LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I think the Church explains it best themselves if you read the entire document:
- Status
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Hmmm, I’m listening to Bishop Conlon speak about the CCHD.
He says that the level of cooperation (with evil) that CCHD has with recipient organizations is remote, and that the bishops can’t wait for everything to be perfect. (at about 6’41"). So he seems to acknowledge that there are problems with the groups that receive or have received funding.
http://content.screencast.com/users...a-22d0e5645654/2011-12-11BishopConlon-CCH.mp3
I wonder why the diocese don’t just help with their funding to fund St. Vincent de Paul, or Catholic Charities? Why do they have to siphon it off to all these other groups anyway?
He says that the level of cooperation (with evil) that CCHD has with recipient organizations is remote, and that the bishops can’t wait for everything to be perfect. (at about 6’41"). So he seems to acknowledge that there are problems with the groups that receive or have received funding.
http://content.screencast.com/users...a-22d0e5645654/2011-12-11BishopConlon-CCH.mp3
I wonder why the diocese don’t just help with their funding to fund St. Vincent de Paul, or Catholic Charities? Why do they have to siphon it off to all these other groups anyway?
Last edited:
Y
YourNameHere
Guest
Leftist? Does everything in this world have to be left or right? How about we consider doing things because they are correct?
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I thought the explanation given, if you listen all the way through, was excellent.
Because the bishops determined that good could be done in a way that is not being done by these other charities. If you disagree with their judgement on this, then just don’t give, or take it up with the bishops.
E
Ender
Guest
Things like this?
Page 7 of the CCHD’s grants list for 2014-2015 identifies the Merced Organizing Project as having a received a $50,000 grant for “healthcare.” But the organization is clearly deeply flawed as its primary worker is a homosexuality activist. Additionally, MOP is working with Planned Parenthood on a health care program with highly questionable goals. More information is needed on this, but if Planned Parenthood is involved in the planning of the project, it seems that an organization receiving Catholic funds should have nothing to do with it.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Do you have any evidence that the project advances a homosexual agenda due to this worker? That is all that should matter.LeafByNiggle:
Things like this?
_Page 7 of the CCHD’s grants list for 2014-2015 identifies the Merced Organizing Project as having a received a $50,000 grant for “healthcare.” But the organization is clearly deeply flawed as its primary worker is a homosexuality activist.
What or who is linked with Planned Parenthood? The organization and its activities, or the one worker? Do you have any evidence that the organization itself is promoting any unacceptable goals? Or that any of the grant money went to this effort?
Again, how exactly is Planned Parenthood benefiting from this grant?
A
adgloriam
Guest
Thanks Bear.
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Take it up with the bishops…okay…
C
Crocus
Guest
Those are excellent organizations that serve immediate need for food, clothing, shelter.
It is valid also to tackle the root causes of poverty and inequality, goal being the dignity of the human person. Rerum Novarum teaches this. Doesn’t say exactly how, but observation shows some stuff out there is not working well. As I understand it, CCHD is an organization that seeks to help people help themselves.
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Oh, hmmm, ways to lower poverty. Maybe education? How many Catholic schools have been closed, while they’re giving money to these radical groups?
Job training? Child care? I think those three things alone could help a lot of people. Without the tie-ins to the radical leftist groups. I just don’t understand this.
Job training? Child care? I think those three things alone could help a lot of people. Without the tie-ins to the radical leftist groups. I just don’t understand this.
G
godisgood77
Guest
I think this is a statement about economic and social structures that tend to act as ‘feudal system’ of sorts… which in effect keep the poor poor. For example, in poor neighborhoods, in say Chicago, the schools are terrible, the food offered for sale is very poor quality, drug infestation is ignored by enforcement… etc.
Additionally, systems like in the US where immense amounts of wealth are consolidated among very few and the economic structures cause an ever widening gap between the super rich and everyone else. If in these systems the poor have a reasonable chance to get out of those terrible situation and are provided for without intervention by institutions like the Church or government, great… if that is not happening as is so in the US, they structural changes are necessary.
Rerum Novarum speaks eloquently about the need for the economic and social structures to work for everyone. The Church has a duty to weigh in on this subject
G
godisgood77
Guest
From Rerum Novarum:
The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration is to take up with the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and that the wealthy and the working men are intended by nature to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view that the direct contrary is the truth. Just as the symmetry of the human frame is the result of the suitable arrangement of the different parts of the body, so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other: capital cannot do without labor, nor labor without capital. Mutual agreement results in the beauty of good order, while perpetual conflict necessarily produces confusion and savage barbarity. Now, in preventing such strife as this, and in uprooting it, the efficacy of Christian institutions is marvellous and manifold. First of all, there is no intermediary more powerful than religion (whereof the Church is the interpreter and guardian) in drawing the rich and the working class together, by reminding each of its duties to the other, and especially of the obligations of justice. Paragraph 19.
The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration is to take up with the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and that the wealthy and the working men are intended by nature to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view that the direct contrary is the truth. Just as the symmetry of the human frame is the result of the suitable arrangement of the different parts of the body, so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other: capital cannot do without labor, nor labor without capital. Mutual agreement results in the beauty of good order, while perpetual conflict necessarily produces confusion and savage barbarity. Now, in preventing such strife as this, and in uprooting it, the efficacy of Christian institutions is marvellous and manifold. First of all, there is no intermediary more powerful than religion (whereof the Church is the interpreter and guardian) in drawing the rich and the working class together, by reminding each of its duties to the other, and especially of the obligations of justice. Paragraph 19.
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Okay, so let’s use Chicago as an example. What if the Catholic Church ran good quality schools there? (Like they probably used to all over the city?) What if the Catholic Church ran job training programs there? What if the Catholic Church ran day care centers there? What if the Catholic Church preached or tried to help the NUMBER ONE cause of child poverty - - children being born to unmarried parents?Loud-living-dogma:
I think this is a statement about economic and social structures that tend to act as ‘feudal system’ of sorts… which in effect keep the poor poor. For example, in poor neighborhoods, in say Chicago, the schools are terrible, the food offered for sale is very poor quality, drug infestation is ignored by enforcement… etc.
Additionally, systems like in the US where immense amounts of wealth are consolidated among very few and the economic structures cause an ever widening gap between the super rich and everyone else. If in these systems the poor have a reasonable chance to get out of those terrible situation and are provided for without intervention by institutions like the Church or government, great… if that is not happening as is so in the US, they structural changes are necessary.
Rerum Novarum speaks eloquently about the need for the economic and social structures to work for everyone. The Church has a duty to weigh in on this subject
Here’s an interesting note from one of the diocese of Chicago’s grantees: the People’s Lobby.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
In fact, when I look at the People’s Lobby FB page, it’s all about electing political candidates. What?!
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Yeah, so why isn’t the Church supporting religious organizations instead of political ones?!
G
godisgood77
Guest
More from RN… particularly poignant given our current challenges…
Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss. The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work-people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character. They are reminded that, according to natural reason and Christian philosophy, working for gain is creditable, not shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them solely for their physical powers—that is truly shameful and inhuman. Again justice demands that, in dealing with the working man, religion and the good of his soul must be kept in mind. Hence, the employer is bound to see that the worker has time for his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex and age. His great and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless, before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; but wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this—that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one’s profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. “Behold, the hire of the laborers … which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.” Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen’s earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred. Were these precepts carefully obeyed and followed out, would they not be sufficient of themselves to keep under all strife and all its causes?
Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss. The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work-people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character. They are reminded that, according to natural reason and Christian philosophy, working for gain is creditable, not shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them solely for their physical powers—that is truly shameful and inhuman. Again justice demands that, in dealing with the working man, religion and the good of his soul must be kept in mind. Hence, the employer is bound to see that the worker has time for his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex and age. His great and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless, before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; but wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this—that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one’s profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. “Behold, the hire of the laborers … which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.” Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen’s earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred. Were these precepts carefully obeyed and followed out, would they not be sufficient of themselves to keep under all strife and all its causes?
G
godisgood77
Guest
I think the Church is supporting religious orgs… why do you say they aren’t?
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Yes, you keep bringing up the necessity of Christian principles, and I keep asking why the Church gives lots of $$$ to organizations that are secular and political in nature? You are arguing against yourself! 
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
Current grantees of the Archdiocese of Chicago:Loud-living-dogma:
I think the Church is supporting religious orgs… why do you say they aren’t?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
G
godisgood77
Guest
No I’m not… the Church gives massive amounts of money to religious orgs… and it also supports well meaning socially focused orgs. You have an issue with that?
More from RN:
The richer class have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy, should be specially cared for and protected by the government.
See the Church teaches that the state has an obligation to the poor… and the Church supports that effort … do you dissent from the Church on this? Have you read the encyclical?
More from RN:
The richer class have many ways of shielding themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; whereas the mass of the poor have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly depend upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that wage-earners, since they mostly belong in the mass of the needy, should be specially cared for and protected by the government.
See the Church teaches that the state has an obligation to the poor… and the Church supports that effort … do you dissent from the Church on this? Have you read the encyclical?
L
Loud-living-dogma
Guest
From the People’s Lobby, a current grantee of the CCHD campaign of the Archdiocese of Chicago:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
I’m sorry - - does this look like a religious organization to you? They may be great candidates, I have no idea, but religion, this ain’t.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
I’m sorry - - does this look like a religious organization to you? They may be great candidates, I have no idea, but religion, this ain’t.
- Status