Some idiot protestors try to occupy St. Peter’s Square

A few whackjobs of the International Indignados movement tried to “occupy” St. Peter’s Square.

Protesters unhappy about the Vatican’s wealth clashed with police in St. Peter’s Square, with one of the demonstrators scaling the towering Christmas tree.

A few dozen “indignados” protesters, from Spain, France and Italy, tried to pitch two small tents in the square and shouted slogans Saturday afternoon. After police detained three protesters, including the tree-climber, to identify them in a space behind the square’s giant Nativity scene, a clash erupted, with officers swinging clubs and dragging away some demonstrators.
Vatican spokesmen were not immediately available for comment. The “indignados” movement decries the concentration of much wealth in the hands of relatively few. The Italian news agency ANSA said one protester had a bloody nose.

ANSA reports here.


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The future and our choices, Throwing a Nutty and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. historyb says:

    Nuts! No respect for anything

  2. Maltese says:

    Idiots inhabit every age; between the Know Nothings and the Tent Revivalists; we must assuage, be kind, and, most importantly, show by example, and allow them their idiocy.

    But when it comes to the likes of Jonestown, we must suppress them. The red-line is when religion imposes death. (As an aside, what is little know is that the Church never imposed death, but the Inquisition passed opinions to state secular bodies, which then imposed separate sanctions, to include death.)

    These disenfranchised anarchists shouldn’t be allowed their disregard for law and civil order; without which society disintegrates.

  3. UncleBlobb says:

    Put them on a plane to Tehran or Saudi.

  4. Kathleen10 says:

    I’m Indignado you’re bothering the Holy Father.
    These Occupiers are pains in the foot. Get a job, then give whatever you make to someone who isn’t working, then let’s talk. Hypocrites.

  5. NoTambourines says:

    Was this a special for the Feast of the Ass?

    A thought experiment I keep in mind when I’m in one of my moods, which I’d like the Indignados to try:

    I imagine complaining to Mother Teresa, who worked with most poor, desperate, and abandoned people on earth, everything about my life that I find difficult, frustrating, annoying, bothersome, inconvenient, expensive beyond my reach, and “just not fair!”

    She’d probably — probably — be too charitable to headbutt me.

  6. wanda says:

    No Tamborines, There, you’ve said it again, ‘Feast of the Ass(es).’ Nice shell horn, by the way. Our Holy Father must have been doing a facepalm.

  7. RobertK says:

    They should go to Saudi Arabia and pitch their tents in front of the lavish Mosques and see what happens to their movement.

  8. RobertK says:

    People like these seem to forget that what is inside the Vatican is for everyone to cherish. Not to be sold to the highest bidder. Do they think that if the Vatican did sell what’s in St Peters, the buyers would care about the poor and distribute the wealth. If they do than they are sadly decieved.

  9. Johnno says:

    It’s always fun to drop by these people and ask them, “What do you suppose the Church is doing with ‘all’ that money? Is the Pope throwing lavish parties with celebrities? Is there a big swimming pool in the back? Does the Pope play PlayStation? Where are all the hot women? You don’t suppose it’s actually going around to run charitable programs, feed people, educate people, help people, keep churches going, spreading the gospel, and the fabulous architecture and treasures of the Vatican were built up by contributions of the Christian faithful and their leaders to glorify God and inspire men over a long period of 2000 years of slow building? etc. etc. Sure there have been periods where illicit Popes did abuse the wealth of the Church, but all in all what are their problems with the current popes of their generation? I’ve heard that the Vatican makes about $10 million a year for a huge global organization. That’s chump change and pennies compared to what other companies rake in…”

    Makes them think things over a little…

  10. Father K says:

    They seem to have plenty of free time on their hands. Why don’t they get a job, like everybody else?

  11. Joe in Canada says:

    In Paris when the SSPX occupied St Nicholas du Chardonnet the Archbishop let them stay. When the ‘sans-papiers’ – mostly African illegal immigrants ‘without papers’ took refuge in churches the Archbishop let the police in. Maybe the Undignified Ones (what’s the best English translation for Indignados?) should try becoming Lefebvrists.

  12. Ismael says:

    “The “indignados” movement decries the concentration of much wealth in the hands of relatively few. ”

    Ironically they mostly are rich and spoiled kids. Can you say ‘hypocircy’? :D

  13. Ismael says:

    hypocircy = Hypocrisy, sorry about the typo.

  14. Supertradmum says:

    It is not just noisy youth who play the “wealthy Vatican must sell all” song. Recently, I have been involved in two discussions, with apparently intelligent adults in Europe, who said the same thing.
    The irony was that at least some of these so-called adults were well-to-do themselves, and obviously would not sacrifice their European vacations, jewels, etc. for the poor. Socialism knows no age limit. I really think these young, spoiled occupiers would be better off working in the fields or, dare I say it, volunteering at a homeless shelter, or helping those in the Sant’Egidio Community pass out food to the poor. Deeds, not words, or not blowing on a conch shell…

  15. Supertradmum says:

    By the way, the conch shell in Hindu mythology gives the “Om” which creates the earth, and the universe….I mean, really…!

  16. DisturbedMary says:

    Yeah. Re-distribute the wealth. On Day 1 divide all the wealth and send everybody a check with their fair share. What happens on Day 2 when I decide to spend it all on electronics, and my neighbor decides to invest his portion, and another starts a business? By Day 3 (or even Day 2) somebody’s got more than the next person. I give thanks to St. Maximilian Kolbe who wrote this compact and direct refutation of “redistribute the wealth” economics.

    “When he sees the luxurious residence or the charming country house of a wealthy person, a poor workingman often asks himself: Why is there such inequality in the world?”

    How many volumes have been written about equality among men! How much blood has been spilled for this idea! And yet, in spite of it all, we still have the rich and the poor…

    Let us imagine that one day all the inhabitants of the work world would assemble to put into effect this sharing of all goods; and that in fact each person, granting that the world is very big, received an exactly equal portion of the wealth existing on earth.

    The what? That very evening, one man might say, “Today I worked hard: now I am going to take rest.” Another might state, “I understand this sharing of goods well; so let’s drink and celebrate such an extraordinary happening.” On the other hands, another might say, “Now I am going to get to work with a will so as to reap the greatest benefit I can from what I have received.” And so, starting the next day, the first man would have only the amount given him; the second would have less, and the third would have increased his.

    Then what do we do? Start redistributing the wealth all over again?

    Even if everybody began to work right away with all his might and at the same time, the results would not be identical for all. There are, in fact, different kinds of work which are unequally productive; nor do workers enjoy the same identical capacities. This leads to a diversity of results achieved, and consequently to differences in people’s profits.

    What would have to be imposed so that, once the division of goods was accomplished, people could continue to live on a basis of equality in this sense? All workers would have to perform the same tasks, all possess equal intelligence and ability, have similar professional training, the same degree of health and strength, and especially the same desire to put forth the necessary efforts. All of this is quite utopian.

    To continue the argument, even if there were only two persons in the world, they would not succeed in maintaining absolute equality; for in the whole universe there are no two things completely identical in every respect…

    In spite of this, the human mind still desires to bring about certain equality among men. Is there any possibility that this can happen? Yes, no doubt. Every man, whoever he is, whatever he possesses and whatever he is capable of doing, owes all this to God the Creator of the universe. Of himself man is nothing. From this point of view all of us are absolutely equal.

    Furthermore we all possess free will, which makes us masters of all our actions. This too constitutes the basic equality of all men on earth. But the use made of our free will is not the same in all cases; it depends in fact on each man’s own determination, on the extent to which he makes use of this precious gift; for not all do so in the same degree. It follows that not even after death will perfect equality be achieved; it will not in fact exist, because every man will receive a just reward or punishment according to his deeds, good or evil. ”

    …The Kolbe Reader: The Writings of Saint Maximilian M. Kolbe (Libertyville, IL: Franciscan Marytown Press, 1987).

    Kolbe died in Auschwitz when he asked to take the place of another prisoner who was sentenced to die.

  17. Father K says:

    The Archbishop of Paris wasn’t involved – the churches in France belong to the State not the Church so he had no authority to evict them

  18. On September 25, 2011, during his visit to Germany, the Holy Father said:

    In order to accomplish her true task adequately, the Church must constantly renew the effort to detach herself from her tendency towards worldliness and once again to become open towards God. In this she follows the words of Jesus: “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world” (Jn 17:16), and in precisely this way he gives himself to the world. One could almost say that history comes to the aid of the Church here through the various periods of secularization, which have contributed significantly to her purification and inner reform.

    Secularizing trends – whether by expropriation of Church goods, or elimination of privileges or the like – have always meant a profound liberation of the Church from forms of worldliness, for in the process she as it were sets aside her worldly wealth and once again completely embraces her worldly poverty. In this she shares the destiny of the tribe of Levi, which according to the Old Testament account was the only tribe in Israel with no ancestral land of its own, taking as its portion only God himself, his word and his signs. At those moments in history, the Church shared with that tribe the demands of a poverty that was open to the world, in order to be released from her material ties: and in this way her missionary activity regained credibility.

    Do statements such as these inadvertently encourage these kinds of protests?

  19. irishgirl says:

    Get the Swiss Guards with their halberds and REALLY boot these ‘Occupiers’ out of St. Peter’s Square!
    Spoiled brats, the ‘Occupiers’ are….not to mention, idiots.
    I’m glad that the cops came in with swinging clubs-something that their brother officers should have done in London when the ‘Occupiers’ set up their filthy camp outside St. Paul’s Cathedral!
    If I were a strong instead of a weak woman, I would have rushed in, grabbed the demonstrators by the scruffs of their necks, and ‘thrown them out bodily’! And I’d also tell them, ‘Learn some respect for a holy place, and get a job!’

  20. CatholicCaliGirl says:

    You said it. These People really tick me off. I’m glad this blog is around to keep sanity from dying out.

Comments are closed.