I am settling into the new world of non-profit fundraising and research. I love my job. It is amazing to enjoy going to work each day. I am also in over my head in seminary. I put Hebrew first because I know my tendency with languages is to be overwhelmed and give-up. Thankfully, that's not the case so far. We'll see what the midterm says. I was encouraged when I was the only one in the class that caught a spelling error (in Hebrew) on a quiz. But as for Systematic and Gospels...
Back to the title topic. Today brought an interesting dilemma to the new work adventure. Being the development coordinator, I get to mess in everyone's business. I get to have an opinion on marketing, research, logos, everything down to how the receptionist answers the phone. Idea being that, as a non-profit, you bend over backwards to get folks to give you money. This is the part of my job that I hate. I hate asking people for money. I can't think about it like that. I prefer to talk of "partnerships" and "supporters" rather than "donors" or "clients." But, at the end of the day, it's my job to convince people to take out their checkbooks. I'm happy to do this only because I fully believe in the call of the organization; we bear the unique claim of aiding the suffering, global Church. (I'll write more about this later when I finish my paper for Gospels.)
So, we're a Christian organization that takes money from Christians and gives it to Christians around the world to help impoverished, persecuted or suffering Christians. On the whole, we make no distinctions along denominational lines. I know where my organizations stands, and I know where my individual coworkers stand on theological/doctrinal issues, and they are in agreement with my own.
However, the issue came up today of how far is acceptable to go to solicit funds from those with questionable theology. I'm not talking about differences between, say, Reformed Baptists and Reformed Presbyterians. I mean more like beyond Emergent and into the realm of Joel Osteen. The advertising in question wouldn't directly link us to anyone; but it would target a very theologically diverse crowd.
So, is this a necessary line to draw? Do we ask supporters if they adhere to the Westminster Confession before they give, or just gratefully take their money, send a (personalized) thank-you and pass it along to those in need? Is this, as Dr. G raised in class last night, the slippery slope of distinguishing the visible church from the invisible church?
About Me
- Ryann
- United States
- Studying Islam and Mid East politics from liberal academic institutions led to my quest for moderation. Currently pursuing an M.A.R. from Reformed Theological Seminary, studying Hebrew and Greek, and wishing I had more time to read.
2 comments:
Hi friend... I have compassion on what you're wrestling with, but it struck a pet nerve in me.
I recently heard a sermon on the verse: "You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel." The pastor talked about how these religious people focused so much on the little things that they missed the "More Important Things":
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former." (MT 23:23)
I note that the Westminster Confession, while drawn from scripture, is not scripture. It seems to me that we should consider the following: 1) Our posture in relation to God; 2) The "More Important Things"; 3) Personal purity; 4) Correct theology
Although I'm not going to state outright that that's the order, Matthew 23:23 seems to say let's collect the money from the people who profess to believe in God and let God take care of the rest. Or, I suppose we could tell the impoverished, persecuted & suffering Christians, "Sorry, we could've funded more but Joel Olsteen doesn't talk about hell from the pulpit."
Does that resonate at all? Thanks for the thoughtful discussion!
Dave – Thanks for your thoughts. I’m going to have to disagree with you on a few points, and maybe raise a few more, though.
I think you are right to say that I should not question the intentions, heart or theology of a giver. I (or, my organization, rather) should gratefully take their support, and faithfully pass it on to those in need. However, my discomfort with the situation was more in how far is acceptable to go in soliciting those donations. Is it proper to advertise with those whose audience is known for certain to have questionable theology?
Given all the warnings in the New Testament about false prophets, teachers and yes, even false doctrine, how is correct theology not just a, but THE important matter? (See Matt 24, 2 Peter 2, and 1 Tim 6) Justice, mercy and faithfulness are all expressions of a proper understanding of our position in relationship to the law that no longer binds us because of the redemptive work of Christ.
“Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.” (1 John 4:1-3)
That’s not suggesting that someone must adhere to the entire Westminster Confession or even be a 5-point Calvinist. But that is a pretty clear indication that we should steer clear of those who do not preach the centrality of Christ as Lord. The question is how much should that impact this situation.
I’ll also argue that our doctrine has a profound impact on how we posture ourselves in relation to G-d (both in how we see it and in how we actually interact with him.)
Two more thoughts: (1) My concern was not just with the appeal but the ramifications of that in the eyes of the rest of our supporters or potential supporters. Whatever the proper action is in relationship to those without similar theology, the fact remains that the majority of our supporters come from a very conservative pool. So, is it worse to say, “Sorry suffering Church, we had to pull the plug on that project because the Smiths, our multi-million dollar donors, disagreed with our affiliation with Joel Osteen?” (2) Is this more clear-cut in the secular world? No one would bat an eyelash if I said “company X had questionable ethics or affiliations so we decided not to market with them.” I’m pointing the finger at myself here when I ask, why does theology make it such a volatile issue?
As someone in a different sphere of the non-profit realm, I welcome your insights and response.
Post a Comment