Tag Archives: Catholic Campaign for Human Development

Catholic Citizens of Illinois Joins Catholic Media Coalition Boycott of the Annual CCHD Collection

Catholic Citizens of Illinois has once again joined the boycott of the Annual Catholic Campaign for Human Development Collection. The statement of the Catholic Media Coalition is below. After the USCCB announced a review and renewal policy that would improve vetting of grantees, we were hopeful that the CCHD would take a new direction. We have also posted below the Executive Summary of the investigation by American Life League and the partners at Reform CCHD Now which indicate that rather than improvement, the questionable groups that receive grants from the CCHD have actually increased.

CATHOLIC MEDIA COALITION ENDORSES BOYCOTT OF ANNUAL CCHD COLLECTION

For years the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) has awarded grants to organizations that work against Catholic teaching, particularly with regard to human life and marriage. Not only have donations from generous Catholics in the pew gone to groups that organize and lobby against Church teaching, but they have indirectly, and even directly, helped to elect liberal politicians who advance evil causes.

In view of the recent devastating report from American Life League and ReformCCHDNow which indicates that the problems continue and have even worsened, the Catholic Media Coaltion endorses a boycott of the annual CCHD collection and urges Catholics to give instead to local organizations that serve the poor. Crisis pregnancy centers, Catholic free clinics and food pantries, Catholic shelters and homes for unwed mothers, organizations that serve the third world through clean water and immunization projects are all worthy alternatives to CCHD.

Despite their assurances to the contrary CCHD continues to funnel a large percentage of donations into community organizing groups and coalitions that are hostile to the faith and undermine the family. That is, certainly, no way to help the poor.

Catholic Citizens of Illinois has once again joined the boycott of the Annual Catholic Campaign for Human Development Collection. The statement of the Catholic Media Coalition is below. After the USCCB announced a review and renewal policy that would improve vetting of grantees, we were hopeful that the CCHD would take a new direction. We have also posted below the Executive Summary of the investigation by American Life League and the partners at Reform CCHD Now which indicate that rather than improvement, the questionable groups that receive grants from the CCHD have actually increased.

Below is the Executive Summary of the 2010-2011 CCHD Grants Report, Frequently Asked Questions Report and the Letter of Dr. William Marshner, the Theologian at Christendom College who reviewed the current grantees.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR 2010 – 2011 CCHD GRANTS REPORT

Background

For a number of years, there has been concern with the grants that CCHD distributes. There have been specific complaints that a significant portion of the grants have been given to organizations working in direct contradiction to Church teaching.

In 2009, American Life League joined with several other concerned organizations to form the Reform CCHD Now Coalition. In March of 2010, the coalition sent a report on CCHD to each bishop, showing that, in 2009-2010, 51 out of 237 groups receiving CCHD funding either directly or through coalition membership promoted abortion, birth control, homosexuality, and/or Marxism. Thus, 21% of the groups funded by CCHD were involved in such work.

As a result of this activity, CCHD conducted an internal effort to revamp its grant process and ensure that all grantees adhered to strict guidelines. The results were published in a CCHD Renewal Document.

2010-2011 Grantees

In January, 2011, CCHD published its list of 2010-2011 grantees. At that time, American Life League reviewed the list and was disappointed to see that many of the offending organizations were still on the list and, in fact, others have been added.

The attached report documents that, of the 218 organizations funded by CCHD, 14 are directly involved in activities contrary to Church teaching and 40 are actively involved in coalitions with such activities. Thus, 54 groups (24%) funded by CCHD are involved in anti-Catholic work.

The number, and percentage, of offending organizations has actually INCREASED in the last year -from 51 to 54 groups and from 21% to 24%.

These 54 organizations received a total of $1,863,000 of the $7,608,000 distributed in CCHD grants in 2010-2011.

Frequently Asked Questions

1) What is the primary purpose of Reform CCHD Now’s (RCN) 2010-2011 CCHD Grants Report?

The primary purpose of the Grants Report is to assist the bishops in maintaining the Catholic identity of the CCHD. RCN supported the USCCB’s effort to strengthen CCHD’s grant guidelines through the review and renewal process. RCN’s 2010-2011 Grants Report is an evaluation of the CCHD’s grantees applying the Review and Renewalguidelines adopted by CCHD after last year’s report.

2) Is the information in this report just based on “unverified web-based information”?

The researchers used Open Source Analysis, a methodology of tools and techniques promulgated by the U.S. Director of National Intelligence (DNI), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This research methodology is also widely practiced in investigative journalism and commercial competitive intelligence.

These tools and techniques require the application of rigorous fact checking, source reliability and credibility scoring, and cross referencing with other independent sources for verification. CCHD’s dismissal of this methodology as “unverified web-based information” indicates a refusal to accept the serious nature and reliability of this research.

For more information regarding the reliability of open source analysis seehttp://www.fusion2004.foi.se/papers/IF04-1172.pdf.

3) Was this report discussed with CCHD staff prior to release?

Yes, in April 2011. The 2010-2011 CCHD Grants Report was hand delivered to the executive director of the CCHD and the findings regarding each individual grantee was discussed. Similar additional meetings with USCCB staff took place in the six months prior to the public release in October.

CCHD’s “Response to Recent Attacks on CCHD,” claims “While some progress was made in these sessions, they usually ended with ALL disagreeing with the CCHD mission as set forth by the bishops and CCHD disagreeing with ALL’s efforts to accuse groups of violating CCHD guidelines based on web searches and without any contact with the groups or dioceses.”

1. ALL made clear that it has never disagreed with “the CCHD mission as set forth by the bishops.” ALL is only concerned with the funding of organizations whose actions, agendas, and ideologies are antithetical to Catholic moral and social teaching: advancing abortion, homosexuality, birth control, and Marxism contrary to the CCHD mission as set forth by the bishops.

2. The information contained in the report is factual. To date, CCHD staff does not dispute the facts but disagrees with ALL’s understanding of them.

4) Was this report discussed with bishops prior to release?

Yes. The Grants Report was provided to the head of the CCHD subcommittee in March 2011 and to the president of the USCCB in July 2011. The Grants Report was then sent to the entire body of U.S. bishops in September 2011.

5) Is the information in the 2010-2011 Grants Report old or recycled “charges”?

Thirty-five of the 55 grantees (63 percent) that violate CCHD Review and Renewal guidelines profiled in this year’s report were not in last year’s report. New information on the grantees from last year is also included in the report. The CCHD claim that “These are not new accusations, but a repackaging of past charges” is accurate only in that 20 grantees which were on last year’s report are again profiled this year because funding them continues to violate grant guidelines and Catholic moral teaching.

6) Has the CCHD refuted the findings and evidence outlined in the 2010-2011 report?

In the CCHD’s “Response to Recent Attacks on CCHD” document, CCHD offers no specific response to any evidence contained in the full report. The response claims, “They [ALL] rely almost exclusively on unverified web-based information and primarily on Internet sites of organizations that are NOT funded by CCHD.”

As was addressed in the question on methodology [FAQ #2], this statement is not accurate.

1. Primary Sources: Information that an organization posts on its own website is a primary source, i.e. an organization’s own statement of its actions, ideologies, and agendas. In essence, it is the official public face of that organization.

For example, the Intercommunity Justice and Peace Center (page 78 of the report) listed its friends and colleagues as follows:

National Organization for Women, Equality Cincinnati, International Socialist Organization, and P-FLAG: Parents, Friends and Families of Lesbians and Gays.

IJPC promoted these organizations that advocate for abortion, same-sex marriage, and/or Marxism. This information is not unverified, nor was it found on some other website. This is irrefutable. (IJPC has since updated its web site but the screen capture is within the report.)

2. Secondary Sources: Information collected from other websites, media outlets, and documents related to CCHD grantee activities include press releases, official grant reports, annual reports, program guides, event announcements, voting guides, and other such sources. Such documents do not constitute “unverified web-based information,” but are indeed standard sources used both in research and legal proceedings.

The veracity of these materials is deemed to be highly reliable because they are not based upon rumor or hearsay, are subject to public scrutiny, and are official reports from various organizations regarding the activities of themselves and their participants and members.

7) What are the findings regarding coalition memberships of CCHD grantees?

The CCHD guideline very clearly states, “CCHD will not fund groups that are members of coalitions which have as their organizational purpose or coalition agenda, positions or actions that contradict fundamental Catholic moral and social teaching.”

The report details dozens of grantees with coalition memberships that defy Review and Renewal grant guidelines. All information provided was cross-referenced and verified from a variety of independent and primary sources. Attributing all these violations to rogue employees and errors of membership does not seem plausible.

8)Has the report been reviewed by a moral theologian?

Yes. The report was thoroughly reviewed and analyzed by Dr. William Marshner, professor of theology at Christendom College. Click here to read Dr. Marshner’s findings regarding the moral validity of the report.

Mr. Paul Rondeau, Executive Director

American Life League

Sir:

Last week, you expressed the wish that a moral theologian review your “Investigative Report on the Catholic Campaign for Human Development’s Grants for the Year 2010-2011,” prepared this July; and I volunteered to do so. My academic credentials and publications are available for inspection on the website of Christendom College, where I have taught for over 30 years. I should confess at the outset that, before turning to the academic life, I worked for several years in journalism and was published in periodicals distinctly critical of what many churchmen accepted as “renewal” in the decade after the close of Vatican II. Since then, I have come to accept the pastoral wisdom of the Church’s “preferential option for the poor,” of which the CCHD is a striking expression. I therefore undertake this review with sincere personal sympathy for the Campaign and sincere respect for its guiding principles.

As you say on p. 3 of your well-organized Report, it is CCHD policy that “no grantee may participate in or promote activities that contradict the moral and social teachings of the Church.” The moral basis for this policy is the fact that funding an organization is practical willing (as opposed to just wishing) that it succeed in what it regularly does. Hence the funding of an organization is formal cooperation in what it regularly does.

But in Catholic moral theology, it is never licit to cooperate formally in an immoral project. Hence a CCHD grantee must not do or promote, as a regular part of its work, anything evaluated by Catholic doctrine as immoral. Thus the CCHD policy is morally sound. But its implementation is another story. Your Report has documented at least 11 cases which, in my judgment, are cases in which prima facie the grantee has done or promoted an immoral activity.

These cases are:

Centro Campesino (granted $35 K), which distributes condoms, as CCHD now admits; it claims to have defunded the group, but evidence for this correct decision is not yet forthcoming; the bishops are owed an explanation of what exactly has been done;

Somos un Pueblo Unido (granted $45 K), which trains immigrant women to advocate “reproductive justice” (i.e. contraception and abortion) and which took from other sources at least two grants to do so; CCHD has yet to explain its lack of response to this information;

NY City AIDS Housing Network (granted $30 K) which is listed on an NYC government website as a place to get condoms; CCHD has yet to explain its lack of response;

Southwest Organizing Project (granted $ 45 K); which is involved in the Elev8 sex-ed program, which distributes condoms and IUDs and refers for abortions at Marquette Middle School in Chicago; CCHD was informed of this problem by its own regional director, Mr. Rey Flores; to date, CCHD has explained neither its lack of response nor its termination of Mr. Flores;

Desis Rising Up and Moving (granted $ 35 K), which advocates and participates in groups advocating sexual “liberation” and abortion;n Michigan Interfaith Voice, A.K.A. Gamaliel of Michigan (granted $ 25 K), which has taken grants from the pro-abortion and pro-homosexual Arcus Foundation to advance Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual and Transsexual (LGBT) rights, which include a “right” to be legally “married”;

Michigan Organizing Project (granted $40 K), which has taken grants from the Arcus Foundation for the same purpose in 2007-2009 and in 2011;

Coalition LA (granted $45 K), which produced a voters’ guide favoring same-sex marriage and telling people to vote NO on the ballot-measure to repeal it; the issue here is not just how the state will treat homosexual persons but whether state law will abandon the meaning of the word ‘marriage’, contrary to Catholic doctrine;

Women’s Community Revitalization Project ($40 K), which sponsored a pro-abortion voter’s guide in Pennsylvania and took money from a feminist, pro-abortion organization called Women’s Way; CCHD was informed of this problem in 2009 but re-funded the group in 2010; since the bishops of PA have played an historic role in the pro-life cause, they are certainly owed a specific explanation of this payment to their declared enemy;

Philadelphia Unemployment Project (given $25 K), which, despite its good work toward issues of workers’ compensation, sponsored the same kind of pro-abortion voter’s guide; in a state as heavily Catholic and Democratic as Pennsylvania, it passes belief that the Church cannot find a pro-labor organization that keeps fully clear of the culture of death;

Restaurant Opportunities Center of NY (given $40 K), which produced “guidelines” telling businesses to make questionable accommodations to LGBT preferences, including permission to cross-dress during work-hours and to choose whichever lavatory suited the worker’s subjective preference.

In every one of these cases, the grantee has behaved in such a way that continued funding puts the Church in a position of formal cooperation (or in the apparent and proximate danger of formal cooperation) with moral evil. The problems with United Workers Association, Intercommunity Justice and Peace Center, and Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights are addressed below in conjunction with organizations cited in the coalitions category of the Report.

Your Report also documents many cases which pose a lesser but still serious problem, namely, that of unwise material cooperation. These are cases in which a CCHD grantee has affiliated with (or become a member of) some broader organization (hereafter: umbrella group) which sponsors, advocates, etc., actions and positions of which the Church cannot approve. With commendable clarity about this problem, CCHD policy reads as follows: “CCHD will not fund groups that are members of coalitions which have as their organizational purpose or coalition agenda, positions or actions that contradict fundamental Catholic moral and social teaching.”

Again, the policy is correct and seems straightforward, but its implementation is problematic. You list 13 umbrella groups; given your documentation of what appears on the websites maintained by these groups, it is prima facie the case that CCHD grantees belonging to them violate the policy just stated. They ought to be defunded, and yet they are not.

I see only two ways to explain this situation. Either the policy is not really adhered to, or else its wording is a work of the lawyer’s art, in which ‘organizational purpose or coalition agenda’ is a technical expression meant to exonerate umbrella groups whose immoral activity is not their sole or primary public purpose. In that case, the policy is too tightly drafted, in my judgment. It fails to secure the moral good for whose sake one avoids material cooperation with evil wherever possible: the moral good of giving no appearance of evil.

You also provided for my review some recent correspondence of yours with the Campaign. It is good to see that a dialogue has been begun. Still, I cannot be satisfied with CCHD’s blanket dismissal of much of your Report, on the ground that your information is taken from websites.

Everyone knows that websites can be in error or out of date. But why would a grantee or umbrella group post and maintain on its own website false or obsolete information? To say the least, one needs to see specific explanations. Perhaps providing such explanation would require man-hours of work to which the CCHD does not think ALL, as an outside group, is entitled. But the bishops of the United States are most certainly entitled.

With hope that these reflections may be of use to you and to the Church, I am

Yours in Christ,

W. H. Marshner,

Professor of Theology

Christendom College

Advertisements

CCHD — “It’s All Good!”

What Is the Catholic Campaign for Human Development Trying to Do?

Did you say you want a revolution?

By Stephanie Block

The American Life League gets eternal kudos for its exposé of the connections between the “Catholic” Campaign for Human Development’s (CCHD) annual funding program and abortion.[i]  That alone should be enough to inspire profound, systemic reform of collection.However, there’s another element in this that’s also disturbing and ultimately leads to the same end of unchecked abortion rights.

Consider this bulletin insert from last Sunday, which appeared in a parish of the Davenport, Iowa Diocese. It includes the short story of a CCHD intern who describes her “opportunity to work with Quad Cities Interfaith, a CCHD-funded group.  Among other duties, I have mentored a group of central city youth who fight many obstacles, including poverty.  The group has titled themselves Hear Us Now and seeks to create a voice for themselves in the hopes of bringing about positive change in their schools, their community, and their lives.  I have seen them grow tremendously under the care and leadership training Quad Cities Interfaith offers.  This past year, they formed relationships with the police, the mayor, and school board members and have even spoken publicly at a fundraising event about the positive influence of Hear Us Now in their lives.”

Coupled with accompanying boxes of poverty statistics and the bishop’s column, “Working to Break the Cycle of Poverty,” in the November 3, 2011 diocesan paper, the impression – the promise – is that CCHD is a poverty-fighting collection.  “The Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) carries out Jesus’ mission ‘to bring good news to the poor…release to captives…sight to the blind and let the oppressed go free,’” the bulletin insert proclaims.

But…

What is this “positive change” we Catholics are funding?

What ideas are being given voice through the youth trained by Quad Cities Interfaith?

To what end are the political relationships with police and public officials formed?

The bulletin insert doesn’t say.

It doesn’t have to.  Sound-bytes and slogans do the job.

If, however, one were to peek behind the veil, there are curious things to find.

In the Beginning

One would discover extraordinary grants awarded during CCHD’s first years.  Here are three from the 1970-1971 inaugural grant period:

·         $50,000 to the Universidad de Aztlan, an alternative educational initiative spawned from Plan Espiritual de Aztlán (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan),[ii] a “manifesto” that insisted “economic control of our lives and our communities can only come about by driving the exploiter out of our communities, our pueblos, and our lands …. Lands rightfully ours will be fought for and defended.”  The exploiter is identified earlier in the document as the brutal “gringo.”[iii]

·         $25,000 to Interreligious Foundation for Community Organizations for Alinskyian organizing.  The Foundation was a deliberate attempt to circumvent “internal debates over Alinsky’s intentions and methods and over the role the churches should be playing in political affairs.”[iv]  In other words, to filter money less visibly, and therefore less controversially, into Alinsky’s work, supporters created an “ecumenical front” to “shield the churches supporting community organizations from the growing anti-Alinsky” sentiments of their congregations.[v]
·         $100,000 to Los PADRES an association of priests who, among other things, established the Mexican American Cultural Center, a hub of liberation theology.[vi]The question isn’t whether these organizations should be free to express their own, peculiar perspectives but is why the Catholic Church, whose perspective is so different, was funding them?  And, lest one dismiss these examples as aberrations, there are numerous others, equally anti-Catholic, funded by CHD in 1970-1971.Or consider CHD’s[vii] early educational materials, which promoted liberationism.  The CHD “Sourcebook on Poverty, Development and Justice,”[viii] published during those first years of the Campaign, argues that “the ‘religious’ person in our society is often equated with the ‘morally upright’ person” but it is, rather, the socially conscious person who is “morally upright.” The author concludes: “In biblical language, liberation is primarily liberation from sin…to speak of liberation in a social sense, then, is to speak of social sin – and to emphasize the social struggle against sin.” [ix]Another of the Sourcebook’s authors retells the parable of the Last Judgment (Matt. 25:32-46) and puts into Jesus’ mouth the words: “When you changed those structures that generate hunger, thirst, nakedness, and loneliness, when you created or operated structures through which men could finally feed themselves, satisfy their thirst and clothe themselves in a community of justice and love, it was to me that you did it.  And when you abstained, it was to me that you did not do it.”[x]Still another author touts “liberating education” – a process quite distinct from traditional western education, which is “institutional, self-serving and divorced from developmental needs, forcing the learned to look elsewhere for meaning and causing institutional education to be in many cases the experience of irrelevance.  Catholic education in the U.S. seems to have shared in this deficiency.”  The “new theory of catechesis,” which includes values clarification and a  threefold pedagogy of transference, reflection, and action-living, is lived out by the learner in a “continual dialectical interrelationship.”[xi]This is not Catholic thought.  This is not service to the poor.It is a political worldview that wants the “infrastructures” of religious institutions – their moral credibility, their interpersonal connections, their resources, and such – for its own uses.Twenty-five Years Later“OH!” someone protests.  “That was long ago. CHD was young; mistakes were made.  It changed!”Did it really?

Twenty-five years after CHD’s founding, at its anniversary celebration in Chicago, keynote speakers were prominent members of the Democratic Socialists of America?[xii]  AFL-CIO president at the time, John Sweeney, served as an advisor to the United States Catholic Conference was another influential Democratic Socialist of America.  Yet another USCCB advisor was Ernesto Cortes, southwest regional director of the Alinskyian organizing network, the Industrial Areas Foundation.  CHD grants in 1995 went dozens of Alinskyian community organizations, pushing liberationism in Catholic parishes.  CHD educational materials from the time, such as “Poverty and Faithjustice” guided participants to the conclusion that poverty in the United States requires fundamental changes in its social and economic structures. [xiii]

So many disturbing facts; so many unanswered questions.  What exactly are these fundamental social and economic changes being funded?  Are they the same as those recommended by the Democratic Socialists of America?  How are these changes to be brought about?

Entering a New Millennium

In 1998, CHD “reformed.”  Under pressure from critics, the Campaign added the word “Catholic” to its name and produced a new set of guidelines emphasizing the sanctity of life and disqualifying organizations from CCHD-funding whose primary or substantial thrust was, ostensibly, contrary to Catholic teaching.

It continued to fund the same organizations, however.

One of these was ACORN.  In 1997, the Wanderer Forum Foundation mailed a copy of ACORN’s socialist People’s Platform to every bishop in the country, and gave them documentation about the political party, called the New Party, which the CHD-funded ACORN, the CHD-funded Industrial Areas Foundation network, and the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) were building during the 90s.

The C/CHD continued funding ACORN for another decade, however, until public outcry became too broad to ignore.   ACORN’s illegal activity was something CCHD couldn’t support; its openly socialist policies and connections – its plans for “positive change” were something it did support.

And CCHD continues to support organizations with similar objectives to ACORN.  In particular, it is funding many of the organizations behind the current “movement” of civic unrest.   In other words, the mass protests of the last several years are organized, in part, by CCHD-funded groups.

Immigration: Consider the wave of marches and rallies demanding increased rights for undocumented workers.  Before sweeping the country in 2006,[xiv] they were preceded by scores of CCHDawards – such as the more than half million dollars for a Nationwide Immigrant Empowerment Project, announced in 2000, to help “immigrants identify and overcome barriers to full participation in their adopted country.”

Many additional grants were distributed.  In the 2001-2002 grant period, $30,000 was awarded the Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights in California and $30,000 to the National People’s Action[xv] affiliate Organization of the Northeast for its Work, Welfare, and Immigration Strategy Team in Illinois …just to name two.

·         The California-based Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights was one of 30 community organizations and local coalitions involved in launching the “Week of Action Against ICE Raids and for Immigrant Rights” in 2007.[xvi]
·         The Illinois-based Organization of the Northeast “helped organize a massive immigrant rights march in Washington, D.C.”[xvii] in 2010.

There were dozens of other CCHD-funded groups in 2001-2002 that later helped organize immigration protests and rallies.  And there were dozens more funded in subsequent years.

Universal Healthcare: Wait, we’re just getting warmed up!  What about the massive drive to pass a universal healthcare package, irrespective of abortion components?  In 2009, PICO and Gamaliel – two of the larger Alinskyian networks whose local affiliates receives millions of CCHD-dollars – worked with Faith in Public Life, Faithful America, Sojourners, and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (progressive organizations targeting religious institutions) to run ads on Christian radio in conservative states for “health care reform.” They coordinated “health care” Sundays during the summer to support the legislation.

Occupy Wall Street and Anti-Banking: Or, what of the Occupy Wall Street protests?  In the last decade, CCHD has given substantial money to the Interfaith Worker Justice network, which was created “to facilitate relationships between local religious leaders and labor unions throughout the United State”[xviii]  and has been working with its union allies to support the Occupy Wall Street protests.[xix]

CCHD has also given substantial grants to National People’s Action (NPA) affiliates, which are intensely committed to increased banking regulation.   A member of Americans for Financial Reform,NPA joined the AFSCME union, CCHD-funded affiliates of USAction, and the CCHD-funded, Alinskyian organizing PICO network[xx] in “fighting to regulate the financial industry.”[xxi]

Under the banner of “Showdown on Wall Street,” NPA – again working in coalition with the AFL-CIO – orchestrated protests in New York City.[xxii]   A year later, NPA’s “Make Wall Street Pay” campaign included the takeover of a DC branch of Bank of America – and involved PICO and the Alliance for a Just Society.[xxiii]  Around the same time, ACORN’s founder Wade Rathkeannounced there would be “days of rage in ten cities around JP Morgan Chase” that would be “the beginning of the anti-banking jihad,” organized by the SEIU union, which urged participants at the 2011 Left Forum “to do everything in their power to make the nation’s financial problems far, far worse,” including staying in their homes as long as possible without paying delinquent mortgages.[xxiv]

Another effort to disrupt the economy, called “New Bottom Line,” which called for participants to move as much money as possible out of major banks on November 5, 2011, was led by the same group, specifically NPA, PICO, the Industrial Areas Foundation of the Southeast (IAF-SE), and others related to the former ACORN network.[xxv]

This is the “change” Catholics are funding through their CCHD dollars.

These are the ideas are being given voice by the CCHD-funded, Gamaliel affiliate, Quad Cities Interfaith (QCI), using these strategies.  In 2005, QCI was a sponsoring organization for an immigration rally outside the National Governor’s Association (NGA) Annual meeting.[xxvi]  In 2009, QCI joined other protesters at the National Mall to “Rally for Health care Justice in Washing DC.”[xxvii]  In October 2011, it rallied at the state capitol for job creation in Illinois.[xxviii]

You want a revolution?  Why didn’t the bureaucrats at CCHD explain beforehand – in the 70s and 80s – that this is “systemic change” they’re after?  Or…did they and no one listened?

Stephanie Block is a Spero columnist. She also edits Los Pequenos.org – a publication based in New Mexico.

——————————————————————————–
[i] To read the 2011-12 report, visit www.reformcchdnow.com
[ii] Lee Stacy, Mexico and the United States, (Marshall Cavendish, 2002 ) p.70.
[iii] Full text of Plan Espiritual de Aztlán (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan): www.utpa.edu/orgs/mecha/aztlan.html
[iv] P. David Finks, The Radical Vision of Saul Alinsky, (New York: Paulist Press, 1984), p 167.
[v] The Radical Vision of Saul  Alinsky…p 234.
[vi] Texas State Historical Association, “PADRES,” from The Handbook of Texas Online: www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/ixp02 (accessed 11-3-11)
[vii] The word “Catholic” wasn’t added the Campaign for Human Development’s name until 1998.  Therefore the acronym for the Campaign’s early years is CHD.
[viii]  “Sourcebook on Poverty, Development and Justice,” edited by the Education Staff of the Campaign for Human Development, published by the United States Catholic Conference, undated (around 1973-4).
[ix] Sourcebook…(emphasis in the original), pp. 67, 73; written by Peter J. Henriot, S.J., Staff Associate of the Center of Concern.
[x] Sourcebook…. “The Social Mission of the Church in the United States,” by Sr. Elinor Shea, OSU and Frederick J. Perella, JR., Assistant Educational Coordinator of the CHD, p. 45 (quoting ReneLaurentin, Liberation, Development, and Salvation, p. 123).
[xi] Sourcebook…. “Education to Justice” by Sr. Josephine Dunne, SHCJ, the Education Coordinator of CHD, pp. 117, 119-120, 124-125.
[xii] Namely, Dr. Cornel West and Dolores Huerta, honorary chairs of the Democratic Socialists of America.
[xiii] “Poverty and Faithjustice: An Adult Education Program on Christian Discipleship in the United States,” prepared by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development and Catholic Relief Service, published by the United States Catholic Conference, 1998, p.2.  According to the declaration of Msgr. Dennis M. Schnurr, General Secretary NCCB/USCC, at the beginning of “Poverty andFaithjustice,” the material is a 1997 CCHD planning document, approved by general membership of the NCCB, which authorized the CCHD “to develop relevant materials on social justice issues in order to raise the consciousness of parishioners.”
[xiv] See, for example, “Rallies across U.S. call for illegal immigrant rights,” CNN Politics, 4-10-06: articles.cnn.com/2006-04-10/politics/immigration_1_jaime-contreras-national-capital-immigration-coalition-illegal-immigrant-rights?_s=PM:POLITICS
[xv] As a dues-paying member of United Power for Action and Justice, ONE is also affiliated with the IAF.
[xvi] “Immigrant Communities Demand An End to Immigration Raids,” 2-26-07
[xvii] Adam Doster, “Chicago Group Wants Intransigent Lawmakers To Pay ‘Political Price,’” Progress Illinois, 6-8-10.
[xviii] George E. Schultze, SJ, “Work, Worship, and Laborem Exercens in the United States Today,” working draft paper, University of San Francisco, undated.
[xix] Among other things, the IWJ website carries “We are the 99 Percent: Occupy Wall Street,” Congregation Discussion Guides and “Prayer Service for Supporting Occupy Together,” (accessed 5-4-11).
[xx] Americans for Financial Security, coalition members:  ourfinancialsecurity.org
[xxi] Heather Booth bio, New Organizing Institute Staff: www.neworganizing.com/profile/Heather-Booth
[xxii] Showdown on Wall Street, 4-29-10: showdowninamerica.org/showdown-wall-street
[xxiii] Make Wall Street Pay Press Release, “Homeowners Tell Attorneys General: ‘Not Enough;’ Hundreds Go to National Association of Attorneys General’s Convention,” 3-7-11:makewallstreetpay.org/news/2011_0307c.html; David Dayen, “National People’s Action Takes over BofA Branch in DC: Updates, 3-7-11: news.firedoglake.com/2011/03/07/national-peoples-action-takes-over-bofa-branch-in-dc
[xxiv] F. Vincent Vernuccio and Matthew Vadum, “SEIU plans days of rage against Wall Street: Boycotts, Marches, and Protests…How to Put Banks on the Edge of Insolvency,” Canada Free Press, 7-18-11.
[xxv] “Hundreds Protest Wells Fargo Shareholder Meeting in SF,” San Francisco Bay Guardian (online), 5-4-11;  Joel B. Pollak, “Email from Lisa Fithian to Occupy Wall Street Confirms ACORN Role in Occupy’s Next Assault on Banks,” [undated but around 10-21-11].
[xxvi] Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, informational flier: “Hundreds of Iowans rally for Immigration Reform; Announce plan to engage governors, Iowa’s political leaders in reform efforts: Call on Governors Vilsack, Huckabee and Iowa Political Leaders to Fight to Restore Integrity, Humanity to Nation’s Broken Immigration System,” 7-16-05:www.iowacci.org/news/pressreleases/latino/latinopress_3.htm
[xxvii] Quad Citites Interfaith: www.qcinterfaith.org/modules/piCal/index.php?com_mode=flat&com_order=1&event_id=742
[xxviii]  “Gamaliel of Illinois Action for Jobs at State Capitol – Part 1:” www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4aZyAkHkxI

It’s Your Choice… CCHD or Better Catholic Giving in the Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon

Click on logo to access Better Catholic Giving information

SOURCE: CRISIS MAGAZINE

The Catholic Campaign for Human Development: Reform or Bust

By Rey Flores

For many years now, Catholics across America have been asked by their local parishes to contribute to a variety of causes, mostly to help the less fortunate. As Catholics we are called to live the gospel and to practice the corporal works of mercy. This includes aiding those who are in need of basic necessities: from food and shelter to clothing and education. The Catholic Church is indeed the largest charitable organization on the planet.

While many Catholic charitable activities have done and continue to do good work on behalf of the poor, there are a number of specific efforts that have raised some concerns. Most infamous of these is the USCCB’s Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). How, exactly, is it spending Catholics’ dollars?

While the CCHD has certainly faced extensive criticism, it has also had many defenders. On the USCCB’s website for the CCHD, its mission is described as follows:

The Catholic Campaign for Human Development is the domestic anti-poverty, social justice program of the U.S.Catholic bishops. Its mission is to address the root causes of poverty in America through promotion and support of community-controlled, self-help organizations and through transformative education.

While this sounds ideal in theory, the CCHD’s mission has simply not been adhered to. In its 40-plus year history, the CCHD has funded many organizations and activities that are at best questionable and at worst downright reprehensible. Indeed, through the CCHD annual November collection, American Catholics have funded efforts promoting “reproductive justice”, (i.e., abortion) and “marriage equality” (gay “marriage”), among other causes.

Many concerned Catholics have challenged the USCCB and the CCHD to either reform the organization or stop the collection altogether. Thus far, the USCCB and CCHD have defiantly defended their efforts, painting their critics as partisan, xenophobic, and even racist. Sadly, because the CCHD has assisted some groups that specifically work to assist undocumented immigrants, some more politically conservative Catholics tend to let their political interests trump their Catholic obligations in regard to human dignity. Some Catholics dislike this aspect of the CCHD’s activities and for the record, the USCCB has never advocated that immigration laws be violated. The worst part is that some of the left-leaning CCHD-funded organizations tend to swallow up many of the traditional Catholic immigrants and lead them down the wrong path to secular leftism.

Some efforts have been made by the CCHD to placate its critics by offering token revisions of its funding guidelines, but these reforms have turned out to be no more than smoke and mirrors. It would be a worthwhile effort for all Catholics to do their homework and question their pastors, bishops and the CCHD itself about what is truly going on with this collection. I also strongly encourage the clergy and the laity to go directly to the organizations which have received funding from the CCHD and ask them what it is they do, how they do it, who they network with and ultimately how exactly is it that they are helping the poor break the cycle of poverty. Only then can you know the truth about the CCHD.

Chicago Reform Efforts

In Chicago a few dedicated members of the clergy and laity, attempted to reform the CCHD at the place of its birth. There were some victories. In 2010, the Chicago CCHD awarded grants to pro-life warrior Joe Scheidler and the Pro-Life Action League, the Women’s Center of Chicago and Aid for Women. This wasn’t an attempt to convert a social justice collection into a pro-life collection, but to educate others about the simple truth Pope John Paul II said so eloquently; “If the right to life is not defended decisively as a condition for all other rights of the person, all other references to human rights remain deceitful and illusory.”

It must be emphasized that authentic Catholic social justice is a good thing and empowering people to fight their own battles is certainly an effective tool for positive change. However, the CCHD tends to keep associating itself with organizations that directly oppose non-negotiable Catholic teachings or are closely linked within networks that tend to support blatant anti-life and anti-Catholic activities.

The monies collected every third weekend in November across all or most Catholic parishes in America are distributed as follows. Twenty-five percent of every local collection remains in the participating diocese or archdiocese. The remaining seventy-five percent is sent to the national CCHD office located at the USCCB’s national headquarters in Washington D.C. The national CCHD then distributes larger national grants mainly at its discretion.

At the Chicago CCHD, it was proposed and agreed that the local office was going to keep seventy-five percent in Chicago and only send the national organization twenty-five percent. This was a way of telling the national CCHD that trust had been breached with contributions from Chicago’s Catholics. After one of Chicago’s auxiliary bishops who sat on the national bishops’ council for CCHD protested, Chicago was forced to split its local collection fifty-fifty with the national CCHD.

This past year, the only pro-life grant awarded in Chicago was an in-house grant to the Archdiocesan Respect Life Office. Not surprisingly, the Rev. Larry Dowling, one of the priests who fervently opposed the Chicago reform efforts and also the president of ARISE (Dowling’s ecumenical faith and labor organization), has been awarded a whopping $20,000 grant.

Terminology and Language of the CCHD

Every Catholic who has had any doubts about the CCHD should familiarize himself with the social justice-speak of the CCHD. Let’s break it down here.

Social justice is a pairing of words that individually are pretty straightforward, but together they have caused much disagreement among Catholics. “Social” refers to human beings and their interactions with each other, which are pretty much unavoidable. The word “justice” seems uncontroversial, unless we disagree over what constitutes justice. And many groups funded by the CCHD have a profoundly different understanding of justice from the Church’s.

Another oft-used term is empowerment. This means to give power to someone who previously has not had any. “Empowerment” is typical community organizing jargon from the streets of Chicago. Chicago is home to the birth of community organizing via its godfather Saul Alinsky.

How exactly does the CCHD claim to empower people in a community? The CCHD is a great believer in the “hand-up” theory over the less empowering “hand-out” approach. CCHD frowns upon funding direct service organizations because it does not see this as a way to empower an individual, but simply as yet another form of charity. Many critics of the CCHD have a hard time understanding this concept, but if the CCHD remained faithful to Catholic moral teaching, there would nothing wrong with its efforts to empower people.

CCHD has mostly gotten in trouble because many of its funded groups tend to see voter registration and political activity as the catalyst for breaking the cycle of poverty. While it is clear that having a voice in the political arena is a factor in bringing about change in a community, the CCHD contradicts itself because one of the funding guidelines requires applicant agencies to refrain from any political activity. It is no accident that the CCHD has indeed funded organizations blatantly involved in political activities, such as the infamous ACORN.

The term “transformative” means to change a condition, nature or function of something. In the case of the CCHD’s work, its leaders often speak of “transformative education.” And this wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing if the transformations envisioned were in line with Catholic social teaching. The problem is that the way the CCHD educates others about transformative change and empowerment is more in line with the socialist and Marxist ideals so prevalent in community organizing. This raises a figurative, and indeed a literal, red flag.

“Subsidiarity” is a favorite word of the CCHD. Subsidiarity, simply put, entails allowing the people directly affected by an issue to make choices for themselves rather than having a larger entity control their lives. In theory, subsidiarity is a positive thing, but many of the community organizations funded by the CCHD have in fact worked against it. They in fact control a community with their social campaigns, only serving to transfer the power from the welfare state to the community organization, leaving the affected people in a community once again powerless. For a truly Catholic understanding of subsidiarity, see “The Principle of Subsidiarity,” written in 1996 by David E. Bosnich for the Acton Institute’s “Religion and Liberty.”

Community Organizing

Ask community organizers what they actually do for a living. They will tell you that they develop leaders to fight against injustice and by doing this, they empower the poor. In reality, the mostly white, college-educated, middle-class organizers exploit the poor, enabling them to self-perpetuate their poverty. If the community organizers really did develop leaders to fight their own battles, why is it that people like Madeline Talbott from Chicago’s Action Now (formerly named ACORN) continue to be at the helm, instead of any of the hundreds of thousands of so-called leaders she and ACORN developed during the last 25 to 30 years?

The CCHD might know, since it gave ACORN hundreds of thousands of dollars in that period. Just how much money has the CCHD given to questionable causes? In New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, the local CCHD collection usually raises close to a million dollars each third Sunday in November.

Typical community organizing in Chicago doesn’t go beyond the mandatory loading of rented school buses with poor African- or Latino-Americans to either street agitation protests or photo opportunities with liberal elected officials during “lobby” days. After all the cameras and reporters are gone, the blacks and Latinos all get back on the buses, all wearing their Action Now t-shirts and return the placards and signs given to them by the white organizers. Then they are given a sack lunch, and a bottle of water, and delivered promptly back to their ghettos and barrios to face the very same injustices they supposedly went to fight against.

While organizing a protest or lobby day, community and labor organizers often talk about “body count” in their planning meetings. Lead organizers demand that the street organizers turn out as many “bodies” as they can to create an illusion of power in numbers. These numbers are further broken down into racial categories so that the properly “diverse” image is captured by the media.

I’ve seen so-called “leaders” in these communities work with organizations for up to ten years and yet continue to live in the same squalor that they lived in before they first got caught up in the web of community organizing. Forgive me for being blunt, but to put it in the simplest terms, community organizing is nothing more than poverty pimping and the CCHD is a funding source fueling this tragic charade.

While the CCHD is adamant about its mission of addressing the root causes of poverty, one would be hard-pressed to find any mention in any of its literature of what the Church considers the real causes of poverty. If the CCHD is indeed working from within a Catholic worldview, why are the Church’s perspectives never included? It is apparent that the CCHD has identified these root causes from a secular perspective, which only focuses on the temporal, physical needs of the person. As Catholics, we are obligated to see the entire person, made in the image and likeness of God. The whole person is not just a physical being, but a spiritual one. While the earthly physical needs are important in this existence, the CCHD neglects to acknowledge the spiritual part of a person.

I believe that the true root cause of poverty is a lack of God in our lives. All other dysfunctions emerge because of this one. When we lack God, we lack respect for ourselves. A whole series of maladies tend to manifest themselves in a soul with no solid spiritual anchor: alcoholism, abuse, abortion, drug use, prostitution, promiscuity, violence, thievery or any other evil that you can imagine.

While I was the Director of the Chicago CCHD, I was told by some of the left-leaning clergy that we should not be talking about spiritual poverty in regard to the CCHD’s goals. If a group claims that the Catholic Church is no longer interested in helping save the souls of the poor, then something inside that group is certainly rotten.

What can we do? The first step is to educate our fellow Catholics about the CCHD and how it has used the faithful and their money to undermine our faith and the Church. While some staunch CCHD supporters ridicule its critics and accuse them of not living out the Gospel, they are dead wrong.

The American Life League and RealCatholic TV have done a tremendous job in exposing the CCHD and the deeply questionable organizations it has funded.  I strongly suggest that you read ALL’s reports and watch RealCatholic TV’s videos online to get more background on the CCHD and its practices.

Better Catholic Giving

While the CCHD collection takes place this year, consider instead supporting the new effort of Better Catholic Giving. BCG is a group of Catholics that is in the process of reviewing all of the CCHD grantees with actual site visits to the CCHD-funded organizations in question. The BCG hopes to act as a mediator between the CCHD and its critics to either confirm wrong-doing or to educate all Catholics about CCHD-funded groups and what exactly they are doing to help the poor while practicing authentic Catholic Social Teaching.

Rey Flores Rey Flores is the Director of Better Catholic Giving and an independent freelance writer and can be contacted at BetterCatholicGiving@gmail.com.

END OF POST

Archdiocese of Portland Oregon: Why we should not support the Catholic Campaign for Human Development collection on November 20, 2011

The facts speak for themselves…

END OF POST

Catholic Campaign on Human Development: The American Life League Report on links to abortion groups

Catholic Campaign on Human Development: The American Life League Report on links to abortion groups

By Stephanie Block

In a long and lengthening list of frustrations over the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), one certainly has to be its response to criticism.  For 40 years, this “charity” has – deliberately on the part of some folks – hidden its primary objectives and misrepresented its critics.  Then, when public outcry has grown too strident, it has staged mock “reforms.”

The most recent of these “reforms” came last year, with the release of “Review and Renewal of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development as Accepted and Affirmed by the USCCB Administrative Committee.”   It was a surly retort to protest over its several funding scandals.

The first scandal concerned decades of CCHD support to ACORN, an Alinskyianorganizing network that was aggressively engaged in progressive (translation: aborted babies) politics and had been over the years been caught in embezzlement schemes, voter fraud, and a host of other scurrilous activities.  CCHD was publicly informed that ACORN had serious problems in 1997. [ii]   Its “reform” then was to tack “Catholic” onto its name and give its grant guidelines token tweaks…but the funding patterns continued exactly as before, with ACORN still receiving approximately 5% of the CCHD pie.

The second scandal engaged the pro-life community, which was particularly aroused over the life-relevant issues that CCHD’s progressive political bias exposed.  As they began digging deeper, scores of grantees with direct ties to abortion promotion (and other problematic moral positions) were unearthed.   It was unfathomable that a collection of groups with such ties was working – is working – under the auspices of the Catholic Church.

“Review and Renewal” acknowledged that five groups – out of the many exposed – “violated CCHD requirements and lost all CCHD funding because they acted in conflict with Catholic teaching.”[iii]  That left a long list of grantees whose anti-Catholic actions were somehow acceptable to CCHD.

And it took a long time to release the next round of grantees in order to, ostensibly, assure that the “substantially revised CCHD Grant Agreement” was indeed “used for all pending and future funding allocations and grants.”[iv]  That meant that groups selected under earlier CCHD guidelines signed the new Grant Agreement in order to receive CCHD funds. In other words, the selection process places the onus of determining which organizations are in compliance with Catholic moral principles on the organizations themselves – which, often, are not administered by Catholics.

CCHD hoped these actions would reassure Catholics that CCHD was awarding its grants in conformity with the newly refined, more Catholic principles.

Sadly, it isn’t so.

The American Life League Report[i]

The American Life League looked closely at the latest crop of grants[v] and what it found is appalling.

They discovered that CCHD’s most recent grant awards included:
·        *   $35,000 to Centro Campesino, which received funding from the Minnesota Department of Health to expand its Community HIV Health and Education Risk Initiative – an initiative that includes the distribution of condoms.[vi]   (After being informed of this, CCHD said it would defund Centro Campesino.)

·        *   $45,000 to Somos un Pueblo Unido, which is part of a coalition opposing the Defense of Marriage Act.  Somos un Pueblo Unido also promotes “reproductive justice”[vii] and contraceptive sex education. [viii]
·       *    $30,000 to NYC AIDS Housing Network, which is a member of several pro-abortion, pro-homosexual organizations,[ix] endorsed the Transgender Day of Remembrance, participated in the openly socialist US Social Forum, and distributes condoms.
·         *  $45,000 to the Southwest Organizing Project, the lead “community partner” for one of the Elev8 projects in Chicago.[x]  These partnerships are supported by Atlantic Philanthropies, an international foundation whose Elev8 programs around the country make “comprehensive sex education a requirement for receiving the four-year grant, which totaled $18 million in Chicago.”[xi]   SWOP is a critical component to assure that “comprehensive” – contraceptive – sex-ed programs in Chicago public schools are accepted by the “community.”
·        *   $35,000 to Desis Rising Up and Moving (DRUM), which regularly participates in Marxist, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual forums.[xii]
·        *   $50,000 to United Workers Association, which joined Equality Maryland, promoting same-sex marriage,[xiii] as well as Progressive Maryland – a local affiliate of the Alinskyian organizing network USActionwhich also pushes same-sex marriage.[xiv]
·        *   $28,000 to Intercommunity Justice and Peace Center, which has listed among its “friends and colleagues” the pro-abortion National Organization for Women (NOW), the International Socialist Organization, and pro-homosexual P-FLAG.[xv]  Current links include the dissident Catholic coalition Call to Action.[xvi]
·        *   $25,000 to Michigan Interfaith Voice, an affiliate of the Gamaliel Alinskyian organizing network.  Michigan Interfaith Voice has also received multiple grants from the Arcus Foundation specifically for the promotion of homosexual “rights.”[xvii]
·        *   $40,000 to Michigan Organizing Project (MOP), an affiliate of the Interfaith Worker Justice Alinskyianorganizing network.  MOP has also received at least seven grants from the Arcus Foundation since 2007, again, specifically for the promotion of homosexual “rights.”[xviii]
·       *    $40,000 to Coalition LA, which produced a voter guide in 2000 calling for a NO vote on Proposition 22, banning same-sex marriage. [xix]
·        *   $40,000 to Women’s Community Revitalization Project (WCRP), which has been an “associate member agency” of Women’s Way[xx] and long-time grant recipient of its “Community Women’s Fund,”[xxi] which only funds pro-abortion, pro-birth control organizations.[xxii]
·         *  $40,000 to Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, which believes that those rights includeuniversal access to abortion, as evidenced by – but not limited to – its membership in the abortion-advocacy groups Healthcare for All coalition,[xxiii] and US Human Rights Network.[xxiv]
·         *  $25,000 to Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York, which was a member of the abortion-advocacy group US Human Rights Network (USHRN).[xxv]  It has also done work, through guidebooks and focus groups, to present current law favoring LGBT individuals to the restaurant industry.
·        *   $25,000 to Philadelphia Unemployment Project which, along with other groups (such as the aggressively homosexual “rights” ACT UP Philadelphia), sponsored a partisan voter guide advocating abortion “rights.”[xxvi]

These organizations, coming from an utterly un-Catholic perspective and actively working for immoral purposes, were supposedly well-vetted and in full compliance with CCHD’s new, more stringent Grant Agreement.  CCHD has given them over half a million dollars this past year.

What a sorry abuse of the laity’s charitable intentions.  This is not “helping the poor.”

Progressive Networking

Unfortunately, the American Life League Report isn’t done.  The problem isn’t simply that a few organizations escaped the CCHD vetting process, were “accidently” funded, and will be weeded out next round.  Rather, these individual instances of regrettable grant awards are a small part of a larger, more serious pattern of supporting the work of progressive networks to push a “culture of death” via their CCHD-funded affiliates.

Ironically, this is exactly what CCHD stated it would be very careful not to do.  Last year, it wrote that CCHD“will not fund groups that are members of coalitions which have as their organizational purpose or coalition agenda, positions or actions that contradict fundamental Catholic moral and social teaching.” [xxvii] However, many of the above-mentioned organizations are members of exactly that sort of coalition – coalitions that are fundamentally working against Catholic moral and social teaching.

Those aren’t the only ones, though.  The American Life League Report lists scores of additional CCHD-fundedorganizations that belong to coalitions with pro-abortion and/or homosexual “rights” agendas.  This past year alone, after its “careful” vetting process, CCHD awarded over a million dollars to organizations working in consort with anti-Catholic coalitions.

If ALL researchers can uncover the abortion and homosexual “rights” activities of so many CCHD-fundedgroups, how is it that CCHD staff is incapable of uncovering the same information?  Either CCHD lacks the ability or it lacks the will to discern between advocacy that is in harmony with fundamental moral principles and advocacy that contradicts those principles.

CCHD has demonstrated, again and again, that its political prejudices leave little room for concern over baby killing.

 Stephanie Block is a Spero columnist and the editor of the New Mexico-based Los Pequenos newspaper. She is a member of the Catholic Media Coalition.
[i] American Life League, “Investigative Report on the Catholic Campaign for Human Development’s Grants for the year 2010-2011,” 10-3-11: www.reformcchdnow.com
[ii] Wanderer Forum Foundation Commentary on the Campaign for Human Development, 1997.  A copy was sent to every bishop in the United States who headed a diocese.
[iii] “Review and Renewal of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development as Accepted and Affirmed by theUSCCB Administrative Committee,” p. 3.
[iv] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Office of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, “The Truth About CCHD: Promoting Catholic Values – 7. Why was CCHD delayed in publishing its grants for 2010?” undated but @ 2010-2011 old.usccb.org/cchd/PROMOTING-CATHOLIC-VALUES[1].pdf
[v] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops website, Department of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, 2010 Grantee List: www.usccb.org/about/catholic-campaign-for-human-development/grants/upload/cchd-grantees-2010.pdf
[vi] Minnesota AIDS Project: www.mnaidsproject.org/resource-guide/detail.php?i=606
[vii] Somos un Pueblo Unido website: www.nmcf.org/new/impact/womens-lives/somos-un-pueblo-unido
[viii] Tides Foundation 2009 Grants Report: www.tides.org/fileadmin/user/pdf/Tides-RJ-Fund-2009-Public-Docket.pdf
[ix] NYCAHN is a member of the Ney York City Human Rights Initiative (NYCHRI which has a mission to assure full implementation of the pro-abortion Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.NYCHRI also promotes pro-abortion and pro-homosexual activism.  NYCAHN also belongs to the Center for Community Change which has, among other things, worked for continued federal funding of the abortion-provider Planned Parenthood.
[x] Southwest Organizing Project website: www.swopchicago.org/display.aspx?pointer=6002
[xi] LISC/Chicago: www.lisc-chicago.org/display.aspx?pointer=7425.  LISC/Chicago (Local Initiatives Support Corporation) is an intermediate organization “for channeling corporate and philanthropic resources into localinitiatives.”  Around 2008, “Atlantic Philanthropies provided LISC/Chicago with a grant to create a program that would partner NCP lead agencies with schools and community-based health centers in CPS middle schools …” “Renewed Funding—and New Achievements—for Elev8,” 9-1-11, www.lisc-chicago.org/news/1430.
[xii] DRUM was a sponsoring organization for the 2007 “Trans Day of Action for Social and Economic Justice,” as part of the Transgender Day of Remembrance: charlotteaction.blogspot.com/2007/06/3rd-annual-trans-day-of-action-for.html; it participated in the Marxist, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual 2010US Social Forum:organize.ussf2010.org/org/drum-desis-rising-moving; DRUM’s co-founder, Monami Maulik was a speaker at the 2011 Left Forum: leftforum.org/files/left-forum-2011-Program-Guide-web.pdf  The Left Forum is openly socialist and supports abortion and homosexual “rights.”
[xiii] Equality Maryland listing of “organizations [that] oppose any amendment to the Maryland Constitution that would ban civil marriage and its vital protections for same-sex couples:”replay.waybackmachine.org/20080906110713/http://equalitymaryland.org/issues/marriage/organizations.htm
[xiv] Progressive America affiliate list: progressivemaryland.org/page.php?id=2480
[xv] IJPC no longer refers to these links as “friends and colleagues” but now says: “The listing of an organization does not suggest IJPC endorsement.”  The organizations cited in the American Life League report have been removed.
[xvi] ijpc-cincinnati.org/resources/national.  Call to Action “reform” demands to the Catholic Church include acceptance of abortion, contraception, and homosexuality as “normal” and ethically acceptable.
[xvii] Arcus Foundation, social justice awards category: www.arcusfoundation.org/socialjustice/grants/awarded
[xviii] Arcus Foundation, social justice awards category:www.arcusfoundation.org/socialjustice/grants/awarded
[xix] The American Life League report states that the CCHD was informed of the Coalition Voter Guide in 2009 and that not only did CCHD never address the concern, it gave Coalition LA another grant in 2010.  Coalition LA is also a partner of the Center for Community Change, which has, among other things, worked for continued federal funding of the abortion-provider Planned Parenthood.
[xx] Women’s Way no longer lists WCRP as a member agency. Nora Lichtash, WCRP Executive Director, was on the Advisory Board of “A Change of Pace,” Women’s Way 2008-updated signature research report in support of “reproductive rights.”
[xxi] Women’s Way, “Community Women’s Fund Grantee in the News,” www.womensway.org/index.asp
[xxii] Women’s Way, “Community Women’s Fund Information,”www.womensway.org/resources-community-fund-general.asp; The American Life League report states that in 2009 the CCHD was informed of WCRP’smembership in Women Vote PA, a pro-abortion coalition. Shortly after, WCRP was removed from Women Vote PA’s coalition list and was awarded a CCHD grant the following year.
[xxiii] Healthcare for All coalition members list: healthcareforamericanow.org/site/content/who_we_are
[xxiv] US Human Rights Network coalition members list: www.ushrnetwork.org (as of 9-11, this website address was inactive and no other web address was available for the organization.)  GLAHR is also a member institution of Atlanta Jobs with Justice, a local affiliate of Jobs for Justice, which actively promotes abortion, homosexual rights and Marxism.  The American Life League Report documents these assertions with photocopies from pertinent webpages.
[xxv] US Human Rights Network coalition members list: www.ushrnetwork.org (as of 9-11, this website address was inactive and no other web address was available for the organization.)
[xxvi] The Philadelphia Coalition for Essential Services and Philly Neighborhood Networks with [others],“Non-partisan Voters Guide: COMMUNITY FORUM FOR THE NEXT GOVERNOR,” 2010:
phillyces.org/Documents/gubernatorial%20forum%202010%20-%20voters%27%20guide.pdf
[xxvii] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Review and Renewal of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development as Accepted and Affirmed by the USCCB Administrative Committee,” 9-15-10, p. 3.

Who is teaching ‘social justice’ to Catholics? By Stephanie Block

‘Teachers indoctrinating addled ideas have serious consequences…’

Who is teaching ‘social justice’ to Catholics?


Thursday, March 03, 2011
Stephanie Block
+++
That organization is JustFaith.org In 2005, JustFaith entered into a “partnership” with the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, Catholic Charities USA, and Catholic Relief Services to expand “parish and church commitment to social ministry and the role that formation in the justice tradition plays.” To that end, JustFaith has trained the deacons and seminarians of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange and other dioceses across the country.
.
Is this group, however, qualified to teach Catholic deaconate and seminary training programs or parish communities? Consider Mary and Gary Becker who both serve on the national board of JustFaith Ministries Inc. Gary Becker’s bio states:
.

Gary Becker is presently serving as a deacon and homilist in the Catholic Church of the Beatitudes. Gary was ordained to the permanent diaconate in August 1993, while in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Louisville, KY, and he retired from that service in May of 2009. He has been married to Mary for forty-six years. Both Gary and Mary are involved in social justice issues and both serve on the national board of JustFaith Ministries Inc., a justice formation program. They also serve on the board of Fonkoze USA, a micro-credit/literacy program in Haiti. In addition, Gary and Mary are spiritual directors who serve on the board of Stillpoint, a local training program for spiritual directors, and they are members of Spiritual Directors International.

For her part, Mary Becker serves on the Church of the Beatitude’s finance committee.

Now, lest one is deceived into imagining that the “Catholic Church of the Beatitudes” is a Catholic Church, it’s instructive to read the pastor’s biography:

Suzanne Dunn sfcc (Sister for Christian Community), is Pastor of the Catholic Church of the Beatitudes , was ordained a deacon on April 27, 2008 and a Roman Catholic Womanpriest on September 7, 2008. Suzanne has a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology and maintains a small private practice. In addition, she is a spiritual director and co-facilitator of the Santa Barbara/Ventura Chapter of the Contemplative Ministry Outreach. She is a trained presenter of the Introductory Workshop in Centering Prayer and conducts Silent Saturdays and three- and five-day retreats in Centering Prayer. Suzanne holds an MA in Religious Studies from Seattle University and has studied with Alexander Shaia, Ph.D. in the Journey of Quadratos: Beyond the Biography of Jesus. Suzanne lives out her religious life with a Sister of Notre Dame in Carpinteria, Ca. She is currently an Assistant Program Coordinator for the Western region of RCWP-USA.

Then, there’s the other reverend serving the “Catholic Church of the Beatitudes:”

Jeannette Love was ordained a deacon on August 28, 2010, and a Roman Catholic Womanpriest on September 12, 2010. Her formation as a religious sister and her graduate study at Immaculate Conception Seminary, Darlington School of Theology in New Jersey, account for many enriching years of theological study. She was previously ordained in the Catholic Apostolic Church of Antioch (not under Rome) and served the Archbishops and the development of the Church for eleven years. Jeannette attended the University of Creation Spirituality, founded by Matthew Fox in Oakland, CA, through which she received a Masters degree (conferred by Naropa University in Boulder, CO). At present Jeannette works as Conference Coordinator at La Casa de Maria Retreat Center, is a spiritual director, facilitates a Centering Prayer Group weekly, and assists Suzanne in ministry at the Catholic Church of the Beatitudes. Jeannette resides in Santa Barbara.

In other words, Deacon Gary Becker is a dissident Catholic. As is Jack Jezreel, the Founder and Executive Director of JustFaith who periodically addresses dissident “Catholic” Call to Action events.

As an interesting aside, the website of the Church of the Beatitudes was scrubbed of Gary Becker’s photo on February 26, 2011, right after an email was sent around Catholic circles, describing the connection between Becker and JustFaith. The site as it appears today: http://beatitudes-sb.org/pastoral-staff/; the site as it appeared before February 26: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HzDs8LZuItMJ:beatitudes-sb.org/pastoral-staff/+church+of+the+beatitudes+gary+becker&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

Such perspectives on the part of key JustFaith personnel have ramifications for how they understand “social justice.” The distorted and rebellious sensibilities that lead people who were once participates in the Catholic Church to set up alternative “Catholic” churches, created in their own images, carries over into their “social justice” activism. They are not teaching Catholic social justice but a perversion that includes, for example, the “right” to be a priest.

Teachers indoctrinating addled ideas have serious consequences. So, one finds that in 2009, in the Diocese of Orange Auxiliary Bishop Dominic Luong, at least two other Diocese of Orange priests, and crowd of invited Catholics cheered Loretta Sanchez [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Q3i9j0KGWI ], one of the most pro-abortion politicians in Congress, at St. Callistus Catholic Parish. The rally was, by the way, led by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development-funded Alinskyian community organization, OCCCO (Orange County Congregation Community Organization, an affiliate of the PICO network).

After years of being re-educated in a secular political ideology, is it any surprise that deacons, priests, and perhaps even some bishops have acquired a deeply distorted – dissident — idea of “social justice?”

Many thanks to a source in the Diocese of Orange for assistance in preparing this article.

Stephanie Block is the publisher of Los Pequenos newspaper of New Mexico and a founder of the Catholic Media Coalition.

PHOTO CREDIT: JEZREEL –  SOURCE/BECKER – SOURCE

END OF POST

Catholic campaign for human what and how? (via Blithe Spirit)

Another reason to boycott the Catholic Campaign for Human Development collection this year… This from the Blithe Spirit blog….

Catholic campaign for human what and how?   The annual Campaign for Human Development collection is coming up for Catholics Nov. 20–21: WHY WAIT UNTIL NOVEMBER? – DONATE TODAY! Your tax-deductible contributions can always be mailed directly to our office at anytime. This method guarantees that you will receive a tax-deduction letter mailed directly to you right away. Make checks payable to “The Chic … Read More

via Blithe Spirit

END OF POST