The following email came to the offices of Cal Catholic in mid-June.
Dear Cal-Catholic,
This link explains how a new report in favor of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development encourages their supports to “Be not Afraid” to continue to support pro-abortion groups.
https://prolifecorner.com/cchd-report-recommends-be-not-afraid-to-support-pro-abortion-groups/
The pro-CCHD report also belittles Bishop Robert Vasa and uphold Saul Alinsky as a model for social justice – the same Saul Alinsky who dedicated his most popular book to Lucifer.
Contact info in this story to thank Bishop Vasa for his faithfulness.
Kevin Rilott
CCHD report recommends “Be Not Afraid” to support pro-abortion groups
Posted on June 12, 2013 by Editor
Rockford, Il – 6-12-2013 – (ProLifeCorner.com) – by Rockford Pro-Life Initiative – The Catholic Campaign for Human Development, known for funding organizations that support abortion, contraception, and attacks on the family, recently had a report issued on its behalf and signed by former CCHD staff members.
The report titled, “Be Not Afraid” claims that in order to continue the mission of social justice organizations that support the murder of babies in the womb, support contraception and the redefinition of marriage, they must and will continue to be given Catholic money.
https://www.faithinpubliclife.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/FPL-CCHD-report.pdf
This report is stunning in its ability to completely ignore the mass murder of children in the womb and its attempt to blame Catholics, who defend the right to life for all of God’s children, as lacking charity.
This report is an attempt to convince Catholics they should “Be not Afraid” to support groups that promote the culture of death as long as these groups are doing some kind of “social justice” work.
In this report Bishop Robert Vasa is attacked for not helping the poor enough and the atheist radical Saul Alinsky is held up as a model of living the social justice message.
In the past, the Catholic Campaign for human Development has given tens of millions of dollars to groups that attack human life and based on this report it appears that they will continue to do so.
Those who wrote this pro-CCHD report that attacks Bishop Vasa and holds up Saul Alinsky know full well in the opening page dedication of Alinsky’s most famous book, Rules For Radicals, Alinsky boldly states, “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history… the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”
Please consider sending a note of encouragement and thanks to Bishop Robert Vasa for his continued love for the poor, children in the womb and authentic Church teachings. phawkins@srdiocese.org
I 100% support Bishop Vasa. The report does not belittle or attack him. Read the report. It does not hold up Saul Alinsky. Read the report. It does not support pro-abortion groups. Read the report. It does not support contraception. Read the report. It does not support re-defining marriage. Read the report. CCHD does not give money to groups who attack human life. Go ahead and send the note to Bishop Vasa, though. He deserves it for many reasons.
The report “Faith in Public Life” supports giving the donation money of Catholics to groups that support the evils mentioned by Anonymous through their nefarious COALITION groups that support these evils – via the CCHD.
Based upon the author and those who are part of the report through their listed endorsements – they are heretics and schismatics.
They do not adhere to the teachings of the Church within the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”. (They want our money to advocate and support groups they have their own coalitions with.)
They violate Muto Proprio “On the SERVICE of CHARITY”.
They violate Canon Law ” 1267 §3. Offerings given by the faithful for a certain purpose can be applied only for that same purpose.”
There is no such thing as a small MORTAL SIN. Mortal Sins send those who are unrepentant to Hell.
Read the report, please, before you insult anyone’s intelligence about the attack on Vasa. Uh, yeah, they didn’t come out and say “Bishop Vasa is a bad man!!”, so you don’t think they’re criticizing him? Get a grip, please. The context is so obvious it’s absurd.
They describe Bishop Vasa as warm and cordial. They would, I assume, disagree with his decision. It is used to make a point in why certain groups are being defunded. This one has nothing to do with abortion, same-sex marriage, contraception or any other Catholic teaching. It is just an example. It is not condemnatory or belittling. It is not personal.
Um, I read the report and the first paragraph gives the theme of the report. That is, “conservative Catholics and their alliance with right-wing groups” and states some of them: American Life League, Human Life International. The list of their supporters have an opposite theme: Maryknolls, Pax Christi, Sisters of St. Joseph (“Nuns on the bus”). This report does a good job in showing the division in the Church. One could describe the division as “conservative v. liberal”, but this is really not an accurate description. It should be those who adhere to the tenets of Catholicism, the Pope and the Magisterium v. those who think they have a better way. The CCHD, IAF, Community Organizers, etc. follow the latter.
I think the report is mistaken. I think what has caused the change is the bishops of the US. I do not think they are very much influenced by ALL and HLI or the Maryknolls or Pax Christi or the Sisters.
I agree with Peggy’s perception that the report’s opening paragraph is reflective of tensions within the faithful. Setting up lines between “those who adhere to the tenets of Catholicism, the Pope and the Magisterium v. those who think they have a better way” is another example of the same divisive attitude. We are a huge Church and I find nothing wrong with people in their own faithfulness wanting to emphasize one aspect of discipleship over another. It is not helpful or even accurate to describe CCHD (or Priests for Life, or any other group) as not adhering to the tenets of Catholicism or being somehow unfaithful to the Pope.
If we all adhered perfectly to the Faith, there’d be no need for Confession.
The CCHD has, for AT LEAST the past 12 years, given grants to organizations that work OPENLY with other organizations to support ss unions and abortion and contraception (the grantees list has been online in the USCCB/CCHD website for all to see – and, before this exploded in 2009, the evidence of these groups participating with these groups/coalitions has been on THEIR websites (telling members to call your legislators to support ss unions, distributing condoms, promoting/selling birth control and recommending “Planned Parenthood” are just a few of the issues). I personally did the research (6 hours of reviewing CCHD records and grantees websites in 2009) and calculated and sent the “over $7 million” figure with the links to the groups websites to Raymond Arroyo in November, 2009. This has been researched and studied by EWTN, Reform CCHD Now, Church Militant TV, and 10 bishops who no longer have a collection for the CCHD. If you aren’t aware of these facts- PLEASE!!! do some research. The evidence is very simple to find and comes from trusted sources.
Raymond Arroyo, EWTN, reported it 4 years ago (November 2009). https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/nov/09111612
American Life League’s report on the CCHD grantees: https://reformcchdnow.com/wp-content/uploads/CCHD-Report-for-web-10.3.2011_reported.pdf AND https://reformcchdnow.com/wp-content/uploads/fullcchdreportfinal1.pdf
I defer to Bishop Vasa’s judgement
Anonymous (whoever you are): Does the word ACORN ring a bell? No-one woke up until the leaders of that stellar group of social justice activists got caught stealing seven million of CCHD funds from the from the till, while setting up government-financed housing for under-aged Latin American prostitutes. Google Breitbart/O’Keefe for details. PS: I read the report.
Got forgiveness? Seriously, they dropped ACORN and they have defunded others, too. Thanks for the Brietbart tip. Since you have read the report, do you agree that it does not belittle Bishop Vasa or promote Saul Alinsky? No one, of course, has to contribute to the CCHD. It is a special collection. Probably most Catholics don’t give to it. But the issue of this article is: Did they belittle Bishop Vasa? Do they hold up Saul Alinsky as a model for living the Church’s social justice message?
Read the report, all of it. This report doesn’t say what the email writer would have you believe it says. It is a well thought out attempt to explain the fear mongering that is going on at the fringes of the Catholic Church in America. It does not attack Bishop Vasa in any way. It does, however, wonder why he made the decision he made. Folks, the Catholic Church is under attack by fringe groups all over the country. Non-profit church groups are afraid to join coalitions with other non-profits because there might be one member of the coalition that doesn’t agree wth Catholic teaching on a specific issue. A case study illustrates one Catholic agency that lost funding because it belonged to a coalition in which one member agency did not advocate for Church teaching. It was an agency that did nothing related to abortion, contraception or same sex marriage. It didn’t work in these areas. I just didn’t refute these issues. There are many regulars on this site who will not agree with the findings of this report. The want the church to be smaller and more “correct”. They don’t like cafeteria catholics. Yet, they themselves are cafeteria catholics. They just don’t buy into the long, sustained and deep Catholic efforts in the area of social justice. And yet, if you study what the Church teaches about social justice, it is imposible to ignore our need to fight for better working conditions, the end of poverty, redistribution of wealth, adequate health care, good educational systems and good housing conditions. This is the role of the church and its agencies. The extreme fringes are trying to take away our Catholic identity and mould it into something they think is a better menu for the cafeteria. We must all pray they don’t succeed. Bishop Vasa, by the way, told a representative of a local agency that he was against organizing to help the poor and that the best thing the poor could do is pray. To paraphrase Archbishop Romero – When I feed the poor I am called a saint. When I ask why there is hunger I am called a communist. Our Bishops have lost their willingness to take on the world and fight for a better life for our people. The fringe elements of the church have them scared. It is time for a change.
A Mortal Sin is a Mortal Sin.
We must never tolerate mortal sin in any way.
Bob One – you are very foolish if you think that Catholic Charities can not help the poor themselves – without giving money to coalitions that violate Church teaching.
In addition you are a schismatic if you promote violating Muto Proprio “On the Service of Charity” (that can be found on the Vatican web site.)
Catholic Charities is not being discussed here. The Catholic Campaign for Human Development is a collection taken up specifically to address the root causes of poverty. Catholic Charities cannot get monies from CCHD because it is not a grassroots organization. CCHD funds efforts of the poor to help their communities; sometimes poor and non-poor work together. When those in a poor neighborhood decide to keep kids after school during after school hours (the hours for them to most likely be shot and killed by gang violence) they can apply for a CCHD grant. The grant would have to be for something specific not a general grant. Again, the organizations do not violate Church teaching. No one promotes violating the Moto Proprio. It was very important. It is also a mortal sin to bear false witness. I am not accusing you of that or anyone else, but people should pay more attention to the facts.
We are all talking about CCHD – the USCCB’s Campaign for Human Development which is supposed to be Catholic and supposed to be a Charity. The term Catholic Charities relates to ALL Catholic Charities.
Anonymous you are the only one who wants to twist things.
Next there are specific groups which are called: “Catholic Charities USA, – CCUSA”, “Catholic Charities of Chicago”, “Catholic Charities of Nevada”, “Catholic Charities of St. Paul , MN”, “Catholic Charities of CA”, etc, etc, etc,
Which one are you talking about?
Ok well then say Catholic charities. I am talking about CCHD exclusively.
All this is new to me….I don’t know what to believe…but I want to get my facts because I can see them deceiving me because I do like to support organizations that help the poor and many a times I do not have any facts that may proof to me that they are crooked and immoral. and if a priest or a bishop is supporting them, I would like to believe that I can trust what they are presenting to us. This is all confusing to me and also enlightening because I can try to figure this out by these articles but I don’t know if I have some kind of learning disability when it comes to this sort of stuff because I still don’t get it. God help me. Especially when some are saying it’s not true and others are saying it is….
Anonymous, if any charitable organization meets all the criteria of the CCHD, and has no sinful coalitions, then they will get a grant.
And you know it.
The Motu Proprio clearly states that Evangelization must accompany Catholic money so that each Catholic Charity is NOT merely another SOCIAL ASSISTANCE organization. This applies to ALL Catholic Charities including CCHD.
In fact the Motu Proprio – “On the Service of Charity” starts out – QUOTE: ” “The Church’s deepest nature is expressed in her three-fold responsibility: of proclaiming the word of God, celebrating the sacraments, and exercising the ministry of charity. These duties presuppose each other and are inseparable. ” UNQUOTE.
and
QUOTE: ” In carrying out their charitable activity, therefore, the various Catholic organizations should not limit themselves merely to collecting and distributing funds, but should show special concern for individuals in need and exercise a valuable educational function within the Christian community, helping people to appreciate the importance of sharing, respect and love in the spirit of the Gospel of Christ. The Church’s charitable activity at all levels MUST avoid the risk of becoming just another form of organized social assistance. ” UNQUOTE.
and
” Article 1 § 3. In addition to observing the canonical legislation, the collective charitable initiatives to which this Motu Proprio refers are REQUIRED to follow Catholic principles in their activity and they may NOT accept commitments which could in any way affect the observance of those principles. ”
and
” Art. 2. – § 1. The Statutes of each charitable agency referred to in the preceding article must also contain, in addition to its institutional offices and structures of governance in accordance with canon 95 § 1 CIC, the guiding principles and objectives of the initiative, the management of funds, the profile of its workers, as well as the reports and information which must be presented to the competent ecclesiastical authority. ”
and
Art 7 ” § 2. To ensure an EVANGELICAL witness in the service of charity, the diocesan Bishop is to take care that those who work in the Church’s charitable apostolate, along with due professional competence, give an example of Christian life and witness to a formation of heart which testifies to a faith working through charity. To this end, he is also to provide for their THEOLOGICAL and pastoral formation, through specific curricula agreed upon by the officers of various agencies and through suitable aids to the spiritual life. ”
and
Art 9 ” § 3. It is the duty of the diocesan Bishop and the respective parish priests to see that in this area the faithful are not led into error or misunderstanding;
hence they are to PREVENT publicity being given through parish or diocesan structures to initiatives which, while presenting themselves as charitable, propose choices or methods at ODDS with the Church’s teaching. ‘
and
Art 10 ” § 3. In particular, the diocesan Bishop is to ensure that charitable agencies dependent upon him do NOT receive financial support from groups or institutions that pursue ends contrary to Church’s teaching.
Similarly, lest scandal be given to the faithful, the diocesan Bishop is to ensure that these charitable agencies do NOT accept contributions for initiatives whose ends, or the means used to pursue them, are NOT in conformity with the Church’s teaching.”
It seems Anonymous that you did not carefully read the requirements for Catholic Charities (meaning ALL Catholic Charities including the CCHD) in the Motu Proprio.
Summing it up, no catholic charity can accept or provide funds to any group that has coalitions that are not in conformity with Church teaching.
And each Diocese Bishop is responsible, or it will be settled by Core Unum at the Vatican.
And all Catholic Charities must evangelize the Gospel in accord with Church teaching to those they provide funds to.
Those organizations that want coalitions with evil groups that support abortion, or contraception or same-sex marriage, etc., can get their funding elsewhere.
Bob One and Anonymous – Catholic Social Justice has NEVER meant supporting those who advocate mortal sin – either themselves or through their own free willed coalitions.
In addition Bob One, – – – this is true Catholic Social Justice –
CCC: ” 1928 Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority. ”
and
CCC: “2426 The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community.
Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God’s plan for man.”
No where does the Church teach that Catholics should support mortal sin through evil coalitions or financially.
CCC: ” 1759 An evil action cannot be justified by reference to a good intention (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). The end does not justify the means. “
Maddie, you are quoting the correct sections of the CCC. And that is what we are talking about. CCHD funds groups that work to ensure that the teachings of the church are accomplished in our society: ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority. When the conditions don’t exist, we must try to organize society to achieve those conditions. We must work to ensure that get their due. We must make sure that laws are for the common good. We must make sure that the means of production and creation of wealth are for the common good as well. So, you are very correct in stating the aim of the church. Now, we must do what we can to make sure that it happens.
I agree that we should make laws for the Common Good, but when many Catholics vote for OBAMA – abortion, same-sex marriage, forcing all taxpayers to pay for contraception and voluntary sterilization, etc. – we will never attain the Common Good.
Catholics need to pay attention to whom they vote for at all levels of government. This is the most important start on making it happen.
MADDY I like what you said “for the common good”
“We must make sure that the means of production and creation of wealth are for the common good” Bob One this was tried in the Soviet Union and our communist president would love to do it here as well. The means of production ie the private sector is owned by those establish it. Not the welfare cheat who is getting a check each month while sucking down cheese doodles and grape soda. They have no claim on other peoples money despite what our pathetic bunch prelates have to say. The same gang who let pederast run rampant through the Church.
Bob One, whoever wrote it as much as admitted that some of the groups with whom they were cooperating were trying to get support for so-called same-sex “marriages”. You do not continue to dialogue with such people on and on til they wear you down; you flat out state that it is wrong. Period! One can compromise one’s soul to death until in the end one is nothing and God vomits one out of His mouth. Remember Tevyev in Fiddler on the Roof. There came a time when even he had to say, “No, No, NO.
Bob One you are the cafeteria catholic, without any doubt.. you constantly attack faithful Catholic who reject your liberal poison
Canisius, I do not attack faithful Catholics. I try only to point out that what you call (from your side of the cafeteria) faithful Catholic, also reject Catholic teaching about social justice. My positions are not liberal (that is a political term), but the teachings of the church. To fight for social justice in the world, and particularly in our own country, cities, etc. is in the tradition of the Chuch over the centuries. Sometimes it is easy for some to equate Catholic teachings with “liberal or conservative”. Both are wrong. We just want to be orthodox.
Bob, there are many ways of helping the poor besides government funding or cooperating with evil organizations. Oft times the poor do not want help from churches because they want to live their own sinful lifestyles. Well, let them, but on their own dime, or let those who believe that way support them. I once refused to give a young girl money on the streets because she and her boyfriend refused to use the local shelter because the shelter made them sleep in separate rooms. Talk about having gall.
I should not have said “Let them” but “we cannot stop them”.
It is all very simple – – – – – – – Organizations that want money from Catholic Charities MUST denounce THEIR SINFUL COALITIONS.
It is all very simple – – – – – – – Organizations that want money from Catholic Charities MUST denounce THEIR SINFUL COALITIONS.
It is all very simple – – – – – – – Organizations that want money from Catholic Charities MUST denounce THEIR SINFUL COALITIONS.
I appreciate and support your boundaries; however, we are discussing Catholic Campaign for Human Development, not Catholic Charities.
Anonymous, the last I heard, CCHD was still a Catholic Charity –
are you telling us something new ?
My post was intended for you, since you seem bent on wanting to give my donation and the donation of other Faithful Catholics to those who choose evil coalitions. Coalitions attached to abortion, or contraception, or same-sex marriage, etc.
Is this easier for you to understand? –
It is all very simple – – – – – – – Organizations that want money from ALL or ANY Catholic Charities MUST denounce THEIR SINFUL COALITIONS.
It is all very simple – – – – – – – Organizations that want money from ALL or ANY Catholic Charities MUST denounce THEIR SINFUL COALITIONS.
If you look at the grant agreement, you will see that organizations that receive CCHD funds may not be a part of a coalition who has as part of its organizational purpose support for abortion or contraception or same-sex marriage. I have supported giving donations to evil coalitions. My post just made the distinction between Catholic Charities and CCHD. I now understand that you intended to include all catholic charitable organizations.
Sorry. That should have read “I have not supported giving donations to evil coalitions.” Somehow we got off the subject, which was whether the report is being accurately reported on.
Amen!
St Paul told us not to associate with evil doers.
The endorsers of that report are evil doers even prior to adding their names to the report.
They want Catholic money going to organizations who through their own free will have COALITIONS with Groups who ADVOCATE MORTAL SIN.
All I know is that they have smeared in this report every decent group I know, and only defended their cooperation with leftest groups. As one American Catholic priest, who served in Viet Nam and other wars and held the dying men in his arms, told me, “Tell them, “You go to your church and I will go to mine.” He was staunchly pro life, and agreed with what I had to tell him.
Oh, I do not know. Perhaps I over reacted to all this at some level. Not about “marriages” between two people of the same sex, though. Yes, many pro life groups do cooperate with Focus on the Family, which, though Evangelical, has excellent materials to teach young people how to avoid the pitfalls of having sex outside of marriage. Nevertheless, they do probably encourage the use of artificial contraception for their adult members, but Catholic pro lifers who cooperate with them, do not use such materials for their pro life crisis centers, just the ones on chaste dating and against abortion. I need to get off of here for some time and just take a vacation away from all this.
Is it the gay trump card that has you stumped, Anne T.? You are willing to allow the Church to affiliate with those who do not believe in the real presence of our Lord at the Eucahrist, which is itself a mortal sin, yet somehow the mortal sin of homosexual sex is worse?
No, YFC, it is not the “gay trump” that has me stumped, I avoid giving directly to sinful causes or buying sinful things whatever they are. Notice my reply to Bob’s post on June 24 at 1:04 pm. Name one person or groups, including the Amish and yourself, who do not buy from people with whom they do not agree at times when it is necessary. It is called indirect cooperation which is often unavoidable vs direct cooperation which is sinful. When you buy at a store, you do not know where the salaries of the clerks will go, but you do not sin by buying your groceries, but if you do know that a company is giving to abortion, it can be a serious sin if it is possible to give to or buy or get funds from elsewhere. It is a judgement call and less serious in some cases out of necessity. Buying a good movie from someone who also produces bad movies can be considered encouraging them to do the right thing and so forth, whereas giving them money to produce the bad movies would be wrong.
May God Bless Bishop Vasa always.
Bishop Vasa is constantly on the radio supporting the “path to citizenship” aka amnesty.
“Our Bishops have lost their willingness to take on the world and fight for a better life for our people. ”
That is not their mission. Our bishops should be totally devoted to saving our souls. I believe this is the crucial difference between those who still believe in a transcendent God and those who think the church is no more than an extension of the social welfare state.
You are right. If I could wish anything for our Church in the USA it would be for all US Bishops to get back to basics.
To teach the Faith, and correct Catholics in error according to the Gospel, the CCC, Code of Canon Law, and GIRM.
All this other stuff including the big business $$$$ of charity, and Bishops’ Conferences – distract from saving Souls.
Only when “everything Catholic” within their own Diocese is according to Church teaching and perfect can they consider their own job finished and well done.
They need to stay out of the prudential judgment of the Laity. – ILLEGAL immigration (which violates the CCC), gun control (which is not Church teaching), and being against the death penalty at all times (which violates the CCC) – merely gives people an excuse to ignore Bishops.
Lee, your 100% correct – the problem is that in order to do all of this Rome would have to replace (fire) all the US Bishops which they will not do – The problem then would be finding suitable replacements –
“That is not their mission.” Fighting for a better life for people (pro multis) is not the totality of the bishop’s mission, but its foundation.
I agree at least in part with Anton, that there is a crucial difference between those who still believe in a transcendent God and those who experience God not limited to other-worldly transcendent manifestation. This is the defining characteristic marking Christianity uniquely among faiths: God, who is transcendent, is manifest to us as immanent though Jesus the Christ, and our Advocate as Jesus promised. The Christian relationship with and through God, the theology of the Holy Trinity as Transcendent Creation, Immanent Incarnation and Universal self-giving Love makes it impossible to “save souls” and at the same time ignore the bodies they animate right now and the needs those bodies have.
There should be no doubt that the “modernist” project replaces an enfeebled, uninvolved and distant God with a social welfare state that actually does help each and every person. Anyone at any level of spiritual development can understand the modern state’s promise to create and maintain infrastructure, stay grounded in real-world needs, and provide compassionately.
But the solution to this enfeeblement of God and Church is not to enfeeble the state. The Church ought to guide the state in its social welfare function, not stop it. That is Step One toward saving souls.
The Church can not guide (or influence) anything good as long as Catholics vote for evil politicians like Obama, Biden, Pelosi, J.Kerry, etc.
Let us remember that the Party of Death (Democratic Party) has abortion and same-sex marriage in its Platform – its part of it’s soul.
Evil politicians will use the Bishops when it satisfies their goals, and ignore the Bishops on moral issues.
“The Church can not guide (or influence) anything good as long as…” The Church’s Charism is not contingent on anything. Don’t let politicians and politics distract you.
Let nothing disturb you,
Let nothing frighten you,
All things are passing away:
God never changes.
Patience obtains all things.
Whoever has God lacks nothing;
God alone suffices
— St. Teresa
Sorry, I don’t understand your comment. In one breath you tell us the Church should be directing the modern welfare state; in the next you say we shouldn’t let politicians and politics distract us. Which is it?
Francis, I love this quote from St. Teresa! St. Pio said something very similar! I decided to apply the quote to the life of Jesus in the Gospels as you seem to be applying it here in regards to a Christian’s concern against giving support to evil politicians.
We know that Jesus challenged the Sadducees, Pharisees, Chief Priest and Elders of his day. These people were the religious leaders of Jesus’ day. Yet He was always calling them out for their evilness and scolding them, even calling them things like “brood of vipers”! In addition, He continually warned His followers ” not to follow them nor act like them. Francis, I am no scripture scholar, but it seems to me that much of the Gospel writings are dedicated to these uneasy encounters Jesus had with those leaders. In fact, Jesus got them so angry with Him that it got Him crucified.
Based on the way you use St. Teresa’s quote here, am I correct to presume that you would hold the position that Jesus was distracted by, as well as, wasting His energies on addressing the leaders of His day and warning His followers about them? If not, wouldn’t you agree that Jesus’ followers necessarily need to practice the same zeal against the evil leaders of our day?
Tracy:
Would I “hold the position that Jesus was distracted by, as well as, wasting His energies on addressing the leaders of His day and warning His followers about them?” As I understand Jesus, when he felt distracted he prayed: “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” The apostles were easily disturbed and frightened from the mission.
And so it is today. Let nothing disturb you, let nothing frighten you… Who gets elected and who is in “power” has nothing to do with the Church’s charism; politics and political passions are a distraction from our purpose. That doesn’t mean “don’t vote” or “don’t care.” I just agree with Teresa: Let nothing disturb you, let nothing frighten you…
Our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ told US to help the poor. He did not say, convince the government to use taxpayer’s money to help the poor. Saint Thomas Aquinas stated that forcibly taking money from one person to give to another is theft. Tax money is taken through the threat of force.
“Tax money is taken through the threat of force” doesn’t sound like Thomas Acquinas but Thomas Paine. Great guy if you’re a red-blooded American Protestant, but he was definitely not a Catholic. Here is what the real Acquinas sounds like (from part 2-2, question 66, Theft and Robbery, as translated on newadvent.org):
Article 1. Whether it is natural for man to possess external things?
Objection 1. It would seem that it is not natural for man to possess external things. For no man should ascribe to himself that which is God’s. Now the dominion over all creatures is proper to God, according to Psalm 23:1, “The earth is the Lord’s,” etc. Therefore it is not natural for man to possess external things.
Objection 2. Further, Basil in expounding the words of the rich man (Luke 12:18), “I will gather all things that are grown to me, and my goods,” says [Hom. in Luc. xii, 18]: “Tell me: which are thine? where did you take them from and bring them into being?” Now whatever man possesses naturally, he can fittingly call his own. Therefore man does not naturally possess external things.
Objection 3. Further, according to Ambrose (De Trin. i [De Fide, ad Gratianum, i, 1) “dominion denotes power.” But man has no power over external things, since he can work no change in their nature. Therefore the possession of external things is not natural to man.
On the contrary, It is written (Psalm 8:8): “Thou hast subjected all things under his feet.”
I see I mis-spelled Aquinas twice. Oops.
COMMUTATIVE JUSTICE:
From the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” under the heading: “RESPECT for the GOODS of OTHERS’ –
CCC: ” 2411 Contracts are subject to commutative justice which regulates exchanges between persons and between institutions in accordance with a strict respect for their rights.
Commutative justice obliges strictly;
it requires safeguarding property rights, paying debts, and fulfilling obligations freely contracted.
Without commutative justice, no other form of justice is possible.
One distinguishes commutative justice from legal justice which concerns what the citizen owes in fairness to the community, and from distributive justice which regulates what the community owes its citizens in proportion to their contributions and needs. ”
SEVENTH COMMANDMENT of GOD: THOU SHALL NOT STEAL.
TENTH COMMANDMENT of GOD: THOU SHALL NOT COVET THY NEIGBHOR’S GOODS.
Jerry S.:
Nothing in 2411 addresses taxation explicitly, not addresses what levels of taxation might be appropriate. So I’m not quite clear if you’re trying to make a statement in support of the “Tax money is taken through the threat of force” meme. Are you?
We’ve done this before, Feeney. Thomas Aqunis said nothing resembling “taxation is theft”. Why do you insist on this lie? Quote Ayn Rand if you wish, don’t sully St. Thomas.
From Question 66:
Reply to Objection 3. It is no robbery if princes exact from their subjects that which is due to them for the safe-guarding of the common good, even if they use violence in so doing…
So your view is that the “Church ought to guide the state in its social welfare function”. Let me be kind. That is an incredibly benign view of the capabilities of the Catholic Church to influence the modern Leviathan state. You also express an similarly benign view of what the modern welfare state does. You need to do some serious research, my friend. How is the church faring in traditionally Catholic, or just traditionally Christian countries? What’s the trajectory of European social welfare states? How’s the church doing in Brazil and Argentina? Sadly, we can’t just let hope triumph over experience and reality. I’m afraid enthusiasts of the Leviathan state like you are doing that. But don’t worry – you have plenty of company among the USCCB and in Catholic institutions like the universities, religious orders, etc. I’m afraid a very bitter harvest awaits us all.
Were the state properly guided by the Church, it would not be Leviathan, and I know of no means of combatting Leviathan, other than the spread of right religion. No one should suppose this will be quick or easy.
On the other hand, any “Red Dawn” fantasies you might have of armed rebellion by outraged yeoman farmers should be discouraged.
Three bishops who are known for their concern and generosity to the poor are St. Nicolas, St. Frances de Sales and St. John Chrysostom. I am sure there are many more.
Annonymous, do you know what these saintly bishop’s generosity to the poor consisted of? Did they give the poor cash? If so, did they obtain this cash by excising a tax from those who they determined were wealthy under the threat of jail time if they did not hand the money over? Did these saints live fancier lives than the poor? Did these saints live fancier lives than those whom they may have determined needed to be taxed under the threat of prison?
I assume these are rhetorical questions. But if not. They might have given cash (St. Nicholas was said to have given gold coins.) They obtained the cash or goods by the generosity of their churchmen. The governments then took almost everything the people owned, including their sons for their armies. And they took it for themselves-I do not think they gave any to the Church to distribute to the poor. I would assume that these bishops lived fancier lives than the poor but it was probably something they did not like, a sacrifice they made for Christ. And obviously, people who did not pay their taxes in those times might have been sold as slaves, imprisoned or worked to death in mines, don’t even think about what happened to their women and children.
And Tracy, if you don’t like America, you can leave it anytime.
Anonymous, why would you assume that Tracy’s question on the particulars of how past Saints aided the poor was rhetorical? There is nothing rhetorical here – the question “how did past Saints obtain the funds to care for the poor?” is exactly on point.
However, your suppositions are based on a recent and bourgeois understanding of the Church, not a historical one. For starters, in a healthier time, the Church held large income-producing properties directly, more obviously it held and exercised a degree of compulsion upon the rich among the faithful which it does not possess today.
This ability shows itself in artistic glories, but also in tragic history. Conflicts between secular rulers eager to seize Church taxes existed for centuries until the 16th-Century rich of England and Germany succeeded – out of resentment of these tithes – in breaking our continental communion.
I looked at the North Bay Organizing Project web site which Bishop Vasa decided not to give money to. It is all about waking people up to their political rights when it comes to immigration issues, transportation rights, and school access after being expelled or dropping out. They organize efforts to win these rights in local and state ballot issues. There is nothing about faith or love or God. With money very tight in most dioceses why should any organization that is not directly dealing with helping people turn around their moral lives be funded. Is this not the Catholic Churches main job.
You are correct lisag. The Church legislation “Motu Proprio – On the Service of Charity” requires evangelization, so that Catholic charities do not become “just another form of social assistance”,
and certainly not a group to further federal, local, or state politics.
Charity is to help those truly in need.
Bishop Vasa got it right.
Lisag writes:
“There is nothing about faith or love or God.” The group obviously doesn’t use the words of Catholic theology, but it’s hard to say there’s nothing about faith or love or God when their brochure starts out with “Lighting the Fire of Justice.” Inside it has a message from Community Baptist Church “Identify your Season of Life, and then look to the Great Architect to give you the wisdom and help to make the most of this time” and a notice of a meeting with the local Friends (Quakers). I’ll take a guess that they use “Great Architect” to avoid putting off people who don’t like “God-talk.” Most Christians aren’t put off by calling God the Great Architect, so this seems line a practical way to draw in as many people as possible who can help and be helped, and ultimately whose lives can be turned around.
People aren’t stupid, and they know when they are being disadvantaged. Denying them opportunity and breeding resentments prevents them from turning their moral lives around.
No doubt the bishop had his own good reasons for not investing in them, but it isn’t right to say there is nothing about faith or love or God.
Francis – the “Great Architect” is Satan which is used by the Free Masons.
Jesus or God is not referred to as the “great architect” in any Christian Bible – including the Bibles used by Protestants.
Never tolerate sin. Never support any groups that join evil coalitions.
Maddy, how do you evangelise to people who are hungry, unclothed, who can’t speak the language, who are taken advantage of by employers, who can’t find a place to live at a decent rent, can’t find the funds for the first month’s rent and cleaning deposit? Those who say that these are not the concerns of the church don’t understand, or don’t want to understand the faith to which we are called. Go further down the cafeteria line and you will see that there is more offered than just a select few favored items. Too many of us are cafeteria Catholics. Too many of us choose only what we like and condemn others. Some on this site are so picky that they don’t even attend real Catholic churches any more because they don’t like what is offered by the one, true, Catholic and apostolic faith. The report did not slam Bishop Vasa. But what he did was dead wrong. We will, of course, continue to pray for him and pray for his conversion to the fulness of the Church’s demand that we fight for social justice for all people.
Thank you Anonymous for not supporting giving money to groups who belong to evil coalitions.
That’s what this article and the report “Faith in Public Life” is all about. The author and endorsers of the report do support giving Catholic Charity money to groups who join evil coalitions.
As I stated, when groups want money from ANY Catholic Charity, all they need to do is publically denounce their evil coalitions (and the reasons why).
By denouncing evil groups and evil coalitions, they denounce the evil they support.
It is quite simple.
The endorsers of the report do not want groups to have to denounce their evil coalitions.
In addition, Bishop Vasa is doing his job. All Diocese Bishops are required to determine which charities are legitimate for Catholic donation money in his own Diocese within the framework of “Motu Proprio On the Service of Charity”.
Bob One – if you do not want to be a cafeteria Catholic (which is really a schismatic and/or heretic) – on the Vatican web site, please read: “Motu Proprio, ON the SERVICE of CHARITY”.
Surely you are not encouraging disobedience to a Motu Proprio.
(I’m not smart enough to write it, it is Christ’s Church officially through the Supreme Pontiff.)
Bishop Vasa was obedient, and correct.
We must never tolerate sin by providing money for an organization to grow and flourish when they choose to be involved in evil coalitions.
Those involved in all Catholic Charities are required to evangelize the Gospel. This can easily be done by following the example of Jesus – evangelizing and feeding thousands at the same time.
Mk 6: 34-44; Mk 8:1-9
Next for Catholics who do not want to be heretics or schismatics they have to ‘know’ their Faith and what Christ Church teaches. And they should never write anything against OFFICIAL Church teaching in the media.
Please read the following:
Mt 16: 18-19;
Catholic Bible;
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition;
Code of Canon Law;
General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) for the Ordinary Form of the Mass.
Last year on the front page of the Santa Rosa paper was an article about an unmarried couple with two children. The Catholic Charities helped them into an apartment. They should have helped them into a marriage. What are the chances that they did. Providing a place to live does give dignity, but so much of Catholic work has been sanitized of our faith. That is the real problem that some Catholics have with CCHD and Catholic Charities.
Bob One, have you checked lately into the cost of hiring a human smuggler to bring someone illegally into our country? I have never heard of someone who is hungry and unclothed being able to afford one. That being said, I have heard of some illegal immigrants ending up poorer and enslaved once they do make it into this country. This, of course, is truly tragic.
I agree with you that anyone who is unclothed and hungry is the concern of the church, as well as, I might add, his/her spiritual wellbeing. For this reason I support charities like Franciscan Friars of the Renewal and their hospital in Honduras. They work to enrich the spiritual and material lives of the poor whom they serve, which in turn enriches and builds up a more vibrant community. Another charity which supports the poor in Guatemala and El Salvador is run by a well known Catholic from the North Dakota, Patrick Atckinson called the God’s Child Program. His organization helps the poorest of the poor in those countries receive an education, including a college education. Some have already become doctors, lawyers and social workers who now work on behalf of the poor in their communities. He has a program which has saved the lives of many starving babies which the doctors had given up on. He helps build decent housing and obtain decent health care for the poor. He visits prisoners in violent jails. Patrick is as dedicated to the poor as anyone I know and he is not afraid to speak out against the evils that illegal immigration fosters, as well as the illusion which gives the idea that it is the solution to one’s poverty. I too really hate to see the poor displaced from their homes only to face the more tragic reality here in the USA, which you have so eloquently outlined in your post.
I would love to hear about those charities you support which help the poor have the dignity of living and taking possession of their ancestral homeland.
Francis: I was taken aback by your use of the word “the Great Architect” when referring to God. In freemasonry, “the Great Architect” refers to the Prince of the World or Satan. I hope it was merely a poor choice of words….
Anton:
I looked up the quote (something I didn’t do before posting the previous comment), and it seems to originate uniquely from the Community Baptist Church (cbscr.org), which supports northbayop.org.
The freemansonry connection is interesting. I know pretty much nothing about the Masons. From to the Wikipedia page on Great Architect of the Universe: “This is a conception of God discussed by many Christian theologians and apologists. As a designation it is used within Freemasonry to neutrally represent deity…”
The 3rd reference from google on “Great Architect” and all the references which include satan are lurid anti-Masonic screeds written by Christian fundamentalists. This doesn’t look any more credible than 2nd century Roman accusations that “Christians are atheists and cannibals.” But maybe you have more reliable sources?
In any case, it is interesting that a Baptist church would use a masonic title for God. I wonder if they are aware of the connection, and I wonder if it has anything to do with the Bishop’s choice not to support northbayop.org?
Maybe you should have more reliable sources (including documentation that you can share with us so we can read it for ourselves) prior to making up your own religion.
Joining the Free Masons is an excommunicable offense. See: ” HUMANUM GENUS ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON FREEMASONRY” on the Vatican web site.
” Indeed, with them (Free Masons) it is lawful to attack with impunity the very foundations of the Catholic religion, in speech, in writing, and in teaching; and even the rights of the Church are not spared, and the offices with which it is divinely invested are not safe.”
“They (Free Masons) have for a long time plotted, that the sacred power of the Pontiffs must be abolished, and that the papacy itself, founded by divine right, must be utterly destroyed.”
” In this insane and wicked endeavor we may almost see the implacable hatred and spirit of revenge with which Satan himself is inflamed against Jesus Christ. – So also the studious endeavour of the Freemasons to destroy the chief foundations of justice and honesty, and to co-operate with those who would wish, as if they were mere animals, to do what they please, tends only to the ignominious and disgraceful ruin of the human race. ”
” Let no one be deceived by a pretense of honesty. It may seem to some that Freemasons demand nothing that is openly contrary to religion and morality; but, as the whole principle and object of the sect lies in what is vicious and criminal, to join with these men or in any way to help them cannot be lawful. ”
Those who habitually attack Catholic Doctrine on this site and other media sites, could be Free Masons.
Ted:
I can’t follow your logic at all. You can read the documentation for yourself! Go to the northbayop.org website just like I wrote, look up their brochure, and you’ll find exactly what I did. Or, go to the cbscr.org website and you’ll find exactly what I found there. I wrote everything down in my earlier comment!
What on Earth is “making up your own religion” supposed to mean?? And who’s joining the Masons?? It looks to me as if you’ve become seriously sidetracked from the topic at hand.
Francis, use “OFFICIAL” Church Documentation – such as the;
Bible, CCC, Code of Canon Law, GIRM, or Motu Proprio and Apostolic Constitutions from the Vatican web site.
These are what we all need to quote for accuracy (along with the appropriate verse or paragraph number when possible for others to follow).
You said you knew nothing about Free Masons, and Ted B – gave you documented info from the Vatican web site.
Sorry, “Bob One” but a dedication to “Social Justice” never is sufficient to overcome sin done in its name. This concept seems completely incomprehensible to liberals such as yourself. The modern notion of “Social Justice” is among the grab-bag of Vatican II-isms that have helped to water down, if not eliminate, the concept of what it means to be a practicing Catholic. Jesus certainly commanded all of us to work to help the poor, the needy, the unfortunate, the imprisoned. He did not suggest, however, that we violate the Commandments to do so. Pagans of all strips can be charitable and help the poor, the downtrodden, etc. But Che Guevara is not a saint, but a murdering thug, like his brother (although many poor are likely better educated and have health care that they would not have had under Batista). While there are certainly issues with Bishop Vasa, his direction regarding Catholic identity and charity are much preferred over the dissembling directors of CCHD. For devotees of the worldview of CCHD, however, it is without question that Lucifer would much enjoy their attendance in his kingdom.
St. Christopher writes “He did not suggest, however, that we violate the Commandments to do so.”
I’m curious how one might interpret the parable of the Good Samaritan? Or what of Luke 14:5?
Francis, no commandment was violated in the parable of the Good Samaritan, at least by the “good Samaritan”. The parable was used by Jesus to point out the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of His day. Luke 14:5 is Jesus reminding his critics that even they would pull a child or an ox out of a well on the sabbath day. Again, Jesus was proving the hypocrisy of these leaders who were continually criticizing Him and trying to trap Him.
Francis, I should add that a commandment would have been broken in the Parable of the Good Samaritan if the Samaritan had extorted money from another person in order to pay the innkeeper the cost of caring for the wounded man. As the Samaritan payed for the care of the wounded man using his own resources, no commandment was broken.
The commenter “St. Christopher” wrote that Jesus didn’t suggest we violate another commandment to fulfill the Greatest Commandment. I’ve given two examples where Jesus did exactly that.
In the parable of the Good Samaritan, a commandment would have been broken if the priest or the levite had touched the naked man. Clearly, Jesus challenged his followers to see through that commandment. Those men weren’t being hypocritical; they were following the Jewish law. And Jesus pointed out that there were times when it would not be right to follow the law.
In Luke 14:5, pulling an Ox or a boy out of a well would also be a violation of the law. Again, Jesus pointed out that the law isn’t absolute.
Bad analogy, Francis, he wanted the Levites to break a minor law to save a man’s life because the saving of human live is more important than ritual contamination. The Old Testament clearly states that in several places, such as when David and his men ate the shewbread to keep alive, which was normally unlawful for them to do. How does that compare with a Catholic group that gives it money to an organization that kills children in the womb. If the organizations were trying to save the life of both the mothers AND their children in all cases, the Lord would praise that but not the killing of unborn babies because that is the taking of an innocent life.
The CCHD does not give its money to any organization that kills children in the womb.
Anne T.:
Are you sure you don’t think it’s a “bad analogy” only because it draws to a conclusion you don’t like? Can you see how twice (or further) removed cooperation with evil compares with “break a minor law…”? The organizations who are supported through CCHD are not abortion providers, and they don’t pay for women to get abortions. They don’t transport women to abortion clinics. It is not unreasonable to think that their ministry is a reminder of God’s love and the preciousness of all human life to mothers who are under severe stress. It is not unreasonable to think that by helping people out of poverty CCHD prevents more abortions than it causes, because people living in poverty have high abortion rates. It is just not true that CCHD supports “an organization that kills children in the womb” as you say.
By the standard you apply when you demand no cooperation no matter how remote, you would have to leave the U.S.A. If you don’t leave the country, you will pay taxes that support an organization who kill children in the womb through drone strikes and by abortions performed in federally-supported hospitals (even though no federal funds go directly to paying for abortions).
It is still Bishop Vasa’s call what kind of relationship, if any, he wants his diocese to have with CCHD. All this name-calling, exaggeration beyond the boundaries of truth and demonization helps nothing and doesn’t support the Bishop’s authority or the cause of Life.
Maybe I missed something here but anyhow, CCHD funds are collected freely. No one is extorted into giving to it.
You did not miss anything, Anonymous, please read my reply to Francis at 2:26 pm today. Also, a correction to that post: it should read “human life” not “human live” in my third line.
“Maybe I missed something here but anyhow, CCHD funds are collected freely. No one is extorted into giving to it.”
Yes, you have missed something.
While no one is extorted into giving money, some pastors resort to fooling the faithful. Some parishes have become wise to the fact that Catholics are not going to finance evil so they don’t use the words CCHD, they call it a specials needs collection for the poor. Pastors should not do this. That is a form of deceit and it scandalizes those who hear it. That is a polished lie. In a court of law that kind of well thought out plan is called a pre-meditated crime. This kind of clever method of deceit does not endear more trust and love.
I assume you are speaking of the diocese of Orange County.
Bob One, Francis and other devotees of Community Organizing: (BTW, the Campaign for Human Development design was based directly on Saul Alinsky principles). Read Caitlin Flanagan’s (she’s a leftist) expose on Cesar Chavez and the her conclusion on the state of migrant farmworkers in California. It’s in Atlantic Monthly.
How is the south side of Chicago making out after all of the years of community organizing? Utter failure. But hope springs eternal, I guess.
Jane, thanks for pointing this out! I myself am an active member of a community organizing group which is criticized and derided for it’s successes by the “compassionate” Left. The group is called 40 Days for Life! It is apparent to me that the Left prefers the failures like the south side of Chicago.
CAN CATHOLIC’S REFER TO GOD AS “THE GREAT ARCHITECT” … ?
The concept of God as the (Great) Architect of the Universe has been employed many times in Christianity. An illustration of God as the architect of the universe can be found in a Bible from the Middle Ages and the comparison of God to an architect has been used by Christian apologists and teachers.
Saint Thomas Aquinas said in the Summa: “God, Who is the first principle of all things, may be compared to things created as the architect is to things designed (ut artifex ad artificiata).” Commentators have pointed out that the assertion that the Grand Architect of the Universe is the Christian God “is not evident on the basis of ‘natural theology’ alone but requires an additional ‘leap of faith’ based on the revelation of the Bible”.
John Calvin, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion (1536), repeatedly calls the Christian God “the Architect of the Universe”, also referring to his works as “Architecture of the Universe”, and in his commentary on Psalm 19 refers to the Christian God as the “Great Architect” or “Architect of the Universe”.
Matthew – – Please provide Bible verses and anything additional “Catholic” that where we can see God referred to as “Great Architect”. I’d like to your documentation for myself.
As for Calvin, don’t bother, he was a heretic and schismatic.
You’ve gotta be kidding!
The Bible?
Please.
Do your own research, which is quite easy these days with the internet.
Ted:
Something’s gone wrong in translation here. Matthew quoted from the Summa Theologica, but apparently you want something more “Catholic.” What could possibly be more Catholic than the Summa? I’m sure I didn’t understand you correctly, because I can’t make any sense of what you wrote.
I’m surprised Ab. Niederauer and George Wesolek’s (director of CCHD for SF) names did not appear in the list of supporters. They were both staunch supporters of CCHD, the IAF and community organizing. In a debate with the coordinator of the SF Respect Life ministry, she insisted that the SFOP was a “good community organizing group”. Maybe with the new archbishop collections for the CCHD will stop and the department of CCHD will be disbanded.
If we had more bishops like Vasa, we would have more real Catholics in America.
I read the report on all those “McCarthy-like’ Catholics (supporters of the Pope & Magisterium) such as Lifesite News and Church Militant TV – who by the way included links to the propaganda piece in their response… Although the ‘cchd’ kind of failed to provide links to ‘other’ (as if there could be such) viewpoints:
Hence, the following is Not for Comparison, as none are allowed… Ahem.
>>”Author of Soros-funded CCHD defense stands by report despite bevy of omissions and errors
BY MICHAEL HICHBORN, AMERICAN LIFE LEAGUE June 24, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) –
On June 11, the liberal organization Faith in Public Life published a report attacking the investigative work of the Reform CCHD Now coalition, which has worked for nearly three years now to promote a thoroughgoing top-down reform of the U.S. Bishops’ Catholic Campaign for Human Development after discovering that dozens of its grantees promote activities contrary to Catholic teaching.
Shortly after Faith in Public Life (FIPL) released its report, LifeSiteNews revealed that FIPL’s CEO was on a panel of “pro-choice clergy” at aPlanned Parenthood event that focused on how ‘pro-choice’ clergy could “make social change in support of reproductive justice in communities across the country.”
LifeSiteNews also pointed out that FIPL published numerous blog entries defending Planned Parenthood, including this one where FIPL states that it “compiled quotes from faith leaders opposing government shutdown over Planned Parenthood funding.”
It’s a little more than ironic that a pro-abortion, Soros-funded organization is crying foul over our investigative reporting that profiles pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro-birth control and Marxist organizations receiving money from the Catholic Church.
Even beyond the irony, however, the FIPL report is full of glaring errors and omissions that must be addressed…
Conclusion – The distortions and untruths in Faith in Public Life’s “report” make it clear that they are not interested in justice, the poor, or honesty in reporting. The mere fact that the report’s author refuses to address the glaring inaccuracies shows that he is more interested in furthering an agenda than the truth.
But in addition to the irony that an organization so friendly with Planned Parenthood is rushing to the defense of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, the homosexuality lobby group Human Rights Campaign endorsed FIPL’s report, just a few days after it was published.
HRC emphaticallyclaimed that it is unjust “that a network of conservative Catholic organizations would choose to withhold funds from local groups working with the poor because they support marriage equality and the LGBT community.”
All of this leads to two conclusions:
The Reform CCHD Now campaign is having a definitive impact on the lobbying efforts of pro-abortion and pro-homosexual organizations. There would be no reason for the obvious effort of writing this slick 28-page report and obtaining its long list of endorsers, otherwise.
FIPL and HRC both make the arguments that in order to help the poor, it is essential for CCHD grantees to join coalitions that support abortion and homosexuality, proving what the Reform CCHD Now coalition has been saying all along: CCHD grantees are indeed members of pro-abortion and pro-homosexual coalitions, and such membership is necessary to advance abortion and homosexuality in American society.
Michael Hichborn is Director of Defend the Faith, a project of American Life League.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/author-of-soros-funded-cchd-defense-stands-by-report-despite-bevy-of-omissi
One difference is that the Faith in Public Life report (admittedly biased) actually went and talked to the groups that got defunded. They didn’t just poke around the internet, looking for something to hold against them. I don’t recall that it tried to get comment from the groups that form Reform CCHD Now. All of the groups in the report were defunded so how can he say that CCHD grantees are member of these coalitions. They are no longer CCHD grantees.
I notice that there is a rebuttal of sorts on the LifeSiteNews website. One of the ALL researchers has posted a few more tidbits it dug up on some of the organizations that lost CCHD funding. He brags that Reform CCHD Now is having a definitive impact on the lobbying efforts of pro-abortion and pro-homosexual organizations. (How does he get that?) I want to tell the impact that Reform CCHD Now has had on my charitable contributions. I never used to donate to the CCHD campaign. I now donate generously. I used to donate to pro-life charities. I never donate to them now. After reading the report from Faith in Public Life, I am supported in my discernment of the Lord’s will for my stewardship. I am pro-life and pro-traditional marriage. I am pro-Jesus. I am pro-Catholic.
I called Bishop Vasa about 15 years ago to ask him about ministry to those with same sex attraction. He did not know me from Adam, but answered the phone right away and spoke to me clearly, pastorally, and frankly. He is a modern day martyr for the faith in Jesus, and subsequently will suffer. Letters of support to him help him during difficult times, so let him know of your love.
Thank you Father, I find your opinion of Bishop Vasa to be right on. He is very concerned for his flock and teaches with love.
Thank you Father Richard, I needed guidance and your comments helped..I trust more your honest guidance….
Thank you Father Perozich, You clearly have met the heart and soul of the man; the good bishop is humble and charitable, but not afraid to stand up for the faith of the Church. for all others: do not pass up a chance to met or speak with Bishop Vasa if the opportunity presents itself. The simplicity of his love for Christ and the Church is palpable and contagious.
This advocacy pamphlet surely chose the most sympathetic cases it could find. However, the claim of many commentators is simply that no alliances at all with a group who dissents from Catholic teaching should be accepted.
The ridiculousness of the that position should be obvious. Under it, my parish’s support for the local pregnancy center would be disallowed, due to the center’s shared support by several protestant and contraceptive-supportive congregations.
I wonder if these posters apply the same scrutiny to their familial connections, rejecting their less-pious or less-obedient cousins. If so, filling their Thanksgiving Day tables must be a challenge.
So Brian S., do you advocate being DISOBEDIENT to Church Teaching and requirements – “Motu Proprio ON THE SERVICE OF CHARITY” ?
And yes, Catholics can donate to organizations that do not violate the Catholic Faith. There are several pregnancy organizations that can be found on the “Priests for Life” web site – that you can donate to.
Do NOT tolerate sin in any manner.
If you personally choose to tolerate sin, you can provide your OWN money to organizations with sinful coalitions but do not expect ALL Catholics to do the same through our Bishops organization.
Sure, I could contribute to other pregnancy organizations, but not if my intent is to assist those in need within the town I live. I’m confident in my obedience to the Church in doing that, despite your capitalizations.
But thanks for confirming that you believe it to be sinful for the Church to support this partnership. Nothing like grabbing that reducto absurdem ring directly….
From the Priests for Life website:
We Are Ecumenical
“The pro-life movement consists of men and women of every religious persuasion, and some of no religious persuasion. Priests for Life serves the entire movement. We therefore eagerly work together with everyone interested in ending abortion. Our seminars are attended by clergy of other denominations, and our materials are used by them as well.”
So Pete – since Priests for Life works with “everyone” interested in ending abortion, even those not interested in ending contraception and does not otherwise apply a sinlessness test, do you advocate ending support to them?
“I wonder if these posters apply the same scrutiny to their familial connections, rejecting their less-pious or less-obedient cousins.” I don’t think the hyper-scrutinizers are much different from anyone else: Draw a distinction, make sure we are on the “right” side of the distinction, then enjoy the gossip, ego puffery and self-righteous anger as we demonise anyone who might be even a little bit on the wrong side.
It’s a lot of fun for all spiritual or political inclinations and it makes a great topic for Confession.
Well, they have set their boundaries and they are entitled to do that. At least they understand the issue and are not repeating the “gives money to pro-abortion groups” mantra, which is false witness.
I knew this Alysnky fellow was a bad actor, but I had no idea he was that horrid
Simple Question for the accommodate Evil (provided it does some ‘good’, at least in a radical leftist / gender feminist / homosex Alinskyite sense of the word) – gang.
Just how long a spoon do you recommend using, for future supper dates with the Evil one.
Michael:
If you’re inviting us to supper, shall we bring a salad of sustainably grown local organic greens or some naturally sweetened organic vegan desserts?
“Francis” and others — there is really nothing that anyone can say that will change the way that you look at the propriety of CCHD handing out money to those that take life or commit other mortal sins. But, you “Good Samaritan” example is a real knee slapper. Jesus argued against the religious legalisms of the time, rules that kept the people from meeting the true commandments of “love thy neighbor” and the like. Like all good liberals, you site to this as proof that you can violate the most sacred of commands in order to “help the poor”. You might think that this is Catholic, and to many you would seem to be correct in this. In fact, the Catholic Church is pretty much done for, at least in an institutional sense (but not defeated, which cannot happen). No, abortion support is always wrong, as is homosexual sex, as is sex outside of marriage, as is stealing to help the poor, or cheating to do to, or murdering to do so, or missing Mass to do so, and so on. The CCHD folks are frauds, but they seek to defraud the Devil’s Children, in many cases. That is, there are priests and bishops galore that want all that CCHD offers. But what does this show? That the Catholic Church is chock full of homosexuals, of non-believers, of those that are not really Catholic in any meaningful sense. You will undoubtedly get your way because the majority within the Church want you to succeed, to ruin whatever sacredness is left to the remnant of Faithful Catholics. Put yet a different way, there would be no CCHD if there were people of faith making diocesan decisions. The Good Samaritan met the demand of the great commandment to love thy neighbor in spite of the artificial laws that served to bar the priest and others from rendering aid. Christ came to destroy artificial distinctions, not to give license to immorality, even if performed in His Holy Name. Being a prostitute for Jesus, giving all of your hard-earned wages to the poor, does not condone those acts. The CCHD should be rejected by all as a vehicle for any Catholic giving. Many, many pagans exist to give to this group, so let them do so. Catholics should avoid giving their money to so vile an organization. (Oh yes, your defense is that of Planned Parenthood, which argues that its mammogram services justify money to it, which then frees up its other money to support its abortion machine; checking for cancer is a fine thing, but not done on the backs of slaughtered babies.)
And, just in case it wasn’t already clear, I don’t believe you have any basis for your extravagant claim that “The CCHD folks are frauds.” Though as you suspect, if I truly believed there’s even one hungry person I could feed one meal by missing Mass, I’d miss Mass and believe I was serving God more truly. I’ve never come across any such situation so I keep going to Mass, and I take my queue from that great non-Catholic leader Martin Luther King: I have got so much to do today that I need to spend another hour on my knees praying.
“Francis”: Your comment of missing Mass to feed a meal to the poor, is about on par with, “I feel closer to God on the golf course” (so will play instead of pray). Avoiding meaningless legalisms is one thing, playing into the hand of George Soros-supported puppets that want nothing more than to destroy Catholic teaching is another. The literature is overwhelming that the CCHD serves to erode Catholic teaching in many ways, all in the name of “serving the poor” of course. You simply cannot give one dollar to an organization that year-after-year grants funding to pro-abortion and pro-homosexual marriage groups. Many many liberal bishops (and just plain liberals like yourself) love doing this, of course, because they apparently do not much hold to what the Church teaches. Bishop Vasa is not really much of conservative, and he is definitely no traditionalist; but many of his statements are true and accurate and reflect sound Catholic doctrine and practical teachings. But, as earlier stated, there really is nothing to say to the “Liberals” on this topic. They will go on — in the name of being pastoral and helping the poor — when what is done is to imperil the souls of those that need help the most. The CCHD people are indeed frauds, and cheats — but you need to be a Believer to see this truth. Don’t worry, you are in a large company of “Catholics” that love the CCHD and do not much care what it does with the honest money of Catholic donors.
“St. Christopher”: Your comment equating a day on the golf course with putting food in a chronically hungry belly is not consistent with being a good Catholic. Not George Soros nor the Koch brothers have enough money to make neglecting our obligation to the needy OK.
“When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?” And the king will answer them, “I tell you the truth, just as you did it for one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine, you did it for me.”
CCHD does not fund pro-abortion or pro homosexual marriage groups.
“…you site to this as proof that you can violate the most sacred of commands in order to ‘help the poor’…” You’ve severely distorted my statements and intentions. I, for one, did not and would not sign up to such a sweeping statement.
Your original claim was that “He did not suggest, however, that we violate the Commandments to do so.” My point is that in fact He did make serving the poor more important than the letter of the law. And, this seems to have been an approach which made Him unique among rabbis of the time (maybe those familiar with Hillel have a counter-example?). There’s a big difference between “suggest we can violate…” and “you can violate the most sacred…”
St. Christopher? I would have thought Jesus cleared up any misunderstanding for us on this matter in, among other places, the 14th chapter of Luke.
But even without the text, do you really suppose Jesus would have left the battered man on the side of the road because the temple bells were ringing?
Despite your words to the contrary, I suspect you would stop and attend an accident even if it delayed your way to Church . I hope I’m not being too charitable…
God bless Bishop Vasa and we will support him because he seems to be caring for the unborn and moral issues….God bless him and I will try to stay away from Catholic Campaign for Human Development CCHD, I will try to remember who they are and why to stay away. So much stuff to remember…
See “The Vortex” report on the CCHD. Too many suspect and conflicting reports for me to ever support CCHD again. Bishop Vasa is a good shepherd–I will follow his lead.