More bizarre than I imagined.
St. Stephen’s in Minneapolis.
I checked out the parish of St. Stephen’s website, looking for the name of the priest who had been assigned to the church before the recent announcement of Fr. Joseph Williams as pastor. (I was curious as to who would have been responsible for the mess there.) The website doesn’t list any priest, in fact, there is hardly any indication the church is Catholic.
Who knew it was so bad?
I called the church and spoke to a woman. I asked if they had a priest assigned to the parish, and she told me they haven’t had a priest assigned for over four years. She mentioned they have a deacon. (For those of you who don’t know, St. Stephen’s is centrally located in a residential area of downtown Minneapolis - there are priests around.) So obviously the women have been running the church all of these years. According to my sources, much of the para-liturgical stuff they were doing in the gym, and sometimes in the church, were in fact “eucharistic” celebrations conducted by women - some of whom are Sisters of St. Joseph.
Who let it get so bad?
Does anyone else see anything wrong with this picture besides the inmates running the asylum? Where the heck was Archbishop Flynn these past several years? And Archbishop Roach before him?
Photo credit: Gymnasium gathering at St. Stephen’s.
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Excellent question, Mr. Terry!
And you won’t get an answer.
Much like how the poor get neglected in cities, states and nations, dissidents in the Church can go their own way for as long as they want as long as they don’t make too many waves that uncomfortably call them to the attention of chancery officials.
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:11 pm
“And you won’t get an answer.”
I’m afraid you are right Ray - it’s like my other question after leaving Mass at a church in St. Paul recently, “Is everybody gay?”
I’ll never get a straight answer from anyone for either of these questions. What does the pavement in hell consist of again?
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Unbelieveable.
Sad. So sad.
March 4th, 2008 at 7:52 am
I think faithful Diocesan Bishops have a lot to deal with in these dissidents, and they prefer to keep them in one place where they can keep their eyes on them vs. closing down their parish & seeing them scatter to the 4 corners of the Diocese, infecting the rest of the flock. Just a thought.
March 4th, 2008 at 7:55 am
Most of the folks in these photos are on the downhill side of 50. Where are the teenagers? The families with five young children? The twentysomething singles?
March 4th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Jeron - That is a good observation, although, considering the recent revelation that feminist/protestant baptismal rituals are invalid, I wonder if the permissiveness on the part of bishops was in the best interest of the souls involved or affected. The repurcussions may be more widespread than we think. A dissident parish is not isolated from the body of Christ, no more than an infected foot is separated from one’s physical body.
March 6th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
When you read about some of the lives of the saints/some religious and how they speak of God’s wrath it makes you shudder. Then you hear the stories of those entrusted with the care of souls and the punishment they’ve merited and you hope the bishop knows what the heck he’s doing in dealing with these people with kid gloves. Padre Pio chastised a woman who came to him for confession for her laxity as a mother (he saw a vision of her children in hell because of her neglect) and then you think of someone who is responsible for the souls of an archdiocese…not a job I would want ever.