Custodian fined for destroying images of Buddha, Mary Poppins in Omaha cathedral

[Memaw]

Even our judgment of actions, which is permissible should be tempered by our ignorance. Memaw seems to be closer and have more knowledge of this situation than anyone else here.

I live in Omaha and know them well. Our Archbishop Lucas a wonderful holy man, I have been to many of his Masses and his Homilies are wonderful. So is Fr. Gutgsell and I have known him for over 40 years. Like I said they are blowing this all out of proportion. I’m not judging anyone, not even the custodian. He had to answer for his actions by civil authorities and he did loose his job. He will also have to make his amends with God. That’s not my business. This years theme for the Cathedral’s Art’s Project, Flower Festival is titled, “A Night at the Movies,” The props are merely a part of the movie displays. They were part of the movies you know. Our Cathedral has had these Art’s Flower Festivals since 1985 and enjoyed by sooo many. I personally have never heard any complaints over the years at any of them. One man can do more damage than destroy props, as is proven in this thread. Our Cathedral also has a Sheehan Museum, Gallery and Cultural Center where one can explore the history of the Cathedral and Omaha’s religious Heritage. Please take a deep breath before criticizing our Archbishop and Cathedral Pastor. God Bless, Memaw

 

[TMC]

This thread is like I fell asleep and woke up in bizarro world. A clearly disturbed person violently attacks and destroys church property and Catholics side with him against the Church. A priest joins the conversation to calmly explain what should be obvious, and Catholic posters attack him as well. :whacky:

 

[Seamus_L]

I find the whole exhibit, inside the church, extremely offensive.

 

[Memaw]

This thread is like I fell asleep and woke up in bizarro world. A clearly disturbed person violently attacks and destroys church property and Catholics side with him against the Church. A priest joins the conversation to calmly explain what should be obvious, and Catholic posters attack him as well. :whacky:

I agree, 100%, God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

I find the whole exhibit, inside the church, extremely offensive.

Come and see it, then tell us what you think!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Seamus_L]

I’ve already seen the photos online. Mary Poppins hangs next to the Stations of the Cross. It’s unconscionable that anyone would even defend this inside a Catholic Church.

 

[pnewton]

I’ve already seen the photos online. Mary Poppins hangs next to the Stations of the Cross. It’s unconscionable that anyone would even defend this inside a Catholic Church.

Odd. The photo I saw has it hanging in the middle, not “next to” anything. But then like I said, only Memaw has firsthand knowledge. Oh, and the use of the word “unconscionable” is odd since we are bound only by our own conscience, along with the obligation to form it. It is not a transferable obligation.

I do not defend this event. I would have no part of it, if it were me. I defend the right of the priest. He should not be subject to rash judgment by those who were not there. I defend the right of those that owned the property against the vandalism inflicted by this disturbed man.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

I do not understand why you are putting cathedral in quotations – unless you are questioning whether or not it actually is the cathedral of the archdiocese of Omaha.

Invocation of a biblical precedent to justify such wanton destruction of property before a court of law has no place in this situation – unless you want that criteria applied by officials of the State against the Church, too, since the court of law does not submit such cases to a religion test.

A judge in a civil court should not be trying to factor in such considerations but ruling on the destruction of private property – just as the judge should do in the case of the statues of the Mother of Jesus that have been vandalised, regardless of whether the vandal can educe some religious justification for his destructive acts.

If the person is doing this action out of some misguided motivation to destroy images from a religious purpose, it also should be given no credence by the civil authority; rather, the man should punished for destroying the property of others.

bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2016/03/vandals_attack_second_statue_of_virgin_mary.

Father, it has occured to me that some passionately anti-Catholic person could use the arguments of “opposing idolatry” to justify destroying images of the Virgin Mary and Saints in a Catholic Church, referencing their own religious beliefs, indeed using the exact same Bible passages, as some posters have used here.

I can also imagine some passionate evangelical destroying a Starbucks in the lobby of a mega Church, again, using the same example of Jesus’s actions against the money changers.

And a civil authority would need to either accept the “religious belief” argument as a defense in all cases, or reject them.

Also agree that this man appears psychiatrically unwell and needs help.

 

[Memaw]

I understand what was going on. It’s inappropriate in a Cathedral and offensive to God to have a Buddha statue in a Cathedral.

It wasn’t a statue, it was a cardboard prop, for Pete’s sake. Anyone with any common sense at all would NOT make this something it wasn’t ever meant to be. I doubt that anyone who saw the Art Display would have jumped to the conclusions some here have done. God Bless, Memaw