Gay Sex, Adultery, Masturbation, Porn are "Gravely Evil": San Francisco Archbishop Clarifies Sexual Morality for School Staffs

[openmind77]

The people who adhere to the rules are all sinners. It’s when they betray trust that make their position untenable and then go on to modify church teaching to suit their foibles. That’s the problem. Also the Archbishop’s actions did not directly effect any one else. He admitted his guilt and was contrite.

If you want a comparative example a certain Archbishop praised a man for admitting that he was a practicing homosexual and has invited an openly Gay rights group to march in a Saints day parade.

Compare and contrast…

I am confused- what action did the Archbishop take and what was he guilty of that it required contrition?

 

[Prodigal_40s]

I am confused- what action did the Archbishop take and what was he guilty of that it required contrition?

He was stopped by the polis and admitted to have taken over the legal limit of alcohol. i assume you have legal limits in the US. He admitted that he has done this, took the fine and attended confession and indeed underwent penitence for this. What happens with the church of nice is that they highlight irrelevant points to try and put challenges down and then won’t debate. I await a long rambling “DIALOGUE”

 

[epan]

see sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/02/04/san-francisco-archbishop-salvatore-cordileone-to-add-statements-on-sexual-morality-in-faculty-handbook-proposes-adding-clauses-to-teachers-contract-gay-sex-adultery-masturbation-porn/
The Archdiocese of San Francisco is adding detailed statements on sexual morality to the faculty and staff handbooks of four diocesan handbooks and is proposing adding such statements to the teachers contracts there. Archdiocesan officials say this calls upon teachers there “to avoid fostering confusion among the faithful and any dilution of the schools’ Catholic mission.” Those at these schools are to avoid publicly challenging the Church’s positions on such issues, some of which are in the forefront, like gay marriage and abortion.

The cynic in me sees this as a political move. Cordileone knows that the teachers union will not accept his proposal, and that if it were put into place, then there could be legal concerns over civil rights. He is relying on the Union to block him. This way, he furthers his political career among conservative Catholics and the Vatican, while at the same time nothing changes in the San Francisco schools, which could alienate his local support from actual consumers of the schools.

 

[Pulvis]

Considering that it has become rare for a Bishop to step up and actually enforce Catholic teaching, Bravo Archbishop! I pray many more may follow your leadership.
And to the Catholics of San Francisco who are all up in arms, shame on you. We had a similar issue up the road from us in Charlotte, NC. A devout Sister gave an address suporting traditional Church teaching at a Catholic high school, and was pilloried for it. Evoking much hand ringing and apologies all around to the "outraged " parents. How dare someone actually tell the truth about Church teachings. We, the Church, need many more clerics willing to tell the truth, and hold us to the higher standard that we need to pursue.

 

[Havard]

First impressions are important, are they not?

And certain actions have much more grave consequences than others. Someone masturbating in private does no harm to anyone else. Drunk drivers often kill innocent people.

Who said anything about masturbation in private? Please familiarize yourself with the Archbishop’s actual proposal:

The handbook additions clearly state that the institution believes in the listed items, and does not require each individual staff member or teacher to assent to each stated item of Catholic doctrine. That is because the archdiocese recognizes that some Catholic teachers and other non-Catholic teachers may not agree with all that the Catholic Church teaches, Archbishop Cordileone said. The aim of the handbook additions is to specify for all what the church teaches and require that high school staff and teachers not contradict Catholic teachings in a school environment or in public actions.

Second, I’ve been around the Archbishop many times. He blew a 0.11 BAC. For a man of his size (160-170 lbs-ish), the difference between being under the legal limit, which is 0.08 in CA, and 0.11 is one less drink:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Driving under the influence is a very serious matter, but having three glasses of wine instead of two (or the equivalent thereof, depending on time) is far from willfully choosing to publicly contradict Catholic teaching/ morals.

 

[epan]

First impressions are important, are they not?

And certain actions have much more grave consequences than others. Someone masturbating in private does no harm to anyone else. Drunk drivers often kill innocent people.

I agree that driving while intoxicated is dangerous, and that one should not put others in danger in that way.

However, I fail to understand what that failure in judgement has to do with this thread. The Archbishop is indeed promoting Catholic doctrine. If he doesn’t, then who will in his congregation? And, just what do you see that is wrong with that?

 

[meltzerboy]

First impressions are important, are they not?

And certain actions have much more grave consequences than others. Someone masturbating in private does no harm to anyone else. Drunk drivers often kill innocent people.

I would be wary of any Catholic school that did NOT promote the teaching of the Church. Since these activities are contrary to Church doctrine, the Archbishop was absolutely correct in calling their attention to all school personnel. It does not really matter what individual employees (i.e. teachers) might think about the correctness of his comments. If they publicly disagree and teach something contrary to Church doctrine, they should be dismissed.

 

[openmind77]

I agree that driving while intoxicated is dangerous, and that one should not put others in danger in that way.

However, I fail to understand what that failure in judgement has to do with this thread. The Archbishop is indeed promoting Catholic doctrine. If he doesn’t, then who will in his congregation? And, just what do you see that is wrong with that?

Promoting doctrine is one thing, threatening dismissal is another. I am not sure dismissing anyone, who for instance writes in some journal of science/psychology on the subject of masturbation, will hold up in court as legal even if it violates doctrine.

The question is whether, when you hire a teacher, you are hiring a professional or someone who is there to propogate your beliefs. Can schools run by fundamentalist churches now forbid teaching anything contrary to their beliefs?

 

[meltzerboy]

Promoting doctrine is one thing, threatening dismissal is another. I am not sure dismissing anyone, who for instance writes in some journal of science/psychology on the subject of masturbation, will hold up in court as legal even if it violates doctrine.

The question is whether, when you hire a teacher, you are hiring a professional or someone who is there to propogate your beliefs. Can schools run by fundamentalist churches now forbid teaching anything contrary to their beliefs?

I think it would be acceptable to discuss different religious points of view on sensitive, social issues, particularly with older students. But to espouse and teach students something contrary to doctrine or to question doctrine would not be acceptable, in my view. When parents send their children to Catholic schools, they expect them to receive a Catholic education and are paying for that. Anything less on the part of instructors is subject to reprimand and dismissal. If parents wish their children to have a more pluralistic, secular education, then they should send them to public schools.

 

[openmind77]

I think it would be acceptable to discuss different religious points of view on sensitive, social issues, particularly with older students. But to espouse and teach students something contrary to doctrine or to question doctrine would not be acceptable, in my view. When parents send their children to Catholic schools, they expect them to receive a Catholic education and are paying for that. Anything less on the part of instructors is subject to reprimand and dismissal. If parents wish their children to have a more pluralistic, secular education, then they should send them to public schools.

I suppose we just have to wait for the contracts to be tested in court when the first teacher gets fired. But maybe it would be better to wait for the Christ to return and explain to us and the Archbishop what is so ‘evil’ about contraception, masturbation and homosexuality - he will be here in less than two years, so we don’t have very long to wait.

 

[Suudy]

But maybe it would be better to wait for the Christ to return and explain to us and the Archbishop what is so ‘evil’ about contraception, masturbation and homosexuality - he will be here in less than two years, so we don’t have very long to wait.

You don’t have to wait. There is a virtual cornucopia of posts here on CAF, articles on catholic.com, blogs, and even more old fashioned books, essays, magazine and journal articles, and even Church teaching on the evils of contraception, masturbation, and homosexual activity (and there’s more than just those 3 as well). There’s no shortage of teaching. There only seems to be a shortage of listening and understanding.

 

[Prodigal_40s]

You don’t have to wait. There is a virtual cornucopia of posts here on CAF, articles on catholic.com, blogs, and even more old fashioned books, essays, magazine and journal articles, and even Church teaching on the evils of contraception, masturbation, and homosexual activity (and there’s more than just those 3 as well). There’s no shortage of teaching. There only seems to be a shortage of listening and understanding.

 

[openmind77]

You don’t have to wait. There is a virtual cornucopia of posts here on CAF, articles on catholic.com, blogs, and even more old fashioned books, essays, magazine and journal articles, and even Church teaching on the evils of contraception, masturbation, and homosexual activity (and there’s more than just those 3 as well). There’s no shortage of teaching. There only seems to be a shortage of listening and understanding.

On such controversial issues, I think it is better to wait and get the Christ’s opinion -especially when it is just a question of a couple of years. I think many may be surprised by what he says. We should not assume that he will necessarily agree with what the Church teaches.

 

[Havard]

On such controversial issues, I think it is better to wait and get the Christ’s opinion -especially when it is just a question of a couple of years. I think many may be surprised by what he says. We should not assume that he will necessarily agree with what the Church teaches.

Re: the bolded part, according to whom?

 

[openmind77]

Re: the bolded part, according to whom?

There are many indications as well as people who think that the Christ will return soon, I would say it is probably less than two years away. But the point relevant to this thread is that it is better not to take such a rigid stand on something when it is so controversial with so many good people on both sides. Some of these activities may be unhealthy, but to call them ‘gravely evil’? I would rather wait for the Christ to confirm that.

 

[meltzerboy]

There are many indications as well as people who think that the Christ will return soon, I would say it is probably less than two years away. But the point relevant to this thread is that it is better not to take such a rigid stand on something when it is so controversial with so many good people on both sides. Some of these activities may be unhealthy, but to call them ‘gravely evil’? I would rather wait for the Christ to confirm that.

What indications and which people are these: certain Protestant prognosticators? Or is this statement in jest?

 

[davidv]

On such controversial issues, I think it is better to wait and get the Christ’s opinion -especially when it is just a question of a couple of years. I think many may be surprised by what he says. We should not assume that he will necessarily agree with what the Church teaches.

We don’t have to wait. Jesus left His Church in charge while He is gone. Jesus said that those who heard His apostles, heard Him.

 

[mdgspencer]

This move on the part of the Archbishop of San Francisco doesn’t have anything to do with what people who aren’t Catholic believe about moral issues. It simply says that the teachers in Catholic schools shouldn’t come out publicly reject fundamental Catholic beliefs. Nor does it address what teachers at the Catholic schools personally believe, but only of public denials of Catholic beliefs. So if a Protestant or Hindu worked on the staff there, no problem. Nor does it speak of what even Catholics there should personally believe. The Archbishop does not address this with this move. He only asks with this move that those at these Catholic schools not come out publicly to reject Catholic beliefs.

 

[chrisb]

This move on the part of the Archbishop of San Francisco doesn’t have anything to do with what people who aren’t Catholic believe about moral issues. It simply says that the teachers in Catholic schools shouldn’t come out publicly reject fundamental Catholic beliefs. Nor does it address of what teachers at the Catholic schools personally believe, but only of public denials of Catholic beliefs. So if a Jew or Hindu worked on the staff there, no problem. Nor does it speak of what even Catholics there should personally believe. The Archbishop does not address this. He only asks with this move that those at these Catholic schools not come out publicly to reject Catholic beliefs.

Peace be with you,

I attend a Catholic Parish that is very open and supportive of homosexuality. Of the 10+ years that I’ve attended I have had 3 Priests. One removed for inapropriate sexual contact with a minor, one removed with alcoholism (who was the most authentically Catholic), and the current one who is very liberal.

We know we don’t have enough Priests so I’m not sure what we are to expect.

 

[oneofmany]

From what I read on secular web sites, most people think if you sign a contract that tells you what is expected and you go against it than they have every right to fire you. And some of these cases are Catholic schools, like a teacher who is living with her boyfriend outside of marriage. They think any private institution should have the right to expect employees to follow what is in the contract they sign.

Now if the people are serving the public like a bakery or photographer than they think they need to serve anyone who comes to them for a service, but for private contracts and employees most say follow the contract or get fired. That is the good news.

What I fear is the HHS mandates people have to follow now. Does that school need to provide the teachers with any service they want from their doctor like abortion pills, sterilization, etc? That is the big court cases we have now that are being decided.