Using the Bible as an inspiration for sacrificial good works

[SteveH]

The Sally Army
The Trussell Trust
The ending of apartheid - Archbishop Tutu etc.
Tear Fund
Christian Aid
CAFOD
Etc.
Etc.

Every time I get annoyed by some nonsense posted on Facebook by some fundy nutter, and seriously consider abandoning Christianity and becoming a humanist, the member of this forum who started the other thread that this is a reply to comes out with some outrageous, one-sided slur against Christianity, and reminds me how bitter and negative I found myself becoming during my year out back in 1992-3, before I came back to a much more liberal version of the faith, which makes me decide not to throw it over just yet - so keep up the good work for the gospel, RJG!

[ProfessorDavey]

The Sally Army
The Trussell Trust
The ending of apartheid - Archbishop Tutu etc.
Tear Fund
Christian Aid
CAFOD
Etc.
Etc.

Every time I get annoyed by some nonsense posted on Facebook by some fundy nutter, and seriously consider abandoning Christianity and becoming a humanist, the member of this forum who started the other thread that this is a reply to comes out with some outrageous, one-sided slur against Christianity, and reminds me how bitter and negative I found myself becoming during my year out back in 1992-3, before I came back to a much more liberal version of the faith, which makes me decide not to throw it over just yet - so keep up the good work for the gospel, RJG!

There are, of course, many charitable organisations established by christians with a christian ethos - you've indicated a few. But for every one you can match to other organisations that are acting in a similar charitable field (e.g. Homeless, emergency/developmental aid, etc etc) that are entirely secular in terms of formal designation and organisational ethos. And of course many of those organisations were set up by people who aren't religious and include non religious people as volunteers/donors etc etc.

So there really isn't any evidence that there are proportionately more christian charities than you'd expect given the proportion of christians in the UK. Nor of course is there evidence that christians are more likely to be volunteering more than non christians, nor giving more to charity than non christians (once you strip out donation to the church that active christian donors gain a direct benefit from in terms of attending worship).

However there is one difference - christians seem to require that charities are badged as christian, which doesn't happen in the secular world where most charities are named on the basis of the work they do, not the attributes/motivation of the people involved/setting up the charity. Why is this - well it seems to me that christians feel the need to be seen to be doing good work, while others have less need to seen being charitable, rather the fruits of that work are sufficient. You see this embedded in christian worship where the collection plate is clearly public (and of course there is no need for this).

So it seems to be that there is a mentality within christian tradition that needs to ensure that individual are seen to be doing good (rather than just doing good per se) and that they need very publicly to ensure that everyone knows that it is their christian faith that motivates them.

[ekim]

... and don't forget the Red Crescent element .....  "The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is an international humanitarian movement with approximately 97 million volunteers, members and staff worldwide which was founded to protect human life and health, to ensure respect for all human beings, and to prevent and alleviate human suffering. "  Wikipedia

[ProfessorDavey]

... and don't forget the Red Crescent element .....  "The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is an international humanitarian movement with approximately 97 million volunteers, members and staff worldwide which was founded to protect human life and health, to ensure respect for all human beings, and to prevent and alleviate human suffering. "  Wikipedia

The red cross is not and never has been a faith-based organisation - I was secular from the start. The name and logo are linked to the Swiss flag not to anything overtly christian.

[ProfessorDavey]

The ending of apartheid - Archbishop Tutu etc.

But the whole apartheid notion was based on christian teaching notably through the Dutch Reformed church which was intrinsically linked to the policy and to the dominant National Party who governed South Africa and developed and maintained apartheid from 1948 until it collapsed in 1994.

[jeremyp]

But the whole apartheid notion was based on christian teaching notably through the Dutch Reformed church which was intrinsically linked to the policy and to the dominant National Party who governed South Africa and developed and maintained apartheid from 1948 until it collapsed in 1994.

Apartheid wasn't ended by Archbishop Tutu in any case.

[ProfessorDavey]

Apartheid wasn't ended by Archbishop Tutu in any case.

True - and there is pretty strong evidence that the key figure, Nelson Mandela, wasn't religious (albeit brought up in a christian household as so many were) and indeed may have been an atheist.

[SteveH]

Apartheid wasn't ended by Archbishop Tutu in any case.

Obviously not - but he played a major part.

[ProfessorDavey]

Obviously not - but he played a major part.

So what - you seem to be engaged in serious cherry picking. Picking one of many people involved in the fight against apartheid (and certainly not one of the key leaders) who happened to be a christian, while many of the others weren't active christians including the key globally iconic leader Mandela. Whilst also conveniently ignoring the fact that apartheid as an ideology was inextricably linked to an organiser christian denomination.

So the reality is that apartheid grew out of organised christian ideology, while its opposition in South Africa was not inextricably linked to christian ideology albeit some of the leading figures opposed happened to be christian.

[ProfessorDavey]

Obviously not - but he played a major part.

So why is his part more important than:

Steve Biko - gave his life for the cause - non religious
Joe Slovo - from Jewish ancestry but overtly atheist

To name but two.

[ProfessorDavey]

So why is his part more important than:

Steve Biko - gave his life for the cause - non religious
Joe Slovo - from Jewish ancestry but overtly atheist

To name but two.

So just be be clear I am being balanced.

We also have Mandela who wasn't religious in any conventional sense and Oliver Tambo, who as far as I'm aware was actively christian.

Point being that the coalition of people against apartheid was just that in terms of religion - involving people of all religions and none, the religion of an individual wasn't a key issue. They were however fighting an ideology that was inextricably linked to a specifically christian ideology (albeit I fully accept not one that come close to be universally accepted in christianity) aligned to an organised christian denomination.

[ProfessorDavey]

The Sally Army

I certainly wont donate to them, and politely tell those who know the door trying to raise funds for them as such.

For many christian charities that are engaged in areas which are inherently non religious (e.g. aid or homelessness) there is always of concern that the money you put in their collection bucket isn't going to front line activity but to evangelising.

Well the Salvation Army are actually clear about this if you actually check their accounts that have to be submitted to the charity commission (not that most people read them) - so over 20p for ever £1 collected goes directly on evangelism. If I want to help the homeless (I do and I work to support organisations that also do so) I want as near to 100% of the money raised to go to help the homeless, not for over 20% to be syphoned off for evangelism, effectively to try to convert vulnerable people to christianity, which is ethically unacceptable.

Also worth noting that while the Salvation Army try to get you to put money in a bucket, tin or envelope their latest account release they are sitting on over £600M in reserves. Yup you read that right - they have not far off £1billion sitting in the bank.

[ProfessorDavey]

The Sally Army

But for balance I love the brass band Christmas music thing - lovely and may make me cry.

But they need not one penny to support that.

[SteveH]

I certainly wont donate to them, and politely tell those who know the door trying to raise funds for them as such.

For many christian charities that are engaged in areas which are inherently non religious (e.g. aid or homelessness) there is always of concern that the money you put in their collection bucket isn't going to front line activity but to evangelising.

Well the Salvation Army are actually clear about this if you actually check their accounts that have to be submitted to the charity commission (not that most people read them) - so over 20p for ever £1 collected goes directly on evangelism. If I want to help the homeless (I do and I work to support organisations that also do so) I want as near to 100% of the money raised to go to help the homeless, not for over 20% to be syphoned off for evangelism, effectively to try to convert vulnerable people to christianity, which is ethically unacceptable.

Also worth noting that while the Salvation Army try to get you to put money in a bucket, tin or envelope their latest account release they are sitting on over £600M in reserves. Yup you read that right - they have not far off £1billion sitting in the bank.

As you say, the SA are perfectly clear and open about donations: they go to the SA genersally, not specifically to their social work. Thast is because they regard all their work - feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, and evasngelising - as of a piece, all part of the same mission.

[ProfessorDavey]

As you say, the SA are perfectly clear and open about donations: they go to the SA genersally, not specifically to their social work.

I don't think that is true - sure I'm aware that over 20p in every £ goes on evangelising. But that's because I've looked at the annual report on the Charity Commission site. Most people won't read their annual report or accounts - they will base their views on the outward publicity that the Salvation Army use to gain donations. So for example the link below:

https://www.salvationarmy.org.uk/donate?gclid=Cj0KCQiAqY3zBRDQARIsAJeCVxOPNELkZdMYTDqr1VmMxjYVVBJMKWbw6IhxYduNj4iSHDaCMfwIblQaAqhyEALw_wcB

Maybe even click on 'Ways we help' - it is entirely about their social work - the impression is clearly that all your donation (minus the obvious admin costs that apply to any charity) will go to that work. But in reality 20p in every £ goes on evangelising. In what way are they being clear and open about that?

[ProfessorDavey]

As you say, the SA are perfectly clear and open about donations: they go to the SA genersally, not specifically to their social work. Thast is because they regard all their work - feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, and evasngelising - as of a piece, all part of the same mission.

I suspect most donors putting a few pounds in a collection tin on the street or in an envelope when the Salvation Army know on your door are blissfully unaware (and would probably be rather shocked) that the organisation is sitting on over £600 million in reserves. They don't seem to be perfectly clear about that either.

[SteveH]

So just be be clear I am being balanced.

We also have Mandela who wasn't religious in any conventional sense and Oliver Tambo, who as far as I'm aware was actively christian.

Point being that the coalition of people against apartheid was just that in terms of religion - involving people of all religions and none, the religion of an individual wasn't a key issue. They were however fighting an ideology that was inextricably linked to a specifically christian ideology (albeit I fully accept not one that come close to be universally accepted in christianity) aligned to an organised christian denomination.

Talking of points, you are missing it. This thread is about people who have been inspired by the bible to do good, and Tutu and others were inspired by it to help end apartheid, and to be remarkably forgiving once it had fallen. I don't deny that the bible has been (mis) used to justify all sorts of wickedness, including apartheid. However, as I said earlier, it is quite clear that doing good is in line with the teachings of Christianity, and doing evil isn't. I just wanted to put the other side of the argument, in reply to LR's typically bile-filled, one-sided thread.

[ProfessorDavey]

If that is true about the Salvation Army, I am more than disgusted.

It is true - and plain to see for anyone (in other words virtually no-one) whose chooses to read their accounts.

[SteveH]

If that is true about the Salvation Army, I am more than disgusted.

Oh, how happy you must be - you've discovered something else to blow up out of all proportion, and harp tiresomely on about for evermore.
It turns out that it's bollocks, anyway. https://www.salvationarmy.org.uk/Fundraising-Q-and-A
"How much of my donation will go to good work?

91 pence in your donated £1 goes to the delivery of caring services and the support of those services. 9 pence in your donated £1 is invested in fundraising to generate those funds and governance. These figures exclude the cost of running our charity shops and trading operations which contributed an additional £16.9 million to our income in 2017/18. "
Like all churches, the SA has a collection at every service, and presumably that is used for the evangelism.

[ProfessorDavey]

Oh, how happy you must be - you've discovered something else to blow up out of all proportion, and harp tiresomely on about for evermore.

In what way am I blowing it out of all proportions. I suspect a large proportion of the population would be rather shocked to learn that the Salvation Army send over 20% of your donations on evangelising. And that they are effectively holding 3 years worth of reserves when the government recommendation for charities is 3-6 months with the average reserves being 4 months.

And I haven't just discovered this - I've known about it for years and indeed I think I've posted about it here before.

So if you want to help disadvantaged people give your money to a charity that will spend 100% (after admin costs) of your donations on helping people. And give to organisations that believe your donation is there to be spent on helping people not of building up astonishing levels of reserves.

[SteveH]

In what way am I blowing it out of all proportions. I suspect a large proportion of the population would be rather shocked to learn that the Salvation Army send over 20% of your donations on evangelising. And that they are effectively holding 3 years worth of reserves when the government recommendation for charities is 3-6 months with the average reserves being 4 months.

Not you - LR.
As my post above makes clear, with a link to and quote from the SA website about their fundraising, you're wrong, anyway.

[SteveH]

I agree with you. Also maybe the oh so HOLY Steve, might help in a practical way to assist those in need.

How do you know I don't?

[SteveH]

Some years ago when I was taking some stuff to the local tip, which also had charity clothes bins belonging to the SA. I was shocked to see a person in the SA uniform emptying those bins and chucking a load of the bags into the waste tip! I have never donated clothes to them since then.

All charities which receive donations of goods, mainly charity shops, chuck away a lot of what they're given because it's unsellable. Some people use charities as a convenient dumping-ground. When I volunteered in an Oxfam bookshop, we chucked out huge amounts of unsellable stuff into big commercial rubbish containers.

[SteveH]

Well do you?

Mind your own business.

[bluehillside Retd.]

PVJ,

Talking of points, you are missing it. This thread is about people who have been inspired by the bible to do good…,

Just out of interest, what makes you think they were “inspired by the bible to do good” rather than by their innate decency or fellow feeling? Had they not been religious do you think they’d just have sat on their hands or gone down the pub, or would they perhaps have done good things anyway just a many non-religious people have done?