USCCB’s Social Justice Arm Caught Funding Pro-Abortion/Prostitution Groups

I had some notes from several people about the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.

I found this story on LifeSiteNews.  I think you should go read it.

Here are the briefest of excerpts of an article by Patrick B. Craine

September 22, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), the U.S. bishops’ domestic social justice arm, says it has taken "decisive action" on a new report that reveals they have been funding groups that support abortion, contraception, same-sex "marriage," and legalized prostitution.

The organization’s funding practices have been the subject of growing scrutiny in the last several years, especially after it was revealed that CCHD had funded the scandal-plagued ACORN organization to the tune of millions of dollars.

Finally, the Women’s Community Revitalization Project is currently scheduled to receive $30,000.  They are a "coalition partner" of WomenVotePA, which works to secure abortion rights; they also push the morning-after pill, contraception, and same-sex "marriage."

 

Do you see a problem?

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to USCCB’s Social Justice Arm Caught Funding Pro-Abortion/Prostitution Groups

  1. JohnMa says:

    I think that the part about the local bishops signing off on these groups says it all. Are any of us surprised that the Cardinal Archbishop of LA signed off on one of the groups?

    I think we need to pray that His Holiness steps up the process of “fast-track” retirement for certain bishops.

  2. mpm says:

    Yes, I see a problem.

    Those two young reporters need to be hired to show up at all these other groups places of business, too! That’s gonna cost us. But probably not as much as the CCHD costs us, both in money and in dignity.

  3. robtbrown says:

    Why am I not surprised.

    If memory serves, the CCHD was the brainchild of Cardinal Bernardin.

  4. Dave N. says:

    Yes.

    The major problem being that people have been pointing this out for decades and nothing has been done. The CCHD is a program of all of the American Bishops (USCCB) and I can’t ever recall ANY bishop standing up and speaking out openly against what goes on within CCHD or who their money is distributed to. I’d honestly love to hear of any exceptions to this if anyone knows of one.

    This is why the words of even bishops like Bp. D’Arcy ring very hollow when they do decide speak out against abortion. Up until the ACORN scandal it’s been “move along…nothing to see here” with the USCCB. Maybe NOW something will happen. But then, I’m not holding my breath either.

  5. Dave N. says:

    For example, here’s a Neuhaus article from First Things dated last November on this topic:

    http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2008/11/obama-and-the-bishops

    Neuhaus makes a glaring error however–the organization is indeed still called the CATHOLIC Campaign for Human Development. His assertion that the bishops dropped the name “Catholic” is either confusing or simply wishful thinking on his part.

    And Notre Dame is still a Catholic University the last time I checked.

    John Allen somewhat cynically points out major schmoozing of the bishops by the CCHD:

    http://ncronline.org/node/12265

    “Several bishops said privately that they turned out for the CCHD reception in large part to show support, especially in the lead-in to the annual collection later this month. (To be fair, invitations distributed for the event promised “heavy hors d’oeuvres” and an “open bar,” which may also have had something to do with it.)

    In effect, the reception sent a signal that the recent controversies have not caused the bulk of the bishops to lose confidence in the CCHD….”

  6. ssoldie says:

    Do I see a problem? I call it Decietful Propaganda has been going on for 40+ years, some do not see it by choice, some will not admit to it, and many are too willing to succumb to propaganda which flatters their sence of self esteem. Now tell me how do we solve the problem, with God’s truth, not ambiguity.

  7. Frank H says:

    Not only should the CCHD de-fund those groups found to be in violation of the terms of the donations, they should demand refunds of previous years’ donations.

  8. ckdexterhaven says:

    I thought last year, was the year that CCHD “cleaned up” its act.

  9. EXCHIEF says:

    Yes there is a problem…the continuing problem of the U S Bishops focusing so much on social justice and feel good issues without insuring that the basic moral principles and teachings of the Church are adhered to. This problem manifests itself not just in giving money to groups who act contrary to Church teaching but in the failure of most priests to follow the rubrics. Another manifestation of this feel good first problem is the lack of focus of most priests on teaching. They would rather “perform” a homily than risk offending some of those in the pews by discussing what the Church’s real position is on abortion, homosexuality, contraception, etc.

    The real problem is that most Bishops have no concept of what LEADERSHIP is. They think it is a popularity contest. To my knowledge principles of leadership have never been taught in seminary. Too many Bishops have ascended to that rank because they happen to be good at one aspect of leadership—financial management. They, excuse the expression, “suck” when it comes to personnel matters, motivation of priests to say the black and do the red and having the intestinal fortitude to say NO, when NO is the only good answer.

  10. Central Valley says:

    How many bishops will be brave enough to refuse taking up the annual collection. I am sure that here int he diocese of Fresno, Ca., the CCHD collection will be pushed down everyones throat as usual. I usually put a protest statement in the envelope. CCHD is very left leaning so I doubt the party will permit Bp. Steinbock from blocking the collection this year.

  11. Clinton says:

    As Dave N. points out, this fiasco is nothing new. It’s been years since I contributed to this farce. It’s much safer to send donations to
    organizations that one can trust to be Catholic.

    Unfortunately, with a bureaucracy such as the USCCB, no one need accept responsibility for the ongoing scandal that is the “C”CHD.
    No heads will roll. No resignations will be handed in, and no apologies will be issued. And, evidently, the complacent administration
    of the USCCB can rouse itself from its stupor only so much as to make cosmetic changes. Basta. Not one more dime from me.

    For the life of me, I cannot imagine pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood contributing funds to organizations hostile to their
    evil ethos. It seems that they have a clearer idea of how to further their agenda than the USCCB. Perhaps our leaders could drop by
    Planned Parenthood and see how it’s done.

    I would like to think that this is not the result of treachery in the part of anonymous apparatchiks at the USCCB. However, stupidity
    and weakness and complacency, while not treachery, can perform the same function.

  12. Supertradmom says:

    Maybe we should boycott the Annual Appeal until this sort of thing is cleared-up. The money is our money.

    We stopped giving to the local seminary when we discovered that a pro-abortion, pro-contraceptive speaker was invited into the classes for “another view” by one of the priests.

  13. hzab says:

    Even if the bishop allows the collection, can a parish choose to not collect for it? If not, is there anything against distributing your own information about what the CCHD spends its money on in your local parish?
    Even the most politically/spiritually unmotivated Catholic in the pews would be on board for any reason to not pull out their wallet a second time…

  14. Central Valley says:

    Supertradmom, money is the key. We pulled out kids from catholic schools in the diocese of Fresno because they were inviting a pro gay mariage pro abortion political activist to come to elementry schools to speak to students. Why pay a monthly tuition to a “catholic” school and endager your childs faith and soul. Why give oney to a “catholic” organixation that spend money contrary to catholic teachings? There are many good religous orders and organizations to send money to. CCHD is not one of them and the bishops should realize this.

  15. Last year everyone was stuffing paper acorns in their envelopes and putting them in the basket.

    This year we could stuff more acorns into the envelopes, but they ended funding of that.

    Perhaps we should be creative about what we could stuff in those envelopes this time around.

    While some good may come from CCHD, the ends don’t justify the means. Hence, if there is even a sniff that money is going for some immoral things, I don’t see how we can support it.

  16. zama202 says:

    Just donate to the FSSP, ICKSP, SSPX and other traditional orders.

    When I feel generous I throw a nickel in my parish collection basket, I haven’t contributed to the annual “Cardinal’s Campaign” in at least a decade and I tear up alumni solicitation letters from my “Catholic” college and “Catholic” law school alma maters when they arrive.

    There’s an old boxing phrase “Kill the body and the head will die”. Stop giving bad people money and they will go away.

    Charles from the Bronx

  17. JimGB says:

    I for one will not give to the collection and will instead send the empty envelope to the Archbishop with a note. This is simply inexcusable and apparently the only way we register our strong condemnation is through withholding donations.

  18. EXCHIEF says:

    I am trying to get a group from our parish that refuses to donate to the Bishop’s CCHD fund to band together and all of us donate for a scholarship at a particular new but very orthodox CATHOLIC COLLEGE

  19. TMA says:

    When this collection came up last year, our pastor put it to us this way – “If you still wish to contribute to this, there is a collection basket near the Pieta, and one in the confessional.”

  20. Agnes says:

    Absolutely frustrating. The bureaucracy of the Church has become a mammoth burden to itself, and in this case, a danger to souls. Wheat and chaff.

  21. catholicmidwest says:

    In this diocese, the decision was made a long time ago (in the middle of the dissent years), to forgo various second collections in favor of a bundling of all causes into a “Diocesan Services Fund.” Someone–I don’t know who–decides what the “worthy” causes are and we are expected to just contribute. A lot of people do. Not me. I never will.

    I give to specific targeted causes chosen for their effectiveness and faithfulness. I make sure I don’t pay for things like this, nor do I pay for “parish lay ministers” who desire to become “professionals,” and make it their lives’ work to torture us with poor catechesis and awful music. We don’t need them.

  22. catholicmidwest says:

    You’re right. The only way to get rid of this corruption is to starve it out. The bureaucracy of the USCCB has been busy demonstrating for years that they’re not going to get rid of it willingly as long as they can pay for such things. It’s endemic in the system.

  23. MikeM says:

    I’m a student and am pretty much broke, but for what it’s worth, I withhold my meager contribution from the CCHD collection. I plan on giving a few dollars to the K of C Culture of Life fund this year in place of the CCHD donation.

  24. MichaelJ says:

    Before withholding a contribution, I recommend checking with the diocese first. I wrote after reading the California Catholic Daily account of the continuing scandals. I was pleasantly surprised by the reply.

    I was told that the Diocese of Birmingham does not contribute to the CCHD but instead contributes to (all) local charities vetted by the diocese itself and only to those that are actually Catholic.

  25. wmeyer says:

    Do I see a problem? Emphatically, yes.

    The problem I see is that some of our bishops — sinners like the rest of us — have clearly fallen victim to the McBriens, Rohrs, and Chittisters of the world. This is why it is so very wrong that such folks continue to have the platform from which to preach views which are not, to be kind, in communion with the Church. And views which, in some cases, appear to me to cross the line into heresy.

    When a shepherd attempts to lead his flock to a wolf’s den, he is no longer fit to shepherd.

  26. Rellis says:

    I wrote an article on the CCHD and ACORN for biggovernment.org, who are the people who ran the ACORN sting operation:

    http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/18/acorn-and-the-catholic-church-a-legacy-of-big-hearts-and-small-brains/

  27. irishgirl says:

    A big YES-there is a problem!

    If I had money to give, I would NOT give it to bureaucracies such as the USCC and CCHD. I’d rather give it to good religious communities and colleges that are truly CATHOLIC.

    These behemoths should be starved!

  28. “Social Justice” says it all! These two words are magic sacred words for the liberals. It sounds so innocuous, but it is insidious. It is a way to hide the Liberal Marxist agenda. When an average person looks at his parish’s bulletin and sees a “Social Justice” meeting planned he probably pays little attention to it and that is just what “they” want. If that person went to that meeting it no doubt would be a meeting of the local parish “Communist Party” discussing the need for the parish to protest Nuclear Weapons, the War, and to support the homosexual outreach ministry, the ordination of women and other radical agendas. This group would be in league with other such groups from other denominations in the area. The Liberals infecting our Church want all Catholics to be and think like them and will not stop until the world is the social justice utopia that they seek… a atheistic communist state that controls all from cradle (if they let you be carried to term) to grave. Social Justice groups must be purged from our Church if we want to really reform the Church. Groups like these and those who are involved are part of the problem with priests being unable to do the red.

  29. Kimberly says:

    I have always wondered, really, what is the reason for the USCCB? What have they given us? And how obedient are they?

  30. mpm says:

    Tridentine Catholic,

    And yet, “social justice” is an authentic Catholic concept. I recognize your point that there are groups of activists who do try to use the mantle of “the Church” to cover over their own personal/group agendas. One could even argue that there is no place in a parish, or a diocese, or the USCCB for such groups of activists.

    However, trying to do that by arguing against the moral concept of “social justice” is the wrong way to do it. The right way, IMO, is to out-social-justice these petty political pullulators.

    A careful reading of Pope Benedict’s recent Caritas in veritate, at least in my reading of it, shows that “social justice” depends on “solidarity” with others (just as Karol Wojtyla wrote about that in The Acting Person back in 1981). Moved by that sense of solidarity, we ought to “reach out” in some fashion to assist their needs. This is the principle of “subsidiarity”, which means that only if we cannot, or do not, reach out to those needs, does any higher element of society have any right to “butt in”.

    If you think about it, the essence of this teaching reflects the modus operandi of the Church, as well as the Mosaic Covenant (OT), down through the millenia. It is ours, unless we let it be high-jacked.

  31. mpm says:

    Comment by Rellis — 23 September 2009 @ 6:46 am

    Ryan,

    Nice article, and you got quite a response!

  32. Prudentius says:

    Tridentine Catholic wrote,
    “Social Justice” says it all!…It is a way to hide the Liberal Marxist agenda…discussing the need for the parish to protest Nuclear Weapons, the War, and to support the homosexual outreach ministry.”

    This is just silly prejudice, and what may I ask is actually wrong with protesting against Nuclear weapons? I assume by that you think they are just fine eh? You are making a huge leap to assume that the very same people also support homosexual outreach ministry.

    Social justice remians a vitally important part of the Church and the faith. I would agree that it requires renewal, clearly it has been infilitrated by liberals to a certain extent. But we cannot simply abandon the entire concept of Justice and Peace. I see more and more an need to re-visit an authentic Catholic Justice and Peace tradition.

  33. robtbrown says:

    I wrote an article on the CCHD and ACORN for biggovernment.org, who are the people who ran the ACORN sting operation:

    http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/18/acorn-and-the-catholic-church-a-legacy-of-big-hearts-and-small-brains/
    Comment by Rellis

    A good article–canon law says:

    Can. 222 §1. The Christian faithful are obliged to assist with the needs of the Church so that the Church has what is necessary for divine worship, for the works of the apostolate and of charity, and for the decent support of ministers.

    Although this obligation can be interpreted as assisting with the needs of the parish, there seems to be nothing in it that says that such financial assistance must be directed to a parish.

  34. Rob Cartusciello says:

    Kimberly, there are some good folks at the USCCB. I’ve worked with some of them in DC had had positive experiences. The problem, of course, is that there are those there with liberal & ‘appeasement’ theological views that cause problems like the one here.

    The house needs to be put in order, and the elephants ushered out of the living room.

    In the meantime, I have found it particularly effective to send $1 to these organizations and tell them exactly where the rest of my donation went.

    I find the Catholic Near East Welfare Association to be a particularly good beneficiary, as you can designate which projects you wish to support.

  35. dcs says:

    This is just silly prejudice, and what may I ask is actually wrong with protesting against Nuclear weapons?

    Indeed, Card. Ottaviani is said to have urged the Second Vatican Council to condemn the use of nuclear weapons.

  36. NLucas says:

    Prudentius: “Social justice remians a vitally important part of the Church and the faith.”

    Quite true. I think that at least part of the problem is that the concept of social justice has been hijacked and made both modern and post-modern in many Catholic quarters. It seems that the idea that God as the sole and authoritative source of justice and truth has been replaced–replaced by either a notion of collective humanity as the source of justice and truth or even the belief that justice itself is simply the result of human experience. In those cases, I would argue that social justice ceases to function as a vitally important part of the Church and the Faith.

    In Christ,

  37. ndmom says:

    Yes, there is a problem.
    It was great that so many of the good bishops chimed in last spring to condemn Obama’s honorary degree here at ND.
    But it would be even better if the good bishops had gotten their own house in order before they did so.

  38. robtbrown says:

    This is just silly prejudice, and what may I ask is actually wrong with protesting against Nuclear weapons? I assume by that you think they are just fine eh?

    Two points:

    First, nuclear weapons were very important in the Cold War when Western Europe was fortified against a possible Soviet invasion. Without those nukes a massive increase in troop strength would have been necessary. In fact, when the US bishops were working on their War and Peace pastoral letter, the West German bishops stepped in (libs tried to accuse the Vatican, but it was the Germans) to try to get the US bishops (read: Cardinal Bernardin) to back off.

    Second, the US has conventional weapons that are far more destructive than some of our smaller nukes.

    Social justice remians a vitally important part of the Church and the faith. I would agree that it requires renewal, clearly it has been infilitrated by liberals to a certain extent. But we cannot simply abandon the entire concept of Justice and Peace. I see more and more an need to re-visit an authentic Catholic Justice and Peace tradition.
    Comment by Prudentius

    My problem with the SJ issues is that they seem to take the form of swarmy generalities (War No More!), or they end up being adopted by quasi Marxists.

  39. robtbrown says:

    Indeed, Card. Ottaviani is said to have urged the Second Vatican Council to condemn the use of nuclear weapons.
    Comment by dcs

    He was a Pacifist.

  40. The words “social justice” make me cringe because of the hijacking that’s taken place, I don’t pretend to speak for Tridentine Catholic, but I think this is what he’s intending..

    Social Justice groups that do not practice an authentic form of Catholic Social Justice should indeed be purged from parishes.

  41. Prudentius says:

    “when Western Europe was fortified against a possible Soviet invasion. Without those nukes a massive increase in troop strength would have been necessary.”

    To be fair, it was actually the Soviets who had to aqcuire Nuclear weapons as a deterent against the west since we had actually used them in Japan and were planning to use them in Korea.

    Also, that statement is a personal opinion which has no roots in Catholic teaching. It might make sense if you are looking at this on behalf of a nation state but there is no possible way you can use this to attack Catholics who are today seeking end to Nuclear proliferation which will lead us all to mass destruction. These people are not Marxists they are devout Roman Catholics!
    Marxist are not pacifist or even anti-war. Try this for statement…
    My problem with the Traditionalists is that they seem to take the form of swarmy conservatives, capitalists, monarchists and militarists (More War!), or they end up being adopted by quasi Holocaust deniers.

    Just like your comment this is a wild generalization which has no basis in fact?

  42. Leonius says:

    When I give money to the Church I expect the Church to keep the money within the Church, not dole it out to secular groups, if I wanted to give the money to secular groups I would do that myself!

    One of the goals of Catholic charity is to give glory to God imo, this is not achieved by handing the money over to non-Catholic groups.

    ALL funding of non Catholic organisations by the Church should cease immediately.

  43. Prudentius says:

    Who’s doing the “Purging” Joe? Instead of such conforntational language and continuing to actively promote a split in the communion. Why don’t we instead try to come together as one “catholic” church.
    Why don’t we try changing the hearts and minds of these people through the use of Church teachings.

    Failing that we could try praying form them instead of Purging them (Prayer, anyone remember that?)

  44. Fr. John Mary says:

    If you want to contribute to a fledgling Catholic monastic community, and are tired of putting up with all of this questionable Catholic contribution to things that are absolutely against the Catholic faith, log onto: http://isjoseph.com.
    We will pray for your intentions and keep you in our hearts each day as we pray before our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, offer the Holy Mass in the EF and OF forms of the Roman Rite, and pray the Divine Office. Thank you.

  45. Dave N. says:

    *I was told that the Diocese of Birmingham does not contribute to the CCHD but instead contributes to (all) local charities vetted by the diocese itself and only to those that are actually Catholic.*

    While this is absolutely fantastic, I think this also leads the bishops who chose to avoid the CCHD feel that they are off the moral hook in this situation. IMO, they are NOT since the organization is run by the USCCB, of which they are a part and are assumed to support, unless they have publicly declared otherwise and/or actually done something to clean up the situation.

    Silence is the real enemy here.

  46. Dave N. says:

    *I wrote an article on the CCHD and ACORN for biggovernment.org, who are the people who ran the ACORN sting operation:*

    *http://biggovernment.com/2009/09/18/acorn-and-the-catholic-church-a-legacy-of-big-hearts-and-small-brains/*

    *Comment by Rellis — 23 September 2009 @ 6:46 am*

    An excellent strategy for keeping your own money within your own parish! Anything that’s undesignated (regular pledge or collection) is essentially the property of the bishop–who can do with it as he sees fit. I think very few people realize this.

  47. robtbrown says:

    To be fair, it was actually the Soviets who had to aqcuire Nuclear weapons as a deterent against the west since we had actually used them in Japan

    And it would deter the West from doing what? In case you didn’t notice, the Soviet Union enslaved Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary. And it was the US who was able to get the Soviets to leave Austria and Greece.

    BTW, there was much more damage and loss of life in Japan from the fire bombing than from the nuclear bombs.

    and were planning to use them in Korea.

    Says who?

    Also, that statement is a personal opinion which has no roots in Catholic teaching.

    What statement?

    It might make sense if you are looking at this on behalf of a nation state but there is no possible way you can use this to attack Catholics who are today seeking end to Nuclear proliferation which will lead us all to mass destruction.

    Who’s attacking Catholics or attacking those trying to end nuclear proliferation? I simply said that it’s a mistake to reduce War and Peace issues to the problems presented by nuclear weapons.

    Did you ever hear of Fuel Air bombs (non nuclear)?

    Or Electromagnetic bombs (also non nuclear)? They kill no one and raze no edifice but instead destroy all the electrical circuits within a certain radius.

    These people are not Marxists they are devout Roman Catholics!
    Marxist are not pacifist or even anti-war.

    I never said they were.

    My comment directly concerned the reference to Social Justice. Questions of War and Peace are matters of Justice, but are usually not considered questions of Social Justice.

    Social Justice concerns economic and social equality within a society.

    Try this for statement…
    My problem with the Traditionalists

    I have said here before that I am not a Traditionalist. I am a Thomist.

    is that they seem to take the form of swarmy conservatives, capitalists, monarchists and militarists (More War!), or they end up being adopted by quasi Holocaust deniers.

    I consider myself a left wing conservative. You can fill in the rest of the blanks yourself.

    Just like your comment this is a wild generalization which has no basis in fact?
    Comment by Prudentius

    ??????

  48. robtbrown says:

    An excellent strategy for keeping your own money within your own parish! Anything that’s undesignated (regular pledge or collection) is essentially the property of the bishop—who can do with it as he sees fit. I think very few people realize this.
    Comment by Dave N.

    The relationship of the parish to the diocese in the US is quirky.

    According to canon law the parish is a juridical person, with the rights of a person. US dioceses, however, are corporations sole, which, as you note, gives the bishop sole ownership–and of course, undermines (and for that matter, probably contradicts) the status of the parish as a juridical person.

  49. BLC says:

    …Might get me jumped on but I agree 100% with Tridentine Catholic on this. (I would not call myself a conservative, either – I’m consistently pro-life – so no death penalty, no war and no abortion – and small government economically. I’d be more Thomas Woods than anyone else politically speaking…) I know there are those here who are more in the distributist tradition (and would thus fervently disagree with me on matters of economics) but I don’t think they’re the same people who Tridentine Catholic (or myself) are thinking of when referring to the Marxists in the ranks and I’m sure most would have similar concerns about the types of people we’d be referring to – distributism =/= Marxism or progressivism, for a start!

    The hijacking of the Catholic Peace & Justice tradition worries me because of what they’re promoting (feminism, socialism, etc.) in place of things like corporal works of mercy, pro-life initiatives, etc. etc. Also, a lot of the people involved in such movements are the very same people who are theologically and liturgically liberal (and no one could really accuse most distributists of that! From my experience, most are orthodox and lean towards the very traditional.) I think Peace & Justice are worthy aims – but like Prudentius said, needs renewal and a more authentically Catholic focus.

    I hope I haven’t offended anyone in making this comment, just wanted to add my opinion/support here. God bless Father Z and all his readers!

  50. yzerman123 says:

    This is a very sad incident indeed. However, at least the USCCB is investigating the matter and taking some action.

    Up here in Canada, we have a much worse scandal on our hands. The Canadian equivalent of the CCHD is funding about 40 pro-abortion groups in developing countries. Yet the Canadian bishops ignore the evidence and pretend that nothing wrong is happening. It’s so unreal.

  51. I’m with “ssoldie” and the others on this one. I know of parishes in my locale that don’t touch their annual campaign with a ten-foot pole. And if my pastor ever went along with it, he’d hear from me. And if he said his bishop made him do it, that bishop would hear from me. They’ve known about this shenanigans for years. YEARS, I tell you! The ties with ACORN are the final straw. I want my bishop to call for a scrapping of the whole kit and kaboodle. We can find any number of ways to serve the poor without serving a bunch of malfeasants. Throw the bums out, I say!!!

    (Did I spell “malfeasants” correctly, or did I just make up a new word?)

  52. Jordanes says:

    Prudentius has a problem with Traditionalists because they tend to be “conservatives, capitalists, monarchists.”

    And the problem with that is??