Our colleague(s) over at Restore DC Catholicism have looked into the Board of Catholic Charities DC. A number of them, just by a quick search, seem to support pro-abortion/anti-family politicians.
Now, as some of you know, that when you obtain a seat on a Board of Directors, like Catholic Charities DC, you are committed to either contribute or raise a certain amount of dollars for the organization. In fact, it is my understanding, that there is at least one Parish Council in this diocese that not only expects members to donate time and talent but also over $1000 on top of their normal giving.
Now, I don't know Ms. Van Hollen. Never met her. But I would assume that she is both pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage. (She at leasts supports her husband -- who voted against the DC Opportunity Scholarships, supports gay marriage and is radically pro-abortion.) Maybe she is not but for the sake of today's posting, let's assume that she is. (I would love to hear from someone who knows.)
The point of this blog posting is, whether is is morally acceptable to have people on the Board of Directors of Catholic Charities DC, who support politicians who are in many instances, diametrically opposed to what the Catholic Church stands for in exchange for $$$.
Living in the US, you can support whomever you want, but does that mean that an organization must have you on the Board?
Personally, I believe that we sell out our beliefs when we do so, for $30,000 or $40,000 or more of donations promised per person.
I would love to hear from Catholic Charities on this, but I know that they will not respond.
What do you think?
3 comments:
I absolutely agree that persons who do not espouse Catholic values should not serve as we board members for a Catholic organization. That is just common sense.
That being said, I don’t think there should be a litmus test or guilt by association. Rather, I would set the bar as to those who use their position to espouse values contrary to church teaching. So Chris Van Hollen, given his votes, would be excluded from the board. Kathleen Matthews, given her outspoken criticisms, should also be excluded. On the other hand, I am not aware of any statements by Ms. Van Hollen that are contrary to church teaching. There is also something to be said also for trying to have some influence in the Chris Van Hollen camp. (Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.)
The problem with Catholic Charities is it goes the other way–the influence is from a secular environment influencing Catholic Charities. Why? A Washington Catholic suggests its about money. That’s probably right (though I somewhat doubt, no disrespect intended, that the Board seats require a certain monetary fund-raising commitment). I think its rather just a ultra-modern variation of the “old boys club” composed this time of rich liberals.
It seems very irresponsible and unfair to say "let's assume Ms Van Hollen is x, y, or z." Some people will take your statement as implying that she is. This doesn't seem very far away from bearing false witness against one's neighbor and I think you you should consider taking down this comment.
I think you bring up a very good point. Who is actually on the Board of Catholic Charities? You are correct that a great deal of the money funding Catholic Charities comes from individuals sitting in the pews of our Catholic Churches. We are asked to give, but not allowed to ask questions about who is directing the spending of this money. I think the Catholics are just becoming aware that they have a responsibly to know how THEIR money is spent. We find out that for years the money we gave to the Catholic Campaign went to fund left wing organizations like Acorn. So, it seems both responsible and reasonable for Catholics to begin question where their money goes and who directs the expenditures. Catholics are coming out of their complacency. I knew when I read your blog that this would shake a lot of people up. I applaud your courage.
Post a Comment