Counterfeit Catholics

August 2, 2013 09:00 AM

Counterfeit: insincere, feigned

Catholics for Choice (CFC) and Catholic Relief Services (CRS) share a cruel tactic in common: Both organizations thrive on distorting what the Catholic Church teaches in order to pursue less than laudable goals.

Over the last few weeks we have witnessed CRS expound gobbledygook in an effort to deflect criticism from its programs. It does this by decrying the research reports of others—alleging that the citations are nothing but an attack on their efforts. Yet it fails to refute the anti-life efforts being pursued by sub-grantees such as Population Services International (PSI). 

Calling itself “an organization of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops,” CRS contends it “is a pro-life organization dedicated to preserving the sacredness and dignity of human life from conception to natural death. Every aspect of our work is to help life flourish. We are resolute in our commitment to the Church and its teaching.”

But the conversation and analysis published by Population Research Institute (PRI) shows beyond a doubt that CRS fails the litmus test for accuracy. As a matter of fact, PRI recommends that CRS attempt to consult with its own employees before denying it has any association with family planning programs in the third world or elsewhere. 

The historical record reveals a tapestry of collaborative efforts that is anything but pristine when one considers the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church on all forms of so-called family planning. This entanglement of CRS in unsavory projects is defined by ace researcher Randy Engel as “anti-life laundry for the death peddlers.” 

One supposes that, since there is no principled explanation for this blemished record, deflection is the best course for CRS. This is a shame and a sham.

The same could be said for Catholics for Choice (CFC), an organization that has one of the most oxymoronic names in the history of special interest groups. If one is Catholic, one is a defender of human dignity, not the “choice” to abort, engage in homosexual activities, or use birth control.

But just like CRS, CFC prefers distortion. This is how it came to pass that the organization recently labeled yours truly as a “religious extremist.” Why? Well, David J. Nolan, editor of Conscience, CFC’s “news journal,” wrote “Religious extremists . . . have an immoderate, uncompromising approach to politics and, given the chance, they would deny basic rights and require fundamental changes to the way most people want to live.”

In other words, Nolan believes that abortion and contraception are “basic rights” and that those of us who struggle to defend the truth are intolerant of sexual wrongs. On that point he is correct.

Nolan and his colleagues refuse to admit that an entire class of human beings—those not yet born—will never have the chance to express their opinion on how they might want to live because millions of them are being murdered by abortion, killed by chemicals, and discarded after in vitro fertilization treatments.

Nolan opines that Judie Brown is an extremist because, among other things, I oppose “anybody, any law, any language or any argument that supports a single abortion for any reason.” Nolan has no tolerance for Catholics who understand Catholic teaching, express it publicly, and exhort bishops and others to do likewise.

Again we see that counterfeit pattern emerge. CFC is but another organization that prefers to call itself Catholic while working against the teachings of Christ and His Church, while also attacking those who love the truth, the Church, and human dignity—and love each of these things enough to publicly proclaim them rather than pandering to the politically correct agenda of Catholic imposters.

CRS, Catholics for Choice, and others actively falsify legitimate Catholic teaching on a daily basis, planting seeds of confusion among those who don’t know better—including many Catholics. Such ignominious deeds are of the devil himself and, as long as we are still breathing, we will expose such hypocrisy at every turn.

Separating the imitation from the genuine is a task each of us should be engaged in pursuing. Extremists unite!

Back to news