This is in regard to the Court granting a preliminary injunction. The USCCB may ultimately be paid for services already rendered, but the pieces of silver spigot is shut off. We are learning just how reliant many denominations are upon Caesar’s silver in this country, and it is very disturbing.
Whether the Church should continue receiving funds from the government is one thing, but shouldn’t the government pay for services already rendered?
I would cast a very cold eye over those accounts and I would want every charge proven down to the penny. I would want receipts and I would be contacting the vendors that supplied the receipts. I would offer a sum in compromise if the evidence looks as if the government was being overcharged, and if the compromise was refused, time to fight it out in court. This racket has been going on a while, and most rackets involve corruption, sooner or later.
The one thing that is markedly different In the second Trump administration from the 1st Trump administration Is that they are completely prepared for lawfare. When the election turned out “odd” shall we say in 2020, they seemed completely unprepared. Of course four years of battling in court will teach you how it’s done. Having been sued and charged more times than anyone can count, he and those around him are undeterred by it.
Samaritan’s Purse (despised by the gay lobby) receives about 4.5% of its revenue from federal grants. Not everyone is equally dependent.
My kids contributed to the Samaritans Purse Christmas “Shoebox” appeal a few years back. They filled a shoebox size box with toothbrushes, toys, school supplies etc.. which was distributed to a child in a third world country over the Christmas period. 77% of funds collected by Samaritans Purse actually goes into their charitable activities. I think Franklin Graham, Billy Grahams son, is CEO. Agree some charities a better run than others.
If a charity is relying predominantly on government grants to survive then that is a big red flag.
[…] and Punditry:Is Worship Music Real Worship? – Lila RoseUSCCB Loses in Court – Donald R. McClarey, J.D., at the American CatholicVatican Could Be Close to Decision in […]
I will, reluctantly, agree that lepanto has a legitimate point. If anything though, I’m concerned about consistency. With judicial rulings.
Didn’t we have a similar sort of ruling last week about the federal government being obliged to pay out for a contract? Now this one does not require payment. Which way is it? Seems to me we ought to go one way or the other. Withhold all payments pending further review, …or require they each be paid. With warning regarding risk of consequences if we discover mismanagement later.
Otherwise, we have the Judiciary picking contract winners and losers, not so much dispensing Justice.
Strange how the bishops have no qualm going over a parishes spending, hold the pastor accountable. I wonder if there has been any outside audit of these millions upon millions of dollars that have been spent on immigration.
The Church should never take any money from Caesar in order to remain completely independent. Once money is taken from Caesar, then Caesar can tell you what to do with that money. It is never good to be beholden to Caesar.