Having served on a local CCHD board for years, I can say that the purpose of the program is to provide make-work jobs for community organizers. Replace this mess with real charity directed at needy people.
I'm sorry that's been your experience. I really felt that the grants my CCHD board produced were vital to helping growing community organizers, especially since so many of them have informal connections to parishes and parishioners. Direct support is really great, but it should also be followed with institutional change
I learned to chant this mantra myself, but I'm afraid what has really been going on is closer to phishing than fishing. Nobody ends up eating except the scammers.
We were told by the CCHD officials to hand over cash to "community organizers" who would tell "the poor and workers" how to get their acts together . . . for a stiff price, of course. That's how the racket works. The poor (as usual) go along for whatever crumbs get trickled down their way.
I would invite anyone who likes to get out and show support, or who likes the idea of evangelizing, to join a Catholic group that goes out into the streets to tell people about the good news. Sometimes we do not seem to know what evangelizing is (the word has been coopted by secular society to mean "you should use the same kind of phone that I do" or whatever) and in trying to recover the meaning of the word (it has something to do with what Jesus told us to do, not with consumer electronics; he told us to do works of mercy; maybe it means doing works of mercy) and perhaps because "philanthropizing" is an awkward word (even the Wizard of Oz settled on "we call them... Good Deed Do -ers") we figure one Greek cognate is as good as another Greek cognate.
It's honestly a bit sad...the people who don't really know what the protest is about are probably sincere, well-meaning people. Of course, well-meaning isn't the same as being well-informed, and it's easy for them to end up as someone else's pawns.
Also, the idea that throwing gobs of money at people to be do-gooders even if they're opposed to church teaching somehow amounts to evangelization is ridiculous. I couldn't make that argument with a straight face, personally.
The flip book boasts of major funding to promote unions, as if this were still about downtrodden coal miners in 1800s Pennsylvania. Whether one is for or against unions in the US today, they clearly are a well heeled political force and do not need to dip into parish collection baskets. It’s especially laughable that the flip book justifies this by pointing to the role of Poland's Solidarity in bringing down the Soviet Union, as if the UAW and Teamsters are in any way like Solidarnosc.
Speaking of the struggle against Marxism, the second largest national grant is to the “Gamaliel Foundation”, which Wikipedia describes approvingly as working “in the tradition of Alinsky” and who once employed Barack Obama as a community organizer. Many others of the same ilk.
In fact the grantee list reads like a yellow pages of Democratic party booster organizations, mostly based in large Democrat-stronghold cities like Chicago. There are a smattering of organizations that look worthwhile, like co-ops that facilitate finding work or franchising a cleaning business, but these are a minority.
Even if the choice of grantees were not so awful, the overhead involved in having a middleman organization is hard to justify. The report lists annual revenue of $9.2M and costs of running CCHD of about $3M (most of this is buried in a line item called “internal grants” which includes both operations expenses and money diverted to another USCCB program, in a gem of accounting transparency.)
So of every dollar that goes into the collection basket that’s supposed to help the poor, about a third is consumed in expenses, and the remaining two-thirds goes to organizations that don’t actually help them - but will supposedly indirectly help, eventually, by promoting left wing goals and organizations. Got it.
My own donations may not be all that consequential, but I will direct them where there won’t be this kind of malarkey.
Ehh, I think that's a stretch. The role of unions is central, no question. However, I don't think that funneling money into American unions (in the way they currently exist) is a core part of Catholic Social Teaching. And along those lines, what's the union's worldview? If they see the world through a lens of Marxism and class struggle, it's inappropriate for the church to give them a single cent.
But should people be allowed to unionize, and should we support good unions? Absolutely.
Well, that depends on the union. American unions are pretty flush with cash. I can attest to that, as a former steward (retired). Most members are members by default (mandatory) and dues are automatically withdrawn, as a condition of employment. Authoritarian-run countries are not going to allow unions for the betterment of the workers. If they have a union, they want a cut of the money. There are much better ways to help the poor here and abroad.
Yes, the bishops should use this perfect opportunity to let CCHD die a death it has deserved for decades. Lepanto gets criticized for revealing things that people don’t want to know. Their research is robust and well-informed.
Worker owned cooperatives provide the same benefits as unions while also helping these owners learn to run organizations. They cut out those who own simply to gain more money.
CCHD provided a major grant to help get the PREPARES program off the ground in Washington State (a joint program of all three Catholic dioceses to offer assistance to women, children and families from conception to age 5). We were better positioned to respond to the end of Roe v. Wade, even as our state political leaders encourage women to come from other states for abortions. If CCHD needs reform, do it wisely. BTW, I would love to see the Lepanto Institute be more transparent about the source of their own donations.
Earlier this year, I believe in this very journal, there was a story on young people either coming to the Catholic faith or deepening their religious life. Each and every individual story was moving and beautiful. And (sigh!) each and every account was a college student or recent college graduate. Only about of third of American have a college degree.
For the more part, I think there is almost zero --- ZERO -- commitment or initiatives to the evangelization of working class and poor people. CCHD is one of the few things we got -- engaged Catholics working shoulder to shoulder with people in working class and low income communities on projects to make their lives better and more stable. I'm sure there are criticisms that can be made comparing CCHD to some ideal. I don't see how it comes short from doing nothing, as is the actual situation. Blessed Adolph Kolping, pray for us!
You forget the St. Vincent de Paul Societies present in most Catholic parishes and the Knights of Columbus, among others. Catholics are not doing nothing to improve the lives of the poor.
If the bishops really want to help the poor, they should help us remove the "scandal of Catholic schools"
“A preferential option for the poor” should be maintained in our Catholic Schools. If we find that we cannot afford to keep our schools open to the poor, the Church should be ready to use its resources for something else which can be kept open to the poor. We cannot allow our Church to become a church primarily for the upper classes while allowing the poor to remain in public schools. The priority should be given to the poor even if we have to let the middle-class and rich fend for themselves.
Practically speaking, the Catholic Schools must give up general education in those countries where the State is providing it. The resources of the Church could then be focused on “Confraternity of Christian Doctrine” and other programs which can be kept open to the poor. These resources could then be used to help society become more human in solidarity with the poor. Remember, the Church managed without Catholic Schools for centuries. It can get along without them today. The essential factor from the Christian point of view is to cultivate enough Faith to act in the Gospel Tradition, namely, THE POOR GET PRIORITY. The rich and middle-class are welcome too. But the poor come first.
"Remember, the church managed without Catholic Schools for centuries."
The argument doesn't make sense. Parochial schools (what I'm guessing you mean by "Catholic Schools") are relatively new, but that's because the idea of giving everybody an education is relatively new. More or less as soon as there was a movement to educate the masses, the church created parochial Schools. And before that time the education that was available was at least partially religious.
Also, to concede general education would be a mistake. In secularization countries the general education students receive would undermine everything they're being taught in CCD. For example, if they learn an anti-Catholic version of history in school, or have their worldview shaped in a secular mold, their CCD classes will need to take time to counteract all of that if they want any chance of success. When all is said and done, the kids will have lost significant time for faith formation because of the need to address the misinformation from their secular education.
My grandparents came from the old world. They learned to read and write at church.
Their were no public schools in my grandfathers/grandmothers hometowns. My family came to the USA for a better life. In America, my father , my mother ,and their siblings went to public schools. After world war 2, there was a baby boom. It was cheaper for the government to give credits to families to send their kids to Catholic Schools as opposed to building more public schools. When the baby boom was over, government changed their tune.
On a related note, while listening to Ms Healy’s lengthy presentation on the NRB she didn’t mention a recommendation re: applying the Dallas Charter to the bishops themselves. Since they managed to exempt themselves from the Charter under the influence of McCarrick over 20 yrs ago, they’ve never had the time/will to re-address this critical issue.
Until this happens, there’s zero credibility to be attributed to the USCCB’s sincerity in finally cleaning up abuse. This double standard between how accusations against bishops & the priests whom they’re supposed to be fathering undermines the whole Abuse program as well as the relationship between the ordinary & his clerics.
CCHD should give all their $ to pregnancy centers and Catholic schools (to support students with disabilities and families that can’t afford to attend Catholic schools). That should keep them plenty busy.
The organization started out with good intentions, I’m sure. But I will not donate to an organization that wastes so much money. It wouldn’t pass Charity Navigator as it stands. Too much overhead and not enough money going to those who truly need it. Obviously there simply aren’t enough checks and balances to make sure money is being used wisely. CCHD is a CATHOLIC organization. It is not wrong to expect the grantees to not support anything against church teaching.
Ed now needs to give Margery the parish secretary a break cos there’s a new stereotype in town! Dotty the Good Catholic(tm) who turns up to the opening of a window just to make sure everyone knows it! For the children you see… God bless you Dotty! You made me giggle today if nothing else.
How can these demonstrators be so uninformed!
I know of a good publication they could use
Very easily. I suspect a number of them text their kids by mistake when trying to google something…
Having served on a local CCHD board for years, I can say that the purpose of the program is to provide make-work jobs for community organizers. Replace this mess with real charity directed at needy people.
I'm sorry that's been your experience. I really felt that the grants my CCHD board produced were vital to helping growing community organizers, especially since so many of them have informal connections to parishes and parishioners. Direct support is really great, but it should also be followed with institutional change
Chairty is giving a man a fish. CCHD is teaching a village how to fish.
I learned to chant this mantra myself, but I'm afraid what has really been going on is closer to phishing than fishing. Nobody ends up eating except the scammers.
I know. The poor and workers can only be helped by charity because unless their social betters are in control, everything does wrong.
We were told by the CCHD officials to hand over cash to "community organizers" who would tell "the poor and workers" how to get their acts together . . . for a stiff price, of course. That's how the racket works. The poor (as usual) go along for whatever crumbs get trickled down their way.
Help grow community organizers?
Their paychecks grow . . . for "social justice," of course. It's a scam!
Marxists gonna Marx, I guess.
I would invite anyone who likes to get out and show support, or who likes the idea of evangelizing, to join a Catholic group that goes out into the streets to tell people about the good news. Sometimes we do not seem to know what evangelizing is (the word has been coopted by secular society to mean "you should use the same kind of phone that I do" or whatever) and in trying to recover the meaning of the word (it has something to do with what Jesus told us to do, not with consumer electronics; he told us to do works of mercy; maybe it means doing works of mercy) and perhaps because "philanthropizing" is an awkward word (even the Wizard of Oz settled on "we call them... Good Deed Do -ers") we figure one Greek cognate is as good as another Greek cognate.
It's honestly a bit sad...the people who don't really know what the protest is about are probably sincere, well-meaning people. Of course, well-meaning isn't the same as being well-informed, and it's easy for them to end up as someone else's pawns.
Also, the idea that throwing gobs of money at people to be do-gooders even if they're opposed to church teaching somehow amounts to evangelization is ridiculous. I couldn't make that argument with a straight face, personally.
The CCHD is exactly the kind of organization I would not want to contribute to. The bishops would do well to get rid of it as quickly as possible.
The Pillar links to a list of small grants, but does not list the larger national grants, available in the USCCB “flip book” at https://www.usccb.org/resources/cchd-annual-report
The flip book boasts of major funding to promote unions, as if this were still about downtrodden coal miners in 1800s Pennsylvania. Whether one is for or against unions in the US today, they clearly are a well heeled political force and do not need to dip into parish collection baskets. It’s especially laughable that the flip book justifies this by pointing to the role of Poland's Solidarity in bringing down the Soviet Union, as if the UAW and Teamsters are in any way like Solidarnosc.
Speaking of the struggle against Marxism, the second largest national grant is to the “Gamaliel Foundation”, which Wikipedia describes approvingly as working “in the tradition of Alinsky” and who once employed Barack Obama as a community organizer. Many others of the same ilk.
In fact the grantee list reads like a yellow pages of Democratic party booster organizations, mostly based in large Democrat-stronghold cities like Chicago. There are a smattering of organizations that look worthwhile, like co-ops that facilitate finding work or franchising a cleaning business, but these are a minority.
Even if the choice of grantees were not so awful, the overhead involved in having a middleman organization is hard to justify. The report lists annual revenue of $9.2M and costs of running CCHD of about $3M (most of this is buried in a line item called “internal grants” which includes both operations expenses and money diverted to another USCCB program, in a gem of accounting transparency.)
So of every dollar that goes into the collection basket that’s supposed to help the poor, about a third is consumed in expenses, and the remaining two-thirds goes to organizations that don’t actually help them - but will supposedly indirectly help, eventually, by promoting left wing goals and organizations. Got it.
My own donations may not be all that consequential, but I will direct them where there won’t be this kind of malarkey.
"The flip book boasts of major funding to promote unions,..."
Which is a core tenant of Catholic Social teaching.
Ehh, I think that's a stretch. The role of unions is central, no question. However, I don't think that funneling money into American unions (in the way they currently exist) is a core part of Catholic Social Teaching. And along those lines, what's the union's worldview? If they see the world through a lens of Marxism and class struggle, it's inappropriate for the church to give them a single cent.
But should people be allowed to unionize, and should we support good unions? Absolutely.
Is there a CCHD grant you think does not meet these standards?
Well, that depends on the union. American unions are pretty flush with cash. I can attest to that, as a former steward (retired). Most members are members by default (mandatory) and dues are automatically withdrawn, as a condition of employment. Authoritarian-run countries are not going to allow unions for the betterment of the workers. If they have a union, they want a cut of the money. There are much better ways to help the poor here and abroad.
Yes, the bishops should use this perfect opportunity to let CCHD die a death it has deserved for decades. Lepanto gets criticized for revealing things that people don’t want to know. Their research is robust and well-informed.
Worker owned cooperatives provide the same benefits as unions while also helping these owners learn to run organizations. They cut out those who own simply to gain more money.
CCHD provided a major grant to help get the PREPARES program off the ground in Washington State (a joint program of all three Catholic dioceses to offer assistance to women, children and families from conception to age 5). We were better positioned to respond to the end of Roe v. Wade, even as our state political leaders encourage women to come from other states for abortions. If CCHD needs reform, do it wisely. BTW, I would love to see the Lepanto Institute be more transparent about the source of their own donations.
Considering how few demonstrators there are, it gives the impression that most Catholics don’t care.
Earlier this year, I believe in this very journal, there was a story on young people either coming to the Catholic faith or deepening their religious life. Each and every individual story was moving and beautiful. And (sigh!) each and every account was a college student or recent college graduate. Only about of third of American have a college degree.
For the more part, I think there is almost zero --- ZERO -- commitment or initiatives to the evangelization of working class and poor people. CCHD is one of the few things we got -- engaged Catholics working shoulder to shoulder with people in working class and low income communities on projects to make their lives better and more stable. I'm sure there are criticisms that can be made comparing CCHD to some ideal. I don't see how it comes short from doing nothing, as is the actual situation. Blessed Adolph Kolping, pray for us!
You forget the St. Vincent de Paul Societies present in most Catholic parishes and the Knights of Columbus, among others. Catholics are not doing nothing to improve the lives of the poor.
If the bishops really want to help the poor, they should help us remove the "scandal of Catholic schools"
“A preferential option for the poor” should be maintained in our Catholic Schools. If we find that we cannot afford to keep our schools open to the poor, the Church should be ready to use its resources for something else which can be kept open to the poor. We cannot allow our Church to become a church primarily for the upper classes while allowing the poor to remain in public schools. The priority should be given to the poor even if we have to let the middle-class and rich fend for themselves.
Practically speaking, the Catholic Schools must give up general education in those countries where the State is providing it. The resources of the Church could then be focused on “Confraternity of Christian Doctrine” and other programs which can be kept open to the poor. These resources could then be used to help society become more human in solidarity with the poor. Remember, the Church managed without Catholic Schools for centuries. It can get along without them today. The essential factor from the Christian point of view is to cultivate enough Faith to act in the Gospel Tradition, namely, THE POOR GET PRIORITY. The rich and middle-class are welcome too. But the poor come first.
"Remember, the church managed without Catholic Schools for centuries."
The argument doesn't make sense. Parochial schools (what I'm guessing you mean by "Catholic Schools") are relatively new, but that's because the idea of giving everybody an education is relatively new. More or less as soon as there was a movement to educate the masses, the church created parochial Schools. And before that time the education that was available was at least partially religious.
Also, to concede general education would be a mistake. In secularization countries the general education students receive would undermine everything they're being taught in CCD. For example, if they learn an anti-Catholic version of history in school, or have their worldview shaped in a secular mold, their CCD classes will need to take time to counteract all of that if they want any chance of success. When all is said and done, the kids will have lost significant time for faith formation because of the need to address the misinformation from their secular education.
My grandparents came from the old world. They learned to read and write at church.
Their were no public schools in my grandfathers/grandmothers hometowns. My family came to the USA for a better life. In America, my father , my mother ,and their siblings went to public schools. After world war 2, there was a baby boom. It was cheaper for the government to give credits to families to send their kids to Catholic Schools as opposed to building more public schools. When the baby boom was over, government changed their tune.
On a related note, while listening to Ms Healy’s lengthy presentation on the NRB she didn’t mention a recommendation re: applying the Dallas Charter to the bishops themselves. Since they managed to exempt themselves from the Charter under the influence of McCarrick over 20 yrs ago, they’ve never had the time/will to re-address this critical issue.
Until this happens, there’s zero credibility to be attributed to the USCCB’s sincerity in finally cleaning up abuse. This double standard between how accusations against bishops & the priests whom they’re supposed to be fathering undermines the whole Abuse program as well as the relationship between the ordinary & his clerics.
CCHD should give all their $ to pregnancy centers and Catholic schools (to support students with disabilities and families that can’t afford to attend Catholic schools). That should keep them plenty busy.
The organization started out with good intentions, I’m sure. But I will not donate to an organization that wastes so much money. It wouldn’t pass Charity Navigator as it stands. Too much overhead and not enough money going to those who truly need it. Obviously there simply aren’t enough checks and balances to make sure money is being used wisely. CCHD is a CATHOLIC organization. It is not wrong to expect the grantees to not support anything against church teaching.
Ed now needs to give Margery the parish secretary a break cos there’s a new stereotype in town! Dotty the Good Catholic(tm) who turns up to the opening of a window just to make sure everyone knows it! For the children you see… God bless you Dotty! You made me giggle today if nothing else.