Abstract
This article sets out to establish a taxonomy of Christian faith-based humanitarian agencies, challenging assumptions that such agencies are similarly informed by Christian theology and pursue a uniform mission. Christian principles and missionary efforts are central in the development of humanitarianism, and the agencies associated with the Christian tradition comprise a prominent and growing portion of international humanitarian agencies. Little, however, is known about how Christian faith-based agencies diverge from one another in their orientation and operations, how their theological tradition shapes their humanitarianism, and whether or how they are distinct from secular agencies. Examining the humanitarianism of Christian faith-based agencies in light of their theological roots, this article delineates three classifications of Christian faith-based agencies: Accommodative–Humanitarian, Synthesis–Humanitarian, and Evangelistic–Humanitarian agencies. The study demonstrates the importance of distinguishing not simply between faith-based and secular agencies, but among faith-based agencies themselves.
Résumé
Cet article se propose d’établir une taxinomie d’agences humanitaires basées sur la foi chrétienne, faisant défi aux présupposés que de telles agences sont informées de façon semblable par la théologie chrétienne et poursuivent une mission uniforme. Les principes chrétien et les efforts des missionnaires constituent une partie centrale dans le développement de l’humanitarisme, et les agences associées à la tradition chrétienne se composent d’une portion de premier plan et en croissance des agences humanitaires internationales. Très peu, cependant, est connu concernant la façon dont les agences basées sur la foi chrétienne divergent l’une de l’autre dans leur orientation et opérations, comment leur tradition théologique forment leur humanitarisme, et si ou comment elles sont distinctes de la mission laïque. En examinant l’humanitarisme des agences de la foi chrétienne à la lumière de leurs racines théologiques, cet article délimite trois classification de la foi chrétienne basées sur les institutions : institutions humanistes accommodantes, de synthèse et évangélistes. L’étude fait la démonstration de l’importance de la distinction non simplement entre les institutions se basant sur la foi et la laïcité, mais parmi les institutions basées elles-mêmes sur la foi.
Zusammenfassung
Dieser Artikel hat es sich zum Ziel gesetzt, humanitäre Organisationen, die auf christlichem Glauben basieren, zu klassifizieren und stellt dabei die Annahme, dass solche Organisationen auf christlicher Theologie basieren und diesselbe Mission verfolgen, in Frage. Christliche Prinzipien und missionarische Bemühungen stehen im Mittelpunkt der Entwicklung einer humanitären Einstellung und mit christlicher Tradition assoziierte Organisationen stellen einen bedeutenden und wachsenden Anteil unter internationalen humanitären Organisationen. Allerdings ist wenig drüber bekannt, wie Organisationen, die auf christlichem Glauben basieren, sich voneinander in Orientierung und Operation unterscheiden, wie deren theologische Tradition deren Humanität beeinflusst und ob oder wie sie sich von säkularen Organisationen unterscheiden. Die Humanität von auf christlichem Glauben basierenden Organisationen unter Berücksichtigung ihrer theologischen Wurzeln begutachtend, beschreibt dieser Artikel drei Gruppen von auf christlichem Glauben basierenden Organisationen: versorgend–humanitär, synthetisch–humanitär und evangelistisch–humanitär. Die Studie zeigt, wie wichtig es ist, nicht einfach zwischen auf Glauben basierenden und säkularen Organisationen zu unterscheiden, sondern auch unter den auf Glauben basierenden Organisationen selbst.
Resumen
Este trabajo pretende establecer una taxonomía de las organizaciones humanitarias religiosas cristianas y cuestiona las ideas de que estas organizaciones tienen en común su teología cristiana y persiguen una misión similar. Los principios cristianos y los esfuerzos misionarios son vitales para el desarrollo del humanitarismo y las organizaciones relacionadas con la tradición cristiana suponen una porción creciente y significativa de las organizaciones humanitarias internacionales. Poco se sabe sin embargo sobre qué es lo que diferencia a las agencias religiosas cristianas entre sí en cuanto a orientación y trabajos, cómo influye su tradición teológica en su humanitarismo y si se distinguen de las organizaciones seculares. Este trabajo, que analiza el humanitarismo de las organizaciones religiosas cristianas desde el punto de vista de sus raíces teológicas, esboza tres clasificaciones de organizaciones religiosas cristianas: las acomodativas-humanitarias, las sintéticas-humanitarias y las evangelistas-humanitarias. El estudio demuestra la importancia de distinguir no solo entre las organizaciones religiosas y seculares, sino entre las propias organizaciones religiosas.
摘要
本文旨在建立针对基于基督教信仰的人道主义机构的分类方法,并对此类机构均类似地受到基督教教义的影响,追求统一的任务使命这一认识提出质疑。基督教原则和传教士的努力对人道主义的发展具有核心作用,与基督教传统有联系的机构在国际人道主义机构中占显著比例,且这一比例正在不断增加。然而,鲜为人知的是各个基于基督教信仰的机构在其目标和运作方面的差异、教义传统对其人道主义的影响,以及他们是否或在哪些方面有别于世俗机构。本文结合基督教的神学根本,研究了基于基督教信仰的人道主义机构,并将其分为三类:救助型、复合型和福音传道型人道主义机构。本研究论证了,不仅对基于宗教信仰的机构和世俗机构加以区分,而且对基于信仰的机构本身进行区分的重要性。
ملخص
هذا البحث يحدد إنشاء تصنيف الإيمان المسيحي القائم على الوكالات الإنسانية ، وتحدي الافتراضات بأن مثل هذه الوكالات هي بالمثل لديها معلومات عن طريق اللاهوت المسيحي وإتباع بعثة موحدة. مبادئ المسيحية والجهود التبشيرية هي المركز في تطوير العمل الإنساني ، الوكالات المرتبطة بالتقليد المسيحي تشكل جزء بارز ومتزايد من الوكالات الإنسانية الدولية. ، لكن قليلا ، معروف عن كيفية الوكالات القائمة على الإيمان المسيحي تتباعد عن بعضها البعض في توجيهاتها والتشغيل، كيف أن تقليدهم اللاهوتي يشكل عملهم الإنساني، و ما إذا كانت وكيف أنها تختلف عن الوكالات العلمانية. دراسة العمل الإنساني للوكالات القائمة على الديانة المسيحية على ضوء جذورها اللاهوتية، هذا البحث يصف ثلاث تصنيفات للوكالات القائمة على الديانة المسيحية: المتكيفة - الإنسانية ، التجميعية - الإنسانية ، والإنجيلية - الوكالات الإنسانية. توضح الدراسة أهمية التمييز ليس فقط بين الوكالات القائمة على الإيمان و الوكالات العلمانية ، بل أيضا بين المنظمات القائمة على الدين أنفسهم.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The analysis of this article is not limited to Protestant Christian agencies. Catholic agencies are included in any reference to Christian agencies unless otherwise noted.
In contrast, Abby Stoddard distinguishes between the religious tradition of humanitarian agencies and the secular Dunantist and Wilsonian traditions. In 1864, Henri Dunant founded the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to care for victims of war, creating the first secular humanitarian agency (Barrow and Jennings 2001, p. 10). Save the Children UK and Médecins sans Frontières stem from the Dunantist tradition. Also, in his desire to spread positive US values around the world, US President Woodrow Wilson’s vision led to the establishment of agencies such as CARE (Stoddard 2003, p. 27). Modern versions of humanitarian agencies multiplied following the Second World War, increasing in their geographical scope and in their mandate by coupling relief with development and accepting “politics as part of a wider development and crisis discourse” (Barrow and Jennings 2001, p. 11).
While these particular religious agencies have thrived since the pre- and post-Second World War period, Catholic humanitarian organizations have declined as a portion of the total number of religious agencies. In 1940, they comprised 39% of the total, in 1946 they declined to 3%, and in 2004 they represented only 8% of the total number of humanitarian organizations (McCleary and Barro 2004, pp. 9–10).
See also Lindenberg and Bryant (2001) for an overview of the factors bringing about the expansion of relief and development NGOs since the 1970s.
See also Van Biema (2003). Cottle also notes that, following the White House announcement, the International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention decided to send food aid in boxes with Scripture references printed on the boxes. During the Gulf War, Samaritan Purse arranged for the distribution of Bibles in the Arabic language in “direct violation of Saudi law,” which “flew in the face of an understanding between the US and Saudi governments to eschew proselytizing” (Cottle 2003, p. 17). Franklin Graham, the face and voice of Samaritan Purse, is also well known for his outspoken criticism of Islam as an evil religion.
Cottle (2003, p. 18) notes that other humanitarian agencies “expressed concerns that the presence of Graham [the head of Samaritan Purse] and his group in post-war Iraq could ultimately make life harder for everyone from non-sectarian aid workers to the country’s Christian minority to other evangelicals.”
An ecumenical or parachurch organization is cross-denominational and grows out of a “common purpose and elements of common faith beyond the denomination” (Marty and Moore 2000, p. 79). World church councils are examples of ecumenical organizations, including the World Council of Churches. Also, World Vision, Habitat for Humanity, and Bread for the World represent parachurch or ecumenical humanitarian organizations that are not under the authority of any one denomination or church. For further discussion on the rapid growth in the number and type of parachurch organizations, see Willmer et al. (1998).
The entirety of the verse states: “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God” (James 4:4).
See Annex 1 for a table laying out Niebuhr’s five paradigms. Admittedly, Niebuhr’s categories do not translate perfectly, as they were not intended to explain Christians’ relationship to agencies of humanitarianism. The book itself was published in 1951 when faith-based humanitarian organizations were not nearly as prevalent. Nonetheless, Niebuhr’s classifications serve as an important reference for developing the taxonomy, illuminating how Christian beliefs may translate into a humanitarian obligation to respond in particular ways to the suffering and needs of others in the world. Also, “culture,” as Niebuhr employs the term, may be interchanged with “society.” According to Niebuhr’s (1951, p. 32) definition, culture refers to the realm of life that encompasses “language, habits, ideas, beliefs, customs, social organization, inherited artifacts, technical processes, and values” and it is “inextricably bound up with man’s life in society; it is always social.”
In the twentieth century, denominations polarized into liberal and conservative theologies. Mainline Protestants most closely reflect the liberal camp and comprise American Baptist, Congregational, Disciples, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian denominations (Williams 2002, pp. 355–356). Mainline Protestantism expanded for much of the twentieth century in the US until its decline began in the 1970s when a conservative backlash questioned the modernist theology (ibid. p. 477; see also Woodberry and Smith 1998, pp. 28–35). In opposition to the increasing pluralism and moral relativism of secular society, fundamentalists went down the path of separatism from society. Pentecostals and conservative evangelicals also tended toward withdrawal from secular society. Wilson and Janoski (1995, p. 138), citing Mock, note that within the Protestant tradition, “Liberal denominations… are associated with ‘social activism’ while ‘the social identity of evangelicals is… oriented towards… saving souls.’” In the 1970s, a shift took place in the discourse of global evangelical leaders who began to question the emphasis on fostering the Christian life in opposition to secular society. Representative of this changing discourse, the International Congress on World Evangelism met in 1974 and produced the Lausanne Covenant that endorsed a social as well as evangelism mission. In 1978, a process began to outline a clear Biblical basis for Christian social responsibility, and, in 1983 the World Evangelical Association sponsored the Wheaton Conference with the primary goal to establish a theology of Christian missions focused on the transformation of all social life, not just the spiritual (Samuel and Sugden 1999a, pp. x–xi). Marty and Moore (2000, p. 154) contend that Christians are moving beyond the disputes between the modernist and fundamentalist camps and are more intent on addressing not only people’s spiritual needs but also their physical well-being (see also Guinness 1999). In the compilation of essays on this topic in Missions as Transformation, Dempster (1999, p. 47) notes that the question of Christian social engagement is not entirely resolved, however, as “Church leaders are not yet sure-footed nor united theologically in justifying Christian social concern as part of the church’s mission” in the fear that “promoting human material welfare may undermine… the church’s evangelistic mandate.” Nonetheless, in contemporary evangelicalism, the separation between the religious and the secular is no longer the dominant conviction. The shift in discourse away from a separatist Christianity coincides with the growth of Christian faith-based relief and development agencies (Barrow and Jennings 2001, p. 9).
These individuals varied, however, in their allegiance to New Testament scripture and the Christian community.
Christian Aid is currently working in nearly 50 countries in partnership with 600 overseas organizations (Christian Aid, “About us: Our history”).
Aquinas is the standard bearer of the Catholic and Anglican Christian thinking on Christianity’s relationship to society.
The synthesist tradition is extremely influential in the “arts, sciences, philosophy, law, government, education, and economic institutions” of Western society and reflects the theology of the Roman Catholic Church (Niebuhr 1951, p. 144).
Christians serve in these social institutions to assist in the “ordering of the temporal life; since reason sometimes falls short of its possible performance and requires the gracious assistance of revelation, and since it cannot reach the inner springs and motives of action” (Niebuhr 1951, pp. 135–136).
Characteristic of the Accommodative– or Synthesis–Humanitarianism, some Christian faith-based agencies attempt to smooth out tensions through their faith-based identity but without an evangelistic agenda. This approach embraces interfaith dialogue, welcoming collaboration with secular agencies and those of non-Christian religions. Lutheran World Service takes this line, hoping to ameliorate and not create tensions in the global context of a rise in interfaith conflicts. The agency notes, “Throughout its history, World Service has nurtured close and fruitful relationships with people and communities of other faiths, including Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists, and with non-secular governments. This network of strong historical ties based on mutual respect and appreciation is invaluable when conflicts and tensions arise. Interfaith dialogue remains high on the agenda as increased knowledge of ‘the other’ promotes peaceful relations” (Lutheran World Federation, “Global strategy 2007–2012”).
CAFOD describes itself as the “official overseas development and relief agency of the Catholic Church of England and Wales”; see CAFOD, “About: Vision and values,” www.cafod.org.uk
See, e.g., Stoddard (2003) who contends that World Vision’s programs in Afghanistan are “indistinguishable from those of secular agencies.”
The social institutions “may all become both the beneficiaries of the conversion of man’s love and the instruments of that new love of God that rejoices in his whole creation and serves all his creatures” (Niebuhr 1951, p. 215). Furthermore, Christian service is not limited to the fellowship of believers, as “everything, and not least the political life, is subject to the great conversion” (ibid.). Indeed, Christian vocation in social institutions can serve not only to constrain evil but to transform the world and bring glory to God.
Darren Mullenix, Samaritan Purse, personal communication, 19 January 2009.
World Vision states that: “The organisation does not coerce nor demand that people hear any religious message or convert to Christianity before, during or after receiving assistance. Educational activities based on Christian values are included in World Vision projects if appropriate and desired by the community. However, World Vision respects the religious beliefs and practices in countries where it operates, and seeks mutual understanding with people of all faiths… Our focus is to respond to human need, and our compassion and professionalism reflect our faith”; see “Frequently asked questions,” www.wvi.org
Linda Tripp, the vice-president of World Vision, during a 2003 interview (Armstrong 2003). Trip couched her justification of the faith witness of aid workers in the language of human rights. Although World Vision does not condone proselytism, Trip argued that World Vision aid workers have the “right” to discuss their faith.
References
Armstrong, S. (2003). Dangerous mission. MacLean’s, 116(3), 118.
Barnett, M. (2008). Humanitarianism as a scholarly vocation. In M. Barnett & T. Weiss (Eds.), Humanitarianism in question: Politics, power, and ethics (pp. 235–263). New York: Cornell University Press.
Barnett, M., & Weiss, T. G. (2008). Humanitarianism: A brief history of the present. In M. Barnett & T. Weiss (Eds.), Humanitarianism in question: Politics, power, and ethics (pp. 1–48). New York: Cornell University Press.
Barrow, O., & Jennings, M. (2001). The charitable impulse: NGOs and development in East & North-East Africa. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
Belshaw, D. (2002). Editorial introduction. Transformation: An international dialogue on mission and ethics, 19(2), 89–91.
Benedetti, C. (2006). Islamic and Christian inspired relief NGOs: Between tactical collaboration and strategic diffidence? Journal of International Development, 18(6), 849–859.
Berger, J. (2003). Religious nongovernmental organizations: An exploratory analysis. Voluntas, 14(1), 15–39.
Bornstein, E. (2005). The spirit of development: Protestant NGOs, morality, and economics in Zimbabwe. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bradshaw, B. (2002). Change across cultures: A narrative approach to social transformation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Byworth, J. (2003). World Vision’s approach to transformational development: Frame, policy and indicators. Transformation: An International Dialogue on Mission and Ethics, 20(2), 99–111.
Catholic Agency for Overseas Development (CAOD). www.cafod.org.uk
Catholic Relief Services (CRS). www.crs.org
Chambre, S. M. (2001). The changing nature of “faith” in faith-based organizations: Secularization and ecumenicism in four AIDS organizations in New York City. Social Service Review, 75(3), 435–455.
Chimni, B. S. (2007). Humanitarianism and imperialism over time. Minneapolis: Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota.
Christenson, E. (2003). Relief aid: Onward, Christian soldiers—to Iraq. Newsweek, 141(18).
Christian Aid. www.christianaid.org.uk
Christian Aid (2008). About us: Regardless of religion. www.christianaid.org.uk
Cooley, A., & Ron, J. (2002). The NGO scramble: Organizational insecurity and the political economy of transnational action. International Security, 27(1), 5–39.
Cottle, M. (2003). Franklin Graham v. Iraq: Bible brigade. New Republic, 4605–4606, 16–18.
CRS. (2006). 2006 Annual Report. http://crs.org/about/finance/pdf/AR_2006.pdf
Dempster, M. (1999). A theology of the kingdom—A Pentecostal contribution. In V. Samuel & C. Sugden (Eds.), Mission as transformation: A theology of the whole gospel (pp. 45–75). Irvine, CA: Regnum Books International.
Eade, D., & Ligteringen, E. (Eds.). (2001). Debating development: NGOs and the future. Oxford: Oxfam GB.
Ebaugh, H. R., Chafetz, J. S., & Pipes, P. F. (2006). Where’s the faith in faith-based organizations? Measures and correlates of religiosity in faith-based social service coalitions. Social Forces, 84(4), 2259–2272.
Ferris, E. (2005). Faith-based and secular humanitarian organizations. International Review of the Red Cross, 87(853), 311–325.
Guinness, O. (1999). Mission modernity: Seven checkpoints on mission in the modern world. In V. Samuel & C. Sugden (Eds.), Mission as transformation: A theology of the whole gospel (pp. 322–352). Irvine, CA: Regnum Books International.
Jeavons, T. S. (1994). When the bottom line is faithfulness: Management of Christian service organizations. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Kniss, F., & Campbell, D. T. (1997). The effect of religious orientation on international relief and development organizations. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36(1), 93–104.
Krapohl, R. H., & Lippy, C. H. (1999). The Evangelicals: A historical, thematic, and biographical guide. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Kuzma, A. (2000). Faith-based providers partnering with government: Opportunity and temptation. Journal of Church and State, 42(37), 37–67.
Lauren, P. (2003). The evolution of international human rights (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Lindenberg, M., & Bryant, C. (2001). Going global: Transforming relief and development NGOs. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
Lutheran World Federation. Global Strategy 2007–2012: Uphold the rights of the poor and oppressed. Department for World Service, www.lutheranworld.org/What_We_Do/DWS/DWS-Stratplan.pdf
Marty, M. E., & Moore, J. (2000). Politics, religion, and the common good: Advancing a distinctly American conversation about religion’s role in our shared life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McCleary, R., & Barro, R. (2004). U.S.-based private voluntary organizations: Religious and secular PVOs engaged in international relief and development. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Working paper no. W12238.
Mennonite Central Committee. www.mcc.org
Minear, L., & Weiss, T. G. (1995). Mercy under fire: War and the global humanitarian community. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Niebuhr, H. R. (1951). Christ and culture. New York: Harper & Row.
Samuel, V. (1999). Mission as transformation. In V. Samuel & C. Sugden (Eds.), Mission as transformation: A theology of the whole gospel (pp. 227–235). Irvine, CA: Regnum Books International.
Samuel, V., & Sugden, C. (1994). Kingdom affirmations and commitments. Transformation, 11(3), 25–56.
Samuel, V., & Sugden, C. (1999a). Introduction. In V. Samuel & C. Sugden (Eds.), Mission as transformation: A theology of the whole gospel (pp. ix–xviii). Irvine, CA: Regnum Books International.
Samuel, V., & Sugden, C. (1999b). Christian relief and development agencies in the twenty-first century: Consultation report June 1996. In V. Samuel & C. Sugden (Eds.), Mission as transformation: A theology of the whole gospel (pp. 392–409). Irvine, CA: Regnum Books International.
Smith, S. R., & Sosin, M. F. (2001). The varieties of faith-related agencies. Public Administration Review, 61(6), 651–658.
Stoddard, A. (2003). Humanitarian NGOs: Challenges and trends. In M. Joanna & H. Adele (Eds.), Humanitarian action and the “Global War on Terror”: A review of trends and issues (pp. 25–36). London: HPG Report.
United States Institute of Peace (USIP). (2001). Faith-based NGOs and international peacebuilding special report. Washington, DC: USIP.
Van Biema, D. (2003). Missionaries under cover. Time Canada, 161(26), 36–44.
Williams, P. W. (2002). America’s religions: From their origins to the twenty-first century (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Willmer, W., Schmidt, D., & Smith, M. (1998). The prospering parachurch: Enlarging the boundaries of God’s Kingdom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wilson, J., & Janoski, T. (1995). The contribution of religion to volunteer work. Sociology of Religion, 56(2), 137–152.
Woodberry, R. D., & Smith, C. S. (1998). Fundamentalism et al.: Conservative Protestants in America. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 25–56.
World Vision. www.worldvision.org
World Vision International. www.wvi.org
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thaut, L.C. The Role of Faith in Christian Faith-Based Humanitarian Agencies: Constructing the Taxonomy. Voluntas 20, 319–350 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-009-9098-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-009-9098-8