Another coming storm... [Cardinal Mahoney Politicking during Mass]

Open Book ^ | 5/15/06 | Amy Welborn

[Zionist Conspirator]

Thank you.

[franky]

Basic Rules

501(c)(3)

Organizational requirement

Assets must be dedicated to charitable purposes

Social activities must be insubstantial

Legislative activity must be insubstantial, or <20% if election made

Absolute prohibition against political activity

Must serve public purposes

Donations are deductible as charitable contributions by donors on their tax returns

Eligible for low cost non-profit bulk mailing permit

Must take care to generate enough public support to avoid classification as a private foundation

Exempt from Federal income tax unless the organization has unrelated business income

[franky]

###"Get the church's tax free status challenged. That will prevent this in the future."###

"church's" means all churches. Catholic, Protestant and Jewish. Are you suggesting all churches? You tax one you tax them all.

Taxes would probably break most churches therefore creating a bigger secular hole for all of us to fall in.

[franky]

The Spanish community my church administers to has as many sinners as the other communities. One of the problems faced is the lack of catachetics in the Spanish community.

One of the newbies to the Church came to the Rectory and asked if she could get money for her abortion.

It is estimated that very few of these new people have been practicing Catholics in their old country and approach the Church specifically for social reasons.

[Draco]

Frankie, peace be with you. But Sheesh --- read the post. My post CLEARLY said "Get the church's tax free status ...." The use of the singular possessive DOES NOT mean all churches, either in the context of the sentence or the article. Moreover, if I intended (as I did not) to revoke the tax free status of "Catholic, Protestant and Jewish" churches (plural), etc., then I would have used the plural "churches" (which means multiple churches), not "church's." No, you are wrong. You said "'church's' means all churches." It does not. Please don't mischaracterize what I clearly wrote. Are you a member of the MSM?

[Zionist Conspirator]

The Spanish community my church administers to has as many sinners as the other communities. One of the problems faced is the lack of catachetics in the Spanish community.

One of the newbies to the Church came to the Rectory and asked if she could get money for her abortion.

It is estimated that very few of these new people have been practicing Catholics in their old country and approach the Church specifically for social reasons.

So much for the traditional Catholic missionary policy (you notice I didn't say "position!") of converting an entire culture and expecting it to stick for hundreds of years.

[ArrogantBustard]

converting an entire culture and expecting it to stick for hundreds of years.

The Old Testament provides a wonderful example of how well that policy works ...

[Zionist Conspirator]

converting an entire culture and expecting it to stick for hundreds of years.

The Old Testament provides a wonderful example of how well that policy works ...

I suppose then that Catholics, Jews, and Eastern Orthodox spend so much time condemning Protestant missionaries out of a sense of inferiority.

[ArrogantBustard]

You can suppose anything you like.

The rest of us can measure your suppositions against reality, and determine their worth.

It's not difficult.

[spankalib]

I'm sorry my use of incorrect terminology confused you.
Thanks for the clarification....
I was trying to make a point as to how religious identity and loyalty seems always to be completely swallowed up in racial/ethnic identities (witness even rightwing Jews attending meetings dedicated, not to Judaism or Jewish moral teachings, but "white civilization").
Color me ignorant....I didn't know that! If it doesn't trash the thread direction, I'd like to at least find out; Is there a name for such activity?
However, the true root of the entire debate is precisely this "clash of civilizations" which completely obscures the fact that both "civilizations" allegedly share the same religion.

And here I thought the true root of the debate was whether we are a nation of laws, or not. You know, like, can I just pick one of our country's law(s) to disobey?

Yet Latin American immigrants, legal or illegal, make up an ethnic political block allied with abortionism and homosexuality despite their own "retro" form of Catholicism (see my reference to Black Fundamentalists, who are by no means "immigrants" of any kind, and the complete annihilation of the influence of Black Fundamentalism on Black politics).

But whether or not, the 'true root'...that is truly a fascinating observation. Indeed, this is true of one of my most trusted friends, who happens to be black. He knows where I stand regarding abortion....he sees it as a 'woman's right' yadayada, yet he is the most fundamental (I am not using this pejoratively here) Christian I know.

The immigration debate is about a "war of civilizations" with English-speaking European Catholics and Protestants on one side and "non-European" Spanish(!!!)-speaking Catholics and Pentecostals on the other.

Fascinating. That sentence alone makes me glad I read this thread. I'll stick to my guns, though, and respectfully disagree, while allowing that that is very insightful, and 'worth pondering', for sure!....
the "Are we a nation of laws or not?" question rings more strongly to me.

After all, in the end, it is my belief that the entire future of humanity will revolve around whose laws will one choose to obey; God's or Man's. I'm a bit biased I suppose.

If people truly lived their religions instead of making them a mere badge of cultural identity the world wouldn't be in the mess it's in today. Instead advocates of morality are joining with atheist racialists to promote "white civilization" and the pro-"gay" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton join together with the anti-"gay" Louis Farrakhan, with nothing joining the groups in either alliance but skin color. I'm sorry, but this disgusts me.

You could start a lively thread or two I'd reckon!

So many "religious" people cast aside their religious identities for ethnic ones that sometimes I wonder if anyone is really religious at all. After all, rural American (white) Fundamentalist Protestants, despite subscribing to a theology in which "race" doesn't even exist, have always become "civilizationists" when the prospect of integration with co-religionists of a different color has been threatened. No wonder so many liberals think that "G-d" is merely a projection of ethnicity. Too many of us act as if He were (G-d forgive us!). I don't know what more I can say to get my point across.

You did fine. I very much appreciate your observations and viewpoints. You have neatly and profoundly 'rolled' a few of our most knotty societal issues 'into a ball' as Prufrock would be wont to say.
FRegards

[franky]

Sorry but that is a problem with sentence fragments. My thought with the posting was to indicate that if one church is taxed, all churches are to be taxed. Notice 'churches'?

Are you a member of the MSM? I don't know the acronym?

God bless and have a good day.

[Draco]

No Franky, my post was meant to urge the parishoner in whose RC Church Cardinal Mahoney's pro-illegal immigrant position was pushed on attendees at a mass to challenge the tax free status. The IRS will revoke a church's tax exempt status if it involves itself in such politicking. This would not result in the entire US Catholic Church losing its tax exempt status, only the offending parish (and possibly) diocese. Cardinal Mahoney was complicit in the active cover up (and hiding of evidence) of the child abuse by priests scandal in Los Angeles. Now he is preaching that we should allow millions of illegal immigrants because it is compassionate in his eyes. Just compounding law breaking with more law breaking. He is entitled to his belief, but if he is pushing that belief on parishoners in church (with the church's imprimatur) then he is just a political hack. In that case he needs to play by the rules.

MSM= Main Stream Media, a branch of media known for distortions in news reporting.

[franky]

Where as I do not agree with Mahoney's opinions and pray that he get "straight" on governing his flock the IRS rule as formulated by congress leaves the usual loop holes. The following as shown on a congressional report leaves some need for interpretation:

"It should be noted, however, that many types of political activities that are not“campaign activities” are permitted to some extent. The key distinction is that non-campaign political activities cannot support or oppose a particular candidate. Permissible political activities under the IRC, so long as no candidate is endorsed or opposed, include: educational activities, such as conducting public forums at which social, political, and international questions are considered;compiling voting records of Members of Congress,so long as the record is not widely distributed to the general public during an election campaign; publishing candidate responses to a questionnaire on a variety of subjects;issuing report cards that indicate whether legislators support or oppose the organization’s
views; issue advertising(this is usually considered lobbying); nonpartisan public opinion polling; non-partisan voter registration drives meeting the requirements of IRC § 4945(f);..."

A question is, does Mahoney's activities fall under "permissible political activities"? Even though he is doing illegal things in promoting immigration, is he doing illegal things under the IRS Code?

There is overall concern in the Catholic Church that there are some in the U. S. who want the Church out of the way and that the tax-exempt basis is what would do it.

There has been a long standing effort to close Christian Churches and Mahoney's church or diocese would be the tip of an ice berg. That is the reason I mentioned a broad sweep by the IRS (government)to close all churches.


http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:JTl709ypEZMJ:fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/24677.pdf+congressional+law+for+tax+free+churches&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4

Thanks for the definition. No, I'm just a senior citizen who is active in the Pennsylvania Pro Life Federation.