Tuesday, July 31, 2012

Everything's Up To Date In San Francisco

They've gone about as fer as they can go. OK, so that was originally "Kansas City," but it seemed to fit. And before you ask, that sign wasn't seen in front of a Chick-fil-A restaurant (if you can't read it, click on it to enlarge it). Still, those pesky Catholics just don't seem to get it. St. Nancy Pelosi has frequently announced the Catholic view of gay marriage, but the Pope and the curia just keep on disagreeing with her. When will the Catholic leaders wise up?

Not any time soon, apparently. Pope Benedict XVI has just appointed Bishop Salvatore J. Cordileone as Archbishop of the San Francisco diocese. Cordileone (whose name translated means "Sal the Lion Heart"), currently chairs the US Conference of Catholic Bishops Subcommittee on the Defense and Promotion of Marriage. Outside of California, he is largely known for his defiant stand on Obamacare mandates. Inside California, he is known for his active support for Proposition 8, the traditional marriage amendment that is being considered at the United States Supreme Court.

Undoubtedly, St. Nancy must be having the vapors. How could the Pope appoint a new archbishop for San Francisco who is so out-of-sync with the crypto-Catholic views of the Pelosians? Recently, Cordileone took a strong stance against the Pelosi/Obama moves to gut the Defense of Marriage Act. For that, he has predictably been denounced as supporting a view of gay rights "that is akin to racism." Well, what traditional conservative or religious point of view hasn't been called racism?

Cordileone gave a nod to his Christian allies recently by saying: "If you take marriage apart, everything comes unraveled. It's been frayed at the edges, and now moving more and more toward the center. But you take marriage out, it all comes unraveled. It all comes tumbling down. And again, the evangelicals, they understand that. They understand this is an attack of the Evil One at the core institution." That produced a Pelosi reaction which countered that the Bishop had gone too far. "The Evil One." What an archaic belief. Still, there are those of us who believe that Satan is the great liar, and the greatest lie he tells is that he doesn't exist. But we aren't Pelosians.

I'm beginning to like the sound of that. The Pelosian Heresy. Hmmmm. Well, never mind, we have to move on. Like so many religious opponents of gay marriage, Cordileone has been denounced as a hater of gays and lesbians. They can't cite a single instance of his ever having said or done anything approaching that, but the current fashion is to equate opposition to gay marriage with hatred of gays. His stance on gay marriage is strictly theological and practical, without any venom for the participants in the ceremonies. For instance, “How well we as a society protect and promote marriage and the family is the measure of how well we stand for the inviolable dignity and good of every individual in our society, without exception. The consequences for our future—especially that of our nation’s children—cannot be greater and must not be ignored.”

In his letter to the Judiciary Committee considering the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Cordileone wrote: "Children have a 'fundamental human right' to a mother and father and redefining marriage would lead to attacks on the religious liberty on those who defend traditional marriage." One can take the position that same-sex parents can provide the same nurture as opposite-sex parents (and many have). But where's the alleged hatred for gays?

Says Cordileone: "In places where marriage’s core meaning has been altered through legal action, officials are beginning to target for punishment those believers and churches that refuse to adapt,” said Cordileone. Any non-conforming conduct and even expressions of disagreement, based simply on support for marriage as understood since time immemorial, are wrongly being treated as if they harmed society, and somehow constituted a form of evil equal to racism." And he's correct. Canadian and Australian courts have already punished pastors who refused to perform gay marriages. One in England was put on probation on the condition that he never again preach any "hateful" Biblical sermon on homosexuality without first submitting it to a government panel for approval or disapproval.

Can't happen here? Bet me! Look at how First Amendment religious freedom is already being entirely ignored by the Obama administration in its promotion of Obamacare birth-control mandates. This administration and liberal courts all over the country believe that nebulous "human rights" trump religious freedom every time.

During the Proposition 8 campaign, the main religious target was the Mormon Church. They are still a relatively small minority in the former Golden State, and it was easier to attack them as homophobes than to attack the large number of evangelicals and Catholics who had taken very public stands in favor of traditional marriage. The thing is that several prominent Mormons put big bucks into the pro-Prop 8 campaign, and they were easy to isolate and defame.

So how does Cordileone actually feel about gays and their relationship to the Catholic Church? Here's a sample: “I think the challenge for us in the church is to help people who are in a situation of sexual orientations where they feel alienated from the church and sometimes experience it very directly. We need to learn, continue to learn, how to be welcoming, let them know that we love them and we want to help them, and that our stand for marriage is not against anyone but its because we believe this is foundational for the good of our society. “ Pretty hateful, huh?

I don't see the new archbishop excommunicating St. Nancy for her views on marriage and abortion any time soon the way a couple of bishops have denied communion to certain prominent Kennedy family members. But I'd love to see it, personally, in the cathedral. And I'm not even Catholic.

36 comments:

Joel Farnham said...

LawHawk,

This Bishop is a very brave man. Isn't San Francisco ground zero for the great Zombie Breakout to occur on Nov 7, 2012?

LawHawkRFD said...

Joel: It is, indeed. But I think he has an exorcism ritual ready. If that fails, there's still nothing much to worry about. There aren't a lot of brains in San Francisco to feed them.

Anthony said...

I'm not Catholic, but based on what I've seen of Catholicism in both the US and Latin America, a lot of self professed Catholics seem to just plain ignore various teachings of the Church.

At least in those regions a lot of people (particularly younger people) are quicker to leave the church (a surprising amount of younger people are evangelicals) than live in heresy or what you call it.

Of course, that is what I have seen in Latin America and the US. Catholicism is growing in Africa and Asia, so perhaps things are different there.

Cheryl said...

Not all homosexuals are as militant as the ones we prominently see in the media.

My brother was gay and he was a conservative. He was also Catholic. He didn't support gay marriage, adoption, or any of the liberal social engineering agenda.

Unfortunately, the reasonable homosexual voice is never heard.

Also unfortunately, he died of AIDS.

patti said...

first read of my bleary-eyed morning. well done. i pray protection for sal the lion heart. he's gonna need it.

tryanmax said...

Anthony, would you judge a team by the players who quit, or a professor by the students who drop his class, or an army by its defectors? I agree the Catholic church does itself no favors by not kicking more people out, but I doubt the opposite approach would win them any accolades either.

StanH said...

As a small “l” libertarian, I don’t care what people do in their own homes, as long as it does not effect me. “But!” This move by a sliver of the population (2-4%) too manipulate the greater society is flat out wrong. I say again, I’m not particularly religious, however Holy Matrimony is a religious ceremony dating back thousands years.

("...For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." Matthew 19: 5-6 (quoting from Genesis 2:24)

I don’t like playing with tradition, too be stylish…shout out to Dirty Harry. Gay people should have the same rights as anyone else, up and until the point you mess with long held societal traditions that could crush the family, by removing another “Western” foundational stone.

Oh, Pelosi is an idiot. Just had to get that in.

T-Rav said...

Hmph, and just the other day one of my liberal friends seriously said that no court would ever force any church to perform a same-sex wedding. I had to get a bit snappish and make her retract that statement. Given that in Sweden you can't even publish Bibles without taking out the verses condemning homosexuality, I'd say most on the Left are either unaware of or highly disingenuous about what their compatriots are prepared to do.

T-Rav said...

Anthony and tryanmax, all I know about that particular issue is that in Latin America, there is a strong Pentecostal movement that a lot of Catholics are switching over to. Beyond that, I got nothing. I don't know many Catholics, period, much less lapsed Catholics.

tryanmax said...

T-Rav, I was unaware of the Pentecostal movement in Latin America. Thanks for informing me. That definitely changes my earlier response in regards to that part of the world. As to U.S. lapsed Catholics, I know many. (Omaha is a very Catholic town.) They tend to just stay lapsed, or go back to Catholicism when they have kids.

The big Cathedral in town, St. Cecelia's, does nice services for Easter and Christmas, and I have occasionally skipped the comparatively staid Lutheran services just for those days.

rlaWTX said...

I realize that "racism" is a default lib position, but I have a friend who is newly converted to lib'ism - and there's no one like the new convert! She has taken up this gay "marriage" issue to heart, and I have been told that I am hateful and that this is JUST like "blacks in the back of the bus". I have been able to ignore politics for the sake of certain relationships, but this one is about to drive me over the edge. And since part of her new lib'ism is a new virulent atheism... geez louise... it's getting tiring.
So, I wish the Bishop well, but he's a glutton for punishment for taking this position!

As for the rest, when are denominations going to realize that the slippery slope is a REAL place, not a fictional boogeyman. You start accommodating factions by changing, removing, altering scripture and there is not a defined stopping point. Saying "OK, we'll done changing things..... NOW" just makes the people you haven't accommodated yet mad. And usually part of those changes in the US are "social justice" positions that are then used to lobby that EVERYONE else make the same changes... or else.

I think today I am kinda looking forward to the zombie apocalypse so we can start all over...

BevfromNYC said...

T-Rav - These liberals that say it can never happen are the same ones that I argue with about late-term abortion. "It never happens!"...uh, yeah it does and at a much higher rate that they care to know.

First, same-sex unions will be legalized whether people want them to or not. And they should be. It's the word and meaning of "marriage" that is holding back both sides. If the militant gay community had pressed for "civil unions" rather than trying to co-opt "marriage", this entire issue could have been settled years ago. Even many in the gay community admit this.

This is one issue where the Europeans have dealt much better than we have. They long ago required a civil union certified/licenced by the state as their legal union between two people. Of course, this was originally to bypass the Catholic Church's ban on "divorce". Couples could marry AND divorce without the chains of the Church's consent.

We need that kind of system, so that EVERYONE can be happy. The State can "unionize" couples of whatever combination, so that they have the same stake in a divorce and frankly, the big issue - can be in the ICU and have all the rights of any spouse when their loved one is injured, sick, or dying. And the Church continue the hundreds of centuries of holy bonds of "marriage" as a sacred religious rite.

Oh, and just wait...the polygamists will be making a stand shortly after DOMA is struck down. Which as I see it, if 2 or more women can live in the same house and share one husband and not kill each other, then they are much better people than most.

LawHawkRFD said...

Anthony: When he was still a cardinal, this Pope traveled to South America and did some housecleaning with the Catholic liberation theologians. For some reason, it had really caught hold in much of Latin America. The trend has been reversed to a large extent, but not wiped out. The concept of interpreting scripture and doctrine from one's own reading and thinking certainly has its place, but not in the Catholic Church. It's called Protestantism.

LawHawkRFD said...

Cheryl: I'm sorry to hear of your brother's death. Though I don't know of any close relatives in my family who are gay, I have and had many friends who are. San Francisco was hit particularly hard by the AIDS epidemic. One of my closest friends stood by my side through some of the worst times in my life. There were times he was a better parent to my kids than I was during my rather messy divorce. He died about five years ago now, though not from AIDS. I gave the eulogy at his funeral, and my kids (all adults now) were heart-broken at his passing. He was among those gay friends of mine who thought the concept of gay marriage was just plain ridiculous, but like me, he felt that if the government would leave the churches alone, then it was fine with him if some of those churches wanted to perform gay weddings.

Yes, there are some very visible gay activists who are involved in the H8 campaign, but most just want to be left alone to make their own decisions and live their own lives. As Andrew and I have both mentioned multiple times, the radical gay marriage movement is not so much about gays as it is about the radical left's war on religion.

LawHawkRFD said...

Patti: The new archbishop is not a man to cave in to pressure from non-Catholics or lapsed Catholics. He will be a strong adversary for St. Nancy.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: It was a bit different in Latin America. Both the evangelical strains and the aforementioned liberation theology had (and may still have) a strong influence south of the border, and conversions to those theologies were much more common than here in the States. Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) recognized that for too long, the Vatican had taken Latin America for granted and that had resulted in a lot of wayward priests developing their own hybrid strains of Catholicism.

LawHawkRFD said...

Stan: Those are pretty much my sentiments, and as the article indicates, those of the new archbishop. There's going to be a battle royal in San Francisco.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: That's true. It has also immigrated to the Southwestern US along with many of the new immigrants. You'll see Iglesias Apostolicas all over the Los Angeles area.

AndrewPrice said...

I can respect the Church's right to take this stand and legally it needs to be protected because our government should not be in the business of deciding who gets to believe what. But in the end, this issue is lost. The mind of the public has changed on this and I really don't think it's going back any time soon.

As for gay activists, they are obnoxious, but conservatives do themselves no favors with non-activist gays by continuing the double speak of saying "I have nothing against gays" and then railing against their immorality and whining about how they will destroy the world. You get a lot more sympathy when you let people be than when you become obsessed with their choices.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Midwestern Lutheranism (particularly in Missouri Synod) is a bit different from what we practice out here. I've seen that when visiting my relatives in Illinois. Here, Good Friday services remain extremely solemn, but Easter services are joyous and celebratory. For both Easter and Christmas, we pull out all the stops.

And as a side note on Lutheran music, I consider Bach's St. Matthew Passion to be the single most magnificent religious music ever composed.

LawHawkRFD said...

rlaTWX: "As for the rest, when are denominations going to realize that the slippery slope is a REAL place, not a fictional boogeyman, et seq." You have just described both the strength and the inherent weakness in Protestantism. The unification of the various versions of the Protestant churches in the US involved, almost required, abandonment of solid theology in order to be "inclusive." Today's United Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church USA and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America have become almost unrecognizable as solid, scripture-based denominations. "You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free" has been replaced with "if it feels good, do it."

LawHawkRFD said...

Bev: That's basically my stance. I oppose gay marriage on religious grounds, but I don't wish to impose my religious views on others (I wish the left were as open-minded). My political and practical objections to gay marriage are based solely on where I think we would be headed if "marriage" becomes a secular matter. So like you, I see the practical answer as legal unions being the sole determinant of legal partner rights and obligations, and marriage being left entirely to the religious institutions. If a church wants to perform a marriage within its theological boundaries, so be it. But I never want to see my church being forced to perform marriages in opposition to our fundamental religious doctrines because of that nebulous "human right" that has become so fashionable, and so oppressive.

T-Rav said...

Bev, I've tried over and over again to explain to my liberal friends that it's not about the "slippery slope," it's about changing the entire definition of marriage and what is considered an acceptable relationship. Personally, I think we've already seen the groundwork laid for taking up the polygamist cause, and it wouldn't surprise me if we move on in the near future to group marriage and even some forms of incest.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: That protection you mention is exactly what I worry about. The French constitution protects "human rights." Ours protects religious liberty, and yet I see the distinct possibility of end-running the First Amendment with those infinitely-malleable human rights we have never subscribed to. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are for everyone, not just for those who subscribe to the popular cause du jour. Gay unions do indeed seem to be inevitable, and I don't have much of a problem with that. Just don't tell my pastor he has to perform one.

And as for everything else you said, I am in total agreement. Condemning homosexuality and getting on a moral high horse only makes things worse. I prefer persuasion over vilification any day in the week.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: The overused slippery slope argument happens to apply here in spades. If traditional marriage is altered to include same-sex partnerships, there is simply no logical argument left to prevent multiple or communal marriages as well. But if it becomes the law of the secular state and the will of the people, I'll have to accept it. Just keep your hands off my religion.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: At least with incestuous marriages, there is medical/genetic/scientific evidence which might allow the state to prevent them. Such evidence doesn't exist for multiple/communal marriages, although there are intelligent arguments regarding psychological harm. I'm just not sure that those psychological arguments would be compelling enough to prevent such marriages.

Individualist said...

Lawhawk

The probelm with the "anti-gay is racism" argument with respect to the catholic church is that it is a non sequitor.

It is not Gay Sex that is seen as sinful. It is Sex. According to Catholic Doctrine dating back to the early church any sex not meant to propigate a child was considered sinful.

It is a difficult standard to maintain but it is the reason for instance a condom's use is sinful. There are varying levels of how this is applied among Catholics. Some are much more Orthodox and Hardcore than other to be sure.

The point is for someone to simply apply some hatefilled label to the Catholic position because they don't like it is simply childish. The more and more I see liberals in action the more convinced I am that Prog values are marketed for the immature and the easily led.

LawHawkRFD said...

Indi: Pope John XXIII did modify the restrictions on sex for its own enjoyment, but only between a husband and wife, and never by artificial means. Thus--the rhythm method!

We had a lot of fun with that announcement. That year, when Cal was playing USC, some of the students in the big dorms put up building-wide signs that read: "Who needs the Trojans? We got rhythm."

To your list of immature and easily-led, I would add just plain lazy. Following a rigorous course of logic and morality can be exhausting.

T-Rav said...

LawHawk, the Swedes may be "officially" Lutheran, but judging by their contemporary culture, I doubt most of them have been inside a church more than once or twice in their whole lives. And don't get me started on the Anglicans. It's reached the point where a lot of the remaining conservatives are splitting off or going Catholic to avoid further association. I don't know how many Lutheran Swedes have such convictions, though.

Tennessee Jed said...

I like the sound of "the Pelosian Heresy" Had it not been seen here, I fear the heirs of Robert Ludlum would have stolen it for a future ghost written book title. For is it not Saint Nan who proclaimed "and those people are smart" when referring to large scale defections of Jewish voters to Romney.

Then again, I also like the fact the archbishop is named Cordileone. It makes me think Luca Brasi might come back to see if she would sleep with Charlie the Tuna (wink, wink, natch natch)

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: Alas, I don't think Sweden (or Norway, for that matter) is salvageable. The Anglicans are in an odd position. They have breakaway congregations all over the US, and the African bishops are very close to schism. It would be ironic if the English Church were to be saved by traditional theologians south of the equator. Secular "feel good" attitudes are weakening the Protestant churches all over the northern hemisphere.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tennessee: Since I invented it, I want a piece of the royalites when Ludlum steals it. LOL

If Cordileone is successful, St. Nancy will soon sleep with the fishes. In this round, I think she has a lion by the tail.

rlaWTX said...

Every so often a congregation member here [PC(USA)] asks me about attending here - and I have to tell them that if God required me to become Presbyterian I'd have to become PCA. They just shake my head. I think as a female I am not allowed to choose the non-woman-ordaining version... But God has not yet made that requirement, so Baptist I shall stay.

As for the marriage slippery slope, I have seen a couple of article where polygamous/polyandrous folks are already planning to challenge limitations if gay "marriage" goes through.

I should say "when it goes through" because I agree with Andrew that the battle will be lost. I think the only fight remaining is whether conscience limitations will be allowed for non-Pelosian clergy.

LawHawkRFD said...

rlaWTX: In summary, I will accept any democratically attained and Supreme Court approved definition of marriage as it relates to the law and the secular world. I unalterably maintain my right and that of my church to reject gay marriage personally and theologically. Thus, I will render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God, that which is God's. I would defend to the death my right to believe what I believe, but I would also defend to the death the right of others to disagree with me. That is the difference between religious liberty and secular oppression.

LawHawkRFD said...

OT: My medical appointment for tomorrow got put off until Thursday, so I won't be making the trip to Bakersfield for Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. I'm counting on all of you who live near a Chick-fil-A to carry on in my behalf. I already did my duty on the first (but less formal) Appreciation Day, so I'm passing the torch to you for tomorrow's event. Cluck, cluck. Eat hearty.

LawHawkRFD said...

rlaWTX: I just heard on FNC that the Tea Party candidate beat the Lt. Governor in the primary. The seat is pretty much safe for Republicans, so that means another true conservative in the Senate.

Post a Comment