"Thou Shalt Not Steal" .. and the collection plate/basket

[ProVobis]

I don’t think electronic methods are any safer. The hackers out there would love it, as they could potentially empty someones entire account and use the information within to steal their identity. I for one will stick with writing checks. Thieves abound and electronics is not going to stop them.

While we’re on the subject of checks, to whom is the check made out? The parish, the diocese, or just “Catholic Church”? Many attend at churches other than their territorial parish these days. For example, the EF, their own vernacular, visiting friends, etc. I understand the money ends up in the same coffers anyway, except maybe the second collection.

 

[Della]

While we’re on the subject of checks, to whom is the check made out? The parish, the diocese, or just “Catholic Church”? Many attend at churches other than their territorial parish these days. For example, the EF, their own vernacular, visiting friends, etc. I understand the money ends up in the same coffers anyway, except maybe the second collection.

Checks are made out to the parish. Even second collection checks are made out to the parish with a notation as to what it is for.

In our parish the collection goes by so quickly we hardly have time to put in our donation let alone take anything out of it.

And our ushers are good people who would never dream of robbing the offerings.

 

[Cricket2]

While we’re on the subject of checks, to whom is the check made out? The parish, the diocese, or just “Catholic Church”? Many attend at churches other than their territorial parish these days. For example, the EF, their own vernacular, visiting friends, etc. I understand the money ends up in the same coffers anyway, except maybe the second collection.

Checks are made out in the name of the Parish. I am not sure what you mean about the first collection landing up in the “same coffers”, except I have to assume into one account for the Parish. That money is then used according to Parish needs and particular mission. Second collections if taken: are earmarked for specific places and purposes. My parish does not take second collections. Instead the Pastor tithes out of the first collection for that. So if it is time to give to, say the retirement funds of Religious and Priests, he takes 10% of the first offering and makes that amount the offering for this particular purpose.

I think all the Parishes in a particular Archdiocese should have to turn in all their money into a general account of that Archdiocese. Then when the total of all Parishes is determined it should be divided equally among them. This would help alleviate poor parishes of some of their financial burdens, serve to distribute funds more equitably to the poor. (And yes I can hear the screaming now. I don’t care.) There should not be poor parishes and rich parishes.

 

[ProVobis]

I think all the Parishes in a particular Archdiocese should have to turn in all their money into a general account of that Archdiocese.

That is my understanding too. From there priests collect their salaries, etc. Priests work for the diocese IOW.

The second collection would be for other purposes, most often for some kind of rebuilding or maintenance for that parish.

 

[Della]

Checks are made out in the name of the Parish. I am not sure what you mean about the first collection landing up in the “same coffers”, except I have to assume into one account for the Parish. That money is then used according to Parish needs and particular mission. Second collections if taken: are earmarked for specific places and purposes. My parish does not take second collections. Instead the Pastor tithes out of the first collection for that. So if it is time to give to, say the retirement funds of Religious and Priests, he takes 10% of the first offering and makes that amount the offering for this particular purpose.

I think all the Parishes in a particular Archdiocese should have to turn in all their money into a general account of that Archdiocese. Then when the total of all Parishes is determined it should be divided equally among them. This would help alleviate poor parishes of some of their financial burdens, serve to distribute funds more equitably to the poor. (And yes I can hear the screaming now. I don’t care.) There should not be poor parishes and rich parishes.

Parishes already give part of their collections to the diocese, which the diocese then uses at its discretion. If you feel your diocese needs to distribute funds more evenly, you should contact them and tell them so.

 

[Cricket2]

Parishes already give part of their collections to the diocese, which the diocese then uses at its discretion. If you feel your diocese needs to distribute funds more evenly, you should contact them and tell them so.

I have no problem doing that. My point however, is start with the distribution in step one. It all goes to the Archdiocese and then is divided equally between all parishes less the amount that is all ready retained by the Archdiocese.

 

[Della]

I have no problem doing that. My point however, is start with the distribution in step one. It all goes to the Archdiocese and then is divided equally between all parishes less the amount that is all ready retained by the Archdiocese.

Egalitarianism is rarely workable. Every parish is different and has different needs. The Church does not function by embracing idealisms, but rather by doing what needs to be done as the need arises. Many parishes have outreach programs and groups that assist those in need, such as the Knights of Columbus and other such organizations. If you really want to help, you ask where you can be useful and then volunteer to do what you can.