Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
On #GivingTuesday, avoid benevolent harm
On #GivingTuesday, avoid benevolent harm
Jan 28, 2026 6:57 PM

Everyone is familiar with Black Friday and Cyber Monday. Now in its seventh year, #GivingTuesday has also e a permanent and popular fixture in the post-Thanksgiving landscape.

#GivingTuesday occurs on the Tuesday immediately after Thanksgiving. On this special day people are encouraged to donate their money toward charitable causes. The official website for #GivingTuesday states that it “is a global day of giving fueled by the power of social media and collaboration.” #GivingTuesday has been astonishingly successful. Last year it generated 21.7 billion social media impressions and more than $300 million in donations.

As charitable organizations solicit donations under the #GivingTuesday banner, potential donors should carefully consider who they are giving to. In addition to concerns about the organization’s financial integrity, donors must gauge whether their charity of choice is unintentionally harming their intended beneficiaries. Indeed, some organizations unwittingly inflict benevolent harm. This tragic e happens more often than people realize and can be especially true of efforts that seek to serve those in material poverty.

How can one’s charity actually undermine the causes or people they mean to champion? When serving the material poor, there are numerous ways charitable giving can go wrong. Creating unhealthy dependencies or an entitlement mentalities are one way. Undermining people’s dignity can be yet another.

The next logical question then is this: how can we avoid benevolent harm? A first step would be to understand the true meaning of charity. The Latin root word of “charity” is caritas, or love, the greatest of the theological virtues. St. Thomas Aquinas provides us a simple but helpful definition of love: “To will the good of the other” (Summa Theologica, II-II, art. 26, q. 6).

When charity is defined as “willing the good of the other,” it ought to necessitate that more reflection and thought be given towards the practical effects of one’s charitable acts. To will the good of the other goes far beyond a sugar high feeling after a donate button is pressed, with no thought given to whether that donation truly empowers someone. Caritas goes beyond a check-list mentality of doing an obligatory “good deed for the day.” No, true charity, true love seeks to affirm the dignity of people, enables them to utilize their God-given talents, and equips people to stand on their own two feet.

Here are three questions to consider when giving to a charitable organization. Does that organization’s efforts:

1.) Affirm or undermine people’s dignity? Everyone, being made in the Image of God (Gen. 1:26-7), enjoys intrinsic worth and is worthy of respect. Furthermore, people’s appropriate sense of pride and self-respect ought to be affirmed as much as possible. When we constantly place ourselves or the charities we support in the position of giver and continually relegate the material poor to the position of mere receivers, we undermine their dignity and self-worth. Instead, organizations should seek to partner with the material poor and be led by their vision and dreams.

How materially poor people are displayed in organizations’ marketing pieces can also serve to affirm or undermine people’s dignity. Charities that throw around photos of children with flies in their eyes or display people rummaging around in trash probably aren’t all that concerned about people’s dignity. Look for charities whose municates needs but simultaneously show people as proud, dignified, and possessing talents they can employ if only given a chance.

2.) Promote or discourage work? Contrary to popular belief, work is a gift given to us long before the fall (Gen. 2:15). We are made to work. Any charitable organization that intentionally or unintentionally discourages able-bodied people from working and providing for themselves and their families errs greatly. Make sure the charities you support don’t unintentionally develop dependency or entitlement within people they work with.

Look for organizations that seek to start businesses or enable people to start businesses themselves. It is enterprises, both large and small, that provide jobs, enable people to utilize their God-given talents, and provide the foundation for economic flourishing.

3.) Possess an exit strategy? Some charitable organizations seem to have institutional longevity as their main goal when they should in fact be working themselves out of the job. For example, munity development organization should have a date by which they want munity they have been working in to be self-sustaining. Once that is achieved, the organization should leave the area as quickly as possible.

Ask organizations if they have an exit strategy. Do they seek to build up a charitable empire? Or does the organization strive to reach certain goals that allow people to stand on their own two feet?

The answer to these three questions will go a long way in helping you determine organizations that are worthy of your support. So on this #GivingTuesday, don’t just give. Consider the practical results of your charity. Study the charities you give to and most of all, will the good of the other.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
PBR: Monsma and Carlton-Thies Speak Out
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” As part of Christianity Today’s Speaking Out (web-only) feature, Stephen V. Monsma and Stanley Carlson-Thies, of Calvin College’s Henry Institute and the Center for Public Justice respectively, address the future of the faith-based initiative under President Obama. Monsma and Carlton-Thies outline five “encouraging signs” and one “major concern.” The encouraging signs include the naming of the office executive director (Joshua DuBois) and advisory council (including “recognized evangelicals”...
Kaarlgard Declares ‘Failure of Morality, Not Capitalism’
In a Forbes blog post titled “Failure of Morality, Not Capitalism,” Rich Kaarlgard counters the critics of supply-side capitalism by pointing to an absence of morality. Kaarlgard declares: Many people do blame capitalism for bringing us to this low moment in the economy. Do they have a point? They do if capitalism, as they define it, is devoid of any underlying morality. True enough, it is hard to see any underlying morality when one surveys the present carnage caused by...
PBR: Public Good and the Faith-Based Initiative
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” I have little confidence in the future of the faith-based initiative because conservatives who gain office are unwilling to take any fire at all in order to advance the cause beyond concept. At the same time, liberals will be unable to make productive use of the idea because of giant fissures regarding public religion in their movement. In theory, President Obama would make an ideal person to...
PBR: A Genuine Challenge to Religious Liberty
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Jordan Ballor kindly asked me to offer a few words in response to this question, as I made it an area of expertise during the previous Administration. I’ve been working up to writing something more formal, but I’ll begin by thinking aloud here, as well as at my my home blog. Without further ado, here’s what I posted over there: By now, you’ve probably heard about the...
Acton Commentary: Choosing a Prosperous Future
“Focusing on education is not a distraction from the pressing business of economic recovery,” Kevin Schmiesing writes. “It is vital to ensuring it.” This focus should advance school choice and a reduction of administrative red tape. Read mentary at the Acton website, and share ments below. ...
America’s Secular Challenge
I’ve been reading America’s Secular Challenge by NYU professor and president of the Hudson Institute Herb London. The book is essentially an extended essay about how elite, left-wing secularism undercuts America’s traditional strengths of patriotism and religious faith during a time when the nation can ill afford it. The assault on public religion and love of es in a period when America faces enemies who have no such crisis of identity and lack the degree of doubt that leaves us...
Acton Commentary: Race Alarmists Hijack Black History Month
Ignore those racial disparity studies that point to the “resegregation” of America’s educational system. They advance the lie that minorities cannot survive without whites. “What is best for e black and Latino students is what is best for all students: stable and supportive families, parental options, and high achieving schools with stellar teachers,” Bradley writes. Read mentary at the Acton website, and then discuss it here. ...
PBR: On Faith
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Perhaps taking a cue from this week’s PBR question (or perhaps not), the On Faith roster of bloggers have been asked to weigh in on the following question this week: “Should the Obama Administration let faith-based programs that receive government grants discriminate against those they hire or serve?” Notable responses include those from Chuck Colson, Al Mohler, and Susan Brooks Thistlewaite, the latter of whom has these...
Dr. Andrew Abela Receives 2009 Novak Award
Maltese-American marketing professor, Dr. Andrew Abela, is the winner of the Acton Institute’s 2009 Novak Award. Dr. Abela’s main research areas include consumerism, marketing ethics, Catholic Social Teaching, and internal munication. Believing that anti-free market perspectives seem to dominate discussion about the social impact of business, Dr. Abela is working to explore Christian ethics further to show how these issues can be resolved more humanely and effectively through market-oriented approaches. To aid this work, Dr. Abela is currently preparing a...
Debunking the New Deal
It’s long been my contention that the mythology surrounding the New Deal in large swaths of the popular imagination plays an ongoing, important, and harmful role in politics and policy debate. For that reason, I e periodic attempts to debunk the myth. Jonah Goldberg offers a perceptive and enlightening perspective on New Deal historiography and its current uses and abuses. Unlike Daniel Gross (cited by Goldberg), I don’t care whether the analyst is an historian, economist, policy wonk, or journalist,...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved