respect them and look up to them, if only they would 217;m convinced that the ressentiment mentality that I see so often around here is only contributing to the problem. Fr. Groeschel has frequently said that reform starts with each one of us. Perhaps I am incredibly naive or idealistic. There is an old saying, however, “It’s better to light a candle than to curse the darkness”. I see an awful lot of darkness and cursing going on. You can roast me for this post if you want, but that’s what I think about all of this.
It’s not “continual doom and gloom,” Bryan. It’s HISTORY and it’s unfortunate. NONE of it should ever have happened. Period.
On the other hand, we’ve been being yanked around for better than 40 years, and at least it’s out of the dark now. Denial is a thing of the past, unless a person really wills to deny.
Denial is a sad thing really—an attempt to prop up belief by willfully ignoring the truth. The church deserves better-the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the Deposit of Faith is worthy of belief even in sad and sorry circumstances like we have now. Nothing is gained by refusal to be truthful.
Yes, reform really does begin with each one of us. We place our faith in God and in the Church He founded, and not in those individuals who would pervert the mission of the Church. Are those sometimes bishops? Yes, they are. Historically this has been true; in contemporary times it is also true.
First off
Bryan, today you are my hero!! You are going to make an eloquent priest.
Seamole
Where to begin… You really don’t know a thing about our Archbishop do you? Not that you need to. From what I’ve witnessed , an informed and intelligent opinion isn’t necessary to comment on a blog.
But to make such a hateful, vile and offensive statement about a man of God who has served the Church and our diocese so well… its a statement of pure ego. But then to have that statement celebrated by others on this thread, you people just don’t get it.
I’ll give you props on this though. At least you’re direct. As opposed to the passive aggressive commentaries made about our bishop, Cathedral and rector that I’ve been reading. Others just nibble around the edges of what they truly believe. What you and they believe is that what happened at the Cathedral was justified and righteous. That groups like Catholics against Sacrilege and the Ushers of the Eucharist are championing your cause. To eradicate evil from our churches and fix what the weak willed bishops won’t . At least you have the guts to state what you feel.
That has been the battle cry of every schismatic since the dawn of the Church. The people here that celebrate these actions, or the statements made about Archbishop Flynn, can be counted in their numbers.
Having the temerity to actually think that bishop may be wrong about something isn’t not schismatic, but that’s neither here nor there. I do think Seamole’s comment was over the top and too strong.
I also don’t think the Ushers of the Eucharist should be lumped in with those who vandalized the cathedral, especially since they so quickly and emphatically denounced what was done.
My main concern in bringing attention to the St. Paul story was the ridiculous assertion that vandalizing a church is evidence of an anti-gay hate crime, not an anti-Catholic one. That’s the calssically narcissistic view. It’s always about me, even when it’s about you.
Granted the Ushers did not lay themselves down in the aisles at the last sash sighting. But I don’t know where you are seeing the denouncement. All Pence said was that “Nobody wants to see church property damaged in the name of an exorcism.” Unless he’s made further statements that denounce the action, but I haven’t seen them.
I’ve never suggested that thinking a bishop may be wrong about something is schismatic. What I am saying, and not suggesting, is this: Taking actions with the intention of undermining a bishop’s authority is schismatic. So is celebrating or defending that action.
If the bishop is in union with Rome, that is.
The denouncement was in the original article I linked. That statement was strong enough.
Jaime,
What you and they believe is that what happened at the Cathedral was justified and righteous.
Nope. Never said that. You’ve set up a straw man with my name on it.
If you remember correctly, several months ago I browbeat an “Usher of the Eucharist” on this site so severely that Dom threatened to ban me.
I’m not taking the side of the vandal, or of anyone who would use force to accomplish what ought to be accomplished by episcopal moral authority.
That said, it’s the archbishop whose dismal failure to apply the unwavering teaching and practice of the Church from the time of the Apostles is creating the occasion for sin, and inviting the faithful to perceive a “sede vacante”. (This is no excuse for anyone to sin or to attack Holy Mother Church; that only makes a bad situation worse.)
a man of God who has served the Church and our diocese so well
He has failed to perform the bare minimum of the apostolic duties of his office, allowing the Eucharist to be assaulted and encouraging schism and disunity among the Church in his territory. He has not served the Church or your diocese well at all. He should be deposed immediately.
such a hateful, vile and offensive statement
Not a shred of hate on my part. If I offended you, I apologize.
Seamole,
“From their spineless, disobedient, Satan-enabling is. And it is your opinion.
“If he wons, clergy and laity, God and country, Jesus and Mary.
If you can’t see a qualitative difference between people who used sacramentals in a foolish and mentally deficient way in an apparent attempt to oppose sodomy and heresy, and people who crowned the Blessed Mother with coat hangers in an apparent attempt to support abortion and repression, then perhaps there’s a big wooden herring in your eye.
to attack a bishop in a most heinous way, which you did
Please. I didn’t use pans and cauldrons. I merely expressed my opinion on a matter necessary to the faith in a forum that the sacred pastors, i.e. the Vatican, can read.
The matter is Flynn’s tenure. Specifically, it must end immediately.
Harry Flynn is being disobedient to canon law, the recent orders of the Vatican, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. I am assuming, charitably, that the disobedience arises from spinelessness because the only logical alternatives are dementia and heresy (the last which incurs automatic excommunication and loss of ecclesiastical office). This disobedience enables Satan in his work begun at Gethsemane to mock, insult, ridicule and assault Him Who Is Love itself, his work begun in Acts to sow disunity among Christ’s faithful, his work begun in the Gospel to persecute and malign those who hold the Christian faith.
You are the pot calling the kettle black.
No, I’m calling the archbishop bad. And he’s bad, Cam. Bad! If he won’t defend the Eucharist, he’s got to go. Plenty of potential Protomartyrs of Minnesota out there for the Pope to choose from.
Here we are discussing a recent act of oppression against the Church in Boston, and we’re back to talking about internal strife in Minneapolis. By their fruits you shall know them.