CRS does NOT evangelize?

[graceandglory]

I agree with this author.
Why promote a “Catholic” organization that doesn’t share their faith?
I don’t see any difference between CRS and others. Now I think I would rather promote a more evangelical organization like Compassion, Intl, or World Vision.
What do you say?

catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=787

Didn’t Pope John Paul II speak to this when he said,
"The missionary Church is certainly involved on these fronts but her primary task lies elsewhere: the poor are hungry for God, not just for bread and freedom."

 

[manualman]

This is one of those tricky situations that doesn’t translate well into “official policy.”

On the one hand, it is true that it does no real good to feed a starving sinner if you refuse to ALSO inform him of the source of Hope that has inspired you to do so. On the other hand, in places like muslim countries the powers that be restrict ANY sort of evangelization that comes along with material aid.

All in all, I think the author is being too harsh based on the facts in evidence. I don’t see that CRS made this an official global policy. Isn’t it possible that they’ve made it the ‘formal’ policy in muslim countries as a first step of SHOWING (rather than telling) the people there that christianity manifests itself in acts of love, not the untruths they are typically told about christianity in the Madrassas?

 

[graceandglory]

Hi manualman,
thanks for reading the article and offering your thoughts! Much appreciated.
I hope others will weigh in, especially those who support CRS with their dollars, and can share with me how CRS spreads the Good News.

Because the Peace Corps does as much, if they both leave out Christ, as the source of all hope and salvation.

 

[SonCatcher]

It is a powerful evangelization in itself to render assistance to those who are not “our own.” Those who receive assistance know the religious identity of CRS workers. They have experienced the love of Christ through them. For CRS workers to complicate the matter by uttering Scripture, etc while the receipients of their care are worring about loved ones is superfluous.

“Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”
-St Francis of Assisi

 

[tafan]

I support CRS with my dollars. I guess I don’t expect them to be an evangelical organization, just an aid organization. That is what they advertise themselves as, so that is what I expect. And in general,they are very good at this. Now, I would not give to the charities you mentioned, because they seem to be protestant. If they are evangelizing in third world countries, I suspect they are evangelizing Catholics. Peace Corps? CRS is a much better organization IMO.
Now I do give to good Catholic missionary organizaions which to evangelize, Aid to the Church in Need is a very good example, as they support a lot of seminaries in third world countries. Research good religious orders, who are missionary in character, and who are faithful to the church’s teachings.

 

[Godfollower]

It is a powerful evangelization in itself to render assistance to those who are not “our own.” Those who receive assistance know the religious identity of CRS workers. They have experienced the love of Christ through them. For CRS workers to complicate the matter by uttering Scripture, etc while the receipients of their care are worring about loved ones is superfluous.

**“Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary **use words.”
-St Francis of Assisi

This is the answer, exactly. As some of the saints have put it in the educational context: We don’t teach them because they’re Catholic. We teach them because we’re Catholic.

Give them the aid; it’s our Christian duty. If you also want to support missionaries, there are Catholic organizations for that, too.

 

[Barbkw]

I can’t stand the thought of any person (of any religion or non-religion) starving to death for lack of food. I give to CRS because I want to know that the money primarily focuses on the continued ability to provide food for the needy.

 

[manualman]

Just 'cause I’m an ornery cuss that way, there IS a point where an organization can be guilty of “putting its lamp under a basket.” I seem to recall that being described as a bad thing.

One of the major faults I find with government welfare programs is that they focus exclusively on meeting the material need. In true christian charity, THREE things occur:

1. The material need is met
2. The giver is changed for meeting Christ in the needy.
3. The receiver is changed for meeting Christ in the giver.

If the aid organization becomes entirely secular in identity and ONLY accomplishes goal #1 above, it has only achieved the LEAST goal of true charity. But from here, I;m not qualified to judge if CRS has made that mistake or not.

 

[Barbkw]

… there IS a point where an organization can be guilty of “putting its lamp under a basket.”

“Hi, I’m from Catholic Relief Services here to provide you with water, food etc. so that you can get back on your feet.”

 

[manualman]

“Hi, I’m from Catholic Relief Services here to provide you with water, food etc. so that you can get back on your feet.”

Excellent.

Unless the worker in question never actually meets the needy person because they do the hard logistics stuff at a central facility and local labor does the delivery. Or unless the CRS guy doesn’t speak the language and the translator just says, “he brings food and tents.” No doubt, meeting part 1 of charity has value, just LESS in the LONG run than #s 2 and 3.

Remember, I’m arguing both sides of the street here. The article just doesn’t tell us enough to make a judgement on CRS. It could go either way.

 

[Carlan]

Catholics give to “Catholic Relief Services” to help the devastated of the world in the way they need it the most .
.The "Propagation of the Faith"gives to the mission fields of the world.
The two very basic Christian charities, Peace, Carlan

 

[beafedor]

I support Catholic Relief Services and I don’t see what is the problem here. Jesus didn’t come to tell the apostles to write a Sola Scriptura book and to distribute it to people. He sent them to preach in words, preach in their actions and do His work and that’s what Catholic Relief Services does. A lot of people serving CRS are religious. So they work for a Catholic service, they wear a habit and a cross, they run/work for Catholic schools, Catholic hospitals, Catholic orphanages, people call them Sister, Brother, Father or Mother. Yes in some countries, they could be accused of proselytism and their mission would be compromised so they have to be careful. Does it mean that they don’t preach in different ways? I don’t believe so. Since when being a Sola Scriptura person makes you a better servant of Christ?

 

[tafan]

manualman:

If the aid organization becomes entirely secular in identity and ONLY accomplishes goal #1 above, it has only achieved the LEAST goal of true charity. But from here, I;m not qualified to judge if CRS has made that mistake or not.

I do not believe that CRS has made this mistake. I do not see the CRS as even close to entirely secular identity. Its just that they are not a missionary religious order.

The other thing to keep in mind, a lot of their focus is targeted as relief, ie kind of a Catholic Red Cross. For example, Haiti after the earthquake, responding to the tsunami a couple of years ago. In these cases, it is hard to find fault with anyone focusing on the emergency at hand and tryin to save/help as many as possible.

 

[ANNE_2]

Please help me with this. I’m afraid to donate anything to any committee/organization of the USCCB for the following reasons:

1. Some of their public/political policies have nothing to do with Church Doctrine (as stated in the CCC);
2. The USCCB has a bloated 300+ employees who are expensive to support including benefits (High administration costs that must come out of donation dollars);
3. Their recommendations that we give up plastic bags and change our light bulbs for Lent is not going to Save Souls including my own - and this is the role of government not the Bishops
4. Their position in support of (fake) global warming/climate change has nothing to do with Church Doctrine.
5. Their support of the DREAM Act is not Church Dogma (Doctrine).
6. This is the first year that the USCCB has set up a Committee to try not to give our Dollars to pro-abortion, pro gay-marriage, and contraceptive social groups, against the complaints of Faithful Catholics for years.
7. In the US the CRS financially supports CLINIC - Catholic Legal Immigration Network for illegal aliens in the USA.
8. There is little evidence that those in the CRS overseas wear any kind of uniform or garb that identifies them as Christians. So how will they “know” them?
9. And since my income is limited, there are other Catholic Charities such as “Missionaires of the Poor” founded by Father Richard Ho Lung; Mother Teresa’s “Missionaires of Charity”, St. Vincent de Paul (local), and others that give directly to the poor without the additional administrative cut taken by the USCCB.
   Lastly with use of the internet, we can send donation dollars directly to Bishops who have Diocese in need such as “Catholic diocese of Sendai” (Japan), etc.

Thanks for helpful comments in advance.
Unless I get some new insight, I think we can make the USCCB limit ALL of their works to those of the Gospel by withholding our money. They seem to understand that.

 

[tafan]

Jeeze. Yes the USCCB is a bloated bureaucracy and yes it has made some, by no means all, bad judgements and decisions. But the CRS is not part of that bureaucracy. It was founded by the US Catholic Bishops in 1946, where as the USCCB was founded in 1966. I don’t know for sure what type of oversite the USCCB provides over CRS, but I am sure it is quite small.

If you have limited dollars for donations, by all means give to the very worthwhile Catholic charitable organizations you mention. But the rest of your post is a rant, pure and simple. Must everything associated with the word Bishop these days evoke such outrage?

 

[beafedor]

Please help me with this. I’m afraid to donate anything to any committee/organization of the USCCB for the following reasons:

1. Some of their public/political policies have nothing to do with Church Doctrine (as stated in the CCC);
2. The USCCB has a bloated 300+ employees who are expensive to support including benefits (High administration costs that must come out of donation dollars);
3. Their recommendations that we give up plastic bags and change our light bulbs for Lent is not going to Save Souls including my own - and this is the role of government not the Bishops
4. Their position in support of (fake) global warming/climate change has nothing to do with Church Doctrine.
5. Their support of the DREAM Act is not Church Dogma (Doctrine).
6. This is the first year that the USCCB has set up a Committee to try not to give our Dollars to pro-abortion, pro gay-marriage, and contraceptive social groups, against the complaints of Faithful Catholics for years.
7. In the US the CRS financially supports CLINIC - Catholic Legal Immigration Network for illegal aliens in the USA.
8. There is little evidence that those in the CRS overseas wear any kind of uniform or garb that identifies them as Christians. So how will they “know” them?
9. And since my income is limited, there are other Catholic Charities such as “Missionaires of the Poor” founded by Father Richard Ho Lung; Mother Teresa’s “Missionaires of Charity”, St. Vincent de Paul (local), and others that give directly to the poor without the additional administrative cut taken by the USCCB.
   Lastly with use of the internet, we can send donation dollars directly to Bishops who have Diocese in need such as “Catholic diocese of Sendai” (Japan), etc.

Thanks for helpful comments in advance.
Unless I get some new insight, I think we can make the USCCB limit ALL of their works to those of the Gospel by withholding our money. They seem to understand that.

3/ and 4/ sound like the Catholic Coalition for Climate Change. The USCCB did make a statement in 2001 about climate change but we didn’t have then all the info that we have now about the manipulated data. That’s my understanding. I have also read on this forum that the CCCC that I just mentioned is tied with heretic groups such as Catholics for Choice. What is the DREAM act?

 

[ANNE_2]

Jeeze. Yes the USCCB is a bloated bureaucracy and yes it has made some, by no means all, bad judgements and decisions. But the CRS is not part of that bureaucracy. It was founded by the US Catholic Bishops in 1946, where as the USCCB was founded in 1966. I don’t know for sure what type of oversite the USCCB provides over CRS, but I am sure it is quite small.

If you have limited dollars for donations, by all means give to the very worthwhile Catholic charitable organizations you mention. But the rest of your post is a rant, pure and simple. Must everything associated with the word Bishop these days evoke such outrage?

Here is the documentation that the CRS is part of the USCCB today. (What is may have been historically is another matter.) -
usccb.org/sdwp/globalpoverty/

I checked it prior to writing my post.

 

[tafan]

Here is the documentation that the CRS is part of the USCCB today. (What is may have been historically is another matter.) -
usccb.org/sdwp/globalpoverty/

I checked it prior to writing my post.

I did not say there was no association, I said the CRS was not part of the USCCB’s bloated bureaucracy. And I said any oversite provided by the USCCB was quite small. What on that web page contradicted what I said? It just talks about a partnership. Maybe I missed something. Better documentation please.

 

[ANNE_2]

3/ and 4/ sound like the Catholic Coalition for Climate Change. The USCCB did make a statement in 2001 about climate change but we didn’t have then all the info that we have now about the manipulated data. That’s my understanding. I have also read on this forum that the CCCC that I just mentioned is tied with heretic groups such as Catholics for Choice. What is the DREAM act?

Here are three links to the USCCB link on Global Warming now called Climate change -
nccbuscc.org/sdwp/ejp/climate/index.shtml
nccbuscc.org/sdwp/ejp/climate/wcd.shtml
usccb.org/sdwp/international/globalclimate.shtml

As far as I can tell, they removed the plastic bags and light bulbs for Lent, but this is still on their site.
usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/climate/homesteps.shtml

We all know about the secular environmental issues, which the government has been spending money to promulgate. Why is the USCCB using Catholic donation dollars to staff this.

 

[Corki]

I agree with this author.
Why promote a “Catholic” organization that doesn’t share their faith?
I don’t see any difference between CRS and others. Now I think I would rather promote a more evangelical organization like Compassion, Intl, or World Vision.
What do you say?

catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=787

Didn’t Pope John Paul II speak to this when he said,
"The missionary Church is certainly involved on these fronts but her primary task lies elsewhere: the poor are hungry for God, not just for bread and freedom."

There is nothing in that article to indicate that CRS is not engaged in evangelization. Everything they do is evangelization. They are not engaged in proselytising. Two related, but very diffierent, activities.

To proselytise in a Muslim country could endanger the lives of the very people CRS is trying to help. It should come as no surprise that CRS would have a policy against that.

I love Catholic Culture but I think they are over-reacting in this specific case.