More Jesuit B as in B, S as in S in Archdiocese of New York

In the otherwise beautiful church in Manhattan, St. Francis Xavier, in the clutches of the Jesuits, the visitor will today see this.  Sent via phone:

Think that this was perhaps a photoshop job, I went to their website HERE

On their rotating header they have this image.

This is sacrilege, as it is the misuse of that altar which is consecrated.  It looks as if the mensa is still there.

This is also blasphemous, since it seems to present these people for veneration.  They are placed, after all, on an altar.

Imagine what St. Edmund Campion would say about this.  Peter Canisius!   John de Brebeuf!  FRANCIS XAVIER!


I respond: GANGANELLI!

Clement XIV (Ganganelli) swag is now available.


Clement_XVI_Mug_01 Clement_XVI_Mug_02





Meanwhile, in Rochester, NY…

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in B as in B. S as in S., Liberals, You must be joking! and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Joy1985 says:

    God have mercy on us and on the whole world.

  2. ChesterFrank says:

    And that’s how the Church turns into yet one more politicized NGO’s

  3. ArthurH says:

    My own Jesuit HS in NYC– already with a blacks-only group (which I have told the president of the school was a BAD idea)– has also told us alums of the great programs they are setting up there to help instruct the students get over their racism; “We’re not doing enough” or words to that effect. Bleh.

    He also received the benefit of my take on that.

  4. PostCatholic says:

    As a point of a parliamentary inquiry, is the B. as in B. and S. as in S (or put another way, your objection) in essentia:

    1. The subject matter, which I assume to be intercessory prayers for justice for George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery and perhaps other victims of police use of lethal force;

    2. The placement of the display for such on an altar in a Catholic church;

    3. Both?

  5. Kathleen10 says:

    I have seen this elsewhere and suggested someone pull a Tschuggel, as in, Alexander Tschuggel, who facilitated the swimming lesson for the Pachamama triplets in Rome. Wearing a hoodie is best.
    Everything in public schools, universities, colleges is going to ramp up in the fall. They cannot wait to get their hands on kids and young people. There shall be “diversity training for all” employees, but it’s aimed at whites, the only possible bigots. White Johnny and Jane will learn in school and in the workplace how utterly rotten they are, and Black Johnny and Jane will learn how ticked off they need to be at White Johnny and Jane. All will learn to hate the nation and culture that bred them so they will embrace violence against any who disagree or are different from themselves, and that their entire nation needs to be destroyed to rebuild it according to Marxist diktats. This has been the value taught for many years now, but it’s going to increase exponentially.
    Thanks to one disordered cop.

  6. Suburbanbanshee says:

    PostCatholic, that’s not a Protestant church or a Protestant altar, and it’s certainly not just a table in a funeral home.

    You do not request intercessory prayer for people by putting their pictures on top of an altar. The altar is for Jesus Christ’s Body and Blood, and for a few other materials used in the celebration of the Mass or other Sacraments. Putting anything there that does not belong is sacrilege (or attempted idolatry, but we’ll stick with sacrilege, and assume it was done ignorantly).

    If the pictures had been placed on a non-altar table, outside the altar and sanctuary area, such as on a nice table in the front aisle or in a side aisle, or even in the vestibule, there would be a reasonable treatment of the pictures going on. Or if they had been placed in front of a saint’s statue where one normally sees votary candles, or perhaps alongside the votary candles as a silent plea for prayers for the dead, one could understand that.

    Altars are not display tables. They are places where Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross is re-presented to the Father. Any other use, no matter how well-intended, is usurping God’s property.

  7. grateful says:

    There is a good article in The Wall Street Journal Sat/Sun, July, 25-26 entitled
    “America Isn’t a Racist Country” by Ward Connerly.
    …”Our history is the best proof that America is not a racist nation. A nation of white racists wouldn’t elect and re-elect a black man as president…”
    …”The claim that America is ‘systemically racist’ is a false narrative that fuels racial paranoia, division and hatred.”…

  8. KateD says:

    OH. MY. GOSH.

  9. PostCatholic says:

    So the subject matter is not the objection, but rather the use of the altar for it? Thank you, Suburbanbanshee, comments supra leave me confused as they seem to digress broadly (and badly, in my opinion) from the three police violence victims rather than from misuse of an altar.

  10. teomatteo says:

    This may not start at the top but it can only end at the top.

  11. LeeGilbert says:

    This reminds me . . . . Back in the day, twenty years ago or so, our parish had a mission given by a Jesuit, and he had some things to say which were very good, in fact some wisdom that I pass on when given the opportunity.

    However, there were a couple of very off-putting elements to his ministry. For one, he advertised himself as a former spiritual director to Mother Teresa. Does one advertise that kind of thing? It seemed like trading on holy things. But related to this post he had decorously filled the sanctuary with boxes of something that he was selling to support his work, I think it was candles. The verse came to mind, “My house is a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves.” There were a ton of these little boxes arranged symmetrically in stacks up to the stairs to the altar..

    It struck me as so inappropriate, but what can one do in such a situation? No, really, what can one do? Is it the better part of wisdom to write the bishop afterwards or to raise Cain then and there? All our Catholic formation tends toward giving the priest the benefit of the doubt, even in such egregious situations and it seems to be a disposition that ultimately bears bad fruit. In fact, that particular priest died in prison, having been convicted of sexually abusing minors. Had he been “pushing the envelope” for years with no one daring to confront him to his face? It seems very likely.

    Similarly, but no where near as bad, on entering the Jesuit church off the campus of their university in San Francisco a few years ago we were confronted with a poster on a tripod advertising books by James Martin, S.J. This was in the nave, not the foyer. Even if they had been advertising books by Pope Benedict, something so commercial in the Church seemed wildly out of place. But are these just aesthetic considerations, or are there specific canons against such things?

    What legal or canonical dangers would a parishioner run if he took down such images from the altar at St. Francis Xavier? Does he really need permission from anyone to do so? Is it a sin or a mitzvah?

  12. Kathleen10 says:

    Sometimes I wish people would just say what they mean rather than post oblique references.
    Latin prefixes are comprehensible. Maybe I do misunderstand. Please excuse me, my church has gone over to apostasy and my nation is collapsing in front of my eyes in the space of 8 years. I’m rather cranky.

  13. Nathanael says:

    Because when sorrows come, they come not single spies, but in battalions, this calls to mind that the Jesuits’ Amerika magazine ran an appalling little article, The crucifixion of George Floyd.

    The parallels between particulars of the crucifixion most familiar to us, as reported in the New Testament, and that of George Floyd are haunting…
    Jesus was laid on the ground to be nailed to the cross. George Floyd was laid face down on the ground and pinned by Derek Chauvin’s knee on his neck… As time passed, Jesus suffered from thirst; George Floyd asked for water.
    Both Jesus and George Floyd were repeatedly mocked by their killers. Jesus cried out to his father, and George Floyd called for his mother. Shortly before he lost consciousness, he said: “I’m through. I’m through”—in other words, “It is finished.”
    The cause of death of a person crucified on a raised cross was usually asphyxiation… Over and over, George Floyd cried, “I can’t breathe.”
    Leaving the body on display for a long time as a warning to others, a central element of crucifixion as punishment (but not so long in the case of Jesus—the darkened sky, the earthquake and the splitting of rocks were presumably [“presumably”!] factors), was present in Minneapolis in altogether modern ways: video and compression of time. The three minutes that Officer Chauvin kept his knee on his unresponsive arrestee’s neck even after no pulse could be found, seems like an eternity on the video. The sounds and images of the entire course of George Floyd’s torment and death will live on in perpetuity on YouTube or whatever is next.
    The story of Christ’s crucifixion was not written down for almost half a century. In our time, to our great credit, the crucifixion of George Floyd has instantaneously touched and galvanized the nation and beyond. “Daddy changed the world,” his 6-year-old daughter said.

    Perhaps it’s not mere happenstance they’re profaning the altar this way?

  14. avus251 says:

    Is this any worse than, say, a pope placing a beach ball on an altar?

    [Think it through. Yes. It is worse.]

  15. Pingback: MONDAY LATE EDITION – Big Pulpit

  16. JonPatrick says:

    Interesting that we don’t have any pictures on the altar of the dozens killed by gang violence in Chicago or other cities which is now worsening as the powers that be defund their police forces leaving the mostly black inner city residents defenseless. Instead it is the tiny minority killed by police deplorable as it may be that gets all the attention. Of course we know the true reason, that this really has nothing to do with caring about black lives but is about bringing down our American way of life and the Judaeo-christian basis of it.

  17. Semper Gumby says:

    Well, the Communists had their shrine to Lenin, the National Socialists had their martyr Horst Wessel, so no surprise these particular Jesuits and the Party of Death are deifying George Floyd. As pointed out above, this misuse of the altar is sacrilege and blasphemy.

    JonPatrick: Good point. There is no photo of Captain Dorn on that altar, nor Bernell Trammell (a black Trump supporter likely assassinated for his political beliefs), nor (since PostCatholic above is concerned about “police violence”) a photo of Justine Diamond (a white Australian woman murdered by black Minneapolis cop Mohammed Noor).

    Fundamentally, this Jesuit stunt is not about skin color, it’s about content of character, Marxist revolution and rebellion against God.

    Suburbanbanshee: Good point.

  18. tho says:

    We are spitting into the wind, and until the church returns to the TLM it will only continue. Archbishop Lefebvre had it so right, and I hope and pray that Archbishop Vigano will carry on the good fight. We are in dire need of high profile conservative clergy, to chastise these abominable Jesuits.

  19. TheLanguageMan says:

    As others have said, there’s nothing wrong with a memorial for the dead, no matter who they are; it just does not belong in the sanctuary and definitely not on the altar.

    That this is virtue signaling is blatantly obvious, especially the background colors of each flower in the second picture. Two birds with one stone, I guess.

    How quickly they exploit these people for their own gain!

Comments are closed.