Z
zab
Guest
Amen. I see no reason for me to continue here.
Catholic Relief Services insists on its fidelity to Church teaching [CWN]
- Status
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Pope decrees: Catholic charities must always act in accordance with Catholic teaching
ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/new-rules-aim-beef-catholic-identity-church-charities
ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/new-rules-aim-beef-catholic-identity-church-charities
CRF has taken millions from the Gates foundation. To be in line with this document they will have to stop receiving such donations because such donation would violate bullet point 3
L
LisaA
Guest
A couple of thoughts. Money is ALWAYS fungible. Planned Parenthood claims they do not use any taxpayer dollars for abortion. Yet if they are asked to spin the abortion business off COMPLETELY so they can receive funds for “healthcare” they refuse. There is no way that money given to an organization that engages in practices unacceptable to the Church can guaranty those dollars did not find their way to “administration” or “overhead” or some other loosey goosey accounting trick to move money around. I’m a CPA so I know how easy it is to justify a percentage of grant money for Project A to cover part of Project B by mingling certain costs that are then allocated back to the project to comply with the grantors’ demands.
The claim that were these funds not given by CRS the joint programs would not exist seem specious. Why isn’t CRS doing the program themselves if they think it’s a proper and appropriate program? Why are they coordinating with organizations that do not adhere to our Church’s teaching?
I’m becoming less and less willing to give to these big umbrella type Catholic organizations because we truly do not know where the money goes.
Lisa
B
Boulder257
Guest
It’s pretty easy to sit on the sideline, after the fact, and criticise. Esepecially when we don’t even have all of the facts.
I assume those that are criticising do not support, in any way, organizations that promote things outside of the Church? Before you say yes, make sure you don’t have your money in a bank since ALL of them provide money in some form or fashion for things not in line with Catholic teaching. I am also assuming you don 't drive a car either for the same reason. You must have a garden, since you certainly would not be able to shop in any grocery store I have ever heard of, again for the same reason. Have a computer or cell phone? You probably need to get rid of that since those companies donate to some charities that are not in line with Church teaching. Heck, I bet you are using a windows based computer right now…what was that you were saying about the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation? Oh, you’re using an Apple computer you say? Pretty sure Steve Jobs was an Atheist. And, their new CEO has offered to match employees contributions to ANY charity of the employees choice. Guess that Ipod has to go too…
Not so easy to seperate it all, is it?
The fact is, they are doing the best they can with the resources they have. When they err, they admit it and make appropriate changes. I doubt I’ll hear back from you since you won’t be able to use a computer, cell phone, internet connection, etc. to respond since you are avoiding all organizations that support non-Catholic ideas.
I assume those that are criticising do not support, in any way, organizations that promote things outside of the Church? Before you say yes, make sure you don’t have your money in a bank since ALL of them provide money in some form or fashion for things not in line with Catholic teaching. I am also assuming you don 't drive a car either for the same reason. You must have a garden, since you certainly would not be able to shop in any grocery store I have ever heard of, again for the same reason. Have a computer or cell phone? You probably need to get rid of that since those companies donate to some charities that are not in line with Church teaching. Heck, I bet you are using a windows based computer right now…what was that you were saying about the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation? Oh, you’re using an Apple computer you say? Pretty sure Steve Jobs was an Atheist. And, their new CEO has offered to match employees contributions to ANY charity of the employees choice. Guess that Ipod has to go too…
Not so easy to seperate it all, is it?
The fact is, they are doing the best they can with the resources they have. When they err, they admit it and make appropriate changes. I doubt I’ll hear back from you since you won’t be able to use a computer, cell phone, internet connection, etc. to respond since you are avoiding all organizations that support non-Catholic ideas.
L
LisaA
Guest
Great strawman argument but it’s not applicable to the discussion which is with respect to a Catholic charity’s activities rather than a personal purchase of a cell phone. I don’t support with my charitable dollars, organizations that engage in activities such as abortion, promotion of same sex marriage or adoptions, etc. That doesn’t mean I research the background of every item purchased in the grocery store…was this can of beans from a company that supports abortion!? Right.
Lisa
B
Boulder257
Guest
I think you just proved my point…actually, you proved my point entirely.
They could not survive in any capacity, let alone as a charitable organization, under the requirements which you (not the Church) have put on them. Even we as individuals cannot do it, so how do you expect a large, charitable organization to do so? They are doing the best they can with what they have.
L
LisaA
Guest
Sorry you continue to mix apples and oranges. It is a far cry from mingling funds with an organization that promotes unacceptable practices and purchase of consumer goods. As with the recent election, the Bishops have clearly explained the difference between being actively complicit with evil versus some sort of hair splitting regarding vague and indirect commercial interactions with companies that may have somehow supported an organization that engages in unacceptable practices.
IOW if you drive a woman to an abortion clinic, escort her in the door and wait to take her home you are involved. If you happen to be using the same road as such an escort or a woman on her way to Planned Parenthood, you are not.
LIsa
M
MHichborn
Guest
False comparison.
There is a BIG difference between purchasing goods in an economy where it is either near-impossible or actually impossible to buy necessities for life (car, food, clothing, etc) without going through stores that support moral evils … and GRANTING money to organizations that support moral evils. One is a matter of necessity, and the other is a matter of choice. CRS does not HAVE to give a grant to CARE International. CRS does not HAVE to be a member of MEDiCAM. CRS does not HAVE to be an active participant in the CORE Group. With the money and resources at CRS’ disposal, there is nothing that would preclude CRS from shoring up its resources and doing the things it gives money to other agencies for.
On the other hand, I HAVE to buy food, and I HAVE to buy clothes. Without those things, I and my wife and children will not survive long. We USED to shop at Ukrops, which was a very Christian grocery store. They weren’t even open on Sundays. But they were forced to close, and now, we only have grocery stores that sell porn, condoms, and contraceptives. Thus, I am forced into the position of HAVING to purchase food from organizations that promote moral evils. But again … CRS/CCHD/other Catholic granting agencies have a choice about where their money goes … and if there is no organization worthy of Catholic funds, the money can be used by the Church for the creation of such organizations under its own initiative.
I
iloveangels
Guest
SHUT IT DOWN. We can’t afford to pay the Obamacare fines anyway.
The culture doesn’t like how we do these things, let them get off their butts and do it themselves. There are plenty of ways to live out the Gospels without taking government money. They’ve been studiously ignoring us while using us anyway. It’s no longer working.
SHUT IT DOWN.
The culture doesn’t like how we do these things, let them get off their butts and do it themselves. There are plenty of ways to live out the Gospels without taking government money. They’ve been studiously ignoring us while using us anyway. It’s no longer working.
SHUT IT DOWN.
J
jwinch2
Guest
Exactly right.
I
iloveangels
Guest
Agree. And there’s a bigger issue here. There are people who work for this agency and have employment insurance through this agency. Are we going to pay the insurance fines for these people, and why or why not? Where will the money come from if we do?
I
iloveangels
Guest
BRAND NEW: But before anyone goes off with their head half off, read the WHOLE THING. It’s meant for adults, not junior high school students.
catholicworldreport.com/Blog/1781/pope_issues_new_motu_proprio_on_charitable_activities.aspx
Pay special attention to the “Dispositive Part” towards the end. This is the applications piece.
It’s probably meant for several countries, as there are several countries with problems in this area, but these problems are probably most aggravated here in the US, and in Germany right now.
The pope is trying to help us out. Now if only we are smart enough to take the help…
catholicworldreport.com/Blog/1781/pope_issues_new_motu_proprio_on_charitable_activities.aspx
Pay special attention to the “Dispositive Part” towards the end. This is the applications piece.
It’s probably meant for several countries, as there are several countries with problems in this area, but these problems are probably most aggravated here in the US, and in Germany right now.
The pope is trying to help us out. Now if only we are smart enough to take the help…
J
jwinch2
Guest
Saw that earlier today. I’m glad to see it and look forward to its full implementation.
I
iloveangels
Guest
IF, big IF, the USCCB pays attention to it.
And if they can get past the general stuff at the beginning which is introduction…and get to the dispositive part.
J
jwinch2
Guest
The Pope is getting bolder lately which, according to commentary I have seen, tends to happen later in pontificates. While I deeply hope we have Pope Benedict for many good years to come, some of the moves we have seen lately might reflect this idea.IF, big IF, the USCCB pays attention to it.
And if they can get past the general stuff at the beginning which is introduction…and get to the dispositive part.
That being said, he specifically directed Bishops to do these things, and he was pretty darn direct, which I enjoy.
Z
zz912
Guest
This is ABSOLUTELY correct.
Anyone who tries to tell you differently is wrong, period.
They may be ignorant or they may be intentionally lying to you, but they are wrong either way. Money is ALWAYS fungible, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to change this.
T
Tigg
Guest
IF, big IF, the USCCB pays attention to it.
And if they can get past the general stuff at the beginning which is introduction…and get to the dispositive part.
I’d say this is very direct, but what authoritative weight does Motu Proprio really carry? CRS could very well just ignore this, couldn’t they?
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Relative to CRS, to CCHD, and to all the other mega-organizations both religious and secular, I long for the good old days of Second Collections, which featured a special cause, either parish-related or a particular non-parish need (a mission collection, etc.)
Give directly, folks. Choose your own causes, secular and religious, and give according to your discernment as to the morality and the level of righteousness and need of that particular cause. I will be giving to a special collection calendared for next week, with a special envelope so designated. No one will be telling me how much to give, how little to give, or that they know better to whom I should give and “where the funds will go.”
I fail to understand why so many people in and out of religion are convinced that (1) they are incapable of doing their own research; others must do it for them, or (2) the quality of their own research must be inferior, and therefore left to “experts,” or (3) all people in positions of authority always suggest the prudent and moral thing with regard to charitable giving, or (4) there’s something more beneficial about letting others decide “where funds are needed and who deserves them,” or (5) it is more efficient to be lazy. (No, it’s more lazy to be lazy.
)
Avoid the confusion and the hand-wringing. Love your cause. When these causes find out that individuals are giving more to them than whatever they received through an umbrella organization, they will eventually see the benefit in direct appeals to the public and the laity, and how that is preferable.
Now, I do believe that both secular and religious institutions have a valuable role to play in publicity about charitable causes. In fact, I think that’s their most important role: I also think they have an important role to play in “housing” written materials, web links, and live opportunities for solicitation, as I’ve explained on previous threads.
Give directly, folks. Choose your own causes, secular and religious, and give according to your discernment as to the morality and the level of righteousness and need of that particular cause. I will be giving to a special collection calendared for next week, with a special envelope so designated. No one will be telling me how much to give, how little to give, or that they know better to whom I should give and “where the funds will go.”
I fail to understand why so many people in and out of religion are convinced that (1) they are incapable of doing their own research; others must do it for them, or (2) the quality of their own research must be inferior, and therefore left to “experts,” or (3) all people in positions of authority always suggest the prudent and moral thing with regard to charitable giving, or (4) there’s something more beneficial about letting others decide “where funds are needed and who deserves them,” or (5) it is more efficient to be lazy. (No, it’s more lazy to be lazy.
)Avoid the confusion and the hand-wringing. Love your cause. When these causes find out that individuals are giving more to them than whatever they received through an umbrella organization, they will eventually see the benefit in direct appeals to the public and the laity, and how that is preferable.
Now, I do believe that both secular and religious institutions have a valuable role to play in publicity about charitable causes. In fact, I think that’s their most important role: I also think they have an important role to play in “housing” written materials, web links, and live opportunities for solicitation, as I’ve explained on previous threads.
I
iloveangels
Guest
Of course, they could. They can also try to reinterpret it, and in the process turn it into what they want it to say, which is a specialty of American Catholics.
I
iloveangels
Guest
I agree. Go to the grocery store and buy GOODS, take them to the food bank and the soup kitchen and give them away. Give GOODS, not CASH. Cash is fungible, goods are not.Relative to CRS, to CCHD, and to all the other mega-organizations both religious and secular, I long for the good old days of Second Collections, which featured a special cause, either parish-related or a particular non-parish need (a mission collection, etc.)
Give directly, folks. Choose your own causes, secular and religious, and give according to your discernment as to the morality and the level of righteousness and need of that particular cause. I will be giving to a special collection calendared for next week, with a special envelope so designated. No one will be telling me how much to give, how little to give, or that they know better to whom I should give and “where the funds will go.”
I fail to understand why so many people in and out of religion are convinced that (1) they are incapable of doing their own research; others must do it for them, or (2) the quality of their own research must be inferior, and therefore left to “experts,” or (3) all people in positions of authority always suggest the prudent and moral thing with regard to charitable giving, or (4) there’s something more beneficial about letting others decide “where funds are needed and who deserves them,” or (5) it is more efficient to be lazy. (No, it’s more lazy to be lazy.
Avoid the confusion and the hand-wringing. Love your cause. When these causes find out that individuals are giving more to them than whatever they received through an umbrella organization, they will eventually see the benefit in direct appeals to the public and the laity, and how that is preferable.
Now, I do believe that both secular and religious institutions have a valuable role to play in publicity about charitable causes. In fact, I think that’s their most important role: I also think they have an important role to play in “housing” written materials, web links, and live opportunities for solicitation, as I’ve explained on previous threads.
GOODS = canned foods, mittens, hats, warm socks, school supplies, disposable diapers and other personal needs items, laundry soap, combs & brushes, etc etc. These are all things that the genuine poor need to have.
Also, don’t forget the animals. This time of year, animal shelters run short of pet food. Elderly people and poor people sometimes have to give up their pets because they can no longer afford food. You can donate to the shelter for the purposes of keeping a beloved pet in their own home rather than ending up at the shelter. This is a worthwhile cause because it benefits both the animal and the owner.
- Status