Catholic Relief Services insists on its fidelity to Church teaching [CWN]

[zab]

I know of no Church requirement to contribute to CRS. And, they are not above criticism where and when it is warranted, correct?

You want to save lives directly? How about contributing the the El Obeid Diocese in South Sudan, under the tutelage of Nobel Peace Price nominee Bishop Macram Gassis?

www.bishopgassis.org

I did not ask whether or not there was any Church requirement to contribute to CRS. Thank you for the recommendation, however, we already contribute to several other similar charities and are not able to take on any new ones at this time. The reason that I contribute to CRS is because it is good to have an organization that I can contribute to that helps out whenever natural disasters occur, including the latest with Hurricane Sandy. Can you name or recommend another major Catholic organization that helps out whereever natural disasters occur all over the world?

 

[zab]

According to 54 International Emergency Response experts, Catholic Relief Services rank 6th on their list of 11 outstanding nonprofits.
myphilanthropedia.org/top-nonprofits/international/emergency-response/2011

Some of you have said in other threads that there are many other organizations that one can give to that provides emergency relief. I want to know what they are. And I am not looking for an organization that just helps provide emergency relief to a limited area such as a few that have been mentioned. Many of us already have a list of charities that we give to. I am looking for an organization like CRS that provides emergency relief to nearly 100 countries so that when natural disasters occur like hurricanes, tsunamis, floods, etc. we can contribute to a Catholic organization that helps to get the necessary aid to these victims.

 

[Tigg]

We are called to use discernment and prayer (knowing that we have formed our consciences in accordance with truth) common sense, and right judgment in recognizing moral wrong. The reports on the past shenanigans of CRS are exhaustive…including one that refutes their claims re: fungibility. And actually, the choices CRS has made in contributing to contraception and other evils has undermined the good bishops who are still trying to teach that Humanae Vitae, was after all, completely correct.

 

[zab]

I agree with this. Like you, my “prayerful discernment, common sense and right judgement in recognizing moral wrong” in reviewing both sides has not persuaded me the CRS is not worth donating to. So I keep CRS on my list.

 

[MHichborn]

I do not know if what you say is true, that CRS is held to a lower standard than secular, non-Catholic entities.

See my point-by-point case above. I illustrate two very similar cases (that of CRS and that of the Land Stewardship Project) Land Stewardship Project’s membership in evil-acting organizations is condemned, and CRS’s membership in evil-acting organizations is defended. As the two cases are identical, and yet the outcomes are different, the only conclusion is that one is held to a higher standard than the other.

The responses and corrections that CRS has made following the recent attacks against them obviously have not been enough to please you (who has spent more time investigating them as well as CCHD than I).

That isn’t my concern in asking the question, “Why is CRS held to a lower standard than a secular, non-Catholic CCHD grantee?” CRS’ excuses are the same as LSP’s, and yet LSP’s excuses were not good enough for it to keep its funding. This is logically inconsistent.

My question to you is: What do you want us to do about it- stop contributing to CRS?

I’m not asking anyone to do anything. I am asking a very valid question about CRS, which no one seems to be capable of answering.

What major organization could you suggest for us to contribute to in order to help the needy people around the world including those who are effected by the most recent natural disaster.?

As far as I know, Cross International has no questionable affiliations, nor does it grant money to questionable organizations.

 

[jwinch2]

You may be right, and you may not. Let’s assume you are correct for a moment. Should we be funding stupidity when it takes them in a direction which is against the teachings of the Church on Faith and Morals? In that scenario, they are not ignorant of Church teaching, they are simply careless which is a major problem as well. Frankly, it is probably a bit of both. There are too many statements made by CRS personnel which support the idea of intent in sending resources in certain directions to ignore. However, there are probably some mistakes being made as well which end up with the same result.

Regardless, the persons talking about fungibility are right to a point, and very wrong to a point. Yes, money sent for a particular project can only be used to directly support that project. However, you purchase things which often, usually in fact, outlive the life of a particular project or program or are used for more than one thing at a time. Cars, computers, buildings, paying of bills (electric, water, etc.), staff, etc. can all provide double duty and offset expenditures in others areas, thus freeing up money which can be used by programs which might otherwise have to provide those things themselves.

I have been part of several research grants, programs, etc. where that is exactly what happens. We purchase a piece of equipment for that project out of our grant funds, but when that project is over the equipment stays and we use it for other projects. We pay our indirect costs to our university out of the grant which pays for things like the building electricity, etc. but elsewhere in the building there are projects going on which are not related to the one we are funded for, but which are happening at the same time.

Keeping money separated sounds nice and makes people feel better, but in practice it is of limited value. Its exactly the same as planned parenthood saying that they do not use taxpayer money to provide abortions. Sure, not directly, but they pay their electric bills, provide transportation, purchase equipment, pay staff, etc. and all of those things free up other money which can then be used to provide abortions. Its a question of direct support versus indirect support. CRS is providing indirect support in many cases, and apparently from the reports provided, direct support in others.

Whether this stems from evil intent or just plain stupidity as you suggested is ultimately irrelevant. It is happening nonetheless.

 

[MHichborn]

Not that I really want to side-track the conversation on this (‘cuz I don’t), as an economics major, I feel compelled to explain fungibility. The claim being made is that CRS’ grant to CARE was not “fungible” because it was given to CARE for a project that CARE would not have operated had it not been for the grant from CRS, and the money was isolated only to that project. Here’s the problem … fungibility is not limited to mere dollars. It is expanded to assets, which includes office space, paper, personnel, and any other resources that expand the organization’s size, scope, and reach. Furthermore, such a grant builds the organization’s prestige, making it appear as an organization worthy of funding from pew-sitting Catholics BECAUSE it received funds from a Catholic agency.

If, by CRS’ grant, the money given provided CARE access to areas it would not have had before, expanded the organization’s size through assets which can be reallocated after the completion of the project, or gave CARE entry to vulnerable Catholic populations it would not have had access to otherwise, then the grant was fungible, because that’s how fungibility works.

 

[Holly3278]

Personally I am just going to have to trust our bishops that they are doing the right thing. I am not about to judge them.

 

[MHichborn]

Personally I am just going to have to trust our bishops that they are doing the right thing. I am not about to judge them.

I don’t know that anybody here has judged any bishop … every action and response regarding the CRS debacle has all been done by staff members.

 

[Tigg]

Someone at CRS does not understand the meaning of fungibility - that it goes way beyond a booked accounting entry and despite the CRS double talk, if the money given to CARE in ANY WAY, helped expand that organization (and how could it have not done so?) then the $$ was, indeed fungible. See comments by other two posters who have adequately explained this.

Hanlon’s Razor

“Do not attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity.”

The CRS annual budget (2010) was $823 million Catholic dollars. What a great responsibility that amount of money entails and how much more the culpability, with all their resources, should the money be used for purposes contra to the Kingdom values of Christ.

I sense a hardness of heart here, (not you specifically Tigg, but the general tone of the posts) and a sort of unwillingness to forgive, which I believe to be lacking in Catholic Christian Charity.

Hardness of heart is NOT the issue here. Good Catholics know the difference between an unwillingness to forgive and the need to defend the faith. CRS has played the same stunts more than once and with no contrition of heart, nor any concern for the scandal given to the faithful.

 

[po18guy]

I don’t think anyone did. One tendency today is to ascribe the motive of anger or hatred to what amounts to concerned criticism. CRS is a human organization, and like the rest of us, needs correction from time to time. This is just one of those times. I have sent them cash for decades and will happily do so again - if I can be reasonably assured that objective evil has been eliminated from the results of those contributions. Their press responses are weak and carefully worded.

Do we do our job when the boss is watching? Yes.
Do we slack off when the boss is gone? Yes.
Time for the boss to watch.

 

[po18guy]

Not that I really want to side-track the conversation on this (‘cuz I don’t), as an economics major, I feel compelled to explain fungibility. The claim being made is that CRS’ grant to CARE was not “fungible” because it was given to CARE for a project that CARE would not have operated had it not been for the grant from CRS, and the money was isolated only to that project. Here’s the problem … fungibility is not limited to mere dollars. It is expanded to assets, which includes office space, paper, personnel, and any other resources that expand the organization’s size, scope, and reach. Furthermore, such a grant builds the organization’s prestige, making it appear as an organization worthy of funding from pew-sitting Catholics BECAUSE it received funds from a Catholic agency.

If, by CRS’ grant, the money given provided CARE access to areas it would not have had before, expanded the organization’s size through assets which can be reallocated after the completion of the project, or gave CARE entry to vulnerable Catholic populations it would not have had access to otherwise, then the grant was fungible, because that’s how fungibility works.

Thank you! This helps explain the “big picture”, which is always helpful in examining a given situation. As an aside, Never in my life have I received solicitations from CARE - until CRS entered into this relationship with them. Now, I am bombarded, not only with mailings from CARE, but from nearly every other secular organization that CARE deals with. And, a little research reveals that “reproductive health” is part of nearly every one of those organizations, even the emergency response agencies. Women in war-torn nations may have been violated and need “reproductive” aid. Even Forrest Gump can tell you what that means.

 

[zab]

As far as I know, Cross International has no questionable affiliations, nor does it grant money to questionable organizations.

As far as you know? You haven’t done as thorough of an investigation on them?

 

[jwinch2]

As far as I know, Cross International has no questionable affiliations, nor does it grant money to questionable organizations.

This one, correct?

crosscatholic.org/

There are two Cross Internationals, one is the one I linked above, and the other appears to be Christian, but not Catholic.

Just making sure.

 

[zab]

Thank you! This helps explain the “big picture”, which is always helpful in examining a given situation. As an aside, Never in my life have I received solicitations from CARE - until CRS entered into this relationship with them. Now, I am bombarded, not only with mailings from CARE, but from nearly every other secular organization that CARE deals with. And, a little research reveals that “reproductive health” is part of nearly every one of those organizations, even the emergency response agencies. Women in war-torn nations may have been violated and need “reproductive” aid. Even Forrest Gump can tell you what that means.

It sounds like you are trying to associate your receiving solicitations from CARE and their other affliates as somehow being associated with CRS. That is and unfair assumption. I have been giving to CRS every month for years and we do not receive any solicitations from CARE.

 

[MHichborn]

This one, correct?

crosscatholic.org/

There are two Cross Internationals, one is the one I linked above, and the other appears to be Christian, but not Catholic.

Just making sure.

Yes, that is the one. My wife and I have contributed to them several times, and I have never seen anything about them related to organizations like CARE International, I have never seen them issue a grant to a questionable organization, and as far as I can tell, they are not members of questionable groups.

In effect, they appear to be what Catholic Relief Services is SUPPOSED to be.

 

[zab]

Yes, that is the one. My wife and I have contributed to them several times, and I have never seen anything about them related to organizations like CARE International, I have never seen them issue a grant to a questionable organization, and as far as I can tell, they are not members of questionable groups.

In effect, they appear to be what Catholic Relief Services is SUPPOSED to be.

On their website, it says that when disaster strikes they do [form partnerships with other churches and Christian organizations throughout the world](Cross Catholic Outreach | Vatican-Approved Catholic Nonprofit | Delivering food, shelter, and hope to the poorest of the poor Work). And we know that not every Church and Christian Organization hold to the same teachings as the Catholic Church regarding artificial contraception.
also, I may have missed it, but I did not see a mission statement like that of CRS declaring fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[MHichborn]

On their website, it says that when disaster strikes they do [form partnerships with other churches and Christian organizations throughout the world](Cross Catholic Outreach | Vatican-Approved Catholic Nonprofit | Delivering food, shelter, and hope to the poorest of the poor Work). And we know that not every Church and Christian Organization hold to the same teachings as the Catholic Church regarding artificial contraception.
also, I may have missed it, but I did not see a mission statement like that of CRS declaring fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

1. Forming a partnership is not the same thing as giving money. CRS gives money to CARE, MEDiCAM, COREGroup, and a host of other “unsavory” organizations. I have never criticized CRS for “working” with others … only that they give money to bad actors.
2. Professing fidelity is not the same as living it. Judas betrayed Jesus by smothering his face with kisses, and there was not a “declaration of fidelity” from all of the Apostles. “You shall know them by their fruits …”

 

[po18guy]

It sounds like you are trying to associate your receiving solicitations from CARE and their other affliates as somehow being associated with CRS. That is and unfair assumption. I have been giving to CRS every month for years and we do not receive any solicitations from CARE.

Decades of donations to CRS without a peep from CARE or the various associated agencies. Then, CRS forms an association with CARE and I get bombarded. To you, this may mean nothing. Mere coincidence. Happenstance. Luck of the draw.

Call me rash, paranoid, whatever, but I faced armed criminals for 29 years and survived by employing my primitive and admittedly limited abilities at deductive reasoning. Effect always traces to cause.

 

[po18guy]

1. Forming a partnership is not the same thing as giving money. CRS gives money to CARE, MEDiCAM, COREGroup, and a host of other “unsavory” organizations. I have never criticized CRS for “working” with others … only that they give money to bad actors.
2. Professing fidelity is not the same as living it. Judas betrayed Jesus by smothering his face with kisses, and there was not a “declaration of fidelity” from all of the Apostles. “You shall know them by their fruits …”

Like the USCCB (which is not entirely Bishops) CRS seems to be some sort of sacred cow, and immune from criticism or inquiry. The following is not a good investigational posture…