I appreciate the responses we had to Peb’s question in last week’s blog:
“Has anyone else noticed the eyes of major donors, especially the younger, beginning to glaze over when ministries describe the enormous numbers they are claiming? Is it just me or are others skeptical of the numerical ‘super-hype’ that has become standard and the sophisticated strategies that are producing and promising them with such confidence? Is everything finally measured by the standard of ‘how many’ and ‘how large’?”
I do think donors are beginning to have a different standard for success than numbers but for reasons that go beyond a “glazing over.” It is deeper and more fundamental than that.
Since the early part of the last century, the bulk of evangelical philanthropy has been shaped by an overriding assumption that is rooted in dispensationalism.  This is oversimplified but many believers held that once the gospel has been preached to every tribe and nation, Christ will return. In other words, there was a reason for stressing the numerical reach because the motivating force and urgency of the increase was “finishing the task.”
Hundreds of parachurch organizations were formed, billions of dollars raised, and hundreds of thousands of workers were recruited around that very simple mission. Having 25,000 people attend a crusade was clearly a way of moving us closer to the goal. Translating and distributing Bibles, sending out missionaries, planting churches, and radio/television ministries were focused on increasing a very specific number. The larger the count of those who have heard, the closer we were to hastening the return of Christ.
While that underlying theology and clear goal of evangelical philanthropy is changing, we are still left with the reality and fascination with measuring by counting.  For instance, what about an exciting conference geared toward motivating 25,000 young people to be engaged in orphan care, trafficking, clean water and fair trade?  It’s not as focused on the goal to reach the world in the same way, but we gloss over that because we are still in the habit of evaluating based on bigger is better, and drawing more people is better bang for the buck.
Again, it is not simply for economics but because numerics have been our best indicator for reaching the goal of the Great Commission. In other words, while the theological assumptions of evangelical philanthropy (“finish the task”) are changing – especially in the next generation – there is still the lingering belief that increased numbers are virtually self-justifying and an unquestioned indicator of success for our funding. The purpose has changed, but the practice remains.
It is growing apparent now that younger funders are looking for a new theology of giving that will provide a sense of motivation and urgency their elders had before them. What will that be? Ridding the world of human trafficking by 2030? Elimination of poverty by 2050? A cure for cancer by 2075? All these are good, but I still wonder if they will have the same grip and sense of larger purpose their parents and grandparents experienced in the post-WWII mission to bring in the kingdom. Perhaps there is something that can incorporate both and it need not be one or the other.
I think C.S. Lewis was right. “If you read history you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were just those who thought most of the next. The Apostles themselves, who set on foot the conversion of the Roman Empire, the great men who built up the Middle Ages, the English Evangelicals who abolished the Slave Trade, all left their mark on Earth, precisely because their minds were occupied with Heaven. It is since Christians have largely ceased to think of the other world that they have become so ineffective in this. Aim at Heaven and you will get earth ‘thrown in’: aim at earth and you will get neither.”
What will be the theology of evangelical philanthropy that will serve this world and the next?