In California, two bishops strike different chords

I thought this was interesting. Two different approaches trying to achieve the same aims:

A frequent writer on social inequality and an admirer of Pope Francis, McElroy called on Catholics to step back from the culture wars rocking the country during a service right before his installation Mass yesterday.

Describing culture as “a spiritual enterprise to be cherished,” he said the Church must be a bridge builder.

“We Catholics are not called to separate from culture,” he said, “nor to be co-opted by our culture, nor to war against our culture, but to embrace our culture with a powerful and transformative love rooted in the Gospel.”

He said that “all forms of marginalization which deny the dignity of the human person are antithetical to the Gospel and repugnant to God.”

cruxnow.com/church/2015/04/16/in-california-two-bishops-strike-different-chords/

I don’t like the tone of this article. It presupposes that one Bishop is "wrong and the other is “right”. That’s a false dichotomy.

Both Bishops McElroy and Cordileone are “right” in that they both believe in upholding the same message, the Gospel of Christ. They both believe in, and are faithful to, the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church and believe in preaching it’s message to the world.

They merely go about it in different ways.

The only difference is style, not substance. The Mass you hear in Churches in San Diego is the same you will hear in Churches in San Francisco.

Same here. But it’s from Crux, so no surprise there. Michael O’Laughlin is also a regular contributor for The Advocate (the leading gay magazine in the U.S.), and has penned such gems as “The Catholic Church isn’t anti-gay, but are its bishops?”

I agree.

:thumbsup:

Since this is a subject that I’m still conflicted about I’m going to propose a question here because I am not quite sure you are making the point you are trying to make.

Would not a person’s “style” be a direct reflection of thier “substance”?

That is probably true. However, style is very important when it comes to leadership. Leaders need to “unite and invite” in addition to being “right”. It seems to me that Archbishop Cordileone is supported by an existing base of conservative Catholics, but he is unlikely to draw lapsed Catholics or others to the Church.

Cycleman, you seem to be implying that lapsed Catholics and others are not conservative. I have known lapsed Catholics who left because they thought the church had become too liberal. I also know of instances where people stopped attending SSPX masses, when the local diocese approved a Latin Mass in there area.

Fair enough, I’m sure some lapsed Catholics are ‘conservative’. But I’m pretty sure that most lapsed Catholics tend toward the liberal side of the pendulum, particularly on sexual morality issues such as contraception, cohabitation, and divorce.

May God bless both of these bishops. It seems like whatever they do, someone will always be dissatisfied, so God bless them to do what is right regardless of the criticism.

The Church is the biggest organization in the world and personnel issues are extremely revelent and important in maintaining an organization that runs well and serves those it is meant to . It was just a plain ridiculous appointment by those advising PE Benedict to place AB Cordelinone in San Francisco. It almost seems to be a slap in the face to the Catholics of San Francisco. Personalities DO matter, and this appointment was not a good fit. You can disparage the Bay Area as much as you like, but they are used to bishops that were more pastoral and less rule driven, my way or the highway, types of administrators. A bad decision by the Vatican and this is only the beginning of the kerfuffle…so sad.

Oh yes - does anyone here really believe that Papa Francis would have made this appointment?? Just asking.:smiley:

I think it is interesting that Bishop Cordileone is from San Diego and Bishop McElroy is from San Francisco. :ehh:

Agreed.

The “if only we were more inclusive by changing our teachings” mantra is understood by most Catholics as capitulation, not evangelization. The end effect will be the majority of the culture likes the Church, but never goes to Mass, Confession, or religious orders.

An other words, a pretty whitewashed tomb.

This is precisely what has been wrong with San Francisco for decades (and this is coming from a long time former resident of the city since the 1950s. I can actually remember when “the Castro” was the wholesome Irish-Catholic neighborhood of Eureka Valley, and it wasn’t littered with BDSM sex shops). The entire culture in San Francisco is rotten to the core and I’m not just talking about the city’s tolerance of homosexuality. Indeed, that’s a symptom of an overarching disorientation of San Francisco culture. San Franciscans need a high dose of tough love medicine not capitulation. When your body is being ravaged by a cancer you would be foolish to take less harsh measures in treating it.

Archbishop Cordileone may not be who San Francisco wants, but he is exactly who San Francisco needs.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

An absolutely perfect way to put it.

X2 !

Since Bishop Mcelroy is now my diocesan bishop, i sure hope he does well.

Hehehe, I guess Pope Benedict XVI didn’t know about Frisco’s unrequited rivalry with SoCal. :stuck_out_tongue:

Unrequited? Let me know the next time a Dodgers fan gets put into a coma at AT&T Park.

Edit: Don’t let my location tag fool you. I bleed the Golden Gate :stuck_out_tongue:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.