Skip to comments.Monks win $316 in court case against church that disrupted them
Posted on 07/16/2004 6:15:13 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
A little more than $300 is not exactly what TIBETmichigan considers compensation for a recent Buddhist monk concert that was ruined by protesting members of a splinter Catholic group.
A Grand Rapids District Court judge last week ordered members of Allendale's St. Margaret Mary Church to pay $316.22 to the Grand Rapids-based group as part of a small claims case it filed for the disruption of a Feb. 8. concert at the Basilica of St. Adalbert.
TIBETmichigan members say morals, not money, were at the heart of the matter.
"We wanted them to realize what they did was wrong," said Glenn Freeman, an administrator for TIBETmichigan, which has promoted Tibetan-related events in the area since 1995. "We are not interested in compensation. We are not at all happy about the result of any of this."
The court case stemmed from events occurring at the concert, which TIBETmichigan helped organize and more than 200 people attended, Freeman said.
Seven Buddhist monks visiting from the Tashi Lhunpo Monastery in Tibet were allowed to perform traditional chants and prayers at St. Adalbert, a Catholic parish on the city's West Side.
In the parish's front pews sat more than 30 members of St. Margaret Mary Church, who attended to denounce the Buddhist concert as offensive and sacrilegious because it was taking place in a Catholic church. Shortly after the monks began their demonstration in the sanctuary, the Allendale group launched into loud recitations of prayers from the Rosary.
The Buddhist monks were forced to halt their performance after the Allendale group, led by its pastor, the Rev. Michael McMahon, ignored repeated requests to leave. Police were called, but the protesters did not leave until after the monks and concert attendees exited.
In March, TIBETmichigan filed a small claims case to recoup funds lost on the canceled concert. Freeman said McMahon later filed an unsuccessful motion to make the matter a civil case.
The reverend did not appear in court on June 1, and was ordered to pay the $316.22 by default.
McMahon, based in Richmond in Macomb County, could not be reached for comment.
St. Margaret Mary Church is affiliated with the Society of St. Pius X, which does not follow tenets of an edict that transformed the Roman Catholic Church during the 1960s.
The priests and traditions of the society -- which has churches worldwide and claims actor and "The Passion of the Christ" director Mel Gibson as a member -- are not recognized by the Vatican or Pope John Paul II.
Freeman believes the society's actions during the concert could be considered a hate crime. His organization is not pursuing any other legal action and is coordinating a visit from another group of Buddhist monks this fall.
"We've never experienced anything like what happened," he said. "We definitely did not plan on it. We can't control the actions of other people, but we hope it does not happen again."
"Bravely defending Catholic churches from sacrilege is now considered an"hate crime""
Their crime? Saying the Rosary in a "Catholic" Church.
HMM... Lots of wreckovations and lots of liturgical destruction came about as a result of the pastoral council known as Vatican II, but where are the Official Edicts? Do they exist?
How can one get Edicts out of a Pastoral Council?
sigh, it gets so tiresome reading the same old lies over and over again.
I would encourage everyone to send $316.22 to Fr. McMahon. He will put it to good use.
Ha! I like that idea!
uh oh. Round II.
The pastor is the one who is at fault here. He should be sued and have to pay the money, since he is using a Catholic church in a way he has no authority to.
Gosh, where can you get a good Auto da Fe when you need one.
"... of an edict that transformed the Roman Catholic Church during the 1960s."
How does one "transform" the Truth?
"... Lots of wreckovations and lots of liturgical destruction came about as a result of the pastoral council known as Vatican II, but where are the Official Edicts? Do they exist?"
At last Wednesdays "adult Education" class, my liberal pastor said that Vatican II directed the removal of Communion rails and that it is up to each bishop whether to allow kneeling in his diocese. The Official Edicts must exist somewhere or my pastor would be a liar.
I picked up a pamphlet at Mass last Sunday at the SSPX chapel that was printed by the Arcadia, CA chapel that FORMERLY WAS where he attended Mass.
Let me review it before I start letting off steam.
I read the same pamphlet. Remember the secular news people rarely get all the facts straight when writing about religion, let alone traditional Catholics.
How is this for a pattern PING?
Seems symbolic. John 3:16, but I'm not sure what the 22 means. Any thoughts?
Re: "Road Trip!!!"
Heh I like that idea.
good to see you.
Shall I criticize the Pastor? In a word, DUH!
You got that right! The pastor was in error because he ignored the teaching of Scripture in 2 John 7-11
7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
8 Watch yourselves, that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward.
9 Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting;
11 for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds. [NAS95]
And Acts 20:26-31
26 Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men.
27 For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.
28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;
30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.
31 Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears. [NAS95]
No one serious about the task of shepherding God's sheep would ever expose them to wolves with a different gospel.
Would have been a good time to ask him where specifically. Of course, you might have been removed from the "class", and had to give up the entertainment.
Of course the Catholics and the SSPX priest who prayed the rosary in reparation and to prevent the sacrilege from taking place were in the right here. Too bad more Catholics from the parishes or even from the cathedral itself did not show up to pray.
But of course "our lives are all so busy these days," aren't they?
Re: "Of course the Catholics and the SSPX priest who prayed the rosary in reparation and to prevent the sacrilege from taking place were in the right here."
Thank you for saying so.
As far as I can tell by reading every Catechism available, with emphasis on the Roman and Baltimore ones, the fact that a pope or bishop or priest gives perhaps scandalous behavior (with the precursor of St. Ignatius that "we also look to give the benefit of the doubt to a fellow Catholic to interpret his message in a charitable light"--in other words not looking to condemn), these do not give us the right to attach ourselves to the Greek Orthodox or other such "Church" just because they have valid sacraments. While the Mass is perennially important, the center of Christian unity is in the Pope, not in a particular rite of Mass. Scandalous behavior (so-called) does not leave us free to flee the coup, right?
"The priests and traditions of the society -- which has churches worldwide and claims actor and "The Passion of the Christ" director Mel Gibson as a member -- are not recognized by the Vatican or Pope John Paul II."
To repeat what I have posted several times before:
Mel Gibson is not a member of SSPX! He only supports independent priests validly ordained by Pius XII bishops. MG knows all about SSPX duplicity and is not allied with false opposition.
MG knows all about SSPX duplicity and is not allied with false opposition.
AGREED! He found out the hard way regarding the theft of Msgr. Donahue's chapel by the SSPX and contributed to the legal defense of it. See:
My Comments on SSPX, especially land grabs
and some following comments down to #47.
He only supports independent priests validly ordained by Pius XII bishops.
As for this part, are we talking about Mel's or Hoot's views on this? I'm not sure they are precisely the same.
Christ said the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church, and while this can mean one lone Catholic who valiantly holds the Faith, whole and entire, as stated by Anne Catherine Emmerich, I think He meant it to include the Mass and the sacraments and all the aids to grace that flows from the apostolic priesthood to continue - which is most difficult considering the fact that all cardinals and practically all bishops consecrated during the reign of Pope Pius XII are now deceased.
One by necessity has to go to priests ordained by bishops who were consecrated bishops by bishops from the Pope Pius XI and XII reigns.
I know Hoot does not go along with this, and further, I think he rejects all priests ordained after the close of the false council, 'vatican ii' in 1965, as being without a mandate. So even if a Pope Pius XII bishp who had not apostazied is still alive, I *think* Hoot would reject him also.
Instead the deciding factor should be the question of valid ordination, i.e. before the changes to the rite in 1968, or subsqunet ordination by a valid bishop using the unadulterated rite of ordination. AND OF COURSE THAT EACH HOLD THE ROMAN CATHOLIC FAITH, WHOLE AND ENTIRE!
As for Mel, I have heard that he has an Eastern rite priest offering the Roman rite at his chapel. I'm not sure whether the priest was affiliated under a valid form of their rite, and by whom, and whether before or after 'vatican ii". I am assuming though, given Hutton';s views, that it is an older priest ordained prior to its close.
The two priests who offered Mass during the filming of the Passion, Fr. Sommerville and the elderly Italian one, though retired, were most definitely affiliated with the false usurper church falsely occupying the Vatican.
I *think* Hoot would reject a priest newly ordained under the real rite by that bishop also - since it has now occured after the close of "vatican II" - and without a mandate.
Who is Hoot? Is that Mel's father?
Who is Hoot? Is that Mel's father?
Actually, he is dead. He died about 6 weeks ago and he had only been the bishop for less than a year. He was in his late 50s early 60s and a pretty good Bishop. My understanding is he had a very big task ahead of him trying to clean up this sort of silliness. So far there has not been a replacement named for Bishop Britt or Bishop Utener in Saginaw who also died several months ago. Michigan is down two Bishops right now.
"So even if a Pope Pius XII bishp who had not apostazied is still alive, I *think* Hoot would reject him also."
From what I know, I don't think he would. Quite the opposite.
Fr. Sommerville got too much press regarding his affiliation with Mel as did many other people. I know of an Italian priest who's Masses MG attended when in Italy. This priest never said the N.O. I don't know if he's the one you are refering to.
In general, your post is right on target.
I *think* Hoot would also reject a priest who has been recently ordained under the real rite by a still living Pope Pius XII bishop - since the ordination has now occured after the close of "vatican ii" - and without what Hoot regards as an essential mandate.
understood. But, unless I have totally misunderstood ol' Hoot or his attitude has recently (very recently) changed, I disagree.
That would be VERY good news.