Skip to main content

Salvatore Cordileone is the Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco and will be a speaker at NOM's March for Straight Marriage on the 19th of this month. A letter has been written to him by supporters of marriage equality, including San Francisco mayor Ed Lee and California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom. The letter does not ask him to support marriage equality; it asks him not to appear alongside a group of virulent homophobes like NOM, FRC and CAAP:

By standing alongside these individuals and organizations, you appear to be endorsing their troubling words and deeds, which directly contradict the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' pastoral teaching that "God does not love someone any less simply because he or she is homosexual. God's love is always and everywhere offered to those who are open to receiving it." (Always Our Children, 1997)

Many people of faith who have different opinions on the question of civil marriage for same-sex couples have come together in respectful dialogue and discernment to discuss those differences. Sadly, the actions of NOM and its invited speakers push us farther apart rather than bringing us together.

We ask that you will reconsider your participation and join us in seeking to promote
reconciliation rather than division and hatred.

NOM's not happy:
The mayor of San Francisco, liberal politicians, and a group of radical activists who call themselves Christians are attempting to shame Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone for his involvement with the March for Marriage.
"Who call themselves Christians"? Just further proof that their concern for people of faith is one way.
Ironically, in a letter to Archbishop Cordileone, the group quoted both Pope Francis and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, implying that Archbishop Cordileone's support for marriage is somehow at odds with his duties as a Catholic archbishop.
Wrong. The letter never asked him to support marriage equality, or claimed that opposing marriage equality was in conflict with the Catholic Church. It claimed that by standing alongside virulent homophobes, Cordileone is in conflict with the Catholic Church's teaching of respect for LGBT people. (It technically exists, but they don't seem to live by it.) The letter points to the Catechism's call for gay people to be "accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity", Pope Francis' statement that "If someone is gay, who searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?" and the aforementioned passage of Always Our Children, 1997.

One more time, slowly for NOM: The letter claims he is conflict with the teachings of the Catholic Church not by opposing marriage equality, but by standing alongside virulent homophobes.

This next part's good (emphasis added):

Completely ignoring the parts about searching for the Lord and having good will, the leftists wrote, "...while not all of us agree with official Catholic teaching on marriage and family, we appreciate the many statements from Catholic leaders defending the human dignity of all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, especially the recent words of Pope Francis: 'If someone is gay, who searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?'  Pope Francis' words echo the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which states that lesbian and gay people 'must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.'"
Is "cchretien" blind, or just lazy? Those parts were mentioned explicitly.
The irony in this is unmistakable.  The letter goes on to imply that refusing to accept the redefinition of marriage is "unjust discrimination," and that advocating for the redefinition of marriage is somehow an action of goodwill.  (Newsflash: Pope Francis has spoken repeatedly about how redefining marriage is an attack on the family, the importance of children growing up with mothers and fathers, and the sanctity of marriage.)
Back to my original point: the claim of "unjust discrimination" is not about marriage equality, but about virulent homophobes and Archbishop Cordileone's allying with them. NOM's claim is a complete straw man, fabrication and lie.
The letter ends with a suggestion that Archbishop Cordileone not speak at the March for Marriage and instead "join us in seeking to promote reconciliation rather than division and hatred."  Ironically, the signers of the letter are the ones promoting division by trying to divide the Catholic Church, which has always and will always teach that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, a Sacrament ordered toward bringing the sexes together to create new life.
How exactly is that the case, NOM? How are the writers of this letter promoting division? You don't say how. You don't substantiate your claim. Indeed, in the third paragraph of the blog post, where NOM erroneously claimed that the letter called for the Archbishop to support marriage equality, the sentence immediately before what they posted (which was excluded) was this:
We understand that people of good will may have genuinely heartfelt differences on the question of civil marriage for same-sex couples.
That's the opposite of divisive. It's civil and respectful, unlike what NOM's put out before. It was right before what NOM did post. Cherry-picking much?
Furthermore, there is unity among faithful Catholics and Christians in regard to marriage--there is agreement that it is quite possible to protect marriage, and the basic human truths it reflects, without being "hateful" toward anyone.  In fact, Archbishop Cordileone spoke about this at last year's march.
Yet the letter never claimed that opponents of marriage equality are hateful, only that virulent homophobes promote "division and hatred". And remember, the official teaching of the Catholic Church is anti-homophobia.
The signers could have been much clearer about their intentions by simply writing, "We ask you to join with us in opposing the teachings of your religion under the guise of 'promoting reconciliation.'"
Was I not slow enough the first time, NOM? The letter, in my view, correctly claims that Archbishop Cordileone is in conflict with the anti-homophobia teachings of the Catholic Church by allying with virulent homophobes. They ask him to follow a teaching of the Catholic Church, not oppose one. The letter does not ask that he support marriage equality.

Is this willful and deliberate misunderstanding, or just, for whatever reason, extremely inaccurate interpretation? I'll put it to a poll.

9:55 PM PT: I misidentified the author of the NOM post. I assumed that it was NOM Staff; 99% of the posts not written by Brian Brown are by them. It's actually someone named "cchretien", not NOM staff as I previously claimed. The diary has been updated accordingly. My apologies for the error.


Poll

NOM's claim is:

94%33 votes
5%2 votes

| 35 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  So Archbishop DUI is at it again (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MKSinSA, jgilhousen, sfbob

    I don't get what NOM thinks it's doing here. Has Cordileone backed out? No, he hasn't. I think this is another last gasp to find SOMETHING that works as a fundraiser.

    I also think this is Professor George at work, not his minions.

    All it takes is security in your own civil rights to make you complacent.

    by Dave in Northridge on Thu Jun 12, 2014 at 05:59:33 AM PDT

    •  yeah, i'm inclined to agree. (0+ / 0-)

      history has marched over and past NOM, but the officers still have to eat. maybe one more big score from the rubes will set them up for a while, until they can find employment suited to their skills. mcdonald's is hiring guys.

      •  Yes, but even McDonald's adapts (0+ / 0-)

        If you had said 25 years ago that McDonald's would sell things like salad, wraps and grilled chicken sandwiches -- you would have been laughed at. But, they do. Now, if they would only bring back the McLean. (I actually liked it.)
        And again, by advancing Marriage Equality, what EXACTLY do the "supporters of 'traditional marriage'" LOSE? A question they have NEVER been able to answer. (Because there isn't one. Except, of course, the ability to feel 'superior' or some such.)

        "Free your mind and the rest will follow...."

        by midknightryder13 on Thu Jun 12, 2014 at 08:14:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The signators deserve a shout-out. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob, zitherhamster

    They are:

    California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom
    California State Senator Mark Leno
    California Assemblymember Tom Ammiano
    California Assemblymember Rich Gordon
    San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee
    San Francisco Treasurer Jose Cisneros
    San Francisco Supervisor David Campos
    San Francisco Supervisor Scott Wiener
    San Francisco Supervisor Norman Yee
    Dr. Michael J. Adee, Director, Global Faith and Justice Project, Horizons Foundation, San Francisco, California
    Rev. Dr. Israel Alvaran, Western Region Organizer, Reconciling Ministries Network
    The Very Rev. Dr. Brian Baker, Dean of the Cathedral, Trinity Cathedral, Sacramento, California
    Ben-David Barr, MSW PhD, Executive Director, Rainbow Community Center, Concord, California
    Selisse Berry, Founding Chief Executive Officer, Out & Equal Workplace Advocates
    Gabriel Blau, Executive Director, Family Equality Council
    Fr. Roy Bourgeois, Founder School of the Americas Watch
    Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), Gary Buseck, Interim Executive Director
    Rea Carey, Executive Director, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
    Faith Cheltenham, President, BINET USA
    Francis DeBernardo, Executive Director, New Ways Ministry

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site