The Pelligrini brothers were selected to perform at the Gay Circus in Barcelona in 2008 where they performed as they did for the pope: same tower, same costumes (or lack thereof). The director of the circus said, "I chose them on the basis of gay aesthetics of beauty, elegance and quality." Well, those aren't particularly "gay" values any more than the rainbow is a gay symbol. God gave it to Noah first!
The brothers are fourth generation circus performers and I certainly admire the skill, strength, and beauty of their gymnastic performance. Nevertheless, it was inappropriate at a papal audience. Would people approve of the Olympic Beach Volleyball team doing a demo complete with bikinis at the Wednesday audience? If not, why not? They need pastoral care too don't they?
My suspicious mind can't help suggesting last Wednesday's event was in the same league as L'Osservatore Romano releasing the controversial segment on condoms from the pope's interview (in violation of the pre-release ban). I think it's likely that someone at the paper did it very deliberately. Whether the Pelligrini brothers are gay or straight or mixed, their connection to the gay circus ensures lewd suggestions and nasty comments harking back to the abuse scandals. Are Vatican PR folks really so naive? What do you think?
If the Lord hadn't been with Moses, he wouldn't have gotten very far. If the Holy Spirit wasn't with the Holy Father, he wouldn't get much done, due to how ill-served he is by those around him in the Vatican. The PR people are many things, but they are not stupid...of course, they knew what they were doing.
ReplyDeleteI am not so surprised that no Vatican official checked the Internet beforehand regarding the Pellegrinis, because no one did the same regarding Society of St. Pius X Bishop Williamson's Holocaust-minimizing statement in his Swedish TV interview before the Pope removed the excommunications for all SSPX four bishops.
ReplyDeleteThe Pope's comments on condoms is more grevious in se and per se--not so much that L'Osservatore Romano violated the prepublication embargo (the quote have been noticed sooner or later) but that no one along the line from Peter Seewald through the translators and editors of the German, Italian, and English editions of the book though that the quote would be controversial and suggested removing it (which could easily be done without its being noticed, because it was a tangential remark with little or no context to the rest of the passage). Fr. Fessio, the publisher of the English-language edition, said that he thought it was a controversial remark but did not expect the reaction that it got.
Mary, I think the world is falling apart and Western Civ. is doomed. I'm at least as mad as you, and I rail about to my friends but I don't have the energy to maintain a website. Are you venting here, do you think you're part of a vanguard of restoration, or do you see some kind of duty to "judge spirits"? The fault, insofar as all of us do not share it equally, is with the Episcopate which has caved in, with varying degrees of culpable knowledge, to Modernism. Can you name a Bishop who has turned around (figuratively or literally, at the altar) after reading traddy or conservative blogs? What's your advice? There's certainly some scriptural support for turning the other cheek and waiting upon the Lord.
ReplyDeleteTurning the other cheek applies to being personally attacked I think and we have to be careful about "waiting on the Lord" so literally that we sink into the heresy of quietism.
ReplyDeleteWhat we increasingly face in this country, I think, is massive societal sin with structures of government and other institutions (media, entertainment, education, etc.) oppressing Christians and other godly people. I guess it's our version of the Babylonian captivity with our captivity right here in our own country.
I think the answer is always the same: ora et labora. We need to pray, fast (some demons are only driven out by fasting), and work.
My personal minimum is daily Mass and the rosary, a weekly holy hour and regular confession. But that probably isn't enough in view of our spiritual (and physical) danger. We also need to be committed to the corporal and spiritual works of mercy. Our Lady's recently approved apparitions in Wisconsin stress catechesis. We need to do that in our own families and daily life. Always teach the faith: to our children, grandchildren, friends, etc.
All the apparitions of the Blessed Mother give us plenty to think about. I'm reading about Kibeho, Rwanda right now (apparitions of 1981-82 by our Lady approved in 2001 - later apparitions not evaluated, including those by Jesus beginning in 1982). Kibeho is scary in view of the genocidal war that Our Lady predicted including decapitated bodies and a "river of blood" - literally.
At Akita the Blessed Mother said
fire would fall from heaven - nuclear war perhaps? I think we are in serious danger of seeing it in my lifetime. So we need to be busy about the works of our Lord and pray especially for our shepherds. So many are wolves preying on the sheep. God help them on Judgment Day! We have a few good ones -- too few. But maybe we are getting what we deserve for our laxity and laziness.
Thanks. That's a better answer than I could make. Perhaps it would be fair to say that we are always challenged to have greater faith. I don't think there've been too many times God let a whole generation just sit in the shade, taking it easy.
ReplyDeleteIt'd be such a comfort, however, to have the Bishops as shepherds rather than (as you say, for the most part--the exceptions are important) wolves. I guess if I'm not willing to sacrifice my comfort, I can't expect them to go first.
I went to the site advertising the same performers and hit the translate button.Then i scrolled down to the "Information on the gay circus", I hit the link and was horrified. If anyone is left that is stupid enough to think this is just an "alternative lifestyle" choice this will shock them into reality!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.amicidelcirco.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=499&Itemid=2
Is this Pope SO naive? Is there an agenda within the Vatican to sabotage the Papal image?Maybe the Pope is just trusting and elderly?Heaven forbid the "OR" that follows my thought pattern here.