Lepanto and PRI catch CRS running contraceptive program

[MHichborn]

How perfectly timed this attack is made. Today is the feast day of St. John Ogilvie, who snuck into Scotland disguised as a member of the military so he could minister to the Catholics in Scotland.

Guess he should have worn his collar instead of “misrepresenting” himself.

LOVE it!!!

 

[zz912]

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

So just ignore evil committed in the name of the Church?

The Catholic thing to do, for those who value** all** Catholic values and not just abortion and contraception, is to avoid encouraging such gossip.

There is mountains of evidence, from multiple investigations. That’s not gossip no matter how much you wish it were.

What we have today is a plethora of “institutes” and “ministries” which are little more that blogs or vlogs of one or two people.

Attacking the messengers…

Michael Hichborn said CRS is running a contraception program. The archbishop says they are not.

The archbishop has refused to listen and refused to meet with them. So he is speaking from a position of ignorance of the evidence.

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.

And yet you are attacking them here.

However, going past that and accusing the archbishop of falsifying documents

No one accused the archbishop of falsifying documents. Please retract this false claim.

People can believe everything they see on the internet they want,

Indeed.

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.

Attacking the messengers. Uncharitably I might add.

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.

Like the denials of CRS…

 

[pnewton]

There’s no assumption being made. Your quote "… to exercise caution and consult the CRS website for clarification before endorsing or giving credence to the groups’ critiques.” is explicitly saying to ask CRS if it did anything wrong.

That’s asinine.

Do you think it a***** if people take you at your word? I would rather say it is in keeping with the Catechism’s instructions on how to walk with respect to the truth. Respect for our fellow Christians and what they have to say for themselves should be our default position. Even non-Christians understand the right people have to defend themselves.

 

[zz912]

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.

And yet CRS works diligently to deny any misdeeds. So how is it being corrected?

And at some point we have to accept that there are some who claim to be giving their life in service to Jesus and His Church who are actually undermining it. Willful ignorance and lack of diligence and vigilance are not traits of Christians.

“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

I believe you mean “fungible”. And that has NOTHING to do with what we are discussing. A Catholic charity or group cannot do a little evil even if it means you are able to do a great amount of good.

 

[zz912]

Do you think it a***** if people take you at your word? I would rather say it is in keeping with the Catechism’s instructions on how to walk with respect to the truth. Respect for our fellow Christians and what they have to say for themselves should be our default position. Even non-Christians understand the right people have to defend themselves.

No, not with what we are discussing here. Church officials and Catholic groups have a DUTY to give an account of their activities and use of funds. That’s just foolishness to not have some monitoring going on of Catholic groups and charities. Especially ones who rake in $1 billion annually.

I have a duty to assume the best of another person, given the information I have. We have a ton of information that CRS participated and ran programs that are contrary to the faith. Our first assumption should be that this is localized to one either misguided or ignorant person/group. But CRS has responded by saying that they didn’t do what we have evidence they did. So we cannot just take them at their word, because their word contradicts the evidence. It’s not “charitable” to accept someone lying.

 

[pnewton]

No, not with what we are discussing here. Church officials and Catholic groups have a DUTY to give an account of their activities and use of funds. That’s just foolishness to not have some monitoring going on of Catholic groups and charities. Especially ones who rake in $1 billion annually…

CRS does have oversight from within the Church. The “C” is for Catholic. Many lay “ministries” cannot make the same claim.

A Catholic charity or group cannot do a little evil even if it means you are able to do a great amount of good.

Of course not. I did not claim they did. Material remote cooperation with evil is not “a little evil”.

I have a duty to assume the best of another person, given the information I have. We have a ton of information that CRS participated and ran programs that are contrary to the faith.

You seem to think so. I do not. Truthiness is not information.

 

[agnes_therese]

How perfectly timed this attack is made. Today is the feast day of St. John Ogilvie, who snuck into Scotland disguised as a member of the military so he could minister to the Catholics in Scotland.

Guess he should have worn his collar instead of “misrepresenting” himself.

Wow. I have seen some total non-sequiturs here on CAF, but this one takes the cake.

BTW, I see you’ve declined to answer my question. End justifies the means?

 

[SWolf]

1. The whole issue boils down to money, plain and simple. CRS obtains 70% of its nearly $1 billion income from the Federal government. CRS says they have to be involved with pro-abortion and contraception-spreading organizations in order to do development work. This is only partly true … what CRS MEANS is that it cannot do development work without working with and funding pro-abortion and contraception-providing organizations IF IT WANTS TO GET GOVERNMENT MONEY. The organizations I mentioned above do not partner with such organizations to do the same development and aid work CRS does. CRS is selling out, and that is what is at the heart of this whole thing.

That sums it up.

There has never been a lack of people who will sell their God over for 30 pieces of silver.

 

[zab]

No, not with what we are discussing here. Church officials and Catholic groups have a DUTY to give an account of their activities and use of funds. That’s just foolishness to not have some monitoring going on of Catholic groups and charities. Especially ones who rake in $1 billion annually.

I have a duty to assume the best of another person, given the information I have. We have a ton of information that CRS participated and ran programs that are contrary to the faith. Our first assumption should be that this is localized to one either misguided or ignorant person/group. But CRS has responded by saying that they didn’t do what we have evidence they did. So we cannot just take them at their word, because their word contradicts the evidence. It’s not “charitable” to accept someone lying.

When you wrote “We have a ton of information…” are you implying that you are part of the investigation or associated with them?

 

[KSU]

If you want to make an omelet, you must be willing to break a few eggs. The end justifies the means. For the greater good. Nothing is perfect.

MHichborn, please don’t get discouraged by having to deal with that constant, well-heeled, progressive drumbeat, and no doubt worse than that. It must be a terrible feeling to be accused of hating charity.

Those of us who know what you have been up against applaud your courage. We know you are doing God’s work and we pray for you and your allies. Considering the evidence, it wouldn’t be surprising if even a good Bishop, here and there, support your efforts to cleanse the Temple.

 

[zz912]

If you want to make an omelet, you must be willing to break a few eggs. The end justifies the means. For the greater good. Nothing is perfect.

MHichborn, please don’t get discouraged by having to deal with that constant, well-heeled, progressive drumbeat, and no doubt worse than that. It must be a terrible feeling to be accused of hating charity.

Those of us who know what you have been up against applaud your courage. We know you are doing God’s work and we pray for you and your allies. Considering the evidence, it wouldn’t be surprising if even a good Bishop, here and there, support your efforts to cleanse the Temple.

Keep up the good work!

 

[zz912]

When you wrote “We have a ton of information…” are you implying that you are part of the investigation or associated with them?

Nope.

 

[zz912]

Wow. I have seen some total non-sequiturs here on CAF, but this one takes the cake.

BTW, I see you’ve declined to answer my question. End justifies the means?

Supporters of CRS should be real careful about saying “end justifies the means”.

And it wasn’t a non-sequitur. Just because you can’t see the connection doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I believe most on here who read it could connect the dots fairly easily.

Keeping secrets and concealment has been used many times over, even in the Bible. I have yet to see a condemnation about it when done in advancing God’s truth. The Israelites used spies when they were coming into the Promissed Land. Jesus indicated that He was not going to a festival when He was going. Samson kept the secret of his hair, until he told it and was beaten. Esther hid her identity as a Jew.

Are you ready to condemn all these instances of hiding some information noted above???

 

[pnewton]

Supporters of CRS should be real careful about saying “end justifies the means”.

That was KSU. I think he said he does not support CRS.

That is something we need to be careful with. The end can never justify the means. The end may* not be justified though if the means is not*, but that only applies when using the principle of double effect. That might apply here. If one suspected that feeding and saving a thousand children might result in another agency transferring funds to contraceptive advertising, that that would be an application of double effect and one would have to weigh the costs of the lives saved versus sin of the advertising, and that the cooperation was remote and not formal.

But this is exactly why we must have episcopal oversight to weigh these issues. I am pleased that attention was called to this problem, as I know sometimes priorities can get lost. However, the issue seems to be well in hand and the concerns are being addressed, even if not every Catholic in America agrees with every decision made. It sure beats doing nothing. In my estimation, it also beats relying on groups that have no episcopal oversight and few checks and balances. These are less prone to problems, simply because the are smaller and actually do less, but they are not exempt from the same pitfalls.

I tell you one thing I can respect though. If someone feels another organization is more in line with one’s political philosophy (more tied to conservatives and less to liberals), then at least that charity is still charity. Just be careful. Political leanings do nothing to exempt humanity from temptation.

 

[agnes_therese]

Supporters of CRS should be real careful about saying “end justifies the means”.

And it wasn’t a non-sequitur. Just because you can’t see the connection doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I believe most on here who read it could connect the dots fairly easily.

Keeping secrets and concealment has been used many times over, even in the Bible. I have yet to see a condemnation about it when done in advancing God’s truth. The Israelites used spies when they were coming into the Promissed Land. Jesus indicated that He was not going to a festival when He was going. Samson kept the secret of his hair, until he told it and was beaten. Esther hid her identity as a Jew.

Are you ready to condemn all these instances of hiding some information noted above???

Please point out exactly where I said I was a “supporter of CRS.” I asked one very specific question – do the ends (investigating an alleged scandal) justify the means (lying) – about one very specific instance. Which you have declined to answer. And since the question is about this one very specific case, there is no connection to St. John Ogilvie.
I believe most on here who read it can understand that.

 

[zab]

No, not with what we are discussing here. Church officials and Catholic groups have a DUTY to give an account of their activities and use of funds. That’s just foolishness to not have some monitoring going on of Catholic groups and charities. Especially ones who rake in $1 billion annually.

I have a duty to assume the best of another person, given the information I have. We have a ton of information that CRS participated and ran programs that are contrary to the faith. Our first assumption should be that this is localized to one either misguided or ignorant person/group. But CRS has responded by saying that they didn’t do what we have evidence they did. So we cannot just take them at their word, because their word contradicts the evidence. It’s not “charitable” to accept someone lying.

Nor is it charitable to falsely accuse someone of lying. Like you, I have a duty to assume the best of another given the information that I have. I have no reason to accuse you of lying about reading a ton of information proving to you that the allegations are true. But I must go by the information that I have. It is not charitable for one (another poster now deleted) to make comments that falsely describe those who have not totally rejected CRS by making references that label them as progressive. Like another poster pointed out, Michael Hichborn comes across as confrontational, not someone who is really concerned about CRS. So it is reasonable to understand why the board of CRS refuses to speak to him. I also am disturbed by the disrespectful way that he has referred to the US Bishop’s statement, saying “Words are cheap…”

 

[MHichborn]

Like another poster pointed out, Michael Hichborn comes across as confrontational, not someone who is really concerned about CRS. So it is reasonable to understand why the board of CRS refuses to speak to him. I also am disturbed by the disrespectful way that he has referred to the US Bishop’s statement, saying “Words are cheap…”

1. I am not concerned with organizations, I am concerned with souls.
2. I am not the only one bringing information to CRS. PRI and HLI have also attempted to meet with the board of directors of CRS, and they were refused as well.
3. Words ARE cheap. For one thing, the USCCB does not speak for all of the bishops. That statement was written by a few bishops and published as if it spoke for the entire conference. I assure you, it does not. For another thing, statements of support do not refute evidence, nor do they correct problems. They are simply what they say they are … statements of support. Nothing more. Would letters of support from family and friends negate the evidence put forth against a man on trial for murder? If so, then prosecuting attorneys, detectives, investigators, inspectors, and police officers should all just pack up their bags and head home.

 

[zab]

1. I am not concerned with organizations, I am concerned with souls.
2. I am not the only one bringing information to CRS. PRI and HLI have also attempted to meet with the board of directors of CRS, and they were refused as well.
3. Words ARE cheap. For one thing, the USCCB does not speak for all of the bishops. That statement was written by a few bishops and published as if it spoke for the entire conference. I assure you, it does not. For another thing, statements of support do not refute evidence, nor do they correct problems. They are simply what they say they are … statements of support. Nothing more. Would letters of support from family and friends negate the evidence put forth against a man on trial for murder? If so, then prosecuting attorneys, detectives, investigators, inspectors, and police officers should all just pack up their bags and head home.

I suspect that PRI is in cahoots with Lepanto Institute. As for others, I doubt that many people have the time to devote to reading “tons of information” when they have their own work to do. So why should I believe that CRS is lying when they say that your allegations are false, misleading or twisted? At least CRS, in their response directs their attention to the allegations and not the character of people involved. And the Catholic bishops at least hoped that those making public critiques were doing so “in good faith”.
And finally, why should I take your words to be of more value than the bishops?

 

[SWolf]

And finally, why should I take your words to be of more value than the bishops?

Which Bishop?

“Even in my own diocese! Without my knowledge,…they [CRS] were working on an artificial contraception project here…And, then, the Catholic people around here heard about it and said: “What’s that all about? That’s supposed to be ‘Catholic’??” So, there you have it: They [CRS] were following the instructions of USAID.’” Archbishop Désiré Tsarahazana of Toamasina (Tamatave)

lifesitenews.com/opinion/madagascar-bishops-and-clergy-complain-about-catholic-relief-services-activ

Sounds like what he is saying is right in line with this Bishop.

 

[zab]

Which Bishop?

“Even in my own diocese! Without my knowledge,…they [CRS] were working on an artificial contraception project here…And, then, the Catholic people around here heard about it and said: “What’s that all about? That’s supposed to be ‘Catholic’??” So, there you have it: They [CRS] were following the instructions of USAID.’” Archbishop Désiré Tsarahazana of Toamasina (Tamatave)

lifesitenews.com/opinion/madagascar-bishops-and-clergy-complain-about-catholic-relief-services-activ

Sounds like what he is saying is right in line with this Bishop.

It seems that there was some error in reporting. Archbishop Desire Tsarahazana of Toamasina has expressed strong support for CRS:
usccb.org/news/2013/13-146.cfm
August 2, 2013

WASHINGTON—Archbishop Désiré Tsarahazana, of the Archdiocese of Toamasina and the president of the episcopal conference of Madagascar, expresses strong support for Catholic Relief Services and confirms that Catholic Relief Services does not provide or facilitate access to contraceptive or abortifacient drugs or devices in his archdiocese.
Archbishop Tsarahazana spoke by phone on August 2 with Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and Bishop Gerald Kicanas, chairman of the board of directors of CRS. During the open and constructive conversation, Archbishop Tsarahazana stated that in the past there had been some confusion in his archdiocese that was quickly resolved, and that CRS is acting in accord with Catholic teaching and does not provide or facilitate access to contraception or abortion.
Archbishop Tsarahazana said that he will confer with the other members of his episcopal conference to confirm that no such immoral activity is taking place in their dioceses.
Here is a link from CRS telling about this allegation. newswire.crs.org/crs-responds-to-concerns-about-programs-in-madagascar/