Catholics supporting Archbishop Cordileone on school identity feel silenced, pressured

[kozlosap]

Wow. The Archdiocese, and its supporters in this effort to enforce these morality clauses on teachers, are certainly doing a fine job of playing the victim. What seems to be missing is the acknowledgement that Archbishop Cordileone is the one who instigated this conflict, that has caused teachers to feel that their jobs are in jeopardy. A little honesty about that would be utterly refreshing.

This insistence that this new language does “not introduce anything essentially new” and is “not intended to target teachers for dismissal” is shamefully dishonest, as that is precisely the reason these “clarifications” are being insisted upon. After all, if it’s not introducing anything new, why is there any need for clarification, unless the Archbishop has noted problems with teachers in diocesan schools that cannot be handled to his satisfaction under the current language? The message is that if you have any hesitance in your acceptance of Catholic teaching, you’re job may be in jeopardy. Get your conscience in line with Church teaching or start looking for another job.

And if that’s what he wants, fine, but he should be honest about it. If you’re going to work in a diocesan school, you need not apply if you are not Catholic, or if you have any disagreement with Catholic doctrine. Period.

Yes! If everyone would Google back to the very beginning of this controversy , it would show that this had absolutely not one thing to do with what is being taught in the classroom . It’s about the private thoughts and lives of teachers outside the classroom. If a teacher, whether Catholic or not, was seen by someone entering or leaving an IVF clinic and that was reported to the Archdiocese, for example, that teacher could be fired. The students and parents in the City did not want their teachers subjected to that wonderful group of “Holier than the Pope Catholic Snitches”!

 

[Fat_Salmon]

God Bless you Archbishop Cordileone!

 

[Pulvis]

Yes! If everyone would Google back to the very beginning of this controversy , it would show that this had absolutely not one thing to do with what is being taught in the classroom . It’s about the private thoughts and lives of teachers outside the classroom. If a teacher, whether Catholic or not, was seen by someone entering or leaving an IVF clinic and that was reported to the Archdiocese, for example, that teacher could be fired. The students and parents in the City did not want their teachers subjected to that wonderful group of “Holier than the Pope Catholic Snitches”!

And somehow you assume that if one lives in direct disobedience to Catholic Doctrine, their opinions will not manifest in the classroom? Their disdain for Catholic teaching will not find its way into their teaching style? As many Catholic primary and secondary schools have proven, we need many many more Archbishop Cordileones cleaning house.

 

[Havard]

Wow. The Archdiocese, and its supporters in this effort to enforce these morality clauses on teachers, are certainly doing a fine job of playing the victim. What seems to be missing is the acknowledgement that Archbishop Cordileone is the one who instigated this conflict, that has caused teachers to feel that their jobs are in jeopardy. A little honesty about that would be utterly refreshing.

This insistence that this new language does “not introduce anything essentially new” and is “not intended to target teachers for dismissal” is shamefully dishonest, as that is precisely the reason these “clarifications” are being insisted upon. After all, if it’s not introducing anything new, why is there any need for clarification, unless the Archbishop has noted problems with teachers in diocesan schools that cannot be handled to his satisfaction under the current language? The message is that if you have any hesitance in your acceptance of Catholic teaching, you’re job may be in jeopardy. Get your conscience in line with Church teaching or start looking for another job.

And if that’s what he wants, fine, but he should be honest about it. If you’re going to work in a diocesan school, you need not apply if you are not Catholic, or if you have any disagreement with Catholic doctrine. Period.

I must assume that you are unaware of what the Archbishop and his office have actually said, because otherwise you’d be intentionally spreading false information.

The pastoral letter and the accompanying materials that were published at the time of the proposed changes made it clear that teachers may certainly have hesitation or disagreements with Church doctricne, as have many subsequent statements.

From the Feb. 4 letter to the teachers:

Finally, it is important to note the careful use of language in the document. In front of many statements of Catholic teaching in the faculty handbook come the words “affirm and believe.” This is a statement made on behalf of the institution, not all individuals in the institutions. Our Catholic high schools try to hire people who do believe what the Church teaches, but in our schools we have good teachers who belong to other Christian faiths or to no faith at all. They are members of the school community. The language “affirm and believe” acknowledges the good activity of the entire corps of faculty and staff by making this claim on behalf of the institution. That is, in the first instance, “affirm and believe” refers to the Catholic high school itself, and, secondly, to many faculty who identify with the Catholic teachings behind which the high school as a whole stands.

From the recent Q&A:

On the contrary, the statement specifically acknowledges that not all of our teachers will agree with everything the Catholic Church teaches.

Similarly, the point of the CBA is not to require assent to any of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[Used2beSherryG]

Wow. The Archdiocese, and its supporters in this effort to enforce these morality clauses on teachers, are certainly doing a fine job of playing the victim. What seems to be missing is the acknowledgement that Archbishop Cordileone is the one who instigated this conflict, that has caused teachers to feel that their jobs are in jeopardy. A little honesty about that would be utterly refreshing.

This insistence that this new language does “not introduce anything essentially new” and is “not intended to target teachers for dismissal” is shamefully dishonest, as that is precisely the reason these “clarifications” are being insisted upon. After all, if it’s not introducing anything new, why is there any need for clarification, unless the Archbishop has noted problems with teachers in diocesan schools that cannot be handled to his satisfaction under the current language? The message is that if you have any hesitance in your acceptance of Catholic teaching, you’re job may be in jeopardy. Get your conscience in line with Church teaching or start looking for another job.

And if that’s what he wants, fine, but he should be honest about it. If you’re going to work in a diocesan school, you need not apply if you are not Catholic, or if you have any disagreement with Catholic doctrine. Period.

The new language in the contract definitely does NOT introduce anything new so far as Catholic teachings are concerned. The new language became necessary only due to the fact that the secular culture keeps moving the line in what is morally acceptable while the Church does not. I agree with your assessment that those who don’t want to adhere to church teachings should look elsewhere for employment. The Archbishop is not creating a crisis, he is reaffirming the teachings of the Church. A few years ago, all this clarification would not be needed as everyone understood what was required. it’s only recently that the agenda of approximately 3 percent of the population has become vicious in it’s attacks on the Catholic Church and the media are just loving all the controversy. The Archbishop is standing strong in representing our faith and deserves our support and our prayers.

 

[Havard]

Yes! If everyone would Google back to the very beginning of this controversy , it would show that this had absolutely not one thing to do with what is being taught in the classroom . It’s about the private thoughts and lives of teachers outside the classroom. If a teacher, whether Catholic or not, was seen by someone entering or leaving an IVF clinic and that was reported to the Archdiocese, for example, that teacher could be fired. The students and parents in the City did not want their teachers subjected to that wonderful group of “Holier than the Pope Catholic Snitches”!

Stop spreading falsehoods.

From the Feb 4. letter to teachers:

At the outset, though, I wish to state clearly and emphatically that the intention underlying this document is not to target for dismissal from our schools any teachers, singly or collectively

and later, in the same document:

The way to assist teachers who distance themselves or privately oppose some Catholic teachings is to alert them to sensitive issues. Because the school fosters holiness, virtue and evangelization, teachers not knowledgeable about the precise contours of Catholic teaching have to be cautious about what they say in the school and what they do in the public sphere outside the Catholic school. Honest mistakes do happen, and when they do, reparation can be made. This is not in and of itself a cause for a teacher to be punished.

 

[oneofmany]

Wow. The Archdiocese, and its supporters in this effort to enforce these morality clauses on teachers, are certainly doing a fine job of playing the victim. What seems to be missing is the acknowledgement that Archbishop Cordileone is the one who instigated this conflict, that has caused teachers to feel that their jobs are in jeopardy. A little honesty about that would be utterly refreshing.

This insistence that this new language does “not introduce anything essentially new” and is “not intended to target teachers for dismissal” is shamefully dishonest, as that is precisely the reason these “clarifications” are being insisted upon. After all, if it’s not introducing anything new, why is there any need for clarification, unless the Archbishop has noted problems with teachers in diocesan schools that cannot be handled to his satisfaction under the current language? The message is that if you have any hesitance in your acceptance of Catholic teaching, you’re job may be in jeopardy. Get your conscience in line with Church teaching or start looking for another job.And if that’s what he wants, fine, but he should be honest about it. If you’re going to work in a diocesan school, you need not apply if you are not Catholic, or if you have any disagreement with Catholic doctrine. Period.

Well that is what my husband’s contract said when he taught just one semester at a Catholic college. He signed and thought it was great. He was glad to do it.

Whenever I see a post about someone not following a contract they have signed most people online say than go find another job. Most people have no problem with a company having rules, I hope we still have religious freedom to do the same.

 

[oneofmany]

catholicnewsagency.com/news/san-francisco-cathedral-sprinkler-aimed-for-safety-not-homeless-51992/

They have found another way to harass the Archbishop.
This is from the article—

However, Singer is aiming at Archbishop Cordileone.

“Everyone is praying that the Pope will remove the San Francisco Archbishop and these priests,” he said in a Feb. 18 Google+ post that referenced the Our Lady Star of the Sea controversy."

Well he doesn’t know it but more are praying for the Pope to stand strong for them.

 

[oneofmany]

patheos.com/blogs/deaconsbench/2015/03/sf-cathedral-dousing-homeless-with-water-to-keep-them-from-sleeping-in-doorways/

Another article on it. They will now remove the system. Want to bet something else will come up to harass the Archbishop? Pray he stays strong.

 

[GraceSofia]

Of course the Archbishop’s supporters are afraid. The huge media campaign is designed to cause fear among his supporters, to make them concerned that they too will face defamation, ostracism, and character assassination. Intimidation is the whole point.

Exactly right.

 

[retire_early]

:hypno:

…

1. Forgiveness and mercy will always flow freely for those who seek it.
2. All sin will be seen for the evil that it is.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Wow. The Archdiocese, and its supporters in this effort to enforce these morality clauses on teachers, are certainly doing a fine job of playing the victim. What seems to be missing is the acknowledgement that Archbishop Cordileone is the one who instigated this conflict, that has caused teachers to feel that their jobs are in jeopardy. A little honesty about that would be utterly refreshing.

This insistence that this new language does “not introduce anything essentially new” and is “not intended to target teachers for dismissal” is shamefully dishonest, as that is precisely the reason these “clarifications” are being insisted upon. After all, if it’s not introducing anything new, why is there any need for clarification, unless the Archbishop has noted problems with teachers in diocesan schools that cannot be handled to his satisfaction under the current language? The message is that if you have any hesitance in your acceptance of Catholic teaching, you’re job may be in jeopardy. Get your conscience in line with Church teaching or start looking for another job.

And if that’s what he wants, fine, but he should be honest about it. If you’re going to work in a diocesan school, you need not apply if you are not Catholic, or if you have any disagreement with Catholic doctrine. Period.

I would say that if 80% of the teachers are signing a letter suggesting they should not have to uphold Catholic doctrine while teaching in a Catholic school, that clarification was needed.
Pax

 

[kozlosap]

Stop spreading falsehoods.

From the Feb 4. letter to teachers:

and later, in the same document:

Thank you for your quoting instead of doing a little research on your own.

 

[FollowChrist34]

catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholics-supporting-archbishop-cordileone-on-school-identity-feel-silenced-pressured-89858/

This situation is so depressing I am just trying to avoid it. No surprise here, right? God bless Cordileone. It is absolutely critical that this man is supported by the rank and file of the Church. It is called witnessing your faith.

 

[Havard]

Thank you for your quoting instead of doing a little research on your own.

Thanks for the laugh.

Now how about a substantive response, rather than uncharitable conjecture.

 

[pnewton]

Thank you for your quoting instead of doing a little research on your own.

It is better to quote what the Archbishop says than to engage in slander and rash judgment by assigning nasty motives to him. I find it ironic that you call googling “research” yet belittle that which was googled and quoted.

 

[Havard]

It is better to quote what the Archbishop says than to engage in slander and rash judgment by assigning nasty motives to him. I find it ironic that you call googling “research” yet belittle that which was googled and quoted.

Well I’ve asked His Excellency about this issue, and about the related media coverage. Why would I need to read about his motivations when he’s looked me in the eye and told me? I have a sense of who he is from my own personal interactions with him, in various settings. I don’t see any of that man represented in the stories the secular news reports.

 

[SavannahGal]

I must assume that you are unaware of what the Archbishop and his office have actually said, because otherwise you’d be intentionally spreading false information.

The pastoral letter and the accompanying materials that were published at the time of the proposed changes made it clear that teachers may certainly have hesitation or disagreements with Church doctricne, as have many subsequent statements.

From the Feb. 4 letter to the teachers:

From the recent Q&A:

You assume incorrectly, as I am quite familiar with what the Archbishop has communicated in the pastoral letter and subsequent communications. I am simply not naïve enough to believe that this new contract language is as insignificant or innocuous as he seems to be suggesting.

The use of the word “minister” in the new proposed language was carefully chosen because of the legal implications the word carries. If teachers sign a contract in which they agree to be ministers, they fall under a “ministerial exception” as far as the law is concerned and have just signed away their right for protection under non-discrimination laws. The choice of that language was no accident and shows a clear indication of the Archdiocese desire to clean house when necessary without any legal entanglements.

 

[ARSpade]

.

The use of the word “minister” in the new proposed language was carefully chosen because of the legal implications the word carries. If teachers sign a contract in which they agree to be ministers, they fall under a “ministerial exception” as far as the law is concerned and have just signed away their right for protection under non-discrimination laws. The choice of that language was no accident and shows a clear indication of the Archdiocese desire to clean house when necessary without any legal entanglements.

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

Agaun if teachers don’t want to teach Catholic values at Catholic schools there’s plenty of public school jobs open, especially in under-served areas.

 

[Havard]

You assume incorrectly, as I am quite familiar with what the Archbishop has communicated in the pastoral letter and subsequent communications. I am simply not naïve enough to believe that this new contract language is as insignificant or innocuous as he seems to be suggesting.

The use of the word “minister” in the new proposed language was carefully chosen because of the legal implications the word carries. If teachers sign a contract in which they agree to be ministers, they fall under a “ministerial exception” as far as the law is concerned and have just signed away their right for protection under non-discrimination laws. The choice of that language was no accident and shows a clear indication of the Archdiocese desire to clean house when necessary without any legal entanglements.

In your last post you said “And if that’s what he wants, fine, but he should be honest about it. If you’re going to work in a diocesan school, you need not apply if you are not Catholic, or if you have any disagreement with Catholic doctrine. Period.”

You’ve said nothing here to justify this earlier comment. You are talking about the ministerial exception, as if it somehow validates your accusation. But it doesn’t. Adding weight to the morals clause is, IMHO, needed. References to teachers, specifically, as being ministers was removed almost a month ago. Fine. However the reference to Catholic schools as ministries remains. Because Catholic schools ** are** ministries. As ministries, Catholic schools are unlike other employers.

Btw, I’m a lawyer. I’ve read the Hosanna-Tabor opinion. And probably more importantly, Dias v. Archdiocese of Cincinnati. Bolstering a morality clause is not a nefarious act. It’s a prudent one, because if dioceses don’t do it, they will have no way to protect themselves in these matters.