What happened at WYD...?

  • Thread starter Thread starter VintageRose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

VintageRose

Guest
We’re hearing so many inspiring stories concerning the life of dear Mother Angelica. Yet, one event is being repeatedly mentioned, although I’ve not heard an explaination. Does anyone know what happened years ago (during a WYD event) that caused her such distress…? Thank you for your thoughts.
 
VintageRose said:
We’re hearing so many inspiring stories concerning the life of dear Mother Angelica. Yet, one event is being repeatedly mentioned, although I’ve not heard an explaination. Does anyone know what happened years ago (during a WYD event) that caused her such distress…? Thank you for your thoughts.
Click to expand...
They re-enacted the Passion and they portrayed Jesus as a woman. It was in 1993…
 
At the World Youth Day in 1993, a woman played Our Lord in a mimed Stations of the Cross in front of the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. She was quite angry at this misrepresentation of Our Lord, in front of the Holy Father himself. Here is an article with a video of Mother Angelica talking about it.
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
At the World Youth Day in 1993, a woman played Our Lord in a mimed Stations of the Cross in front of the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. She was quite angry at this misrepresentation of Our Lord, in front of the Holy Father himself. Here is an article with a video of Mother Angelica talking about it.
Click to expand...
That video is awesome. Pray for us, Mother Angelica!
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
At the World Youth Day in 1993, a woman played Our Lord in a mimed Stations of the Cross in front of the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. She was quite angry at this misrepresentation of Our Lord, in front of the Holy Father himself. Here is an article with a video of Mother Angelica talking about it.
Click to expand...
no wonder she was upset! I would have been too! I wasn’t Catholic then so I did not know that happened. was that in Denver?
 
PaulfromIowa said:
Read Raymond Arroyo’s excellent biography of Mother Angelica. If your library doesn’t have it, request it.

“Mother Angelica: The Remarkable Story of a Nun, Her Nerve, and a Network of Miracles”
amazon.com/Mother-Angelica-Remarkable-Network-Miracles/dp/0385510934/ref=asap_bc
Click to expand...
I bought that book a few years ago. I need to read it. I was not a big fan of Mother Angelica, but I am very thankful for her work creating EWTN and making it what it is today. She was ahead of her time. I have enormous respect for her.
 
7_Sorrows said:
I wonder what JPII thought. that must have been before Bishop Chaput came to the Diocese of Denver?
Click to expand...
It was indeed. Mother made that point that she felt that the woman playing the part of Jesus was not only blasphemous but that it was an even bigger disgrace given the face that the Holy Father was there. I can imagine him being very bemused to say the least if not very annoyed…
 
Last night I saw Mother Angelica’s video for the first time. For lack of a better word, I found it…very off-putting. Portraying Christ as a woman is not a choice I would have made, but she seemed to think being a woman was foul and dirty (btw, I’m a woman myself).

Please correct me if I’m reading her wrong. I believe she’s a saint in heaven, but just the same I would like to have a little more respect and affection for her than I have right now.:hmmm:
 
billsannie said:
Last night I saw Mother Angelica’s video for the first time. For lack of a better word, I found it…very off-putting. Portraying Christ as a woman is not a choice I would have made, but she seemed to think being a woman was foul and dirty (btw, I’m a woman myself).

Please correct me if I’m reading her wrong. I believe she’s a saint in heaven, but just the same I would like to have a little more respect and affection for her than I have right now.:hmmm:
Click to expand...
She was and rightfully so very annoyed to say the least that Our Lord and Savior, God in the flesh was purposefully in a very devious way portrayed as a woman. She never shirked the truth and many bishops saw her as confrontational which is what she was in truth. I can’t remember anything from the video in what she said which suggested that being a woman was foul and dirty though but she was understandably angry and that anger may have blighted her judgment if she made certain suspect comments…
 
It was her tone of voice more than the exact words she used that made it seem this way to me. Furthermore, I can see why having a woman portray Christ would be ill-advised, but why blasphemous? Especially since the presentation was meant to be symbolic rather than literal.
 
StBenedictLabre said:
She was and rightfully so very annoyed to say the least that Our Lord and Savior, God in the flesh was purposefully in a very devious way portrayed as a woman. She never shirked the truth and many bishops saw her as confrontational which is what she was in truth. I can’t remember anything from the video in what she said which suggested that being a woman was foul and dirty though but she was understandably angry and that anger may have blighted her judgment if she made certain suspect comments…
Click to expand...
And why was it devious? I don’t think it was meant to deceive. Even a teenager should be able to figure out that it wasn’t a literal presentation.
 
billsannie said:
It was her tone of voice more than the exact words she used that made it seem this way to me. Furthermore, I can see why having a woman portray Christ would be ill-advised, but why blasphemous? Especially since the presentation was meant to be symbolic rather than literal.
Click to expand...
Oh ok. The definition of blasphemy is the “act of showing lack of reverence for a God”. The production showed a lack of reverence, was insulting therefore and ultimately showed contempt for Jesus, making it blasphemous…
 
billsannie said:
And why was it devious? I don’t think it was meant to deceive. Even a teenager should be able to figure out that it wasn’t a literal presentation.
Click to expand...
Because they used underhand tactics as Mother noted to undermine Jesus in this way. Yes of course it wasn’t literal but it was still blasphemous regardless…
 
StBenedictLabre said:
Oh ok. The definition of blasphemy is the “act of showing lack of reverence for a God”. The production showed a lack of reverence, was insulting therefore and ultimately showed contempt for Jesus, making it blasphemous…
Click to expand...
I’m still unclear about why portraying Christ as a woman would be disrespectful in and of itself, but I can accept that this particular production may have been contempuous of Jesus and thus blasphemous. Thank you.
 
StBenedictLabre said:
Because they used underhand tactics as Mother noted to undermine Jesus in this way. Yes of course it wasn’t literal but it was still blasphemous regardless…
Click to expand...
I still don’t know how it was underhanded, but I can certainly grant that it was a very poor choice.
 
billsannie said:
I still don’t know how it was underhanded, but I can certainly grant that it was a very poor choice.
Click to expand...
If you listen to Mother’s “rant” again, she briefly touched on this underhanded scheming again. The organizers knew the Pope was there and they wished to put on a provocative performance in order to upset the Holy Father, his entourage and the general audience…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top