Skip to comments.The PR Guru Who Wants to Take Down San Francisco's Archbishop Cordileone
Posted on 03/19/2015 1:14:52 PM PDT by NYer
The battle for San Franciscos Catholic schools has been joined. Will Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone or a public-relations expert survive?
Last month, the archbishop called for changes to the staff and faculty handbooks of the archdioceses four high schools in the 2015-2016 school yearSacred Heart and Archbishop Riordan in San Francisco, Marin Catholic in Kentfield, and Junipero Serra in San Mateo. The proposal would add a detailed statement on Church teaching about sexual morality and the sanctity of life.
According to Catholic SF Weekly, the archbishop explained his proposals this way:
One magazine profile of Singer says: You hire Sam Singer to have a fight. Whoever hired him has gotten a fight. Articles on the subject no longer say that the archbishop is a reasonable man whose reasonable goals can be met by reasonable people coming together and reaching agreement. Instead they say that the archbishop is an affront to Pope Francis, who should be fired because he still believes the unpopular teachings of Catholicism.
Somebody paid for a fight. Somebody got a fight. It doesn't seem to be in the teachers' interests, but it is being fought in their name.
If the archbishops own diocesan paper is a guide, Cordileone has a good idea of the people footing Singers bill.
Figures. We get a Church leader that speaks the truth and the deviants (and Pelosi the “Catholic”) go after him. If we don’t support him, we deserve what we get.
During this season of Lent, we recall the 40 days our Lord spent in the desert. Satan used the occasion to tempt Jesus. This is no different. Please pray for the good bishop. He needs our prayers.
Amen to that.
I am betting that their "sexuality" won the struggle in every single case.
Everyone is praying that Pope Francis will get rid of Archbishop Cordileone and these priests,
Praying? To whom? Satan?
Thank you for reminding us to pray.
St. Michael, the Archangel, defend us in battle!
Sorry, Sam Singer, you have nothing to say about the Archbishop’s placement in your archdiocese now, nor will that opportunity ever present itself.
Unfortunately, thats wishful thinking. Sam singer isnt going anywhere; whether the Archbishop does or not remains to be seen.
As a traditional Catholic, and a genuine supporter of Archbishop Cordileone, Im terribly saddened by what is going on in SF these days, but Im not surprised. Archbishop Cordileone took what can only be described described as the most meek and gentle step to bring back just a touch of Catholicism to his school district, and hes slapped down like a stray dog. So how can this happen to a Catholic Archbishop?
Actually, its quite simple. We are all now witnessing the start of the destruction of the Catholic Church in real time. No, it will never be destroyed, because Jesus Christ has promised us that. But it will certainly come as close to appearing to disappear (at least as we know it) as anyone might imagine. To think otherwise is Pollyannaish. Just last week the bishops of Ireland were unwilling (deathly fearful) of even asking their flock to vote against homosexual marriage. Their advice was to reflect upon your vote, but we bishops take no position. Can the USCCB be far behind?
Personally, I hope Archbishop Cordileone has the stones to hold firm, if not even up the ante. Many of the homosexual bishops of the USCCB will try to pressure him to back off, and surely this pope will deliver some warning signals to him as time goes on. But Singer is good, and the homosexual community will back him to the hilt. But if you happen to think that Im too pessimistic on this, and thats understandable, take a look at how many anti-homosexual public relations firms have been hired to wage a counter-attack on the Sam Singer blitz. I believe the answer to that is zero; and unfortunately, it will probably remain there.
Inexplicably, Pope Francis has made about 4 separate references to a book that has predicted what we are essentially witnessing today. The book is Lord of the World (Hugh Benson), but what is really strange about this, is that the book (written over 100 years ago) is an out and out condemnation of everything that Pope Francis stands for. Others have noticed this strange fixation of Francis on this book as well. But if your curious as to why there are people who are seeing much more than a mere schism forthcoming, this book provides some incredible insight
I am praying for Archbishop Cordileone!
Oh, the heart-rending lament of the lost who want to be saved. (From what??? By what???)
The plaint of the above-italics is surprisingly widely shared by the members of the gay community with whom I have been dealing all my life, plus their friends.
What these people all seem to have in common is the demand that they not be offended in any way, shape, or form, by anything that makes them feel uncomfortable. Any perceived slight to their self-esteem evidently causes visceral pain. Therefore, the State (and its minions) must step in to redress and relieve this harm to, this suffering of, their self-esteem, etc.
Whatta buncha wimps!!!
Anyhoot, this very issue is very close to me personally right now. My beloved sister is gay. As far as I can recall, we have never broached this subject in our 60 years of sisterly togetherness .
But I managed to grieviously offend her partner of 27 years, J, in a phone conversation last Tuesday night. We were having a lovely discussion involving philosophy/theology, when all of the sudden the gay issue came up. But not from my side!!!
It was simply that J asked me point-blank what I thought of the issue. I figured the better part of wisdom, given the family connection/context, was to say as little as possible as I could truthfully say.
And so I said: I have always had the utmost difficulty in understanding how a person could have a mental, psychical self-concept so completely in contradiction of the facts of their own personal biology.
Note I wasnt asserting a position; I was merely indicating a problem I was experiencing in the analysis of evidence.
Notwithstanding, the conversation terminated at that point.
So I ruminated over these events, and the next day wrote a letter of apology to J. The key concept was that I have always engaged with her as if she were a full-blown, sovereign individual in her own right, and not merely as a member of some class, or group. And thats the truth of it. Also I reaffirmed the family connections .
I got a letter back today, thanking me for my apology, but somehow I did not get the sense that J has yet accepted it. She indicated she was still suffering, still speechless, owing to the injuries that I had imposed on her in my recent hateful speech. Or words to that effect.
Sigh. Life goes on.
Meanwhile I dont dare write back a word til J is over her blue funk assuming she ever gets over it.
Take this sample family problem and blow it up to the size of the entire contemporary American culture, and perhaps you can see the types of argument that a sane society has a stake in refuting.
Thank you for the excellent post, NYer!!!
What gays do in private and personally.. as I've read...
Disgusts and offends me.. I'd rather not even think of it..let alone see, hear or read it..
Public displays by them FORCE THE ISSUE(s)...
I don't like being forced.. tends to make me want to force BACK..
Gay parades are disgusting displays of disgusting things..
for kids to observe, hear, and process.. AND I'm not happy about it..
Not happy at all...
My opinion...... Sodom got off EASY...
No matter how you would have phrased the response to her question, her pride would have been hurt. She knows you are straight ... what type of honest response did she expect?
I have worked with gays over the years; we have several gay parishioners and, like you, have a few in our family. The one common thread that binds them is their extreme sensitivity. Their fragile nature cannot deal with an honest response. You probably realize that this "slight" will be used as justification to distance herself and your sister, from you. Science has not found a "gay" gene. So, for us, the question remains - how can someone become gay? One of my aunts had 6 children. When we were all kids, I immediately sensed that one of her boys was different. Back then, we lacked a term to associate with this difference. It wasn't until we grew into adulthood and my cousin became a popular female impersonator that I could connect the dots. Pray for them!
That thought has occurred to me, dear NYer, re: my sister (future collateral damage?). Thanks for supporting me in the view that I am not "nuts" in imagining this possibility.
What I haven't been able to say outright to J or my sister is this: People who live in First Reality, and people who live in Second Reality, have an extraordinarily difficult time in communicating with one another. So much so, that one suspects that the entire point of constructing a Second Reality is to obviate, to "get rid of" First Reality in the first place.
If one can imaginatively dispose of one's own biological nature at will, then why not think that the entire order of Nature is similarly up for grabs? That is to say, subject to a "redefinition" may I ask, according to what deranged criteria of quasi-human imagination are the things of life being "redefined?"
Anyhoot, what is happening in my family is sad. I'll try to do anything I can to make things better, by the Grace of God.
I better shut up and sign off for now. Thank you so very much, dear sister NYer, for writing!
A couple of things come to mind.
One is that some things wrap themselves around your sense of self to the point that you imagine that to give that up, you are no longer you. In reality the opposite is true, but because you can’t conceive of it you have a permanent stronghold there and you will not allow anyone including God to intrude there.
Many of us, maybe most of us have strongholds in our makeup, sometimes so closely intertwined with our sense of self that we don’t even recognize them, we certainly can’t see them as something that requires fixing. Its who we are, we can’t imagine trying to change it.
This is not necessarily the final answer, though. At least it doesn’t have to be. Whatever stronghold you or I may declare off-limits, God can work with it and work around it. If we once give him permission to take up residence, and begin to shuffle the furniture around, he will initially respect our boundaries (gentleman that he is) but over time he will change us and change the circumstance that causes us to cling to the things we cling to until one day you wake up and it has fallen away and you’re not sure how or when it happened.
Some things can change in a moment, others change slowly over time as the thing that drove it or caused it or created the need for it slowly disappears. But the first step is giving God permission to be God of your life without dictating what that will ultimately mean. She might be afraid to do it; a lot of us are, or she may harbor some private anger that makes it difficult to do. The day comes, though, when you decide to just go with it; let him lead and let the chips fall.
So the answer for now is to just pray for her. (I’m sure you already do). Ask God to show himself to her in a way that she can understand, and begin the work of drawing her in. You can’t do anything to change her at this stage of life; he can. That his job.
Truly I suspect people like her want to be justified, affirmed or authenticated. But to do so would require ignoring what God has said consistently in natural law, canon law and Spiritual law.
There is no wiggle room there.
May God bless you in all things and may He give ears to hear and guidance to all those caught up in such desires.
Indeed, I agree with your assessment, dearest sister in Christ.
But this begs the question: justified, affirmed or authenticated by WHAT??? Or more to the point, by WHOM???
J is what one might call a "lapsed Catholic." I gather she fell away from the Faith because it stipulates certain moral imperatives that she does not personally agree with.
Which is an enterprise widely joined nowadays, captured in the phrase "cafeteria Catholic": People who feel that the Faith is really just a smorgasbord that one can just willy-nilly, selectively choose from in satisfaction of one's own personal predilections. Mainly because whatever shreds of the faith that survive this editing process make us "feel good about ourselves."
Which expectation results in the following: We believe in the Church when its pronouncements concur with our own personal predilections. Ignore all the rest.
Indeed, before our recent conversation took such a bad turn, J and I were discoursing on the idea of "the white lie." J averred that "white lies" were nothing consequential to the future state of a "white liar." Not only that, but that the Catholic Church looked askance at such as a matter of policy.
I took the opposite point of view, averring that ANY lie, whether "white" or "black," is equally a falsification of Reality, and thus not to be entertained by people who loved God, the Creator of Reality....
Since our basic disagreement as to such matters is so profound, how am I supposed to "justify, affirm, or authenticate" her?
Such are matters I definitely want to leave up to God's Judgment. I am not qualified to render judgment of this kind.
I just leave the matter this way: J is a beloved member of my family until such time as she chooses to take my sister hostage, against the time wherein I fully comply with her will.... whatever the Hell that is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.