Lepanto and PRI catch CRS running contraceptive program

[zab]

zab, that’s why it’s important to do the research yourself. Voris, I discount, but Lepanto and HLI have an impeccable reputation. When CRS receives a $21 million dollar grant from the Gates and Warren Buffet Foundations (which organizations freely admit they are involved with abortion advocacy and contraception) does that not that raise a glaring red flag? Are the bishops making a deal with the devil? I actually wrote to our former bishop about this and to my astonishment I did receive a personal letter from him. My question was never actually answered, but he did make a sort of response by stating that no one can know the byzantine networking of money that passes hands. Not exactly a glowing recommendation for the way CRS does business. Which upholds my belief we should not be donating when a third party is involved. We each must do what our conscience tells us.

I admit, the sound of a $21.8 million dollar grant from the Gates Foundation does raise some concern but even according to the information on the Gates foundation site the purpose of this grant *" **Purpose: ****to develop, test, document and promote commercially-sustainable supply chains for affordable quality assured cassava seed, serving small farmers in Nigeria" *http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2012/04/OPP1041467and CRS explains the purpose in more detail: * A $21.8 million grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is enabling Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and its partners to help small farmers in central and east Africa protect cassava — a critical source of food and income — from two spreading pandemics that are decimating as much as 70 percent of crop yields. crs.org/newsroom/releases/release.cfm?id=1453 *

 

[zab]

zab, that’s why it’s important to do the research yourself. Voris, I discount, but Lepanto and HLI have an impeccable reputation. When CRS receives a $21 million dollar grant from the Gates and Warren Buffet Foundations (which organizations freely admit they are involved with abortion advocacy and contraception) does that not that raise a glaring red flag? Are the bishops making a deal with the devil? I actually wrote to our former bishop about this and to my astonishment I did receive a personal letter from him. My question was never actually answered, but he did make a sort of response by stating that no one can know the byzantine networking of money that passes hands. Not exactly a glowing recommendation for the way CRS does business. Which upholds my belief we should not be donating when a third party is involved. We each must do what our conscience tells us.

Well, I did do a little research, probably no more than most here. I did not do any in depth research nor have I read or studied the entire report from Lepanto then sought to determine whether or not their accusations were true. Did you?

 

[zab]

I recall an old adage: “One needs a long spoon if one sups with the devil.”

What strikes me is the apparent attempt to destroy the good charitable relief work of CRS throughout the world with the way that the allegations from the Lepanto Institute and others are being presented. CRS has taken criticisms and allegations seriously. They strive to keep their Catholic Identity and have launch a new course that enhances their existing training courses for their nearly 5,000 colleagues around the world. CRS provides many links on their website answering questions that people may have regarding the allegations against them: newswire.crs.org/crs-upholds-catholic-teaching-and-values-3/

Speaking of the devil, here is some of what Pope Francis has to say:
“Calumny aims to destroy the work of God, and calumny comes from a very evil thing: it is born of hatred. And hate is the work of Satan. Calumny destroys the work of God in people, in their souls. Calumny uses lies to get ahead.” Be in no doubt, he said: “Where there is calumny, there is Satan himself."

Read more: ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-calumny-is-of-the-devil#ixzz3Tuj719Hy

 

[zz912]

What strikes me is the apparent attempt to destroy the good charitable relief work of CRS throughout the world with the way that the allegations from the Lepanto Institute and others are being presented. CRS has taken criticisms and allegations seriously. They strive to keep their Catholic Identity and have launch a new course that enhances their existing training courses for their nearly 5,000 colleagues around the world. CRS provides many links on their website answering questions that people may have regarding the allegations against them: newswire.crs.org/crs-upholds-catholic-teaching-and-values-3/

Speaking of the devil, here is some of what Pope Francis has to say:
“Calumny aims to destroy the work of God, and calumny comes from a very evil thing: it is born of hatred. And hate is the work of Satan. Calumny destroys the work of God in people, in their souls. Calumny uses lies to get ahead.” Be in no doubt, he said: “Where there is calumny, there is Satan himself."

Calumny involves false speech. The allegations asserted by PRI and Lepanto have substantial evidence backing them up. Their allegations against CRS appear to be truthful, especially when you look at the denials issued by CRS, where they don’t actually deny the substance of the allegations, but instead focus on minute matters or attack those who bring up the issue.

It doesn’t matter if CRS does 99% good, if they willingly do 1% evil. This is a repeated pattern over many years, where CRS has been caught committing evil acts, and denying it. They refuse to amend their ways, or even admit it. So it doesn’t matter if they do 99% good when they refuse to quit doing the 1% evil.

 

[zab]

Calumny involves false speech. The allegations asserted by PRI and Lepanto have substantial evidence backing them up. Their allegations against CRS appear to be truthful, especially when you look at the denials issued by CRS, where they don’t actually deny the substance of the allegations, but instead focus on minute matters or attack those who bring up the issue.

It doesn’t matter if CRS does 99% good, if they willingly do 1% evil. This is a repeated pattern over many years, where CRS has been caught committing evil acts, and denying it. They refuse to amend their ways, or even admit it. So it doesn’t matter if they do 99% good when they refuse to quit doing the 1% evil.

Give me an example of what you are referring to when you say that CRS “…don"t actually deny the substance of the allegations but instead focus on minute matters…”

 

[Tigg]

We all know it ultimately comes down to the credibility of who is doing the reporting. I have dozens of links that could be posted on the activities of CRS, and no doubt they have refuted every one.

Some sources I would trust are Catholic Culture, Bellarmine Veritas, Catholic World Report, NCR, Our Sunday Visitor – the list is endless of those who have researched and written about CRS and their anti-life stance. Michael Hichborn of Lepanto also helped with the ALL report (2012) which was the most researched I’ve ever seen. Are they all wrong? An essay entitled “The Church Betrayed” written by the professor of Christian Ethics at Mount St. Mary’s University was quite enlightening about condom use in Africa years ago and he urged the bishops to do a complete investigation into the staff at CRS. Also convincing to me is the political ties CRS has and the dues-paying membership they carry to certain PAC groups like Emily’s List whose sole purpose is to elect progressive candidates to office who advocate abortion.

 

[zab]

We all know it ultimately comes down to the credibility of who is doing the reporting. I have dozens of links that could be posted on the activities of CRS, and no doubt they have refuted every one.

Some sources I would trust are Catholic Culture, Bellarmine Veritas, Catholic World Report, NCR, Our Sunday Visitor – the list is endless of those who have researched and written about CRS and their anti-life stance. Michael Hichborn of Lepanto also helped with the ALL report (2012) which was the most researched I’ve ever seen. Are they all wrong? An essay entitled “The Church Betrayed” written by the professor of Christian Ethics at Mount St. Mary’s University was quite enlightening about condom use in Africa years ago and he urged the bishops to do a complete investigation into the staff at CRS. Also convincing to me is the political ties CRS has and the dues-paying membership they carry to certain PAC groups like Emily’s List whose sole purpose is to elect progressive candidates to office who advocate abortion.

Anti-life stance? That is a pretty damning accusation. I have no reason to doubt the words of Archbishop Paul S. Cloakley, Archbishop of Oklahoma City and Chair of Catholic Community Services board of Directors that states CRS’s, praising CRS crs.org/response/statement-archbishop-paul-coakley.cfm
… CRS launched a new required course titled “Catholic Identity,” which provides essential information about the foundation of Catholic identity for the mission and work of CRS. This course enhances our existing training program for all of our nearly 5,000 colleagues around the world and complements previous courses, such as “Protecting Life.”…

 

[MHichborn]

Since this thread is already going, I thought it would be worth noting that information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act revealed documents … produced by CRS itself … indicating that it implemented a condom-promoting video series in Kenya, exposing over 3,000 kids to it.

lepantoinstitute.org/crs-implemented-condom-promoting-video-series/

 

[zab]

Since this thread is already going, I thought it would be worth noting that information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act revealed documents … produced by CRS itself … indicating that it implemented a condom-promoting video series in Kenya, exposing over 3,000 kids to it.

lepantoinstitute.org/crs-implemented-condom-promoting-video-series/

CRS responds to the False Allegations about Kenya Program: crs.org/response/false-allegations-about-kenya-program.cfm

---

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed are thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

 

[MHichborn]

CRS responds to the False Allegations about Kenya Program: crs.org/response/false-allegations-about-kenya-program.cfm

---

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed are thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

ZAB … two things here.

1. I don’t think you read the link I posted because if you had, you would have seen that CRS has NOT, in fact, responded to the condom-promoting program called Shuga they were found to be implementing.
2. CRS clearly didn’t read the report as closely as they claimed. Here is our dismantling of CRS’s response: lepantoinstitute.org/uncategorized/investigative-organizations-address-denials-made-by-crs/ You will see in the very first bullet point, CRS claims to have carefully examined the report, and then complains about a charge against CRS that was never made.

It’s this kind of sloppiness and laziness that has allowed CRS to perpetuate the illusion that it isn’t doing anything wrong.

 

[zz912]

Give me an example of what you are referring to when you say that CRS “…don"t actually deny the substance of the allegations but instead focus on minute matters…”

CRS claims: “We are concerned that the ‘investigator’ misrepresented himself during his ‘research’ in Kenya. He presented himself as a student doing research for his thesis when he visited CRS’ office and shared his CV. Such misrepresentation does not appear to comply with international standards on research that normally requires full disclosure on the purpose of research to all interviewees. It is our sincere hope that international research standards were upheld during his interviews with children, as young children were not only quoted, but photographed in this report."

Response: …PRI has a long history of conducting field research; we are concerned that CRS is seeking to discredit us rather than address our concerns for constructive reform.

pop.org/content/investigative-organizations-address-denials-made-crs

You can also read there about CRS intentionally talking about one program, but not discussing the other program they were running that was the actual problem.

 

[zab]

CRS claims: “We are concerned that the ‘investigator’ misrepresented himself during his ‘research’ in Kenya. He presented himself as a student doing research for his thesis when he visited CRS’ office and shared his CV. Such misrepresentation does not appear to comply with international standards on research that normally requires full disclosure on the purpose of research to all interviewees. It is our sincere hope that international research standards were upheld during his interviews with children, as young children were not only quoted, but photographed in this report."

Response: …PRI has a long history of conducting field research; we are concerned that CRS is seeking to discredit us rather than address our concerns for constructive reform.
pop.org/content/investigative-organizations-address-denials-made-crs

You can also read there about CRS intentionally talking about one program, but not discussing the other program they were running that was the actual problem.

And you can read CRS’s response to all of the accusations. And you can also read letters of support from bishops and their expressed sadness over such allegations. It comes down to who do you trust. I keep gravitating back towards CRS.

 

[pnewton]

Why can’t those that do not like CRS simply not give? Why the need to gossip? The Catholic thing to do, for those who value** all** Catholic values and not just abortion and contraception, is to avoid encouraging such gossip. What we have today is a plethora of “institutes” and “ministries” which are little more that blogs or vlogs of one or two people. Michael Hichborn said CRS is running a contraception program. The archbishop says they are not. I applaud anyone who would inform Church leaders of the shortcomings of those who operate in the name of the Church. That is the proper role of the laity and takes courage and fortitude. However, going past that and accusing the archbishop of falsifying documents, in a “he said/she said” battle of personalities, and airing this battle in the blogosphere, is not fortitude.

People can believe everything they see on the internet they want, but please consider the sources. Just like ex-Catholics make the worst anti-Catholics, there is a plethora of Catholics that have gotten their feelings hurt in these spats are quite biased. They are electronic yentas that fund their work by the work of working people up.

Yes indeed! An old fireman’s saying; “where there’s smoke there’s fire” most certainly would appear to apply here.

Stephen Colbert coined the term “truthiness” to describe the internet phenomena whereby stories get swapped around enough until they are accepted as truth for no other reason than they are repeated often. As people are still as gullible as always, it is easy for a few people to shape “truth” by repetition, recycling and rewording the same claims until they become “truthy” enough to be accepted as facts.

Your old saying applies to chemical reactions, but not very well to human interaction. Wars have been started over this error.

 

[pnewton]

And you can read CRS’s response to all of the accusations. And you can also read letters of support from bishops and their expressed sadness over such allegations. It comes down to who do you trust. I keep gravitating back towards CRS.

I do not doubt for one minute that errors can and will occur in every human endeavor. The CRS has a great deal of oversight. The laity had ever right to jump in and bring any problem that may be over looked to the attention of those who oversee the CRS. However, at some point we have to accept that those who have given everything in life in service to Jesus and His Church actually try to serve Jesus and His Church. Unlike the one-man ministries, there is are enough checks built in to correct misdeeds… eventually. The lack of trust people have in the Church astounds me. Yes, I know they will say it is “churchmen”, not the Church, but that distinction does not account for situations where multiple people in authority jointly oversee a program. Jesus promised that he would be wherever two or three are gathered in his man.

“Spongible” is the current fad in criticizing charity, or choosing one over the other. The only option to avoid this issue though is to never give anything and reject the concept of charity. Just as money given to a beggar may go to alcohol, so food given to the same beggar will allow him to spend a few dollars more on alcohol. Food given directly to a needy people will allow more of the countries resources to be go to propping up a dictator. Anything we do might have negative results because of the resources they free. Yet we are still under the obligation to help the needy and bear no moral responsibility for how someone of lesser morals rearranges money in the wake of charity

 

[Tigg]

Why can’t those that do not like CRS simply not give? Why the need to gossip?

Ad hominem attack as is the one regarding slander. You may not judge those hearts (there are many, not just Lepanto and PRI) who have sincerely investigated this, nor the ones who have read the allegations (mountains of it) and reached the conclusion through prayer and common sense that CRS is working against the church. You are free to reject what I find evidence, but you may not accuse others of sin. Those in the pro-life movement are fighting with all means available to save lives and be faithful to God which includes the necessity of warning others about efforts to undermine teaching regarding the sanctity of life. In fact, it is a serious duty that can invoke the sin of omission.

 

[zab]

My thinking is along the same lines as pnewton on this. I know that errors can be made. And people do have a right and an obligation to point out errors so that they can be corrected. This is fraternal correction, the intent of which is not to destroy the good reputation of the organization but to help it be better. I trust CRS when they say that they are doing all that they can to protect their Catholic identity while serving the poor, the refugees, like those suffering religious persecution in Syria, and all needy people of the world.
But the impression that I get when I browse the Lepanto Institute website is that sole purpose of this organization is to attack and dig up dirt on Catholic organizations causing people to not donate or to cease giving donations to organizations that provide the much needed charitable work throughout the world. Whether any of the accusations are true or not, the intent and result seems to me to be more like spreading gossip rather than fraternal correction.

 

[agnes_therese]

CRS claims: “We are concerned that the ‘investigator’ misrepresented himself during his ‘research’ in Kenya. He presented himself as a student doing research for his thesis when he visited CRS’ office and shared his CV. Such misrepresentation does not appear to comply with international standards on research that normally requires full disclosure on the purpose of research to all interviewees. It is our sincere hope that international research standards were upheld during his interviews with children, as young children were not only quoted, but photographed in this report."

Response: …PRI has a long history of conducting field research; we are concerned that CRS is seeking to discredit us rather than address our concerns for constructive reform.

pop.org/content/investigative-organizations-address-denials-made-crs

You can also read there about CRS intentionally talking about one program, but not discussing the other program they were running that was the actual problem.

Then, PRI doesn’t deny that the investigator misrepresented himself?

 

[pnewton]

Ad hominem attack as is the one regarding slander. You may not judge those hearts (there are many, not just Lepanto and PRI) who have sincerely investigated this, nor the ones who have read the allegations (mountains of it) and reached the conclusion through prayer and common sense that CRS is working against the church.

No, it is not ad hominem. If it were, you should have reported it. I am confident that the moderators are familiar with what that term means.

I did not say it was slander. I said it was gossip. The archbishop who investigated said the accusations were false. Not one person here knows better that either he or Michael Hichborn. Yet people are always really willing get emotional about that which they do not know and talk about it. That is why I used the word gossip.

 

[zab]

Ad hominem attack as is the one regarding slander. You may not judge those hearts (there are many, not just Lepanto and PRI) who have sincerely investigated this, nor the ones who have read the allegations (mountains of it) and reached the conclusion through prayer and common sense that CRS is working against the church. You are free to reject what I find evidence, but you may not accuse others of sin. Those in the pro-life movement are fighting with all means available to save lives and be faithful to God which includes the necessity of warning others about efforts to undermine teaching regarding the sanctity of life. In fact, it is a serious duty that can invoke the sin of omission.

For the record, I was the one who wrote: "…slander is a terrible sin that can effect the good work being done through out the world. " And that is a fact, not an Ad hominem attack.
Many of us are trying to sort out the truth in all of these allegations as well as the intent and if there is really any need to withhold our donations.

 

[pnewton]

Many of us are trying to sort out the truth in all of these allegations as well as the intent and if there is really any need to withhold our donations.

I have found a simple application of Occam’s Razor, along with an understanding of rash judgment and how the Catechism beckons us all to give the most favorable interpretation, can be used to support the good from the bad. Sure, we can investigate such claims, but let us consider the sources, most of which can be checked on by a simple search. One would weight Fox News differently than MSNBC, for example, depending on the issue, if the two are in direct conflict. Which is most likely? We can actually spend time examining the details if we choose, and if the details do not contradict, then we can decide.

I am unconvinced that this whole CRS “scandal” is little more than politics (based on the philosophical leanings of 100% of its critics) and personality conflicts. When complaints of wrongdoing exist, I have the utmost confidence they will be addressed and remedied if of substance. For the life of me thought, I do not see why good Catholics are trying so hard to defund the charity to the needy. One only has to read this thread and see the response. Yes, CRS needs to consider the ramifications of all of its actions in regards to funding partnerships. Yet, the message of the beam and mote apply hear. If this feud with the CRS results in less true charity being done, then do not those who conduct such campaigns against the CRS have the same responsibility of considering their actions? Why not simply address the concerns in the appropriate forum, instead of trying to remove funding for the legitimate needy as well? Are they not aware that it is in our nature look for reasons not to do what we know is good?