USCCB accepting money from HHS for Illegal Immigrants?

[marbleartist]

A few days ago, a friend sent me an article stating that USCCB had been accepting a pretty large sum of money beginning in 2010 to help illegal immigrants. This money was used primarily by Catholic Charities and included training, clothing, shelter, food, etc. for those who arrive in the U.S. illegally. Her article also stated that a large sum of money had also been given to the Baptist church for the same reason. I didn’t trust the article (which is why I didn’t provide the link) and told her so, for the article was attempting to prove that this wave of children at the border had been orchestrated. However, it weighed on me, and after doing further research, I discovered the same info in a blog written by a priest. He was upset that we were accepting tax payer’s money and felt that we would be beholden to the government. Worse yet, if we are making things acceptable for the illegal children- this encourages more to attempt the trek. Because these children arrive sick, 1 out of 3 girls raped, some die or are maimed getting on the “death train”- doesn’t this mean that we share a responsibility for this, even though we are attempting altruism? Still bothered, I went to HHS and checked out their budget- and it seems that the USCCB is indeed at the trough- primarily through grants- and the money received is not unsubstantial. Is this a conflict of interest? Does giving taxpayer money to religious organizations violate the separation between church and state? Has this always been done, and I just didn’t know about it? I can provide links, but all of this is easily discovered with minimum research. On the Illegal Immigrants page of USCCB, it clearly states that the money primarily is provided by HHS. I guess I always thought that we, as Catholics, were giving this money through our donations- and I’m bothered. What do you think?

 

[thestudentAD]

Personally, I have no idea on what to say about this. I mean, I’ve heard that the Church has been taking some heat from pro abortion groups for not accepting the HHS mandate.
We do have a responsibility to liberate the oppressed and give hope to the hopeless (I myself struggle with pornography addiction, doubts about some things in the Church and occassional bouts of radical traditionalism that only last a few hours sometimes) However, there are moral and legal procedures (Lawful need I remind anyone about it) to do so. If the Immigrants wish to come here to make a living for themselves, yes. I believe that they should do so under the law and with immigration naturalization reforms.
However, the Church should not always listen to the government for we are above national levels. This may be a bad comparison, but it would be like the early Christians listening to Imperial Rome before its Christianization. Those are my thoughts right now.

 

[on_the_hill]

The federal and state governments frequently, usually, almost always pay non-profit organizations to provide services, particularly in the area of health and human services. This has been the funding model for decades.

Personally, I see it as a good thing: despite the differences between the administration and the USCCB, there are still areas where they can cooperate and collaborate to help the needy.

 

[marbleartist]

The federal and state governments frequently, usually, almost always pay non-profit organizations to provide services, particularly in the area of health and human services. This has been the funding model for decades.

Personally, I see it as a good thing: despite the differences between the administration and the USCCB, there are still areas where they can cooperate and collaborate to help the needy.

I seriously had no idea about this! I thought that Catholic Charities were funded by Catholics!! I find it ironic that we have our hand out for money from HHS while the Little Sisters of the Poor are fighting them. And, if the “welcome packets” and support we’re giving the illegal children are encouraging even more to risk their lives and cross the border, then we share in the guilt of human trafficking.

 

[marbleartist]

One more thought- Catholic Social Justice honors the sanctity of each life and encourages helping all people, legal or illegal. Even Pope Francis said as much recently. However, the U.S. is a country, and most citizens, I would think, favor helping our own poor with the money from taxes. Citizenship in a country means following laws- not being rewarded for breaking them! I had NO problem helping the needy no matter their origin when I thought it was being done by the church with donations from Catholics. It seems wrong to help ILLEGAL immigrants rushing through our borders, crowding our schools and bringing disease to our innocent citizens- while obtaining the money from the taxpayers while claiming the charity is from Catholics.

 

[on_the_hill]

I seriously had no idea about this!

Yep.

For example, the Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare spends millions and millions of federal and state dollars on social work, but doesn’t employ *any *social workers who are actually carry a caseload. All social workers who carry actual social work caseloads are employed by county agencies and private organizations. (Obviously, there may be social workers who are program administrators in state offices.)

Same with mental health services, drug & alcohol services, adoption services, medical care…

Of course, groups like Catholic Charities are funded by Catholics, but they also receive contracts and grant funding from government sources.

 

[Mumbles140]

I seriously had no idea about this! I thought that Catholic Charities were funded by Catholics!! I find it ironic that we have our hand out for money from HHS while the Little Sisters of the Poor are fighting them.

When the Federal Government does not have the resources to provide for a group in need, it typically gives funding to organizations that do. Correct me if I’m wrong, but this was brought up with W and his ‘faith-based initiatives’ funding. It is not an uncommon practice, and it has helped the Church provide services for the homeless, hungry, sick, and others in need.

I also think it is a good thing to show that, while we vehemently disagree on issues of “reproductive rights”, we can still come to agreement about other matters. The HHS is not the mortal enemy of the Catholic Church, but it is not a friend, either. It is a business partner - some of their business we agree with and encourage (i.e. caring for those in need), and other parts we disagree with and try to work with them to change their mind. If they don’t want to cooperate, we defer to the Judicial Branch.

As for saying that the Church is responsible for the conditions that these young children are in is quite the stretch. The Church doesn’t ask for immigration status, but they do target people in need. Just because help is available in a location doesn’t mean the person providing help is responsible for people trying to get there. And the Church is active all over the world, even in the communities where these people are currently living.

If the Church, in those countries, is encouraging people to flee to America by any means necessary without giving any support, maybe there would be some responsibility. But receiving donations from a government entity to carry on charitable work is not making them responsible for the tragic situation of these children.

 

[marbleartist]

It still seems disingenuous to accept government money in order to help people who are breaking the law, human trafficking, crowding the schools, exposing the citizens to contagious diseases, etc. and to do this with the money provided by the citizens but using the Catholic umbrella. I understand Catholic Social Justice (I teach a class on it!!) and I agree that meeting the immediate needs of these people is important, from a Catholic view point. I have been active with a Catholic prison ministry- and we support those people, even though they’ve broken the law, too. No problem there. It just seems unethical to accept money from a government to help people who are harming the same government’s citizens. Perhaps this Catholic effort should be funded by the Catholic Church!

 

[Mumbles140]

It still seems disingenuous to accept government money in order to help people who are breaking the law, human trafficking, crowding the schools, exposing the citizens to contagious diseases, etc. and to do this with the money provided by the citizens but using the Catholic umbrella. I understand Catholic Social Justice (I teach a class on it!!) and I agree that meeting the immediate needs of these people is important, from a Catholic view point. I have been active with a Catholic prison ministry- and we support those people, even though they’ve broken the law, too. No problem there. It just seems unethical to accept money from a government to help people who are harming the same government’s citizens. Perhaps this Catholic effort should be funded by the Catholic Church!

Panhandling is against the law in many jurisdictions. Should we as Christians withhold need from these ‘lawbreakers’ also? Living on the streets, creating dirty conditions, etc? What about prostitutes? Should we not try to break them of their sinful ways because they break the law and spread disease?

Our nation has long held the belief in certain inalienable rights. You want to talk about crowded schools, maybe you have some validity, at least if you want to rule out education of children as an inalienable right (it is one of the two charges of marriage, according to God).

You think it is unethical, but the ‘harm’ they are ‘causing’ is because of their situation in life. By being charitable and helping them out of this situation, the ‘harm’ goes with it. You get them educated, teach them English, teach them job skills, get them to work on legal status, get them paying taxes, being involved in the community, etc. and now you have good, upstanding citizens who contribute to society. But you take away that assistance, those guiding steps, and the negative cycle continues.

 

[on_the_hill]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but this was brought up with W and his ‘faith-based initiatives’ funding.

I thought of that example, but it probably predates W by about 30-40 years. Without knowing the exact history, I would guess a lot of federal funding of private service providers started with LBJ’s Great Society.

I do know that federal and state dollars were flowing to private orgs prior to W’s administration. But as to when it started…

 

[marbleartist]

Panhandling is against the law in many jurisdictions. Should we as Christians withhold need from these ‘lawbreakers’ also? Living on the streets, creating dirty conditions, etc? What about prostitutes? Should we not try to break them of their sinful ways because they break the law and spread disease?

Our nation has long held the belief in certain inalienable rights. You want to talk about crowded schools, maybe you have some validity, at least if you want to rule out education of children as an inalienable right (it is one of the two charges of marriage, according to God).

You think it is unethical, but the ‘harm’ they are ‘causing’ is because of their situation in life. By being charitable and helping them out of this situation, the ‘harm’ goes with it. You get them educated, teach them English, teach them job skills, get them to work on legal status, get them paying taxes, being involved in the community, etc. and now you have good, upstanding citizens who contribute to society. But you take away that assistance, those guiding steps, and the negative cycle continues.

These are people who have entered the country illegally- many aren’t children and many are criminals. Already, some who have been cleared through and given a court date have murdered U.S. citizens- one just yesterday in Kenner, La. I know first hand that many aren’t immunized, have scabies and impetigo, drug resistant TB and other transmissible diseases. They are now free to spread these diseases through-out the US because they aren’t being treated or even tested before release! Catholic Charities, using tax payer money, is failing to advocate for the citizens and is instead favoring those who seek to harm them. There is a way to enter the US legally and there are good people waiting in line. As for “getting them educated, teaching them English, teaching them job skills, etc.”- there are many citizens who need these skills too! The poor and neglected in our cities would LOVE to have this help. If we, as a Catholic Church, are going to use a country’s money, we should be directing our efforts towards helping those in that country! Because we are called, as Catholics, to help ALL people, we are called to help these aliens, too. However, I feel it is immoral to do so while stealing the money that could be helping citizens. We should fund this effort with the illegal aliens with donations from Catholics. A country’s money is not infinite and a country is not a charity! Use the US dollars to help the citizens- yes, the panhandlers, prostitutes and inner city children. Use the Catholic donations to help the illegal immigrants.

 

[pnewton]

then we share in the guilt of human trafficking.

This makes as much sense as saying those who treat women following rape are enabling rapists. We are called to be the hands of Christ in the world. I think you are imputing guilt to cooperating with HHS because of the conflict the Church has had over one specific mandate. Despite the problem with the HHS mandate on contraception, the Church still supports both health and humanity.

 

[marbleartist]

Just to clarify- I don’t view this as a political problem and don’t really care when the flow of public money to private charity began. I definitely think that in most cases, private charities can handle the situation better than government. My objection is that we’re using money paid by citizens to be used for the betterment of citizens- and instead, using vast amounts of money on non-citizens. Morally, it feels like theft. I think that many Catholics would donate in a second collection towards helping these illegal aliens. Then, rather than taking from the citizens of the US, we would be showing them, as Catholics, our belief in the sanctity of each life. Now…I must go teach a class on Catholic Social Justice. Seriously!

 

[pnewton]

My objection is that we’re using money paid by citizens to be used for the betterment of citizens- and instead, using vast amounts of money on non-citizens.

This is hardly unique. We send aid abroad every year. We send money and relief to disasters like the earthquake in Haiti and the tsunami in Indonesia. However, I think there is something to be said for all in a society paying in to the services they use, whether they be poor and can pay little, or here from abroad, legally or illegally.

This is also the balance in Catholic social justice to our duty to help strangers. The visitors have their responsibility as well!

 

[oldcatholicguy]

A few days ago, a friend sent me an article stating that USCCB had been accepting a pretty large sum of money beginning in 2010 to help illegal immigrants. This money was used primarily by Catholic Charities and included training, clothing, shelter, food, etc. for those who arrive in the U.S. illegally. Her article also stated that a large sum of money had also been given to the Baptist church for the same reason. I didn’t trust the article (which is why I didn’t provide the link) and told her so, for the article was attempting to prove that this wave of children at the border had been orchestrated. However, it weighed on me, and after doing further research, I discovered the same info in a blog written by a priest. He was upset that we were accepting tax payer’s money and felt that we would be beholden to the government. Worse yet, if we are making things acceptable for the illegal children- this encourages more to attempt the trek. Because these children arrive sick, 1 out of 3 girls raped, some die or are maimed getting on the “death train”- doesn’t this mean that we share a responsibility for this, even though we are attempting altruism? Still bothered, I went to HHS and checked out their budget- and it seems that the USCCB is indeed at the trough- primarily through grants- and the money received is not unsubstantial. Is this a conflict of interest? Does giving taxpayer money to religious organizations violate the separation between church and state? Has this always been done, and I just didn’t know about it? I can provide links, but all of this is easily discovered with minimum research. On the Illegal Immigrants page of USCCB, it clearly states that the money primarily is provided by HHS. I guess I always thought that we, as Catholics, were giving this money through our donations- and I’m bothered. What do you think?

No, fulfilling our moral obligation to these children does not somehow make us responsible for the evil acts that occurred to them en route here. You’re basically trying to argue that one does not have to act morally if your moral act will be used an excuse for someone else’s immoral act.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Best not to put to much faith in government.

What government giveth, government can reduce, eliminate or require “favors”. We see it with the Fed Gov withholding federal funds from states for not “playing the game” expected from them.

Catholic Charities should graciously refuse government help and rely exclusively on Catholic generosity. The USCCB should follow suit.

The USCCB could volunteer to take charge of all the unaccompanied children crossing our border. It would be no problem to distribute these children to various dioceses and parishes for Catholic families to take them in. Since this is a moral obligation, no government assistance would be needed and Catholics would happily provide for these kids.

 

[marbleartist]

::

Best not to put to much faith in government.

What government giveth, government can reduce, eliminate or require “favors”. We see it with the Fed Gov withholding federal funds from states for not “playing the game” expected from them.

Catholic Charities should graciously refuse government help and rely exclusively on Catholic generosity. The USCCB should follow suit.

The USCCB could volunteer to take charge of all the unaccompanied children crossing our border. It would be no problem to distribute these children to various dioceses and parishes for Catholic families to take them in. Since this is a moral obligation, no government assistance would be needed and Catholics would happily provide for these kids.

That’s an excellent idea! And what a powerful witness it would be to the sanctity and value of each child of God! :clapping::clapping:

 

[markomalley]

I seriously had no idea about this! I thought that Catholic Charities were funded by Catholics!! I find it ironic that we have our hand out for money from HHS while the Little Sisters of the Poor are fighting them. And, if the “welcome packets” and support we’re giving the illegal children are encouraging even more to risk their lives and cross the border, then we share in the guilt of human trafficking.

Each diocese’s Catholic Charities gets a different amount of funding from the government.

The following comes from Charity Navigator and are just a few examples.

CC of New Orleans:



CC of San Francisco:



CC of Cleveland:



CC of Oklahoma City:



CC of Baltimore:



Oh, and by the way, here is the corresponding chart for Catholic Relief Services:



As far as your statement, we share in the guilt of human trafficking, I don’t think that the fact that Catholic Charities receives government grants means that we share in that guilt. Our tax dollars are not voluntary contributions to the government and, well, frankly, when was the last time Catholic Charities asked your opinion about anything.

Don’t get me wrong: I am not a big fan of these charities receiving government funding, but guilt? Nah.

Having said that, I do believe that it is exceedingly unwise of any Catholic apostolate to accept government funds. I think it creates an inherent organizational conflict of interest. Look at a couple of those dioceses whose Catholic Charities organizations receive over 50% of their funding from the government. They have a vested interest in large government, as their funding depends upon it.

Secondly, government grants come with strings: specifically, that they cannot discriminate by protected class against people they serve. All well and good. But they also are not allowed to preach to the people they are serving (and by that, I mean that they are not able to simultaneously perform the spiritual works of mercy…like admonishing the sinner and instructing the ignorant…)

Contrast that with the words of Pope Francis:

Our Lady also wants to bring the great gift of Jesus to us, to us all; and with him she brings us his love, his peace, and his joy. In this, the Church is like Mary:** the Church is not a shop, she is not a humanitarian agency, the Church is not an NGO. The Church is sent to bring Christ and his Gospel to all**.

Seems like with government grants, the Church is prevented from doing just that. Now, compare the above with the Little Sisters of the Poor (Washington DC):



You will see that they receive no money from the government. That means that they have no associated strings.

I can’t tell somebody where to donate. Myself, I prefer to donate to an outfit that is not constrained and can act with the vision that Pope Francis communicated in his quote above. But that’s just me.

 

[marbleartist]

That was incredibly interesting, Markomalley. Thank you for posting this!!

 

[markomalley]

That was incredibly interesting, Markomalley. Thank you for posting this!!

By the way, you might want to look at this 2012 item posted in Catholic World News: Federal funds account for nearly 93% of USCCB’s migration/refugee budget