"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

It's Like Sophie's Choice but with Baseball

This Dad should get very little for Father's Day this year. I'm not saying he should get nothing because he does eventually stop the stroller but...come on.

Update: It looks like MLB won't let folks embed it. Don't know why but it probably has something to do with lawyers. So here's the link.

http://larrybrownsports.com/youtubeage/dad-baseball-kid-baby-stroller-video/222214


In the end, he can always point to this Dad and say at least he's not as bad as him.


*subhead*Bye bye.*subhead*

Your Ad Here

102 comments:

Patrick Archbold said...

I duplicated Deacon Sandy's search for "Fine Vestments," as you will note in the search window on this screenshot. When you click on the picture he chose, you get what you see in the screenshot. How did he "not know it was Pope Benedict?"

Patrick Archbold said...

He cannot have it both ways. You cannot post something on a VERY PUBLIC forum like YouTube and expect that no one will react. He is neither a victim nor a martyr; he is simply a coward.
I called and left a voice mail last night. I am still pondering sending him my own response to his juvenile and insipid remarks:
http://benedictgal-lexorandilexcredendi.blogspot.com/

Patrick Archbold said...

Also, I did find the red shoe picture he used, under "Fine Vestments" -- many pages into the search. When you click on the image, it describes it as a photo of Benedict, and then gives the source site for the photo.

Patrick Archbold said...

Divisive? No, Deacon Dusty, I was going for derisive. And you make it too easy. Really. Stop playing at Fisher-Price Play Church, and GROW UP.

Patrick Archbold said...

I did find it under "Fine Vestments," but many pages into the search. guess what pops up when you click on the image though? THE DESCRIPTION! Here's my screenshot...

Patrick Archbold said...

That image didn't even come up in my search of that term (it may have been further down than I looked). But the fact that those red shoes have often been mistakenly labeled as "Prada" and that he had just mentioned Prada as one of those designer labels is highly suspicious!

Patrick Archbold said...

Shame on Benedict. Shame on him for his lavish lifestyle. All hail the humble rags of Lady Gaga, Jay-Z, Dennis Rodman, and all others who call us to truly model what it means to be understanding towards less fortunate people.

Patrick Archbold said...

You gents are having a tough time with users removing videos.

Patrick Archbold said...

I'm a regular reader of CMR, have recommended it to many friends over the years, but I'm not much for commenting as I'm usually chasing after my toddler or running kids to activities. I have to say, I think it is a lot to go after this man by name again, with parish contact info attached.

And I think the other commenters need to take a good, hard look at themselves. You do not, in fact, know if he was lying and you need to stop and remember that you are speaking about another human being made in the image of God. Just out of curiosity, if Our Lord was standing next to you, watching you type "liar", "self-absorbed", "lacking self awareness", "hypocrite", "coward", would He be proud if your work? How about when you typed that this Deacon needed to grow up and reevaluate his vocation? Are you people serious?

Here is how I google: I type in a search term, look through a few pages of images, and if I don't see what I need, I refine. Is it possible that he typed in fine vestments, either saw a picture of red shoes or was reminded of another picture, and did a further search? Isn't that possible? Instead of just assuming the worst about him? I can respectfully disagree with his previous video and I can even not approve of this homily without resorting to name calling and viciousness. I'm really ashamed of the other commenters.

Patrick Archbold said...

Red Riding Hood??

Patrick Archbold said...

Although I do think Deacon Sandy is misguided, I also think that some of the commenters can be a little more charitable too (which is generally true for any blog/website).

It is hard to express one's dislike for a particular progressive agenda, without coming off as being hateful towards an individual. It sounds to me that this particular parish is associating itself with a particular community of people (or agenda), and disregarding the individual. I think that if we all focused more on the individual, then we can get past generalizations.

Patrick Archbold said...

Who has the accusatory, divisive and judgmental tone here? Deacon Sandy is the one who started this whole thing with his accusatory, divisive and judgmental tone towards +Benedict.

Patrick Archbold said...

But that "defense" is just as damning. Aside from the gross ignorance that is displays from a Deacon and "parish director" it also demonstrates that he was willing to find some "random" picture as he would characterize it and pass judgment on the individual therein without knowing who it was or the circumstances.


Again, such a defense just doesn't add up and no matter what the onus is on him to make amends for this misstep of his, calculated or not.

Patrick Archbold said...

So he deserves to be name called and shamed? I'm just curious. It feels to me like this site is now actively looking for reasons to shame him and I guarantee in my life, I could not hold up to such scrutiny. I don't know many that could.

Patrick Archbold said...

I have a pair of Red Ecko Shoes, though they don't go well with many of my outfits : )

Patrick Archbold said...

No, the name-calling is not warranted. We can still be respectful but direct in pointing out the weakness in his position.

Patrick Archbold said...

I second what Stu and Ben have said in response. First of all, if you actually believe that the man is telling the truth, then you are hopelessly naive. Second, even if he did not who he was mocking, he still is mocking or at least publicly chastising someone for their choice in accessories, and I might add without knowing what the man is wearing.


And yes, it's always rich when folks like you show up in the comment boxes and deride other people in their tone all the while employing the nasty, accusatory rhetoric while bathing in self righteousness. If Jesus was standing next to you would you be comfortable declaring how "ashamed" you are of all us lesser human beings, or are you just like the Pharisee who declares how grateful he is that he not like the rest of these poor sinners?

Patrick Archbold said...

I find all this cruel and unfair of Deacon Sandy to be just so...so unfair and cruel! Stand tall and be brave, Sandykins! I will instruct all my fellow sisters to light incense for you tonight during their Buddhist meditation hour, and align their chakras to the Third Insight of Cosmic Oneness!

Oh, and I'll bake some cookies too!

Patrick Archbold said...

"Me" generation+willful ignorance+relativism=dissenting deacon.

Patrick Archbold said...

What is interesting is that there are many photos of Benedict in red shoes, but this is about the only one that shows the sash with his coat of arms. He wanted to be "clear" to the parishioners who he was talking about.

Patrick Archbold said...

How stupid does he think we are? Sheesh.

Patrick Archbold said...

Just in time to pray to St. Joseph for all fathers!

Patrick Archbold said...

I believe the term we are looking for here is "duplicitous."

Patrick Archbold said...

The Internets can be so cruel sometimes. There are two ways to avoid harsh critiques of liturgical abuse. 1) Don't record your liturgies if you plan to do something offensive or, even better, 2) Don't do offensive things in your liturgies.

Patrick Archbold said...

For number 2, there should be a rule or something that forbids that.

Patrick Archbold said...

As a permanent deacon, I'm angry, and embarrassed that one of my brethren is being this disingenuous. Did he not pay any attention to the promises at ordination ? Don't like Benedict? Don't like Francis? Fine, that's between you, your confessor and God. When you are at the ambo, you speak for THE CHURCH. We don't trash the Pope from the pulpit. Any Pope. Goes with the gig. Don't like it? Poor discernment on your part, and poor judgement on the part of those responsible for putting you in the position. If you're unclear on that, check with your diocesan Vicar for Clergy. Or the bishop to whom you swore respect and obedience.

Patrick Archbold said...

He/She's baaaaack...

Patrick Archbold said...

I'm confused by this other homily of Deacon Sandy's: http://youtu.be/UIQL-yjekBI

Start at 7:30 and pay attention at 7:50 to the image he displays in his power point presentation of the cardinals. It is unclear whether the image is supposed to correspond with his commentary about "gays and lesbians" who are "hated in many places" or the "women in our church who are rejected and kept out of the pasture."

He is either unabashedly and purposefully insinuating that cardinals hate women and/or reject women, or he is so steeped in "the spirit of Vatican II" that he is unaware that he should be sensitive to being interpreted as being rebellious against the authority of those in the hierarchy. Worse, I think many will watch this thinking that he's advocating for women in the priesthood.

Or, could it be possible that he is not as "up" on current events as a shepherd of a flock ought to be (despite demonstrating his technological aptitude and habit of keeping up on current events in this very homily).

Perhaps he intended the image of the cardinals to be an image of the shepherds he was speaking of, but he was in control of the slide changes. Even if it was a faux pas, he should have apologized and clarified immediately.

At the very least, he was unclear and irresponsible in his presentation. Why was this video posted? He must think his homily and PP presentation were an example of effective communications. Should we be blamed for misinterpreting his homily when we are taking it at face value?

If he had not intended the picture of the cardinals to be on display while saying that "gays are hated" and "women are rejected," but messed up the timing in such a way as this, he should never had posted it, especially without clarification.

Patrick Archbold said...

I'm calling a big bravo Sierra on this guy. I tried his search, no image like that... sorry.
He should also know why the pope is supposed to wear red shoes (blood of the martyrs).
What a clown. I hope their bishop forbids the novus ordo and forces them to implement the TLM only.

I bet Karl Keating is running to deacon sandys defenses now

Patrick Archbold said...

Sadly, rules are no obstacle for those who lack common sense and good taste.

Patrick Archbold said...

Hang in there, Dan. I'm a revert myself. I now travel an hour every sunday (early) for the sacrifice of the TLM.
Go more than a few months, and ignore the few crabby people there.
The TLM will help I think, like it did me

Patrick Archbold said...

A fruit of Paul VI (among other things)...

Patrick Archbold said...

I think its fair to say that Deacon Sandy is having a bad week.
Hey deacon sandy...., confiteor deo... (I bet you never recite this one during mass)

Patrick Archbold said...

another commenter noted, but it bears repeating:


The pope's red shoes represent the blood of martyrs.


He's standing on the blood of martyrs, who died for the true Church, for which he is also called to give his own life.

Patrick Archbold said...

It didn't have to be ANY particular pope, but it was a pope. And that was the point.
But the issue began when he stated “here’s how bad it gets. In our church” while the graphic shows the red shoes of the Pope and the
congregation snickers and laughs without a single response from him or the priest.
But he went even further, stating, after the transcript he references, "And some, unlike us secular folks, need to wear the red shoes and flowing white linen, have the lace and have the gold threaded vestments because it’s an issue of self-esteem and lifting themselves up as well.”
So his response simply was not acceptable.

Patrick Archbold said...

He needs to preach and apology and retraction for what was shown and said about others wearing vestments. It was not germane to his sermon and should not have been said. It was obviously a slight to hierarchy in my view.

Patrick Archbold said...

Well, we know there is no greater sin in these United States than to be "judgmental" - that is calling someone out when you disagree with them and suggest they are wrong.


That said, Deacon Sandy did not ask for this level of hostility (and you know who piles on, Pat). AND there are far more powerful people doing far more dangerous things. SO, in the name of Christian charity, I would cut him some slack.


I am pretty sure that would be the Christian thing to do.

Patrick Archbold said...

As a Navy Chief Petty Officer was once quoted as saying: "I can't stop stupid, sir. I can only slow it down."

Patrick Archbold said...

Rob,
I am not being hostile. I am calling out something he publicly did in an effort to put a stop to it.

Patrick Archbold said...

Can I have some of what you are smoking?

Patrick Archbold said...

ThereseZ, I'm sorry, but I'm not at all understanding where you are coming from here. I was not objecting to Our Holy Father's shoes—in fact I love them. I was jokingly replying to Scott Eric Alt's question, "Who else wears red shoes?" I assure you I would be as honored as you to make red shoes for the Pope. I would even be honored to kneel before him and kiss his red shoes. :-)

Patrick Archbold said...

... And disingenuous.

Patrick Archbold said...

With a great office comes great responsabilities. Being a deacon is not a right, it is a call and a privilege from God. He clearly misused his responsabilities and made disgusting statements. His response is just as disgusting; how can he think anyone will believe ''that''?

Patrick Archbold said...

Sigh.

Patrick Archbold said...

The world can see that Benedict is wonderful because he's being mocked.

Patrick Archbold said...

DISGRACEFULL!!!

Patrick Archbold said...

In typical NeoCatholic fashion, Howard fails to get the point.

Patrick Archbold said...

The deacon thinks that we sucks our thumbs!!

Patrick Archbold said...

Pat, Many of the comments here, and I am sure direct messages to DS have been hostile (I do think you put his contact information up). It has provided many an opportunity to show an interesting lack of charity.

And, you know the way to deal with things is in private first (Matt 18:15-20). So it is not just about putting an end to it me thinks (you don't want to really play the same game DS did about the shoes)?

You know that I agree with you on most of this, so I am not some crank calling it out. Just sayin'. it is Lent....

Patrick Archbold said...

Did you notice about 20 seconds into this video he mentions "...Father so and so, myself, Father so and so, Jane Clare...and others who PREACH to you..."

Patrick Archbold said...

Lazy or weak priest.

Patrick Archbold said...

Yes. Apparently they allow the laity to preach at Mass.

Patrick Archbold said...

In Redemptionis Sacramentum, xix "the homily which is
given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass...should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself...He may entrust it to...but never to a lay person."

Patrick Archbold said...

I do and one of my fellow parishioners calls them my pope shoes.

Patrick Archbold said...

I didn't catch your irony, sorry.

Patrick Archbold said...

Rob
This was no private matter to be discussed privately. This was a public homily in a mass and put on the internet for all to see.

All I did was highlight what he already publicly exposed. I put his contact info and that of the diocese because I want it to stop. There has to be a price to pay for these actions. Part of that price for a public humiliation of the Pope is an equally public rebuke.

I am not responsible for how people react to the video, he is. I just made known what he wanted known. Everything was already public info, all I did was put it together.

Patrick Archbold said...

Mr. Sandy, the Papal Coat-of-Arms is clearly seen. Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder both saw it, and told Helen Keller. She could not believed what she heard and saw it herself. So I ask the question: What is the maximum effective range of an excuse?

Patrick Archbold said...

I'll admit to being slightly puzzled, really. I had to watch the pertinent part twice before I understood the problem. ..DId he REALLY suggest that Pope Benedict wore red shoes because he had self-esteem issues?? REALLY?!

Patrick Archbold said...

Why don't you know, Deacon Sandy, that our Pope Emeritus wore the red shoes? Also, why is it wrong, as you searched for fine vestments, for us to spend, set aside, money for these vestments? These vestments, if made well, can last YEARS and end up being less than the horrible polyester blend. Why is it wrong to spend money on vestments, for our priests, but yet it is OK to buy fancy projector - which if you are a good orator you don't need - or if you have purchased missals/song books you don't need? The projector and lack of kneelers are very offensive in my book. - how you had to just find "something" to bring that point home - that being our pope. Really? The fact if my family visited and had to kneel on the hard floor, because it isn't an optional posture during Eucharistic prayer here in the US, is insulting. Unless there was good reason which you don't seem to have. Really?

Patrick Archbold said...

Too bad I can only vote this "up" once.

Patrick Archbold said...

And by the way, the shoes aren't Prada like everyone says. They're made by a master cobbler who was going to gift them to whomever became pope saying, “I’m not doing this for business purposes; I want to show the quality of Italian craftsmanship.”

Even if we grant the Deacon's ignorance which is a stretch, it's shameful ignorance and he owes a big apology.

Patrick Archbold said...

UMM...the deacon at my parish is very useful. he runs the religious ed program, assists in marriage prep and baptism prep and takes a lot of the day to day headaches away from our priests. I know him and know he is a very nice and true believer. when he does preach (once a month) its about teaching children the failth, being open to life, being prolife etc. don't lump all deacons with this guy. rememeber St Francis was a permenant deacon.

Patrick Archbold said...

well ... he still does not really understand the words "mea culpa ! mea culpa ! mea culpa !"

Patrick Archbold said...

Exactly. The deacon indulged in public, ignorant, and rash judgement, hasn't genuinely apologized for it, and people are trying to pretend he's the victim. This is what Bishop Sheen would call false compassion.

Patrick Archbold said...

Archbold, look at the number of people at this mass at Good Shepherd. There are only a handful peppered in the back seats. By all the evidence, the Deacon Sandy's of the world are living on the last fumes of a dying movement. They have had their revolutionary day in the sun, but that day is over. This guy is living in the past where "giving it to the MAN" was all the rage. The irony is that they are free to attack their enemies, but when they are exposed, they run for cover under the fig leaf of victimology. Sad. Just sad.

Patrick Archbold said...

Well now you know what it feels like when Pope Francis is mocked by fellow Catholics for his public displays of humility- standing in line to get a coffee, getting a seat for his guard, driving an ordinary car.

If you think it is horrid for Catholics or anyone to make fun of Pope Benedict's red shoes (I think it's horrible), then it is equally horrid to make fun of Pope Francis car.

Quit the double standards.

Patrick Archbold said...

Considering that that image doesn't show up in a Google Images search for "fine vestments".....

Patrick Archbold said...

This man calls himself a "deacon pastor." I don't have a 1983 Code of Canon Law handy, but I'm not sure a person can be a pastor unless he is a priest. This ordained gentleman then justifies being [merely?] a "deacon pastor" so as to encourage more "laity" to be involved in the Church. Sorry, guy, you can't have it both ways. As a deacon, you are not a member of the laity, but of the hierarchy (albeit the lowest rung).


In his intro video, he speeds directly into disobedience, as well as nonsense, by stating that the congregation at his parish stands during the Eucharistic Prayer to show respect, much as they would towards the president of the U.S. Now, while the current officeholder wouldn't mind receiving the same outward obeisance this deacon wants to offer Almighty God, ought we to treat them the same? The Blessed Trinity, and especially Our Lord Jesus Christ present on the altar [see below], could be considered, at least by some Catholics elsewhere, a tad more exalted and worthy of actual adoration than the rest of creation, even more than this Menomenee Falls congregation, centered, it seems, on its own feelings.


How special that the (one or two?) bakers for the week can "feel" more involved when they see "their" bread on the altar! This deacon states that the bread is valid and "feels" it's more "symbolic." Unless this is an Eastern Rite parish (and the bareness of the "worship space," lack of visible crucifix or central tabernacle argue otherwise), "valid" means wheat flour, water, and nothing else.


As for sending home the "bread" to the shut-ins: since it's not in the form of a pathetic wafer, I wonder what they carry it (It?) in?


One glimmer of hope: the congregation was--thankfully--quite sparse.


Exsurge, Domine!

Patrick Archbold said...

For the heresy, view the other video.

Patrick Archbold said...

Canon 517 § 2 , but on the other hand we have Can 521
§ 1

Patrick Archbold said...

How does Deacon Sandy maintain his faculties to preach in Minneapolis? Each time I have seen his "homilies" they have been banal at best, rarely covering any great theological subject or teaching of the gospel. The priest sits back there taking all this in when, part of Sandy's "lecture," uses a COMMERCIAL? If I were his priest he would never preach again. He reminds me of Joel Osteen, that "magnificent" purveyor of false virtue.

Patrick Archbold said...

Don't you think this parish will have a priest when the Archdiocese of Milwaukee has enough new vocations? He is a product of the Weakland episcopacy. Deacon Sandy is obviously a kind of placeholder, regardless of what he thinks. The parish stays open even without adequate priests and with few people attending. The Deacon Sandy story is a good example of how the blogs form people in nastiness and mockery. Highly unfortunate though this may be, ignorant, indeed indefensible, nothing alleged so far is terribly grave.

Patrick Archbold said...

What is even more offensive to me than Deacon Sandra's jibes at the Pope is the nauseating phraseology he uses. "Painful and hurtful" is only one example of this mushy claptrap.

Deacon Sandra, er, Sandy, should, as they say, act like a man.

Patrick Archbold said...

Have you seen how many are in the congregation and their ages? And the point of his homily: 'don't worry'! Worry, Deacon Sandy, and then worry again.

Patrick Archbold said...

"the dark nature of the commentary, and the accusatory, divisive and judgmental tone"


What do I think? I think Unintentional Irony Alert.

Patrick Archbold said...

Deacon Sandy must have missed this helpful article from March 2013:

http://catholicexchange.com/red-shoes-and-the-room-of-tears

"Throughout Church history, the color red has been deliberately chosen to represent the blood of Catholic martyrs spilt through the centuries following in the footsteps of Christ. The red papal shoes are also linked to Christ’s own bloodied feet as he was prodded, whipped, and pushed along the Via Dolorosa on his way to his crucifixion, culminating in the piercing of his hands and feet on the cross. The red shoes also symbolize the submission of the Pope to the ultimate authority of Jesus Christ."

Patrick Archbold said...

I think the Deacon is a fine example of the dissenters in the Church who bash others and then act surprised when caught. He should be dismissed from the clerical state or otherwise sanctioned.

Patrick Archbold said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo9A7vVtDhU wow! I thought the swipe at
Pope Emeritus Benedict wasn't that bad (unnecessary and dumb, but not
awful) after Sandy explained why some wear nicer things for the glory of
God...but then he made the comments about white flowing robes and
golden tassels for their own egos and I was just shocked...like
completely. This schmuck is just a deacon, can't a bunch of K of C guys
just walk in during Mass and drag his ass out? There's gotta be a
seminarian in his first year that has more reverence and respect for God
and the Church then this idiot. ...or we could just remove the
tabernacle and burn the church down...whichever is easier at this point,
lol.. just kidding people...I the NSA is watching now, lol..

Patrick Archbold said...

Bet the archbishop hasn't removed him because it would create a schism.This is what happens if the laity is left to own devices without the direction of Holy mother church.

Patrick Archbold said...

Folks, this is all part and parcel of progressive Catholicism. Why they choose to arrogantly ridicule, defy and dissent from Church teachings, and continue to claim allegiance with the true Catholic faith, is beyond me. There are more "Deacon Sandy's" than you know. The real question is...how do they get away with it? I left at progressive parish when they made themselves clear to me. The damage they do is frightening.

Patrick Archbold said...

He is blowing the Smoke of Satan in the Church - the only issue is it deliberate or has he been deceived because his hubris and lack of humility. He is in my prayers.
Ditto to Scott Eric Alt

Patrick Archbold said...

I had to search for "fine vestments and red shoes" to get the image of B16's red shoes. Nothing like it came up with just "fine vestments." And Sandy never put red shoes and Benedict together when everybody knows he wore those red shoes. I'm afraid D. Sandy can't face his own anger at Papa.

Patrick Archbold said...

If *only* our Papa Emeritus had had the good sense to leave his stemma off the fascia, like his successor has done!

Patrick Archbold said...

Who's he kidding? Sandy's syrupy style can't hide his stabbing Benedict in the back. Imagine how those red shoes stuck in Sandy's craw each time the pope wore them.

Patrick Archbold said...

A little less show and tell and AV presentations, a lot less rambling, and a subscription to Homelitics might help

Patrick Archbold said...

how sad, I browsed through several other videos , one video was marketing the church. really poor. he must have taken an evangelism course in the seventies. he warns visitors that they will be asked to introduce themselves.


it has been recognized for over a decade that pressuring people to introduce themselves in a new church is off putting. maybe the congregation is so sparse because he has given potential visitors a reason to pass up on his parish. there is some extra bowing to and from the congregation , just silly.


I would give the guy a pass for at least trying something to keep the place alive but his passive aggressive panning of disagreements as hurtful and divisive is meretricious .

Patrick Archbold said...

Now, that's probably not the original reason the Pope has worn red shoes, but it irritates me when the added symbolism is dismissed: it's often quite valuable and it makes keeping an otherwise dispensable habit, custom, or tradition worth it. This is a case in point.

Patrick Archbold said...

He marginalizes, ridicules, ostracizes, and when he is called out on it, he plays the victim. A Communist wrote a playbook which included these tactics. His name was Alinsky. Any relation, Sandy?

Patrick Archbold said...

He's either a bigger liar than previously imagined, or a fool. My money's on both.


"I do not ask that you or anyone else agree with me – what is troubling is the dark nature of the commentary, and the accusatory, divisive and judgmental tone." You don't ask much, do you, champ? Only that we believe you are the victim of an elaborate hoax, when in fact your pre-recorded actions are your own accusers.



(And one more thing: to call someone judgmental is to BE judgmental.)

Patrick Archbold said...

Schmenz - the deacon IS acting like a man. A girly man. "...painful and hurtful..." What a wimp.

Patrick Archbold said...

No, I am not buying his excuses. If he really doesn't know who might wear a white cassock and red shoes and a fascia with a coat of arms, then he really is a fool. I suppose it is possible that a permanent deacon is an absolute ignoramus, but it surely is unlikely.

The pope emeritus is a beloved grandpapa to me and to many others. I not only respect him and the office he held at the time the image was captured, I love him dearly. How can Deacon Sandy expect us to ignore this affront? I ask an apology from him. To use his own language, I find this very "painful and hurtful", not to mention "divisive" and "judgmental".

Patrick Archbold said...

I do think the persecution of Deacon Sandy has been way over the top. A very young person I know well has gotten way too into attacking Deacon Sandy and the whole thing is just sad to me now.

Patrick Archbold said...

"Persecution"? Are you serious? Deacon Sandy very publicly ridiculed a Pope..or just some other guy in a white cassock with red shoes and a white fascia with a coat of arms. I am sorry if some young person is attacking him. I am in no way attacking him. He is a grown man and a cleric of the Catholic Church. As such, he has no business sneering at a man who has given his all to God and to the Church. A man who has been a priest for Yeah, I think THAT is sad.

Patrick Archbold said...

I absolutely love Pope Benedict. As I said on the other recent Deacon Sandy post, DS's actions are lamentable and indefensible... but not actually grave. He is an obvious product of Weakland's episcopacy and when there are enough priests in that diocese the current bishop will be pleased to have a real priest pastor at that parish again. In the meantime the parish remained open. This deacon has way more people scorning him on the blogs than he has sitting in his parish apparently, one does imagine that this may have been painful for him, and I do not happen to think this was a necessary or a glorious episode for the blogs or that my young friend is helped to grow as a man by his role in the mass mockery of DS.

Patrick Archbold said...

Jdub--yes. You are right.

Patrick Archbold said...

Not grave? Insulting and mocking a man who sat in the chair of Peter for being materialistic? And comparing himself and his parish to that man and patting himself on the back for being better and less materialistic? Yes, that is grave matter that all Catholics should reject.

We don't get to say that it is someone else's fault when we act like a..well, horribly, towards a man who has done nothing to deserve it. Has he free will or has he not? He has born false witness towards his neighbor. That is objectively grave sin. And no one told him to broadcast his idiocy..that was his choice. Having broadcast on youtube his calumnious accusations towards PBXVI, he has no defense that we are all just mean and judgmental. And, no, I am not buying the..I had no idea that dude in a white cassock and red shoes and a white fascia with a COAT of ARMS was not just some random dude whose image just showed up. Please!

I do not mock him..HE mocked Pope Benedict XVI. He should apologize, and do it publicly. I demand an apology for his behavior. He is a cleric of the Catholic Church. I do say he should be ashamed, and I will not apologize for saying that. Perhaps if he took responsibility for his actions, your young friend could respect that. I hope that he would. I guarantee you that I would.

Patrick Archbold said...

You evidently are not strongly grounded in the Church, common-sense, or reality.

Your argument is thin.

We are called to admonish those who sin, and in this case an ordained minister of the Church has sought to belittle and ridicule the pope emeritus, both in a Catholic church but also then to do so as publicly is possible by elevating it to YouTube. He knew what he was doing, and you should know it too.

Last year we had a Jesuit speaker address our parish after supper. Before supper started he, our pastor, and 3-4 parish progressives stood around extolling thenew Pope Francis (which is absolutel fine). However, our pastor made a crack that at least he won't wear the red shoes and all of them roared with laughter, mentioning Benedict between gasps for breath. They thought it was pretty funny.

Believe me, Catholic liberals have been ridiculing his read shoes and other papal dress for years. They ALL know about them. This deacon has been caught in a lie, and I suspect you know it.

As another commenter above pointed out, liberals always attack the word choice or tone when they lack an argument of substance. You betray yourselves, Jdub and ELizD. Youshould be concerned about the insult to our pope emeritus.

Patrick Archbold said...

I second both Pat and Scott, particularlly that a public action requires a public rebuke and, eventually, a public apology or where appropriate, a recantation. This has ever been so in the Church. If Deacon Sandy (sorry, the very title makes me laugh...where has gone our sense of proper decorum for ordained clergy?) had done this in private, no one but his parishioners would even know about it and the "rules of engagement" wwould be scaled down to require an apology from the ambo at the church where the offense occurred - after he had been rebuiked in the churc hin view of the other parishioners. Unfortunately, I bet there's no one at this church who would do that.

Scott's paricularly good contribution is to correctly bring in Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen's view. Rob, you and your "amen corner" are a transparent lot. We see right through such thin argumentation.

Sheen not only would dismiss you with a wave of his hand (a blessing very much needed, no doubt), but I suspect he'd haul in Dcn (I hoped abbreviation would help control the snickering, but no...) Sandy for major disciplinary action.

Patrick Archbold said...

Fuck him and his heretics back to Helldom!

Patrick Archbold said...

Sure Deacon; we are the judgmental and divisive people when you are the one who is causing grave scandal by voluntarily choosing to mock the Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI as you have also subjected him to laughter by your Cafeteria congregants. Your title should be stripped of your name, you are a disgrace to religion and those who admire a theologian whose academic and intellectual caliber will Never reach.

Furthermore, you add insult to injury to the American public by claiming that you do not know the identity of the Pope in the red shoes. How dare you, how dare you treat us like sheeps in misery. You are disgusting and I hope you repent for this scandalous act. Your bishop is no better!!!! All the same with you and your kind, apostasy apostasy and apostasy.

Patrick Archbold said...

Honestly, I think it was rather hilarious, and certainly a good poke at ostentation in the papacy, whether intended or not. Red shoes can symbolize all kinds of things, but you have to admit that in the context of the video, it was funny. What -- we can't laugh at the pope and the pope's finery now and then?

Patrick Archbold said...

I think that he wants to do his ministry in the best way possible. We shouldn't escalate that bullying of a deacon. Maybe our comments will have some positive respond from the deacon. But insulting him is not what Jesus teaches us.

Post a Comment