Saturday, July 16, 2011

Patches Gets Married in a Tent

Howie Carr has a rather colorful description of the sad deterioration of the Kennedy family, HERE.

Another Kennedy wedding on the Cape today — big night for package stores and state police sobriety checkpoints. But somehow it doesn’t seem the same — so many things seem to be missing from the traditional Kennedy wedding.

For starters, a Catholic church. Didn’t the Kennedys used to get married in Catholic churches? Caroline at Our Lady of Victory in Centreville, Maria Shriver at St. Francis Xavier in Hyannis?

Now Patches gets hitched at the compound. Forget “celebrating” Mass, these nuptials will be “officiated” by moonbat Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.

Bill Clinton must not have been available.


If we don't laugh, we'll cry.

Really?

What a sad development for Boston Irish Catholics.

We can't blame this one on Episcopal misfeasance. Bishop Tobin invited Patrick to numerous come to Jesus meetings. Privately and publicly.

I'm not even sure why this really bothers me. It's better than having prelates Sacramentally endorse defiance and leading hundreds of thousands of Catholics into an abyss. Maybe it's because I had secretly hoped they could get it through their thick Irish skulls and this is just another step in the wrong direction.

Apparently they're all fighting over Rose and Joe's house on the compound. Ted donated it to host think tanks? The family is appalled and concerned about the infringements upon their heritage and history. The place is a ghost house. Bobby's children feel the Kennedy Library has snubbed their father. Isn't the Kennedy Library another blueprint of Jack Connors'? He's really got the Midas touch doesn't he.

I didn't think anything could top sitting between two bitches listening to John Unni, but the cocktail hour must have been something else, huh?

God help them.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

"I'm not even sure why this really bothers me."

At one point in time the Kennedy's stood on the correct path and their descisions and policies were based on morals. They had the potential to be great leaders. Back in the 60's & 70's my parents used to have a picture of JFK on our living room wall. This all changed when they were directed off course by the bad consel of some liberal theologians.

As Ronald Reagan use to say 'the Democratic party left me, I didn't leave it.'

Jasper

Anonymous said...

"...two bitches listening to John Unni" -nice language for a lady to use and a Catholic lady at that. You offend and scandalize me, Carol. You come to Mass and sit there all smug with your rosary beads and smart phone and act like a total bitch yourself and dare to call two women "bitches" when they had the misfortune of sitting next to someone who attented the celebration of Mass simply to pick and criticize. You, Carol, are the real bitch and you need to atone for your lack of charity. You completely discredit yourself and anyone who follows you. You offend. You are an obnoxious, sinful woman.

Joe Catholic said...

Carol, I am on your side with many things. However, I believe you are discrediting yourself (and I would put it much more nicely than the post by anonymous) when you write the following:

"I didn't think anything could top sitting between two bitches listening to John Unni, but the cocktail hour must have been something else, huh?"

It's distasteful and uncalled for and undermines our cause when you use words like that. I have been to mass at St. Cecilia in the past. I have witnessed a number of liturgical abuses including invalid matter and the congregation going around the altar, and just flat out made up prayers, so none of this surprises me.

I share your frustration, but you are not helping by calling women a nasty name, no matter how offended you may have been by their behavior.

Carol McKinley said...

I'll take the criticism that it would have been better to call the the two hostile women something other than bitches.

I wholeheartedly disagree that the use of the word 'discredits' the information that the two women were anything but 'welcoming'. They were unwelcoming and hostile long before I took notes on the homily on my smartphone. Furthermore, they were quite welcoming to the press who were also taking notes, filming, photographing. I assume now, it was the Rosary beads that is repellant to you.


In fact many in the congregation were 'unwelcoming' also to others.

One gentlemen repeatedly told incoming people that a group of Catholics giving out Cardinal Sean's letter 'lunatics' that were not to be considered 'one of us'. I had a conversation with the man, explaining that as Catholics, all of us are 'us' and that he was contributing to unecessary hostility.

Another gentleman ripped bulletin out of the hands of another Catholic calling him a 'lunatic'. Seems that word, which is more offensive than bitches, is a regular part of the vocabulary at St. Cecilia's.

It is certainly honorable to note the misconduct and lack of charity at something pitched as Mass of welcoming for those carrying in rosary beads.

I also reject the characterization that I was there to "pick and criticize". I was there because the pastor had slandered faithful Catholics concerned about his apostacies and mismangement of souls as 'hateful' - etc. and the Liturgy all across the diocese as 'unwelcoming' to gays and lesbians. A letter had been sent to the lawyers and the Bishops, the Nuncio, the CDF and the Congregation for Bishops telling them to restrain Unni from characterizing faithful Catholics this way. I was there to hear what he was going to say myself. I was also there to pray and to receive the Sacraments - and to be present so that you could see that I was not the boogiewoman.

You didn't and don't have any problem with Chuck's recording and taking notes during that Mass - and you will not take up revenge against him - because the content of his reporting is favorable to the schismatic parish being operated by Fr. Unni.

Let's dispense with the malarkey, shall we?

Carol McKinley said...

One further note of clarification re my presence to note whether Fr. Unni has been restrained from characterizing faithful Catholics in the ways he has historically.

Numerous parishioners have said in previous threads that Fr. Unni has some kind of control over the Cardinal, that the Cardinal had given his permission to continue to slander Catholics and there was nothing anybody could do about it. (These were also sent about to the luminaries in the heirarchy and lawyers).

Since it is important to know the reasons the Cardinal's power is trumped by Fr. Unni - which could be weakness but even include blackmail - I wanted to to hear for myself whether threats made by parishioners would indeed be carried out.

Carol McKinley said...

ps - thanks Joe.