Acton senior fellow Marvin Olasky writes about two examples of churches placing the needs of Christians and evangelism in the developing world above their own congregational comforts. In the first piece, Olasky discusses Mount Zion United Methodist Church just outside of Baltimore.

Read more on A Little Heat Now, or a Lot Later?…

The issue of the federal regulation of non-profit groups, including churches, has meshed with a number of other questions, including allegations of government discrimination against faith-based groups. Charles Colson, founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries, writes of an attack on funding for faith-based initiatives in the New York Times as “typical of what’s been happening in the press and in Congress. Year after year, a Senate minority blocks votes on faith-based legislation. They demand that ministries not ‘discriminate’ by hiring only people of their own faith.”

Read more on Faith and Works…

Hard as it is for me to believe, we are quickly approaching the first anniversary of my father’s death. He had struggled with kidney cancer for a number of years, and had in fact lived a relatively healthy and active life well beyond medical expectations. But as time went on, the disease gradually took its toll, and in September of 2004, my father passed away.

Read more on On the Passing of an Instrument of God’s Peace…

Remember what I said about the relationship between charity and evangelism? Here’s a tip: Be careful in Uzbekistan.

Forum 18 relates the story of a woman who runs a charity in Uzbekistan, and has been the target of harassment by the secret police. Marina Kalinkina

Read more on Not in Uzbekistan…

“In the first nationwide study that specifically measures how faith relates to the organization and delivery of human service programs, initial results indicate that faith-based or religious charities do indeed conduct their operations in ways that markedly set them apart from secular organizations.”

Read more on Faith Makes a Difference…

“We don’t want you to give your money. We’ll just take it instead.”

That commercial, the one where all the celebrities and guys in collars and habits are talking about raising your “voice” for the world’s poor, has been nominated for an Emmy award for best TV commercial.

Read more on You Know the ONE…

As public policy debate about the extent of government regulation over charities, Karen Woods argues in favor of a “common sense approach” that “would look to transparency and accountability measures that are already on the books, rather than fashioning yet more regulation and mandated enforcement from public agencies.”

Read more on More Government Control of Charities Looms…

Some caricatures of Puritans depict them as strict, severe, and stolid. H.L. Mencken’s famous definition of a Puritan is an example of this: “A Puritan is someone who is desperately afraid that, somewhere, someone might be having a good time.”

This stereotype carries over into various areas of life that are often considered “fun,” including the drinking of alcoholic beverages. Indeed, Christians have historically been at the forefront of efforts at prohibition of various drugs, most notably perhaps in the case of The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU). The United Methodist Church notably opposes alcohol use, stating, “We affirm our long-standing conviction and recommendation that abstinence from alcoholic beverages is a faithful witness to God’s liberating and redeeming love.” Baptists are so famous for their traditional teetotalling that “the Baptist minister” has become a figure appearing in jokes and humorous stories (see “The Wedding Reception”).

The position in favor of complete abstinence from alcohol is far from ubiquitous in Christian circles, however. This issue, as most others, receives a variety of responses from faithful Christians. Martin Luther’s love for beer has been variously exploited slanderously by opponents and celebrated by his followers. My own denomination takes a middle-ground position on the issue, “Though abstinence from alcohol is a morally creditable choice, those who, in their freedom in Christ, choose to use alcohol moderately are not to be condemned.”

Christians of course agree on the impropriety of drunkenness, following the biblical injunctions, but seem to split over whether there is any legitimate popular use of alcohol in moderation. Certainly some of the Christian oppposition to alcohol stems from the linkage of drunkenness with pagan practices. In this sense, alcohol use is understood as characteristic of sinful behavior.

An interesting editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal argues that there are empirical data that suggest otherwise, at least in our contemporary situation. Arthur C. Brooks, an associate professor of public administration at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, in “Drink More, Earn More (& Give More),” writes,

moderate drinkers tend to be more charitable than nondrinkers. For example, 54% of nondrinkers contribute to charity each year, giving away an average of $1,100. In contrast, 62% of those who take one to two drinks per day have an average annual giving level of $1,200. The alcohol effect has diminishing returns, however: Just 40% of people drinking five or more drinks per day are donors, and they give only $230 per year on average. (So once you get past two or three, you have to stop claiming you’re “doing it for a good cause.”)

He sums up the matter this way, “Compare two people who are the same in terms of income, education and even religion, but where one drinks moderately and the other doesn’t: The drinker will give between $50 and $100 more to charity each year.”
Read more on The Virtues of Drink…

A fascinating interview with Kenyan economist James Shikwati in the July 4 edition of Der Spiegel:

SPIEGEL: Mr. Shikwati, the G8 summit at Gleneagles is about to beef up the development aid for Africa…

Read more on ‘For God’s Sake, Please Just Stop!’…

A question over at the ONE Campaign blog:

Why don’t these celebrities cough up their own money and stop asking for mine?

Answer: First off, they are. Most of the celebs involved in the campaign give hundreds of thousands, if not millions to charity. They just choose not make it public. But this campaign is not about asking you for YOUR money either, we want your voice. We are also talking about BILLIONS of dollars here. Not millions. If all the celebs in Hollywood banded together it still wouldn’t touch the amount that the G8 countries could give.

Read more on Why Not Give Yourself?…