This is a statement I received from Julie Wolf, spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee regarding the recent video homily which many people (including me) took to be a purposeful insult to Pope Benedict.
MILWAUKEE – Archbishop Jerome Listecki is aware of the situation and has communicated with Deacon Sites about his comments in the parish video. While the delivery of Deacon Site’s message could have been more succinct, it’s clear, when you hear the entire message that his intention was not to insult the Holy Father. Unfortunately his presentation could have left that impression.
March 13, 2014 at 9:19 pm
The big question is: who woke Archbishop Listecki from his slumber??
March 13, 2014 at 9:27 pm
Hogwash. Of course the intention of his homily as a whole was not to insult the Pope Emeritus, but clearly this pointed jab that he took was done with that intent. Let's hope that Bishop Listecki was a little more forthright in his denouncing of this sort of behavior when speaking with Deacon Sandy in private.
March 13, 2014 at 9:35 pm
Oh, oh, yeah, okay.
March 13, 2014 at 9:39 pm
Ahh, it seems the Archbishop has successfully completed Bill
Clintons “parsing the statement 101.”
Of course Deacon Sandy did not intend to insult the (current)
Holy Father. He did however intend to
insult Pope Emeritus Benedict. And so he
did, to the great joy of his little flock of modernists.
Though I am saddened and sickened by this ecclesiastical double-speak
I am sadly not surprised; the heretics are circling the wagons.
March 14, 2014 at 1:43 am
I guess we have to take the Archbishop at his word on this but let's face it people it has been open season on Benedict ever since he resigned and has intensified since Francis was elected. Remember Cardinal Mahoney's tweets last year? I even hear many well known Catholics say things like John Paul and Benedict were good teachers and speakers BUT I could just scream. I also hate the cult of personality that these same Catholics built around him. People do still love Benedict, you saw the reaction when he came in the Consistory. My main problem is Most people Catholic or no too many who like Francis hate Benedict.
March 14, 2014 at 1:53 am
Forget Pope Benedict; what about everything else wrong with that "unique" parish?
March 14, 2014 at 3:44 am
"His intention was not to insult the Holy Father." If by Holy Father you mean Francis.
March 14, 2014 at 12:00 pm
It's hard to tease out motives when the homily was crap to begin with even without the dig at the Holy Father. Lecturing to a congregation where few have even heard of Prada let alone buy it? No wonder the pews are empty.
March 14, 2014 at 12:23 pm
If the deacon is that "unconscious" about his intent, then he is not qualified to be a deacon
March 14, 2014 at 12:27 pm
Abp. Listecki ought to work at IHOP, he's a waffler!
March 14, 2014 at 12:46 pm
Now compare this with the Deacon who has been prohibited from blogging. I guess some Bishops do actually take disciplinary actions against their Bishop, it's just that only certain types actually receive any kind of rebuke. http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/03/a-deacons-blog-suppressed/
March 14, 2014 at 1:50 pm
I am sorry that you were treated in this way, Deacon Sandy Sites, and I have prayed for you and for those who led the charge against you. You were restrained in your reactions and I hope Abp Listecki praised you for that. Like others, I do not agree with some of your choices, but I do not think it was justifiable that you were subjected to the mass mockery and harassment that occurred.
March 14, 2014 at 2:23 pm
In some sense, of course, this statement is correct. I would be greatly astonished if the Pope Emeritus is aware that Deacon Sandy even exists, let alone what he said. But note that the archdiocese does not say that Sandy did not intend to insult *anyone*, because of course he did. He intended to insult everyone who believes that the liturgy is more than a miniature folk music festival combined with a political lecture.
March 14, 2014 at 2:36 pm
Glossing over the progressive agenda…smoothing it out…there is nothing to see here folks, move along…WHY?
March 14, 2014 at 3:12 pm
"…could have been more succinct?" That's the best rejoinder which the Archdiocesan office could muster? I don't suppose the *content* of the homily mattered at all?
March 14, 2014 at 3:15 pm
One born every minute.
March 14, 2014 at 3:17 pm
Er… ElizD: I'm assuming that you only meant to be kind and considerate, but… couldn't that kindness and consideration extent to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, whom Deacon Sandy obviously set up for derision? To call out someone for publicly scandalising (i.e. making sin easier) a congregation (albeit a small one) by heterodox teaching and uncharitable (and even puerile) behaviour is not unloving. Rather, the instinct to apply misplaced mercy (i.e. be "nice", at all costs, regardless of whether a rebuke is required) is unloving; there is nothing "loving" about letting someone publicly damage their own soul (and lead others to do the same). Do you "love" Deacon Sandy by smiling and nodding as he (proverbially–hopefully not literally) goes to hell in a hand-basket? Come, now.
March 14, 2014 at 3:29 pm
Maybe the overall intent of the homily wasn't to insult him, but that one comment probably was.
March 14, 2014 at 3:35 pm
What do you mean?
March 14, 2014 at 7:35 pm
"I am sorry that you were treated in this way, Deacon Sandy Sites, and I have prayed for you and for those who led the charge against you. You were restrained in your reactions and I hope Abp Listecki praised you
for that."
Exactly to whom are you addressing? Deacon Sites? The writers of this blog? Is your intent at confusion? Or do you need help with your punctuation?