The fashionable antipathy to the Christian faith is by no means solely confined to our “body politic,” the courts, our public schools, and the nation’s secular colleges and universities. It is also deeply embedded in many of America’s best-known charitable institutions.
This sprang to mind when a friend told me he planned to designate a portion of his annual United Way contribution to St Stephen’s.
I told him not to waste his time or his money. The United Way of Central Maryland struck St Stephen’s off the list of institutions worthy of its service 10 years ago.
The United Way didn’t even do us the courtesy of breaking the news gently. Instead of a letter of explanation, a postcard arrived curtly announcing: “This is to inform you that your agency was not approved to receive donor designations . . .” [Their emphasis]
The cut-off might have been unobjectionable if the United Way had been giving St Stephen’s money from its own pocket. But this wasn’t the case. The United Way was merely passing along cash that participants in United Way campaigns specifically earmarked for St Stephen’s.
Many donors, you see, designate their gifts to be divided among specific recipients, not solely to the politically correct outfits the United Way deems worthy.
The United Way didn’t offer this service solely from the goodness of its heart. It has been a useful tool for selling the group’s fund raising campaigns in the work place—acting as a guarantee that at least part of the money will go to charities the donors favor.
People, not unreasonably, feel more comfortable about donating to large, amorphous outfits like the United Way when they are able to nominate their own churches and other local charities as beneficiaries.
It is not as though the United Way’s services come free. The organization deducts a handsome percentage of the amount donated for passing the money on. Moreover, it hangs on to the cash for up to a year, drawing interest that it keeps for itself.
It is highly unlikely that the United Way’s decision to drop St Stephen’s—and presumably churches like it—was impelled by economics. Implementing it almost certainly cost the organization money—donations from folks who have become aware their favored recipients have been dropped.
Sadly, the United Way’s motive for cutting off donations is to coerce churches and other organization it views with disfavor into changing policies it deems politically incorrect.
For example, the Boy Scouts of America was struck off the recipients list by a number of United Way branches in a bid—ultimately successful—to force it to change its policy towards homosexuals.
It is one thing for an individual to make such a decision. But it is presumptuous beyond belief for an umbrella organization like the United Way to make the decision by fiat for them.
Actually, if one accepts at face value the United Way’s excuse for striking St Stephen’s off the list, one has no alternative but to conclude it was inspired either by ignorance or sheer dishonesty.
The organization explained it had adopted a policy only to accept designated gifts for non–profits, the core mission of which was health and human service.
Utter humbug! St Stephen’s has always been deeply engaged in the fields of health and human service.
Take for instance, our work at the Joseph Richey Hospice, At Jacob’s Well, Glen Meadows Retirement Community, Broadmead, Mays Chapel Ridge Assisted Living, Power Back, College Manor, Union Memorial Hospital, GBMC, as well as nursing homes like Lorien and our ministry to shut-ins.
And how about the Red Cross blood drives we organize, and the other services we offer the community?
In short, it seems clear the United Way’s action against this parish is simply another example of the mounting antipathy towards Christians and Christianity that is increasingly apparent among our self-anointed elite.
There is, however, no reason to take this lying down. The United Way relies heavily on corporate and peer pressure for the success of its fund drives. This year show some backbone. Tell them: “I’m not donating this year because you won’t accept money for the charities I support.”
Furthermore, it doesn’t take much more courage to ask the boss for permission to set up a company-sponsored charitable collection pool and cut the United Way out of the loop entirely.
Do this, and the charities you support will certainly receive a much higher percentage of the money you collect. Your donations will not be levied for a portion of the United Way’s very considerable administrative overhead.
That said, there is something decidedly flawed about the whole concept underlying outfits like the United Way. Not least, there is something intrinsically amiss about letting other folk play Lady Bountiful with your money.
Besides, it simply isn’t true that a bunch of professional do-gooders are likely to be better at allocating your charity dollars than you are.
In any event, the best way to institute a change of policy at the United Way is to give them a hearty dose of their own medicine: Grasp them firmly by the purse strings and their hearts and minds will follow. GPH✠
Newsletter