Speaking of Catholic Charities....

California Catholic Daily published an article on May 9 (written by us) on a May 2 column in the National Catholic Reporter by CCCYO Ex-Executive Director Brian Cahill:

"Clumsy, heavy-handed, ineffective”
Former head of San Francisco Catholic Charities blasts faithful bishops, condemns what he calls the ‘Official Church’

On May 2, the National Catholic Reporter published a column by Brian Cahill, ex-executive director of Catholic Charities of San Francisco, titled “Why let bishops drive us from church we love?” In the piece, Cahill excoriated a number of bishops, including two from California.

It was under Mr. Cahill’s leadership that Catholic Charities embarked on the ill-advised “partnership” with Family Builders by Adoption -- “the gayest adoption agency in the country.” That three-year partnership, which came to an end in 2009, united Catholic Charities with an organization that thought it was a good idea to advertise for gay adoptive “dads” on the “leather” and porn” pages of San Francisco’s two homosexual-oriented newspapers. The ad campaign, exposed by CalCatholic, was so outrageous that even the city government of San Francisco realized it had to shut it down.

Mr. Cahill’s column began, “Well-informed U.S. Catholics are acutely aware of the arrogance, paternalism, flawed logic, inflammatory rhetoric, failure of personal accountability, and lack of pastoral sensitivity of many of our church leaders. The U.S. bishops have set the tone with their continued denial of the wholesale rejection of church teaching on contraception; their clumsy, heavy-handed, ineffective attempt to influence national health care legislation; their opposition to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians; and their condemnation of the work of theologian St. Joseph Sr. Elizabeth Johnson without even meeting with her.”

Mr. Cahill then lambasted by name a number of cardinals and bishops, beginning with Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, “the latest U.S. poster boy for our church’s continued failure to confront the molestation scandal.” He then turned his pen against two of the finest thinkers in the Church today, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver. Cardinal Burke and other unnamed bishops, Cahill said, were “shortsighted” because they favor “the Eucharist as a sanction against public officials.” Archbishop Chaput, said Cahill, “tried to tell us not to vote for presidential candidate Barack Obama.”

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington got it because, in Cahill’s words, he “referred to a Vatican pronouncement that equated child molestation and women’s ordination as a ‘welcome statement.’" Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix got the thumbs down from Cahill for “excommunicating a dedicated Mercy nun” just because she facilitated an abortion.

Cahill then criticized Bishop Robert Vasa of Santa Rosa because he “had forced a loyalty oath on all church employees in his former diocese.” Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland got it because he “trashed President Obama and Gov. Jerry Brown for not defending heterosexual marriage and for ignoring the will of the people.”

Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, who leads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, earned Cahill’s displeasure for his defense of “the Roman church’s” teaching on natural marriage.

Cahill then gave a short list of those bishops who met his standards, or whom he simply knew and liked personally, since they were all from the Archdiocese of San Francisco. He began by lauding Robert McElroy, San Francisco’s newest auxiliary bishop, who sits on the Advisory Board of the University of San Francisco’s notorious Lane Center for Catholic Studies and Social Thought. Bishop McElroy was one of the two moral theologians who gave Catholic Charities, under Cahill’s leadership, the green light to form the partnership with Family Builders by Adoption.

Cahill also gave his OK to ex-Archbishop John Quinn of San Francisco, “who continues his advocacy for the reform of the papacy.” It was Archbishop Quinn who began the slide at San Francisco’s Most Holy Redeemer Church by appointing Fr. Anthony McGuire as pastor in 1982. According to Fr. Donal Godfrey, this was the beginning of the archbishop’s warm relationship with the parish: “In fact Quinn came frequently and loved his visits to MHR.” Mr. Cahill is also a fan of MHR; he was the featured speaker at the church’s 2008 Ash Wednesday vespers service.

Cahill praised Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City, a former Auxiliary Bishop of San Francisco, “a priest of deep compassion who has led the U.S. bishops in their advocacy for the needs of immigrants,” and current San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer, “whose first response to an issue is always pastoral.

Cahill’s criterion for good bishop/bad bishop seems selective with regard to Archbishop Niederauer since the archbishop was instrumental in accomplishing the very thing Cahill criticizes Bishop Cordileone for: the defense of natural marriage in California. At the instigation of MHR pastoral council member Matt Dorsey, Archbishop Niederauer received the 2009 “Pink Brick” award by the organizers of the Gay Pride Parade, dishonoring the archbishop for allegedly causing “significant harm to the LGBT community.”

Cahill recently had another column published in Communion, the monthly newsletter of “Catholics for Equality,” in which he supported same-sex “marriage.” Like other Catholics for Equality writers and similar dissidents, Cahill condemns “the official church.” That term seems to be replacing the formerly preferred “institutional church.” The change of wording is significant. Dissidents and pro-homosexual activists no longer object to “the institutional church,” since they have begun to develop institutions of their own. Now the objection is more honest: it is to “the official church,” the Church of Rome, of the popes, and, for orthodox Catholics, of Jesus Himself.

Cahill served as executive director of San Francisco Catholic Charities from 2000-2008. In a March opinion piece published by the San Francisco Chronicle, Cahill revealed that he voted against Proposition 8 and gave $1000 to the unsuccessful campaign to defeat it. Under Cahill’s leadership, Catholic Charities merged with the archdiocese’s Catholic Youth Organization in 2003 to become Catholic Charities CYO, the name it still uses today.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Brian Cahill tells the Truth--Finally

Today, our friends over at Calfornia Catholic Daily linked to an article in the National Catholic Reporter by Brian Cahill, immediate past Executive Director of Catholic Charities CYO. It was under Cahill's leadership that CCCYO embarked on the disastrous partnership with Family Builders by Adoption--a partnership that saw CCCYO bound by contract to increasing the numbers of children placed into adoptive LGBT households.

Left: Brian Cahill with openly homosexual San Francisco Supervisor Bevan Dufty, who acted as a "consultant" on the CCCYO/Family Builders by Adoption partnership.

When news that the partnership was to be dissolved was made public back in 2008, due to outside pressure by the likes of us, Mr. Cahill stated:

"CCCYO officials told Catholic San Francisco that, as planned, the agency’s placing of two full-time employees at California Kids Connection will end in June 2009. 'The action is completely consistent with our 2006 announcement on adoption. At that time, we said that our plan was for a three-year partnership with California Kids Connection. That period concludes in June of 2009,' [CCCYO Executive Director Brian] Cahill stated."

We demolished the assertion that CCCYO had ever planned the partnership to be three-year deal in a post we wrote back on October 21, 2008. Today, Mr. Cahill finally comes clean and shows he was not telling the truth (which, to repeat, we showed at the time) in 2008. From today's column:

"When the collaboration was announced, we had a positive response from our local government partners and from the secular press, but the reaction of the conservative Catholic press was scathing in its criticism and condemnation. In spite of the archbishop's support of the program, there was strong conservative pressure to end the program.

Why would that matter if the program was only for three years? If that was the case, it was due to end anyway. Mr. Cahill's very next sentence:

"As the recession hit, the Catholic Charities budget deficit forced some painful choices. I retired at the end of 2008, the collaboration with Family Builders ended in 2009..."

"Forced" implies that it was budgetary constraints (coupled with the "conservative" pressure) that caused the dissolution of the partnership. But if Mr. Cahill was telling the truth back in 2008, nothing was "forced"--everything was moving along a pre-planned timeline. As he wrote then:

"At that time, we said that our plan was for a three-year partnership with California Kids Connection. That period concludes in June of 2009..."

But he was not telling the truth in 2008. He's a heck of a lot more honest now. Check out Mr. Cahill's column, as well as his previous NCR column, to see what Mr. Cahill really thinks. It's a condemnation of the culture at Catholic Charities that such a man can serve in a leadership position.

Catholic Charities of San Francisco Adoptions (Conclusion)

This week's "Catholic San Francisco" printed an article confirming the dissolution of the relationship between Catholic Charities CYO and Family Builders by Adoption/Adoption SF ("the gayest agency in the country") in the words of their Executive Director, Jill Jacobs.

While the dissolution is itself good news, the article is confused and confusing, and begs at least two questions:

1) The article asserts that only a three-year partnership with FBA was ever envisaged:

"CCCYO officials told Catholic San Francisco that, as planned, the agency’s placing of two full-time employees at California Kids Connection will end in June 2009. 'The action is completely consistent with our 2006 announcement on adoption. At that time, we said that our plan was for a three-year partnership with California Kids Connection. That period concludes in June of 2009,' [CCCYO Executive Director Brian] Cahill stated."

Where, when, and to whom was this said? The only CCCYO announcement mentioned in the entire article is the CCCYO Press Release of August 2, 2006 (to this day the only document on the CCCYO website addressing the issue) which gives no indication whatsoever that the partnership was temporary.

And if that was the plan, why, in a Bay Area Reporter article published eight days later, on August 10, 2006, did Mr. Cahill himself say:

"Partnering with Family Builders actually will allow Catholic Charities to help even more children than before, he [Mr. Cahill] emphasized.

'It's impossible not to use the word 'irony' in this situation. Out of what could have been a crisis came a great opportunity,' said Cahill.

'We actually are going to increase our role in adoptions...'

And why, a little more than two weeks after that, in a San Francisco Chronicle article published on August 27, 2006, did Mr. Cahill himself say:

"This place started with adoptions -- how could we ever consider not doing them?''

And why did the body of that article open with:

"In an adroit end-run against a Vatican ban on granting adoptions to same-sex couples, Catholic Charities of San Francisco will launch a new project in coming weeks that experts say will lead to the placement of hundreds of foster children around the state every year."

(All emphases above are added.) None of that sound to me like the arrangement was seen as temporary.

___________________________________________________________

So, on October 17, 2008 Mr. Cahill says that in 2006 it was announced that only a three-year partnership was envisaged.

But contradicting this:

1) the August 2, 2006 CCCYO press release addressing the issue does not say or give even the slightest indication that the partnership was temporary;

2) on August 10, 2006 Mr. Cahill said CCCYO was going to "increase its role in adoptions";

3) on August 27, 2006 Mr. Cahill said: "This place started with adoptions -- how could we ever consider not doing them?''

If, as he said last week, Mr. Cahill knew back in August of 2006 that only a three-year partnership with FBA was planned, why did he make the above statements to the press? For if what Mr. Cahill said last week was true, in August of 2006 CCCYO had not only considered not doing them, they had already decided not to do them--after a three-year period.

Conversely, if what he said in the August, 2006 statements to the press were true, why did he say last week:

"The action is completely consistent with our 2006 announcement on adoption. At that time, we said that our plan was for a three-year partnership with California Kids Connection."

The second strange contention in the article come from Jill Jacobs, Executive Director of Family Builders by Adoption:

"According to Jacobs of Family Builders and CCCYO officials, the strategic goal of the expanded CKC outreach was to establish data that supported its effectiveness in placing foster care children in adoptive families, and, thereby, provide an economic incentive to the state to step in when CCCYO vacated."

This is ridiculous. According to the Catholic San Francisco article, from 2006-2009 CCCYO was giving $110,000 annually to FBA. Over that same period, state & federal government was already giving over $1,100,000 annually to FBA--more than 10 times the contribution of CCCYO.

They did not need to "step in" when CCCYO "vacated"--they were already in to the hilt. The contract specifying government funding to FBA is below. Click on the image for a larger version.

Why all the contradictions? I think the simplest explanation of what happened is this: Catholic Charities partnered with Family Builders by Adoption, "the gayest (adoption) agency in the country." From the moment the partnership was created, Catholics loyal to the teaching of the Church were outraged. It was a disaster. Catholic Charities is now pulling out, but trying to find a way to do so without admitting their mistake.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Catholic Charities Director's Going-Away Party

This Monday, December 1, Catholic Charities of San Francisco will hold a farewell reception for its outgoing Executive Director Brian Cahill. That's Mr. Cahill (right) with openly homosexual San Francisco Supervisor Bevan Dufty at a 2008 Catholic Charities event.

We remind the reader that under Mr. Cahill’s leadership, Catholic Charities, among other things:

Formed the disastrous partnership with “Family Builders by Adoption,” which saw Catholic Charities staff an organization whose mission included "Increasing the number of children adopted by Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) adults." Thankfully, the partnership will be dissolved next year.

Invited male transvestite, same-sex “marriage” activist, and Equality California Institute borad member “Donna Sachet” to be a featured entertainer at one of their parties;

Honored Mr. George Marcus at their 2008 “Loaves and Fishes” dinner, ignoring the fact that Mr. Marcus had given over $175,000 to political campaigns in California promoting the culture of death, and which were unwaveringly opposed by the Catholic Church;

In between time, Mr. Cahill found time to personally donate $600 to "Equality for All" and “Equality California --No on Proposition 8.”

It’s no secret that “A Shepherd’s Voice” is glad to see Mr. Cahill leave, and a look at the “Honorary Committee” for Mr. Cahill’s going-away reception just underscores why.

Committee members include:

San Francisco Supervisors Tom Ammiano, Ross Mirkarimi, and Gerald Sandoval, all of whom voted for Resolution 168-06 on March 21, 2006, which called the Catholic Church “hateful” and “discriminatory” for daring to say that a child should be raised in a home with a mother and a father;

Senator Dianne Feinstein, who made a television ad supporting same-sex marriage, and who has throughout her career garnered a 100% pro-death rating from NARAL;

Dr. Sandra Hernandez, CEO of the San Francisco Foundation, who personally donated $1,000 to the Campaign opposing Proposition 8, and whose webpage states “The San Francisco Foundation endorsed a No on 8 position and in the coming weeks and months we will be tracking closely the next steps to continue the strategy for justice.”

Dennis Herrera, City Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco, who is currently suing the State of California to outlaw the definition of marriage and the will of the voters by invalidating Proposition 8;

Jim Illig, Director of Government Relations for “Project Open Hand,” who gave $300 to oppose Proposition 8;

Father Anthony McGuire, former pastor of Most Holy Redeemer parish, of whom an admiring Fr. Donal Godfrey wrote: "Under Father Anthony McGuire—‘Fr. Tony—the parish was reborn…” The “reborn” Most Holy Redeemer Church now has “married” lesbians serving as lectors, acolytes, and Eucharistic Ministers, and a Liturgy Planning Group Coordinator who participates at events that are pictured on a website requiring an obscenity disclaimer.

San Francisco City Assessor Phil Ting, who in June, 2008 officiated at at least one same-sex “wedding.” From Sing Tao Daily: “Phil Ting spoke after the ceremony and said that he is very glad to marry gay and lesbian couples and very happy to see the day that the California government will allow their gay and lesbian couples the freedom to marry.”

We are glad to see the last of Mr. Cahill, and we pray Catholic Charities can find a way to fulfill its mission while being true to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Former CCCYO Boss / Current "Catholic San Francisco" Columnist Attacks Bishops On HHS Mandate

That would be Brian Cahill, immediate past Executive Director of San Francisco's Catholic Charities. Cahill, whose column Catholic San Francisco, the newspaper of the Archdiocese of San Francisco, publishes from time to time, had a column published in today's San Francisco Chronicle. In the column, Cahill attacked each and every Catholic bishop in the United States for opposing Obama's unconstitutional HHS Mandate.

We point out that A Shepherd's Voice nailed this Cahill as an enemy of the Church years ago, when some of the Bishops whom he now attacks (he attacks all of them, since they have all opposed Obama's mandate) were perfectly happy with him, employed him, supported him, and attended his going away party.

We won't rehash Cahill's misdeeds here (follow the second link above for an exhaustive list)--suffice it to say they included honoring big-time abortion supporters, contributing money in support of counterfeit marriage and in opposition to Proposition 8, and allowing transvestites to "entertain" at CCCYO events. And who can forget the "gay adoptions" fiasco:

"It was under Mr. Cahill’s leadership that Catholic Charities embarked on the ill-advised “partnership” with Family Builders by Adoption -- 'the gayest adoption agency in the country.' That three-year partnership, which came to an end in 2009, united Catholic Charities with an organization that thought it was a good idea to advertise for gay adoptive 'dads' on the 'leather' and 'porn' pages of San Francisco’s two homosexual-oriented newspapers. The ad campaign, exposed by CalCatholic, was so outrageous that even the city government of San Francisco realized it had to shut it down."

UPDATE: And perfectly, on March 21, 2012, Cahill will be the Lenten Vespers speaker at (where else?) San Francisco's Most Holy Redeemer Church.

More on Catholic Charities

" 'The love of money is the root of all evils' and there are some who, pursuing it, have wandered away from the faith, and so given their souls any number of fatal wounds."- First Letter of St. Paul to Timothy 6:10. Jerusalem Bible Translation.

"The 2008 Loaves & Fishes Dinner met/exceeded our financial objectives and the attendance of all honorees and dignitaries was complete. " -Brian Cahill, Executive Director of Catholic Charities, quoted in the Bay Area Reporter--"Serving the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender Community since 1971"

Mr. Cahill's short sentence speaks volumes.

Here's Mr. Cahill at the event honoring Mr. George M. Marcus. Mr Marcus has given over $175,000 to ballot initiatives that promote the Culture of Death, all of which were vehemently opposed by the Catholic Church. And here's Mr. Cahill honoring Levi Strauss. The Levi Strauss Foundation has given well over $1,000,000 to organizations worldwide that provide and promote abortion/contraception, not to mention numerous homosexual activist organizations: GLSEN, GLAAD, etc.

The CCCYO Press Release on the event is here. They took in $600,000 less than last year. And one name is conspicuous by its absence.

Posted by Gibbons.

CCCYO Ex-Director Comes Clean, Supports Counterfeit Marriage

Brian Cahill, immediate past Executive Director of Catholic Charities of San Francisco published an op-ed in last Sunday's San Francisco Chronicle, declaring his support for counterfeit marriage, and reavealing that he had donated financially to the opponents of Proposiition 8.

Of course, to the readers of "A Shepherd's Voice" this is no surprise--we revealed it back in October of 2008.

For new readers, Mr. Cahill is the guy who thought it would be a good idea for Catholic Charities CYO to provide staffing to an organization that advertised for adoptive "dads" on the s/m page of the Bay Area Reporter and the "Porn" page of the San Francisco Bay Times, two homosexualist publications. That action outraged even the city government of San Francisco--which is not easy to do.

Thankfully, Mr. Cahill's tenure at Catholic Charities ended in 2009, along with CCCYO's partnership with Family Builders by Adoption. But as this post about his CCCYO going away party shows, much more needs to be done.

For an in-depth report on the how this situation arose, visit our sister website "Homosexual Activism in the Archdiocese of San Francisco."

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

SF’s 1% Comes out against Archbishop Cordileone--Millionaires Urge Pope Francis to Remove Faithful Shepherd

On Wednesday, April 15, the San Francisco Chronicle reported “Prominent Catholics call on pope to oust S.F. archbishop.” The column began “In an unprecedented move, more than 100 prominent Roman Catholic donors and church members signed a full-page ad running Thursday in The Chronicle that calls on Pope Francis to replace San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone for fostering “an atmosphere of division and intolerance.”

Full-page weekday ads in the Chronicle cost $60,889, according to published information on the Nationwide Newspaper Advertising website. A 2013 article in SF Weekly confirmed the astronomical cost, reporting full-page ads in the Chronicle range $59,000 to $92,000. The advertisers may have bought more than the ad, or the Chronicle decided to throw in a bonus: photo #6 of 13 accompanying the Chronicle’s story was captioned “Archbishop. Your shocking intolerance, homophobia and sexual dread are not much threat at all anymore, and are actually increasingly quaint”:

The ad objected, among other things, to the Archbishop’s new initiative to keep Catholic schools Catholic, his defense of natural marriage, and his appointment of Fr. Joseph Illo as pastor of San Francisco’s Star of the Sea Church.

The Archdiocese responded to the ad, calling it “a misrepresentation of Catholic teaching, a misrepresentation of the nature of the teacher contract, and a misrepresentation of the spirit of the archbishop. The greatest misrepresentation of all is that the signers presume to speak for 'the Catholic Community of San Francisco.’

The Chronicle’s breathless report that “more than 100” persons signed the ad is reminiscent of their recent report that “over 100” people attended a March meeting opposing Star of the Sea’s pastor Fr. Joseph Illo. The Chronicle did not report that on Palm Sunday more than five times as many parishioners signed petitions of support of Fr. Illo.

The Archdiocese’s point “The greatest misrepresentation of all is that the signers presume to speak for 'the Catholic Community of San Francisco” is accurate. As the Chronicle story, the cost of the ad, and the names of many of the signatories indicate, the ad far over-represents the “1%”, wealthy and politically connected, which, in San Francisco, can mean only leftist and liberal.

Signatories included Brian Cahill, past executive Director of Catholic Charities. It was under Cahill’s tenure that Catholic Charities embarked on the disastrous partnership with Family Builders by Adoption, who described themselves as “about the gayest adoption agency in the country.” That partnership contractually obligated Catholic Charities to “Increasing the number of children adopted by Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) adults” --deliberately placing children in situations that would deprive them of a mother or father. That dissolution of that partnership was announced in 2008 and Cahill was gone soon after.

Signatories also included former political consultant and President of the Board of Directors of Catholic Charities Clint Reilly, and his current wife Janet. As a political consultant Clint Reilly ran campaigns for pro-abortion, pro-same sex “marriage” politicians Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, and Nancy Pelosi, among others. He is now an extremely wealthy real estate mogul. As far back as 2004 an article in the SF Weekly mentioned “Reilly’s estimated $100 million fortune.” During her failed 2006 campaign for the Assembly, Janet Reilly “announced support for same-sex marriage and adoption by LGBT couples” according to the Bay Area Reporter. She also supports abortion rights and has been a regular at NARAL Pro-Choice America’s annual “Power of Choice” luncheons, appearing there in 2010, 2011, and 2014.

Another signatory, attorney Frank Pitre, a partner in Cotchett, Pitre, & McCarthy, told the Chronicle: “It seems he (Cordileone) is going in a direction that is completely opposite where Pope Francis is going and creating an atmosphere of complete intolerance.” It is hard to believe that a capable attorney such as Mr. Pitre is not misunderstanding Pope Francis, as it were deliberately. He chooses to ignore Pope Francis’s description of same-sex “marriage” as “a move from the father of lies” and of being part of the “ideological colonization” that attempts the destruction of the family. Ironically, Mr. Pitre’s statement came on the same day the Holy Father made headlines worldwide for blasting “gender theory.”

Another signatory was Larry Nibbi, from Nibbi Brothers Construction, one of the largest general contractors in San Francisco. In 2014, Nibbi had revenue of $199 million, according to Engineering News-Record annual report on the country’s top 400 contractors.

Another signatory is Terence Coleman, a partner in the law firm Pillsbury and Coleman (although the ad gives his affiliation as with the firm’s former name, Pillsbury & Lebvinson), with offices in San Francisco’s iconic Transamerica pyramid. His bio on P & C’s webpage says Mr. Coleman “was named a Northern California ‘Super Lawyer’ in 2006 through 2014.”

The wealthy, with honorable exceptions, have never been very fond of the Church, for obvious reasons—even when they are by birth “Catholic.” Jesus Christ himself said “For where your treasure is, there also will your heart be.” We must pray for the wealthy, for they are subject to greater temptations, and with the ability to indulge them. Jesus also said “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.”

UPDATE: The Chronicle pulled the caption to the picture of Archbishop Cordileone, which we have screenshotted, above.

Massachusetts Treasurer: Obamacare Already a Disaster in State

From Boston.com:

"State Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, an independent candidate for governor, today offered a wide-ranging and scathing criticism of the state’s universal health care law, saying it is bankrupting Massachusetts and will do the same nationally, if a similar plan is passed in Congress.

"If President Obama and the Democrats repeat the mistake of the health insurance reform here in Massachusetts on a national level, they will threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years,” Cahill said in a press conference in his office."

Treasurer Cahill also said the only way universal coverage in Massacusetts is being sustained is with federal aid, and asks:

"Who, exactly, is going to bail out the federal government if this plan goes national?"

UPDATE: Turns out the Wall Street Journal also had an article today about the Massachusetts system. Emphases added.

"The Bay State is also suffering from what the Massachusetts Medical Society calls a 'critical shortage' of primary-care physicians. As one would expect, expanded insurance has caused an increase in demand for medical services. But there hasn't been a corresponding increase in the number of doctors. As a result, many patients are insured in name only: They have health coverage but can't find a doctor.

Fifty-six percent of Massachusetts internal medicine physicians no longer are accepting new patients, according to a 2009 physician work-force study conducted by the Massachusetts Medical Society. For new patients who do get an appointment with a primary-care doctor, the average waiting time is 44 days, the Medical Society found.

As Dr. Sandra Schneider, the vice president of the American College of Emergency Physicians, told the Boston Globe last April, "Just because you have insurance doesn't mean there's a [primary care] physician who can see you."

The difficulties in getting primary care have led to an increasing number of patients who rely on emergency rooms for basic medical services. Emergency room visits jumped 7% between 2005 and 2007. Officials have determined that half of those added ER visits didn't actually require immediate treatment and could have been dealt with at a doctor's office—if patients could have found one."

Catholic Charities/Most Holy Redeemer Update.

Back on November 25, 2008 we posted on the upcoming “Salute to Brian Cahill” which took place in San Francisco on December 1.

We noted that the Honorary Committee was filled with opponents of the Catholic Church, and included people like Supervisors Ammiano, Mirkirami, and Sandoval, all of whom signed Resolution 168-06 which condemned the Church for daring to say a child should be brought up in a home with a mother and father; City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who sued the state of California to legalize same-sex marriage; plus other luminaries who have contributed to and worked for the legalization of same-sex "marriage."

He wasn’t on the honorary committee but Supervisor Bevan Dufty showed up and addressed the gathering. Dufty is the man who, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, acted as a consultant to Catholic Charities at the time the disastrous partnership between Catholic Charities and Family Builders by Adoption was created.

I wonder what all those churchmen thought as they were being addressed by a man who: a) is openly homosexual; b) voted to condemn the Catholic Church as “hateful” and “discriminatory”; c) champions the legalization of same-sex “marriage”; d) is on record as supporting pornography; and e) is a “homosexual” man who had a daughter with a “lesbian” mother via artificial insemination? (I put the words “homosexual” and “lesbian” in quotes, since, like everybody, Dufty and the mother are biologically heterosexual—the adorable little girl is the proof of that. Sometimes our bodies are wiser than our minds--see footnote 1.) No pictures of Dufty appear on the Catholic Charities photo page covering the event, but his presence is well documented on the site of Drew Alitzer. Mr. Alitzer photographs many “society” functions in San Francisco, including this one.

Most Holy Redeemer was represented, too. Here’s a photo, from the Catholic Charites website, of Monsignor Harry Schlitt with Nanette Miller and Olga Barrera.

As readers of “A Shepherd’s Voice” know, Ms. Miller is an open lesbian who also happens to be Treasurer of Catholic Charities. According to the “Bay Area Career Women” website (a now defunct lesbian networking site) Miller and Barrera were “LGBT Newlyweds” on February 22, 2004—back when Mayor Gavin Newsom was “marrying” same-sex couples. At Most Holy Redeemer Church, Miller serves at Mass as a lector and acolyte, and is also a member of the Liturgy Planning Committee. Ms. Barrera serves Mass there as a Eucharistic Minister. That’s a direct violation of Redemptionis Sacrementum #46, but the folks at MHR hold that teaching in contempt. We've shown that here and here. Ms. Miller herself honestly laid out the agenda in the pages of the San Francisco Chronicle on September 27, 2005:

"I'm someone who believes you have to live how you believe, and by doing that people will change"

One wonders if the Monsignor was aware of these facts. But is Ms. Miller right? Mr. Cahill is gone from Catholic Charities and that's good. But why is an openly lesbian, same-sex "married" lady still serving as treasurer of an Archdiocesan organization? Is there not a single faithful Catholic in the entire Archdiocese capable of reading a balance sheet? Ms. Miller's presence as treasurer would only be absurd if it were a mistake, but it is not a mistake.

How (and why) can our Archdiocese continue to remain passive with MHR? This is no longer about gay people who are sinners like the rest of us. As I've argued before, this is about the establishment of a new religion, a religion using the trappings of Catholicism but that is actually something else.

"Is it less appropriate for gays to imagine Jesus as gay than for African Christians to picture him as black, Asian Christians as Asian?"

That's from Fr. Donal Godfrey, SJ, "Gays and Grays. The Story of the Gay Community at Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church." p134.

Footnote 1) According to published reports Dufty and the child’s mother live together and are raising the little girl together. I guess this means he thinks it best for a child to be brought up by his or her parents, who are always a man and a woman. Of course, this makes him a bigot, too. Welcome to the club, Bevan—“Bigots for Reality!”

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Catholic Priest, Catholic Charities Director Donate to DEFEAT Proposition 8!

On August 4, the Conference of California Catholic Bishops issued a statement to their flocks on Proposition 8. It closed with these words:

"And finally, we strongly encourage Catholics to provide both the financial support and the volunteer efforts needed for the passage of Proposition 8. "

Why do our bishops expect their flocks to listen to them when they are not only ignored, but defied, by their own priests and employees?

Here's a page from the website of the California Secretary of State that tracks campaign finance. It shows a donation of $100 to DEFEAT Proposition 8, made by Cameron Ayers, SJ, the Pastor of St. Agnes parish in San Francisco. Click on the image for a larger view:


This is not totally unsurprising. During Fr. Ayer's pastorate, he led his flock at the 2005 San Fancisco "Gay Pride" parade.


And here's a page from this morning's "SF Gate" the website of the San Francisco Chronicle. They had a story today with an interactive feature that allowed you to search for who is giving to the "Yes on 8" and "No on 8" campaigns. This page shows a donation of $500 to DEFEAT proposition 8 made by Brian Cahill, Executive Director of Catholic Charities. Click on the image for a larger view.




This is not surprising at all. During Mr. Cahill's tenure (which thankfully ends this year), Catholic Charities:

a) installed a "married" lesbian as their treasurer;

b) had male transvestite and same-sex "marriage" activist "Donna Sachet" entertain at their parties;

c) embarked on the disastrous partnership with Family Builders by Adoption, which is being dissolved in June 2009.

So while our bishops (including our own Archbishop George Niederauer) are spending their time, talent, and treasure to defend marriage, and encouraging us to do the same, they are being undercut by these guys in their own dioceses.

This is pure unadulterated scandal. Why the hell do they tolerate it?

For more information on homosexual infiltration of the Archdiocese of San Francisco, go to "Homosexual Activism in the Archdiocese of San Francisco"

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Where are we going?

On May 21, 2007, the "San Francisco Chronicle" ran an article ("SF's Same-sex couples asked to adopt foster kids.") about the recruiting effort by the city of San Francisco to find homosexual couples to adopt children. In the body of the article was the sentence: "Aiding San Francisco with its recruitment effort is Family Builders, an Oakland nonprofit adoption agency with which the city contracted to match parents with kids."

"Family Builders by Adoption" is a name familiar to Bay Area Catholics.

That article provoked this lengthy post.

From 2006: "In an adroit end-run against a Vatican ban on granting adoptions to same-sex couples, Catholic Charities of San Francisco will launch a new project in coming weeks that experts say will lead to the placement of hundreds of foster children around the state every year. . . Next month, the collaboration formally begins between Catholic Charities CYO and California Kids Connection, a statewide adoption exchange run by the Oakland-based nonprofit Family Builders by Adoption. . . . . '"

'When Catholic Charities first approached us, I was very hesitant. My organization has a long history of serving the gay, lesbian and transgender community. It was really ironic -- I had to make sure that our (!) integrity and values were not compromised.' -Jill Jacobs, Executive Director, Family Builders.

"There will be critics who say that kids will still be placed with same-sex couples,'' said (Brian) Cahill, (Executive Director, Catholic Charities CYO) who is planning "an aggressive recruitment'' of potential adoptive parents among the archdiocese's parishes. "That is true -- the largest potential number of adoptive parents in the foster care system are gay and lesbian couples. But this is what we are supposed to be doing. This is the work of the church."- Excerpts from "Catholic agency finds way out of adoption ban. Alliance with other groups gets around same-sex parent issue." San Francisco Chronicle, Sunday, August 27, 2006. It should be mentioned that the Director of Services and Programs for Catholic Charities of San Francisco, Mr. Glenn Motola, also sits on the Board of Directors of Family Builders by Adoption.

On Monday, May 28, 2007, Family Builders by Adoption runs the following ad in the SF Chronicle:

The full-page ad was part of an ad campaign around the San Francisco Bay Area.

The website "California Catholic Daily" followed up the May 21, 2007 story and the May 28 ad campaign, with a story of their own "An Act of Moral Violence" on May 28, 2007. Some excerpts:

"'I think Catholic Charities in San Francisco is very supportive of all our work, they're just restrained by church edicts," said Jill Jacobs, executive director of Family Builders.

Catholic Charities had no comment on the ad campaign, but praised Family Builders.

'We greatly admire the work of Family Builders by Adoption, and that is why we have partnered with them on the California Kids Connection Web site, to help find adoptive homes for the most vulnerable children in the foster care system,' stated Executive Director Brian Cahill in an e-mail….

The Archdiocese of San Francisco did not respond to requests for comment on the campaign.'"

This post is an attempt to chronicle how and why the Archdiocese of San Francisco found itself unable to comment on the city of San Francisco's aggressive push to have children adopted by homosexual couples.

The controversy over the Catholic Charities/CYO facilitating of adoptions by same-sex couples is only one in an ongoing series of events. Simple sustained attention shows that there has been a relentless advancing of a "gay" agenda in the Archdiocese. Each "compromise" made by the Archdiocese, no matter how well-intentioned, was in fact a retreat. Then the position retreated to became the new ground from which further "compromises" were demanded. The main protagonists in this are Catholic Charities, the University of San Francisco/the Jesuits, and a few Catholic parishes. A chronological sample:

The Beginning:

On February 6, 1997, Archbishop William Levada grants domestic partnerships benefits to the gay employees of Catholic Charities. He does this in order to retain funding for Catholic Charities from the city of San Francisco. The Archbishop justifies this as part of a larger plan, one that will allow any non-married person to name another person with whom they live as a beneficiary. Since the Archbishop's generous plan was only announced after the threatened cancellation of funding, a reasonable person would conclude that the plan was developed as a response to the threat, not on its own merits. It is, in our opinion, a total cave-in to San Francisco's powerful gay lobby. San Francisco gay activist/Supervisor Tom Ammiano understands this perfectly well: "'I think this is a very positive step for the two entities -- the archdiocese and the city -- to try to coexist without devaluing each other's principles,'' Ammiano said." - SF Chronicle, 2/7/1997. Just how interested Supervisor Ammiano is in not "devaluing" the Church's principles will become evident in the years ahead.

"Gay Pride" in the Archdiocese:

Starting in the 1990s, things go on at Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco that one would not normally expect in a Catholic Church... More than once, clergy and parishioners officially represent Most Holy Redeemer, with banners, t-shirts, and an official contingent, in San Francisco's "Gay Pride" parade. The video below shows the participation of Most Holy Redeemer Church and St. Agnes ' Church in the 2005 & 2006 parades.

We must warn you that parts of this video are obscene; nevertheless, we do not apologize for posting it.

Most Holy Redeemer will have a contingent at the parade again this year, on Sunday, June 24. Please follow this link to their webpage promoting the event.

One picture is worth 1,000 words (follow link) : Sunday Mass lets out at Most Holy Redeemer Church.

One picture is worth 1,000 words (follow link): Most Holy Redeemer Pastor and (at that time) Archdiocesan Chancellor Fr. Steven Meriwether blesses parishioners on their way to the 2006 "Gay Pride" parade.

One picture is worth 1,000 words (follow link): Fr. Meriwether is currently the head of the "Ecumenical & Interreligious Affairs" Department of the Archdiocese.

St. Agnes Church in San Francisco, staffed by Jesuits, also has parishioners officially representing St. Agnes with an banner in the Gay Pride parade. Not only that, the Pastor himself, Fr. Cameron Ayers, attends the parade (see video link, above).

The University of San Francisco: Jesuit Education

On February 12, 2006 the University of San Francisco's "Lesbian Bisexual Gay Transgender Caucus" sponsors a seminar hostile to the Church. The seminar is held at Most Holy Redeemer on February 12, 2006, and is entitled "Is it Ethical to be Catholic?" The University, a Jesuit Institution, funds this group. Information about the event, as well as a complete transcript, may be found here.

On March 26, 2006 the University of San Francisco’s LGBTQ Caucus sponsors a seminar at St. Agnes Parish: “Alienated Catholics: Establishing the Groundwork for Dialogue.” A sample:

“Thus, despite coming up against Magisterial teachings to the contrary, the alienation which homosexual catholics experience is not rooted in that which they believe to be intrinsic to Christian tradition itself, but rather, is associated with an erroneous interpretation of tradition imposed by the teaching authorities of the church. To put it plainly, we simply disagree with the church’s interpretation of Scripture and Tradition which we otherwise experience as affirming.” -Dr. Vincent A. Pizzuto, Assistant Professor Theology and Religious Studies, USF

Same-sex Adoptions:

In 2005 it is revealed that branches of "Catholic Charities," including those in Boston and San Francisco, have been facilitating the adoption of children by same-sex couples. In 2003, the Vatican had insisted such adoptions stop, but that order had been ignored. In 2005-6, the Archdiocese of Boston finally complies. By doing this, it loses funding from the state of Massachusetts. In early 2006, the Archdiocese of San Francisco also says it will comply.

On March 21, 2006, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors issue a non-binding resolution, authored by Supervisor Tom Ammiano. It reads, in part: "It is an insult to all San Franciscans when a foreign country, like the Vatican, meddles with and attempts to negatively influence this great city's existing and established customs and traditions, such as the right of same-sex couples to adopt and care for children in need." (Supervisors Slam Vatican on Adoptions; San Francisco Chronicle, March 22, 2006) The article continues: "'It appears that Catholic Charities is trying to find a creative solution such as that one [the domestic partners "compromise" of 1997] when it comes to adoptions', said Supervisor Tom Ammiano, a gay Catholic, parent and grandparent who wrote the resolution adopted Tuesday." Once again, Supervisor Ammiano proves to have an admirably clear understanding of the dynamic situation.

In 2006, San Francisco gets a new Archbishop, George Niederauer. He is now faced with a similar challenge to the one faced by Archbishop Levada back in 1997: either allow Catholic Charities to allow adoptions by same-sex couples, or Catholic Charities will lose city and state funding. His response is similar to Levada's. On August 3, 2006, the San Francisco Chronicle reports: "Catholic Charities plans to collaborate with both California Kids Connection, a network provided by the nonprofit Oakland-based Family Builders by Adoption, and the state Social Services department, which oversees the welfare of 82,000 foster children. Archbishop George Niederauer said that the new partnership would still allow children to be placed with gay and lesbian couples. 'That would be a decision that would be made by the adoption agency,' Niederauer said. 'We can no longer run an agency that makes those decisions.'"

In fact, Catholic Charities, an arm of the Archdiocese, will actually supply staffing to "Family Builders." And who are "Family Builders"? "We're about the gayest adoption agency in the country," Jill Jacobs, director of Family Builders by Adoption (which runs the network California Kids Connection), told the Bay Area Reporter, a homosexual newspaper. Jacobs confidently said that the new partnership poses no risk to its pro-homosexual policies since she had made it clear to Catholic Charities "who we were, and that in our own adoption program more than half the families we serve are LGBT families." -"A Distinction without a Difference", Catholic World Report. Again, it is probably worthy of mention that the Director of Services and Programs for Catholic Charities of San Francisco, Mr. Glenn Motola, also sits on the Board of Directors of Family Builders by Adoption.

On February 9, 2007, Archbishop Niederauer is interviewed on KCBS radio. Among other things, he comments on the adoptions "compromise": "… and I'm really very happy with the decision made by the Catholic Charities CEO, on that, was to work with the program on the Internet for finding homes for children, posting their pictures and being able to guide people who would be interested in this particular child to an adoption agency which could handle the situation." The transcript of the interview may be read here.

Blasphemous Bingo:

Beginning in October, 2006, Most Holy Redeemer Church begins hosting "Revival Bingo" on the first Thursday of the month in their basement hall. "Revival Bingo" is hosted by a group called the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence." This group has been around for many years. Their chosen identity consists in the mockery of Catholic Sisters. The "Bingo" offers prizes such as spankings for the lucky winners. The November 2, 2006 bingo is MC'd by a person named "Peaches Christ," who claims to be a direct descendant of Jesus. The "Bingo" takes place in the same building that houses the Blessed Sacrament.

Two "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence"

One Picture is worth 1,000 words (follow link): Fun on Bingo Night

News of this event sparked nationwide outrage among Catholics. Various Catholic blogs publicized this, and, as a result, the Archdiocese directs Most Holy Redeemer to discontinue the Bingo. The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence issued a press release expressing "shock and surprise" at this: "The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence believe that our commitment to giving is in alignment with the philosophy of the Archdiocese of San Francisco, which represents a cross-section of the San Francisco population. It is unfortunate and extremely disappointing that this appears not to be the case, and that our shared values cannot overcome our differences of opinion when it comes to how we serve the community."

MHR Goes Global:

On April 29, 2007, the BBC World Service airs a "Gay Service" from Most Holy Redeemer. A transcript can be read here. As this is on the BBC's website, it has worldwide circulation. The Archdiocese issues a statement saying it did not know of the event, and had not approved it.

And this brings us back to where we began, and what provoked this post:

On Monday, May 21, 2007 the San Francisco Chronicle runs a long story on same-sex adoptions:

Excerpt: "Today, the San Francisco Department of Human Services is starting a campaign to recruit more people like the VanGundy's (two gay men) to adopt foster kids, especially teens, who are among the hardest to place. The agency sees gays and lesbians as an underutilized pool of potential parents. . . . Aiding San Francisco with its recruitment effort is Family Builders, an Oakland nonprofit adoption agency with which the city contracted to match parents with kids."

And, again, from California Catholic Daily:

"The Archdiocese of San Francisco did not respond to requests for comment on the campaign."

If you'd like to share your feelings about this:

US Nunciature
Archbishop Pietro Sambi
3339 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W,
Washington, DC, USA
Telephone: (202) 333-7121Fax: (202) 337-4036

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Piazza del S. Uffizio,
11, 00193
Roma, Italy
Telephone: 06.69.88.33.57 or 06.69.88.34.13 Fax: 06.69.88.34.09

Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco
One Peter Yorke Way
San Francisco, CA 94109
Telephone: (415) 614-5500
E-mail: info@sfarchdiocese.org

San Francisco Versus the Church

Since the mid 1990s, there has been a state of war between the government of the city of San Francisco and the Catholic Church. The city and archdiocese had grown up together, in reasonable harmony, and this state of war was a new thing. What had changed? Simply this: by the mid 1990s, homosexual activists had taken power in the city. As the homosexual activists grow more powerful the war grows hotter.

If you attempt to promote Church’s teaching on homosexuality in San Francisco you face an implacable enemy. This is not only true in San Francisco. We've seen the same thing in Connecticut, where Bill #1098, authored by two homosexual activist legislators, attempted essentially to facilitate a takeover of the Church in Connecticut by forcing a restructuring of Church governanace.

In San Francisco, there were two important event this past week. First, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the lawsuit brought by two San Francisco Catholics against the city and county of San Francisco. The suit was provoked by the City’s Resolution #168-06, which called the Catholic Church “hateful” and “discriminatory". Resolution 168-06 was provoked by Vatican insistence that children being placed for adoption by Catholic adoption agencies should not be placed in same-sex households--that to do so would be to deliberately deny such children of their fundamental right to be raised by a mother and father. This rather commonsensical insistence was, in turn, provoked by the actions of at least two branches of Catholic Charities (Boston and San Francisco), which had already placed children in such households. More on this below.

The second event was the ongoing attempt by the city to levy somewhere between $3 million and $15 million dollars of new taxes on the Archdiocese. The city is attempting to justify this on the basis of an Archdiocesan restructuring of assets. Other non-profit organizations are watching this closely.

The San Francisco Chronicle first reported this on January 14, 2009:

“San Francisco will try to collect up to $15 million in taxes from the Archdiocese of San Francisco, which is refusing to pay certain taxes on properties the church is transferring from one Catholic nonprofit organization to another.

‘The city has applied the law in an uneven fashion (e.g. We are aware of non-Archdiocesan, non-Catholic charities which have transferred property to other charities and no transfer tax has been levied),’ wrote Jack Hammel, legal counsel for the archdiocese, in an e-mail to the assessor's office.

San Francisco Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting said the tax is fair and equitable. He said his office spent months investigating the archdiocese's case and considering all of the reasons the church might be exempt from the tax.”

We thought then, and we think now, that this action by the city was in response to the Church’s support of Proposition 8. (We also contend that the actions of the Connecticut legislators was in direct response to the Connecticut Diocese’s opposition to same-sex “marriage” in that state). As we mentioned at the time, Assessor Ting had made news in 2008 for officiating at same-sex “weddings.” The Sing Tao Daily reported:

‘Phil Ting spoke after the ceremony and said that he is very glad to marry gay and lesbian couples and very happy to see the day that the California government will allow their gay and lesbian couples the freedom to marry.’

Yesterday, June 6, 2009, the Chronicle had a follow-up story:

“Both sides agree that the year-long battle, which will come to a head at a June 16 appeals hearing, isn't only about the millions of dollars at stake for the local Catholic Church and city coffers. It could also have wide-ranging implications for hundreds of other nonprofit groups…”

“A city appeals board - made up of the city controller, treasurer and head of the real estate division - will hold the hearing on June 16 to determine whether the church owes the taxes. If his office is successful, Ting estimates the archdiocese could owe between $3 million and $15 million in taxes.”

The Chronicle tells us the review will be heard by “A city appeals board - made up of the city controller, treasurer and head of the real estate division …”

And who are they? The city controller is Mr. Ben Rosenfield. So far, so good. But the treasurer is Mr. Jose Cisneros. Mr. Cisneros sits on the Board of Directors of Equality California, the group whose mission is to shove same-sex "marriage" down the throats of Californians. (Assessor Phil Ting also sits on the board.) Here’s Mr. Cisneros (center), protesting the passage of Proposition 8. The man to his right is San Francisco Supervisor Bevan Dufty.

(Photo courtesy Steve Rhodes and Flickr.)

The head of the real estate division is Ms. Amy L. Brown. Here she is, coaching other city employees on how to perform same-sex “marriages.”

(Photo courtesy Brant Ward, San Francisco Chronicle)

Ms. Brown was also a donor to “No on 8-Equality California” the PAC of Equality California.


That’s the same “Equality California” on whose board city treasurer Jose Cisnero and city Assessor Phil Ting sit.

With Cisneros and Brown as two of the three members of the review board, will the Church get a fair hearing? We doubt it. Look for this to end up in court, where public attorneys--paid in part by the tax dollars of Catholics--will try to hamstring the Church.
______________________________________________________________

That’s one story. The other was the dismissal by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals of the lawsuit against the city by San Francisco Catholics over Resolution 168-06.

It is important to recognize that the genesis of that lawsuit was not the action by the city but the action by Catholic Charities CYO of San Francisco.

As we said above, the lawsuit was in response to the resolution by the city, which was in response to a statement from the Vatican, which was in response to actions by Catholic Charities. The entire series of events was set in motion by Catholic Charities’ defiance of the teachings of the our Church. It is also important to recognize that throughout that conflict Catholic Charities was on the side of the city, not the Church.

While it is bad that the city government is now an enemy of our Church, it is far worse that elements within Catholic Charities, using the name “Catholic,” actively work to undermine Church teaching. Despite its name, the fact is that Catholic Charities is more an arm of the city than it is of the Church. In 2007-2008 Catholic Charities CYO received over 68% of its entire operating revenue ($21,471, 994 of $31,072,409) in the form of government contracts.

One of those sponsoring Resolution 168-06 was the openly homosexual Supervisor Bevan Dufty. Reader of “A Shepherd’s Voice” will remember that, following the resolution, Catholic Charities tried to finesse Church teaching, by outsourcing their adoptions service to “Family Builders by Adoption” who call themselves “the gayest (adoption) agency in the country.” The “consultant” for this partnership was the same Supervisor Bevan Dufty who not only voted for but was a sponsor of Resolution 168-06--the same Supervisor Bevan Dufty who is pictured above with city treasurer Jose Cisneros, who will rule on the Church’s tax appeal next week.

As has been amply demonstrated, the partnership obligated Catholic Charities to “increase the number of children placed in “LGBT” households. And Catholic Charities was well aware of this when they signed on.

Thankfully the contract between Catholic Charities and Family Builders by Adoption ends this month, and it will not be renewed. That is strictly due to the outrage expressed by Catholics faithful to our Church’s teaching. Catholic Charities claimed that the partnership was only intended to be short term, but that claim does not stand up to scrutiny. And the departure of the former Executive Director, Mr. Brian Cahill, gives reason for hope. But the problem predated Mr. Cahill, and the relationship between Catholic Charities and the same people who called the our Church “hateful” continues to this day—as it must, since those are the same people from whom Catholic Charities receives the vast majority of its operating revenue.

This Thursday, June 11, Catholic Charities will host its annual “Red House” fundraiser to benefit those suffering from AIDS. Look at the Honorary Committee. It includes Mayor Gavin Newsom, Supervisor Bevan Dufty, and transvestite male entertainer “Donna Sachet,” who is also a board member of Equality California. Below is "Sachet" (in red) with the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (Photo courtesy Malcom and Cook's Boulevard)

Why are people like that still being honored by Catholic Charities? Given this, is it right for Catholic Charities to still be one of the very few organizations for which there is a mandated second collection in every church in the Archdiocese?

As long as the Church teaches that it is better for a child to be brought up by a mother and a father than by a homosexual couple, and as long as the church teaches that marriage can only exist between one man and one woman, and as long as there are homosexual activists running the government of San Francisco, this enmity will continue.

Since our Church cannot change its teaching on this issue, the activists--in conjunction with likeminded persons both inside and outside the Church--will try to intimidate the Church from without and undermine it from within. The Thomas More Law Center will appeal the Ninth Circuit’s verdict--but the more dangerous issue, the undermining of Church teaching from within, can only be addressed by the Archdiocese.

More on Tuesday.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Proposition 8 and the Archdiocese

Speaking of "fifth columnists," Proposition 8 has certainly clarified positions within the Archdiocese of San Francisco. While Archbishop Niederauer has written and spoken in support of the victorious amendment, that's not the case throughout the Archdiocese. We've already posted about the donations made by Brian Cahill, Executive Director of Catholic Charities, and Fr. Cameron Ayers, SJ, Pastor of St. Agnes Church, to the "No on Proposition 8" Campaign. We can now add Most Holy Redeemer Church to the mix. Three current members of the MHR Pastoral Council donated to the "No On Proposition 8" campaign. A past President and past Vice-President of the MHR Pastoral Council have done so as well. (Go here for links to donation records). This is no surprise.

Back on August 28, 2007, we reviewed Fr. Donal Godfrey's book "Gays and Grays: the story of Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church." Our review was called: "MHR and How it Got That Way" . We argued that Fr. Godfrey's book shows that the true organizing principle at MHR is not Catholicism, but homosexuality. We also showed how this could be proven by examining what happened whenever Catholic teaching and the celebration of homosexuality came into conflict. Whenever that happened, Church teaching was abandoned.

On November 25, Salon did an interview with Richard Rodriguez "Why Churches Fear Gay Marriage." Mr. Rodriguez is a well known TV commentator, and a parishioner at MHR. His interview once more undercores our point. He completely rejects the Church when it is in conflict with his own sexual desires:

"I belong to a Catholic parish in San Francisco (Most Holy Redeemer), where my partner and I are acknowledged by the other people in the parish as a couple. We take communion together, the priests know who we are, they're supportive of who we are, and what we are, and they see us in various roles -- giving eulogies to dead friends but also helping to baptize little babies. We're very much a part of that community. That's why I'm not prepared to lose it because some archbishop in Colorado or cardinal in Los Angeles is behind Proposition 8. It is not my church that they're talking about, it's not even my experience of love."

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

The Holy Father, Cardinal Sarah and Reform at Catholic Charities

Brick by Brick, as Fr. Z would say.

Last week, at the Ad Limina visit of the Bishops of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming, His Holiness Pope Benedict discussed the role of the Catholic University, and specifically problems "in such basic areas as compliance with the mandate laid down in Canon 812 for those who teach theological disciplines." Are you listening USF? Reverend Pizzuto?

On May 2 His Eminence Robert Cardinal Sarah, under the Holy Father, issued the "Theological Inspiration of the New Juridical Framework of Caritas Internationalis." The document may be read here.  It is the result of years of work, and reflects the Holy Father's concern that "Catholic" organizations be faithful to the teaching of the Church.

On May 12, the Tablet, UK reported on a commentary Cardinal Sarah gave May 3 in L'Osservatore Romano.

Cor Unum chief suggests further local Caritas reforms
Robert Mickens - 12 May 2012

Cardinal Robert Sarah, whose Vatican office recently gained sweeping powers over the operations of Caritas Internationalis (CI), has suggested that bishops around the world impose similar controls over their own local and national Caritas agencies. This would include Cafod, the aid organisation of the Church in England and Wales.

The cardinal, who heads the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, implied that the 2 May implementation of new Vatican-imposed statutes for the Rome-based CI office might be a first step in a wider reform of the Caritas confederation at national level.

“This juridical corpus [for CI] does not per se concern the national Caritas organisations, which maintain their autonomy and depend on their respective ordinaries. But it could inspire the bishops and the episcopal conferences eventually to revise the statutes of their diocesan or national Caritas agencies,” the cardinal wrote in a commentary published in the 3 May issue of L’Osservatore Romano.

In the case of Caritas Internationalis, the new statutes and a fresh set of internal regu­lations stipulate that Cor Unum must approve its statements, its budget and expenditure, contracts with other non-governmental ­organisations and its hiring of personnel. In a similar way, the more than 160 national members of the Caritas confederation, such as Cafod and Catholic Charities USA, could face analogous regulations if their bishops’ conferences adopt the cardinal’s suggestion.

Since Pope Benedict XVI took office in 2005, the Vatican has increasingly exerted pressure on church organisations, such as CI, to strengthen their Catholic identity and to help them become more explicit instruments of evangelisation.

One way the new CI statutes will ensure this is through a more careful selection of employees who profess and faithfully live out the Vatican’s teachings on faith and morals. Such scrutiny, if applied at local and national levels, could have repercussions for current hiring practices"


"Repercussions for current hiring practices."

That is something sorely needed, (Brian Cahill comes to mind) and God bless and guide the Holy Father and Cardinal Sarah as they put this into practice.