In an email from Compassion Australia yesterday:
Mercy Ministries has stopped supporting children through Compassion Australia but we continue to have a number of children sponsored by their American counterparts.
So the removal it seems, is due to Mercy folding in Australia. Though American counterparts is vague, do they mean Mercy International/Nancy?
In any case the relationship appears have ended not through Compassion seeing anything immoral in Mercy’s actions but through mere process.
Related posts:
- Compassion Australia quietly removing reference to Mercy Ministries? One of my readers notes that an article I...
- The Evangelical back scratching network – Gloria Jeans, Compassion and Mercy Ministries Now while Gloria Jeans has pulled their funding and...
- Compassion responds to my Mercy query…sort of I mentioned in this post that I was going...
Loading ...
That's a really vague answer and strange wording. Shouldn't they have said that Mercy Ministries in Australia has stopped sponsoring Compassion children (if they ever were, which I'd never heard before) but that Mercy Ministries of America is still sponsoring children? You asked whether Mercy Ministries as an organisation was still a sponsor, not which specific countries were involved.
So why would Mercy/ anyone involved in Mercy sponsoring Compassion kids be a bad thing? Surely money is money, food is food?
If you ran a charity in Africa for arguments sake and you received money from a warlord well known for his brutality and criminal activities (say growing drugs or selling slaves) would you take the money to help your charity? What you appear to be suggesting is that it does not matter where money comes from, how it was earned etc.
Now in regards to compassion I had hoped that the reason they had removed the information was that they were severing ties with an organisation that mistreats women.
Because Compassion was advertising Mercy on their website in return.
(This is Anna — I have decided not to use my real name on my blog anymore and have changed the URL to reflect that)
Hm…I am hoping that the only reason this is continuing is because Compassion doesn't know what Mercy is doing. Since it hasn't been as well publicized here in the U.S., I think this is quite possible…there are a lot of individuals and organizations that still support them. Although some may know the truth, I would be willing to bet that others either don't know, or have heard but have been so deceived by Mercy that they don't believe it. Of course, I can't say whether that's the case with Compassion or not, but I hope it is.
Wess Stafford came and spoke during chapel at my school last year. He was absolutely one of my favorite chapel speakers. I believe he is an honest and genuine person who believes in what he is doing. He talked about growing up in Africa and the poverty there and watching his friends die around him. He truly cares about helping the poor, and I believe in the work that Compassion is doing.
So, I will have to respectfully disagree with your view of Compassion. =) I do hope that they learn the truth about Mercy though, and am considering writing to them myself.
I don't mind if people respectfully disagree
I don't doubt that they do help people,their stance on condom use is dangerous though, when all evidence points to a multifaceted approach being the most successful in combating aids. I guess I don't see the point to saving young African lives if a large proportion of them die due to ignorance surrounding sexual matters.
Okay, I can agree with that! You're right, a multifaceted approach would make much more sense, and save many more lives. I don't understand why some Christians are so against it. I thought we (Christians) were supposed to model our lives after Jesus — teaching about contraception as a way to prevent AIDS doesn't hurt anyone, and somehow I think Jesus would be in favor of saving as many lives as possible.
Hey, Grace, can you send me you're blogs new URL so I can link to it. Thanks!
John