SF archbishop: Gay adoptions conflict with church views

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaPatri4
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GloriaPatri4

Guest
SF archbishop: Gay adoptions conflict with church views
LISA LEFF

Associated Press

**SAN FRANCISCO - **Without barring adoptions by gay families outright, San Francisco’s new archbishop has made it clear he believes that placing children in same-sex households conflicts with Roman Catholic teachings on homosexuality, a spokesman said.

Archbishop George Niederauer therefore has asked the social services arm of the Archdiocese of San Francisco to bring its adoption program “fully in sync” with the church’s views while continuing to find homes for hard-to-place youngsters, spokesman Maurice Healy said Monday.
 
This should cause quite a kerfuffle in the Bay Area…here’s a link by the way: mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/14145827.htm
In response, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom decided not to attend Levada’s official elevation to cardinal this week in Rome, said Peter Ragone, a spokesman for Newsom. Meanwhile, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is scheduled to consider a resolution Tuesday calling on Levada to withdraw his comments and for local Catholic leaders to "to defy all discriminatory directives of Cardinal Levada."
Click to expand...
I don’t think Levada will withdraw his comments, but they will have some support for defiance in the local Catholic community - both lay people and clergy, unfortunately.
 
40.png
rlg94086:
This should cause quite a kerfuffle in the Bay Area…here’s a link by the way: mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/14145827.htm

I don’t think Levada will withdraw his comments, but they will have some support for defiance in the local Catholic community - both lay people and clergy, unfortunately.
Click to expand...
I can only hope and pray that our pope will continue to guide our bishops and priests.
 
I agree. I welcome the controversy because it brings clarity to the Church’s views. We need to shake up the Catholics in our area, and remind them that our actions should be in line with Church teaching.
40.png
bones_IV:
I can only hope and pray that our pope will continue to guide our bishops and priests.
Click to expand...
 
“We realize that there are people in our community, some of whom work side by side with us to serve the needy in society, who do not share our beliefs, and we recognize and respect that fact,” Niederauer said in a written statement.
Click to expand...
respect??!! what’s with this guy?? he’s basically confirming people in their errors. this bishops reeks of relativism.
** Without barring adoptions by gay families outright,** San Francisco’s new archbishop has made it clear he believes that placing children in same-sex households conflicts with Roman Catholic teachings on homosexuality, a spokesman said.
Click to expand...
i wish he was as concerned about being orthodox as he is about being well liked.
 
oat soda:
respect??!! what’s with this guy?? he’s basically confirming people in their errors. this bishops reeks of relativism. i wish he was as concerned about being orthodox as he is about being well liked.
Click to expand...
You might be surprised to find that Rome will speak of respect for others who do not conform to our view.

It is a Catholic thing.

And for those who don’t get it, repsecting another person doesn’t mean that one gives their opinions equal value. It means that one treats them like a child of God that they are.

Funny, how those Catholics are.
 
40.png
otm:
You might be surprised to find that Rome will speak of respect for others who do not conform to our view.

It is a Catholic thing.

And for those who don’t get it, repsecting another person doesn’t mean that one gives their opinions equal value. It means that one treats them like a child of God that they are.

Funny, how those Catholics are.
Click to expand...
If by ‘child of God’ you mean in a generic sense that we are all God’s creatures made in His image and likeness, then okay. But strictly speaking we are not all children of God. This is just doctrinal nitpicking.

In Christ,
Irenaeus
 
40.png
rlg94086:
I agree. I welcome the controversy because it brings clarity to the Church’s views. We need to shake up the Catholics in our area, and remind them that our actions should be in line with Church teaching.
Click to expand...
And yet, I just don’t see Jesus tolerating the modern pharisees and scribes, especially those who love to troll the forums.
 
40.png
otm:
You might be surprised to find that Rome will speak of respect for others who do not conform to our view.

It is a Catholic thing.

And for those who don’t get it, repsecting another person doesn’t mean that one gives their opinions equal value. It means that one treats them like a child of God that they are.

Funny, how those Catholics are.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is an issue of grammar? I read the bishop’s quote and he seems to be saying he respects the fact there are folks who do not accept Church teaching on this important matter. Now, does he mean he respects those persons or that he respects that false opinion they hold?

While we cannot force anyone to accept the truth, it certainly seems we should not respect error.
 
Hopefully the archbishop and cardinal will not back down. They need to be as courageous as the bishops in Massachusetts in this case. Pray for them and other bishops in similar situations.
 
And for those who don’t get it, repsecting another person doesn’t mean that one gives their opinions equal value. It means that one treats them like a child of God that they are.
Click to expand...
i understand what you are saying. my gripe is that it sounds like he is saying that he respects their erroneous belief that gay adoption is ok. this is equivalent to saying that we agree to disagree and that there is no way to say who is right because there is no absolute truth and hence is relativistic. but he could be saying that he gives their opinion serious consideration. so, i wish he wasn’t so ambiguous with his words.
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation <remarks having respect to an earlier plan>
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respect**s>
Click to expand...
so he probably means consideration which means he respects that person as being loved by God.
 
I would like to see stronger language from the Archbishop, but I think he is telling the adoption services in his own way, to shape up and come in line with the Church. Saying things with respect is pretty typical.

Even my favorite Archbishop (Chaput in Denver) may have said he “respects the fact” that some people have different beliefs. However, he probably would have been a little stronger in the “they are wrong” category and barred the adoptions outright. But then, he is in Denver, not the gay capitol of the World.
40.png
bones_IV:
And yet, I just don’t see Jesus tolerating the modern pharisees and scribes, especially those who love to troll the forums.
Click to expand...
 
Sir Knight:
Hopefully, the Bishop will deal appropriately with such clergy accordingly.
Click to expand...
I hope so, as well. I’ve only been back for about a year, so I don’t know our local bishops that well. The bishop we had when I left in the late '90s was pretty liberal. Luckily, he has retired.
 
40.png
fix:
Perhaps it is an issue of grammar? I read the bishop’s quote and he seems to be saying he respects the fact there are folks who do not accept Church teaching on this important matter. Now, does he mean he respects those persons or that he respects that false opinion they hold?

While we cannot force anyone to accept the truth, it certainly seems we should not respect error.
Click to expand...
I agree. It may be an issue of grammer, or may be an issue that he is off base. He certainly can respect the right of others to have differeing opinions, without implying that all opinions are of equal value. The bishop can respect the fact that others do not share our values; What I read is that while the Church will work alongside other social work agencies for the betterment of society, we will have differences of opinion on specific matters. the fact that we continue to work with them on other issues does not mean that we agree with their approach to all issues, or even consider their approach on specifi issues to be moral. We will, however, continue to work with them in ways that we can.

In short, we will work with other adoption agencies in terms of adoptions to heterosexual couples, and disagree and not work with them on adoptions to homosexual couples.

There are those who would posit that if someone is not completely in line with your values, you do not work with them. That is somewhat akin to throwing out the baby with the bath water. there comes a point, and Planned Parenthood would be a prime example, of a group we do not work with. But a social adoption agency that works to place children with heterosexual couples and homosexual couples is one we would probably work with on specific issues.
 
40.png
rlg94086:
This should cause quite a kerfuffle in the Bay Area…here’s a link by the way: mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/14145827.htm

I don’t think Levada will withdraw his comments, but they will have some support for defiance in the local Catholic community - both lay people and clergy, unfortunately.
Click to expand...
It is a real hoot that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors think they have the power or tell the bishop what to do. But then the previous Bishop caved on providing health insurance for same-sex couples so perhaps they figure they can roll this bishop too.
 
I live in crazy but adorable San Francisco. I’m very happy this is happening here. First the “Walk of Life” takes place here (you should have seen their faces) and now this! What’s the City coming to??? I’m smiling. I only pray that our bishop takes a stronger stance. The City supervisors really made jerks of themselves and are showing what they’re made of. Basically they called the Church “ignorant”. That means you and I as well if you believe in Church teachings.
 
oat soda:
respect??!! what’s with this guy?? he’s basically confirming people in their errors. this bishops reeks of relativism. i wish he was as concerned about being orthodox as he is about being well liked.
Click to expand...
What will it take for you to approve of Archbishop Niederauer?
 
40.png
estesbob:
It is a real hoot that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors think they have the power or tell the bishop what to do. But then the previous Bishop caved on providing health insurance for same-sex couples so perhaps they figure they can roll this bishop too.
Click to expand...
I think that it is inaccurate to say that Lavada “caved” as to the issue of inusrance requirements. He was looking at an unwinable situation and negotiated a result that the Church could live with. It was a result that was not specifically directed to homosexuals, but actually broadened the coverage scope.

I don’t believe that it is an element of moral theology that the Church is required to put on a pyrrhic defense in order to avoid making any decision and then letting the failed defense (and the other side’s win) set the decision.
 
40.png
otm:
I agree. It may be an issue of grammer, or may be an issue that he is off base. He certainly can respect the right of others to have differeing opinions, without implying that all opinions are of equal value. The bishop can respect the fact that others do not share our values; What I read is that while the Church will work alongside other social work agencies for the betterment of society, we will have differences of opinion on specific matters. the fact that we continue to work with them on other issues does not mean that we agree with their approach to all issues, or even consider their approach on specifi issues to be moral. We will, however, continue to work with them in ways that we can.

In short, we will work with other adoption agencies in terms of adoptions to heterosexual couples, and disagree and not work with them on adoptions to homosexual couples.

There are those who would posit that if someone is not completely in line with your values, you do not work with them. That is somewhat akin to throwing out the baby with the bath water. there comes a point, and Planned Parenthood would be a prime example, of a group we do not work with. But a social adoption agency that works to place children with heterosexual couples and homosexual couples is one we would probably work with on specific issues.
Click to expand...
:clapping:

The Church has much to accomplish. To end abortion, we pray at abortion clinics w/ Christian denominations that teach heresy. To feed the hungry in the world, we work side by side w/ the UN which promotes aborfacents (spelling is wrong I know). To see to it that young single girls choose adoption rather than abortion, we need to stay in the adoption business. This might require us to work with on a case-by-case basis with organizations that do not accept all the Church’s teachings on homosexuality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top