:-D
Posted on 10/16/2007 11:42:57 AM PDT by bigdcaldavis
Another outrage in San Francisco and this one is very hard to believe. As you may know, San Francisco is run by far left secular-progressives who despise the military, traditional values and religion. Not everybody in San Francisco feels that way, but certainly the power structure does. Time and again, we have brought you stories of outrageous behavior on the part of militant people living in that city.
Now, things have reached critical mass, no pun intended. Last Sunday, at the Catholic Church of the Most Holy Redeemer, Archbishop George Niederauer was celebrating mass. As part of that ritual, holy communion is given to Catholics by the celebrants. Two gay militants in bizarre dress took communion from the archbishop in an attempt to mock the mass and the man. — The people who did this are members of a militant homosexual group that runs around San Francisco dressed as nuns.
All city officials are aware of the group because in the past they have publicly demeaned Christianity. The Mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, has refused to comment.
The District Attorney, Kamala Harris, says she is waiting for a complaint to be filed.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
:-D
Guys, wait until my Geocities bandwidth resets. I made a picture and attached it to the bottom of the article. It’s sort of funny. :-D
Well, ping then!
Let’s imagine this with another religion:
The f*gs, er, I mean gay men dress up in burkas and go to a mosque to mock islam.
The result would be entertaining. And unlike with the Christian church, political authorities would be outraged and would seek to prosecute what was left of the militant qu**rs.
After his lies and efforts to smear FR with his false attacks, I don’t really care what Bill O’Reilly fakes outrage about.
Bill is as disgusting and immoral as the outrages that he promotes on his show.
Of course -- he's too busy fellating microphones.
Good ol’ Bill really goes ape over anything involving the Catholic Church. That’s really his only link to conservatism.
What the HELL would a District Attorney DO??? This is a CHURCH matter, and I’m POSITIVE that GOD did NOT like the MOCKING SACRILEGIOUS taking of Holy Communion!!!
If the priest was celebrating Mass for circus performers then giving Communion to those with face paint might have been understandable.But otherwise.....
Special punishments in Hell await those two who defiled the service and the Church...
O'Reilly has it wrong. The church has to take a stand on issues like this and not be afraid to "offend" those who might be offended but could care less, in any event. And if a priest or anyone distributing communion is unwilling to refuse the sacrament when the person receiving it is committing deliberate sacrilege in front of the priest, then the priest should reconsider the vows he took. Committing to being PC, I don't believe, is one of them.
O’Reilly has this story all wrong. The real story is that Archbishop Niederauer has been tolerating a totally gay “Catholic” parish, which was created by his predecessor Abp. Quinn about 25 years ago by sending a “gay-friendly” priest to be pastor. The parish’s total capitulation to the gay culture was tolerated by Abp. Levada through his entire term in San Francisco. The Sister of Perpetual Indulgence held their regular meetings in the parish facilities for years. If these two “sisters” were protesting anything, it was the fact that Niederauer ordered them out of the parish facilities a few months ago—only after a lot of embarrassing hell-raising by a group of orthodox Catholics.
The real story is Niederauer’s refusal, along with the majority of U.S. bishops, to obey Canon 915 (and explicit statements by the current Pope). Canon 915 says that notorious public sinners are to be refused Communion.
To be fair to Niederauer—no one distributing Communion should refuse Communion on the spot. Notorious public sinners are to be warned, and reasoned with, before Communion is refused. The real scandal is not that he gave these two Communion, but that he has been tolerating such things as Holy Redeemer’s having a float in the Gay Pride Parade each year, including 2007. Video is available online showing the float in the parade, just a couple of months ago, preceded and followed by ranks of totally naked men and women.
There is probably no practical solution to a TOXIC PARISH like Holy Redeemer except to shut it down for a year or so, let the good Catholics go elsewhere for awhile and the misguided Catholics disperse, and then send in a CATHOLIC priest as pastor to re-open the church. In the case of Holy Redeemer, which is in the center of the Castro District, the parish would probably go bankrupt if it were to have Catholic priest as pastor, so there would be little point to re-opening it, ever.
This being said, San Francisco remains the Gomorrah of the modern world.
Agreed the city has no business interfering with church services and who attends them. But the city should be looking into the actual fair that they host, it seems like it would be illegal....do they not have any decency laws in California? I wish Bill O’Bore would focus more on exposing what “the gay lifestyle” really is like. Most Americans have no idea how sick their behavior really is.
Well, one of O’Reilly’s email comments on last night’s TV show was “If this had happened in a mosque, they would be dead”.
Feel bad for the faithful Catholics in service that day: These people (the gays) are NUTS!
If they were to follow the canon, they would have to refuse
shalom b'shem Yah'shua
communion to the Kennedy, Kerry and Pelosi and all democrats for
support of murdering innocent babies.
http://www.cwnews.com/offtherecord/offtherecord.cfm
This is the real story of Holy Redeemer Gay Catholic Church, with links to other sites with video of the pastor throwing holy water on the church’s float in the Gay Pride parade this year.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.