Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Campaign updates
Next Post: The fix is in
Posted in:
* From a few days ago…
Local political leaders have signed an open letter urging Cardinal Francis George not to halt church funding for immigrant-rights groups that support same-sex marriage.
Last month, Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown reported the Catholic Church was upset over a statement the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights issued in May supporting “marriage equality” for same-sex partners. Cardinal George has opposed legislation in Springfield that would legalize gay marriage.
The Catholic Campaign for Human Development, the anti-poverty arm of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, has provided grants to several members of the immigrant-rights coalition. Their funding agreements prohibit them from pursuing an agenda contrary to Roman Catholic teaching. The archdiocese has the final say on approving the grants.
When church officials learned of the immigrant-rights coalition’s position on gay marriage, they contacted the grant recipients and told them to forget about future funding unless they withdrew from the coalition and renounced its gay-marriage position.
* From their letter…
We note that the Church has insisted that these organizations disassociate from the ICIRR because of its support for civil marriage for gays and lesbians in Illinois.
In essence, Church leaders have decided to use immigrants and those who seek to help them as pawns in a political battle about an issue that is entirely unrelated to the care and welfare of those who seek refuge in our country.
There were several signatories, but here are the politicos…
James Cappleman, Alderman, 46th Ward
John Fritchey, Cook County Commissioner, 12th District
Susana Mendoza, Clerk, City of Chicago
Proco Joe Moreno, Alderman, 1st Ward
Patrick J. O’Connor, Alderman, 40th Ward
Danny Solís, Alderman, 25th Ward
Larry Suffredin, Cook County Commissioner, 13th District
* The Cardinal’s response indicated he was not amused…
It is intellectually and morally dishonest to use the witness of the Church’s concern for the poor as an excuse to attack the Church’s teaching on the nature of marriage. Four weeks ago, Pope Francis wrote: “…marriage should be a stable union of man and woman…this union is born of their love, as a sign and presence of God’s own love, and of the acknowledgement and acceptance of the goodness of sexual differentiation, whereby spouses can become one flesh and are enabled to give birth to a new life.” In other words, when it comes to marriage and family life, men and women are not interchangeable. The whole civilized world knows that.
Those who signed the open letter in the Tribune proclaimed their adherence to the Catholic faith even as they cynically called upon others to reject the Church’s bishops. The Church is no one’s private club; she is the Body of Christ, who tells us he is “the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” Because the signers of the letters are Catholic, they know that in a few years, like each of us, they will stand before this same Christ to give an account of their stewardship.
Jesus is merciful, but he is not stupid; he knows the difference between right and wrong. Manipulating both immigrants and the Church for political advantage is wrong.
* Mark Brown…
Cook County Commissioner Lawrence Suffredin said he thought the letter was “beneath the office of the cardinal.”
On the cardinal’s not so subtle suggestion that signers of the letter prepare to account for their actions in the afterlife, Suffredin said he’s ready.
“I think theologically a clear conscience is important for all of us. I have a clear conscience,” Suffredin said.
More…
Alie Kabba, the UAO’s executive director, told me his group was among those informed earlier this month that it could continue to receive a CCHD grant — if it agreed drop its association with the immigrant coalition.
Kabba said his board politely declined.
“We did not think it was for them to decide,” Kabba said. “We were not attacking the church. We cannot allow marginalization of any group in society.”
Kabba quoted an African proverb that seemed very appropriate: “The elephants are fighting, and the grass suffers.”
* And the Sun-Times reports today that Bill Daley has also weighed in…
Democratic gubernatorial hopeful William Daley called Wednesday on Cardinal Francis George to back off his threat to cut off funding to an immigrant-rights coalition because of its support for same-sex marriage legislation at the Statehouse.
“My view on marriage equality and those of immigrant-aid groups who have similar views really are irrelevant to our collective duty to help those who are less fortunate,” Daley wrote in a letter to George. […’
As a lifelong Roman Catholic, Daley said he was “proud our church has been such a leader on the issue of comprehensive immigration reform.
“But for the church to turn its back on its long-standing work with groups that aid the poor over a completely unrelated issue is an injustice, plain and simple,” Daley wrote in his letter.
“The path of justice should lead the Archdiocese to leave these two issues separate and continue to seek justice through charitable works,” Daley said.
Daley’s full letter, which is actually dated July 11th, can be read by clicking here.
* While I support gay marriage, I also believe that groups have the right to only give money and support to others who are with them on an issue. If a member of a union-backed coalition suddenly signed on to a “right to work” legislative push, I don’t think anybody would say much if that group’s funding was pulled.
Then again, this appears to be a fight between people who believe that their church should be going in far different directions. So, while the Cardinal may agree with that “right to work” analogy, I seriously doubt people on the other side view themselves that way.
The bottom line here is that there doesn’t seem to be any reachable solution. The Cardinal’s position is obviously rock solid. He apparently believes he has church doctrine behind him, so that leaves little to actually debate.
* So, Maybe Daley and the other politicos could just go and help those groups raise some money. They all have plenty of rich friends.
I totally get the anger and the political angle, but how about solving the immediate problem at hand?
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 8:54 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Campaign updates
Next Post: The fix is in
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The Church is no one’s private club…
Maybe Francis George should tell that to Francis George.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:08 am
Gee, cutting off funding because someone isn’t following the rules, that reminds me of something the anti-gay crowd constantly whines about…
Either way, it certainly is their right, and in the long run it’s just going to damage them more than the ICIRR.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:09 am
It’s true that the church can give money to anyone they like, as long as they are not discriminating illegally.
The problem is that these politicians invest authority in people like the Cardinal or the Pope, based on nothing but faith in ancient myths. Church leaders are not used to being questioned, and they have enjoyed centuries of mostly unquestioned obedience from their congregations. Due to the nature of their vocation, they are purposely out of touch with the real world. On this issue and many others, the church applies Bronze Age teachings to a modern society. That does not engender meaningful debate.
Comment by Snucka Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:14 am
==In essence, Church leaders have decided to use immigrants and those who seek to help them as pawns in a political battle about an issue that is entirely unrelated to the care and welfare of those who seek refuge in our country.==
I also favor recognizing same-sex marriages, but this complaint is dead wrong. If the same-sex marriage issue is “entirely unrelated to” the mission of these immigrant rights groups, why are they taking a public position on the issue? It looks more to me like they are the ones using immigrants as pawns in this battle.
Comment by Anon. Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:15 am
People keep donating to the Church and then they complain because the Church uses the money the same way it has for centuries.
People need to decide if the Church is still relevant.
Although I was raised Irish Catholic, I’ve made that decision. My children have not set foot in a Catholic Church. The Church’s values and priorities are different from my own.
Other people raised Catholic need to ask those same questions.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:15 am
His position will further alienate the Catholic church from Catholics. More and more, Catholics today feel that they can have a relationship with God without the constant self-serving fund raising apparatus that the church has become. If his goal is to push more people into becoming what is gingerly referred to as lapsed Catholics, he’s doing a great job. Using a temporal hammer to whack people into adhering to the spiritual is like employing torture to obtain the answer you want. You’ll get compliance in some cases, but not willingly, and that free will is what matters most spiritually.
Comment by PublicServant Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:15 am
==So, Maybe Daley and the other politicos could just go and help those groups raise some money. They all have plenty of rich friends.==
What a wonderful idea! I wonder how much money was pulled; I may have missed it but I didn’t see the amount reported. 9 organizations listed, so a wild guess would be $50,000 grant per organization or $500,000 in total. But certainly could be $100,000 or $1,000,000.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:18 am
No matter where you are on the position of Gay Marriage, it’s not at all difficult to know where the church is and why it’s there. Adhering to a doctrine, whether one agrees with it or not is a responsibility some have and others don’t. The Cardinal isn’t trying to be politically correct. He was just as firm in his support for the Illinois Dream Act supporting immigrant rights and opportunities, citing Doctrine. The church is not a private club. Neither the Kennedy’s, the Daley’s , Sufferendins or anyone else is going to speak for the church. Thinking they can or should is sinful arrogance. Simply state that they disagree with the doctrine. Signing an open letter is just plain stupid. Catholic Charities houses and feeds more poor people daily than any government program. It is a fact our state government relies on them to do this. I’m a little tired of the faith bashing going on. Catholics seem to be easier targets than most. The first rebuttal will be about priests and abuse…shock. It’ terrible, we abhor that it occurred, it will occur far less often, but will occur again because you can’t control the mind of every human. Gay activists should learn to live side by side with this doctrine that they may not agree with and quit trying to force themselves on the leadership of a church that doesn’t have an option when it comes to their view. If people weren’t wearing rainbow sashes a few years ago, they would have received communion quietly and intimately like everyone else did. They forced a refusal by loudly identifying their defiance to the church doctrine. They received a blessing instead. The church does not advocate gay bashing or discrimination in society. I’m guessing, but feel confident in saying they’ve provided more services to this community without ever asking about their orientation. They never ask questions when people are in need. They just feed, clothe and medicate. Here’s a shocker: I don’t have a position myself on gay marriage. I just don’t know yet. I’m praying on it. I know and love plenty of gay people. I’m doing a lot of listening.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:23 am
What exactly is Christ-like about the Cardinal’s attitude toward gays and groups who disagree with him on gays? Mark Brown is right; the Cardinal’s statement the other day on “homosexual genital relations” was downright bizarre.
Comment by Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:24 am
I dont go to church and for sure am not a catholic, BUT…
It is a church. Not a state agency, not a corporation and in the US churches have freedoms. In this case a church can decide not to give money to certain groups that it believes are acting contrary to their faith.
Could I fault an Islamic church for not donating to a group that supports same sex marriage?
The Catholic church is so big its a target. If you dont like how they dole out money, go somewhere else for the cash but stop trying to shame a church for its beliefs which is really shaming a church into continuing your cash flow to your group.
Comment by RonOglesby Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:24 am
@MJM
actually he’s not calling it HIS private club is he? he is attempting to guide his region/churches in church doctrine. We may not agree with him but that doesn’t make him a bad person as some people would like to make him out to be.
Maybe we should remember that when we preach “tolerance” it has to be on both sides. Just because someone doesn’t believe like you doesnt make them evil. just as it shouldn’t make you evil in their eyes.
Comment by RonOglesby Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:27 am
—
His position will further alienate the Catholic church from Catholics.
—
just his? or the entire churches position? but anyway, then the church will continue to shrink. That will reduce influence, cash, etc. As it should.
On the flip side asking a church to change and agree with you because you want their money is kind of funny.
Comment by RonOglesby Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:31 am
The Roman Catholic Pope just said it all for anyone who wishes not to discriminate against half the population…”that door is closed.” No women as priests. Why in the world would anyone support an institution which discriminates against someone for a job? If the Roman Catholic Pope had proclaimed that those of African heritage were not eligible for the job of priest imagine the outcry. The Roman Catholic church discriminates against women in hiring. Outcry! Who’s with me?
Comment by Amalia Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:36 am
A guy…
You know that Catholic Charities receives billions in grants from the federal government?
Saying they house and feed more people “than any government program” is slightly misleading.
Comment by ZC Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:37 am
Setting the debate aside and just focusing on the politics of the matter, pretty shrude move by Daley to bolster his liberal street cred. He needs to find a way to get to Quinn’s left on some issues if he’s going to have a snow ball’s chance in hell next March. Very hard to beat an incumbent Dem from the right in a primary.
Comment by Frank Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:37 am
“The whole civilized world knows that.”
Trust me, there are far more hetero couples that would not qualify as civilized than you will find in the LGBT community. This was a spiteful and condescending punch. Uncalled for Cardinal dude. Not cool.
Comment by Mr. Jim Lahey Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:38 am
I’m not Catholic, so it’s none of my business how the church hierarchy decides to spend its private donations.
I have a lot of Catholic friends who believe it is their business.
On the other hand, when Catholic Charities gets nearly 90% of its funding from all taxpayers, how that money is spent is my business.
As a Christian, I’m glad to see that the cardinal thinks “Jesus is merciful, but he is not stupid; he knows the difference between right and wrong.”
So do we all, I think, sinners though we be. And we will all have to answer for our sins one day, including the cardinal.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:40 am
Daley made a lot of sense, as did Rich in his comments.
There’s no clear way out for the Cardinal. The criticism should not be directed at him, but at the institution he serves.
Comment by walkinfool Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:41 am
I find the irony of the requirements of my faith, (I am a Catholic, even said so at the election of Pope Francis I), is seen as “troubling” and a “reason I left the church”, by many a talk to, and then compare that to when My Party decides to be “religious-like” in doctrine requirements, by those who require the Litmus Tests and Blood Oaths stil call the ILGOP a “political” party, and then not seeing the comparision as they see the GOP and how it SHOULD be according to them.
Religions have doctrine and rules and if you follow them, fine, if you don’t, then don’tm and you may even leave the Church. Those following that Faith will keep their religion under their roof, recruiting new members with LIKE beliefs;
Political parties are based on the premise we agree on “basic principals”, but disagreeing with some of those principals should not exclude you from membership of the party if you only disagree with, let’s say, 20%, of them.
The GOP is not a religion. Look at what the Cardinal is saying, look at how some think we NEED to run the ILGOP, and see why people are leaving.
Religions have people leave, enter, visit, join …Political parties need to have people CHOOSE them, and when the time comes, vote for those running as a member of that party. Politics is an adding game, not a “framing of a ‘perfect’…” game.
Pope Francis I is refreshing, and time will tell if His Holiness and his views are seen as to “welcoming” to the strict doctrine some in my faith see as critical. But, that is religion, my faith, big difference from My Party.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:42 am
One more note –
Whether or not you agree Francis George’s position (no funding to groups he doesn’t like) the tone of his letter was absolutely awful.
Suggesting that people are stupid?
That should be beneath the dignity of any reasonable conversation. Mr. George said a lot about himself with that comment. Anybody looking at him for any sort of leadership should remember his tone and how he treats others.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:46 am
The church does not advocate gay bashing or discrimination in society.
Baloney. Maybe they don’t advocate hitting people, but the church most certainly discriminates against gay couple who want to be legally wed.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:49 am
Move along folks, nothing to see here.
Cardinal George will be called out for defending traditional Catholic orthodoxy, but it is also a case of contributors to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development being put on a short leash again.
In the past the CCHD has been justly criticized for soliciting and collecting funds from the faithful during church services and then using the funds to provide grants to organizations that are promoting positions which are contrary to those of the Catholic Church. The most objectionable case was that pro-abortion groups had applied for such grants under the guise of counseling and family planning.
There are faithful Catholics who are pleased that the Cardinal has been monitoring the CCHD.
Comment by Esquire Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:51 am
ZC, the federal government does provide funding to Catholic Charities because they provide a supply chain to the poor. They simply do it more economically than any other organization can; scandal free and at a tiny admin cost. This funding is added to the huge private fund raising they do themselves. They work with United Way, Salvation Army, Red Cross and others to very inexpensively connect people in need with food, clothing, shelter, etc. Many of the board members of Catholic Charities are not Catholic. No one ever asks. It’s about the servitude with them.
Skeeter- The Cardinal didn’t call anyone stupid. Read it again. He’s defending the position he’s taken a vow to defend. Rev. Meeks is further out there on this issue than Cardinal George. He’s defending doctrine too. Is his faith community more understanding? Is his flock more disciplined? Are Catholics just an easier, more acceptable target, socially acceptable to snipe at? All of these people are doing good work and the Catholic Church is at the forefront of aiding and defending immigrants- They always have been!
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:08 am
@Skeeter - Cardinal George did not state people are stupid. “Jesus is merciful, but he is not stupid” was the quote.
Most rank and file Catholics (myself included) do not oppose civil same sex marriages; but we would oppose the government requiring the sacrament of Matrimony be performed in its Church to same sex couples. Similarly, the Catholic Church opposed the government’s requirements that as part of insurance coverage, HAD to include contraception.
Look, you may find some of the Catholic teachings archaic (truth is, I scratch my head a lot) but then it would have to answer to those who find it hypocritical to support a group with a position it opposed.
Has anyone questioned the ICIRR and asked why it supports SSM, which is not a core issue with immigrant reform?
Comment by Darienite Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:09 am
===Has anyone questioned the ICIRR and asked why it supports SSM, which is not a core issue with immigrant reform?===
ICIRR is an advocacy organization. Advocacy organizations often build coalitions to get legislation passed. Coalition partners are often asked to support each other’s goals and agendas.
The Illinois Dream Act and drivers’ licenses for undocumented Illinoisans were passed with the help of a lot of left-leaning, progressive lobbyists and legislators. Politics is a two-way street, you help those who help you.
Actually, the Catholic Conference could learn a little bit about effective lobbying from ICIRR. How many times are the bishops standing up alongside evangelicals to oppose abortion, only to find themselves standing alone for a variety of social justice and anti-poverty programs?
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:17 am
“But for the church to turn its back on its long-standing work with groups that aid the poor over a completely unrelated issue is an injustice, plain and simple,”
Well said and good politics.
The Cardinal’s tone was unnecessarily harsh and condescending. He didn’t need to go there.
Comment by Wensicia Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:17 am
A guy,
Did you actually write that the Catholic Church does anything scandal free?
You may want to do some reading about that church. Nothing they do is scandal free.
Did Francis George call people stupid? It sure as heck was implied by the way he turned that phrase.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:19 am
Upshot: the letter to the Cardinal was an act of pure political pressure. Its message was: “get in line” — that means, get in line with the liberal elite consensus: pro-liberal amnesty laws and pro- gay marriage. The liberal signers need to keep everyone in the same corral — gosh, you can’t have your followers who support amnesty also proclaiming that their against gay marriage! That’s a chink in your political armor! (Particularly since the amnesty issue resonates with Hispanics who are also largely — traditional Catholics!)
And equally important is to keep that money flow going the right way. SURE these folks could pool enough money to substitute the loss, but the point is that its already free money from a good number of unsuspecting and ideologically uncommitted donors, i.e. Catholic parishioners who donate to the Catholic charity without dissecting the myriad strands of their donations’ ultimate destination. Its like the use of union members’ money. These politicos need to keep these unsuspecting donors funding this “iron triangle (or however many sides you want to add)” of broad leftist interests because its free money, and thus easing the overall fundraising demands for all leftist causes.
This incident is essentially no different than the incident the other year when liberal politicians across the country shamed the Susan G Komen Foundation for trying to stop its funding of Planned Parenthood. In other words, once your on the preferred funding train, don’t you dare think about climbing off, like Cardinal George has.
These are the real issues in this dust up. And this is why so many of the commenters here are happy to try to shame the Catholic Church into continuing to give its parishioners’ money to their preferred liberal causes.
Comment by Conservative Republican Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:20 am
===Nothing they do is scandal free.===
Wow.
You deal with Billions of dollars, for example, and someone in…Peru … does something shady with money, all the good is lost?
Multinational organizations throught the U.N., are they completely, 100%, scandal-free?
Wow, when you come down from your “high and mighty perch”, show us those… who do …
EVERYTNHING they do is scandal free.
Yikes!
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:23 am
PS, its also only a rescission of funding for ICIRR, not of the immigration reform movement as a whole, an important distinction lost on many, but not the signatories of the letter.
Comment by Conservative Republican Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:25 am
Darienite –
NO BILL HAS REQUIRED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TO PERFORM SAME SEX WEDDINGS.
I thought the ALL CAPS might help, since I keep reading that baseless argument.
In this case, the groups took a position. They did not require the Catholic Church to take that position or participate in it.
Is the Catholic Church going to start denying any aid to single moms? Divorced people? People who backed the war in Iraq? Anybody who opposed them on the long list of possible positions?
There is simply no defense for either the actions of Francis George or the tone of his letter. They don’t like gay people. They want to punish people who do. That’s it and nothing more.
People are free to act as they wish, but anybody who attends Mass should do so knowing that the Church acts that way deliberately and as a matter of policy.
They should also know that Sunday morning is a great time to have a relaxing breakfast and a few cups of coffee without any great need to leave the house. I highly recommend it.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:25 am
Oswego,
“A guy” said what they do is scandal free.
I said it was not scandal free.
I’m not really following your outrage at me.
Are you claiming “A guy” is correct?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:28 am
@Conservative Republican:
Anybody that uses the word “liberal” so many times kind of betrays their blatant partisan bias. Nice original thoughts, though.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:33 am
Are you saying NOTHING they do, ever, is “Scadal-Free”?
My cousin was adopted through Catholic Services, there was no scandal.
Nothing is way too harsh.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:36 am
Skeeter, you do the research and show me where “Catholic Charities” (not the whole Catholic Establishment) has been accused of any scandal or wrong doing. I’m reasserting that they have performed their missions of feeding, clothing, housing and educating the poor in the Archdiocese scandal free. If you have a case and some evidence otherwise, you’re the only one who has it, so show it smart guy. Don’t make blanket statements about nothing is scandal free. CC is not a political organization. Completely humanitarian. They don’t discriminate on any basis whatsoever and never have. They are the gold standard in providing relief. Ask any corporate giver (I am one of those). If CC is involved, they feel safe giving them donations. If they disappeared tomorrow, social agencies would be crushed and the chaos would be unfathomable. Feeding people keeps the peace like no other method imaginable.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:39 am
@Darienite ICIRR released this statement about their position at the end of May: http://icirr.org/content/icirr-statement-marriage-equality
When ICIRR signed on, pre-DOMA, same-sex, binational couples could not sponsor their partners for green cards because their marriages were not recognized. There are also provisions in the Senate bill that are beneficial to LGBT immigrants seeking asylum and keep LGBT folks going through deportation from automatically going into solitary confinement.
Those are specific examples, and doesn’t touch on the notions of intersectionality or solidarity, which also might have been a factor in their support.
Comment by DriXander Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:39 am
@Skeeter - First, thank you for printing the first line in ALL CAPS. I was taking the Barney Fife approach - “If you give ‘em an inch, they take a foot……..”.
Actually I go to Mass on Saturdays so I can play golf Sunday mornings. But I’ll keep your tip in mind for the winter.
Comment by Darienite Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:40 am
Darienite,
As a long time (and now recovering) Catholic I feel compelled to advise, for the good of your soul, that the Catholic faith distinguishes between Saturday and Sunday mass. Saturday is not a real mass.
Please stop violating the requirements of the church, since Jesus is not stupid. When it comes time to judge, He will know.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:44 am
SKEETER, capitalized for your amusement…Usually one swat and a skeeter is history. You’re more pesky. Who do you think all of the poor divorced, single parent, orphaned and otherwise downtrodden people go to for help. Maybe instead of having your extra cups of coffee and donuts on Sunday morning, you can go to a Catholic Charities shelter and see what people who profess your level of compassion actually do. They’re located all over so we can find you a convenient location. Really dude, making light of people attending mass or services on Sunday morning vs. your approach to social justice? And yes, OW does agree with me. Now you’ve got the wrath of Willie. I’m sure that scares you more than the Cardinal or the Pontiff. From where I sit, both would approve of Willy.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:48 am
===Saturday is not a real mass.===
Saturady after 3pm (afternoon/evening) Mass is considered a “Sunday” Mass, as is a Wedding Mass, done in late afternoon is meeting your Sunday Obligation.
As you keep “recovering”, understand the rules of the Faith you left before you “teach”.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:48 am
Oswego,
I’m pretty sure you are wrong about that last one. I seem to recall it was technically considered some sort of pre-mass. But it doesn’t really matter.
A Guy,
Try Googling “Catholic Charities scandal” into Google. You will get a long list. The first is the following.
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Catholic-Charities-CEO-resigns-months-after-sex-3104834.php
The idea that Catholic Charities is scandal free is just not consistent with reality.
Google is your friend, smart guy.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:53 am
This just in “The Catholic Church has traded Skeeter to whatever faith he’s decided upon or none at all for a player to be named later who doesn’t espouse to know the rules of the faith he’s recovering from”. Saturday evening is most definitely in line with keeping holy the Sabbath Day”. Let me quote Fr. Hesburgh, one who was viewed as a more enlightened member of our clergy by many- “If you find the perfect church, by all means join it. But know that the moment you do, it’s not perfect anymore”. Skeeter, to be a lapsed or recovering Catholic, you need to have been one in the first place. It just doesn’t appear that way to me.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:54 am
By the way A Guy, I do appreciate the violent imagery. A swat to kill a “Skeeter”?
Yeah, tell me more your great faith.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 10:55 am
===…some sort of pre-mass. But it doesn’t really matter.===
It matters to those attending the Wedding, especially those which end at Holy Name in the City, and the Bishop officiating says at the end of Mass,
“And I am sure your guests thank you, because they have now fulfilled their Sunday obligation.”
In religion, unlike politics, those things DO matter.
I have never heard of “pre-mass” as a ritual of the Church, especially if you have a High Mass Wedding on late Satuday with a Bishop at Holy Name …
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:00 am
If you’re thanking me Skeeter, you’re welcome. I’ll confess as I frequently do that I’d have preferred Noah skipped bringing along certain creatures; Mosquitoes being one of them. No overt offense intended. I don’t want you to die. Flying away would be ok though.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:01 am
Willy: What, are they on Roman time?
This wasn’t true when I was a kid, at least according to the nuns who instructed me.
A lot of the “rules” of the Church shift as demands and needs of thousands of local parishes rise to the surface. Much of the modern “pro-life” movement rose primarily from American laity in the 20th Century, to finally influence Rome to take a firmer and clearer stand. And so it goes. Eventually, the institutional stand on gays and married clergy will evolve as well — just slowly.
Comment by walkinfool Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:03 am
1983 Code of Canon Law
“…Mass itself does not have to be specifically a Saturday Vigil Mass; it can be a Nuptial Mass or a funeral Mass, etc. So long as it is a liturgy celebrated licitly according to a Catholic rite, it meets the Sunday obligation.
Rome has not been specific about the “time” at which a Saturday Mass must be celebrated in order for it to fulfill the Sunday obligation. This is an area over which canonists disagree. Some say after 5:00pm (vespers onward) and some say after midday. The “time” is actually regulated by the local bishop and varies from diocese to diocese.
The only definitive timing we have for fulfilling the Sunday obligation on the previous day is “afternoon.”…”
Well I feel better …lol, sorry for the digress.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:13 am
With all of this talk about Mass I feel like I’ve just been to one.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:18 am
Thanks for sorting that out for us, Willy.
Now when I put together the list of “reasons Skeeter will eventually end up in hell, if such a place exists” I will cross off “before leaving church, would at times attend mass on Saturday.”
So I’ve got that going for me.
Which is nice.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:22 am
Looks like there are a lot of “Cafeteria Catholics” out there.
Comment by catch 22 Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:39 am
A Guy, we’re all supporters of Catholic Charities. In reality, they work for the taxpayers.
From their 2012 Annual Report:
Revenues:
Fees/Grants from Government: $151.5M
Services Fees: $14.0M
Contributions: $8.2M
TotaL $173.7M
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:44 am
@catch22 without us “cafeteria Catholics” your pews would be pretty empty on Sunday.
Comment by SpfldCatholic Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:51 am
==Looks like there are a lot of “Cafeteria Catholics” out there. ==
I prefer Cafeteria Catholics to the holier-than-thou crowd any day.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 11:54 am
I knew Catholic teachings were pretty legalistic, but I didn’t know the time of church attendance was so important. Makes me glad I’m a protestant.
Comment by SirLankselot Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 12:03 pm
- Skeeter -,
Plead your case to St. Peter, I know I have my list, which is actually about 4 sprial notebooks, but I digrss …
I am not a “cafeteria Catholic”, I always see it as …ala carte, like brunch after Mass. Also, those without sin…
- SirLankselot -,
We have rules for everything. In a Faith, I don’t mind, in my politcal beliefs, don’t get me started …
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 12:12 pm
Stop giving the church money. Give to needy causes that are effective and administrative costs under 10#%. Plug here for The Water Project
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 12:17 pm
Wordslinger, you are correct. Catholic Charities works wonders for the taxpayers. I think you didn’t mean this as a compliment though. They are not bureaucrats. They are a primarily volunteer organization that sees to it that well over 90% of that money is spent on direct aid to the poor and homeless in our society. The government chooses CC to administer these benefits because no one does it more selflessly and efficiently than they do. If the government’s subsidy went away, CC would still be there doing the most they could with the money and resources they have. Just as they did before the gov’t. realized they were the safest and most effective place to send the resources to help the poor. I’ve seen CEOs and immigrants standing in the same food line preparing and distributing food. No one knows who’s who and no one cares. Just feed ‘em, clothe ‘em, shelter ‘em, educate ‘em, medicate ‘em and give ‘em a shot at the American Dream. You’d be stunned at how many succeed and come back to help the next guy. So yes, they work for the taxpayers, but they’re hardly employed by them.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 12:34 pm
–If the government’s subsidy went away, CC would still be there doing the most they could with the money and resources they have.–
Yeah, well, you can do a lot more good with the $151.5M provided by the taxpayers than you can with the $8.2 million in private contributions.
And providing 87% of funding seems to be stretching the definition of “subsidy” a wee bit.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 12:43 pm
Just feed them, clothes them, but if they happen to be gay, make sure they don’t adopt or marry and that you don’t inadvertently support their cause.
It seems you left that last part out, Guy.
Or maybe you don’t view gays as real people. That’s possible too with your kind.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 12:50 pm
Rich makes a good point. Instead of trying to sway the church on one of their bedrock positions, proponents may be better served by stepping up and putting their money where their mouth is.
Unless they care more about getting their name in the paper than they do the underlying issue. In which case, they can follow up with a nice climate change piece next.
Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 1:06 pm
The Church is no one’s private club; she is the Body of Christ, who tells us he is “the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”
I have to say that so long as only men are allowed to serve the lord as priests–things look a little clubby to me.
Comment by anon Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 1:48 pm
Wordslinger, with no disrespect, you just don’t get how this public grant/subsidy has grown over the years. In a rather massive consolidation of State Social Services, they have relied more and more upon Catholic Charities, Lutheran Services and many other groups to implement social services and basic needs. Your understanding of these groups “needing” state funding is misplaced. With limited state funds, the state “needs” these groups to perform these services. If they ask for more state money, it’s to take care of more of the state’s poor. Without them: Chaos my friend. Chaos.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 1:48 pm
Sorry Skeeter, being gay doesn’t mean anything to the people providing services. Nor does being a drug or alcohol abuser or former convict, or any other societal ill. They’re there to help regardless of how you got to their door. If you’re “recovering” you can stay in a shelter. If you’re still abusing, they’ll offer food, clothes and counseling, but not a place to stay. If you had any notion of how many people Catholic Charities served during the height of the AIDs crisis, when even public hospitals were leary, you’d be stunned. They were among the very few showing compassion. Nobody’s lifestyle is challenged in order to receive some help. I can assure you I’m not a gay basher. Skeeters really are annoying. Deal in the truth or tap out brother.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 1:55 pm
@anon - I was encouraged when Pope Francis said, while men can only be ordained as priests, women need to occupy an increased role of authority in the Church. I could see a day where priests exclusively administer sacraments, while non-ordained manage the parishes, hospitals and educational institutions. Won’t be overnight. Why can’t women administer sacraments - the 12 apostles were a men’s club.
Comment by Darienite Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:02 pm
Darienite, I do love that reasoning. “2000 years ago we treated women badly, so let’s continue it!”
Awesome, guys.
But we are getting off track again.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:05 pm
A guy, I’m pretty sure I get it.
Catholic Charities is non-profit state contractor, like any other, almost wholly dependent on taxpayer funds.
Annual private charitable contributions — $8.6 million — don’t cover their administrative costs — $13.2 million.
Nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:07 pm
- Skeeter -
To clarify, who is ===your kind.===?
Fair question…
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:15 pm
Oswego,
Based on his comments so far, “his kind” appears to be people who think the more they talk about god the less they need to act like him. His comments overall strike a pretty aggressive tone.
People like him are part of the reason I left the church. I don’t need to be lectured on morality by people like him.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:20 pm
===Darienite, I do love that reasoning. “2000 years ago we treated women badly, so let’s continue it!===
- Darienite - stated the 12 Apostles were men, that is a fact, - Darienite - stated how Pope Francis I is handling the women’s role in the Church, but Faith and Religion are based on traditions too.
Having a woman in the United States Senate is groundbacking … a woman Catholic priest, recognized as such by Rome would be well beyond groundbraking and a move far beyond a paper saying its ok to do so.
- Skeeter -, if you are removed from my Faith, and you have reason, go in Peace from the Catholic Church, but understand, a 3-Day conclave of Cardinals is not going to decide statring next Wednesday, women are going to be Catholic priests, and if that is a “deal-breaker”, again, godpspeed …
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:26 pm
Its fairly evedent that some have hijacked the movement for equality to fight their own personal battle with God. That is both sad and misguided.
The Catholic faith is deep and complex and not easily understood by children. Having a ten year old’s grasp of the religion doesn’t give much credibility. Good luck with your “recovery” though.
Comment by whatever Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 2:26 pm
@whatever:
I hope you’re not part of the welcoming committee in the Catholic Church. Having a holier-than-thou attitude doesn’t give much credibility to your thoughts.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:04 pm
==Darienite, I do love that reasoning. “2000 years ago we treated women badly, so let’s continue it!”==
Well, accordingly to the New Testament, Jesus selected the 12 apostles, so if you wish to call him a chauvinist, have had it. As it turns out, one of the 12 backstabbed him which led to his crucifixion. Maybe he would have been better off with a woman instead of Judas……..
We will see pension reform in Illinois before a female priest, but not by a lot.
Comment by Darienite Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:08 pm
Skeeter, whatever type it is that has the pleasure of lecturing you on morality, please make an appt. and see them. You’re just angry at a church and a faith you were never really truly a part of. Could even be the Church’s fault. God knows mistakes have been make. Just make peace somewhere.
W Slinger- they perform a service that the state has asked them to perform, hardly state contractors. Their admin costs are minuscule and set the standard for other relief agencies. Is the Red Cross or the Salvation Army a Federal or State Contractor? If you say they are that, rather than relief agencies who provide needed services at the lowest possible costs, then in your mind I guess every private relief agency that receives public grant money is a State Contractor. Even based on that understanding, no one does it better, more compassionately or more cost effectively. You’re a smart person (no snark) WS, but I prefer my phrasing to your paraphrasing.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:33 pm
@whatever Who has hijacked the movement?
Comment by SpfldCatholic Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:34 pm
A Guy, isn’t performing services for money pretty much the definition of contractor?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:37 pm
==You’re just angry at a church and a faith you were never really truly a part of=
Just because they left I don’t think that means they were never a part of it at one time.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:39 pm
Looks like a rather volatile mix of politics and religion here today. “… peace be to you and peace be to your house and peace to all that you have.” (From the New American Standard Version - hope that doesn’t cause any additional problems.)
Comment by West Side the Best Side Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:39 pm
“angry at a church you were never truly part of”
Jeez, that sure sounds like you are judging me.
Now where did I read something about not judging the faith of others.
Looks like you are not really part of that faith either, One.
Or maybe you are one of those cafeteria types.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:39 pm
- every private relief agency that receives public grant money is a State Contractor. -
If that money comes from the state, then yep.
I don’t understand the confusion, it’s not a great intellectual leap. Every state contractor provides the service at the lowest possible cost, it’s kind of a rule for awarding contracts. Another rule is that the contractor has to follow state laws.
It’s really not difficult to understand.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:45 pm
Several of the comments here are the types that give organized religion a bad name. People telling others what they must believe and how they must act in order to be a “true” part of that religion. It’s nonsense and as someone who was away from church for a long time, I can tell you it is the exact kind of sentiment that kept me away from attending a church. I didn’t need a bunch of people sitting in judgment of me telling me what or how I had to think and that if I didn’t pass some sort of litmus test then I better look for some other place to worship. Churches as organizations have completely destroyed faith in my opinion. They are so caught up in their “rules” that they constantly miss the big picture. And what is even more shameful is that they have some of their caught up in those phony rules as well.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:45 pm
That should say “they have some of their FOLLOWERS caught up in those rules as well.”
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:46 pm
Skeeter, read your own posts. Not judging you, but interpreting what you’ve said multiple times today. The whole Catholic Charities relationship with the state would start another tirade. Suffice it to say they are the instrument of the State to minister to the poor of any faith, creed, color, orientation or otherwise.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:53 pm
Love that response A Guy.
You are not “judging”, like CC is not “contracting.”
And no, they were not retained to “minister” to the poor. They contracted for various services, but “ministering” is not one of them.
The State of Illinois does not hire people to “minster.” In fact, we fought a revolution just for that purpose.
If you don’t reject history along with science, you might want to read some history to sort out why Illinois doesn’t hire people to “minister.”
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 3:58 pm
Oswego Willy for Governor: He’ll swat the Skeeters so you don’t have to!
Comment by Name Withheld Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 4:02 pm
A church can do with its own money what is wishes, but as long as it chooses to characterize the love that some humans feel for others as “inherently disordered” it will rightfully be seen as bigoted, as well as decidedly unChristian.
Comment by wishbone Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 4:12 pm
–they perform a service that the state has asked them to perform, hardly state contractors–
No, they perform a service that the state pays them to do, to the tune of 87% of their revenues.
Again, out of Catholic Charities $173.7 million in revenues, only $8.6 million comes from private charitable contributions.
You mention the American Red Cross and Salvation Army. They also publish annual reports.
The Chicago chapter of the American Red Cross reports that 83% of their revenues come from private individual contributions, with no government grants or fees listed.
The Salvation Army of Chicagoland gets 23% of its revenues — $14.8 million — from government fees and grants.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 4:12 pm
==they perform a service that the state has asked them to perform, hardly state contractors==
I’m pretty sure that when you sign an agreement and pay somebody to perform a service that they are a contractor. I think that’s a pretty standard legal definition.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 4:21 pm
Neil Reagan (brother of Ronald) used to share a prayer (paraphrasing out of necessity here) Lord, please turn the hearts of those who don’t have faith, if you can’t, please turn their ankles, so at least we’ll recognize them by their gait”.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 4:34 pm
The Diocese is in a spot, as - wordslinger - has shown, that a vast, VAST majotity of its funding is coming from the state of Illinois. We can all agree on that…
I would then remove, just for 1 second please, thanky you, that entire aspect away as you then speak to the Catholic Church doctrine. The Doctrine goes back over 2000 years, and is evolving, and moving, and pushing back, and retreating, and being shaped every day as millions, some say a billion people, who call themselves “Catholic”… live.
Now, having laid all that out, if you invest in anything at over an 85% clip, you want to call the tune, we can hopefuly agree… now, if calling the tune means going against what is believed … religiously … which is complete contrast of the Doctrine of the Faith, there is going to be, “conflict” and that is putting it …um, nicely.
Easy answer, stop funding to Catholic Charities, farm it out somewhere else, or start an agency. The Catholic Church can refuse to be a Vendor and then the state would be forced to look elsewhere, since the Catholic Chariites option is not even being offered.
Why am I going through all this?
Having a difference with Catholics is understandable, we all have different beielfs, different ways of worship, I get it. But, as the conflict exists between the state and the Church and they are reconciling what to do, as the Church grapples to deal with its beliefs, the teachings of how Man should aid Mankind, there is a money issue and money as leverage to change at a rate that an investor of 85%+ expects from the group it invests in.
As we have grappled with Theology of the Catholic Church, what some like, don’t like, understand or don’t, the 85% financial stake in the …business… of the Catholic Charities has to reconcile, “At what rate do we give up who we are … for money … but to do good for out fellow Man?”
The rest of “Who is more Righteous in their postings today”, or anything on Faith is window-dressing to the 85% funding versus 2000 years of evolving, living, growing, Doctrine that is the Worldwide Catholic Church, and Catholic Experience for the Church’s faithful.
So I hope as we pull out spreadsheets, and numbers and programs, and others pull out Catholic Doctrine, traditions, Catholic Failures, and childhood and adulthood religious feelings and emotions… we are talking about somethng co complex, that no posts today or in future tomorrows will fully answer. I just hope for the people who need help, any help, they find it somewhere, through Catholic Charities, their own faith, or a government run agency with no faith base. They are the ones lost in all this.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 4:47 pm
O’Willy: Amen brother.
Comment by walkinfool Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 5:48 pm
Gosh, I hate having to read this blog later than everyone else… I always seem to be the last to comment - but here it is…
There are several commenters on this thread who have suggested that marriage and immigration are somehow unrelated. Darienite wonders why the ICIRR has taken a position on marriage at all, and Wensicia calls out the church for turning it’s back on poor people over a “completely unrelated” issue. 47th Ward describes this as a coalition - which isn’t wrong - but, since coalitions are formed between unrelated groups, it seems that even he seems to view these as unrelated to each other.
They’re not separate issues. As long people are allowed to sponsor their spouses for immigration purposes, then these two issues will be inextricably intertwined. There are bi-national couples who are stranded on opposite sides of a border (and sometimes an ocean) because they cannot legally wed. There are people living in this country who are at risk of being deported because they cannot legally marry the person who is, in practical terms, their spouse. Immigrant groups and LGBTQ groups are both rightly opposed to this. LGBTQ groups because it treats LGBTQ people poorly, and immigrant groups because it treats immigrants poorly.
Comment by FoxValleyPride1 Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 8:53 pm
FVP1, well said.
But since you mentioned my comment, allow me to clarify. I agree that marriage has a direct impact on immigration rights and privileges. I chose not to focus on that because those are federal issues that have been addressed now that DOMA is no longer operative. The fact is, if you know what the acronym stands for (and I know you do), ICIRR is an Illinois-based advocacy group. The Archdiocese of Chicago directed its ire toward ICIRR because it endorsed Illinois’ same sex marriage bill.
I used to work on immigration cases at the federal level. I am very aware that marriage and visas go hand in hand. But thanks for your comment.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:10 pm
47th - Thanks for the clarification. I want to be clear that my comments were not meant to call anyone out. Just to point out these issues are related.
You raise another interesting point though… The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights is an Illinois group, and as such, would generally focus on state-level immigrant issues. But while the treatment of immigrants can certainly be a state issue, immigration itself is exclusively a Federal issue. In fact, there is only ONE thing that the state determines that would affect immigration at all - and that’s marital status.
So, since we certainly couldn’t argue that immigrant issues are unrelated to immigration… and since the only way the state has any effect on immigration at all is through marital status… it makes sense for Illinois-based immigrant groups to endorse marriage equality for Illinois residents. Wouldn’t you think?
Comment by FoxValleyPride1 Thursday, Aug 1, 13 @ 9:57 pm