"Catholic Donors Keep Cash Flowing While Priests Abuse Children"

[lynx]

The reality is to even suggest in this case that you are promoting child abuse by tithing is frankly unfounded, and might I say asinine to suggest.

Who is stating that? Giving money does not support child abuse, but it does work against the punishment.

BTW what do you mean by guilty parties hanging around? Who is guilty? To what degree or extent?

If a church official is found guilty of child abuse charges by the law or church, and continues to stay under employment of the church.

In our diocese there has always been a clear statement that the annual appeal, called Diocisan Services Fund here, is not intermingled with funds for defending abuse claims.

That is the good knowledge to know

Really, how do you avoid paying your taxes?

Illegally or legally?

Our school taxes go to defense expenses for teachers and administrators accused of all kinds of misbehaviour - sexual and otherwise. School districts reach big dollar settlements all the time. The county and state taxes fund the public defenders offices which are the legal expense for many criminals much worse that those being discussed here. Not to mention that, once found guilty, our taxes pay to house, feed and educate many guilty men and women.

True, we pay a lot of taxes, some of which I don’t agree with, and if I cared enough I would try not to pay it. There are no great ways, or sometimes legal ways, of doing this, but if you believe in a cause enough you do what you have to.

 

[Corki]

“For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come toward the light, so that his works might not be exposed.” --John 3:20

The Body of Christ is calling for light, not cash, to protect children.

Why isn’t the Vatican paying settlements? Does Rome accept NO responsibility in this matter?

The settlements are driven primarily by the risk insurance companies. Those are local.

And no, the Vatican won’t be paying settlements. While the Church as some universal policies, no one in Rome is directly involved in supervising clergy, assigning clergy below the level of Bishop or disciplining clergy except where requested by the Bishop and/or as required by canon law.

 

[Catholic1954]

The settlement money in my diocese did not come from the average, Sunday Mass attending parishioner. (And we had a HUGE setttlement, one of the biggest in the nation). It mainly came from insurance and the sale of some diocesan property; we almost lost our seminary and pastoral center. After the court circus was over, the Bishop was very good in communicating where the money would come from and assuring us that Church donations would not be used. We were a little short, so he did ask for specific donations, that we were free make or not, and the priests of the diocese all donated one month’s pay. Our bishop was in a very uncomfortable spot, but all in all he handled it pretty well, and we are putting the ugliness behind us now.

 

[1strongcatholic]

Well then, that begs the question…what is the Vatican’s responsibility if a Bishop DID request disciplinary action for a clergy member and no disciplinary action was dispensed?

 

[SoonerforChrist]

Who is stating that? Giving money does not support child abuse, but it does work against the punishment.

lynx speak with a clear tongue and let us know what your main argument is.

If a church official is found guilty of child abuse charges by the law or church, and continues to stay under employment of the church.

When specifically has this happened?

 

[SoonerforChrist]

Well then, that begs the question…what is the Vatican’s responsibility if a Bishop DID request disciplinary action for a clergy member and no disciplinary action was dispensed?

I keep asking this question, “Why should the Vatican be responsible when the Bishop can take control over his own diocese not to mention local authorities being contacted and justice being served?”

I like a justice system that actually prosecutes and jails criminals. I believe that the solution to many of these problems don’t remain with the Vatican putting people to jail. The Vatican can laicize priests but what good does that do when the sickos are still running around?

Also the Vatican has a better process to speed up the laicizing of guilty priests.

 

[lynx]

lynx speak with a clear tongue and let us know what your main argument is.

When the average church goer pays for fines and settlements of the guilty then the church doesn’t feel the full intent of the punishment.

When specifically has this happened?

How would you like me to gain this information? The church certainly doesn’t report to me I’m playing the what if game. If you know that your money will be spent to support the guilty then you shouldn’t have to pay it. Why not support the poor and needy in other ways.

 

[thomasf]

I think that unless you take the time to find out where the $$ comes from for legal defense of abuse cases, you cannot assume that the $$ you donate weekly to your parish is going to pay for legal expenses. I’m on my parish council and I know where the money we spend goes. The parish publishes a quarterly accounting of how the parish spends money. I’ve never seen an entry for legal expenses for abuse cases. I HAVE seen where the dollars do go, and how in this economy the parish has had to cut costs across the board because of shrinking donations. I love my parish and want to see it stay open, so I donate my time and $$.

My parish also keeps a separate fund for the service work we do for the poor. You can donate to that directly and that money gets used for only that.

And in my parish at least, I know that most of the money donated stays in our parish. Not a lot gets kicked up to the diocese. The diocese does separate services appeals for the charity work on that level.

Unless you know where the $$ for abuse cases comes from, it’s irresponsible to just unilaterally stop giving to your parish. Times are tough and churches have problems making ends meet too. Your parish depends on your donations, and to stop giving because you assume that your money is going to pay for abuse cases is wrong. If you’re that upset, then take the time to find out where that money comes from and make sure you’re not giving to it. But don’t punish your parish for something it may have nothing to do for.

 

[Santi2]

I think that unless you take the time to find out where the $$ comes from for legal defense of abuse cases, you cannot assume that the $$ you donate weekly to your parish is going to pay for legal expenses. I’m on my parish council and I know where the money we spend goes. The parish publishes a quarterly accounting of how the parish spends money. I’ve never seen an entry for legal expenses for abuse cases. I HAVE seen where the dollars do go, and how in this economy the parish has had to cut costs across the board because of shrinking donations. I love my parish and want to see it stay open, so I donate my time and $$.

My parish also keeps a separate fund for the service work we do for the poor. You can donate to that directly and that money gets used for only that.

And in my parish at least, I know that most of the money donated stays in our parish. Not a lot gets kicked up to the diocese. The diocese does separate services appeals for the charity work on that level.

Unless you know where the $$ for abuse cases comes from, it’s irresponsible to just unilaterally stop giving to your parish. Times are tough and churches have problems making ends meet too. Your parish depends on your donations, and to stop giving because you assume that your money is going to pay for abuse cases is wrong. If you’re that upset, then take the time to find out where that money comes from and make sure you’re not giving to it. But don’t punish your parish for something it may have nothing to do for.

My Parish council is the same. They provide a clear accounting of the needs of the Parish and the parishioners oblige. We have second collections for seminarian support as well. Our faith in the Church is not shattered by errant priests but, bouyed by holy ones. If there is a decrease in collection, it would only be because of the current economic climate.

 

[CAnnElizabeth]

If the money paid for abuse cases comes from insurance policies – the diocese paid for the policies - from our money. If it comes from some parish’s general fund or a diocesan fund – it still comes from our money. If properties/assets were sold for the pay outs, those were acquired from… our money. There is no other source, is there? Even parish fund-raisers only move the money from our pockets to the parish pocket.

I’ve been part of the budgeting process, too – and the beginning source of all funds is donations – unless someone has some kind of revenue-producing scheme not shared with laypeople. Even if there have been investments made that have yielded substantial return, the initial deposits came from…our money.

The final authority in our Church, like it or not, is not the layperson, no matter how involved or active that person may be, even in a perfectly-structured parish. It is the pastor or Bishop – and these are two levels of authority that have mishandled abuse cases for years.

I think it’s admirable that some cleric can say the payouts are not coming from donations – I just have to wonder where they are coming from, what the source is. “The Church” is not a revenue-producing entity – WE are ultimately the funding body (discounting whatever interest or other returns on prior investment).

I understand that withholding money may hurt parish programs – but unfortunately it is also the one way of putting teeth to our disappointment in management. It’s really the only punitive measure we have, the only thing we really control.

This whole conversation is probably moot as (hopefully) most of the American abuse cases have been settled or are in the process – but there are still several millions of dollars yet to be paid from some areas that aren’t yet resolved. As long as there is continuing evidence that these abuse cases were mishandled by Church authority, I think we have every right to modify our donations to the parish or diocese. There are thousands of other organizations not tainted by abuse or mismanagement which can use funding to do His work.

By the way, the yearly diocesan campaign in our area is extremely aggressive. 25% of monies collected are returned to the parish, but this particular diocese has a big bad bill to pay for mishandled abuse cases, too.

Also, even though the MSM has gone overboard in its eagerness to slam the RC Church, and I’ve hated it along with everyone else, this may be one instance where it’s had a positive effect. At the very least, safeguards are in now place in schools and parishes and the hierarchy have been forced (by the media - not by us or even their collective consciences) to act responsibly.

 

[mlund]

When the average church goer pays for fines and settlements of the guilty then the church doesn’t feel the full intent of the punishment.

And this is where the train parts ways with the tracks, I’m afraid.

The “Church” is the body of parishioners and clergy alike. These settlements and lawsuits are directed specifically against our Dioceses and Parishes - not merely suing the cleric in question individually. We’re not paying money to keep the priests out of jail or from going bankrupt. We are paying money to keep lawyers from bankrupting our Dioceses and Parishes - from using the State to confiscating our seminaries, schools, chapels, charitable missions, parish centers, and churches proper.

I’ve met and read some very, very sick people who are overjoyed at the prospect of these lawsuits leading to shuttering Catholic schools and parishes. This is because such people are not motivated by justice, but by hatred and bigotry. They want the Church discredited, bankrupted, and utterly silenced.

• Marty Lund

 

[SoonerforChrist]

And this is where the train parts ways with the tracks, I’m afraid.

The “Church” is the body of parishioners and clergy alike. These settlements and lawsuits are directed specifically against our Dioceses and Parishes - not merely suing the cleric in question individually. We’re not paying money to keep the priests out of jail or from going bankrupt. We are paying money to keep lawyers from bankrupting our Dioceses and Parishes - from using the State to confiscating our seminaries, schools, chapels, charitable missions, parish centers, and churches proper.

I’ve met and read some very, very sick people who are overjoyed at the prospect of these lawsuits leading to shuttering Catholic schools and parishes. This is because such people are not motivated by justice, but by hatred and bigotry. They want the Church discredited, bankrupted, and utterly silenced.

• Marty Lund

Thank you Marty for the response. This is more or less my thoughts as well. I actually feel that that parish needs more money during those times for the reasons you mention.

 

[thomasf]

I understand that withholding money may hurt parish programs – but unfortunately it is also the one way of putting teeth to our disappointment in management. It’s really the only punitive measure we have, the only thing we really control.

IMO, I don’t understand a member of the church needing a ‘punitive’ measure against the church. Do you really believe that your ‘punitive’ measure is going to change church behavior? What it’s going to do is eliminate programs, close parishes and schools, and hurt other people, including fellow catholics. And lawsuits against the church will not cease because of your ‘punitive’ measure that decreases the funds available to the church.

 

[Loboto-Me]

And this is where the train parts ways with the tracks, I’m afraid.

The “Church” is the body of parishioners and clergy alike. These settlements and lawsuits are directed specifically against our Dioceses and Parishes - not merely suing the cleric in question individually. We’re not paying money to keep the priests out of jail or from going bankrupt. We are paying money to keep lawyers from bankrupting our Dioceses and Parishes - from using the State to confiscating our seminaries, schools, chapels, charitable missions, parish centers, and churches proper.

I’ve met and read some very, very sick people who are overjoyed at the prospect of these lawsuits leading to shuttering Catholic schools and parishes. This is because such people are not motivated by justice, but by hatred and bigotry. They want the Church discredited, bankrupted, and utterly silenced.

• Marty Lund

I agree with your thinking Marty, and for that reason I’ve been trying to give a little more than we had been to make up for those Catholics who wrongly think that withholding sends “a message”.

Funny, as Catholics we don’t think twice about praying, making sacrifices and suffering for other people’s sins, but when it comes to the pocketbook, they(we) think differently.

 

[Appealing_Woman]

IMO, I don’t understand a member of the church needing a ‘punitive’ measure against the church. Do you really believe that your ‘punitive’ measure is going to change church behavior? What it’s going to do is eliminate programs, close parishes and schools, and hurt other people, including fellow catholics. And lawsuits against the church will not cease because of your ‘punitive’ measure that decreases the funds available to the church.

I agree with this. The Church is not a political party where we withhold our vote or a corporation where we boycott by refusing to buy a product. It is the Kingdom of God on Earth, and we, as members of the Body of Christ, have work to do–to evangelize, to take care of the poor and needy, to educate our children and provide faith formation for our families. This takes membership donations at the parish, diocesan and national levels. The offending priests are being dealt with, the Bishops who handled the problem poorly have learned the error of their ways, the reform has begun. What the Church needs now is support, not chasetisement.

 

[lynx]

These settlements and lawsuits are directed specifically against our Dioceses and Parishes - not merely suing the cleric in question individually.

Then quite frankly the Church shouldn’t deal with it. But, the church is protecting its image, going into damage control mode. That is what any settlement stands for. Maybe if they decided to let the guilty party fry then this wouldn’t be an issue.

We’re not paying money to keep the priests out of jail or from going bankrupt.

Although that is the conclusion of this hypothetical.

We are paying money to keep lawyers from bankrupting our Dioceses and Parishes - from using the State to confiscating our seminaries, schools, chapels, charitable missions, parish centers, and churches proper.

You gotta do, what you gotta do.

I’ve met and read some very, very sick people who are overjoyed at the prospect of these lawsuits leading to shuttering Catholic schools and parishes.

So does this mean that it’s the motivation for all lawsuits?

This is because such people are not motivated by justice, but by hatred and bigotry. They want the Church discredited, bankrupted, and utterly silenced.

If I was molested by someone I trust in my place of worship I might want that place dismantled as well. I see nothing wrong with hatred in these cases. When there appears to be systematic cover ups of abuse I feel hatred as well.

 

[markomalley]

Lynx,

If you don’t want to donate to the Church, then, by all means, don’t.

Problem solved.

 

[lynx]

Lynx,

If you don’t want to donate to the Church, then, by all means, don’t.

Problem solved.

Let me get this straight, you don’t want me to give to the church ? I am floored (can you tell my the smiley ) . Where are my millions going to go to now?

 

[markomalley]

Let me get this straight, you don’t want me to give to the church ? I am floored (can you tell my the smiley ) . Where are my millions going to go to now?

Unlike some, I certainly wouldn’t want to hold a gun to your head and force you to support programs that you don’t want to support!