Posted on 02/14/2025 5:07:40 PM PST by ebb tide
Corpus Christ for Unity and Peace’s (CUP) investigation will unveil a systemic issue stemming from inadequate financial oversight, raising the question of who truly governs the Catholic Church in America: the bishops or the government.
At the pinnacle is the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which has amassed billions of dollars from the government, making these funds a significant portion of their revenue. The USCCB then distributes millions of government funds to Catholic Charities and other Catholic NGOs, thereby wielding substantial influence over these organizations.
But who is ultimately in the driver’s seat? The government. As Aristotle aptly put it, “The man who has the purse strings rules the house.”
In the past week, CUP verified that, according to the latest available financial reporting information for 2023, the USCCB received more than 50 percent of its total revenues from the U.S. government, and over 80 percent of its unrestricted revenues:
When the USCCB relies this heavily on government funding for a long period of time, several potential dangers arise:
Does the USCCB deserve to maintain its tax exempt status?
I am a CPA, so my brain gravitates toward financial auditing and IRS rules. Naturally, the geek side of me wishes to point out that the USCCB has failed the 501c3 public support test requirement (to maintain the public charity status).
This test ensures that a non-profit organization receives a substantial portion (at least 67 percent) of its support from the general public, governmental units, or other public charities, rather than a few large donors or any single source (defined as one that single-handedly contributes 5 percent or more of the not-for-profit’s revenue).
So, what does this mean in simple terms? If the USCCB received from the government (a single source) more than 33 percent cumulatively over a three-year period, it fails the public charity test. By requiring that at least 67 percent of its support comes from a variety of sources, the IRS ensures that the organization is genuinely supported by a broad base of donors/sources, which aligns with the public charity mission.
The IRS essentially frowns upon a not-for-profit becoming overly reliant on one source of income as the objective is to remain independent.
READ: Pope Francis plans major inter-faith event for ‘fraternity’ between Catholics and Muslims
When performing the 33 percent public support test over the required 3-year period, the test requires inclusion of any single source that contributes 5 percent or more of the organization’s total support, whether that source is an individual donor, a business, or a governmental unit, including contributions from the U.S. government. The USCCB would have to add up the revenues from every single “significant” source (i.e., those greater than 5 percent of revenues).
Since the USCCB received more than 44 percent of its total revenue from the U.S. government from 2021-2023 (data for 2024 unavailable), it clearly fails the 33 percent public support test.
This simple rapid test is without looking to see if the USCCB had any other “significant” source to include in the public support test.
Because the USCCB has failed the mandated IRS public support test, it risks being reclassified as a private foundation rather than a public charity. Private foundations face stricter regulations, including higher excise taxes on net investment income and more restrictive rules on self-dealing and lobbying activities.
What does this mean for parishioners wishing to donate to the USCCB? The limits for tax deductions are lower for contributions to private foundations. For cash donations, the deduction limit is typically 30 percent of the donor’s adjusted gross income (AGI) for private foundations, compared to 60 percent for public charities. For donations of appreciated securities, the limit is generally 20 percent of AGI for private foundations, compared to 30 percent for public charities.
CUP must ask: what kind of governance is being exercised by the bishops? Are they aware they are jeopardizing the public charity status of the USCCB? Do they deserve to maintain this status since they are operating essentially as a governmental unit?
In our first article, CUP highlighted the substantial amount of money flowing from the government to the USCCB and Catholic Charities. It’s evident that protecting their position on immigration is crucial for them, given the billions at stake.
Last week, we reported that since 2008, the USCCB and Catholic Charities have collected nearly half a billion dollars for transferring unaccompanied migrant children. Alarmingly, the U.S. government has been unable to locate 300,000 of these children who crossed the border during the Biden administration, leaving their wellbeing in question.
We now have a detailed breakdown of immigration-related funds paid to sub-grantees by the USCCB during the Biden years and from 2008 to the present. This information may surprise those who believed their local Catholic Charities affiliate was uninvolved in the human trafficking money flow.
READ: Wisconsin Catholic bishops release immigration letter supporting secure borders
Click HERE to view all subgrantees receiving USCCB migration revenues during the Biden years. There was a total of $369 million paid to sub-grantees during the Biden years.
Since 2008, the USCCB has paid out to sub-grantees just over $1 billion. The top 25 beneficiaries of government funds to contribute to the immigration crisis we are in today include the following:
Click HERE to view all subgrantees benefitting from the USCCB migration grant money from the government from 2008 to the present.
Given these findings, one must consider whether the laity should independently govern the financial affairs of the USCCB to preserve the integrity and autonomy of the Catholic Church. Relying on government funds endangers not only the Church’s tax-exempt status but also its mission and credibility. As devout Catholics, we must hold the bishops accountable and champion a return to the Church’s true mission.
The events of the past 15 years have shown that we cannot depend on the bishops to manage this aspect of the Church without both the appearance and reality of government dependence. Can we continue to allow the bishops to lead us down this path? We owe it to the Church to advocate for a new governance model that eliminates financial reliance, ensuring the bishops’ moral and spiritual leadership remains untainted. The future of the Church hangs in the balance.
Reprinted with permission from Corpus Christi for Unity and Peace.
Ping
Pope Donald I
Make the Vatican Great Again
The integrity of the USCCB was lost yrs ago, I’m afraid.
Indulgences ain’t cheap. How else would Pelosi and Chomo Joe still get communion for their evil ways.
The loss of independence is the violation of a Church/State issue that NEVER should have occurred.
The corruption has been going on for decades.
Name a Bishop with an ounce of Integrity...
Bishop Strickland.
Bishop Joseph Strickland
Bishop Athanasius Schneider
Cardinal Robert Sarah
Cardinal Raymond Burke
Cardinal Joseph Zen
Cardinal Brandmüller
Bishop Elengati
They haven’t granted financial indulgences for a few hundred years, and to receive a plenary indulgence requires that one be free from all attachment to sin. Also, people on a state of mortal sin can’t gain benefit from their prayers, so I don’t think they can gain even partial indulgences.
They don’t count - none of then have any influence on the Church of Francis the Fake Pope - Strickland will probably be removed for speaking out. Burke has been all but banished.
Some of the men on this list cannot speak or celebrate Mass in certain US Dioceses
They count in God’s eyes and those of faithful Catholics.
Look up St. Athanasius; he was excommunicated.
like they say, Follow the money. One of the reasons why I NEVER give to the CCHD collection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.