« More Sour Notes in Houston | Main | For Your Edification »
May 13, 2005
Here ya go:
From the reader who passed this along:
Catholics for the Common Good is essentially the be all and end all of Faithful Catholic action in San Francisco. There are other tiny groups of nonagenarian pro-lifers, but this group is young, active, big, positive, and effective. Nothing like it existed here before AB Levada's tenure. It is interesting to note their take:
SAN FRANCISCO, CA – “Catholics for the Common Good congratulates San Francisco Archbishop William Levada on his appointment to the office of Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith,” said Bill May, Chairman of Catholics for the Common Good, a new Catholic Action founded in San Francisco in response to the call of the Pope John Paul II for a new evangelization.
“Archbishop Levada has been courageous in witnessing to truths of our faith and has been very supportive of lay led action engaging the culture with faith and charity. We have appreciated his support and encouragement of Catholics for the Common Good, and have always loved working with him. We will certainly miss him in San Francisco.”
“Archbishop Levada has presided over a See where the Church is deeply opposed, and is frequently openly mocked and abused. Radical secularists’ hostility to basic moral principles, including those of Christianity and natural law, is so prevalent that civil discourse and dialogue is difficult and often non-existent. Rampant intolerance has created an increasingly intimidating atmosphere for Christians and others who have views contrary to a rigid, morally relativist culture.”
"He has shown that he is willing and able to put himself at risk when public opinion is against him, when standing for human rights and truth. He puts his words into action."
When San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in February of 2004, Archbishop Levada was the only person in San Francisco to stand up and witness to the truth about marriage and the family. No other church leader in the city had the courage to join him; he stood alone.
"His courage motivated Catholics for the Common Good to organize a prayer rally for the protection of marriage, in part to provide support for him and to let the world know that there is a different opinion on marriage and the family in San Francisco,” May said. “As he proclaimed the teachings of the Catholic Church in defense of marriage, the 1,500 faithful Catholics at the rally cheered him like a rock star. There was a feeling of liberation as we joined our Archbishop by standing up for the truth with faith and charity.”
“In January, Archbishop Levada led a walk of nearly 8,000 people standing up to educate women on the harmful health effects of abortion. The 2-mile procession along San Francisco’s waterfront was condemned by a resolution of the San Francisco board of supervisors who fomented hostility and protests against this witness of concern for women and the truth about life.” CCG members Dolores Meehan and Eva Muntean organized this first annual Walk for Life.
Catholics for the Common Good is a lay movement organized in direct response to the call of Pope John Paul the Great for a new Catholic Action for an evangelization of culture. It is founded on the social teachings of the Catholic Church and addresses concerns related to life, family, freedom and the poor.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
Beautiful.
Posted by: Cheeky Lawyer at May 13, 2005 4:20:50 PM
Viva il papa! Viva Cardinal Levada!
Viva Sancta Mater Ecclesia!
As so many others have said, I trust Benedict and believe he knows who can best fill his old job better than I do--period.
Posted by: GregY at May 13, 2005 4:23:24 PM
Sounds reasonable to me!
Posted by: Mark Shea at May 13, 2005 4:35:45 PM
This is heartening.
Posted by: Gerry O' Neil at May 13, 2005 5:10:13 PM
Greg Y:
Ditto on the sentiment, but Abp Levada hasn't received a red hat... yet...
Posted by: Bill H at May 13, 2005 5:10:56 PM
Still tryin' to figure me out, Amy? :)
This statement gives me hope. Others will be wise to heed the wisdom of youth.....
Posted by: Rocco Palmo at May 13, 2005 5:34:49 PM
I posted this on the other thread but figure that thread is probably done.
I'm curious about whether anyone read Levada's own defense of his decision to compromise with SF city officials over extension of health benefits (Posted above by grateful-catholic). I agree that it was very compelling. He took steps to oppose the law, when that didn't work he worked out a compromise that allowed the Church to avoid doing anything contrary to Catholic teaching. I like the analogy with life insurance beneficiaries. Is anyone going to argue that every diocese should be investigating the named beneficiaries of all its employees to make sure there are no gay lovers named. Anyway, I'd be interested in a thoughtful critique of what Levada wrote.
Here's the link to the article again: http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9708/opinion/levada.html
I'm even more encouraged by this post than I was by reading his very intelligent defense of the health benefits decision.
Posted by: np at May 13, 2005 6:09:45 PM
I didn't previously know the specifics of Levada's compromise about domestic situations. But I have long thought that ad hoc domestic situations should be treated alike civilly regardless of who is having sex with whom. I am old enough to remember the TV show "Kate & Ally" wherein 2 divorcees and their kids pool their resources and live together. Seems like a smart move to me.
I don't care whether you call them "families" or whatever - these folks are financially and otherwise relying on each other. Providing child care, fall-back support, shared expenses, etc. for each other. I would have done it gladly. What's wrong with recognizing this situation civilly and providing health and life insurance support? Why inquire into who is sleeping with whom?
I'll bet there are as many people who are providing non-traditional support for eath other and families as there are "gay" domestic arrangements. It could provide a support system sufficient enough to keep other-wise desperate Catholics from entering heterodox sexual unions that get them into trouble with their church.
I'm now 60 and can see the advantage of having insurance back-up if I decided to pool resources and living space with another person - whether male or female.
I don't think Levada is a sell-out; he's understanding how real life is working out these days.
Posted by: Julia at May 13, 2005 7:18:45 PM
This is heartening, and proves that speaking out too soon is folly. Perhaps now the longknives can be put back into theie scabbard and let the Holy Spirit do His work, pray that he will be responded to possitively and await the fruits.
Posted by: Don(kiwi) at May 13, 2005 8:25:20 PM
I live in the SF Bay Area and was here when this all happened. The then-Mayor "His Williness" Brown was NOT someone used to being defeated. Levada basically did an end-run around Brown and turned the situation into a "win-win" situation for both sides. Levada is obviously a deft politician and shrewd strategist. He is not going to be the neocon's delight by any stretch. However, those of us who have seen how he works, even though we don't necessarily agree with him, are impressed with and by his skills. He'll do fine @ CDF and, hopefully, bring a more human approach to the work there.
Posted by: Jimmy Mac at May 13, 2005 9:37:55 PM
In Neuhaus’s opinion, “Catholic publications with intellectual seriousness” are obliged to engage alternative and opposing positions, but not in a way that suggests that a position supporting church teaching and one opposing it “are somehow on an equal footing and that the magisterial position is simply one opinion among others.”
This is a howler. After Neuhaus added his "Catholic"neocon figleaf to Bush's mideast slaughter, in opposition to JPII, he now refers us to magesterial authority.
It is possible to lose interest in what some
writers have to say about anything.
Posted by: Henry Patrick at May 13, 2005 10:39:08 PM
I respect our Pope and support his choice because of that respect. I have a concern that Bishop Lavada had some issues in Portland and SF with priest abuse problems and not sure I fully understand his role in them. I trust this was covered when he met with Pope Benedict XVI. It will be interesting to see how the new language comes out on homosexual priests and the visitation to Amercian seminaries. We will know soon on this choice.
Posted by: Ellen at May 13, 2005 11:34:37 PM
I know quite a few people involved in Catholics for the Common Good, and can vouch for the intelligence, orthodoxy and good will of them and the organization. They, as usual, hit the nail on the head with this press release.
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at May 14, 2005 2:42:46 AM
I don't know anything about Abp. Levada except what I've seen blogged over the last few days, however, I think the appointment of a moderate American is a stroke of genius. When it comes to the inevitable "smackdown on heresy," much of which will be felt in America, Abp. Levada will have credibility and won't be able to be dismissed like the "panzer cardinal" was. (By some... not me!) I think Pope Benedict is one smart cookie.
Posted by: Regina at May 14, 2005 6:52:45 AM
Now feeling a lot better about Levada's departure for V City, thanks to this statement by this fine organization. Surprise, another lay-driven model of orthodox Catholic action. I trust that, given their locale, they may be drawing up plans for catacombs from San Jose to Palo Alto and every community in between. Meanwhile, hoping and praying for an Episcopal Spine Alert with the announcement of the successor to Levada (also comforted by LA Times' description of him as 'conservative. From the Well-Duh! Dept.)
Posted by: Gerard E. at May 14, 2005 9:27:58 AM
Why the unnecessary swipe at "nonagerian pro-life groups" in the opening statement? It doesn’t speak well for the writer's charity or wisdom.
Posted by: TomM at May 14, 2005 10:17:19 AM
Nonagerian isn't in the dictionary.
Nonagenarian which is in the dictionary ia an adjective which means "a person whose age is in the nineties
Posted by: Tom Hynes at May 14, 2005 11:20:56 AM
A detailed article on the Orthodoxy of Levada for your discernment. RIAW
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1402954/posts
Posted by: Greg at May 16, 2005 6:21:20 AM
What people are doing now with Levada's decision to recognize civil unions (marriage-in-all-but-name) is in 2005 to call this "defeat by compromise" a victory.
Creating government mandates for private employers to provide health insurance to people not otherwise insured at the private employers expense might be a good idea but why condition this idea on the legalistic "sharing a domicile" rather than other criteria? Shouldn't every employee be allowed to designate aboslutely anyone to receive insurance through their employer?
The reality is that this legislation was introduced to advance step-by-step the legal recogntion of same-sex marriage and the coercion of religious faiths to recognize them as well. Think in terms of decades.
On one hand we have provision of something that symbolically addressed a concern of the Church, i.e. health insurance to those "sharing a domicile" and the long-term legislative and cultural agenda of people who would criminalize the preaching of the Gospel when it comes in conflict with the gay agenda. Archbishop Levada's compromise is forgotten today and his former collaborators on this compromise are still demanding more today. It didn't end in 1997.
Posted by: Patrick Sweeney at May 16, 2005 1:34:40 PM
"What people are doing now with Levada's decision to recognize civil unions."
Levada doesn't recognize civil unions.
"Even with today’s changes in the workplace, to seek to equate domestic partnership with the institution of marriage and family runs contrary to Catholic teaching, indeed to the beliefs of most religious and cultural traditions, and as recent polls have shown, to the basic convictions of the great majority of Americans."
"What we have done is to prohibit local government from forcing our Catholic agencies to create internal policies that recognize domestic partnerships as a category equivalent to marriage."
http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9708/opinion/levada.html
Posted by: Julie at May 16, 2005 1:58:40 PM
Julie, compliance with the law is de facto recognition of civil unions or domestic partnerships. He could have canceled the contracts with the city and supported the charitable work of the Church on only private donatations trusting that God would provide. He didn't.
He surrendered and announced victory.
Posted by: Patrick Sweeney at May 16, 2005 5:46:34 PM
Shouldn't every employee be allowed to designate aboslutely anyone to receive insurance through their employer?
That is exactly what the compromise does. What is your point?
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at May 17, 2005 11:56:52 PM
thai Insurance: "The Importance of Travel Insurance
By: Karen Zastudil "
thai insurance: "What Is Term Life Insurance?
By: Tim Gorman "
thai insurance: "How Do I Lower My Auto Insurance Premiums?
By: Tim Gorman "
Posted by: insurance at Jun 7, 2005 4:49:38 AM
