Pro abortion thugs violate the Mass and destroy parts of Santiago Cathedral on the Feast of St James

Pro abortion thugs have attacked the Metropolitan Cathedral of Saint James, Santiago, Chile, during the Mass celebrating on the feast of its patron saint, Sant Iago. The pro-abortion thugs violated the Mass, attacked worshipers, interrupted the homily, smashed parts of the church including the confessionals, destroyed side altars and painted blasphemous graffiti on the walls. They also attempted to set fire to pews.

“We were celebrating the feast of St. James the Apostle, with the mayor in attendance, and offering thanks to so many Catholics who serve the public, in an atmosphere of peace and recollection when protestors suddenly came in,” said Bishop Pedro Ossandón Buljevic, an auxiliary bishop of the Santiago de Chile archdiocese.

“The truth is that we are always for dialogue, for civilized debate. We believe in the God-given gift of reason.”

“Therefore we invite everyone to protest in whichever way they wish, but that they do so with respect for the law, for democracy, and the for the dignity of others.”

According to the Washington Post:

‘They painted walls with pro-abortion messages, broke ornaments and hauled pews all the way to the Plaza de Armas square in front of cathedral. Police in riot gear rushed to contain them, and arrested at least two people.’

President Sebastian Pinera condemned the vandalizing of the colonial-era cathedral, which remains closed for repairs. “We repudiate and reject these types of acts,” Pinera told reporters outside the presidential palace on Friday. “This means not respecting the rights of others,” he said. “They’re not tolerant and are contradicting their own views.”

Independent Catholic News reports:

‘The attack has been condemned by Chilean President Sebastián Piñera  saying: “I spoke with the archbishop of Santiago to express our full solidarity and ratify the government’s commitment regarding freedom of religion, freedom of worship and the protection of the unborn”.

The mayor of Santiago, Carolina Toha, told reporters that she “is not a believer”, but held that “the people who were in the cathedral at that time, were attacked for no apparent reason and this is not acceptable”. Toha was among those attending the Mass which was celebrated by the Metropolitan Archbishop of Santiago, Mgr Ricardo Ezzati.

Mgr Ricardo Ezzati  voiced “his dismay towards those who have the obligation to ensure people’s safety”. He said: “The intolerance of fanatics and their violent irrationality was a great offense to God and the community of believers in Christ. This was a painful incident with assault and ill-treatment to different persons, and the destruction and damage to the artistic and religious heritage of the main temple of the country”.

“The Metropolitan Cathedral is a public, open place, declared a national monument, where they are hundreds of citizens every day, but in recent times people have been threatened by bombs and other attacks”.

He said the archdiocese’s lawyers have filed a complaint in court against the perpetrators.’

Protect the Pope comment: Pro-abortion protesters in Texas recently shouted in public ‘Hail Satan’ and now pro-abortion protesters in Santiago have violated the Mass and desecrated Santiago Cathedral on the Feast of St James. This attack on Catholics during the Mass is outrageous, but it shouldn’t surprise us because those who promote the killing of unborn babies will hate the Catholic Church for her outspoken defense of the sanctity of human life. Chile is blessed with a president who is such a staunch defender of the rights to life of unborn children. President Sebastián Piñera had the courage and conviction to support a 11 year old rape survivor’s decision to give birth to the baby conceived during the sexual assault by her mother’s partner. President Piñera rightly praised the girl for her “depth and maturity”. Chile has the enviable pro-life reputation of banning the killing of unborn babies through abortion. The Chilean Senate rejected three bills last year that would have eased the absolute ban on abortion. The pro-abortion industry and their political stooges will have their sights on Chile now that Ireland has legalised the killing of babies. St Iago pray for us.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/pro-abortion-demonstrators-vandalize-chile-cathedral/2013/07/26/8ffb7412-f613-11e2-81fa-8e83b3864c36_story.html

http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=23032

 

50 comments to Pro abortion thugs violate the Mass and destroy parts of Santiago Cathedral on the Feast of St James

  • Karla

    An 11 girl in Chile was raped and became pregnant and decided to keep the baby:

    http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/11/raped-11-year-old-girl-from-chile-courageously-rejects-abortion

    This has been met with calls to legalize abortion from some people and shamefully Amnesty International has also called for abortion to be an option:

    https://www.amnesty.org/en/news/chile-must-provide-11-year-old-pregnant-rape-victim-all-options-including-abortion-2013-07-11

  • Michael Petek

    I’m not in favour of civilised debate, nor of debate of any other description, with monsters like these. If they were given a measured dose of police brutality, well, part of me at least would look the other way.

    • John Dare

      Bit like Spain under France, or Chile under Pinochet eh, Michael?

    • Same old, same old

      Michael, why is it that when people on a demonstration that you disapprove of peel off from that demo to desecrate a cathedral and intimidate worshippers you condemn it? I actually completely agree with you, but when it is a demo you approve of (as in the recent case of those in Paris) you actually call for the right to brutalise the police who are dealing with the rioters.

      • Michael Petek

        Because thugs who desecrate a cathedral, and police officers who hammer pro-marriage demonstrators from the streets, are lawbreakers and evildoers.

        • Same old, same old

          And what about the pro-marriage demonstrators who lob smoke bombs and dress themselves in Nazi regalia? Are you honestly saying that there are good rioters and bad ones?

          • Michael Petek

            I’m saying that thugs who desecrate a cathedral, and police officers who hammer pro-marriage demonstrators from the streets, are lawbreakers and evildoers.

          • same old, same old

            What you’ve actually been saying is that you’d be quite happy for the police to beat up rioters that oppose the Catholic church’s position and also more than happy for the police to be beaten up by rioters that support your cause.

            Or you could simply condemn without reservation, as I would with the monsters who desecrate cathedrals, the smoke-bomb throwers and neo-Nazis who rioted in Paris.

            Or maybe you couldn’t.

  • John Dare

    Overegging the pudding Nick.

    • Wake up England

      John Dare:

      What do you mean “Over Egging the Pudding Nick”???

      Do you think Deacon Donnelly is, in some way, exaggerating what happened in Chile?

      Or do you support the violent and sacrilegious desecration of a Catholic Cathedral?

      Or maybe you approve of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass being wilfully interrupted?

      Kindly explain your very, very peculiar comment. What on Earth can you mean by it?

    • Charles

      You post regularly, none of which is constructive. They are mostly irritating. But this one is below the belt. It is time for you to blog off somewhere else.

      • John Dare

        Morning Chas; not sure if you’re talkin to [about] me or WUE. If its me then I’m puzzled as to why ‘overegging the pudding’ is below the belt, given that Nick has ‘excised’ my explanation.

        • Charles

          The name is Charles. I was clearly talking to you. Wake up England has many constructive and interesting things to write. You do not.

          As I have previously written “please blog off somewhere else.

          • Wake up England

            Hear hear Charles. Very well said.

            John Dare: you are akin to a very dull parrot, which repeats the last thing it hears.

          • John Dare

            Its a POV Charles, but I think WUE’s enthusiasm [and some rudeness] does need to be addressed occasionally.

    • Appreciative Protestant Reader

      I see that ‘John Dare’ is trolling yet again.

  • Wake up England

    Well, be careful in life, lest you get what you wish for.

    Is this what the Pope had in mind when he said kick up a fuss in your diocese? Probably not.

    I hope, however, there will be plenty of “trouble” created (with lots of “noise” in every dioceses if there is a spread in the latest Vatican attempt to suppress the Traditional Latin Mass.

    Only the other day Cardinal Burke & Co were telling us all how much The Pope revered the legacy of Pope Benedict. In my opinion the evidence for this statement is extremely weak, given the (very recent) seeming reversal of Summorum Pontificum.

    Perhaps the “Split” predicted on this blog (within the last week or so) is more of a reality than any of us dared to fear.

    What a mess.

    • peter

      Hi Wake up England

      What “split” are you referring to?
      peter

      • Wake up England

        Peter:

        If you read the this blog’s entries for the last 10 days you can hardly fail to understand what I mean.

        By the way Peter:

        Are you a Priest?
        A Deacon?
        A religious?

        A simple yes or no answer would be a sign of your integrity.

        • John Dare

          Morning WUE; where did you go to school?

          • Wake up England

            TO DEACON NICK,

            RE: JOHN DARE

            I believe I am not alone in finding John Dare’s posts here facetious, unhelpful and distracting from the very serious matters and subjects which are discussed on your blog.

            His childish personal questions about my personal and private life are impertinent and irrelevant. I suppose they are a clumsy retort to my on-going question addressed to Peter about whether he is a priest; a question which (in my opinion) is reasonable, and asked in a spirit of integrity.

            I can find no integrity in John Dare’s infantile silliness which I am afraid is so often displayed by him on this blog. His comments to me appear to be designed to cause mischief; they are not meant as genuine contributions to the subjects in-hand.

            As I have often demonstrated on Ptp I am quite willing to divulge highly personal information about myself when it seems relevant and appropriate; but I thoroughly object to being personally “trolled” by John Dare over information which is none of his business.

            I contend that John Dare has little to recommend him, except a talent to annoy.

            William Weber.

          • John Dare

            Maybe six of one and two three’s of tother WUE. I doubt that Nick needs prompting if he wants to get rid.

          • Wake up England

            John Dare:

            I haven’t the faintest idea what you’re banging on about. Nor do I remotely care.

            If you insist on making comments on this blog, why not make them either

            Relevant

            Interesting

            or amusing

            As things are, it’s difficult to see the point of your being here

          • John Dare

            The thing is WUE, if you don’t ubderstand what I’m banging on about then there’s little point in my explaining [as my wife would say].

            Good that you notice tho’.

    • Rob

      It is not a mess. Both Popes are properly Catholic, faithful to the doctrines etc.

      Their styles are very different however, and I have to say that I rather like the new guy. For the first time I can actually belief that we have a Pope who will grab the bull by the horns and sort out the corruption in the Curia and Vatican bank (there is even talk of closing it down). For all his strengths Pope Benedict failed to do those things although we should be thankful for the groundwork he layed and the wisdom he displayed in realising his own limitations in stepping down.

      Please don’t worry about a split. So long as we all follow the same Catecism we will be fine.

    • John Dare

      Evening WUE. I did reply to your questions, but Nick has zapped the post for some reason.

      • Wake up England

        John Dare:

        Good.

        I’m quite sure that if your comment was exscinded, it deserved to be.

        In my opinion it’s a pity more of your comments are not similarly “zapped” – as you so eloquently put it.

  • Wake up England

    Hmmmm,

    It now seems as well as instigating suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass, our new Pope is at the same time giving the Papal Green Light to homosexual priests.

    Is this is continuing the teachings of Pope Benedict? Doesn’t look that way to me.

    It appears the “Lavender Mob” in high places are more powerful than anyone supposed. Am I alone in smelling rats?

    What next?

    • tro

      @WuE

      This is what The CCC has to about people who frequently experience same sex attraction:

      “The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”

      Yet Bishop Francis airily dismisses the strong inclination to homosexuality as “not a problem”.

      Could this be partly because he’s reluctant to fire his regular lunch companion, Monsignor Ricca?

      This, on top of his booting ‘Summorum Pontificorum’ into the long grass, does not bode well for the future.

      I fear we are now in deep trouble.

  • freboniusthe2

    Amnesty International is such a joke nowadays; It calls for protect the human and then advocates the destruction of the unborn. Please point out the contradiction.

  • peter

    Although i disagree with SP I don’t believe Francis is ditching the principle set by Benedict.

    There are some particular circumstances with this group of Fransiscans.

    • Wake up England

      Peter:

      To avoid misunderstanding

      By “SP” do you mean Pope Benedict’s Moto Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”?

      • peter

        Sorry Wake up England i meant Summorum Pontificum.

        Though i do believe it is an unusual step by Francis, it does not mean that SP has been abrogated.

        I have sympathy for those parishes who will no longer have the Old Rite available to them via this group of Franciscans.

        peter

        • Wake up England

          Peter:

          As you personally “disagree” with Summorum Pontificum (which seems hugely arrogant to me) why do you then indulge in Crocodile Tears for those parishes who will now not have the Traditional Mass?

          You can’t have it both ways.

          • peter

            It’s quite simple really. I disagree with the way SP was introduced by Benedict, i think he should have consulted with the bishops first. There is a certain restorationism amongst supporters of the old mass and a wish for pre vatican 2 days. There was no need for SP, there was already enough room for the old mass within church law.

            I was brought up with the old mass and have a certain nostalgia for it, but the change to the vernacular in the liturgy was overdue and right. But i do believe that there is room in the church for different ways of celebrating the liturgy and we should find ways of doing so.
            peter

          • Wake up England

            Well, Peter:

            That’s Pope Benedict put in his place.

            Doubtless we’ll be hearing more of your whacky Papal advice in the weeks to come.

            You really do have the most exaggerated idea of your own self-importance; it’s a wonder the Pope hasn’t sent for you to tell him how and what to do.

            Are you a Cardinal?

          • John Dare

            WUE; at the risk of annoying you again, can I ask why you continue writing about peter in the way you do? It comes across badly, and really is very rude.

          • Wake up England

            John dare:

            NO. You may not.

          • John Dare

            The thing is it begins to look like you do it because:
            * you do know who he is, and don’t like his views
            * or you don’t know who he is, and don’t like his views
            * or (and please forgive me if this comes across badly) he comes across as more learned and reasonable than you
            * or you just like doing your Brideshead Revisited act generally (and it just happens that you don’t like his views)

          • Wake up England

            John Dare:

            No one on this blog cares one way or another about your views which are dull, boring and irredeemably unintelligent.

            What a dreary little man you are.

          • John Dare

            Thats quite rude WUE.

          • Wake up England

            Yes it probably is “Rude” if we’re indulging in Victorian Lower-Middle-Class prissiness (which you appear to enjoy).

            However, the important thing is that what I say is TRUE: YOU’RE A FEARFUL BORE.

        • John Dare

          That was quite rude too. I thought that the forum rules discouraged personal attacks?

    • AkP

      Correct Peter – see http://maryvictrix.com/2013/07/29/the-fis-and-pope-francis/ for more info, seems it is something particular to the Franciscans of the Immaculate.

  • Lynda

    I believe that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass ought not to be used by the Holy see for purposes of bringing peace to any order. Restricting the offering of the ancient form of the Mass is no way to bring peace or heal divisions. I think it is wrong to use the sacred Mass in this way. I think it looks like political opportunism and tends to scandal. It certainly will cause grave suffering to many innocents.

    • Wake up England

      Lynda:

      Quite right as usual:

      It certainly will cause “grave suffering to many innocents” as has been (very) quickly pointed out by Peter.

      How anyone can FAIL to see this as an attempt to suppress the Traditional Latin Mass, I just don’t know.

      You see, if something Looks like a Suppression and smells like a suppression then, really, it probably IS a suppression – however it’s dressed-up. Common sense.

  • Ioannes

    Summorum Pontificum has juridical force and would need to be formally abrogated. Although some would no doubt welcome this (they have a dog-in-the-manger attitude in that they have no wish or necessity to attend the Old Rite but would deprive others of the opportunity), Pope Francis is unlikely to comply as it would cause bitterness and division, even disobedience from a section of the Church that has hitherto remained loyal. If at the same time he is indulgent to dissident groups like ACTA and LCWR this would exacerbate the problem. I don’t think he sees himself as a recruiting sergeant for the SSPX.

    However, what he has done is to use his prerogative to override or dispense with two key aspects of SP – the right of any priest, be he secular or regular, to celebrate the EF as a private (i.e. unscheduled) Mass, and the right of a ‘stable group’ of faithful to have it (in the case of a FFI priest serving in a bi-ritual parish, who would be obliged to apply for a dispensation which may or may not be granted). If this is an exceptional case, then it is regrettable if understandable; if he starts making a habit of it, it is a different matter.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>