Changing Priorities Regarding Safety

I was born into a large family in a small town in 1960, and when I was four, my family moved to another small town in another state. This was at a time (and in places) when kids, including me, spent a large portion of our non-school time outdoors. Any concerns about our physical safety seemed to center around occasional scrapes and bruises, and in some cases more serious injuries, like broken bones. My father was a pastor, and it seemed like most people back then went to church, where people’s spiritual safety was the focus. Admittedly, a lot of the preaching seemed to be focused on “don’ts,” such as those found in the ten commandments. However, even though I didn’t become a Christian until I was twenty, I think that even when I was a young boy, I had a vague understanding that these commandments promoted spiritual as well as physical safety–including avoiding physical punishment if I said taboo words! Looking back, it seems that spiritual safety was regarded by church leadership as at least equal to, if not greater than, physical safety.

Jumping ahead a couple of decades to the early ’90s: when my wife and I came back to the U.S., toddler in tow, after teaching English for a few years in a Third World country, it seemed that the landscape of American culture had changed in some ways. One thing we noticed was that there were not a lot of kids “roaming” the neighborhood, at least not compared to my experience growing up. Admittedly, we were not in a small town, but my wife, who had grown up in a good-sized city, noticed the difference as well. As time went on, I began to wonder what some reasons might be for this change. I vaguely recalled hearing a horrible story about a boy who had been “snatched” and murdered several years before; his name was Adam Walsh, and it happened in 1981. Digging a little deeper, I found that there were other child abductions in the 1980s as well. As a result of these, faces of missing children began to appear on milk cartons in 1985, and after Amber Hagerman’s abduction and murder in 1996, the first Amber Alert was made.

I came to believe that these child abductions were one factor in causing parents to be more careful about their children’s safety, and understandably so. I came across a quote that supports this idea: Richard Moran, criminologist at Mount Holyoke College, said a few years ago, “The Adam Walsh case created a nation of petrified kids and paranoid parents. Kids used to be able to go out and organize a stickball game, and now all playdates and the social lives of children are arranged and controlled by the parents.” This is in spite of the fact that abductions by strangers are rare and have, in fact, been decreasing over the past two decades. Increasing parental caution and the commonality of cell phones among kids probably have a lot to do with this.

I don’t “blame” parents for being overcautious about their kids’ physical safety. I remember, for example, the panic of my brother-in-law when he couldn’t find his young son at a popular beach in Michigan in 1981. He and I were loudly calling out the boy’s name as we went further and further down the beach, and my brother-in-law was even looking in the lake. Thank the Lord, when we finally found him, he was safely with a police officer far down the beach. In a previous post, I have written a similar story about my daughter, who was “lost” for an hour or so after school one day; I had forgotten that it was a minimum day, and she had wandered into a nearby neighborhood, where she was playing with some girls.

On the other hand, I have seen examples of parents who seem to have very little, if any, concern about their kids other than physical safety, and even then, only of a certain kind. Here’s a vignette from about 20 years ago that encapsulates a strangely twisted notion of safety: I have a friend who had gotten divorced, and he had a son. When the son became a teen, my friend told me that he was vexed because his ex was providing her house as a place for not just him, but also his girlfriend, to hang out after school. When my friend (who’s a Christian) expressed his concern to his ex, she said that if their son and girlfriend were going to have sex anyway, why not do it in a safe place? It wouldn’t surprise me at all if the ex had also provided their son with condoms! It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand what is twisted about this so-called notion of safety; compare this with most parents’ concern that their kids not engage in sex back in the 1960s.

Jumping ahead to the present, in the child sexuality realm: a federal judge ruled just three months ago that California is not violating parents’ rights by requiring public schools to accept students’ gender identities and to let them decide whether to inform their families. Compare this with this requirement from the CA Dept. of Education: “You must supply the school with all medicine your child must take during the school day. You or another adult must deliver the medicine to school, except medicine your child is authorized to carry and take by him or herself.” And then there are the LGBTQ activists and some in the medical establishment who have been pushing for “gender-affirming care” for those kids who want to transition to the opposite gender; I have written more about that here: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2022/02/23/clarity-and-compassion-for-the-transgendered/ In Spain, minor children as young as 16 are now allowed to legally change their gender without parental consent, including sex reassignment surgery (also known as genital mutilation); is that safe, and do you think that won’t happen here? Again, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand these twisted and inconsistent notions of safety in the realm of childhood sexuality. This is also obvious, for example, in laws in some states allowing kids to use the restroom of the gender they “identify” with.

I would be remiss if I didn’t add a couple of examples about safety in relation to society at large. You will find differing numbers depending on which source you consult, but what is clear is that since 2019, there has been a significant surge in crime in the U.S. One of the reasons for this is cashless bail, which can be seen by the fact that a comparatively small number of criminals commit a large proportion of violent crimes, and over a relatively short period of time. If you’re interested, you can check out this article by Brad Hamilton from last year: https://nypost.com/2022/08/06/why-a-small-number-of-criminals-perpetrate-the-worst-crimes-in-america/

One more example: in late 2021, the FAA held a summit focused on inclusive language–and then another one early this year. Chew on this: in the FAA, inclusion (think DEI: diversity, equity, and inclusion) is now regarded as equivalent in importance to air safety, meaning that they are striving for this equivalency. (This is from a video from the summit.) Do you remember at the beginning of this year when all flights were grounded for several hours because of a corrupted computer file? Following that fiasco, many pilots blasted the FAA’s 2023 budget because of its inclusion of tens of millions of dollars for “environmental justice” along with, you guessed it, equity and inclusion. My guess is that 99.99% of Americans would rather have the FAA focus on air safety and allocate its finances accordingly.

Safety of all kinds is important, including physical safety. However, as a Christian, there is another kind of safety that is more important to me: spiritual safety. Here’s how Jesus defined love for Him, in John 14:15: “If you love me, you will obey what I command.” And in 2 Thessalonians 3:3, we are told, “But the Lord is faithful, and he will strengthen and protect you from the evil one.” Regardless of what may happen to me, when I live in obedience to Jesus, I am protected spiritually from Satan. In contrast, secularists have a hard time being consistent, to put it mildly, in their ever-evolving notions of physical safety. If you’re not a believer, may this be the day you put your trust in Christ; when you do, He will keep you safe in the way that matters most.

Paying What You Can vs. Paying the Full Cost

A few months ago, a headline about a recently-closed cafe/coffee shop in Toronto called The Anarchist caught my eye; this self-described “anti-capitalist” business had a “pay what you can” model for its drip coffee, while charging high prices for other drinks as well as pastries. It also allowed the public to use its restroom and hang out in the storefront without making a purchase. Naturally, the locals called out the hypocrisy of the owner, Gabriel Sims-Fewer, for charging high prices while claiming to be anti-capitalist. More importantly, his business survived only a year; the owner blamed a “lack of generational wealth/seed capital from ethically bankrupt sources.” In other words, “Hey, my anti-capitalist business didn’t survive because you venture capitalists out there didn’t support me!” The end of his statement to the public was filled with expletives.

The Anarchist (good riddance, by the way) story brought to mind an organization called Promise Keepers. This is a Christian organization that seeks to equip men to be Christian leaders of integrity in their homes, churches, workplaces, and communities. Back in the mid-1990s, I attended two large outdoor stadium conferences with other brothers from my church. There were several speakers, each one focusing on one of seven promises; if you’re interested in what they are, click here https://promisekeepers.org/about-us/7-promises/ and scroll down a little. Interspersed with the challenges from the speakers was music from the Promise Keepers Praise Band. We literally rocked the stadium, and I came home reinvigorated to live out those promises!

I don’t know how many men were at those two outdoor events, but looking around, the stadium looked pretty full, with a capacity of ~48,000. A couple of years later, Bill McCartney, the founder and CEO of Promise Keepers (which began in 1990), announced that from that moment on, their conferences would be free. This is how the press reported it; actually, conference-goers were encouraged to pay/donate whatever they could. When asked why PK was going to stop charging for its conferences, McCartney said: “We stopped charging admission because we felt it was the heart of God that we would not charge admission.” In a different interview, he said this: “I felt during a prayer session, like the Lord told me the expense was too much for some people, and felt like we needed to make sure everyone could come.” The problem was that ~72% of PK’s revenue had been coming from its conferences, which had been charging an average of $60 a ticket (with lunch provided); attendees (including me) also bought various resource materials, particularly books.

The high point of Promise Keepers was in 1996, when 1.1 million men attended 22 stadium events; the revenue for that year was $87.4 million. However, following McCartney’s announcement of no-admission conferences in early 1998, along with the switch to volunteerism on the part of staff, the organization nearly fell apart, coming close to bankruptcy before the year was out. I was not able to find year-by-year financial or attendance records, but here are some numbers:

  • 2000: conference admission fees were reinstated; total revenue for the year was $32 million, down sharply from $87.4 million in 1996
  • 2004: attendance was 179,000, down very sharply from 1.1 million in 1996
  • 2005: staff dropped to 100, down from 470 in 1996
  • 2010-2021: revenue ranged from $1.1 million to $4.6 million

As the years went by, events were held in indoor arenas (drawing 7000-10,000 men) rather than outdoor stadiums. And naturally, online events (free of charge) began when COVID hit.

Bill McCartney was a visionary man of God, but he was not a businessman. Furthermore, it seemed as though he did not have an awareness of “scholarships.” At the church I was a part of back in the 1990s, when someone was not able to pay the full cost of a given event, whether for kids or adults, partial scholarships were often available. Admittedly, I don’t know how common these are at churches around the country, but I think they are a great idea and could even occupy a small portion of a church’s budget. I suppose even Promise Keepers could have offered a limited number of scholarships. Instead, McCartney said in 1998, on the heels of switching to free events and volunteerism: “I believe that every church that names the name of Jesus is supposed to give Promise Keepers $1,000.” Notice the phrase “is supposed to.” It seems to me that would be more likely to alienate churches than result in donations. And in fact, as mentioned earlier, Promise Keepers nearly went bankrupt a few months later. I should also mention that McCartney stepped down five years later.

One passage in the Bible that came to mind as I was reflecting on Bill McCartney was Exodus 18, where Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro, advises Moses. In verse 18, Jethro says, “You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out. The work is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone.” Jethro goes on to tell Moses that he should select men and appoint them as judges over the people; Moses wisely follows Jethro’s advice. Here’s another good verse; Proverbs 15:22 says, “Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed.”

Bill McCartney did not operate alone, but it seems as though he did not have people with various skill sets (including in business) who could give him wise counsel and challenge him if need be. What of Promise Keepers today? I’m glad to say that they are alive and reasonably well. Their seven promises have not changed from the ones I posted on my bedroom wall 28 years ago, and I’m grateful to them for helping equip me at that time in my life. I noticed that there are those who have attacked them over the past few years because of, among other things, their standing firm against the encroachment of the LGBTQ activists and their agenda in society at large; my prayer is that the leadership of more churches would follow PK’s example.

On a final note: Back when McCartney made his announcement about switching to free-admission Promise Keepers conferences, I talked with several of my brothers about it. We were unanimously against it because, among other things, we were aware of the cost of putting on such events. My idea of giving was (and is) that when I give, I don’t expect anything tangible in return. Could I have attended another Promise Keepers event for free and donated to the organization? (As I mentioned earlier, that’s what Promise Keepers encouraged in 1998.) Yes, but that didn’t sit right with me, especially when I had saved enough money to pay for the conference itself. My brothers and I were united: Tell us what the cost is, and we’ll pay it if we can afford it; otherwise, we won’t go. And as I also mentioned earlier, I like the idea of churches building “scholarships” into their budget.

If you disagree and you like the idea of paying what you can, I’m not saying you’re wrong, but frankly, it doesn’t seem to work out well in the real world, whether you’re a coffee shop or a parachurch organization holding events.

Are Christians Obligated to Forgive, No Matter What?

Several years ago, my house was broken into. The burglars took some of our keys, our wallets, and an old laptop that didn’t work anymore. Thankfully, we discovered the break-in very quickly (it wasn’t very obvious, but they weren’t in the house very long, either); as a result, the burglars were able to make only a couple small credit-card purchases before I canceled the cards. Furthermore, we got all of the money back that was stolen via those purchases, so in the end, the thieves got only a couple hundred dollars. On the other hand, they took away a lot of our time as we had to change our locks and buy “clubs” for our cars, in addition to canceling cards.

Around that same time, a close friend of mine asked me, “Are we required to do something that even God doesn’t do?” That “something” he was referring to was forgiving, no matter what. His question and the break-in got me thinking, and for quite some time, I have been studying Scripture as well as what other people have had to say about it.

First of all, was my friend’s assumption about God right? Another way of posing this question is: Does God forgive everyone, no matter what? More specifically, for example, does God forgive even unbelievers who never repent? If you read the Bible, you will find that repentance and forgiveness are always linked. For example, Jesus tells us in Luke 24:47, “Repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” Acts 2:38 says, “Peter replied, ‘Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.'” God is clear throughout the Bible: He does not forgive without our repentance. If He did, I suppose every single person who has ever existed would go to heaven!

Now let’s move on to my friend’s penetrating question: Does God require us to forgive no matter what, even though He doesn’t? I think a good place to start is in Luke 17:3-4, where Jesus tells us, “If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, ‘I repent,’ forgive him.” Matthew 18 has a very similar passage; in verse 15, Jesus says, “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you.” He goes on to say that if your brother will not listen, take along one or two witnesses, and if he still doesn’t listen, tell it to the church; finally, if he still doesn’t listen, treat him like an unbeliever. In verse 21, Peter asks, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?” In verse 22, we have Jesus’ answer: “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.” Putting these passages together, notice that Jesus tells us to go to our brother and tell him how he has wronged us; if he repents, then we need to forgive him. This is the point of the parable of the unmerciful servant, which immediately follows Peter’s question and Jesus’ answer. In the parable, a man owes the king millions of dollars, but the king cancels the debt when the man begs him. The man then finds another man who owes him a few dollars and has him thrown in prison. When the king hears about it, he is very angry and has the first man thrown into prison and tortured. Scripture is very clear that when someone asks for forgiveness, we are to grant it.

In Matthew 5:44, Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. In Romans 12:19-21, Paul expands on this: “Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord. On the contrary: ‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” In other words, we are to treat our enemies with kindness; one of the great theologians of the last fifty years, R.C. Sproul (now in heaven), said that the “burning coals” refer to either shame or God’s judgment; in other words, when you treat your enemy with kindness, he will feel shame, and he may even repent! If he doesn’t repent, he will face God’s judgment. Regardless, we are not to seek revenge against anyone but to leave it to the Lord.

Some have pointed out what Jesus Himself said from the cross: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” We also have the example of Stephen, the first martyr, who forgave those who were stoning him to death; in Acts 7:60, he says, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” It has been inferred from these two examples that we should always forgive. Interestingly, in Revelation 6:10 we have the words of the souls of martyrs in heaven who say something very different: “They called out in a loud voice, ‘How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?'” These martyrs are asking the Lord to avenge them, which is in line with Romans 12:19, quoted earlier. And notice where they are: in heaven! I love what R.C. Sproul said about Jesus’ words on the cross: From that example of Jesus, it has been inferred that Christians must always forgive all offenses against them, even when repentance is not offered. However, the most that we can legitimately infer from Jesus’ actions on that occasion is that we have the right to forgive people unilaterally. Though that may be indeed a wonderful thing, it is not commanded. Notice R.C.’s insight; we have the right to forgive someone unilaterally (without their apology and/or repentance), but we are not commanded to do so.

I thought of the mass shooting of nine parishioners at Mother Emanuel AME Church in 2015 and the responses of some of the survivors and family members; the media reported that many forgave the murderer, but at least in some cases, their words of forgiveness were combined with words of hope that he would repent. I also thought about a story that I read more than forty years ago of a believer who had unspeakable things done to her, but who forgave her attacker unilaterally. However, as R.C. said, this unilateral forgiveness is not a command. If we regard it as such, we may find ourselves admonishing other believers who have had even horrible things done to them to forgive. That is not something they have to do unless the Holy Spirit tells them to!

One aspect of forgiveness that is overlooked and which I am very grateful to Dr. Guy Richard (President and Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary in Atlanta) for writing about is this: forgiveness is relational; in other words, whether it’s between a person and the Lord, or between two people, true forgiveness is about a relationship; when it happens, it results in reconciliation and the restoration of the relationship. It doesn’t mean that there are no changes in the relationship, but it means that it can continue. You can read more about what Dr. Richard wrote here: https://guymrichard.com/2023/04/do-we-still-need-to-forgive-even-if-they-never-apologize/

Much more could be said, for example, about unilateral forgiveness of someone who has died, someone whose location you have no knowledge of, or even someone whose identity you don’t know. When I began thinking about this question regarding forgiveness, I had thought of it in terms of whether believers are obligated to forgive unbelievers. However, it evolved into a better question, which is irrespective of the other person’s faith or lack thereof. In that regard, I have told the Lord more than once that if someday, one of the burglars that I mentioned at the outset comes to my house and confesses, I will freely forgive him. If he offers me some money, I will accept it (for his sake, not mine), and I will not report him to law enforcement.

When I was a young boy, one of my brothers once told me that I was a “vengeful little bugger.” It’s true that I enjoyed “getting back at” people and that I used to hang on to my resentment and bitterness. Thank the Lord, I have become more forgiving over time; one shining example of a person who forgives very readily is my wife, and I know that her example is one reason for this. While I am very rarely a unilateral forgiver, when I experience forgiveness, whether I am the offended or the offender, the sweetness of it makes me want to do it ever more readily. May all of us who profess the name of Christ be shining examples of those who both receive and extend forgiveness.

How Do You Handle Problems with Neighbors?

There seems to be a tendency among people to simply get frustrated (or call in law enforcement or a lawyer) when they have a problem with a neighbor rather than going directly to them to work it out. When I have had a problem with a neighbor, I have not always been willing to go directly to them; however, most of the time, I have. In this post, I will recount some examples.

It’s been a while since I’ve needed to confront a neighbor about something, thankfully, but the vast majority of times that I have, it’s been about late-night noise. Here are a few vignettes, with a variety of neighbors over a period of several years.

  • It’s after midnight, and there’s very loud music coming from across the street. I get dressed, pray, and walk across the street. My neighbor isn’t outside, but there is a couple in the back of a pickup; that’s where the music is coming from. The guy, who is somewhat inebriated, greets me and asks if I want a beer. I politely decline, but then I point to my watch and say, “Hey, it’s pretty late, and I’m having a hard time sleeping. Could you turn down your music?” He jumps up, saying, “Sure, I’ll turn it off right now.” I say, “Oh, that’s not necessary; just turn it down.” He says, “No problem!” and turns it off. I thank him, walk back home, thank the Lord, and get to sleep as soon as my head hits the pillow.
  • It’s another late night, and I hear some very loud talking from in front of my next-door neighbor’s house; there’s also some music, but not too loud. I get dressed, pray, and walk next door. My neighbor, very inebriated, is talking with a couple of friends. He greets me and introduces me to his friends, with handshakes all around. I tap my watch, and he says, “Hey, this is my neighbor, and he’s a great guy. He has to put up with me and my family having parties and making noise.” I say, “Thanks, but I wonder if you’d mind talking maybe in your house or garage; it’s kind of loud.” He apologizes and essentially repeats his line about my being a great neighbor and having to put up with their noise. After a little more friendly back and forth, we wave, and he and his friends go inside. Interestingly, there was another time with this same neighbor and family when his wife brought us some homemade soup and told us that over the coming weekend, they’d be having a party; it was her way of saying, “Hey, can you just tolerate some noise, especially since I’m giving you this soup?” We thanked her for the soup, and I told her that as long as they didn’t make noise too late and kept it inside, it would be all right. A couple nights later, they had their party, and the noise level was very tolerable.
  • It’s yet another late night, and I wake up to a noise I can’t immediately place. After a couple of minutes, I realize that someone is riding a skateboard back and forth on the street in front of our next-door neighbor’s house (a different neighbor) as well as our house. (Have you ever heard a skateboard in the dead of night? It’s really loud!) There’s also a lot of loud talking, and when I peer out the window, I can see at least a dozen guys. This time, I’m a bit concerned because of the sheer number of guys and also because I don’t see my neighbor. I get up, pray (longer this time), and with a bit of trepidation prepare to walk out the door. I decide that I’m going to focus on spotting my neighbor and making a beeline for him. Thankfully, I quickly spot him, and I tap my watch and say, “Hey, sorry to bother you, but it’s really late, and I’m having a hard time getting to sleep.” He looks at me, puts his hands on his hips, and then nods, saying, “I can respect that. Okay, guys, let’s take it inside.” They do, and after my heartbeat slows down again, I get back to sleep.

Maybe you’re wondering where my wife has been during all these late-night noise episodes. The answer is: Right next to me, fast asleep! She has no trouble sleeping through almost anything. There have been other similar episodes as well over the years, but as I alluded to earlier, thankfully, it’s been a long time since the last one.

Another type of confrontation that we had with a neighbor years ago was one evening when my wife noticed some yard-waste clippings flying over our backyard fence (a very tall one; not our preference, but it’s the norm here) into our yard. We went outside and said, “Hey, what are you doing?” Some more flew over, and I said, “Can you just stop a minute?” The neighbor said that what they were throwing over was from our climbing fig, which was encroaching on their side; my wife said that there was no more climbing fig on our side. Our neighbor’s teen son, who was on a ladder, looked over and saw that our side of the fence was indeed bare. He nodded and said something to his mom. That ended the conversation and the tossing over of yard waste. (No, we didn’t throw it back!) A little background: with the previous neighbor in that house, my wife had offered some weed-killer, but when my wife also asked her to sign a homemade “hold-harmless” agreement, the neighbor turned it down.

Maybe you’ve noticed that with the late-night noise incidents, I have always prayed before talking to the neighbor. One of the reasons I have prayed is simply because frankly, I’ve been feeling angry about the noise, so I know that I need the Lord to settle me down. Otherwise, my anger will show to my neighbor, and things are very likely to escalate. One verse that comes to mind is Romans 12:18, which says, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.” The other reason I have prayed is simply that I want the Lord to grant me a good night’s sleep! Psalm 127:2 says, “In vain you rise early and stay up late, toiling for food to eat–for he grants sleep to those he loves.” One time when I was having a dinner with colleagues, we were talking about problems with neighbors. None of my colleagues were willing to talk to their neighbors, so I told them a couple of my stories. One colleague looked at me and said (nonsarcastically), “It’s great that you like to do that, Keith.” I said, “I don’t like to do it, but if I don’t, I won’t get a good night’s sleep!”

As I mentioned at the outset, I have not always been willing to go directly to a neighbor that I have a problem with; you can read, among other things, about an example related to “donuts” here if you’re interested: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2023/05/31/making-your-mark/ Lord willing, in my next post, about forgiveness, I plan to include another example of a neighbor that I have not been able or willing to go to directly. I should also add that I have heard enough stories about violent, even deadly, confrontations with neighbors not to be naive about this kind of situation. However, I would venture to say that with the Lord’s help, we can try to directly resolve problems with neighbors more often than we might think.

Discernment in Charitable Giving

A few months after I got married, my wife and I went to a Third World country to teach at a university and to share the Gospel as the Lord opened doors. We went there under the auspices of a Christian organization that required us to raise financial and prayer support; that was truly a faith-building exercise as we watched God’s people provide the funds that we needed.

When we returned to the U.S. three years later, with a toddler in tow, we were eager to “give back.” We did this through a church that we had joined as well as through a few parachurch organizations. Our starting point was Christian organizations whose goal was to share the Gospel in various ways. We looked at their finances (not as easy then as it is now; see https://www.charitynavigator.org/ for a quick way to examine an organization’s finances as well as other information, like leadership and results) and decided if an organization that we liked spent no more than ~15% of its funds on administration and fund-raising, we would give to them; in some cases, even if that figure was more than 15%, we would still give, but less.

One of the organizations that we gave to specialized in child sponsorship, which was something both of us had a strong desire to do. We chose a boy who was our son’s age, and then a couple years later, a girl who was our daughter’s age. That way, our kids could “grow up with” their sponsored counterparts, and indeed, they would sometimes write a note or send them a small toy. About ten years ago, this organization announced that they would lift their ban on hiring gay and lesbian married “Christians;” two days later, they (thankfully) reversed that decision. However, the damage had been done; it didn’t take long for news to spread on social media, and a significant number of evangelical Christians canceled their child sponsorships. In large part because of the quick reversal by the organization, my wife and I decided to continue sponsoring “our kids,” but the organization was definitely more on our radar.

About five years ago, the organization’s leader retired, and a new man took over the helm. In their communiques with donors, we noticed a continuing shift, including in theology. For example, here’s a quote from early 2022: “Imagine if we expanded our vision of community to encompass all God’s children around the globe.” The context implied that the leader views every person as one of God’s children, which is simply not true; you can read more about that view in something I wrote a while back if you’re interested: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2020/12/03/are-we-all-children-of-god/ Then recently, two of our sponsored children and their communities became independent, which is a good thing. The organization sent us picture cards and information about two new kids that they suggested we sponsor. On the cover of the pamphlet, under each child’s picture, it said, “Thank you for believing in me!” Also, on each child’s fridge magnet, it said, “I believe [name of child] is full of potential!”

My wife and I had the same reaction to these sentences; we especially objected to “Thank you for believing in me!” because although we would love these children, we would not “believe in” them; our belief, and hence our trust, is in the Lord God. I would have been more than happy to call the organization, but my wife had an even stronger desire. She told the representative about our objection to the above sentences, and thankfully, the rep listened! It was obvious that she hadn’t really thought about those sentences before. She even asked what we would suggest instead, so my wife suggested “I am unique. I am loved. I am fearfully and wonderfully made.” (Any or all of the above.) A few days later, we received a short survey in the mail, and in the comments section, I wrote about our conversation with the rep as well as the “children of God” comment. We haven’t heard anything more since, but we have decided to continue our sponsorship of our remaining child until she and her community become independent. In the meantime, we are researching other organizations to sponsor children through instead.

A second organization that we had been giving to is one that trained native missionaries to share the Gospel. In other words, instead of training and sending North American missionaries, for example, to the Third World, they focused on raising up people in their own communities to be missionaries. We first heard about this organization through friends of ours; the husband was going to work for them and needed to raise money to do so. My wife and I strongly appreciated the concept of native missionaries compared with North American missionaries because of the cost-effectiveness of such a paradigm, so we started to support our friends as well as two native missionaries in India.

Some time later, we received a letter from an administrator at the organization saying that our friend was being let go; the letter suggested that it was because of some kind of moral failing. We were rather shocked, so we spoke with our friend. He said that he had actually been let go because of issues related to his work; he had made some of the changes that they had suggested, but not to their satisfaction. As time went on, the atmosphere in the office had changed in ways that negatively affected him as well. We also spoke with the person who had written the letter about our friend and explained to him that his wording suggested something very different from what he had apparently meant; he seemed to accept that, so we continued our support of our two native missionaries. However, we stopped that support a couple years later because they no longer needed it, for whatever reason.

Several years after that, this same organization became embroiled in a series of financial scandals related to misuse of donor funds. For example, they were accused of redirecting specifically designated funds into other areas; it would be like a church redirecting funds designated for the deacons’ fund into the general fund. Directly connected with this redirection, or misappropriation, of funds, this organization had essentially been “hoarding” millions of dollars. It settled a large lawsuit just a few years ago, although I’m sorry to say, the leadership admitted no wrongdoing. One would hope that a purportedly Christian organization would be able to say, like King David after being confronted over his adultery with Bathsheba, “I have sinned against the Lord.” (2 Samuel 12:13)

One principle that we have strived to live by is not to react very quickly to emotional pleas for money from charitable organizations. On 9/11, for example, along with the rest of the nation, I watched the news with disbelief as they showed, again and again, the planes crashing into the Twin Towers. Our church gave the congregation the opportunity to give, especially to the families of the firefighters who had died; the church would funnel funds to them through a charity. My wife asked what I thought about giving in that way, and I said I didn’t want to. My reasoning was that there would be an economic downturn, which would cause charitable giving to drop off; I thought we should continue giving as we had been, or possibly increase it, because “our” organizations would need the money even more. I also thought that there would be plenty of giving to the firefighters’ families, as there should be. My predictions aren’t always right, but for the next couple years, there was an economic downturn, and charitable organizations suffered along with the rest of the country. Interestingly, a large, well-known organization that had collected a very significant amount of money designated for firefighters’ families was discovered to have redirected some of those funds to other areas; they quickly made it right, at least mostly, by diverting the money back to those families.

Please don’t misunderstand me; if you gave to firefighters’ families in the aftermath of 9/11, I think that’s great! They certainly needed it, deserved it, and received it. However, for my wife and myself, we decided to continue giving as we had been; for us, that was the right decision, but that doesn’t mean it would have been the right one for you. Regarding the second organization that I wrote about: I would guess that most potential donors would look at the financial scandal engulfing it and at the very least wait for some time before giving to them. In regard to the first organization that I wrote about, maybe you have no concern over the initial lifting of the ban on hiring gay and lesbian married “Christians,” the “children of God” comment, or even “Thank you for believing in me!” If so, then so be it; some of these issues are matters of conscience. That’s why in both the first and second case, my wife and I talked to people in the organizations to express our concerns. The good news is that there is an abundance of other charitable organizations to choose from, and Charity Navigator makes it easy to research them.

One thing I would not suggest is blindly giving to parachurch and other charitable organizations. We always need to be wise as stewards of the funds the Lord has given us, including when there are signs that something is changing negatively in an organization that we support.