Soon after the earthquake hit Haiti, I noticed something that surprised me. I studied things on the ground for a few more days before I commented because I wanted to be sure that my observation was correct. When I mentioned my observation on Twitter, the liberal backlash was fierce and I actually started getting hate mail, harassing phone calls, and more.
80% of the people on the ground that left the United States to bring help and hope to Haiti were conservative, evangelical Christians. They weren’t passing out bibles either. They were doing HARSH, horrific work. Unmentionable stuff in the early days and the hardest work around in the first few weeks.
I didn’t make this observation to brag. I am not a part of this group. I am a part of the shrinking minority that still loves President Obama :-) The observation surprised me. The American organizations on the ground that were getting stuff done ALMOST ALWAYS had evangelical roots -i.e. World Vision, Samaritan’s Purse, Compassion, etc.
One of my heroes, Nicholas Kristof (a beloved liberal journalist) just wrote about this same observation all around the world in the NY Times. In it, he offers some surprising observations and solutions for both sides. Here’s the article. It is a must read!
Learning From the Sin of Sodom
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
For most of the last century, save-the-worlders were primarily Democrats and liberals. In contrast, many Republicans and religious conservatives denounced government aid programs, with Senator Jesse Helms calling them “money down a rat hole.”
Over the last decade, however, that divide has dissolved, in ways that many Americans haven’t noticed or appreciated. Evangelicals have become the new internationalists, pushing successfully for new American programs against AIDS and malaria, and doing superb work on issues from human trafficking in India to mass rape in Congo.
A pop quiz: What’s the largest U.S.-based international relief and development organization?
It’s not Save the Children, and it’s not CARE — both terrific secular organizations. Rather, it’s World Vision, a Seattle-based Christian organization (with strong evangelical roots) whose budget has roughly tripled over the last decade.
World Vision now has 40,000 staff members in nearly 100 countries. That’s more staff members than CARE, Save the Children and the worldwide operations of the United States Agency for International Development — combined.
A growing number of conservative Christians are explicitly and self-critically acknowledging that to be “pro-life” must mean more than opposing abortion. The head of World Vision in the United States, Richard Stearns, begins his fascinating book, “The Hole in Our Gospel,” with an account of a visit a decade ago to Uganda, where he met a 13-year-old AIDS orphan who was raising his younger brothers by himself.
“What sickened me most was this question: where was the Church?” he writes. “Where were the followers of Jesus Christ in the midst of perhaps the greatest humanitarian crisis of our time? Surely the Church should have been caring for these ‘orphans and widows in their distress.’ (James 1:27). Shouldn’t the pulpits across America have flamed with exhortations to rush to the front lines of compassion?
“How have we missed it so tragically, when even rock stars and Hollywood actors seem to understand?”
Mr. Stearns argues that evangelicals were often so focused on sexual morality and a personal relationship with God that they ignored the needy. He writes laceratingly about “a Church that had the wealth to build great sanctuaries but lacked the will to build schools, hospitals, and clinics.”
In one striking passage, Mr. Stearns quotes the prophet Ezekiel as saying that the great sin of the people of Sodom wasn’t so much that they were promiscuous or gay as that they were “arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” (Ezekiel 16:49.)
Hmm. Imagine if sodomy laws could be used to punish the stingy, unconcerned rich!
The American view of evangelicals is still shaped by preening television blowhards and hypocrites who seem obsessed with gays and fetuses. One study cited in the book found that even among churchgoers ages 16 to 29, the descriptions most associated with Christianity were “antihomosexual,” “judgmental,” “too involved in politics,” and “hypocritical.”
Some conservative Christians reinforced the worst view of themselves by inspiring Ugandan homophobes who backed a bill that would punish gays with life imprisonment or execution. Ditto for the Vatican, whose hostility to condoms contributes to the AIDS epidemic. But there’s more to the picture: I’ve also seen many Catholic nuns and priests heroically caring for AIDS patients — even quietly handing out condoms.
One of the most inspiring figures I’ve met while covering Congo’s brutal civil war is a determined Polish nun in the terrifying hinterland, feeding orphans, standing up to drunken soldiers and comforting survivors — all in a war zone. I came back and decided: I want to grow up and become a Polish nun.
Some Americans assume that religious groups offer aid to entice converts. That’s incorrect. Today, groups like World Vision ban the use of aid to lure anyone into a religious conversation.
Some liberals are pushing to end the longtime practice (it’s a myth that this started with President George W. Bush) of channeling American aid through faith-based organizations. That change would be a catastrophe. In Haiti, more than half of food distributions go through religious groups like World Vision that have indispensable networks on the ground. We mustn’t make Haitians the casualties in our cultural wars.
A root problem is a liberal snobbishness toward faith-based organizations. Those doing the sneering typically give away far less money than evangelicals. They’re also less likely to spend vacations volunteering at, say, a school or a clinic in Rwanda.
If secular liberals can give up some of their snootiness, and if evangelicals can retire some of their sanctimony, then we all might succeed together in making greater progress against common enemies of humanity, like illiteracy, human trafficking and maternal mortality.
{ 17 comments }
Amen.
Shaun, fantastic article. That took a lot of guts to write.
are you a conservative or liberal?
I am a pretty moderate dude. A big supporter of President Obama. Against the Death Penalty, but also pro-life.
Having spent a considerable time in and out of Haiti after the earthquake, I have to agree with the observation when I look back on our most agile, eager and out-there-on-the-ground partners. However do not forget the rest of agnostic or other faith-related volunteers. The advantage of catholic and long standing faith groups is that they have a solid network of local stakeholders and global outreach. That been said, they have been proactive activating their network and not passive or slow as many other institutions. From day one, the salesians and the jesuits and other groups such as World Vision were out there in the field and ready to work with anyone, regardless of his/her faith. They have provided not only shelter for victims but infrastructure and venues for doctors, rescue workers and volunteers. I have had the non-exclusive, inspiring, experience of collaborating with Good Samaritan Hospital in Jimaní (Dominican-Haitian border), Quisqueya Christian School Earthquake Crisis Center (Delmas 75, Port-au-Prince – http://quisqueya.org/qcsrelief ), Firefighters for Christ ( http://www.firefightersforchrist.org ), the Jesuits service for refugees and migrants coordinated by Centro Bonó (Santo Domingo, http://www.bono.org.do ), all traditional (the word conservative in Spanish has stronger connotations than in English as not just identifies an orientation) Christian groups.
Quite different than other large relief organizations, they were not concerned on who you were or who you worked for, but in how you can help and how they can help you help others and you could coordinate in minutes relief actions and missions combining and joining forces.
I was happily surprised when I met Maria, a young girl working with the Jesuits when she showed up at one of the camps and informed me that their goal was to get this people back on their feet, back on track and into their communities as soon as possible. And then she proceeded to ask what was needed: food, translators, volunteers, resources? We replied "all of the above" and they delivered the next day and started to work with the victims in counseling, assistance and human aspects of relief efforts left out by other relief organizations focused on the medical and more "practical" issues at hand.
We met World Vision by chance, and when they learned what we were doing and the difficulty on running the last mile and getting resources to the people and places needed, they offered full access to their warehouse and to provide whatever was needed.
Similar experience with Good Samaritan Hospital, always willing to share medical personnel, supplies and resources with remote places where they were needed.
No need for complex bureaucratic procedures to make it happen. The best example of efficient good will and trust in times of emergency with minimal paperwork and personal one-on-one supervision and control.
The Firefighters for Christ group of firefighters we collaborated with, they all paid for their flight tickets and all the resources they brought with them and fended pretty much on their own, being the first ones to respond to any stress or help call.
I guess proper credit is due to all of them, probably not because of their faith or regardless of their faith, but for living up to the teachings of their faith. Some thing we can not say about many public officers and large relief organizations not living up to the mandate of their constituents, supporters, donors or the people they have an obligation to help.
Ps: Don't know if this disclaimer is needed, but I see some questions interested in the orientation of posters. So I will disclose that I am a non-practicing Jew with extreme liberal positions related to politics and social issues.
I, for one, have had my liberal, skeptical mind opened dramatically by observing so many evangelicals, Christians, Republicans, and conservatives working so hard and so passionately to help the Haitian people. It's been eye opening and humbling and thrilling to watch people from different ideologies find common ground.
do you believe in state rights?
Isn’t being against the death penalty synonomous with being pro-life? It’s funny how you phrased that.
I understood it as pro-life is usually associated with conservatives and being against the death penalty is usually associated with liberals.
I understood it as pro-life is usually associated with conservatives and being against the death penalty is usually associated with liberals.
This is a fantastic article. I have been following you on Twitter and love your passion towards Haiti and those who are the "least of these!"
Fantastic article, Shaun. Thanks for posting it.
Thanks for the post – - through history Christians have always responded — with hospitals and acts of mercy to the weakest, most vulnerable members of society. Of course, as Kristof rightly points out, during the last century many Christians failed to engage in social problems, but this is an historical abberion.
I'm a Christian, running a relief center in Haiti
and I can't spell abberation — grammar and spelling are the first things to go!
Fantastic article, Shaun. Thank you for posting it.
Great article…thanks for posting it here for many to read and contemplate. I guess I would be considered a relatively conservative evangelical (although I dislike labels and I differ on some things from my fellow conservatives). If we are following the teachings of Christ, we will want to live out His mandate to "Love the Lord with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself." We are concerned with the message of the gospel but it is complicit with the acts of love that go out to those who are hurting.
I might add…I cringe and despise the idea that being a conservative Christian means that one is automatically considered a "right-wing Republican." I do not consider myself to be of any political party affiliation. I try to be involved politically with wisdom for issues and candidates.
I would like to concur with SWH above…the movement of followers of Christ have been historically at the center of providing for the health, education, well-being, and the representation of the oppressed.
Was that a philosophical question? If not, then the answer is No, politically they're not synonymous. Pro-life is synonymous with being against abortion. Against the death penalty is just against the death penalty.