U.S. bishops’ relief agency gives $5.3 million to major contraception-providing charity

[zab]

Re-reading your last comment, I think you misunderstand. I am not questioning your giving to CRS. What I am questioning is that you say that you cannot give to CARE because you have come to understand that CARE is doing pretty awful things now, but somehow … it’s ok for CRS to give to CARE. THAT’S what doesn’t make sense to me.

I love what the Apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians: “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?”

As I have previously explained in earlier posts, I initially contacted CRS expressing my concern, and they quickly responded with an answer that made sense to me. In addition, I have read CRS’s reponses online to the article from LifeSiteNews and I have also read the response of Dr. John Haas of the National Catholic Bioethics Center correcting the LifeSiteNews article regarding what he had or had not advised. The links have all been previously posted. I am satisfied with their response. And that is what matters.

 

[Ridgerunner]

As I have previously explained in earlier posts, I initially contacted CRS expressing my concern, and they quickly responded with an answer that made sense to me. In addition, I have read CRS’s reponses online to the article from LifeSiteNews and I have also read the response of Dr. John Haas of the National Catholic Bioethics Center correcting the LifeSiteNews article regarding what he had or had not advised. The links have all been previously posted. I am satisfied with their response. And that is what matters.

Well, maybe it made sense to you. But it does not make sense to me that a Catholic organization called “Catholic Relief Services” takes the money of people who think they’re supporting a Catholic charitable endeavor, and gives it to some secular organization instead of doing what everybody thought they were doing with the contributions.

If the’re nothing but a “conduit” of funds, who needs them as “middlemen”? Why should they even exist? Why should we be encouraged in the parishes to give them a nickel? In my mind, they are perpetrating a fraud, which is bad enough even if they never gave anything to any organization that acts contrary to Catholic teachings. If they “hire out” their ostensible mission to other organizations, they really need to fold their tent.

 

[zab]

Well, maybe it made sense to you. But it does not make sense to me that a Catholic organization called “Catholic Relief Services” takes the money of people who think they’re supporting a Catholic charitable endeavor, and gives it to some secular organization instead of doing what everybody thought they were doing with the contributions.

If the’re nothing but a “conduit” of funds, who needs them as “middlemen”? Why should they even exist? Why should we be encouraged in the parishes to give them a nickel? In my mind, they are perpetrating a fraud, which is bad enough even if they never gave anything to any organization that acts contrary to Catholic teachings. If they “hire out” their ostensible mission to other organizations, they really need to fold their tent.

CRS does not keep it a secret that they at times collaborate with other organizations in order to send relief to certain areas that would otherwise be without aid. In trying to explain this I am reminded of situations like baby Jessica who fell in the well and the whole country came together to support the effort to get her out. There were other situations like the trapping of the Chili miners for 69 days. Would it have been wise to let people die rather than accept charity from people and organizations who support artificial birth control etc. Suppose the company that owned the needed drill and the other necessary equipment gave contributions to support artificial birth control etc. Would you tell, them “Sorry we cannot accept your charity because of…” It makes sense to me that there would be times when CRS would feel the need to work with other groups in order to get aid to where it is most needed.

 

[iloveangels]

But you could’ve bought something else.

Jim

And you check out the ideological preferences of the ladies in China who knit your sox and underwear and make sure you approve of every idea that goes through their pretty little heads, I presume? Not to mention the ideological preferences of the foreman, the plant owner, and everyone down the line all the way to marketing headquarters and corporate headquarters, wherever they are for your favorite brands.

If you don’t, then according to your very own argument, you’d better start. Either that or find a crowd of a few thousand people who you can guarantee are of your ideological stripe to do all those labor-intensive and specialized processes for are required for the business, design, engineering and production of a consumer product like a pair of sox or lowly bloomers.

[BTW, have you thought about raw materials at all? Or chemical treatments such as bleaching, permanent press, static release? Or the petrochemical content of the elastic? Did you know that they stabilize those yarns with a dressing before they put them on the machines to be knit? Yes, I do know some detail about the process, thanks to my line of work. The work of thousands of people go into the production of most consumer products.]

Please. When you buy a product, you’re buying a product in order to get the product.

It’s different than making a donation, unless of course, you really think you’re buying something when you make a donation, which some people do. But in that case, I’m not really all that sure that it’s actually a donation, after all.

 

[iloveangels]

CRS does not keep it a secret that they at times collaborate with other organizations in order to send relief to certain areas that would otherwise be without aid. In trying to explain this I am reminded of situations like baby Jessica who fell in the well and the whole country came together to support the effort to get her out. There were other situations like the trapping of the Chili miners for 69 days. Would it have been wise to let people die rather than accept charity from people and organizations who support artificial birth control etc. Suppose the company that owned the needed drill and the other necessary equipment gave contributions to support artificial birth control etc. Would you tell, them “Sorry we cannot accept your charity because of…” It makes sense to me that there would be times when CRS would feel the need to work with other groups in order to get aid to where it is most needed.

I know we’ve all been taught that it’s a moral good to participate in Christian charity, but I’m wondering if the point is to end poverty or is the point more theological? That is, are we really only social workers trying to remedy poverty or is the point something else?

To say it another way: Americans think poverty is the worst thing that can ever happen to them or anyone else. It’s a cultural thing. We approach poverty with trepidation and horror and we think that it’s automatically a good thing to eradicate it, no questions asked, no doubt. Is this what we’re working from? Or is it something else?

Basically, what are we trying to do when we donate to a Catholic organization?

 

[april32010]

I know we’ve all been taught that it’s a moral good to participate in Christian charity, but I’m wondering if the point is to end poverty or is the point more theological? That is, are we really only social workers trying to remedy poverty or is the point something else?

To say it another way: Americans think poverty is the worst thing that can ever happen to them or anyone else. It’s a cultural thing. We approach poverty with trepidation and horror and we think that it’s automatically a good thing to eradicate it, no questions asked, no doubt. Is this what we’re working from? Or is it something else?

sorry zab DING

 

[zab]

sorry zab DING

Ding don’t mean a thing, if it ain’t got that zing.

 

[zab]

I know we’ve all been taught that it’s a moral good to participate in Christian charity, but I’m wondering if the point is to end poverty or is the point more theological? That is, are we really only social workers trying to remedy poverty or is the point something else?

To say it another way: Americans think poverty is the worst thing that can ever happen to them or anyone else. It’s a cultural thing. We approach poverty with trepidation and horror and we think that it’s automatically a good thing to eradicate it, no questions asked, no doubt. Is this what we’re working from? Or is it something else?

Basically, what are we trying to do when we donate to a Catholic organization?

huh?

 

[Used2beSherryG]

Well, Used2beSherryG, since you are from the Ozark Mountains of Arkansas, you are necessarily a person worth listening to. (Oh, okay, I’m from the Ozark Mts of Mo, so I have a prejudice in your favor…welcome to CAF by the way.)

You know, we got a new bishop not too long ago, and he encourages donation to the diocesan Catholic Charities of Southern Missouri, which he started, as an alternative to the USCCB entities. The diocesan program provides direct aid to individuals in need. A person really needs to be careful nowadays when it comes to donating to charity.

heh, heh,heh! I like how you listed your location- very creative!
Back to the subject at hand, all this wrangling about where the money goes, etc reminded me of why I refused to donate to United Way way back in the 90’s, when I began to realize how many of their associations were evil, like planned parenthood. The uw people said, well, just designate which charities you want to support and just keep giving. No thanks, I can give directly to those i wish to support. Same thing goes with CRS. I used to think they used the money for their own organization that worked around the world. Now I see that is not the case. If they are a funneling organizaiton, who needs 'em.

 

[Ridgerunner]

CRS does not keep it a secret that they at times collaborate with other organizations in order to send relief to certain areas that would otherwise be without aid. In trying to explain this I am reminded of situations like baby Jessica who fell in the well and the whole country came together to support the effort to get her out. There were other situations like the trapping of the Chili miners for 69 days. Would it have been wise to let people die rather than accept charity from people and organizations who support artificial birth control etc. Suppose the company that owned the needed drill and the other necessary equipment gave contributions to support artificial birth control etc. Would you tell, them “Sorry we cannot accept your charity because of…” It makes sense to me that there would be times when CRS would feel the need to work with other groups in order to get aid to where it is most needed.

Assuming your premise is correct, which I do not grant, then CRS ought to be honest about it. “Donate to CRS. We’ll give it to some unrelated secular organization we like, but which you might not, to which you could have donated yourself if you wanted to.”

I think they would find their donations dropping in a hurry if they were honest about it.

It is just preposterous to imagine that CRS cannot find places to do charitable work without the aid of secular organizations. Ten minutes in Haiti would tell them that. And nobody ever said any Catholic organization should have refused to allow companies to aid the Chilean miners. It wasn’t within their power to do it anyway.

 

[zab]

Assuming your premise is correct, which I do not grant, then CRS ought to be honest about it.

It is posted on their website. crs.org/about/mission-statement/

 

[JimR-OCDS]

And you check out the ideological preferences of the ladies in China who knit your sox and underwear and make sure you approve of every idea that goes through their pretty little heads, I presume? Not to mention the ideological preferences of the foreman, the plant owner, and everyone down the line all the way to marketing headquarters and corporate headquarters, wherever they are for your favorite brands.

If you don’t, then according to your very own argument, you’d better start. Either that or find a crowd of a few thousand people who you can guarantee are of your ideological stripe to do all those labor-intensive and specialized processes for are required for the business, design, engineering and production of a consumer product like a pair of sox or lowly bloomers.

[BTW, have you thought about raw materials at all? Or chemical treatments such as bleaching, permanent press, static release? Or the petrochemical content of the elastic? Did you know that they stabilize those yarns with a dressing before they put them on the machines to be knit? Yes, I do know some detail about the process, thanks to my line of work. The work of thousands of people go into the production of most consumer products.]

Please. When you buy a product, you’re buying a product in order to get the product.

It’s different than making a donation, unless of course, you really think you’re buying something when you make a donation, which some people do. But in that case, I’m not really all that sure that it’s actually a donation, after all.

You’re making my point.

Yeah, various businesses support abortion and other moral issues, but are we culpable for buying from them?

A recall a statement put out by the USCCB a while back, that say’s we’re not. They wree addressing people who purchase health-insurance from companies which include abortion coverage for their customers in their policies.

Just as we have no control over what the Gates do with the profits they make from Microsoft, we’re not directly supporting abortion by buying a computer with Microsoft products.

You can almost be assured, that dioceses across the USA are using Excel and Word on their chancery computers.

Jim

 

[zab]

Re-reading your last comment, I think you misunderstand. I am not questioning your giving to CRS. What I am questioning is that you say that you cannot give to CARE because you have come to understand that CARE is doing pretty awful things now, but somehow … it’s ok for CRS to give to CARE. THAT’S what doesn’t make sense to me.

What I should have pointed out also is that I, personally, did not want to continue giving to CARE because my donation would have most likely gone to whereever they felt that it was needed including their programs that conflicted with Catholic teaching. The time came when I decided that I would rather trust my donations to a Catholic Charity. The grants that CRS issues to CARE go specifically to certain humanitarian programs that are not in conflict with Catholic teaching.

 

[Ridgerunner]

It is posted on their website. crs.org/about/mission-statement/

No. They do say they “work with” other organizations. They do not say “we’re often just a middleman, collecting your donations and giving them to secular organizations whose methods and objective may be different from those of Catholic organizations.”

They really aren’t disclosing the truth about their practices. They’re glossing it over at best.

 

[Ridgerunner]

What I should have pointed out also is that I, personally, did not want to continue giving to CARE because my donation would have most likely gone to whereever they felt that it was needed including their programs that conflicted with Catholic teaching. The time came when I decided that I would rather trust my donations to a Catholic Charity. The grants that CRS issues to CARE go specifically to certain humanitarian programs that are not in conflict with Catholic teaching.

Are there no Catholic charities in Haiti or Guatemala? Now and then a missionary will show up in the parishes, asking for money they use directly in aid of Catholic missions. Every year, our bishop issues an appeal for Catholic Charities of Southern Missouri. I know where that money goes. I do not know what CRS does with it, but obviously it gives some of it away to secular institutions. Why would I give money for that when I can give it to some Catholic charity?

Never again will I donate to CRS.

 

[zab]

No. They do say they “work with” other organizations. They do not say “we’re often just a middleman, collecting your donations and giving them to secular organizations whose methods and objective may be different from those of Catholic organizations.”

They really aren’t disclosing the truth about their practices. They’re glossing it over at best.

Well, one can read into it whatever they want.

 

[MHichborn]

Assuming your premise is correct, which I do not grant, then CRS ought to be honest about it. “Donate to CRS. We’ll give it to some unrelated secular organization we like, but which you might not, to which you could have donated yourself if you wanted to.”

I think they would find their donations dropping in a hurry if they were honest about it.

It is just preposterous to imagine that CRS cannot find places to do charitable work without the aid of secular organizations. Ten minutes in Haiti would tell them that. And nobody ever said any Catholic organization should have refused to allow companies to aid the Chilean miners. It wasn’t within their power to do it anyway.

A couple of things here. To be fair to CRS, they are not using Catholic-donated funds to give to other organizations, like CARE. The grant CRS provided to CARE was called a “pass-through” from the government. In essence, the government gives a lump sum to CRS, who is then obligated to disseminate the funds to other organizations (keeping some for themselves, of course), and that is the money that is given to CARE.

Here’s something else to consider … CRS is a $1 billion organization, nearly $500 million of which comes from the government. If we really wanted to make sure that our Catholic Relief Service was “clean,” we should make sure it isn’t receiving government money because those usually come with strings attached. Or, you wind up in a situation as with CARE, where CRS is left making a feeble attempt to defend giving money to such a rabidly anti-Catholic organization.

 

[april32010]

You’re making my point.i recall a statement put out by the USCCB a while back, that say’s we’re not. They were addressing people who purchase health-insurance from companies which include abortion coverage for their customers in their policiesJim

kinda of the point why this brouhaha started in the first place Jim,the USSB is suing,but it is ok for us peons?

 

[iloveangels]

You can almost be assured, that dioceses across the USA are using Excel and Word on their chancery computers.

Jim

You bet they are. It’s bad business to use anything else as a practical matter. I’m pretty sure they’re using Microsoft at the Vatican. That doesn’t mean they approve of Bill Gates personally. That means that they needed to buy software and so they bought a product just like I, and millions of others, did.

 

[iloveangels]

kinda of the point why this brouhaha started in the first place Jim,the USSB is suing,but it is ok for us peons?

Confusing isn’t it? There’s a lot about this that’s just really messed up on a bunch of different levels.

That said, this has been apparent for quite some time for those who did a bit of research. I am very careful who I give money to. It doesn’t get used as people think a whole lot of the time. I don’t give to United Way or the Red Cross either, same reason.

Actually, if you want to know the truth, the best bet is to give locally and as personally as possible. Food banks and animal shelters are in desperate need of products to serve their clienteles who are actually poor and need things to get by, especially around back-to-school time and wintertime, and particularly in the cold parts of the country.