The USCCB is morally right, here, of course. I am not sure they will win the legal argument because the Constitutional concerns implicated here are already in a state of long-deferred crisis. It is a good theory of the case, though. And they're in the right.
Moral correctness has nothing to do with the fact that the federal government can issue stop work orders on contracts. It doesn’t matter whether the USCCB has moral standing; the interests of the government are the final determining factor. That’s the problem with government contracts: you are at the mercy of the whims of the current administration in power. There’s a saying that working with the federal government is like wrestling with a pig: everyone gets dirty and the pig loves it.
While I do think it should be illegal to break a contract, I’m pretty sure government contracts include a break for any reason which includes stop payment (for when contractors are doing a crappy job or non delivering. Not saying that’s what usccb is guilty of but just what the reason that clause is there).
What I would like is for someone to explain how the refugee department at usccb has 150 employees give or take. JUST that department?? Please tell me how to feel about this bc that seems incredibly large for a subsection of the conference. How many employees does the whole usccb have?? 😳🤯
I mean, it’s almost as if the USCCB only cares about money. That couldn’t possibly be the case, right?
Bueller? Bueller?
Don’t give to your bishop’s Lenten appeal. Don’t give to any second collections. Don’t give to your parish general collection, which is taxed by the chancery. Drain the swamp.
Is there anyone whose cause for sainthood you'd like to see advance? Because it'll take a high caliber miracle to get the respectful discourse you're asking for...
Your parish is worthy of your support. Personally, I write a check and specify that it only go toward certain parish funds (e.g., the building fund). In my diocese, this avoids the bishop's tax. Even in terrible dioceses, there are usually several local pro-life charities, disabled charities, schools, and evangelistic missions that one can support.
I do get where you are coming from, though. My local chancery is largely run by people of no faith who have daily mass available and scrupulously avoid it, preferring to rail about the evils of excluding women from the priesthood over attending mass and promoting the gospel. Kids who attend the largest "Catholic" high schools are mostly inoculated against the faith, and many of those who remain consider political activism and rallying for doctrinal changes to be the primary locus of their faith.
This has nothing to do with "getting politics out of the church." That is just a meaningless throwaway line.
It costs a lot of money to run a program like resettlement. Lots of moving parts and lots of contractual obligations to fulfill on the part of the service provider. The overwhelming majority of the money is pass through, namely that the USCCB is issued the money and they push it through to Catholic Charities on the ground to cover expenses.
Because money is spent on contractually obligated activities (basically determined by the government and agreed to by the service agency) and expenses are reimbursed after the fact, the USCCB and other organizations are not being reimbursed for money spent doing what they were obligated to do under the contract. I don't know contract law well enough to understand the ins and outs of why the federal government would not be obligated to reimburse for this work, but if it is not required than on a moral plane what we are basically dealing with legalized theft.
If the help they give migrants in my diocese is indicative of what they do elsewhere, I'd rather they never receive another penny. They put up Chaldean Christians in ghettos with trash filled hallways alongside Shias and Sunnis who brought their religious wars with them, threatening Christians if they didn't attend Friday prayer at the local mosque. They gave them disgusting, smelly, pee-stained mattresses (one for a family of four I knew of) and never even told them about the Eastern rite Catholic churches in the area, only offering them a list of mosques to attend.
If this is "Christian charity," then I'd rather the money go to people who actually care. My diocesan refugee resettlement program is awful.
The USCCB is morally right, here, of course. I am not sure they will win the legal argument because the Constitutional concerns implicated here are already in a state of long-deferred crisis. It is a good theory of the case, though. And they're in the right.
Moral correctness has nothing to do with the fact that the federal government can issue stop work orders on contracts. It doesn’t matter whether the USCCB has moral standing; the interests of the government are the final determining factor. That’s the problem with government contracts: you are at the mercy of the whims of the current administration in power. There’s a saying that working with the federal government is like wrestling with a pig: everyone gets dirty and the pig loves it.
While I do think it should be illegal to break a contract, I’m pretty sure government contracts include a break for any reason which includes stop payment (for when contractors are doing a crappy job or non delivering. Not saying that’s what usccb is guilty of but just what the reason that clause is there).
What I would like is for someone to explain how the refugee department at usccb has 150 employees give or take. JUST that department?? Please tell me how to feel about this bc that seems incredibly large for a subsection of the conference. How many employees does the whole usccb have?? 😳🤯
Who are "the Bishops' lawyers"?
And how do they get paid?
I mean, it’s almost as if the USCCB only cares about money. That couldn’t possibly be the case, right?
Bueller? Bueller?
Don’t give to your bishop’s Lenten appeal. Don’t give to any second collections. Don’t give to your parish general collection, which is taxed by the chancery. Drain the swamp.
Swamp my ass, these are the successors to the apostles. You need to show a bit more respect.
Is there anyone whose cause for sainthood you'd like to see advance? Because it'll take a high caliber miracle to get the respectful discourse you're asking for...
Your parish is worthy of your support. Personally, I write a check and specify that it only go toward certain parish funds (e.g., the building fund). In my diocese, this avoids the bishop's tax. Even in terrible dioceses, there are usually several local pro-life charities, disabled charities, schools, and evangelistic missions that one can support.
I do get where you are coming from, though. My local chancery is largely run by people of no faith who have daily mass available and scrupulously avoid it, preferring to rail about the evils of excluding women from the priesthood over attending mass and promoting the gospel. Kids who attend the largest "Catholic" high schools are mostly inoculated against the faith, and many of those who remain consider political activism and rallying for doctrinal changes to be the primary locus of their faith.
Good. 850 million is a ton of money. Get the politics out of the church. Painful but necessary! Thanks for reporting.
This has nothing to do with "getting politics out of the church." That is just a meaningless throwaway line.
It costs a lot of money to run a program like resettlement. Lots of moving parts and lots of contractual obligations to fulfill on the part of the service provider. The overwhelming majority of the money is pass through, namely that the USCCB is issued the money and they push it through to Catholic Charities on the ground to cover expenses.
Because money is spent on contractually obligated activities (basically determined by the government and agreed to by the service agency) and expenses are reimbursed after the fact, the USCCB and other organizations are not being reimbursed for money spent doing what they were obligated to do under the contract. I don't know contract law well enough to understand the ins and outs of why the federal government would not be obligated to reimburse for this work, but if it is not required than on a moral plane what we are basically dealing with legalized theft.
Being entangled with govt money, some of which gets wasted and spent on waste, is getting messed up in politics.
In the instance of refugee resettlement, what specifically gets wasted and spent on waste?
If the help they give migrants in my diocese is indicative of what they do elsewhere, I'd rather they never receive another penny. They put up Chaldean Christians in ghettos with trash filled hallways alongside Shias and Sunnis who brought their religious wars with them, threatening Christians if they didn't attend Friday prayer at the local mosque. They gave them disgusting, smelly, pee-stained mattresses (one for a family of four I knew of) and never even told them about the Eastern rite Catholic churches in the area, only offering them a list of mosques to attend.
If this is "Christian charity," then I'd rather the money go to people who actually care. My diocesan refugee resettlement program is awful.