CRS Document: “Do not forget to provide information on local condom provision”

  • Thread starter Thread starter MHichborn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MHichborn

Guest
In its defense of Daphyne Williams, CRS says, “As is expected of all staff at CRS, Daphyne has carefully abided by all Church teaching in her work for CRS, adhering to CRS’ strong position against the use of contraceptives and abortions.” If this is the case, then CRS needs to thoroughly address a CRS-published document she helped create which specifically instructs CRS staff to provide information to participants in its program on where to acquire condoms.
Click to expand...
Ever since the scandal that CRS donated $5.3 million to CARE, it insisted that it NEVER participated in the promotion of condoms, and that it relies in the excellence of its staff for the good work it does … and now, we find out that these “excellent” staffers (at least 10 CRS employees), produced a document that instructs CRS employees to inform CRS clients on where they can acquire condoms. This is not a mere “oversight” problem, folks … this is an institutional problem, and it needs to be addressed!

societasrestituo.org/2012/08/30/crs-document-do-not-forget-to-provide-information-on-local-condom-provision/
 
CRS responded to the problem of this document: CRS Revising HIV Prevention Document.

There are several problems with this response, and I do hope they will be addressed.
  1. The problem isn’t that it is in need of revision, the problem is that it was published at all. How on Earth did a CRS-published document have the sentence “Do not forget to provide information on local condom provision” in it at all?
  2. This document was published after having been worked on by no less than 10 upper-level CRS staffers. How does a CRS-published document that instructs CRS staffers to tell clients where to obtain condoms pass through no less than 10 upper level CRS staffers with that stuff still in it?
  3. In CRS’ response regarding its hiring of employees from pro-abortion organizations, it specifically stated:
There was also concern about the prior employment of Daphyne Williams who works in Nairobi for CRS. As is expected of all staff at CRS, Daphyne has carefully abided by all Church teaching in her work for CRS,** adhering to CRS’ strong position against the use of contraceptives and abortions.**
Click to expand...
However, Daphyne Williams was one of the writers and reviewers of this document. CRS needs to address the huge disparity between its defense of employees, claiming that they adhere to “CRS’ strong position against the use of contraceptives” and the existence of this document.
  1. CRS’ response said, “CRS does not purchase, promote or distribute condoms …” Clearly, this is false. This document, which instructs CRS staffers to tell clients where to get condoms totally contradicts this claim.
  2. CRS said, “nor do we provide funding to other organizations for the purchase, promotion or distribution of condoms.” Interesting choice of phraseology. While claiming not to give money to organizations for the purchase, promotion, or distribution of condoms, they certainly do give these organizations money, and CRS does not deny this. In fact, it celebrates this. Just look at their defenses of membership in CORE Group and MEDiCAM.
  3. CRS said, “We thank LifeSite News for pointing out this inconsistency, which will be corrected.” Sorry … but this is much more than a mere “inconsistency.” The pattern goes like this: CRS hires staff from pro-abortion, pro-contraception organizations. These employees go to forums and join the board/steering committees of pro-abortion/pro-contraception organizations, and these employees help create CRS documents that promote contraception.
The bottom line is … that document isn’t the only thing in need of correction.
 
Swiss_Guy said:
Why are you so intent on bringing CRS down?
Click to expand...
Please do not misunderstand my intentions. I have no desire to “bring CRS down.” My only intent is for CRS and other organizations that call themselves “Catholic” to actually BE Catholic.

For the record, CRS would not have even been a blip on my RADAR had it not given millions of dollars in grants to pro-abortion organizations, had it not been a dues-paying member of contraception-spreading and abortion-expanding organizations, had its employees not come from population-control organizations, and had CRS not actually produced its own documents which promote condom use.

If CRS was actually CATHOLIC, and abided by Catholic moral teaching, I might even be a donor. But I can’t sit back and let them bear a false witness against the Church by claiming to be Catholic while aiding the enemies of Christ.
 
There is a dispiriting feature common to many of the larger catholic charitable organizations out there in which the temporal charity work becomes the sole focus of the organization crowding out what is supposed to be the religious motivation for the work in the first place. I’ve seen similar problems in diocesan (not saying which one!) Catholic Charities organizations where people with worldviews totally incompatible with catholicism are employed by Catholic Charities simply because their secular credentials are in order.

I DO wish catholic organizations would start remembering their priorities again. Aiding people via the corporeal works of mercy is of no help if you are simultaneously corrupting them via a false version of the spiritual works of mercy.
 
manualman said:
There is a dispiriting feature common to many of the larger catholic charitable organizations out there in which the temporal charity work becomes the sole focus of the organization crowding out what is supposed to be the religious motivation for the work in the first place. I’ve seen similar problems in diocesan (not saying which one!) Catholic Charities organizations where people with worldviews totally incompatible with catholicism are employed by Catholic Charities simply because their secular credentials are in order.

I DO wish catholic organizations would start remembering their priorities again. Aiding people via the corporeal works of mercy is of no help if you are simultaneously corrupting them via a false version of the spiritual works of mercy.
Click to expand...
AMEN!!!
 
MHichborn said:
Please do not misunderstand my intentions. I have no desire to “bring CRS down.” My only intent is for CRS and other organizations that call themselves “Catholic” to actually BE Catholic.

For the record, CRS would not have even been a blip on my RADAR had it not given millions of dollars in grants to pro-abortion organizations, had it not been a dues-paying member of contraception-spreading and abortion-expanding organizations, had its employees not come from population-control organizations, and had CRS not actually produced its own documents which promote condom use.

If CRS was actually CATHOLIC, and abided by Catholic moral teaching, I might even be a donor. But I can’t sit back and let them bear a false witness against the Church by claiming to be Catholic while aiding the enemies of Christ.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks for explaining. 🙂
 
Several different stories on CRS broke today, and all of them seem to confirm that there is an institutional problem that needs a swift resolution.

According to various news stories:

  1. *]CRS released a statement that the condom-promoting document it produced was "written in 2009 by outside consultants” who failed to carry out “CRS staff prescribed revisions“.
    Source - Catholic Relief Services Responds to Criticism Over HIV Document, Employees

    *]Life Site News found SEVERAL more documents produced by CRS that promote condom use.
    Source - Caught red-handed: Catholic Relief Services documents promote condoms

    *]As it turns out, the document that CRS claimed was "written in 2009 by outside consultants” who failed to carry out “CRS staff prescribed revisions“ isn’t true. Societas Restituo published a screen caputre of the CRS document in question, where it explains that the first draft of the document was written by consultant Michael Rosati (who, the document indicates, was familiar with CRS’ policies because he had worked with CRS before) and two CRS employees, Kristin Weinhauer and Tran Thi Linh Giang. But after he wrote the first draft, it left his hands and went to CRS HQ and then to CRS Vietnam for final revisions.
    Source - New Evidence: Multiple CRS Documents Promote Condoms

    CRS needs to be investigated and its staff needs to be completely evaluated if this is going to be resolved.
 
manualman said:
There is a dispiriting feature common to many of the larger catholic charitable organizations out there in which the temporal charity work becomes the sole focus of the organization crowding out what is supposed to be the religious motivation for the work in the first place. I’ve seen similar problems in diocesan (not saying which one!) Catholic Charities organizations where people with worldviews totally incompatible with catholicism are employed by Catholic Charities simply because their secular credentials are in order.

I DO wish catholic organizations would start remembering their priorities again. Aiding people via the corporeal works of mercy is of no help if you are simultaneously corrupting them via a false version of the spiritual works of mercy.
Click to expand...
First and foremost our duty is to try to help people get to heaven.
 
Several different stories on CRS broke yesterday, and all of them seem to confirm that there is an institutional problem that needs a swift resolution.

According to various news stories:


  1. *]CRS released a statement that the condom-promoting document it produced was "written in 2009 by outside consultants” who failed to carry out “CRS staff prescribed revisions“.
    Source - Catholic Relief Services Responds to Criticism Over HIV Document, Employees

    *]Life Site News found SEVERAL more documents produced by CRS that promote condom use.
    Source - Caught red-handed: Catholic Relief Services documents promote condoms

    *]As it turns out, the document that CRS claimed was "written in 2009 by outside consultants” who failed to carry out “CRS staff prescribed revisions“ isn’t true. Societas Restituo published a screen caputre of the CRS document in question, where it explains that the first draft of the document was written by consultant Michael Rosati (who, the document indicates, was familiar with CRS’ policies because he had worked with CRS before) and two CRS employees, Kristin Weinhauer and Tran Thi Linh Giang. But after he wrote the first draft, it left his hands and went to CRS HQ and then to CRS Vietnam for final revisions.
    Source - New Evidence: Multiple CRS Documents Promote Condoms

    CRS needs to be investigated and its staff needs to be completely evaluated if this is going to be resolved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top