LifeSiteNews.com

CCHD Responds to Reform Movement

LifeSiteNews.com
LifeSiteNews.com

By Patrick B. Craine

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The national office of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), the USCCB's domestic anti-poverty arm, has responded to the movement calling for their reform in a new document posted to their website on Friday.  At the same time, new evidence implicating several more CCHD grantees in activities contrary to Catholic teaching has been reported by the reform movement.

The CCHD document, entitled "For the Record - The Truth about CCHD Funding," seeks to convince Catholics of the organization's commitment to Catholic moral teaching and to assuage any misgivings raised by the recent revelation regarding a number of their grantees.  In the first section of "For the Record," the CCHD assures supporters that, "All grant applicants are carefully screened and funds are provided only to projects with objectives and actions that are fully in accord with the moral teaching of the Catholic Church." 

However, Michael Hichborn, a researcher with American Life League (ALL) and spokesman for the Reform CCHD Now (RCM) movement, told LSN that despite the CCHD's insistence on their fidelity, "they never address the fact that yes, they are giving funds to organizations closely associated with the pro-abortion movement.  They never once deny that.  They just point to their criteria and say 'See, we have a strict criteria.  We don't give to organizations that do that.'  But you do."

The Bellarmine Veritas Ministry (BVM) agreed with Hichborn's analysis, charging that the CCHD has simply exonerated several implicated grantees, but without addressing the evidence against them.

CCHD goes on to again exonerate the Los Angeles Community Action Network (LACAN), which was one of the two groups defended after BVM's first report.  They state, simply, that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles "determined the organization does not engage in any activity contrary to Church teaching, and has recommended continued funding for the organization."  BVM has rebutted however, that the CCHD does not address the evidence they presented from LACAN's own newsletters.  "We still await explanation of how promotion of homosexual marriage and contraceptive services meets the CCHD's guidelines," BVM states.

CCHD also exonerates the San Francisco Organizing Project (SFOP), which strongly supports health clinics that offer "family planning" and emergency contraception.  They defend their grant by indicating that the Archdiocese of San Francisco "strongly supports the work of [this group] to expand access to health care to children."  But, as BVM notes again, "this does not address the information we discovered concerning the SFOP.  We would like to see a specific response to the charges we made in our report concerning SFOP."

Regarding the Women's Community Revitalization Project (WCRP), which was the other group originally exonerated following BVM's first report, they now state that they "continue to gather the facts," and that the grant has "been placed on hold."  They have made the same determination regarding Preble Street, a group offering homeless shelters and soup kitchens that makes "family planning" services available at one of their day shelters.

CCHD's shift in approach to WCRP follows BVM's recently-revealed evidence that this group received a grant from Women's Way, a feminist organization whose funding policies restrict grants to pro-abortion groups.  "We hope this third screening of WCRP will be more successful, and look forward to learning the results of the investigation," states BVM.

BVM had revealed in one report that several CCHD grantees were members of a coalition called Mobilize the Immigrant Vote (MIV), which formulated ballot initiatives in favor of abortion and same-sex "marriage" through consultation with their members.

CCHD says, however, that each group "confirmed to CCHD they were never consulted about MIV taking positions on ballot initiatives contrary to Catholic social teaching."

BVM responds by pointing to statements previously documented from Nancy Berlin, Executive Committee Chair of MIV, "which stated that the voter's guide was produced in consultation with MIV's coalition partners."  BVM also points out that several of the grantees are, in fact, even more closely related to MIV through a program that gives a "higher level of support to approximately thirty grassroots groups."

"Due to their higher level of involvement, we find it difficult to believe that these grantees were in the dark about the MIV ballot initiatives," the BVM report reads, "and simply taking these grantees' word that they were not consulted about the MIV platform does not constitute a proper investigation."

Stephanie Block, who began researching the CCHD for the Wanderer Forum Foundation in 1993, said that key sections of the 2009 document are nearly identical with an earlier version from 1997.  These include the section dealing with their support for pro-abortion grantees and a section responding to allegations that their grants are fungible.

"They have never dealt with the real criticism," she said.  "They are putting up a straw man to knock down.  They did that before and they are doing that again.  They aren't really addressing the criticism, because they can't.  It isn't entirely recycled, but you still have the same false response in that you're not dealing directly with the criticism."

According to Hichborn, this "recycled" response, "just shows that over twelve years, nothing's changed.  They're fighting off the same allegations and they keep telling us that 'Oh no, we're fixing the problem.  We're making sure that nothing goes to anything else.' And the same problem still exists."

"It's funny that they keep claiming that they don't do any of this stuff and they keep getting caught doing it, and they keep using the exact same language to defend themselves for several decades," commented Stephen Phelan, communications director for Human Life International (HLI) and another RCN spokesman.  "It's obvious that their leadership's incapable of responding genuinely."

Yesterday, American Life League, an RCN member, announced that they had discovered six more CCHD grantees engaged in activities contrary to Catholic teaching.  In total these groups are allocated $220,000 for the year.

"Given how easily we discovered CCHD funding going to anti-Catholic causes, the only two possibilities are that the CCHD is incompetent or complicit," stated Hichborn in a press release.  "We're finding more and more evidence every day with far less information than the CCHD receives through its granting process."

"We are calling on Catholics everywhere to boycott the CCHD donation this Sunday by dropping our 'No, Thank You" statement in the collection basket,' said Hichborn.


CCHD's "For the Record - The Truth about CCHD Funding"

BVM's rebuttal

Full listing of the evidence compiled thus far click here.

Contact Information:

Catholic Campaign for Human Development
3211 Fourth St. NE
Washington DC 20017
v: 202-541-3210
f: 202-541-3329
cchdpromo@usccb.org

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Reform CCHD Reps Reveal on EWTN Shocking Evidence Against USCCB Anti-Poverty Arm
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/nov/09111612.html

Truth. Delivered daily.

Get FREE pro-life, pro-family news delivered straight to your inbox. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

PBS defends decision to air pro-abortion documentary ‘After Tiller’

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

Under pressure for showing the pro-abortion documentary "After Tiller" on Labor Day, PBS' "POV" affiliate has defended the decision in response to an inquiry from LifeSiteNews.

The producers of the film say their goal with the documentary, which tells the stories of four late-term abortion doctors after the killing of infamous late-term abortionist George Tiller, is to "change public perception of third-trimester abortion providers by building a movement dedicated to supporting their right to work with a special focus on maintaining their safety.” 

POV told LifeSiteNews, "We do believe that 'After Tiller' adds another dimension to an issue that is being debated widely." Asked if POV will show a pro-life documentary, the organization said that it "does not have any other films currently scheduled on this issue. POV received almost 1000 film submissions each year through our annual call for entries and we welcome the opportunity to consider films with a range of points of view."

When asked whether POV was concerned about alienating its viewership -- since PBS received millions in federal tax dollars in 2012 and half of Americans identify as pro-life -- POV said, "The filmmakers would like the film to add to the discussion around these issues. Abortion is already a legal procedure."

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

"This is an issue that people feel passionately about and will have a passionate response to. We are hopeful that the majority of people can see it for what it is, another lens on a very difficult issue." 

In addition to the documentary, POV has written materials for community leaders and teachers to share. A cursory examination of the 29-page document, which is available publicly, appears to include links to outside sources that defend Roe v. Wade, an examination of the constitutional right to privacy, and "a good explanation of the link between abortion law and the right to privacy," among other information.

Likewise, seven clips recommended for student viewing -- grades 11 and beyond -- include scenes where couples choose abortion because the children are disabled. Another shows pro-life advocates outside a doctor's child's school, and a third is described as showing "why [one of the film's doctors] chose to offer abortion services and includes descriptions of what can happen when abortion is illegal or unavailable, including stories of women who injured themselves when they tried to terminate their own pregnancies and children who were abused because they were unwanted."

Another clip "includes footage of protesters, as well as news coverage of a hearing in the Nebraska State Legislature in which abortion opponents make reference to the idea that a fetus feels pain." The clip's description fails to note that it is a scientifically proven fact that unborn children can feel pain.

The documentary is set to air on PBS at 10 p.m. Eastern on Labor Day.

Kirsten Andersen contributed to this article.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

,

He defended ‘real’ marriage, and then was beheaded for it

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

A Christian man was executed during the night by a high-profile ruler after making an uncompromising defense of real marriage.

The Christian, who was renowned for his holiness, had told the ruler in public that his relationship with his partner was “against the law” of God. The Christian’s words enraged the ruler’s partner who successfully plotted to have him permanently silenced.

John the Baptist was first imprisoned before he was beheaded. The Catholic Church honors him today, August 29, as a martyr and saint.

While John’s death happened a little less than 2,000 years ago, his heroic stance for real marriage is more pertinent today than ever before.

According to the Gospel of Mark, the ruler Herod had ‘married’ his brother’s wife Herodias. When John told Herod with complete frankness, “It is against the law for you to have your brother’s wife,” Herodias became “furious” with him to the point of wanting him killed for his intolerance, bullying, and hate-speech.

Herodias found her opportunity to silence John by having her daughter please Herod during a dance at a party. Herod offered the girl anything she wanted. The daughter turned to her mother for advice, and Herodias said to ask for John’s head on a platter.

Those who fight for real marriage today can learn three important lessons from John’s example.

  1. Those proudly living in ungodly and unnatural relationships — often referred to in today’s sociopolitical sphere as ‘marriage’ — will despise those who tell them what they are doing is wrong. Real marriage defenders must expect opposition to their message from the highest levels.
  2. Despite facing opposition, John was not afraid to defend God’s plan for marriage in the public square, even holding a secular ruler accountable to this plan. John, following the third book of the Hebrew Bible (Leviticus 20:21), held that a man marrying the wife of his brother was an act of “impurity” and therefore abhorrent to God. Real marriage defenders must boldly proclaim today that God is the author of marriage, an institution he created to be a life-long union between one man and one woman from which children arise and in which they are best nurtured. Marriage can be nothing more, nothing less.
  3. John did not compromise on the truth of marriage as revealed by God, even to the point of suffering imprisonment and death for his unpopular position. Real marriage defenders must never compromise on the truth of marriage, even if the government, corporate North America, and the entire secular education system says otherwise. They must learn to recognize the new “Herodias” of today who despises those raising a voice against her lifestyle. They must stand their ground no matter what may come, no matter what the cost.

John the Baptist was not intolerant or a bigot, he simply lived the word of God without compromise, speaking the word of truth when it was needed, knowing that God’s way is always the best way. Were John alive today, he would be at the forefront of the grassroots movement opposing the social and political agenda to remake marriage in the image of man.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

If he were alive today he might speak simple but eloquent words such as, “It is against God’s law for two men or two women to be together as a husband and wife in marriage. Marriage can only be between a man and a woman.” 

He would most likely be hated. He would be ridiculed. He would surely have the human rights tribunals throwing the book at him. But he would be speaking the truth and have God as his ally. 

The time may not be far off when those who defend real marriage, like John, will be presented with the choice of following Caesar or making the ultimate sacrifice. May God grant his faithful the grace to persevere in whatever might come. St. John the Baptist, pray for us!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
The Wunderlich family Mike Donnelly / Home School Legal Defence Association
Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus

,

German homeschoolers regain custody of children, vow to stay and fight for freedom

Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus
By Thaddeus Baklinski

One year to the day since a team of 20 social workers, police officers, and special agents stormed a homeschooling family’s residence near Darmstadt, Germany, and forcibly removed all four of the family’s children, aged 7 to 14, a state appeals court has returned custody of the children to their parents.

The reason given for the removal was that parents Dirk and Petra Wunderlich continued to homeschool their children in defiance of a German ban on home education.

The children were returned three weeks after being taken, following an international outcry spearheaded by the Home School Legal Defense Association.

However, a lower court imposed the condition on the parents that their children were required to attend state schools in order for them to be released, and took legal custody of the children in order to prevent the family from leaving the country.

In a decision that was still highly critical of the parents and of homeschooling, the appeals court decided that the action of the lower court in putting the children in the custody of the state was “disproportional” and ordered complete custody returned to the parents, according to a statement by the HSLDA.

The Wunderlichs, who began homeschooling again when the court signaled it would rule this way, said they were very pleased with the result, but noted that the court’s harsh words about homeschooling indicated that their battle was far from over.

“We have won custody and we are glad about that,” Dirk said.

“The court said that taking our children away was not proportionate—only because the authorities should apply very high fines and criminal prosecution instead. But this decision upholds the absurd idea that homeschooling is child endangerment and an abuse of parental authority.”

The Wunderlichs are now free to emigrate to another country where homeschooling is legal, if they choose, but they said they intend to remain in Germany and work for educational freedom.

“While we no longer fear that our children will be taken away as long as we are living in Hessen, it can still happen to other people in Germany,” Dirk said. “Now we fear crushing fines up to $75,000 and jail. This should not be tolerated in a civilized country.”

Petra Wunderlich said, "We could not do this without the help of HSLDA,” but cautioned that, “No family can fight the powerful German state—it is too much, too expensive."

"If it were not for HSLDA and their support, I am afraid our children would still be in state custody. We are so grateful and thank all homeschoolers who have helped us by helping HSLDA.”

HSLDA’s Director for Global Outreach, Michael Donnelly, said he welcomed the ruling but was concerned about the court’s troubling language.

“We welcome this ruling that overturns what was an outrageous abuse of judicial power,” he said.

“The lower court decision to take away legal custody of the children essentially imprisoned the Wunderlich family in Germany. But this decision does not go far enough. The court has only grudgingly given back custody and has further signaled to local authorities that they should still go after the Wunderlichs with criminal charges or fines.”

Donnelly pointed out that such behavior in a democratic country is problematic.

“Imprisonment and fines for homeschooling are outside the bounds of what free societies that respect fundamental human rights should tolerate,” he explained.

“Freedom and fundamental human rights norms demand respect for parental decision making in education. Germany’s state and national policies that permit banning home education must be changed.

"Such policies from a leading European democracy not only threaten the rights of tens of thousands of German families but establish a dangerous example that other countries may be tempted to follow,” Donnelly warned.

HSLDA Chairman Michael Farris said that acting on behalf of the Wunderlichs was an important stand for freedom.

“The Wunderlichs are a good and decent family whose basic human rights were violated and are still threatened,” Farris said.

“Their fight is our fight," Farris stressed, "and we will continue to support those who stand against German policy banning homeschooling that violates international legal norms. Free people cannot tolerate such oppression and we will do whatever we can to fight for families like the Wunderlichs both here in the United States and abroad. We must stand up to this kind of persecution where it occurs or we risk seeing own freedom weakened.”

Visit the HSLDA website dedicated to helping the Wunderlich family and other German homeschoolers here.

Contact the German embassy in the U.S. here.

Contact the German embassy in Canada here.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook