Archbishop Chaput: 'anti-discrimination' legislation threatens Catholic identity

  • Thread starter Thread starter stbruno
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, but Stbruno, if Catholics were properly catechized, just maybe we would also be better donors, and wouldn’t need to ask the government to help us out with our religious duties. When you’re a conduit for government money, is that really charity?
No, it is not.

We are becoming what I call Couch Potato Catholics. We sit on the sofa, drink beer and eat chips and cheer for the team (or government program) of our choice – but do nothing to move the ball ourselves. It’s time we suited up, went out on the field and played in the game – with our own money.

And as I said, the government money will not go unspent. If the Catholic Church doesn’t spend it, someone else’s charity will.
 
No, it is not.

We are becoming what I call Couch Potato Catholics. We sit on the sofa, drink beer and eat chips and cheer for the team (or government program) of our choice – but do nothing to move the ball ourselves. It’s time we suited up, went out on the field and played in the game – with our own money.

And as I said, the government money will not go unspent. If the Catholic Church doesn’t spend it, someone else’s charity will.
Couch Potato Catholics. I like it! 👍 You haven’t trademarked it have you, because I think I will pass that label along to my pastor? I’m pretty sure he will use it in his homilies. 🙂
 
Couch Potato Catholics. I like it! 👍 You haven’t trademarked it have you, because I think I will pass that label along to my pastor? I’m pretty sure he will use it in his homilies. 🙂
Be my guest – I am here to spread the Word.😃
 
We shall find out more as the public discussion on this continues. This also raises a question, just what is the Archbishop’s definition of “Catholic”? I believe it was posted in MT a couple of week ago and it seemed pretty limited. Charity management should transcend religious identity. Catholic Charities’ mission is to all, and if a person of a different religion can do the job better and provide superior charity outreach, then they should seriously be considered for the job.

To the person receiving the warm meal, heating aid, free or reduced counciling, warm bed, loving adoption, the politics at the top are non-existent. They key is to get as many services to as many in need as you can.
Laudatur Iesus Christus.

Charity is a part of the liturgy of the Church*. It is not as though God has all of these needy people on His hands and needs them fed. Rather, God is love; charity is an integral way in which we participate in the expression of God’s love, the Son’s love for the Father. This is not a matter of mere logistics but of authentic love, within the structure of the Sacraments.

Pope Benedict put it this way, in part:

This can only take place on the basis of an intimate encounter with God, an encounter which has become a communion of will, even affecting my feelings. Then I learn to look on this other person not simply with my eyes and my feelings, but from the perspective of Jesus Christ. His friend is my friend. Going beyond exterior appearances, I perceive in others an interior desire for a sign of love, of concern. This I can offer them not only through the organizations intended for such purposes, accepting it perhaps as a political necessity. Seeing with the eyes of Christ, I can give to others much more than their outward necessities; I can give them the look of love which they crave. Here we see the necessary interplay between love of God and love of neighbour which the First Letter of John speaks of with such insistence. (Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est, (2005) no. 18.)

It is important for the Church to bring others into these activities, but it cannot be an “equal opportunity” activity, because it is integral to the identity of the Church and requires the authentic Catholic Faith, if it is to have effect in eternity.

The awareness of this responsibility has had a constitutive relevance in the Church from the beginning . . . (Ibid, at 20.)

Charity is salvific, not because it feeds the poor and prolongs their physical life, but because it is an encounter with others which is an opportunity for authentic love, the love of Christ for His God and Father.

Caritas Christi nobiscum.

John Hiner

*The word “liturgy” is usually given a more restrictive meaning, but this is not its only or even its most fundamental meaning in the Church: “In the New Testament the word “liturgy” refers not only to the celebration of divine worship but also to the proclamation of the Gospel and to active charity. . .” (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1070 (emphasis added).) Further, charity is linked to the offering made in the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass, represented by our offering of the wine, “the fruit of the vine.”
 
Yes, but Stbruno, if Catholics were properly catechized, just maybe we would also be better donors, and wouldn’t need to ask the government to help us out with our religious duties. When you’re a conduit for government money, is that really charity?
It starts at home…I tithe,not only my treasures, but my time and talent too. Do you?
 
“Who takes the King’s shilling is the King’s man.”
But this quote uses “king” which represents a tyranical dictatorship where all are enslaved to the whims of one man. In America, we are a tyranical dictatorship where all are enslaved to the whims of a small group of men. Not the same thing. 😃

I obviously am in agreement that the Catholic Church should not be in bed “the King.”
 
Because there are some social programs that religion-based institutions can reach that other public sector ones cannot. It is also to diversify the Church’s mission of charity towards others. The Church has a broad, non-discrimination mission towards charity, since Catholic means universal anyways. Anti-discrimination towards anything should be a main foundation block of a universal church.
Those who are served by the Church’s charitable mission are diversified and “universal”. What the Archbishop is referring to are the MISSIONARIES of charity themselves. If Catholic Charities no longer has the right to employ primarily Catholics, then what you are left with is nothing more than a social service agency.

What sets religious charities apart from your local DSHS is the opportunity to appeal to the soul in need. Remove the predominant Catholic presence in the charity and you remove the ability to reach the spiritually needy.
 
I do not see this legislation singling out any particular religion. To talk about anything being “anti-Catholic”, we need to consider what “Catholic” means in this situation compared to other definitions.
Maybe you are confused. The Archbishop is speaking of the employees of Catholic Charities. There is no need to “consider definitions” when it comes to employing Catholics in a Catholic enterprise. This “situation” is no different from any other Catholic environment.
The Denver Archbishop has used a more narrow definition of Catholic in things that have been posted in MT at CAF recently. It leans to more of a faithful only vs universal definition.
What does that even mean? Is there a “less faithful” way to be Catholic?
This leans towards alienation and exclusion based on this or that.
You are correct. The employees of a Catholic institution charged with providing CHRISTIAN services to the needy should know the faith, live the faith, and share the faith. Would you have a Wiccan run the show?
Being that charity is part of the Catholic identity and heritage, there is no possible interference with the accepted goals of charity. This follows with the meaning of Catholic being universal, which is the one accepted by most of society. Charity is universal.
You have completely confused Christian charity with governmental charity. Perhaps you should do a refresher read through of the CCC on the meaning of Catholic charity.
 
Vern,
100% agree. I continue to pray that the Church will rid Herself of the albatross of government money.
 
Having been gone from the forum for some time, it is good to see the level of exhange found in this thread.

I agree with Vern and those who see the Church needing to be free of govt. money, etc. We can and should stand on our own.
However, some of the taxpayer money that will be spent by other organizations who step in our place will likely be spent on abortion and other “services” that do not need to have more finacing.

I also see that Bishop Chaput does need to fight this kind of legislation if only because it sets up the thinking that the govt. has a right to curtail religious thought and speach and so on…even when the govt. has no $ involved…look at Canada.

I wonder what would happen if they extended this kind of legislation to other “non-profits”. Perhaps Planned Parenthood should be required hire an orthodox Catholic mother of 8 kids to be their CEO if she is the most qualified applicant and bring to the job her values. (Their employment ads clearly state that you must uphold their mission.) Can you imagine them tolerating that kind of a dictate?
 
However, some of the taxpayer money that will be spent by other organizations who step in our place will likely be spent on abortion and other “services” that do not need to have more finacing.
And what we should do about that is oppose such financing of murder in the political arena.

By accepting the money, we may find ourselves in the position of doling out public money for abortions!!
 
And what we should do about that is oppose such financing of murder in the political arena.

By accepting the money, we may find ourselves in the position of doling out public money for abortions!!
No argument there! One would hope that would not happen, but when there are strings attached to money lots of ugly things occur. We have seen that in the past with Catholic Charities in other parts of the country. I would rather we used our own resources and had nothing to do with the govt. dollars for the very reasons we have covered in this thread.

But I still support the good Bishop’s fight. Lots of other organizations decide how to spend the taxpayer’s money…some of them might as well be Catholic; as long as we don’t compromise the Faith in doing so. I don’t believe Bishop Chaput would put himself in that position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top